First Session, 43rd Parliament

Official Report

of Debates

( Hansard )

Tuesday, May 13, 2025

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 64

The Honourable Raj Chouhan , Speaker

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

Contents

Blessings and Acknowledgements

Eugene Louie

Orders of the Day

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 29 — Amendments to Tla’amin Final Agreement

Hon. Christine Boyle

Scott McInnis

Rob Botterell

Hon. Jodie Wickens

John Rustad

Hon. Randene Neill

Á’a:líya Warbus

Hon. Christine Boyle

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 15 — Infrastructure Projects Act

Hon. Bowinn Ma

Peter Milobar

Hon. Jagrup Brar

Misty Van Popta

Hon. David Eby

Scott McInnis

Hon. Ravi Parmar

Lawrence Mok

Lynne Block

Tony Luck

Ward Stamer

Bill 14 — Renewable Energy Projects (Streamlined Permitting) Act, 2025 (continued)

Teresa Wat

Reporting of Bills

Bill 13 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 13 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family Development (continued)

Brennan Day

Hon. Jodie Wickens

Amelia Boultbee

Point of Order (Chair’s Ruling)

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family Development (continued)

Hon. Jodie Wickens

Amelia Boultbee

Reann Gasper

Personal Statements

Withdrawal of Comments Made in the House

Amelia Boultbee

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family Development (continued)

Reann Gasper

Hon. Jodie Wickens

Estimates: Ministry of Attorney General

Hon. Niki Sharma

Steve Kooner

Trevor Halford

Peter Milobar

Teresa Wat

Proceedings in the Birch Room

Committee of the Whole

Bill 13 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2025 (continued)

Tony Luck

Hon. Ravi Kahlon

Lynne Block

Larry Neufeld

Hon. Anne Kang

Donegal Wilson

Hon. Randene Neill

Appendix

Tuesday, May 13, 2025

The House met at 1:31 p.m.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

The Speaker : Hon. Members, I ask you to rise as I invite Elder Eugene Louie of the ɬəʔamɛn Nation to offer a blessing.

Blessings and Acknowledgements

Eugene Louie : Thank you very much. Eugene Louie from the ɬəʔamɛn Nation. I raise my hands to all of you in honour and respect.

Also at this time, belated happy Mother’s Day to all the mothers in here. All the

men have to wait till next month.

Thank you for this opportunity.

I always look at things from the past, the present and the future. The past for us

as a nation is a story, a long story, but that’s in the past. Now presently, we are

very happy with the process that we’ve gone through and the discussion that’s going

to be happening today. Appreciation for the recognition and inclusion.

Also in the past, our nation has always been recognizing the people in our environmental

area, the city, the regional directors and the industry at that time, but now it’s

gone. They were always at our table when we started to negotiate our treaty. Every

table we had, they were there presently. So that was the past. Like I said, the present

now is recognition and inclusion.

For the future, working together from a government to government-to-government situation

is what we are happy about. Also that in our territory, the recognition and inclusion

of all the environmental people that live in our

section is much appreciated in terms

of the regional district changing their name to qathet regional, the Powell River

General Hospital changing their name to qathet, the school district changing their

name to qathet.

qathet in our language is “togetherness.” The recognition of that is much appreciated

from our nation.

With that, I’m going to say in ʔayʔaǰuθəm , our language, a short prayer for you.

[1:35 p.m.]

[ ʔayʔaǰuθəm was spoken.]

I also would like to express my appreciation to the nations that are living in and

around this area and respecting the territory that we’re on.

[ ʔayʔaǰuθəm was spoken.]

Thank you very much.

The Speaker : Thank you, Elder Louie.

I had the privilege two years ago, along with our head Clerk, Kate Ryan-Lloyd, to

visit the ɬəʔamɛn Nation. It was a beautiful area, and we want to say thank you for hosting us.

It was part of our reconciliation project. We are reaching out to different nations

to seek guidance and learning from them.

Thank you so much for coming.

Orders of the Day

Hon. Mike Farnworth : I call Motion 29.

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 29 — Amendments to

Tla’amin Final Agreement

Hon. Christine Boyle : I move Motion 29 standing in my name on the order paper.

[Be it resolved that, pursuant to paragraph 5 (

b) of

Chapter 25 of the Tla’amin Final

Agreement, the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia consents to the amendments

to the Tla’amin Final Agreement set out in the attached Tla’amin Final Agreement Amending

Agreement (No. 4).]

TLA’AMIN FINAL AGREEMENT

AMENDING AGREEMENT (N o . 4)

AMONG:

HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Crown-Indigenous

Relations

(“Canada”)

AND

HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, as represented by the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation

(“British Columbia”)

AND

TLA’AMIN NATION, as represented by the Hegus

(“Tla’amin Nation”)

WHEREAS:

A. On April 5, 2016, the Tla’amin Final Agreement came into effect;

B. The Tla’amin Final Agreement provides for its amendment and specifies requirements

for the amendment of various of its provisions;

C. The Parties have previously agreed to amendments to the Tla’amin Final Agreement;

D. The Parties agree to propose further amendments to the Tla’amin Final Agreement set

out in Schedules 1 and 2 of this Amending Agreement;

E. The Parties have determined that the processes set out in paragraphs 3 and 5 of

Chapter

25 – Amendment apply to the proposed amendments set out in Schedules 1 and 2 of this

Amending Agreement;

NOW THEREFORE the Parties agree as follows:

PART I –

DEFINITIONS AND

INTERPRETATION

1. In this Amending Agreement:

“Tla’amin Final Agreement” means the Tla’amin Final Agreement among the Tla’amin Nation,

His Majesty the King in right of Canada and His Majesty the King in right of British

Columbia, as it took effect on April 5, 2016 as amended.

2. A reference to a

Chapter by number or name is a reference to the

chapter of that number

or name in the Tla’amin Final Agreement.

3. Words and expressions appearing in this Amending Agreement that are not defined in

this Amending Agreement but are defined in the Tla’amin Final Agreement have the meanings

ascribed to them in the Tla’amin Final Agreement.

PART II – PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Schedule 1.

5. The proposed amendments in French to the Tla’amin Final Agreement are set out in

Schedule

6. The Parties agree that, as necessary, the Tla’amin Nation or British Columbia may

provide their consent to these amendments in accordance with paragraph 5 of

Chapter

25 – Amendment before

Schedule 2 is complete, subject to subsequent approval of

Schedule

2 by the Tla’amin Nation or British Columbia, as applicable, which shall be provided

in writing:

a. for the Tla’amin Nation, by the Hegus, and

b. for the Province, by the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation.

7. Pursuant to paragraph 7 of

Chapter 25 – Amendment, the proposed amendments set out

in Schedules 1 and 2 will take effect on the date the last Party required to consent

to the amendment provides its consent.

PART III – PROCEDURES

8. This Amending Agreement may be signed in one or more counterparts. A signed counterpart

may be delivered by one Party to another Party by facsimile or e-mail transmission

and a facsimile or e-mail so transmitted will constitute an original document. Signed

counterparts held by a Party, taken together, will constitute one and the same instrument.

9. This Amending Agreement may be executed by electronic signature, which will be considered

as an original signature for all purposes and will have the same force and effect

as an original signature on paper. Without limitation, “electronic signature” will

include faxed versions of an original signature or electronically scanned and transmitted

versions (e.g., via pdf) of an original signature.

FOR HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Crown-Indigenous

Relations, signed this day of ________________, 2025.

______________________________

Authorized Signatory

Printed name: ___________________________

FOR HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, as represented by the Minister

of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation, signed this _____ day of ________________,

_______________________________

The Honourable Christine Boyle

Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation

FOR THE TLA’AMIN NATION, as represented by the Hegus, signed this _____ day of _____________,

______________________________

Hegus John Hackett]

[See Appendix…]

I rise in the House today to move the fourth amending agreement to the Tla’amin final

agreement.

I am incredibly honoured to be here in the Legislature on the territory of the lək̓ʷəŋən peoples, the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations.

Before I start, I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the ɬəʔamɛn Nation on their ongoing efforts to support their strong, healthy and thriving community.

And I want to thank Elder Eugene Louie, pelachiewtwx, a ɬəʔamɛn Elder, former Chief and former treaty negotiator and adviser, for starting us off

in a good way.

I also want to say č̓ɛč̓ɛhaθɛč to the members of the ɬəʔamɛn First Nation who are here in the gallery today. This means “welcome.” It also means

“thank you” and “I honour you” in ʔayʔaǰuθəm , the language of the ɬəʔamɛn People.

I want to acknowledge and introduce the ɬəʔamɛn delegation that has joined us in the gallery here today: hegus John Hackett; ɬəʔamɛn executive councillors Brandon Louie, Callum Galligos and Dillon Johnson; as well

as Stefan Virtue, director of intergovernmental relations; ɬəʔamɛn government intergovernmental relations staff Emily White and Wren Shaman.

I want to recognize all members of the ɬəʔamɛn executive council, legislators, ɬəʔamɛn Elders and Matriarchs and ɬəʔamɛn citizens, all of whom may be observing our proceedings today and whose participation

has brought us to this important moment.

The purpose of the proposed amendments to the Tla’amin final agreement include the

following.

The first is the inclusion of ʔayʔaǰuθəm , the language of the ɬəʔamɛn People, in the treaty and one of the reasons I am so proud to be wearing a T-shirt

gifted to me by the community with ʔayʔaǰuθəm landmarks on it. The inclusion of ʔayʔaǰuθəm better reflects the taʔow , the teachings of the nation and community.

As well, a change to the title of the Tla’amin final agreement to ʔaʔǰɩnxʷegəs , which means “a good relationship with someone.” I just want to make a clear point

on this: changing the name from the final agreement to ʔaʔǰɩnxʷegəs , a good relationship with someone.

The amendments also include adding a provision to the general provisions

chapter to

reflect a recognition and acknowledgement that the ɬəʔamɛn treaty is a living agreement and provides a foundation for evolution and an ongoing

relationship among the parties.

The amendments include aligning the adoption, guardianship and child and family services

provisions with changes made to B.C.’s Adoption Act and Child, Family and Community

Service Act under Bill 38, Indigenous Self-Government in Child and Family Services

Amendment Act passed in 2022.

[1:40 p.m.]

These amendments are part of our commitment to working responsibly with ɬəʔamɛn Nation as a treaty partner. This work today is the result of a significant commitment

by the provincial and federal governments to honour and respect our treaty relations,

as well as reaching new treaties.

Chapter 25 of the Tla’amin final agreement allows any party to the treaty to propose

amendments to the ɬəʔamɛn treaty, and the ɬəʔamɛn Nation proposed a series of amendments to the treaty. Through tripartite discussions,

the parties have now agreed on the amendments that I just walked you through.

There are confirmed mandates or policy approvals in place for all three parties.

The Ministry of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport’s heritage branch has confirmed that

the proposed updates to names of geographic features, like mountains and rivers solely

located on ɬəʔamɛn lands, in the amending agreement align with official geographic feature name changes

which came into effect April 5, 2025.

The proposed provision to acknowledge the ɬəʔamɛn treaty as a living agreement is consistent with B.C.’s direction under the Declaration

on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. It’s also in line with the Recognition and Reconciliation of Rights Policy for Treaty Negotiations in British

Columbia .

The language now acknowledges that treaties and treaty relationships may change and

evolve over time. This has been demonstrated through the province’s treaty relationship

with ɬəʔamɛn , and we are so grateful for that partnership. The proposed amendments regarding adoption,

guardianship and child and family services will ensure that ɬəʔamɛn have the same opportunities as other Indigenous governing bodies under federal and

provincial legislation.

ɬəʔamɛn Nation has already consented to these treaty amendments. Canada has also signed the

amending agreement and will be seeking consent to these treaty agreements by order

in council. For the amendment to be ratified by the province, the Legislative Assembly

must consent to the amending agreement.

In 2016, ɬəʔamɛn Nation, through the Tla’amin final agreement, became the eighth B.C. First Nation

to become a self-governing modern treaty Nation, the seventh nation through B.C.’s

treaty negotiation process. On April 5, we celebrated the ɬəʔamɛn treaty’s ninth anniversary by hanging their nation’s flag in our Legislature’s Hall

of Honour.

ɬəʔamɛn Nation demonstrates the power of modern treaties to build government-to-government

relationships as we work toward common goals.

It is my great honour to rise in the House today, with the support of the ɬəʔamɛn Nation, and move this motion to give British Columbia’s consent.

Scott McInnis : On behalf of the official opposition, I would like to welcome the ɬəʔamɛn delegation here today in this very significant moment.

I rise today to speak in support of the Tla’amin final agreement and the amendments

therein. This is one of British Columbia’s landmark modern treaties and a testament

to the strength and dignity of the ɬəʔamɛn People.

The ɬəʔamɛn treaty is more than a legal document. It is a living agreement that represents reconciliation,

respect and a shared future. Most significantly, it has been given the name which

in the ʔayʔaǰuθəm language means “a good relationship with someone.” That name is powerful. It personalizes

the treaty, grounding it in values of mutual trust, cooperation and forward-looking

partnership.

The treaty process in British Columbia is one that is very robust. It helps to address

long-standing questions of Aboriginal rights and title, while offering certainty and

clarity to everyone. Treaties like the Tla’amin final agreement mark a departure from

conflict and uncertainty and, instead, chart a path toward meaningful and enduring

reconciliation.

Recent amendments to the agreement bring about significant improvements, especially

for children and families. The treaty now allows for greater flexibility in child

and family services in giving decision-makers the ability to prioritize the best interests

of the child in culturally appropriate ways. This means families can benefit from

services designed with the community’s needs, traditions and values at the heart of

the process. It’s an important and compassionate shift that takes children first.

[1:45 p.m.]

It’s also worth noting that the current Leader of the Official Opposition signed the

Tla’amin final agreement on behalf of the government of British Columbia in his previous

role as Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. That should remind us all that reconciliation

and treaty-making should transcend partisan politics.

This is about building a better future for everyone in British Columbia. We should

all be proud of this work. The treaty process brings certainty, healing and self-determination

above all else. It acknowledges history, affirms rights and build a future based on

respect.

Let us continue to support and strengthen the treaty process in B.C. as we walk a

path of reconciliation together.

Rob Botterell : Thank you, ɬəʔamɛn Elder Eugene Louie, for opening this House in a good way. As a former Chief and former

treaty negotiator and adviser, your presence, guidance and insights carry deep meaning

for us here today. Recognition and inclusion are vital elements of moving forward

in a government to government to government relationship. We very much appreciate

your words.

I also want to echo the welcome extended to those in the gallery, including the hegus,

John Hackett; Brandon Louie; Callum Galligos; Dillon Johnson; Emily White; Wren Shaman;

Stefan Virtue, many of whom I’ve had the privilege of working with in my previous

endeavours. We are grateful for your presence and honoured to welcome you here today.

The treaty amendment process we’re completing today is an example of good progress.

It is ɬəʔamɛn -led. All First Nations choose their own path, and I have great respect for that autonomy.

The ɬəʔamɛn have chosen the path of a treaty, and they are showing us the many benefits of that

path.

Today we’re also witnessing good progress, because the process to reach today has

been open and transparent, and ɬəʔamɛn , Canada and B.C. have worked together to negotiate the wording of this amending agreement.

The province has taken time to meet with its opposition counterparts to bring everyone

along.

Today’s amendments also remind us, as was mentioned earlier, that treaties are living

documents. They’re not papers to be signed and then stuffed in a drawer. The relationship

between nations must continue to grow and adapt to the circumstances of the day. It’s

an important reminder, as we move legislation through this House, that our relationships

with other governments and nations are ongoing and must always be considered and advanced,

because reconciliation and treaty-making are ongoing and must never be stopped in

time.

We’re also adding the language of the ɬəʔamɛn People, ʔayʔaǰuθəm , to the text of the treaty. This is a sign of respect and inclusion and also improves

the treaty’s accuracy. Today we’re giving the ɬəʔamɛn treaty a new name, ʔaʔǰɩnxʷegəs . It means “a good relationship with someone,” something that we can all celebrate

because good relationships are the key to our future.

Today’s amendments also add new language on adoption, guardianship, child and family

services, which enable ɬəʔamɛn to exercise their rights in the same way as other Indigenous governing bodies.

The B.C. Green caucus celebrates all of these changes, as well as the process used

to reach today’s agreement. May our two nations continue to come to the table and

continue to work together for a prosperous, shared future on a government to government

to government basis.

Hon. Jodie Wickens : It is an absolute honour for me to stand, to acknowledge and thank the members of

ɬəʔamɛn Nation for coming to the Legislature and spending time with us today.

I want to join my colleagues in thanking and welcoming Elder Eugene Louie for getting

us started in a really good way with your words and your guidance.

[1:50 p.m.]

A warm welcome to the hegus, John Hackett, and the ɬəʔamɛn executive council members, staff and citizens here today. We are pleased to have

you here in person. It is our honour that you have taken the time to be here with

us.

I also want to applaud the ɬəʔamɛn Nation on their ongoing efforts to support a strong, healthy community. I know that

the care of children and youth in your community is paramount. They certainly are

our most precious resource in this province, and they’re the most important treasure

for us to take care of today and every day.

I am moved to see the ʔayʔaǰuθəm language of the ɬəʔamɛn People added to the treaty. I look forward to the impact that it will have on children

and generations to come.

I congratulate the nation for implementing amendments for adoption, guardianship and

child and family services into the treaty. It’s been a long time coming, and historic

changes in federal and provincial legislation have made this shift possible.

I am proud that B.C. enacted legislation to recognize Indigenous peoples’ inherent

right to self-government, including the right to provide child and family services.

We know that the journey started long before that to address barriers and gaps that

hindered the exercise of Indigenous jurisdiction. We also know that there is far more

work to do.

In my role as the minister, I see what a privilege it is to advance historic agreements

like this one; to work together to support First Nations children and families and

create a new approach to child and family well-being in British Columbia; to ensure

First Nations and communities like ɬəʔamɛn can decide what’s in the best interest for their children, keeping children and families

connected to their culture, because we all have a deep love for children and youth

in our families and our community.

We know this province and this country have a dark history, and the impacts and trauma

of that history are still with us. We know that there are better outcomes for Indigenous

children and youth when they are connected to the community and people in their culture

who love them dearly and deeply. We are encouraged to see that the number of children

and youth in care is coming down, but Indigenous children continue to be overrepresented

in care, and that absolutely needs to change.

Indigenous youth and children belong with their parents, their grandparents, their

aunties, their uncles and their communities. We are working hard every day to make

this happen. We know that there is much more work to do.

In 2024, we hired the very first Indigenous child welfare director, who is working

with First Nations on crucial care decisions to help better ensure the safety, wellness

and access to community and culture for Indigenous children. It is the first of its

kind in this country and represents a significant step in our work to reform the child

welfare system and reduce the overrepresentation of Indigenous children and youth

in care.

We have been working with the federal government, First Nations and Indigenous organizations

to support nations who wish to provide child and family services under their own laws,

in ways that work best for them. We have signed five trilateral coordinating agreements

with First Nations, one interim bilateral coordinating agreement and seven more bilateral

community agreements.

Each nation is at a different stage or different path, and we need to ensure each

has an opportunity to participate fully in the process if they wish to do so. This

includes working collaboratively with modern treaty Nations like ɬəʔamɛn to amend the provisions in their existing treaty so it aligns with the legislative

changes that we made in 2022.

We are also actively working with our partners to advance the discussion on funding

for jurisdiction. In fact, just last week I attended a workshop in Vancouver, along

with ɬəʔamɛn .

It was an honour to get to meet you, to talk to you and hear leaders who care so deeply

and the concerns that you have.

[1:55 p.m.]

It is my hope that we can move forward in a meaningful way and that my ministry can

continue to build on the historic work that has taken place here today. We need to

continue making a positive difference to Indigenous children, families and communities.

It is too important not to.

We have a lot of hard work to do in my ministry, a lot of hard conversations to be

had. I’m committed to taking the steps to improve existing treaties with modern treaty

Nations and develop measures that support your inherent right to self-determination.

I thank you. It is an honour of mine, and I look forward to working more with you

in the future.

John Rustad : I want to take a moment to add a few words to this moment, to this motion as well.

First of all, I’d like to thank Eugene Louie, Elder, for starting us off in a good

way. Thank you for being here and for doing that.

I want to recognize John Hackett, hegus, as well as the whole delegation from the

ɬəʔamɛn Nation. It’s nice to see them here.

I had the honour of being in ɬəʔamɛn territory back in 2016, when we signed the treaty, when we went through that whole

process, and the honour of seeing that move through the Legislature as part of that,

as minister. It was one of those things that I was very proud of.

I have to admit…. You know, when you think about a treaty, it’s the three governments.

It’s the ɬəʔamɛn government coming together with the Canadian government and the British Columbia

government with an agreement about how to build a future, how to come together and

work together in cooperation and coordination. It’s about moving beyond the Indian

Act. It’s about moving beyond

section 35 of the constitution.

Most importantly, it’s about empowering the nation for their culture, for their language,

for their people to take control of their future and how we can work as partners,

as opposed to what has happened historically, which is governments looking at it as

being more of an overseeing and not actually working as true partners.

That, to me, was one of the huge problems, one of the huge errors that we made in

Canada for our existence. Moving beyond that into partnership, into what is I believe

to be true reconciliation, is an important step. Certainly, the treaty has been a

way to be able to do that with the ɬəʔamɛn Nation.

I want to just maybe make mention of a couple other little things. Like I say, I remember

when I was there, there was some friction within the community when we signed the

treaty. There were some people who opposed; there were some people who were supportive.

But what I’ve seen from that is how the community has been able to come together,

how the community has been able to grow and how it’s been able to really strengthen

the ɬəʔamɛn People.

I think that’s a great testament to the ɬəʔamɛn People in terms of their treaty, in terms of how they’ve implemented it and how they

work both within their nation but also with people around them.

When I look at some of the changes, particularly the implementation of the language

as part of the treaty and some naming within the territories, it’s something that

is easy to dismiss, or it’s easy to say: “What does this mean? Why are we doing this?”

The important thing is that the treaty is about, like I say, recognizing the culture

and the language and supporting that and understanding, as Indigenous and non-Indigenous

people, that true history within the area. I think this is an important step in terms

of having that added.

I find myself, even, too often dismissive of that, not recognizing the strengths that

are needed and the strengths that should be there as part of this. So I actually want

to celebrate and say thank you for bringing it forward and making those changes. I

think it’s an important piece of how we recognize reconciliation and how we work together

in terms of building those futures.

With that, I also want to make mention, of course, of the child services. For far

too long, the federal government and the provincial government have viewed First Nations

as wards of the state. It’s hard to say that, but it has been the way that government

and government policies have happened for far too long, whether it’s the Sixties Scoop

or whether it goes back to residential schools — the entire process that has happened

over time.

To empower the nation to be able to look after their own children in a culturally

appropriate way, to be able to make sure that the federal and provincial governments

are partners in supporting but not overseeing is the important piece that, I think,

is being put into this treaty. I think it’s something, of course, that’s work that

needs to be done right around the province for so many nations.

It’s the only way we can get past what has happened historically and be able to move

forward in terms of dealing with the children in care and making sure that services

are done appropriately.

[2:00 p.m.]

I had many conversations as a minister with nations around this province about these

steps, about things that needed to be done to move beyond the provincial government

in supporting nations for that. There were always issues around the legal side. There

were always issues around responsibilities. I’m actually very glad that we’ve seen

this move beyond that and that we see now, certainly as part of the treaty, that we’re

now in that much better place. I think it’ll have a much better outcome for children,

for the ɬəʔamɛn People.

Once again, I wanted to stand and say I’m honoured to be able to support this motion

coming forward for the changes to the treaty. I’m very pleased to see the ɬəʔamɛn Nation has been advancing with the work, and I look forward to seeing that work continue.

This is a multigenerational effort that took a long time to get here but that will

also take a long time to see the really positive changes.

I wish everything could happen immediately, overnight, but I understand this is about

laying a foundation and building that foundation, strengthening it and continuing

to make those proper moves forward so that the nation can stand proud in its culture,

in its people, in its language, and be recognized, certainly, by all people around

the province.

Once again, I’m honoured to have an opportunity to say a few words and say congratulations

to the ɬəʔamɛn People.

Hon. Randene Neill : I won’t take up much time. It does my heart glad to see so much support for this

motion today, and I’m so honoured to speak to the importance of this treaty agreement

amendment.

As the MLA for Powell River–Sunshine Coast, I’ve had the absolute privilege to get

to know the hegus and council and work with them.

As Minister of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship, it has been my honour and pleasure

to work with my counterpart, the legislator of lands and resources, Callum Galligos,

and talk to him about the vision and future of the area — the description of stewarding

their land for the next seven generations and beyond, the abundance, biodiversity,

water security and protection that will benefit not only the ɬəʔamɛn People but also the entire community.

That’s what modern treaties do. They are essential for government to government to

government relationships. They are based on mutual recognition and respect. This amendment

will allow for this agreement to be a living agreement, as everyone else has mentioned,

allowing it to change and evolve as our relationship grows over time.

The inclusion of ʔaʔǰɩnxʷegəs , meaning “a good relationship with someone” in ʔayʔaǰuθəm , in the language that the ɬəʔamɛn People speak, is so incredibly powerful.

Part of the importance of this agreement is in the benefits to the health, to the

well-being of the children, to the families and to the people not only for the ɬəʔamɛn but for the entire qathet community, and the benefits to the health and well-being

of our water and the ecosystem, which once again benefits the ɬəʔamɛn but also the entire community in qathet.

Thank you so much for your wisdom, your determination and your generosity.

Congratulations to you, and we will see you all back at home.

Á’a :líya Warbus : Hoy chap. Á’a:líya tel skwix, xwelmexw tel skwix, Stó:lō Nation casta Sq’ewqeyl xʷməθkʷəy̓əm Se:math casta Sts’ailes Sq’èwlets.

[Halq’eméylem text provided by Á’a:líya Warbus.]

My name is Á’a:líya Warbus, the MLA for Chilliwack–Cultus Lake, but I come from the

Stó:lō Nation. My grandparents come from all up and down the coast, from xʷməθkʷəy̓əm , Sts’ailes, Sq’èwlets, representing almost the entire valley.

I really want to thank you for being here today and for the work that I know you’ve

done to bring your community to this place. Getting people to sit together, come to

an agreement, one vision to share the territory with all of the people that have come

to Turtle Island — a big undertaking. You completed it, and you’re here to show everyone

what a relationship built on trust, partnership and a foundation of true kindness

and compassion looks like.

[2:05 p.m.]

I’m honoured to be standing here as a part of the official British Columbia government,

but in my heart, there’s always a conflict, because I’m not with my people. I know

that our Ancestors are with us. In our language, we say tómiyeqw, “seven generations

back and seven generations forward.” Our community has worked to try to establish

treaty agreements. It has been very difficult, for many reasons. As our leader has

stated, the work ahead is not easy, but there’s hope.

To see you walk through those doors as a sovereign leader in British Columbia is such

an honour for me today. I’m so humbled to be in the presence of a strong treaty Nation

like yours.

I only wanted to speak today to reflect on the importance of bringing language into

these agreements, bringing language back to our people, because there are words in

sentiment that we have for our land, for the water, for the animals and for the trees

that we connect to and that are alive to us, that continue to show us the way forward,

for exactly the complicated issues that we have in the province.

That’s why I continue to stand as an elected leader in British Columbia and hope to

carry the work that’s been passed down with humility and remembering that for all

of the generations that came before, all of our Elders, the suffering that they endured

for us to be here, we can never pay that back, but we can do our best. The language,

for us, means everything, so that we don’t lose that connection to our past.

I only wanted to congratulate you and just express how honoured I am to be here today

from the official opposition but also from my nation, which hopes to do something

like this and to find our way through reconciliation. It’s messy. There are a lot

of conversations that need to be had. There are a lot of voices that need to be heard.

The most important thing is that we bring everybody to the table in a respectful way

and that we try to honour as much as we possibly can.

It makes my heart happy. It makes me feel good.

I know that everybody in this House is committed to finding a way forward for all

of our people so that British Columbia can prosper once again.

Le hoy.

The Speaker : Seeing no further speakers, the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation

will close debate.

Hon. Christine Boyle : I want to thank all of the members present for their cooperation and for the words

of support from all three parties. I want to particularly thank the MLA for Chilliwack–Cultus

Lake and the House Leader for the official opposition not only for powerful words

but for bringing in the language of the Stó:lō Nation as well.

I, too, think that the shift in language of this treaty and the opportunity to bring

a nation’s language into this space is groundbreaking. I’m so grateful to get to do

that work together and to have the opportunity to vote on these amendments, which

include so powerfully integrating ʔayʔaǰuθəm into this treaty agreement.

[2:10 p.m.]

This is a living agreement, and as others have remarked on, I am struck by the reminder

of the new title, which is a good relationship, ʔaʔǰɩnxʷegəs .

Now, I don’t know if I’m allowed to do this, but we do a lot of heckling, so I’m going

to just do it anyway. I’m going to ask folks to join me in practising saying that

new title of the new treaty, a good relationship.

Some Hon. Members : ʔaʔǰɩnxʷegəs .

Hon. Christine Boyle : Pretty good. Pretty good. As a former camp counsellor, I appreciate you all participating

so willingly in that ʔaʔǰɩnxʷegəs , a good relationship, which is what got us to this point.

I want to acknowledge the huge amount of work that brings us here and the work that

we have to do still ahead together in good relationship.

With that, thank you.

I move the motion.

The Speaker : Thank you, Minister. Thank you to all speakers.

Members, the question is the adoption of the motion.

Motion approved.

[Applause.]

Hon. Mike Farnworth : In this chamber, I call second reading debate on Bill 15.

In the Douglas Fir Room,

Section A, I call continued estimates debate for the Ministry

of Children and Family Development, and after that, Ministry of Attorney General estimates.

Committee stage to be called on Bill 13 in the tiny House,

Section C, the Birch Room.

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 15 — Infrastructure Projects Act

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, everybody. Welcome and good afternoon. We are going to contemplate Bill

15 debate this afternoon. We’ll call on the minister to introduce the bill.

Hon. Bowinn Ma : I move that the bill be read a second time now.

I’m pleased to rise in the House today as Minister of Infrastructure to speak to this

piece of legislation. New and expanded schools, hospitals and other health care facilities

are critical for growing communities. That’s why our government has been working to

implement the single largest and most ambitious capital infrastructure plan in B.C.

history.

For more than 80,000 students, more than 226 new, expanded and seismically upgraded

schools have been built or are underway. Additionally, more than three dozen major

hospital and health care projects and over 10,700 student housing beds are complete

or underway in communities across the province, and there is more to do.

Despite our efforts, however, an exploding population in recent years has meant that

even a record-breaking financial investment isn’t enough to ensure new infrastructure

is keeping up with the growing needs of British Columbians. We need to find ways to

do this faster, better, more economically. That is why my new Ministry of Infrastructure

was created and why we have tabled Bill 15, the Infrastructure Projects Act.

The new Ministry of Infrastructure was formed last year to support B.C.’s growing

communities by providing major capital project planning services, procurement and

delivery for schools, hospitals and health care facilities, post-secondary facilities

and other important public buildings.

[2:15 p.m.]

By consolidating the capital functions that were previously spread across ministries,

the new ministry can officially lead work in communities on behalf of the province

and ensure that government planning and resources are well coordinated.

This will allow the ministry to identify and implement opportunities to reduce costs

for taxpayers, to take advantage of economies of scale by procuring in a bundled way

— for instance, through modular expansions for schools or long-term-care buildings

— and to create project efficiencies, such as the standardization of infrastructure.

The new ministry will also be empowered to deliver projects for health authorities,

school districts and post-secondary institutions on a project-by-project basis when

it makes sense to do so. This will enable the ministry to provide additional capacity

to deliver major capital projects for partners who may not have deep experience in

capital projects themselves or who don’t regularly employ large capital teams.

Projects too often face unnecessary delays caused by existing approval processes and

lengthy timelines for permitting requirements. Delays can mean missed opportunities

and higher costs for much-needed infrastructure projects.

Therefore, the ministry is also mandated to expedite the approval of projects in order

to ensure faster delivery of designated infrastructure investments. This is critical

at a time when government is working to deliver the largest capital investment in

the province’s history amidst global economic uncertainty.

During this legislative session, the opposition parties have spoken to the need for

more schools, hospitals, clean energy projects and other critical infrastructure across

our province, which this bill will help to deliver. This bill will support the ministry’s

work in two ways.

The act’s first purpose is to provide statutory authority for the Ministry of Infrastructure

to conduct activities related to planning and prioritization, procurement and the

acquisition, development and administration of surplus lands, as well as to consolidate

the duties, powers and functions that relate to capital planning and infrastructure

from the Ministries of Health, Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills, and Education

and Child Care. It will consolidate those duties, powers and functions into the Ministry

of Infrastructure.

This act brings over those powers from the various schools, universities, colleges

and health statutes. It will allow the new ministry to deliver projects on a case-by-case

basis on behalf of health authorities, school districts and post-secondary institutions

when it makes sense to do so.

This would allow the Ministry of Infrastructure to do a coordinated procurement for

multiple projects at the same time, to achieve cost savings per project. For instance,

as I noted before, the ministry could bundle procurement for project components for

multiple health authorities’ projects together or procure multiple modular classrooms

for multiple school districts at one time.

As I noted earlier, it would also allow the Ministry of Infrastructure to build a

school for a school district in situations where a school district might be very small

or inexperienced with building a school on their own. As it stands, without Bill 15,

the school district must fully lead their own project.

The second purpose of the legislation is to provide the province with tools to streamline

and expedite decisions, so that projects that provide critical benefits to British

Columbians can be built more efficiently and cost-effectively.

Specifically, the act will do this by enabling the Lieutenant Governor in Council

to designate two categories of infrastructure projects. Category 1 projects are Ministry

of Infrastructure projects and other ministries’ projects that are provincially funded.

Category 2 projects are projects that have been designated as provincially significant

and could include projects delivered by entities outside of government, such as Crown

corporations, local governments, First Nations, the federal government or private

proponents.

To provide greater clarity, category 1 projects could also include projects delivered

by the Ministry of Transportation and Transit. However, immediately following royal

assent, it is anticipated that Ministry of Infrastructure projects will be designated

as category 1 projects as a priority.

[2:20 p.m.]

Category 2 projects need to create significant economic, social or environmental benefits

for people in our province. They must have First Nations support and must also significantly

contribute to the priorities of the province, such as public infrastructure, critical

mineral supply, food or water security, human health and safety, energy security,

recovery from post-disaster events, trade diversification, access to new markets,

supply chain security, replacing U.S. imports, housing or reaching British Columbia’s

climate goals.

The criteria for provincially significant projects will expressly exclude pipeline

projects, LNG facilities, low-barrier housing and overdose prevention sites.

Projects that are designated as provincially significant would not get access to all

the streamlining tools of this act automatically. It would depend on the circumstances,

on a case-by-case basis.

Ultimately, however, it is important to note that none of the tools in this act allow

for such a project to skip over environmental standards or provincial obligations

to First Nations. The tools instead allow for decisions to be made more quickly, whether

that decision be a yes or a no.

All category 1 and 2 projects will be required to uphold B.C.’s high environmental

standards and our government’s commitment to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous

Peoples Act. Again, this bill does not change that.

Several powers will be available under the act to get shovels in the ground faster

for designated projects. Some of the powers expedite provincial permitting, while

some streamline local approvals. Upon designation, the Lieutenant Governor in Council

may select the power or powers that are authorized to be used to expedite that specific

category 2 designated project. Any combination of these powers may be authorized by

the Lieutenant Governor in Council and must be authorized by regulation in order to

be implemented.

While we continue to work to speed up permitting across government, this act will

enable the province to expedite these processes and environmental assessments on projects

that bring significant benefits to B.C.

Under this act, the Ministry of Infrastructure may be authorized to collaborate with

natural resource permitting ministries such as Water, Land and Resource Stewardship,

Energy and Climate Solutions and Mining and Critical Minerals in order to identify,

track and prioritize provincial permitting to expedite designated projects.

For example, we had a school in recent years where a provincial permit was required

very late in its development process because the school district’s team had not realized

until quite late that what they thought was a ditch in the corner of the property

met the statutory definition of a stream, under provincial law. This resulted in the

entire school being delayed for two years, while they waited for their permit to be

processed.

With Bill 15, this permit, under this circumstance, would be brought forward for immediate

review. The project would still have to meet all of the environmental standards of

the permit, but that permit would be seen by reviewers much more quickly.

Additionally, this act will enable the Lieutenant Governor in Council to authorize

the use of qualified professional certifications in place of select lower-risk provincial

permits in order to expedite the approval of a designated project. I would note that

complex and high-risk permits will remain with statutory decision–makers.

To enable a framework that will allow for qualified professional certifications to

be used, the act provides regulation-making powers to the Lieutenant Governor in Council.

This process would not be appropriate for all decisions, but it could be appropriate

for some.

Keeping in mind that a major project has many decisions and permits that it must achieve

success on to move forward, a qualified professional certification process is not

a one-and-done sort of situation for project approvals. Again, major decisions would

still be left with the statutory decision–maker within government.

This framework, the qualified professional certifications framework, will be developed

in consultation with interest holders and key partners, such as First Nations regulatory

bodies, interested private sector proponents, natural resource permitting ministries

and the office of the superintendent of professional governance. This framework will

ensure that quality standards and safety mechanisms are in place to ensure professional

integrity and environmental protections remain a priority.

[2:25 p.m.]

To illustrate how this tool might work, I’ll provide a hypothetical example. Let’s

say that a provincially significant private sector project receives permission to

access the qualified professional reliance route on some provincial decisions. Per

the set-out process, the proponent accesses two professional engineers, independent

of each other, who have been pre-qualified by government as being trustworthy and

experienced enough to provide a professional certification for a certain decision.

The project goes through the rigour of the provincial standard. However, for a specified

decision or specified permit, the two professional engineers would independently conduct

works and activities to provide their assessment and recommendation around certification

to the B.C. government public service as to whether the criteria has been met for

the particular decision.

I look forward to working with my counterparts within government and with a broad

cross-section of interest holders and partners on this framework, that will go a long

way in creating efficiencies in permitting, in collaboration and partnership with

trusted licensed professionals.

There are two tools available in the act that relate to environmental assessments.

Firstly, the act will provide the Ministry of Infrastructure with the power to order

the approval of low-risk duplicative or redundant provincial permits to be issued

under other provincial natural-resourcing permitting statutes.

This power will be developed in consultation with First Nations and can only be exercised

where three conditions have been met:

(1) The designated project is also a reviewable project under the Environmental Assessment

Act.

(2) The environmental assessment for the designated project is complete, and an environmental

assessment certificate has been issued.

(3) Only where the minister has been authorized to do so by the Lieutenant Governor

in Council.

With this power, we can ensure that projects continue to undergo robust environmental

reviews and consultation with First Nations as part of the review and approval process.

But by foregoing duplicative requirements for other lower-risk provincial permits,

we can expedite approvals and get projects moving more quickly.

Bill 15 would allow government to recognize that because the environmental assessment

process is already so rigorous, the need to go through more minor provincial permits

following the achievement of an environmental assessment certificate can be redundant

in many cases.

Here is an example. Let’s say that a mine has successfully completed an environmental

assessment and received their environmental assessment certificate. The five-year

process that it took to achieve the certificate included a rigorous assessment of

the impact of the mine on the trees in the area and the impact to biodiversity that

removal of those trees would result in.

Under the current process, the mine would then have to subsequently apply to the Ministry

of Forests for a separate tree-cutting permit for the trees that have already been

assessed. Bill 15 would allow for that tree-cutting permit to be automatically issued

following the environmental assessment certificate, due to the impacts of the removal

of those trees having already been assessed by a more rigorous process through the

environmental assessment office.

Our government has been working hard to speed up projects while making sure that we

continue to defend our clean air and water and consult with First Nations. We are

committed to continuing this critically important work.

We also recognize that the existing environmental assessment process does not provide

the flexibility and efficiency that is needed for some projects. Therefore, the legislation

adds a new part to the Environmental Assessment Act to enable the environmental assessment

office to work with interest holders to develop an expedited environmental assessment

process that is an alternative to the one currently provided for under the act.

Projects designated for this expedited process will continue to undergo robust environmental

reviews and support our goals to build a sustainable future for everyone. The environmental

assessment office will develop this framework in consultation with its partners and

interest holders, notably First Nations. I will note that once developed, this expedited

process will only be available to projects that are designated under this legislation

and where authorized by the Lieutenant Governor in Council.

Here is an example of how this might work. Let’s say that a project comes forward

that is a collaboration between First Nations and the private sector. It has broad

support to proceed but does have potential impacts on the environment that need to

be assessed. They appeal to the B.C. government for designation as a provincially

significant project on the basis of its economic impact on communities and contributions

to a critical mineral that is needed to replace U.S. imports.

[2:30 p.m.]

The environmental assessment office does a preliminary review of the project and speaks

with all partners and stakeholders involved. The environmental assessment office then

determines that based on its broad support and low to moderate levels of complexity,

it is a good candidate for a streamlined process that takes two years instead of five

years or more, and the project receives permission to access the streamlined process.

So that’s an example of how that process might be used.

I will say that I have heard some reference or describe this expedited environmental

assessment process as bypassing the environmental assessment process altogether. This

is incorrect. Projects using this tool would still have to go through an environmental

assessment process. This tool is about putting projects through the same rigour of

an environmental assessment process, but in ways that allow it to be done more quickly

when conditions are right.

I want to be clear. Consultation with First Nations is and will continue to be critical

and required. We remain committed to our

section 35 constitutional obligations, as

well as our obligations under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Act.

This legislation will also address certain types of approvals that happen at the local

government level. I have heard from many local governments who tell me that the processes

they are obliged to follow are sometimes unable to facilitate speedy permitting on

projects that are critically important to their communities. Since the tabling of

Bill 15, I have also heard from local government leaders who are excited about the

opportunities to collaboratively work with the province on solving issues that can

ensnare important infrastructure projects.

Bill 15 provides two tools to expedite designated projects with respect to local permits

and approvals.

First, it sets out a framework for an agreement-seeking process between project proponents,

including the province, and local approval authorities to collaborate and come to

an agreement on addressing constraints that impede the construction or intended operations

of a designated project.

Where an agreement can be reached, the legislation provides for the agreed-upon replacement

measure to take the place of the identified constraint. This legislation provides

for facilitators to be appointed to assist the parties, if required, to help reach

an agreement, and for monitors to be appointed to ensure that the designated project

is undertaken and completed in an appropriate manner.

As well, it provides for the province to step in to develop replacement measures to

replace a constraint where agreement cannot be reached between a project proponent

and a local government approval authority. This latter provision is to be used only

as a last resort, as the goal in all of these projects is collaboration.

We are stronger together, and we want to be able to support local governments in achieving

our shared goals, which is what British Columbians also expect us to do.

I would note two things about these provisions. Under the act, local authorities are

defined to include a local government, the University Endowment Lands or the Islands

Trust, and the framework in this legislation is modelled after the process laid out

in the Significant Projects Streamlining Act and is not an entirely new power.

I note that the Significant Projects Streamlining Act was enacted in 2003. It preceded

the enactment of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act and therefore

does not reflect the requirements for the province to align its laws with the United

Nations declaration under

section 3.

Further, with recent population growth and economic uncertainty, our province needs

the ability to build schools faster, and with an aging population, we need the ability

to meet the health care needs of our communities. The existing Significant Projects

Streamlining Act was not designed with those needs in mind.

Additionally, that act does not account for projects where the Ministry of Infrastructure

is a project proponent, which this legislation does. This tool has thus been modernized

and brought into the Infrastructure Projects Act, and the Significant Projects Streamlining

Act will be repealed as part of this bill.

We are working closely with the Declaration Act secretariat and the Ministry of Indigenous

Relations and Reconciliation and will be undergoing deeper consultation with First

Nations for policy and regulation development.

Here is an example of how the municipal authorizations tool might be used. Let’s say

that a town is devastated by wildfire or another natural disaster and that they want

to rebuild quickly in a way that ensures that their communities are more resilient

than before.

[2:35 p.m.]

They identify that their usual planning, development and permitting processes were

not set up to support a speedy post-disaster recovery scenario and are too bureaucratic

and inflexible for the challenges that they’re facing.

This town asked the province for help on this, and the provincial government and local

government worked together to come up with a plan that allows for multiple processes

and steps to be done all at once across the entire disaster zone, instead of doing

it step by step, which could take many years.

The second tool in this legislation is a tool for local governments to take advantage

of if they so choose. The legislation empowers local governments to expedite and streamline

their own permitting and approval processes by providing for a mechanism for them

to request provincially legislated requirements to be waived or modified for a designated

project.

Under this legislation, a local government could, by way of resolution, request that

planning requirements be waived or modified, such as requirements for development

approval for a designated project to be in alignment with the official community plan

in order to move forward. This tool could eliminate issues that we’ve encountered

in the past.

In one instance, for example, a student housing project was delayed by a year or more

because of the requirement for a local government to update their official community

plan first. Everyone in this case, including the municipality, wanted construction

to begin, but rigid provincial requirements dictated that the official community plan

needed to be updated before development permits could be issued, and therefore before

building permits could be issued and construction could begin. Under this legislation,

the municipality would be able to request that the province waive or modify these

provincial requirements.

In keeping with our intent throughout this legislation to preserve health and safety

and environmental protections, certain requirements that impact those areas are carved

out of this power to exempt or modify. Examples of such requirements are those that

are critical to health and safety, the natural environment or protection from hazardous

conditions. Such requirements might be building inspections, occupancy permits, requirements

related to sewer or stormwater management and engineering permits.

Bill 15 signals government’s new approach to infrastructure development. Through the

consolidation of capital functions across the critical school, health and post-secondary

sectors, the new Ministry of Infrastructure will be able to prioritize and plan projects

from an overarching perspective to enable critically important infrastructure projects,

such as schools and hospitals, to be built more quickly and cost-effectively for people

in our communities.

The legislation will also empower local governments to expedite and streamline their

own permitting and approval processes by removing provincially legislated requirements

that are sometimes the cause of local government approval delays. It establishes a

framework for alternative permit authorizations through an agreement-seeking approach

with local governments to help get shovels in the ground faster for provincial and

other designated projects. To support the implementation of this framework, the Ministry

of Infrastructure will begin consulting with local governments this year.

Finally, with this legislation, we will build upon work already underway across government

to improve efficiencies and further support government to get out of its own way with

respect to provincial permitting and project approvals, without reducing environmental

standards or affecting our obligations to First Nations.

The latter, in particular, is assured by both

section 20 in Bill 15 itself and by

the

Interpretation Act, which requires that all provincial laws, including Bill 15,

be interpreted in a way that upholds Aboriginal and treaty rights as recognized in

section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and are consistent with B.C.’s Declaration

on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.

Pragmatically speaking, Bill 15 is about moving projects forward more quickly, which

is not possible without First Nations support. Everything about Bill 15 is about accelerating

infrastructure, and that can only be done hand in hand with First Nations.

British Columbians expect their government to deliver the critical infrastructure

projects their growing communities need. At its core, Bill 15 is about doing just

that, not by reducing standards but by overcoming duplicative processes and redundancies

that sometimes ensnare critical projects. Members of the opposition have regularly

referred to the need to build projects more quickly, and this bill is an important

step towards that.

[2:40 p.m.]

I would hope, then, that they put their vote to where their mouth is and join me in

support of Bill 15, B.C.’s Infrastructure Projects Act.

With that, I look forward to hearing from my colleagues in this continued debate today

on second reading of this bill.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you very much, Minister of Infrastructure, for opening debate on Bill 15.

Now recognizing the member for Kamloops Centre.

Peter Milobar : Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be our designated speaker on this bill.

There’s a lot of ground to cover, actually, with Bill 15. With the government changing,

as is their prerogative, the order of bill debate today, I was fortunate enough, I

guess, to be wrapping up my Bill 14 comments just before lunch, and here I find myself

immediately after lunch addressing Bill 15.

I say that because the two…. I referenced this in my Bill 14 comments, and I think

the minister even slightly touched on it in her comments — that we can’t look at these

bills in isolation. There’s a reason the government made Bill 7, Bill 14 and Bill

15 confidence votes, because they’re very far-reaching, and they’re very all-encompassing,

and frankly, they’re all blatant power grabs by the Premier’s office under the guise

of a tariff threat.

I’ll dive into some of what the minister said throughout my comments. We’re talking

about bringing on stream a critical mineral mine with expedited permitting, expedited

environmental assessment process under Bill 15 that will require several overrides

by cabinet.

What we heard in the minister’s speech were lots of references to “may” or “might”

or “possibly.” What the minister fails to highlight in her comments — and understandable;

any government minister would stay away from this area — is the amount of regulatory

power that Bill 15 would put in the hands of cabinet through orders in council, and

that’s fundamentally, at its core, the problem with Bill 15.

I’ll touch on one area to start, and I’ll likely loop back to it. When we hear about

the words used on the Environmental Assessment Act and the changes…. I want to read

into the record a government press release and see how similar the language is — from

what we heard today for this government press release.

“The British Columbia government has introduced legislation to modernize the environmental

assessment of major resource projects. This is designed to provide a clear and timely

path for the approval of responsible resource projects, pursue reconciliation with

B.C.’s First Nations, Indigenous peoples, increase public engagement and transparency

and deliver strong environmental protections.

“British Columbia was one of the first provinces in Canada to introduce environmental

assessment legislation in 1995 and is making a comprehensive regulatory framework

stronger.

“‘By revitalizing our environmental assessment process, we’re striking a better balance

for our province, where good projects that respect B.C.’s environment, Indigenous

peoples and the public will be approved more quickly,’ said George Heyman, Minister

of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. ‘Our province was built upon the wealth

of natural resources at our disposal. This legislation reaffirms the continued importance

of these resources to British Columbians and enhances public trust by engaging people

and communities early to ensure our resources are being used sustainably. Growing

a strong economy and protecting the environment we all cherish go hand in hand. That’s

the legacy we want our kids and grandkids to inherit.’

“Revitalizing the environmental assessment process in B.C. is a shared priority between

the government and the B.C. Green Party caucus, and it’s part of the confidence and

supply agreement.

“‘Revitalizing the environmental assessment process is a key shared commitment because

we both recognize the need to strengthen public trust in government decision-making,’

said Sonia Furstenau, MLA for Cowichan Valley. ‘It is vital to modernize the EA process

so that important considerations like climate change, cumulative impacts and new scientific

standards are properly incorporated. I look forward to discussing the legislation

further so we can ensure that the wealth of our natural resources and the well-being

of our ecological systems can be enjoyed by British Columbians for generations to

come.’

[2:45 p.m.]

“In introducing the Environmental Assessment Act, Heyman said Indigenous participation

in environmental assessments will also be greatly enhanced. If passed, the legislation

will result in an EA process delivering timely evidence-based decisions where the

public can more actively participate. The legislation reflects government’s commitment

to reconciliation and the implementation of the United Nations declaration on the

rights of Indigenous peoples.

“‘Having Indigenous collaboration from the beginning means more certain and efficient

processes where good projects can move forward quickly, providing benefits to Indigenous

peoples while respecting their rights, values and culture,’ said Heyman. ‘We want

to reduce the potential for these types of legal challenges we’ve too frequently seen

in B.C. These have impacted our province’s economic development, eroded public trust,

alienated Indigenous communities and left project proponents trying to navigate through

a costly, time-consuming process.’

“The legislation will also provide increased clarity and certainty to project proponents

through an early engagement phase that will identify the focus areas for the project

assessment prior to proceeding through an environmental assessment; enhanced public

engagement, including additional comment periods; earlier collaboration between the

environmental assessment office and local communities, coupled with funding to support

public participation; the ability to more fully assess positive and adverse environmental,

economic, social, cultural and health effects, including greenhouse gas emissions

and require their consideration in decisions.

“Strengthened compliance and enforcement for approved projects, along with audits,

to make sure conditions, including EA certificates are mitigating identified adverse

effects as intended. Government has been engaging extensively on a revitalized EA

process for over one year, consulting with Indigenous peoples, industry, communities,

environmental organizations and the public.

“This included establishing an EA advisory committee that included a cross-section

of members from industry, academia, non-governmental organizations, Indigenous peoples

and local governments. The committee met for over 75 hours and produced a report recommending

changes to the current EA process and legislative framework, with direct engagement

with a variety of key stakeholders, including industry and business associations,

environmental associations, local governments and EA practitioners and extensive engagements

with Indigenous people through bilateral meetings and regional workshops and a public

comment period on a discussion paper outlining the proposed changes, which received

over 2,500 public comments and 60 formal submissions from Indigenous peoples, industry

and stakeholders.”

That was November 5, 2018. The language sounds very similar to the government’s new

stated objective in Bill 15. Except in 2018, they insisted they knew how to get things

moving while still protecting the framework around environmental assessments and respecting

Indigenous comments.

In fact, the people that came out supporting this at the time…. Grand Chief Stewart

Phillip; Grand Chief Edward John, First Nations Summit political executive; Regional

Chief Terry Teegee, B.C. Assembly of First Nations; president and CEO of the mining

association, Bryan Cox; Gavin Smith, staff counsel to West Coast Environmental Law

Association — they all came out in favour.

What do people say about Bill 15? Well, let’s see.

Jody Wilson-Raybould predicted more lawsuits. George Heyman said in 2018 that it would

result in less lawsuits. UBCIC, Stewart Phillip’s organization — he’s still there

— are adamantly opposed.

The minister talks about municipalities and her discussions, with some wanting this.

It’s interesting, because back in 2018, they actually consulted with municipalities.

This year UBCM, which typically doesn’t actually take very strong stances or firm

positions on legislation, is not a fan of Bill 15. Stand.earth is not a fan of Bill

15. And the list goes on and on and on.

That’s the problem. With this government, it’s rinse and repeat. Except with Bill

15, they finally have essentially acknowledged they don’t know what they’re doing.

They don’t know how to move projects forward in a timely fashion while still respecting

all those other values that former Minister Heyman talked about. So their solution

is just to give cabinet unlimited overriding powers on a wide range of areas.

[2:50 p.m.]

Now, about a week later, ten days later, George Heyman wrote an op-ed.

“When the use of B.C.’s natural resources intersects with the protection of our natural

environment, British Columbians expect their government to make decisions that are

transparent, responsible and, above all, in the public interest. We’ve recently introduced

new measures we believe will restore the public’s trust in a way that government manages

our natural resources.

“Our new Environmental Assessment Act will bring about a strong and transparent environmental

assessment process based on science. The decisions we make about the resource development

affect the air, land and water we value. We have a responsibility to our children

and grandchildren to pass along a healthy environment, and that’s why concerns such

as sustainability, climate impacts, community health and safety and effects on future

generations will all be addressed in future assessment decisions.

“The general public and Indigenous communities will be able to participate meaningfully,

and companies will be able to get good projects reviewed and ready more quickly. Local

and Indigenous communities as well as the project proponents will be engaged much

earlier in the new process. This is to everyone’s benefit.

“The time for the public and Indigenous peoples to flag questions or concerns about

a project is at the beginning, not well down the road after companies have already

developed project designs. This way, companies can incorporate feedback into project

designs early, eliminating the need for costly design changes or expensive litigation

later on.

“The new process will provide more public comment periods as well as funding to support

public participation. There will be independent reviews on the evidence and science

put forward by proponents, and Indigenous knowledge and values will be incorporated.

Overall there will be shorter time frames to get projects assessed and decisions made.

“Where a project requires both provincial and federal approval, we will work with

the federal government to reduce redundancies while retaining independent final decision-making

authority.

“The collaborative partnership with Indigenous groups will advance reconciliation

through a consent-based process that must be considered and addressed by ministers

when we make decisions. This is so Indigenous people can share in the economic prosperity

of a robust sustainable resource sector while their rights, values and culture are

respected.

“Another important way we are increasing public confidence in resource management

is by improving the way we regulate the qualified professionals who make decisions

in the natural resource section.”

Let me repeat that. Another important way we’re increasing public confidence in resource

management is by improving the way we regulate the qualified professionals who make

decisions in the natural resource sector. I’ll come back to that in a second.

“New legislation we’ve introduced will improve the professional reliance model by

aligning and consolidating oversight of regulated professions integral to the model.

This includes agrologists, technologists, technicians, engineers, geoscientists, biologists

and foresters. Our aim is to ensure that roles, responsibilities and expectations

of qualified professionals are clear. This will improve public trust in the professional

reliance model and provide industry the certainty it requires to continue to generate

jobs in a healthy economy.

“The legislation we have introduced for both the environmental assessment process

and regulating qualified professionals is designed to get responsible, sustainable

projects approved in B.C. more quickly and efficiently so communities can prosper,

Indigenous peoples can prosper and people can have good jobs all while ensuring environmental

responsibility.”

That was November 15, 2018.

Mr. Heyman and myself did not always see eye to eye on everything, I think it’s fair

to say, but I was his critic back then. I was his critic from 2017 until the election

in 2020. I remember very clearly the debates we had around the Environmental Assessment

Act changes, professional reliance model changes.

Now you hear the government talking Bill 15, and they seem to have zero issues with

the professionals that are going to be providing reports. Back in 2018, they needed

to blow the whole thing up because they didn’t trust the reports that were coming

forward. You know, it’s interesting because again, in 2018, the language from the

government was all about how this is going to speed everything up.

Here we are seven years later. Very little has actually been approved in that time

frame — very little; and the government says they need Bill 15 to correct the problem

that they created back in 2018. But they won’t actually say that. They won’t say that

about 15, they won’t say that about Bill 14, and they won’t say that about Bill 7.

[2:55 p.m.]

Make no mistake about it. I do not think it’s coincidental that as

part 4 of Bill

7 got repealed, Bills 14 and 15 magically appeared. The government would not need

Bill 14 and 15 if Bill 7 had stayed intact. They would have had their all-encompassing

power, their overreach, their ability to make whatever rules they wanted at the cabinet

table through the Premier’s office.

It’s not just in 2018 that the government was repeatedly talking about how they’ve

sped things up and how they’d fix things. And they could say: “Well, this Premier

wasn’t the Premier then. That was then; this is now.” So let’s look at what this Premier

promised about permitting timelines while he was the Premier.

April 14, 2023, the Premier, in a story by the Prince George Citizen . He was up talking to COFI and others.

“‘We’re going to retain our high standards, but we’re going to reform our permitting

program to make sure that it’s timely and predictable for people and that it works.

In the meantime, we’re bringing on 40 additional staff to work through the backlog

within the permitting system.’

“The Premier admitted that Friday to a crowd of 600 delegates at the B.C. Council

of Forest Industries convention in Prince George, acknowledging that lengthy delays

to approve mines, forestry developments and housing projects are far too prevalent,

and he vowed to fix a broken system.

He said:

“I know the state of permitting in the province is unacceptable. It’s too slow, too

complicated and many governments have grappled with it and failed to address it. It

needs to be addressed. I saw it first as Housing Minister, working with people in

the housing sector who wanted to build and had to deal with five ministries and, in

some cases, multiple years before they could put a shovel in the ground. Bureaucratic

backlogs and delays are unacceptable.”

He also admitted:

“Some of the delays are out of the province’s hands, with federal and municipal and

First Nations jurisdictions adding to the complexity of permitting. ‘It’s an issue

I’ve raised with the federal government, and there’s enthusiasm on their side to get

permitting times down, too, and find other ways to work together.’”

He goes on to a few other…:

“A vital message that I’ve heard certainly from the sector is predictability. They

need to know where the trees are coming from and that the basic for the forest industry….

So our goal as a government is to deliver that. We’ve had lots of challenges. We’ve

had wildfires. We’ve had the end of beetle-killed wood and court decisions that have

resulted in injunctions around issuing permits.”

You have Jody Wilson-Raybould — who obviously knows the subject area much better than

I do, especially given her history with the federal government — saying that this

is going to lead to more lawsuits.

Back in 2023, we had the Premier already saying: “We know that the era of litigation

and fighting First Nations as a predominant response is over and that big changes

are necessary. We have to address the legal rights and interests.” You had the Premier

acknowledging in 2023 that was still a big problem. You had former Minister Heyman

in 2018 saying they’d solved that problem.

We’ve had other pieces of legislation come forward and proposed changes that they

tried and then walked away from in the Land Act, before the election. This government

said that would solve the legal issues as well.

The reality is that Bill 15 is the government’s ham-fisted way to take the full reins

and the full control over processes of picking winners and losers of projects that

they deem tolerable to them or not. One only has to look at what projects, what classification

of projects are exempted to see that they’ve already started to draw the lines in

as to what they feel is morally acceptable for them as a government to support or

not.

When they exclude pipelines and LNG…. When the LNG project, when Site C and when Kinder

Morgan were responsible for 80 percent of our GDP growth over the last four to five

years, to just flat out, up front exclude them…. At least they’re being honest with

everyone about their thoughts around that. But it’s not like they didn’t just put

up a bit of a fake fight on those things and still proceed with them.

If we’re truly trying to rebuff what is happening and get highest and best yield of

our products to international markets, it doesn’t mean everything should be rubber-stamped

— absolutely not.

[3:00 p.m.]

This is a government, at a time when you have a new Prime Minister talking about energy

corridors, when you have other provinces talking about trying to get their resources

to tidewater, saying they’re not willing to entertain expediating anything like that,

unless it’s dredging of Burrard Inlet. The minister that’s flip-flopped back and forth

on Kinder Morgan is okay dredging Burrard Inlet so we can have even bigger tankers

with the logic that that means fewer ships.

Again, how is the public, based on that track record of decision-making coming out

of this government’s members…? You know, this government loves to try to heap back

— back when our leader was in government, back when he did this. He was in cabinet

in the second half of when he was part of a government. I’m surprised they don’t say

when I was in government. I was there for 18 days, so I guess that qualifies me as

well, you know.

You would think that the ministers that fling that out know that ministers…. You know,

they bring their best case forward on their files, but ultimately, Premiers’ offices

hold a lot of power on decision-making and direction. This government would be no

different than the previous NDP government, which would be no different than the previous

B.C. Liberal government. When they try to hang everything on one minister at a table,

that a previous government did, it’s a little bit rich.

When I say, you know, the Energy Minister had these positions, we’re not talking about

his positions that he inherited from some other Energy Minister. These were his own

personal decisions he was making and positions he was taking, and they never want

to actually answer for that in this House. They never want to answer for their own

track record of ever-changing priorities or ways that they view, especially, resource

development.

Yesterday when we talked about a flawed piece of private members’ legislation moving

forward despite the Attorney General’s advice, the Premier was kind of chuckling away.

I hollered over to him: “Yes, because what could go wrong with this government expediating

things?”

I would point out that, as best as I understand it, you know, the Mount Polley tailings

design was actually approved by the NDP government when they were in office. They

might not want to talk about that. But if we want to keep going back to the sins of

previous governments and different decision-making, that’s the confidence they want

us to enshrine on them now. It’s their track record and saying: “Just trust us. We

know how to expediate things. We know how to do it without proper oversight.”

I’m going to touch on it, and I’ll come back again. Thankfully, I’ve been allotted

some time by our House Leader on this.

Another area the minister talked about was that this will help us build schools. Well,

a couple of things. The treasury is broke, so first off, you actually need money to

be able to build schools. If every highway and hospital project you were doing wasn’t

consistently over budget, you could actually be building those schools at the same

time right now.

I say that every time in my area, in Kamloops. Every time a local area highway around

the Trans-Canada went $75 million or $100 million over budget — and it was actually

getting scaled back at the same time, less project for more money — I would point

out that extra $100 million or $120 million would build two more schools in Kamloops.

We should actually be building and expanding a highway while having two other construction

sites providing schools for the same amount of money out of our taxpayers’ pockets.

It’s interesting, eight years in, that this government has finally decided that they’re

overspending on every project and what they need is the ability…. They need all-encompassing

power in Bill 15 to be able to go out and tender two or three schools at the same

time. That absolutely makes no sense.

[3:05 p.m.]

If you want to build two or three schools at the same time and bundle them to try

to get best value from a contractor, just go ahead and do it. You just make the bid.

You ask people to bid on three schools so they can leapfrog their crews from site

to site. They can take their form people from site to site. They can take their framing

people from site to site, their HVAC contractors from site to site, and they can roll

them.

You can already do that. You don’t need Bill 15 to actually do that. You actually

need a government that knows how to deliver infrastructure, which this government

doesn’t know to do.

Now, I say that because the minister…. You know, they announced, in the budget, plans

around modular schools and other things. I got asked by several manufacturing companies….

There are quite a few in and around Kamloops that do camp-type modular housing, but

they’ve branched out into other types of modular industrial-type construction, commercial

industrial construction. They’re big employers in Kamloops and area.

The prefabricated school classroom additions — they asked me what the process would

be to tap into these hundreds of millions of dollars the government had identified

in the budget. I said I didn’t know but I’d find out. I would send a letter off.

Now, in fairness to the Minister of Infrastructure, I didn’t cc the Minister of Infrastructure.

I was running out of ministries that I could think might be connected to a school

capital project, because this is brand new in terms of how this government is now

structuring certain projects and which ministry it goes through.

Typically, you would ask the Education Minister about a school construction project.

That’s pretty standard. You’d ask the Health Minister about his hospital. This government

wants to change that — add a different layer of ministerial bureaucracy to speed things

up. Seems like strange logic to me, but let’s see how it’s going so far, shall we?

On March 26, I wrote the Education Minister. I cc’d the Minister of Finance, who I’m

the critic of, thinking it might fall into her area, since it was a budget program,

and the Minister of Citizens’ Services, who deals with a lot of procurement. I wasn’t

sure if it might fall into them.

I’ll just read the whole letter. It’s very short. It says:

“As MLA for Kamloops Centre, I’m writing to seek detailed information about the bidding

process regarding prefabricated school classroom additions. Given the current economic

challenges facing local manufacturers, I am seeking clarity on several key aspects

of the procurement process. Specifically, I would appreciate guidance on the following

points:

“

(1) Bidding process. What are the precise steps for manufacturers to submit bids

for these classroom addition projects?

“

(2) Bid publication. Will these projects be listed on B.C. Bid and, if so, will they

be posted by individual school districts or through the provincial government?

“

(3) Manufacturer eligibility. Are there any specific requirements regarding local

manufacturing? Specifically, will the bidding be restricted to B.C. or Canadian manufacturers

due to current economic considerations and tariff threats?

“

(4) Project timeline. What is the anticipated timeline for project postings and potential

contract awards?

“The local manufacturing sector is experiencing significant economic pressure, and

an expediated response would be greatly appreciated. These details will help local

prefabricated structure manufacturers prepare and position themselves for potential

opportunities.

“Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I look forward to your comprehensive

response. Sincerely,” myself.

Not a big, politically charged…. No big gotcha questions in there, I don’t think.

Pretty straightforward, only four. Pretty well laid out. Pretty easy to understand

what direction I was going for. That was on March 26, to the Education Minister.

We decided to follow up on May 8, having not heard anything back at all, and we got

a very quick response back, finally, saying: “Actually, you’ve got to go talk to Infrastructure.”

To Infrastructure’s credit, on May 9, they said: “Let us get back to you. Thank you

for your query. We’ll reply back.”

I don’t necessarily…. I’m not taking issue with the Ministry of Infrastructure, because

they can’t respond to something they didn’t even know existed. Three different ministries,

though, that were contacted, that ought to have known where to direct that query back

on March 26, sat silent until we decided to follow up on May 8.

I directly talk about tariffs. I directly talk about Buy B.C., Buy Canadian in this

— all the language the government wraps themselves in, this whole time.

[3:10 p.m.]

But they need Bill 15 to act with urgency. They need Bill 15 to actually get their

act together, ministry to ministry, and say: “Oops. The MLA erred on which ministry

that went to. We should just fire that query over to the appropriate minister.”

Again, Infrastructure can only do with what they were provided the information on.

They responded very quickly once they finally got the notice. It does make one wonder.

If that had just been forwarded on at the end of March, when I first sent the first

inquiry to Infrastructure, we might have actually had a proper answer by now. Instead,

we’re delayed almost a month and a half.

It’s not me they delayed. I followed up because I had those same companies asking

me if I’d heard anything. It’s a month and a half later, and they’re starting to wonder

if they have to start laying people off or not, if this will be a viable source for

them to try to hang on and keep a skeleton crew going for scarce work that’s out there.

But no certainty from this government. No, they need Bill 15, which wasn’t even on

the docket — it wasn’t even being talked about at the end of March — to fast-track

modular schools, instead of answering very basic questions about that exact program.

Yet it shows up in the speaking notes of the minister to defend why they need Bill

This is the problem. This is why I say it’s great they made it a confidence vote,

because I have no confidence in them.

Their track record would say that we should not have confidence in this government,

not when it comes to health care, not when it comes to crime and safety, not when

it comes to the finances of the province and not when it comes to the environmental

assessment process or fast-tracking projects. Their track record would say, based

on what I’ve read into the record already of their own government press releases since

2018 and their own Premier’s comments while he was the Premier, that they simply haven’t

been able to deliver.

They’re pointing fingers back at previous governments, except they seem to forget

they are the previous two governments. In 2018, when the environmental assessment

process was dramatically changed and the provincial professional reliance model was

dramatically changed, they were the government.

Then we had an election in 2020. Then they were the government. Now we’ve had an election

in 2024. They went from supermajority to clinging to a one-seat advantage, but they

are still the government. We recognize that.

But they’re blaming others for why things are taking so long. They certainly aren’t

taking any responsibility for their lack of actions over the last eight years.

It doesn’t make any sense they then turn around and, under the guise of what’s happening

with the United States, say that is the number one driving reason they need these

types of powerful tools to override municipalities, to override Indigenous leadership,

to override the environmental groups.

We have business groups out there now, contractor groups…. I mean, the Premier is

getting quite a backdrop of people that aren’t very thrilled, not just with Bill 15.

You’ve got the unions now mad about the way contract negotiations are going. I’m starting

to lose track of where he might even have any allies left out in the real world.

Instead of actually acknowledging, instead of bringing forward legislation that could

address things without creating this level of fear and anxiety, the government just

makes it a confidence vote.

Now, what the government fails to comprehend or understand is the reason there’s this

much anxiety out there isn’t because of the great speaking notes that the minister

brought forward. Anyone listening to that would think, “Well, that sounds pretty reasonable,”

except for how it plays out in the real world, to real applicants, to real projects,

to municipalities, to Indigenous communities, to the environmental groups.

[3:15 p.m.]

What they have watched from this government is a complete failure in all those areas.

So when the government says, “Just trust us; it won’t be so bad,” with a slight asterisk

that says, “But if we want to, we can still override just about everything else we

just talked about in glowing terms,” people get a little suspicious. When they bring

forward a piece of legislation they previously hadn’t even talked about needing….

I mean, this is a piece of legislation, Bill 15, that is supposed to help create the

Ministry of Infrastructure. The budget was on March 4. The cabinet was announced —

when was that? — in February, or before that. Sorry, it was November. I can’t even

remember when the cabinet was announced.

The minister was announced six, seven months ago. The first order of business wasn’t

to bring forward a piece of legislation to actually create that ministry? It waits

until the last week and a bit of sitting before it comes forward to create a ministry

that’s supposedly supposed to be there to fast-track infrastructure projects in this

province? Were we so jammed up in this Legislature up until now, on critical work,

that the government couldn’t have brought that piece forward?

No, they needed to bring it forward and attach it to a piece of legislation that creates

massive power overreach for the Premier’s office. I say the Premier’s office because

if anyone at home thinks that any minister in this government would stand up against

the Premier’s directive of their ministry or for a project the Premier wants, they’re

kidding themselves.

I mean, we’ve stood in this place…. It will be very interesting to see when the votes

actually happen. I do wonder how much political capital the Premier is burning internally

in his caucus.

You have a caucus that campaigned on safe supply that has now walked away from safe

supply. You have a caucus that campaigned on a wide range of issues, carbon tax, that

they’ve now walked away from. How great CleanBC was, and they’ve now walked away saying

that their emission profile is nowhere near going to be met.

EV mandates will be next, because there’s no way they’re going to meet the 2026 target,

which means they’re going to have to change it, and you’re going to have a caucus

full of people that campaigned on the exact opposite.

Involuntary care. The list goes on and on and on.

Now you have a government…. We had the Minister of Environment bring forward the motion

to the House that we all supported. But respecting what we’re hearing within Indigenous

communities and working with Indigenous communities….

Well, it’ll be interesting to see how this government and their members vote on a

bill that UBCIC Grand Chief Stewart Phillip says of: “Bill 15 raises concerns about

projects being fast-tracked under the guise of responding to Trump’s tariffs and watering

down the EA process. Additionally, UBCIC is concerned the province is not upholding

its own interim process on alignment of laws with UNDRIP, or UNDRIP itself.”

And as I say, Jody Wilson-Raybould is saying: “My prediction: more lawsuits from proponents

and First Nations, more uncertainty and poorer economic and environmental outcomes.”

So I will be curious to see what the Indigenous leadership within the NDP caucus does,

hearing Indigenous leadership outside of this chamber about Bill 15.

I know if Bill 15 was reversed, if this was a B.C. Conservative bill, the NDP would

be asking those exact same questions about members on our side of House, the exact

same. In fact, I hazard to guess if Bill 15 had been brought forward by the B.C. Conservatives,

and Bill 14 and Bill 7…. I find it highly unlikely that the NDP members would be voting

in favour of it.

I’d be very curious what those members, those Indigenous members within the NDP caucus,

would say about the UBCIC comments if those were related to a B.C. Conservative Bill

[3:20 p.m.]

I think they’d be in lockstep with those comments.

We get mocked by the NDP sometimes because we have open votes on this side of the

House. I do wonder how much pressure internally is being put on three members to not

listen and support Indigenous leadership from outside of this chamber. I feel bad

for that.

Motions were brought into this place in good faith to be discussed and debated. A

standing vote was had, and everyone voted unanimously in favour. Then a week or two

later, Bill 15 drops a complete and utter 180 degrees to the premise of that motion.

But I’m going to love to hear how the NDP tells me: “But don’t worry just because

the Premier is flexing on this and demanding everyone toe the line and vote.” They’ll

be more judicious as they pick losers and winners of projects, moving forward. That

it won’t matter what government relations firm you hire to help you navigate whether

you’re deemed to be a provincial project of interest or not. That it won’t matter

the Premier’s personal opinion on a project or a government relations firm. Somehow

we’re supposed to actually believe that. Based on the track record, I’d say that’s

a pretty far stretch.

Bill 15 enables the government to acquire and gift government land to private proponents.

It’s incredible to me when you read through. You know the minister will take issue

with how we’re characterizing some of these clauses. That’s what committee stage is

for; she can try to correct us if we’re wrong. The interesting thing at committee

stage is what tends to come out.

First off, we’re going to be jammed for time. Closure has already been invoked. It’s

eight o’clock next Wednesday, the vote.

Secondly, it’s interesting when we interpret how the clauses are written, the minister

will always — and not just this minister, all government ministers — jump to: “That’s

not accurate. That’s not right. That’s not….”

Well, welcome to what happens to the private sector when they’re reading a piece of

legislation and trying to interpret it. That’s why committee stage of any bill is

so critically important. Because when the inevitable lawsuits get engaged — that the

government has already been warned about — courts will actually look at the government’s

intention based on the minister’s answers clause by clause. That’s what they do.

Unfortunately, this government did their usual trick of bringing legislation of consequence

in at the very end. I mean, you think of the first few pieces of legislation we had.

We had the hard-hitting “How to appoint a Conflict of Interest Commissioner and extend

that process” piece of legislation.

We had another two- or three-clause piece of legislation. It was so consequential

I can’t even remember what the issue was.

We had the ever-present, every-single-year parks GIS mapping update, where they take

five or six parks in the province and they update based on new, current and better

mapping.

That’s what this chamber spent the first month, month and a half of a three-month

session dealing with. Not Bill 15. Not Bill 14. Not Bill 7. The government couldn’t

even have the decency to present Bills 14 and 15, at least, on March 13, when they

brought in Bill 7. At least we would’ve seen the full package of the power grab that

was happening with this government.

[3:25 p.m.]

This is why we firmly believe the only reason they need Bill 15 is because

part 4

of Bill 7 got withdrawn by the government, because the same groups raised the same

concerns about that. So the government blinked on it, and now the Premier is doubling

down. There will be no amendments. There will be no changes. There will not be pushing

of Bill 15 into the fall sitting so it could be properly understood, properly vetted,

properly looked at by the legal community.

I mean, in 2018, the committee met 75 hours to produce a report recommending changes

in the Environmental Assessment Act. They engaged with a variety of key stakeholders,

including industry, business associations, environmental organizations and local governments.

Extensive engagement with First Nations communities. Public comment period. Over 2,500

public comments and 60 formal submissions. Those same groups actually supported those

EA changes.

So when the government says that if you’re opposed to Bill 15, you must be opposed

to moving things forward quickly or getting things done in the province…. No. No,

we’re not. The Indigenous groups aren’t. UBCM isn’t. The environmental groups aren’t.

What we’re saying is that it needs to be a proper process. What it needs is the government,

instead of spending the last six or seven months since the election trying to pretend

they’ve made these great changes to the environmental system and permitting process

and everything’s been accelerated….

The minister just tweeted out a list of accomplishments, of permits and timelines,

last week. If that’s accurate, why do we need Bill 15? If things are actually moving,

finally, if things are actually moving forward, why do we need Bill 15? To build schools

quickly? Are you kidding me? You need all-powerful control and overrides at the cabinet

level, at the Premier’s office level — let’s call it for what it is — to build schools

quickly, to build a hospital quickly? Yes, because municipalities are famous for holding

up hospital projects. That’s a surefire way to get yourself re-elected in a municipal

election.

The delays in Kamloops on the cancer centre certainly haven’t been municipal. They’ve

been provincial. Now we’re going to get an improperly rammed-through cancer centre

on our hands because the government refuses to listen. But somehow that’s the municipal

fault.

Oh, that’s right. The government said: “Oh, but if we built it properly, we would

need a height variance, a three-foot height variance.” Yes, because we all know municipalities

are going to say no to a three-foot height variance, in a city that doesn’t protect

view lines, to build a proper cancer centre. Yeah, I’m sure that’s what’s going to

happen. So let’s just build it improperly and have an improperly functioning cancer

centre for 50 years.

This is the government that wants the power to just build and move forward a project

that they deem to be okay when, even though current ones they have…. When they’ve

pointed out their flaws, their design flaws, the government refuses to build it properly.

The response we get back from them, in, say, the cancer centre in Kamloops’s case

is: “If you delay any further, it will just be cancelled.”

Well, the interesting thing is that those delays have been the government’s delays.

It was Premier Horgan in October of 2020 that promised the doors would be open in

October of 2024. Architectural drawings still aren’t finished yet, but somehow it’s

local leadership, if they raise concerns, that are now delaying this project or the

local MLAs that are being obstructionists and delaying the project, as if we’re the

ones sitting in the architectural offices drawing up the blueprints.

They haven’t even broken ground. It was promised by this government. Cancer care was

promised to be open in October of 2024, and they haven’t even broken ground. This

government is trying to blame local governance and height variances, potential height

variances, as the issue.

[Mable Elmore in the chair.]

I should explain to the public that the back side of this property is a hillside that

goes up and up and up before you get to the first house. That’s what they’re worried

about getting a height variance for, of three feet, to build it properly.

[3:30 p.m.]

But Bill 15 is necessary or this government won’t be able to build things quickly.

Not one delay has been this government’s fault. The Pattullo Bridge, two years behind

schedule — not their fault. In fact, when they first finally announced and admitted

it was behind schedule, they tried clinging to that it wasn’t over budget.

Apparently, it was the only magical construction site in B.C. that had full construction

and is two years behind

schedule with people fully employed at it, and somehow not

one extra dollar of what was budgeted was being expended. A couple months later they

finally came clean and said: “Oh yeah, it’s a few hundred million over budget.”

Hospitals on the Island — over $1 billion over budget, double the cost of what they

first said it was going to be. Hospital in Surrey — way over budget. SkyTrain in Surrey

— way over budget, by billions of dollars. When they get asked about this, they say

they need Bill 15 to somehow do other projects quicker and more efficiently, with

better value. They can’t manage the ones they’ve got.

The Transportation Minister goes on about $15 billion of infrastructure in this budget.

Their current projects are $15 billion over budget. And $15 billion — what would that

do for schools, if they’d just managed all those other projects properly? We’re supposed

to believe that Bill 15 is the linchpin, that this has been the missing piece all

along. For eight years, they’ve sat idly by and defended project after project being

delayed and over budget, and the missing piece, the secret to it all was Bill 15.

With Bill 15, they can wave a wand, and everything will just work fast.

No consultation. “We’ll consult after the fact.” How many times have we heard the

government say that about legislation in here? Just about every time. “We’ll consult

afterwards. We’ll talk to UBCM afterwards. It’ll be fine.”

Well, what’s the point? Bill 15 would enable this government to have so much power

over municipalities that, once it’s law, it doesn’t matter what the municipalities

think about it. The whole reason you consult with municipalities is beforehand…. If

it was really that good and benign of legislation to these groups…. They’re all pretty

smart people.

Is the minister honestly trying to say that it’s fine? They want to say that we’re

over-politicizing as an opposition or that we’re being creative with our

interpretation

of clauses or whatever word you want to use. I get it. That’s politics. That’s this

chamber. It’s easy to dismiss us.

Are they saying that all the smart people at UBCM are completely wrong? UBCM typically

does not push back very hard against government, not this publicly. They might do

it in private boardrooms and private conversations. They certainly don’t do it on

a piece of legislation like this.

Is the UBCIC totally misinterpreting? Is Jody Wilson-Raybould completely misinterpreting,

how to read a provincial bill properly and interpret its consequences?

Well, according to this government, that’s just all overblown, and that’s a problem.

That’s a problem when there’s a repeated ask to just trust, but then the trust keeps

getting broken, and rules keep getting changed, and there’s an ever-shifting sense

of how things will play out.

Madam Chair, you were here when I was talking on Bill 14 about how these are interrelated.

They are interrelated.

[3:35 p.m.]

You have Bill 15, where the government can start unilaterally picking and choosing

which projects get accelerated. The government will try to say, “Well, it doesn’t

guarantee they move forward,” as if there are not investment decisions and cost pressures

and a significant cost for every month, every year that a project languishes in a

holding pattern with this government. They seem to not want to either acknowledge

that…. The scary

part is that they don’t understand that. I’ll give them the benefit

of the doubt that they just don’t want to acknowledge it.

There’s a very real cost to someone else not being on the fast track for almost what

appears to be the identical project except for what government relations firm they’re

using or which riding they may be in. That does not inspire investment confidence

in British Columbia. It creates investment chaos in British Columbia.

Banana republics have more defined processes. It’s not legal, especially in the Canadian

context. It doesn’t make it right, but you tend to know how big of a briefcase of

money you need to get your permit moving. You don’t need shifting legislative sands

with two or three competing pieces of legislation that create a whole other patchwork

of regulation and potential cabinet overrides or not. They just need to know what

the rules are.

I used to say this when I had a hotel and a pub. I could literally do that anywhere

in the world. There are hotels and bars everywhere in the world. You just need to

go there and know what the rules are to operate in. Then you can figure out if there’s

a business case for your business. I chose to stay in Kamloops, where I grew up. I

chose to raise my family there, and I chose to keep operating the business there because

I reasonably knew what the rules of the game were and I reasonably felt I could provide

for my family.

Mining, forestry, any type of industry is the same. They operate around the world.

What they need to know is what the rules of the game in that jurisdiction are and

that there’s some certainty around the rules. Then they can make the decision if they’re

willing and able to afford to operate in that regulatory regime that is there.

This doesn’t mean our regulatory regime has to be lockstep with everyone else. It

just means it has to be consistent. Our tax structure has to be competitive. Our overall

business climate has to be competitive with those other jurisdictions. The regulatory

regime just needs to be consistent to understand what that pathway is and what the

actual timeline is.

The government’s response to failing to properly implement or deliver what they promised

from 2018 till today, with all of their reforms on the environmental act, with their

reforms to the professional reliance act, with the Premier acknowledging in 2023 that

they still had work to do…. Fine, that was a different regime. He was merely the Housing

Minister and the Attorney General. We’ll give him a pass.

I mean, he tries to take runs at our leader for being at the cabinet table for decisions

made on things that were nowhere near our leader’s former portfolio. The best one

is when they say he was a former Forest Minister. Yeah, for those same 18 days that

I was in government. Apparently, he should have solved forestry in those 18 days.

He should have solved softwood lumber in those 18 days back in 2017.

That’s what this government likes to do. Yet the Premier — who was the Attorney General

from 2017 till 2022, was it? — had no sway, no voice at the cabinet table. Who knew

that the Attorney General had so little power of influence at a cabinet meeting. Apparently,

the gentleman who became Premier, who had enough political heft to strong-arm his

way through a leadership race, didn’t have that same type of sway in the cabinet room

— only in a leadership race. That’s what we’re trying to be led to believe by this

government and this Premier.

[3:40 p.m.]

That’s the problem here. They have failed miserably to advance things in a way that

all those groups that signed on and validated thought was going to happen.

Now they wonder why those same groups are saying, “You know, we’ve been down this

road before. We don’t believe it’s actually going to happen. You told us you had the

answers and you were going to expedite based on our concerns and our input back in

2018. That hasn’t happened. The Premier said he was going to address it, yet again,

in 2023. That hasn’t happened. And so, yeah, we’re a little concerned that your final

solution is to keep making an end run on absolute power in the Premier’s office.”

Part 4 of Bill 7 would have provided absolute power in the Premier’s office. That

got withdrawn; Bill 15 got introduced. Bill 15 does the exact same thing, just in

a more defined area of oversight. But make no mistake about it. This is a bill about

the Premier getting to pick winners and losers when it comes to resources. And the

message keeps changing, which is how you know the Premier got it wrong.

Now the Premier has alluded to how only Indigenous-owned projects, or that have equity

stake, will be the ones fast-tracked. But we’re not really sure, because he flings

this stuff out at press conferences. The minister didn’t touch on that in her opening

comments. Normally, the opening comments by a minister would provide a lot more detail

into things like that, if that’s actually what was going to happen.

Apparently, there’s already a disconnect between the Premier and how he’s going to

interpret Bill 15 and the minister and how she’s presenting Bill 15. If that doesn’t

give you cause for concern as well, I don’t know what does. The Premier’s vague statements

also create a whole lot of other questions, even within Indigenous communities.

Does that mean a proponent, an Indigenous nation in and around a mine who perhaps

doesn’t have the wherewithal to raise the equity to be an equity partner or doesn’t

want to assume the risk of being an equity partner would just prefer to get a royalty

payment off of the mine?

Does that mine no longer qualify because of the ownership structure? We’re now tying

the winner and loser of a project not to the project, not to whether the project should

advance because we need that critical mineral. It’s going to be at the Premier’s discretion

as to who the ownership group is. But ownership groups come and go. So is this just

a new, fancy way to make sure we have an ownership group in place to get you expedited

through the permitting, and then the sale happens to the next ownership group?

These projects aren’t owned in perpetuity by one company. Shareholders come and go.

Majority shareholders come and go.

Sorry, does the minister need to…?

Deputy Speaker : Recognizing the Minister of Education and Child Care.

Hon. Lisa Beare : Thank you very much, Speaker. I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Hon. Lisa Beare : Joining us in the gallery today we have Lord Byng Secondary School and their teacher

Scott McKeen.

On behalf of the Premier and all of us here in the House right now, we welcome you.

Thank you for joining us.

Debate Continued

Peter Milobar : I was talking about how a project…. Especially in the mining world, companies come

and go. Companies come in. Junior companies start getting the process moving. They

feel they’ve created enough value in the project that a bigger company comes in. Permits

start to get issued. The cost of construction and to get access to the higher-quality

ore body start to change that profile, and they need to go out, and they need to find

other investors. That’s just standard business.

[3:45 p.m.]

There’s nothing shady about it. It’s not nefarious. It’s literally how you take a

mine from somebody claiming an area to getting it all the way to a full-production

mine. How does that have any certainty in this process? How does it have any certainty

at all in this process?

These processes are supposed to be independent of the Premier’s office, not at the

whim of the Premier’s office. What happens if a municipality or a First Nation is

at odds with the Premier’s office on a different topic completely? Will this be used

as leverage to make sure that there’s grudging adherence, glowing press releases about

a government project or program that’s completely unrelated to the project they want

to get fast-tracked?

It sounds ridiculous, I know, but the legislation actually enables those scenarios

to start to happen. That is the problem of the eroding of the process.

So when ICBA chimes in…. They say: “The irony is impossible to ignore. The NDP has

had to create an entire new ministry and pass legislation just to cut the red tape

they created in the first place. Yes, permitting delays and red tape are slowing down

schools and hospitals, but they’re also slowing down homes, roads, energy, bridges

and every other type of construction. This should have been an across-the-board fix,

not a narrowly focused government workaround.” That’s from Chris Gardner, the ICBA

president.

He also said: “Simpler is better. The answer is to eliminate unnecessary delays for

all projects, not just the ones favoured by government. Government procurement is

broken. Every major project in B.C. is behind schedule, often by years, and over budget,

often by hundreds of millions of dollars. We need real, across-the-government reform

that empowers B.C.’s builders, gets more projects to yes faster and restores investor

confidence in this province.”

You only get that if you have a clear set of rules and guidelines for these applicants

to follow, and it can’t have them circuiting through the Premier’s office. It’s the

equivalent of when we raise issues in this House about health care or people not having

a doctor, and the minister will stand up and…. Ironically enough, it’s the current

Energy Minister, who’s dealing with Bill 14, that would say this repeatedly in this

House: “Well, you should just bring that concern to me. We’ll talk after the House

rises.” He was good; he would follow up with you. I give him that.

Our health care system has really gotten to the point that it requires somebody needing

a doctor to phone their local MLA to stand up in the chamber at the Legislature, to

talk to the Minister of Health directly in person, to have him then finally follow

up to try to find that one person when we have almost a million people without a family

doctor. That’s the government view of efficiency with the NDP. All MLAs are more than

happy to try to help people find that family doctor, but I don’t think that sounds

like a reasonable way, one case by one case by one case, to deal with the bigger,

broader issue.

Instead of dealing with that bigger, broader issue, we just have to keep stan