Third Session, 41st Parliament

(2018) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Monday, March 12, 2018

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 100

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

Housing

R. Sultan

M. Dean

Music education

N. Simons

P. Milobar

Indigenous languages

A. Olsen

B. Ma

Creative economy

B. D’Eith

J. Thornthwaite

Private Members’ Motions

Motion 9 — Trade agreements

J. Rustad

R. Glumac

T. Wat

M. Elmore

D. Barnett

J. Brar

G. Kyllo

A. Kang

D. Davies

L. Krog

B. Stewart

R. Leonard

10:48:44, B. D'Eith, $2.2 million corrected to 2.2 million; "industries" added after

"non-creative"10:06:23, R. Sultan, sentence repunctuated; 11:40:20, D. Davies, "trade" added – "relies

very heavily on trade within Canada"

MONDAY, MARCH 12, 2018

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[10:05 a.m.]

Introductions by Members

N. Simons: I looked up, and I saw this beautiful little face in the gallery. And

I saw Gary Coons as well. Gary Coons is a former MLA for up north, North

Coast. He sat diligently next to me for many years, I think it was. He

continues to hold the record for Michigan state for most penalty minutes in

a season. It’s not his favourite accomplishment, but he’s been a strong

advocate for ferries. I’m glad to see him in the House — a good friend and

former MLA, Gary Coons. Please help me welcome him.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

HOUSING

R. Sultan: Housing is the most important issue of the day for my constituents

and, I believe, for yours. From the extremes of those who sleep on a

cozy goose-down pillow in Point Grey to that rough person who beds down

on the concrete median at the intersection of Pender and Georgia as I

drive home from the evening’s engagements, who has concrete as his

pillow…. Yes, he does. We all need some place to sleep. But a roof over

one’s head has been getting harder and harder to find.

Our government is full of ideas on how to stimulate supply by

taxing demand. The logic of that is somewhat hard for me to follow.

Perhaps we’re all listening too much to the university professors whose

real-world experience seldom extends beyond Sasamat Street. Suffice it

to say the combination of the speculation tax, a souped-up property

transfer tax, an education tax and further discouragement of foreign

investment is proving a bit hard to digest. But I’m not really here to

use private member’s time to debate taxes. I’m more interested in how we

can best stimulate actual housing supply.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Housing is an important example of a free market driven by supply

and demand. Its profile is shaped by central bank policy, geography,

demographics, consumer confidence and many other factors, including huge

reservoirs of offshore capital seeking safe haven. The scary thing is

that this market, as we all know, is playing with the very lives of the

human beings involved. Housing is a fundamental need in our society, and

how we arrange our affairs to provide it or not provide it can

drastically alter the fabric of our society. That’s why we need to

ensure that we always have the supply of housing necessary to fulfil our

needs.

The key to ensuring a prosperous and healthy society, I would

argue, is to have affordable housing supply — with “supply” in capital

letters. How can we get more supply? Well, we might ask the suppliers,

who know more about it than all the professors and politicians put

together. Experts such as my friend Anne McMullin from the North Shore

suggests that we could:

(1) Incentivize housing supply through targeted tax incentives,

such as PST rebates for purpose-built rentals.

(2) Legislate maximum delay times permissible in municipal

permitting and approvals. We legislate maximum delay in our provincial

regulatory affairs. Why not in municipalities? In Vancouver, it can take

four years and 25 separate steps to navigate the approval

process.

(3) Focus on transit-oriented development where taxpayer transit

funding is tied to housing density targets. No more transit lines

through low-density, single-family-zoned neighbourhoods.

(4) Exempt all of the new taxes on all development sites purchased

for construction of any housing, rental or not, market or non-market, as

savings which will be passed on to homebuyers.

[10:10 a.m.]

If we do not make increasing supply more possible, housing won’t

be there when we need it.

By the way, about 233,000 trades jobs rely on construction and

real estate development, making it our largest industry. Tom Sigurdson

of the building trades unions emphasized this point to all of us during

his rounds last week. Let’s keep supply growing and healthy.

M. Dean: I thank the member for West Vancouver–Capilano as well, and yes,

we will be talking about supply. Housing affordability does affect us

all, and for too long, B.C.’s housing crisis has actually been ignored.

Everybody has been affected, from homeowners to new buyers and people

renting. Renters have seen vacancy rates drop and prices rise

dramatically.

I’ll tell you about a single mom in my community. She’s got three

kids. She was given notice on her family home. This happened last

summer, so she went house hunting. She went to view an alternative

rental property. There were 17 other families there looking at that

property. She left straightaway. She knew she wouldn’t be able to

compete with them.

The market has been building. It’s been building small units for

speculation and parking capital. Our land has been used as a stock

market. That’s why our government is setting out a 30-point plan that

commits to long-term solutions to curb speculation, crack down on tax

fraud, support renters and create that supply — to build the homes that

people need.

Local governments have actually been putting out more supply than

ever before, but of course, that has been taken advantage of as a

commodity, not building homes for British Columbians. Already, we’ve

invested in homes for people, including 1,700 new affordable housing

units and 2,000 modular homes for the homeless.

Let’s look at supply. We’re making the biggest investment in

housing affordability in B.C. history. This will help build homes,

create jobs, build community capacity and enhance economic development

in communities. We’re going to work in partnerships. We’re going to

build the homes in every corner of the province that people need. We’re

working with all levels of government, Indigenous peoples, non-profits

and the private sector to streamline the creation of affordable

homes.

That’s why we’re creating a new housing hub office at B.C.

Housing, and that will bring everyone together to facilitate building

affordable homes. It will develop partnerships to find, use or redevelop

available land in communities hardest hit by the housing crisis. These

partnerships include working with the non-profit sector, faith groups,

for-profit builders, all levels of government and others to develop or

redevelop available land and buildings so that we can increase the stock

of available and affordable homes. This new housing hub underlines the

importance of partnerships and the coordinated effort it’s going to take

to address housing affordability.

We’re also told by local businesses — nine out of ten business

owners — that the housing affordability crisis is impacting their

ability to recruit and retain good workers. In my community, I hear from

chiefs of police and fire departments across my constituency that they

can’t recruit the necessary professionals for our core services because

they can’t afford to live in our communities.

Our 30-point plan includes 14,000 rental units for the missing

middle. This includes skilled workers, teachers, the service sector,

nurses and carpenters, who our communities need and without whom our

communities and our economy suffer. We’re building for the vulnerable as

well.

It’s not only about planning and building new stock. It’s also

about taking care of what we have and making sure that that is not lost.

Our plan includes $75 million in funding to make sure that existing and

in-build stocks are kept in the sector and are available for British

Columbians who need them.

We’re also investing in the construction of 1,750 units of social

housing for Indigenous people across B.C. — again, developed in

partnerships. We’re making the first significant investment in two

decades in housing options for women who need a refuge from domestic

violence.

After decades of post-secondary institutions asking the government

to support and enable them to build student housing, our government is

finally allowing colleges and universities to borrow to build

much-needed student housing, and we’ll help finance 5,000 new student

housing beds.

[10:15 a.m.]

In turn, this will free up rental housing in our communities —

increasing stock, increasing capacity and therefore making it more

affordable for British Columbian families. We can’t fix the housing

crisis overnight. But we can act now, and we can plan and work in

partnerships together for the future.

R. Sultan: I thank the member opposite for her comments. It’s clear that all

of us in this chamber are concerned about housing. Our Finance Minister

should be concerned also. The province receives well over $1 billion a

year from this sector. Our federal government receives $1.6 billion, and

municipal governments $1.1 billion in British Columbia, and that’s not

the full story.

Unique to this industry is the payment of developer fees and

various levies, which give an additional $1.1 billion in revenue to

municipalities, including nearly a quarter of a billion annually to the

city of Vancouver alone. In total, at least $5 billion in tax revenue is

generated for all levels of government. If $5 billion is somehow

disappearing one day, our Finance Minister will have some additional

concerns — no question.

How are we doing just in terms of sheer supply? Across Metro

Vancouver, there were just 80 new, move-in-ready units available in the

fourth quarter of 2017 — 80. Contrast that with Statistics Canada’s

suggestion that we could be adding as many as 20,000 persons each

quarter to our population, on average, over the next 25 years. That’s a

long-term forecast, of course, but the striking contrast between a

supply of 80 and a potential demand of 20,000 is noteworthy. My note is:

should we laugh or cry?

Meanwhile, the total of new, unsold multifamily homes for purchase

across Metro Vancouver — including presale, under construction and

move-in-ready apartments and townhomes — has fallen 74 percent from Q2

2013. That’s a decrease of 95 percent from the five-year average of

move-in-ready units.

Question: why is housing supply down by 95 percent? Well, about 85

percent of Metro Vancouver is zoned for single family. That means

high-density housing — most useful to renters, for example — is only

permitted on the remaining 15 percent of available land. If we’re to

find a solution to the rental housing crunch, I suggest we might begin

by looking there.

MUSIC EDUCATION

N. Simons: It’s a pleasure for me to be able to talk about music education,

and in particular, I’m going to talk about music education in our public

elementary schools.

I would acknowledge my friend Tom Kellough, who’s a music teacher

on the Sunshine Coast and was, at one point, an accompanist for some

concerts that I was in. He’s a wonderful pianist.

B.C. schools provide a consistently high standard of instruction

in the core academic subjects. However, the delivery of music

instruction in B.C. is not consistent and varies widely, even within

school districts.

Recent research and development in neuroscience and the psychology

and sociology of music education provides strong evidence that music is

an important part of a comprehensive, quality education. The research

shows that we are musical beings, born with innate musical skills. The

study of music and making music engages, connects and develops many

parts of the brain. Musical learning positively affects cognitive

development and has been conclusively shown to be associated with

generally higher academic achievement.

Age seven is a critical time to introduce song and dance.

Significant brain development occurs in early and middle childhood, and

by age seven, children begin to hear and process music the way adults

do.

Making music helps human beings form lasting bonds of commitment

and trust. Ensemble work is the ultimate kind of teamwork, where

everyone is engaged in the play, and everyone always carries the

ball.

[10:20 a.m.]

Music has the power to evoke, embody and express emotions. Music

classes offer the identity-developing adolescent an emotional outlet, an

opportunity for self-expression and discovery of their emotions and

feelings in a safe and supportive environment.

Music students work seriously and interactively within clear

timelines on complex problems, reaching beyond mediocrity to achieve

more than they could do on their own. Music classes instil

responsibility, commitment, perseverance and self-discipline, which

boost self-esteem, self-confidence and self-knowledge.

The B.C. teacher regulation branch recognizes secondary music, but

it doesn’t recognize elementary music as a teaching specialization.

There are windows of opportunity in a child’s development, and certain

musical skills can be acquired only when those windows are open.

Elementary music classes are perhaps more important than secondary music

classes.

Like a plant, if the roots aren’t fed, the plant won’t flower. We

would not expect students to transition easily into grade 8 math without

any elementary foundations in mathematics. Yet we expect secondary

students to elect a subject in which they have little or no experience,

and we expect them to flourish.

The B.C. Music Educators Association published an inquiry report

in June 2013, which recommends that at least 60 minutes of elementary

music instruction per grade per week be mandated through the province,

with the option of adding more time with the discretion of the school

administrators. The report also recommends that the teacher regulation

branch accept elementary music as a specialized teaching area, thereby

encouraging post-secondary institutions to offer a degree, major,

concentration and/or diploma program in elementary music.

Just as an aside, I’m happy to say that school district 46 on the

Sunshine Coast is committed to offering music classes taught by music

specialists to all elementary students, at a minimum of 60 minutes per

week in the K-to-3 age group and a minimum of 30 minutes for grades 4

and 5, while most receive more; and that all grades 6 and 7 students

receive 100 minutes per week of beginning band. It’s Supt. Patrick

Bocking’s intent to hire a fifth full-time elementary music specialist

next year to help provide more flexibility in scheduling and in meeting

these district guidelines.

The world needs creative problem-solvers who understand and

appreciate how to work collaboratively and cooperatively for the greater

good. In 2018, given the evidence supporting the inclusion of music in a

comprehensive, quality program of basic education, we must give

consideration to the current state of the delivery of music instruction

across B.C. and adopt the recommended actions of the 2013 music

educators program quality teaching report. A government aiming to offer

B.C. students the very best education possible within its means should

consider the value and importance of music in education and take steps

to match the standard of excellence across the curriculum by including

music.

Let me add that the district band in school district 46, made up

of students from the lower Sunshine Coast, recently performed at the

Surrey jazz festival. This performance resulted in an invitation to the

MusicFest Nationals. I hope that between now and then, the concert band

members will audition for the jazz band so that they get an opportunity

to travel together.

The class called musical theatre recently put on a successful

production of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat , and

that class is grades 6 to 12. What a great course to help the students

make the transition into high school.

Music education breaks down barriers. It brings people together

from different age groups, different generations and different walks of

life. And the importance of music education can’t be overstated. I look

forward to my colleague’s response.

P. Milobar: It gives me great pleasure to rise to speak to the statements

around music education. Certainly, I am a firm believer in music

education for our youth and all the way through, as a life learning

tool. In my own background, my family has been very musical in the past.

Both my brothers and sisters — ironically, not myself — are all very

accomplished with the violin and as pianists, in their own right, and my

own children have been fortunate to excel in violin and piano as

well.

[10:25 a.m.]

So I can see the value firsthand of the importance of music

education. But not every household has the ability to seek out the

private lesson or the group lesson setting in a private building,

although I think the demand for those services we see across this

province speaks very much to the want of families and kids and youth in

our communities to access this type of educational opportunity by

seeking out these opportunities at very large music schools in

after-school hours.

However, I agree that in-school instruction is important in terms

of capturing all and making sure that it’s one connection point for all

kids within a classroom, to have a common connection and discover where,

maybe, some talents — which they didn’t realize they even had —

are.

Certainly, when I reflect back on my own school career, as limited

as I was in music, there was still that elementary school band, which

you could go and play a saxophone in, or a flute or any of those types

of instruments. Even in my own instruction, with teachers that I had, I

still remember a male teacher, when we were in grade 6 and 7, who,

although incredibly off-key with his own singing style, managed to have

a group of grade 6s and 7s singing even more off-key. That is where we

developed some very interesting takes on “Eye in the Sky” by the Alan

Parsons Project.

It was a way to bond together and, by demonstration of that story,

is something that sticks with you for life. You remember those types of

things as a class. When I bump into old classmates, we even laugh about

those various music sessions. It wasn’t the highest level, maybe, of

music instruction possible, but it was still a teacher going above and

beyond to make sure that the effort was made so that the class could see

that instruction.

Any efforts to try to change a curriculum that, I believe, was

changed about 20 years ago would be a step in the right direction.

Certainly, there are still many teachers out there that take it upon

themselves to make sure that that instruction is happening.

My own children, coming through not that long ago — they’re now

19, 22 and 25 — were fortunate enough to have teachers in elementary

school that did something as simple as having a ukulele band, a very

low-cost option where all those kids were still learning how to read

music, how to play some chords. The singing was sometimes a little

questionable, but there was a lot of fun, and there was always a

year-end concert with just the ukuleles. The amount of songs that they

were able to play with the ukulele was quite phenomenal.

Again, that took a teacher willing to step up, willing to do it

and wanting to make sure that the value of music education was still

taught to their kids. Any concerted effort to make sure the curriculum

stresses that — and that we have good, solid music education throughout

our system, especially for the primary grades — would be most welcome.

It certainly would build upon a whole lot of different strengths, let

alone all the studies that have shown how it helps with your

mathematics- and science-based learning as well, when your mind is tuned

into — pardon the pun — music education.

With that, I will take my chair, but I’m sure that everyone on

this side of the House, too — I can say very confidently — fully

supports and understands the importance of music education within our

school system to all, to make sure that they can have the best success

possible, touching into all of their various educational pursuits at the

same time.

N. Simons: I was just talking about how music sometimes breaks down barriers

and brings people together, and I feel a deeper affection for that side

of the House after my friend from Kamloops–North Thompson told us the

story of remembering choral productions — I don’t know if he’d have

called it that — opportunities to get together and sing. Just the fact

that he remembers it as a young person when he runs into people that

shared that experience, I think, speaks to the quality of music

education.

I think it’s a good time to thank music educators in this

province. I’m a little biased. My family — uncles, aunts and parents —

were all involved in music education in one form or another. I’ve

actually been a teacher of music as well, and it’s always a pleasure for

teachers, also, to see the success of their students, whether it be in

music or not.

Just having developed a skill, a mastery of something, I think, is

an important achievement. I think back to my first cello teachers and

how they’ve influenced me more than just musically, in terms of being a

person who recognizes differences in our society and the successes that

we can have, when we come together, in erasing those

differences.

[10:30 a.m.]

On the Sunshine Coast, in Powell River, there’ll be PRISMA, which

is Pacific Region International Summer Music Academy, where people from

around the world come together. They may not share a language, but they

sit next to each other and play the same notes, and then they realize

that they’ve got something very much in common.

I think music can serve to bring communities and cultures together

and actually break down barriers. We’ve seen international efforts. When

countries are getting closer together, they start with cultural

exchanges. Often it’s sports exchanges as well. But just the value of

music and music education can’t be overstated.

I appreciate the comments from my colleague across the way, and I

thank Madame Speaker for the opportunity to talk about music.

INDIGENOUS LANGUAGES

A. Olsen: I’m SȾHENEP. I grew up in the

WJOȽEȽP village of the WSÁNEĆ

people. I’m the son of Sylvia Snobelen and TSAYWESUT, Carl Olsen; the

grandson of Don and Phyllis Snobelen and ZICOT, Laura Bartleman, and

TELQUILUM, Ernie Olsen.

When my colleague from Oak Bay–Gordon Head and I met the

incredible team of Indigenous language warriors at the First Peoples

Cultural Council on Friday, my Uncle

STOLȻEȽ, John Elliott, was there.

He told us that SENĆOŦEN, the language of the WSÁNEĆ, was given to us

from the Creator. It was a gift from the Creator. It gave us our law and

showed us how to live in a good way in our territory.

It was how we communicated with everything around us. It was that

way since forever in WSÁNEĆ. But, as we know, things changed in our

territory. A dark cloud has hung over us. The law was broken. SENĆOŦEN

was attacked.

In the

summary report of Sen. Murray Sinclair’s Truth and

Reconciliation Commission, it states:

“Cultural genocide is the destruction of those structures and

practices that allow a group to continue as a group. States that engage

in cultural genocide set out to destroy the political and social

institutions of that targeted group. Land is seized, and populations are

forcibly transferred, and their movement is restricted. Languages are

banned. Spiritual leaders are persecuted, spiritual practices are

forbidden, and objects of spiritual value are confiscated and destroyed.

And, most significantly to the issue at hand, families are disrupted to

prevent the transmission of cultural values and identity from one

generation to the next.”

This was the most destructive work of the residential schools and

Indian day schools. These schools beat, abused and neglected Indian

children. The goal was to systematically destroy every connection to

what they saw as savage, godless cultures. An essential feature of this

work was to remove Indigenous languages.

The identity of a people is closely related to our territory, our

home, and it can only be described using our language, our words. Across

our province, most of our history has been captured and maintained

through words; that is to say it is an unwritten history.

The theft of our languages weakened our culture and left our

communities exposed to new kinds of trauma. The trauma is felt by

everyone in every one of our communities. It is felt by every one of our

relatives. It has challenged even the strongest. The trauma of a

ministry official tearing a newborn baby from her mother’s nipple, to

prop up some despicable baby industry that has been quietly operating

since the Sixties Scoop. You know, we don’t want to lose our children.

We don’t want our babies stolen from our communities.

The trauma of lack of adequate housing and government policy that

limits the ability to get proper housing — housing that is full of mould

and overcrowded. You know, we don’t want to be the most homeless people

in our society. The trauma of a seemingly endless list of suicides: our

mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, our cousins, nieces, nephews,

aunties and uncles — losing faith and feeling hopeless. You know, we

don’t want to feel hopeless. We don’t want to take our own

lives.

The trauma of incarceration and a lack of justice. Murderers and

abusers of Indigenous people walking free while the same story in a

different town has a different result. Meanwhile, the prison population

is overwhelmingly Indigenous. You know, we don’t want to be

imprisoned.

[10:35 a.m.]

We don’t need more police or a forceful approach to address the

deep-seated social ills that have come from our trauma of being

displaced from our homes, taken from our parents and grandparents,

stripped of our language and our identity, becoming a foreigner in our

own home. The attempts to cleanse British Columbia of more than 30

Indigenous languages did not entirely succeed. While many languages and

dialects are extinct, last uttered from the lips of passing elders, many

have been rescued from the edge of extinction by modern-day linguistic

heroes.

Indigenous people are resilient, our leaders are strong, and we

have survived a deep trauma. These heroes worked through the pain of

their experiences. They overcame punishment and humiliation and never

forgot the words our ancestors used to describe our territory, our way

of life, our connection to our home.

Government inherits decisions of the past. We inherit them when we

swear an oath to serve and protect the honour of the Crown. Frankly,

there has been so much to dishonour it. As Senator Sinclair said: “The

government spent so much time trying to exterminate our language and

culture, it’s important it take the time to re-establish language and

culture as a foundation for the future.”

It is within this context that I celebrate the government’s

transformative investment in the restoration of Indigenous languages.

From my perspective, it is the most substantial step taken so far in our

long journey of reconciliation.

I have witnessed the overwhelmingly positive impact of the

restoration of language. Our own language, SENĆOŦEN, was nearing

extinction, and our grandparents worked to preserve it. We now have a

thriving SENĆOŦEN immersion program at

ȽÁU,WELṈEW̱ School in

WJOȽEȽP. Our youth are coming

alive, reconnecting with their ancestors and their history, their

territory and culture through language. It is exactly as Senator

Sinclair suggested. It is a foundation for the future.

Finally, this provincial government has deployed different tactics

from the past. Today I celebrate our government for starting from the

beginning and recognizing that providing the resources for Indigenous

people not only improves the lives and well-being of our relatives but

indeed the lives of all British Columbians.

B. Ma: I want to begin by thanking the member for Saanich North and the

Islands for putting into words what I can only begin to appreciate as

someone who is not indigenous to these lands. The passion that he has

brought to this discussion cuts through the misunderstanding around the

importance of Indigenous languages in a way that I could never. So I

will add what I can to support his words.

There was a suggestion made some weeks ago in this place that we

should take the money that the provincial government has committed to

investing into the revitalization of Indigenous languages and redirect

it into policing for First Nations communities. I will be frank. When I

heard this suggestion, I was embarrassed. I was embarrassed for the

member who had said it. I was embarrassed for myself as someone who

perhaps might have thought similar thoughts out of ignorance. And I was

embarrassed for our society.

Now, do not misunderstand me. I say this not to disparage the

member. I believe that the comment came from a place of compassion, from

someone who has had harrowing experiences that he had to endure in his

former life as an officer of the law, which leads him to believe what he

does. I respect his experiences and his personal perspective.

My fear is that the argument that is being used to defend his

statements, which so many settlers, like me, might not know better than

to agree with, means that there is still a level of ignorance around the

importance of revitalizing Indigenous languages that cannot be left to

stand.

I don’t speak an Indigenous language so I will use an example in

is Bowinn Ma, but in Chinese, it’s Ma Bo Wen. Ma literally translates as

“horse,” which is the family name, and Bo Wen literally translates to

“plentiful script.” But what it means can be roughly translated as

“ocean of knowledge” or “broad scholar.” It means someone who has a

broad understanding of many things and someone who has the wisdom to use

this knowledge in a good way.

[10:40 a.m.]

It represents what my parents and grandparents had hoped I would

sounds used to identify me. But in my traditional language, those two

simple syllables are a culmination of all of the hopes and dreams that

my family have had of me since my birth — aspirations that could never

truly be translated properly across cultures in as succinct a

way.

You see, the revitalization of Indigenous languages is not simply

an exercise in translating words. It’s the beginning of the healing of

cultures, through which an expression of world view emanates. It speaks

to a person’s core identity. Ideas, values, feelings, aspirations, hopes

and dreams are communicated in ways that sometimes cannot be done in any

other way. It’s about grounding a person; tearing down the walls of

isolation; reconnecting them to their ancestors, their community, their

family, their environment, their Creator and, indeed, even

themselves.

The positive impact of this cultural healing is real, and it is

documented. I want to share with the House today what a young Squamish

woman had said to me about this topic. Her name is Taylor George-Hollis,

and she says:

“The revitalization of Indigenous languages is vital to keeping our

spirit alive. Speaking Squamish, I am aware that my ancestors hear me

tied to the land, water, air and all beings. I look forward to the day I

share the Sḵwx̱wú7mesh

sníchim and Nuu-chah-nulth with my future children, as it shows

that through our resilience, love and passion for our children, we are

not assimilated peoples.”

There is an urgent need here when it comes to walking the talk on

a road towards reconciliation. It starts with recognizing that, as

settlers, as benefactors of colonialism on this land, we were the

problem for these First Nations. Our ways were the problem. Government’s

use of law enforcement to tear children away from their families and

prevent Indigenous peoples from accessing their language and culture was

the problem. Our ways will continue to be the problem if we do not learn

from this.

I stand firmly by our government’s decision to invest $50 million

into the urgent revitalization of Indigenous languages. Chen Kwen

Mantumi .

A. Olsen: We know the power of language. This place knows the power of

language well. We’ve weaponized it. Government is built on words.

Political careers are built on just a few well-placed, well-delivered

words. Effective election campaigns are carefully constructed on a

platform of words that convey a compelling message. To a great extent,

words and language are our business. It is a perilous business, as we

all know, because years, months, weeks, days, hours of perfect execution

can be undone in just a split second of a careless utterance.

We all remember, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but

what you can do for your country” or “I’m not a crook” or “Yes We Can.”

Powerful orators have inspired millions of people to rise up through

their words, the pauses between them, their pace and the stories that

inspired us, that make our heart race or our blood boil or that give us

the calm, contented confidence in their leadership.

Take our language from us, take it from the people in this place,

and what do we have left? We have nothing. If our society, our law, our

understanding of the world around us is built on our language, then the

most destructive thing that one people can do to another is to steal it

away, to attempt to purge it, to cut our tongues from our

mouths.

It may not be visible to everyone in this place, but language

revitalization is happening. It’s having a tremendous impact in our

Indigenous communities. As STOLȻEȽ

says: “Our language, SENĆOŦEN, was given to us by our Creator. It was

our law. It was the way we communicated with every living thing in our

territory.”

[10:45 a.m.]

In WSÁNEĆ we know there is a different way. The restoration of

language is working, and we’re eager to share it. I’m not naive. I know

there are problems. I’ve lived amongst them my entire life. But we are

optimistic. We are excited. I raise my hands to this government for

recognizing it and investing in it. HÍSWḴE

SIÁM.

CREATIVE ECONOMY

B. D’Eith: Recently we discussed the importance of the creative industries in

British Columbia. It was very clear that supporting the $5.23 billion

per annum creative industries of film, television, music, digital,

gaming, books and magazines is critical to B.C. jobs and the B.C.

economy. The Budget 2018 commitment to the creative industries through

their new tax credits, increased funding to B.C. Arts Council and

Creative B.C. is fantastic and necessary. But today I wish to talk about

the broader issue of the creative economy.

Now, what is the creative economy? This concept was actually

proposed by John Howkins in 2001, in his book The Creative

Economy , which he updated in 2013. In this, there’s a new

definition of economic systems. Instead of looking at land, labour and

capital, value is based on novel, imaginative qualities. This concept

applies not only to the creative industries but applies to the whole

economy. In fact, some observers suggest that creativity itself is a

defining characteristic of the 21st century global economy.

The British Council, the U.K. version of our Canada Council, has

an entire

section devoted to the creative economy. They’ve embraced this

new view of the economy. John Newbigin, who is the chair, says that:

“The creative economy not only requires new and rapidly changing skills;

it requires a completely new approach to education in which

collaborative learning and mutual respect between the traditional

disciplines of arts, science and technology will be crucial.” He goes on

to say that it’s not arts versus science. It’s a diversity of

perspective that produces the best results.

Now, one powerful piece of evidence that he brings forward is the

U.K.’s Arts and Humanities Research Council Fuse project in 2014. They

looked at 450 creative digital media businesses in Brighton, England.

Basically, in this, they found that businesses in which employees from

arts and humanities worked as equals with employees from science and

technology backgrounds actually grew faster than companies in which one

dominated the other. The greater degree of integration between arts and

science disciplines, the greater the company’s growth.

In fact, the report concluded that Brighton’s creative design and

IT firms grew faster than the local economy and ten times faster than

the British economy as a whole. But the fused businesses grew more than

twice that speed, and super-fused firms grew faster still.

Not only did this demonstrate the value of maintaining a balance

between different skills, it illustrated the truth that a diversity of

skills and perspective is, as of itself, an important element in

building a successful creative economy.

Now, some people bristle when you suggest that STEM should be

increased to STEAM to incorporate the arts, but in this context and when

you’re looking at the creative economy and the British research, it’s

really the cross-sector and cross-disciplinary work that needs to be

encouraged.

This also speaks…. We had a previous speaker in terms of music and

its importance. It certainly speaks to maintaining arts, music and

culture in our schools.

Now, what does Canada look like? In an article, Creative

Economy Employment in the U.S., Canada and the U.K… . Based on

the

definitions used in the report, Canada’s creative economy is

comprised of 2.2 million workers, including 534,000 creative workers in

the creative industries, 815,000 creative workers in the non-creative

industries and 893,000 non-creative workers in the creative industries.

The point here is that there is an integration.

One would hope that the Canadian government would recognize this.

In fact, in September 2017, the federal government created Creative

Canada. Of course, this policy framework that they put together shows a

wonderful commitment to the creative industries, broadcasting, arts and

culture, but does not really embrace the broader creative economy in the

way that Britain has through the British Council.

For example, while the Canadian framework talks about creative

hubs, they focus on the creative industries and arts but don’t take the

next step towards cross-sectoral collaboration. That is really the

essence of the new creative economy.

What are examples of this cross-sectoral connectivity? Well, we

just recently had Mining Day at the Legislature, and it featured a

number of B.C.-based clean and high-tech companies currently active in

the mining industry, including our Carmanah’s solar-powered solutions

and Victoria-based LlamaZOO Interactive 3D communications.

[10:50 a.m.]

This is an example of how a gaming company was able to use its

technology for a traditional sector in the B.C. economy. From their

website, a leading example of LlamaZOO’s work is MineLife VR, a 3D

virtual reality platform for the digital twinning of a mine, from

exploration to reclamation, used to consolidate and communicate mine

data, such as drill holes, mineralogy, ore bodies, infrastructure,

facilities and tenures, layered on high-resolution, geospatial

data.

Now, if you understand what that meant, I think you’re awesome.

But the whole point is that they’re using this amazing technology to

help the mining industry. So this is the creative, the digital and the

traditional together.

We live in a digital age, an age where knowledge and creativity

drive the economy, so continued technological innovation in all areas of

the economy is crucial. B.C. has the opportunity to be a leader, not

only in the creative industries, but also in applying creativity to the

existing sectors. That’s why I’m very excited that the minister

announced, on March 1, the Innovation Council is now being turned into

Innovate B.C.

The Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology said:

“‘Innovation is the lifeblood of a successful economy…. By making

Innovate B.C. a single point of contact for entrepreneurs and businesses

across B.C., we will ensure that people get the help they need to create

good jobs and benefit from the opportunities of an emerging economy.’

Innovate B.C. will make recommendations to government on how best to

create science, technology and innovation policy that promotes the

commercialization of B.C. industry.”

In order for the B.C. economy to stay strong and sustainable, we

need to embrace the creative economy that drives the 21st-century global

economy. We need to ensure that our post-secondary programs foster

creativity across all programs. We need to encourage cross-sector and

cross-disciplinary work across all sectors, and we need to make sure

that traditional industries work with non-traditional industries.

Cultivating our creative minds in B.C. will ensure that B.C. thrives in

the new global economy.

J. Thornthwaite: I rise today to speak in response to the member opposite in what

is starting to become a weekly tradition for us on the creative economy.

Our government was a huge supporter of the creative economy. We

undertook many initiatives to support it, and we often ensured that

these initiatives served a dual purpose.

One such example is the Our Living Languages exhibit at the Royal

B.C. Museum right across the street. I’m sure the member for Saanich

North and the Islands, who just recently spoke on Indigenous languages,

would be interested to learn that the exhibit first opened in 2014. It

was part of the effort to preserve 61 dialects of the 34 First Nations

languages in British Columbia.

Last week was International Women’s Day, and in honour of that

day, I would like to speak on women in film — specifically, B.C. women

in film. First, I would like to speak on Women In Film and Television

Vancouver. WIFTV is a member-driven, not-for-profit society. Their main

objectives are to further the artistic and professional development of

women in the Canadian screen-based media community and to recognize and

promote the artistic and professional contributions of women in the

Canadian screen-based media community and in the community at

large.

WIFTV’s first major endeavour was the producer’s workshop series,

a three-year educational program aimed at increasing access to

information about funding to increase the number of Indigenous

productions being created by women. This launched the careers of many of

Vancouver’s female media creators — meaning producers, directors and

industry managers — and initiated the creation of the Producer’s

Workbook . In 2010, they published the fourth edition of the

Producer’s Workbook , which is now used as a curriculum

resource at the Vancouver Film School.

Last Saturday night, I attended the third annual Women in

Entertainment International Women’s Day awards and fundraiser. There,

they recognized the mentors and trailblazers in our entertainment

community and also gathered to celebrate our best and our continued

communal push for progress in screen-based media. Women’s voices have

never been stronger, and the industry is talking about real issues, real

talk and real momentum.

[10:55 a.m.]

During the evening of celebration and joy, we remember also that a

rising tide lifts all boats. It was therefore also a fundraiser for the

Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre, a low-barrier shelter and safe space

for our women. Certainly, the film industry gives back to all sorts of

organizations. Honoured that night were leaders of several unions, who

serve the entertainment industry and act as mentors for women in the

industry. I’d like to recognize Susan Butler-Gray from IATSI Local 891;

Marnie Wynnyk, Teamsters Local 155; Lee Anne Muldoon, ICG 669; Linda

Darlow, UBCP-ACTRA; and Rachel Talalay, DGCBC. I’m very honoured that I

was there to help them celebrate.

In my riding is Capilano University’s Nat and Flora Bosa Centre

for Film and Animation. I’ve had the pleasure of attending numerous

presentations there. Our leader attended in his capacity as Minister of

Advanced Education a year or so ago. Cap U is home to the largest

full-time, four-year production-oriented film degree program in western

Canada, and the award-winning 6,662-square-metre LEED gold-standard

facility provides every tool necessary to create a production, both live

action and animated, from idea to final releasable

production.

The project was first announced in 2009, with a $30.2 million

combined contribution from the federal and provincial governments under

the knowledge infrastructure program. Through their philanthropic

leadership, Nat and Flora Bosa donated $6 million in 2011 — the largest

private donation in the university’s 43-year history — to support the

centre that now carries their name.

Since then, as I said, I’ve been proud to attend many events and

productions at this world-class facility. I’m proud that Capilano

University is one of the most prominent film schools in Canada and that

our creative industries are doing so well here in British

Columbia.

B. D’Eith: Thank you for the comments from the member for North

Vancouver–Seymour. I do share her love for the creative industries and

the support. But again, we’re talking today about the creative economy,

which is really a bigger discussion.

One of the things that I’d love to see…. I just went to Garibaldi

High School. They’re going to compete in a robotics competition this

week in Victoria. What I thought was really telling was that nearly half

of the robotics club was also in the band program. I thought this was a

really good example of how creative people — because this a very

creative endeavour, putting these robots together — and how, actually,

the music and the science work together. It also goes to the earlier

discussion we had about the importance of music in schools.

Another example of that. When I was the executive director of

Music B.C., we did a project with Science World which was technology and

music and how they work together. That was a great exhibit, but what

really was interesting was the scientists on that panel — nine out of

ten of them were also musicians. I think that really also speaks to

that. You look at someone like Einstein, for example. He frequently

played classical music as a brainstorming technique, and Einstein’s

second wife said that the music actually helped him with his

theories.

Another example. I went to the Mission Historical Society, and

their biggest challenge, actually, is that they’re digitizing everything

— their pictures. Actually, one of their biggest needs right now is

creativity on the tech side, which I never would have thought

of.

It’s about thinking outside the box. I think with our sectors of

agriculture, forestry and mining, we have to look at what creativity can

bring to that. The University of the Fraser Valley, for example, has an

agriculture technology diploma. I thought this was really interesting,

because what they focus on is innovation in agriculture, education and

technology. That’s where the future is.

We look at things like forestry, with engineered wood products.

Engineered wood products are actually a very interesting technology,

again, using creative ingenuity to show how we can sustain and grow our

traditional forest industry. We’re very excited about how creativity and

the creative economy can help drive our traditional

industries.

We need to ensure that our post-secondary programs foster

creativity through all programs, including STEM programs. We need to

continue to encourage cross-sector and cross-disciplinary work across

all sectors so that we can take advantage of our amazing pool of

creative talent. We need to work with traditional non-creative

businesses to use creative workers to make their industries more

effective.

[11:00 a.m.]

Embracing the creative economy will help B.C. stay strong in the

global 21st-century economy, in order for us to meet our environmental

commitments and stay competitive in the world.

Hon. S. Robinson: I call Motion 9 that’s on the order paper in the name of the

member for Nechako Lakes.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to

proceed with Motion 9 without disturbing the priorities of the motions

preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 9 — TRADE AGREEMENTS

J. Rustad: It’s a pleasure to move the motion:

[Be it resolved that this House acknowledge the importance of strong

trading relationships with its neighbours and the benefits of

diversifying trade through supporting Canadian Free Trade

Agree­ments.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

This is an important motion to bring forward for this Legislature,

I think, for us as a province but also for my riding of Nechako Lakes.

When I think about activity in my riding, whether it is farming, whether

it is mining or whether it is forestry, everything is reliant upon our

ability to have trade and the ability for us as a province to be able to

exchange trade goods with our neighbours and abroad.

More importantly, when I think about trade and what it does, it

brings a positive investment climate. People look at wanting to invest

in this jurisdiction if they know that there are good relations and the

opportunity to be able to trade and move goods.

When I look at the approach that this government has taken…. In

particular, I think about the softwood lumber agreement. The first thing

that they did…. They went down to Washington on a junket to talk about

it, yet what came from it? Absolutely nothing. The softwood lumber

agreement and the softwood lumber relations right now between British

Columbia and the United States are not doing well. As a matter of fact,

there are no prospects at the moment for any kind of agreement between

us and the Americans, which is very troubling.

Beyond that, why should we do trade? In trade, it’s about helping

people. It’s about creating jobs. It’s about supporting families. It’s

about improving quality of life.

I want to go back and look at some quotes from the members

opposite; in particular, the now current Energy, Mines and Petroleum

Resources Minister. In the Nelson Daily News back on April 27,

2009, here’s what she said: “When talking about free trade, it’s not the

people who benefit; it’s the corporations. It’s not about communities;

it’s about corporations.” Nothing could be farther from the truth. This

is about how we support people and families, not

corporations.

She went on in the same article. She said: “It provides us with no

incentive to protect or recruit and encourage professionals to stay here

in British Columbia.” Nothing could be farther from the truth. If

corporations are creating jobs, if they have the opportunity for trade

to be able to drive investment, that attracts professionals and

individuals here. And it speaks to misguided thoughts and policies on

behalf of the current government that’s in place.

Trade missions, of course, are an important part of that. I’m glad

to see the current government went on a trade mission, but the current

Jobs, Trade and Technology Minister, from an NDP news release back on

August 14, 2013, dissed trade missions: “At this time like this, it’s

only responsible to look critically at all spending decisions,

particularly trade missions that come with such a steep price

tag.”

Is this the philosophy that we currently have? You only need to

look at what’s happening next door and the relationship we currently

have with Alberta. This day, today, they are currently debating whether

or not to carry on with further trade actions against British Columbia.

How is that in the benefit of supporting people?

We have members of the NDP and past members of the NDP that

actually boasted about voting against things like NAFTA. She stood and

voted against NAFTA. That’s not about improving people’s lives; it’s

about politics.

Study after study show that issues like…. For women, they live

healthier, longer and more independently in countries with high levels

of economic freedom. You start blocking off economic freedom, and you

start actually hurting people. Economic expansion and a free economy

have contributed greatly to the quality of life and improvements

worldwide. The amount of people that have been lifted out of poverty and

the benefits that have happened over the last 50 years, predominantly

through trade, has been phenomenal, and energy plays a key role in that.

It plays a key role.

[11:05 a.m.]

I quote from a report called “Energy, EROI and Quality of Life.”

EROI is the energy return on investment. It says:

“Humanitarian efforts continue to focus on poverty reduction

programs — example: health and education. Our results suggest that the

metrics of societal well-being and per-capita net energy available to

society appears to be linked. Policies developed with the purpose of

improving the human condition within a society may have little impact on

society’s well-being without accompanying increases in per-capita net

energy delivery to that society.”

When you’re talking about trade and the ability to move goods,

you’re talking about….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Rustad: You’re talking about the ability to be able to move

energy…

Deputy Speaker: Member, time is up.

J. Rustad: …and that is exactly what we need to be thinking about.

Deputy Speaker: Time is up. Thank you.

J. Rustad: Thank you for ending my time early, Mr. Speaker.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: No, the red light was on.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Member, are you challenging the Chair’s ruling?

J. Rustad: Sorry?

Deputy Speaker: That’s fine. Thank you.

R. Glumac: B.C. has an economy that relies heavily on trade, yet we live in a

time where these mutually beneficial trade deals are being ignored or

they’re being used for political advantage by our neighbouring

jurisdictions. Let’s take one example — our good friend to the south,

Donald Trump. He sees problems, legitimate problems, in the U.S. job

sector and targets these trade deals as the source of the problem. He

stated, but I can’t do the impersonation: “NAFTA is the worst deal, one

of the worst deals our country has ever made from an economic standpoint

— one of the worst deals ever.”

I’ve not met many people that agree with very much of what Donald

Trump says, especially this particular comment. There’s almost universal

agreement among economists that NAFTA has been mutually beneficial to

all three countries, yet we’re still faced here with the ramifications

of his actions.

North American trade has grown considerably since the

implementation of NAFTA. It was $290 billion in 1993 and over $1.1

trillion today. Some 14 million American jobs depend on trade with

Canada. In my time in government so far, I have also encountered almost

universal support of strong and stable trade agreements.

For example, as the government’s representative to the Pacific

NorthWest Economic Region, or PNWER, which represents five states and

five provinces…. There was uniform agreement about the importance of

NAFTA. All ten jurisdictions signed on to a letter that stated that

PNWER members encouraged their federal governments to strive towards a

modernized NAFTA that builds upon its current success to further enhance

trade and investment in North America.

In 2016, the two-way trade within the PNWER region was $29

billion, supporting jobs linked through various integrated regional

supply chains, with $9.3 billion in goods and services exported to

Canadian PNWER jurisdictions from U.S. PNWER jurisdictions, and $19.7

billion exported from Canadian PNWER jurisdictions to U.S. PNWER

jurisdictions.

As Parliamentary Secretary for Technology, I can say with

confidence that there is strong support in the tech sector. There’s

currently $1.3 billion of high-tech goods being exported from B.C. and

$4.5 billion of high-tech services. The Ministry of Jobs, Trade and

Technology is working together with other ministries to increase export

opportunities as a means of creating long-term jobs and growing the

economy.

For example, we are working with the Minister of Forests, Lands,

Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development to expand efforts to

market manufactured wood products to world markets. Under the previous

government, we know that we’ve lost 30,000 jobs in the forestry

industry. We want to bring those jobs back.

We’re also working with the Minister of Agriculture to promote

B.C. food and agricultural exports, especially to growing markets in the

Asia-Pacific. And we have a growing network of trade and investment

representatives throughout the world that are working to secure export

agreements for B.C. goods and services in new markets.

[11:10 a.m.]

I support the motion today. But I don’t agree with other

jurisdictions that walk away from these mutually beneficial agreements

strictly for political advantage, whether that be Donald Trump to the

south or Rachel Notley to the east. In B.C., we will continue to stand

up for our economy and our environment, and we acknowledge the

importance of strong trading relationships and the benefits of

diversifying trade.

T. Wat: I rise in the House today to speak in support of free trade and

its many benefits for our provincial economy. Here in British Columbia,

we take a lot of pride in the great variety of high-quality goods that

we produce for local consumers and export abroad. Commodities like wood

products, agricultural foods, fish and seafood, machinery and equipment,

and metallic mineral products are in high demand.

In 2016, when the previous government was in power, total B.C.

goods exported worldwide rose to almost $40 billion. That represented an

increase of 9.8 percent over 2015, 20.8 percent over 2011 and 56 percent

over 2009 to when the NDP was in government.

It’s worth noting, however, that events south of the border and

around the world have created uncertainty. With that in mind, the

diversification of our economy has never been more important. That is

why our former government worked so hard with the private sector and

with workers and families in British Columbia to develop and maintain

our Asia-Pacific partnerships.

These markets, in particular, continue to grow, and they provide

significant opportunity for B.C. trade and investment. Canada’s recent

signing of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific

Partnership or CPTPP is another important step in that relationship

building. It is one of the largest free trade agreements in the world.

It removes trade barriers and provides preferential market access for

B.C. goods and services. Ultimately, it will increase investment and

create new jobs and opportunities for many British

Columbians.

With all these positives in mind, you would expect this government

to be publicly declaring its support of the CPTPP. But so far, they have

remained silent. We do know that their counterparts at the federal level

have been vocal in their opposition to the agreement, saying no to jobs

and the working people. And if we look back to when the members across

the way were in opposition, we see many examples where they have spoken

out against free trade, whether it be NAFTA, TILMA or our former

government’s trade mission to Asia.

Meantime, instead of creating a level playing field for B.C.

business to compete on a global scale, many obstacles have been put in

their path to success. We saw a budget update in September that raised

corporation tax, raised the carbon tax and removed its neutrality. We

just saw this government’s first full budget in February that replaced

MSP premiums with a surprise and crippling employers health tax. Since

then, we have relayed numerous concerns to this House from business

owners across B.C. who tell us how this payroll tax will hinder them

from hiring staff or potentially even cause layoffs or price hikes for

their customers.

What’s more, B.C. got tangled up in a trade war with Alberta that

didn’t need to happen — over a pipeline that has already received

federal approval. Alberta banned B.C. wines, hurting our agricultural

industry and our economy. While Alberta has called off their ban, this

government is now musing about taking further actions against British

Columbia that could hurt our economy and our people. They are doing it

today.

When you look at all of these different events I’ve just

described, a pattern of uncertainty emerges, a pattern that chips away

at our competitive advantage. It makes investors wonder whether British

Columbia is still a good place to do business. It puts investment and

trade at risk. It puts our economy at risk. It puts the future of B.C.

workers at risk.

[11:15 a.m.]

As the former Minister of International Trade and now the Trade

critic, I know all too well that a reputation takes years to build but

moments to destroy. I urge the current government to support free trade

with action in order to grow B.C.’s economy and support the men and

women who have worked so hard to build it.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to be speaking to the motion today to recognize

the importance of strong trading relationships and the benefits of

diversifying trade. We know the record of the previous government. It

was a near-constant refrain about everything. All of our economic

development in B.C. was dependent on liquefied natural gas, basically

putting all their eggs in that basket while ignoring other sectors of

the economy.

Our government recognizes, really, the diverse nature of our

economy and the need to support that. We know under the old government —

what was the record? — 30,000 good forestry jobs were lost, 100 mills

were shut down. As well, the softwood lumber deal expired under the

tenure of the previous government, and no efforts to travel to

Washington to get a deal.

We know that the importance of our diverse economy — in

particular, our manufacturing centre — is key. Our manufacturing sector

contributes 7.2 percent of our GDP, which equates to $16 billion for

B.C.’s economy. According to the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters,

manufacturing is an important driver of our economy. B.C. is the

third-largest economy dependent on manufacturing and the third-largest

output for manufacturing in our country. The largest source of

employment, it directly provides 180,000 jobs and indirectly supports

hundreds of thousands more jobs. For every dollar generated by a

manufacturer, there’s a multiplier effect of another $3.50 in economic

activity that results in benefiting local B.C. communities.

We know that the wages in the manufacturing sector are 15 percent

higher than the overall average for other industries. The sector

contributes 30 percent of business taxes. As well, our exports — 67

percent, two-thirds — are manufactured goods. Certainly, it’s a growing

sector. We know that…. In terms of our government and our support for

manufacturing, we recognize that for companies to be successful, they

need support in terms of trained workers, and our world-class

post-secondary education provides highly skilled workers.

B.C. is well situated in terms of having global access, with

respect to our strategic location on the West Coast and our efficient

transportation and communication systems. As well, it’s an important

consideration that our government ensures that we have a very

competitive environment to ensure that manufacturers are

successful.

I want to talk specifically about some key initiatives led by our

government to support this sector. We have, under the confidence and

supply agreement with the Green Party caucus, appointed an innovation

commissioner, Alan Winter, to be the point person to lead on ensuring

that innovation is supported and companies are successful in

B.C.

As well, we have expanded the mandate for, previously, the B.C.

Innovation Council. It’s renamed Innovate B.C., and it’s a main agency

now for tech businesses to build capacity to reach global markets,

attract new investment and access start-up capital.

We have, as well, the announcement, very exciting, in terms of the

B.C.-based digital technology supercluster, which is a successful

recipient — one of the five winning bidders in the federal government’s

innovation supercluster initiative. This will provide support and ensure

that British Columbia is competitive and able to access and leverage not

only funding but also support for the network of industries as

well.

We have a very dynamic sector. We have life sciences,

transportation, agrifoods, clean technology, tourism, film, TV and

digital media, forestry, mining, international education, technology — a

very dynamic sector.

[11:20 a.m.]

Our government, supported by the Green caucus, has taken

initiative to ensure that we are competitive. We are building

relationships with our Cascadia Innovation Corridor, with our trading

partner in Washington, to ensure that B.C.’s economy is strong and works

for British Columbians.

D. Barnett: I rise today in support of the member’s motion that cares for

those that live in the Cariboo.

As you have heard me say time and time again in this House, my

riding is the proud host to our province’s most prolific farms and

cattle herds. The agriculture sector serves the province in many ways —

by feeding our citizens, by providing jobs and by bolstering our economy

through trade with our neighbours.

The Cariboo is one of the last intact temperate grasslands in the

world. This ecosystem can be maintained through carefully managed

livestock grazing, which makes the industry sustainable. This, of

course, brings me to the people behind agriculture. These operations are

often passed from one generation to another, making farming

an act of

heritage and of community. The people who work in the industry love the

industry. They have worked through droughts, through forest fires and

through uncertain markets — all for the tremendous love of the work. I

am delighted whenever the ranchers in my community are rewarded for

their hard work and sacrifice.

British Columbia’s sectors are all integrated and are all kept

healthy through steady trade. One of the reasons that our province has

been considered so prosperous is because of these transparent and fairly

negotiated trade deals. These deals are made on behalf of our citizens

for their benefit. They protect and guide British Columbians through

national and international trade deals.

Our province has approximately 5 percent of the national beef

herd, which is supplied to local, national and international markets.

Approximately 45,000 B.C. cattle are sold directly as beef into the

local market annually, and many more are sold to Alberta’s feedlot and

finishing industry before, in turn, joining domestic and international

markets. These markets include China and Japan, which have become

Canada’s second- and third-largest export markets. It’s amazing to think

of the beef raised here in B.C. being enjoyed by families on the other

side of the world.

Free trade agreements allow us to further build upon B.C.’s

already strong Asia-Pacific ties while simultaneously capitalizing on

our own established industries. It’s amazing to think of what expanded

market access would mean to B.C. cattle ranchers as they are able to

meet the need of other countries.

There are just over 4,000 cattle ranchers in our province, with

the industry employing some 8,700 people and contributing an estimated

$600 million to the province’s economy annually.

Free trade agreements foster economic growth at both the community

and national levels, and that’s why I support this motion.

J. Brar: I am very pleased to rise in this House today to respond to the

trade motion introduced by the member for Nechako Lakes. The motion

reads as follows: “Be it resolved that this House acknowledge the

importance of strong trading relationships with its neighbours and the

benefits of diversifying trade through supporting Canadian Free Trade

Agreements.”

In my respectful and unbiased opinion, I believe that all members

on both sides of this House believe that diversifying trade through

supporting trade agreements and strengthening our relationship with our

trading partners is critical to growing our economy.

We are all committed to doing that, but there’s a difference

between us and them. The difference is that the members on the other

side of the House and the members on this side of the House have a

different approach and a different purpose for diversifying trade and

strengthening relationships with our trading partners.

[11:25 a.m.]

That’s why I think it’s very important for us to debate this

motion. This is really important for the people who are watching TV,

watching this debate, to understand how our approach is better for the

people of British Columbia than the approach of the previous

administration. Our government is building strong trading relationships

and diversifying B.C.’s exports to build a better B.C., to make life

more affordable, to improve the services you count on and to build a

strong, sustainable economy that supports jobs in every part of the

province.

Our government wants a better B.C. for each and every person in

this province,

whereas the members on the other side of the House made

bad choices on these trade agreements for 16 long years. To be fair,

they did diversify B.C.’s exports, but their focus was to benefit only

the top 2 percent of the wealthy people of this province. For example,

the result of the diversification of raw logs under the previous

administration was that 30,000 British Columbians lost good forestry

jobs and 100 mills were closed.

There is a difference between the members on the other side of the

House and the members on this side of the House. They made efforts to

diversify B.C.’s exports to benefit the top 2 percent, and we are doing

it to build a better B.C. for each and every person in this province.

That’s the difference.

Our government has done more during the first seven months than

the previous administration did in many years. Our Premier has recently

led a very successful trade mission to China, Korea and Japan. These

three countries are B.C.’s second-, third- and fourth-largest trading

partners. During this trade mission to China, Korea and Japan, we

promoted many sectors of B.C.’s economy, such as tourism, wineries, wood

products and our tech sector.

We are committed to building on our strong relationships with Asia

and connecting B.C. businesses to new international markets. The

previous administration let the softwood lumber deal expire and refused

to go to Washington to get a deal. Unlike the previous administration,

our Premier was willing to go to Washington and fight for a deal on

softwood lumber. We stand up to support B.C. businesses and fight for

better trade deals. The previous administration, on the other hand, made

bad choices by giving up too early on that issue.

Our government has also extended the export navigator pilot

program for another six months to help more small business owners and

entrepreneurs develop export capacity and gain access to new markets.

Our government is fully committed to building lasting relationships with

our trading partners that help B.C. businesses grow and prosper. We do

that to build a better B.C. for each and every person in this province.

That’s the difference between us and them.

G. Kyllo: I’m absolutely amazed by the comments from the member opposite

when he talks about relationships. In less than eight months, what the

new government has actually done is destroy relationships with our

closest trading partner, Alberta, and caused lots of grief as far as the

relationship we had with our federal government. These are things that

should be extremely concerning to British Columbians.

Now, when it comes to the global economy, British Columbia proves

that while we may be little, we are fierce, we are innovative, we’re

daring, and we’re constantly growing. Our industries are flexible and

resilient, adapting to whatever the world throws at us. We have

weathered economic storms which grow in intensity as the world becomes

increasingly globalized. Now, in order to press forward, rather than

being left behind, we must turn our gaze outwards and aggressively

pursue export markets.

As a former president and CEO of a family-run business here in

B.C., I understand and appreciate the positive benefits that can float a

company from the pursuit of export markets. In the case of my houseboat

manufacturing company, we looked to export markets south of the border

and were able to experience exponential growth in sales, whereby upwards

of 75 percent of our products were shipped Stateside. This growth in

international sales provided us with the ability to expand our

production facility and hire over 70 new tradespeople to meet growing

demand for our products.

[11:30 a.m.]

Fostering strong relationships is of critical importance, and that

applies at all levels. At the local level, it’s important for business

owners to foster good relationships within our communities. Just as

importantly, our governments must also work together to build

relationships and to secure and support free trade agreements at the

international level. These ties allow British Columbian businesses to

access niche markets, supporting industries that would not be able to

thrive on a strictly local scale. On the whole, these agreements create

and maintain strong, respectful and mutually beneficial relationships

with our neighbours and contribute to the success and vibrancy of both

local and global markets.

I know this is something our former B.C. Liberal government

recognized and why we worked hard to create new opportunities for B.C.

business. The results speak for themselves. In 2016, B.C.’s exports of

goods totalled nearly $40 billion. This represents a nearly 10 percent

increase over the previous year and a remarkable 56 percent increase

since 2009. This kind of growth does not happen on its own.

Members opposite, I encourage you to take note. It requires a

government that is committed to supporting businesses in this province —

a commitment that I know members on this side of the House have never

wavered on. As I mentioned previously, a big part of supporting B.C.

businesses is helping to ensure that they remain competitive. It comes

as no surprise that the taxes a government imposes can have a huge

impact on that competitive edge, which is why this government’s recent

tax changes give me cause for concern. Despite the current government

inheriting a near $2.7 billion surplus on taking office, they still

chose to hike corporate taxes — truly perplexing.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member, let’s keep the remarks relevant to the motion,

please.

G. Kyllo: Absolutely, Mr. Speaker.

Here we have it: a $2.7 billion surplus last year yet still a need

to raise taxes. These increases in taxes have a significant impact in

reducing the competitiveness of B.C. business. Yet in the spring, we saw

more obstacles in economic competitiveness, including minimum-wage

increases and a surprise employer health tax.

Business owners are concerned. I’m receiving lots of letters and

communications from employers. I’m sure that the members opposite are as

well, but they certainly will not stand up in this House and actually

speak and represent businesses within their own communities that are

having significant concerns with respect to this increased

taxation.

Interjections.

G. Kyllo: Lots of heckling from the other side, Mr. Speaker.

Now, the economic success that we have enjoyed as a province is

contingent upon the competitive advantage that businesses have here in

B.C., but as we see this competitiveness being chipped away before our

eyes, I can’t help but wonder why government is punishing B.C.

businesses by destroying their competitiveness. In order for B.C.

businesses to be successful in pursuing export markets, governments must

ensure that they have a competitive tax framework from which to

participate. I once again call on government and members opposite to

support businesses and support the relationships that allow them to

thrive.

A. Kang: Today’s motion is: “Be it resolved that this House acknowledge the

importance of strong trading relationships with its neighbours and the

benefits of diversifying trade through supporting Canadian Free Trade

Agreements.”

The member for Nechako Lakes brings up a really good point: that

our province needs to diversify trade. For too long, the old government

put all their eggs in the LNG basket, while ignoring other sectors of

the economy. This government is doing something differently.

Our Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture is making considerable

effort in supporting our tourism sector — a sector that builds on a

strong and sustainable economy and good jobs for people in the

communities across our province. Tourism is a bigger industry than

people think and understand, and it’s definitely one of the most

exciting aspects of our economy. After all, who would say no to a good

vacation? Tourism creates jobs that support families. These are jobs

related to lodging, food and beverage, transportation and more. These

are jobs that cannot be outsourced, as they are tied to our British

Columbian identity.

[11:35 a.m.]

Trade is so important for the B.C. economy. It is represented

through the sales of both goods and services. That’s why it is so

important to market B.C. as a destination for travellers, both

nationwide and worldwide.

When my family and friends have visited B.C., they would ask me:

“What can we do in B.C.?” and “Where could we go to get a unique B.C.

experience?” I would say: “Well, why don’t you visit the Kootenays and

experience the charms and attractions, whether it’s beautiful

snow-peaked mountains for skiing and winter sports or the breathtaking

outdoor experience? And what about the beautiful beaches of Tofino? And

the beautiful scenery of Victoria?” By the end of those trips, they were

grinning from ear to ear, showing everyone their pictures and planning

their next trip back to B.C.

Promoting these types of visits to B.C. is a key to building good

jobs in our communities. Last week the minister also announced the new

minister’s tourism engagement council, an advisory group of industry

experts from across the tourism sector. It is looking for

representatives from arts, sports and other areas that contribute to

B.C.’s tourism vitality. I want to take this opportunity to encourage

people in the tourism industry who are interested in participating to

apply to help provide the ministry with expert advice on tourism

policy.

The minister also announced a new marketing campaign to promote

and support wine and food tourism in B.C. The first campaign aims both

to encourage B.C. residents to add wine-touring to their 2018 vacation

plans. The second campaign will encourage international tourists to

visit B.C.’s world-class wine and culinary destinations. This campaign

will of course also benefit our agricultural industries, and it is an

exciting lead-up to B.C. Wine Month, in April.

Tourism is such an important aspect of trade, and I love talking

about it. It helps create the brand that not only attracts film

productions like Once Upon a Time ,

Smallville and one ever my favourites, Stargate , to

come to the province, but it also helps attract talent from around the

world that want to live in our beautiful province of B.C.

My daughter is in grade 5 right now, and I can just imagine this

conversation between her and her friend. “My mom is an MLA who works in

Victoria.” The other says: “Well, my mom is the blue fairy that is shown

in Once Upon a Time .” They will look at each other. “All right,

you win, so I lose.” Once Upon a Time and the film industry —

this is one of the great makings in our province. Last month I visited

Canadian Motion Picture and Bridge Studios. The producers and the CEOs

talked about why so many productions choose B.C. as one of their number

one destinations to shoot.

Tourism also reminds us of the importance of protecting our

agriculture sector, our outdoors and our beautiful natural industry. By

investing in our tourism industry, by building our identity and brand of

B.C. — what it means to British Columbians is we are helping to support

our local small businesses and helping to diversify trade.

Our province has also welcomed trade with open arms, whether they

are domestic or international partners. Our recent trade mission to

Asia, which my colleague from Surrey-Fleetwood just spoke about, is

another excellent example of our work to promote tourism. These are

important steps to support good jobs for people in our tourism industry

and to build strong and diversified trade relationships. By building

strong relationships with our partners, we are supporting a growing

economy with good-paying jobs here in British Columbia.

D. Davies: There’s a lot to talk about in this morning’s motion — talking

about the importance of our export economy and free trade agreements

that facilitate job growth in British Columbia and, more importantly,

the ability for this government to deliver the incredible services that

all B.C.’ers rely on.

My riding is Peace River North — located, of course, in

northeastern British Columbia. Most people think of the oil and gas

sector when they think of my area. However, as I’ve mentioned previously

in this House, you’d be surprised that one-third of the total farmland

is located in my riding in British Columbia.

This means that we are just as much an agriculture community as we

are an energy centre. And I’ll tell you, it also means that we in my

region are pretty darn reliant on trade within this province and within

our country. We are, in fact, the breadbasket of British Columbia,

producing 90 percent of B.C.’s grain and 95 percent of B.C.’s canola

crop.

[11:40 a.m.]

As I’m sure that you’re aware, canola stands for Canada oil. It

was actually considered, in Canada and by the allies, as a substitute

plant-based lubricant during the Second World War when oil was in

shortage. Our agricultural industry in my riding relies very heavily on

trade within Canada and around the world.

That small piece of trivia is a great segue into the importance of

the oil and gas sector in my riding, particularly all of northeastern

British Columbia. The history of B.C.’s natural gas and crude oil sector

can be traced back to over a hundred years ago. Natural gas was first

commercially produced in Pouce Coupe, a small community just outside of

Dawson Creek, to supply natural gas into Dawson Creek.

Oil was discovered near Fort St. John in 1951, which marked a new

stage in industry growth in my area, including the construction of the

McMahon refinery in Taylor. While the production of oil in British

Columbia averages around 21,000 barrels a day, it actually represents

less than 1 percent of Canada’s total oil production. We are, therefore,

very much dependent on our neighbours, as most of our petroleum comes

from Alberta. In fact, 90 percent of the fuel that is consumed in

British Columbia comes from that province.

Fortunately for us, the Canadian free trade agreement came into

force July 1 of 2017. The CFTA strengthens and modernizes the former

agreement on internal trade and helps clarify the free flow of commerce

between the provinces and our territories. Crucially, the CFTA

introduces important advancements into Canada’s internal trade

framework. It also eliminates technical barriers of trade, greatly

expands procurement coverage and promotes regulatory cooperation in

Canada.

With all of that going for us, it comes as a great surprise when

we’ve recently heard the Alberta throne speech that singled out B.C. for

not playing nice in the Canadian sandbox. I would quote a little piece

from that throne speech in the Alberta Legislature: “The dispute British

Columbia has triggered with its attack on Canadian workers will not

stand. We won’t let it. We have been vigilant in defending our workers,

and we will remain vigilant. When the city of Burnaby tried to block the

Trans Mountain pipeline in court, your government” — speaking of Alberta

— “intervened. When the government of British Columbia tried to overstep

its authority and regulate something it has no right to regulate, your

government stepped in. We shut down talks about electricity sales to

British Columbia.”

The Alberta throne speech goes on to say: “A task force of experts

and notable Canadians will provide us with the best possible advice.

Some people have asked how far we’ll go, and today we affirm we’ll do

whatever it takes.” I could be wrong, but it sounds like those are

fighting words from the Alberta government to the province of British

Columbia.

Interestingly, I think that they will be debating this week about

the flow of bitumen in the Trans Mountain pipeline. This is

unprecedented and does not bode well for the economic well-being of

British Columbia, nor does it bode well for the economic well-being of

all Canadians and the workers that work in the oil and gas industry in

my riding.

Therefore, I fully support this motion and hope it will encourage

the government of British Columbia to work with greater cooperation with

our neighbours in Alberta, and with our neighbours all over Canada, and

not build their own trade wall.

L. Krog: I love to hear the sweet words of the member for Peace River

North. I think he just encouraged us to make love and not war in Canada

— a child of the ’60s, no doubt.

Now, we started this morning with a motion: “Be it resolved that

this House acknowledge the importance of strong trading relationships

with its neighbours and the benefits of diversifying trade through

supporting Canadian Free Trade Agreements.”

I notice the member for Nechako Lakes used the term “agreements,”

so it’s given this Legislature this morning the wide latitude to talk

about all kinds of trade agreements, which doesn’t confine us to the

Canadian free trade agreement, which came into effect last year. So I

feel free to stretch this a little bit.

[11:45 a.m.]

Now, the member for Nechako Lakes started off kind of harsh, and

then he got kind of soft, and then he said something that is profoundly

true — profoundly true. He said: “It’s about politics.” Yes, shocking.

This morning’s motion is about politics. Because of the language he

used, it was made very evident.

In fairness, when he got soft in the middle, he did talk about the

trade mission which this government undertook to the Far East, but he

started off by referring to the Premier going down to Washington, of

course, as a junket. One goes to Washington for junkets and to the Far

East for trade, I guess. Given the announcements made recently by the

U.S. President, I’d suggest it’s fairly apparent that trade is important

in Washington as well. It’s not just about junkets.

Now, many members this morning have mentioned the phrase “eggs in

one basket” and talked about liquid natural gas. Some of us do remember

the former Premier’s promise. I think it was a $100 billion prosperity

fund, the elimination of provincial debt and all those good things. I

just remember the sage words of Andrew Carnegie, who had a monopoly on

steel production in the United States under U.S. Steel and who said very

wisely one time: “Put all your eggs in one basket, and then watch that

basket.”

Well, in a world governed by trade agreements, we don’t get to do

that anymore. We work in regulated economies around the free world that

enable us to engage in the trade that brings us prosperity.

After all, in the history of this province, we think of the great

Alexander Mackenzie traversing this country, the first from Canada by

land. But of course, Alexander Mackenzie only followed the grease trail

established by the Indigenous peoples of this country in order for them

to accomplish and achieve their own trading goals and desires by seeing

goods, services and food substances passed back and forth.

When the opposition — who used to be the government for 16 long

years, as we’ll recall — attacks the government for not doing enough

about trade, I think it doesn’t really lie in their mouths to talk about

it when you consider the missions that have already been undertaken by

this government.

I think particularly of the Minister of Trade and Technology,

himself, and the Premier going down to Washington to defend our forest

industry, which this former government over there watched disappear,

virtually, from being the signal symbol of British Columbia’s historic

prosperity to an industry that now faces enormous struggles

internationally as well — save and except for the glories of the U.S.

housing market, which has given a boost to our lumber.

What I want to say about trade this morning is that I’m proud of

this government’s record. In 33 short weeks, we’ve made a number of

remarkable approaches to expand and create further trade around the

province and in the country, notwithstanding the difficulties with the

province of Alberta, which will get ironed out, and notwithstanding the

Liberals’ reference to it as a sandbox fight.

We know that the Ministry of Jobs, Trade and Technology…. Their

service plan was working towards opening and expanding priority markets

for B.C. goods and services, because what we produce here in B.C. is

valuable and important.

People around the world want it, whether it’s agriproducts, which

are becoming a significant force in the British Columbia economy;

whether it’s our wine; whether it’s manufactured goods; or whether it’s

the high-tech sector in this province, which has recently received a

significant boost with the appointment of Alan Winter to his position,

one of the most respected people in the province, who’s going to give us

further opportunities to expand that trade.

So I’m delighted this morning that the member for Nechako Lakes

brought this resolution to the House. We acknowledge the importance of

strong trading relationships. We support strong trading relationships.

We want to expand our trading relationships. We want to create the kind

of prosperity that’ll see workers in British Columbia working all around

this province, but not just only in the resource sector.

B. Stewart: It gives me great pleasure to speak to this motion in support of

trade. It gives me greater pleasure to stand here today in this place

representing the riding of Kelowna West, the riding that greatly

benefits from trade agreements both internationally and

interprovincially.

As British Columbia’s former special representative in Asia, this

is a topic that I am well versed in. It was my role to act as the

province’s official, on-the-ground representative in Asia to further

strengthen British Columbia’s government-to-government relations in the

region. The most important part of that was fostering trade

relationships. It was my job to show how B.C. could benefit the

world.

[11:50 a.m.]

Thankfully, the veritable cornucopia of fantastic products,

resources and industries in B.C. helped to make my job much easier. In

this globalized world of diversified economy, it is a key to success.

Recent times have clearly demonstrated the problems with relying on a

single trade partner for our goods. As protectionist policy continues to

thrive to our southern border, British Columbia and Canada cannot allow

their economy to be held hostage by a bombastic “America first”

rhetoric. How? Free trade is the answer.

In 2016, B.C. exports totalled $39.4 billion, a 56.3 percent

increase over 2009 numbers. Of those exports, $21.2 billion were to the

U.S. However, thanks to efforts to diversify our markets, our exports to

other countries have grown rapidly. Between 2009 and 2016, our exports

to China increased by 145 percent; in India, a staggering 946 percent.

In less than a decade, we have vastly improved our standing in emerging

markets by fostering these trade relationships.

We currently have 14 offices in Southeast Asia to promote trade. I

personally oversaw the introduction of B.C. cherries and blueberries to

China and Korea and hothouse peppers to Japan — a simple action by the

Japanese government that increased trade by over $60 million per annum

for our greenhouse industries, with cherries into Japan soon to

follow.

One of the first things anyone looks for in a potential trading

partner is stability. The certainty of outcomes and the stability of

decision-makers are of vital importance, but the status quo has changed

in B.C. for now. We find ourselves in turbulent times, with isolationist

tendencies in the U.S., NAFTA at stake and a fragile majority government

led by a party that has never met a trade deal that it liked.

In 1993, the now Government House Leader publicly voiced his

opposition to NAFTA. In 2009, the now Minister of Energy, Mines and

Petroleum Resources commented on the new TILMA agreement between B.C.

and Alberta, saying of free trade: “It’s not the people who benefit;

it’s the corporations. It’s not about communities; it’s about the

corporations.” In 2013, the now Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology

said that we should look critically at trade missions. This is exactly

what the Premier was talking about in January when he said that the NDP

will have to set aside its activism and start being better

administrators.

Well, I don’t see this as having happened. We have a Minister of

Agriculture so preoccupied with farmers markets that she misses the big

picture and a Finance Minister who’s set her sights on increasing costs

to businesses across our province. We have a government that starts

petty trade wars with Alberta.

To paraphrase an Elizabethan poet, John Donne:

No province is an island entire to itself; every province

is a piece of the country, a part of the main.

If a clod be washed away by the sea, Canada

is the less, as well as if a promontory were,

as well as any manner of thy territories.

Any province’s misfortune diminishes me,

because I am involved in Confederation.

And therefore, never send to know for whom

the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

No province is an island, and our government seems intent on

making it so. Personally, I think we’re all in this together. I stand

before the House today, proud of what we’ve accomplished, proud of our

trade agreements, proud of free trade and proud to be a

Canadian.

On that note, I move adjournment of debate.

Deputy Speaker: Member for Courtenay-Comox.

Member, hold it. Sorry, I missed it.

The member has already moved the motion. Is the member going to

rescind? We have one more speaker.

B. Stewart: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I’ll rescind that motion.

R. Leonard: With thanks to the member, I’d like to pay tribute to the hard

work, the ingenuity and the gutsy attitude of small businesses — small

businesses who can benefit from the opportunities and the protections

that free trade agreements are intended to provide.

[11:55 a.m.]

After all, in B.C., one in five jobs is generated through trade,

and $39 billion worth of goods were sold globally in 2016. Small

business represents 98 percent of all businesses in B.C., and

collectively, they create over a million jobs. In 2015, there were

388,500 small businesses in B.C., with over 80 percent operating with

less than five employees.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

This government is working to build a strong economy in every

corner of the province, where small businesses thrive, workers have

well-paying jobs and people have the opportunity to reach their full

potential. With the kind of statistics I’ve just outlined, it is clear

that supporting small businesses to succeed, first at home and then on

to distant horizons, will mean a better B.C. for everyone.

The Canadian free trade agreement website outlines the top five

benefits of the new deal. I’d like to focus on the benefit to local

businesses. To quote the CFTA, it “will help Canadian businesses scale

up at home so they can more effectively compete globally.”

May the House please consider the recent rollout of the Ministry

of Agriculture’s $5 million fruit tree competitiveness fund. Family-run

orchards and the sector as a whole will be supported to modernize their

practices and share their oh-so-delicious apples, cherries and other

fruits with more customers at home and around the world. The fund’s

three key focuses include research on cultivars and disease and pest

management; new infrastructure; and export-market opportunities and

market-development research. By the way, the fund will also help with

the successful replant program, which I’m sure that the member for

Penticton, opposite, will appreciate.

We’re talking about 800 growers, who produced nearly 129,000

metric tonnes of fruit in 2016, worth $116 million. This sector is

challenged in the marketplace, and this fund is shining a light to a

bright future for the fruit tree sector at home and abroad.

I’d also like to highlight the successful export navigator

program. Thirty-six agribusinesses, 21 manufacturers, consumer goods and

clean tech businesses topped the more than 100 B.C. businesses that were

helped to navigate the export process and access the right services to

expand their local businesses and create new, well-paying jobs in their

communities. Six regional advisers are on the job throughout B.C.,

including in my home, the Comox Valley, where the program was originally

developed by the province, in partnership with Small Business B.C.,

federally funded Community Futures offices and the Comox Valley Economic

Development Society.

It’s so important that all sides of the House stand up for our

local businesses that are competing in the national and international

markets. This is why our government is helping all B.C. export

businesses to diversify and expand into new markets

worldwide.

As I sail across the Salish Sea on a ferry or fly over our

snow-capped mountains and lush valleys, I continue to be in awe of the

vast beauty of British Columbia that we are entrusted to steward. As we

move further into the 21st century and strive towards a more sustainable

low-carbon economy, it is critical that we support our local businesses

to innovate, embrace technology and diversify so that our businesses and

economy are better placed to withstand whatever challenges the future

may hold.

I am confident that this government is on the job to help us along

that path, to support the people of this province and to build a strong

and sustainable B.C.

R. Leonard moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:59 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2018: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada