Fourth Session, 41st Parliament

(2019) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Tuesday, October 8, 2019

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 270

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 36 — Gaming Control Amendment Act, 2019

Hon. D. Eby

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

SurreyCares Community Foundation

S. Cadieux

Library Month and School Library Day

R. Singh

Darrin Yusishen and room dedication at Royal Inland Hospital

T. Stone

West End Seniors Network

S. Chandra Herbert

Cariboo-Chilcotin residents’ response to community issues

D. Barnett

Community Inclusion Month

M. Dean

Oral Questions

Police investigation of former Citizens’ Services Minister and government response to allegations

M. Polak

Hon. J. Horgan

S. Bond

Hon. D. Eby

Soil disposal site in Shawnigan Lake watershed

S. Furstenau

Hon. M. Mungall

Police investigation of former Citizens’ Services Minister and government response to allegations

J. Johal

Hon. D. Eby

P. Milobar

A. Wilkinson

M. Polak

Petitions

Hon. C. Trevena

Motions Without Notice

Acting Sergeant-at-Arms

Hon. M. Farnworth

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 35 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2019

Hon. D. Eby

M. Lee

Hon. K. Conroy

N. Letnick

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2019

The House met at 10:05 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Hon. J. Darcy: I have two very, very special guests in the galleries today. Chief

Rhonda Larrabee of the Qayqayt First Nation and the Coast Salish people — I

think it’s fair to say that in our community, Rhonda Larrabee is an

incredibly courageous leader. She has single-handedly, over the last decade

or so, put the issue of reconciliation on the agenda in our community. She’s

such an active part of our community and a wonderful leader.

She’s accompanied by her husband, Bryan Larrabee, who previously

worked as an emergency management director with Vancouver Coastal Health and

now teaches emergency management at the Justice Institute. Would the House

please join me in welcoming these two very, very special guests

today.

D. Davies: It gives me great pleasure to introduce two people in the House today,

all the way down from Fort St. John. First of all is my constituency

assistant, Tamara Wilkinson. She’s also joined by her husband, Barry

Wilkinson — his first time here in the Legislature today. Would the House

please make them feel welcome.

Hon. R. Fleming: As members of the House know, October is Library Month in British

Columbia. It’s a time to celebrate library staff, board members and

volunteers who work hard every day in our communities to make sure that

British Columbians can access a world of information at their fingertips in

fantastic library facilities.

I would like to introduce a number of guests in this regard who are

part of the Greater Victoria Public Library system. We have with us Irwin

Henderson, who is president of the volunteer-run Friends of the Greater

Victoria Public Library. We have Deborah Begoray, who is board chair of the

Greater Victoria Public Library system. Councillor Andy MacKinnon is

vice-chair of the GVPL. Jennifer Windecker is a director of the Greater

Victoria Public Library. Her colleague Daphne Wood, also a director, is

here. Tracy Kendrick is a coordinator with the public library system. Andrea

Brimmell, also a coordinator, has joined us today. Sheila Gregg is a

dedicated Greater Victoria Public Library patron.

I would ask the House to join me in welcoming all of these special

guests here today to celebrate Library Month.

A. Wilkinson: From Parksville to Fernie, to Kitimat, across to Dawson Creek, the

largest opposition caucus in British Columbia history is very effectively

represented by 56 constituency assistants here today and another 40 or so

who work part-time who aren’t here. We have to thank them for doing that

front-line work that makes the government of British Columbia effective for

all of its citizens.

We all know that constituency assistants serve everyone. They never,

ever ask someone how they vote or what their preferences are. Their job is

to serve them as citizens. These people do it with great style, to the point

where on a good day, we’re not even sure they’re doing it because they do it

so well and so effectively.

With that in mind, I’m going to ask our enormous caucus not to get up

one by one to introduce 56 people. Instead, can we have a rousing round of

applause to welcome the constituency assistants from across British Columbia

who happen to work for the opposition. [Applause.]

M. Dean: It’s my honour today to introduce someone who is here in the gallery,

the fire chief from View Royal, who has given decades of service to our

province. He is chief Paul Hurst, and he received the rare Medal of Bravery

in 2014. Would everybody please make him very welcome.

[10:10 a.m.]

Hon. L. Popham: In the precinct, wandering around, having an amazing tour, is a

Saanich South class of grade 5s from McKenzie Elementary School, with

their teacher, Ms. Sunny Jun.

I visited this class a few weeks ago. I told them about this amazing

apple that we produce in British Columbia called the Ambrosia. They’ve got

an apple to take home as a souvenir. I also told them that the member for

Penticton has given us all some apples from his orchard to enjoy, which are

the Aurora Golden Gala. There are a lot of great apples that we produce, and

we have 28 apples for the teacher from McKenzie Elementary School

today.

I welcome them here. I know they haven’t made it into the chamber yet,

but they’re very excited to be here.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 36 — GAMING CONTROL

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. D. Eby presented a message from Her Honour the

Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Gaming Control Amendment Act,

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

now.

I’m pleased to introduce the Gaming Control Amendment Act, 2019.

This bill provides for the sharing of annual provincial gaming revenue

with the B.C. First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership.

It increases the maximum number of directors of the B.C. Lottery Corp.

to 11, to facilitate the appointment of one position for a First Nations

nominee.

Provincial gaming revenue will support self-government; strong,

healthy communities; and services that make life better for families.

The provincial government has already transferred nearly $200 million to

the newly formed B.C. First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited

Partnership, providing the first two years of shared gaming revenue as

part of its long-term commitment to revenue-sharing announced in

connection with Budget 2019.

Our government is putting in place a long-term revenue stream for

First Nations as part of our commitment to reconciliation through

supporting self-determination. This funding will make it possible for

nations to provide important new economic, social and cultural

opportunities that directly benefit the people who live in their

communities.

Mr. Speaker: The question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

Hon. D. Eby: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 36, Gaming Control Amendment Act, 2019, introduced, read a first

time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the

next sitting of the House after today.

Introductions by Members

Hon. B. Ralston: I’d like to make an introduction. Joining us in the members’ gallery

this morning is His Excellency Urban Ahlin, the Ambassador of Sweden to

Canada. His Excellency joined us for the economic mission to British

Columbia last week and is back here for more meetings. I’ll be meeting with

His Excellency later today to discuss new areas of cooperation between

British Columbia and Sweden.

Would the House please make him feel very welcome.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

SURREYCARES COMMUNITY FOUNDATION

S. Cadieux: Twenty-five years ago Francisca and Edwin Darts created a trust

for their land to be preserved as a botanical garden. Their endowment

for the park was the seed for the SurreyCares Community Foundation.

Since that time, the SurreyCares Foundation has invested in the people

of Surrey through grants to community agencies. This Sep­tember

SurreyCares dispersed another $32,000 in community grants.

The SurreyCares grants recipient in the General Community category

this year was the Volunteer Cancer Drivers Society, and it’s a worthy

cause, no doubt. Since conception in February of 2016, just three or so

years ago, more than 200 volunteers have contributed 70,000 hours for

45,000 patient trips, totalling more than 1.3 million

kilometres.

[10:15 a.m.]

In the Special Needs category, the 2019 SurreyCares grants

recipients were numerous. They were the ALS Society of British Columbia;

the Centre for Child Development; Hori­zon Church; the Lower

Mainland Down Syndrome Society; the Progressive Intercultural Community

Services Society, which so many of us know as PICS; the SuperChefs

Cookery Society; and the Kindred Farms Sanctuary, which was formerly

SALI.

In the Youth Initiatives category, the 2019 SurreyCares grants

recipients were Dan’s Legacy and VAYA Youth Arts Society.

As we all know, much work goes on behind the scenes, and we have

hundreds of people who give their time to serve on the boards of

community agencies and charities in our local communities. So I’d also

like to take a moment to thank the board of the SurreyCares Community

Foundation for their commitment to our city and our people — John

Lawson, Debbie MacDougall, Jeff Hector, Mike Bose, Sonia Parmar, Linda

Stromberg, Sue Anderson and Peter Unruh.

Congratulations to the SurreyCares Foundation and the recipients

of the 2019 SurreyCares grants on their continued community

service.

LIBRARY MONTH

AND SCHOOL LIBRARY

DAY

R. Singh: I’m honoured to stand in the House today to celebrate Library

Month and School Library Day. For the entire month of October, libraries

and library partners throughout B.C. and Canada are raising awareness of

the valuable role libraries play in Canadians’ lives.

Libraries are so much more than just a place to find books.

Libraries promote cultural awareness, engage in the community, provide

educational programs, support freedom of expression and so much more.

Libraries are partners in fostering lifelong learning and fulfil a vital

role, helping people of all ages and from all backgrounds so they can

access the information and services they need to learn, work and

thrive.

Families throughout the province benefit every day from library

and literacy programs. Last year over 50,000 children, parents and

caregivers attended 2,500 family literacy sessions made possible with

support from Raise-a-Reader, in addition to thousands of books and

learning materials distributed to family literacy programs, schools and

libraries throughout B.C.

In just a few weeks, on October 21, students throughout B.C. will

celebrate School Library Day, also known as Drop Everything and Read, as

a part of Library Month. It’s a celebration of reading designed to

remind people of all ages to make reading a part of their lives. At a

certain time, students in all classrooms are encouraged to stop what

they are doing and take some time to read, drawing attention to the

importance of reading just for fun.

School Library Day is coordinated and supported by the B.C.

Teacher-Librarian Association, a specialist association of the B.C.

Teachers Federation. Library Month is also a time to recognize dedicated

library staff, board members and volunteers throughout the province, who

enhance the quality of our life every day. Thank you for all that you

do.

I encourage all of you to head down to your local library and find

an exciting new book to read or participate in one of the many

activities that your community library offers.

DARRIN YUSISHEN AND ROOM DEDICATION

AT ROYAL INLAND

HOSPITAL

T. Stone: The human condition is inherently flawed. Thankfully, however,

failure is instructive, and we have the ability to learn from

mistakes.

It was a warm summer day, July 20, 2017. Darrin Yusishen of

Kamloops begrudgingly went to Royal Inland Hospital seeking treatment

for an agonizing headache. He returned home with medication for a bad

migraine. Less than a week later Darrin lay awake for a six-hour

surgical procedure to remove an aggressive brain tumour known as a

glioblas­toma. Sadly, from the beginning of this unfortunate

story, several mistakes were made — from accidentally being informed

about his cancer by a nurse to spending several days in a hospital

hallway to delayed treatment.

A devoted husband and father, Darrin always put others first,

especially his children, son Kellen and daughter Bella. But when the

health care system failed Darrin, his sister Crystal became his Rock of

Gibraltar, his devoted advocate.

When we first met Crystal, we were impressed. Laser-focused on the

issues facing her brother, she was calm, brave and reasoned at a very

difficult time, over many months. Crystal’s determination was big

picture — to ensure that no others would endure the same suffering as

her brother, who sadly died at age 40 on January 23 of last

year.

[10:20 a.m.]

Now, I’d like to express my appreciation to the Minister of Health

for his empathy surrounding Darrin’s story. Recently the minister and I

were honoured to take

part in a ceremony to announce that a room in the

new Royal Inland Patient Care Tower will be named after Darrin Yusishen.

It will be named after him so that his memory lives on forever and so

that the focus will always be on the future patients who enter that room

and the care, dignity and respect that they deserve.

At that ceremony, Darrin’s sister Crystal said: “There is no

greater power than that which stems from unconditional love, a force

that propels you forward to work until you’ve achieved the results

required to bring a sense of peace, a sense of what is right.” Crystal

reminded us that no matter what happens, no matter who tells you

otherwise, one person can indeed make a difference.

WEST END SENIORS NETWORK

S. Chandra Herbert: Members should know that some days I feel like the late, great

Marx — I speak of Groucho, not Karl, but apologies to the members

opposite — when he said: “I don’t care to belong to any club that would

have me as a member.” Sometimes we all get that way, I’m

sure.

However, there is a club that I’m very, very glad to be an

honorary member of. It’s an organization in my community, the West End,

that I would describe as the West End’s best friend. That organization

is the West End Seniors Network. Our community would not be the same

without it.

I think sometimes we don’t say thank you enough or celebrate the

things that are good, so today I choose to celebrate the network. It’s a

community of friends. I say “best friend” because they are all best

friends of our neighbourhood — the volunteers, the board, the staff —

every one of them looking out for the well-being of our neighbours, of

those who aren’t connected to anybody, newcomers, to be part of the

great, great community of the West End.

They have three locations. I mention this now because I find that

sometimes people in my community aren’t aware of the good work they do.

Of course, at Barclay Manor, where they offer over 50 different

You want to learn chess? You want to learn computers? How to fix that

darn cell phone that your kid gave you that you can never quite make

work, or to teach somebody how to use that cell phone?

They’ve got incredible volunteers. One of them, Vlad, I’d like to

mention. He just won the senior of the year award in Vancouver because

of his service to that community, to my community. And so many more —

Pamela as well. Led ably by Anthony Kupferschmidt with an incredible

board, it’s an organization that I learn from every single

day.

I know every community’s got one, but I just want to say thank you

to the West End Seniors Network, to Kay’s Place, Clothes and

Collectibles, Barclay Manor. You’re an incredible gift to our community.

Keep on giving. We’ll keep on trying to give our best back to

you.

Thank you, West End Seniors Network.

CARIBOO-CHILCOTIN RESIDENTS’

RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY

ISSUES

D. Barnett: Yesterday the member for Cariboo North spoke about her riding and

how resilient the people in the Cariboo are. It’s true. In my riding of

Cariboo-Chilcotin, you will find some of the most resilient people in

this province. Spanning from Tweedsmuir Park in the west to Bridge Lake

in the east, our population of over 33,000 is truly

resilient.

In times of emergency, whether it be flooding or record wildfires,

a neighbour will help defend their home against high water and forest

fires. Strangers will help people they have never met before, just like

Leslea and Duane Destree did last week.

After seeing over 200 logging trucks descend on a UBCM in

Vancouver to draw attention to the crisis in the forest industry, the

couple organized a highly successful barbecue fundraiser for local

families affected by the mill closures held at Margetts Meats in

Williams Lake. Companies like Still North Design, Interior Properties,

Lorne Doerkson, Old Dutch and people like Tammy Tugnam, Finning all

pitched in and raised nearly $6,000 in a matter of two hours.

Forestry used to be the top employer, but unfortunately no more.

And while our region has many family ranches raising beef cattle, many

are also disappearing or downsizing because no one in the family wants

to take over.

[10:25 a.m.]

This is unfortunate because the Cariboo region has so much to

offer. We have the highest concentration of copper and gold ore in North

America. We also have some of the best lakes, resorts, guided fishing,

bear viewing and ecotourism in the country. And thanks to the member for

Kamloops–South Thompson, we now have a fully refurbished Northern

Sea Wolf ferry bringing visitors to the region from all over

the world.

Whether you are a visitor, an investor or just looking for a home

in a beautiful place, come to the Cariboo, a land where people are

resilient, helpful and friendly.

COMMUNITY INCLUSION MONTH

M. Dean: It was not that long ago when people labelled with a developmental

disability had to surrender their rights and have all decisions made for

them. They were completely segregated and faced lifelong isolation from

their friends and families and from society. They were forgotten, and

their voices went unheard. They were discriminated against in every

aspect of their lives and had no choice in how to live.

Through self-advocacy, community advocacy and determination, these

same people are reshaping society and helping to ensure that people who

live with a developmental disability have the same rights and

opportunities as everyone else. That perseverance has led to each

October in British Columbia being recognized and celebrated as Community

Inclusion Month.

First celebrated in 1998 and originally called Community Living

Month, Community Inclusion Month recognizes that people with diverse

abilities make our province stronger. The month also recognizes the

important role families, friends, caregivers, volunteers, community

groups and employers play in ensuring the full participation of those

living with developmental disabilities in our communities. Progress for

inclusion is made through actions big and small.

This year the theme for Community Inclusion Month is: “The future

is accessible.” Throughout October, Community Living B.C. will be

hosting events around the province. I would like to encourage all

members to find events in their constituency to participate in. Together

we can continue to work towards raising awareness and promoting equality

for all.

Oral Questions

POLICE INVESTIGATION OF FORMER

CITIZENS’ SERVICES

MINISTER AND

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS

M. Polak: When the Premier was asked about the criminal investigation into

the activities of the former Minister of Citizens’ Services, he said: “I

am well aware of the allegations that the member raises. My chief of

staff received a letter from the secretary to cabinet in March. He

reviewed the allegations to the extent that he could…. An appropriate

investigation was done at that time.”

Will the Premier tell us what that investigation

entailed?

Hon. J. Horgan: I think it’s appropriate that the House understand that there was

no criminal investigation at the time the questions were raised in this

Legislature. I know the member understands that, but she might want to

review the handwritten note she has there and ensure that the House is

clear on that question.

Issues were raised last spring. A letter came to the secretary to

cabinet that made reference to allegations from a former employee. That

was transmitted to my chief of staff. He conducted a review of the

information that was available in that correspondence. He translated

that to the deputy to the Premier. That was the end of the story because

there was no basis in the allegations that had come to government at

that time.

Subsequently the official opposition raised a myriad of issues,

waved paper in the air, had a great deal of indignation, but nothing

further came forward. We asked them, if they had anything, to take it to

the RCMP.

Fast forward to Friday. At 2:30, I was advised by the Attorney

General that a special prosecutor had been appointed to review the

actions of the Minister of Citizens’ Services. The minister resigned,

and at 5:15, the public was advised that she had left her position. The

member for Coquitlam-Maillardville, the Minister for Housing and

Municipal Affairs, took over the responsibilities for Citizens’

Services.

[10:30 a.m.]

The press release would have gone out earlier, but I was at an

awards ceremony with the Minister of Education — the Premier’s

Excellence Awards in Education — giving out awards. I reviewed the press

release, sent it out. That’s what happened on Friday.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader for the opposition on a supplemental.

M. Polak: Originally, the Premier said that he had no know­ledge of

the whistle-blower’s allegations, even though, as he’s stated now,

there’s certainly an email chain that reveals that that’s not the case.

In fact, on March 7, the chief of staff to the Premier emailed the

Deputy Minister to the Premier and, referring to an email from the

whistle-blower, said: “After reviewing the email, I have followed up

with Roseanne Moran, executive director of the NDP caucus, and the

member for Surrey-Panorama, the Minister of Citizens’

Services.”

That’s what we know from this email that we received through FOI.

We don’t know what’s in the body of the email. We don’t know how the

investigation was conducted. If we’re to take this email at face value,

it sounds like all they did was make a couple of phone calls. People

said everything was okay, and that’s what they rested their assurances

to British Columbians on.

British Columbians deserve to know. What was the Premier told at

that time that gave him confidence that there was nothing to the

allegations?

Hon. J. Horgan: The correspondence that was received by the cabinet secretary made

references to events that were charity events, not fundraising events.

That was confirmed to be inaccurate through the investigation that did

take place. There was a claim that there were visa applications that had

been fabricated. There was no evidence of that happening. There was

notice of an invoice that was incorrectly issued for a website design.

All of these issues were canvassed at the time.

The issue, I believe, for the people of British Columbia, for the

people of this Legislature, is that on Friday a special prosecutor was

appointed to do an investigation. That investigation is underway, and I

know at least one member of the bar on the other side would understand

that. We should let that investigation run its course.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader for the opposition on a second

supplemental.

M. Polak: The fact is the Premier himself said that there was an

investigation. He has yet to tell us how that investigation unfolded.

What exactly did they do to find out, to determine, whether or not the

facts were as he seems to think they are?

More troubling than that is now, after we have been

stone­walled in finding out any information with respect to notes

or documentation that was provided to the Premier, he seems to have

possession of sufficient notes and information around what was

discovered in that investigation — so-called.

Why, then, does this government refuse to provide to the public,

provide to the opposition, the results of that investigation and what

was reported to the Premier that gave him that confidence?

Hon. J. Horgan: A letter that was in the possession of the official opposition

before it was in our possession outlined a series of allegations. We

looked into those allegations. They were unfounded. We closed the file.

There is an investigation underway.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. J. Horgan: I appreciate that maybe it was a better day in the spring than it

is in the fall for the official opposition. But the reality of the

situation is that allegations were made. They were looked into. A note

was given. She’s read from it. I have given her the substance of the

letter that the Liberals had for months and months and

months.

On Friday at 2:30, I was advised that a special prosecutor had

been appointed. By 5:15, that was public knowledge. We proceed to make

B.C. a better place. You should get on board with that.

S. Bond: The Premier says he has confidence in the former Minister of

Citizens’ Services because his chief of staff made a phone call, said,

“Everything is all right,” and dismissed serious allegations from the

whistle-blower. Now a special prosecutor has been appointed to look into

potential criminal wrongdoing by the former Minister of Citizens’

Services and others.

It’s important to remember that it wasn’t just the member for

Surrey-Panorama who faced allegations from the whistle-​blower.

The former minister’s political staff were also singled out.

[10:35 a.m.]

To the Premier, were Mindy Bansal and Shannon Russell at the

political staff briefing that he organized last Friday before the public

became aware of the issue, and if so, what specific instructions were

they given?

Hon. D. Eby: I can advise the member that the ministry staff member who was in

the former minister’s office was placed on administrative leave, and her

devices were taken. She’s on administrative leave as well.

Interjections.

Hon. D. Eby: I hear the members shouting questions, but maybe they’ll stand up

and ask them. We’ll do one at a time.

The member asked about a Friday afternoon meeting. The opposition

has literally made up a meeting that didn’t happen. On Friday afternoon,

“there was an NDP staff meeting, and that’s where” — they use my name —

“the Attorney General told the NDP insiders to cover their tracks. And

then they told the public.” This is what the Leader of the Opposition

said happened on Friday. I attended no such meeting.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, please.

Interjections.

Hon. D. Eby: He did say it outside. He said it on CKNW.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the Attorney General has the floor.

Hon. D. Eby: Now, I attended no such meeting. I said no such thing. They are

making it up. It is unacceptable.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member for Prince George–Valemount on a

supplemental.

S. Bond: Well, let’s talk about making it up on the fly. We discovered

yesterday that the former Minister of Citizens’ Services was allowed to

keep her devices for hours and days without any precautions taken by

this Attorney General.

Let’s talk about making it up on the fly. Let’s be clear. We

know….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Thank you.

S. Bond: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We know that the former minister actively used iMessages and

WhatsApp as her preferred approach of communication with her political

staff Mindy Bansal and Shannon Russell. We know the member for

Surrey-Panorama had access to her devices and all those private channels

for days.

When exactly were the minister’s former staff…? When were their

devices confiscated, and what steps did the Attorney General take to

make sure that that information is protected?

Hon. D. Eby: Another unfortunately inaccurate representation. In fact, on

Friday, the former minister’s log-in was terminated. She lost all access

to….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. D. Eby: She lost all access to government email and her calendar. We don’t

control…. The member is floating that perhaps there’s information in

private apps like WhatsApp and others. We don’t control that. If the

member had used applications like that, she would know that you could

access that from any computer in the world.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. D. Eby: We don’t control that. We can’t shut down access to it. If the

member is making a substantive allegation against the former minister,

she should do so. She should do it outside. But regardless, we don’t

control access to WhatsApp.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. D. Eby: What we control access to is government email, calendar, records —

those….

Interjection.

Hon. D. Eby: That’s right, and the log-in was terminated on Friday.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

I’ll be asking the Attorney General to take a rest for a minute,

until it’s quiet.

Hon. D. Eby: Thank you, hon. Speaker.

I can also tell the member that prior to the triple-delete

scandal, which the member might remember, it was possible to eliminate

an email record if it was deleted on the day it was created, before the

daily backup. But of course, our government did change that.

Following the Loukidelis review, it was changed so you can no

longer circumvent the daily backup. The daily backup is held for a

minimum of 13 months. That can be extended.

SOIL DISPOSAL SITE IN

SHAWNIGAN LAKE

WATERSHED

S. Furstenau: On May 14, the Ministry of Energy and Mines issued an order to

South Island Aggregates pertaining to a piece of property the company

owns in the Shawnigan watershed, a piece of property known as lot 21, on

which the company has deposited somewhere in the neighbourhood of

100,000 tonnes of industrial soil. This lot is directly adjacent to lot

23, where the same operators have deposited 100,000 tonnes of

contaminated soil, much to the dismay of Shawnigan residents.

[10:40 a.m.]

The Mines order reads:

“The permit holder shall remediate the mine site by removing all

soils imported since the date of issuance of permit G8331. Upon

completion, the permit holder will provide the inspector with a written

report showing that the volume of material removed from the site

corresponds to the volume imported since the date of issuance of the

permit. This remediation shall be completed by September 30,

2019.”

My question is for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum

Resources. It is now October 8. Has the company responded to the order

that your ministry issued, and has the soil been removed from the site,

as ordered?

Hon. M. Mungall: First, I just want to acknowledge the hard work that this member

has done on behalf of her community on this issue. I remember the very

first time I actually met her. She was bringing this issue to the

Legislature with the then MLA, Bill Routley. I just wanted to

acknowledge her hard work on this, because we do have a problem on our

hands.

In May, as the member mentioned, we did issue a compliance order

on South Island Aggregates, because they were out of compliance with

their permit. They had until September 30 to get in compliance with that

order.

The site has recently been inspected, and what we found was that

they were still out of compliance. They had not taken our order

seriously. That is unacceptable.

This issue is now before a statutory decision–maker so that we can

proceed, moving forward, in terms of how we can bring them into

compliance and the punishment, or should I say the penalty, they will

have to pay in reference to being out of compliance longer than they

should have been.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader, Third Party on a supplemental.

S. Furstenau: Thank you to the minister for her response.

I harken back to May 2016, when the B.C. Auditor General released

an audit of compliance and enforcement in the mining sector. One of the

report’s main findings was that both Ministry of Mines’ and Ministry of

Environment’s enforcement responses have significant deficiencies and

Ministry of Mines’ enforcement tools are, in some cases, ineffectual.

This is resulting in delayed or unsuccessful enforcement by ministries

and inaction in several instances.

Nearly 3½ years after this report was released, we have a company

with a long history of non-compliance with both its mines and

environment permits, essentially disregarding an order from the

ministry. I hear that the minister is saying that they intend to take

action. However, Shawnigan has been hearing that story for a very long

time.

My question is to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum

Resources. If the ministry doesn’t seem to have the capacity to enforce

the rules of its orders and to bring about compliance, who is, in this

province, looking out for the public interest?

Hon. M. Mungall: I appreciate that the people of Shaw­nigan Lake lost

confidence in government when they saw, time and time again, their

issues not being considered and not being addressed. It was part of a

larger problem under the previous government.

This government takes its responsibilities as a regulator very

seriously — so seriously that we put….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, the minister has the floor. Thank

you.

Hon. M. Mungall: I get that the opposition is quite upset by the fact that we put

$20 million into this ministry to put more boots on the ground to make

sure that inspections are taking place. Those inspections are now taking

place. That’s why we have people on the ground knowing exactly what’s

going on with lot 21, knowing exactly what’s happening there and taking

action to make sure that we’re bringing South Island Aggregates into

compliance — something, when they were in government, they never

did.

POLICE INVESTIGATION OF FORMER

CITIZENS’ SERVICES

MINISTER AND

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS

J. Johal: The former minister has a very clear record of breaking the very

laws she was sworn to enforce. Whether it’s hiding emails or using

private communication channels, the minister always went out of her way

to block the public’s access to information.

Even the Office of Information and Privacy slammed her for putting

roadblocks up to legitimate requests. That’s why it was shocking to hear

the member for Surrey-Panorama tell reporters she had devices for four

days before turning them in.

[10:45 a.m.]

A simple question to the Premier: why was the minister, with a

record of deception, who now faces an active police investigation into

criminal wrongdoing, allowed to keep her phone and iPad?

Hon. D. Eby: There were about four months between the time when the opposition

wrote their letter to the RCMP and the appointment of the special

prosecutor. During that time, we can assume that the RCMP were looking

at the letter that the member for the opposition had written. During

that time, if they deemed that there were government records or other

materials that they needed for their work, I assume they would have

asked.

In fact, they may have asked. I may not have knowledge of that,

because the request could well have gone through members of the public

service or through the Speaker’s office. I don’t know. In any event, I

have no knowledge of any requests at that time.

What I do know is that when the Premier received notice from me

that a special prosecutor had been appointed, he accepted the

resignation of the former minister. Her access to her government email

and her devices through her log-in was terminated on the Friday. It was

the same day. It all happened on the same day. The devices are currently

in the possession of the public service, physically, as are the devices

of her ministry staffer who was located in her constituency

office.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Richmond-Queensborough on a

supplemental.

J. Johal: At the end of the day, of course, using WhatsApp, Signal,

iMessage, all of those…. She had access to those for four days. You

know, she could have tampered with them. We don’t know.

Let’s be clear for a second. The member for Surrey-Panorama is a

serial offender.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the member for Richmond-Queensborough has the floor.

Thank you.

J. Johal: The member for Surrey-Panorama is a serial offender when it comes

to breaking the laws she was sworn to uphold. The Premier is the one who

talked to her, advised her on a lawyer and called a meeting for

political staff to discuss how to proceed, all before the public is told

that the minister is under an active police investigation into criminal

wrongdoing.

In what world does the Premier think it’s okay for the suspect to

have access to evidence for almost four days?

Hon. D. Eby: The member listed three or four private apps that we don’t have

access to shut down. I’m glad he’s not the critic for technology. The

way these things work is you can log into them from any computer in the

world, and we can’t stop that from happening. I do appreciate his

concern. The police can access records through various technology

providers.

As for the records within the control of government, the log-in

and password access for the former minister were terminated.

P. Milobar: I have absolutely no idea how the Premier still has confidence in

the member for Surrey-Panorama — as late as yesterday still espousing

this great confidence. The member for Surrey-Panorama has a track record

of being completely derelict when it comes to preserving public

documents, seems to have no problem knowing how to delete emails and

minister responsible for Citizens’ Services. Maybe the Premier can take

care of that problem too.

The Attorney General yesterday said, though….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

P. Milobar: “If we have any requests from law enforcement or a special

prosecutor or anyone else for preservation of any documents related to

any subject matter, of course we’ll make sure that that happens.” That’s

what the Attorney General said yesterday.

Well, the Premier and the Attorney General can consider this a

request from anyone else. When will the Premier do the right thing and

ensure the former minister’s emails, texts, WhatsApp, any other messages

and any other information is properly preserved?

Hon. D. Eby: It sounds like a similar question, hon. Speaker, but I will point

out to the member to underline government’s commitment. I was trying to

think about a way to do it properly, because I certainly am concerned

about writing to the special prosecutor about perceptions of

independence of the prosecutor and, at the same time, making sure that

everybody knows that government is fully committed to preserving any

records that are a matter of concern, as well as providing them to the

police investigation.

I have directed my Deputy Attorney General to write to the

commissioner of the RCMP to underline what I believe would be understood

by everybody involved. But just in case it’s not, the government is

fully ready to cooperate with preserving any records at all, with

providing any records at all that will assist them in their

investigation. That is the commitment of government.

[10:50 a.m.]

I have now directed the deputy to write. The deputy will be the

contact for the commissioner, if necessary, not me. I’m trying my best

to preserve independence yet, at the same time, respond to what are

obviously concerns from the other side that maybe this government, for

some reason, has not committed to that, when we have said repeatedly we

are. Good to have some paper on it and to write to the commissioner and

say: “We’re here for you if you need us.”

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

supplemental.

P. Milobar: This really isn’t that complicated. We know there’s an active

police investigation into criminal wrong­doing featuring the

member for Surrey-Panorama. I guess, thankfully, for once, we’re not

worried about whether or not things have been backdated with the

records. We’re just worried whether the records actually exist or not

still.

This is about preserving those records of a serial offender when

it comes to breaking FOI laws — someone who was allowed to keep her

phone for four days and still had access to government information. If

the Premier actually has confidence in the former minister, why not

ensure all of those records are preserved and available for this

criminal investigation?

Hon. D. Eby: A few times I have said that she did not have full access, that

her log-in and password access were terminated on Friday.

A. Wilkinson: It’s unfortunate that when a minister has been forced to resign

because of allegations of criminal wrong­doing and when a very

senior special prosecutor is in place and the RCMP are conducting an

in-depth investigation, the members opposite find it appropriate to

laugh about it. They mock the need to protect the evidence that could be

used to convict the member for Surrey-Panorama. What has this chamber

descended to when these members mock the judicial process?

Interjection.

A. Wilkinson: I just heard the Premier say he’s mocking me, not the judicial

process.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Wilkinson: Perhaps it won’t be so amusing if the member for Surrey-Panorama

is convicted. That’s what’s at stake. Yet we have an Attorney General

who sits here…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Wilkinson: …and implicitly states he did nothing to preserve the evidentiary

record.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

A. Wilkinson: A first-year associate having been called to the bar for a few

months knows the first thing you do when the allegations arise is

preserve the record. Instead, the accused perpetrator over there took

her machinery home and had the opportunity to wipe out all of the

texts.

This is a flagrant failure on the part of the Attorney General,

and it begs the question: is this a manifestation of the incompetence of

the Attorney General? Or perhaps this was just a convenient oversight to

let the accused perpetrator go home with her devices for four

days.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Member, was that your question?

A. Wilkinson: So we now see the question arrives. Does the Premier continue to

mock this criminal investigation, to make fun of the need to preserve

evidence? Does the Pre­mier think this is a funny joke?

Maybe we should start with a very simple question. Will the

Premier now stand up and apologize for intimidating the whistle-blower,

for having the NDP caucus legal counsel send her letters of

intimidation, now that the police and the special prosecutor have

decided that, yes, indeed, it is worth looking into? It’s over to you,

Premier, whether you want to apologize or sit smugly and smile and mock

the process.

Hon. D. Eby: Well, there are a number of challenges with what the Leader of the

Opposition has said, both inside this House today and outside of the

House — wildly inaccurate statements, to try to use parliamentary

language.

First of all, there is an RCMP investigation. As I understand it,

there haven’t been any charges. There haven’t been any specific

accusations yet against the former Minister of Citizens’ Services. We

shall let that investigation continue and that work continue. So that is

one point.

[10:55 a.m.]

On a second point, I look forward to the withdrawal, from the

member, of the accusation he made against me on CKNW on the seventh,

that I held an NDP staff meeting where I advised NDP insiders to “cover

their tracks.” I look forward to that withdrawal, and I expect that

withdrawal, because it is not true.

With respect to other suggestions about preserving evidence, of

course I’ve responded to many of his colleagues’ questions about the

fact that the log-in and password for the member were terminated,

terminating her access to government records that we control. Physical

records in her office are being archived by members of the public

service, as they do when any member leaves cabinet and goes into either

opposition or into another position. That is all being done independent

of the political level.

Maybe that provides some assurance and also an opportunity for him

to withdraw.

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

supplemental.

Member, will you be withdrawing your comment?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Well, there was some language used here in the House,

Member.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member, if I may say, you used the term “accused perpetrator.”

That is not true. I’m requesting that you withdraw.

A. Wilkinson: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’m quite happy to use the police language of

“perpetrator.” Is that your preference? You have extensive experience

with the police, I understand. You know perfectly well that’s how the

person is described.

What’s your choice, Mr. Speaker, of term for the member for

Surrey-Panorama?

Mr. Speaker: I’m saying…. As per the request from the Attorney General, I’m

asking for you to withdraw.

Member, again….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Please be seated.

Proceed.

M. Polak: Mr. Speaker, I’m trying to understand if we are…. The Attorney

General asked for something to be withdrawn that was said in the public

sphere on radio, not for something to be withdrawn that was said here in

this House.

Mr. Speaker: Well, I was understanding it’s the language used in here: “accused

perpetrator.”

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: In any case, the term “accused perpetrator” would not be

appropriate in here under the circumstances.

M. Polak: The former Minister of Citizens’ Services, by statement of, I

believe, the justice branch, is under investigation for criminal

wrongdoing. In that instance, the language is entirely appropriate and

descriptive and accurate.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Official Opposition: would you like to ask another

question as a supplement?

A. Wilkinson: Indeed I would, Mr. Speaker.

This is a very basic question. It turns to the role of the

Attorney General as the protector of the legal system of the province,

as the chief legal officer of their entire judicial system, as a man who

has obligations far beyond elected office, which is why he is presented

with the Great Seal of the province of British Columbia the day he is

sworn in. That obligation extends to protecting the criminal trial

process, and it extends to protecting evidence.

[11:00 a.m.]

It’s a very simple question. Will the Attorney General admit that

by failing to ensure that the member for Surrey-Panorama’s electronic

devices were not removed the moment that she became aware of these

accusations of criminal wrongdoing, he actually made an

error?

Hon. D. Eby: On accepting the resignation of the member, access to her computer

was terminated. The log-in and password access was terminated. I’ve

heard the member and others talk about private apps that we have

absolutely no control over, that can be accessed from any computer in

the world. So I’m not sure how I could do better than that.

With respect to the member’s continuing inaccurate comments, I do

look forward to his withdrawing this comment that he made on CKNW, which

was: “There was….”

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, the Attorney General has the floor.

Hon. D. Eby: On Friday afternoon, there was “an NDP staff meeting, and that’s

where the Attorney General” — he used my name — “told the NDP insiders

to cover their tracks.” So I do look forward to the member’s withdrawal

of that, because it was completely false.

[End of question period.]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Petitions

Hon. C. Trevena: I have two petitions to present.

The first is from the citizens of the village of Tahsis. They

respectfully request that the Legislative Assembly of the province of

British Columbia immediately protect and preserve McKelvie Creek, in Tahsis,

for drinking watershed, wildlife and recreational values.

The second petition is from the Sierra Club of B.C., Quadra branch,

about old-growth logging.

Motions Without Notice

ACTING SERGEANT-AT-ARMS

Hon. M. Farnworth: By leave, I move:

[That Greg Nelson be conferred the duties and responsibilities of

the Sergeant-at-Arms on an acting basis, and be styled Acting

Sergeant-at-Arms, until the appointment of a Sergeant-at-Arms. Mr.

Nelson is authorized by the Legislative Assembly to undertake any

responsibilities prescribed to the Sergeant-at-Arms by statute, the

Standing Orders, and any other authority.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading of the Miscellaneous Statutes Act.

[11:05 a.m.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 35 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT

(N o . 2), 2019

Deputy Speaker: The second reading of Bill 35 now starts.

Hon. D. Eby: Mr. Speaker, thank you for a moment to change gears

here.

I move that the bill be now read a second time.

This bill amends subsection 3(1) of the Family Maintenance

Enforcement Act. This amendment clarifies that child and spousal support

provisions in a family law arbitration award may be filed with the

director of maintenance enforcement. The amendment supports the use of

arbitration to resolve family law disputes by ensuring that the family

maintenance enforcement program can enforce the support awards for the

benefit of children and families in British Columbia.

Amendments to the Judicial Compensation Act update pension

provisions for Provincial Court judges and align the act’s language with

recommendations from the 2016 Judicial Compensation Commission. The 2016

Judicial Compensation Commission’s recommendations reflect the changes

to the Pension Benefits Standards Act, which was repealed and replaced

effective September 30, 2015, as well as changes to the early retirement

pension reduction formula contained in the public sector pension plan

rules. The commission’s recommendations were enacted by resolution of

the Legislative Assembly in 2017.

These amendments update the language in the act to ensure that the

act reflects current practice respecting the pension vesting period, the

early reduction factor for members with less than two years of

contributory service and options for receiving the commuted value of a

pension if a member retires before age 55.

The amendment to the Professional Governance Act will provide

regulatory bodies with the interim authority to increase annual

membership fees under their current statutes to ensure they have

sufficient resources while they transition to the new professional

governance legislation over the coming year. This interim authority

fills a gap until the professional associations are fully under the

authority of the Professional Governance Act, which already provides

regulatory bodies the authority to set annual fees. To use this

authority, the professional associations must be prescribed by

regulation.

In addition to this amendment are housekeeping amendments to amend

an error in wording in

section 31 and to correct a cross-reference in

section 118 of the act.

Amendments to the Provincial Court Act address the term and

reappointment of judicial justices, in response to concerns from the

Chief Judge of the Provincial Court about losing a number of experienced

judicial justices at the same time, due to the expiry of their

term-limited appointments. In 2017, the fixed term of appointment for

judicial justices was extended from ten years to 12 years as an interim

measure to address the issue. These amendments reduce the term of

part-time judicial justice appointments from 12 years back to ten years

and provide for the reappointment of judicial justices for one

additional fixed term of ten years.

Judicial justices who have served on either a full-time or a

part-time basis may be reappointed, but a reappointment will only be

available on a part-time basis. To help ensure there is no infringement

on judicial independence, the proposed amendments will vest

reappointment with the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court upon

recommendation of the Judicial Council, rather than with

government.

Amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act enhance the

existing anti-reprisal protections for those who disclose a wrongdoing,

seek advice about making a disclosure or cooperate in an

investigation.

[11:10 a.m.]

These amendments will ensure that reprisal protections apply

whenever adverse measures listed in the act are taken by reason of a

person’s good-faith participation in a disclosure, request for advice or

investigation under the act.

These amendments also clarify that adverse measures taken for the

purpose of managing or terminating an em­ploy­ment

relationship, contract or agreement are not prohibited as reprisals, as

long as they are not taken by reason of a person’s good-faith

participation in a protected whistle-blowing activity.

Other amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act include

clarifying that the prohibitions on the disclosure of confidential

information in other B.C. enactments do not prohibit a person from

disclosing that information under the Public Interest Disclosure Act,

including the newly appointed Human Rights Commissioner within the scope

of the act; and correcting cross-referencing errors.

The amendment to the Trespass Act adds “aircraft” to the

definition of “premises.” This amendment makes the Trespass Act

consistent with the Occupiers Liability Act and brings B.C. in line with

Ontario and Saskatchewan. The omis­sion of “aircraft” from a

definition that includes ships, trains and other vehicles was noted by

the legislative committee that reviewed the Trespass Act revision in

Amendments to the Child, Family and Community Service Act are in

response to feedback received from Indigenous communities following the

implementation of previous amendments to the act made in 2018. These

amendments will enable Indigenous communities to be more involved in

planning for the needs of all their children in care, not just those in

continuing custody. Additionally, Indigenous communities will be able to

provide services to any child and family, not just members of their

community.

The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act has two

purposes: to promote accountability by providing a right of access to

information and to protect personal information held by public bodies.

The two amendments to this act are urgently required to ensure that the

public sector can continue using the technology it needs to provide

quality services to British Columbians. Without these amendments, public

bodies would be forced to choose to operate in non-compliance, forgo the

use of basic tools or invest millions of public dollars to develop

custom technology solutions. I’m not talking about specialized systems.

I’m talking about basic business tools such as email or presentation

software.

The Carbon Tax Act, Provincial Sales Tax Act, Motor Fuel Tax Act

and Tobacco Tax Act have service-of-notices pro­visions which

describe how and to whom a notice or other document is conclusively

deemed to have been served. Currently it is not clear when these

provisions apply, as the language in provisions where notices are

required is not consistent.

The amendments provide consistent terminology respecting the

giving of notices. The intent of the amendments is to provide clarity

for taxpayers and government and improve government’s ability to

effectively and consistently give notices under these acts.

Also included are three minor language changes to the Speculation

and Vacancy Tax Act. These are housekeeping amendments for the provision

of good governance, clarity and consistency across all provincial tax

acts.

The Health Care Costs Recovery Act was enacted in 2008 to permit

government to recover from a wrongdoer the costs and expenses incurred

in providing health care to an injured person in circumstances where

injury is caused by a wrongful act or omission. Amendments to

section 24

are made to clarify that the act does not apply to a particular

wrongdoer who is insured by ICBC when that wrongdoer’s use or operation

of a motor vehicle causes personal injury or death.

Amendments to

section 4 are made to impose a requirement for

defendants in class proceedings initiated in provinces and territories

other than B.C. to provide written notice of the proceeding to the B.C.

government. The goal of these amendments is to enable the government to

maximize the recovery of health care costs under the act. There are also

a few amendments to include gender-neutral terminology within the

act.

The amendment to the Assessment Act will provide that solar power

plants are “power plants” for the purpose of assessing those plants in

the same manner as other independent power producers. It will also

ensure there is sufficient authority to apply exemptions under the

assessment authority regulation. This amendment will result in an

equitable property assessment and tax outcome for existing and future

solar power plants. Without it, the future development of solar projects

may be discouraged.

The amendments to the Motor Vehicle Act by the Ministry of Public

Safety and Solicitor General will create a statutory presumption on the

presence of a speed sign to support the successful prosecution of

intersection safety camera speeding tickets and will clarify that the

visibility of a speed limit sign is a defence to a charge of speeding,

rather than an essential element of the offence.

[11:15 a.m.]

The intersection safety camera program began issuing tickets for

speed in July of this year. Fourteen of the 35 planned speed enforcement

sites are governed by a sign rather than the legislated speed limit,

50/80 kilometres per hour, and so rely on the presence of a sign. The

presumption and clarification on sign visibility will provide greater

legal certainty for prosecutions. The program will monitor the presence

of the signs every 14 days to support the presumption. There is wide

support for this program expansion by municipalities, police, health

authorities, public health officers, Doctors of B.C. and the coroner for

its ability to prevent accidents.

Amendments to the Employment and Assistance Act and the Employment

and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act support the poverty

reduction strategy TogetherBC and the government’s action on

homelessness.

These amendments aim to improve income and disability assistance

by ending the need for clients to pursue Canada Pension Plan retirement

benefits before age 65, protecting vulnerable youth by eliminating the

two-year independence rule as a barrier to assistance, improving

fairness for couples and children in need by recognizing modern living

arrangements when calculating assistance, ensuring that information and

verification requirements do not create homelessness, enabling maximum

repayments for client debt, reducing delays in determining eligibility

by clarifying the treatment of evidence on appeal and removing the

requirement for reporting forms to be prescribed in

regulation.

These measures continue the ministry’s efforts to make assistance

more compassionate and effective, ultimately reducing poverty and

preventing homelessness for the most vulnerable citizens.

Technology is rapidly changing the way people use streets and

sidewalks in the province. To support the use of new, clean modes of

mobility, it is important that people know when, where and how emerging

forms of transportation technologies can be used. Amendments to the

Motor Vehicle Act by the Ministry of Transportation will provide an

important tool to drive reform in this regard.

As part of government’s active transportation strategy, amendments

to the act will provide enabling authority to establish regulations for

new and emerging forms of personal mobility devices that are

increasingly prevalent on roadways in the province. Further amendments

enable pilot projects to research, test and evaluate new approaches to

regulate what happens on our roads.

These amendments to the Motor Vehicle Act will ensure that the

province finally has a mechanism to shift the act from a statute

governing the roads of the last century to a modern framework of laws

supporting people on our roadways and sidewalks in this

century.

M. Lee: I rise today to speak on the proposed amendments to the 17

statutes in Bill 35, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2),

First of all, I’d like to thank the Attorney General’s office for

quickly arranging briefings on the numerous amendments being proposed

yesterday afternoon. There certainly will be a number of sections of

this bill that my colleagues will speak to here on second reading. We

will all want to explore in more detail these amendments at the

committee stage.

Let me just say first that it’s really disappointing that when

members were called back for four days of sitting this week, on the

first day, yesterday, there wasn’t sufficient business for the House to

sit. It rose 2½ hours earlier than scheduled. Given that this government

doesn’t have any other legislation to put forward this week, other than

the Gaming Control Act amendments — this is the only bill — it makes you

wonder, Mr. Speaker, what other priorities this government is focused on

when it doesn’t have its act together in the orders of the House and the

business of this House.

When you look at the majority of the amendments in this bill,

they’re primarily amendments of a housekeeping nature. In fact, some of

these amendments, including to the Trespass Act, went through the

Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform. That being said, certainly —

I’m sure, Mr. Speaker, you’ll agree — there are better uses this week

for the time of the members of this House. We certainly could have used

that 2½ hours yesterday for more pressing matters, more urgent

priorities for British Columbians.

That being said, there are a number of points of interest that

this set of amendments to the various statutes provides. Certainly,

there are some jumping-off points, I would suggest, as to other

priorities that we need to focus on as British Columbians.

[11:20 a.m.]

For the last two days, there has been tremendous focus on, in

part, the allegations made by a whistle-blower against the now former

Minister of Citizens’ Services. Of particular

note in this bill are amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act,

or PIDA. These changes include the definition of “office” to include

that of the Human Rights Commissioner, rewording the act to make it

clear that PIDA overrides other enactments and providing protections for

employees who, in good faith, seek advice, make a disclosure or

cooperate with an investigation under the act. All of these amendments

serve to improve the act and make it easier for whistle-blowers to come

forward about wrongdoing.

It’s curious — the timing of this. This government is making

changes to this act,

an act that was introduced to this House 16 months

ago yet has not been enacted by this government. All during this time,

there has been this whistle-blower coming forward, with respect to

allegations that are now, presumably, under investigation by the special

prosecutor and the RCMP, forming the basis of that

investigation.

Yet this government has delayed bringing in force this act, this

act that would certainly be a benefit to this whistle-blower and other

whistle-blowers that might have other allegations against this

government. So we question the delay. It’s one thing to continue to

tweak a bill they introduced 16 months ago. But why is it that this

government has not yet put this bill and this act into force?

I know that the member from Chilliwack will be speaking to the

Trespass Act and appreciate that there is one amendment here that’s

proposed, but certainly, there are other concerns of British Columbians

as to the rights of private property owners, landowners and farm owners,

given recent activities by protesters and the like. So again, when this

government looks at those concerns of British Columbians, why is it that

it’s only addressing one specific technical amendment at this

time?

Another example of this is the Freedom of Information and

Protection of Privacy Act. Certainly, we’re glad to see the government

continuing to update our laws and procedures to keep up with

technological advancements. However, when we were in the briefing

yesterday, questions were raised by my colleagues and myself as to what

really is driving this particular change in respect of this

bill.

Were the changes that deal with enabling temporary processing and

metadata handling offshore — through the United States, for example…?

That would still be in compliance with FOIPPA, the Freedom of

Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Was that necessary due to the

significant amount of personal data that over 1.6 million British

Columbians had to provide to this government in connection with the

speculation and vacancy tax? Is that the reason why this government is

now filling in the gaps of how it was able to manage that data — again,

now under the former Minister of Citizens’ Services, under her

oversight?

When it comes to something as critical as personal data that

British Columbians had to provide to this government, we’ll be asking

questions at committee stage as to what the procedures were that

government put in place in order to have this happen, to manage that

data and why the need for this gap to be addressed.

Under the Health Care Cost Recovery Act…. We’ve seen examples, of

course, and concerns around the continued function of this government as

it props up ICBC, with the continued rise of premiums and an inability

for British Columbians, including young British Columbians, to purchase

insurance for vehicles that they have just bought to go to school or to

go to work.

[11:25 a.m.]

There are amendments in this miscellaneous statutes bill that

raise concern around whether this government is attempting further to

ensure that the playing field between ICBC and any other insurance

company that might provide auto insurance in this province, including

optional insurance coverage, is being made to be an un-level playing

field…. On the read of the bill, as the Attorney General just indicated,

if the desire is to maximize recovery of health care costs…. Is it that,

or is it to ensure and put another roadblock in front of insurance

companies that want to provide insurance to British Columbians in this

province?

Under this arrangement, under the Health Care Costs Recovery Act,

ICBC is under a separate agreement with government,

whereas any other

insurance provider that is not covered under that agreement needs to

provide for those health care costs on a recovery basis under this bill.

We’ll be looking at that in committee stage as to whether that provides

and puts up another block or barrier to other insurance companies coming

forward.

There is also an amendment in this bill to the Assessment Act,

under

part 6. It is another good step forward in promoting the use of

clean energy in this province, ensuring that with solar power, in this

case, their plant and their assets are potentially taxed, from an

assessment point of view, at a lower rate. That is something that is

good for this province to consider for its future, in terms of its

energy security and renewable power.

Again, with what has happened since the last spring sitting of

this House, there’s been a continued press and a need for this

government to consider other aspects regarding the Assessment Act, and

that includes the consideration by that joint task force, including with

the city of Vancouver, for split zoning.

Mr. Speaker, I ask this House: why is it that this government has

not considered, on an expedited basis with the Minister of Municipal

Affairs and Housing, that proposal which was supported by the Vancouver

city council to create a property subclass for unused airspace above

small businesses? This would allow that subclass to be taxed at a lower

rate than the existing businesses and keep costs lower for owners and

operators of the local businesses that play such vital roles in our

communities.

In my own riding of Vancouver-Langara, there are many examples of

businesses that are fighting to stay afloat and many others that have

been forced to relocate to areas where property taxes are lower,

resulting in the loss of valuable parts of our community. Implementing

the split-zoning proposal by amendments would lower property taxes

dramatically, enough to make a real difference to those who are

challenged with making ends meet, and we would revitalize neighbourhoods

that have suffered the loss of local shops, restaurants and other

businesses to financial pressures.

It is clear that such a change will be welcomed by local

businesses and communities. So it would be important to see this

government move forward to the necessary changes to enable this to

occur.

Lastly, I will say, to

part 9 under this bill, changes to the

Motor Vehicle Act include further ability by this government to regulate

motorized personal mobility devices. Of course, with the growth of the

use of e-scooters and other similar devices on our city streets and bike

lanes, we need to ensure the safety of the public, to work with

municipalities to have the right regulations in place for pedestrians

and others who are on our bike lanes and our city streets.

I welcome this particular amendment under this bill and also see

the need for the necessary updating and modernizing of the use of

terminology around the definition of “pedestrian” and the new language,

which is more appropriate, around person-centred mobility, including for

those in wheelchairs and other persons with disabilities.

As I mentioned, we’ll be looking forward to discussing in detail

many aspects of this bill in committee stage. I look forward to joining

other colleagues of mine to do so, as there are many questions, as I

mentioned, including the ones that I have outlined in my comments

here.

[11:30 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: I’d like to recognize the territories of the

Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking peoples of

the Songhees and the Esquimalt First Nations where we meet here every

day in this Legislature.

I’d also like to introduce a friend that’s in the gallery. I know

this is a little unusual, but I just happened to notice her. Amanda

McDonald is from Castlegar, has just moved to Victoria. She’s here with

a friend from Victoria. Everybody knows her as Mme. McDonald because she

used to teach French immersion to many, many kids in the Castlegar

school district for a number of years, including a lot of my relatives,

and they love her. It was great to see her in the gallery

today.

Welcome.

I just have to tell you, Mr. Speaker, how happy I am to be here

for a fall session and how great it is to be able to have the fall

session. It’s our third fall session since we became government. It is

an unusual thing, because this is….

Interjection.

Hon. K. Conroy: I know, this is somewhat new, because when I was in opposition, we

rarely had a fall session. In fact, I think we might have had one or two

— one. One in 16 years. In 16 years, we had one fall session. Maybe I

might be….

The member for Vancouver-Langara is relatively new to the

Legislature, so you know, fall sessions are new to him. I think he would

appreciate that we actually have a fall session. It’s great to be here

and to be able to speak in the chamber and to have a number of weeks to

deal with very important legislation, including this bill, Bill 35, the

Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act.

This bill does contain some minor amendments to the Child, Family

and Community Service Act. These proposed amendments — they clarify the

intention that Indigenous communities have the ability to plan for their

children and youth in care and are able to deliver a broad range of

supports and services to their children and families, as well as to the

children who identify as non-Indigenous or members of other nations.

These proposed changes are in response to feedback that was received

from Indigenous communities following the implementation of previous

amendments to the act, to Bill 26.

Now, Bill 26 was the first bill I introduced as Minister of

Children and Family to give Indigenous communities greater involvement

in child welfare decisions. These changes are helping Indigenous

children out of care, safe in their home communities and connected to

their cultures, and they speak to the mandate letter given to me by the

Premier. This letter was very clear: things need to change in the child

welfare system for Indigenous peoples. We all know that that system has

failed them. We know it needs to change, and we have been acting on

that.

Bill 26, introduced in spring 2018, was brought into force in

April. It was incredibly important for me to introduce that bill, my

first bill, for a number of reasons.

For years now, Indigenous communities and leaders have demanded

urgent changes to keep Indigenous children out of care. One of the sad

realities of our colonial history is that more than half of the children

in government care are Indigenous. It’s a legacy of colonialism that

must change, and Bill 26 helped to start that change. The amendments in

this Miscellaneous Statutes Act, Bill 35, continue the

change.

Shortly after taking on the role as the Minister of Children and

Families, the leaders of the September 2017 First Nations Leaders

Gathering told me that I needed to make changes now, in order to ensure

that our social workers do the work they needed to do. This message was

again driven home to me at the emergency meeting on Indigenous child

welfare called by the federal government in January 2018.

Reducing the overrepresentation of Indigenous children in the

child welfare system by working with Indigenous communities is a

priority for our government, as we move towards meaningful and lasting

reconciliation. Bill 26 gave us practical, meaningful ways to do just

that. Our government believes that Indigenous children connected to

their community and culture are Indigenous children growing up in a

safe, healthy and loving environment.

The changes to the Child, Family and Community Service Act…. It

gave Indigenous communities greater involvement in child welfare

decisions to help keep their children out of care, safe in their home

communities and connected to their cultures. The message was further

strengthened in speci­fic recommendations in Grand Chief Ed John’s

report. His report was developed after extensive consultation with First

Nations and Indigenous peoples and called for changes to the legislation

that commits government to work more collaboratively with Indigenous

communities, right at the beginning of a child protection

concern.

While we’ve reduced the number of Indigenous children in care by

almost 100 in our first year by focusing on prevention and supporting

families in communities, we needed to do more.

[11:35 a.m.]

For that, we needed to change the legislation. We listened to what

communities were telling us, and we reviewed Grand Chief Ed John’s

report to inform us of what aspects of the legislation we needed to

change urgently, in order to reduce the number of Indigenous children

coming into care. We also looked to what the United Nations declaration

on the rights of Indigenous peoples and the Truth and Reconciliation

calls to action tell us about the best interests of Indigenous children

and their entitlement to connection with family and

community.

I knew we were heading in the right direction when I learned that

because of Bill 26…. Two children from the Interior were returned to

their community because of the withdrawal provisions. They were able to

stay in their community with their extended family, learning their

culture. Now, some people might say to me: “Well, that’s just two kids.”

But to those two kids, it meant an incredible difference in their lives,

the lives of their family and the lives of their community.

And the numbers have grown. Fewer Indigenous kids have come into

care, with the tabling of Bill 26. The withdrawal provisions came into

effect a year ago and are helping keep kids out of care. The changes

give social workers the ability to withdraw from court proceedings when

there are agreements between the parents and an Indigenous community

that will keep a child safe.

The proposed changes in this miscellaneous statutes bill are in

response to feedback received from Indigenous communities during

consultations that continued on the implementation of Bill 26. It became

really clear that some of the wording in the act was too narrow to fully

make the changes we were intending and that Indigenous communities had

been asking for. The original wording in the act allowed Indigenous

communities to enter into an agreement with the ministry to plan for the

needs of children in continuing care only. This has been amended to

include children in care under any legal status. These proposed

amendments respond to these concerns that we’ve heard.

Amending legislation is one way we’re acting on our commitment to

help Indigenous children remain safely in their families, with their

family’s communities and connected to their culture. We’re working in

partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Métis partners to reduce the

number of Indigenous children and youth coming into government

care.

Through the Tripartite First Nations Children and Families Working

Group, we’ve been working with the First Nations Leadership Council and

welfare system, including governance and jurisdiction.

Additionally, we have committed to ensure the new federal

Indigenous child welfare legislation aligns with the work we are doing

in B.C. We’ve also started meeting quarterly with the First Nations

Leadership Council executive — an important opportunity to hear from the

leadership what’s working and what’s not.

Our work includes partnering with individual First Nations and the

federal government to sign agreements that will ultimately see the

nations exercise their jurisdiction over child and families themselves.

We’ve entered into separate agreements with the Cowichan Tribes, the

Wet’suwet’en Nation and the Secwépemc Nation. Every time I meet with

different nations, I’m struck by their commitment to their children —

their belief that what happened in the past can’t be forgotten but that

we must ensure that children are raised in healthy and happy

communities.

At the Wet’suwet’en gathering, at the ceremony, we had a huge

feast to celebrate the signing of this agreement. Before the ceremony, I

met with the Hereditary Chief and Elders who talked about their past and

why this agreement was so important to them and why their children

needed to be raised in their community learning their

culture.

The young children from the school danced, and they sang for us in

their language. I could see the pride and happiness on the faces of the

Elders and Chiefs as they listened to the children sing in their

language — something that one Elder said to me she never got a chance to

do as a child. Whenever I get frustrated that things don’t always move

quickly enough, I’m reminded of those Elders and how happy they are that

these changes are happening in their lifetime, and it inspires me to

work harder.

In June 2018, I signed a joint commitment with Métis Nation B.C.

to work toward their authority over child welfare. We signed it in

Kamloops at the Lii Michif Otipemisiwak, the Métis family and children

services organization. I’ll never forget when I was told that of all the

kids they provided supports to, none had to come into care, because they

had been able to keep kids with their families. They also said none were

adopted, because again, they were able to keep kids with extended

families.

Another thing I learned: adoption doesn’t always work for

everyone, especially Indigenous kids. We know children do better when

they live and are connected to their families, their communities and

their cultures. We want to support families to stay together. One way we

are doing that is by offering more financial assistance through the

extended family program. We have nearly doubled the monthly rate paid to

family members caring for young family members under the

program.

[11:40 a.m.]

This is a long-standing practice with Indigenous communities to

help keep kids connected to their families. Now a granny caring for her

grandchildren is receiving the same amount of monthly financial

assistance as a foster parent.

Last week I had the honour of kicking off Foster Family Month at a

dinner for foster parents from lower Vancouver Island. I got to meet all

the foster parents there who were being honoured for the incredible work

they do each and every day.

Parenting can be hard. I think any of us in this room would be

stretching the truth a little bit if we all said that parenting was a

breeze and we’d never had any trouble or things that didn’t quite go

right with our kids, because I’m sure we all have had those issues. I’m

sure we all had. I’m the first to say I did.

Interjections.

Hon. K. Conroy: Maybe not you, Minister of Health.

When we are raising kids who have had a difficult start to begin

with, that makes it even tougher.

At the dinner, I met some couples who are grandparents raising

their grandchildren. All of them spoke about how incredibly helpful the

MCFD staff have been, but one grandmother in particular got quite choked

up when she talked about the support and the differences the extra funds

have made in their lives. No one expects to retire and then suddenly be

raising your grandchildren. But none of them would have changed what had

happened other than to have had their grandchildren stay with their

child — their own son or daughter.

Not only are we better supporting those who care for their

relatives, but we are better supporting expectant parents to help keep

families safe and newborns together. We’ve also ended the practice of

birth alerts. Health care providers and social workers will no longer

share personal information about expectant parents without their

consent. Instead we are providing voluntary early supports and

preventive services to help them plan and safely care for their

babies.

This change to practice allows for a more trusting, collaborative

relationship with service providers right from the beginning. It

empowers women, their families and their communities to work together to

care for the children.

This change was welcomed by B.C.’s independent Representative for

Children and Youth, and professors and leaders across the country are

calling on other jurisdictions to follow our lead. Mary Malebranche,

clinical lecturer at the University of Calgary, has said all provinces

and territories should promptly end birth alerts. Additionally, Cora

Morgan of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs has said our province is

leading the way and hopes our actions will start a trend.

We are working with Indigenous peoples and local communities to

put the practices of the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous

peoples into action. Together we are making progress to build a more

prosperous future through agreements with First Nations, agreements that

support economic development that’s making a difference on the ground to

everyone. We’re creating a predictable path forward for everyone that

means good jobs and opportunities while protecting our environment.

Meaningful reconciliation takes time, but we’re committed to getting

there with a balanced approach and a real plan.

And we do have a plan. We have a plan that…. We’re working to

provide affordable, quality child care for all families that need it and

want it, including Indigenous families. We are working closely with

Indigenous communities to understand how our child care plan can better

support their families.

We’re investing $3.6 million to support 11 early learning and

child care planning and navigator positions. We’re investing $30 million

for our early learning and child care agreement with the government of

Canada to create and expand Aboriginal Head Start programs in more than

30 communities across the province. In addition to this investment,

Indigenous governments are eligible for up to $3 million through the

childcare B.C. new spaces fund to create new licensed child care spaces

in their communities, with Indigenous non-profit organizations eligible

to up to $1.5 million.

I have to tell you that when I was in Grand Forks recently with

the COINS society, where we announced the expansion of Aboriginal Head

Start in the Kootenays…. We are actually going to have one in Grand

Forks. The excitement and happiness, especially of the elders that were

at the ceremony to announce the opening of this Aboriginal Head Start

centre….

I also saw it in Prince George, where I was actually at an

Aboriginal Head Start centre that has been built, that has been working

for a number of years and that is going to expand their program. The

fact that the kids were learning their language…. Little three, four and

five-year-olds did a demonstration for us on what they had learned in

the program. It made me realize that we are on the right track here and

that we are doing the right things.

We still know that we need to do better for Indigenous children

and families. We are helping to increase the rate of family preservation

for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous families.

[11:45 a.m.]

The number of Indigenous children and youth in care is starting to

go down, but there is still an overrepresentation of Indigenous kids in

care in B.C. It’s unacceptable, and we are working to change this. I

know the amendments in Bill 35 will help that.

A change in child welfare will take concerted efforts and

meaningful collaborations by all levels of government. It’ll take some

time, but we are committed to this work to ensure that children or youth

are living in strong, healthy families where they are connected to their

cultures and tradition.

The amendments that are part of this bill, Bill 35, the

Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, will do just that by clarifying

the intention that Indigenous communities have the ability to plan for

all their children and youth in care and are able to deliver a broad

range of supports and services to their children and families, as well

as to children who identify as non-Indigenous or members of other

nations who live in their community to get the supports they need in

their community.

I would just be remiss if I didn’t comment on a few…. I know all

of us, as ministers, are getting up to talk about how the amendments in

Bill 35 affect our ministry. I just have to say there’s a…. I do want to

just acknowledge the changes that the Minister of Social Development and

Poverty Reduction is bringing in, because they are amazing in so many

ways. Kudos.

I have to say that when I was on the other side of the bench, in

opposition…. I was the Seniors critic. For many years, I would meet with

senior women who talked about how they struggled to make ends meet. And

when we would go to food banks, the food banks would tell us that the

largest-growing sector of people accessing food banks in the province

were senior women who just couldn’t afford to make ends meet.

By improving the financial security of low-income seniors, by

taking away the punitive action of not having them apply early for

Canada Pension — to not have to apply until they’re 65 — is a step in

the right direction. It’s a step to ensure that we can get those numbers

of senior women who do live in poverty down, so they don’t live in

poverty. It’s something that women, once they reach over the age of 65,

shouldn’t have to face. Kudos to the Minister of Social Development and

Poverty Reduction for ensuring that that is part of the amendments of

Bill 35.

The other one is protecting vulnerable youth by eliminating the

two-year independence rule as a barrier to receiving income assistance.

We are talking to youth. We are changing the way we look at agreements

with young adults as they transition out of care into adulthood, and we

are looking at ways that we can ensure that we can provide supports to

young adults.

We have made some incredible changes. We’ve increased the amount

that they can apply for. We’ve extended it to a year. I talk to youth

who, when they didn’t have the AYA program for a whole year, were

homeless for four months of the year while they weren’t going to school.

We’ve made sure that we’re looking at the way we provide those supports

so we can provide more supports to youth aging out of care.

This is another way of helping youth that are not…. You cannot

expect youth to be independent the minute they turn 19. This is

eliminating a barrier that will help youth. I know that working

together, we can carry on ensuring that youth aging into adulthood out

of care can get the supports they need, through this amendment but also

through the work that we are doing with the agreements with young adults

in the ministry.

I just want to recognize those amendments that the minister is

bringing in because they so affect me — on a personal level, from work

that I did in the past, but also as it affects our ministry.

With that, I thank you for the opportunity to speak to Bill 35,

and I’ll sit.

N. Letnick: Thank you to the members present and those watching on TV

worldwide for this fall session. Absolutely.

I’ll be speaking about Bill 35, intituled Miscellaneous Statutes

Amendment Act (No. 2), 2019. I won’t be too long. I don’t want to keep

people from their lunch plans, lunch meetings.

Two particular sections I want to speak on. None of them are

health-related, to the Health Minister, so he can go about his

business.

[11:50 a.m.]

I do have one piece, which is the speculation and vacancy tax

that’s being amended. The other one is the Motor Vehicle Act. I’m glad

to see that the Minister of Transportation actually looks like she’s

following me. So after lunch, I’ll get to hear, maybe, some of the

answers to these questions.

First, on the spec tax…. I’ll be very simple, very blunt on this.

It’s being proposed to be amended. I would actually propose it be

abolished. It’s done a very bad job for the Okanagan — Kelowna, in

particular, and West Kelowna — and the places around British Columbia

where it has been instituted. It’s not a tax on speculation; it’s a tax

on wealth. It should be removed so we can get back to the business of

creating wealth for all British Columbians by ensuring that we have a

robust industry and robust economies.

On the Motor Vehicle Act, I would say that of all the pieces in

this miscellaneous bill, one of the pieces people will actually see the

most and interact with the most, I would think, would be this particular

change. Even though it’s in part of a miscellaneous statutes act, I

would ask the Minister of Transportation to actually get her own bill

and really expose this to the public, because when this passes — and I

hope it does — it’s going to have a very different feel for all British

Columbians, motorists and pedestrians, around the province.

I go back…. A couple of years ago I was travelling abroad, and I

saw this thing. A child was on this beast that I’d never seen before in

my life. Basically, it was a unicycle with a battery and an engine, and

it was called an Airwheel. He just zoomed past me, and I was going:

“Whoa, isn’t that great? I’ve got to get one of those so that I can go

through my streets and areas of my community without having to incur

greenhouse gases. I can go and commute to work without having a negative

impact on the environment.”

Lo and behold, I come back to home, and I find out that they’re

actually not legal on roadways in British Columbia. So there went that

dream. But as you know, you don’t quit after the first no, you keep

trying and trying. That’s exactly what people around British Columbia

have been doing together to really get to the 21st century when it comes

to pedestrian uses on the roads and also on the sidewalks.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Now, Mr. Speaker, I’ve seen that you’ve taken your chair, so I’m

going to go on longer than the time. Just give me a nod when you want me

to make any motions.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you.

N. Letnick: Okay, so what are we doing here? Through this amendment, we’re

actually empowering the government, through regulation, to define what

can and what cannot be used on our roadways. Now, when I say roadways or

highways in British Columbia, I mean streets in our cities, so that, for

instance, if you want to use an e-powered scooter or an Airwheel or

something else — I’ve seen hoverboards that have motors in them as well,

and other things — you could, if and when this passes and if and when

the regulations pass, be on the bike path, for example, and use these

modes of transportation.

What I’ve also seen in the legislation — and I’m hoping the

minister can clear this up during her speech — is that it looks like

there’s also going to be an opportunity to use the same vehicles,

e-vehicles, on sidewalks. If that’s the case, then there might be some

safety concerns. There might be some really tough regulations as to

speed limits, because obviously, someone choosing to be on their

e-vehicle on a roadway is one thing. They’re the ones taking the risk,

because they’re now competing with cars. But by putting them on the

sidewalks, now you’re making the pedestrian take the risks. I think we

need to have some discussion on that. Maybe I misread the statute and

the minister would be happy to correct my limited

interpretation of

that.

Now, the city of Kelowna — I have to really thank Coun. Ryan Donn

on this; he’s been a champion for these kinds of vehicles in the city of

Kelowna — completed a pilot this past summer with the scooters, the

e-scooters. They had over 25,000 trips in three months — really a great

testimony to the city of Kelowna and what they were after.

I just have some of the words that they used to get the system up

and running. They said: “Shared low-speed electric stand-up scooters are

a new type of service that has provided safe, sustainable and low-cost

‘last-kilometre’ transportation to tens of millions of riders across

North America. In doing so, they have reduced carbon emissions and

relieved congestion.”

[11:55 a.m.]

Absolutely right. If we are going to reduce our greenhouse gases,

we need to look at ways that, individually, we can help, and

collectively. I know people who have looked at buying local as a way of

doing that, people who have put more insulation in their homes, people

who walk and bike and use transit for transportation. Now, of course, in

addition to the electric vehicles that we’re all supporting, we now

have, potentially, these low-speed e-vehicles.

I would, again, continue to ask the minister to move forward. She

did a public consultation on this. She heard back, government heard

back, that this is something we should move forward with — obviously,

keeping public safety in mind. But the day has come when we will see, I

hope, these e-vehicles, with due regulations and safety measures,

brought in to British Columbia streets.

I look forward, during committee stage, if it’s not clarified

during second reading, to asking further questions as to how we make

sure that the balance is there so we have these vehicles that people can

use in a safe manner, in particular on our roadways, and make sure that

we continue to improve our transportation options throughout British

Columbia that reduce greenhouse gases.

N. Letnick moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. A. Dix: I move that the House do now adjourn and look forward to seeing

everyone at 1:30.

Hon. A. Dix moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:56 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2019: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada