Fourth Session, 41st Parliament

(2019) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Wednesday, February 27, 2019

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 209

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

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 9 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act,

Hon. D. Eby

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Pink Shirt Day and prevention of bullying

M. Dean

Marc Pelletier and Michael Dally

M. Stilwell

Coldest Night of the Year fundraising walk

A. Kang

Pacific Autism Family Network and Wall of Love

initiative

T. Wat

Harmac mill

D. Routley

Pink Shirt Day and prevention of bullying

D. Barnett

Oral Questions

Marine traffic and protection of resident orca

population

A. Wilkinson

Hon. G. Heyman

Government policies on oil transportation

A. Wilkinson

Hon. J. Horgan

P. Milobar

Hon. G. Heyman

Call for public inquiry into money laundering

S. Furstenau

Hon. D. Eby

Government policies on oil transportation and U.S.

tanker traffic

S. Bond

Hon. G. Heyman

T. Stone

Hon. J. Horgan

Trans Mountain pipeline and transport of oil by

rail

M. de Jong

Hon. G. Heyman

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate

(continued)

Hon. S. Robinson

A. Wilkinson

M. Dean

D. Davies

Hon. K. Conroy

R. Sultan

J. Routledge

T. Wat

D. Routley

G. Kyllo

J. Brar

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2019

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Hon. D. Eby: We have a special guest on the floor here with us today. I will read to

you, a little bit, from the back of his new book, called Take the Torch ,

for members who aren’t familiar with him.

“Ian Waddell has been on the front line of progressive change in Canada for

over five decades. When he ran a storefront law office in Vancouver in the ’70s,

he argued and won the first class action lawsuit in Canada. A few years later he

was accompanying Tom Berger on his groundbreaking hearings in Canada’s north.

Almost by accident, Waddell found himself in Canada’s parliament, embroiled in

battles over the national energy policy, gas exports, national park reserves, the

right to die, cultural policy, NAFTA, amongst others.”

Joining us is Ian Waddell. He has his assistant with him here today. Colin

Edmundson is joining us as well. Will the House please make this former member of

this place feel very welcome indeed.

Mr. Speaker: And he was a good professor.

A. Weaver: It gives me great pleasure to introduce a group of first-year University of

Victoria political science students. They’re MA and PhD students who are visiting

the Legislature today to learn about our politics and parliament firsthand. The

group is spearheaded by someone many of you may know: former 2016 B.C. legislative

intern Michael McDonald. He’s pursuing his master’s degree in political science at

the university in my riding. Would the House please make them all feel very

welcome.

I have another introduction. My good friend and dear colleague Michael

Markwick is in the precinct today with three visitors from the Metro Vancouver

region. Would the House please make Michael and his guests also welcome

today.

B. Ma: The Leader of the Third Party stole my thunder there on one of my

introductions. I would also love to be able to introduce Dr. Michael Markwick. Dr.

Michael Markwick is a resident of the North Shore. We actually ran against each

other in the 2017 election — not quite in the same riding. He was up against a

much more formidable opponent, the hon. member for West

Vancouver–Capilano.

In the years since, I have been so incredibly honoured to be able to not

only work with him on an incredible number of issues — including helping

vulnerable people in North Vancouver to find housing, on the reduction of poverty

and on actions to address climate change — but also to be able to call him a

friend. He is here today visiting with a delegation of incredible women, who I

will leave to the Parliamentary Secretary for Gender Equity to

introduce.

Would the House please join me in making him feel very welcome.

R. Kahlon: I have two guests here today in the House. They are Jan and Dan Donnelly.

They are celebrating their 43rd wedding anniversary. They’ve made their way to

Victoria to watch the proceedings. I’m hoping the whole House can please make them

welcome.

Hon. M. Mark: Joining us in the chamber is a fierce advocate, someone I respect very

deeply. Her name is Fay Blaney. She has been a leader in the Downtown Eastside,

fighting for missing and murdered Indigenous women. She is an educator; she’s an

activist. She’s someone that I highly respect. Will the House please join me in

welcoming Fay Blaney.

[1:40 p.m.]

M. Dean: Today we were honoured to meet with a delegation on systematic human

trafficking. I want to thank Trisha Baptie, Fay Blaney and Laurel McBride for

sharing their wisdom and experience with us today. Would everyone please make them

very welcome.

Hon. J. Horgan: For those who can’t see it, I’m wearing a pink tie today. I didn’t even

know it, but I am. I wanted to thank all members from every corner of this House

for joining us on the stairs today with representatives from school districts

around greater Victoria.

Particularly, I want to pay tribute to Chantelle and Isabella from the

great high school of Reynolds. Go Roadrunners. They were here with teachers and

other associates, kids from Northridge School, kids from Central Middle School,

reminding all of us how important it is to be kind every day. I know that that’s

self-serving just before question period, but it is something I know we all hold

in our hearts. I want to thank all members for doing that not just today but every

day.

Hon. R. Fleming: I have a couple of introductions to make.

The first: joining us in the gallery is Mr. Gordon Swan, who is the

president of the B.C. School Trustees Association and has been involved in public

education for something like 19 years — been involved in that organization for

many, many, many years, playing a leadership role that has been

essential.

I don’t think I’m spreading any rumours, because he announced it before

about 200 or so school trustees a week ago, but Mr. Swan is hanging up his boots,

so to speak, as president. I just want to not only welcome him but thank him for

his years of service for our public school system and welcome him to be here

today.

We have a few other guests who are joining us in the precinct here as well.

Gordon Matchett, is the CEO of the Take a Hike Foundation, which many members of

the House will be familiar with. He’s joined by Deb Abma-Sluggett, who’s the

director of philanthropy, and Larissa Hayes, who’s the manager of philanthropy for

Take a Hike, which is a very, very innovative alternate education program that is

establishing a presence in more and more school districts each year with an

investment from our government.

We’re very pleased to see the results for students in the Take a Hike

program. Very welcome and very pleased to have them here in the precinct

today.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 9 — ATTORNEY GENERAL STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. D. Eby presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a

bill intituled Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2019.

Hon. D. Eby: I move the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

I’m pleased to introduce the Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act,

2019. This bill amends the Family Law Act to add the statutory authority needed

to implement planned reforms through the Provincial Court family rules. This

bill also amends several sections of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act,

which was brought into force in 2016.

The purpose of these amendments is to clarify the operation of these

sections and to improve the ability of those provisions to achieve their

intended purpose. Doing so will help to reduce the potentially time-consuming,

costly need to seek court direction on how these sections will

apply.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. D. Eby: Now I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 9, Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2019, 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)

PINK SHIRT DAY AND

PREVENTION OF

BULLYING

M. Dean: Bullying is a major problem in our schools, workplaces, homes and on

line. It’s a significant threat to the health and well-being of British

Columbians. It is cruel, harmful and preventable.

Today is the 12th annual Pink Shirt Day, a day where thousands of

British Columbians join together to take a stand against bullying. Pink Shirt

Day aims to raise the awareness of the issues as well as support programs that

help build and foster kids’ self-esteem. It is now a movement to stop bullying

by celebrating diversity and promoting positive social

relationships.

The theme this year is cyberbullying. Cyberbullying can happen around

the clock and can follow victims everywhere, including home, into bedrooms and

invading safe spaces. In today’s digital world, it can be impossible to escape

on-line bullying, whether it’s harassment, spreading rumours or

threats.

[1:45 p.m.]

This year Pink Shirt Day is encouraging all British Columbians to combat

cyberbullying by thinking twice before posting something negative and instead

encouraging others to use the Internet as a positive sharing

platform.

B.C.’s ERASE program was recently expanded and now focuses on social

media and on-line safety, mental health and wellness, substance use, gang

prevention and supporting students of all sexual orientations and gender

identities. Every child has a right to feel safe, accepted and respected,

regardless of their race, culture, religion, sexual orientation or gender

identity.

We need to stand up with those being bullied and show them they’re not

alone. I encourage all British Columbians to practise the principles of Pink

Shirt Day every day, not just today, as we help build a brighter future for

all.

MARC PELLETIER AND MICHAEL DALLY

M. Stilwell: All RCMP members and auxiliaries make our communities healthier, safer

places every day. Today I want to pay tribute to two such individuals with big

hearts and big smiles who are big supporters of community, Oceanside RCMP staff

sergeant Marc Pelletier and auxiliary constable Michael Dally. These two men go

above and beyond to support and connect with our community.

Auxiliaries must volunteer a minimum of 160 hours each year, but in

2018, Michael logged more than 12 times that amount: 2,291 hours. He’s a

wonderful ambassador for the RCMP with a larger-than-life personality, a

booming laugh and his love of people. Whether it’s teaching children about

cyberbullying or conflict resolution, raising money for the Salvation Army or

helping people feel more secure in their homes, he’s always willing to

help.

Staff Sgt. Marc Pelletier started at the Oceanside detachment in 2016,

and under his leadership, Secure-Us was launched. The initiative is all about

empowering victims of property crime and educating people on how to make their

properties more secure. He also makes every effort to be at many community

events — putting on an elf hat to celebrate the holiday season with the family

resource centre or welcoming the new Canadians at citizen

ceremonies.

Just last week he and Michael took the ice-cold plunge for Special

Olympics B.C., raising a combined total of more than $3,000 as part of Team

RCMP Copsicles. Both men have also been recognized by the RCMP for building

positive and respectful relationships with Indigenous communities, which speaks

volumes to the community connections that they have made. Oceanside is so

fortunate to have these two individuals in our community.

I thank Michael and Marc for all that you do.

COLDEST NIGHT OF THE YEAR

FUNDRAISING

WALK

A. Kang: Imagine that you have to keep moving and walking to stay warm because

you are homeless and out in the cold. Imagine that you’re constantly tired and

low on energy because you’re homeless and you’re out in the cold. Imagine that

your fingers and your lips are numb, chapped, cracked and bleeding because

you’re homeless and out in the cold. Imagine. Just imagine.

I can only imagine because this thought is abstract to me. I can only

imagine because I have never lived it. I can only imagine because I have not

walked a mile in their shoes.

I rise today to recognize the joint effort of Burnaby Community Services

and Society to End Homelessness in Burnaby in raising homelessness awareness

and organizing the Coldest Night of the Year walk 2019. The Coldest Night of

the Year walk event raises awareness by offering a glimpse into the challenges

faced by people who are homeless. Although we may never truly understand the

hardship of those who do not have a place to call home, I hope that through

efforts like this, we can rally more support to take care of the most

vulnerable in our society.

It was approximately 2 degrees Celsius when we began our walk, but as

the sun began to set, the weather felt like it dropped a few degrees below

freezing. Many of us had walking shoes, some of us wore warm boots, and we were

all given some really cool-looking toques. Participants can choose to walk two,

five or ten kilometres. But at the end of the cold walk, we will all return

home to our warm beds.

[1:50 p.m.]

Change can only happen when people are empowered to improve their lives

and the lives in their community. I would like to take this moment to thank

everyone who participated, donated, volunteered and sponsored this

event.

PACIFIC AUTISM FAMILY NETWORK

AND WALL OF LOVE

INITIATIVE

T. Wat: I’m proud today to rise in the House to speak on the unveiling ceremony

of the Wall of Love at the Pacific Autism Family Network Centre last week in my

riding of Richmond North Centre, hosted by the Canada Youth Sports Alliance in

support of those with autism spectrum disorder.

I would like to thank the alliance — especially the 18 families

mentioned on the Wall of Love, as well as the three families that came forward

to donate during the ceremony — for their efforts to raise funds for the

Pacific Autism Family Network. With the theme of “Lighting up the dream, to

shine,” the Wall of Love is an honorary mural in the centre. It was lovingly

painted with paper planes, each filled with the names of families who donated

to the network.

The opening of the centre in 2016 by former Premier Christy Clark was a

seminal moment. Thanks to the $20 million funding by the former provincial

government, vital support is provided to those with autism spectrum disorder

and to their families.

For the past few years, Canada Youth Sports Alliance president Frank Wu

has been actively engaging the Chinese-Canadian community in understanding

autism disorder spectrum. Frank and I were among the many people who joined the

centre’s opening ceremony, and we were moved by their care and

passion.

Frank also noticed that very few Chinese-Canadians were present at the

opening ceremony, which shows a relative lack of knowledge and attention to

autism in the community. This was the driving force for his determination to

promote awareness of autism in the Chinese-Canadian community and the

meaningful work of the Pacific Autism Family Network. Over the years, much has

been accomplished on this front, and I will continue to actively support this

effort. I’m extremely touched to be a part of this event and hope that more

will join this worthy cause.

HARMAC MILL

D. Routley: I’d like to tell you a little story about a mill named Harmac. Harmac is

a pulp mill in my riding. It was owned by MacMillan Bloedel. It was first

started by them and named after Harvey MacMillan, thus “Harmac.” Pope and

Talbot was the last company to own it before the employees, and they went

bankrupt in 2007. That left the community of Nanaimo — the region, the workers,

their families — on the edge of an irreplaceable loss.

Those workers saw opportunity. They gathered together, formed a workers’

cooperative and became partners in rescuing that mill. They did so with the

help of the Sampson family — Levi Sampson is now the president of the company —

and a couple of other investors, including Williams Lake–based Pioneer Log

Homes, the subject of the reality TV show Timber Kings .

The Sampsons, the employees at Harmac and their other investors carried

forward where no one thought they could. They started with no line of credit

because of inherited environmental liabilities. This meant that they had to pay

their hydro bill every day — $50,000 a day, $100,000 on Saturdays to cover

Sunday.

They struggled. Harmac made the decision to sell its first order, 15,000

tonnes, at a loss. Levi said: “We were in a tight spot, losing money. It was

hard to get customers back.” They were afraid they wouldn’t be around in a

couple of months, so they weren’t necessarily wanting to fill out order

forms.

Since then, more than $20 million has been paid out in municipal taxes

by Harmac. Things haven’t always been easy. The union stepped in during the

first couple of years with a $1.2 million loan. But Harmac enjoys a competitive

advantage, and that is the workers and the partnership they have forged, which

delivers competitive business results, fairness and prosperity to families, and

spreads that prosperity out into the region broadly.

I thank them, all of them, for everything they’ve done.

PINK SHIRT DAY AND

PREVENTION OF

BULLYING

D. Barnett: Pink Shirt Day was inspired in 2007 in Nova Scotia when David Shepherd

and Travis Price saw another student, who was wearing a pink shirt, being

bullied. These two courageous young men stood up to the bullies for the young

lad.

[1:55 p.m.]

As a result, a protest was staged, and Pink Shirt Day was born. We

continue to wear pink on this day as a message to our young and old alike that

no one should be bullied.

Every day many are still subject to the nastiness of bullying, so we

must continue to ask why. Where does bullying come from? It starts with what

children see from birth, at home, at play and at school, but what starts in

children often doesn’t end when they’re 19.

Nowadays bullying occurs across society, including many workplaces. As a

result, Pink Shirt Day is highly relevant to us all, no matter what age and

whether or not we have children. Unfortunately, bullying is now more potent and

harmful than it ever has been.

A new mode of bullying has evolved from the new economy and the world of

to post any picture and to do all of this behind a shield of anonymity. It is

far more difficult to hold modern-day bullies to account, and these modern-day

bullies, in the truest sense of the word, are cowards. They can’t even bring

themselves to face those who they destroy.

Pink Shirt Day provides all of us with an opportunity to reflect on what

we say to others, both in person and on line, and on what effect these words

may carry. Think about the pain that those who have been and are still being

bullied endure on a daily basis. Think about those who could no longer endure

the bullying and took their lives. Think of the loved ones they left

behind.

More importantly, allow today to be a reminder of the reflections we all

must make on a daily basis to do our part to stop bullying.

S. Furstenau: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

S. Furstenau: Having gotten leave, I might take a little bit more than people are

expecting. You may have noticed a large group of students come in wearing pink

shirts just now. This is half of a group of grade 10 students from Shawnigan Lake

School. There are 120 of them here in the precinct today, wearing their pink

shirts.

These students have just completed a mock parliament, complete with

political parties, a coalition agreement and a decision to pass a bill to bring in

a national carbon tax as a means to address the very serious challenge of tackling

climate change.

I’m absolutely delighted to see them here today. I want to also

congratulate their teacher Paul Klassen, who’s providing the opportunities for

these and many other students to again and again realize they are not the future

leaders we are waiting for. They are the leaders we need right now.

D. Routley: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

D. Routley: Joining us later in the precinct today will be Mike Ravenhill, CEO of the

David Foster Foundation, and director Levi Sampson, who I mentioned in the

statement earlier, the president of Harmac pulp mill.

They’ll be meeting with members of government in order to bring attention

to the fundraising that they do, last year raising $10 million at their annual

event to support families of children who are having transplants.

Oral Questions

MARINE TRAFFIC AND PROTECTION

OF RESIDENT ORCA

POPULATION

A. Wilkinson: Our Environment Minister is no doubt aware that the world’s leading

scientific journal goes by the name of Nature . A recent report in

Nature entitled “Evaluating Threats to Endangered Killer Whales”

makes it very clear that commercial vessels, including freighters, tankers and

ferries, are all a threat to our killer whale population.

[2:00 p.m.]

The expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline would result in 29 extra

sailings per month, about one per day. The Environment Minister recently

defended the addition of 2,700 sailings per year by B.C. Ferries, on top of the

existing 117,000 sailings by B.C. Ferries.

Is the Environment Minister prepared to ignore the science in pursuit of

his political agenda around killer whales?

Hon. G. Heyman: Well, only the opposition could try to convince British Columbians that

they cut ferry service to remote communities in order to save an endangered

species but declined to introduce any legislation to do the same or to act on

the many threats to species around British Columbia.

The Minister of Transportation, I, my ministry, take the report very

seriously. We have worked and will continue to work with B.C. Ferries on all

reasonable methods that we can discover and ones that are being explored, like

electrification, to cut down on the noise from ferries, but we will stand with

people in remote communities and ensure they have the services they

need.

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

A. Wilkinson: Now, an additional report was commissioned by the Port of Vancouver from

JASCO Applied Sciences entitled Regional Ocean Noise . That report

found that B.C. Ferries contributes 67 percent to the lost foraging time by our

southern resident killer whale population due to its sailing schedule. Traffic

from the shipment of petroleum products in Canadian waters contributes 1

percent of the noise that inhibits that foraging.

Is the minister prepared to defend a further 2,700 sailings with the

accompanying noise pollution? Is he just becoming a complete hypocrite on this

file when it comes to noise pollution?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Heyman: Well, I think British Columbians will be interested to know that the

opposition thinks that their ability to get from remote communities to other

communities via B.C.’s long-standing ferry service is less important to them

than a sevenfold increase in the number of tankers potentially putting our

coast at risk. I’m, in fact, shocked to hear that.

We take the safety and the protection of orcas seriously. We’re working

with the federal government on a number of measures. We’re in regular contact

with the Ministry of Fisheries and Oceans, who were pleased to note the new

minister is from British Columbia and understands the importance of this iconic

species to British Columbians very clearly.

We will work with B.C. Ferries to minimize the threat to orcas, and we

will continue to defend our coast, our environment and tens of thousands of

jobs from a project that we continue to stand against because we believe it is

not necessary and it’s a threat to British Columbia.

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

supplemental.

GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON

OIL

TRANSPORTATION

A. Wilkinson: Let’s be clear what the Environment Minister is saying. He is prepared

do nothing about the 500 large crude carriers that go down the Strait of Juan

de Fuca every year to Anacortes and Birch Bay — nothing at all — while the

Premier goes to Olympia, Washington, to cozy up to the governor who’s

protecting that tanker traffic.

We have an Environment Minister who is prepared to do absolutely nothing

about thousands of railcars being purchased to bring oil down the Thompson

River, down the Fraser River, when we’ve just had a derailment that sent 110

grain cars into Kicking Horse Canyon. We have an Environment Minister who is

prepared to do nothing in the face of 120,000 B.C. Ferries sailings generating

noise pollution when two-thirds of the problem with the killer whales comes

from those sailings.

This minister sits in this House and smiles and says: “Oh no.” He’s

“protecting the coast of British Columbia.” Please, will someone on the other

side stand up and do something to protect the coast of British

Columbia?

[2:05 p.m.]

Hon. J. Horgan: I will take the Leader of the Opposition up on his invitation to stand

and defend the coast, because we’ve been doing that since we were sworn in, in

2017. I’m as incredulous as the Environment Minister to hear the Leader of the

Official Opposition say to British Columbians on the coast and on Vancouver

Island: “Stay in your homes, because we want to make sure oil products can get,

not refined here to help British Columbians, to help Canadians, but sent

somewhere else so they can create jobs somewhere else.”

The Liberals, to recap, say: “We want to send raw products as far away

as possible, not create jobs and wealth and opportunity here. And we want

people in coastal British Columbia to stay home because we don’t want to fund

the ferry service.” Outrageous.

P. Milobar: It’s always astounding — the attempts at deflection from the real

question when it comes to this government.

This isn’t about the ferries. This is about the ferries not having a

plan that’s any faster than 50 years from now to try to address the noise as it

relates to the killer whales. Let’s look at what the science says about the

noise implications within these waters.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Thank you.

P. Milobar: The shipment of energy contributes just 1 percent of noise pollution to

the killer whale situation. The expansion of Trans Mountain adds one more trip

per day. Other threats are ignored. Yet this government chooses to block the

pipeline for political reasons. They seem to think that if a spill happens on

the other side of the international waters, the bitumen and the oil in the

water will respect the dotted line on the map and not wash up on our

shore.

Why should our economy and B.C. workers have to pay the price for this

minister and this Premier cozying up to the United States’ energy interests

instead of Canadian interests?

Hon. G. Heyman: Only the masters of spin on the other side of the floor could think that

protecting British Columbians’ jobs, environment and coastline is somehow

acting for political reasons instead of the reasons we were elected to

serve.

The member opposite should know that those tankers are outside the

jurisdiction of British Columbia. They are regulated by the federal government.

We are talking about applying B.C.’s jurisdiction on a hazardous product that

transports through a pipeline or by rail through our territory and the impacts

it may have on the marine environment and our coastline. We’ve been clear.

We’ve been consistent. We’re standing up for British Columbia, and we’ll

continue to do that.

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

P. Milobar: I think that answer very clearly demonstrates the blinders that this

minister has — him and his Bowen Island buddies — when it comes to protecting

things along our coastline. They seem to have no problem

whatsoever….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, the chamber is suffering from noise pollution. If we

could respect the member for Kamloops–North Thompson. Thank you.

P. Milobar: They have absolutely no problem turning a blind eye to what is going on

in our oceans, in our seas, right next door to us. The Premier goes down to

Washington state and never broaches the subject at all. Yet when he comes home,

the governor from down in that same state is making statements about our energy

shipments and our energy products in Canada.

Again, their goal seems to be to landlock Canadian resources while

saying nothing about the U.S. oil and gas interests and the U.S. tankers right

next to our waters and our shorelines. How is that protecting our

coastline?

Again to the Minister of Environment, why does he prefer foreign tankers

and foreign jobs over Canadian tankers and Canadian jobs?

Hon. G. Heyman: Again, only the opposition could pretend that turning a blind eye to the

risks of a project — risks that were confirmed by the National Energy Board but

which they chose to ignore, risks to our coastal economy, risks to tens of

thousands of jobs — is somehow siding with interests outside of British

Columbia. It’s simply not true.

[2:10 p.m.]

Let me say again: we are consistent. We are rational in our position.

We’ve stood up for British Columbia’s environment, our coastal economy and tens

of thousands of jobs. We haven’t flip-flopped back and forth like the members

of the opposition when they were in government.

Bring on another question, and I’ll tell you exactly how you’ve done

that.

CALL FOR PUBLIC INQUIRY

INTO MONEY

LAUNDERING

S. Furstenau: I’m sorry to disappoint the Minister of Environment, but we’re going

back to money laundering, which is prospering in B.C.

Money laundering enriches those who are damaging our society, and it’s

harming citizens across the province. As criminal money pours into our housing

supply, jacking up the prices, it pushes people away from homes that they

could’ve lived in. It also fuels the opioid crisis that is destroying families

and communities across this province.

Last week I raised the issue of the integrity of past

anti-money-laundering investigations and the role of the B.C. Lottery Corp. In

his response, the Attorney General stated that the U.S. lists Canada as “a

problem jurisdiction for money laundering.” He also stated: “It appears as

though money-laundering investigations aren’t taking place to the degree that

they should.”

Yesterday, in a response to my colleague’s call for a public inquiry

into money laundering, the Attorney General stated that the procedure his

office is taking to address the issue is faster than a public inquiry. However,

the main appeal of a public inquiry is not its speed but its depth — its

ability to expose the legal gaps of our system, dig deep into the roots of the

issue in public and use legal powers to summon individuals to

cooperate.

My question is to the Attorney General. There is widespread agreement

that money laundering is a huge problem. It’s not being adequately addressed.

Will his government launch a public inquiry into money laundering?

Hon. D. Eby: I thank the member for the question. Obviously, the approach that we’re

taking is aimed at stopping the activity that is happening right now in British

Columbia. That is our main focus, and it is taking the government’s full

attention to work on that.

I agree with the member, though, that a public inquiry does bring the

benefit of going into significantly more depth on these issues. One of the

pieces I was concerned about when Dr. German’s initial report came out was that

there were many stories in that report that didn’t get attention. Beyond that,

there were likely many stories that were not told, just given the amount of

time and the scope that we gave Dr. German, because we wanted answers quickly

about how to stop what was happening in our casinos.

I agree with her about the benefits of a public inquiry. But I hope she

also agrees with me about the benefits of trying to stop the activity as

quickly as possible that’s happening in B.C. and keeping the option of a public

inquiry open, if that’s necessary.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader, Third Party, on a supplemental.

S. Furstenau: It’s great to see agreement on this front, because I think so many

people across B.C. really are asking when the evidence is enough to make the

move towards having a public inquiry.

The German report originally estimated that the levels of money

laundering were in the hundreds of millions, but now the Ministry of Finance

has estimated that the problem is closer to $1 billion. A recent Global B.C.

report reinforces this, estimating that roughly $5 billion of illegal funds

have been laundered in Vancouver real estate since 2012. The evidence of the

problem does continue to grow, as does its size and scope. We know the two

reports the minister is expecting in March will likely raise even more

concern.

The Attorney General said earlier this month that public inquiries

generally take a long time and that he doesn’t think solutions are so

complicated. Yet clearly, we have no idea how big this problem is or how deep

it goes.

My question, again, is for the Attorney General. I know he has not ruled

out a public inquiry. I’m heartened by his words today. But when will the

public know if an inquiry into money laundering is going to happen or

not?

Hon. D. Eby: We’re expecting the reports from Dr. German and from Maureen Maloney at

the end of March. We expect that they will be of great interest, both within

this House and outside of this House, to many British Columbians — and, likely,

to many Canadians — who are concerned about what they’re seeing happening in

British Columbia. I’m sure we will have more conversations at that

time.

[2:15 p.m.]

GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON

OIL TRANSPORTATION

AND U.S.

TANKER TRAFFIC

S. Bond: Right now there are eight foreign tankers off our coast carrying Alaskan

crude oil. Because these tankers are not subject to National Energy Board speed

requirements, they have a much greater impact than the proposed single sailing

a day from a potential pipeline expansion.

Can the Environment Minister stand up and tell British Columbians why he

is silent about the foreign tankers that are off our coast today and every day

and why he refuses to stand up for Canadian resources and Canadian

jobs?

Hon. G. Heyman: We on this side of the House are pleased to stand up for Canadians, for

British Columbians and for our jobs every single day we’re in office. That’s

exactly what we’re doing. The members opposite can say that it’s simply one

tanker a day, but the fact is that that’s a sevenfold increase over one tanker

a week.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Heyman: A couple of days ago the member for Kamloops–North Thompson claimed

there were multiple tankers in the Salish Sea carrying Alaska crude to

Washington. The members opposite might want to do some research. He pointed to

a specific tanker, the T Rex , holding it up as an example of a foreign

tanker carrying oil off our coast.

In fact, that tanker was in Vancouver’s harbour. If it was in

Vancouver’s harbour, it’s because it was carrying chemicals, not crude

oil.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member for Prince George–Valemount on a supplemental.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member, you can wait until you feel that there’s quiet enough for you to

ask your question.

S. Bond: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Let’s be clear. To the Minister of Environment, we are talking about one

additional sailing a day. Today, right now, there are eight tankers sitting off

our coast. Let me paint the picture, because this is a minister who apparently

believes it’s acceptable that if it’s out of sight, it’s out of

mind.

Let me paint the picture. The Polar Enterprise tanker is

approximately 15 kilometres off Saturna Island right now. It is a 141,740 tonne

oil tanker carrying crude oil to the Ferndale Refinery in Washington state. Yet

this government hasn’t said one thing to Governor Inslee about these U.S.

tankers, even while that governor is busy attacking Canadian projects and

Canadian jobs.

Well, apparently, the minister has no problem with foreign

tankers….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Thank you.

S. Bond: Well, apparently, the minister has no problem with foreign tankers

sailing off the coast of British Columbia day after day. He refuses to support

one sailing a day of a ship that carries Canadian resources and creates

Canadian jobs.

A simple question to the minister: why is it acceptable for foreign

tankers to sail off our coast and not one additional vessel carrying Canadian

resources?

Hon. G. Heyman: We in this government regularly and collaboratively talk to other

jurisdictions about how to minimize the risk to our respective coastlines and

to the sea that knows no borders, just as orcas know no borders.

We work collaboratively to try to minimize risk, and we will continue to

do that. We had hoped to be able to work collaboratively with governments in

Canada to look seriously at the risk that was posed to British Columbia’s

coastline, our economy and tens of thousands of jobs, but apparently, that

wasn’t on the agendas of the other governments with whom we tried to deal. We

continue to state that we want to protect British Columbia jobs.

It’s sad to note that it wasn’t enough for the members opposite, when

they were in government, to cut coastal ferry service to remote communities and

endanger tourism industries that were dependent on those routes. They now,

apparently, would like this government to cancel them all over again and put

those communities and those tourism jobs at risk. Well, we’re not

interested.

[2:20 p.m.]

T. Stone: Effectively, the Minister of the Environment, the Premier, the

government have continuously stood in this House and they’ve basically said

that because these U.S. tankers aren’t in Canadian waters, they’re not a threat

to British Columbia’s coast.

But the hundreds of tankers that are plying the waters off of B.C.’s

coast from Alaska to Washington do indeed pose a far greater risk to British

Columbia’s coast than the one additional tanker per day that would come as a

result of the Trans Mountain pipeline project. The Premier has said “out of

sight, out of mind,” and he’s very happy to lock arms with his compatriot,

Washington Governor Inslee, and work together to kill the Trans Mountain

pipeline project.

My question is this. The Washington governor is standing up for U.S.

interests. He’s standing up for U.S. resources, and he’s standing up for U.S.

jobs. When will this Premier and this government do the same for

Canadians?

Hon. J. Horgan: Although all of the things allegedly said by me were never said, I want

to thank the member for his question, because I think that’s a theme that

they’ve got going and they’ve got half an hour to kill. I respect that. I

understand the challenges of opposition, and I have sympathy for the members

having to continue to go down a road where they’re not going to get any

success.

I did meet with Governor Inslee. That is true. We talked about orcas. We

talked about chinook salmon. We talked about the mutual interests between our

two jurisdictions. We talked about a range of issues, because I believe the

best way forward is to work cooperatively with people of different persuasions,

different perspectives. I think the member on the other side should adopt that

position as well.

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

T. Stone: The interesting thing here is it seems like the Premier is kind of

harkening back to the day when you’d walk into a restaurant and there was a

smoking

section and a non-smoking section. You’d say, “I want to sit in the

non-smoking section,” as if the smoke wouldn’t waft over to your table from

time to time.

To the Premier: an oil spill off of B.C.’s coast is an oil spill off of

B.C.’s coast. There are hundreds of U.S. tankers plying those waters every

single day. He doesn’t appear to have raised it with the governor of

Washington. The Premier’s buddy, the governor of Washington, clearly wants to

landlock Canadian resource projects to benefit U.S. interests. That’s what he

wants to do, including in his own state, in Washington state, where they refine

nine times as much as we do here in British Columbia.

You don’t have to take my word for it. The CEO of the Tacoma refinery —

the Tacoma refinery CEO — said in a recent investor conference call: “As you

all know, dips for Canadian crude are at record levels, and the Tacoma refinery

is a big beneficiary of this pricing environment. As a result, we expect a

significant increase in profitability from Tacoma next year.”

Well, to the Premier, well done. Well done. Your policy with the

governor of Washington has enriched the bottom lines of U.S. oil companies.

It’s certainly strengthened the jobs of U.S. workers. He’s even gone down to

Washington state with a cheque in hand for a high-speed rail project. This is

all ridiculous, and the Premier should be embarrassed.

Why is the Premier turning a blind eye to the hundreds of U.S. ships

that ply our coast and the Salish Sea every single year instead of siding with

Canadian interests and Canadian jobs?

Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the member from Kamloops for his question. Not being a coastal

dweller, he won’t have the same profound impact when his leader stands up and

says we should cut ferry service. I recall him being responsible for ferry

service at one time, I believe. I remember the member for Cariboo-Chilcotin

pleading and begging with him when he was minister to not cut service to her

community. But that fell on deaf ears.

[2:25 p.m.]

We’re committed to making sure that we protect the interests of British

Columbians. That means working cooperatively with people from other

jurisdictions — Alberta, Saskatchewan, Washington, Oregon, California and

Alaska.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: To be so narrow-focused to suggest that the province of British Columbia

can stand up and say, “International waters no longer exist. We can dictate to

other jurisdictions how they conduct themselves….” It’s ridiculous.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: What we can do is control those things within our jurisdiction. That’s

why, in the interests of our environment and our coast, we have gone to create

a reference case to test the jurisdiction to make sure British Columbians can

indeed stand up and protect our environment. Everyone on this side of the

House, the majority in this House, agrees with that position.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE AND

TRANSPORT OF OIL BY

RAIL

M. de Jong: I’m trying to be fair in assessing the approach that the government is

taking to this issue, but to be fair, we have American oil tankers plying our

coast on a daily basis. And actually, the additional marine protection that was

pledged by the Canadian federal government is not there because of the actions

of this government. Meanwhile, the amount of bitumen and crude that is flowing

through British Columbia transported by rail is increasing

dramatically.

The minister promised a year ago to release the statistics. So far,

nothing. I warned him a year ago, and he suggested that I was exaggerating the

risk. Well, here’s what the National Energy Board says. “In July of 2017, the

amount of bitumen exported from Canada was 92,000 barrels a day. Today it is

over 350,000 barrels a day. That is five 100-car trainloads every single

day.”

The International Energy Agency, whose predictions have been bang on so

far, says it’s going to 600,000. Six hundred thousand barrels a day.

Will the minister admit that his politically motivated approach to this

issue has been a failure? Instead of protecting the British Columbia

environment, he has actually put it at risk and, more importantly, put British

Columbians at risk.

Hon. G. Heyman: Only the members opposite could expect British Columbians to be gullible

enough to believe that the only way we can get the protections for our

coastline that we deserve from the federal government is to increase the risk

to our coastline sevenfold.

We would have welcomed it…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Heyman: …if the members opposite had stood with this government when we

introduced regulations to protect both our land and our coastal waters, washing

up on our shoreline, from the threat of the spill. We brought in regulations to

specify specific geographic response plans, to specify mandatory response times

that needed to be tested by exercise, to expand our jurisdiction to that part

of the marine environment which is clearly within our jurisdiction and to

ensure that if there was an impact on communities, they were compensated. But

the people on the other side did not stand with us.

As to rail, most of those shipments go directly south from Alberta. We

demanded from the rail companies…

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

Hon. G. Heyman: …that they release to us the volumes of oil being shipped, and they took

our order to the Environmental Appeal Board and asked for an injunction till

their appeal was heard. It is to our great regret that they were granted that

injunction. We will continue to push…

Mr. Speaker: Minister, thank you.

Hon. G. Heyman: …for the information that British Columbians need for their health and

safety, and we will not stop.

Mr. Speaker: I will allow that supplemental question. That answer went on at

length.

[2:30 p.m.]

The member for Abbotsford West on a supplemental.

M. de Jong: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I related some statistics to the House and to the minister. I don’t

actually need the stats, because like hundreds of thousands of British

Columbians, I can watch the trains roll by from my porch. They roll by, train

after train, car after car, as they do through towns up and down the Fraser,

the Thompson, the Columbia River. And there will be a derailment. There will be

a derailment, just as there was in Saint Lazare, Manitoba, where 37 cars

carrying crude oil slipped the track and leaked their contents into the

environment.

What does it look like when 37 cars are floating in the Fraser River, in

the Fraser Canyon? What does that look like? I don’t actually think the

minister is evil, and I don’t think he intends for harm like that to

occur.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. de Jong: But will he admit that it is his policies and the policies of his

government that have created a circumstance where rail shipments of crude oil

by rail are increasing dramatically, that it is increasing the risk of a

derailment and increasing the risk to the environment and increasing the risk

of safety to the British Columbians who live along those rail

routes?

Hon. G. Heyman: What I will admit to is doing every­thing possible to defend

British Columbians against a catastrophic oil spill, whether it’s from pipeline

or rail.

Let me quote the then Minister of Environment, the member for Langley,

who said: “We believe that right now all land base spills preparedness and

response is not sufficient in British Columbia.”

That’s why we introduced two phases of spill control regulations, the

second phase of which I outlined a few moments ago — to require specific plans,

to require adequate response times and to ensure that compensation was

available in the event of a spill as well as measures to protect our coastline.

Part of that is demanding from oil companies that they release volumes. They’ve

refused to do that. We’re pressing that. We will do everything possible to

protect British Columbians with these new regulations, which we’ll be releasing

in a matter of a few short weeks, against a spill, whether by rail or by

pipe.

Let me close by quoting former Premier Christy Clark. Our job “is to

stand up for British Columbia. It’s to fight to make sure our coasts, our land

base, our communities are protected….”

I agree with her on that. Apparently, the members opposite no longer

do.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: In this chamber, I call continued debate on the budget.

[2:35 p.m.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Budget Debate

(continued)

Hon. S. Robinson: It is my pleasure to be up on my feet in the House, in a full House today —

we have, it looks like, some students who are joining us — to provide my response

to Budget 2019.

It’s a pleasure, I have to say, to represent Coquitlam-Maillardville. My

community is on the traditional territory of the Coast Salish people and the

Kwikwetlem First Nation. Coquitlam is a traditional suburban community that’s in

the process of transformation as investments and transit infrastructure have seen

the Coquitlam central area create a city centre with high densities, restaurants,

shopping and so much community activity. It’s a community that my husband and I

have chosen to raise our family in because of the good schools, the good

neighbourhoods, the community amenities and, certainly back in the early ’90s when

we arrived there, because of its affordability.

Now, I do want to speak to affordability because it’s a very important

issue to our government. It’s an important issue to British Columbians. Before I

do that, I want to just take a moment to thank the staff who work so hard on my

behalf while we spend so much time here in Victoria as well as travelling the

province as a minister. I want to thank my constituency assistants — Laura

Gullickson, Linda Asgeirsson and Erica Williams — for the work that they do to

make sure that the citizens of Coquitlam-Maillardville are well served and

understand what their government services are, and to help to make sure that they

are connected to their government.

I also want to take a moment to thank my ministry staff, because they spend

so much time making sure that we’re able to deliver on our government’s priorities

in the areas of municipal affairs and housing as well as TransLink. I want to

thank Craig Ashbourne; Daniela Gardea; Matt Djonlic; Christine White; Lisa Grant,

who has gone on to work elsewhere just recently; and also, new to our team, Jena

Rayner. They really do help keep my office going and making sure that we are able

to deliver.

Back to talking about my community and about the affordability issue. When

I arrived in Coquitlam in ’94, afford­ability was manageable. We could find

enough resource in our capacity to pay for a mortgage and pay for child care, pay

for dental care, do all of the things that we want to be able to do when we have a

young family. I know that all members of this House have heard just how difficult

it has become. We certainly heard that on the doorstep in the 2017

election.

It’s becoming so much harder for families over this last decade. It’s

become so difficult. It’s resulted, I have to say, in stressed out families who

are concerned about their survivability in my community. We are seeing instances

of seniors who are being priced out of their rental accommodations; young people

who are unable to move out of their family home.

Now, this reminds me of a family that I came across when I was knocking on

doors back in 2017. It was the very last door that I knocked on, and there was a

young couple who answered the door. I asked them some questions about what was

important to them and what mattered to them, and their priority was that they

wanted to be able to save money to get out of their parents’ house. It was really

important to them to be able to find a way to move forward.

I asked them. I said: “So tell me a little bit more about who you are and

your family.” And they said…. One of them was a pharmacy assistant, and the other

one worked in the medical technology field. They had finished their education.

They were looking to move forward in their life. But they could not move out of

his parents’ basement. They couldn’t figure out how they were going to, on their

salaries, make it work.

This has always stayed with me because we know that the previous government

ignored this issue. It’s one that’s been going on for a very, very long time.

Because of the previous government’s lack of interest in it…. Or maybe it was

their choice to not act on it. I’m not going to pretend to understand, but they

clearly chose not to act to make sure that housing was available for people when

they needed it.

[2:40 p.m.]

I’m really proud of all the three budgets that our government has brought

forward. Budget 2019 is a continuation of the budget update that we did in 2017

and then that we presented last year in 2018. Again, I have to say that when you

take a look at the scope of what we have been able to do in 18 months, I think

it’s absolutely outstanding. I’m very proud to stand here and to defend the budget

that was presented by the Minister of Finance.

Just to remind everyone in the House and to remind British Columbians, in

2017, our government made historic investments not just in transit infrastructure

but also in housing and in child care. These three things combined have been

starting to put money in people’s pockets. Investments in these key areas mean

that people can not only work and participate more fully in the economy, but it

means that they can find a place to live, a place to raise their family. This is a

part of a strong economy that we need. We need it in every urban centre in our

province, and we need it in rural British Columbia.

Now, I think it’s important to remember that people have been asking for

these investments for years. I’m proud that we are able and willing to deliver

them. I also think it’s important to recognize that the business sector has been

strongly advocating for these investments as well. We’ve certainly heard from the

Greater Vancouver Board of Trade. They were calling on addressing housing

affordability. They’ve been calling on the need for child care and, absolutely,

the need for investments in public transit.

The thing that I think we need to remember is that when you invest in these

things, you actually put money back in people’s pockets. When people have money in

their pockets, they can buy more things. They can go out to more restaurants. They

can get haircuts. They can also save for the future.

I have heard from constituents, particularly on the child care front, about

what it means for them when they have an extra $400 or $500 in their pocket

because of our investments in child care. This one family said: “I’m thrilled to

have this money, because I can do two things with it. One, I can now afford to buy

new hockey gear for my son, who keeps outgrowing it. While I do go to the KidSport

fundraiser and get used equipment, sometimes I can’t find what I need. Now I don’t

have to figure out how I’m going to pay for new skates or new shoulder

pads.”

The other thing she said where she’s putting some of those savings is into

an RESP, because she knows that she wants her child to be able to go to

post-secondary education, whether it’s a trade school or academic setting. She

wants to be able to help her children to thrive and to have those opportunities.

So she feels like a good parent. She feels like she is preparing her children for

the future, and that means that she has the confidence that her family will be

okay and taken care of. These are the kinds of things it really means when you

invest in people.

Now, Budgets 2017 and ’18 also invested significantly in housing — 2,000

supportive modular homes. About 800 of these homes have opened already. More are

opening every week. And 1,700 homes that were made more affordable — that was back

in 2017. These, too, are coming to fruition, and they’re making a difference in

people’s lives.

Budget 2018 built on that — $7 billion over ten years in housing. That is

the single-largest commitment that any government has ever made in this province

on housing. We’re seeing the first of 4,900 homes announced last fall for families

and seniors who are falling further and further behind, because it’s getting

harder and harder for them to find the kind of housing they need.

Also, we have an Indigenous housing fund. We are committed. We’re the first

government committed to support Indigenous people living on reserve and supporting

them in their housing, because they’re British Columbians, and they need housing

that works for them. We’re committed to working with them. The first of 1,100 of

these homes were announced last fall.

[2:45 p.m.]

Women fleeing violence. This is the first time in 20 years that a call has

been put out to communities that this government is investing in the families that

are affected by violence, making sure that those children and those women have a

safe place to call home. Almost 300 of these homes are moving through the

development process as we speak.

We’re investing in additional supportive housing that is building on Budget

Update 2017, an additional 2,500 units of housing over the next ten years. I have

to say, given the response from local governments and homelessness and housing

task groups from around the province, Budget 2019 has added an additional 200

homes just like this so that, all told, we have 4,700 homes for those who are most

vulnerable in our province that will be coming on line over the next ten years,

with 2,200 of them in the near term.

Budget 2019 is a continuation of this work, recognizing that there is still

so much more to do. Life in British Columbia has become unaffordable for most

British Columbians. Now, those at the top, under the previous government,

benefitted. There was lots of opportunity for them. But many British Columbians

certainly got left behind.

Budget 2019 builds opportunities for British Columbians, and it introduces

the B.C. child opportunity benefit. Nearly $400 million will be returned to B.C.

families, those families who are raising children, those families who have been

saying: “It’s getting really hard. I can’t do it. I have to think about leaving

this province.” Or it’s been creating so much stress that it’s actually destroying

families. This is a commitment that our government has made, and I’m very proud of

that commitment.

When I hear members from the other side say that they’re not going to

support this budget, then they’re not interested in supporting these families who

have been struggling for so long, or providing them with some relief. They’re

saying they don’t support relief for families.

We’re also eliminating interest on B.C. student loans. We’re fully

eliminating the MSP, saving families as much as $1,800 a year. Again, when I hear

members from the other side say they’re not supporting this budget, they do not

support eliminating the MSP. In fact, if I recall, it doubled under their

watch.

Again, it’s about paying attention to who British Columbians are and what

they need. British Columbians are people trying to raise their family, trying to

get ahead, trying to make sure that their kids have the resources they need so

that they can fully participate in the economy. People in Coquitlam-Maillardville

are looking for relief, and this budget provides those families with the relief

that they have been desperately looking for.

When I think about what this means, when they have this money in their

pocket, when they have that little bit of extra, I think of the families who want

to make sure that their kids get swimming lessons. They want to make sure that

their kids and their families get dental care. They want to put away money so that

they can purchase a house. They want to be able to send their child to a summer

camp or to take guitar lessons or gymnastics or karate lessons.

Having that extra money in their pockets means that they will be able to

deliver for their children. When I hear the members from the other side say that

they’re not interested in what this budget brings to the table for British

Columbians, it says that they’re not interested in supporting those

families.

I want to say a little bit more about what we’ve been doing, particularly

in my community, because I think we need to recognize that in

Coquitlam-Maillardville, we’re sort of in between two hospitals. At my community

hospital, which is Eagle Ridge Hospital, it was announced recently by the Minister

of Health that we’re finally, finally expanding the emergency department. I have

to say how grateful I am that it also means that the health authority doesn’t have

to sell the land, that we made sure that the hospital and the expansion are funded

properly and appropriately.

I know that that will bring relief to people in my community. They’ve been

asking for it for years. The foundation has been working on this for years, and

I’m very, very proud to be part of a government that is delivering on that kind of

health care for the people in my community.

[2:50 p.m.]

Now, I also want to make a couple of comments about the CleanBC and that

our government has made a commitment for over $900 million to put us on a path to

a cleaner, brighter, low-carbon future: reducing air pollution and saving families

money through the clean energy vehicle program, incentives for energy-saving home

improvements, a net-zero building code and programs to help communities transition

to cleaner energy solutions.

I also think it’s important to recognize that our 2018 budget, where we are

investing almost $1 billion into energy retrofits for social housing right across

this province to make sure that it’s quality housing that will last for another

generation and also reducing GHG emissions, is part of this plan. That’s a

significant investment in housing that currently exists.

I also want to point out that the largest single-transit infrastructure in

the Lower Mainland is also contributing to lower GHG emissions. We have a million

more people coming to the Lower Mainland, and making sure that we have a transit

infrastructure that’s built out to accommodate that is absolutely critical —

making sure that people get out of their vehicles and have the opportunity to do

that in Vancouver and out to Surrey, as well as 900,000 more hours of bus service

so that we can actually reduce congestion but also reduce our carbon

footprint.

That’s also an investment that our government is making, and I think that’s

really important to recognize.

I also want to just make a few comments about some things that I’m also

really proud about and it seems like members on the other side aren’t interested

in supporting. That’s our commitment to expand high-speed Internet in rural and

remote communities throughout B.C. That’s $50 million.

I have been the critic for local government, and now I’m the minister

responsible for local government. In all these years, I’ve spent a lot of time

really wanting to make sure that I understood the challenges of rural and remote

British Columbia. I am an urbanite, a suburbanite. I’m very familiar with that

kind of living in an urban environment, where we really do take high-speed

Internet for granted. But it’s really a challenge in rural communities, and it’s

really a challenge in remote communities. Making sure that they have that is

absolutely critical to their survival and to their growth.

Imagine that you want to take courses, but you can’t access the Internet

because you don’t have a high-speed Internet connection. So you can’t build an

economy, you can’t build a business, and you can’t get an education. I think it’s

absolutely critical that we support that, and I would hope the members on the

other side would consider that.

I also want to point out that, as a responsive government, we have been

listening to communities, because that’s what responsive governments do. We’ve

been hearing from rural and remote British Columbia that there have been certain

challenges, certainly in the northwest. The pressures from private sector

investments that are coming to the northwest are significant.

I stood very proudly with the Premier not too long ago, and with a number

of mayors from the northwest, as we announced a $100 million northern capital and

planning grant that will go to four regional districts and their 22

municipalities. We recognize that the hard-working people of the northwest

absolutely contribute to the prosperity of our province, but the success of that

hasn’t been poured back into their communities. In fact, Prince Rupert still has

wood pipes.

I have to say that the mayors of Kitimat and Terrace, both of those mayors,

were present. The mayor of Terrace was weepy when we made the announcement. She

kept saying: “You heard us. You heard us. You heard what we’ve been saying for

years — that our capacity to support resource investment, as a community, is so

hard. We don’t have the capacity to do that.” This grant opportunity gives them

the ability to do the planning that they need so that their communities don’t

struggle under the burden of having to respond to the excitement that comes with

resource investment.

I’m very proud of that. I think having a government that is prepared to put

a budget together that responds to all of those needs, those challenges that

people have in all parts of the province, is something that I know that everybody

should be proud of. I know that everybody on this side of the House is very proud

of that — very proud of a government that is committed to listening to people and

responding to the needs as they describe them.

[2:55 p.m.]

That’s not just those top 2 percent, not just those who get the ear at a

lobby event, but those who are on the ground doing the work, those who are saying:

“I worry that my kids will never be able to stay here because they can’t afford a

home” or “I worry that I can’t get an education because I can’t access the

Internet, so my ability to move forward in my life is being compromised” or “I’m

concerned that my kids won’t be able to get the education they need because the

interest is going to add such a burden to them that they’re going to be

overwhelmed with it.”

So we’ve taken those steps. There is more to do, but I really do want to

encourage everybody in this House to support the budget, because it’s a damned

good one.

A. Wilkinson: Of course, this is the time of year when, in the halls of government, hopes

run high. We all converge for the first day of the sitting for the throne speech,

and we wait for a week for the budget. This year, sadly, we were dearly and

steeply disappointed.

The throne speech contained next to nothing, and of course, it ended with

this pearl of wisdom on behalf of the government: “Too many British Columbians

feel that no matter how hard they work, they can’t get ahead. Affordability

remains the biggest challenge facing B.C. families. Many people are working two or

three jobs, commuting farther for work and spending less time with their families

just to make ends meet. But no matter how hard they work, they cannot seem to get

ahead.”

On one point at least, the government is exactly correct. This budget,

after that statement in the throne speech, does absolutely nothing to help people

to get ahead in British Columbia.

It’s all about affordability. We all know what the issue is. And what does

this government do in its budget? It increases taxes by $6 billion over the next

three years. That boils down to, amongst five million British Columbians, $1,200

for every living, breathing human being in this province. Only about half of us

pay taxes, because some are children, some are seniors, some are incapacitated, so

for a family that’s merging up to $3,000, $4,000, $5,000 per family in increased

taxes that have to be paid to pay for this government’s agenda.

On the other side of the coin, this government has laid out nothing

whatsoever to stimulate the economy, to support entrepreneurs, to create

opportunity, to support our resource projects. There is nothing in this throne

speech or budget to build the future of British Columbia. This is something of

which this government should be ashamed.

There are a few pros in this budget that they can be proud of and that we

support them on. Increased support payments for foster parents. This is a good

thing. Mental health initiatives for youth — a $74 million agenda. That is a good

thing. We wholeheartedly support those initiatives. But overall, this is a budget

that leaves people with less money in their pocket, no sense of hope or

opportunity and a future where the state takes on more and more functions at the

expense of citizens of British Columbia.

Piling on these taxes does not create prosperity. You cannot tax your way

to prosperity. That is a lesson that this government has failed to figure out from

all of its legislative history in the early ’70s and all through the dismal decade

of the 1990s where they thought that government knows best and money is better off

in the hands of the state than it is in the hands of the citizens. This is a

continuing pattern with this budget.

The housing initiatives that they constantly tout, having started the

election with 114,000 houses they’re going to build…. What are we seeing? We’re

seeing a few thousand modular homes for people who have otherwise been homeless,

but nothing whatsoever for working British Columbians no matter what their income

is. The consequences of their housing policy has been a crash in high-end housing

prices, so it’s cheaper for rich people to buy a house.

They have accomplished absolutely nothing in terms of affordability of

housing in the middle and lower ranks for people who are having regular working

lives. This has been a shameful effort on the part of this government, which is

really an investment in a pending recession in the housing industry with no

benefits to the people of British Columbia — just a pending construction crash

with unemployment in the construction sector but no cheaper housing for people who

are in need of that housing, unless they happen to be fabulously rich.

[3:00 p.m.]

This budget assumes that people will continue to pay higher and higher ICBC

rates. We hear the games being played by the Attorney General, where he’s moving

numbers around the balance sheet and pretending that the deficits rocket up and

down magically and that somehow, with his magic beans, he’s going to solve the

ICBC problem the next year. But in the meantime, he’s been slapped down by the

courts on his first initiative. It’s gone to pieces already.

Average British Columbians, all of us who drive motor vehicles, are going

to pay more for ICBC, and it’s still going to run deficits. They keep pretending,

on the government side, that the deficit is going to go away. This model of auto

insurance is broken, and it’s time for an honest assessment of what we can do

better for consumers and automobile insurance.

The goal of government has to be to make life better for citizens, not to

keep piling costs onto them because government knows best, because all too often

government doesn’t deliver on the grand promises. We’re seeing that right now, and

I’ll talk about that further, with respect to daycare and with respect to

housing.

The carbon tax, sadly, has turned into a cash grab — $6 billion of revenue

projected over the next three years. That comes from people who use gasoline, who

heat their homes, who have to go and drive around the countryside to do their work

or to visit their family members. It’s individual British Columbians who pay it.

There’s no way around that.

Out of five million people, $6 billion in revenue, every single person in

British Columbia is going to pay $1,200 in carbon tax. Not all of us have a car;

not all of us drive. Some of us are seniors or under the age of 16. They’re not

paying carbon tax, but everybody who has a motor vehicle is paying it, and

everybody who heats their home is paying it. And everybody who goes to a shopping

mall is paying it indirectly. What that amounts to is thousands upon thousands of

dollars in carbon tax, and it is no longer even a dream that it would be

revenue-neutral. There are no corresponding tax reductions, the way there were

under the B.C. Liberals. It’s a cash grab by the NDP.

We are faced with a government that is having trouble balancing its

budgets. In spite of being given phenomenal economic success after 16 years of

good government, this government has inherited a surplus, which has disappeared.

It’s now running a budget where it’s back into the House here, asking for

permission, because nine of its ministries overspent by hundreds of millions of

dollars. That has not happened since the Great Recession of 2008. This government

says we’re in prosperous times, so why are they overspending? It’s because they

don’t have a handle on their fiscal picture.

They don’t have the ability to manage their ministries to keep them on

budget. This is a huge disappointment and a shameful performance by this

government, because British Columbians are now being asked: “Oh sorry, Mom and

Dad. We’re in the last six weeks of the school term. I just need a few thousand

more dollars.” That’s what this government is doing. It is coming back to the bank

and saying: “Sorry. We spent all the money you gave us. Can we have some more?”

They surely must do a better job than that.

They’re also being saved, whether we like it or not, by a one-time $1.6

billion transfer from Ottawa. Think about that. That’s $320 for every British

Columbian, which we got out of the clear blue sky unexpectedly. What has this

government done? They turned around and instantly spent it. It’s gone. We have a

government that’s a little drunk on spending and drunk on taxation and seems to

have forgotten where it all comes from.

This is a government that doesn’t seem to be overly concerned about where

the economy generates this wealth. That’s most notable in the housing situation.

In their own budget book, it shows a massive impending collapse in house starts —

from 50,000 in 2018 to 31,000 this year and 30,000 the year after. Think about

that. If 20,000 new homes are not being built, what happens to the tens of

thousands of people who work in construction? They’re sent home with no

income.

Think of the purchasers of homes. If they’re looking for a place to live

and the number of housing starts drops, what happens? Supply and demand. The

prices will stay up. Affordability goes out the window. Those 10,000 construction

workers can’t afford anything. We’re seeing that in certain quarters of the

province already, notably in Surrey, where there’s a lot of anxiety now about the

impending slowdown in construction.

[3:05 p.m.]

On the flip side of that, the prices aren’t going down. We’ve all noticed

that. What’s happened, of course, is that a lot of people who’ve been chased out

of the upper end of the market have come into the mid-market, and they’re driving

the prices up or keeping them floating up. There’s no cheap housing out there,

folks. There’s nothing affordable, even though this government said it would make

it happen with their fiction of 114,000 new homes.

Let’s add on to that the resource economy. We’re looking at, by their own

numbers, a 30 percent drop in resource revenue. They don’t seem to be overly

concerned about this. They’ve admitted it, for the next three years. We’re seeing

a massive slowdown in the resource sector, but we hear nothing from them about it.

“Oh well, that’s too bad.” Maybe that’s because the vast majority of the NDP seats

are well removed from the resource economy.

They represent most of Vancouver Island. They represent much of the eastern

suburbs of Vancouver. They do not represent the Interior of British Columbia, 250,

where all of British Columbia and the Interior, with the exception of Smithers,

Prince Rupert, Nelson-Creston, Castlegar and Trail…. Everywhere else is

represented by the B.C. Liberals. There is a cold, complete silence from this

government about that resource-based economy because they, apparently, couldn’t

care less what happens to our resource-based industries. That is starting to show

in a budget that does nothing at all to help the resource-based economy of British

Columbia.

We’ve also seen a few little tricks in their budget. There was much talk,

and a complete

section of the budget last year, about the speculation tax. “This

is going to be the greatest thing going.” It would create opportunities for people

to rent properties. It would put people back into housing. None of this has come

true. Instead, what did we get? Well, 1.6 million people are being asked to fill

out a 20-page form to prove that they exist, they’re telling the truth, and

they’ve paid income tax. They may or may not have children. Are they renting? How

many days a year? It’s an interrogation, and people resent it.

I had that experience last weekend in Coquitlam. There’s a tiny town called

Belcarra, population 800. It’s just outside of Port Moody. It’s on Indian Arm,

across the way from Deep Cove in North Vancouver. These have been seasonal homes,

traditionally. There’s now a road to Belcarra, but there are still a lot of cabins

up Indian Arm — hundreds of them. They have fallen within the speculation tax

zone. Many of these cabins have no running water. Most have no insulation, and

none of them are habitable year-round. They are all in the speculation tax zone,

and they are all being told: “Unless you rent this place out, you’re a

speculator.”

Some of them have been there for 70 years. They are owned by

fourth-generation family members. And these people are not people of means. Last

week I met a woman who is widowed. She’s one of three family owners in a cabin.

Her income is $22,000 a year. She is being deemed a speculator, has to fill out

the form and is now libel for the speculation tax. This is an offence to so many

people in British Columbia who are being accused of things they have never done,

under an NDP-driven ideological agenda with a tax policy that doesn’t

work.

Lo and behold, in this year’s budget — poof! — no mention of the

speculation tax. It has disappeared because it’s not working. This government said

last year that in the first three months of this year — now — they’d be collecting

$87 million in speculation tax. It has proven to be such a gigantic blunder. They

haven’t even got the forms back yet, let alone collected any money. And they

certainly haven’t generated any housing stock in terms of people putting things on

the market or people moving into those houses or renting them out. Nothing has

happened in a good way from the speculation tax. It’s nothing but a class warfare

way of collecting revenue for a government that has run out of ideas.

Now let’s talk about the employer health tax for a moment. We have heard

endless stories in the last year where companies, small and large, say: “It’s not

worth building your company in B.C. anymore.” Window manufacturers in the Fraser

Valley, freight-forwarding companies in Vancouver — companies all over this

province — say they’re not hiring in B.C. anymore because the cost base has gone

up so much that it’s easier to hire people elsewhere or, worst of all, to move

your manufacturing operations to Washington state.

So here we have…. The NDP’s idea of social equity and tax fairness is to

drive jobs out of British Columbia and penalize employers. This has been a

debacle, and the NDP refuse to admit it.

[3:10 p.m.]

For those employers, the MSP premiums are still in place, so their bill has

tripled this year. Why didn’t they put it up incrementally if they were going to

do this? Why a big whack of tax all at once in 2019? It’s because this is a

government that seems to think that if you’re employing more than a dozen people,

you’re some kind of fat-cat capitalist who should be penalized for it to benefit

the workers. Nothing could be further from the truth, because what happens is that

for those employees, their numbers are capped or they’re laid off because the jobs

are going elsewhere.

We’ve seen the same attitude with this government’s approach to rentals:

“Let’s protect the renters.” I was a renter for 15 years. I lived in a dozen

different rentals. It was challenging at times, but it was fun. It was part of

growing up and getting better. We’ve all done it. It’s kind of a wacky time of

life, but it can be really enjoyable. Being a renter is a fact of life; it’s a

rite of passage.

What this government has done is try to pander to renters with their $400

renters rebate, which suddenly vaporized. There’s no sign of it. Two years into

their mandate, nothing has been done. They’ve put all kinds of restricted caps on

the behaviour of landlords around changing rents, long-term leases and renovation

of apartments. The net effect is that people are getting out of the landlord

market. Why would you go and take that on?

In particular, some of those folks in Belcarra said this. The ones who have

road access say: “It’s not worth having a tenant anymore, and it’s not worth

having this cabin anymore because of the speculation tax. Now I can’t sell it,

because nobody wants to buy a cabin that they’ll be forced to rent out, and

there’s no way to deal with a troublesome tenant.”

What do we get? Shrinkage of the rental market — congratulations to the NDP

— and static rental situations where you can’t find a place to move to. Most

renters move up the scales, slowly but surely. I crawled out of those tiny

basement suites into a place with some sunshine and finally was able to purchase a

place. You kind of moved up the ladder because there was another place to rent.

Nowadays it’ll be tough to find anything to move to because the landlords are not

interested anymore.

We’ve also seen this in the child care policy of this government. The

information we get from the city of Victoria: 250 new spaces were created; 450

closed. Why? The operator said that the NDP has dictated such restrictive,

oppressive terms that they can’t make it work anymore. We’ve heard any number of

stories — from Amanda Worms in Kelowna, from a six-pack of providers in Maple

Ridge. These are all women in their 30s whose life’s dream was to run this nice

little business, rent a place for five years and provide top-quality child

care.

One day they woke up, and the NDP said: “What you’re doing isn’t good

enough. You can’t make it work. You’re going to go broke.” It’s over — shattered

dreams, shrunken spaces, disappointed parents and frustrated kids. Congratulations

to the NDP on yet another high-handed state-run concept that turned out to be

driving the car into the ditch.

The proof is in the pudding in terms of human behaviour. The budget itself

says that in the last three months of 2018 the total net migration from other

parts of Canada — I moved here from Alberta — was 400 people a month. It has

shrunk dramatically because British Columbia is no longer the land of opportunity.

It’s a place to be wary of.

My own kids don’t intend to live here, because they can’t see the

opportunity here to match the cost of living. They just don’t see the chance to

get ahead and to climb the ladder here, so they’re looking elsewhere. As a parent,

I’ve got to tell you: that hurts. You feel like you’ve watched the world go by,

and somehow you bear it, because it’s your problem. You didn’t fix it.

I have the sad duty of telling them: “Don’t worry. It’ll be better if we

can just remove the NDP from government. Wait, hold on. Hold your breath. Don’t

write us off completely.” That’s a sad way to describe the province of which

you’re a citizen, of which you’re very proud and which, like all of my colleagues

in this House, you decide to dedicate your best adult years to making a better

place. Instead, you’re making excuses for the performance of this economy and the

performance of this government.

Let’s talk about building B.C. Let’s start with how you actually build the

infrastructure. We’ve all heard about community benefits agreements. Well, we call

them union benefits agreements. There was a very good column yesterday in the

Vancouver Sun by our most eminent columnist in the province, probably,

Vaughn Palmer, pointing out three major projects, totalling $4.64 billion of our

taxpayers’ money — the Pattullo Bridge, the UBC SkyTrain and a project in the

Interior.

[3:15 p.m.]

All of those are coming under the community benefits agreements, which

means that the costs are going up by at least 7 percent, for the benefit of union

bosses and no discernible benefit for the workers or for the

communities.

These are dressed up as some kind of wonderful social project and

engineered agenda. They accomplish absolutely nothing for the people who are

affected by them, and they mean that we pay in that case. Put 7 percent out of

$4.5 billion. That’s $300 million of other opportunities squandered, because this

is an ideological government trying to support its pals in the union movement. Not

all their pals are in the union movement, only the ones who were donors to their

past campaigns. They are amongst the 19 selected locals that are eligible for

community benefits agreement employment.

We visited a crane company out near the Port Mann Bridge. They were

Teamsters Local 31, and only Teamsters Local 33 was allowed to be in the community

benefits agreement. They’re shut out completely. So they have to go to their

workers and say: “You know, folks, you’re going to have to look for another job,

or go to your union and say we’ve got to change locals, because the NDP is playing

games. They’re saying you’re not good enough. You have to be a certain kind of

Teamster — not Teamster A. You’ve got to be Teamster B.”

What kind of arrangement is this, where people are picking favourites that

way because of past political donations? This is an offensive kind of behaviour by

the NDP, and it’s got to stop.

We also have the whole phenomenon of investment attraction. There is

nothing in this throne speech or budget about economic prospects for British

Columbians, no sense of encouraging small business. The tech sector gets no

mention whatsoever — after we’ve had all kinds of chit-chat from this government

about having an innovation commissioner who’s going to do wonderful, magical

things and create the kind of technology sector we see everywhere else on the west

coast of North America.

It was a budding, burgeoning sector under the B.C. Liberals. Thousands of

people have been employed. Most of us who are aware of the Oscars know that Sony

Imageworks won the Oscar for best animation with their team based in Vancouver.

Vancouverites won that Oscar. What does this government do? It ignores them

completely. It does nothing for the sector. They need talent, they need ideas,

they need capital, and they need markets. This government ignored them on all four

counts.

It’s time that we had a government that served British Columbians. We need

to be the land of opportunity so that my kids and yours can be happy and contented

and say: “This is the place I’m going to get ahead. This is the place where I can

be my best.”

We also have to look at the resource projects going on. The long and sad

story of Trans Mountain — we won’t recap that here. But where are we now? All

we’ve got left is a scrawny little lawsuit run by this government that will

export of Canadian resources to foreign markets. Is that a goal we should pursue?

Is this something we should be doing as our purpose in life — fighting the rest of

the country in the courts and pretending the constitution doesn’t exist, all

because of some shallow dream from the NDP to block the development of the

Interior economy?

Coastal GasLink is part of this huge LNG opportunity in British Columbia.

All of us are wanting it to happen. What do we have with this government? They

announce with great enthusiasm, October 1 of last year, that it’s going to happen.

Then they start dilly-dallying with all kinds of obscure interests for trying to

block the project. It’s their job to deliver this project, not to say: “Well, your

$40 billion might or might not be of interest. I’ve got to go talk to my friends,

and they might not want to do it.” It’s too late for that. It’s time to get on

with it.

That’s the job of the government — to make opportunities real, rather than

be part of what the C.D. Howe Institute calls the $100 billion loss of capital

projects in Canada because of the kind of behaviour we see from this government.

It’s time for us to wake up in this government and this province and say: “We

cannot just depend on ongoing prosperity.” We can say: “We’ve got the lowest

unemployment in the country. Isn’t that great?” That’s no good if you can’t afford

to live here.

The Premier himself had two or three jobs just to try and get ahead. What

happens? People can’t get ahead. They get despondent, and they leave. What good is

full employment if you can’t afford to live here? We all have to take that to

heart, look at it through the eyes of our kids and our citizens and say: “What’s

the purpose of government here?” It’s to make life better for everybody. It’s our

duty to the citizens of this province. The key issue in this province is that

there’s not enough take-home pay to get by and get ahead.

[3:20 p.m.]

The solution to not having enough take-home pay is not to increase taxes by

$6 billion, take more money out of your pocket and reduce your take-home pay. That

just leads to despair, the sense you’re never going to get anywhere. Off to the

Payday Loan operation — that these folks are trying to regulate even further —

because people are going to run out of steam. Those tens of thousands of

construction workers not only on major projects but on residential housing who

face unemployment have to find a way to get ahead, and they may find it somewhere

else. That would be a failure for all of us.

So what do we people do? What do we need to do? What’s the purpose of being

here in government and trying to sort things out? What we propose is to get people

out of that rut of looking for their second or third job just to get by. We need

lower taxes so that people have the money in their pockets to get ahead. This is

critical. This government doesn’t care to understand it, because they think they

know better what to do with your money than you do. This is their whole philosophy

— that the state, embodied by the NDP, is smarter than you are. History has shown

that is just plain dead wrong.

We’ve got to lower the cost of living. There’s a critical issue around

housing, and it will not be solved by constraining supply and putting on tighter

rental rules. It will be solved by providing more housing for the 60,000 people

who move here from elsewhere every year. They’re coming mostly as immigrants, just

as I did. As we have heard earlier, the interprovincial migration from Ontario and

Alberta has completely dried up because B.C. is starting to close its doors and

shrivel up as a place to do business and get ahead.

We have got to focus, as I’ve said, on lowering the cost of living,

increasing take-home pay and making sure that there are good jobs out there.

Sadly, this budget did nothing at all on the employment side of the equation.

Nothing on major projects. Nothing for small business. Nothing that will lead to

the kind of prosperity we need in this province to get ahead.

We should be able to look people in the eye and say: “We work every day —

on the government side, the Third Party and us — to make this a place where you

can get ahead and have a good life. The state is not smarter than you are. Our job

is to support you.” We want the citizens of British Columbia to have that smile on

their face of their take-home pay going up, their costs going down and an even

better job on the horizon — not the prospect of the NDP telling them how to

live.

With that remark, I’ll close my speech and say we all have a duty here to

keep things in focus. It’s not working right now. So let’s make British Columbia a

better place. Let’s work together to do some things that are good for the people

of British Columbia, and let’s make it possible to look our kids in the eye and

say: “You are going to be successful here. You’re going to have a great life right

here in British Columbia.”

Sadly, it may not be this year.

M. Dean: It truly is an honour to be here on the traditional territory of the

Songhees and Esquimalt people and for me to take my place in the debate on Budget

I’d like to start by taking a few moments to thank some of the so many

people who play a major

part in my life as an MLA and support me during my time

here at the Legislature and in my constituency of Esquimalt-Metchosin.

My constituency assistants are enormously dedicated, and I feel very

grateful and fortunate to have them in our office. Thank you to Nubwa Wathanafa,

Andrew Barrett and Lawrence Herzog for everything that they do day in, day out in

my constituency office and across our community.

Thank you to all of the volunteers and those who support me every day in so

many ways. Thank you especially to the people of Esquimalt-Metchosin, who inspire

me every day with their generous, hard-working spirit of getting things done and

taking care of each other. It is a really fantastic community to call home, and

I’m honoured to represent them, all of them, here at the Legislature.

Thank you to all of the staff working here at the Legislature and all over

the precinct. We’re surrounded by a high level of professionalism every day, and I

do not take that for granted.

I’m also supported by our administrative staff here at the Leg, Noah

Mitchell, in particular. My gender equity work is supported by a wonderful team of

Molly Henry, Kelly Sather, Melanie Stewart, Carolyn Jack and Miranda

Mason.

[3:25 p.m.]

Thank you so much to the Minister of Finance for her support and guidance.

Thank you to all of my colleagues here in chambers. It really is an honour to

participate in democratic work with everybody.

Lastly, thank you to my husband, who looks after our amazing daughter — and

special mention to her, as she is my inspiration. This is a budget that I’m proud

of for all of our children.

Now, just over a year ago, I was asked by Premier Horgan to take on the

role of Parliamentary Secretary for Gender Equity. I am so proud to serve in this

role, in a government that is acting to make life better for people across our

province. British Columbians and people in Esquimalt-Metchosin believe in

fairness, in equality and respect. I’ve heard these words over and over again as

I’ve spoken with British Columbians all around this province. Fairness, equality,

respect — these are values which guide our government and our actions.

We know that, for too long, British Columbians haven’t been able to get

ahead, and that is especially true for women, transgender and gender-diverse

people. They deserved and looked for fairness, equality and respect but have not

found it.

In the past year, people in my community of Esquimalt-Metchosin and across

the province have shared with me how the last government ignored their problems.

I’ve heard from families held back by a lack of quality affordable child care;

from women, Indigenous people, immigrant groups, people with disabilities and

others who have fallen into poverty because of years of cuts to the programs and

services that people need; from women wanting to leave violent situations but who

were turned away because of the lack of shelter beds.

Well, from day one, our government got to work tackling these urgent issues

and more, and with our first full budget one year ago, we set out on a path to

make British Columbians’ lives better. Now with Budget 2019, my colleague the

Minister of Finance has presented a budget that is going to make a big difference

for people across Esquimalt-Metchosin and across our whole province, that will

continue our work of making sure everyone is treated fairly, with respect, and has

access to opportunity.

There is no question that after years of neglect, there is a lot that needs

to be fixed. This budget takes another important step forward in supporting the

people of B.C. and creating a more equal province.

Last year we made a historic $1 billion commitment to affordable child

care, an investment that is going to make an enormous difference for families and

for women, especially.

[J. Isaacs in the chair.]

For too long, B.C. parents have been forced to choose between career and

family. Lack of quality child care spaces and hefty child care costs forced them

into that choice. Now, research shows that women are held back from participating

fully in the economy because of the exorbitant cost of child care. This has

long-term impacts on their income, their career and their savings for retirement.

British Columbian families need support, and our growing economy needs these

workers.

I heard from a young couple living in the Lower Mainland. They were new to

Canada and pregnant with their first child. They were talking about how worried

they were about being able to afford both rent and child care costs. They were

actually thinking, planning and intending to leave the province, to move out of

B.C. to bring up their family, until our government announced our child care

strategy.

Then they were able to find a child care space. They received the child

care subsidy, and with that support, they have stayed in greater Vancouver. These

are two young professionals that are able to stay here to contribute to their

community and to the local economy and keep their family together.

[3:30 p.m.]

I was so proud to be here in this House as my colleague the Minister of

Finance announced this historic investment in child care.

This budget sees our government move further forward to set the foundation

for full implementation of our affordable child care program. Today, tens of

thousands of B.C. families are already benefiting from our government’s investment

in quality child care. With our government’s new budget, more children will get

the quality child care they need and deserve. More moms and dads can go back to

work or school knowing their children are getting good care from early childhood

educators who know their work is valued.

Until now, B.C. was the only province in Canada without a poverty reduction

strategy, and I’m so proud that this budget gives support to B.C.’s first-ever

poverty reduction strategy. Our government is taking steps to lift people

up.

We’re taking more steps to ensure people are supported and are not

penalized as they strive to move forwards, because we know that women —

particularly single moms as well as women with disabilities, Indigenous women,

women of colour — and transgender and gender-diverse people are overrepresented

among low-income British Columbians. This budget will make a huge difference for

these people and their families in particular.

Now, one of the elements that I’m most proud of in this budget is how our

government is prioritizing care and caregivers. Family-based caregivers, like

foster parents, will receive higher support payments starting April 1. This is the

first increase in a decade. At the same time, we’re making sure that extended

family, like grandmoms and aunties, who support children and keep them out of

care, will finally have payments equal to foster parents. This is a really

important response to recommendations from Indigenous communities and Grand Chief

Ed John.

I know this is going to be make such a difference in my community. I

remember a local elder in my community came to me with a story of her sister in

her 70s, living alone and on a fixed income. She had three grandchildren in the

care system, but she had them with her for a week. She fed them. She sheltered

them. She took them to school. She took them to activities. But for all that, over

a week, she only received $100 in support. That wasn’t enough. Now she and many

families like hers will be able to take care of each other without that kind of a

struggle.

What’s more, our government is bringing in the new B.C. child opportunity

benefit. This is a historic investment that puts more dollars in the pockets of

working and middle-class families, and this will particularly help single moms,

who are fighting for a better future for their children.

The YWCA tells us that single moms are the poorest of any type of family in

B.C. Half of single-mother-led families are living in poverty — people like Kat, a

young single mom living in my constituency of Esquimalt-Metchosin. She works three

part-time jobs and has a nine-year-old daughter.

She’s trying to hold on to her home. She budgets. She takes extra hours at

work. She buys secondhand clothes and out-of-date food, yet she can’t make ends

meet. This new benefit will help her provide the care and necessities that they

need. It’s going to make such a difference for their family.

Most families in B.C. will receive the benefit. It provides support from

the day a child is born up to the age of 18. For the first child, the benefit is

as high as $1,600 a year, and the total amount rises for families with more

children.

[3:35 p.m.]

This support will have a profound impact on making lives better for

thousands of working- and middle-class families. These extra dollars will mean

that people like Kat will be able to buy her daughter new clothes, maybe her

soccer gear. It’s a transformational change for families in my community and

across B.C.

Over the last 18 months, our government has taken important steps to open

opportunities for all. For example, community benefits agreements are one approach

that will open doors for women, youth, Indigenous people to receive training and

get good jobs on major infrastructure projects.

In Budget 2019, we’re providing a real boost to women seeking to get an

education. Consider this: more than 60 percent of student loans are held by women.

Interest-free B.C. government student loans mean real money in their pockets so

they can focus on school and on their future. I am thrilled by this initiative

introduced in Budget 2019 and implemented already to help thousands of

students.

Our government is listening to people. Over the past 12 months as

parliamentary secretary, I’ve been privileged to have the opportunity to look

women in the eye in Burnaby, Prince George, Kelowna and Vancouver and tell them:

“Our government heard you when you told us you needed more safe spaces for women

and children leaving violent situations.” This new budget affirms our government’s

plan to build 1,500 new transition homes over the next ten years — homes that will

help women and children, because no one should have to face the choice of

homelessness or violence.

In my community, for example, we have a counselling service in the

community that’s provided to women experiencing domestic violence. But when a

young woman came to the centre a few years ago scared for her safety, her

counsellor could not find her a safe place of refuge. The nearest shelters were

miles away and were full. Well, thanks to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and

Housing’s Building B.C.: women’s transition housing fund, we will have new

transition house in the West Shore, and women like her will have a safe place to

go.

There is no question that these investments really matter to people. When I

was in Prince George, we were fortunate to spend time with the Elizabeth Fry staff

and board. They told us about a recent donation drive that they’d been holding

where a man came along and gave them a really significant donation. He told them

how he had lived in their shelter in Prince George as a little boy and how it

saved him and his mom at a time of great risk. Stories like these are why our

government is taking action to dramatically increase the number of safe spaces

available for women and children leaving violence.

When I was in Prince George, I also had the opportunity to speak with

people benefiting from our Highway 16 bus services. I met a lovely young

Indigenous mom on the bus with her little baby. She was travelling off to visit

grandma. So it was her mom — grandma to her little boy.

It was going to be a two-hour journey, which she was happy to take. But in

the past, before the bus service, her mom would hitchhike all the way to Prince

George to visit her grandson. This young woman had always been so anxious about

her mom being so vulnerable on that stretch of road. Now the family is safe, while

still being able to visit each other.

Also, there I spoke with a program coordinator, and she told me that

drivers are reporting far fewer hitchhikers along the route. Affordable, reliable

transportation makes women and other targeted people safer.

[3:40 p.m.]

That’s why I’m so pleased to see $21 million invested in transportation in

this budget to improve bus services in 30 communities around the province.

Affordable, reliable, safe public transportation isn’t just an economic issue. It

isn’t just an environmental issue. It’s a women’s issue.

Our government is also working hard to combat gender-based violence. Women,

transgender, gender-diverse people face higher rates of domestic violence and

sexual assault than other people in our province. Since forming government, we’ve

announced more than $20 million to assist victims of gender-based violence and

sexual assault. This money is helping reduce wait-lists for critical services and

better meet demand for vital services such as counselling, outreach and crisis

support. It means organizations can better meet demand for vital

services.

Because women’s health and family health matter to this government, we’re

investing $24 million over three years to support the B.C. Children’s and Women’s

Hospital. This means better services for women, mothers, newborns and

families.

Now, there are many reasons to be very proud of this new budget. I’ve

mentioned just a few of the key measures that are important for the gender equity

that we’re striving for. But there is also another one that I’m especially happy

about. That is the introduction of gender-based analysis plus.

Gender-based analysis is in place in one form or another in every other

province in Canada and at the federal level. Gender-based analysis plus recognizes

how diverse and marginalized groups of people may be impacted by policies,

programs and budgets. It tackles the systemic issues. Our gender equity office is

working hard to build capacity and understanding throughout government about this

new tool.

Budget 2019 is the first step as we integrate GBA+ into all our government

actions. This is an essential part of making sure our government has equity at the

heart of all our actions. I am so proud that it’s now underway here in British

Columbia.

Advancing gender equity ensures that everyone can benefit from

opportunities and reach their full potential. It makes our communities and our

economy stronger. Later this year, I’m going to welcome colleagues from across

Canada, here in Victoria, for the annual status of women

federal-provincial-territorial meeting. I’m looking forward to sharing with them

the many steps forward that our government has taken to promote gender

equity.

You know what, Madam Speaker? The person that I’m really excited to share

Budget 2019 with is my daughter. Like many of you in the House, I’m a parent, and

like parents everywhere, I hope the world I leave my daughter and her children is

better than the one I inherited.

There is much to be done, but with this new budget and all the work we’re

doing as a government, I’m confident that here in British Columbia, we are moving

forward.

On behalf of my community of Esquimalt-Metchosin, I’m very proud to support

this budget. And when I tuck my girl in bed tonight, I can tell her that we are

building a better, more equal British Columbia for everyone.

D. Davies: I just want to start off today by talking a little bit…. It is Pink T-shirt

Day. I do have my pink T-shirt. I wasn’t sure of the rules in the House, if we

could actually wear a T-shirt. I am wearing my pink T-shirt in spirit today to

recognize this extremely important day — in fact, a day that I first introduced

when I was on city council in Fort St. John and had it proclaimed in the city of

Fort St. John about seven or eight years back, one of the duties that I did, first

as a city councillor as well as a school teacher, seeing the extreme importance of

Pink T-shirt Day and the anti-bullying movement.

[3:45 p.m.]

Thanks to everybody here in the House that…. I think pretty much every

single person has participated in this extremely important debate. It is my

pleasure, though, to rise today and debate what I would call an unaffordable

budget.

Before I begin, though, I would like to thank my constituents first and

foremost, for giving me the incredible honour to represent each and every one of

them in this chamber. You know, in the face of government’s wild spending and lack

of planning, in my opinion, I certainly take my responsibility as more important

than ever. As the representative of Peace River North, I will make the fight here

in this chamber ever-present, with my hope to build a stronger and brighter future

for the communities that I represent in Peace River North.

I certainly want to thank my wife, Erin — without her, certainly, I would

not be here today — as well as my children, Hana and Noel, who I get my motivation

from to do this job. I do it for their future — as well as the future for all of

our children here in British Columbia — so that they also might have a bright and

prosperous future and stay here in British Columbia. I think we’ve heard a theme

for the past few days during the budget debate. I really feel that that is

something that is being threatened, where we may not be providing enough

opportunity for our children and our grandchildren to stay in this incredible

province.

I want to thank my staff in Fort St. John as well as in Fort Nelson, in my

two constituency offices: my CAs, Tamara Wilkinson and Kim Eglinski, as well as my

auxiliary staff, Lori Slater, Lavena Brekkas and Julie McNeice. I also want to

recognize my LA here in the Legislature, Jaspinder Badesha. Again, with all of

these people working with us, we can certainly deliver the services that are so

important to our constituents and fellow British Columbians.

This past year the community of Old Fort, which is a small community

immediately south of Fort St. John, suffered a horrible landslide that cut off

complete road access to the community as well as all utilities. It was cut off,

basically, from the world for a number of weeks, and the entire community had to

be evacuated.

I do want to take this time to thank the Solicitor General, Public Safety

Minister, for his quick action and willingness to regularly meet with me, and the

support that has come from his ministry, as well as the Ministry of Transportation

— the hard work they did in getting access back into the community once it was

deemed safe. Again, myself and certainly the residents of Old Fort appreciate the

action.

As I’ve stated in this place before, my region is a very unique region in

this province. With a land mass of 161,000 square kilometres, it is only the

second-largest riding, just by a little tiny bit. But to give you a bit of

perspective, my riding is the same size as the countries of Ireland, Nigeria and

the entire Vancouver Island combined. That is the size of my riding.

It gives a unique perspective when I have to move around my riding. If I

were to drive from the district of Taylor, which is at the far south end, right up

to the Yukon border, I’m looking at a 14- to 16-hour drive, depending on the

roads. To visit my next major community, which would be the community of Fort

Nelson, I’m looking at a five-hour drive. In the winters, when we’re sitting,

right now, at 20, 30 below with snowstorms, it certainly makes it challenging to

get around.

I was born and raised in Fort St. John, which is the largest community in

Peace River North. We’re very lucky to call home a variety of industries. Oil and

gas. We have a strong forest sector, and agriculture, mining as well as tourism.

All of these industries provide well-paying, family-supporting jobs and careers

for hard-working British Columbians all over the province, as well as up in my

riding. And they are an extremely important part of the way of life that we

embrace in the north.

That is why this budget is so troubling to me. I see the future of my

place, which is right now the envy of Canada, as the strongest province — British

Columbia — being threatened. It seems as if this government’s plan is to keep

making big promises while doing nothing to ensure that these promises are

sustainable or possible for the long term.

[3:50 p.m.]

Combined with declining resource revenues, with no job creation

initiatives, topped off with 19 new or increased taxes over the past year and a

bit means trouble for the northeast and trouble for British Columbia. And the

throne speech gave me very little reason to be.

The throne speech gave me very little reason to be optimistic. From the

robust debate that the government put up on their throne speech, or should I say

the lack of debate, I really hoped that this year would have been different from

2018. But I guess I was just dreaming that.

Even one of the notes that it did hit on, that seemed exciting for many

people, was the genuine need for better cell service in the province. I’m sure

that none of us would argue that. But even this promise rings a little bit hollow,

as that falls outside of the realm of British Columbia and is within the federal

jurisdiction.

Last year I criticized the NDP for their tax-and-spend plan in B.C. There’s

no private sector jobs plan. There’s no plan to meaningfully grow the economy of

British Columbia. So many of these promises that are in this budget are destined

to be a pretty pan flash.

In fact, even the name of the budget, Making Life Better , seems

like a mean-spirited joke, especially for the people of Peace River North. The

first thing that truly — I can say this — lit my hair on fire was the 30 percent

decrease in resource revenue. I’ll tell you. I had a full head of hair before I

heard that.

When government predicted that there would be a 30 percent decrease in

resource revenues, that is extremely scary for communities like mine that rely on

the resource industries. It’s a complete threat, and we don’t see anything other

than the government rolling over and saying: “Okay.” That’s what really worries me

and my constituents.

When I see that this budget is supposed to make life better for British

Columbians, raising the income tax for individuals and corporations, raising the

carbon tax…. Then you add on disasters like the employer health tax, speculation

tax. It’s a worry. Hiking taxes means ratcheting up prices for our communities

that are already going to be and already are starting to see hard times. So much

for making life more affordable.

I’m going to look at a couple of areas that are particularly lacking in the

eyes of folks in the northeast. That’s around energy and agriculture, the

indifference that this government has shown in these areas — the lifeblood, the

true lifeblood of the Peace River as well as the whole province.

It’s even more frustrating given the government’s refusal to work with

other provinces that are in favour of projects that would benefit the residents of

Peace River North and my constituents, as well as constituents across northern

British Columbia and all throughout British Columbia. It really bothers me that we

have a government that is constantly fighting that.

The North Peace has a heavily diversified economy, as I mentioned, with

incredible potential and potential not, again, only for the residents of Peace

River North but for every single resident of British Columbia. Despite the steep

price tag that this budget that includes no job creation, or very little, very

little around growing the economy…. The mention of the decrease in resource

revenues and the increase in carbon tax and the increase in all these other taxes

is startling.

I’ll refresh, maybe, some of my fellow members here about the importance of

the contributions of Peace River North and the northeast and the people who live

there today — what they contribute to the B.C. economy. While we’re typically

associated with oil and gas, which is, no doubt, extremely important for the folks

in my area, we also have a very strong forest sector, certainly around Fort St.

John.

We also have the largest agriculture region in British Columbia. We have

1,800 farms that produce over $100 million annually, including 90 percent of

B.C.’s grain. And 95 percent of all of B.C.’s canola is produced up in the Peace

Country.

[3:55 p.m.]

We’re also big producers of livestock, being home to the largest bison

herds, as well as llamas, alpacas, wild boars, to mention a few. If anybody has

looked at the budget, I’m not sure where agriculture was, but it was quite vacant.

There was very little mention about growing the agricultural economy in British

Columbia.

Along with no real support for our farmers in Budget 2019, here’s an

example of an even more complicated issue, one that apparently has been neglected

by the other side in drafting their budget. In the North Peace — as well as,

probably, the South Peace, I’m quite certain — many farmers own small businesses,

maybe welding shops or pipefitting shops, on their property. Oftentimes, they work

in the natural resource industry. For many farmers, this is a necessity just to be

able to continue farming because the farm season is only four or five months

long.

Last year I explained my concerns when the changes to the zoning practices

were raised and introduced, which have now made it even more difficult for farmers

to be able to continue farming and to raise money for their families while

operating these businesses on the side. The lack of relief in Budget 2019 for

these farmers, and in the face of this rezoning, makes me wonder if government is

even concerned about the livelihood of the farmers in the north