Second Session, 42nd Parliament

(2021) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Wednesday, April 21, 2021

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 54

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Tributes

Jack Planes

Hon. J. Horgan

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Video games industry

B. Bailey

S. Cadieux

Stanley Park

S. Chandra Herbert

Role of faith communities during COVID-19

R. Merrifield

Action on racism

M. Elmore

Impact of forestry practices on wildlife

M. Morris

Oral Questions

Budget provisions on Surrey hospital project and school portable use

S. Bond

Hon. J. Horgan

Budget provisions for school districts

J. Tegart

Hon. S. Robinson

Budget provisions on opioid crisis and access to safe supply

S. Furstenau

Hon. S. Malcolmson

Budget provisions on COVID-19 and support for businesses and workers

M. Bernier

Hon. S. Robinson

Budget provisions on economic recovery and jobs plan

T. Stone

Hon. S. Robinson

Budget provisions and government plan for child care

K. Kirkpatrick

Hon. S. Robinson

P. Milobar

Tabling Documents

Report pursuant to the COVID-19 Related Measures Act regarding Order-in-Council

247/2021, Attorney General

Orders of the Day

Budget Debate

(continued)

M. Bernier

S. Furstenau

B. Bailey

T. Stone

A. Mercier

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 3 — Employment Standards Amendment Act, 2021

Hon. H. Bains

G. Kyllo

A. Olsen

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 21, 2021

The House met at 1:33 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: D. Davies.

[1:35 p.m.]

Tributes

JACK PLANES

Hon. J. Horgan: It’s with great sadness that I advise the House that this past

April 9, T’Sou-ke Nation Elder Jack Planes passed away, leaving an

enormous void in the lives of not just the T’Sou-ke Nation but the

people of the Sooke community and anyone who had the good fortune and

opportunity to come across Jack Planes during his 87 years on this good

earth.

Jack’s traditional name was KLON-USTH. He was born in 1933, and in

1934, at the first All Sooke Day, he was declared best baby. That wasn’t

his first crowning achievement, nor was it the last for the Planes

family, as his son Johnny was also named best baby at All Sooke Day in

1982. Jack was a loving father to ten, loving grandfather to 22 and a

mentor and friend to anyone who held the earth and all of its animals in

high regard.

Jack was one of the first people to come to my office when I was

elected in 2005. He and his brother Frank, who joined him at that time,

were quick to tell me what my responsibilities were as their

representative in this House. He was quick to tell me what his rights

were as a member of the T’Sou-ke Nation and as someone who was

generations connected to the land that he called home. Jack was someone

who championed reconciliation long before governments started talking

about the importance of reconciliation.

He volunteered for 25 years to be part of the Sooke volunteer fire

department. He was always available to those leaders in the community

who needed advice on any subject that Jack cared to bring up. It was

that approach that Jack brought to almost everything that he did. He was

also a logger, a fisherman and a hunter. Although Jack leaves behind

many trips that he would have liked to take, he was also someone who was

quick to say that the lands were there for everyone.

One of the first issues he wanted me to champion was the erection

of gates on logging roads in the Sooke Hills, just up in the territory

of the T’Sou-ke Nation and part of my constituency. These are

characterized as private lands, in fee-simple terms, lands that were

ceded away from the T’Sou-ke Nation and the people of Vancouver Island

that were here before colonization because of a railway grant that a

former government gave to a very rich fellow at the time. We don’t need

to get into that. Suffice it to say that Jack thought that was not a

problem for him.

The animals, the lands, the waters, the air and the trees were

part of his heritage, the heritage of his people and the heritage of

anyone who cared to come and live on Vancouver Island.

I am going to miss Jack Planes, and I know that many, many others

will as well. I remember also the stories of his defiance of those who

would suggest that his rights did not exist and the title to the lands

was something that was fabricated by lawyers. He stood defiantly in

front of DFO officials and sold crab that he’d pulled out of the Sooke

Basin, just off the point, because they were his crab and he could do

whatever the darn well he wanted to do with them. He was arrested, and

the issue was now part and parcel of the lore of not just Jack Planes

but of those Indigenous Peoples who have lived on Vancouver Island and

lived in British Columbia without ever ceding title to their

lands.

Jack Planes was one of those people you are just so blessed to

meet. His son Gordie, now the Chief of the T’Sou-ke Nation, adopted much

of the philosophy and ethic that Jack brought to his life. The solar

array that is now on all of the outbuildings on the T’Sou-ke reserve

administration, the “Powering yourself” values that Gordie Planes brings

as Chief, were passed on to him by his father, Jack. The food security

and food sustainability initiatives that the T’Sou-ke Nation now

promotes, under the leadership of Gordie Planes, were planted in his

mind and the minds of others by Jack.

An extraordinary individual, one that I will greatly miss. For

those members of this House who did not have the opportunity to meet

him, know, please, for this day that it would be a good thing for you to

think about him and the extraordinary deeds that he was able to do while

he was here and the extraordinary people he’s left behind, with values

that are rock solid, focused on valuing every piece of life — animal,

mineral and otherwise.

That’s who Jack Planes was, and that’s who I’ll miss.

[1:40 p.m.]

Introductions by Members

S. Furstenau: I just want to take this opportunity to wish a very happy birthday to

Cole Smith.

Cole is my constituency assistant. He came to us a few months ago and

joined our team. We couldn’t be happier. As B McKenzie, another of our

amazing constituency as­sistants, described Cole, he is an enlightened

soul. He is incredibly self-aware, incredibly wise and very kind, and we are

so grateful to have him on our team and serving the constituents of Cowichan

Valley.

Happy birthday, Cole.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

VIDEO GAMES INDUSTRY

B. Bailey: Today is the UN-declared World Creativity and Innovation Day, and

I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to stand in this

House and draw attention to the extraordinary creative economy, alive

and well in B.C. We spoke last week about this during Creative

Industries Week, so I’ll take a different angle and just speak about one

aspect: games.

Humans love to play games. In almost every era of history, we find

evidence of this. Archaeological digs find ancient Mesopotamian

backgammon games from 5,000 years ago. Much of today’s games happen

online, and B.C. is home to some of the best video game developers in

the world. Some of the most creative people in British Columbia work in

this industry, so let me tell you about one of them: Eric

Jordan.

Eric is here in Victoria and owns Codename Entertainment, a small

business building video games, licensed in the Dungeons and Dragons, or

D&D, universe. Eric has a BFA from UVic and has translated his mad

creativity into an illustrious career in the tech sector. Prior to

founding Codename, Eric was a co-founder of PureEdge Solutions, a

company he sold to no less than IBM. Eric’s creativity and passion has

led his studio’s games to being in the top 1 percent of games on Steam.

Now, to parlay this into language for people who aren’t familiar with

video games, it’s like having your TV series being in the top 1 percent

of series viewed on Netflix. It’s a huge deal.

Creativity drives economic growth. This UVic BFA has built and

sold one business to IBM, and his second business is a record-breaking

video game studio employing creatives right here in Victoria.

There are nearly 7,000 creatives in this industry, working in 200

studios across B.C., from Cloudhead Games in Parksville to the hundreds

of studios clustered in Kelowna, Victoria and Vancouver.

Please join me in celebrating this vibrant sector of our economy

today on World Creativity and Innovation Day.

FOR DISABLED

PERSONS

S. Cadieux: More than 50,000 British Columbians use a form of wheeled

mobility. This number appears to have increased by 25 percent in a

decade and is expected to in­crease as our population continues to

age. Wheelchair-accessible parking is an essential piece of community

infra­structure for these people to be included and mobile in

their communities.

Anyone that depends on the designated disability parking spaces

could recount to you the copious times they’ve encountered parking lots

with too few designated spaces, parking spaces that are too narrow to

accommodate a vehicle and a wheelchair, spaces without access aisles for

vehicles with side ramps or the inappropriate placement of sidewalk

access ramps, rendering them useless. Add to that the times we see

people misuse or flagrantly abuse the right to park in these spots. I

guarantee you, you wouldn’t believe the stories. Today I certainly wish

we could have visual aids for our speeches in the

Legislature.

Regardless of whether it’s the fully able person who uses

grandma’s disability parking permit when she’s not with them or the

person who had knee injury and is still using an expired temporary

placard or just the person that says, “I’ll only be here for a couple of

minutes,” or the building manager that thinks disability spaces are a

good place to put the dumpsters or the snow cleared from the rest of the

lot, the callous disregard for legitimate users is plain offensive. Yes,

it has even happened here at the Legislature, where there have been very

few adjustments to disability parking in the last 40 or more

years.

Extra-wide spaces and access aisles are essential for people with

mobility devices. As more and more people are needing parking placards

for other reasons, like an inability to walk long distances, perhaps

it’s time for a discussion of a change — different-coloured placards and

different designated spaces for different users, perhaps.

[1:45 p.m.]

Here’s my PSA. If you see an abuse, report it. If you have a

placard, but you don’t need an extra-wide spot because you don’t have a

mobility device, park in the regular spot beside. If you manage a

parking lot, monitor and enforce it. And if you’re an elected official,

make sure the legislation and bylaws you oversee provide clear,

consistent and enforced standards.

For you, not finding a parking space might be a little

inconvenient. But for a person who uses a mobility device, not finding

an accessible space is access denied.

STANLEY PARK

S. Chandra Herbert: Folks that know me well will tell you that my favourite place to

be, where I’m most relaxed, is outdoors in nature, in the backwoods, in

the back country, hiking somewhere or camping by a lake or a river. But

folks might not understand how I could live in and represent such an

incredibly dense community like the West End — an urban jungle, so to

speak.

Well, I will tell you the secret: Stanley Park. For many of us in

the West End, and for many constituents in Coal Harbour as well, one of

the biggest challenges during COVID has been no backyards. Many of the

buildings don’t have outdoor spaces to really speak of, yet constituents

are stacked on top of each other in little shoeboxes. Where to go?

Stanley Park and the beach.

I want to thank those who have worked so hard for so many years to

take care of our park. Of course, there are controversies. Of course,

there can be challenges. But that’s only because we love it so much.

It’s where we go to get peace. It’s where we go to get freedom from

others. It’s where we go to find others and find connection, find

connection with the earth, outside of the concrete world that we often

live in.

I want to thank the Stanley Park Ecology Society, a group that has

existed for now over 32 years, who I normally would be out with on Earth

Day tomorrow, pulling ivy, chopping blackberry, planting native species

and trying to do our part to bring this place back to the natural

wonderland that the Musqueam, the Tsleil-Waututh and the Squamish lived

on and took care of for so many years. It’s an incredible place and one

that I think really needs to remind us all of how we have to take care

of those native species and the wild places that they exist in, even if

we face challenges like the coyotes that we’ve had to deal with there

recently.

With that being said, I want to wish Stanley Park a hap­py

many, many more years to come, especially the ecology society, who take

care of it and look after it so well.

ROLE OF FAITH COMMUNITIES

DURING

COVID-19

R. Merrifield: The pandemic has greatly affected our society. I’m so moved by how

we have all come together. My daughter recently came home with a T-shirt

that said: “We are in this together for a reason.” It had this picture

of a globe, symbolizing our interconnectedness.

This year all of us have sacrificed, from distanced social

relationships, families that have not been together in months or

modifying our entire lives to adjust how we live, who we see, how we go

to work. Truly, it has been a sacrifice in order to keep each other

safe. We celebrate our front-line workers, protecting our lives with

theirs. They’re heroes.

But there are also some unsung heroes, those who si­lently

provide supports without acknowledgment and without requirement. I’m

talking about our faith-based communities. They continue to serve. These

are the same facilities, sanctuaries, tabernacles, mosques, temples,

gurdwaras — the same spaces — that normally house so many and are

sitting empty. It’s my delight today to acknowledge one of these

facilities, just one example of how so many faith communities in our

midst continue to serve us during this pandemic.

Trinity Baptist Church has long been a venue, the largest venue in

my riding in Kelowna, where conferences and large funerals as well as

all of our high school graduations are held, in addition to their

services. But right now it serves as one of the region’s vaccination

centres. They’ve transformed the area that normally has cinnamon buns,

coffee and lunch on a Sunday into a space that delivers thousands of

vaccinations daily.

This is a difficult time for all religious communities. But while

we sacrifice together, I thank you. I thank you for continuing to serve

our communities in so many ways.

[1:50 p.m.]

I offer you hope, for one day soon you will be able to gather

again in person. We're all in this together for a reason.

ACTION ON RACISM

M. Elmore: A recent report states that over 40 percent of Asian British

Columbians have experienced racist ac­tions over this past year.

It has been along a continuum of indirect-direct racial slurs — social

media slurs, which also included targeting elected representatives;

racist in­cidents at work, school and the community;

discrimination; property damage; graffiti; to assault.

Eighty-seven percent think it’s getting worse. In the context of

the global COVID-19 pandemic, there is a rising wave of racism targeting

Asian, Indigenous, racialized and people of colour across North America.

The Atlanta shooting which targeted the killing of Asian women has

struck a chord with women in B.C. and around the world. Women face a

double threat of racist and sexist violence.

A high percentage of attacks in our province have been against our

most vulnerable, our seniors. We know these attacks are rooted in

systemic racism and structural discrimination. The new resource entitled

Challenging Racist British Columbia: 150 Years and Counting

documents that B.C. was founded on white supremacy and patriarchy at the

expense of the original inhabitants, our Indigenous Peoples.

Meeting these challenges, individuals and communities are coming

together. They are standing up, speaking out, reporting acts of racism,

organizing across B.C. They are actions all British Columbians can take.

If it’s safe to do so, intervene against racist incidents, support those

victimized and examine our internal biases, our internalized

privilege.

Now is the time to practise empowered citizenship a­cross

differences in communities. We need more men standing with women against

violence, those with white skin privilege standing in solidarity with

racialized and Indigenous communities, rejecting toxic masculinity and

undoing racist misogyny and hate from our minds and hearts.

Let’s take our leadership from our elders and, in the words of

Martin Luther King, come together to ensure all British Columbians can

enjoy our beautiful province with dignity. In his words, let us not be

satisfied until “justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a

mighty stream.”

IMPACT OF FORESTRY PRACTICES

WILDLIFE

M. Morris: In 1945, British Columbia adopted the sustainable yield forest

harvesting strategy, focusing solely on growing and harvesting trees.

Over these past 75 years, we have harvested tens of millions of hectares

of our forest, forever altering the landscape and unique biodiversity of

our great province.

As we have expanded our populations and our impacts on the land,

we have also equally impacted nature and our environment. By

clear-cutting millions of hectares of forest over the past 75 years, we

have also displaced hundreds of species of wildlife, millions of birds,

millions of ungulates, millions of every wild thing. Our activities have

contributed in significant ways to a major ecological imbalance in our

forests.

The removal of natural forest cover impacts some species of

wildlife more than others. It makes it difficult to impossible for

ungulates to find shelter or to hide from predators. It makes it easy

for predators to see and hunt their prey. Our once robust populations of

ungulates have been decimated, almost eliminated in many regions, with

most mortality proven to be by wolves, grizzly bears, black bears and

cougars. Predator populations have expanded across the

province.

The alterations to our landscape from decades of intense human

activity places the burden of responsibility on us to get the balance

right between human activity and biodiversity. A small but important

part of that balance in­cludes predator and prey.

I want to thank the hundreds of hunters and conservationists from

across our great province who have written to me and every member of

this House asking for our support in finding this balance. We have

leading wildlife biologists, ecologists and scientists skilled and

available to help us find that balance.

I have experienced the gentleness of nature, but just as often I

have witnessed the harsh realities of survival in nature, both eliciting

deep emotional responses. I am, however, a conservationist, and reality

and science must prevail for us to get the balance right.

[1:55 p.m.]

Oral Questions

BUDGET PROVISIONS ON

SURREY HOSPITAL PROJECT AND

SCHOOL PORTABLE USE

S. Bond: Well, the Premier has developed a bit of a pattern. He makes an

announcement, brags about it for a few years and then fails to deliver

it. The people of Surrey were promised a new hospital, but there are

zero dollars in the budget this year for that project. So they sneak the

name into the budget, and they just skip the details part.

In fact, the NDP is so fuzzy on this project that they have two

different completion dates offered up in the budget, which tells you

pretty much where this project lies on the priority list as the NDP

continue to deal with Surrey.

Can the Premier tell the people of Surrey, first of all, why

there’s no money in the budget this year for that project, and why are

there two different completion dates in the government’s own

documents?

Hon. J. Horgan: I am delighted to talk to the Leader of the Opposition about

Surrey, something that they neglected when they were in government for

some 16 years.

Of course, they didn’t neglect residents of Surrey when they put a

toll bridge in the middle of the community and said: “Only you will pay

to cross this bridge.” That was their approach to people in Surrey — pay

more, get less. We are building a hospital in Surrey. It will have a

cancer centre. I think the reason that the B.C. Liberals couldn’t find

it in the budget….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members will come to order.

Hon. J. Horgan: The only time a hospital in Surrey was mentioned in a B.C. Liberal

budget was when they put a line item saying: “This is the land that we

sold where the hospital was supposed to be.”

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

supplemental.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, come to order, please.

The Leader of the Official Opposition on a

supplemental.

S. Bond: Let’s be clear. Maybe the Premier should get his facts straight.

After years of NDP neglect, it was members on this side of the House

that expanded Surrey Memorial and, in fact, the Guru Nanak emergency

de­partment. It was this side of the House that built the Jim

Pattison Outpatient Centre. This side actually delivered on its

promises.

Sadly, that’s not the only promise that the Premier has broken

when it comes to Surrey. “We have to have a total removal of these

portables over the next four years and start by reducing them by half in

the first two years.” Well, that was five years ago. Let’s see what the

Premier has managed to deliver. Guess what. That hasn’t happened. In

fact, the number of portables has actually increased by over 30 percent.

Neither the throne speech nor the budget makes any reference to that

promise. Once again, another promise made, bragged about and

disappears.

Can the Premier stand up today and explain to the parents, the

teachers and the residents of Surrey what hap­pened to the promise

he made four years ago about eliminating portables?

Hon. J. Horgan: Was it four years ago? Was it five years ago? They don’t really

know. They don’t really care. They just want to make noise, not provide

services for people.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Members will come to order. You’re losing very

precious time, Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: I was reflecting that there are more members in the Surrey caucus

on this side of the House than there are members sitting on that side of

the House right now. But that’s just an aside.

The fastest-growing region in the province — you know this full

well. More kids are coming into schools in Surrey than anywhere else in

British Columbia.

What did the former government do between 2011 and 2016? Zero. A

thousand new kids a year every year for five years. Not one portable was

removed. They were stacking them up like cordwood. What did we do? We

built 2,700 spaces.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: We’ve worked with the school board. We’ve worked with the city of

Surrey to fast-track approval processes.

[2:00 p.m.]

We weren’t just taking money out of tolls. We were taking money

and putting it into schools, putting it into better outcomes for kids.

We are unapologetic about that, hon. Speaker. Again, the reason there

are more Surrey members on this side of the House than there are members

on that side today is because we are delivering on the promises that we

made.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, are we interested in asking questions and in the answers?

If we are, then we’ll continue. Otherwise, there’s no need

to.

BUDGET PROVISIONS FOR

SCHOOL

DISTRICTS

J. Tegart: School boards have been warning this government that they face

significant deficits without support. Students and staff want to know

that COVID safety standards will be maintained when school resumes in

the fall. Parents want to be assured that support for their children,

who may have fallen slightly behind, remains in place.

What does this Premier do? He cuts $55 million from the budgets of

school boards.

Can the Premier tell us whether custodians or learning assistants

will be fired because of his budget cuts?

Hon. S. Robinson: Only the B.C. Liberals could look at an emergency boost in funding

for school districts during a pandemic and then call it a cut. Do you

know why, Mr. Speaker? It’s because that’s all they know: to cut

programs for children in our schools. Everything, to them, looks like a

cut.

We are putting more into the education system this year than we

ever have before. There are more supports in the pandemic — for making

sure that the schools are clean, that our children are safe, that the

teachers are safe and that all the staff, in school districts right

around the province, are safe. That has been a priority for our

government from day one of this pandemic, and it’s continuing to be a

priority for us.

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

J. Tegart: Well, it seems that this government is predicting a return to

normal — that in September, everything will be magically better. Staff,

teachers and parents want to know that schools will be safe. They want

to know that PPE will be there, that staff resources will be there and

that the government has their back.

In school district 61, Victoria, they know that the Premier

doesn’t. Trustees are looking at having to cut music programs and youth

and family counsellors.

Again to the Premier, who is going to be given a pink slip in June

in order to deal with these cuts?

Hon. S. Robinson: Well, Budget 2021 protects people’s health and their livelihoods,

and it builds on the resilience of British Columbians — the resilience

that we have seen for the last year.

It has been absolutely amazing to see people take care of each

other and to have a government that has been taking care of British

Columbians since this pandemic began. We did that in March. We’ve been

doing that all last spring, all last summer, all fall and right now in

the spring, and we will as long as there is a pandemic to be dealt with.

This government has people’s backs.

BUDGET PROVISIONS ON OPIOID CRISIS

AND ACCESS TO SAFE

SUPPLY

S. Furstenau: Yesterday’s budget saw this government announce $330 million aimed

at addressing the overdose crisis. Treatment beds and supervised

consumption sites are long-term measures, but they do not immediately

ad­dress our current reality.

Over 900 people have died since safe supply measures were promised

by this government in September, and that number is only current to the

end of February. Yet in this budget, we have seen no directive that

government is following up on that commitment to provide alternatives to

an illicit and poisonous street supply. Experts and drug user advocates

are distraught that this government’s budget has gone back on their

promise to implement a regulated, safe supply.

My question, hon. Speaker, is to the Minister of Mental Health and

Addictions. Will her government immediately fund a regulated, safe

supply, in order to stop the unnecessary deaths of five people a day in

British Columbia?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: British Columbia is leading the country in providing prescription

alternatives. A safer supply is something that we are leading the

country on.

[2:05 p.m.]

That there has been a 400 percent increase in the people that have

been prescribed a safe supply since the pandemic began has saved lives,

yet the death toll has been terrible. The announcement — ahead of the

budget, the week before the budget — of $45 million to continue to

implement the life-saving harm reduction and substance use supports,

again, has saved lives during a terrible year of loss of life. It’s

something that we wanted to signal early, so that those on the front

line were able to continue and expand on those new measures.

There are items in the budget for continuing to separate people

from the toxic drug supply, from the mass poisoning that’s happening

across British Columbia. I can say with absolute confidence and convey

to those who have been advocating for a continued expansion of safe

supply that there is budget provision for them. I’ll be talking with

stakeholders in the coming days about the continued expansion and the

deepening commitment of our government to lead the country and to

separate people from the toxic drug supply during a terrible public

health emergency.

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

S. Furstenau: When asked yesterday about the absence of mention of safe supply

in the budget, the Minister of Finance said this government is expanding

treatment beds and consumption sites, because “we know what works and

works so well.”

This government also knows that regulated safe supply, accessible

to people when they need it, is what has been committed to and what is

needed right now to stop the deaths from the toxic drug supply. It isn’t

an either-or. As a continuum of care is set up, five people are dying

per day. We need to couple long-term measures with immediate, regulated,

safe supply that recognizes, now more than ever, because of COVID-19,

people are isolated and facing an increasingly toxic drug supply. We

need proactive measures that are combined with long-term

solutions.

My question is again to the Minister of Mental Health and

Addictions. She says there will be funds in the budget. Can she provide

specific details about what we can expect to see for funding regulated

safe supply in this province immediately?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Anybody that’s watching: I want you to know that in addition to

prescribed safer supply, our commitment, as exhibited in the budget, is

half a billion dollars of mental health and addictions support. It’s

unprecedented in British Columbia’s history.

On responding to the overdose crisis, it includes building new

treatment beds. It includes standing up additional supervised

consumption sites. Across the continuum of care, we are working on every

front and working hard.

Here are the specifics on prescribed safer supply: $22.6 million

over three years. It includes leveraging existing programs and creating

new programs to provide expanded regional access hubs, ongoing

evaluation of implementation and clinical impacts on the health and

safety of patients, and development of clinical protocols and guidance

based on emerging evidence.

Again, to those who have been advocating and doing the very hard

work of developing protocols — the first in Canada — I’ll be in touch

with them in coming days about the specifics of how that budget

commitment will be spent.

BUDGET PROVISIONS ON COVID-19 AND

SUPPORT FOR

BUSINESSES AND WORKERS

M. Bernier: Yesterday we saw a completely botched budget put forward by the

Premier. There are no real supports for businesses. No support for

workers that are im­pacted by this pandemic. We’ve all heard the

stories. It’s too bad the Premier is not listening to the people of

British Columbia right now.

Look, it's cold comfort to the restaurant sector that was banking

on new supports to make it through the COVID restrictions. Despite this

glaring oversight, the Premier is sitting on over $1 billion in unused

COVID funds — $1 billion he’s sitting on.

Will the Premier direct that funding today to support the

businesses and workers that have been completely ig­nored in this

budget?

[2:10 p.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: I’m happy to get up on my feet to talk about a fabulous budget

that is here to support British Columbians, protecting people’s health,

protecting their livelihoods and building out and preparing for a

recovery that we know is coming. We know it’s coming because we have a

vaccine rollout that is playing out, that is making a difference for

British Columbians.

I want to remind everybody that we have been in this pandemic for

over a year, and we’ve always been there to support British Columbians.

To date, we offered, just to remind everyone…. A $1,000 worker benefit

went to 600,000 British Columbians whose jobs were impacted last year.

We were the only province to provide a rental supplement for those who

had to pay rent and were worried about it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. S. Robinson: A recovery benefit was received by over 2.5 million British

Columbians. We’ve had business supports, the small and medium-sized

business grant program, that are helping people, and those in the

tourism industry are eligible for up to $45,000 to help make the

difference, to help provide a bridge until better days ahead. There’s

absolutely a lot more in this budget. I know we’re going to be getting

more questions, and I look forward to that coming up.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Peace River South on a supplemental.

M. Bernier: It would have been nice if the Finance Minister actually talked

about this budget. Everything she just talked about was last year —

stuff that all three parties in this House worked together to try to

help people in the COVID crisis. Again, the government failed to even

get that money out the door then. We’re talking about people who are in

crisis now. They’re still in crisis because this government failed to

help them when this House worked together for that exact

reason.

The circuit breaker grant was originally supposed to support a

three-week shutdown. That three weeks is actually ending this week. The

shutdown now has been extended for possibly two months, if not more —

shutting down businesses, putting more people out of work.

Again the minister avoided, completely, the question. The

minister, the Premier, are sitting on $1 billion of unallocated funding,

which is 20 times what the circuit breaker grant is. The Premier can fix

that mistake today.

Will he direct that that $1 billion go out, increase the circuit

breaker grant and make sure that money gets out the door now to help

people who are affected today?

Hon. S. Robinson: I’m very happy to get back on my feet and talk about the $127

million that has gone out through the small business recovery grants, up

to $45,000, as well as the circuit breaker relief grant, up to $10,000.

Also, I’m very happy to talk about the PST on new equipment machinery —

waiving that — that’s in this budget and the impact…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. S. Robinson: …on the savings that are going to be going to businesses as a

result of that investment. Again, we are continuing to listen to

businesses. I know that my colleague the Minister for Small Business has

been engaging with the businesses that are most im­pacted. We have

been there. We have demonstrated our commitment to the business

community, to be there for them. We’re going to keep being there for

them. That’s our commitment to them.

BUDGET PROVISIONS ON ECONOMIC

RECOVERY AND JOBS

PLAN

T. Stone: Well, only in NDP-land would they celebrate taking two years,

essentially, to get critical supports out to businesses that are

struggling, because that’s what’s going to happen here.

The dollars in the B.C. recovery grant and the circuit breaker

grant…. These were dollars that were approved over a year ago. The

programs were established just before the last election that the Premier

felt necessary to call. We’re sitting here today, and they’re so excited

about their progress that they’ve had to push the program out by an

extra year, because they can’t figure out how to get money out the

door.

It’s pathetic. The Premier also failed….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Let’s not have side conversations, please. Let’s hear the

question.

Member.

T. Stone: If the small business owners — those restaurateurs, those in the

service industry, those hospitality businesses, those tourism

businesses, those hard-working British Columbians around the province —

could hear the members opposite laughing today when we’re asking

critical questions about what this government is doing and what they’re

not doing to support small business, I think they’d be pretty darn

disappointed in their government.

[2:15 p.m.]

The Premier also offered no hope and no vision for British

Columbians in their jobs in this budget. That being said, he has put a

plan in front of British Columbians that grows the size of government

massively. In fact, one can only be astounded when you look at the

budget documents and you see on page 34, and you see it clearly

indicated, that the government is basing its recovery on taxpayer-funded

public sector jobs, which have increased by 60,000 positions over the

past year. You heard that right — 60,000 positions in one year.

Meanwhile, the private sector is still trying to recover 43,000 jobs

that are lost today compared to one year ago.

My question to the Premier is this. Will the Premier immediately

table in this House a private sector jobs plan?

Hon. S. Robinson: Well, it’s so interesting to listen to the members of the other

side sort of jump around with their anxiety and their stress. Because

they seem to sort of forget…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. I think the question was al­ready asked.

Hon. S. Robinson: …that it’s really important, I think, to listen to what others are

saying. I want to note that….

Interjections.

Hon. S. Robinson: Precisely. I want to note that the Surrey Board of Trade has said:

“We were happy to hear that there are financial commitments in the

service plan for trade and industry development, small business and

economic development and the strategic investment fund called InBC.”

This is from the Surrey Board of Trade. They like what they heard. They

value what they heard.

On the other hand, the members opposite…. They are just grasping

at straws because they don’t like it that the business community is

happy with what we are presenting in our budget.

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

supplemental.

T. Stone: Well, I’m not sure if the Minister of Finance could be more

dismissive than that — more dismissive of the thousands of British

Columbians who are sitting at home today, wondering if they’re going to

get called back to work any time soon, wondering if they’re going to be

able to pay their bills.

In fact, 53 percent of British Columbians aren’t sure, or they’re

$200 away from paying their bills at the end of the month. And we hear

today dismissive responses from the Minister of Finance about anxiety

and stress. You’re darn right British Columbians have a lot of anxiety

and stress, because this government hasn’t stepped up to support

them.

Now, the minister responsible for…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member will continue.

T. Stone: …economic recovery actually got no new funding in his budget in

order to help businesses in need. Clearly, his ministry is not a

priority for the Premier.

In addition to that, despite women and youth being impacted most

by this pandemic, the Premier has no jobs plan for them either. This is

something that we’ve been calling for, for months.

My question to the Premier is this. Will the Premier fix this

mistake? Will he table both a private sector jobs plan and a jobs plan

focused on youth and women?

Hon. S. Robinson: Well, it’s interesting to listen to the members opposite talk with

such disdain for teachers and health care workers in our province. In

fact…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. S. Robinson: …one of their own….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Minister, just take a seat, please.

Members, I understand heckling is more tempting, but heckling is

not going to produce anything. Shall we call this a heckling session,

then, instead of question period?

Okay. The minister will continue.

Hon. S. Robinson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It’s really, I guess,

disappointing that we get heckled every time we try to answer a

particular question. It’s very, very disappointing.

I want to point out that in this budget, you see

tremendous….

Interjections.

Hon. S. Robinson: I’m happy to answer the questions. The question that I have is if

they’re prepared to listen to the answer.

[2:20 p.m.]

In this budget, we are investing heavily in the youth of British

Columbia with co-op opportunities, with job training, with upskilling

opportunities — 30 micro-credentialing programs. We know that youth have

been hit hard in this pandemic, and that’s why we are investing in

them.

For women, we have tripled the child care budget since we formed

government. That’s the biggest difference for women.

BUDGET PROVISIONS AND

GOVERNMENT PLAN FOR CHILD

CARE

K. Kirkpatrick: This two-term government is abandoning families and working

mothers at an astonishing rate. In 2017, this Premier promised $10-a-day

daycare, and this promise was the underpinning of the Childcare B.C.

plan. Then he promised it again, and yesterday we saw his incompetence

on full display. All that’s been referenced in this budget is to convert

more spaces that already exist into the pilot program. No new spaces.

According to Sharon Gregson from the $10-a-day daycare coalition, this

budget did not “deliver the system B.C. families and educators were

promised in the recent election.”

Can the Premier tell parents, to whom he broke his word not once

but twice, when universal child care will be available to all British

Columbians?

Mr. Speaker: Minister of Finance.

Hon. S. Robinson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Interjections.

Hon. S. Robinson: They start heckling before I even start answering. I mean, this is

sort of getting a little bit…. Maybe they’ll have the answer, or maybe

they’d prefer to hear it.

Our budget more than doubles the number of $10-a-day prototype

centres. You know what that means? That means 4,000 more affordable

spaces for families here in British Columbia.

You know what else we’re doing with this budget? We are doubling

the wage enhancement for early childhood educators to $4 an hour. That

brings their minimum wage to $25 an hour — when we started in

government, they were barely making $15, $16 an hour — because we care

about making sure that there’s quality, affordable and accessible child

care for all British Columbians.

Mr. Speaker: The member for West Vancouver–Capi­lano on a

supplemental.

K. Kirkpatrick: I find that an interesting answer, considering the fee cap that

was recently imposed on the child care providers, which is one of the

biggest things to push down ECE salaries. You’re going to have to make

up for the $4 an hour.

The Premier made a promise of $250 million in new spending on

child care each year. He committed to a separate capital program for

daycares, and instead this Premier has delivered $233 million over three

years — that’s $83 million, not $250 million.

Emily Gawlick is the executive director of the Early Childhood

Educators of British Columbia. She says: “The progress is so minimal, it

does not meet the needs of families or educators as they try to recover

from this pandemic.”

Can the Premier tell us why he has abandoned his commitment and

blown it for parents and families expecting more?

Hon. S. Robinson: It’s absolutely fascinating to listen to members of the other side

who’ve finally discovered that child care is a necessity….

Interjections.

Hon. S. Robinson: For years, they neglected child care in this province. They

ignored the needs of families, they ignored the needs of women, and they

ignored the needs of children. It took them four years to create as many

spaces as we created in our first ten months in government.

I’m happy to say that with this budget, we are helping almost

2,000 more families access supported child development programs. That’s

going to make a real difference for those families that have children

with special needs in the child care system. That’s going to make a

difference for these families, because we care about families, we care

about children, and we want to make sure that it’s there for women to

work and contribute to the economy and participate in our economic

recovery.

[2:25 p.m.]

P. Milobar: Well, it’s very interesting listening to the avoidance of the

questions today by the Minister of Finance. It’s interesting how the

language has changed — how they don’t really want to talk about

universal $10-a-day daycare anymore. They don’t want to talk about

numbers. They talk about a doubling — a doubling of a failed target

already, that was only a few thousand spaces when it should have been

fully implemented by now, from a promise made twice by this Premier over

the last four years.

The NDP have only opened ten percent of the spaces they’ve

promised. That means a doubling gets you to 20 percent of your promise

after five years. It’s not good enough. There’s still 80 percent of the

public looking for the child care they were promised by this Premier not

once but twice.

A couple of quotes. “This provincial budget does not deliver on

promises to child care.” That’s from Paul Kershaw. “Today’s B.C. budget

has thrown cold water on the good child care news we heard from the

federal government.” That’s from the Coalition of Child Care Advocates.

“Finance Minister Robinson’s first budget does not deliver the system

B.C.’s families and educators were promised in the recent election” —

Coalition of Child Care Advocates. “B.C.’s government must now improve

on its lacklustre 2021 budget.” That’s from Sharon Gregson. And finally:

“B.C. shouldn’t wait for federal funds to arrive before making more

significant improvements to child care in our province.”

When will this Premier stand up and actually deliver on his now

twice-delivered promise in two different elections and ensure residents

of British Columbia they will have affordable, $10-a-day, fully

accessible child care in British Columbia now, not another five, six

years from now?

Hon. S. Robinson: Well, our government’s Childcare B.C. plan began with the historic

$2 billion investment for child care in the first two years. And when

you’re building a system, it does take some time, for sure. Doubling….

And over 36,000…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. S. Robinson: …families now receive child care for $10 a day or less. We are

doubling that. And I’m so glad that the member opposite mentioned that

the federal government is finally at the table, because you know what

that means for us? It means that we’re going to be able to move

faster….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Members, we’ll come to order.

Hon. S. Robinson: With the federal government that, just on Monday, announced that

they are finally participating in child care, we’re going to be able to

deliver much faster.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present a report pursuant to the

COVID-19 Related Measures Act.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call continued debate on the budget.

Budget Debate

(continued)

M. Bernier: I know a lot of people are gathering up their belongings and leaving

right now. I appreciate that.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Interjections.

M. Bernier: Sorry, I’m being heckled by the Premier.

I didn’t quite hear that, sir.

Actually, can I call a two-minute recess, please?

Deputy Speaker: Yes, you may.

This House will be in recess for two minutes. Thank you,

Members.

The House recessed from 2:28 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

M. Bernier: Thank you, Chair. Sorry for the disruption that we had. It’s always

unfortunate when you hear unparliamentary language in the House. You know,

obviously in question period things can get a little heated, but it’s

unfortunate when people take it to a personal level. I appreciate the

recess, where I was just able to address an issue.

As the designated speaker for the official opposition on Budget 2021,

I am also really pleased to continue my remarks from where I left off

yesterday. You know, I had a lot of time to go through the budget documents

last night. Unfortunately, as people can appreciate, in lockup yesterday we

weren’t given all of the documents, so it took me until through the evening

last night to dive into a little bit more detail in this budget.

I’m looking forward to not only covering off a few more things today,

but also once we get to estimates. I know the critics in the official

opposition are all lined up ready to ask lots of questions of the individual

ministers, especially around a budget that has left more questions, I would

say, than answers.

We want to focus on the specifics of the budget, but again, I want to

just talk about a few themes that we saw in this budget first of all. The

number one thing is it’s devoid of any vision. It’s devoid of any plan.

Right now what people are looking for in the province of British Columbia is

some hope. They wanted vision. They wanted something from government that

would show them a pathway post-COVID. What is economic recovery going to

look like in the province of British Columbia?

Unfortunately, what we’ve seen was kind of a status quo budget, a few

reannouncements, really no new spending. More importantly, there was

nothing, again, in there to show people that we are not only going to get

through this pandemic in the short term, but we’re going to be able to

survive and move forward in a prosperous way in British Columbia in the long

term.

There’s a lack of a jobs plan. There’s nothing really in this budget

that talks about growing the province, growing the economy, making sure that

we’re helping employers out, making sure that the job creators of the

province are supported and given some optimism that they should stay in

British Columbia, that they can survive through the pandemic, but then for

the long term, to make investments to help grow the province

back.

That optimism is important. It’s not just about flashy announcements.

It’s not about just tabling a budget in the House like the government did

yesterday. It’s about messaging a plan. It’s about showing where

government’s in­tentions are, where they want to go not only as a

government, but where they want to see the province to go.

We saw very little of that in the throne speech, but be­tween

the throne speech and the budget, almost every single time a minister in

this House has been questioned about a problem, their answer was always:

“Don’t worry. Wait for the budget.” So we waited for the budget. People of

British Columbia, and affected people because of the COVID pandemic, waited

for the budget. How disappointing it was, after all that wait.

As we know, the budget was delayed twice, so we know the budget is now

being just tabled yesterday, which is two months later than normal. But

after all of that waiting, after all of the anticipation that people were

told, “Don’t worry. It’ll be taken care of in the budget,” now we’re hearing

from everybody in the public, from the stakeholders, from people who were

told to wait: “Well, that was cold comfort. We waited, and all the promises

that we were told to wait for didn’t materialize.”

[2:35 p.m.]

What’s unfortunate about that is the government is continuing to hide

behind the COVID pandemic. Every single answer in this House, every time

this government is asked a question, they say: “Hey, don’t you realize we’re

in a pandemic?” Of course, we realize we’re in a pandemic. Why do you think

there are people who are asking for help? Why do you think there are

employers right now that are struggling? Why do you think there are

employees who are out of work, who are phoning all of our offices saying: “I

don’t have a job. I can’t pay my bills.” Where’s the hope?

According to the government, it’s like: “Don’t worry. Wait for the

budget.” There was nothing in there for them. There was nothing in this

budget that would show somebody, right now, who has been laid off or who has

lost their job because of COVID, because of the downturn in the province….

There is nothing in there that says: “Don’t worry. We’ve got your back.

We’ll support you. We’re going to help you get through this. Don’t worry.

When this is over, here’s our plan for you and your family to prosper, to

stay in British Columbia, so employers can grow, so investment can happen

and people can get back to work.”

That’s what people wanted to see in this budget. It’s not in there.

Great expectations but no delivery from the government. Again, it’s

unfortunate when people are told just to wait and see. Now we’re seeing it

in this budget, when we talk about any support that may be there.

We talk about the $10-a-day child care — I’ll get into it later — but:

“Don’t worry. Wait, it might happen.” What about growing capital investment?

“Don’t worry. Wait, it’ll happen some day.” What about people who are laid

off right now and businesses that we’re all hearing about that are

shuttering their doors and telling us that they might not be able to reopen?

They need help now, but what are they being told by this government?

“Wait.”

People can’t wait anymore. People need help now. A­gain, that

road map to recovery is so important. When you look at the budget and the

budget documents and the forecasting that this government has done, they can

say: “Look at this pathway we’ve generated for optimism.” I’ll tell you

right now, every business that I’ve talked to that’s looked at this budget….

Where is the optimism when you’re forecasting almost ten years of buying

shovels to dig a hole for a big deficit? Almost ten years of borrowing

money.

The government, by their own admission in their own budget documents,

has said: “We don’t see this province doing well for ten years. We don’t see

us getting back on track to revenue-generation and balanced budgets for

almost ten years.” It’s in the government’s own documents. How does that

instill confidence?

If I was a company that had any choice of where to in­vest, with

B.C. now being one of the highest tax jurisdictions in the country, and now

a document that says, “But don’t worry; we don’t see anything changing for

ten years,” I know where I’d be investing my money. Definitely not here. I

hate to say that, because we know how great British Columbia has been and

how great it could be, if only we show that plan for people to stay

here.

The government is touting all this spending they are doing. The

spending is in government. It’s not to help people that are suffering right

now in the province. It’s to help government. You talk to anybody on the

streets, and what is their biggest complaint, usually? It’s about

and not looking out for the people in British Columbia.

I cannot believe that the NDP just tabled a document that verifies how

people feel. This document proves them right. When you look at that hole

that is being dug, when you look at the provincial debt now going to be

about $103 billion, of which $72 billion is taxpayer-supported debt, rising

by 13 percent a year to a staggering $127 billion — staggering.

[2:40 p.m.]

This is a number that this province has never, ever been even close to

before. By 2023, $127 billion in debt.

The concern now is B.C.’s credit rating. What will that mean? Even

just recently Moody’s credit rating agency, which as everybody in this House

is aware of, is part of the rating for the province, said that the

province’s credit rating could be facing downward pressure if new direct and

indirect debt were to materially exceed the current projections, which it’s

doing, coinciding with a loss in the financial management of this province.

So even our credit rating agencies now are worried about the path that the

province is taking, and they’re going to be watching with a close

eye.

Anybody who follows the finances of the province knows that if you

lose even a notch in your credit rating, the number one thing that does is

just increase the cost to run government, taking more money out of

taxpayers’ pockets, taking more money out of programs to pay for debt

repayment and interest. It does nothing to help people.

Based on the government’s own projections — again, out of the

government’s own budget document — by the end of this government’s second

term, the NDP will have added the equivalent of $10,000 in additional debt

for every single British Columbian — every single man, woman and child. It

equals $10,000 of extra debt for them. I can tell you right now that I could

go on the street and ask any single person about that $10,000, and they’ll

say, “Give it to me. I don’t trust government. Give me that $10,000. I know

I can invest it. I know I can spend it a lot more wisely to help myself, my

family, my communities and the people around me than government,” because

we’ve seen how this is playing out in this budget document.

Now, we know that’s fictitious, in a way. Government’s not going to

give everybody $10,000 and say: “Go ahead and spend it.” That’s too bad,

door to people who need it now. We’ve approved COVID relief funding to help

the employers, to help our businesses, to help people who have lost their

jobs. The government has failed to get that out the door in any meaningful

way to help people.

I was thinking about the budget last night. I was reflecting on the

comments yesterday. I was reflecting on the feedback that I was hearing.

People were looking at: “What is going to be in this budget to improve my

life, to improve my family’s life? We’re in a difficult time. What is in the

budget?” And again, the answer has to be: not much. There is not much in

here. For the average person in the pro­vince, Budget 2021 is actually

not going to impact their life, really, in any meaningful way. There’s

hardly any new money. There are hardly any changes.

The government can make a whole bunch of flashy announcements. They

can stand on the street corner with fanfare, saying what they’re going to do

to get elected, which we’ve seen through two elections now. But they fail to

follow through with almost every single promise that they have made, and the

few that they have tried to tackle, they have completely botched and not

been able to follow through with.

Here’s a perfect example: affordability, housing affordability — one

of the staples, one of the major pieces of platform for the NDP government.

“Elect us and we will make life more affordable. We will help everybody get

into a home. We will lower the prices of houses in the Lower Mainland.”

Well, guess what. Under the NDP’s tenure, every single year prices have gone

up. The thought of ever owning a home for many people now is a dream. How

sad is that?

[2:45 p.m.]

The government stands up constantly and says: “We are going to tackle

this problem.” Well, then tackle it. You’ve had four or five years to do

something, and it’s only gotten worse. Prices to buy a home are at a record

high. The prices to rent any accommodations are at a record high.

Interestingly, this government, who used to chastise, who used to bang

on the desks when they were on this side of the House…. Any time we talked

about the property transfer tax, they would talk about how horrible that

was. Yet how delighted they are now, in government, to realize that almost

$2 billion this year, the highest that I could find, in property transfer

tax is one of the things that is helping government — one of the only areas

where there has actually been a revenue increase — on the backs of the

people in British Columbia, only further exaggerating and exacerbating the

challenges of home ownership.

A National Bank report estimates that it’ll take 34 years — I think I

mentioned this yesterday — to save up enough money for a down payment on a

house, if you live in Vancouver, for a typical Vancouver home — 34 years. So

most people, if they’re fortunate enough to be living in Vancouver right now

and fortunate enough to have a job, will be filing for their old age pension

at the same time that they’ve saved up enough money to maybe buy a home.

That’s not the B.C. that most people want.

The real estate association says that the average B.C. home price is

up 20.4 percent, year over year, for March 2021, while the supply of homes

and sales are the lowest since 2000, a 21-year low. Isn’t that interesting?

The property transfer tax is going up because house prices are going up, but

houses aren’t being built. We’re talking about the existing

stock.

We talk about supply and demand. Well, we know the demand is there.

Government has said they would deal with the supply, and they have failed to

do that. Investors have been given the cold shoulder by this government to

develop multifamily dwelling units which would, in essence, help solve a lot

of this problem. What happened to that promise of this government to work

with local governments to try to eliminate a bunch of the red tape to ensure

that those that do want to invest have a clear path to be able to get the

shovels in the ground and build homes and accommodations to help families in

British Columbia?

You know, I mentioned renters. Renters are feeling the squeeze right

now. On average in Metro Vancouver, they’re paying over $2,500 a year more

than they used to, to rent. When they were looking for help from this

government, the government said, “Don’t worry,” in the election campaign,

twice. “We have a $400 rebate that’s going to be announced, and we will be

helping you with that rent. Just wait for the budget,” they were

told.

I challenge anybody to find the page — and point the page to me and

prove me wrong — where it says that that $400 renters rebate is coming or

that it’s even identified or that it’s even talked about anymore. It’s a

great campaign slogan for the NDP — like so many other things — to get

elected, but when the rubber hits the road, the heads go in the sand and

they forget about the promises they’ve made. That announcement, that promise

— I’m interested to see if it’s going to be made again. It’s nowhere in this

plan, nowhere in the budget. But when it comes to elections, the flashy

announcements seem to continue.

What about job creation and economic recovery to try to help people,

to try to help with that affordability and get people working? There’s

almost nothing in this budget that we can point to that’s going to help

people in need right now, immediately, today or for their prospects in the

future. There’s no funding; there’s no comprehensive jobs plan.

[2:50 p.m.]

It’s easy for governments to stand up and say: “Well, we’re in the

middle of a pandemic.” That seems to be their response for everything, but

again, that’s cold comfort to all the people losing their jobs. If they lose

a job but they see that plan, there might be some hope. There might be some

optimism. What we’re calling for is for government to do that.

They still have a chance. Government can do a jobs plan. They can put

something forward to make sure that people are not being left behind. They

might have to move away for a job, or even worse, suffer without one. We

can’t ignore this issue. I’m not saying this on behalf of the opposition.

This is British Columbians talking. We can’t ignore this issue. The

government is hiding from it.

Now, obviously, again, it’s a global pandemic. We know that people

have lost their jobs. B.C. is not unique. This is happening in other

provinces, in other countries as well. But if we want to be the leaders that

we like to brag about, the way to do that is to show that we’re better, to

show that we can do better, to show people that B.C. is the right place,

that we can get things on track quickly, and we can get people back to work

to help our families.

Right now, unfortunately, everybody has to remain disappointed in this

budget, because it’s not in there. The only thing in this budget that is a

jobs plan is the government itself growing. This is the old playbook of the

NDP: “When in doubt, grow government.” As we heard earlier today, almost

60,000 new government jobs. I’m not speaking against the 60,000 jobs. What

I’m speaking against is the fact that government is not recognizing that

there are 40,000 people in the private sector that are unemployed, who have

been given no hope or opportunity. They deserve just as much.

This shouldn’t be one or the other. This is about growing the

province. This is about giving everybody an equal opportunity. We’ve all,

I’m sure, been getting calls to our offices, of people telling us the

terrible stories of losing their jobs, trying to put food on the table,

trying to figure out how they can afford their next rent — their next

mortgage payment, if they’re lucky — their car payment, their cell bill,

some of what people consider the staples of life and society right now.

People are not able to afford them. We need to be helping those

people.

I thought we did that last year, when all three sides of the House

came together and acknowledged that, yes, we’re going to have to borrow up

to $8 billion to get out and help people. But that money didn’t all get out

the door. People are still waiting. On top of that, in this budget, now the

NDP are sitting on $1.1 billion in unallocated recovery funding.

We keep hearing that we’re in the middle of a pandemic, so why is the

government waiting until the end of the pandemic to offer help? You don’t

put money in the budget to say: “We have unallocated COVID recovery funding

money that we’ll allocate, undefined, at a later date, unspecified of when

or how.” Does that mean government’s not listening to the people who are

speaking right now? Are they not hearing the same things that we are? Are

media, on the radio? People are talking and giving and sharing their stories

of how they’re struggling.

It’s a slap in the face when government stands up and says, “Don’t

worry. We’ve got your back,” when in fact, all they have are their own

backs, by padding unallocated money to sit in government. Nobody is going to

pat the government on their backs for saving money right now for COVID

recovery and leaving it in the government’s bank accounts when it’s been

allocated to help people.

[2:55 p.m.]

I spoke a little bit yesterday about tourism and some of the

challenges. The minister and the government are trying to brag about the

fact that they have allocated in this budget — one of the few areas where

there is new money — $120 million for tourism. But there’s a catch. All you

small tourism providers: sorry, doesn’t look like it’s for you. The catch is

it’s, again, unallocated, for major tourism operators, whatever that means.

I don’t know. Is that the Science World? Is that the PNE?

What does that do to help the downtown businesses that are suffering

right now due to the fact that there are no cruise ships coming into the

harbour? What does that do for our guide outfitters who, for two years, have

been told: “Sorry, you can’t operate”? The people from around the world that

used to travel to beautiful British Columbia to go hunting or fishing,

“Sorry, you can’t come here right now,” but also: “Sorry, all you businesses

that are affected by that. You’re too small. You don’t qualify.”

When we talk about tourism, we’re talking about billions of dollars of

opportunity and revenue to the province, but we’re also talking about

hundreds of thousands of people who rely on that for employment, for their

livelihoods. How many people in this House, either themselves or somebody in

their family, worked in the hospitality and tourism sector to help put

themselves through college or university? How many people have that maybe as

a first or second job even to help pay the bills? So for the government to

say, “Don’t worry, there’s $120 million….” I regret to say again, like

always, that there’s always a catch to anything that this government

announces.

When we get to estimates, we’ll be asking the different ministries

that have received funding like this to be very specific. Because we have

examples, especially being here in Victoria, of small businesses, part of

the tourism sector, that are being negatively affected, that are basically

being put out of work, who are sitting there waiting for help or at least

the opportunity to get back. I think that’s the biggest catch in

this.

Most entrepreneurial people out there, most small businesses, are not

looking for handouts. What they’re looking for is a chance to get back to

work. They want that opportunity and some sense of hope from this

government. They all recognize we have to do our part right now, though,

because of COVID. No doubt. They all recognize that. There are those

hardships. Any little bit of help for them obviously is needed. But the main

thing they want to do is get back to what they know how to do.

I am interested, though, on tourism again…. The minister and

government touts the fact that they do consultation, that they put task

forces together, to bring back specific, targeted recommendations from

different sectors. We’ve seen this in so many ministries under the NDP:

“Don’t worry, we’re going to put a task force together to bring back

recommendations of what we need to do to help that sector.”

Well, the tourism sector was given that opportunity. The task force

was created last year. That task force came back and said: “We need $680

million around the province to support us, to get us through the pandemic,

to ensure we can survive and be there for when the province

reopens.”

Like every single other recommendation from every single task force,

it seems, this government puts together: “Thanks for your work. Thanks for

your time. Thanks for your opinion. We’re not listening to it. We’ve got our

own ideas.” So why does government waste people’s time? Why do they put

these groups and task forces together if they’re not going to genuinely

listen to the recommendations and the advice that they give?

[3:00 p.m.]

The government tries to tout the small business recovery grant to help

the tourism sector. Only 8 percent of tourism businesses in the Vancouver

area and 12 percent provincewide reported even being able to access and

qualify for that grant. Eight percent.

Is that why the government is sitting on so much COVID money? Because

they put in so much red tape — they make the qualifying abilities so hard —

they can pat themselves on the back to say, “Don’t worry, we have money

available,” but not have a plan to get it out the door and make it hard to

get it out the door.

If government wants us to support the budget, if they want us to

support COVID recovery programs, we will do that if they’re actually,

genuinely going to follow through with what they’re promising — to help

people. Businesses in the tourism sector now are going into their second

summer with no hope. I’m still waiting to hear something from the Minister

of Tourism on what the plan is, because all we’ve heard right now is that

they can apply for a grant and then be told they don’t qualify.

The tourism sector, like so many other areas, has been brought to its

knees by the pandemic. To be told time and time again from this government,

“Don’t worry. We’re here to help you….” It is hollow words.

Now, if we want people to get back to work after this pandemic, one of

the biggest issues we’re going to have to face is child care. We need to

have access to quality and affordable child care.

For two elections now, for almost five years, the Premier and this

government has said: “Elect us, and we will bring in universal $10-a-day

child care.” They didn’t say: “Elect us, and we’ll consider, at some future

date, allowing everybody in the province to have access.” I didn’t read that

anywhere in their platform. It said: “Elect us, and this is what you will

get.”

People are staring at this government right now, once again, realizing

hollow words out of the Premier’s mouth — that the Premier will make

announcements to say anything to try to get elected and, again, hope people

don’t hold him accountable for those promises that he’s making.

We’ve been standing in this House supporting the movement as well for

affordable child care and quality child care. When you hardly have any to

begin with…. The government in this budget says: “Look how great we are;

we’re doubling it.” Well, when you’re doubling a small amount, you’re still

left with a small amount. You’re not left with 100 percent like the

government promised.

I think that’s all people want from the government, is just to be

truthful with what’s going to happen. It would have been a lot more prudent,

I would argue, especially since the minister even today said: “It’s a

process, and a it’s difficult process, and it takes time.” Nowhere in the

NDP documents, nowhere even in any announcement that I’ve ever heard, does

it say or the Premier say or the government or the minister say: “We are

bringing in affordable $10-a-day universal child care maybe sometime in the

future. Please elect us.” Because that’s what they’ve done.

For the minister, even today, to acknowledge the federal government….

Isn’t it ironic that, once again, the B.C. NDP provincial government will

drag their feet long enough until the issue becomes so difficult and so hard

on people that the federal government has to come in and try to rescue the

problem?

If you even listen to the federal government’s announcement…. The

Minister of Finance said it’s going to be at least five years before the

federal government has even brought it in. So put that on top of the five

years people have already been waiting in B.C. Most children will be

graduating high school and missed out on that entire promise, missed out on

all of that time, from what the Premier announced.

[3:05 p.m.]

They are going to be graduating high school when they could have been

people now taking advantage of $10-a-day universal child care.

Again, we’re not the only people. It’s not the opposition saying: “Why

didn’t you do this?” This is the people of British Columbia saying: “Why

didn’t you do this?” These are the families, the mothers and fathers, who

have been begging this government to fulfil their promise. These are the

child care providers themselves and the educators that are saying: “Where’s

the promise that you said you were going to deliver?” It’s not

here.

Emily Gawlick, the executive director of Early Childhood Educators of

B.C., spoke of the commitments in the budget yesterday. She said: “The

progress is so minimal, it does not meet the needs of families or educators

as they try to recover from the pandemic.” The Coalition of Child Care

Advocates of B.C. also said the Finance Minister’s first budget “does not

deliver the system B.C. families and educators were promised in the recent

election.”

The government continues to make announcements. They continue to make

promises. But their track record is that they don’t deliver on them. People

are starting to see that. Again, it’s not just child care. It’s the homes

for these families and these children to live in.

You know, I mentioned about the missing renters rebate, the

skyrocketing housing prices. What’s the government doing to solve this?

There’s nothing in the budget to help this issue, after four years of them

promising to deal with it.

This budget actually shows that direct housing capital funding is

going to decline by 50 percent. It’s right in the NDP’s own documents.

Housing capital funding is going to decline by 50 percent. Housing starts.

The government is acknowledging it in their own plans. They’re projecting

housing starts are going down. They’re set to decline. There’s no action in

the budget documents at all to tackle or deal with the red tape, to get more

houses built. Maybe that’s why they’re forecasting that the housing starts

are going to go down.

There’s absolutely nothing in this budget that I could find to give

relief for strata owners facing insurance costs — they’re making it

increasingly difficult to make ends meet — and to help those that are in

strata situations. This was talked about last year. The minister said:

“Don’t worry. I’ll deal with it. Don’t worry. Wait for our budget.” Again,

I’m more than willing to be proven wrong if somebody can point to the page

where it references strata owners and how we’re going to be helping them

with their insurance costs.

When you talk about building, you know, we’re talking about capital.

We’re talking about money being spent. When you look at this budget, from

the government’s capital spending, there are some really staggering numbers

that need to be explained. Or should I say even the lack of staggering

numbers in the budget that need to be ex­plained?

The minister, in her own Finance announcements yesterday, referenced

the George Massey Tunnel. How eager were the people of Richmond and Delta to

flip open the budget document to say: “Holy cow, the minister referenced the

George Massey Tunnel replacement. Something’s happening”? So we looked

through the budget document, and guess what we found. Nothing. Not a

dollar.

In fact, even worse. A footnote towards the end of the budget document

that references the long-awaited George Massey Tunnel replacement, a little

footnote at the very end, says, kind of like in a movie: “To be continued.

Nothing here to see. But don’t worry. We recognize it’s an issue, but we’re

not dealing with it.”

[3:10 p.m.]

That’s the footnote that's in the budget document, the government’s

own document. How surprised were so many people that the minister would

actually reference something that they’re going to do that’s not even in the

document? Not a dollar being spent.

Just a reminder: if this government hadn’t cancelled the project that

was already funded — that was already started — it would be open, I believe,

next year. It would be a moot point. The people in Delta and Surrey and

Richmond would have that new bridge that was being built to solve one of the

largest bottlenecks, or parking lots, that this province has.

When you look at the capital again in this budget document, there is

nothing — no funding, no mention of a dollar amount this year — for the

Richmond care tower, something that the NDP promised in this last election;

something that every NDP MLA in Richmond still brags about. I’m waiting to

see how they are now going to go back to their constituents and say they

failed, how they’re going to go to back to their constituents and say: “I

know we promised it, but there’s not even a dollar in the budget to deliver

it.”

There are no new schools being built up in Burke Mountain, although

the stress is there, and new schools are needed. New schools were built up

in Burke Mountain when we were in government. Burke Mountain continues to

grow, and they need more. The Premier stood out there and said: “Don’t

worry. If we’re elected, you’re getting your new schools.” Nothing in the

budget.

The Premier announced: “Don’t worry, Surrey. If we’re elected, every

portable will be gone in our first four years.” Well guess what. That was

last year. There are more portables in Surrey now than there were before. We

built some massive, beautiful schools in Surrey when we were in government.

Contrary to the NDP, who like to continue to say: “Oh, you

never….”

[Interruption.]

Well, that’s interesting. Siri just agreed with me. Siri just found on

the web when the B.C. Liberals built schools in Surrey. I guess I have to be

careful when I mention Surrey in the House now.

But to get back to that…. The Premier stood on a corner with all the

fanfare, with all the ribbons and balloons, with the critic at the time for

Education, with some families, and said: “Don’t worry. We’re getting rid of

every portable in Surrey.” They are still there. There’s no new school —

nothing in the budget for the Olympic Village, one that’s been promised for,

I think, four or five years now by this government.

One thing I did find interesting, though, in the budget. Although

there are hardly any schools being built around the province, interestingly,

ones that kind of weren’t promised but are being built are two new schools

in the Premier’s riding. That’s in the budget — two new schools in the

Premier’s riding.

Now, I’m not going to take away from the fact…. As the former Minister

of Education, I know well how that area is growing as well. They need help.

They need more schools. I’m excited to see those ones being built. But it

shouldn’t be a competition of whoever the Premier is and whichever the

Premier’s riding is, is the one that gets the schools. It should be going

equally to those in need around the province.

The minister and the Surrey MLAs continue to brag a­bout a

Surrey hospital, which, for the most part, is also a footnote this year,

because there’s not one dollar. There’s nothing in the budget, nothing at

all, this year for a hospital in Surrey. They can stand up and say: “Don’t

worry; you’re getting one.” But getting one when? They can’t even get the

date right in their own document.

[3:15 p.m.]

You might be getting one in six years. You might be getting one in

seven years. It’s all notional. It doesn’t actually say specifically:

“Dollars attached. This is when it’s going to start, and this is what you’re

going to get.” It’s another flashy announcement with no dollars this year

put towards it. It’s only notional in the capital plan. And even in the

document, when it has the paragraph talking about the Surrey hospital, it

says that they’re only going to be able to build 168 beds, when and if the

hospital is built — 168 beds. That’s a far, far cry, and far below capacity,

from what is needed right now in the fastest-growing city in British

Columbia.

One of the things that government announced in the budget that I will

carefully acknowledge — because it’s a start, and that’s why I say

“carefully acknowledge” — as a step in the right direction is $500 million

over three years. That’s $500 million to help the Ministry of Health, I

should quantify.

It’s not the Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions but $500 million

going into the Ministry of Health to help in the crisis that we have in

mental health and addictions and the opioid crisis. The Minister of Mental

Health and Addictions’ budget is flat. She saw zero increase in her budget.

The Premier’s office, though, mind you, went up by 30 percent — his budget.

A lot of other budgets went down. The Ministry of Mental Health and

Addictions stayed flat. The Premier’s office went up, though.

The Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions still only has a $13

million budget — $13 million. I know we’re going to ask questions again this

year specifically around that. Where does that $13 million go? How many

staff work in the ministry? Does most of that go to fund the ministry? How

much of that actually goes out the door to help people?

In past years, when we’ve asked this government, the Minister of

Mental Health and Addictions has always had to defer those answers to the

Minister of Health, because it’s the Minister of Health that actually

follows through and deals with a lot of these issues. So again, it might be

really flashy to have a person designated with a title, but we haven’t seen

any success with that. If it’s not working, maybe they need to remove that

ministry. Put that $13 million back into the Ministry of Health, if that’s

where it came from, or at least add it in there, and specifically target

where that money is going to go out the door.

With that money, it’s over three years. It’s a start. I will

acknowledge that. But the challenge with that is we don’t have just one

jurisdiction. We don’t just have one city or community. We don’t just have

one set of the population that is struggling with mental health and

addictions. This is a provincewide issue.

I hear the — I probably could say — horror stories from our front-line

workers, from the firefighters in my community and up in Fort St. John, the

Dawson Creek area, who have told me the devastating circumstances where

they’ve had to respond to a young person, in their home alone, who has

accidentally overdosed and died because of their addiction to opioids. How

are we helping those people? Where are the supports when they need it,

before the tragedy?

So $500 million over three years, just to put that in perspective —

and it’s in the government’s own documents — creates only 195 new treatment

beds. Not to single out the Chair, but I know in his area, in Vancouver, 195

beds are a drop in the bucket for what’s needed right now to help

people.

[3:20 p.m.]

Is it a start? Absolutely. But how do we disperse that? How do we deal

with it on a provincial scale?

We look at downtown Vancouver and the thousands of people who are

looking for help right now or who are struggling right now. One hundred and

ninety-five new beds — yes, it’s a start. But we have almost 200 communities

in British Columbia. So 195 beds — how is that going to be split up? How’s

that going to make sure that a place like Dawson Creek or Prince George,

Prince Rupert…. This isn’t a metropolitan issue. This isn’t a downtown

issue. This is a provincial issue.

We see it, and we hear about it all around the province. Our challenge

is going to be, to the government on this part…. Yes, it’s a start, but

where do we go from here? And with this start, what are the outcomes? What

do we plan on doing that’s actually going to make lives better, to actually

help people?

According to the ministry service plan, 21,000 additional people have

been diagnosed with opioid-use disorders since November of 2017 — 21,000

people diagnosed. Only 5,000 people, though, have received recent treatment,

so 21,000 people, new people, and only 5,000 have been helped. That right

there should show people the challenge — not only that we’re facing as a

government but as a society — that we need to address.

At the end of the day, we just expected more from this budget. We

didn’t expect a status quo. The government has made all these promises and

none of them are being delivered in the budget. I want to kind of end how I

started, by saying we need to — by we, I mean all of us in this House — do

our jobs to help the people of British Columbia, to set the path for a

strong future, to show that there’s optimism, to show that there’s a plan,

to make sure people know that they’ve chosen the best province in Canada to

live in, because it is.

But it’s our job to continue proving that to them. It’s our job to

continue showing them that they made the right choice to be here. It’s our

job to prove to them that they need to stay here because it will be a bright

future for them here in the province, that we do have their backs, that we

do have a vision and do have a plan. It’s not in this document, but it’s not

too late. This is just one budget. But it’s not everything.

There is still time for each minister, each ministry, the Premier and

the Minister of Finance to do the right thing. They have time to put a plan

forward. They have time to not just say something but do something. That’s

what people want to see. They don’t want to see a government abandoning

promises. They want to see a government making promises and then fulfilling

those promises. That’s a government people can be proud of, not one that

they would shy away from.

Whether it’s helping the affordability, helping renters, helping

people in Surrey that have been asking for it, there is still time. It’s not

in the budget, but this government can still do better.

I want to acknowledge, again, that this is a budget during a pandemic

time. Nobody is arguing that. We understand the stresses of running a

deficit. We understand the need for borrowing money to help people now. Our

only ask is if government’s going to be doing that, then do it. Get that

help out the door. Get it out to people who need it now.

[3:25 p.m.]

We should not be seeing cuts to school districts. We shouldn’t be

seeing cuts to health authorities. We shouldn’t be seeing a 30 percent

increase in the Premier’s budget, in his own personal office, while

everywhere else people are hurting and trying to just figure out how they

can make it through to the next week, to hopefully keep their employees on

the payroll.

People expect a big vision, big ideas. They were not expecting, I

would argue, ten years of deficits and borrowing that this budget put

forward. Again, it’s not too late, so we implore this government to do

better. If they can’t do it in their budget, then they can at least do it

properly for the people of British Columbia. They need help. People need

help, and they need optimism. They need a clear vision, a clear path of how

we’re going to get through this pandemic and then how we are going to

survive as a society and economy for the years after that.

It’s unfortunate that this budget did not highlight hardly any of that

for the people in the time when they need it most. It’s unfortunate that I

have to say again that this is probably one of the worst budgets that I’ve

ever seen and, unfortunately, at one of the worst times in provincial

history. This could have been the time for government to do the right thing,

for government to shine, for government to do what people needed, not

abandon them.

With that, I look forward to getting into the estimates portion of the

debate. It’s very important that we ask the critical questions of each

minister, to see where the money is going, where the help will be for the

people in the province. I look forward to hearing the other speakers in this

House as well, especially the members of the government, who know, if they

have read the budget, that everything I’ve said today is factual, because

it’s reading right out of their own document. It’ll be interesting to see

how they try to contradict that in their speeches, when they get

up.

I’m looking forward to hearing all of those comments, Mr. Speaker.

With that, I just want to thank you and the House for their time.

S. Furstenau: I’m grateful for the opportunity to take my place, to respond to this

year’s budget.

I recognize that budget days tend to be celebratory aff­airs for

governments, an opportunity to put forth their agendas and point out key

investments that reflect their commitment to particular goals and policies,

to fulfil campaign promises, to generate hope and excitement for the year

ahead. But it is hard right now to feel particularly celebratory.

[N. Letnick in the chair.]

We are reeling from the ongoing risk to our health and the tragic loss

of lives to COVID-19. Our hospitals are be­ing stretched to the limit.

Health care workers, exhausted from 13 months of a pandemic that has become

its most ferocious in this brutal third wave, are pleading with us to do all

we can to prevent infections from rising. Young people are struggling with

separation from friends and family, spending the last year having to manage

loss of income, loss of opportunities and loss of the kinds of experiences —

attending university in person, travelling, meeting new people — that all of

us took for granted as part of our lives.

A year into this pandemic, with what appears to be widespread

acknowledgment that it has laid bare the deep and structural inequalities in

our society, the rich have gotten richer. Those with the lowest-paying jobs,

the highest risks and the most marginalized communities have borne the

hugest costs of this pandemic — loss of jobs and in­come, loss of

health, loss of lives.

[3:30 p.m.]

COVID didn’t just expose inequality in our world; it deepened it. We

can see it right in the budget documents.

“The B.C. unemployment rate averaged 8.9 percent in 2020 and 7.5

percent year-to-date to February 2021, up from 4.9 percent in the first

months of 2020.” There has been some recovery, but as of February 2021,

“there were still 15,100 fewer people employed than in February 2020.” In

addition, we see in the budget that “the share of unemployed people that

have been without work for 27 weeks or more was 33 percent in February 2021,

its highest reading in 36 years.” In February 2020, to compare, it was 12.8

percent. This is a deepening of entrenched poverty for more people in

British Columbia.

At the same time, revenues from property transfer taxes were

significantly higher than expected due to a housing market that saw rising

prices and sales at a rate that have left many who are looking for homes

unable to even get a bid in before the house is sold. Those with wealth and

assets saw their wealth, for the most part, increase — and in some cases

increase dramatically — in the past year. Those without significant wealth

and assets, for the most part, saw their incomes decline and the opportunity

to enter the housing market become even more out of reach.

Inequality, already a significant problem before COVID-19, has become

worse. There have been many studies on the effects of inequality in

societies, and the findings are consistent and stark. From inomics.com, an

economics research site, we get a

summary of some of the societal impacts of

inequality: “Research by sociologists Marii Paskov and Caroline Dewilde has

shown that living in unequal societies fundamentally changes the way that

people interact with those living around them and, more broadly, how they

perceive their community. Most notably, intersocietal solidarity — that is,

the willingness of individuals to try and improve the living conditions of

other members of their community — suffers.”

They go on:

“As the collective traits of generosity and compassion reduce, the

social cohesion is damaged. The slippery slope is then further greased. The

same study shows that declining solidarity is quickly reflected in dwindling

public support for government-led redistribution which, for communities

facing high levels of inequality, is exactly what is most needed.

“Economist Henrik Jordhal has looked further, linking greater social

distance not just to estrangement but to higher levels of mistrust —

specifically, the growing belief that other members of one’s community are

fundamentally different from one’s self.

“Declining trust is not exclusive to individuals but extends to people’s

faith in institutions. In a research paper exploring the impact of

inequality on values and attitudes, social scientist Frederic L. Pryor found

that people in less equal countries had less interest in politics, less

confidence in their sitting parliament and often bemoaned a societal lack of

respect for authority.”

Addressing inequality can’t be something that we app­roach with

disparate policies and investment. It needs to be the lens that we apply to

all of government policy, legislation and budgeting. We need to relentlessly

ask the question: does this move us to become a more or a less equal

society? We need to make the decision that we need to be a more equal

society.

[3:35 p.m.]

At the same time, over the course of this last year, we have seen the

relentless ravaging brought on by climate change, environmental degradation

and biodiversity loss. It has been yet another year of records. From the

state of the climate 2021 report, there are many sobering statistics. Record

CO 2 levels, hitting 417 parts per million last May. The past

decade was the hottest on record. The year 2020 was more than 1.2 degrees

hotter than the average year in the 19th century. In Europe, it was the

hottest year ever, while globally, 2020 tied with 2016 as the

warmest.

The exceptionally warm temperatures triggered the largest wildfires

ever recorded in the U.S. states of California and Colorado and the Black

Summer of fires in eastern Australia. In June 2020, the temperature reached

38 degrees Celsius in eastern Siberia, the hottest ever recorded in the

Arctic Circle. The Arctic is heating twice as quickly as the rest of the

world, and as less ice makes it through the warm summer months, we lose its

reflective protection. In its place, large areas of open, dark water absorb

more heat, fuelling global warming further.

“Globally, forest areas continue to decline,” says Bonnie Waring,

senior lecturer at the Grantham Institute, noting that there are big

regional differences. “Protecting existing forests,” she tells us, “is even

more important than planting new ones. Every time an ecosystem is disturbed,

you see carbon lost.”

The World Economic Forum’s report on the risks of biodiversity loss

states:

“All species, including humans, depend for their survival on the

delicate balance of life in nature. Yet biodiversity — the diversity within

species, between species and within ecosystems — is declining faster than it

has at any other time in human history. The current rate of extinction is

tens to hundreds of times higher than the average over the past ten million

years, and it is accelerating. Although the world’s 7.6 billion people

represent just 0.01 percent of all living creatures, humanity has already

caused the loss of 83 percent of all wild mammals and half of

plants.”

As reported in Forbes magazine, the World Economic Forum does

not mince words when it comes to the economic risks of climate change.

“‘Climate change, to which no one is immune, continues to be a catastrophic

risk. Although lockdowns worldwide caused global emissions to fall in the

first half of 2020, evidence from the 2008-​2009 financial crisis

warns that emissions could bounce back. A shift towards greener economies

cannot be delayed until the shocks of the pandemic subside.’ Climate action

failure is the most impactful and second most likely long-term risk

identified in the report.”

The advice that the report offers: “As governments, businesses and

societies begin to emerge from the pandemic, they must now urgently shape

new economic and social systems that improve our collective resilience and

capacity to respond to shocks while reducing inequality, improving health

and protecting the planet.”

That’s the World Economic Forum. Let’s compare this to the

summary

report of B.C.’s Economic Forecast Council that was released in yesterday’s

budget. In the

summary of the report from our Economic Forecast Council,

climate is mentioned once, in the same sentence as LNG: “Other topics

discussed by the council included the general resilience of LNG development

and other capital projects despite minor pandemic-related delays; recent

strength in the natural resources sector, particularly forestry; and issues

surrounding climate change.”

[3:40 p.m.]

LNG, the natural resources sector and “issues surrounding climate

change.” That’s the extent of the consideration that we get to see in the

budget from the advice given to the minister and her staff from the economic

council. That’s the extent that they thought needed to be given to climate

change, which is the greatest risk to future generations.

What about the housing crisis? From the same

summary report: “Looking

ahead, renewed international mi­gration after a pandemic-induced lull

is expected to help support B.C.’s housing market.” There’s a worry that the

out-of-control housing prices that are blocking more and more people in this

province out of the potential of home ownership is not recognized as a

problem in this

summary.

What about inequality? What did our Economic Forecast Council have to

say about inequality? Nothing. Not a word. In fact, and let’s sit with this

for a moment, the word “inequality” does not appear once, not once in this

entire budget document. Not once.

All of the suffering, all of the sacrifices of this last year, all

that we’ve seen and learned about how deeply rooted inequality and racism

are in our province, our country and our world….We have a budget from what

is supposed to be a progressive, social democratic government, and there is

not a single mention of inequality.

Just to be fair, I also looked for the word “equity.” Just like

climate change, equity got passing mention in the

summary of the economic

council’s discussions. “Key topics of discussion included the varied impacts

of COVID-19 pandemic across industries and GBA+ identity factors; government

policies to support the economy while maintaining fiscal discipline; issues

around equity and in­clusion; B.C.’s housing market; the outlook for

immigration and trade; and uncertainty in the global economic

outlook.”

Issues surrounding climate change and issues around equity and

inclusion — the two greatest challenges that we collectively face in our

world and in B.C., and what our economic council has to say is that there

are issues.

Yesterday, when we responded to the budget by indicating that we

believe that this government has missed a pivotal moment to pair our

recovery from COVID-19 with a transformative plan for this province that

would ensure a green and just future for British Columbia, it was an

expression of our dashed hopes that this government would seize this

historic moment that we are in and truly set our province on a course that

our grandchildren could thank us for. But this is not what was delivered

yesterday. As so many others have also expressed, this was essentially a

status quo budget, after what has been the least status quo year that any of

us have experienced in our lifetimes.

What’s our common agenda? What’s the story of where we’re going as a

province? Where is the unifying sense of what we’re trying to achieve

together? Compare this to the United States budget, with an ambitious

climate action and a commitment to economic transformation and innovation at

its centre, or to New Zealand, with health and well-being as the organizing

principle for budget decisions.

[3:45 p.m.]

We are still operating without a cohesive purpose for how we spend

money and what overarching outcomes we are trying to achieve in this

province. Right now, around the world, other jurisdictions are recognizing

that reducing inequality, addressing the climate crisis and building a clean

economy are not just nice to have. They are imperatives. They need to be at

the centre of our recovery from this pandemic.

To achieve this, it starts with how we measure success. We need to

start measuring our economy holistically and get serious about reducing

inequality and reducing the share of our economy that harms well-being, like

an out-of-control housing market.

I remain troubled by this government’s continued sole reliance on

narrow economic indicators, like GDP growth, that don’t truly capture the

health of the economy or how well it is serving the people of this province.

Our continued reliance on GDP ignores and papers over an uneven and unstable

economic foundation that actually harms people, partly driven as it is by

the affordability crisis, household debt, and unsustainable resource

extraction.

Under the confidence and supply agreement, we worked closely with the

NDP, including with some extremely dedicated and motivated public servants,

to develop a suite of genuine progress indicators for B.C. I’m disappointed

that the work that we started together doesn’t seem to have come to anything

with this new majority government.

It is crucial that we start to measure the health of our economy

differently if we’re going to start making different decisions that support

the health and well-being of people and if we’re going to build an economy

that is inclusive and sustainable.

One place in this budget where we can see the problem clearly is with

housing. Growth in housing sales and prices drove revenue gains to

government, partly helping to reduce our projected deficit. On the surface,

and because of how we measure our economy, this looks like a positive. But

we know that the housing affordability crisis is damaging communities and

leaving young British Columbians in extremely precarious and stressful

situations. British Columbians have lived with a growing affordability

crisis for years. They know that growth driven by an out-of-control housing

market actually makes life harder. B.C.’s economy continues to rely far too

much on real estate to drive revenues.

We need to change the way we assess the health of the economy if we’re

going to address the structural inequalities that are built into it and that

are being exacerbated by the rising housing costs and prices. While I

welcome the enhanced investment into the housing hub, and into building

missing middle supply, we cannot get ourselves out of this problem by

expanding supply alone.

I think it’s disappointing and frankly dangerous for the health of

society that neither this budget nor the recent federal budget take any

action to cool the housing market and reduce the affordability crisis

gripping cities across B.C. This is an extremely troubling omission, not

only for young people who cannot afford to buy or rent a decent home for

themselves, but for the health and long-term sustainability of the economy

and local communities.

I welcome investments to youth mental health care, but we need to

provide all British Columbians with the care they need to live healthy and

fulfilling lives. It’s time to treat mental health like a right and fully

incorporate it into our health care system. Providing proactive, accessible

and regulated mental health services is an important step in addressing

inequality in this province, as well as addressing many other crises we

see.

[3:50 p.m.]

The budget fails to expand a regulated safe supply to combat the toll

that the toxic, illicit drugs are taking on people, which this very

government promised to do less than a year ago. Five British Columbians are

dying every day from bad drug policy. That is unacceptable. Without

immediate solutions like safe supply available, people will die before they

can access any treatment beds or supervised consumption sites.

We cannot address this crisis without addressing mental health. In

light of increasing deaths from a toxic supply and increasing demand for

emergency psychiatric services, we must be proactive in supporting British

Columbians. That care should start by ensuring that everyone who needs

mental health care can access it.

On issues like seniors care and reducing poverty, we see some good

steps but still a lacking commitment to deal with systemic issues. It is no

doubt a positive step that, for the first time in many years, we are seeing

a significant increase to income and disability assistance in this province.

However, while these increases are welcome, they still leave people

receiving supports well be­low the poverty line.

This budget also ignores many of the evidence-based recommendations

that were made last year by the basic income expert panel to transform our

social safety net and implement targeted basic income for people with

disabilities, women fleeing violence and youth aging out of care. This

government promised to “fix the cracks” in our seniors care system, yet in

this budget, we only see $68 million, over three years, targeted towards

hiring additional staff.

This pandemic has highlighted the urgent need to support our seniors,

and this budget missed an opportunity to take even initial steps to increase

the quality of care provided and enhance oversight for the long-term-care

sector. It’s unfortunate we did not see a commitment from this government to

take the steps recommended by seniors advocate Isobel Mackenzie to improve

transparency and oversight of public funds that go to for-profit seniors

care in British Columbia and to ensure that the requirements are being met

in every seniors care home in this province.

One of the most profoundly disappointing aspects of this budget is the

area of natural resource management and, specifically, forestry. It gives me

no joy to say that this budget seems to confirm what many have been

concerned about, that the NDP’s promises to do things differently on the

environment, on land use, on forestry and on old-growth protection are,

indeed, empty words and that there’s no intention to back them up with real

action that would elicit any change on our landscape.

The Premier promised, during the recent election, to do things

differently on old growth and to implement all of the old-growth review

panel’s recommendations, including an immediate halt to logging in B.C.’s

most at-risk old-growth forests within six months, and a new science-based

approach to forest management that prioritizes biodiversity and proactive,

adequately funded, local and provincial transition plans. As the Union of

B.C. Indian Chiefs and conservation groups made extremely clear, a shift

away from old-growth logging simply cannot happen without adequate funding,

including conservation financing and funding for Indigenous-led protected

areas.

With this budget, the government has shown they have no intention of

changing the status quo of old-growth logging in any meaningful way. The

minister, when pressed on how they would fund enhanced old-growth

protection, said it would come from within FLNRORD’s budget. But the

forestry budget is being slashed by $41 million this year and $30 million

next year.

As Andrea Inness, from the Ancient Forest Alliance, said: “The B.C.

government has missed a critical opportunity to show British Columbians that

it’s serious about its old-growth commitments. Despite promising a complete

paradigm shift in the way B.C.’s forests are managed, the NDP government’s

2021 budget is bereft of meaningful solutions to make it happen.”

[3:55 p.m.]

She asks: “How does the province expect to protect ancient forest

ecosystems, support communities and overhaul its forest management regime

with less funding than it had before?”

I expect we will see more of the same: the loss of these irreplaceable

ecosystems, and the reliance on a short-term and fundamentally unsustainable

source of jobs and revenues for local communities. This lack of funding

particularly stings, because it means that B.C. risks forgoing the

opportunity to partner with the federal government and leverage matching

federal funds to protect these ecosystems.

The federal government has committed billions of dollars to protect

endangered ecosystems and to support Indigenous-protected and conserved

areas. I cannot understand the possibility that this government would

potentially walk away and leave hundreds of millions of federal dollars on

the table.

This is part of the broader trend of reduced investment in land use

and natural resource management. The proportion of the budget spent on

natural resource management has declined steadily, year by year, regardless

of who has been in power. While the total B.C. budget has gone up, the

amount we spend on managing our natural re­sources and our lands has

declined. This is in the face of a biodiversity and climate crisis, and more

complex land use decisions and processes than we’ve ever had

before.

It is no wonder we are seeing declines in species and erosion of

critical habitats, because we don’t commit the necessary funding to manage

our lands and our resources sustainably.

I’ll add to this, and I expect that this is an experience for most of

the MLAs who represent rural and semi-rural ridings. People are dismayed

that they see activities on the land base that clearly contradict

regulations and rules, whether it’s the destruction of riparian areas,

whether it is mining without a permit, whether it is dumping of soil

illegally, whether it is destruction of habitat, whether it’s activities on

ALR land that are not allowed. All of those are happening in my

riding.

When the citizens turn to government to enforce the regulations, to

enforce the rules, what they hear more often than not is: “We simply don’t

have the staff to ensure that there’s compliance of these regulations.

There’s nothing we can do.”

In one case, there is a community in the Cowichan Valley where there

has been mining operations for over a decade, often without any permitting

at all. Rocks have flown into people’s yards. Groundwater has been affected.

Yet despite relentless efforts of a community association, and I think I

probably have well over a dozen of my own missives to government and

conversations with officials, this kind of activity just carries on. The

rules aren’t enforced, because there aren’t enough people to enforce those

rules.

What we see in this budget is a shrug, a decrease in funds to ensure

that what happens on B.C.’s land base actually just follows the basic rules

that exist.

In the areas of climate and innovation, this budget makes some solid

investments, including investments in the clean tech sector and the new

strategic innovation fund, and funding to continue CleanBC.

I was glad to see this budget follow through on the commitment to

create a $500 million strategic investment fund for B.C. A fund like this is

something that we’ve been calling for, for years. This type of fund could go

a significant way to supporting the growth of B.C.’s tech start-ups, by

funding for the programs and supports necessary to scale.

We still need to see more details about how this fund’s mandate exists

and how it will be deployed. If it's used strategically to support

innovation and the scaling up of companies aligned with ambitious

environmental and social goals, it could be a significant positive for our

economy. Those are big ifs. We will really want to see details about how to

ensure that that happens.

[4:00 p.m.]

This budget makes modest increases to continue to im­plement

CleanBC. I welcome the investment into zero-emission vehicles, steps towards

enhancing the electrification of our transportation sector and the

investment into energy efficiency in communities. However, with this budget,

government is not rising to the challenge of the climate crisis with the

funding and ambition that are re­quired.

As Clean Energy Canada has said in its response to this

budget:

“As countries around the world ratchet up their climate ambitions,

climate action and economic action are increasingly one and the same.

Canada’s largest trading partners, like the U.S. and the EU, have recognized

the huge economic opportunity in transitioning to a net-zero world, as did

the federal government’s budget released yesterday. We would have liked to

see greater recognition of this net-zero opportunity in B.C.’s economic

plan.”

Even the government’s language of a “greener” recovery, not a green

recovery, makes this lack of ambition very clear. We can and we must do so

much more to tackle the defining challenge of our time and seize the

opportunity that is presented if we truly transition our economy.

In conclusion, there’s been a lot of commentary comparing COVID and

the varying responses to it from governments around the world to the similar

threat that climate change poses and the similar varying responses that we

see. COVID is a much more immediate threat. Yet so many governments have

found it difficult to shift away from the status quo in response to this

very new, very different threat of a virus.

At the same time, there have been countries, and prov­inces here

in Canada, that responded decisively and agg­ressively to COVID: New

Zealand, Vietnam, Australia, South Korea and, here, the Maritimes. These

governments decided that the risk of COVID was a risk they did not want to

mitigate; it was a risk they wanted to eliminate. As Prime Minister Ardern

said: “Aiming for zero doesn’t mean that it is a guaranteed success, but it

does mean that a lot fewer people will get ill or die.”

We now look with envy at these countries where gatherings happen,

families come together, and ironically, return to the actual status quo was

achieved much more quickly than for those of us in places where mitigation

was chosen over elimination. These countries have also had much less

negative impact to their economies, which rebounded more quickly and are now

enjoying the benefits of almost full economic activity.

This teaches us a valuable lesson. It’s hard to make difficult choices

in response to risks that lie in the future, risks that are not right in

front of us. Yet as governments and decision-makers, this is exactly what is

required of us. Taking a passive and reactive approach to risks and threats

that we know are coming is not what the people who we serve need us to do.

They need us to identify the measures that need to be taken so that there is

the least harm from these risks and these threats.

While we continue to navigate the very real and very present risk of

COVID-19, we must absolutely look at the horizon and recognize that growing

inequality and accelerating climate change are going to create more

upheaval, more suffering and more loss. We have to be relentlessly willing

to learn and, perhaps most importantly, acknowledge and learn from our

mistakes. It’s what’s needed most from those of us who occupy the seats in

this House.

[4:05 p.m.]

There will be much more to look at with this budget. We look forward

to the estimates process. I thank you for my opportunity to

respond.

B. Bailey: I rise today to speak to the 2021 budget and to speak about what’s in

this budget to help the people of my riding, Vancouver–False Creek. This is

a large document. Its heft and depth speak to the large number of measures

it contains to support the people of this province, as we continue to battle

our way out of this pandemic and into the future. It would be impossible to

speak to all of the measures that are included, so I’ll prioritize what I

think are the most pressing items to the folks in my riding.

I’ll look at the impacts of this budget on businesses, on families and

youth, the Indigenous community members, seniors and vulnerable

Vancouverites. I’ll look specifically at some of the issues most pressing in

my riding and discuss how this budget supports addressing these issues

specifically: the opioid and poisoned illicit drug crisis, health and

post-pandemic recovery.

COVID-19 has of course had a huge impact on businesses in the riding

of Vancouver–False Creek, but the impact has been anything but uniform. Some

businesses have posted record sales in 2020, and their revenues continue to

grow in 2021. I refer to much of the tech sector, the housing sector and

those who have had a successful pivot to online sales.

For those who have not, and specifically those who work in the live

entertainment, restaurant and tourism sectors, this budget has a number of

measures to continue to support these important businesses. Budget 2021

funds ongoing business supports initiated through the StrongerBC economic

recovery plan, to help B.C. businesses through the pandemic and to help them

prepare for recovery.

Ongoing business supports include: $140 million for the StrongerBC

increased employment incentive