Fourth Session, 42nd Parliament

(2023) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Tuesday, February 28, 2023

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 277

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Norman Embree

G. Kyllo

Umoja Society immigrant and settlement services

G. Begg

Sam Peters and athletic achievement

B. Stewart

Volunteer firefighters and emergency preparedness funding

D. Routley

Howard Mills and seniors housing project in Kitimat

E. Ross

Wild Bird Trust and Coast Salish Family Day at Maplewood Flats

S. Chant

Oral Questions

Disaster recovery funding for farmers and ranchers

I. Paton

Hon. P. Alexis

B. Banman

Old-growth logging deferrals and role of First Nations

A. Olsen

Hon. B. Ralston

Hon. M. Rankin

Opposition to Coastal GasLink Pipeline project and government response to incidents

E. Ross

Hon. M. Farnworth

Health worker vaccination and rehiring of staff

D. Davies

Hon. A. Dix

Maintenance and repair of Quesnel River Bridge and rail overpass

C. Oakes

Hon. R. Fleming

Disaster financial assistance and wildfire recovery funding

B. Stewart

Hon. B. Ma

Labour dispute in Fraser Valley transit system

T. Halford

Hon. D. Eby

Questions of Privilege (Reservation of Right)

Hon. G. Heyman

Hon. N. Cullen

Orders of the Day

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 17 — Addictions care (continued)

Hon. S. Malcolmson

Question of Privilege

Hon. N. Cullen

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 17 — Addictions care

(continued)

A. Olsen

N. Simons

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2023

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: G. Kyllo.

[10:05 a.m.]

Introductions by Members

K. Greene: I want to welcome the Richmond Chamber of Commerce, which has made the

arduous journey across the waters to join us here in Victoria. I’m very

happy to have them here. They work very hard on behalf of Richmond

businesses and non-profits and do great work in our community.

Thank you for joining us, and please make them welcome.

Hon. M. Rankin: Today I rise to welcome two constituents from my riding of Oak

Bay–Gordon Head, Linda Brown and Lupo Minciarelli. They are both here today

with us.

Linda formerly worked in the B.C. Legislature, and her husband is a

former police officer. They are Lupo’s host family. Lupo is an international

student attending grade 12 at Mount Doug Secondary as part of the

international homestay program.

Lupo was born in Paris, lived most of his life in Italy and has

incredible experiences changing school systems some three times, speaking

four languages fluently and looking to add either Mandarin or Arabic to his

repertoire. His experience has put him on a path towards politics and

diplomacy, and he has applied to three universities in Europe to

date.

Today is a great opportunity for Lupo to experience how our

Legislature operates, and I look forward to visiting him and Linda later

today.

I would ask the members to please make them feel welcome.

B. Stewart: It’s a pleasure to welcome two people from my constituency office

today, here to get to know more of the people in this House. Many know them

as tenacious, hard-working CAs.

Please welcome Cheryl Doll, and Jane Inkster, who has just completed

her first year with me.

Hon. G. Heyman: Joining us in the gallery today are four staff members from my

minister’s office. I’m pleased to welcome them. My administrative assistant,

Emma Murray; my administrative coordinator, Caroline Hogg; my ministerial

adviser, Reamick Lo; and my executive assistant, Nicolas Bragg.

Nicholas and Remick have worked for me for many years. Emma and

Caroline have been in my office for quite some time. As far as I know, it is

the first time in the gallery for all of them.

Will the House make them very, very welcome.

E. Ross: Today in the audience, we have representatives from my band, the

Haisla band, as well as representatives from the Tsimshian First Nations, of

which there are probably at least six bands in my region, including

Gitxaała, Kitselas, Kitsumkalum and Port Simpson, which is Lax

Kw’alaams.

Anyway, we’ve got Arthur Renwick, who is not only the deputy chief

councillor of Haisla Nation Council, but he’s also the chair of the Northern

First Nations Alliance health and wellness. Brenna Innes, from Gitxaała

First Nation, is the Northern First Nations Alliance health and wellness

vice-chair, and Jeannie Parnell is the interim executive

director.

They’ve actually authored a report called Feasibility Study,

Northwest B.C. Indigenous Detox and Wellness Centre . They have been

diligently trying to find government support for the last six months, and

they’re not going to quit.

Would the House please welcome the representatives of the Northern

First Nations Alliance.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Today I see up in the gallery a special guest, Rajmeet Virk who worked

in this building for a long, long time and now is working with Métis Nation

B.C. in intergovernmental relations.

Would the House please make Rajmeet welcome back.

A. Olsen: Today I introduce three guests to the Legislative Assembly. I’m

welcoming Talia Cordero, the engine of the B.C. Green Party over in the

Lower Mainland; Simran Sarai, who ran for us and was an incredible candidate

in Surrey South and is a student at Simon Fraser University; and as well,

Michael Wiebe, a previous Vancouver Green councillor in the city of

Vancouver.

Would all the members of this House please welcome our guests and make

them feel very welcome here today.

H. Yao: I want to take a moment to express my gratitude to the member for

Richmond-Steveston for coordinating the visitation from the Richmond Chamber

of Commerce.

I presume I echo North Coast and Richmond-Queensborough if I want to

say thank you.

[10:10 a.m.]

First of all, I want to take a moment to express our gratitude for

Shaena Furlong, president and CEO; Dan Sakaki, director for members and

stakeholders; Carolyn Robertson, chair. We have Fan Chun, treasurer; Grant

Bryan; Lisa Wong; Bernard Loh and Connor Williams.

I want to take a moment to express my sincere gratitude for your

joining us today for our Budget Day. Thank you, and welcome to the

Legislature.

M. Dykeman: I’d like to take a moment to welcome to the gallery some very special

guests that have come over to visit us today. We have, from Langley

Community Services, Sanjeev and Greg. We have Langley Hospice. We have

Shannon Todd Booth and Kathy Derksen, and we have my amazing constituency

assistant, Carly Haugen. We have joining us, with Langley Community

Services, Shawn Bouchard.

I was wondering if everybody could please take a moment to welcome

them to the precinct.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

NORMAN EMBREE

G. Kyllo: It is with a heavy heart that I rise in the House today to pay

respect to the life of Norm Embree. Loved dearly by his loving wife,

Ruth, of over 50 years, Norm was truly a family man. He and Ruth were

blessed with two accomplished daughters, Lee and Regan, and four amazing

grandchildren, Sammy, Jay, Shae and Macey. Norm was a husband, a dad, a

brother, an uncle, a friend and a mentor but most affectionately known

as Bubba.

I know Norm would also want to recognize his sons-in-law, Mike

Stanfield and Ross McKeever. I fondly recall Norm sharing many years ago

the three stages of relationship with those that were courting his

daughters. Norm shared that initially, any young suitor should be

referred to as sin-in-law. Norm chuckled that after advancing to a

marriage proposal, these young men advanced to the title of soon-in-law

and, once wed, rose to the esteemed role of son-in-law.

Norm was truly a family man. He and his best friend, Bruce Cook,

would take great joy in sharing stories of their children and their

grandchildren. Norm was immensely proud of his family.

Norm spent a lifetime working as an entrepreneur and devoted

decades to public service, most notably as former chair of the Interior

Health Authority board of directors and as chair of the board of

governors of Okanagan College in their transition to Okanagan University

College in 2004-05, serving until 2007. His career began in securities

and eventually joining his family’s machining business, Embree

Industries Ltd., of Hamilton, Ontario, which was founded by his

grandfather in 1913.

Norm and his wife Ruth took early retirement from the family

business and moved to Salmon Arm in the late ’90s, becoming deeply

involved in a number of not-for-profit organizations. He served as a

board member of the Salmon Arm Economic Development Advisory Committee,

OUC, Haney Heritage House, Shuswap Hospice Society, the Nature Trust of

B.C. and the College of Pharmacists of B.C. He was a driving force

behind fundraising efforts of the Shuswap Hospice Society, B.C.

Liberals, the Shuswap centre for Neskonlith First Nations and the Rotary

Club of Salmon Arm.

An athlete from an early age, he played competitive football,

tennis, squash and sail racing, and upon arriving at the Shuswap, he

continued his love of sport with boating, skiing, golfing, old-timer

hockey and tennis.

In 2015, Norm was recognized as an honorary fellow of Okanagan

College for his many years of service.

Norm was a force to be reckoned with and 10,000 other things. His

family fondly shared that “Norm was the best we could have ever hoped

for.” The world has lost one of the great guys.

UMOJA SOCIETY IMMIGRANT

AND SETTLEMENT

SERVICES

G. Begg: Twenty years ago, two recent immigrants to this country from

Uganda reflected on their early experiences in their new homeland and

vowed to build a program that would help to bridge many of the gaps that

they had experienced when they first arrived here with their four

sons.

They are Amos Kambere, who was first elected in the 1980 Ugandan

general elections as the youngest ever member of parliament in the

National Assembly of Uganda, and Edith Kambere, his loving wife and

mother of their sons. Together, while he continued his work with Canada

Post and she looked after their active boys, they began Umoja, which

translates as unity, to strive for and maintain unity in the family,

community, nation and race.

[10:15 a.m.]

On Saturday night, the member for Surrey-Whalley and I gathered

with hundreds of others to celebrate the 20th year of Umoja’s existence

in Surrey. It is a charitable and newcomer settlement organization

formed to work with recent immigrants and refugees of all cultural

backgrounds living in Surrey.

Their culturally attuned, trauma-informed programs are

particularly essential for those at risk of socioeconomic

marginalization based on language and skills gaps; race, culture and

religious background; trauma; or perceived status. The society supports

integration into Canadian society while recognizing each person’s

dignity and unique worth. In so doing, they aspire to bridge the

privilege gap and to work towards an authentically thriving Canadian

society in which no one is left behind.

Over their 20-year existence, they’ve supported the successful

mainstreaming of over 4,000 newcomers and families to Canada. It is

truly a labour of love for Amos and Edith Kambere and their staff, and I

know that all members of this House join me in celebrating this amazing

Surrey organization.

SAM PETERS

AND ATHLETIC

ACHIEVEMENT

B. Stewart: Today I’d like to take a moment to recognize a remarkable young

man who was born a double amputee but refuses to be limited by his

disability. Sam Peters, who hails from West Kelowna, has made the Team

B.C. para team and will be competing in the Canada Winter Games this

week at Mount Crabbe in New Brunswick.

The 15-year-old new member of Big White Racers, who joined the

team just this year, has enjoyed skiing for the past eight years. Sam

attributes his success to the volunteers at Powderhounds on Big White

Mountain, who work with the disabled to get them onto the mountain.

Sam’s physical setbacks have never stopped him from pursuing his dreams

or ambition. He has unparalleled courage and determination, which have

enabled him to reach his goals, despite the obstacles that he has

faced.

Sam’s story is an inspiration to all of us and serves as a

wonderful example that our abilities are not defined by what we are able

to do with our bodies, but rather by how hard we work. At the same time,

Sam’s story reminds us of the importance of fighting for inclusion and

equality, as every individual deserves to have the chance to pursue

their dreams, regardless of disability.

I wish Sam the very best of luck as he competes in the Canada

Winter Games, and I have no doubt that he will give it his all and make

us proud. We know that, with his commitment and perseverance, he will

have a successful and rewarding experience.

Good luck, Sam.

VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS AND

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

FUNDING

D. Routley: Our government recently announced a $6.3 million fund, through the

community emergency preparedness fund, to help 110 volunteer and

composite fire departments throughout B.C., including four in my riding

— North Cowichan, Thetis Island, Cowichan Tribes and Gabriola

Island.

While supporting firefighters throughout the province is a key

priority of our government, this support goes even further in smaller

communities, where volunteer firefighting departments are often called

upon to assist in a variety of ways. For instance, a few months ago

there was an incident on Gabriola Island which knocked out the main

Telus cable and left the community with no phone or Internet services

for close to a week, putting everyone at risk if there were an

emergency.

While Telus and B.C. Hydro work to identify and repair the damage,

the Gabriola volunteer firefighting department opened up their facility

to the community, 24 hours a day, until the communications services were

restored, ensuring that people could still access emergency services by

visiting the station.

Recognizing the impact that these programs can have, last week we

announced an additional $180 million in funding for the community

emergency preparedness fund. This increase will go a long way to helping

local governments, First Nations and volunteer firefighters better

prepare for emergencies.

Over the past few years, we have seen our fair share of

climate-related emergencies in B.C., and I am proud to be a part of a

government that recognizes the importance of supporting communities in

being better prepared when disaster strikes. I’m equally proud of the

amazing volunteer firefighting organizations in my riding and throughout

B.C., who work hard every day to ensure our communities are

safe.

[10:20 a.m.]

HOWARD MILLS AND SENIORS

HOUSING PROJECT IN

KITIMAT

E. Ross: Dr. Howard Mills has been a full-service family doctor in the city

of Kitimat for over 40 years, raising his family there and operating a

large practice the entire time. He continues to serve our community

extremely well and provides stellar care to those who have been visiting

his practice for all these years, including me.

In his time as a doctor, he has seen the struggles of hospitals

around British Columbia and specifically how the Kitimat General

Hospital has been grappling with staff shortages and limited beds for

patients. Most notably, at the Kitimat Hospital, more than half of the

available beds are being used by elderly citizens who have nowhere else

to go.

Dr. Mills realized this and has taken a great initiative by

starting the process of acquiring an empty lot across from the hospital

to construct a four-storey, mixed-use building to help relieve stress on

hospital services. The project would contain a senior living residence

with 45 residential units that have adjacent medical care and include

multiple medical services on the lower floors.

This facility has the potential to provide housing for many

elderly citizens with no other options and to centralize multiple

medical officers for the residents of Kitimat. The core idea behind the

proposed facility is to provide a building that will enhance the

community and add benefits to local medical businesses and health care

services.

Dr. Mills has received approval from the city of Kitimat, which is

very supportive of the project, but is also looking to secure funding

and government support to take this project across the finishing

line.

WILD BIRD TRUST AND COAST SALISH

FAMILY DAY AT

MAPLEWOOD FLATS

S. Chant: I, too, would like to acknowledge that I’m speaking from the

traditional territories of the

Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ people, the Songhees

and the Esquimalt First Nations.

I come from the traditional and unceded territories of the

Tsleil-Waututh, Squamish and Musqueam Nations, where my constituency

office is based.

On Family

Day, I attended the Coast Salish Family Day event at the Maplewood

Mudflats in my riding of North Vancouver–Seymour. Maplewood Flats is a

126-hectare area of nature preserve right beside the bustling port and

the industrial areas of North Vancouver. It’s managed by the Wild Bird

Trust fund of B.C., strong advocates for the protection of wildlife and

the restoration of native plants and also for genuine reconciliation.

The Coast Salish Family Day event was just one amazing example of the

work that this organization does.

The day started with an introduction acknowledgment by Irwin, the

president of the organization. Then Nick George gave us a welcome song

and greetings from the Tsleil-Waututh Nation to open the proceedings in

a good way. I was able to speak briefly to acknowledge the important

work that the trust continues to do and outlined some of the grants that

our government has given the trust, including a recent $200,000 gaming

grant, which will go a long way in ensuring its continued

operation.

The day continued with a planter box workshop from LifeSpace,

teaching how to build self-watering urban planters for office spaces and

apartments, allowing increased green space for vegetables and flowers;

talk on soil health; a panel discussion; walks and workshops about local

flora and fauna. There’s a native plant nursery there, and they have

found a local plant that competes with our non-native

blackberries.

I had an amazing time at the event, as did the other families I

spoke to. I look forward to attending future events such as the annual

Osprey Festival.

If you’re coming to visit in North Van–Seymour, I’d love to take

you on a walk through the Maplewood Flats and share this hidden gem that

provides safe shelter for many of our birds and some of our

wildlife.

J. Rice: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

J. Rice: I recognize we’re not supposed to be acknowledging whether our

presence is in or out of the House, but I wanted to state that I am Zooming

in today from the unceded and traditional territory of the Tsimshian

peoples.

I’m here in Prince Rupert. I do wish that I could be at the

Legislature today to also welcome some of my constituents and some of our

northern partners that the member for Skeena introduced.

[10:25 a.m.]

I just wanted to talk a little bit, quickly, about the work that the

NFNA, Northern First Nations Alliance, health and wellness community

endeavours do, which is to actually provide more treatment options for drugs

and alcohol in the North Coast.

With such a high Indigenous population, it is very difficult for many

people to actually leave their home territories to actually seek treatment.

I’m certainly in alignment with the endeavour to bring more treatment

options to rural, remote and First Nations communities, particularly in the

north and on the coast.

So thank you, acknowledge the guests in the gallery and please make

them feel welcome.

Oral Questions

DISASTER RECOVERY FUNDING

FOR FARMERS AND

RANCHERS

I. Paton: Today is the second provincial budget since disastrous flooding

hit farmers and ranchers from the Fraser Valley to the Nicola Valley.

Unfortunately, for many, the physical, mental and financial toll

continues.

As shadow minister, my phone and email has lit up for over a year

from distraught farmers in Abbotsford and Merritt. Despite the promise

of $228 million in federal-provincial funding, many farmers who suffered

severe losses feel frustrated, forgotten and abandoned by their

government.

My question to the Premier. After over 15 months, why are farmers

still waiting for the help promised to them?

Hon. P. Alexis: Thank you, Member, for the question.

It’s my very first time to rise today, and I want to acknowledge

the good work that has been done previously by the Minister for Tourism,

Arts and Culture now. So thank you for the opportunity.

These last few years have absolutely been incredibly difficult for

farmers and food producers affected by flooding and landslides. The 2021

flooding was B.C.’s biggest ever agricultural disaster and resulted in

our biggest ever response. So far over 950 payments have gone out to

impacted farmers and food producers. The Ministry of Agriculture and

Food has contacted every single farmer that has reached out to us about

flood recovery supports.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Delta South, supplemental.

I. Paton: This is cold comfort to the hundreds and hundreds of phone calls

that my caucus is getting still today from farmers all over Merritt,

Nicola Valley, Abbotsford, Princeton. Farmers are fed up with slow,

inadequate government assistance. Ranchers on Highway 8 between Merritt

and Spences Bridge are still dealing with devastating mudslides with

zero compensation in sight.

Farmers like Rolf and Jaswant on Sumas Prairie need costly home

repairs but face bureaucratic red tape and inadequate support. Jaswant

received only 70 percent compensation for two years of lost blueberry

production, leaving a four-year income gap before new plants start to

even produce.

Farmers feel incredibly frustrated and abandoned. When will the

Premier take responsibility and provide the much-needed support that

these farmers deserve?

Hon. P. Alexis: We have worked with farmers and farming organizations at each step

of the development of this response to make sure it works for them. In

my travels around the Fraser Valley and British Columbia, I’ve heard so

much positive feedback about the program and the speed of its

delivery.

For example, Rhonda MacDonald, the owner of Bar FX Ranch in

Merritt, said: “The government did come out with an AgriRecovery program

for the flooding. Actually, it’s quite an extensive program, and it’s

very helpful. I really have to give them props, because it’s a decent

program that helps out those of us that were affected by the

flooding.”

Finally, if there is someone you know that hasn’t already been in

touch with the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, please reach out and

connect. We’re only too happy to assist.

[10:30 a.m.]

B. Banman: It may be working for one farmer, but blueberry farmers in the

Sumas flats have some major concerns — rising costs for replacement

plants, sawdust, fertilizer, a maze of red tape and dense paperwork —

and the NDP are missing in action.

Farmers like Mr. Sangha have been set back a decade, and there is

no compensation from the NDP for income replacement. They feel the

system is designed to make them just give up. When will the Premier

provide the support these farmers desperately need?

Hon. P. Alexis: We understand that many people in British Columbia are impacted by

rising costs, and we recognize that the global inflationary trends and

uncertain economic conditions continue to impact farmers and farm

producers. The provincial government will continue to look for

additional ways to support farmers as we navigate these challenging

economic conditions together.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Abbotsford South, supplemental.

B. Banman: To the minister, this government needs to look harder. Let me give

you another example.

Daljit, a retired farmer and widow with limited funds, lost six

acres of blackberries in the floods. She was denied financial assistance

for rebuilding a farm building submerged in over six feet of water that

was used to house farmworkers. Daljit feels like the NDP is simply

looking for excuses not to help, leaving her drowning in red

tape.

It’s been over 15 months. When will the Premier and this minister

step up and provide the support that farmers like Daljit desperately

need?

Hon. P. Alexis: We have stepped up, and we have been working for over 1,000

different farmers in the region.

If there is someone that needs additional assistance, please ask

them to reach out to the ministry, because we’re only too happy to help,

as I said before.

OLD-GROWTH LOGGING DEFERRALS

AND ROLE OF FIRST

NATIONS

A. Olsen: Yesterday, my colleague asked the government who stopped the

development of species-at-risk legislation. The Environment Minister

stood and blamed First Nations, but that was 2018.

Interjections.

A. Olsen: Groan if you want. That’s what he said.

So 2018 was when that….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Olsen: I did. That was before the Declaration Act, and that was also

before

section 3 in the interim approach.

The minister knows, and the minister knows that I know, that First

Nations are not the reason that this government is not protecting

species at risk or biodiversity. It was terrible and infuriating to sit

in this place yesterday and hear First Nations be the scapegoat for this

government’s inactions.

While this B.C. NDP government talks, trees die. While they

promise a new policy, trees die, because of the agreements made under

the old policy. The old agreements paid First Nations for dead trees.

Now the province is proposing to defer logging on 2.6 million hectares,

and once again, the agreements they have in place with First Nations

under the old policy is being blamed for the inability to defer the

death of these critical forests.

To the Premier, are these forests doomed to the death economics

and scapegoating of this colonial institution, or will he provide

immediate funding for First Nations to defer old-growth logging in their

territories?

Hon. B. Ralston: British Columbians care very deeply about our forests and the many

social, environmental and cultural benefits they provide. Forestry is

the foundation of British Columbia’s economy.

To deal, specifically, with the question that the member has

raised, indeed, following the Merkel report, the future of forests in

British Columbia, we have embarked as a government upon a process of

deferral of old growth.

[10:35 a.m.]

That process is a very inclusive one. It includes every First

Nation. The responses from various First Nations have been different,

but nonetheless, they are all included in that process.

So far, 2.1 million hectares has been deferred. We’ve made a

commitment, recently, to establish what are called forest landscape

tables. Where, in the past, the companies would provide a logging plan,

this process will include First Nations, communities, companies, unions

and develop an enduring plan that will have community support and

provide a new path forward for forestry in British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: House Leader, Third Party, supplemental.

A. Olsen: I’m glad the minister states that his government is working with

all First Nations. This should be a fairly easy question for the Premier

to answer.

Yesterday I sat in the Mungo Martin Big House with MÁN ZÁWIZUT

Hereditary Chief Walas ’Namugwis, David Mungo Knox, the head chief of

the Kwakiutl; Ma’amtagila Chief Makwala, Rande Cook; Tom Child; and

others around the fire. Those Chiefs carry the powerful names of their

ancestors, names that they looked after and honoured in a good

way.

These are the leaders this government has always overlooked and

ignored, and that continues. The provincial and federal governments are

willfully undermining and eroding the governance structures that have

existed on this landscape since time immemorial and elevating people who

will, frankly, sign their agreements.

This government promises to protect old growth, but they are

clear-cutting the territory that the Chiefs of the Kwakiutl and the

Ma’amtagila must protect. The Chiefs have sent multiple letters to the

former Premier, the former Ministers of Forests and now the new Premier

seeking to meet in a good way, at the fire, to discuss the sacred

responsibility that their ancestors left for them.

My question is to the Premier. Will he sit with the Chiefs as they

have requested?

Hon. M. Rankin: Thank you to the member for the question. Our government has

concluded that we must work with First Nations. Whether that leadership

is hereditary, elected or fused, we will work on the ground with them to

meet their needs both in forestry and other areas.

Since the Declaration Act was enacted, that Indigenous governing

body we take from the nations themselves and work in consultation and

cooperation with those nations on issues such as the one that my

colleague has raised.

OPPOSITION TO COASTAL GASLINK

PIPELINE PROJECT AND

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO INCIDENTS

E. Ross: For years this NDP government has been cozying up to the

protesters and spewing anti–resource project propaganda. Three years ago

those same protesters caused chaos, shut down critical infrastructure

all across B.C., including rail lines and ports. They even successfully

blockaded this Legislature. That was three years ago, and it’s only

gotten worse, with increasing violence today.

A little over a year ago masked thugs armed with axes stormed a

construction site on the Morice River, destroyed equipment and

terrorized workers. Last fall eight vehicles, including four RCMP cars

and an ambulance, were burned in downtown Smithers, on the streets of

Smithers. Just this past weekend we learned of more acts of terrorism:

sabotage, drilling holes in pipes, even pouring hydrochloric acid on

concrete pipes that are meant to protect steel pipes.

There have been no consequences for these acts of terrorism —

nothing. And this government’s complete silence and lack of information

have left everyone in the dark.

My question is to the Premier — not to the ministers, to the

Premier. When will this Premier finally take action to restore the rule

of law and end the violence and terrorism?

[10:40 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question, but I also want to correct

some things he has just said in his remarks. First off, this side of the

House — in fact, everybody on this side of the House — condemns in no

uncertain terms any act of violence, intimidation, terrorism against

people doing lawful activities in this province. We have made that clear

right from the get-go.

To suggest otherwise, hon. Member, is just plain wrong.

I also want to let the member know this. Police take this very

seriously and are doing thorough, independent investigations to ensure

that those who are responsible for these kinds of actions are in fact

brought to justice. That means working to ensure they’ve got the

strongest possible case that they can build. It’s often working with

very difficult circumstances. What they need is information. What they

need is people who know things to come forward to assist them in their

investigations.

I want to assure you that the police are doing everything they

can. They brief me on a regular basis in terms of what’s taking place

and what’s happening. I can assure you when charges are laid — and at

some point, they will be — we expect them to be prosecuted to the

fullest extent of the law.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Skeena, supplemental.

E. Ross: Mr. Speaker, just saying that you condemn something doesn’t mean

anything. Actions speak louder than words.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Let’s hear the question.

E. Ross: We have seen no results of these supposed investigations, and this

is three years running now. We’ve seen nothing coming out of the attack

in Smithers. We’ve seen nothing coming out in terms of what happened to

the workers on the pipeline. In fact, a group, the ICBA, put out a

reward for tips to figure out who exactly was behind all this. Now we’ve

got this anonymous posting on the Internet talking about how they’re

sabotaging infrastructure in the province of B.C.

If you do have this information, let the public know, because

we’re talking about the safety of B.C. citizens. We’re talking about the

safety of B.C. workers. Yes, we’re talking about the safety of

front-line workers, including the RCMP.

So if you are so concerned about condemning these actions, back it

up. Show the public what you’ve done to date. What charges are you

talking about, and who are you going to lay them against? Who’s guilty

for these acts in B.C.?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, Members. Hold it.

Please finish off.

E. Ross: The NDP, aligning with protesters, have made incidents even more

serious than anyone could have ever imagined. Imagine talking about

terrorist activities in B.C.

Look up the definition of “terrorism” while you’re at it. Back in

the day, when the NDP sided with protesters, that was just playing

politics. I get it. But today the inaction actually equals terrorism.

This is serious.

Mr. Speaker: Question, Member?

E. Ross: This is reckless.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

E. Ross: I’ll repeat the question, gladly, but it’s to the Premier, who

used to be the Attorney General of this province, who fully understands

the consequences of what’s happening on the ground.

My question is to the Premier, not to the ministers. When will

this Premier finally take action to restore the rule of law and end the

violence and terrorism?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I want to make a couple of points. First off, I’m sure the member

did not intend to call members of the government terrorists. I’m sure he

did not, and if he did, he would withdraw those remarks when he has the

opportunity to do that.

[10:45 a.m.]

I also want to take exception with his comments about supposed

investigations. The police do not take supposed investigations. They

take these actions seriously, as does every single member on this side

of the House and on that side of the House. So to suggest that the

police are doing supposed investigations — that’s insulting.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: To suggest that government does not take this…. I’m not even going

to dignify that with an answer to that. The police are doing their job

in terms of thorough investigations. If they need resources, they get

them from us.

We have an independent judicial system. I can tell you, as I said

a moment ago, that at some point when they’ve concluded their

investigations into often difficult and complex situations, and they’re

determined to get to the bottom of it, I expect charges will be laid.

When those charges are laid, they’ll go to court, and I expect them to

be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

People who are engaged in work that sabotages the lives of

individuals or puts their lives at risk should spend a maximum amount of

time in the penalty box behind bars.

HEALTH WORKER VACCINATION

AND REHIRING OF

STAFF

D. Davies: Every day we hear stories of the crisis in our health care system.

Every day we hear stories of the shortage of health care workers. But at

a time when we need all hands on deck, thousands of doctors and nurses

who want to work are sitting on the sidelines.

Since June of last year, the official opposition has repeatedly

urged the government to provide a pathway for all British Columbians to

return to work, just like the federal government and nearly every other

jurisdiction in Canada. There is no reason why we cannot follow their

lead, especially with safety protocols in place.

On behalf of the tens of thousands of British Columbians waiting

without basic health care, when is this Premier going to allow these

doctors and nurses back to their jobs so that they can provide the care

that people desperately need?

Hon. A. Dix: The actions that have been taken in British Columbia against the

COVID-19 pandemic in support of people who are most vulnerable, I think,

have led Canada and have been leaders in the world. The reason they’ve

led Canada and been leaders of the world is that provincial health

orders have been directed by the provincial health officer, with the

support of myself and the government.

We have, in British Columbia, vaccine mandates in place because

people who are in acute care and people who are in long-term care and

other circumstances are the most vulnerable to COVID-19. So we have and

we continue to take actions to protect them, and we are going to

continue to do so.

I understand it’s the position of the hon. member. This is a

public debate, and I say it with the greatest of respect, because I

never criticized anybody for taking a contrary opinion to ourselves or

Dr. Henry or anybody else. But what he’s suggesting is that we overrule

the provincial health officer on a matter of public health in a pandemic

— I don’t agree with that — and not take due care for people who are the

most vulnerable to COVID-19, those who are in acute care hospitals, as

we speak, and are in long-term care. I disagree with that.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The minister will continue.

Hon. A. Dix: We are going to continue to take steps to ensure that we keep

people safe in this public health emergency.

MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF QUESNEL

RIVER BRIDGE AND RAIL

OVERPASS

C. Oakes: Wildfires, floods and landslides in Cariboo North have caused

dramatic damage in recent years, with hundreds of roads impacted, washed

out and/or collapsed. Urgency is desperately needed for preventative

work and maintenance on rural roads, bridges and culverts. The current

condition of the Quesnel River Bridge and rail overpass are very

concerning, and the lack of a concrete plan is equally

alarming.

[10:50 a.m.]

Record levels of snow have already fallen this year, and more is

expected. People are bracing for a potential disaster with spring

freshet.

To the Premier: what is the plan for the Quesnel River Bridge and

rail overpass, a vital link for Highway 97’s transportation

network?

Hon. R. Fleming: Thank you to the member for the question. She and I have had an

opportunity to speak on many occasions, over many freshets and recent

calendar years, where roads in the Cariboo have sustained significant

damage and where slide activity has emerged where it was previously not

a factor. This is due to the impact of wildfires, as the member

correctly noted.

I think the member also knows that in every instance where we have

literally restored connectivity for hundreds of roads, this government

has spared no expense to get people to and from work; to and from

school; to use the construction seasons in the spring and summer; and to

work as quickly as we can to restore the Cariboo communities that have

lost road access. We will continue to do that.

I know we have a budget pending this afternoon. The member will

have an opportunity to see what the investment plan looks like in her

region as, indeed, all MLAs will look in their own region. But we have

worked with the federal government on disaster financial assistance. We

have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the West Fraser Road, for

example, to in fact reallocate corridors to areas that are away from

climate risk and further damage in the future, to build resiliency. We

will continue to do that.

DISASTER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE

AND WILDFIRE RECOVERY

FUNDING

B. Stewart: The disaster financial assistance program is just that: a complete

disaster, as it fails to provide proper and necessary supports to people

who have lost everything in devastating wildfires. In August of 2001,

over 80 of my constituents, including Neil Morgan, lost everything — his

home, his sawmill — in the devastating White Rock Lake wildfire that

struck communities all over the region.

The official opposition has called for a grant program to offer to

high-risk wildfire area homeowners. My colleague from Kamloops South has

introduced a bill to improve the DFA claim process dramatically. When

will the Premier call the bill — when? — and make the necessary changes

to ensure that the government support wildfire victims like

Neil?

Hon. B. Ma: Thank you to the member for that very important question. What we

have seen in recent years as a result of climate change is an increased

frequency, duration, scope of extreme weather events. There can be no

doubt. The climate crisis is here, and it is here now. The impacts are

very, very real. We only have to point to….

Actually, you can point to a lot of different extreme weather

events. But certainly, the atmospheric river events of 2021 are a

perfect example of that. During that event, the DFA program, the

disaster financial assistance program, received a record-breaking 2,300

applications — absolutely unprecedented in this province.

Emergency management British Columbia, EMBC, which was the

organization that existed before EMCR was created by the Premier,

recognized very quickly that changes needed to be made in order to

evolve the program to expand eligibility so more people could be

supported. We also recognized very quickly that the volume of

applications we were receiving was not a volume that EMBC, at the time,

was equipped for, so many more people were staffed up to support that

process. Even after all of these learnings, even at this point, at which

point….

To the member, we have now successfully processed 99 percent of

the DFA applications from that event. But even today, we recognize that

there is a lot more that needs to be done in the years….

[10:55 a.m.]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Shhh.

Hon. B. Ma: I apologize. The member is talking about wildfires as well. There

is extraordinary work and damage that has happened about wildfires. I

apologize for focusing on the atmospheric river events. The reason why I

focus there is because a lot of what we learned about the DFA program

and its inability to fully support people through extraordinary events

was learned from that event.

We know that the DFA program must be modernized. We know that the

program must be evolved, and that is work we’re going to be doing this

year. The federal government will also be revising their eligibility

requirements for the DFAA program. That will, of course, inform our

work. So that work will happen this year.

LABOUR DISPUTE IN

FRASER VALLEY TRANSIT

SYSTEM

T. Halford: The Fraser Valley is a disaster zone for commuters, and it’s not

just because of the snow. Bus services in Abbotsford, Chilliwack, Hope,

Mission and the Fraser Valley Express route have come to a complete

stop.

The strike is already causing frustration and anger for those who

rely on it to get to school, to work, to their medical appointments.

Last year the NDP failed to help people during the Sea to Sky transit

strike, the longest strike in B.C.’s history. It’s unacceptable that

this government sits idly by while people are stranded in the Fraser

Valley.

My question is to the Premier, and it’s a direct one. Is he going

to sit there and let commuters and the people in the Fraser Valley be

unable to get to work, to school, to medical appointments? Or are they

going to do something to end this strike?

Hon. D. Eby: Making sure that people in the Fraser Valley are able to get to

work and get home, spend time with their families and get there

efficiently has been front of mind for this government since we were

sworn in. You’ve seen the Surrey-Langley SkyTrain expansion. You’ve seen

the extension of our expansion work around Highway 1. These are front of

mind.

The member, importantly, raises an issue affecting people right

now — the strike. I have every confidence that both the employer and the

workers are going to get to work and get a deal that works for people in

the community. But we’re not going to leave those commuters stranded. We

are focused on making sure that they get to school and get to work.

That’s a priority for our government.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Hon. D. Eby: Now, we’ve heard a lot of questions from the opposition here

today. They’re concerned about farmers, food security, housing for farm

workers. They’re concerned about health care…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, please.

Hon. D. Eby: …and making sure that health care is available for people. They’re

concerned about public safety. They’re concerned about disaster and

flood recovery around essential infrastructure for people up the valley

and across the entire province.

Well, so are we. That’s why we’re putting the surplus to work for

people, investing in these very areas that they’re talking about. That’s

why the budget today that will be delivered by the Finance Minister is

going to invest in exactly these areas.

But can you believe that this morning, on Global News ,

the Leader of the Opposition didn’t get the memo from all his

colleagues? He said that if he was in charge right now, he’d be using

that surplus — not for people. He’d be using it to pay down the

debt.

So there’s a difference. There’s a difference.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, please.

Members will come to order, both sides.

Member, that’s enough.

The Premier will continue.

Hon. D. Eby: I’m proud to say that we will be making a significant payment on

provincial debt, but we’re putting the surplus to work for people in

British Columbia, exactly what member after member after member on their

side asked about today. We’re doing that work. We agree with them. We

need to do that work.

The Finance Minister is going to do that in the budget today. I’m

so proud of her and the work she and her team have done, and every

single member of this House, fighting for people in British Columbia.

That’s how we’re doing things differently.

[End of question period.]

[11:00 a.m.]

Questions of Privilege

(Reservation of Right)

Hon. G. Heyman: I reserve my right to raise a point of personal privilege regarding

remarks by the member for Saanich North and the Islands.

Hon. N. Cullen: Mr. Speaker, I stand on a point of order today, arising out of the

comments in question period from the member for Skeena. Not only did the

member, I believe, harm the reputation of the police….

Mr. Speaker: That’s okay. Just reserve your spot. Thank you, we’ll do it

later.

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Kahlon: I call continued debate on Motion 17 on the order paper.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: If members are leaving the chamber, could they please do that as quietly

as possible.

Government Motions on Notice

MOTION 17 — ADDICTIONS

CARE

(continued)

Hon. S. Malcolmson: I am pleased to be carrying on my remarks from yesterday. I was

speaking to our government’s support for recommendation 14. This is one

of the all-party consensus recommendations to see “a substantial

increase in publicly funded, evidence-based, accredited treatment and

recovery beds, including managed withdrawal and aftercare supports,

ensuring a variety of treatment options.”

To finish my comments in this area, I wanted to pick up on the

Minister of Jobs and Economic Development and her comments about the

Peardonville investment that we’ve made in addiction treatment beds in

Abbotsford. A place that I got to visit two summers ago, I believe. One

of the, again, beds that we are publicly funding, but I believe one of

the only places in British Columbia where part of the funding involves

having a built-in daycare.

I understood from the practitioners working there, some of them

who had been working for decades in the child care part of the addiction

treatment, that in some cases, women — well, parents battling addictions

— have had other family members really providing the bulk of the care

for children.

To see the women in programs through the day getting the

counselling that they need to overcome addiction while their children

are in the daycare below and to have the parents, the mothers, come in

and learn about putting their kids to bed, dressing them for a bedtime

story, meal preparation — all with the support of early childhood

educators.

Another way that, when we can bring people into addictions

treatment and bed-based treatment, and we are funding this and want to

fund more, we really end up reuniting families and building skills

beyond simply the physical withdrawal and overcoming

addiction.

I wanted to speak also to Red Fish Healing Centre, which was

opened a year and a half ago. It started, as the opposition correctly

noted, on paper in plans while they were still in government. It took

them 12 years to permanently close Riverview. Unfortunately, they did

not establish the community supports that should have been in place when

people exited Riverview. The promise was that there would be community

supports they’d be moving to. That didn’t happen. They didn’t build that

support of help that people wanted.

[11:05 a.m.]

The Red Fish Healing Centre only had five more beds than the

facility that it closed. We did, because of the speed and the urgency,

carry on with that 105-bed hospital, the Red Fish treatment and healing

centre. We sure wish it were double the size. That would have connected

more people with this very high-end and specialized care that now is in

existence. We’re grateful to the practitioners that are there doing the

work.

A third piece — again, I’m just pulling out some of the models of

new forms of addiction treatment that we have been funding over the last

five years, all ones that we continue to expand and absolutely need to

expand more — are the integrated treatment teams operating in every

health authority.

I was particularly compelled by hearing about integrated treatment

teams. Where people who have been — in Interior Health, because of

travel, child care, elder care, shift work — unable to walk into an

addiction treatment centre or unable to walk into some of the

out-patient, more urban-focused, treatment, for them to be able to get

out and meet people where they are and deliver to them, in their homes,

that kind of counselling or medication-assisted treatment that can

attend to withdrawal and have them overcome addiction is extremely

encouraging. I’m grateful to people in every health authority that we

are funding to do that work.

Another recommendation is also related to addictions treatment:

recommendation 17, to ensure opioid agonist treatment is available in

all areas of the province. We agree with that recommendation. We agree

with it so much that OAT is available across British Columbia. This

July, 24,500 were prescribed OAT, just in that month alone.

More options for medication-assisted treatment are available than

ever before, including injectable opioid agonist treatment and

low-barrier pharmaceutical alternatives like tablet iOAT. So a multitude

of different ways, from the medication perspective of delivery, across

the whole spectrum of delivery areas: a centre, a medical clinic or a

family doctor’s office. Also, we’re the only province in the country

where nurses are allowed to prescribe medication-assisted treatment,

again as a medical intervention.

The final thing I’ll speak to, one of the really encouraging areas

of consensus in this select committee report, was the support for

decriminalization. I want to speak again about the context for

decriminalization.

We are building up health care interventions and a diversity of

supports and ways to have people overcome addiction and stay alive,

through harm reduction, in order to be able to stabilize them and give

them the opportunity to step into treatment. The benefit of

decriminalization is to remove that stigma and to very clearly assert by

removing the criminal penalties for possession, for individual people

who have small amounts of illicit drugs.

My sidebar is the drugs themselves remain illegal. The selling,

trafficking or possession of a large amount of these illicit drugs

remains illegal, but we have decriminalized people because our

government believes — and, as it turns out, every party in this House

believes — that addiction is a health care matter. It is not a matter

for the criminal justice system. Because the need is so deep, and

because we are still losing so many lives to the overdose and toxic drug

poisoning crisis, we have to do things differently.

I talked with a Nanaimo city councillor this weekend, who said:

“Decriminalization is not working.” It has only been in place for a

month. Our application to the federal government said it will probably

take five years for it to have the change in psyche, the change in

attitude, which right now is causing too many people to hide their

addiction from their families and from their family care practitioners,

and use drugs alone.

We’re in this climate where using drugs alone terribly, sadly, so

often means dying alone. But immediately, the benefit will be that

police are able to focus more of their attention on the drug dealers,

the true criminals in this situation. On some of the stigma around

people walking into a drug-testing centre or asking for the kind of help

that they need from their primary care provider, we start to lift that

stigma.

Decriminalization alone, it’s true, does not solve our overdose

crisis, but building out every form of support across the entire

continuum and diversity of offerings, as represented by our Pathway to

Hope plan that we are building out, and also as represented by the

consensus agreement in the all-party committee, which we are speaking to

today.

[11:10 a.m.]

It has been a tremendous breakthrough to have all-party support

for prescribed safe supply, for supervised consumption sites, for

decriminalization. All of these used to be controversial things. We need

to embrace, fund, expand and implement the full continuum of care to

save lives at this really tragic time.

With that, Madam Speaker, thank you for your attention and the

opportunity to speak to my remarks.

Question of Privilege

Hon. N. Cullen: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I won’t take long in interruption

of the order of debate today. I rose, as you recall, just at the end of

question period, on a point of order. We’ve clarified our process to make

sure that this is the right standing time for me.

It came out of question period with regards to some comments in a

question from the member for Skeena that were twofold and which I would

focus on. One was a suggestion and, I think, a harming of the reputation of

our police forces by alleging that investigations were supposed

investigations, with regards to criminal matters that may have taken place

in the northwest.

The second, and this is the primary focus of my point of order, is

that the member for Skeena insinuated criminal activity on behalf of members

of the government, equating some, from his perspective, inaction — equating

that with, in his words, terrorism. This is not something that we can allow

to take place in our Legislature.

We can have vigorous and important debate about all of the issues that

we seek to clarify and raise on behalf of our constituents. I, of course,

will look to the Blues , once they’re produced, for the very

specific phrasing, but I heard very clearly, and I’m sure other members did

as well. The insinuation was direct. It was a quid pro quo that the alleged

inactions, which, in fact, are not true, he equated to terrorism, thereby

equating an illegal activity, a criminal activity, upon members of the

government.

He was offered an opportunity, I noticed, in question period to

withdraw those comments and apologize. He has not, at this point, chosen to.

I would hope that he does, so we can move past this matter and not have to

see it again.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Minister. It is so noted, and the Speaker will address it

at the appropriate time.

Debate Continued

A. Olsen: I rise to speak to Motion 17, with respect to the motion that was

tabled by the Government House Leader yesterday, asking that “this House

affirm” — or reaffirm, I guess, in this case — “its support for a

spectrum of addictions care, such as lifesaving harm reduction measures

— including safe consumption sites, decriminalization and safer supply —

and for a rapid, unprecedented expansion of drug treatment and recovery

spaces.”

It’s unfortunate that we’re using this time to debate this motion

work that, frankly, has already been done, in terms of the

coalition-building or the consensus-building process that an all-party

committee completed last November.

I’m not sure what the point of this motion is, other than maybe

politics, and that, to me, is very problematic. The work that the then

Leader of the Official Opposition, interim leader at that time, and my

colleague, the Leader of the Third Party, undertook to encourage the

government and to work with the government to create an all-party

committee was done under the approach and with the approach that we need

to depoliticize this work.

When we have 2,200 British Columbians pass away in 2022, just a

few less than the record number that passed away in 2021, or when we’re

seeing, still, six British Columbians passing away each day due to the

illicit and toxic drug supply, or when we’re counting numbers like

11,000 British Columbians who have passed away since the 2016

declaration of an emergency in this province, or when we see many

countless other British Columbians being poisoned on a daily basis,

sometimes multiple times a day, because of the increased toxicity, it

was incumbent upon this House to depoliticize that

discussion.

[11:15 a.m.]

That was, indeed, the entire point of asking it to move from the

toxicity of question period to the Douglas Fir Room, where committee

deliberations happen in a much less partisan, far less charged

manner.

That work was good work. It was months in the making. It was a

consensus-building process, intentionally designed to build consensus

across party lines. The people that are dying, the families who are

losing family members, can ill afford the political division that you

see by this red carpet further hampering action from the government.

Shame on this government for dragging this conversation back and

repoliticizing it after so much work was done to depoliticize

it.

The things that are written in this motion, as has been pointed

out, are all in this list of consensus recommendations, 37 of them. I

know the process started and there wasn’t consensus. That’s committee

work. Over and over again, they deliberate in camera to come up with a

list of recommendations that all the members of this place can get

behind. And now, here, what we’re doing is separating. We see, “Well,

for 16 years, you ill-prepared British Columbians to be able to deal

with this toxic drug crisis. For six years, we’ve done this or we’ve

done that” — drawing the line, defining the line, separating the

parties, trying to create political advantage of, frankly, a public

tragedy.

I find it distasteful. I find it distasteful to the members of the

committee, who spent hours listening to the testimony of British

Columbians, of stakeholders, of experts, academics, people with lived

experiences. It’s certainly distasteful to all of the people who

provided that testimony, that they would then see their work be dragged

back out here onto the floor of this Legislature and to the very same

situation that we were faced with prior to the calling of that committee

starting to take shape and take form here on this chamber floor

again.

I think back to last year, after that committee was called. Once

the debate stopped showing up here at question period for 30 minutes

each day, questions being lobbed across this way, responses being

volleyed back — the minute that that committee started its work, those

questions ended in here. To me, that was a success because the questions

and the responses didn’t help us advance any further. Accusations from

this side, defensive responses from that side: we were not making any

progress on actually solving the challenging problem that far too many

families face in this province.

By removing it and by giving a committee the responsibility for

taking on this important work, the Premier, the Minister of Mental

Health and Addictions, the Minister of Health, the government cabinet

were able to successfully depoliticize this and send it away to have

good work be done.

I really see this as a process where the survivors of this

incredible situation that we face, with the increased ramping up

toxicity, where they’re being forced to relive the trauma over and over

and over again and now this debate here again today…. It’s not for,

really, the purposes of the debate because, as has been pointed out, we

agree.

[11:20 a.m.]

There is a consensus list of 37 recommendations that are right

here. They include life-saving harm reduction measures, including

parameters around safe consumption, around decriminalization, safer

supply, the de-stigmatization of people who use addictive substances,

support for the rapid and unprecedented expansion of drug treatment.

That’s what all of these recommendations represent.

The only thing that’s left is the execution of these

recommendations, the delivery of them, either through policy or through

legislation or through programs and services. I’m not sure what benefit

this debate is having, other than to spend time in here, because

remarkably, we’re in the third week of this legislative session, yet,

again, no bills tabled this morning, no bills tabled yesterday, no bills

tabled Thursday, no bills tabled Wednesday.

Actually, that’s unfair to the opposition members who have been

standing up and tabling private members’ bills. We’ve got a few. Members

of the official opposition have a few. So there are bills to be debated,

but instead, for the first time in my six years, or 5.75 years, in this

Legislature, when we should be debating bills — this would be normally

the time where we are either in second reading or committee stage of

bill debate — we’re here debating motions, government motions, to fill

time.

The one that they dragged up here…. I was very grateful for the

one that they brought forward last week. It’s been a part of the program

that we’ve been trying to advance in terms of reforming the democracy of

this institution. I spoke supportive of that motion and look forward to

it being sent to a committee.

It’s curious though. It seems like a completely unnecessary

measure when every other committee got members added to it and a job

given to it by the government by moving a quick motion by the Government

House Leader, and off we go, and the members of the committee get on

with the work. Never before have I seen a committee debated

here.

Now, I suppose, as I mentioned in my previous debate, it’s of

benefit to the momentum-building process that needs to happen with these

committees, where we want to see a positive outcome. We’d like this

place to become more democratic in its function. That’s fantastic. We’ve

got members of the government side saying that they support it. We’ve

got members of the opposition saying they support it. We support it.

We’re going to move on and, hopefully, by October, get some good reforms

on paper, and then it will be up to the government to do the work.

That’s the committee process.

For the second motion that we’re debating, they’ve undertaken that

work. They have the recommendation. We have dozens of pages of a report

with the discussions, with an outline of the deliberations, with an

exhaustive list of recommendations built on all-party consensus, and the

only part that was missing was the partisan fight that happens in this

place, apparently. The government had to circle back around and

re-dredge up all the old battles.

Shocking that the previous government left them with nothing.

Shocking that now we have a government who is acting on all of the

things. It’s a narrative that gets told and retold in this place over

and over again. But it’s not the work. The work is the work. Delivering

on the recommendations is the work. In fact, what this debate is doing

is taking us backwards in time. It’s unnecessarily creating divisions

where they need not be.

I sense it’s because, actually, the official opposition came

forward with some ideas. So now we have to…. I guess we can’t possibly

have it where the other ideas are in conflict or whatever it is. Now we

have to show the definition between the parties. We’ve got to make this

about a campaign.

[11:25 a.m.]

But it’s not necessary, and it’s not supporting the families whose

children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews and parents have a health care

need that needs to be met by a government whose responsibility is to

meet health care needs.

Often when we hear government’s responses to the questions or

government’s responses in this debate, speeches that have happened on

this motion, there is the context of the things that they have been

doing. Very rarely is there a context of the size and scope of the

problem.

So while we have an exhaustive list of actions being taken, we

have no context as to whether or not they are enough, are good enough or

are far from good enough. Maybe they’re more than good enough. There’s

no context that’s been provided. That is what has framed this debate on

Motion 17 as well — a list of actions, no context.

The coroner has come out repeatedly…. If we want to look for

context on what the scale and scope of the problem is in this province,

we need to, I think, listen to what the coroner is saying. In the last

coroner’s report…. This was reported on the CBC. Dr. Paxton Bach, the

co–medical director of the B.C. Centre on Substance Use, said, I think,

some things that this government can take to heart and act

upon.

First of all, an apology. I think that it would be nice to see

that be reiterated here, as this conversation gets brought back out onto

the floor in order for us to argue about it again, when we had gotten

past arguing about it.

“To the families of the 45 individuals who passed away in the last

week alone….” This was in the last week of January. Forty-five

individuals passed away in that week. “To their friends and their

colleagues and their communities and loved ones: my heart goes out to

you, and I’m so sorry that we’re continuing to fail.”

That’s not the story that’s being told right now about the

situation. We’ve just heard about the remarkable progress. Yet the

co–medical director of the B.C. Centre on Substance Use is apologizing

where the government, frankly, should be apologizing.

He goes on: “I hope that we can sit with that grief and that

outrage. I hope that every citizen of the province reflects on this

report and feels that outrage and uses that to drive the advocacy that

is needed to generate change.”

That advocacy had started. The report had been written. The

recommendations had been tabled. And here we are, being dragged back in

here to fill time so we can argue about it again.

On decriminalization measures, chief coroner Lisa Lapointe said

the following on the change for decriminalization, which came into

effect the week that this

article was written, the last week of January

— a month ago. The change is a “key first step,” but “only one measure

of many that are necessary to end this crisis.”

Is that what’s happening in here today? Are we doing the work? Are

we talking about the work that needs to be done? Are we rehashing what

has already been outlined and on the record? It doesn’t feel like we’re

doing the work that should be done. That’s in the hands of the

government. Only the government has the power and is empowered to

actually do the actions that are outlined in this.

Bach continues: “The province needs a critical and comprehensive

response plan with ‘everything’ from a regulated safe supply, effective

patient-centred treatment to investment in upstream drivers of substance

use in order to prevent use.”

People are still giving this government advice, still advocating

on what needs to be done. Nowhere in the conversation was: “Drag this

back out for the House to debate and fight over again.” Nobody I’ve seen

has said that this would be a good way of doing this work.

[11:30 a.m.]

When you had just gained the support of all of the House, drag it

out here and beat each other up over it again. Nobody is saying that’s a

good idea, yet here we are. This is what we’re doing. The damage of this

needs to be noted, the potential damage that’s caused, dragging us

backwards.

I’m just going to say this because I believe that this motion here

today is a government response to a proposal that was put forward by the

official opposition. I feel like it’s a good time to make a comment

about that proposal that was put forward by the official

opposition.

Certainly, we have heard over and over and over again that access

to treatment is one of the critical obstacles for people who are

suffering from substance use and abuse, addiction and health care needs.

The ability to get treatment when you need it, where you need it, is one

of the key challenges that people have, and it’s costing us

lives.

The official opposition offered an idea. Let’s privatize it,

essentially. Paraphrasing — it was more detailed than that. The one

caution that I have and feel needs to be on the record and on the debate

of this is that we need to be very careful. It was pointed out to me

that it will be public funds that are paying for this. “Don’t worry;

it’s public money that’s paying for it.”

We do not want to create a pipeline for an industry. It feels like

we need to keep feeding it people who are suffering. That is not the job

of this government. The job of this government and the job of the

provincial government is to ensure that people are well. And if we

create an industry around treatment, we’ll find ourselves in a similar

situation that we found ourselves in the other privatized industries

that we’ve created that then need us to continue to feed the

industry.

We might be able to find some comfort in that it’s public money

that is going to be paying for the treatment of these folks. But once we

start to create privatized treatment, then there will be a need for us

to continue to feed the industry, and that’s very dangerous. We need to

be focused on ensuring people are well. We need to be making sure that

we’re covering off all of the continuum of someone in this process. We

need to really be starting the process, and the investments need to be

really on the prevention side of it, at the very beginning.

There’s more that will be said on the plan. I think that the plan

that the official opposition have produced…. The government is probably

going to have a response later today in the budget to that plan. There

are a lot of discussions, but I just really felt uncomfortable not

mentioning the feelings that I had around the announcement that was

made, since I believe that this motion today is in response to the

official opposition’s plan. This is the government’s response — to spend

time further dividing this House rather than bringing us

together.

True leadership brings together. True leadership uses the

committees. True leadership trusts the work of the committees, takes the

recommendations and implements them. Too often we see committees being

used as a way to distract the conversation, set it aside, move it aside.

The reports come in, and then they collect dust.

I really hope that later today what we hear from this government

is leadership on the aspects of this report that are fully under their

responsibility for implementing now and that we stop using this time in

this space in here to foment mistrust, to erode the confidence of people

in this institution and to take good work and undermine it, which is

effectively what’s happening in the Legislature as we debate Motion

With that, I take my seat and thank you for the opportunity.

HÍSW̱ḴE

SIÁM .

N. Simons: It’s a pleasure to take the opportunity to speak to Motion 17, which

speaks to the Select Standing Committee on Health’s report on Closing

Gaps, Reducing Barriers .

I want to thank my colleague from Saanich North and the Islands for

his words. I’m not necessarily agreeing with all of what he said, but many

of the points he made were very valid.

[11:35 a.m.]

I think, based on what he said, I’m going to do my best to ensure that

this isn’t an argument, that this is just a discussion around some of the

findings of a committee. In fact, those who chose to take it, make it an

argument, maybe were just upset at what…. They repeatedly stated that they

wished there were other things to talk about. But this is what’s on the

order paper, and this is what we’re talking about.

I want to say that the work of the committee was very well

appreciated, and, you know, the work of all the select standing committees,

the other committees, is much appreciated. They get a varied degree of

support and acceptance and a varied response from government, regardless of

what government it is. I’ve sat on committees under previous governments and

seen very little action. I’ve seen action from other governments.

I don’t think this is necessarily an opportunity to argue. There

remain…. Despite 37 recommendations that are consensus-based, there are some

nuances to the debate that can be brought up if there’s a desire to find

differences rather than similarities.

But I don’t have a problem talking about this important issue, having

spent some of my career working with vulnerable communities, working as the

director of health for First Nations for a number of years and working in

the Ministry for Children and Families, coming across issues around

addiction on a very regular basis, quite frankly, and seeing the responses

over time, over the years, the varied responses that were available for

people seeking out treatment.

Obviously, part of government is to show the work that it’s doing and

to reassure the community that efforts are being made to address the

concerns that are primary in their minds. So I do believe that we, as

members of the government caucus — and in fact, all members of this House —

support the work that government is doing.

It’s really just a question of…. You know, people would like faster

responses in some areas. It would be nice if there were some shortcuts to

some of the resolutions to this toxic drug supply issue.

I do want to just say to the moms and the dads and the siblings and

the kids of people who I know who have been affected by the overdose crisis,

in fact, the deaths of children who were on my caseload as a social worker….

I’ve been to funerals. These are people in our community there. They live on

our streets. They live in houses on our streets. Some do live on the

streets.

It’s just important to say that first and foremost, our response

should be compassion. Our response should be one of understanding that these

addiction issues results don’t come about just on their own. They’re often a

secondary response to, perhaps, childhood trauma or other challenges that

young people might have faced as they grew up — adults as well.

I’ve spoken to people who have been personally impacted, whose family

members I may not have known, but I’ve certainly recognized the grief and

have recognized the desire for things to be better and for things to get

better faster. I agree. I would love to see….

You know, I remember in the ’90s and in the 2000s trying to get young

people into detox and treatment, and it was a struggle. It was always….

There were challenges because of wait-lists. This is not a new thing.

Treatment wasn’t always successful the first time or the second time or the

third time. We have to recognize that it’s not….

I’m not going to say that anyone has tried to simplify it, but to

build out a recovery treatment program in its fullest possible way does take

time. We don’t have…. Even today in question period, we heard about the

challenge in finding people to fill professional vacancies across the

province. Here we’ve increased the number of beds for adults and youth, and

that’s a very, very important thing.

[11:40 a.m.]

It’s important, also, to talk about…. What I would like to talk about

is the prevention side, and not just the prevention through the reduction of

stigma and for the education of young people about the harms of drugs, but

prevention in ensuring that people don’t grow up in abject poverty in this

province — that we address issues around poverty, that we address issues

around food security and that we address issues around recreational

opportunities. If we can invest properly in the young people of the

province, then we will get better results as the years go by.

I can’t help but suggest that there was a time in this province that

investments in young people, health care, education and child care weren’t

what they needed to be. I believe that ensuring young people and families

have the supports around them necessary to raise children in a healthy way

and be healthy families…. We need to continue to invest in those, even if

those immediate results are not measured in the outcomes that we see from

the coroner. We do need to invest, and we need to continue to do

that.

I’m pleased this issue finds consensus in this place. Not always 100

percent consensus, but I’m thankful for that. I think the work just needs to

keep going, and it keeps going hard.

N. Simons moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. A. Dix: It’s a very exciting day here in the Legislature. We’ve got the

budget coming up this afternoon. I move that the House do now

adjourn.

Motion approved.

Deputy Speaker: The House is now adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:42 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.