British Columbia Committee Hansard (Blues) — Tuesday, May 31, 2022 a.m. — Number 216 (HTML) (42nd Parliament, 3rd Session)

20220531am-CommitteeA-Blues

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Third Session, 42nd Parliament

(2022) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Tuesday, May 31, 2022

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 216

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Tom Fletcher

K. Falcon

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

100th anniversary of agricultural fair and stampede in Peace area

M. Bernier

Graduates of 2022

J. Sims

Cerebrospinal fluid leak awareness

G. Kyllo

Forward House mental health and addiction services in Parksville

A. Walker

B.C. dairy industry and ice cream event at Legislature

I. Paton

Prince Rupert Library

J. Rice

Oral Questions

Proposed medical school at Simon Fraser University and museum replacement project

K. Falcon

Hon. A. Dix

Staffing shortages in health care system

S. Bond

Hon. A. Dix

Protection of public and workers from health impacts of climate change and wildfire smoke

A. Olsen

Hon. M. Farnworth

Labour dispute in Sea to Sky transit system

J. Sturdy

Hon. H. Bains

School conditions and repairs and museum replacement project

K. Kirkpatrick

Hon. J. Whiteside

Seismic upgrades for schools and museum replacement project

P. Milobar

Hon. J. Whiteside

Tabling Documents

Office of the Ombudsperson, special report, Short-Changed: Ensuring Federal

Benefits Paid to the Province Reach Caregivers of Children with

Disabilities , May 2022

Reports from Committees

Public Accounts Committee,

summary of activities,

2021-22

P. Milobar

R. Glumac

Tabling Documents

Office of the superintendent of professional governance, annual report, 2021-22

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill Pr401 — Sea to Sky University Amendment Act, 2022

J. Sturdy

Committee of the Whole House

Bill Pr401 — Sea to Sky University Amendment Act, 2022

J. Sturdy

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Bill Pr401 — Sea to Sky University Amendment Act, 2022

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Attorney General (continued)

M. Bernier

Hon. D. Eby

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (continued)

B. Stewart

Hon. R. Fleming

R. Merrifield

TUESDAY, MAY 31, 2022

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: J. Tegart.

Introductions by Members

Hon. L. Popham: Today is Ice Cream Day in B.C.

[10:05 a.m.]

I am udderly excited to have some special guests to introduce in the

chamber today. I am going to seize the mooment and milk it for all it’s

worth.

Joining us from our amazing dairy industry are Lindsay Heer from Robin

Creek Dairy, Mickey Aylard and baby Campbell from Brackenhurst Farm, Dave

Taylor from Viewfield Farms, Sarah Sache from West River Farm, Mark and

Christa Van Klei from M&L Farms, Jeff Hanson from Hanson Farms, John and

June de Dood from Sunninghill Holsteins, Greg and Breanna Streuker from

Riverbend Dairy.

We are so fortunate to have the dairy industry here to talk about the

challenges and the successes of the industry. I’m not sure if our guests

have heard, but the opposition tried to pass a law banning ice cream in B.C.

But as your government, we deemed it unconestitutional.

Welcome to the chamber.

Hon. B. Ralston: Joining us in the members’ gallery this morning is His Excellency

Scott Ryan, the high commissioner of Australia to Canada. Before his role as

high commissioner, he served as president of the senate in the Australian

Parliament, and before that, he held various ministerial portfolios in the

Australian government, so he is certainly no stranger to the kind of

question period he will witness here shortly.

He is joined by Miss Ayla Black, second secretary, and Mr. Kevin Lamb,

honorary consul of Australia in Vancouver.

His Excellency is here on his first official visit to British

Columbia. I had the pleasure of meeting with him yesterday, and today he

will be meeting with the Premier as well as with a number of ministers,

including the Solicitor General, the Minister of Forests and the Minister of

State for Trade.

Will the House please make him feel very welcome.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I have a couple of introductions that I’d like to make today. First,

there are five individuals who I’d like to thank. They are in the gallery

today. Today is their final week with us, and they are the 2022 B.C.

government caucus interns. As all of us know on both sides of the House,

interns do an amazing job for us.

I’d like to thank Ireland Bellsmith, Jerika Caduhada, Aidan Guerreiro,

Corie Kielbiski and Katie Korte. I want to thank them very much for their

hard work for all the government MLAs.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Chilliwack.

Oh, sorry. Please continue.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I know I don’t make many introductions, hon. Speaker, but today I do

have a couple.

The second introduction is…. As you all know, people do retire,

sometimes from this chamber, but occasionally from the press gallery. Today

we have a longtime member of the press gallery, Tom Fletcher, whose last day

it is in this place.

Interjections.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Oh, shame. Shame, hon. Members. Applauding the last day of a

journalist? Particularly one as esteemed as Mr. Fletcher, who has been

around these chambers for a very long time and has reported on events over a

number of years. I do know that many of you do think he has a certain

political bent on a certain side of the spectrum, but I am assured, hon.

Members, that when he does retire, he will be going to his communist plot to

do cantaloupe smackdown in the very near future.

Would the House please wish him a good retirement.

D. Coulter: I, too, would like to welcome my friends from the Dairy Association. I

have open invitations to pet cows at some of their farms any time, which is

great.

I also have a very special introduction to make. I’d like to introduce

Rob Sleath. He’s in the gallery today. Rob lives in Richmond and is a member

advocate for those living with vision loss and, particularly, to providing

them with the same rights and access to information as the

sighted.

[10:10 a.m.]

Rob is also a well-known transportation advocate in the Lower Mainland

and has been president of the Committee for the Promotion of Accessible

Conventional Transit and founding chair of Access Transit Users Advisory

Committee for the South Coast British Columbia Transportation

Authority.

I know that everyone knows already that today we will be making an

refreshments and a little bit of food. I hope that everyone stops by and

Committee.

If the House would please welcome Rob Sleath.

I. Paton: I, too, would like to say thank you to the B.C. Dairy Association, who

have come over here to Victoria. We had a wonderful get-together with them,

with our caucus last night, and we had some great banter back and forth

about the industry, in general, in British Columbia with farming and

agriculture.

These good folks have travelled a long ways. Some of them are from

Smithers, from Saanich here on the Island, from Courtenay, Chilliwack,

Creston and Grindrod. We welcome them here today. It was a great

time.

I, also, am proud to say that at one time I did what they do. It’s a

grueling lifestyle milking cows twice a day, at 5 a.m. and

5 p.m. Whether you get up in the morning with a cold, the flu or even

a hangover, you still have to milk those cows every morning.

Hon. Speaker, I do have one other introduction to make. We have some

good friends from Delta that are here today. I believe they’re in the

gallery: Mr. Hari Aroon and his wife, Jini; and Jas Garewal and Suren Dutia.

Welcome them, and a round of applause for my guests.

Hon. G. Heyman: It may be a coincidence that the group I’m about to introduce is here

on Ice Cream Day, but maybe not. They’re not in the gallery at this moment,

but they are in the precinct. There are two groups of grade 5 students

from Vancouver Talmud Torah school. They’re visiting the Legislature today

with their teachers. I hope to meet with them later today.

If any of you pass them in the hallways, please make them feel

welcome. They’ll be in the gallery later today. And some of them, I hope,

will be checking out some of the seats, for the future.

T. Halford: One of the best parts of this job is actually getting to interact with

the students that come here. I’ve got two classes today from Star of the

Sea, from my riding. They will be entering the precinct here, I think, in

the next 20 minutes.

I ask that the House please make them

welcome.

Tributes

TOM FLETCHER

K. Falcon: I want to just play off the Government House Leader’s recognition

that after today our press gallery is going to be a little bit different

here in Victoria, because we are bidding farewell to Tom Fletcher, an

intrepid reporter with the Black Press, who has done such an amazing job

here since 2005 when he joined the press gallery. He was the voice, and

this is important, for countless communities — rural communities,

especially — throughout the province of British Columbia.

Whether it was the Ashcroft–Cache Creek Journal , to the

Castlegar News , to the Fernie Free Press , to the

Haida Gwaii Observer and the Williams Lake

Tribune , Tom has spent years connecting communities to what’s

happening here in Victoria that affects them directly and making sure

that many of those issues are going to be addressed by holding

government and opposition to account, which is what really good

journalists do. And he did.

As press gallery president for over half a decade, Tom contributed

a great deal to this institution. And in return, he was granted the

opportunity of a lifetime when he got to dine with the Duchess of

Cambridge, Kate Middleton. That’s pretty impressive.

On behalf of the entire B.C. Liberal caucus, and I would indeed

say everyone that serves in this Legislature, I want to thank you, Tom,

for your years of tremendous service. Journalism matters. It is

important that government and opposition always be held to

account.

Thank you for the work that you’ve done. Hopefully, you will

continue to do something related in the future.

Introductions by Members

S. Chandra Herbert: I rise today to acknowledge somebody who watches this House, who

watches what we do and wants us all to do it better — my friend, my

neighbour, a good friend to my son Dev: Jody Lee.

Happy, happy birthday.

[10:15 a.m.]

S. Furstenau: I’m delighted to welcome back to the House, in the gallery, Dr. Lisa

Gunderson. She has two other students who are part of the Black Youth

Empowerment program.

Aisha Ismail is in her second year of business at UBC, and Avi

Gunderson is a grade 10 student at Mount Doug. Both are part of the Black

Youth Empowerment program. Both were honoured by the AHAVI youth leadership

award for community involvement, initiative and inspiration for Black youth

on April 30. I’m delighted to have them join us here today.

Also with Dr. Gunderson is her son Dominic Gunderson. He’s a student

real time, we got to learn this morning that Dominic recently made it to the

dean’s list.

Congratulations, Dominic, and welcome to all to the chamber

today.

K. Paddon: As my colleagues have mentioned, B.C. Dairy is here today, and I’d

like to introduce some folks from Chilliwack-Kent who came all the way out

here.

Firstly, I was very grateful to see Mark and Christa Van Klei here

with B.C. Dairy from M&L Farms on Camp River Road. Thank you for being

here.

Also with us, from West River Farm in Chilliwack-Kent, is Sarah Sache.

Sarah’s family, her partner Gene and her sons Winston and Curtis, are

holding down the fort at the farm right now during a really difficult time,

as we know.

The Sache family have been an important part of my time as an MLA.

Their farm was one of the first dairy farms that I went to visit as an

MLA.

Gene’s uncle, Jim Sache, recently taught me how to plow at

Chilliwack’s 100th plowing match. I won last place, and I’m very grateful to

Jim for very patiently teaching me to not only start and drive the plow but

also how to stop it. Also, it gives me a very strange flex when I drive past

farmer’s fields. Now I can fully appreciate the complexity of those straight

lines.

Would the House please make welcome these guests and join

me.

H. Sandhu: I, too, would like to welcome the guests from the B.C. Dairy

Association today. I was going to join them for the breakfast, but my leave

was not approved, because I had to attend the Finance Committee meeting. We

are blessed in Vernon-Monashee to have amazing farms.

In addition to that, I want to wish my brother Lakhvinder Singh

Boparai a very happy birthday. He’s two years younger than I, and he’s been

very supportive to my sister and I through childhood but also after our dad

passed away. He’s a very kind, caring human being, and he does farming. He

also does volunteer social work.

Often when I talk about, sometimes, work we’re doing, the hurdles that

are thrown in our way, he always says in Punjabi chal koi na . It

means: “It doesn’t matter.” Then he further reminds me why it’s important

for the work we do and to let the people, what they do to us…. But let’s not

change who we are. Therefore, I’m always so proud of my younger

brother.

Would the House please join me to wish a very happy birthday to my

brother.

Happy birthday, Veer Ji.

G. Kyllo: It gives me great pride to rise in the House today to introduce some

close friends of mine, John and June de Dood hailing from Grindrod. They’re

dairy farmers, have recently opened Farmer John’s Market, an amazing

agrotourism facility in Grindrod, in my riding of Shuswap.

Would the House

please welcome John and June to this House.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

100 th ANNIVERSARY OF AGRICULTURAL

FAIR AND STAMPEDE IN PEACE AREA

M. Bernier: In Dawson Creek, the greatest show in the Peace is gearing up yet

again this year from August 9 to August 14, and you’re all invited. This

year’s event is just a little bit more special, as we are celebrating

the 100th anniversary of the show. That’s right — 100 years of holding

an agriculture fair and stampede that’s become one of the premier stops

in Canada for professional rodeo and chuckwagon competitors

alike.

[10:20 a.m.]

One hundred years ago this event started between two communities —

and Tom Fletcher, up top, would know this well — Rolla and Pouce Coupe,

because Dawson Creek actually wasn’t even around or a city

yet.

It was a way to bring all of the farmers of the region together,

but it has now grown into the largest event in the entire Peace, in the

B.C. and Alberta region, bringing tens of thousands of people together

every single year for this event.

This is truly a family event, as well — everything from an ag show

to a heavy horse pull, from a full rodeo, from live country bands,

chuckwagon races. Oh yeah, and of course, the most important thing for

me and my family is the full road of food stands and evening fireworks

every single night.

The money raised through this event helps support many

non-for-profits and community groups who rely on this event every single

year for funds to keep going.

I want to thank all of those who work tirelessly to make this

event happen — people like Karl Gitchiff, who’s been the groundskeeper

now for over 20 years; vice-president, as well, Murray Pratt; and the

face and the person who has really kept this going for so many years.

Everybody in the town of Dawson Creek and the region knows Connie

Patterson, who is the life of this event.

It’s because of people like her and all of the people who

volunteer their time that we are now able to celebrate 100 years of the

greatest show in the Peace coming this year. I look forward to seeing

everybody there.

GRADUATES OF 2022

J. Sims: There’s a certain electric energy in our schools. Kids seem more

energetic, more carefree. Many of them are preparing for the next

chapter of their lives. The bulk of their academic work is complete.

Most of them have a plan for next year. All that is left is the closure

of their school year, to their many years as a student in our school

system.

It is so nice to see the graduations, convocations and all of the

celebrations that go with these milestones taking place this spring —

the grad gowns, the beautiful dresses, the suits, the flowers, the

smiles, the friends, the families. It feels more meaningful this year,

given what we have endured throughout the pandemic, and 2022 grads are

celebrating with both their school and home families with dinners,

dances and large ceremonies.

To all the school staff and parents that have made the end of this

school year feel special and that have worked with students to

commemorate this wonderful occasion, thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that I really miss the energy in our

schools at this time of the year. I can tell you that it is really

palpable.

To our students, as you close this

chapter in your life, go into

the world. Live your dreams, and more importantly, do good. Be bold

enough to use your voice. Be brave enough to listen to your heart and

strong enough to live the life you imagined. Do not let anyone tell you

that you cannot live your dreams.

To the students in my riding — Panorama Ridge, Sullivan Heights

Secondary, Regent Christian school — and to all the many grads in

Surrey, congratulations. Go and enter the world. Enjoy the next phase of

the rollercoaster ride called life.

CEREBROSPINAL FLUID LEAK AWARENESS

G. Kyllo: I rise today to inform the House to mark your calendars, as June 6

to 13 is Spinal CSF Leak Awareness Week in North America.

Now, cerebrospinal fluid, or CSF, truly is the fluid of life. The

daily functions of our brains and nervous systems wouldn’t be possible

without it. A spinal CSF leak, also known as spontaneous intracranial

hypotension, is a debilitating condition that many British Columbians

and Canadians may face in their lifetime. Even the former member for

Parksville-Qualicum Michelle Stilwell struggled with it for many

years.

A leak occurs when the CSF escapes via a tear or abnormality in

the dura mater, the tissue that surrounds the brain and the spinal cord.

This can be caused by head injuries, brain or sinus surgery, lumbar

punctures and a variety of other circumstances.

Now, the most common symptoms of a CSF leak are headaches, usually

in the back of the head. However, other symptoms can include neck or

shoulder pain, dizziness, changes in vision or hearing and brain fog, to

name a few. Because of this, CSF leaks can go undiagnosed for weeks,

months, even years.

While data show there are approximately 2,000 Canadians struggling

today, it is believed the real number could be more than double that. If

left unchecked, CSF leaks can be life-threatening and lead to serious

long-term health risks, including meningitis, brain infections or

stroke.

Now, the best way to protect Canadians is to increase awareness,

to help lead to more early diagnosis. Although some CSF leaks may heal

on their own, others require surgical repair.

[10:25 a.m.]

I encourage all members to wear purple and to tweet and share the

help more Canadians live long and healthy lives.

FORWARD HOUSE MENTAL HEALTH AND

ADDICTION SERVICES IN

PARKSVILLE

A. Walker: In any normal year, one in five Canadians experiences a mental

health or addiction problem, but as we all know, the last two years have

not been normal.

Forward House in downtown Parksville has been providing mental

health day programs for adults in our community since 1982. Their house

on East Hirst Avenue has a welcoming home-like environment that moves

adults from isolation to connection, with laughter, compassion and

encouragement filling this house.

Forward House serves more than 100 adults each month through their

day programs and community outreach, along with providing more than

3,300 meals per year. Clients do not need a referral or a formal

diagnosis to participate. They can simply walk in and get one-on-one

support or join the more than 25 group programs offered each

week.

They have recently launched a program called Recovery Initiative

for individuals who have started their personal journeys in addiction

recovery. One-to-one sessions and small group activities help

individuals embrace a healthier lifestyle while receiving caring and

non-judgmental support from Sareh, the program director of addiction

recovery services, and her team.

Now they are embarking on splitting their mental health and

addiction recovery services into two locations, both in downtown

Parksville. Their first house will continue to provide mental health

services. The soon-to-be-opened Forward Recovery Centre, at 129 Alberni

Highway…. This new centre will be one of the first of its kind in

Canada. They offer services that are completely free. They are led by

people with lived recovery experience, and they honour the multiple

pathways to recovery.

Sharon Welch, the executive director for Forward House, shared

with us this quote from a client: “In my entire life, Forward House is

the first community where I’ve felt totally accepted for who I am, not

despite it. The healing that has been able to occur as a result is

unparalleled.” This client has gone back to school and has now started a

successful business in our community.

Forward House helps keep clients out of hospital. It keeps them in

their homes, and it keeps them connected to our community. They are

mostly community funded, and they are 100 percent community

focused.

Would the House please join with me in congratulating Forward

House for their upcoming opening and for the life-changing services they

offer to the people of Parksville-Qualicum.

B.C. DAIRY INDUSTRY AND

ICE CREAM EVENT AT

LEGISLATURE

I. Paton: Well, I scream; you scream; we all scream for ice cream. Today the

B.C. Dairy Association is holding Ice Cream Day outside on the front

steps of our B.C. Legislature.

The aim of this fun event is to create more awareness around the

B.C. dairy industry. It gives members of this House a chance to meet

with dairy producers and learn more about their experiences dealing with

the heat domes, wildfires, catastrophic flooding over the past

year.

Here are a few interesting facts about the industry. There are 470

dairy farms in B.C. alone, which are averaging about 150 milking cows

per farm, and over 12,000 related jobs in the province, which contribute

over $1.2 billion to B.C.’s GDP. Over 900 million litres of milk are

produced annually here in British Columbia.

As a proud former dairy farmer, I know well the importance of

contented cows and the gruelling lifestyle of milking cows twice a day,

at 5 a.m. and 5 p.m., 365 days a year. All this work translates into the

delicious food products we enjoy on a daily basis, from the milk and

cream you put in your cereal and coffee, the cheese melted on your

favourite sandwich, the butter used on your pancakes or the cold ice

cream you enjoy on a hot summer day.

We should also be proud of the fact that B.C. dairy farmers are on

the cutting edge of environmental innovation. Farmers are taking note of

new and emerging technologies around the world to reduce their carbon

footprints, like using new technology to rapidly cool raw milk and

adopting a geothermal system from Europe that not only draws heat from

the fresh raw milk but also repurposes that heat for the barn, offices

and family home, to an anaerobic digester on a Delta dairy farm that

uses livestock waste and organic consumer waste to create renewable

biogas energy sold into the grid.

B.C.’s dairy farmers are also committed to providing excellent

care for their cattle. The code of practice among dairy farmers includes

strict requirements for housing space, bedding, feed and water, health

and welfare, animal handling, and staff training.

[10:30 a.m.]

To get more of the scoop around initiatives like these and other

important work being done by the B.C. Dairy Association, please join

them outside the Legislature and enjoy some B.C. ice cream

today.

J. Rice: Hon. Speaker, before I commence, I seek leave to make an

introduction.

Mr. Speaker: Proceed.

Introductions by Members

J. Rice: As the legislative session wraps up this week, I will be heading to

Ottawa to celebrate my mother’s 70th birthday, as well as her husband’s 60th

birthday, so I wanted the House to please wish them a happy

birthday.

My status as the favourite child will now be overtaken by the status

of my son as the favourite and only grandson.

Mr. Speaker: Is the member making a statement?

J. Rice: Thank you. I’m just trying to follow protocol.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

PRINCE RUPERT LIBRARY

J. Rice: Prince Rupert’s first library originated as a municipal reading

room, which opened its doors in 1913. Stocked with magazines and

newspapers in mostly foreign languages, it became a favourite haunt of

men off the boats as well as the older men of the city looking for the

PROPOSED MEDICAL SCHOOL AT

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

AND MUSEUM REPLACEMENT PROJECT

K. Falcon: We are in the middle of a health care crisis, with one in every

five British Columbians unable to secure a family doctor, and it’s only

going to get worse with the wave of retirements coming. But yesterday

the Premier had the worst excuse ever for building his billion-dollar

vanity museum boondoggle instead of their promised medical school at SFU

Surrey.

He said: “The commitment to new training spaces for health care

workers was made just a few years ago. The first call for action on the

museum was in 2006.”

My question to the Premier is simple. Why is a billion-dollar

vanity museum boondoggle a higher priority for this Premier than a

promised second medical school at SFU Surrey?

[10:35 a.m.]

Hon. A. Dix: The training of new health care staff — as you know, we’ve added

30,000 people to the B.C. health care system over the last two years

during the pandemic — is a fundamental priority of the government, such

that we’ve just added 602 additional nursing spaces in B.C. We’ve led

the country in new registered nurses since 2017.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. A. Dix: Albeit, we were starting in last place at that time, but

nonetheless, we have led the country…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. A. Dix: …in new nursing spaces. We established, as the members will know….

We said at the time of the last election that over the next three years,

we’d be adding, through the HCAP and other programs, 7,000 new health

care workers in long-term care. We’re at 6,600 today. We’re adding new

training positions around the province, in particular in different

regions of the province.

The members talk about doctors. We’ve added 60 new residency

spaces for doctors in B.C., giving us the largest family residency

program in Canada.

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

K. Falcon: Well, Stats Canada’s own numbers show that actually, in British

Columbia, we have over 10,000 fewer people working in hospitals today,

the worst record in Canada, demonstrating that they’re voting with their

feet and leaving the system. But when the B.C. Liberals were in

government, we more than doubled the number of medical training spaces,

from 128 to 288, expanding the UBC medical program to the University of

Northern British Columbia, to the University of B.C. Okanagan and to the

University of Victoria.

The NDP, now in their second term, have failed to add a single new

space — not one — in spite of the fact that we have a doctor shortage

crisis. When the NDP promised their new NDP SFU Surrey medical school,

they failed to mention that the Premier’s billion-dollar vanity museum

project was going to be a higher priority.

Here is the NDP commitment: “The first graduating class could be

in 2023-2024.” But the NDP have chosen a billion-dollar vanity museum

project instead, which means that any graduating class on their

broken-promise new SFU training spaces would be at least eight years

away at minimum.

My question is a simple one, for the Premier. When will the first

class graduate from their broken medical school promise at SFU Surrey?

Will it be before or after he spends the billion dollars on the vanity

museum project that they insist on going forward with?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, the Leader of the Opposition just asserted that we lost

10,000 health care workers in 2020. It is….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Members, let’s hear the answer.

Hon. A. Dix: All that shows is he can’t read a spreadsheet even though he was

Minister of Finance. We count the number of health care workers in

British Columbia….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members will come to order.

Hon. A. Dix: The Leader of the Opposition just said Stats Canada…. I have the

numbers in front of me. For 2020, there was a net increase of 10,000

health care workers. All that happened….

Interjections.

[Mr. Speaker rose.]

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Minister, take your seat.

[10:40 a.m.]

Members, if you think outbursts are going to stop the answer

coming from the government or stop a question coming from the

opposition, it’s not going to work. Let’s have order. Let’s hear each

other. Then we can continue with the question period.

Thank you. The minister will proceed.

[Mr. Speaker resumed his seat.]

Hon. A. Dix: Thank you, Hon. Speaker.

I mean, what the Leader of the Opposition says is contrary to

what’s actually in the Stats Canada numbers. It’s contrary to it. All

there was at Stats Canada was a reclassification in the numbers — 10,000

were added to one category; 10,000 were taken to another category.

That’s all that happened, and the Leader of the Opposition knows this. I

believe he can read a spreadsheet, so he knows. I give him more credit

than a lot of people would give him. Some people would argue that he

can’t read a spreadsheet.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. A. Dix: What the Stats Canada numbers showed in 2020 was an increase of

14,000 health care workers. What the PSEC numbers….

You know, he was Minister of Finance. He’ll remember. The Public

Sector Employers Council showed, in the last two years, an increase of

30,000 health care workers. Why? It’s because we added nurses. We added

health sciences professionals. We added health care assistants. We added

doctors. We’ve got to continue to do that work, to continue to build the

health care system of the future.

Mr. Speaker: Members, there’s no point in heckling when somebody is trying to

answer or somebody is asking a question. Let’s hear each other. We are

wasting our precious time here.

STAFFING SHORTAGES IN

HEALTH CARE

SYSTEM

S. Bond: Well, I can tell the Health Minister one thing. What the Leader of

the Opposition knows is that British Columbians desperately need this

government to do something to deal with the health care crisis that is

growing in British Columbia. That’s what we know.

It’s not the words of the opposition. It is the numbers that Stats

Canada provides, and here, for the minister’s information, there are

10,000 fewer people working in hospitals under this government — the

worst in Canada. Those are the facts; those are the numbers.

Let’s take a look at what happened in British Columbia over the

last weekend. We had emergency rooms closing all across this province.

The primary care clinics — which the NDP and this minister use as a

magic bullet, we know — are woefully understaffed, and people can’t get

the care they need. That’s the fact. The minister knows it, stands here,

and dismisses the concerns of British Columbians every single

day.

Let’s talk about Marian Howard. Maybe this will get the minister’s

attention. Here’s what Marian said: “I have stage 4 metastatic breast

cancer, and I live in an isolated area. We’ve lost the services of three

family doctors since the beginning of this year.” I think that the

minister’s words echo pretty hollowly with Marian and thousands of other

people like her.

Can the Premier tell us why his million-dollar vanity museum

project is more important than providing the services that British

Columbians like Marian need and deserve?

Hon. A. Dix: I take the issues people raise with me every day about health care

extremely seriously. The fact is that over the last two years, we’ve

added 30,000 people to our health care system. They’re doctors, nurses

and health care workers to support people such as Marian. We’ve taken,

and are taking, the province through two public health emergencies that

have had a significant and lasting effect on our health care

system.

It’s why we’re taking the steps we’ve taken to increase the number

of family residency positions in B.C. It’s why we’re taking the steps

we’re taking, working with the Doctors of B.C. to support and sustain

existing family practices. It’s why we’re taking the efforts, working

with the Resident Doctors of B.C. to increase and improve the number of

new doctors who choose longitudinal family practice, because we do take

seriously the issues raised by people like Marian every day.

The member will know, because they’re the same stats from national

agencies, that the number of people without a family practice doctor

doubled between 2003 and 2017, during a period when the previous Health

Minister, now the Leader of the Opposition, promised that everyone would

have a family practice doctor. We were behind other jurisdictions in

terms of health care reform, and we’re taking the steps now, in the

context of a pandemic, to support people everywhere in B.C.

[10:45 a.m.]

I’m very proud of our health care system, but we always have to do

better for people like Marian and everybody else.

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

S. Bond: Well, the fact of the matter is, and the minister knows this, that

not one new training seat, under this minister’s watch, when it comes to

physicians in British Columbia — not one, zero. He talks about people

serving in the health care system. Then why on earth are emergency rooms

closing day after day, weekend after weekend? People are

afraid.

The minister can stand up and say what he wants to say, but here’s

what British Columbians are saying. They are afraid. They have their

doctors retiring, the longest wait times in the country. Clinics are at

capacity, and closed emergency rooms. That’s under this minister’s

watch. The ER in Clearwater, for example, has closed five times this

month. Guess what. Those patients were sent to Kamloops, where staffing

shortages are acute and getting worse every single day. That’s the

system, under this minister’s watch.

Here’s what one nurse told us. “Nurses are beyond done. They are

beyond the point of exhaustion. They are defeated. Every shift is

grossly understaffed…. Staff are taking stress leaves, or they are

outright leaving the profession.” That is the record of this Premier,

this minister.

It is time they did the right thing: shelved their billion-dollar

boondoggle and gave some hope, support and the medical care that British

Columbians deserve. Will the minister do that today?

Hon. A. Dix: The member knows when you ask a question — I think the question

was about Clearwater; there was some rhetoric at the end — that at

times…. There was, at times….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, let’s listen to the answer. Let’s hear the

answer. Otherwise, you’re not going to get any ice cream

today.

Hon. A. Dix: The member will know it is the responsibility of the health care

system — and in this case, of Interior Health — to ensure that treatment

can be provided safely for people. The member knows this. Everybody

knows this.

Last week Interior Health had the largest number of people off

sick of any health authority, per capita, in the province. There were,

last week, 16,000 people — 16,000 health care workers, in a very large

system — who had at least one day off sick last week. That’s because of

COVID-19 and the challenges it presents to the system.

Interjections.

Hon. A. Dix: It is because of it. The Leader of the Opposition can heckle, but

it’s those nurses that are dealing with the reality of it.

Interjections.

Hon. A. Dix: Well, the previous week it was 16,500, and four weeks ago it was

17,500.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. A. Dix: They can heckle all they want, Hon. Speaker, but typically those

numbers are about half of that. That’s because of COVID-19.

I’m very proud, under these very challenging circumstances, of the

work of our health care workers in Kamloops and in Clearwater and in

Vancouver and in Prince Rupert, everywhere in our province. We have to

continue to do that work and continue to support health care workers,

like we’re doing when we’re adding 602 nursing training spaces in

British Columbia.

PROTECTION OF PUBLIC AND WORKERS

FROM HEALTH IMPACTS OF

CLIMATE CHANGE AND WILDFIRE SMOKE

A. Olsen: As we continue to talk about this unfolding health care crisis in

British Columbia, it would be nice to see this B.C. NDP government

proactively working on another growing emergency, the climate emergency.

Last summer climate disasters brought an unprecedented heat dome, a

devastating wildfire that entirely destroyed the town of Lytton and a

record-setting wildfire season darkening the skies of our province for

months.

A recent study examining 20 years of health data in Canada found

that people who lived near wildfires for the past decade were more

likely to develop brain tumours and lung cancer.

The worst three fire seasons on record in B.C. have occurred in

the last decade. Last summer over 867,000 hectares of our province

burned.

[10:50 a.m.]

Wildfire smoke contains hundreds of dangerous particles,

gases and chemicals, including carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and

nitrogen oxides. Anyone who’s been exposed to wildfire smoke, even

hundreds of kilometres away from the source, will know how unbearable

air quality is and how difficult it is to breathe.

To the Minister of Public Safety, in three of the five summers

that he has been the minister, wildfire smoke has choked out our

communities. What specific actions has his government taken to protect

British Columbians from poor air quality?

Hon. M. Farnworth: There are a number of initiatives that have been underway every

fire season to ensure that we’re prepared as proactively as possible,

whether it’s through the fire service, which is under the jurisdiction

of the Minister of Forests, or through EMBC by ensuring that we’ve got

the emergency social and health supports in place in communities where

people are evacuated to.

Overall, it is also ensuring we have a climate action plan that is

able to deal with the changing climate here in British Columbia, and we

will continue to do the work. Part of that, of course, is related to the

overhaul of the Emergency Program Act that is currently

underway.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Saanich North and the Islands, supplemental.

A. Olsen: As I suspected, our government is doing nothing to protect the air

that workers are breathing from the impacts of wildfires. Today we’re

celebrating the agricultural industry, people who work outside in the

wildfire smoke.

We’re seeing other jurisdictions, though, take action, proactive

measures. Oregon occupational safety and health created rules to protect

workers from the impact of climate disasters like heatwaves, like

wildfire smoke. They mandated heat protections like paid breaks;

drinking water; a heat illness prevention plan; access to shade;

wildfire protection measures, specifically including N95 masks — the

Minister of Health talked about, in estimates, having 18 million or 19

million on hand; and as well, medical checks.

The B.C. NDP government likes to think of themselves as the

workers party, yet they’ve not done anything to protect workers from the

impact of climate change. They failed to protect schools. They failed to

protect public spaces and have failed to put plans in place to protect

British Columbians from the polluted air, the worst of which comes from

these wildfire seasons.

My question is to the Premier. He says he is a friend of the

worker. What is he doing to protect workers — including teachers,

agricultural workers, construction workers and any other worker that

works outside — from the poor air quality that we are seeing summer

after summer as a result of wildfires?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member.

I want to take in that no government takes workers occupational

health and safety more seriously than this side of the House, whether

it’s ensuring that we’ve increased the standards in terms of the removal

of asbestos or whether it’s ensuring that we have some of the toughest

health and safety standards and WorkSafe standards of any province and

any jurisdiction in this country. It’s ensuring that when firefighters

go out to work, they’ve got the presumptive-cancer security systems in

place. We’ve done that. Sometimes the opposition has done that. But all

of us in this House have taken that very seriously.

At the same time, we ensure that when our fire crews go out on

those front lines, when they’re fighting fires, they have the protective

equipment that they need. That’s always been the case with the fire

service, and it will always continue to be the case. So to suggest that

that is not happening is absolutely not true.

LABOUR DISPUTE IN

SEA TO SKY TRANSIT

SYSTEM

J. Sturdy: It probably shouldn’t come as a surprise to the House that I rise

to talk a little bit about this transit strike in the Sea to Sky, which

has been going on for 17 weeks now. Squamish, Whistler and Pemberton

have not had bus service. Families, workers, employers and communities

are all saying: “This has got to end. Enough is enough.”

[10:55 a.m.]

Tomorrow I think we’ll bring this NDP government the distinction

of presiding over the longest transit strike in the history of British

Columbia, the longest B.C. Transit strike. As a matter of interest,

though, they hold the current record right now. The previous longest

transit strike was under the NDP as well, so maybe they’re looking to

break it. One would hope not.

This House is in the last week of session. This is the last

opportunity that we have to force these parties into binding

arbitration.

A simple question to the Premier, and perhaps the Labour Minister:

will the minister bring legislation to this House to force these parties

into binding arbitration?

Hon. H. Bains: I share the frustration brought in by the member of the residents

of Whistler, Pemberton and Squamish. I’m not happy that both parties are

not able to resolve this dispute this long into the dispute.

I have spoken to both parties yesterday. Both parties were able to

negotiate a tentative agreement. It was put to vote for ratification,

and the members of the union rejected that tentative agreement. I’ve

spoken to both of them last night and this morning. I have reminded them

of their responsibility not only to their members or to the shareholders

but also to the residents of that region that they serve.

I have made it very clear that we’re not happy that they’re not

able to resolve this and that they must get back to the bargaining

table.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. H. Bains: They must get back to the bargaining table. That’s where the

agreement will be negotiated. Not in this House, not anywhere else — at

the bargaining table.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Please continue.

Hon. H. Bains: I think the opposition, knowing their record on labour rights….

They’re heckling, and they’re trying to score cheap political

points. I think that is shameful. I’m talking to….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Order. Order.

The minister will continue.

Hon. H. Bains: As I said, I have spoken to both sides. I have brought to their

attention their responsibility. I will have more to say later

today.

SCHOOL CONDITIONS AND REPAIRS

AND MUSEUM REPLACEMENT

PROJECT

K. Kirkpatrick: The NDP’s own documents show that the Royal B.C. Museum was in far

better condition — far better condition, Mr. Speaker — than the average

school in British Columbia. In fact, a school with an identical rating

to the museum by this government would not even be considered for

replacement.

Not only are schools in worse shape today than they were five

years ago, but the NDP are not keeping up with school repair bills and

have deferred an additional $1 billion while spending money on a museum

that nobody asked for.

How can this NDP government be in such a rush to spend $1 billion

on a vanity museum project when there are schools, with our children in

them, in far worse condition than the museum today?

Hon. J. Whiteside: I thank the member for the question. I do have to say it’s a

welcome opportunity to talk about the investments that our government

has made in education, both in operating and certainly in

capital.

I would want to highlight the fact that over the last three years,

we’ve invested close to $3 billion in education to build new schools, to

build replacement schools, additions, to seismically upgrade schools so

that our children have safe places to learn.

In fact, we’ve been doing that at a rate much more quickly than

the B.C. Liberals ever did when they were on this side of the House.

They spent $574 million between 2012 and 2017.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Whiteside: Since 2017, we have invested over $1.2 billion to seismically

upgrade schools across our province.

[11:00 a.m.]

Those 58 projects have resulted in 32,000 safe seats for British

Columbia students. Over the next three years, we will invest close to

$800 million to accelerate our seismic mitigation programs so we can

build safe seats for British Columbia’s students. That is a record that

is unmatched in the history of this program.

SEISMIC UPGRADES FOR SCHOOLS

AND MUSEUM REPLACEMENT

PROJECT

P. Milobar: Well, the numbers just don’t match up to what the minister is

saying. The reality is that this is about a billion-dollar vanity museum

project that the Premier has decided to jump the queue and prioritize

ahead of 250 schools, most of which are more seismically unsafe than the

museum.

In fact, if the NDP did just a modest update to the museum, like

they’re doing in Alberta for the $120 million in the Glenbow Museum,

we’d have about an extra $800 million to spend on schools. If they

followed the Treasures for Generations…

Mr. Speaker: No props.

P. Milobar: …from the Royal B.C. Museum and archives that came out in 2018,

that’s $150 million, and they’d still have another $800 million to spend

on school and seismic upgrades.

In Surrey, the rating has gotten worse at the average school by 50

percent since 2017, under this government. In Chilliwack, it’s worsened

by 180 percent.

When will this government start to prioritize the health and

safety of our children over the Premier’s billion-dollar vanity museum

project?

Hon. J. Whiteside: Well, I have to say that the record of our government is really

clear when it comes to the investments that we have made in ensuring

that students have the spaces they need in terms of new schools we have

built, the additions we have built, the investments we have made working

in partnership with school districts across the province.

I appreciate that it’s a little, perhaps…. It’s not something that

the members opposite are familiar with, because when they were on this

side, they closed 250 schools across our province.

We’re investing $2.65 billion over the next three years. That’s on

top of…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members, Members.

Hon. J. Whiteside: …close to $3 billion in the last four — $1.3 billion to expand and

replace schools to address growth, close to $800 million for seismic

upgrades, $554 million for routine capital. Those projects, the projects

we have approved since 2017, include 18 new or expanded schools in

Surrey.

The other side of the House did nothing in Surrey when they were

on this side. One addition — they built one addition in the whole time

they were on this side of the House.

Eighteen hundred new seats in Sooke. Four new or expanded schools

in Chilliwack. We replaced Quesnel High School. A new middle school in

Lake Country. The list goes on and on and on. I’d be happy to spend as

much time as the other side would like enumerating the many projects

that we are investing in.

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

P. Milobar: Well, the minister might want to pay attention to the Vancouver

school board meeting today. They’re talking about closing schools in

Vancouver at the board meeting today, under this government’s watch. The

question was about the prioritization of dollars, putting the Premier’s

vanity museum project ahead of schools — unnecessarily. It’s about the

prioritization of this government — choosing that school safety should

take a back seat to the Premier’s billion-dollar vanity museum

project.

In fact, seismic updates to schools…. Under this government, we

can only find net 18 new schools that this government’s even been

working on. They know how to spend a lot of dollars. They don’t know how

to get any results for the dollars spent. That’s why everybody’s so

concerned about the billion-dollar vanity museum project.

We could do over 100 extra schools with seismic upgrades while

still following the Treasures for Generations program, which describes,

almost word for word, what the Tourism Minister talks about for a

billion dollars. In terms of seismic upgrades, space revamping,

for $150 million, made in 2018. But instead, the Premier wants to keep

100 schools’ worth of children at risk from seismic upgrades so that his

museum project can jump the queue.

[11:05 a.m.]

When will this government stop this ridiculous billion-dollar

vanity museum project, follow Treasures for Generations and get 100

extra schools seismically upgraded instead?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Let’s hear the answer.

Hon. J. Whiteside: In 2016-2017, the capital budget for our K-to-12 system was less

than $500 million. This year it’s over $900 million. Last year we spent

over $1 billion investing in schools in this province.

We are producing seismic upgrades to schools at a rate much faster

than the previous government ever did. Our budget for seismic upgrades

is twice…. We’ve spent more than twice what they have spent. Over the

next three years, we are investing close to $800 million to ensure that

we can accelerate our seismic mitigation program. This is work we do in

partnership with school districts to ensure that we are delivering safe

seats for British Columbia’s children as quickly as we can.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Members, I have the honour of tabling the Ombudsperson’s report

entitled Short-Changed: Ensuring Federal Benefits Paid to the Province

Reach Caregivers of Children with Disabilities .

Reports from Committees

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

P. Milobar: I have the honour to present the first report of the Select

Standing Committee on Public Accounts for the third session of the 42nd

parliament titled

Summary of Activities 2021-22 .

I move that the report be taken as read and received.

Motion approved.

P. Milobar: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the

report.

Leave granted.

P. Milobar: It gives me great pleasure, as Chair of the Select Standing

Committee on Public Accounts, to provide the

summary of activities

2021-22 to the chamber and to the broader public.

I want to, first off, thank all the committee members. I’m

relatively new to the role. Previously, it was the member for Peace

River South that was chairing, and we’ve had some new membership filter

through over the last year as well.

In addition, I want to give thanks

to the Clerk’s office for keeping us on track with all of those changes

and making sure that the important work that the committee does

continues on in a way forward.

We have a great working relationship with the Auditor General’s

office, reviewing all the reports that the Auditor General does to hold

various government agencies to account to make sure that reports and

recommendations that the audits contain are being followed through on

and delivered on for the betterment of all the public.

I look forward to the next year’s work, as well, as we continue

on. If the public’s at all interested in what happens in terms of

accountability for all the various public agencies, I would strongly

recommend they look up the report, see what types of reports we have

reviewed over the year.

I will leave it at that, I guess.

R. Glumac: I’d also like to thank the Auditor General and their staff, the

Clerk’s office and their staff, and all members of the committee. I’ve

served on this committee, I think, longer than anyone else since we’ve

been government, and I understand the very important work that is

carried out in providing oversight and accountability over public sector

administration.

I wanted to highlight that if you turn to the back of the report,

there’s a little bit of a chronology. We’ve spent some time formalizing

our follow-up process for audited organizations. Since 2015, all audited

organizations have been required to table annual progress reports. But

in our new process, there will also be an annual report from the Auditor

General, which will help provide better assurance on the implementation

of completed recommendations.

This is a new direction that we’re going, which will help close

the loop and ensure more timely implementation of recommendations. This

new process is expected to be fully implemented in the fall of next

year.

I thank everyone in the committee, again, for their ongoing

efforts.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is the adoption of the report.

Motion approved.

[11:10 a.m.]

Tabling Documents

Hon. D. Eby: I rise to present the annual report for the office of the

superintendent of professional governance for 2021-22.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading, Bill Pr401.

Second Reading of Bills

BILL P r 401 — SEA TO SKY UNIVERSITY

AMENDMENT ACT, 2022

J. Sturdy: I move that Bill Pr401 intituled Sea to Sky University Amendment

Act, 2022, be read a second time now.

The Sea to Sky University Amendment Act, 2022, deals with the

Quest University, which is an internationally respected liberal arts

university located in Squamish. After some significant financial

challenges, it was forced to sell its campus assets and lease back the

property.

The original Sea to Sky University Act did not contemplate the

necessity for Quest to enter into a triple-net lease situation. The

standard tax exemption was originally provided for owned land. This

amendment proposes to extend the property tax exemption to leased land

within the district of Squamish.

The district of Squamish is very supportive of both the university

and the proposed amendment. This same provision has been provided to

other post-secondary institutions, including Trinity Western University,

so there’s certainly precedence there.

As sponsor of the bill, I obviously support this amendment and

look forward to the university rebuilding from its economic and pandemic

challenges. I look forward to third reading.

Motion approved.

J. Sturdy: By leave, I move that the bill be committed to the Committee of

the Whole for consideration forthwith.

Leave granted.

Bill Pr401, Sea to Sky University Amendment Act, 2022, read a second

time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration

forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House

BILL P r 401 — SEA TO SKY UNIVERSITY

AMENDMENT ACT, 2022

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill Pr401;

S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.

The committee met at 11:13 a.m.

Clauses 1 and 2 approved.

Preamble approved.

Title approved.

J. Sturdy: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete

without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:14 a.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

BILL P r 401 — SEA TO SKY UNIVERSITY

AMENDMENT ACT, 2022

Bill Pr401, Sea to Sky University Amendment Act, 2022, reported

complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

[11:15 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: In this chamber, I call continued estimates debate for the

Ministry of the Attorney General.

In the Douglas Fir Room,

Section A, I call continued estimates

debate for the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

ATTORNEY

GENERAL

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply (Section B);

S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.

The committee met at 11:17 a.m.

On Vote 15: ministry operations, $581,587,000

(continued) .

M. Bernier: Obviously, we are transitioning from the estimates portion now

under the Attorney General to the Housing portion of his

responsibilities, which will carry for a little while here. We’ve got a

few minutes before lunch, and we’ll try not to get too deep into too

much and to save that for the afternoon. I also want to thank the

minister’s staff that are here and that will be helping, I assume, in

different capacities with some of the members.

I’d like to start off, Chair, with some simplistic questions

around the Building B.C. program. I know that every year we announce…. I

don’t want to talk about the targets. I want to talk about the numbers

right now that usually get announced every year about what’s open in the

different categories under the Building B.C. program.

To put on the record here for the minister, we have, I guess, the

nine main portions under there: the affordable rental housing, the

deepening affordability housing, community housing fund, regional

housing first, women’s transition housing, Indigenous housing, the rapid

response to homelessness project, the supportive housing fund and the

homelessness action plan. Those are nine different components the

minister is well aware of. There has been work that government has been

doing around opening different facilities in the Housing component

around the province.

[11:20 a.m.]

I know I just announced, to the minister, those nine different

ones. I guess this will be similar to last year. I’m looking for an

update, looking for the open numbers for those categories, if the

minister has those close by, to be able to update for me. Of course,

again, I’m looking for what’s open, what has got people actually in the

units at this time. I’m just looking for an update.

Hon. D. Eby: I’ll provide a couple of sets of numbers in relation to these

different programs: completed, which is the number that the member is

interested in, and under construction; and then the total. The

difference between those completed plus under construction, minus the

total, is for projects that are either in development or initiated.

Those are projects that have been funded but are not currently under

construction.

On the affordable rental housing program — 465 units completed,

396 under construction.

Rapid response to homelessness, 1,894 completed.

Deepening affordability of existing projects — 1,736 completed,

398 under construction.

Community housing fund — 711 completed, 3,374 under

construction.

Indigenous housing fund — 388 completed, 373 under

construction.

Supportive housing fund — 1,584 completed, 1,275 under

construction.

Women’s transition housing fund — 155 completed, 309 under

construction.

Homelessness action plan — 286 completed, 183 under

construction.

HousingHub provincial rental housing supply — 2,341 completed, 985

under construction. HousingHub affordable home ownership, 11 under

construction.

I’ll run quickly through the totals for each of these programs,

which would include completed, under construction, and in development or

initiated: affordable rental housing, 1,247; rapid response to

homelessness, 1,894; deepening affordability of existing projects,

2,194; community housing fund, 8,829; Indigenous housing fund, 1,331;

supportive housing fund, 3,786; women’s transition housing fund, 794;

homelessness action plan, 469; HousingHub, 4,934; HousingHub affordable

home ownership, 554.

The subtotals for Building B.C. — 7,219 units completed; 6,308

under construction; a total of 20,544 units completed, under

construction, in development or initiated.

For HousingHub — 2,341 completed, 996 under construction, 5,488

total.

M. Bernier: I appreciate those numbers. I figured the minister would have

those, so it’s good.

I have a question, though, just with some of those. It’s great to

see that in some of those categories we are seeing progress — in some

areas more than others. I’m sure that at some point, maybe in this

afternoon, we’ll get into where some of the struggles are.

Can the minister just explain to me…? When he talks about the

difference between “initiated” and “under construction,” we use

different terminology, but I know that B.C. Housing, in their affordable

housing investment plan report, I believe said that “initiated” means no

commitment has been made by government yet towards them

financially.

Is that an accurate statement, or is there something that has

changed in the process? I appreciate the commitments that government is

trying to make around affordable housing, because there’s a lot that’s

needed out there. I’m just trying to quantify, obviously. When the

minister is saying initiated, has it already been approved through

treasury, is the funding there, or are these announcements that are yet

to be funded, at some point in the next, maybe, year or two?

[11:25 a.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: I thank the member for the question, because there is some nuance

here.

Projects under construction have final project approval and are in

construction — that’s probably the most intuitive of the different

categories; those in development have received provisional project

approval. There may be an additional approval that’s required from

Treasury Board in relation to financing, but they’ve gone through the

B.C. Housing financial approval process. Initiated projects have been

publicly announced by government, but the specific financials of the

projects have not yet been approved.

M. Bernier: On the numbers that the minister just put out, on the different

categories — on what has opened, what’s under construction — I

appreciate those. I will say this up front. The minister knows that I’m

saying this, with all due respect. Being a new critic in this role, I’ve

had lots of reading in catching up to what knowledge the minister would

have, obviously, in this.

The minister and the government have made commitments around

114,000 affordable housing units within ten years. Can the minister

explain, then, on the categories that he just gave to me — I might be

wrong here: are those all of or part of the 114,000 commitment that this

government has made? If those are not all of the 114,000, where are the

other categories that are going to fill in, to complement the numbers

he’s given me, to reach that 114,000 goal?

[11:30 a.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: The numbers that I gave the member correspond to B.C. Housing

programs. Government’s initiatives go beyond those.

I can provide the member with a more complete list of housing

initiatives, which include things like the COVID-19 action plan, the

hotel purchases and the student housing initiatives of government. This

includes updates from the September 2017 Budget Update and the housing

plan/Budget 2018. The numbers will be broadly similar, but there are

additional categories, as I said.

Affordable rental housing. I’ll just give the total number of

units that are in progress for now, and we can drill down as the member

wishes.

Affordable rental housing, 1,247; rapid response to homelessness,

1,894; deepening affordability of existing projects, 2,194; community

housing fund, 8,829; women’s transition housing fund, 794; supportive

housing fund, 3,786; Indigenous housing fund, 1,331; HousingHub, 5,488;

student housing, 6,077; homelessness action plan, 469; regional housing

first program, CRD, 856; COVID-19 action plan hotel purchases, 800

units.

The total of those units in progress is 33,765. The total of the

units from those categories under construction is 9,165. The total

number of units open is 13,627. Our target for those categories is

39,110.

That provides a more complete picture of where we’re at on the

housing supply program, which is directly funded by government. In terms

of the 114,000 units, a significant portion of those units will be

directly funded or supported by government.

We also, the member will know, recently passed a bill here in the

House about purchasing land adjacent to transit stations, through the

Ministry of Transportation, for the purposes of constructing more

affordable housing near transit stations. That is a program that will,

potentially, be delivered by the private sector without additional

government support, other than the land purchase, and transit-based

community planning engaged in by the local government.

We anticipate those units are also going to contribute to our

affordability targets and the 114,000 units. We’re also doing other work

with local governments around their planning processes and supports in

order to be able to deliver more housing faster, including, especially,

affordable and rental housing. We will have more updates about that as

we continue our work.

M. Bernier: I appreciate that information now.

I’m trying to understand again. When the minister and government

made the announcement, I guess, of 114,000 units by 2027…. It sounds

like, from the minister’s answer…. He’ll correct me if I’m wrong. It’s

important information, I think, not only for myself but for the public

and that as well.

So 114,000 promised units are not government-subsidized,

government-initiated — government-funded, I guess — units. It sounds

like a portion of those, the expectation is, will be coming from the

private sector — as the minister and I both know, of course, depending

on zoning and through the permitting process. That’ll be a discussion

later. He and I will probably agree on some issues here.

[11:35 a.m.]

On this one here, especially from the last answer, talking about

the new bill around the acquisition of lands around transportation

corridors…. How did they come up with the 114,000 number? If I’m

understanding the minister correctly, it sounds like a big portion of

that is going to be attributed to the private sector, who will be

building affordable housing as part of, possibly, a large development

process, where a percentage will be required of them to do

so.

Did I understand that correctly? Am I stating it accurately, and

if so, how much of that 114,000 was earmarked to be non-government

funded and private sector developed?

Hon. D. Eby: Embedded in our Building B.C. program is a significant program

invested in by government called the HousingHub. It’s a $2 billion

construction financing program designed for the private

sector.

Private sector could include non-profit organizations, churches,

legions, others to facilitate the development of rental housing. There’s

expertise for people who are new to development, like a legion that

wants to build housing on property that they own, or a church. There is

construction financing for more sophisticated developers. In exchange

for the construction financing, we ask for commitments around increased

affordability on the site. So the private sector development has been

built into this plan from the beginning.

The original target of 114,000 came from the affordable housing

association of British Columbia and a report that they did about the

capacity of government, the ability of government, to deliver, through

things like transit-oriented development and strategic investment, more

affordable housing.

The member will know that this program was initiated in 2017. The

planning process and the implementation started in 2018. Things have

shifted quite dramatically since then, in terms of inflation, in terms

of building supplies, in terms of the tightness of the labour market and

the economic outlook going forward.

We’re going to do a review of this program to ensure that we are

responding to the bottlenecks and the challenges of delivering

affordable housing, if there are changes that are needed to the program

— in other words, different categories of housing are more in demand

than previously, and some programs were more successful than others in

implementation — and whether we need to shift focus. It is not proposed

to be a change to the total number or to the goal of affordable housing

that the government has. Instead, it’s just to make sure that we’re

still responsive to the realities on the ground for British Columbians

who are looking for housing. That review process will be

underway.

The member is correct. We are looking to the private sector for

delivery of some of these. In fact, a significant number of these

affordable housing units are in partnership with government through

different initiatives.

M. Bernier: I’ll probably have a couple of questions in a little bit around

the HousingHub and through the process. I’ll maybe hold off on those for

a few minutes to continue on with the train of thought that I have

around this section.

When we’re looking at the different areas…. The community housing

fund is one of them. Now, if I’m reading the budget documents correctly,

it appears there’s about $100 million that’s been added in the budget

for the community housing fund. The comment was needing to accelerate

it.

[11:40 a.m.]

When I’m looking at the numbers that the minister just gave me….

The community housing fund right now is sitting at — I’m going to guess

at numbers, by what the minister just gave me — around 4 or 5 percent,

maybe not even that high, of the commitment and target that they were

looking for. Their original ten-year target was just shy of 15,000

units, if I remember correctly.

I guess my question around the community housing fund is: am I

reading this correctly? Is there another $100 million that’s been added,

and if so, why was that added? Are there struggles of getting projects

off the ground? Maybe the minister can just highlight that for me a

little bit.

Hon. D. Eby: Just for clarity, the community housing fund are 8,829 of our

target, which is 14,350. I’m not sure how the member got 5 percent from

that.

The $100 million is…. This is a ten-year plan, so the $100 million

was brought forward from future years. Because of the demand, we saw

significantly more applications for community housing fund construction

than we had funding. Understanding that there were projects that were

ready to go, ready to break ground and that the need is quite urgent, we

brought $100 million forward to accelerate that work.

There are categories of government’s work where we are

significantly over our target. For example, our supportive housing fund.

We have 3,786 of 2,500 targeted units, so we’ve exceeded the target by

1,200. This program is for supportive housing for the homeless or those

at risk. The reason why we’re so significantly over target was a real

emphasis during the COVID period to get people inside to manage the

pandemic and also to ensure that people were not COVID-positive sick in

parks and community spaces in the province.

There have been shifts in emphasis as we roll the program along,

which is leading us to want to do this review to make sure we’re

responsive to the needs in community with the funding we’re

delivering.

M. Bernier: I apologize if I wrote something down wrong. As the minister was

stating numbers, I had heard 711 completed under the community housing

fund last year. It was 310, and I heard 711. I’ll go back and look at

that. I might have written it down wrong, in the wrong category, as the

minister was stating all of the numbers. And there might have been more

added to that that I didn’t catch. I think it’s just important to also

highlight.

We’re hearing an extra $100 million put in there for a multitude

of reasons. But looking through the different programs, then, it does

appear…. Maybe I’ll give the minister an opportunity to explain it to

the House. It seems like some programs are very successful, according to

the minister, and there are some that are really struggling to get even

close to what the targets were. Is there a common theme, maybe, that the

minister can say is one of the struggles to have some of these different

categories…?

I know again, when we’re talking about Indigenous housing or

women’s transition housing, obviously there are going to be different

components built into the process to get development or get units open.

But is there a common thread? Is there a reason why some programs seem

to be successful and some are not, or are there maybe different reasons

that the minister could enlighten us on?

Hon. D. Eby: The member will be aware of some of my public frustrations that

I’ve expressed about approvals processes within municipal

governments, the length of time that they take and the impact that they

have on affordability.

[11:45 a.m.]

This is true for private sector development projects. It’s also

true, unfortunately, for B.C. Housing and government affordable housing

projects. The longer these projects take, the more expensive they are.

We see rising interest rates. We see rising costs of goods required to

build the housing. And it’s been very frustrating, frankly — the length

of time that it takes some governments to get to approval of these badly

needed units.

As a generalization, there are communities that have really gone

above and beyond to get these approved quickly. One of the positive

stories I’m going to cite is the city of Victoria, where an affordable

housing project is consistent with the official community plan. They can

be approved without public hearing. That’s a new initiative that they

undertook following legislation introduced by government. They’ve

invited us to use statutory immunity, which allows us to bypass

municipal approvals processes to construct housing for people who

are homeless or at risk of homelessness in the community, which has

literally taken a year and a half to two years off of the construction

process.

I’m incredibly grateful for municipalities that place that

emphasis on delivering this housing quickly. It’s one of the challenges

that has faced the community housing fund in getting units

open.

The number 711 is correct in terms of units that are open for the

community housing fund. We have 3,374 units under construction, 4,744 in

that planning stage and 8,829 total for the category in

progress.

That’s part of the challenge. The other part of the challenge with

some of these programs is they’re application-based. We’re dependent on

people to come forward and take up the funding — another reason why

we’re doing the review.

I would say, personally, I would like to see us make more progress

in the women’s transition housing fund. This is housing for women

fleeing violence, spaces for them. We have a target of 1,500 units, and

155 units are open, 309 units under construction and 330 in the planning

stage.

I’m working with the parliamentary secretary, working on issues

related to gender-based violence, to ensure that the transition housing

fund is meeting the needs of the sector. That will be part of our review

as well.

M. Bernier: Thank you for that. I know the minister and I….There’s quite a bit

on this we’ll probably agree on, especially as a former mayor. I’ll

probably dive into some of the discussion around objectives, especially

with local government, maybe later on this afternoon.

I also want to state the direction around trying to deal with

affordable housing — there’s no argument, obviously, from myself or

anyone in this House that this is important. When we look at the

affordability crisis that’s facing the province right now, obviously

there’s support to make sure we reach some of these goals. And that’s

why the pressure will be…. You know, the government is making

announcements. I’m not criticizing the announcements. I’ll want to make

sure that those are actually achieved.

That’s where the commentary will really come in, because these are

important for people right across the province, which leads me to maybe

a general question. It’ll be hard for the minister to answer. I’ll

acknowledge that up front. But it’s more around a decision process from

a provincial basis. The minister just highlighted, let’s say, the city

of Victoria. And there are some municipalities…. Again, we’ll talk about

it in detail, maybe after lunch, around the process of approving

programs and development.

When we’re looking at the specific programs around the

affordability funding for these different nine or ten that we talked

about, how does not necessarily the ministry but through, obviously, the

different associations…? How do we determine where that funding goes? By

that, I mean that this is a provincial issue. This is not a downtown

Victoria or a downtown Vancouver issue only.

When we, especially…. The minister just highlighted women’s

transition housing. That’s important in places like Fort St. John and

Dawson Creek as well as downtown Vancouver. So how do we determine,

whether it’s through an application process…? I’m trying to understand

this, as well, and bring awareness to this. How do we determine how that

funding is dispersed, how the projects are approved to try to reach

people right around the province, not just in a select few areas based

on obviously where the majority of the population is?

[11:50 a.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: I’ll keep my answer brief, and we can go into more detail after

the break, if the member likes.

The high-level process is that the vast majority of these programs

are calls for proposals. B.C. Housing will announce that there’s

an opening for applications for funding through one of these housing

funds: the Indigenous housing fund, the supportive housing fund, women’s

transition housing fund. Applications will be received by B.C. Housing.

They’ll be evaluated and scored by staff on a number of different

factors — the need in the community, the affordability delivered by the

program, considerations of distribution geographically — to make sure

that funding is distributed across the province.

Those recommendations from staff go up to senior B.C. Housing

management level, where a recommended list of projects goes forward to

government. It goes through internal processes around fiscal safeguards

for government, through Treasury Board and through my ministry, and then

those projects are approved to go ahead.

One of the biggest challenges of that approach is that it depends

largely on either a private sector developer or a non-profit

organization, or both, to be bringing forward these applications — or a

municipality. There are lots of communities in the province that don’t

have that capacity. They don’t have non-profit organizations. Some

communities don’t even have sufficient development capacity for what

they need, even just for the private market. I’m thinking of Prince

Rupert in this example.

It’s another reason why we’re doing a review of this program, to

make sure that we’re responding to these communities, especially more

rural and remote communities, where there’s limited capacity in the

non-profit sector and the development sector, which is what these

programs are really based on and assume exist in these

communities.

With that, I move the committee rise, report progress and ask

leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:52 a.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Committee of Supply (Section B), having reported progress, was

granted leave to sit again.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported progress, was

granted leave to sit again.

Hon. L. Beare moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. today.

The House adjourned at 11:53 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE

DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

TRANSPORTATION

AND INFRASTRUCTURE

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); J. Sims in the

chair.

The committee met at 11:17 a.m.

On Vote 45: ministry operations, $955,980,000

(continued) .

B. Stewart: It’s good to be back. As I mentioned to the minister last night,

we wanted to touch on transportation — or transit, I should say.

Transportation, I guess, is obvious.

B.C. Transit recently tweeted out about upcoming trip

cancellations across the Victoria region due to the ongoing driver

shortage. Over a particular three-day period, B.C. Transit had to cancel

more than 200 bus trips in and around Victoria. Since the tweet, I

understand B.C. Transit has held a job fair, hired 17 new drivers that

will start in the next month in Victoria.

I’m wondering. What discussions has the minister had with B.C.

Transit about this issue not only in Victoria but across regions that

are experiencing similar shortages? Kamloops is having difficulties, and

of course, the one that was mentioned today. Well, it’s not part of B.C.

Transit, but Sea-to-Sky transportation.

[11:20 a.m.]

Hon. R. Fleming: Thank you to the member for the question.

B.C. Transit is experiencing a competitive labour market, like

many, many parts of our economy. The work that B.C. Transit is doing —

which includes a number of strategies to attract and retain new transit

operators to the company in various regions around the province; working

with contractors, in some cases, who operate B.C. Transit service in

various communities — includes a number of things.

First of all, it includes enhanced job fairs and advertising to

attract people into a good career with good benefits. It includes more

in-class scheduled training sessions, larger cohorts of drivers being

trained. It includes a focus on reducing the time from application for a

job to the actual hire date for new hires. Those strategies have been

successful.

We’re also living in a time of a pandemic, so when we talk about

disruption to a schedule, it has to be put in that context. It also has

to be measured to look at what the impact looks like. We do have some

numbers — for example, in April and May of this year, the current month

and the month prior — that may be of interest to the member.

[11:25 a.m.]

He asked specifically about Victoria’s regional transit system.

Even with all of these challenges, even with the strategies that are

being rolled out and that are starting to show good success around new

driver hiring and with the tail end of the pandemic and those sorts of

things impacting workplaces across the province, the numbers for April

and May were that 98.85 percent, so nearly 99 percent, of scheduled

trips in Victoria were delivered during those two months. We want to get

to 100, but we’re at 98.85 under these challenging

conditions.

We do believe that some of the work that started in 2020 between

the ministry and B.C. Transit on recruitment and retention strategies

are showing good achievement. There’s more work to do to attract people

to this. There is a lot of labour mobility in the economy. Some of the

shortages that we anticipated and that we’re working on involve other

ministries. Advanced Education has been involved in helping our ministry

and B.C. Transit with mechanics and maintenance programs to make sure

there are no shortages on that side of the workforce.

B. Stewart: Well, I hope the ministry and B.C. Transit are successful, because

of course, with the extreme pressure on fuel prices, people are looking

for alternatives. Transit is one of the ones that I know the government

and the Premier have suggested are the ones that need to be considered

as an option.

I want to move to the change that B.C. Transit has made. Users in

Vernon and, I’m sure, other communities have a concern over newer buses,

which have stairs rather than a ramp and which are more difficult to

manoeuvre, especially for those with walkers or who are visually

impaired. What discussions has the minister had with B.C. Transit

issues?

[11:30 a.m.]

Hon. R. Fleming: I want to pick up on the member’s comment before he asked his

question, which was wishing B.C. Transit success on restoring service,

operating successful services around the province. We are, indeed,

blessed to have the most comprehensive public transit system, the most

community coverage per capita in the country. We also were the

best-supported transit system of all provinces and territories through

the pandemic.

In terms of maintaining service, there were no cuts to routes or

services. There were no workers furloughed in the province of British

Columbia, in our transit system. We were the best-supported transit

system in the country. I think that’s probably why we are experiencing

among the best ridership recovery rates in North America. The additional

money that we invested when farebox revenues collapsed to keep systems

operating in communities like that member’s and others’ here in this

committee room was money well spent, in terms of positioning us to

recover quicker and more comprehensively as we build back and as we get

to the end of this pandemic.

Specifically on the complaint that the member has raised here

around handyDART services in the community of Vernon, I believe he was

speaking about, there have been some changes there, and there have been

some decisions that B.C. Transit has made recently on what kind of

technology to use to help mobility needs of transit

customers.

The B.C. Transit handyDARTs are equipped with lifts or low-floor

ramps. There have, in the past, on low-floor buses, been complaints,

occupational health and safety determinations that they were

contributing to transit operator injury. That has since been revised,

based on the experience of the new fleet used here in the Victoria

system. That will be instructional for Vernon and other

communities.

Going forward and having reviewed performance and functionality,

there will be a combination of lift-based and low-floor handyDART and

bus service in the community of Vernon and in the services we provide in

communities around the province.

B. Stewart: Thanks very much. I appreciate the work that B.C. Transit does in

all the communities of British Columbia and the comments about the

funding and the recovery.

That takes me to something that is about the actual cost,

Minister. B.C. Transit operating cost per service-hour is reported as

$122.20 per hour in ’20-21, $127.67 in ’21-22 and is forecast to

increase by 28 percent over the next three years. I guess the question

is: is the revised forecast on the operating cost per service-hour over

the next three years adequate, considering the inflationary pressures

that you were just describing in terms of attracting drivers, the

equipment and other pressures like fuel, etc.?

[11:35 a.m.]

Hon. R. Fleming: The member asked a question about whether inflationary pressures

are part of the budget consideration for B.C. Transit service. They are.

The budget that’s before the House for B.C. Transit has an 11 percent

increase this year, a $13 million rise that will cover inflationary

increases that B.C. Transit will experience on its base service

costs.

The grant will also allow expenditure to do service, 2.55 million

annual service-hours in this budget. Other features include an estimate

and an enhancement of the budget to cover free public transit for all

children 12 and under in the province, so that’s included.

I want to go back to maybe the point I was making previously, as

well, around the COVID payments for farebox losses as ridership

collapsed. At one point, I think it was at about 30 percent of its

normal volume. That totals $116 million. The latest instalment was

provided by the province and the federal government in March of 2022,

which will smooth out some of the risk as we rebuild ridership going

forward to the 2024-25 budget year. That’s anticipated to be an

important part of building back ridership.

There’s obviously going to be an anticipated surge coming in

September as we get further and further away from the pandemic, as work

patterns and post-secondary and school commuting patterns are,

hopefully, the first normal year we’ve had in a few years, as we’ve

toughed it out during this difficult period.

Those are sort of the highlights of the budget that will hopefully

satisfy the member’s question about how we have anticipated some of the

inflationary pressures and have been able to budget to accommodate for

them.

R. Merrifield: In recent meetings with students and the VP of the students union

of UBCO, it’s been identified that transit throughout the pandemic had a

really serious negative impact on students, especially those that were

still living on campus. The minister might recall that the university

campus is quite a bit outside of the main centre of the Okanagan, of

Kelowna, and those that were on campus had very few options for

transit.

Despite going back to campus last fall and the campus reopening in

whole and going back to in-person learning, there was a little bit of a

chicken-and-egg that was happening with transit in that transit did not

see an expansion, yet students were still looking to be on

campus.

Now we have the further exacerbation with gas prices skyrocketing.

While many students were forced into their vehicles and forced to drive

because there weren’t transit options, that now has become almost

untenable for most students with the current affordability

crisis.

[11:40 a.m.]

When will Kelowna and area see true rapid transit restored and

further transit options that make sense with scheduling and

frequency?

Hon. R. Fleming: Thank you to the member for the question. The question was, I

think, really generally about what’s happening with service levels in

Kelowna and using an example of the UBC Students Union Okanagan, which

has concerns that services haven’t been maintained.

In actual fact, as I was explaining in the previous question, the

safe restart money has allowed us to maintain all of the service that

has been present in the Kelowna transit system. That continues, even as

ridership levels continue to hover around the 70 percentile.

Of course, that service may not have aligned with students’ and

others’ commuting patterns that were changed by the pandemic, and of

course, UBC Okanagan and all post-secondary institutions flipped to

virtual education delivery from March of 2020 all the way to September

2021, which is quite an extended period of time.

[11:45 a.m.]

What we’re doing right now, throughout the system, is B.C. Transit

is looking at where the areas of greatest demand are. There has been a

differing trajectory in different communities about…. When we look

within the ridership recovery data, we look at which routes have come

roaring back, which ones are slow to re-emerge and whether we

should optimize service and, therefore, deploy some of the existing

resources to service the areas that have the highest usage.

That’s happening. That, of course, is involving the city of

Kelowna and others to help us conduct that exercise. We have lots of

data sets from all of the boardings within the B.C. Transit system to

inform that.

Perhaps I’ll have more to say about that, depending on the

member’s follow-up.

R. Merrifield: The minister is correct. I used UBCO as an example, but I could

have used health care workers coming from West Kelowna into Kelowna or

workers coming from Rutland into the industrial sector. There is a huge

demand for reliable and frequent transit and a real increase in the city

of Kelowna’s desire for more transit, which brings me to my second

question.

One of the bottlenecks that Kelowna currently has is the size of

the current transit yard and its electrification capacity. Kelowna has

had land earmarked for a transit hub and has just recently received ALR

approval. This project, yes, will require about $80 million, but it also

is going to require an annual operating agreement with the

ministry.

Does the province have funds that are available for this type of

project, and what sort of date and timing could we anticipate for an

annual operating agreement?

Hon. R. Fleming: Thank you to the member for the question. I’ll have some

additional time to consider the answer, because I would like to move

that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit

again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:47 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates (Hansard) and webcasts of

chamber proceedings are available at www.leg.bc.ca .

For inquiries contact:

Hansard Services

612 Government Street

Victoria, BC V8V 1X4

Telephone: 250-387-3681

Email: hansardservices@leg.bc.ca

Published by Hansard Services under the authority

of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20220531am-CommitteeA-Blues
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20220531am-CommitteeA-Blues
Language	en
Format	htm
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	67910c3f166c25b4b8f5ac595ae21ae94958950a

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (htm).

British Columbia Committee Hansard (Blues) — Tuesday, May 31, 2022 a.m. — Number 216 (HTML) (42nd Parliament, 3rd Session)

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

ISSN 1499-2175

CONTENTS

I. Paton

TUESDAY, MAY 31, 2022

I. Paton: I, too, would like to say thank you to the B.C. Dairy Association, who

TOM FLETCHER

FAIR AND STAMPEDE IN PEACE AREA

GRADUATES OF 2022

CEREBROSPINAL FLUID LEAK AWARENESS

FORWARD HOUSE MENTAL HEALTH AND

ADDICTION SERVICES IN

PARKSVILLE

B.C. DAIRY INDUSTRY AND

ICE CREAM EVENT AT

LEGISLATURE

I. Paton: Well, I scream; you scream; we all scream for ice cream. Today the

introduction.

PRINCE RUPERT LIBRARY

PROPOSED MEDICAL SCHOOL AT

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

AND MUSEUM REPLACEMENT PROJECT

STAFFING SHORTAGES IN

HEALTH CARE

SYSTEM

PROTECTION OF PUBLIC AND WORKERS

FROM HEALTH IMPACTS OF

CLIMATE CHANGE AND WILDFIRE SMOKE

LABOUR DISPUTE IN

SEA TO SKY TRANSIT

SYSTEM

SCHOOL CONDITIONS AND REPAIRS

AND MUSEUM REPLACEMENT

PROJECT

SEISMIC UPGRADES FOR SCHOOLS

AND MUSEUM REPLACEMENT

PROJECT

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2022

AMENDMENT ACT, 2022

AMENDMENT ACT, 2022

Section A, I call continued estimates

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

ATTORNEY

GENERAL

PROCEEDINGS IN THE

DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

TRANSPORTATION

AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Document details