Fourth Session, 42nd Parliament

(2023) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Monday, March 27, 2023

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 290

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

Speaker’s Statement

Travis Jordan and Brett Ryan

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 17 — Family Law Amendment Act, 2023

Hon. N. Sharma

Bill M216 — British Columbia Transit Amendment Act, 2023

J. Sturdy

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Young Agrarians land matching program

B. Anderson

Thor Froslev and Brackendale Art Gallery and eagle festival

J. Sturdy

Ehattesaht First Nation

M. Babchuk

Women in mining industry and Diamonds in the Rough mine rescue team

C. Oakes

Hockey in Maple Ridge and Hockeyville competition

B. D’Eith

Community centre for homeless and vulnerable persons in Terrace

E. Ross

Oral Questions

Release of B.C. Housing audit report

P. Milobar

Hon. D. Eby

K. Kirkpatrick

Hon. R. Kahlon

Government action on climate change and LNG development policies

A. Olsen

Hon. G. Heyman

Hon. J. Osborne

Release of B.C. Housing audit report

M. de Jong

Hon. R. Kahlon

Tent cities and construction of new housing units

S. Bond

Hon. R. Kahlon

Tent cities and government action on homelessness and community safety

E. Sturko

Hon. R. Kahlon

Tabling Documents

Office of the registrar of lobbyists for B.C., Determination Decision

23-02 , Greater Vancouver Board of Trade, designated filer:

Bridgitte Anderson, February 8, 2023

Motions Without Notice

Consideration of Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement amendments by Committee of the Whole

Hon. R. Kahlon

Permission for Indigenous leader to address the House

Hon. R. Kahlon

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 16 — Supply Act (No.1), 2023

Hon. K. Conroy

P. Milobar

Hon. K. Conroy

Bill 15 — Vital Statistics Amendment Act, 2023

Hon. A. Dix

S. Bond

Hon. A. Dix

Bill 14 — Miscellaneous Statutes (Modernization) Amendment Act, 2023

Hon. B. Bailey

T. Halford

A. Olsen

R. Merrifield

Hon. B. Bailey

Bill 11 — Election Amendment Act, 2023

Hon. N. Sharma

A. Olsen

Bill 10 — Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2023 (continued)

G. Kyllo

C. Oakes

M. Morris

A. Olsen

Address by Indigenous Leaders

V. Cross

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 29 — Amendments to Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement

Hon. M. Rankin

M. Lee

A. Olsen

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 10 — Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2023 (continued)

Hon. K. Conroy

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of the Whole House

Amendments to Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement

Hon. M. Rankin

M. Lee

M. de Jong

Proceedings in the Birch Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Citizens’ Services

Hon. L. Beare

B. Banman

A. Olsen

MONDAY, MARCH 27, 2023

The House met at 1:33 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

M. Bernier: I have a couple of introductions today. It’s my honour to introduce,

first of all, no stranger to this House, because seven years ago, I was able

to introduce him in the House when he was born. My oldest grandson, Crozzley

Bernier, is here today with us, and accompanying him is, I would say, and

put words in her mouth, my biggest fan and supporter. My wife, Valerie, is

also here with Crozzley today. Would the House please make them

welcome.

Hon. M. Rankin: Joining us in the gallery today from the Ehattesaht First Nation are

Chief Simon John, David Miller and band administrator Darlene Smith, as well

as Ashley John and Ernie Smith. We also have Coun. Ashley John’s son joining

us today. His name is Jaden Puglass.

[1:35 p.m.]

Recently the Ehattesaht First Nation purchased the majority interest

in Strategic Natural Resource Consultants. SNRC was founded in 2003 in Port

McNeill and has grown to be one of the largest natural resource management

consulting firms in our province.

Joining us from SNRC today are President Niels Jorgensen, Aaron

Nelson, Steve Gilette and Brian Scott.

Finally, from Terra Remote Sensing, who work closely with the

Ehattesaht First Nation, are Taylor Davis and David Mostyn.

Would the House please make them feel welcome.

P. Milobar: Today is the only day in my oldest daughter’s life that I will be able

to say this without it being a slight white lie. I would just like to take a

moment and wish my oldest daughter, Kayleigh, a happy 29th birthday

today.

Hon. K. Conroy: It gives me a great deal of pleasure to actually introduce somebody

from my constituency, from my hometown of Castlegar. Pat and Fran Metge are

here. They’re visiting Victoria for a while.

I also just want to thank Pat, because he gave me my very first job

when I ran the kids program at the recreation complex. I’ve always been

grateful to him for that.

Please join me in welcoming Fran and Pat to the

Legislature.

D. Clovechok: It gives me a great deal of pleasure today to have a couple of

introductions up in the gallery today. My brother Larry and my sister-in-law

Marie from Winnipeg, are here, and my wife, Susan. Will this House please

make them feel welcome.

Hon. M. Dean: Today in the gallery we have Penny Barratt and her daughter Savannah.

Penny is the owner and the business person of the Wine Maker in View Royal,

in Esquimalt-Metchosin. It’s a very highly awarded local business and

currently has been voted Best of the City and Best of the West Shore in

Hon. A. Kang: In the gallery today, I would like to introduce some good friends of

myself and of the member for Penticton. From the city of Penticton, Mayor

Julius Bloomfield, as well as city councillor Amelia Boultbee and city

manager Donny van Dyk.

They’re in the precinct today talking about really important issues

that are in the community — the successes, challenges and priorities. As

well, the city of Penticton received over $7.1 million in the growing

communities fund, and we’re just very excited to hear more about what their

plans are.

Would the House please make them feel very welcome.

E. Sturko: I just want to welcome a good friend and former colleague, Redd

Oosten, who is here in the gallery today. Redd is a long-time serving

member. She’s currently a staff sergeant of the Surrey RCMP. She served

across Canada, including in Nunavut, with distinction. I hope that the House

will make her feel welcome today.

Hon. M. Rankin: I’d like to welcome to the House today Kwuntiltunaat, Kim Baird, who

is the chief administrative officer for the Tsawwassen First Nation; and

executive council and Speaker of the Tsawwassen Legislature, Chemkwaat,

Valerie Cross.

I’d also like to acknowledge the Chief, Chief Laura Cassidy,

Tsawwassen legislators and members of the Tsaw­wassen First Nation who

may be observing our proceedings remotely today. Will the House please join

me in making them feel welcome.

M. Babchuk: It feels like North Island day in the House today. Along with my

Ehattesaht neighbours, I welcome also a member of my constituency, from

Campbell River, Line Robert, who joins us here in the gallery after being

the CEO of the Island Coastal Economic Trust for 12 years. Because she is

retired now, she gets to join us for the first time for question

period.

Would the House please join me in welcoming Line Robert.

[1:40 p.m.]

E. Ross: Today in the House, we have my constituency assistant, Gina Versteege,

in behind Hansard there. A very inspirational guest is with us from Skeena

as well, Sharon Bandstra. More on her later.

Hon. B. Bailey: I’d like to welcome 13 members of the JEDI team into the House today.

These individuals truly go above and beyond to support B.C. businesses,

whether it’s from supporting mom-and-pop businesses throughout the pandemic

or supporting our trades folks in galaxies far, far away, these are the

staff members we are looking for.

I’ll just quickly introduce by first name, because I’ve got 13 —

Diana, Adriana, Savannah, Alice, Brad, Hassan, Steve, Valsy, Ian, Aman, Kim,

Meghan and Echo.

Would the House please join me in making them feel most

welcome.

Hon. A. Kang: As I looked up into the gallery, I saw a very good friend of mine —

I’m sorry; I don’t have my glasses on today — city councillor of Kelowna

Loyal Wooldridge.

Would the House please make him feel very welcome, and we’ll see you a

little bit later today.

Hon. L. Popham: Well, if you want to have some fun, I suggest you go and talk to the

folks that are visiting here today. It’s a pod of excitement up

there.

We have Walt Judas, the CEO of Tourism Industry Association of B.C. We

have Jeneen Sutherland, director of the Wilderness Tourism Association; Dave

Butler, the director of sustainability at Canadian Mountain Holidays. Kathy

MacRae, executive director of the Commercial Bear Viewing Association; Scott

Ellis, the CEO of the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C.; and Ross

Cloutier, ED of Helicat.

Welcome.

C. Oakes: Joining us in the gallery today are two constituents from Wells,

British Columbia, from my riding. I’m incredibly proud to have these

individuals in the gallery.

In each of our small communities, we know the people carry on multiple

hats. Emily and her husband Brendan Bailey are here. Emily works for Osisko

Development, which I’ll talk a little about in my two-minute, and Brendan

works for Barkerville Historic Town. They also share the duty and title of

the Wells Volunteer Fire Brigade fire chiefs. Brendan is also — gratefully,

for stepping up — one of our fire wardens in Cariboo North, and Emily has

recently obtained her emergency medical responders licence and will be going

for her new worker orientation with the B.C. Ambulance Service in

April.

Would the House please make them welcome.

D. Ashton: If I could just push the protocol a little bit, I too would like to

welcome His Worship Mayor Julius Bloomfield, Coun. Amelia Boultbee and CEO

Donny van Dyk from the beautiful city of Penticton that I’ve been so

fortunate to call home for so long.

Also, I would like to thank the Premier and the ministers that have

moved their schedules around to accommodate the people from Penticton. It’s

greatly appreciated, so thank you very much.

A. Olsen: Today I’d like to welcome into the viewing gallery Jo-Ann Roberts and

Jeremy Valeriote. Jo-Ann is the interim executive director of the B.C.

Greens. Jeremy was our B.C. Green candidate in West Vancouver–Sea to Sky.

Could the House please make them both feel very welcome.

K. Paddon: I have a little piece of home here today. I have constituents who have

joined us: Julia Veer, Gordon Robertson, Amelie Robertson and Hannah

Ushkanova, a student from Ukraine. Would the House please join me in making

them welcome.

N. Letnick: Two people are going to be introducing Loyal Wooldridge again. Loyal

is a good friend of the members from Kelowna and chair of the regional

district of Central Okanagan, also a multi-term city councillor. I’m so glad

to have him here amongst us. Would the House please make him welcome

again.

[1:45 p.m.]

A. Walker: Four very brief introductions. I would like to introduce Barry O’Neill

to this House. He is a member of the BCEHS board and also a board member for

the Island Coastal Economic Trust.

Somewhere in the chamber here we have Elaine Young. She is a school

board trustee, and with her is Audrey Keating, who I have been told is more

political than even Elaine.

Last but not least, I would like to wish the Minister of Social

Development and Poverty Reduction a very happy birthday.

J. Sims: I rise today to reintroduce a very special brother, who is in the

House today. He and I go back a long way.

We started off working together in Nanaimo and then, of course, he

proceeded provincially. I followed provincially. When he became president of

the Nanaimo CUPE, I became president of the Nanaimo Teachers Association.

Then, of course, as we know, he became president of CUPE B.C., and I

followed and I became president of the BCTF. Then nationally we were

together at the CLC, and I was at the CTF as well.

One thing I want to say about Barry O’Neill is that he has been a

lifelong activist to build a very strong, inclusive and more just British

Columbia. When it was not common or woke enough to talk about these issues,

Barry was. I will always remember his passion. I will always remember his

commitment for building a just society.

More than that, I know he thinks he’s retired, but I can assure you he

has not retired. He continues to fight and make a difference for British

Columbians and people around the world.

Please help me to welcome Barry O’Neill, a brother, into this

House.

H. Sandhu: I am thrilled to introduce my kids here, two out of three kids: my

daughter Jasreen; my son, Avishaan; my sister-in-law, Jasmseet; and my

nephew Avinoor. They are here. They still have one week of spring break

left, so I just dragged them along to manage work-life balance.

My last week was busy with the B.C. Winter Games in Vernon. We had a

blast with the Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport.

For Jasmeet, my sister-in-law, and Avinoor, my nephew, it is their

very first time in the gallery. They’re visiting here. Would the House

please join me to give them a warm welcome.

Mr. Speaker: Anyone else? All right.

Speaker’s Statement

TRAVIS JORDAN AND BRETT RYAN

Mr. Speaker: Today we also want to send our sincere condolences. We are

remembering the two police officers from Alberta, from Edmonton, for

their service. The whole nation is paying tribute to these police

officers. On behalf of all of you, we would like to send our sincere

condolences to their families and their colleagues.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 17 — FAMILY LAW

AMENDMENT ACT,

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

Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Family Law Amendment Act,

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

now.

I am pleased to introduce the Family Law Amendment Act. This bill

represents phase 1 of a multi-phase project to modernize the Family Law

Act, which came into force ten years ago. This bill amends sections in

part 5 of the act, which governs division of property, and

part 6 of the

act, which addresses division of pensions between spouses who

separate.

The

part 5 changes clarify when some excluded property may be

divided between spouses and how to address companion animals, family

pets, when spouses separate.

Part 6 changes ensure that the act remains

aligned with current pension administrative and actuarial

science.

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

Motion approved.

[1:50 p.m.]

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

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 17, Family Law Amendment Act, 2023, introduced, read a first

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

next sitting of the House after today.

BILL M216 — BRITISH COLUMBIA TRANSIT

AMENDMENT ACT,

J. Sturdy presented a bill intituled British Columbia Transit

Amendment Act, 2023.

J. Sturdy: I move that the bill intituled B.C., British Columbia Transit

Amendment Act, 2023, of which notice has been given in my name on the

order paper, be introduced and read a first time now.

This is the third time I’ve proposed this amendment as an initial

step to expanding transit in West Vancouver–Sea to Sky. We’ve known for

many years now that the Sea to Sky region is growing rapidly. The last

census numbers confirmed this, showing that over 8,000 residents moved

into the corridor. These growth rates of 18 percent in Whistler, 22

percent in Squamish and 32 percent in Pemberton demonstrate that things

are getting busier in the corridor, and the Sea to Sky Highway is no

exception.

B.C. Transit, the local government, the Squamish and

Líl̓wat First Nations also

recognize this. It’s time for this House and this government to

recognize it as well. Through the 25-year Sea to Sky transit futures

plan, the region has with one voice been advocating for a commission

model for a new regional transit service. It’s critical to meet the

demand created by Greyhound’s abandonment of the region and further

fueled by rapid growth in population and recreation.

The first step in the creation of this service is straightforward.

Currently only local government elected officials are eligible to sit on

the Sea to Sky Transit Commission. This bill rectifies this issue by

amending the B.C. Transit Act to allow representatives of the Squamish

and Líl̓wat Nations to also serve on

the commission.

This supports the memorandum of understanding between the parties

which speaks to governance, growth, a funding model and reconciliation.

Government should finally listen and act in the in the interests of

efficiency, connectivity and the environment and support for growing

communities in the Sea to Sky corridor.

I’d also be remiss if I didn’t take the opportunity to remind

everyone that just less than a year ago, the Sea to Sky experienced the

longest transit strike in B.C. history, which massively disrupted the

region. This same issue is currently playing out in the Fraser Valley.

There’s no question that these service disruptions hurt kids, families

and businesses and drive people back to their cars or to put out their

thumbs.

It’s time for government to have the backs of communities and

expansions across British Columbia. Connecting communities is just too

important to ignore.

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

Motion approved.

J. Sturdy: 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 M216, British Columbia Transit Amendment Act, 2023, introduced,

read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

YOUNG AGRARIANS

LAND MATCHING

PROGRAM

B. Anderson: In the Kootenays, there are countless members of the community

working towards building resilient local food systems. Today I want to

highlight the B.C. land matching program delivered by Young Agrarians

and, specifically, celebrate the work done by Hailey Troock, the

Kootenay Columbia Basin land matcher.

There have been loads of agricultural businesses and collaborative

relationships nurtured through Hailey’s support. Zero Fox Tree Crops in

Harrop were the first match in our region. After four years, their

nursery business selling bare root to fruit and nut trees is

thriving.

In Krista and Brian’s words: “The program has made our entire

farming enterprise possible between matching us with the perfect hosts,

Ursula Heller and Barry Gray, navigating our land lease agreement and

resourcing us. Haley’s services have proven invaluable as we’ve grown

our farm over the last four years.”

Matt

Carr, another successful young farmer in the Kootenays from Linden Lane

Farms, has a diversified market garden that produces vegetables, fruits

and nursery plants that they sell online, at their farm stand, at the

local farmers market, in grocery stores and through their CSA. Matt’s

farm has been supported with two land leases. Their popular Pumpkin Fest

attracts thousands of visitors to their farm in just the span of a

weekend. Matt is one of three nominees for the 2023 B.C. Outstanding

Young Farmers Award.

[1:55 p.m.]

In Matt’s words: “The program has taken a lot of worry off of both

parties to create mutually beneficial agreements. Ultimately, our leases

have allowed us to produce nearly 30 percent more product than just two

years ago, a success for both the businesses and for our customers that

are dependent on local food.”

A huge thanks to the farmers, Hailey Troock and the entire Young

Agrarians team for the work you do in the Kootenays and across B.C. to

support resilient local food systems.

THOR FROSLEV AND BRACKENDALE

ART GALLERY AND EAGLE

FESTIVAL

J. Sturdy: Thor Froslev arrived from Denmark in the 1950s and came to

Squamish after living and working in communities across British

Columbia. By the 1970s, he had the vision of bringing arts and culture

to what was then the small industrial and logging town of Squamish. In

1973 he opened up the Brackendale Art Gallery, an out of the woods

destination, in order to offer a community space for art and

culture.

Thor Froslev passed away at 89 years of age last fall with his

wife, Dorte, at his side.

Through the Brackendale Eagle Festival and the Brackendale Art

Gallery, Thor left a truly unique legacy. Over time, Thor had

experienced the spectacle of eagles descending in Squamish in astounding

numbers and felt it important to track their progress, so he established

a local eagle count and festival in 1986, the first in the

province.

Thor embraced the opportunity of educating the public and of

monitoring and protecting eagles. Along with a local conservationist and

a number of volunteers, Thor lobbied to establish the Brackendale Eagle

Reserve, and eventually 1,500 acres of land were designated as the

Brackendale Eagle Provincial Park.

Thor also wanted to provide a focal point for artists, musicians,

actors, chefs and conservationists, so built the Brackendale Art

Gallery. Given the eccentric nature of the gallery, I’m pretty sure

there wasn’t a building permit or engineer on site, all of which didn’t

stop Thor from serving on the Squamish Council, receiving the B.C.

Achievement Award or the Freedom of the Municipality in 2018.

It won’t be a surprise to know that Thor had a knack for bringing

people together. In 2020, during COVID when indoor events were not

possible, he organized 23 free outdoor concerts and another 30 in

Thor enriched the life in Squamish and has been immortalized by

way of a community mural, which is truly deserved. As past mayor Patty

Heintzman described Thor, he was a force.

EHATTESAHT FIRST NATION

M. Babchuk: I’m delighted to stand up today and further acquaint this chamber

with the Ehattesaht First Nation.

The Ehattesaht Nation is a First Nations government covering about

66,000 hectares on the west coast of Vancouver Island and mostly covers

the Esperanza Inlet, the Zeballos Inlet and the Espinosa Inlet. It is

accessed by boat, plane and a 42-kilometre stretch of dirt road off of

Highway 19 and is nestled beside B.C. and Canada’s smallest municipality

of Zeballos.

I may be a bit biased, but it’s one of the most picturesque places

on the west coast of Vancouver Island. Even though its beauty is

unmatched, its remote nature lends to challenges that the nation has

highlighted in the last three months by calling a state of emergency. My

heart goes out to the community for the loss of so many youths due to

the toxic drug crisis.

We know that First Nations people continue to be

disproportionately affected by the toxic drug crisis as a result of

colonization, intergenerational trauma from residential schools,

COVID-19 and climate-related challenges. That’s why I was extremely

happy to have both the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and the

Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation in the North Island

recently to meet with the nation and discuss how we can work

together.

We heard clearly that more needs to be done. I’d like to raise my

hands today and welcome Chief Simon John and Couns. Ashley John, Tim

John, Ernie Smith and Cory Hanson for being with us in the chamber

today.

I know that the dialogue with the Minister of Indigenous Relations

and Reconciliation and the Minister of Energy, Mines and Low Carbon

Innovation continues today, and that some in this chamber took

part in a

session at noon where the nation and strategic natural resource

management gave us a look at the miraculous direction they have moving

forward.

I look forward to continuing to work with the Ehattesaht Nation,

raising their issues and highlighting all of their future

successes.

[2:00 p.m.]

WOMEN IN MINING INDUSTRY

AND DIAMONDS IN THE ROUGH

MINE RESCUE TEAM

C. Oakes: Women are taking on critical roles in the mining sector. One such

individual who is in the gallery today is Emily Bailey. Emily is a

health and safety coordinator for Osisko Development of the Cariboo Gold

project.

In September of 2022, Emily had the opportunity of competing with

the Diamonds in the Rough, which is an all-female Canadian mine rescue

team. It is a non-for-profit that identifies women in Canada who are

trained in mine rescue. They bring together women, mentor and train, so

that they can take

part in rescue competitions and advance their careers

in mining while promoting women and diversity in mining.

The team travelled to Beaver, West Virginia, where they competed

against 21 teams from around the world, from countries such as the U.S.,

Australia, India, Finland, South Africa and all other parts of Canada.

Their team was made up of eight women from across the country with all

different mining backgrounds.

They’d never met in person before, and only had four days to train

together before the competition began. They placed sixth overall of the

22 teams, which were primarily made up of men. They placed second in

high-angle rope rescue, coming in behind the host team that had been

competing together for two years. They placed third in the technician

and theory event.

Having an inclusive and diverse workforce is something we all must

work towards in all sectors of British Columbia. The B.C. provincial

mine rescue competition is being held in Williams Lake in June of this

year. Although the Diamonds won’t be competing, mines from all over

B.C., including Cariboo North, will be participating. It should be an

exciting showcase of mining and mine rescue.

Mining is an important part of the B.C. economy. It provides

good-paying, family-supporting jobs, and I’m proud that there are so

many women, women like Emily, working in the sector.

HOCKEY IN MAPLE RIDGE

AND HOCKEYVILLE

COMPETITION

B. D’Eith: Hockey is an important part of being Canadian, and young players

dream to be like their favourite players like Connor McDavid or Alex

Ovechkin or Sidney Crosby. For me, it was Bobby Orr. That dates me a

bit.

I was privileged to be a coach in hockey with the Ridge Meadows

Minor Hockey Association for many years. I figured that if you have to

get up at five in the morning for practice, I might as well strap on

some skates and help out. I’ll tell you: it was a great experience for

me and the two of my kids who played. They learned the benefits of being

a team player and staying fit for life, and I learned how much parents

really value how much time their kids get on the ice. One thing I can

say is that we made lifelong friends.

We’re lucky to have Planet Ice in Maple Ridge. The complex is

actually the centre for our local Albion community, hosting events,

tournaments and various leagues, and includes Cam Neely Arena. That’s

home to our Junior B team, the Flames, and the Burrards lacrosse

team.

Now this

year is a special year, hon. Members, for Planet Ice for RMMHA. The

association members, along with organizers Tonya Lynch, Sabriena Eyford,

Chris Raynor, Layna Brown and Jordan Emmerson, entered the Kraft

Hockeyville 2023 competition, and they made the top four in

Canada.

They’re the only B.C. arena in Canada that’s in the top four. The

others include Ontario, Quebec and Manitoba. The winner will receive

$250,000 for the arena, and Planet Ice would use this to improve

scoreboard and sound system, which would help for years to

come.

Our mayor, Dan Ruimy, star Darcy Rota and Canucks mascot Fin were

at the arena last week with young players to try to get everyone to vote

on March 31st at Hockeyville Canada. Anyone can vote. 13 and up. And

while it’s fun for all of us to talk about our various teams, this is

about B.C. I would encourage everyone in this House….

Please, let’s support British Columbia. Let’s support Maple Ridge

for Hockeyville Canada 2023.

COMMUNITY CENTRE FOR HOMELESS

AND VULNERABLE PERSONS IN

TERRACE

E. Ross: In Skeena, we’ve had a few town hall meetings to discuss the

growing number of people experiencing homelessness and

addictions-related issues in Terrace. Terrace has been fortunate as

there are a number of organizations that have been in place to support

those in need, but also because the citizens themselves want to be part

of the solution.

[2:05 p.m.]

Sharon and Sid Bandstra are with us today. They are two of those

people that want to do their

part in helping their community. Out of

their own pocket, they bought the old Shell gas station and converted it

into a centre for those people who need not just help but also a warm

and friendly place to gather.

It has become such a success that many of the existing programs in

Terrace start to gather there. As well, now there is incredible

collaboration happening at what is now named the Garage. The newly

formed Garage is a non-profit community space society and is also home

to the Terrace church’s food bank, which now operates weekly.

The Garage has hosted numerous events in partnership with other

non-profits and government-funded programs, and they are just getting

started. I’ve watched this idea grow from a dream to a reality. Every

time I drop in, I can’t help but notice how vibrant and positive the

people are. The Garage is making connections between those who are down

on their luck with the community and with programs that can and do

help.

This is the kicker. Against my advice, the Garage has not asked

for government support or funding. Sid and Sharon are doing this on

their own pocket because they care not only for the people but for their

community.

This is an amazing and inspirational story. The impacts are

already being felt across Terrace and the neighbouring

communities.

On behalf of Skeena and on behalf of this House, I would like to

thank Sharon and her husband Sid for establishing and operating this

much-needed community centre. I look forward to making it

grow.

There’s not enough time in two minutes to explain all the exciting

things that are happening at the Garage. It’s because of the citizens of

Terrace, B.C. and their surrounding communities but especially Sharon

Bandstra, who is with us in the gallery today.

Oral Questions

RELEASE OF B.C. HOUSING AUDIT REPORT

P. Milobar: As housing affordability and homelessness continue to get worse in

British Columbia, the public deserves to know the full extent of the

mismanagement at B.C. Housing under this Premier’s watch.

Yesterday we learned from the Housing Minister that despite the

government receiving the forensic audit of B.C. Housing a few weeks ago,

it appears to have sat unread on the minister’s desk for those few

weeks. The very existence of this forensic audit of a

multi-billion-dollar public body is something that…. The Premier was

very hesitant to try to even acknowledge what’s happening, to this

chamber.

He didn’t tell the Legislature. He didn’t tell the opposition. He

didn’t tell the media. He didn’t tell anyone for months. It’s in the

public interest that the audit be immediately made public and be

provided to the Public Accounts Committee. Unfortunately, this

government has refused to make that happen.

Will the Premier release the full, unredacted forensic audit of

B.C. Housing today and make it available to the Public Accounts

Committee?

Hon. D. Eby: Thank you to the member for the question. This is, indeed, a

serious issue. My commitment to this House was that we would release as

much of the report as the law allowed us to do. We’re working on that,

and we’ll do it as soon as possible. I’ll keep that

commitment.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Kamloops–North Thompson, supplemental.

P. Milobar: Frankly, that’s just not good enough. The government has been

sitting on this report now for the last couple of weeks without taking

action on it as well. The response of “just trust us” simply is not good

enough. The Premier’s actions have shown that.

He tried to bury the 2018 BDO financial review of Atira. He

quietly released the results of the E and Y review of B.C. Housing over

the Canada Day long weekend. A week later, at seven o’clock on a Friday

in July, he fired the NDP-appointed board and then says it wasn’t really

a firing.

Days upon days of questions in this House, and it was only after

that that the Premier even acknowledged that there was a forensic audit

that apparently had been started a couple of months earlier. The

government has blocked the attempts of the opposition to have this audit

be brought forward to the Public Accounts Committee for pure, open and

transparent vetting.

The Premier has the ability to release the full report in the

public interest, but his refusal to do so only raises more questions of

what this government is trying to hide with the dysfunction of B.C.

Housing. Again, will the Premier release the full, unredacted forensic

audit today and make it available to the Public Accounts

Committee?

[2:10 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: The reason why the member knows about these reports and why he has

them is because they’ve been released publicly. This forensic audit

report — I’ve committed to this place that we will release as much of it

as the law allows. We’re working on that. We’ll do it as quickly as

possible.

It’s a serious matter. I agree with the member that the public

deserves to know. That’s our commitment.

K. Kirkpatrick: Housing is one of the most critical issues that we’ve got today,

with vulnerable people still living on the street while this government

has promised over and over that this was a priority.

B.C. Housing is at the centre of this. The Premier has

consistently kept crucial information about B.C. Housing and Atira from

the public. During his tenure as Housing Minister, B.C. Housing

experienced financial and organizational turmoil. The lack of

transparency surrounding the forensic audit, the concealment of the 2018

BDO financial review of Atira, and the quiet long-weekend release of the

Ernst and Young review have all contributed to the public’s growing

concerns.

Will the Premier admit to this pattern of evasiveness and release

a full and unredacted copy of the forensic audit?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I appreciate the comments from the member across the way. As the

member knows, we are in a housing crisis. We are dealing with challenges

within community, decades of underinvestment in housing. The chickens

have come home to roost. Communities are facing the pressure right

now.

The member talks about the audit. The Premier has just answered

the question; I’ve answered the question multiple times.

I’ve read the report. I believe it’s in the public interest for

that report to be released, without redactions, as much as legally

possible. We’re going to make that public to everyone here, as well as

those in the gallery and the media, when it’s possible. It’s going to be

as fast as possible.

In the meantime, the work that we have to do in communities

continues. I’m glad the member talked about vulnerable populations. This

Sunday I was able to announce, with the city of Vancouver mayor, our

Downtown Eastside plan, positive news — to be able to share that we have

330 units coming online, for people that are most vulnerable on the

streets, by June of this year.

With the combination of working with our not-for-profits, working

with the city of Vancouver, 90 people have been able to find housing.

That is a really positive piece for those that are struggling in the

Downtown Eastside.

We have a lot more to do, and we’re going to continue to do that

work.

Mr. Speaker: Member for West Vancouver–Capilano, supplemental.

K. Kirkpatrick: Well, the chickens have had six years to roost in this two-term

government. There have been consistent failures, over and over, by this

government on living up to the promises that they’ve made.

Of the 114,000 homes to be built, there are 12,000. That

commitment has now disappeared completely from this budget. Housing

affordability and homelessness are pressing issues in British Columbia,

and the public deserves full disclosure in terms of what is happening

and has been happening at B.C. Housing and why B.C. Housing and this

government have not been able to live up to the promises that they’ve

made to British Columbians.

Under the Premier’s watch as Housing Minister, chaos and

dysfunction have reigned at B.C. Housing. FOI documents confirm “a

dramatic increase in staff departures over previous years” and highlight

significant upheaval. A total of 102 staff members, including 17 senior

executives, left the organization during this Premier’s tenure. Despite

the severity of these issues, the Premier has not provided clear

explanations or evidence that this dysfunction has been

addressed.

Will the Premier do the right thing and release the full and

unredacted forensic audit?

Hon. R. Kahlon: The folks working at B.C. Housing have been working very hard

through the pandemic, supporting people during some of the most

challenging times that we’ve seen in the history of our province. We

have over 1,000 employees at B.C. Housing. I don’t know of a private

sector company that hasn’t seen turnovers. I know that even the Leader

of the Opposition has had turnover on his staff. This

happens.

[2:15 p.m.]

In this time, there are opportunities for people to find

opportunities. We know that there is a lot of movement in careers right

now, coming out of the pandemic. People are seeing opportunities that,

perhaps, they’ve never seen before.

What’s vitally important is that….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. R. Kahlon: There’s plenty of time for you to ask more questions, Members, but

if you want the answer, you’ve got to be quiet for it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: As it comes to the….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Please continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: As it comes to the audit, the Premier has already mentioned it.

I’ve already mentioned it. Once it’s possible and once the process has

taken its place, we will make that public.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON CLIMATE

CHANGE AND LNG DEVELOPMENT

POLICIES

A. Olsen: Last week the IPCC released their latest synthesis report. In

order to reduce global warming, we need to act urgently within this

decade. The report makes it clear that avoiding the worst case scenarios

is only possible if we stop the expansion of new oil, gas and coal

development.

Despite the science, the warnings by experts and the evidence

around all of us of the climate collapse, this government just approved

new fossil fuel projects, Cedar LNG, and they gave the Ksi Lisims LNG

proposal the green light to enter into the environmental review process.

The more that governments like this one delay action, greenwashing

fossil fuels, the more catastrophic the outcomes of climate change will

be, especially for marginalized people.

There’s no such thing as clean fossil fuels. This government

should be ashamed of themselves for trying to and attempting to

greenwash LNG. The IPCC report tells us clearly that climate plans that

expand fossil fuel development are not good enough. Our survival is at

stake.

To the Minister of Energy, Mines and Low Carbon Innovation, how

does the minister justify approving new LNG projects in the province

when the science is clear that we must stop expanding fossil fuel

infrastructure?

Hon. G. Heyman: We’re proud of the plans we put in place across all sectors to

reduce emissions and meet our legislated targets. Many people in British

Columbia, credible commentators, many people across the country and, in

fact, many people in other governments in North America laud the B.C.

government for having the most comprehensive climate action program in

North America.

The member — I respect his concern about climate change. For many

months now, the member and his colleague have been saying: “What are you

going to do about emissions from the oil and gas industry? How can you

meet your targets if you’re continuing to have fossil fuel

projects?”

What I said to the member is that we have a sectoral target, a 33

to 38 percent reduction in emissions from the oil and gas sector by

2030. We’re committed to that target, and we will have more to say about

how we are going to meet that target.

On the 14th of this month, we released the new energy action

framework that said very clearly we are going to bring in a regulated

cap on emissions from the oil and gas sector in consultation with First

Nations and industry to ensure that we meet our sectoral emission

reduction targets. That’s exactly what we’re going to do.

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

A. Olsen: We have a Minister of Energy, but when we ask questions about

energy, the Minister of Energy won’t stand up. Instead, it’s the

Minister of Environment. The fact of the matter is that on that same

day, just a couple of hours before, this government approved a new LNG

project that does not meet….

Interjections.

[2:20 p.m.]

A. Olsen: There are only two members in this place that aren’t clapping for

that.

Everybody else in this place is clapping for new fossil fuel

development in a climate emergency.

Interjections.

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

A. Olsen: The Minister of Environment talks about the comprehensive plans.

The Minister of Environment knows we’re not meeting the targets that we

have set, the 2030 to 2050 targets. We’re missing those. We can have all

the comprehensive plans we want. But if we’re not committed to meeting

those targets, which this government has proven they’re not prepared to

do, the plans don’t mean anything.

The fact is that in that energy action framework, the emissions

cap and the net-zero requirements that are laid out there have

absolutely no substance to them. So you can say: “We’re going to go

through with negotiations, with consultations. We’re going to develop

those later, down the road.” They still don’t have any substance to

them.

We cannot afford a government that is prepared to continue

greenwashing LNG and pretend like this fossil fuel is clean. There’s no

such thing as clean fossil fuels. The Premier knows expanding the fossil

fuel industry and tackling climate change are fundamentally at odds with

each other. Why does this government believe they are exempt from this

reality?

Hon. J. Osborne: Thank you to the House Leader of the Third Party, the member for

Saanich North and the Islands for raising the question.

First of all, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Strategy and I work very closely together on these issues because we

know that the issues of energy and environment and meeting our climate

action targets are intrinsically linked. That’s why it’s important that

we continue to do this work together.

We very carefully considered the environmental assessment on the

project that was undertaken by the environmental assessment office. This

included extensive consultation with First Nations, consideration of

climate action targets, working with the Haisla and the Cedar LNG

project to understand and know how they are going to take every action

possible to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and, in fact, signing

a memorandum of understanding with the project to reach near zero

emissions by 2030.

We know that on the same day, of course, we announced the energy

action framework. This is an important signal to the sector at large to

say: “We need to meet these targets.”

We know British Columbians want to do this. In fact, I just

returned from a trip up to the northwest portion of B.C. I was in

Kitimat. I was in Terrace. I was in Smithers. I was hearing from people

and talking to them about these projects.

The regulatory cap on emissions that my colleague here spoke of….

That work is underway. It is work we are going to do with industry, with

First Nations, in consultation with communities, hearing from them, so

that we can set the regulations in place.

It’s not all that we’re doing. The other part of the energy action

framework, of course, is the incentivizing and moving towards a clean

energy future that all British Columbians want us to be a part

of.

The world is looking at us here in British Columbia on how we can

do this work. We are going to do it with the B.C. Hydro task force. We

are going to do this. We are moving towards a low-carbon-focused future,

one that is prosperous for all British Columbians and means so much for

First Nations and communities.

RELEASE OF B.C. HOUSING AUDIT REPORT

M. de Jong: Look, people have become very, very skeptical about this Premier

and this government’s approach to housing and the plight of the homeless

in British Columbia. I would suggest they have become skeptical for two

reasons.

One, the results are getting worse and worse. In communities right

across this province, including my own, the proliferation of tent cities

and all of the health and safety challenges associated with that is

getting worse, not better.

Secondly, there is a demonstrated tendency on the part of this

Premier and his government to try and camouflage the release of

information by doing so on long weekends and late on Friday

evenings.

The opposition and, more importantly, the public’s interest in

this forensic audit is real, and it is pertinent. Happily, in this case,

where there is a genuine will, there is a way. The Freedom of

Information Act, under

section 25, says very clearly that when it is in

the public interest…. When there is information about the health or

safety of the public or a group of people or the disclosure of which,

for any other reason, is clearly in the public interest, the government

and the minister can proactively and immediately release that

information.

[2:25 p.m.]

The simple question hopefully that will elicit a simple and

straightforward answer is: will the government, will the Premier make

use of these provisions in the Freedom of Information Act and release

the forensic audit unedited, unredacted today?

Hon. R. Kahlon: As the Premier has said, and I have said multiple times, we

believe that this report needs to be made public in a timely way with as

little redaction as possible because we think it’s in the public

interest.

I find it hard to listen to that member talk about transparency —

a complete

chapter missing from an ICBC report when he was the minister.

So we will not be taking lectures from that side of the House about

transparency on any matter.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Abbotsford West, supplemental.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Please, continue.

M. de Jong: Well, we can stand here and exchange political shots and political

barbs while these tent cities are created in communities right across

British Columbia. The minister can try and avoid responsibility for the

report that is on his desk that reveals some of the chaos that is taking

place at B.C. Housing and, presumably, provide some answers to why the

housing and the situation for the homeless in this province has gotten

worse, not better.

The act is clear that the minister has the authority to release

the report now. He has the authority to provide notice to any third

parties that might be impacted by the release of the report. Where

there’s a will, there is a way, but I don’t think there is that

will.

I think the trend and the practice of this government has been to

be dragged kicking and screaming, to have information dragged out of it,

not to proactively release the report, and we’re not going to get any

solutions if that is going to continue to be the approach on the part of

this government. The minister can show some leadership. The Premier can

show some leadership.

Stand up and say this report…. Release this report, unredacted,

today.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Again, the member says: “Do as I say, not as I did.” If the member

wants to talk about the serious issue of encampments, I think that is an

important issue. We should be talking about that. There are people

struggling, coming out of the pandemic, with global

inflation….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: This is a serious issue. So let’s talk about it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The minister will continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I know, for example, in Abbotsford, there’s an encampment, and

there are some serious challenges. I was on the phone with the mayor of

Abbotsford this morning. We talked about how we’re going to address the

encampment at the Lonzo park. It’s a serious concern. It’s not safe for

the people that are living in the encampment. It’s not safe for the

community.

We both agree that it’s been going for too long. We are making

some significant progress on an action plan forward. We’re going to be

making some announcements on that in the very near future, but community

by community, we are looking at solutions to address the challenges

we’re seeing, whether it’s encampments, whether it’s people that can’t

find housing, whether it’s people who are just struggling to make it

through.

The budget has significant supports to ensure that people have the

supports they need. We know…. We’ve been seeing signals from the federal

government that they also are going to be putting additional supports in

with their new budget.

We’re going to continue that work. I think all members in this

House can agree that it is vitally important that we provide supports

for the most vulnerable people in our society.

TENT CITIES AND CONSTRUCTION

OF NEW HOUSING

UNITS

S. Bond: We’ll take that as a no and that the minister will not do what he

is empowered to be able to do with regard to the audit.

The minister stands up and talks about action. In fact, what’s

happening is that there isn’t even action on a completed plan from this

government. We should be clear. This Premier committed to taking over

and ending tent cities months ago. Another day, another broken promise.

Because what we see on the ground, contrary to what the minister just

said, is escalating violence and total chaos on our streets.

[2:30 p.m.]

Last year when the Premier first announced more modular housing,

he said…. These are the Premier’s words, his promise: “They’ll open in

March of 2023, just a matter of months.”

Well, on another Sunday update, the government confirmed that will

not happen. No other way to describe it — broken promise. Kevin Barlow

of the Hastings Crossing BIA is fed up with this delay. He said: “I

don’t believe they have a plan.” Announcements without results mean

nothing. Chaos and violence on our streets.

Can the Premier tell British Columbians why he failed to deliver

on a promise he made directly to them months ago?

Hon. R. Kahlon: There were a lot of questions in that comment. I want to say,

first off, that when we look at the lack of investment in housing over

the last two decades, especially for the most vulnerable people, you

have to wonder why. Why was that investment never made? Why, when this

side was on this side, did they not make that investment?

You know what? The answer is actually available when you look at

the words of the B.C. Liberal Party president. The B.C. Liberal Party

president said: “We should focus on the 60 percent and essentially not

bother with some demographics that will not likely, or absolutely never

will, support us — for example, ‘homeless people’ or ‘dependent on

social supports.’”

That’s the type of mentality that was in power for 16 years in

this province. On our side, we do have a plan. We have announced that

plan. We worked with the city of Vancouver. We worked with our

Indigenous partners.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: The minister will continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you, hon. Speaker.

I’ve shared with the members that we had over 200 people in the

Hastings encampment. In the last few months, we’ve been able to house 90

of them. There are 70 people now who need housing, and the message to

them is: there is shelter space available for you. Take the shelter

space.

We believe, given the fires, given the increase in violence, given

a report recently released by a not-for-profit that had interviewed 50

women, that all 50 had been sexually assaulted…. We’re saying the

shelters are a safer place to be, and we’re encouraging people to do

that. We’re working with our teams on the ground to encourage people to

take that space. We’re going to continue to do that work, because we

know it’s vitally important.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Prince George–Valemount, supplemental.

S. Bond: Well, it is absolutely outrageous that this minister stands up and

provides an answer like that, cheap shots, when in fact, in Vancouver,

since last July….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

S. Bond: Since last July, there have been 360 fires. There are dangerous

tent fires, and, in fact, people dying in their tents in Vancouver. And

that’s the answer this minister gives.

There is only one person who has been in charge of the Housing

file the entire time that this government has been in power, and that is

the person sitting in the Premier’s chair. Let’s be clear. He has

utterly failed. He made promises to British Columbians. He said that

there would be housing in place by March. He has failed devastatingly,

and that’s the answer we get from the Minister of Housing.

Let’s be clear. Dangerous tent fires, exploding propane tanks are

putting residents and first responders at risk, and that’s the best this

minister can do.

Why has the Premier failed miserably to keep his promise to

British Columbians, and when is he actually going to do something that

he said he was going to do?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Ninety people. Ninety people have been housed from the 200 people

that were on the Downtown Eastside. That is action. That’s helping

people to get stability.

What we’re saying is that there are 70 people there still that are

looking for housing, and we have shelter space available for them. We’re

saying that we have 330 additional units on top of that, that will be

opening. Every month, we’ll be opening around 110, up to getting 330

by….

Interjections.

[2:35 p.m.]

Hon. R. Kahlon: We’re not stopping there. We’re also investing in supportive

housing for those that are already in the shelters, that are already in

supportive housing, to get into market-based, affordable rentals with

rental supports and other measures. We are building a continuum of

support around how people can transition from being in a shelter to

being into market rent. That is the work we’re doing.

The member talks about outcomes. When the mayor of Vancouver was

standing beside me, he said that we are getting the results. We’re

helping people. Now the member says that it’s not safe. I agree.

Everybody on this side agrees.

I continue to say it; the Premier continues to say it. The

encampments are not safe. They’re not safe for the people that are

there. They’re not safe for the community. And that’s why we’re trying

to get the last 70 people that need housing into shelters. We don’t

believe the encampments are the place that they should be in.

TENT CITIES AND GOVERNMENT ACTION ON

HOMELESSNESS AND

COMMUNITY SAFETY

E. Sturko: Where I come from, 40 percent is a failing grade. That’s less than

half the people who needed to be housed in the Downtown

Eastside.

When the Premier signed an MOU with Victoria to end homeless camps

over two years ago, he called it a template for the province, and he

said: “We’ve gotten to the beginning of the end of this crisis.” But you

know what? It hasn’t gotten better. In fact, it’s become worse all

across the province.

Over a year ago, the opposition wrote to the Premier urging him to

act on the Lonzo encampment. Despite his personal and written

assurances, the encampment has turned into the city’s most violent, and

there’s no reason to believe that 2023 will bring anything

different.

Every day across B.C. vulnerable people are left unhoused, and

people in communities feel unsafe as they’re forced to confront rampant

crime and street disorder. At the growing tent city at Lonzo Road in

Abbotsford, there were 1,600 calls for police, over 100 violent crimes

and over 300 fire calls in 2022 alone. This encampment is on provincial

property.

Why has the Premier completely failed to act and failed to provide

the housing that people need?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I think that the member will know, because I answered the question

from the member from Abbotsford on Lonzo, that there are some challenges

there. It’s not a new challenge. There’s been an encampment there for a

long time. What we’re doing right now — I spoke to the mayor of

Abbotsford this morning — is working on plans to ensure that we’re not

just moving people along but that we have housing for them to go

to.

It’s not just moving people along to another challenge. We need to

be able to address the challenge at hand, make sure there’s housing,

stability and support for people to get back on their feet. We’re doing

that work there. We’re doing that work in Victoria. We’re doing the work

in every single community.

I know all members in this House want to ensure that people have

housing and are not living in encampments. That is a goal that I share.

That’s a goal the Premier shares. That work will continue.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: I have the honour of tabling the report from the office of the

registrar of lobbyists, Determination Decision 23-02 .

Motions Without Notice

CONSIDERATION OF TSAWWASSEN FIRST

NATION FINAL

AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS

BY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

Hon. R. Kahlon: By leave, I move:

[That, notwithstanding any provision of the Standing Orders or usual

practices of the House:

1. The House forthwith resolve itself into a Committee

of the Whole House in

Section A to consider the Tsawwassen First Nation

Final Agreement Amending Agreement (No. 2) and for Members to put

questions on the Amending Agreement (No. 2) to the Minister of

Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation.

2. The said Committee of the Whole House rise and

report to the House by 5 p.m. today.

3. For greater certainty, the Standing Orders and

practices of the House with respect to the conduct of proceedings of

Committees of the Whole House be applicable to the said Committee of the

Whole House.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

PERMISSION FOR INDIGENOUS LEADER

TO ADDRESS THE

HOUSE

Hon. R. Kahlon: By leave, I move:

[That, notwithstanding any provision of the Standing Orders or usual

practices of the House, Valerie Cross (Chemkwaat) of the Tsawwassen

First Nation (sc̓əwaθən məsteyəxw) be

permitted to address the House from the floor of the House later

today.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

[2:40 p.m.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Kahlon: In

Section C, I call the consideration of the estimates of the Ministry of

Citizens’ Services, followed by the consideration of the estimates of the

Ministry of Children and Family Development.

In the main chamber, I call second reading of Bill 16, Supply

Act.

[R. Leonard in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 16 — SUPPLY ACT (N o .1),

Hon. K. Conroy: I move that Bill 16, the Supply Act (No.1), 2023, be read a second

time now.

Existing voted appropriations will expire on March 31, 2023. Bill

16 provides interim supply for the ministry operations and other

appropriations for approximately the first three months of 2023-2024

while the House completes debate of the appropriations presented in the

’23-24 estimates. Interim supply for ministry operations and other

appropriations is required to ensure continuation of government services

until the final supply bill comes into force.

Bill 16 also provides one-third of the combined voted amounts in

schedules C and D of the 2023-24 estimates for disbursements related to

capital expenditures, loans, investments and other financing

requirements. The one-third authorization provided for in relation to

these disbursements is higher than proportion authorized in relation to

ministry operations, as the disbursements prescribed in schedules C and

D are not evenly distributed throughout the year. Therefore, the higher

level of interim supply is required to accommodate the payments that

will be made under these schedules.

Bill 16 also authorizes the full amount of the disbursements

referred to in

schedule E of the 2023-2024 estimates.

Schedule E of the

estimates outlines the revenue collected on behalf of, and transferred

to, specific programs or entities. There is no impact on the operating

results, borrowing or debt resulting from the collection and transfer of

this revenue.

These interim supply appropriations are based on the

accountabilities and allocations outlined in the 2023-24 estimates. The

final supply bill for the 2023-24 fiscal year will incorporate these

amounts to ensure it reflects the sum of all voted appropriations to be

given to government in that fiscal year.

P. Milobar: I rise to Bill 16. Just have a couple of quick comments. The

opposition, of course…. This is a fairly standard bill routine that

comes through every year to keep the doors of government open, as the

minister referenced in her comments as well. We have no interest as the

opposition to not see the government still in operation as we move

through estimates.

[2:45 p.m.]

Certainly, though, I would not want any votes that we take around

budgetary issues to be misconstrued or misunderstood by the government,

as we saw during supplemental estimates recently. Although we will be

supporting Bill 16 as it moves through to keep the doors of government

open, of course, we also have that with the caveat that as we move

through estimates and peruse the bill. the budget. in its entirety, much

as the government used to do when they were in opposition, we will

likely be voting against the overall budget.

Certainly the supply bill, in its three-month term here to keep

the doors of government open, we don’t take issue with. We fully

understand how things were calculated with the various schedules to

front-load some of the money based on contracts and construction

schedules and time frames like that.

We look forward to moving forward with this bill.

Hon. K. Conroy: I move second reading of Bill 16, the Supply Act (No. 1),

Motion approved.

Hon. K. Conroy: I move that Bill 16 be committed to a Committee of the Whole House

for consideration at the next sitting after today.

Bill 16, Supply Act (No. 1), 2023, read a second time and referred to

a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the

House after today.

Hon. A. Dix: I’m calling Bill 15, the Vital Statistics Amendment Act,

BILL 15 — VITAL STATISTICS

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. A. Dix: I move that Bill 15, the Vital Statistics Amendment Act, be read

for a second time now.

I rise to speak about these important amendments to the Vital

Statistics Act. The amendments help people born in British Columbia who

wish to make a change to the gender recorded on their birth

registration, who would like to have a birth certificate issued without

a gender indicator displayed. According to the 2021 census, British

Columbia is one of the most gender-diverse provinces, with roughly one

in every 200 people identifying as transgender or non-binary. In

addition, two-spirit people have vitally important traditional roles

within Indigenous communities.

In recognition of the gender diversity that exists in B.C. and the

trauma that people feel when misgendered or faced with unfair barriers

to self-determination and gender expression, we’re following through on

a commitment to modernize the ways we manage the recording of gender and

processes relating to the changing of an individual’s gender.

We have made some systemic changes that support individual rights

to self-determination, including changes initiated in 2018 to enable the

use of gender X on identity documents and changes in 2021 that allow a

change to the gender indicator on drivers’ licences, identification

cards and the B.C. Services Card without the affirmation or sign-off of

a physician. Last year we introduced a policy that people aged 12 and

older could change the gender on their birth registrations without

medical sign-off.

The bill before you today proposes amendments to the Vital

Statistics Act that will continue and reinforce this approach. The Vital

Statistics Act governs the recording and reporting of all information

related to vital life events in British Columbia, from birth through to

death, and establishes the Vital Statistics Agency, which is responsible

for administering the records and procedures related to these life

events. All births in B.C. must be reported to and registered by the

Vital Statistics Agency.

The first amendment proposed of the two amendments proposed in

this bill will remove the requirement in

section 27 of the act for

people 12 and older to obtain confirmation from a physician or

psychologist when they apply to change the gender indicator on their

birth registration. This will bring the legislation into alignment with

the policy implemented last year.

Moving away from a medical model of gender identification removes

real barriers to two-spirit, transgender, non-binary and other

gender-diverse people in the province — the barriers they face when

trying to change their identification documents. People know, and each

person knows, their gender best. Requiring medical sign-off on gender

designation reduces an individual’s ability to legally change their

gender. Updating the legislation to reflect the policy we introduced

last year will ensure an easier process for people to have their true

genders reflected on their birth certificates and other identification

documents.

People under the age of 12 will still need a supporting statement

from a physician or psychologist as a part of their application to

change the gender indicator on their birth registration. This age was

chosen because it is commonly considered to be the age at which youth

are capable of giving consent on their own behalf and of making

independent decisions of significance to themselves.

[2:50 p.m.]

For example, in the case of an adoption or a name change where a

minor 12 years and older is affected, their consent is required as part

of the process.

This change will align B.C. with several provinces and territories

that do not require a medical sign-off for changes to the gender on a

birth registration. All other requirements for a person to apply for an

amendment to the gender indicator on their birth registration will

continue to be in place. All minors must continue to seek the consent of

their parents and guardians as a part of their application.

In the same spirit of support for equity and self-determination,

we’re also proposing an amendment that changes the information that must

be included on a birth certificate. Under

section 36 of the act, the

registrar general of the Vital Statistics Agency can issue a birth

certificate upon application from a person requesting one. The

certificate is based on information recorded in the birth registration

and must contain the sex designation of the person it relates

to.

Currently the gender designation F, X or M, as recorded in the

person’s birth registration, is automatically displayed on the birth

certificate to fulfil the act’s requirement for sex designation.

However, gender-diverse people may not recognize themselves in those

descriptions.

B.C.’s gender-diverse community has long shared the trauma that

one feels when misgendered or faces unfair barriers to

self-determination and gender expression. Furthermore, a person’s gender

may not be relevant in all of the possible circumstances where a birth

certificate might be issued and produced as a piece of identification.

Therefore, the amendments we are proposing would remove the requirement

in the Vital Statistics Act that all birth certificates must be issued

with an indicator of the person’s gender on them.

This means that if a person applying for a birth certificate

wishes to omit the gender indicator, they can do so. This change is

consistent with and upholds an individual’s equality rights under

section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Ontario and Nova Scotia already offer birth certificates without

an indicator of gender. International jurisdictions, such as the

Netherlands, have begun the work to provide genderless government-issued

documentation as well.

In conclusion, removing unfair barriers to self-determination and

equity for two-spirit, intersex, non-binary, transgender and

gender-diverse people is another step we can take together to make all

British Columbians feel respected and valued.

I ask all members of the House to support this bill at second

reading.

S. Bond: I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the minister, ever so

briefly, and thank him for laying out very clearly what the amendments

accomplish. I think what’s important today to recognize is that, in

fact, what this bill — the amendments that have been tabled — does is

actually bring legal standing to the policy changes that were announced

previously.

When I went back and sort of looked at what had been said, I was

very moved by the thoughtful comments of people who had participated in

this process. Perhaps one of them said it best when they talked about

people having a legal right to have their names and gender markers

recognized.

One of the issues…. As the minister knows, obviously, this is

second reading. There will be some questions, although not many, because

in going back and looking at the policy changes that were announced,

there is relatively little that is different here. But we recognize that

British Columbia is a very gender-diverse province. The minister has

described this as an important step in reflecting inclusivity in our

province.

One of the things that I think is important for people to

recognize is that parental consent is still required in the case of

minors. The minister certainly included that. Obviously, the main thing

that we’re doing today is making sure that when there is documentation,

British Columbians have the opportunity to have that information

accurately reflect who they are.

The minister pointed out, I think very clearly, that there are two

clauses to this bill. I think the last time that the minister brought a

bill to this House, he and I debated a bill for a period of time that

had over 600 clauses, as I recall. This one has two, and the minister

described the difference between the two.

[2:55 p.m.]

The first clause does allow a person aged 12 or older to apply for

an amendment on the person’s birth certificate without a physician’s or

a psychologist’s confirmation. That actually has already been taking

place, as I understand it. The minister can walk through that, I hope,

for me in the committee stage. I understand that that took effect in

January of 2022.

What I’d be most interested in, actually, is looking at whether or

not the system has become more transparent, easier for people to

manoeuvre their way through, because one of the concerns that was

expressed prior to this step being taken was that there were a lot of

barriers when it came to making an application and how difficult it was.

So at that time, when the original announcement was made, there was

concern about the streamlining of this process, how it would work, did

the government actually make sure that that was going to be as effective

as possible.

It is important to note that those who are under the age of 12

will still be required to provide that confirmation from either a

practising registrant of the College of Physicians and Surgeons or a

practising registrant of the College of Psychologists. Again, the

requirement for consent from parents having guardianship or other

guardians of the minor — that’s subsection 27(2)(d) — remains

unchanged.

Clause 2 actually allows an applicant for a certificate to request

that the person’s birth certificate not include the designation of a

person’s sex — in essence, a two-clause bill that actually brings legal

standing and legal status to the policy changes that the government

brought forward in order to ensure that people have the ability to

self-declare their gender on identity documents.

I look forward to continuing our discussion simply through a

series of questions in committee. I thank the Chair for the opportunity

to respond today.

Hon. A. Dix: I want to thank the member for Prince George–Valemount. I think

when you’re dealing with issues of human rights in our communities…. We

do, in our constituency office, frequently deal with people who have

challenges in expressing themselves in society. I think it’s really

valuable to have serious exchange and debate but also support from

members of all sides of the House for changes we bring

forward.

This is an area of public policy, in the time the member and I

have sat together in this House, that has evolved. I think doing it

together, being supportive together and saying as a Legislature, “We

support people’s individual rights,” is one of the things that we can

critically do. That doesn’t change the fact that there needs to be

discussion, debate and accountability, of course.

Also, it’s important that we do what I think we’ve done today and

in our discussions, which is to say to people who are two-spirit and

intersex and non-binary and transgender and gender-diverse people in our

communities that they have our support. They have our support when they

are facing some of the most difficult challenges. We know, when we look

at social determinants of health, that many people in those

circumstances face some of the most significant challenges in our

society.

I’m very appreciative of the comments of the member for Prince

George–Valemount.

I move second reading.

Motion approved.

Hon. A. Dix: I move that the bill be placed on orders of the day for Committee

of the Whole House at the next sitting of the House after

today.

Bill 15, Vital Statistics Amendment Act, 2023, read a second time and

referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next

sitting of the House after today.

Hon. A. Dix: I believe the Minister of Jobs will be coming down to the House

very shortly. I’m going to call Bill No. 14, and I think she’ll be here

within a short period of time to deal with the next bill. So if I could

ask for a two-minute recess so she can get here.

Deputy Speaker: This House stands in recess for two minutes.

The House recessed from 2:59 p.m. to 3:04 p.m.

[R. Leonard in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: I call the House back to order and recognize the Minister of Jobs,

Economic Development and Innovation.

BILL 14 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES

(MODERNIZATION)

AMENDMENT ACT, 2023

Hon. B. Bailey: I move that the bill be introduced and read a second time

now.

Madam Speaker, I’m pleased to present Bill 14, the Miscellaneous

Statutes (Modernization) Amendment Act. Words matter. Whether written or

spoken, words have a powerful effect, and all British Columbians deserve

to see themselves reflected in the words we use to describe government

programs and services.

[3:05 p.m.]

This bill will modernize B.C.’s legislative framework by amending

more than 230 instances of outdated gendered and binary language —

amendments found in more than 200 provincial statutes, amendments that

will ensure that all British Columbians see themselves reflected in our

laws. Words matter, especially when it comes to promoting inclusion and

eliminating discrimination, and this bill represents a key step to

furthering our government’s commitment to do just that.

Adrienne Smith, litigation director at the Catherine White Holman

Wellness society, a trans clinic, put it this way: “Trans and non-binary

people, particularly youth, can be erased by laws that only use ‘he’ and

‘she.’” Bill 14 signals “to those people that they are important and

that they are included and protected by the law.” Modernizing language

isn’t just a nice-to-have. It’s a necessary step towards creating a more

inclusive society.

It also happens to align with legislative drafting best practices,

so the bill also improves clarity by proposing minor amendments to

various acts that will, for example, repeal outdated sections and

reflect the way technology has changed the language, especially as it

relates to working and meeting virtually.

What’s key is that Bill 14 will systematically amend provincial

laws to remove outdated gendered and binary language, better reflecting

the diversity of our province. British Columbia will become the first

province in Canada to do this, because legislative modernization and

reform…. Bill 14 is one way that we can promote inclusivity and equality

for all British Columbians.

T. Halford: I want to take an opportunity here to speak to this important

issue, because it is one that I think is pivotal to the conversations

that we’re having every single day. I know that in my house, with my

children and in our family, we are continuing to have this dialogue on

such an important matter and on these changes.

I think they’re changes that are necessary to reflect where we are

as a society and how that goes. I know that growing up, those

conversations did not happen when I was in school. They didn’t happen

when I entered the workforce. I think it’s absolutely necessary what the

minister has highlighted today — that there are changes that need to be

made, that there are things that need to happen to bring us to a much,

much better space than where we are today.

I want to thank the minister, and I want to thank everybody that

has done the work in terms of bringing this forward. I think that when

we look at modernization — in any facet, but in what the minister

highlighted today — it’s absolutely essential that we do the work

necessary, that we have those conversations and that we are able to move

forward in a way that understands how society has changed and how we

have evolved — that whether it’s in our school system, in our public

sector, in the private sector, in this House, we’ve evolved in a way to

be able to have those conversations.

I think that the work is necessary. I think that it’s absolutely

vital, and I look forward to making sure that we on this side are doing

everything we can to continue those conversations and making sure that

they are absolutely necessary. To the minister’s words that….

When I look at some of the challenges that are brought forward…. I

had the opportunity on Friday to host an organization in my riding, the

White Rock Pride Society.

[3:10 p.m.]

The White Rock Pride Society was actually one of the first

meetings I took as an MLA. The work that they are doing…. When we talk

about inclusivity, one of the major challenges that they had is making

sure how they are promoting what is important to them in terms of

values, and how are we echoing that today in this House.

I think that when we look at some of the challenges that

individuals face, it’s absolutely necessary that we continue to do the

work that is incumbent on us to bring forward the challenges that

individuals face in every single community. I think that it’s important

work and an important step. I want to make sure that we do realize that

every person faces different challenges.

We want to make sure that we continue that work. We want to make

sure we continue that dialogue so that when we are standing up in this

House and when we are meeting with organizations like the White Rock

Pride Society and when we are continuing to have that dialogue, we are

doing it in a way that is respectful.

With that, I will take my seat.

A. Olsen: I just want to rise today and speak in favour of Bill 14, the

Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act. This bill will amend over 200

different pieces of legislation, removing outdated, gendered and binary

language. In effect, it ensures that our laws are inclusive and

affirming of gender diversity. This is a good thing.

For several years, we’ve seen amendment acts update gendered

language one by one as bills are brought forward updating the acts,

making sure that they’re reflecting the language that we’re using in our

society today. This bill before us is a proactive step to systematically

update the province’s laws, updating hundreds of pieces of legislation

all at once.

For a very long time, the laws that were written and passed in

this building were not written with the diversity of the public in mind.

Instead, they were written with an eye of a patriarchal,

heteronormative, colonial society in which we live. We still face

challenges on this front, so it’s essential that we move through our

roles as individuals and as elected officials and that we uphold the

importance of human rights and elevate the voices of marginalized

groups.

This legislation also comes at a time when we’re seeing increased

legal attacks on the rights and safety of trans and LGBTQ2S+ communities

in our neighbours to the south. I’m proud that in our jurisdiction, we

are celebrating and respecting gender diversity and inclusivity and

updating our laws to reflect that.

Finally, this bill also provides for updates such as allowing

documents to be delivered by email and repeals obsolete provisions,

ensuring the ongoing clarity and modernization of B.C.’s legal

landscape.

I want to just take a moment to raise my hands to the members of

the public service. This bill has 1,200 clauses in it, and I know that

it’s taken some effort for us to review each and every one of these

clauses.

It’s a lot of work, just as it must have been a lot of work for

the public service to begin this process and to ensure that this — I

think, probably, what will be a first go at this — was inclusive. Having

200 statutes across multiple ministries included in this is an

indication of the level of work that was required. I just want to take a

moment to raise my hands to the public service who did that

work.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak to this important bill. I

look forward to continuing to support legislation in this spirit as we

go forward.

HÍSW̱ḴE SIÁM .

R. Merrifield: Thank you for this opportunity to speak to this bill. Like the

member before me mentioned, the bill is very extensive. There are a lot

of clauses, and going through each one was…. Yeah, it took quite a bit

of time. But although the bill is extensive, it’s actually quite

straightforward, so I don’t feel like I need to say too much to

it.

[3:15 p.m.]

If you want fairness, if you want equality and if you want laws

that welcome and that include, then you have to modernize your

legislation. You have to modernize your language. I believe that this,

actually, brings that language up to date and allows it to be much more

inclusive.

It’s important to promote fairness, to allow each member of our

communities and of our province full inclusion. This removal of gender

language and of the outdated words that have been used in the past to

talk about people experiencing, let’s say, mental health issues, for

example…. Well, these are important modernizations that will help to

reduce stigma and that will help to improve inclusivity and improve and

build our community.

I also believe…. Some of the other important aspects are just

modernizing — things like having B.C. Hydro not just approve board

resolutions through telex and telegraph. I don’t remember the last time

I telegraphed someone, but I’m sure it’s still used somewhere.

Obviously, just as we’re modernizing these outdated modes of

communication, we’re also modernizing our language to become more

inclusive. That is the crux of this bill and what we are attempting to

do.

As I noted earlier, this is very straightforward in nature. I

believe that we all want to move towards fairness and equality. In doing

so, the modernization of the language in this bill will help

us.

Hon. B. Bailey: Thank you to the members who spoke on this bill.

I’d like to take a moment to thank the better regulations

legislative team, who provided advice and legislative drafting services.

They continue to work diligently on the better regulations for B.C.

amendment process, and their work is truly appreciated.

With that, I move second reading.

Motion approved.

Hon. B. Bailey: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole to be

considered at the next sitting after today.

Bill 14, Miscellaneous Statutes (Modernization) Amendment Act, 2023,

read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for

consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. A. Dix: I am going to again ask for a couple minutes of recess, just

for the Attorney General to come down.

I’m calling Bill 11, the Election Amendment Act, at this time.

Then I’d also request a five-minute recess.

Deputy Speaker: This House will stand in recess for five minutes.

The House recessed from 3:18 p.m. to 3:28 p.m.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: I call the House back to order and recognize the Attorney

General.

BILL 11 — ELECTION

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. N. Sharma: I move that the bill be read now a second time.

This legislation acts on the Chief Electoral Officer’s

recommendations for changes to the Election Act. The amendments respond

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

Digital Communications, Disinformation and Democracy and

the CEO’s May 2022 report Recommendations for Legislative

Change .

The general concern outlined in the disinformation report is that

there is an increasing difficulty in meeting the act’s principles of

transparency and fairness in light of the increasingly complex and

sophisticated means of disseminating political

communications.

To address these concerns, the amendments will establish

restrictions on making specified types of false statements about

candidates, senior officials of political parties and vendors and

contractors providing services to Elections B.C.; establish restrictions

on deliberate disinformation about the electoral process; establish more

specific criteria for what constitutes an independent third-party

advertising sponsor; require all digital platforms that publish election

advertising to remove non-compliant content within a specific time

frame, following notice by the CEO; give the CEO regulatory authority to

establish content and format standards for authorization statements on

election advertising; and extend the definition of canvassing on a

commercial basis to include the transmission of online

messaging.

[3:30 p.m.]

The 2020 provincial general election was the first election held

during a pandemic in British Columbia. An unprecedented number of voters

voted by mail and at advanced voting. The amendments will streamline the

vote-by-mail process and update the criteria for ballot

adjudication.

Overall, these amendments will provide new measures to protect the

elections in B.C.

A. Olsen: I appreciate the opportunity to speak to Bill 11, and I apologize

for the delay. Just wanting to stand and speak to some of the changes

that are being put into this bill and some of the recommendations from

the CEO of Elections B.C. that are not finding their way into this bill

and maybe some of the questions that we’ll have as this bill moves

through the remaining parts of this legislative process.

We do recognize the process that has been involved in order to

draft this legislative amendment today and including the CEO’s ability

to authorize locations for mail ballot drop-off beyond electoral offices

or voting places. A campaign period — election advertising is now going

to be more broadly defined to include electronic communication instead

of simply text messaging. Recognizing that this allows people to write

the name of a party leader on a write-in ballot to vote for that party’s

candidate in their riding. I’ll come back to that in just a

second.

The CEO doesn’t currently have to issue a mail-in ballot if they

don’t think that there’s enough time in order for the voting member,

citizen, to return it. It requires mail voters to provide a date of

birth as a shared secret to confirm their identity when voting. It

removes the requirement that the mail-in voting be done before a witness

and allows for the curing of mail-in ballots returned with errors, so

voters can correct mistakes to allow the votes to still

count.

I think all of these initiatives that I just outlined are laudable

initiatives, save one. And I’ll speak to that. I think it is important

all British Columbians — those who don’t have a fixed address, for

example, or maybe those who may have made a mistake in that process. I

appreciate the effort that’s being taken by government here to ensure

that British Columbians are able to have their say in one of the most

important acts in our democracy, which is to go out to the poll and to

vote.

I recognize that in this bill we have the ability for, and I

mentioned this, people to write the name of a party leader into their

ballot instead of their party’s candidate. I recognize that during the

snap election in 2020 this was a particularly challenging aspect for

voters, in that it was being done in a pandemic. It was a snap election,

meaning it wasn’t planned. In some ridings, no party had a candidate

until quite some time. Because of the pandemic, we used mail in ballots

to an extent that I don’t think have ever been used in this province

previously, so we saw an awful lot of write-in ballots.

[3:35 p.m.]

I think the idea of writing in the party leader’s name into a

ballot goes against the electoral system that we have, where members

from their community put their name forward to represent their

communities. This idea that we can simply just have leader-style

politics is kind of like they do down in the States, to some extent,

when they vote for the President. It’s a focus on the leader of the

party rather than actually those individuals who have been nominated and

elected to be the candidate for their party.

It was indicated to me that during one of the ballots back in the

2020 election — in the West Vancouver–Sea to Sky riding, I believe —

there was a different position that was taken by Elections B.C. on this.

Now, in this report that the CEO of Elections B.C. has given to the

minister, in order to draft this legislation, he has changed the

position, maybe, from what was in the judicial recount

decision.

I think we need to be very careful if we are moving away from 87

MLAs elected here, all in the same way, by a majority of the members in

their riding and we’re moving towards more of a leader style of

politics, where the focus is on the leader of the political party. I

think we need to recognize that that is a system that has evolved over

the decades. That is not how this institution is supposed to work, as it

was historically set up.

It has evolved that way. This place is about the political parties

that exist here. It’s about the sparring between the political parties

that exist here. It is about the consolidation of power by those

political parties that exist in this House. That’s what this chamber has

become, and, I believe, what this amendment will further entrench: a

lack of understanding and awareness, for some British Columbians, of who

their candidate actually is.

In my riding, for the first four weeks of the election, I had the

Premier’s signs up all over my riding, promoting somebody who wasn’t

running in my riding. You know, I still beat the Premier in my riding

during that election, as it turns out. He did not win in Saanich North

and the Islands. He wasn’t running in Saanich North and the

Islands.

What it did…. I can talk about what it did. As I was standing

having a conversation with people on the street in Sidney, it brought a

sense of confusion into that race. I didn’t know the Premier was running

in Saanich North and the Islands. Well, he was not. People were

legitimately confused.

This is the single most important act in our democracy: going to

the polls and selecting the person that you want to represent you in

your riding. Indeed, we all, most of us, run for a political party in

here, and the collections of candidates that run under those banners

form a government. They form an opposition, they form a Third Party, and

they form a fourth party and maybe a fifth party.

The reality here is that if we are changing our laws that are

going to serve to further confuse British Columbians, I think we need to

pause and reflect on that. It was confusing. You know what? I think the

Premier of the day got what he was looking for. He got the outcome that

he was looking for, and that’s fine, but that doesn’t necessarily make

it the right thing for us to do.

I think it’s important to acknowledge some of the things that the

CEO of Elections B.C. had in their report and that, for some reason

inexplicably, are not appearing in this bill.

Prohibiting the spreading of misinformation about the political

officials or the elections process. Imposing monetary penalties on those

who spread misinformation. Providing criteria for what constitutes an

independent third-party sponsor. Allowing voters to use date of birth to

confirm identity to vote by mail. Allowing ballots to be dropped off at

CEO-designated drop-off locations.

[3:40 p.m.]

Some of these are not…. Oh, sorry. I should say that those were

in. Here are the things that are not in the…. This is my confusion. This

is what happens when your notes walk in at the moment that you’re

supposed to stand up and speak.

There are aspects of this bill that do not cover recommendations

that were made by the CEO. From the 2020 report, require online bots to

disclose their automated nature. That seems to me, in a world of AI,

something that we should be aggressive…. In fact, I would say that this

government has been very slow on the rapidly changing digital landscape.

We are five years behind, perpetually, because of the way that we update

our acts and because of the way that we view this. I would say that this

is something that is a missed opportunity in this bill.

Expand the definition of “election advertising” to 12 months

before an election if the ads endorse a candidate or a party and six

months if the ads are solely issues-based. This would reflect the trend

towards permanent campaigning in our politics, which we’re

seeing.

Require third-party advertisers to be B.C. residents, using

Canadian funds and bank accounts. Back in 2013, we spent a considerable

amount of time talking about foreign money and the influence that it’s

having in our political system. It seems to me that this would be an

aspect, a remnant, a legacy of the system that was in place back in 2013

that could have been addressed in this legislation.

Impose penalties for fraudulent or incomplete nomination forms and

nomination contest reports, and ban advertisers from sponsoring content

on platforms that fail to remove illegal content. The reality is that if

we don’t get ahead and ensure…. Those who own and operate these digital

platforms do not believe that we are going to penalize them for allowing

fraudulent or incorrect information to just linger in that digital

landscape. This would be a way for us to be able to ensure…. Many of

these platforms are driven by their advertising models. So banning that

advertising on platforms that don’t conform, I think, would be one of

those pieces.

These are issues…. I’m very happy with the fact that some of the

aspects of this bill are moving forward. I have some pretty substantial

questions, frankly, about the move towards a leader style of politics.

That, frankly, I think, is outside of the way the system of our

government and our elections should work.

I have some questions for the minister as to why it is that some

of these pieces were ignored — the correct ones, the ones that I got

right. Why the ministry and the minister decided to leave these out for

now. It could be that there’s another bill coming, and that would be

fine too. We will be pressing at the committee stage as to why those

pieces were left out.

With that, I’ll take my seat.

HÍSW̱ḴE

SIÁM .

Hon. A. Dix moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. A. Dix: I call Bill 10, the Budget Measures Implementation Act, on the

adjourned debate by the member for Shuswap.

BILL 10 — BUDGET MEASURES

IMPLEMENTATION ACT, 2023

(continued)

G. Kyllo: It definitely gives me a great deal of pride to rise in the House

today and speak to Bill 10, the Budget Measures Implementation Act. Just

before the break, I did have an opportunity to start my remarks with

respect to government’s fiscal plan for spending for this current

fiscal.

As we know, last year government projected a signifi­cant

budget deficit. I believe about a $5.4 billion deficit. As we know, the

government received a significant windfall, which changed the numbers by

about $11 billion from the initial plan.

Now, for members watching from home, the government operates on

about an $80 billion a year budget. When you have a look at a potential

$11 billion swing, that’s government’s opportunity to provide a

financial fis­cal forecast and then to come back.

[3:45 p.m.]

We’re certainly happy to see that things are looking more positive

than government initially forecast. But it harkens to some of the

understanding of the financial picture of government. All the swing this

past fiscal has been in favour of British Columbians and in favour of

government. We’re fortunate for that. But it certainly calls into

question government’s ability to actually provide accurate financial

forecasts.

This current year’s budget, which is being put before British

Columbians for debate…. We certainly have a considerable amount of

concern with respect to the accuracy of the spending plans of this

government.

We know, on a multitude of different factors, ranging from the

quality of life of British Columbians, everything from health care….

Some of the worst results in the country. Crime at an all-time high.

Housing affordability has never been more unaffordable. Homelessness.

The amount of street crime impacting businesses and families around the

province has never been worse.

For a two-term government, now almost six years in power, six

years in office…. On many of these factors, the quality of life in

British Columbia has gotten demonstrably worse.

As we look at the significant surplus that government has and

their desire to have those fiscal moneys out the door by March 31, just

a few short days from now…. They’re on a spending spree. Governments

definitely have choice. We recognize that governments have choice. But

when you try and put out those monumental dollars in a very short amount

of time without the proper safeguards in place to ensure that the money

is being spent wisely, it should cause British Columbians significant

concern.

The Ministry of Agriculture, just as an example. Their base budget

is $106 million. And what did we see in the supplemental estimates? An

additional $110 million, basically an effective doubling of their budget

within a short amount of time. When the minister was asked very specific

questions…. “Minister, what specific request did you make of Treasury

Board for your ministry?” Well, none was had.

As the questions were put forward to the minister, we saw, I

guess, a lack of answers and a lack of rigour from this government. We

saw moneys that were basically put out the door not so much because

there’s a need or necessity within the ministry but because that was

something that the Premier’s office chose to delve out.

Now, as we look at the funding for this current budget…. I’ve got

thereof, of taxpayers. Government has choice. They have the ability of

making a determination, with legislative changes, on how projects are

being tendered and how services are being delivered to British

Columbians.

What we have seen is significant growth in the public sector. I

think all members of this House would have a great deal of respect for

the services that are provided by the public sector — nursing, our

health care system. I see our Health Minister cheering. Yeah,

absolutely. We all rely on health care funding.

What we’ve seen under this government’s tenure is actually a

reduced amount of spending as a percentage of the fiscal budget. Health

care funding dollars represented 42 percent of all tax dollars in the

province back in 2017. Sadly, that percentage has actually dropped. Yes,

there are more gross aggregate dollars out there in the system, but as a

percentage of the overall funding envelope presented by this government,

we’ve actually seen a reduction to just 39 percent.

Now, 3 percent doesn’t sound like a lot. But a 3 percent reduction

on an $80 billion budget…. That’s actually a reduction in the actual

importance that this government has on the health care system. We’re

seeing that play out with hospital closures and emergency room closures

around the province, negating the opportunity for residents to get

timely service. We’ve seen challenges with the ambulatory care and wait

times upwards of an hour or two.

[3:50 p.m.]

I’ve had a number of issues even in my riding of Shuswap where

individuals would actually make a call for an ambulance in that time of

need only to be told: “Well, we’re not sure when we can dispatch an

ambulance.” Individuals are waiting for upwards of two hours in order to

get that opportunity to actually get transferred for the care that those

individuals require.

We have a government that has choice. They have a significant

surplus carried over from last year, yet what do we see? A change in

focus on where they’re actually investing those hard-earned dollars that

British Columbians all pay. When we look at value for money, we have to

give consideration to how some of these projects are going

out.

The community rip-off agreements, as they’re now being touted and

actually recognized around the province, the community benefits

agreements, are negating the opportunity for 85 percent of construction

workers in the province from actually working on many of these public

sector jobs. We’ve seen cost overrun after cost overrun after cost

overrun. Meanwhile, we have 85 percent of construction workers largely

being cut out and negated the opportunity of working in their own

communities on these public sector projects, yet what do we see? Project

after project going grossly over budget and British Columbians getting

less for more.

I’ve shared in this House that one of the very first community

benefits agreement projects that was ever put out by this government,

the Salmon Arm west highway expansion project, $162.7 million, 6.1

kilometres of four-laning…. Because of government’s choice to use their

community rip-off agreement, what did we see? A $20 million cost overrun

and only half the project built. Think about that, $20 million more for

half the project.

Who is benefiting from these agreements? Certainly not the

taxpayer. Taxpayers are paying more money for less projects. And we have

a burgeoning public sector — 128,000 new hires, a 33 percent increase in

the public service just in the last 5½ years at a gross cost of almost

$10.8 billion a year in additional wages and benefits.

I think as we look around, we just have to ask ourselves: what

level of service are British Columbians receiving that has actually

improved? A 33 percent growth in the public service, and service

delivery has never been worse. Wait times for ambulatory care, service

in our hospitals…. We’ve gone from No.1 in Canada for cancer outcomes to

No. 10.

We see significant backlogs in permitting. Whether you’re looking

to obtain a permit for a cutblock in order to provide the necessary

fibre to keep our mills busy and operating…. Significant delays. B.C.

Timber Sales — over 400 days. They represent 20 percent of the cut in

our province. They went over 400 days without issuing a single cut

permit — 400 days.

You know, I certainly am hearing from the forestry companies back

in my riding that the forests are there. The mills are needing that

fibre in order to keep running and keep operating, yet we’ve seen a

significant delay. A mill in Merritt recently curtailed on account of

just that very thing: the inability to get permitting. One of the

communities that I represent, the community of Salmon Arm…. The Salmon

Arm marine park wharf — it’s been in existence for over 80 years. Their

lease renewal was up three years ago.

[3:55 p.m.]

As a standard protocol, the leases that are issued by the ministry

have to be renewed. It’s typically a fairly simple process, but for some

reason, this ministry has such a backlog. Even with the huge increase in

the number of bureaucrats that are now working in the public service,

they can’t seem to get even a simple renewal out the door. Salmon Arm

has been waiting over three years just for a renewal.

They also wanted to move forward with a new lease application for

the foreshore at Canoe. Now, this is a community pier and boat launch

that has been in existence for well over 60 years. The lease was never

formalized. Salmon Arm made an application to the government. It

actually applied for a foreshore lease which would allow them then to

undertake some significant leasehold improvements on the boat ramp and

the pier section. That also has been delayed now over three years. When

Salmon Arm requested a bit of an update on timing, they initially were

told: “Call us in June, and we should, hopefully, be able to provide you

an update at that time.”

Timely access for permitting for everything from cut permits in

order to provide that access, the necessary fibre to keep our mills and

our forest workers working, or even the support of municipalities around

the province that require either lease renewals or lease applications to

be approved so they can undertake to provide those necessary upgrades….

What do we see? Delay after delay after delay. When government is

choosing not even to provide necessary services to our municipalities,

one can only have increasing concern about how British Columbians are

being served.

When it comes to health care, there’s an amazing facility in my

riding. It’s the only hospital in the riding of Shuswap: Shuswap Lake

General Hospital. It has been providing invaluable service to not just

the community of Salmon Arm, which is, by the way, one of the

fastest-growing communities with a population under 25,000 in British

Columbia. It’s rated by Maclean’s magazine, I think, as the

most desirable place in all of Canada to live. But it has

needs.

The ambulatory service is due for a significant upgrade, the

single operating room no longer meets national health care standards,

and they also have a requirement for additional ICU beds. The services

that are available in Salmon Arm at Shuswap Lake General — they call it

acute care, so it doesn’t even stand up to what we would deem to be the

ICU. There’s a requirement and a need, and government has been waiting.

We have been waiting at Shuswap Lake General, as have the surgeons and

the hospital staff, for a significant amount of funding to at least move

forward with the planning stages. But what are we seeing? Delay after

delay after delay.

My concern is that the amount of capital funding that’s available

is diminished, and the opportunities for some of these very necessary

hospital expansion projects around the province — not just in Salmon

Arm, but in other communities — is being delayed. And why? Because of

cost overruns on other projects. As I mentioned earlier, the whole idea

of value for money.

The Cowichan District Hospital, which was announced back in 2018,

was initially budgeted between $400 million and $600 million. But last

year, just towards the end of November, we saw government come out with

an update. So that project that was initially budgeted between $600 and

$800 million is now $1.45 billion.

Why? Because, again, government has made a choice to exclude 85

percent of construction workers and to let that project out under their

community rip-off agreement, which denies opportunity for the majority

of construction workers to work directly on that project.

[4:00 p.m.]

Again, that’s a choice of this government, a cost overrun from

their budgeted amount, $455 million, not because the hospital is bigger,

not because it has more service delivery, not because there are more

beds. This hospital at Cowichan district, at $1.45 billion for 201 beds,

$7 million a bed, will be the single most-expensive hospital ever built

in North America, from the numbers that I’ve been able to

find.

Get this. The existing Cowichan Hospital is nine years newer than

Shuswap Lake General, the hospital in my riding that has been waiting

for even a $30 million or $40 million expansion. Yet government, through

choice, through this community ripoff agreement, is blowing $455 million

of additional spending — so money for this community benefit agreement,

which favours 19 of the NDP’s handpicked unions, but for other very

important projects around the province, there does not seem to be either

the will or the capital in order to advance these projects.

We have a look at the significant budget surplus that government

just spent. I was having a conversation with a locally elected municipal

leader. For those of you listening from home, you may not be aware, but

government chose in the last days of last month to provide $1 billion of

additional funding to municipalities — $1 billion.

When government was asked on how they came up with $1 billion,

well, it wasn’t because they looked at all the different financial asks

of municipalities and put that together and said: “Okay. Look at this,

what municipalities are looking for, and the gross aggregate cost of

that is $1 billion.” No, they picked an arbitrary number and decided

that that was the amount of money that they were going to choose to

provide to municipalities.

I know municipalities have significant funding challenges when it

comes to infrastructure, and I don’t deny them the access to additional

funding. But why did this government choose $1 billion? Would $800

million have sufficed, which would have provided maybe $200 million that

could have gone to the different health authorities around the province

so that they could advance some of those very important

projects?

Health outcomes are one of the single largest concerns in this

province, yet with a huge $2.7 billion of surplus cash that government

found themselves in, they chose not to use a significant portion, or any

of those funds, in order to help advance some of the funding shortfalls

that we’re seeing in some of our hospitals and other health authorities

around the province.

Again, it comes down to choice. It’s some of the choices that this

government is making that is causing life to be just that much harder

for British Columbians.

Crime. We hear day after day; we see it in the newspapers; we see

it on our streets — the amount of increasing crime and all of the other

hardship that creates for communities. Yet when given the opportunity

for this government to take proactive efforts, especially for violent

and repeat offenders, to give direction and encourage Crown counsel to

put a reverse onus on those individuals….

If you have an individual that is committing crime day after day,

week after week, just continuing to turn them back on the street is a

huge frustration for our RCMP and police officers around the province.

It only exacerbates the problem. I was just reading the news today. An

individual that was arrested in possession of a bunch of stolen goods

was released back onto the streets and the very next day was pulled over

intoxicated and driving a stolen vehicle.

[4:05 p.m.]

Now, thank goodness that impaired driver didn’t hit somebody or

kill somebody. That individual was in custody. They were turned back on

the streets and then chose to get impaired, steal a vehicle and drive on

our streets.

Government has the tools and the legislative ability in order to

make change, but they seem so reticent. Only when coming kicking and

screaming did they finally decide to take action. It’s putting

additional cost pressure on municipalities. It’s putting additional cost

pressure on businesses.

I had an opportunity to meet with a fairly large retailer, a

retailer that we would all have a lot of trust and confidence in, in

British Columbia. That large retailer had reported losses last year

because of the impact of crime. Their staff are being verbally and

physically abused. The amount of additional security cameras and

investigative measures they have to go through when an employee is

assaulted or even verbally assaulted, the amount of time and energy they

have to expense in order to investigate those alleged incidents, the

amount of theft, the breakage….

You have organized crime preying on some of our most vulnerable.

This is actually unbelievable. They will go to the streets and get five

or ten people and actually give them a wish list, a shopping list. They

will go in and steal from these stores and run out. So organized crime

is now preying on some of these homeless populations.

I see that I’m coming towards the end of my time. Budget day

should be a day where we have hope for the future. I’m seeing a lot of

the same challenges which have been evidenced over the last six years,

and I have a significant amount of concern over the direction where this

government is going.

C. Oakes: It is an honour and a privilege to be able to join the debate

today on Bill 10, the Budget Measures Implementation Act.

For many of us, the last two weeks we’ve been out in our

constituencies, constituency week, and we’ve had the opportunity to talk

to many people. It’s always incredibly important for each of us, as

legislators and as representatives, to hear clearly what our

constituents are saying and to bring that here to this fine chamber and

ensure that their voices — the voices of, in my case, the residents of

Cariboo North — are heard.

In response to the budget, some of the comments that we’ve heard….

There were some challenges, of course, that we heard in our

communities.

As I begin, I’m going to break it into two points: some of the

initial responses of what people were saying and where I think we could

get to. I want to lead my comments with where I think that there are

some tremendous opportunities. We still have time before March 31. We

still have time to reflect. For example, the Minister of Transportation

is here. Perhaps the Quesnel River Bridge and rail overpass could find

its way into the budget yet. Perhaps there are projects that are so

critically important in our communities that could find our ways —

clearly very much needed in our communities.

At first glance, this budget really has been uninspiring, with

record-high spending and record-low results. After nearly six years of

worsening results, Budget 2023 offers nothing new but the same NDP

rhetoric and empty promises. Budget 2023 is the seventh NDP budget, and

after six years, we see the same terrible results that have left the

province in multiple crises.

Life has never been more unaffordable, with the highest gas prices

and housing costs in North America. I know people in the Cariboo going

to the grocery stores right now are really, really struggling. People

are literally dying because they cannot access basic health care.

Emergency rooms are shutting down in every corner of the

province.

[4:10 p.m.]

I committed to several people in my constituency of Cariboo North

who have shared, recently, their very difficult stories of the

experiences that they’re facing right now in our community of Cariboo

North and G.R. Baker Hospital. They wanted me to raise it here in this

Legislature. They wanted me to share their stories of the struggles that

they’re seeing in our health care sector and how there is a disconnect

in what the budget announced and what is actually happening as results

in our community.

We’ve got to do better. We’ve got to figure out a better way of

making those very important changes in our communities. Boy, in our

communities right now, people are really, really struggling. Like every

community, Cariboo North is very much struggling with violent prolific

offenders. We’re seeing vicious, random attacks and assaults. We see

this catch-and-release justice system, and people are frustrated.

They’re angry. They’re also saddened. They’re saddened because there

just aren’t the services.

I sat with a family for three hours. My heart goes out to them.

They shared with me a very personal story of a loved one that is

struggling right now and was flown down here to Victoria to the hospital

— had struggled with addiction for many, many years. The family has

struggled, as well, to support their loved one.

They found their way back into our community, and I sat down and

talked with them and looked at options. What are the options in our

communities where we can possibly provide support and treatment for

their loved one in the North? It’s an Indigenous family. As we walk

through these very difficult conversations, and as we walk through the

emotions of it, there’s just no place in our communities. There’s no

place for treatment. There’s no place for the necessary supports that

our families need.

When we look at the budget and we look at the steps that the

government is taking, for communities like ours, we feel…. I use the

word “abandoned,” and it’s because we can’t find the supports that our

people are expecting. We know we can do better. We know that in our

communities, there have been some very strong plans that have been put

forward on how we could address treatment for addictions and mental

health supports in our communities. We just want to see those plans get

approved through government and that that funding finds its way so that

we can help people on the ground.

Last week in Prince George, there was the Indigenous health

conference, where a lot of discussions were shared about how we can

improve upon things. I want to bring that story into this House because

there are working groups across this province who are doing

extraordinary work on how we can get results on the real, serious

concerns that we have in our communities.

I’m going to turn now to where a way forward can be. One of the

great p