Second Session, 42nd Parliament

(2021) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Wednesday, October 27, 2021

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 117

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 27 — Election Amendment Act, 2021

Hon. D. Eby

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Housing projects in Maple Ridge–Mission

B. D’Eith

Indigenous redesign of UNBC athletic jersey by Trevor

Angus

S. Bond

COVID-19 impact on children and National UNICEF

Day

R. Singh

Orange Shirt Day and Phyllis Webstad

L. Doerkson

West End drag community and Dogwood Monarchist

Society

S. Chandra Herbert

Eugene Casavant

G. Kyllo

Oral Questions

Access to information on COVID-19 in schools

S. Bond

Hon. J. Whiteside

COVID-19 vaccine policies and safety measures in

post-secondary institutions

S. Cadieux

Hon. A. Kang

Funding for Tsow-Tun Le Lum addiction recovery

facility

S. Furstenau

Hon. S. Malcolmson

Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act

Review Committee activities

P. Milobar

R. Glumac

M. de Jong

Protection of Fraser River steelhead

J. Sturdy

Hon. K. Conroy

J. Tegart

Hon. G. Heyman

Veterinarian supply and funding of training

spaces

I. Paton

Hon. A. Kang

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 25 — Education Statutes Amendment Act, 2021

(continued)

H. Yao

J. Rice

B. Anderson

Hon. J. Whiteside

Bill 24 — Environmental Management Amendment Act,

Hon. G. Heyman

P. Milobar

S. Furstenau

S. Cadieux

B. Anderson

R. Russell

Hon. N. Cullen

B. Bailey

Hon. G. Heyman

Bill 26 — Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act

(No. 2), 2021

Hon. J. Osborne

D. Ashton

Hon. N. Cullen

A. Olsen

B. Stewart

R. Russell

Hon. S. Malcolmson

R. Leonard

M. Starchuk

Hon. D. Eby

Hon. N. Simons

Hon. J. Osborne

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 22 — Freedom of Information and Protection of

Privacy Amendment Act, 2021

Hon. L. Beare

B. Banman

A. Olsen

S. Furstenau

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2021

The House met at 1:33 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: M. Starchuk.

Introductions by Members

Hon. S. Robinson: I have two friends who are joining me here in the gallery today, Barry Burko and Karen McKibbin. My parents are friends with Barry’s parents, and as a result, we were thrown together for family holidays. A Passover Seder or two were shared between our families.

Barry and Karen are outdoor enthusiasts. Barry has experience as a whitewater guide and a

ski patrol. He and Karen together ran a property management company in Whistler.

Then they decided to semi-retire, I think the word is, and they bought a

campground in Vernon. They winter here in Victoria. So they’ve just arrived here

to Victoria.

I want to point out that I have great admiration for Karen, partly because she puts up

with Barry but also because she has some things in common with two of my

colleagues: the member from Pitt Meadows, the Minister of Citizens’ Services, and

the member from False Creek. Karen is a pilot as well.

I’d like the House to join me in welcoming my two friends to the chamber today.

[1:35 p.m.]

G. Kyllo: I am very proud to stand today and to welcome my lovely wife, Georgina. Last Friday was actually our 33rd wedding anniversary. I’m also joined today by my lovely daughter, our youngest daughter, Samantha Hansma, and a rambunctious 2½-year-old, little Harvey Hansma, whom many of you might have heard just a few short minutes ago.

Anyhow, I think we’re all reminded of why we come to this place. It’s largely for our

families, our kids and our grandkids. I think that we, obviously, have a very

important role that we serve in this Legislature.

Would the members please give a warm welcome to my lovely wife, Georgina, my daughter Samantha and my grandson Harvey Hansma.

J. Sims: It’s my pleasure today to do three introductions.

The Democracy and Me creative contest was open to K-to-12 students across British Columbia

from 2020 to January 2021. Over 200 young artists shared their views through

creative visual posters. Today we are fortunate enough to meet these thoughtful,

creative and passionate future voters in person.

The contest invited young British Columbians to reflect on the importance

of community, civic engagement and the rights and responsibility of citizenship

and democracy. Contest entries were divided into three age categories, each with a

different question to answer.

William Wen, from Coquitlam, was in grade 4 when he answered the question: how can I help

my community? Along with his poster depicting a clean, happy world, he describes

democracy as a way to serve people kindly and equally: “All people have equal

rights to accept education, clean air and water and medical health, to work safely

and to live peacefully.”

Priya Bhatia, from the riding I represent, Surrey-Panorama, was in grade 8 when she answered the question: what role can I play in our democracy? Her poster aptly reflects caring for our environment and what citizens can do to make a difference.

Priya says: “What democracy means to me is having a choice to express what you believe in.

If you are passionate about something, then get people to agree with what you

believe, and make real change. I believe a huge part of democracy should be in the

hands of youth. We are the future, and it’s our lives that are being affected. It

also means to not silence and marginalize groups who have been fighting for

decades.” Those are Priya’s words.

Teagan Chow, who also happens to be from Surrey-Panorama, was in grade 9 when she answered the question: what can I do to strengthen our democracy? Her poster was titled “Democracy with Diversity” and features a lovely drawing of our parliament, some dogwood flowers and a group of diverse citizens. Teagan says that, to her, “democracy means that everyone is given a chance to make a difference in our community, no matter their age, race, gender or ability, and that who we are as a society is reflected in our government.”

I think we can all agree that our future is in good hands with these artists. It is my

honour today to introduce these winners in the House. Joining us is William

Wen, with his mom, Lisa Jing, and his dad, Jack Wen. Priya is joined by her

dad, Sanjeev Bhatia; Amarjit Bhatia; and Harsh Bhatia, her brother. Teagan

is joined by her dad, Dan Chow.

Please join me in congratulating them and giving them a warm welcome to the people’s House.

L. Doerkson: My guest visits the House for the first time today. She makes the best apple crumble you will ever taste in your life. With respect to living with me, she has been regarded as the most patient woman in the Cariboo. She is the love of my life. I welcome Shelley to the chamber. Would everybody please welcome Shelley Wiese, my wife.

[1:40 p.m.]

Hon. M. Mark: I’m very proud to be Nisga’a. I’m very proud to be the MLA for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant.

I want to stand in these chambers and acknowledge Angela White, the executive director who provided all members of this precinct with masks. I know we’re not allowed to use props, but we did just have the first National Truth and Reconciliation Day, and Eddy Charlie was down in the Hall of Honour today as a residential school survivor.

As a granddaughter of residential school survivors, I’m happy to stand in these chambers

with my colleagues.

Thank you, all, for paddling together, for standing in

solidarity.

I think the call to action from survivors has been to make it more than

Orange Shirt Day, make it more than National Truth and Reconciliation Day and make

our commitment to move forward on the importance of reconciliation

together.

T’ooyaḵsiy̓ n̓iin to Angela White and everyone

out there supporting residential school survivors at this time.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 27 — ELECTION AMENDMENT ACT, 2021

Hon. D. Eby presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Election Amendment Act, 2021.

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

I’m pleased to introduce the Election Amendment Act. This bill implements the recommendations of the report of the Special Committee to Review Provisions of the Election Act on annual allowances paid to political parties.

The bill makes annual allowances paid to political parties permanent and sets out how the amounts will be calculated from 2022 onwards. This builds on the amendments introduced to the act in 2017, when government banned corporate and union donations and reduced individual contribution limits.

Motion approved.

Bill 27, Election Amendment Act, 2021, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

HOUSING PROJECTS IN

MAPLE RIDGE–MISSION

B. D’Eith: The universal declaration on human rights proclaimed by the United

Nations in 1948 declared housing as a human right.

We all know we are struggling with a housing crisis in British Columbia.

I hear from my constituents in Maple Ridge and Mission about the challenges

people are facing on the broad spectrum of housing, from affordable

single-family homes to rental housing for low-income seniors and youth as well

as supportive and transitional homes for those in need.

While we have a lot of work to do, I wanted to talk today about the

successes and the partnerships that are forming in my riding. One of them is

Cornerstone in Maple Ridge. It’s a partnership with the province, the

contributions from the city. This project will deliver 74 units of rental

housing for low- and middle-income families and seniors. Recently they pivoted

20 units for youth, who are between 18 and 25, experiencing or at risk of

homelessness.

We also need to ensure that there is housing available for moderate

incomes. In Maple Ridge, B.C. Housing is currently taking applications for

Turnock Manor, which is a 64-unit rental building offering apartments at rates

below market rates. In the other side of my riding, in Mission, the Mission

Association for Seniors Housing and the city of Mission and the province worked

together to create 74 units of seniors housing earlier this year.

Also, the Lookout Society partnered with the province through HousingHub

to open seven units of affordable housing in my riding, and other partners,

like Habitat for Humanity, are also working with the HousingHub and others in

our community. Also, Mission is partnering with B.C. Housing and Mission

Community Services Society to start construction on 50 new supportive housing

units in our community.

I want to say thank you so much to the advocates and organizations who

joined with our government to address the issues of housing affordability and

ensure that we deliver on this key human right of housing.

INDIGENOUS REDESIGN OF UNBC

ATHLETIC JERSEY BY TREVOR

ANGUS

S. Bond: Earlier this month and for the third time in seven years, the University of Northern British Columbia was named the top university in its category in Canada, certainly something we are very proud of. But there is another accomplishment that I want to celebrate today.

[1:45 p.m.]

Just days ago UNBC became the first college or university athletic program in Canada to unveil a uniform logo…. [Applause.]

I knew the minister would like this.

Sorry, take that off my clock, please.

Just days ago UNBC became the first college or university athletic program in Canada to unveil a uniform logo and jersey designed completely by an Indigenous artist. That artist was Trevor Angus, a Gitxsan alumnus of UNBC who spent some of his time on campus back in the early 2000s imagining a redesign while following our Timberwolves basketball team.

Trevor took the inspiration and his deep connection to both UNBC and the Gitxsan people to

redesign and reinterpret the gold and green Timberwolves logo. Across the

shoulders of each jersey, written in the Dakelh language, is the UNBC motto:

“Respecting all forms of life.” The jersey was unveiled at Masich Place Stadium

in a special ceremony, and both the UNBC soccer and basketball teams will

proudly be wearing the new alternate jersey.

The project involved collaboration with the Lheidli T’enneh, the UNBC First Nations Centre and the UNBC office of Indigenous initiatives. I want to thank artist Trevor Angus and everyone involved for leading the way in this inspiring initiative. Not only is the jersey beautiful, but in the words of the artist, the uniform redesign shows respect for the territory the university sits on.

UNBC director of athletics Loralyn Murdoch said: “The uniforms are absolutely gorgeous. The attention to detail and the meaning behind the detail is a story to be heard. I hope it’s a story our athletes, our university and our community cannot wait to tell.”

I would encourage every member in this House to help tell this very special UNBC story.

COVID-19 IMPACT ON CHILDREN

AND NATIONAL UNICEF DAY

R. Singh: Over the last year and a half, we have heard and read about people around the world who have been affected by the pandemic. However, during these conversations about the economy and economics, children are a group that often gets overlooked, whose lives COVID-19 has disrupted beyond measure, the true impacts of which might never be known.

Children across the world have experienced interruption in their education and their social learning. They have faced increased vulnerability because of economic and health impacts borne by their parents and guardians. Last but not least, they have been exposed to the trauma of unhealthy and toxic situations at home.

UNICEF has been working tirelessly during the pandemic to raise awareness and channel resources towards children all over. Of many of its campaigns that run across Canada, National UNICEF Day is one of the highlights. Canadians have raised over $100 million for, mainly, children’s education through this campaign. Celebrated in Canada on October 31, it offers a chance for us to learn more about the challenges that children face globally and about the resources and how resources can be directed to help mitigate some of these obstacles.

Many schools have participated in this campaign, imparting not only a lesson in philanthropy to children but also educating them about their peers and their lives across the world. I have learned that lessons in kindness go a long way, and we can all do with a little more of that.

Today I rise among you to invite you all to join me in appreciating the volunteers, the teachers and, most of all, the young children who participate in the National UNICEF Day, spreading kindness and scattering hope among young hearts, both at home and abroad.

ORANGE SHIRT DAY

AND PHYLLIS WEBSTAD

L. Doerkson: This morning many of us in this House attended a ceremony to commemorate the installation of a framed orange children’s shirt here in the Legislature. This shirt will serve as a permanent reminder of the significance of Orange Shirt Day and provide a new opportunity for reflection within the walls of this building, a place to honour and remember those impacted by residential schools and families.

It was a moving and meaningful ceremony and one that caused me to reflect on the symbol that the orange shirts have become. Who would have thought that a T-shirt could unite a country, that it could serve as a symbol in a nationwide movement for advancing reconciliation?

[1:50 p.m.]

Many of us know the origins of Orange Shirt Day. Members of this House even reflected on the history a few weeks ago. In 1973, when Phyllis Webstad was six years old, she lived with her grandmother at the Dog Creek reserve, south of Williams Lake. Her grandmother saved enough money to take Phyllis to Robinson’s store, where she picked out a bright, shiny orange shirt for her first day of school at the mission. Excited to attend school, she was shocked to be stripped of her clothes and her belongings the first day, including the orange shirt that she was so proud to wear.

From then on, the colour of orange reminded her of that moment and the legacy of

residential schools. The courage that Phyllis has shown in generously sharing

her story and creating space for others to tell theirs is one of the most

unselfish acts I’ve ever witnessed. I’m proud to know her and, along with the

residents of Cariboo-Chilcotin — and, indeed, the members of the B.C.

Legislative Assembly — am extremely grateful and thankful for her commitment to

advancing reconciliation.

Phyllis, you are a true leader. We are so thankful for your contributions.

WEST END DRAG COMMUNITY

AND DOGWOOD MONARCHIST SOCIETY

S. Chandra Herbert: One night only. One night only. Step on up. Step on up for the big race. We gather on Davie Street or in our apartments, in the clubs, in the pubs. It’s almost time.

Racers, start your engines. May the best drag queen win.

That’s right. Drag race. Not the noisy cars and trucks that my constituents could do

without but the art of drag.

The West End has long been the capital of drag in B.C. — sorry, Victoria — and in this

season of Canada’s Drag Race , we’re making a pitch to be the capital

of Canada for drag. Four of our top queens are in the race: Kendall Gender, Gia

Metric, Synthia Kiss and Beth. They are working it and doing the West End

proud. It takes a certain amount of charisma, uniqueness, nerve and talent to

do what they do, and they are slaying it.

Drag sends a message of love and acceptance. As RuPaul says: “Drag is there to remind culture not to take itself too seriously. All of this is illusion. If you can’t love yourself, how the heck are you going to love anybody else? Can I get an amen?” We are all born naked, and the rest is drag. Don’t I know it.

Our international court in Vancouver is the DMS, the Dogwood Monarchist Society, and those

are the courts which led to the creation of shows like Drag Race . The

DMS is celebrating its 50th year, and in each one of those 50 years, they’ve

raised money. They’ve stood up for human rights. They’ve helped people be all

they can be. I’m honoured to count them as friends and as, well, incredible

heroes in our community.

It’s been tough these last two years for drag in our community and for everybody who

serves the drag community — the servers, the bars, the squirrel friends, the

lovers, the not-so-lovers…. You get the picture. They’ve been creative. They’ve

gone online.

I want to congratulate empress Kendall Gender and Emperor Sean for

raising over $25,000 this last year for charity, only online.

Congratulations to everyone who makes drag possible. As RuPaul says: “Good luck and don’t bleep it up.”

EUGENE CASAVANT

G. Kyllo: I rise today to honour and recognize a great man in our community of Shuswap, Eugene Casavant.

Like most of my fellow residents of the region, we’ve been able to rely on the incredible services, staff and facilities of Shuswap Lake General Hospital, thanks in no small part to the tireless work and advocacy Eugene undertook as administrator and CEO. Eugene also served as managing director for the hospital foundation for 15 years while sitting on the foundation board since its inception back in 1986.

A fixture of the facility for more than 30 years, Eugene oversaw the quiet community

hospital as it transformed into a major health care hub for the region,

supporting tens of thousands of patients throughout the Interior and raising

millions of dollars for major upgrades in equipment that helped to provide more

people with the health care they needed right in their own

community.

Despite his unrelenting advocacy and hard-working spirit, Eugene humbly credits the incredible team he’s surrounded himself with for the many successes that Shuswap Lake General experienced over the years.

[1:55 p.m.]

He announced his retirement back in 2013, but as you can imagine, someone like Eugene can’t sit still for very long. Over the years, he has served on many local and provincial committees and associations, including stints as the president of the provincial hospital administrators association in two provinces.

Eugene has also remained involved in the hospital foundation in a more tertiary role, while remaining an active member in the local Rotary club, as well as the Knights of Columbus, which he served as a member for more than 50 years.

Even in retirement, Eugene, with the love and support of his beautiful wife, Lorette, continues to make an invaluable impact on our community and the many people who have enjoyed better health care and lived healthier lives, thanks in no small part to his tireless work. It’s truly an honour to have Eugene as a valuable member of our community.

Would the House join me in congratulating my dear friend Eugene Casavant for an incredible career and a legacy truly worthy of recognition.

Oral Questions

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

ON COVID-19 IN SCHOOLS

S. Bond: Well, we know the Premier likes to hide from making tough decisions, which is why there is a 17-step process for 61 school boards that will end with a patchwork of vaccination policies across the province.

The government’s habit of hiding information has meant that parents, staff and teachers

have been kept in the dark when it comes to knowing the health risks in our

schools. This quote from the president of the BCTF: “It’s unacceptable that

over a year and a half into this pandemic, there is still no provincewide

consistency in how exposures and clusters in schools are defined and

reported.”

Will the Premier finally step up and provide the up-to-date notifications in schools that parents and teachers deserve and have been calling for?

Hon. J. Whiteside: Thank you to the member for the question.

I think, as we all understand and agree, the health and safety of everyone in our school system is of primary importance during this third school year where we are dealing with COVID in our schools.

I want to assure parents that, as has been the case throughout the pandemic, should their child be at risk of an exposure to COVID in schools, they will be notified by public health. Parents have to understand that. That is what is happening today. It’s what’s been happening last month. It’s what happened all last year in our school system.

Exposures are defined by the CDC as a situation when a person with COVID-19 has had close contact with others during their infectious period. An exposure, importantly, does not mean you are infected with COVID. A cluster is when public health determines there is a link between two or more individuals with COVID in schools.

Those incidents, those potential exposure events, are recorded by public health. They are recorded, in fact, on the health authority websites. They are accessible. Students or staff who have been at risk of an exposure are directly contacted by public health. That is what’s happening today across our school system.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition, supplemental.

S. Bond: Thank you very much to the minister.

Let’s be clear. We continue to hear, from across British Columbia, that

parents don’t feel that sense of assurance that the minister keeps talking

about. And it’s not just parents. It is staff. It is teachers.

In fact, let’s look at some statistics — not mine but the B.C. Teachers

Federation. Here’s what they report. Seventy-one percent feel that they have

not received enough information regarding COVID-19 exposures and the cases in

schools and districts. That doesn’t sound like the answer the minister gave.

Sixty-two percent feel they haven’t received enough information about the

quality of ventilation in schools — something we’ve been asking about since

before school actually started — and 53 percent of teachers feel that the

cleaning and sanitation in schools is inadequate.

Those are statistics based on comments from teachers across British

Columbia. Hardly a sense of assurance.

Let’s listen to what Teri Mooring from the B.C. Teachers Federation

actually said: “It has become very clear that the information provided and the

communication to school communities is not painting an accurate picture. Trust

in the system has been broken.”

[2:00 p.m.]

Hardly any sense of assurance. There is concern. There is confusion.

There is a lack of consistency. Parents and teachers want and deserve

answers.

Will the Premier get up today and provide that desperately needed

assurance?

Hon. J. Whiteside: I thank the member for pointing to concerns raised by

teachers.

I have to say: it’s an interesting change in perspective on members of

the BCTF. I think it’s been quite some time since the members on the other side

of the House have actually stood up and advocated for something that BCTF has

actually said, I might just add, since losing a case in the Supreme Court in

what I think was the most remarkably quick verbal opinion issued by the

court.

At any rate, I understand…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Whiteside: …and have in fact very recently, in the past few days, met with members of the BCTF, heard their concerns that were illuminated in their survey.

I know that school boards, that district staff, that principals are working with their communities, are working with families, are working with their members, are working with their occupational health and safety committees in schools and school districts throughout the province to address the very issues that have been raised. We are going to continue to work in collaboration, at a provincial level and at a district level, as we work through this challenging time in the pandemic.

I thank the member for her concern.

COVID-19 VACCINE POLICIES AND

SAFETY MEASURES IN

POST-SECONDARY

INSTITUTIONS

S. Cadieux: On Monday, the Minister of Advanced Education’s excuse for not enforcing vaccine guidelines at universities was that professors are happy. That response got a failing grade.

Dr. Izabella Laba from UBC says: “I’m not excited…. I’m exhausted and burned out, thanks in part to you and your abdication of responsibility.”

UBC’s Alma Mater Society says the rollout that was promised for the start of the school

year has taken far too long.

Has the Premier been skipping class, or will he finally listen to concerned professors?

Hon. A. Kang: I know it has been a very difficult two years as we have pivoted very quickly, during COVID times, to virtual learning. It’s very understandable that some students, faculty and staff are still feeling very anxious. Feeling comfortable in returning to full on-campus learning is going to be a journey that everyone takes differently.

We do have some measures in place, and we follow the guidance of the PHO. We have masks in

classrooms and in public indoor spaces and proof of vaccination in student

housing and many parts of campus life, such as restaurants, pubs and ticketed

events. As well, we do have protocols to monitor and respond to

outbreaks.

As I have said before, there are mechanisms for post-secondary institutions or colleges and universities to be able to put in above-and-beyond guidelines of what the PHO would like. They are able to work with public health as well.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Surrey South on a supplemental.

S. Cadieux: Perhaps the minister hasn’t been to the campuses, but there’s no checking of vaccine passports. There’s no checking of any kind of safety at the universities.

Let’s do some math for the Minister of Advanced Education. Ten percent of a 300-person

in-person lecture hall is 30 unvaccinated students, all crammed into close

quarters for three hours.

People want to know what the rules are and that they’re being enforced. They are not. Derek Sahota with the SFU Teaching Support Staff Union says: “There’s no actual enforcement and no consequences.”

Why does the Premier think it’s fine to cram 30 unvaccinated students into a 300-person lecture hall with no precautions?

[2:05 p.m.]

Hon. A. Kang: I take my job very seriously, and I know that the presidents of our

colleges and universities take their jobs very seriously. The health and safety

of our students, our staff and faculty — everyone who is on our post-secondary

campuses — are very important, and we have mechanisms in place.

As I have previously said, post-secondary institutions, those that I

have been talking to, have reported that they have over 90 percent vaccination

on campus, and this is something that we should celebrate. As well, we know

that there is more work to do. We need to encourage people to get vaccinated,

and we have vaccine clinics on campus to enable staff and students who are not

vaccinated to get vaccinated.

We have a strong and thriving public post-secondary institution, and we

will continue to keep our students and staff and faculty safe.

FUNDING FOR TSOW-TUN LE LUM

ADDICTION RECOVERY

FACILITY

S. Furstenau: Tsow-Tun Le Lum means “helping house.” Tsow-Tun Le Lum is an addictions recovery centre for residential school survivors and their families currently based in Nanoose Bay. They offer a 40-day residential program grounded in culture and tradition for Indigenous participants who are in long-term recovery.

Tsow-Tun Le Lum, I’m excited, is in the process of building their new helping house in the Cowichan Valley. When I met with the executive director, Nola Jeffrey, this summer, we were surprised to learn from her that they are having to fundraise for their capital budget. The province was set to give $20 million towards restoring places of healing, with Tsow-Tun Le Lum earmarked for part of this money. But they haven’t seen any yet. Now the healing house is on the hook for a $5 million funding gap to build their new centre.

After a year of promising to expand treatment options, and in the midst of this devastating drug toxicity crisis, an Indigenous-run facility near Duncan is forced to find its own funding to offer a place to heal for survivors of residential schools.

My question is to the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. Why has this government not funded construction for an important place of healing?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: We are funding the Tsow-Tun Le Lum rebuild in Duncan. It’s one of the

many projects…. The province of British Columbia is very proud to be a partner

with the First Nations Health Authority.

The disproportionate impact of drug overdose and addiction on First

Nations people, on all Indigenous people, is front of mind for our government.

To that end, we’ve committed $20 million to the rebuild of First Nations

healing and treatment recovery centres that were initially built by the federal

government, which has neglected them.

I have been working, along with the Minister of Indigenous Relations and

Reconciliation, here in this chamber to encourage the federal government to

also partner, along with the province of British Columbia and First Nations

Health Authority, so that each of the three of us would all be committing $20

million.

Absolutely, money has been committed to the Tsow-Tun Le Lum rebuild. I

will undertake to let the member know the exact figure, but it’s certainly in

the several million dollars. It is the First Nations Health Authority — our

government’s commitment is to focus on Indigenous-led solutions — that actually

administers the funding.

Tsow-Tun Le Lum has absolutely been assured that the province and FNHA

are funding it to the order of many millions of dollars, and we are encouraging

our federal partners to do the same.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Third Party on a supplemental.

S. Furstenau: I’m delighted to hear this, and I’m sure that the executive director, Nola Jeffrey, will also be delighted to hear this.

I guess my follow-up question will be: can the minister commit in writing to Ms. Jeffrey what the exact funding from the province will be?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: I’ve met several times with Tsow-Tun Le Lum leads. I don’t think there’s

any question that their funding is assured, and I’ll certainly get back to the

member with the documentation of that. This is a commitment that was made by my

predecessor, Judy Darcy, the first Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. So

this is a commitment of some time standing.

While I have the opportunity, I’ll indicate also, in addition to the $20

million that our budget has committed to the rebuild of First Nations treatment

and recovery centres….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[2:10 p.m.]

Hon. S. Malcolmson: We’ve also put $20 million into Indigenous-led addiction recovery

services, $24 million over three years to support the First Nations Health

Authority response to the overdose crisis and $1.13 million to Métis Nation

B.C., also for overdose prevention.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND

PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT

REVIEW COMMITTEE

ACTIVITIES

P. Milobar: As a relatively new House Leader, still, in this place, I often find

myself looking through Hansard and trying to reflect on what previous

House Leaders did, either in opposition or in government. It was surprising to

me — and I was thankful to find — that on October 7, 2015, the now House Leader

for the government, who was the House Leader for the opposition at the time,

reaffirmed rules around question period for this House around how questions can

be asked.

I’ll quote very briefly: “I would draw your attention to the standing

orders, MacMinn’s fourth edition, 40(1)(a), page 141, Erskine May’s edition 23,

page 345, Beauchesne’s sixth edition, page 119, that deal with

questions to private members. The authority states that the only time you can

ask to a private member is a Chair of a committee.” In fact, that was upheld,

and questions were asked by the then House Leader to a Chair of the

committee.

On June 16, 2021, this assembly agreed that a statutory special

committee be appointed to review the Freedom of Information and Protection of

Privacy Act. My question is for the Chair of that committee.

On August 23, the Chair of that committee said at their meeting: “We

will reconvene at some point, likely in the fall….”

To the Chair of the committee, the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam, can

the Chair tell this House when the committee will meet next?

Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is in order, but the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam has no obligation to stand up and answer if he doesn’t want to.

If he feels comfortable, he can answer, or we can ask a minister.

R. Glumac: Well, thank you for the question. This is a bit of a surprise. I actually was….

Could you please clarify the question one more time before I answer? I want to make sure I answer correctly. When are we meeting next?

Mr. Speaker: Okay. Take your seat, Member.

Interjections.

R. Glumac: Yes. The committee will meet…. The current plan, as I understand it, is we will meet within the next few weeks. The committee is dedicated to reviewing the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act. We will look forward to doing that work.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader of the official opposition on a

supplemental.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

There’s always a first. The member tried his best, and he answered it.

Now next question, supplemental.

P. Milobar: It’s unfortunate the government finds this a laughing matter. It is a

very important statutory committee that the member chairs, doing very important

work — or trying to do very important work.

One would hope…. I mean, we saw the attempts of ministers to get the

member to not answer the question. One would hope they’re not trying to direct

a statutory committee’s work at the same time.

Interjections.

P. Milobar: Wow. Seems to have struck a nerve there. Too bad they didn’t have

this much to say when the bill was up for debate.

On October 20, B.C.’s Information and Privacy Commissioner,

Michael McEvoy, wrote a letter that raises serious concerns about his

ability to protect and advance the access to privacy rights of British

Columbia.

Again, my question to the committee Chair: when and will the

Information and Privacy Commissioner be called to appear before the

committee?

R. Glumac: I’ll take the question under advisement and get back to you.

[2:15 p.m.]

M. de Jong: My question is also for the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam, the Chair of the committee, and follows on the authority to pose questions about the agenda for that committee.

Can the Chair, the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam, indicate: has the special committee placed on its agenda consideration of whether or not the Premier’s office should be subject to FOI regulations?

R. Glumac: Thank you for the question.

We have only met one time. We will meet again as a committee to discuss our agenda, and we will, at that point, determine what our workplan will be.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Abbotsford West, supplemental.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. The member for Abbotsford West has the floor.

M. de Jong: Thank you, hon. Chair.

Can the Chair of the committee undertake to this House that the committee will be called to convene prior to the final votes on Bill 22?

R. Glumac: As I said earlier, we will be meeting in the next few weeks. I cannot give you an exact answer on the date we’re going to meet yet, but I will take your question under advisement.

PROTECTION OF

FRASER RIVER STEELHEAD

J. Sturdy: Steelhead are close to extinction in the interior of British Columbia. Only 58 fish are expected to spawn in the Thompson watershed and 27 fish in the Chilcotin. But there’s no provincial species-at-risk act, no federal SARA designation, and government — ironically enough — is still advertising steelhead fishing on the tourism website.

Question to the Premier. Does the Premier intend to take strong action on steelhead, or is he happy enough to let Fraser River steelhead go extinct?

Hon. K. Conroy: I really appreciate the question. Thank you very much.

Our province is committed to the goal of reversing the decline of the steelhead and

ensuring the recovery of the wild steelhead populations. The province has

increased coordination between the different ministries involved with the

fisheries and fish habitat and has also worked towards building relationships

with First Nations groups to work collaboratively on solutions for

steelhead.

Our province is invested in increased enforcement of steelhead regulation as well as

investing in habitat-related projects, such as removing blockages and improving

fish passage in steelhead watersheds. I know this is a significant interest to

many of the members in this House, and we are continuing to work on this

issue.

Mr. Speaker: The member for West Vancouver–Sea to Sky, supplemental.

J. Sturdy: It’s not just the opposition that is sounding the alarm. Just last month the Minister of State for Lands and Natural Resource Operations said that government was failing. On September 20, he said: “It’s in a crisis state, from my perspective, and we are not doing enough.”

The Interior steelhead action plan and activities report from August of this year describes the plan. Here’s the plan.

Priorities include updating strategic plans — so they’re going to update some plans;

policies for steelhead; continuing to monitor steelhead returns; continuing to

support the transformation of non-selective fisheries to selective — although

we don’t see a lot of that happening; assessing management interventions,

including fish culture; and improving transparency, communication and

information available regarding Interior Fraser steelhead, which is a bit

ironic given the freedom-of-information situation that we’re facing these

days.

I ask you, Mr. Speaker: does that sound like action? No, actually, I don’t believe it does. It sounds like waiting, watching and hoping.

To the Premier, when does the Premier intend to take real action to save this iconic B.C. fish?

Hon. K. Conroy: The province continues to explore the different options, such as hatcheries and other interventions, to determine when they are feasible…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, listen to the answer, please.

[2:20 p.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: …and when they are appropriate, and also having those really important discussions with First Nations who are also looking into these issues. In the longer term, we are working to increase these populations back to their previous run sizes, increasing their resiliency and ability to support fisheries, all with the goal of reversing the decline of the steelhead.

J. Tegart: The steelhead have almost disappeared, but the Premier’s promise of legislation to protect them has vanished entirely.

On November 21, 2019, the Minister of Environment stood in this House and said: “It is in

my mandate, and has been since day one, to develop B.C.’s species-at-risk

legislation.” I have here the minister’s current mandate letter. There is no

mention of legislation to protect steelhead. Zero. It’s gone

extinct.

To the Premier, why did he break his promise to protect an iconic species like steelhead?

Hon. G. Heyman: Thank you to the members for the question.

I know that the issue of steelhead and all endangered species is of

critical importance to British Columbians. We’re taking a number of measures in

this government to look at the variety of ways in which we can protect and

enhance biodiversity.

The member is correct that a specific reference to species-at-risk

legislation is no longer in my mandate letter, but what is in my mandate is to

work with other ministers to take action to protect biodiversity in

species.

We have been in a variety of meetings with the federal government. We’ve

established the Canada-B.C. nature agreement, and we are looking forward to

working on that with the new federal minister and completing that to put in

place a framework through which we can work with Indigenous people and all

British Columbians to put in place the measures that are required to protect

biodiversity in species at risk.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Fraser-Nicola on a supplemental.

J. Tegart: Fifty-seven fish. We could name them. But guess what. This two-term government hasn’t fulfilled its promise. The minister said two years ago: “We will bring in the act that we’re working on in this mandate.”

The Premier likes to make big promises. He just never delivers. UBC conservation scientist

Tara Martin had this to say: “Nothing came of it. Essentially, the province

walked way from their commitment with no statement as to why.” I’ve said in

this House before that steelhead are being managed into extinction.

Will the Premier admit he made a promise to protect steelhead and then he broke it?

Hon. G. Heyman: It’s been an honour to be in this position for four years and a couple of months. I’d like to note that the member opposite and many of her colleagues were part of a government that had four terms, 16 years. No species-at-risk legislation.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Order, please.

Hon. G. Heyman: They appointed a committee to review measures to address species at

risk. Guess how many of the recommendations of that committee were implemented.

Zero.

We continue to work on the issue of protecting biodiversity, whether

it’s through the plans to implement the strategic review of old

growth…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members will come to order now.

[2:25 p.m.]

Hon. G. Heyman: …whether it’s through various actions that we’ve taken to restore habitat and watersheds. We will continue to work with Indigenous people and people around British Columbia and the federal government to create a workable framework that protects species at risk in British Columbia — steelhead, caribou, marbled murrelet, northern goshawk and others.

VETERINARIAN SUPPLY

AND FUNDING OF TRAINING SPACES

I. Paton: Well, it seems everyone and their dog is waiting for care in British Columbia. B.C. needs 100 veterinarians per year for the next five years, but the Minister of Advanced Education has refused to do so.

Corey Van’t Haaff, of the Society of B.C. Veterinarians, says: “In 2018, we started asking for the Ministry of Advanced Education to fund those 20 seats at WCVM. Since 2018, we’ve been told no, and since 2018, we’ve been refused a meeting with the minister.”

Veterinary student Madison Audeau says: “Despite having the support of the Minister of Agriculture and the chief veterinary officer, the Advanced Education Minister isn’t interested in supporting the education of additional veterinary students.” It seems the Minister of Agriculture can’t convince her own colleague, or maybe she can’t even get a meeting with her, just like the stakeholders.

Will the Premier pick a side and choose to support more veterinarians in British Columbia?

Hon. A. Kang: Thank you so much to the member across for asking this very important question.

I am working with my partner the Minister of Agriculture on this very important issue. We understand that there’s a shortage of vets in British Columbia, and it’s very important that as pet and livestock owners want this service, they have it quickly. The western college of western medicine — every year in British Columbia, we have 80 students there.

To answer the member’s question, we have increased the capacity to ten additional British Columbian students in the college.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading on Bill 25, Education Statutes Amendment Act.

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 25 — EDUCATION STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2021

(continued)

H. Yao: I will continue my conversation, as I mentioned earlier, about the importance….

Mr. Speaker: Member, just take a minute, please. Just one minute.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: Members, let’s get this session going. Thank you for making the space for the member for Richmond South Centre to take his place on this bill.

Member, please proceed.

H. Yao: I apologize for starting too early, earlier on.

I would like to continue to express my support for Bill 25. One thing I do want to continue to emphasize is the importance of understanding that we are limiting our knowledge. I think one of the things I’m so proud of our government and our minister for is that we continue looking for ways to create space on the stage and share the spotlight with our community partners. I want to express my kudos to the minister. She takes on a completely different form of leadership, different from everyone else. By stepping away from the stage and allowing everybody to participate, she contributes to their own self-determination.

As we talk about Bill 25, it gives the First Nations Education Steering Committee the right to certify teachers. Why is this important? I would like to share a personal life example, as I was a youth worker back then.

[2:30 p.m.]

One of the interesting things that happened is that I was actually asked, about 18 years ago, looking after about four foster kids…. I still remember the conversation I had with the foster mom. She was trying to help me understand that the kids are playful. They like to push the boundaries. They had a different style of working with them before, and they couldn’t maintain consistent boundaries for the kids to have a healthy development.

I took on the challenge with pride and ignorance. I thought that I could stand up. I could definitely make sure I could work with the kids, and when they tried to break a rule, I would not back down. That’s how my father taught me, and it’s how my culture raised me up.

After a while, the kid decided to kick the leg and break the tub. I stood up and became disciplinary. I was very disciplinary. I set my boundary and was not giving an inch until the foster kid apologized. But due to my unfortunate lack of knowledge, on which I later was educated by the foster mom, what I did was actually counterproductive in a child’s development.

The child went through a lot of trauma when he was younger, and he was addressing a lot of issues with anger as a way to express himself, as he often dealt with environments where he was not allowed to express himself in any other way. Civility, open communication and dialogue were often not options provided for him. For me to stand up so firmly and so strongly against a child, I actually further aggravated the very trauma that hurt the child, which was in his heart.

I admit that I was ignorant. I admit that I lacked the knowledge. Unfortunately, due to the fact that I wasn’t really, truly certified or trained through the appropriate system back then, my action wasn’t truly accounted for. For that, I want to apologize to the child, and I did apologize back then. But I also reflect the importance of why we need a First Nation community to be able to pick the teachers and certify the teachers, because they know better than we do.

I want to use another example that also happened to me. After training to become a youth worker, one of the children that I was looking after was an individual who was, back then, identified with FASD. Now, of course, as we all know, many Indigenous children, when they have different behavioural issues, our diagnosis often will go the wrong direction by automatically jumping to FASD. Is it considered potentially ADD or ADHD?

When a youth was under my supervision and went into the washroom and, unfortunately, left

a mess behind, my initial gut reaction from my culture, from my education and

from my background is to step up and say: “You need to clean this up. I don’t

care what your argument is. I don’t even want to blame you. But you need to

clean this up.” Now, I regret my comment. Now, I know that what I said was

hurtful. I was ignorant, and I didn’t have the proper understanding of the

cultural background as well.

We actually had an Indigenous youth worker who had to take me aside and spend half an hour explaining to me — for my little, sheltered mind to fully comprehend — the trauma and the intergenerational pain that many Indigenous families and youth have experienced. I didn’t know, and I walked into a situation thinking that I knew and thinking that I could bring my culture, my understanding and my discipline into a situation. It worked in my environment. Why couldn’t it work in that environment? This is why it is so important.

Again, I will say kudos to the minister in regards to introducing Bill 25. We’re looking at opportunities to empower First Nation communities who know the children better than we do, who understand the culture better than we do, to really ask themselves: who is the better teacher, and how can we certify the teacher in a way that reflects our culture?

I remember that I actually had a conversation with the representative of youth and children earlier this week. It was actually an interesting discussion. What is the concept of family? What is the concept of a teacher? What is the concept of relationships between the teacher and the learner? And why do we have such a high, unfortunate overrepresentation of Indigenous children in care? If we look back into a lot of those conversations, it reminds us all that we continuously feel the world in different lenses.

[2:35 p.m.]

I remember that I was speaking to some colleague also from the Children and Youth Committee. She was sharing her perspective with me, too, and I want to say thank you to her. I know that she’s also in the chamber, and she was phenomenally explaining her field to me as well. We are all learning together. But I think, fundamentally, we all will take a step back to realize when we come from a certain community, where our parents, our teachers, our peers, our extended family and even our community may educate us in certain directions. It shapes us and creates our paradigm.

Now, the question we need to ask, when we step back on Bill 25: what does Bill 25 say? The

first thing it’s saying is we believe in reconciliation. We believe in truth.

We are here not to talk about a system, but we’re here to talk about a

relationship — a relationship where we understood our shortcomings. We want to

offer the position on a stage and share with the First Nation community so that

they can step up and pick their teachers and use a certification program to

actually understand what kind of teacher they are looking for. And some are

still a match with our British Columbia education system.

I also want to take a moment to say thank you to the MLA for Skeena. He was also sharing about a different perspective. The reality is that I don’t understand most of the stuff. And I think that it’s often said that a wise person is truly wise when they realize what they don’t know of the world. I’m just so thankful that many, many of our colleagues from both sides of the aisle are able to share so many different perspectives, their life experience and sometimes even sharing their pain — or even sharing their community and family members’ pain.

We are just coming out of our orange shirt ceremony earlier today and even listening to

some of the presenters talking about the horrors of residential schools. I dare

not say I understand. I dare not say I appreciate. I feel a certain amount of

pain, but compared to what they went through, years in and years out without

family support…. I dare not assume the trauma they experienced.

I am privileged. I am privileged. I think what we are actually introducing with Bill 25 is

that we are saying we are privileged. And it’s not fair for us to use our

privileged perspective to tell everybody how they should live their life, how

they should be educated. That’s why, again, I want to go back to square one, I

want to say kudos to our Education Minister for introducing Bill 25, because we

have chosen to take a step back.

We have taken the leadership and said that we are wanting to make ourselves small so our

partners, our First Nation community members, can step up. They can grow. They

can prosper. They can thrive as self-determined. How great is it that we are

able to have a provincial government that is so progressive and realizes the

importance to continue looking to partnership. We’re not here to jump into

action just because we think that we know what is right. We’re not here to jump

into a situation because we know what to do, because we assume that we know

what to do.

We’re not here to jump into circumstances because somehow we believe there’s only one way to solve a problem. Our government is continuously committed to progressive policies that are focused on healthy relationships that build collaboration, cooperation, dialogues and mutual understanding, and to share a stage with different stakeholders, to allow them to thrive, because we believe British Columbia will succeed when all British Columbians succeed together.

We cannot again determine the success measuring point. We might assume a measuring point

of success can be measured by money, that it can be measured by career. But

different individuals from different cultural communities will measure success

differently as well, which is why, again, I’m going back to square one. Because

you can never walk away from the Bill 25 spirit — that we are here to say we

don’t know everything. Therefore, we are asking you to help us

appreciate.

Help us understand what is success, in your definition. Help us understand what is prosperity, in your definition. Are success and prosperity even a good way for us to help to identify the quality of life? Or do you have a better way to define the quality of life?

That’s the reason why we need a First Nations steering committee to be able to certify the teachers and do real understanding: how can they cultivate an education environment that a student can see somebody who is similar to them, who’s thriving and who’s prosperous and who’s actually picked by leadership within the community?

I do want to say that Bill 25, again, is truly inspiring for me, and it truly fulfilled a foundation of our community and our government. I also want to emphasize what the ensuring thing is. It also creates an opportunity to combat potential systemic racism that you and I might not even be able to observe.

[2:40 p.m.]

I know, as an individual from a visible minority, that due to my skin colour, I can feel a certain level of racism that other people might not experience. It’s no fault of anyone, because it’s like a dice. From a different perspective, we see a different number. It’s not just because a person cannot see the number on your side means they are blind. It is just because they don’t see it. Because of my circumstances and my experience, I am able to experience a different form of racism from my perspective. It is a humbling experience to remind me I don’t know what kind of racism First Nations, Indigenous communities are experiencing.

It is easy to look at the circular results of trauma, results of years of neglect, results of addiction and mental health issues and just call them weak. But in reality, we all know the circumstances are extremely overwhelming. And when we are talking about Kamloops and 215 children who didn’t make it home, their circumstance was so extreme. They weren’t even given a chance.

As an individual who comes from a diverse background, I want to say I humble myself in the

presence of the First Nations community and say I don’t have the capacity to

deeply, truly appreciate your trauma, appreciate the devastating lifestyle you

had to go through, appreciate the fact that you were ripped away from your

family.

I cannot appreciate the fact that when you went back to your family, you

had to bring the hurt, as one of the presenters mentioned earlier, back to your

community and amplified the hurt because that was how you were taught. You were

physically, emotionally, forcefully, violently and sometimes sexually

conditioned and abused to the point that normalcy was different from what we

often look at.

It’s shocking to even talk about what potential trauma they experienced, let alone try to imagine the trauma. Why am I still talking about this? Why am I still talking about culture? Why talk? Because it’s about context. Why is it so important for the First Nations Education Steering Committee to really ask themselves who is the better person to share their language, to share their culture, to share their understanding?

It is time for us as a government to say we don’t know, and we want to share this

opportunity with our stakeholders. It is time for our government to say we are

humbled by what we do not know. Please educate us. Please share with us so we

can all grow together and we can all understand together.

It’s time for our government elected officials to really say that we

will never in our lifetime deeply, truly appreciate the pain, trauma and

devastation you experienced. We can only beg God to give us some opportunity

that we can reconcile through truth and reconciliation. This is the reason why

I’m so supportive of Bill 25 as one of many first steps to truth and

reconciliation through the education system.

I also want to talk a bit about my background. Being a Chinese Canadian, we often talk about the education system and the importance of how education can change a person’s mind, perspective and learning. I still remember well my elementary school teacher. Because he came from a punitive education system, getting whipped was a pretty typical expectation.

I remember once I was sticking out my hand and was just about to get punished because I

didn’t do my homework. My teacher was about to whip my hand. I said: “This is

not fair. I am a student. I have rights. We live in a democracy. I should have

my rights.” The funny thing that teacher said to me was: “Students don’t have

rights.” He whipped me on my hand because I didn’t do my homework.

The reality of that experience is not about what it taught me. It’s how long it lasts in me. I remember the experience just like it was yesterday. It reminded me that authority with the ability to control, the ability to discipline…. How much pressure it can apply upon students, how much pressure it can apply upon innocent souls who don’t know better. We might be seen as rebellious, but really we’re looking for a way to self-identify.

[2:45 p.m.]

Again, I just want to say it is so important. I want to show my support for Bill 25. We need to continuously cherish, uphold our stakeholders in this situation and allow the First Nations community to have the opportunity to self-determine, not because we ourselves are generous but because it is their right. They deserve to be self-determined, and we were in a position of power for too long, and we need to take a step back.

That’s why I want to thank the Minister of Education for this, and I want to thank many of the members in this House, sharing their views and educating me and everyone else together. Let us together continuously find a way to establish partnership, to establish cooperation, to establish opportunities to work together so British Columbians can thrive together, including all the First Nations community members and the children, and we can find a way to support our kids in care as well.

J. Rice: Education can and must play a key role in reconciliation and in creating equity and justice. That’s why I’m happy to stand today and speak to Bill 25, the Education Statutes Amendment Act, which is about making legislative changes to support First Nations jurisdiction over education.

These legislative changes and their joint development are concrete steps in implementing the province’s reconciliation commitments to advance education outcomes for Indigenous students and work in partnership with Indigenous peoples. These changes are in line with our commitments under DRIPA, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, and in line with the calls to action from the TRC, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s calls to action.

In partnership with FNESC, the First Nations Education Steering Committee, we have announced legislative changes to amend the First Nations Education Act, the Teachers Act and the Criminal Records Review Act. First Nations that are participating in the initiative will soon be able to certify and regulate teachers working in their schools. The legislative changes introduced will enable the province to provide operational support.

The legislation will also change the composition of the B.C. Teachers Council, the provincial body whose responsibilities include establishing certification, conduct and competence standards for provincial teaching certificate holders. The changes will ensure representation on the B.C. Teachers Council by the soon-to-be created First Nations Education Authority, which is the body that will be made up of individuals appointed by First Nations participating in this initiative.

Thirteen First Nations are currently in bilateral negotiations with the federal government. One of those Nations is the Heiltsuk First Nation, which is in my riding. Efforts to advance First Nations’ jurisdiction over education have been ongoing for more than 20 years. Teacher certification and regulation is one of the key components of jurisdiction. The legislative changes brought forward have been co-developed with FNESC, acting under the direction of the First Nations engaged in the initiative.

Supporting First Nations control over First Nations education, including greater control over teacher certification and regulation, will support students to ensure they are confident in their self-identity, their families, their communities and traditional values, languages and cultures, give them the skills they need to thrive in contemporary society and prepare them to access any opportunities they choose for higher learning and employment.

The proposed First Nations Education Authority teaching certificate will be a unique certificate, established under First Nations jurisdiction over education and valid only for employment in schools operated by First Nations participating in this initiative. The FNEA will set the standards an applicant must meet and maintain in order to hold an FNEA teaching certificate. The certification will be rooted in Indigenous ways of knowing and being, teaching competencies and professional growth, rather than based on conventional teacher education competency or education programs.

As I said, one of the 13 nations participating is the Heiltsuk Nation. They’ve been operating their own school for decades.

[2:50 p.m.]

In the 1970s, Bella Bella had one of the highest suicide rates in Canada, which was

attributed to the various education systems imposed upon them — first

residential schools, then Indian day schools and then boarding schools, where

Indigenous children were taken and put into white families and put into the

public education system. Turning to today, they now see high graduation rates

and have a highly successful program that runs a K4-to-grade-12 program and

even beyond, into their own college in their own community.

What makes the Bella Bella Community School so special is that they balance

Háiɫzaqv ways of knowing and being with

western ways. Each student from K4 to 12 takes a language and culture class,

and they take that class every day. They also have their own supportive system,

which is a social-emotional system. There is a word for this,

gvi̓ḷás , which is a

háiɫzaqvḷa word meaning “to be wise, to

know.” This part of the education system goes beyond teaching skills to teach

about connections to each other and their social connection to community, and

how to take care of their own minds.

They also have the SEAS program, the supporting emerging Aboriginal stewards program. They

were one of the first schools to take on this program, which is a partnership

with Nature United, formerly the Nature Conservancy. This is an opportunity for

people to go out on to the land and waters and learn from

Háiɫzaqv knowledge holders and to learn

about western science simultaneously.

The curriculum through SEAS is for students to be connected to place, to learn where they

come from and to feel responsible for it. They go out and harvest food and

medicines, and they gift it to the elders. They learn about place-names,

stories, and learn to be in service. In

Háiɫzaqv ways, youth have a traditional

role to take care of Elders. Through this program, they learn the importance of

that role, and they learn important practical steps on carrying out this role.

They learn about what’s important and learn about being

Háiɫzaqv.

I want to take a moment to highlight an educational leader in Bella Bella. Anita Hall is a longtime teacher and now principal in this school. She’s a strong Indigenous woman, leading the school in a very powerful way. She’s also a skilled teacher. Her students, like many students, come into her classroom at different reading levels. By the end of every year, every one of her students is reading at grade level. She’s a literacy expert, a learning expert and now principal and, just recently, a B.C. Achievement Foundation community award recipient.

Anita believes wholeheartedly in the ability of those around her to succeed. As the elementary principal at Bella Bella Community School, she has created a place where students feel safe and included. She exemplifies what a decolonial and community-rooted approach to education can look like. Through her vision, students thrive both academically and personally. Under her leadership, and in spite of the challenges that COVID presented, Anita has shaped a community school to which Bella Bella youth want to belong.

At Bella Bella Community School, 65 percent of the staff are Indigenous, and most of them

are Háiɫzaqv, which makes a significant

difference. Research shows that Indigenous learners learn better from

Indigenous teachers, because they have similar cultural touchstones. At Bella

Bella Community School, culture and academia are intertwined. There is no

separation.

My friend Ayla Brown describes the school by saying: “We don’t create the split; we

harmonize them.” She notes that they have very high graduation rates because

children do feel safe in their school. They are student-centred, because the

Háiɫzaqv way is to be child-centred.

Children are the very centre of the community.

If a child needs calculus 12 for a program they’re interested in, they find a way to

provide it, even if there’s only one student. They have an art room and a

robotics program and so much more. They make sure that students get the courses

they want and need, and they don’t limit options to what is standardly

available. An important takeaway from the Bella Bella school program is that

people don’t have to choose between being

Háiɫzaqv and being an academic student.

They bridge western ways of knowing and

Háiɫzaqv ways of knowing. They bridge

these worlds. They can be the same world.

I wholeheartedly support the amendments proposed in Bill 25 to support First Nations in B.C. to have autonomy over their own education systems and to see incredible success stories, like the Bella Bella Community School.

[2:55 p.m.]

B. Anderson: Of course I would like to stand in support of this bill.

We’re all on a journey right now of truth and reconciliation. Before we

can have reconciliation, which I do believe is a fundamental part of this bill,

we need to acknowledge the truth. The truth is that the residential school

system was a system of genocide for First Nations people across Canada. It has

impacted every single First Nations community.

Now that is a very hard truth. During the truth and reconciliation….

When they were going around and people were able to bear witness and were able

to tell their stories, I was able to attend that in Whitehorse, as I was

working for the Yukon Aboriginal women’s centre. The stories were absolutely

heartbreaking, but it is critically important that this information is on the

record so that the institutions can be held accountable for their

actions.

Many of us attended a ceremony today in the Legislature. It was an

orange shirt celebration. We were placing, on the wall, an orange shirt. Now we

know the story and the history of Orange Shirt Day and what it means to so many

now across Canada.

In my community, I want to speak of one of the schools. The Yaqan Nukiy

are running their own independent school. Now, what’s absolutely incredible

about this school is they’re teaching Ktunaxa to the children. They’re teaching

their world view to the children, and this is to children of all

heritages.

I have a friend who is not of First Nations background, but she’s able

to send her little girl to that school to learn Ktunaxa. Now that is an

incredible opportunity for reconciliation. Knowing that people in that

community…. Chris Luke is one of them. He authored the book Drags

Grizzly . He expresses what it was like for him and his siblings to

attend these residential schools. Now his family members will be attending the

Yaqan Nukiy School. It’s providing a tremendous learning

opportunity.

What this bill does is provide First Nations the autonomy to have

autonomy over their education system, which they always should have. If we look

at the Truth and Reconciliation calls to action, we see No. 10, which is: “We

call on the federal government to draft new Aboriginal education legislation

with the full participation and informed consent of Aboriginal peoples. The new

legislation would include a commitment to sufficient funding and would

incorporate the following principles.”

Now, what I think is important is, obviously, that we are the provincial

government, not the federal government. But what we are doing today is enabling

First Nations to have the autonomy over their education systems, which is a

critical part of reconciliation.

Today I want to celebrate the great work of the Yaqan Nukiy with the

Yaqan Nukiy School in the Creston Valley, the incredible work of the ministry

that has pulled this together and, of course, the First Nations that were

involved in order to draft this piece of legislation, which is, as we’re

recognizing the truth of the genocide, one step, again, towards

reconciliation.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, I recognize the Minister of Education, if

she wants to close the debate.

Hon. J. Whiteside: Thank you so much, Mr. Speaker.

I will take just a moment to reflect on a bit of what has passed during this debate and to recognize, as well, that I think today, in particular, there is some importance with respect to this discussion and this subject matter.

[3:00 p.m.]

I, too, was with all of our colleagues in the Hall of Honour this morning as we were witness to the ceremony that appropriately commemorates the memorial that has been sitting on the steps of the Legislature for five months, since the discovery…. I won’t say discovery. I will say the recovery — the recovery of knowledge that the community in Kamloops knew, the Indigenous community in Kamloops knew was there but has now been confirmed, the discovery in Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc of the 215 graves.

I know that every member of this House has been very moved by the memorial that has sat on the Legislature steps. I think that to have it commemorated and brought in and recognized — to have process and ceremony around it — is very, very important. It’s fitting that we advance our work on this important bill today in that context.

I want to thank all members of this House and, in particular, the member for Fraser-Nicola

for her thoughtful reflections on our colonial education system and the changes

we need to make, in many different ways, to improve circumstances and

experiences and outcomes for Indigenous children.

I very much want to thank all of my colleagues who have brought such

important reflections and stories on the need to recruit Indigenous teachers to

ensure that we are supporting teachers in their ability to provide and teach

the content and support the curriculum that is relevant and culturally

appropriate and values and acknowledges Indigenous communities and knowledges

and ways of knowing and perspectives and, importantly, languages — very

importantly, languages.

I’m so excited to hear about the work being done in different parts of the province, always. We have a very diverse province, and Indigenous students learn in very diverse environments. They learn in our public schools. They learn in public schools on reservations. They learn in schools on reservations that are funded by the federal government and operated by First Nations. There’s a diversity of environments.

Of the 129 schools that we’ve been talking about that are First Nations schools in B.C.

that are funded under the authority of First Nations but funded

federally…. Those First Nations have, indeed, been operating schools

that provide a very important approach to education. But those nations

have not had jurisdiction over their own education systems. They have

not had the authority to certify, regulate the teachers who teach in

those schools. That, of course, is fundamental to operating an education

system.

The changes that are contemplated in this bill to the First Nations Education Act, the

Teachers Act and the Criminal Records Review Act are perhaps small, in terms of

the numbers of words that they change in those pieces of legislation, but they

are profound in terms of their scope and impact and in the potential to advance

us, collectively, on this road that we are on, this road to

reconciliation.

I think, finally, I want to just again reflect on the experience that I had this past

summer in visiting the north Island in my search for the northernmost school on

Vancouver Island, finding that on the Gwa’sala-Nakwaxda’xw reserve in Port

Hardy, and having an opportunity to visit a school that is operated by the

First Nations and that is wholly centred around, wholly built around,

supporting Indigenous children from that community, bringing a trauma-informed

approach to education.

There is so much for us to learn in our colonial system from the work

being done in First Nations schools, and these changes are going to really

facilitate that ability. It will build on work being done by Indigenous

communities, by First Nations communities, by the First Nations Education

Steering Committee.

[3:05 p.m.]

Also, importantly, I want to acknowledge the work that educators in this province have done to advance knowledge and understanding and healing with respect to the impact of residential schools. I learned about the impact of residential schools from my time in the labour movement, from work that the B.C. Teachers Federation has done — incredibly important work — to support the exposure of the knowledge of this shameful history and to support Indigenous teachers in their journey as teachers in our education system but also to support all teachers to understand and to be able to teach this important content. That work will continue.

I want to just say, lastly, a word about Indigenous languages and the incredible importance. I think members have commented on the importance of connecting language to history, to identity, to community. I saw that in action in a visit that I made, also, in Port Hardy to Kwakiutl territory, visiting with the community there, who were celebrating, during the summer, their first ability as a community to get together in 18 months of working so hard to protect their community and, in particular, their Elders, their knowledge-keepers, their language-keepers, from the impact of COVID — and doing that very successfully.

I had a chance to spend some time with Chief Ross Hunt, and to hear him in the process of reclaiming the language of his people, Kwak’wala. I can tell you it was incredibly impactful to hear him stand in front of his community and speak in the language of his community in an active process of reclaiming dignity and history and identity. Those are all objectives that we have in this bill.

This bill is a testament to the countless people who have worked, who have advocated, who have agitated, who have spoken truth to power in very many settings to realize the dream of equality in education for Indigenous students.

With that, I will close debate.

Deputy Speaker: The question is second reading of Bill 25.

Motion approved.

Hon. J. Whiteside: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to be considered at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 25, Education Statutes Amendment Act, 2021, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. B. Ralston: I propose a brief recess before commencing with the next bill, which is Bill 24, the Environmental Management Amendment Act.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

The House will be recessed for approximately five minutes.

The House recessed from 3:07 p.m. to 3:12 p.m.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Hon. B. Ralston: I call second reading debate on Bill 24, the Environmental Management Act.

BILL 24 — ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

AMENDMENT ACT, 2021

Hon. G. Heyman: I move that this bill be read a second time now.

Amendments to the Environmental Management Act would enable regulations establishing

provincewide bans on the sale, distribution or use of single-use products as

well as packaging or containers that are provided but not sold — for example,

plastic drinking straws, plastic utensils, polystyrene plates — and products

that are sold separately from the object they protect — for example, single-use

products sold in multiple, such as packages of polystyrene clamshell containers

or cups.

The amendments would enable regulations that apply fees and alternatives to single-use products where necessary. They would also enable regulations requiring businesses to make items available only by request and regulate products that have a short-term use and can be reused — for example, reusable bags, Tupperware containers, disposable razors.

This authority would be in addition to existing authority to make regulations prohibiting or restricting the use and nature of specified kinds of packaging, including plastic packaging. The amendments support my ministry’s mandate commitment to the provincewide phase-out of single-use plastics.

It will reduce the environmental impact caused by the amount of plastic waste created in B.C. and reduce the negative impact of plastic pollution on human health and the environment, while also minimizing the risk of unintended consequences posed by other non-plastic, single-use alternatives.

It will meet the public’s expectation for strong action on problematic single-use products and the desire of local government and industry for a coordinated provincial approach.

[3:15 p.m.]

It will also align with CleanBC’s priorities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from waste and complement proposed federal bans on single-use plastics. We have seen, over the last number of years, increasing public concern about plastic waste, where it ends up, particularly in the marine environment or environments where it can potentially be ingested and be harmful to wildlife. We’ve seen increasing reports of how these plastics break down into microplastics that end up being found in human bodies as well as marine life and land-based wildlife.

The public is very aware of the problem, particularly in B.C. The public is increasingly eager to see alternatives. We’ve seen a number of municipalities respond to that by proposing bans on certain single-use plastics, most notably plastic grocery bags.

We have subsequently created an order that no longer requires municipalities to seek approval from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. But we heard very clearly from industry, from retailers, from local governments around the province that people would much prefer to see a provincewide approach, and they thought that it was the role of the provincial government and my ministry to design and provide the approach.

P. Milobar: It gives me pleasure to rise to take my place in the debate around Bill 24, the Environmental Management Amendment Act.

As the minister stated, this seems to be a fairly straightforward bill as it relates to single-use plastics and trying to, I think, in this day and age accomplish what many would expect most governments to do to try to figure out ways to make sure the use of single-use plastics is minimized while recognizing that there is certainly still a legitimate need for many single-use plastics out there in terms of things around health care and other types of provisions of services that people expect in their daily lives.

Certainly, as we move through this bill and as we get, more importantly, into committee stage, I think it will be important and very instructive for the public to hear those questions and answers back and forth with the minister so people get a full and a clear understanding of what exactly is being proposed, how it will or will not impact them, and making sure that some of those critical aspects in their lives are not to be worried about but, certainly, that steps are being taken to make sure that we do minimize that plastic waste out there that, for a large part, is not necessary.

Make sure that if it is a waste that’s being generated, it’s being repurposed in a way that makes the most environmental sense in this day and age, given, again, the technologies and the advancements we’ve seen around recycling and repurposing a product into either energy or other sources.

Generally speaking, we are supportive of the concept of this bill. I say concept because,

again, a lot of it will come down to those questions and answers in committee

stage. We do recognize that 93 percent of the participants in the government’s

engagement on plastics believe it’s important to consider a ban on single-use

plastic packaging.

Thankfully, that was done before Bill 22 was passed, or we’re not sure what would’ve happened with the data of people participating in that engagement from government, as Bill 22 would then enable the government to collect and collate and link that data from that engagement. It would be another, I guess, example of why everything we do in this House is somewhat interconnected.

[3:20 p.m.]

When you see things in Bill 22 that talk about data linking and how government is able to

and when you see things mentioned in a bill like this around public engagement,

that the government would use for something as important as environmental

issues, it does make one worry. When you look at other pieces of legislation

that are currently in front of the House, some debated more vigorously than

others, obviously….

Certainly, as a former municipal politician…. You know, municipalities have been wanting the powers to do things on their own as well. A great many want to see a provincewide standard so that it’s easier to understand and so that you don’t have a patchwork across this province of things happening. More often than not, on things of import, patchworks don’t work.

You think of 180-some municipalities out there and the fact that they are hoping for

something around plastics to be cohesive across the province to make it easier

for the public to understand.

You can see why 61 school districts would not want to see a patchwork of

COVID measures. Parents would want to make sure that that patchwork was one

where it was cohesive and easy to understand, on something as important as our

children in school. If recycling plastic is, indeed, so important to this

government that we make sure it’s done cohesively across this province, one

would hope COVID recommendations for schools would be viewed in the same light.

But alas, at this point, they’re not.

It’s good that there will be more consultation with this, up until ’23, or at least until

they’re put into place. Again, some questions and some worry around that

consultation and whether or not it will fall victim to Bill 22 and the

provisions in that, in terms of what would happen. One would hope that that

does not create a situation where people do not want to engage, perhaps, as

much as they might normally, especially if they’re worried they may be linked

on environmental issues and worried. Again, we’ll have some questions around

that just to make sure.

All in all, it’s a concept that’s supportable from this side of the House. But many serious questions and many serious ramifications when you consider…. To the minister’s credit, as I say, he was able to try to move forward to make sure there’s a provincewide standard of one thing. So one would hope that in those cabinet meetings, when the minister is talking to other colleagues, if we can have a provincewide standard as it relates to plastic recycling, we might be able to have a provincewide standard that respects K-to-12 students and COVID measures in their schools.

I look forward to committee stage. I will reserve any questions I have or any other ponderances on this bill until we get to committee stage.

S. Furstenau: I’m happy to rise and speak to Bill 24. As with the opposition caucus, we are supportive of these steps. It’s important to, obviously, find solutions to the very significant issues of too much waste, particularly of the single-use variety, and plastic waste.

I don’t have much to add to the comments that have been made thus far. I’m also looking forward to committee stage. However, I think one thing to note here is that the leadership of municipalities is something that we should be acknowledging and recognizing.

This is often the case, not just here in B.C., but we can see municipalities taking leadership steps when it comes to issues like this or climate change or cycling infrastructure. Then often the province and the federal government catch up and recognize that leadership and take the steps, as are being taken right now, to provide a more consistent approach across the entire province. But I think it’s important to really recognize the elected officials at local levels who see problems that may be much greater than just in their own regions or their own towns and cities but who take steps and lead us, ultimately, to these wider steps, which is important.

[3:25 p.m.]

I think that the only other thing that we’ll be canvassing in committee stage is…. As we’ve seen in the past, sometimes when there are changes to recyclable materials or to recycling rules and regulations, it can have an impact to the infrastructure and whether these changes are anticipating there being an impact on that infrastructure, a need for it increased or decreased.

I think that in the conversation around reducing single-use plastics, there’s still a pretty significant conversation around whether or not recycling in and of itself is effectively addressing the volume of waste that’s being created.

We are happy to support this legislation and look forward to committee stage.

S. Cadieux: Obviously, the climate situation is very real. We all have to take responsibility for our own impact on the environment, and I certainly accept that. But if your chronic illness or your disability restricts the positive changes that you can make, what about that? Sometimes the environment initiatives we undertake put some people’s safety at risk.

Initiatives like these, like the ones proposed in this legislation, run the risk of being ableist, and here’s why. It’s clear. I think initiatives like this suggest that the reducing of plastic waste is essential. If we want to save the planet, we have to all do our part. I don’t dispute it. But time and time again, it becomes obvious to disabled people that we aren’t invited to the table or considered when these decisions are made.

We have seen this, this past year, in Victoria, with decisions around bike lanes and park access that put the safety and needs of people with disabilities aside completely. While the initiatives themselves are well-intentioned and good, the implementation is often flawed.

I don’t want to make this the great straw debate. That is not my intention either. But it’s illustrative, so I just want to provide a little bit of context about why it’s important that we think when we do these things, and why it’s important that when we provide, for example, enabling legislation for other bodies to make decisions about banning plastics, we have to think about how we ensure that they do that thoughtfully.

There are many, many people in our society who have conditions that cause tremors or spasms, who can’t reposition themselves to drink from a cup or tip their head backwards. We have people who have compromised immune systems, and those same people might have dexterity problems or painful conditions. Often, that means that they rely on a reusable straw, or not so much a reusable straw, but a plastic straw. Many alternatives exist: metal, paper, glass, silicone, acrylic, pasta, rice, bamboo, biodegradable. Not one of those is an option for all.

Sometimes it’s not possible to prepare in advance. Why should a disabled person have to prepare in advance for something an able-bodied person does not? How will one know if one might need a sip of water? What if the average person was told to bring their own toilet paper? There would be an outcry.

[3:30 p.m.]

For people with disabilities, bringing your own straw is seen as: “Well, that’s their

obligation. They should do that for themselves.” But when you look at all those

options of straws, only single-use disposable plastic straws are usable for

some.

Metal has an injury risk. Metal and glass aren’t safe for hot liquids. Acrylic and pasta

straws aren’t safe for hot liquids. They dissolve. Paper dissolves after a long

use. There are all sorts of problems with the products that are available

today. That’s not to say we won’t come up with something new that works for

everyone, but currently, it doesn’t exist. We have to be careful about how we

go about banning something like a plastic straw.

But it’s not about just straws. For a lot of people with disabilities, prepackaged convenience foods are a necessity. Fruit that has its own packaging is inaccessible to people with disabilities. Yet fruit that has been peeled or cut and packaged in plastic might be the only way they can enjoy that product or that opportunity.

[N. Letnick in the chair.]

We have to think about how we will ban those products, ban those plastics, that packaging.

Again, there are alternatives. They may or may not yet exist readily, and they

almost always, at least in the short-term, will add incredible expense. People

with disabilities don’t need another expense added. In fact, I’m sure I don’t

have to tell this government how challenging that would be. It’s not that we

shouldn’t move to reduce or ban those products, but we have to do it, again,

thoughtfully.

For people with disabilities, much of their medication, much of their medical supplies come wrapped in plastic or are single-use plastics. Will they be included or not? Because at this point, there is no alternative.

What about wet wipes? For many, they’re a luxury. For people with disabilities, they’re a necessity, especially during the pandemic, with the need for disinfecting. I guess my message is that many environmental initiatives are inherently ableist. They don’t take into consideration the needs of people with disabilities. Legislation like this that enables the prescribing of things like straw bans disproportionately disadvantage disabled people if they are not expressly consulted and a part of the decision-making process.

There are solutions to be found. We might not have them yet. We might need to wait until those options exist. Limiting the use of plastic products to the greatest degree possible while continuing to allow them to be available as a necessary tool for people with disabilities isn’t unreasonable, because we all care about the planet that we call home. We all want to be able to enjoy it on an equal footing, and for that to happen, people with disabilities’ needs need to be considered and built into the laws of the land.

There are over a billion disabled people in the world. Nearly 25 percent of the population of our province self-identifies, so the voices matter. I hope that in committee we will hear from government how they intend to answer those questions from the disabled community, how they will build in an assurance to that community that their needs will be considered at each and every stage of this process as we look to reduce or to ban the use of single-use plastics.

Again, we all want to see this happen for the good of the planet, but it can’t be done in

a way that risks the health, safety or access of people with disabilities to

the things that others do not need. We have to be careful in how we do this. We

have to ensure that we do it in a balanced way. We have to understand how this

legislation and these decisions will pair up with the enabling act of the

[3:35 p.m.]

How will we ensure that these things talk to one another? When, in fact, and how will people with disabilities be included in that conversation? I look forward to further discussion in committee.

B. Anderson: I’m absolutely delighted to be able to speak on this bill today. Of course, this is Bill 24, the Environmental Management Amendment Act.

What this piece of legislation will do will enable us to further ban single-use plastics. This is critically important as we have a global plastics problem. What we’re doing here in British Columbia is that we are literally showing the world that we are able to lead by example, by ensuring that we are able to ban single-use plastics.

What this will do…. This is just part of our CleanBC plastics action plan. This is one piece of the puzzle. Banning single-use plastics is just one part of that.

We also know that we need to be doing things like cleaning up our coastlines. Also, in British Columbia, through the extended producer recycling program, we have one of the best recycling programs in the world. But what’s better than recycling is to not have to recycle it at all — for that product not to need to be recycled. We need to be taking these items out of circulation altogether. There are alternatives.

As we’ve heard from the opposition and from the Third Party, there is general support of this legislation. I know that in my communities of Nelson and Creston, this legislation is going to be very well received. When I was on city council at the city of Nelson, it was something that we talked about years ago. I know that other municipalities have been talking about it also for a long time. What this legislation does…. Municipalities have been leaders, but we do need a provincial approach.

We went out. We spoke with people from across the province. And what this legislation will be able to do is then, through regulation, ensure that we are able to continue to be leaders with CleanBC, reduce our plastics and really create healthier communities for the future. I know the youth that I’m speaking with are so far beyond this. They are totally ready to see a ban on single-use plastics.

We’ve all seen those devastating images of wildlife that have been injured or killed largely due to plastics in our environment. Now, we can’t fix that, necessarily, on a global scale, of course, with this legislation. This only impacts B.C. But what we can do is show other places, not only in Canada but North America and around the world, how they’re able to reduce their plastic pollution so that we are able to tackle this together.

Again, I thank all of the work of the ministry and the staff and everyone that was involved in the consultation and all the leaders in the municipalities that have worked hard to get us to this place today. I believe this is a day of celebration as we are moving forward again on other components of CleanBC.

I will just end off. Also, with our CleanBC plastics action plan, one of the pieces is that we’re going to be evaluating options for recycling more package and paper beyond residential sources, such as from businesses.

Now, I know that people of Kaslo, Balfour, Crawford Bay, Riondel and Ymir are going to be very happy to hear this news, because it has been a real struggle in our community. With the current regulations, tiny businesses have not been able to recycle their cardboard with the residential waste.

[3:40 p.m.]

Our government has been listening, and we’ll be able to move forward on those things because we also know that in rural areas, what fits in a large urban centre doesn’t always work for a rural area. So by really listening and evaluating different options, we know that in those rural areas, we’re going to be able to solve some of these issues, which I’ve spoken to many people of.

It has been a point of great frustration. I am delighted to see that we’re, not necessarily through this legislation but through our CleanBC plastics action plan, going to be moving forward to make it more equitable for everyone. Again, we have a plastics problem, and this is part of the solution.

R. Russell: I am happy to stand today to rise in support of this bill.

As we’ve heard from a number of different presenters already, plastics

are really at the core of one of our major environmental problems that we’re

facing, and really the root of that is that as plastics degrade, they don’t go

away. They don’t go anywhere. We’ve heard some of the challenges. But

certainly, if we can reduce the use of those single-use plastics, I think we

recognize that we’ll be in a better place.

The Leader of the Third Party had commented earlier on the leadership of

local governments in this as well. Potentially, the minister presenting this

bill will recall that previously, as a regional district chair, I was part of a

contingent of rural representatives from across the province coming forward to

ask for this as well. I’m really happy to see that leadership from local

governments that has made it clear how important this is — and the

responsiveness in the leadership of the province to put forward, now, an

opportunity for us to move forward on this.

One of the pieces…. As, historically, also a marine-focused ecologist….

Some of you may have heard of the North Pacific gyre, which is a large

circulation pattern that results in a lot of things accumulating in the North

Pacific. Recently there has been a real focus — over the last five, ten years,

I would say — on the amount of plastic garbage that has accumulated there in

terms of what has been known under various titles but, all around, as an

enormous garbage patch in the North Pacific.

There’s a paper that came out a few years ago that predicts that at

least 79,000 tonnes of ocean plastic is floating inside an area of 1.6 million

square kilometres, which is a pretty surreal number to try to fathom. An

estimated 1.8 trillion pieces of plastic is what they estimate. So these

plastics that we’re creating when we do not do a good job of our recycling,

which is a challenge, end up somewhere. In many cases, there is a significant

accumulation in ocean systems, and that accumulation all ends up compiling in

localized areas.

Bills like what we have in front of us today help us acquire the tools

and provide local governments with those tools to be able to do a better job of

minimizing that impact on the environment. It’s more than just an aesthetic

impact. We heard some of the wildlife impacts from the previous

speaker.

Likewise, there are impacts in terms of leachate from those plastics

into marine systems. There are impacts — the negative impacts — of cutting off

the light integration into the ecological system. So basically, if there is

more plastic, there is less light. The plankton doesn’t grow as well. That has

impacts throughout that whole system, and when we’re dealing with the scale

that we’re talking about here, that can have a substantial ecosystem-level

impact.

Likewise, I’m sure some of you are familiar with the challenges of

plastics absorbing toxins and then, in turn, being consumed by various levels

of the food chain and magnifying up through the food chain, which again causes

individual and ecosystem-level challenges.

[3:45 p.m.]

I’m very happy to see this kind of bill in front of this House and happy

to hear the support that we’ve seen for it from across the floor. I don’t think

I have a whole lot more to say. I wanted to stand up and make clear that I’m

very much in favour of this. I’m happy to hear that it is a phased approach

that we are moving down to make sure that we are doing this right and that it

won’t negatively impact the ability of anybody to have their say in what this

looks like and making sure we do this right.

Hon. N. Cullen: Like my colleague, I’m pleased to be talking about this type of legislation — Bill 24, moved by my colleague the hon. Minister of Environment — because of what it enables, what it makes possible.

I represent Stikine, the largest riding in this province. It is arguably, although some in this House might disagree, the most beautiful riding in the province as well. It extends all the way out….

Deputy Speaker: I think your time is up.

Hon. N. Cullen: Is that right, Mr. Speaker? That was a bit arbitrary — and quick — but understandable.

An incredibly beautiful place, as those members in this place and other British Columbians that have had the wonderful opportunity to visit Stikine….

I welcome you, Speaker, if you haven’t been up to the northwest.

It extends all the way from Telkwa and Smithers, through the Hazeltons, the Kispiox, up to the north, through Stewart, B.C., a little nook in the corner of British Columbia, nestled up against Alaska — if you’ve never spent any time in Stewart, then your life is just a little bit more impoverished than it needs to be — all the way up through Tahltan territory and Taku River Tlingit in the far northwest. That little bit on the map that doesn’t often get properly recognized, in the Atlin area, is so important to the province.

The reason I so want to base my comments in that place is because when we’re talking about plastics, oftentimes the effects of pollution are not felt in the immediate area where the pollution starts. With something so nefarious and persistent as plastics and the microplastics that are so difficult to even see, they accumulate, and they make their way around the world.

I can remember — and the Minister of Environment, I’m sure, can remember as well — various

studies on blood toxicity that discovered that people, even in Nunavut…. The

far north of Canada, which doesn’t generate any of these toxins and pollutants,

uses some of those products — but very few people and very few grand

quantities.

In their food system, in the food chain, these chemicals can start to

bioaccumulate. They can start small and grow and grow in the flesh of fish and

various animals and then end up in humans. In fact, a nursing mother can

transfer — unintentionally yet still transfer — these toxins and pollutants to

their newborn, starting out life.

The responsibility that we all share as people of the planet, as consumers, is to be as

responsible as we can. That’s the individual’s responsibility. What

responsibility do we collectively share, especially those of us here, who make

laws and pass guidelines for how our province is operating? What care are we

taking for this place that we so cherish?

Bill 24 allows us to expand the tools and the measures to do a better job. The tragic irony of things that we have invented as humans, which are incredible and almost magical…. The things that we can come up with and devise are sometimes so outrageously inappropriate for their originally intended use. The plastic shopping bag that takes your groceries is meant to really be of service for the few minutes you take the bag to your bicycle or vehicle and then get it home, unload it. Once home, it has now served its useful purpose. That’s what it was designed to do.

Last thing. A total — I read one industry estimate — of 18 minutes of effective use. Yet

that same thing that we invented will last far longer than any of us are on

this planet — or our kids or our grandkids. Generations down, it’ll still be

there. That thing that was meant for 18 minutes will last hundreds, if not

thousands, of years.

What we’re doing here in this bill today, I think, is important in terms of our

responsibility as British Columbians — to expand the products that we are now

going to limit, which will be either under a fee or banned outright, with some

small and notable exceptions that I think we do need to mention. But we will

just simply not have them.

[3:50 p.m.]

There was great rending of garments and gnashing of teeth when it was originally suggested that the plastic straw — again, meant to last for as long as the drink lasts…. For most of us, if it’s a tasty drink, it’s not very long. But it will then go on for hundreds of years in existence and then eventually break down and end up in our food supply, sickening and poisoning future generations. But that plastic straw could be made out of something else.

Well, goodness, if you follow Twitter — and I don’t necessarily advise anyone to do that,

but if you do — when originally, other straws were brought onto the market,

straws that we can actually make here in British Columbia…. The Ministry of

Environment can talk about this as well, and I’m sure has — our ability to

actually create jobs with these alternatives. Well, to go away from something

that we were accustomed to….

I get my drink, I get the plastic straw, and I know how it works. It’s

going to last for the duration of my time with that beverage. Who cares what

happens next? Well, we do. We need to. We collectively need to.

The foam takeout container that lasts as long as it lasts, until you eat those leftovers…. The responsibility, once you so-called throw it away, and it goes into the garbage, is still ours. It’s still ours collectively. I think the whole notion of garbage is a problematic way of thinking about things. It sort of makes it the other. Here I’ve got this thing, and it’s useful to me while I have it, and as soon as it’s not useful to me anymore, now it’s garbage. It’s somebody else’s problem. Well, we know that is no longer the right way of thinking. It’s not sustainable.

For somebody who lives in the North, many of our communities struggle with this responsibility: the responsibility of what happens when our citizens buy something, use something and then put it in the garbage. Our transfer and our dumps are filling up. They’re incredibly expensive, an enormous burden on the taxpayers over time. You just can’t keep paying for these landfills.

I grew up back east in a larger city that…. I can remember the first incidence of real awareness for me was during a garbage strike. If you want to see how a community does, look at what happens six weeks into a garbage strike. The city’s design at that time was to use the municipal tennis courts. So residents were to take their garbage, which was no longer being collected, and put it in the tennis court, which was surrounded by fences. After a week, it was as tall as I was as a little kid. After a few more days, it was well over my height. Soon it was over the height of the fences that were in the tennis courts.

Awareness in that community grew dramatically as we saw what we produced, as we were made to come face to face with the effects of our choices. People said: “Is this the only way we do things?” Up until then, the problem had just simply been moved away. The garbage guy came once a week, he picked it up, and it was out of sight, out of mind. It wasn’t a problem, until it was a problem. That’s when the recycling program was born in that city, from that very dramatic, awful-smelling and slightly — more than slightly, incredibly — embarrassing realization of what our responsibilities were as citizens. Is this right? Are we behaving well?

We’ve all done it. We’ve all been to a campsite — some beautiful place. You head down a trail. You get in your canoe. You stop off, and you get into this amazing part of British Columbia, or wherever you happen to be travelling, and someone has left a pile of garbage behind. You think: “Really? Really? This is how it is? You’ve come to appreciate this beautiful place that we cherish, and the way that you mark your presence there is by leaving all your crap behind?” We can’t help but think poorer of the person or the people that did that and how fundamentally disrespectful it is.

Well, collectively, that’s what we’ve been doing this to planet. If anyone follows behind us, and they will, they’ll say: “Really? Is that what you thought of the place? You thought just to leave it behind for somebody else to take care of?”

In this bill, introduced by my colleague, the CleanBC plastics action plan grows on the

idea that we’re responsible, that we have to look at these things in a cyclical

and responsible way.

There are three components to it: that we clean it up, that we clean up

the mess; that we make sure that we’re diverting things away from the landfill

that shouldn’t be there; and that we, maybe in that diversion effort, can

actually make new products that close the loop and say that something we used

to see as “garbage” is actually a very useful product. It has a reuse potential

and a recycling potential to go again and again because, like I’ve talked

about, these things are incredibly durable. They, by their chemical design, can

last for an incredibly long time.

[3:55 p.m.]

I did mention earlier the notion of exceptions. There are a couple of important exceptions for people with some physical disabilities, mobility challenges. There will be some exceptions placed in this legislation, I believe, and what follows next, to allow the use of some straws in those particular cases, but I think it’s quite marginal.

This is going to be phased in over time. I think this is important. I think it’s a very reasonable and responsible way to go about this. We’re not going to suddenly drop the hammer on day one because, as we know, in the restaurant industry, you don’t order 20 straws at a time. You order in the tens or thousands. We don’t want to bring in a new bill that says: “Take all of that, and now throw it in the garbage.” That would be counterproductive to our eventual goals here.

So there’s some phasing in. There is some analysis that I see written in, as well, to allow us to understand what the economic impacts are, what the impacts are on our communities, to make sure that what we’re intending is working, so that phased-in process works.

I want to take…. I’ll perhaps end here, to the great gratitude of many in the place, with acknowledging efforts by the Minister of Environment, but also by some local leaders in my community in the northwest. We had lost our curbside pickup. We had a fire at the transfer station, and it caused the whole domino effect within our community. We no longer had the ability as residents in Smithers, where I live, to bring things down to the curbside once a week, as most British Columbians, most Canadians do.

Our regional director representative Mark Fisher and our local mayor, Gladys Atrill, were

incredibly persistent — and the Minister of Environment can confirm this if he

chooses to — in rethinking the way that we were doing recycling in the

northwest, because we have these challenges.

Any of our rural or remote communities have the great distances to

collect the material, send them on and get them somewhere useful so that they

can be reused and repurposed. These two local leaders were incredibly motivated

and dedicated, and it was with great excitement when we could, once again, take

our recyclable materials down to the curbside. I know it doesn’t sound like a

great thing, but it was remarkable to me, because it was soon after the most

recent election a year ago where we engaged in this project.

Interestingly, it’s one of the collective reasons I stepped back into politics. I left federal politics, and folks were coming to me with these challenges like this one. It might seem small to people watching, but it mattered to us. A bunch of other cases — sitting in coffee shops with people in Smithers, saying: “How are we going to fix this? The system is not quite working for us in rural B.C.” So I would try to phone in. I can remember contacting the minister’s staff and saying: “Is there anything we can do about this?” Someone said: “You should run again and just do this all the time, because you enjoy it.”

We all believe in recycling, repurposing. I think it’s really important not to simply throw things away, be they products or people. I guess folks in the northwest thought that recycling was okay, because a year ago, with great gratitude to the folks in Stikine, I was re-elected to public office, which is an incredible honour and privilege. Every day, you get to walk into a place like this and attempt as best as you can to represent the voices and concerns of people in your constituency.

Interjections.

Hon. N. Cullen: What we’re doing here today on Bill 24 — it is good to hear of support from across the way — is to continue the work and to understand that it’s iterative. It’s not perfect and not done. You continue to seek a better solution to the challenges that we face.

Similar to that campsite that we find, always try to leave it better than you found it. We

as a generation, as generations, have been unable to make that promise to

future generations to this point. We’re trying, and we’re getting

better.

When we all visit those schools and we talk to those kids, we say:

“You’re the future. We have hope in you. You’re who we’re leaving this behind

to.” Inevitably, one of those kids will say: “Well, what are you doing about

climate change? What are you doing about the forests? What are you doing about

the garbage that we see?” Those are the voices that must compel us and motivate

us to see these systems that were built improperly, incorrectly, without

considerations of their sustainability and to make them better.

That’s what we’re doing with this bill. I’m very happy to support it.

B. Bailey: It’s my pleasure to rise and speak to this bill from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, looking at the question of plastics. I want to speak a little bit about why this is so important in regards to our oceans.

[4:00 p.m.]

I was very fortunate to have been raised on a small Gulf Island — rather an idyllic childhood, I’ll admit. The ocean is — as it is, I think, to many people in British Columbia — just such an important part of my experience and connection to nature. I’ve been very, very fortunate to be able to travel to many other oceans, not just our beautiful ocean. I’ve been able to travel to the north and have been to the Arctic Ocean. I’ve been able to travel to Antarctica and have kayaked in the Antarctic.

In every one of these extraordinary, pristine, stunning, beautiful places — even in Antarctica, which really feels like the middle of nowhere — inevitably, there is plastic. It’s not the plastic that we can see in the oceans that is most threatening and disturbing, in fact. It’s the microplastic that is most problematic. Folks might not be aware that plastics actually account for 73 percent of marine litter. It’s an extraordinary problem that has to be addressed on a global scale. I’m very proud that this legislation is coming forward to encourage us to address it here in our own beautiful province.

When we think about the impact of plastic, we have to also consider this microplastic. There’s research that has come out and shown how that microplastic really is not breaking down and staying within the food systems. It’s present in fish; it’s present in whales. There is a nearshore study in British Columbia from plastic labs that showed elevated levels of microplastics up to 3,200 particles per cubic metre. Now, I’m not a scientist who specializes in this, but I can assure you, from the article, that that was a very high number. I think it’s really important that we consider what the impacts are.

It’s so easy to accept convenience instead of what we really should do. It’s something

that we’ve all fallen into, regardless of where we stand in our devotion to

environmental issues, but we really must move beyond that. It has not always

been the case that we have this perception that moving away from single-use

plastics will be problematic. I had the benefit of having many hippies in my

family and being members of co-ops, where we would bring our own jars and have

them filled. That was in the ’70s; that was a long time ago. At college we did

the same thing.

It has been very fun to watch that movement transition into something much slicker and quite elegant in the solutions that we see in zero-waste stores in Vancouver, where you can have just an extraordinary array of products that do not contain plastics or microplastics, that are not sold to you wrapped in plastic and that you don’t take away in a plastic bag. It’s very important that we provide the opportunities for peo