British Columbia Hansard — Wednesday, March 4, 2015

20150304pm-Hansard-v21n1

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth Session, 40th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) THE HONOURABLE LINDA REID, SPEAKER ISSN 0709- 1281 (Print) ISSN 1499-2175 (Online) Wednesday, March 4, 2015 Aft ernoon Sitting Volume 21, Number 1

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Judith Guichon, OBC Fourth Session, 40th Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Linda Reid EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council .............................................................................................................. Hon. Christy Clark Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural Gas Development and Minister Responsible for Housing ......................Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ......................................................................................................... Hon. John Rustad Minister of Advanced Education ............................................................................................................................... Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Minister of Agriculture ........................................................................................................................................................ Hon.

Norm Letnick Minister of Children and Family Development ....................................................................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development ........................................................................................... Hon. Coralee Oakes Minister of Education ..................................................................................................................................................... Hon.

Peter Fassbender Minister of Energy and Mines and Minister Responsible for Core Review .....................................................................Hon. Bill Bennett Minister of Environment ..........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Minister of Finance .................................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations......................................................................................Hon. Steve Th omson Minister of Health ............................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Minister of International Trade and Minister Responsible for Asia Pacifi c Strategy and Multiculturalism ..................Hon.

Teresa Wat Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour ...................................................Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of State for Tourism and Small Business ....................................................................................................Hon. Naomi Y amamoto Minister of Justice ...............................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation..............................................................................................Hon. Michelle Stilwell Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services ................................................................................................ Hon. Amrik Virk Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................Hon.

Todd Stone LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Offi cial Opposition ...................................................................................................................................................John Horgan Deputy Speaker .............................................................................................................................................................................Douglas Horne Assistant Deputy Speaker ...............................................................................................................................................................

Raj Chouhan Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ............................................................................................................................................ Pat Pimm Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ................................................................................................................................................... Craig James Deputy Clerk and Clerk of Committees .................................................................................................................................

Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sessional Law Clerk ...................................................................................................................................................Roderick MacArthur, QC Sergeant-at-Arms ................................................................................................................................................................................. Gary Lenz

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Anton, Hon. Suzanne (BC Liberal) .............................. Vancouver-Fraserview Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal).....................................................................Penticton Austin, Robin (NDP) ................................................................................ Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP) ....................................................................Surrey-Newton Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) ............................................... Cariboo-Chilcotin Bennett, Hon.

Bill (BC Liberal) ...................................................Kootenay East Bernier, Mike (BC Liberal) ................................................... Peace River South Bing, Dr. Doug (BC Liberal) ................................ Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Bond, Hon. Shirley (BC Liberal) ........................... Prince George–Valemount Cadieux, Hon. Stephanie (BC Liberal) ................................Surrey-Cloverdale Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) .................................Vancouver–West End Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................

Burnaby-Edmonds Clark, Hon. Christy (BC Liberal) ........................................ Westside-Kelowna Coleman, Hon. Rich (BC Liberal) ...........................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .............................................................. Kootenay West Corrigan, Kathy (NDP) ..................................................... Burnaby–Deer Lake Dalton, Marc (Ind.) ......................................................... Maple Ridge–Mission Darcy, Judy (NDP) ..................................................................New Westminster de Jong, Hon.

Michael, QC (BC Liberal) .............................. Abbotsford West Dix, Adrian (NDP)............................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Donaldson, Doug (NDP) ......................................................................... Stikine Eby, David (NDP) ..........................................................Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable (NDP) ................................................... Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ............................................................ Port Coquitlam Fassbender, Hon.

Peter (BC Liberal) ................................... Surrey-Fleetwood Fleming, Rob (NDP) .......................................................... Victoria–Swan Lake Foster, Eric (BC Liberal) .......................................................Vernon-Monashee Fraser, Scott (NDP) ............................................................Alberni–Pacifi c Rim Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) ............................................. Abbotsford-Mission Hamilton, Wm.

Scott (BC Liberal) .................................................Delta North Hammell, Sue (NDP) .................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Heyman, George (NDP) .................................................... Vancouver-Fairview Hogg, Gordon (BC Liberal) ............................................... Surrey–White Rock Holman, Gary (NDP) .......................................Saanich North and the Islands Horgan, John (NDP) .......................................................................

Juan de Fuca Horne, Douglas (BC Liberal) ..............................Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ....................................................Surrey-Panorama Huntington, Vicki (Ind.) ..................................................................Delta South James, Carole (NDP) .........................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................Esquimalt–Royal Roads Krog, Leonard Eugene (NDP) .............................................................

Nanaimo Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal) ........................................................................ Shuswap Lake, Hon. Dr. Terry (BC Liberal) ....................Kamloops–North Th ompson Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) .........................................Boundary-Similkameen Lee, Richard T. (BC Liberal) ......................................................Burnaby North Letnick, Hon.

Norm (BC Liberal) ..............................Kelowna–Lake Country Macdonald, Norm (NDP) ....................................Columbia River–Revelstoke McRae, Don (BC Liberal) ............................................................ Comox Valley Martin, John (BC Liberal) ..................................................................Chilliwack Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ..................................... Prince George–Mackenzie Mungall, Michelle (NDP) ..........................................................Nelson-Creston Oakes, Hon.

Coralee (BC Liberal) .............................................Cariboo North Pimm, Pat (BC Liberal) .........................................................Peace River North Plecas, Dr. Darryl (BC Liberal) .............................................Abbotsford South Polak, Hon. Mary (BC Liberal) .............................................................. Langley Popham, Lana (NDP) ...................................................................Saanich South Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ................................................................ Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon.

Linda (BC Liberal) ..................................................Richmond East Reimer, Linda (BC Liberal) ........................................ Port Moody–Coquitlam Rice, Jennifer (NDP) ........................................................................North Coast Robinson, Selina (NDP) .............................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Routley, Bill (NDP) .................................................................. Cowichan Valley Routley, Doug (NDP) ............................................Nanaimo–North Cowichan Rustad, Hon.

John (BC Liberal) ................................................ Nechako Lakes Shin, Jane Jae Kyung (NDP) ...............................................Burnaby-Lougheed Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ................................... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Shane (NDP) ..................................................... Vancouver-Hastings Stilwell, Hon. Michelle (BC Liberal)............................... Parksville-Qualicum Stilwell, Dr. Moira (BC Liberal) ........................................ Vancouver-Langara Stone, Hon. Todd (BC Liberal) .........................

Kamloops–South Th ompson Sturdy, Jordan (BC Liberal) ..................................West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Sullivan, Sam (BC Liberal) ...........................................Vancouver–False Creek Sultan, Ralph (BC Liberal) ..................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Tegart, Jackie (BC Liberal) ............................................................Fraser-Nicola Th omson, Hon. Steve (BC Liberal) .......................................Kelowna-Mission Th ornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ..........................

North Vancouver–Seymour Th roness, Laurie (BC Liberal).................................................Chilliwack-Hope Trevena, Claire (NDP) .................................................................... North Island Virk, Hon. Amrik (BC Liberal) ............................................. Surrey-Tynehead Wat, Hon. Teresa (BC Liberal) .............................................. Richmond Centre Weaver, Dr. Andrew (Ind.) .......................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Wilkinson, Hon. Andrew (BC Liberal) ........................ Vancouver-Quilchena Y amamoto, Hon.

Naomi (BC Liberal) ................ North Vancouver–Lonsdale Y ap, John (BC Liberal) ......................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission ......................................................................Simon Gibson Abbotsford South ..................................................................... Dr. Darryl Plecas Abbotsford West ...................................................... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Alberni–Pacifi c Rim ..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Boundary-Similkameen ................................................................ Linda Larson Burnaby–Deer Lake ................................................................... Kathy Corrigan Burnaby-Edmonds ..........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Lougheed .............................................................Jane Jae Kyung Shin Burnaby North .............................................................................. Richard T.

Lee Cariboo-Chilcotin ........................................................................Donna Barnett Cariboo North .................................................................... Hon. Coralee Oakes Chilliwack ......................................................................................... John Martin Chilliwack-Hope ....................................................................... Laurie Th roness Columbia River–Revelstoke ..................................................

Norm Macdonald Comox Valley.....................................................................................Don McRae Coquitlam–Burke Mountain .....................................................Douglas Horne Coquitlam-Maillardville........................................................... Selina Robinson Cowichan Valley ................................................................................ Bill Routley Delta North .........................................................................Wm.

Scott Hamilton Delta South...............................................................................Vicki Huntington Esquimalt–Royal Roads .....................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ...................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Fraser-Nicola.................................................................................... Jackie Tegart Juan de Fuca .....................................................................................John Horgan Kamloops–North Th ompson ............................................ Hon. Dr.

Terry Lake Kamloops–South Th ompson ..................................................Hon. Todd Stone Kelowna–Lake Country ..................................................... Hon. Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission .............................................................. Hon. Steve Th omson Kootenay East .......................................................................... Hon. Bill Bennett Kootenay West ............................................................................ Katrine Conroy Langley.......................................................................................Hon.

Mary Polak Maple Ridge–Mission ..................................................................... Marc Dalton Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ........................................................ Dr. Doug Bing Nanaimo ........................................................................... Leonard Eugene Krog Nanaimo–North Cowichan ......................................................... Doug Routley Nechako Lakes ........................................................................ Hon.

John Rustad Nelson-Creston ........................................................................Michelle Mungall New Westminster ............................................................................... Judy Darcy North Coast......................................................................................Jennifer Rice North Island .................................................................................. Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale ........................................Hon.

Naomi Y amamoto North Vancouver–Seymour ..................................................Jane Th ornthwaite Oak Bay–Gordon Head ...................................................... Dr. Andrew Weaver Parksville-Qualicum .......................................................Hon. Michelle Stilwell Peace River North ................................................................................ Pat Pimm Peace River South ............................................................................Mike Bernier Penticton............................................................................................

Dan Ashton Port Coquitlam ..........................................................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Coquitlam ................................................................Linda Reimer Powell River–Sunshine Coast ................................................. Nicholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie ............................................................. Mike Morris Prince George–Valemount ................................................... Hon. Shirley Bond Richmond Centre ......................................................................Hon.

Teresa Wat Richmond East ..........................................................................Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ..............................................................................John Y ap Saanich North and the Islands .................................................... Gary Holman Saanich South ................................................................................

Lana Popham Shuswap ................................................................................................Greg Kyllo Skeena .............................................................................................. Robin Austin Stikine ....................................................................................... Doug Donaldson Surrey-Cloverdale ....................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Fleetwood ........................................................... Hon.

Peter Fassbender Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton ................................................................................. Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ........................................................................... Marvin Hunt Surrey-Tynehead ......................................................................Hon. Amrik Virk Surrey-Whalley..............................................................................

Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ....................................................................... Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Fairview ..................................................................George Heyman Vancouver–False Creek ................................................................... Sam Sullivan Vancouver-Fraserview ......................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Vancouver-Hastings ....................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington .................................................................Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara .................................................................Dr. Moira Stilwell Vancouver–Mount Pleasant .........................................

Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey .........................................................................David Eby Vancouver-Quilchena ................................................ Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Vancouver–West End ...............................................

Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee ...............................................................................Eric Foster Victoria–Beacon Hill .......................................................................Carole James Victoria–Swan Lake.........................................................................Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano ............................................................. Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ..........................................................Jordan Sturdy Westside-Kelowna ................................................................

Hon. Christy Clark Party Standings: BC Liberal 48; New Democratic 34; Independent 3

CONTENTS Wednesday, March 4, 2015 Aft ernoon Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members ..................................................................................................................................................... 6363 Statements (Standing Order 25B) ......................................................................................................................................... 6364 Burnaby Heights neighbourhood and merchants association R. Lee Eye health initiative for children J. Darcy Blenz Café social enterprise at HOpe Centre R.

Sultan Nepal and Nepalese community in B.C. S. Hammell Politics and decision-making in policy debates G. Hogg Mustard Seed Food Bank services and initiatives A. Weaver Oral Questions ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6366 Participation of WorkSafe employees in coroner’s inquest into Lakeland Mills explosion J. Horgan Hon. S. Anton Funding for workers and families participating in coroner’s inquest into Lakeland Mills explosion S. Simpson Hon. S.

Anton Laundry services at Interior Health Authority facilities J. Rice Hon. T. Lake M. Mungall Child placement issues and Children and Family Development Ministry response to court order D. Donaldson Hon. S. Cadieux N. Simons Adult basic education K. Corrigan Hon. A. Wilkinson Attendance of government staff at meetings on bus service on Highway 16 M. Karagianis Hon. T.

Stone Orders of the Day Committee of the Whole House ............................................................................................................................................ 6371 Bill 4 — Chartered Professional Accountants Act (continued) K. Corrigan Hon. A.

Wilkinson Reporting of Bills ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6395 Bill 4 — Chartered Professional Accountants Act Th ird Reading of Bills ......................................................................................................... .................................................... 6395 Bill 4 — Chartered Professional Accountants Act

Second Reading of Bills .......................................................................................................................................................... 6395 Bill 8 — Protected Areas of British Columbia Amendment Act, 2015 Hon. M. Polak S. Chandra Herbert A. Weaver B. Ralston L. Krog G. Holman G. Heyman Hon. M. Polak Committee of the Whole House ............................................................................................................................................ 6403 Bill 3 — Building Act D. Eby Hon. R.

Coleman Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of Supply .............................................................................................................................................................. 6406 Estimates: Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Hon. S. Th omson H. Bains B. Routley

WEDNESDAY , MARCH 4, 2015 Th e House met at 1:34 p.m. [Madame Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Prayers. [1335] Introductions by Members J. Kwan: Today I have the distinct pleasure of introdu- cing someone whom I hold in high regard and someone that I’m proud to call a dear friend. Th is individual is vis- iting us today. His name is Leo Gerard. He is the inter- national president of the United Steelworkers. I’ve got to say this.

His heart, I have to say, is larger than life itself, as he dedicates every single waking mo- ment of his time to advance the rights of workers, to ad- vance economic, social and environmental justice for all. Most recently, without fanfare, without much ado, he’s found fi nancial support and additional support for Lorelei Williams, who is a family member of the missing and murdered women, so that she can go to actively par- ticipate and tell the stories from British Columbia around the missing and murdered aboriginal women at the UN commission on the status of women in New Y ork.

Would the House please make welcome Leo Gerard. V . Huntington: I’m pleased today to introduce Dr. Michael Markwick and his class of 20 students from Capilano University’s school of communication. The communication program’s focus is on shaping students as citizen leaders and advancing our democracy. Th ey had the honour this morning of being the very fi rst delegation from Capilano University to be received by Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor. I look forward to meeting with them this aft ernoon to discuss their work, and I ask that the House please make them welcome. E.

Foster: I have three guests in the precinct today. First, my sister-in-law Brenda Foster is visiting from Nova Scotia. With her today are her brother and his wife, Robert and Cynthia Bailey, who live here in the greater Victoria area. Robert and I have been very good friends since the ninth grade. Y ou don’t have to add that up to fi gure out how many years that is. I would like the House to please make them welcome. G. Kyllo: I have two guests in the gallery today — my constituency assistant Holly Cowan, from Salmon Arm, along with her lovely husband, Brian Cowan.

Brian is also my riding association president for Shuswap. I would like the House to please make them feel very welcome. K. Corrigan: I also wanted to, in addition, recognize one of the particular members of the delegation that’s here from Capilano University, the communication stu- dents. Brittany Barnes is one of those communication students, and she is also on the executive of the stu- dent government at Capilano. A particular welcome to Brittany and to all her classmates who are here today. Will you please make them welcome. B.

Routley: It is indeed a pleasure to have the op- portunity to introduce to this House the nominee for Cowichan-Malahat-Langford, the new federal riding in the upcoming election. Alistair McGregor is with us here in this House. Please join me in making him feel welcome. J. Horgan: Following on the introduction from my colleague from Cowichan Valley, I want to say that I was in the precinct with a special guest, and I bumped into a school group from Langley Christian school.

One of the teachers said to me aft erwards: “Y ou know, we’ve spent over four months trying to get in the kids’ minds that there are two levels of government in Canada, and now here comes the Leader of Her Majesty’s Offi cial Opposition and Her Majesty’s Leader of the Official Opposition. ” In the precinct today is the Hon. Thomas Mulcair. He’s in the building and in the House. Would the people of British Columbia please recognize that we have two offi cial opposition leaders in B.C. today — me and the other guy. A.

Weaver: It gives me great pleasure to introduce Rudi Wallace, director of food security and access at the Mustard Seed here in Victoria. [1340] Joining Rudi is Teresa Hartrick, an incredibly talented young woman who I’m so fortunate to have working in my constituency offi ce. Would the House please make them feel warmly wel- comed. Hon. M. Polak: Soon to be joining us in the gallery are the students from Langley Christian School in my riding. Th ere are 39 grade 5 students and eight adults, led ably by Mrs. Linda Boersma. Would the House please make them welcome. R.

Lee: I would like to introduce 54 grade 5s, ten chaperones and Ms. Geetu Parmar of Confederation Park Elementary School of Burnaby, who are touring the Legislature today. I ask that the House do make them very welcome. 6363

British Columbia Debates6364 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 Statements (Standing Order 25B) BURNABY HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOOD AND MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION R. Lee: I would like to share the recent exciting and successful development in my riding, Burnaby North, with all the members of the House today. Th e Burnaby Heights neighbourhood is usually known as the area bounded by Boundary Road, Gamma Avenue, Hastings Street and Burrard Inlet. It has three schools: Gilmore, Rosser and Confederation Park. Today we have the group of Confederation Park Elementary School students vis- iting the House.

Th e Heights has had a street-level community shop- ping area along Hastings Street for over 100 years. With the great work of the Heights Merchants Association in improving the physical attractiveness and business en- vironment of the area, the Heights is now a business improvement area, characterized by the design of three- to four-storey buildings which feature the distinctive cul- ture of the older community.

Th e area consists of more than 350 merchants with a great variety of businesses, from restaurants of diff erent cuisines; fl orists; hair salons; bookstores; fi nancial, legal and medical services; to fashion, furniture stores and pet services. Th e Heights Merchants Association also hosts excit- ing events in the area to attract customers. For example, on February 21 traditional lion dancers perform in the area to celebrate the lunar new year. In April the area will host an event called Crave, which is similar to Dine Out Vancouver, where participating restaurants will off er set menus at discounted prices.

Every year on the fi rst of Saturday of June, when the Heights merchants take their hats off to their customers and community, we have the best festival in Burnaby. With a rich history, diversity and culture and the re- vitalized Heights Neighbourhood Association, the neigh- bourhood has become one of the landmarks of Burnaby North. I encourage all members of the House to visit the area and experience the dynamic colours and strong im- petus in the community. EYE HEALTH INITIATIVE FOR CHILDREN J. Darcy: Y esterday many members of this House at- tended an event hosted by the B.C.

Doctors of Optometry, where we heard what was truly an eye-opening presenta- tion about the importance of eye health for our children. When children don’t see properly, it aff ects their ability to learn. It aff ects their physical and their mental health. It aff ects their ability to succeed. Th at’s because 80 per- cent of learning is through the eyes. One in four children have a vision problem that aff ects learning, and 60 per- cent of children with learning disabilities have an under- lying vision problem. Th ose numbers tell a powerful human story.

Th at’s why the optometrists of B.C. stepped up to the plate in a very big way last year with a program called Eye See, Eye Learn. I want to both commend them for doing so and also to acknowledge the wonderful work done by these health care professionals in our communities every single day. Optometrists are now partnering with school districts to encourage parents to take their kindergarten children for an eye exam with a local participating eye doctor. If glasses are required, they are provided to these kids at no cost.

Since this program was launched last year, over 1,000 children have been examined, and one in fi ve need- ed correction to their vision. [1345] I’m pleased to say that aft er that meeting last year at the optometrists’ breakfast, Dr. Brenda Horner, a New Westminster optometrist…. I was able to introduce her to our school board chair, Jonina Campbell. Now New Westminster is one of the fi rst districts involved, and New Westminster kids are having their eyes tested.

Th e optometrists of B.C. want to expand this wonder- ful program to all of B.C., and they need government support to do that — to ensure that a program that relies on the goodwill of optometrists and industry donors is sustainable into the future and also, very importantly, to promote the program to all corners of B.C. so that every single child in B.C. has the right to good eye health. BLENZ CAFÉ SOCIAL ENTERPRISE AT HOPE CENTRE R. Sultan: What does the aroma of freshly brewed cof- fee and freshly baked croissants have to do with mental health?

On the North Shore, we say: “Quite a lot. ” Our new HOpe Centre for mental health and addictions is a striking architectural triumph, providing 26 beds for critical care and facilities for outpatient and community care, research and students from UBC medical school. It was funded by Greta and Robert Ho, Dr. Djavad Mowafaghian, gift s from North Shore residents, land do- nated by the city and funding from the province.

In the wonderful foyer, coff ee and croissants are provided by Blenz Coff ee, which provides meaningful employment for people recovering their mental health, including the manager who runs the place. Blenz at HOpe is a social enterprise with a mission. Th e result is great coff ee served by wonderful baristas, employed by a partnership between Blenz, the Canadian Mental Health Association and Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. As reported in the Georgia Straight recently, medical director Dr.

Burgmann said: “Th e thing I love more than anything is that it’s open to the public, and people from the neighbourhood are coming in and grabbing a cup of

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6365 coff ee. Very quickly, it begins to erode the stigma of men- tal illness. ” HOpe Centre’s reputation has grown quickly, and we are very proud. Don’t underestimate the power of coff ee and croissants. NEPAL AND NEPALESE COMMUNITY IN B.C. S. Hammell: I had an opportunity to visit Nepal about a year and a half ago, with the planning and opportunity to connect with the Nepalese community in Surrey. Th e community in B.C. is not large, about 200 people strong, with a large portion living in Surrey.

For a public ser- vice announcement, the main organization is the Nepal Cultural Society of B.C. at bodncsbc@gmail.com. Nepal is an amazing place and could be called as super, natural as B.C. Th e land mass is 147,000 square kilo- metres smaller than ours, but 23.23 percent is protect- ed. It has an incredibly diverse geography and climate, and from a bird’s-eye view, fl ying from Pokhara, from Kathmandu and back, it looked and felt a bit like home: snow-capped high mountains, rivers fl owing through hills and valleys, and then lowlands and plains. Much changed, once on the ground.

I was warned about the roads and the traffi c. Th e population of Nepal is about 27 million, while ours is about 4½ million. Nepal has moved rapidly from an absolute monarchy to a dem- ocracy, and they continue to work on a constitution. Nepal has good bones, one of the few countries in Asia to abolish the death penalty, the fi rst country in Asia to rule in favour of same-sex marriage, a quota to ensure that women are elected to their political institutions, and although they haven’t got their constitution yet, patience is clearly the option favoured in building a strong and progressive democracy.

Nepal has a great future. Congratulations to the people from that country. POLITICS AND DECISION-MAKING IN POLICY DEBATES G. Hogg: Albert Einstein, at a conference in Princeton, New Jersey, in 1946 was asked: “Why is it that while the mind of man has stretched so far as to discover the struc- ture of the atom, we are unable to devise a political means to keep the atom from destroying us?” [1350] Einstein answered: “Th at is simple, my friend.

It is be- cause politics is much more diffi cult than physics. ” Most of us would agree that the fi eld of physics has made great advances since 1946, and most would also agree that the fi eld of politics, even in this House, has not made quite as many advances. But there is reason for optimism. Research is now telling us that how we think matters more than what we think. Th erefore, policy debates are more about val- ues than facts. Facts play a role in raising the volume of debate, but the values drive the facts and the decisions. How does how we know what we know aff ect how we do what we do?

Well, it seems that on occasion people, even politicians, make poor decisions. We oft en cling to beliefs even in the face of disconfi rming evidence and sometimes even interpret information in a manner that supports already held beliefs. Reasoning is seen by most as a means for improving knowledge and decision-making. However, a great deal of evidence now suggests that, instead, reasoning oft en leads to cognitive distortions and poor decisions. Th e functioning of reasoning tends to be argumentative, and arguers are not aft er the truth but aft er arguments that support their point of view.

It seems that Einstein was right, that politics is more diffi cult than physics. But as Churchill once said: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. ” So with that thought, may we remain ever optimis- tic and positive in our duties. MUSTARD SEED FOOD BANK SERVICES AND INITIATIVES A. Weaver: Today I rise to recognize the Mustard Seed, a non-profi t organization that provides crucial service to address food insecurity in the capital regional district, mainly to children and families.

Approximately 20,000 people, over 6 percent of the CRD population, are mod- erately to severely food-insecure. Since 2010 the number of individuals assisted by the Mustard Seed has increased from 4,000 to 7,000 per month. Th e Mustard Seed has been exploring ways to move away from a traditional food banking model focused primarily on processed, non-perishable food items to one that provides fresh, healthy food, thereby improving health outcomes for food-insecure people.

Th eir vision is to create a three-tiered food access system subsidized through social enterprise with emergency, preventative and retail components, with the latter two components supporting operational costs of the emergency programs. A proposed processing and community kitchen compon- ent would enhance food skills, literacy and provide em- ployment and skills-training opportunities. The Mustard Seed’s exciting vision aligns with the Ministry of Health’s priorities for short-term food relief and longer-term food security.

While currently there is insuffi cient storage space available for both non-prof- its and food retailers to manage the necessary volume to meet the food security needs of our communities, the Mustard Seed is working hard to develop solutions. With the support of the community and government, the Mustard Seed hopes to realize their vision of a food-se- cure region with a transformed, sustainable, non-profi t social enterprise model.

British Columbia Debates6366 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 I want to thank them for their more than 40 years of service in our community, and I commend them on their exciting new vision forward. Madame Speaker: Th e member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan seeks leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members D. Routley: It gives me great pleasure to welcome a group of students from Vancouver Island University, a group of business students who comprise part of my con- stituency and the member for Nanaimo’s constituency. Included in that group is Catherine Lindberg.

Catherine is the daughter of my oldest friend, Gerry Lindberg, who I’ve known from the sandbox at three years old. It’s a stark reminder of age when your three-year-old friend’s daugh- ter is here in her third year of university. Can the House help me welcome these fi ne students from Vancouver Island University. Oral Questions PARTICIPATION OF WORKSAFE EMPLOYEES IN CORONER’S INQUEST INTO LAKELAND MILLS EXPLOSION J. Horgan: Th e Minister of Jobs will be aware that a coroner’s inquest has begun in her community with re- spect to the disaster at the Lakeland mill in Prince George.

WorkSafe B.C. botched the investigation, and as a result, no charges were laid. But despite the failures at WorkSafe B.C., we learned this week that key individuals in deci- sion-making roles at WorkSafe will not be compelled to testify. In fact, WorkSafe lawyers have gone to the lengths of disrupting proceedings and saying to the coroner that they’re not required. [1355] I would think when you’ve had a series of investiga- tions on the watch of the B.C. Liberals over the past 12 to 24 months where no accountability was found and senior individuals were not compelled to testify….

One would think if the Premier really wanted to, as she wrote to the victims’ families: “It’s understandable that you and the families of the other victims have a lot of questions. Y ou deserve answers. Y our entire community deserves answers…. ” If the Premier is going to say that to the people of Prince George, to the victims at Lakeland and to the people of British Columbia, surely she would agree with me that the CEO at WorkSafe and the vice-president of investigations would be on the inventory of witnesses that would be giving testimony in that regard. Does the minister agree with that position? Hon. S.

Anton: Th e coroner is, indeed, holding the inquest into this tragedy, and her goal is to fi nd out what happened so that such a tragedy can be prevented from happening again. Indeed, the families do deserve answers, and that is what the coroner is setting out to get. I must emphasize that this is an independent proceed- ing, and it’s up to the coroner to conduct the proceeding. She has, I am informed, called 50 witnesses who have the best information, she believes, relating to the issues and the circumstances surrounding the deaths.

Th ey have been chosen for their personal knowledge and involve- ment, but there can be additional witnesses called. Th e witness list is not closed, and certainly, other witnesses may be added as time goes on. I must emphasize the two things that I have already said. One is this is an independent proceeding. Second, it’s the job of the coroner and her stated goal to prevent an accident like this from happening again by fi nding out what happened at this tragedy. Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a supplemental. J. Horgan: Well, I do.

It’s with sadness that I say that the writer of answers on the Liberal side of the House has got pretty easy work. Th ey’ve been repeating that re- frain regardless of what the situation is. Th ey did with the health fi rings. Th ey’re now doing it with the tragedy at Lakeland, and I rather suspect they’ll be doing it again with the tragedy at Babine. I know that the member from Prince George is heart- felt in her concern for her community. I know that to be true.

But when the Premier of British Columbia goes to a community and makes a solemn pledge that there will be justice and then denies an independent public inquiry and then denies access to legal representation and then denies that the people that were at the top of the organiz- ation that should have been looking out for the people of Lakeland and the people of Prince George and the people of British Columbia, then there is a massive, massive dis- connect with the reality of all of us and the reality of the people running this operation.

If the Attorney would like to stand again, will she agree with me that the CEO of WorkSafe should be on the in- vitation list to this inquiry? Hon. S. Anton: The coroner is conducting her in- dependent inquiry in Prince George. We should all have confi dence in the work that she is doing. She is deter- mined to fi nd out what happened in that terrible tragedy — to fi nd out the circumstances of the tragedy so that such a thing will not happen again in British Columbia. She has a witness list which she has proposed to call.

It is not a closed list, and it is up to the coroner to decide whether or not there should be additions to that list. Th ere’s no question that in her conduct to date, the

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6367 coroner has shown great interest in hearing from fam- ilies, hearing from people around the issue and, most of all, fi nding out what happened so that this tragedy would not happen again in British Columbia. Madame Speaker: Th e Leader of the Opposition on a further supplemental. J. Horgan: Again, the Attorney is identifi ed in the let- ter from the Premier to the families of victims. In the letter the Premier says that the Attorney General will en- sure that the concerns of the individuals are represented by lawyers from WorkSafe.

Well, at the inquiry this week lawyers from WorkSafe put some of the victims on cross- examination without ever having seen any of the docu- ments that they were asked to comment upon. [1400] How is it possible, Hon. Speaker, through you to the Attorney General, who should have some understanding of these matters…? How can the victims have adequate representation when the very people that the Premier said you would appoint to take care of their interests aren’t even briefi ng them on the material that they’re see- ing in the inquiry? Th at seems, again, to me to be a massive disconnect from reality.

Th e people involved at Lakeland want justice for their families. Th ey want justice for their commun- ities. I would suggest to the Attorney General that she stand with me and those on this side of the House and call to ensure that the WorkSafe offi cials that botched the investigation, the WorkSafe offi cials that are not on the list of witnesses, be put on that list post-haste. Hon. S. Anton: Th e coroner holds an independent offi ce. She holds an independent inquiry.

She has stated her goals many times during the course of leading up to this inquest that it is her determination to fi nd out what happened at Lakeland and to prevent that from happen- ing again, to prevent a tragedy like this from happen- ing again. The coroner, with the advice of her counsel, deter- mined the witness list. It is not a closed list, because her goal, the coroner’s goal, is to fi nd out what happened and to prevent a tragedy like this from happening again in British Columbia. FUNDING FOR WORKERS AND FAMILIES PARTICIPATING IN CORONER’S INQUEST INTO LAKELAND MILLS EXPLOSION S.

Simpson: I attended the fi rst day of the inquest into the deaths of Alan Little and Glen Roche. Aft er the widows of the deceased both made very emotional and dignifi ed presentations, Mr. Brian Primrose, a 30-year employee of Lakeland, spent the rest of the day on the stand — about fi ve hours. Mr. Primrose was an articulate and thoughtful witness about the tragedy at Lakeland. Unfortunately, he was es- sentially on his own.

While the all the parties — the com- pany, the union, the safety council, WorkSafe and the coroner — all have teams of lawyers there, there was, es- sentially, no one who truly was representing the victims. A series of lawyers cross-examined Mr. Primrose about complex issues that he had no help preparing for. Th e victims have a right to support in preparing for their time on the stand, and they have none.

Will the Attorney General immediately make funds available to allow the victims to hire their own legal counsel before this inquest loses any credibility due to the real inequity in how people are being treated? Hon. S. Anton: Th e inquest counsel is there to assist the coroner — to help in conducting the inquest properly, to make sure that voices are properly heard, to make sure that the families are properly represented, to make sure that their concerns are properly heard.

Th is is an inquest whose job it is to fi nd out what hap- pened at this tragedy, to determine the cause of the ac- cident and to ensure that such a thing can be prevented in the future by fi nding out what happened on that ter- rible day. Madame Speaker: Vancouver-Hastings on a supple- mental. S. Simpson: Th e day that I was there, the coroner’s counsel was the first to interview the witness, Mr. Primrose. He started by presenting him with a series of photos that Mr. Primrose had never seen — had no idea — and was asked to explain these photos of the mill and what they were and where they were.

And he had never seen them. Th at was the degree of preparation that the coroner’s counsel provided to him. Th ese people were the victims of an explosion. We cannot allow them to become the victims of an inquest. When the opposition asked for resources to ensure in- dependent legal counsel for the victims, we were told that the coroner’s counsel would fulfi l that role. It’s not hap- pening in any way. It does not resemble in any way the legal representation that everybody else has at that table. Th e victims need their own voice at the table.

Th ey need to be assured that their questions are being asked and being answered. Will the minister approve resour- ces today to ensure that they have their own legal coun- sel and get the answers and the satisfaction they need? [1405] Hon. S. Anton: Th e inquest is an independent inves- tigation into these deaths, into this tragedy. Th e coroner has emphasized on many separate occasions leading up to this inquest her determination to get to the bottom of the tragedy and to prevent such a tragedy from happen-

British Columbia Debates6368 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 ing again in British Columbia. She has coroner’s counsel who assist her, who assist the inquest, to make sure that the evidence is properly called… Interjections. Madame Speaker: Members. Hon. S. Anton: …so that the determination can be made, so that the facts can come out, so that this kind of tragedy can be prevented from happening again in British Columbia. LAUNDRY SERVICES AT INTERIOR HEALTH AUTHORITY FACILITIES J. Rice: Th e Health Minister suggested on Monday that cleanliness wasn’t part of health care.

However, keeping a clean hospital, as the minister discovered in Burnaby, is what can prevent C. diffi cile outbreaks. Keeping a clean hospital is the best fi rst line of defence against super- bug outbreaks. Does the minister stand by his claim that cleanliness isn’t part of health care? Hon. T. Lake: I was very clear the other day when I said that cleaning and doing laundry services were not front-line health care, not that they weren’t important. Of course, in an environment where people are susceptible to infection, cleanliness is absolutely important.

Th at’s why at Burnaby General they were able to reduce their C. diffi cile rates. Th e improvements they’ve made are truly remarkable, thanks to all of the staff — cleaning staff , nursing staff , all the professional staff — at Burnaby General Hospital. We make sure, through the health authorities, that cleaning is audited and that the results are satisfactory to keep driving down the rates of infection in hospital. Madame Speaker: Th e member for North Coast on a supplemental. J. Rice: Th e Health Minister knows that living in the Interior means living with delays because of closed roads and closed airports.

So a plan to ship laundry to Alberta or to the Lower Mainland carries a real risk that hospi- tals in places like Nelson and Golden and Williams Lake and Kamloops will be without clean sheets for no other reason than the weather. Th at’s why the minister’s plan to fi re 175 workers in hospitals across the region could have real impacts on health care. Will the minister admit this is a foolish plan that could seriously impact health care and stop it in its tracks to- day? Hon. T.

Lake: Well, the member opposite might be interested to know that we folks in the Interior actual- ly have electricity now and televisions and all kinds of things in the modern world. We do not worry about ac- cessibility. We have great functioning airports, we have great highways, and we have great people working in the health care system in the Interior. Th e objective of Interior Health is to make sure they get best value for money so that money can be used for front-line health care, as I said. On this side of the House we will buy endoscopes over washing machines any day of the week. M.

Mungall: I’m glad the minister realizes that we have electricity. Th e other day he didn’t realize that clean- liness is actually important to health care — an idea that comes right out of the Dark Ages. Interjections. Madame Speaker: Members. M. Mungall: Vicki Harris is a constituent of the Minister of Health. She is a single mom of three working at Royal Inland Hospital in the laundry. She does her best to make ends meet. She shops in Kamloops, pays taxes and contributes to the local economy. Doctors, nurses, care aides — everyone on the health care team — know her work is imperative to the health care system.

Why doesn’t the minister? [1410] Hon. T. Lake: Th e work of all Interior Health Authority employees is valued. At the end of the day, the goal of the Health Ministry and health authorities is to follow the principles of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, which means that we get better outcomes for patients, we get better population health, and we get value for money. We look for effi ciencies on this side of the House in our core government. We expect health authorities, school districts, other organizations to look for savings as well.

We want to make sure that health care dollars are pro- viding front-line health care — more hip surgeries, more knee surgeries, more endoscopes. Madame Speaker: Th e member for Nelson-Creston on a supplemental. M. Mungall: Well, Irma Stretch is another Kamloops resident, another constituent of the minister, who is on the front lines of health care. She works in the laundry, and she’s very effi cient at making sure there are clean, sterile sheets for everything from X-rays to the operat- ing rooms.

If those sheets aren’t available because they’re stuck somewhere on the Coquihalla in bad weather — and the minister knows that bad weather happens in the Interior just as much as I do — no one is going to be get- ting their surgery, Minister.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6369 How can the minister be so out of touch with his con- stituents like Vicki and Irma who play a vital role in the health care system? Hon. T. Lake: I had an opportunity to be in Kelowna General Hospital, where a good friend of mine — he happens to be my father — is being well looked aft er by the staff at Kelowna General Hospital. In fact, the food which he is eating comes from Vernon, which is up the highway from Kelowna. He remarked at how much he enjoyed the food and the care he was getting in Kelowna General Hospital.

The fact is, the members opposite make it sound like these are small villages in the middle of nowhere. Transportation systems, logistics, are pretty sophisticated all over the province. I’m sure that we can manage to get laundry services and have that laundry delivered around the Interior Health as necessary, getting good value for the taxpayer and making sure that we can do more hip replacements, knee replacements, colonoscopies and all the other medically necessary services that people in British Columbia need. CHILD PLACEMENT ISSUES AND CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT MINISTRY RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER D.

Donaldson: Last week in response to questions about why children were being kept in foster care despite close family being able and willing, the minister said it was complex. Th at’s not always the case. In a Supreme Court order, Justice Groves strongly criticized the min- istry for failing to follow a court order, saying: “ An or- der was made which binds the Ministry of Children and Family. Th ey were represented. Th e court told them to do something. Th ey have not appealed that order. Th ey have not made application to reopen the matter.

But still, they did not follow the order. ” Why did it take the minister 18 months to follow the court order to reunite a family? Hon. S. Cadieux: As I’ve said before in this House, the safety and well-being of children is the ministry’s fi rst priority. And as the member and all members of this House well know, due to privacy laws we cannot speak about specifi c cases in this House. Now, any time a judge would raise concerns about the conduct of our staff , the ministry would conduct a fulsome review, and any meas- ures taken would be informed by that review.

Th e prov- incial director of child welfare is conducting a review. Madame Speaker: Th e member for Stikine on a sup- plemental. D. Donaldson: Th is is a court order. Th ere is noth- ing complex about this case, as a judge made an order granting a grandmother custody of her grandchild. Th e ministry refused to follow the order for 18 months. Th e judge found that not only was the ministry ignoring this court order.

Th ey were treating the grandmother “as an annoyance, as opposed to a custodial parent. ” [1415] If the minister won’t take responsibility for the actions of her ministry, will she at least apologize to the family? Hon. S. Cadieux: Perhaps the member did not hear my previous answer. Th at is, in fact, why there is a re- view underway. I would remind the member that because I cannot dis- cuss cases in this House due to privacy law, I would again invite the member to make inquiries directly with my of- fi ce. We’ll facilitate any conversations that can be had on the matter with the member.

Unfortunately, to this time he has not done so. N. Simons: Th e problem is when it starts to look like a pattern in the ministry, that really needs to be addressed at another level. I’ll quote Justice Groves again: “I have concluded that the ministry is acting like the orders of the B.C. Supreme Court are an annoyance, something they might consid- er following but do not necessarily have to. ” Th at’s the Supreme Court justice saying that. If not this minister, who in the Ministry of Children and Family is responsible for ignoring Supreme Court orders? Hon. S.

Cadieux: Regardless of which member of the opposition chooses to ask the same question, the same answer will be given. We cannot speak to cases in the House. As I said, any time a judge or others would raise concerns about the conduct of our staff , the provincial director would do a review. Th at is underway. Madame Speaker: Powell River–Sunshine Coast on a supplemental. N. Simons: It’s a serious problem, and I think that the minister should pay signifi cant attention to this trend that seems to be occurring.

Aft er 18 months where a ten-year-old wasn’t returned to her grandmother, the judge said this: “ An order of the B.C. Supreme Court — an order which, if the court fi nds someone in contempt of, could result in a fi ne or imprisonment…. ” Th is is a judge cautioning the ministry that if they don’t obey his order, they could be found in contempt. That’s a problem, and the problem lies in the min- istry for which this minister is responsible. I think that the public deserves an answer as to how it could hap- pen that this kind of circumstance happens to a family in our province.

British Columbia Debates6370 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 Hon. S. Cadieux: As I said, the safety and well-being of a child is always the ministry’s fi rst priority. However, I cannot speak to specifi cs of any case in this House. Th e members know that. As it relates to the circumstances that a judge has raised about the conduct of our staff , the provincial director of child welfare is conducting a review. ADULT BASIC EDUCATION K.

Corrigan: In 2007 the Minister of Education at the time, now the Minister of Jobs and Tourism, said there were as many as one million British Columbians who struggled with basic literacy, with things as simple as be- ing able to read a restaurant menu — one million people in the province. In that same year the government eagerly embraced a recommendation from former Attorney General Geoff Plant to off er adult basic education at no cost, thereby allowing thousands of British Columbians to complete their high school education or upgrade to qualify for post-secondary courses.

My question is: why today has this government aban- doned its promise and its commitment to adult education and decided, once again, to impose fees on hard-work- ing adults who just want to complete their high school education? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e recent changes in adult basic education provide that it is free in the K-to-12 school sys- tem. It is free to non-graduates, and it is provided at 18 post-secondary institutions around the province oft en free of charge, because those institutions make their own decisions about whether to charge tuition. [1420] Th e tuition is set at a maximum of $320 per course.

Th ere’s a $6.9 million fund available this fi scal year to as- sist with the transition to the new regime, and grants are available for low-income students. Madame Speaker: Burnaby–Deer Lake on a supple- mental. K. Corrigan: Th e minister knows that it’s not free in post-secondary institutions. It’s not free for students that want to upgrade and go on and get into another course. Th ese are British Columbians who are willing to do the work to better their lives and those of their families, yet this government is creating new barriers.

Th e minister knows this simply means that thousands of students that would have gone on and completed their high school or would have gone on to post-secondary education are sim- ply not going to be able to do it. My question, again, to the minister: why is the min- ister, why is this government, breaking its promise to adults in this province who simply want to fi nish their high school education? Hon. A. Wilkinson: This government is very con- cerned about individuals who want to improve their qualifi cations, to increase their talents, to work on their abilities, to be the best they can be.

With that in mind, we have increased the grant budget by 33 percent this year, to $7.6 million. Th e net eff ect is that an individual with an income less than $23,647 will pay no tuition to do adult basic education. A family of three with an income of less than $36,192 will pay no tuition for adult basic education. Anyone within 10 percent above those thresholds will only pay half of the cost. ATTENDANCE OF GOVERNMENT STAFF AT MEETINGS ON BUS SERVICE ON HIGHW AY 16 M.

Karagianis: Recently the Minister of Transportation claimed to have had 80 meetings with communities along the Highway of Tears to talk about the bus system. However, a freedom-of-information request produced zero documents about any of those meetings. I expect that the Minister for Aboriginal Relations probably at- tended those meetings. It’s in his constituency. It’s part of his fi le. I’ d like to ask the Minister of Aboriginal Relations: how many meetings did he attend and where were they? Hon. T. Stone: Indeed, the member is correct.

Th ere were approximately 80 meetings with First Nations lead- ers and municipal leaders and a number of other organiz- ations. Th ese meetings took place last summer, and these meetings were attended by Ministry of Transportation staff . Madame Speaker: Esquimalt–Royal Roads on a sup- plemental. M. Karagianis: Th is is the fi rst time that we have heard in this chamber that it was only staff that attended these meetings. So all of these communities, these 80 com- munities that the minister claims to have consulted with, actually had no consultation from this minister or from the Minister of Aboriginal Relations.

We know along this highway that women are hitchhik- ing every day. Th ey are looking for solutions from this government. Th e women’s inquiry said the recommenda- tion was transportation solutions, public transportation, along that highway. Th e minister has claimed repeatedly in this House that he’s had consultations. Now it turns out he has not. How does he explain the fact that he has misled this House about the meetings he has had? Madame Speaker: Th e member needs to withdraw that fi nal remark.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6371 M. Karagianis: I would rephrase the question. Will the minister explain his claim of 80 meetings with commun- ities and consultations along the highway? Madame Speaker: And withdraw. On your feet, please. M. Karagianis: I withdraw the previous term that I used. Madame Speaker: Th ank you. Hon. T. Stone: Aft er the performance that we saw yes- terday on the line of questioning on PavCo, and today…. [1425] What’s outlandish are the claims that the members opposite just seem to make up on the fl y.

It’s a sad state of aff airs here in British Columbia when this is the best that the members opposite can do to hold the govern- ment to account. Interjection. Madame Speaker: Member. Interjections. Madame Speaker: Members will come to order. Please proceed. Hon. T. Stone: I will say once again for the mem- ber opposite that last summer staff from the Ministry of Transportation spent several weeks travelling up and down Highway 16 meeting with First Nations leaders, meeting with local government leaders and leaders of a wide variety of other kinds of organizations.

Th ere were approximately 80 individuals that the staff met with, and again, those meetings took place last summer. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon. T. Stone: In

Section A, I call estimates of the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, and here in

Section B, continued commit- tee stage on Bill 4. Committee of the Whole House BILL 4 — CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS ACT (continued) Th e House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 4; R. Chouhan in the chair. Th e committee met at 2:30 p.m. On

section 17 (continued). K. Corrigan: We’re pretty well fi nished with

section 17, but I did have one more area. I just wanted to clari- fy with regard to

section 17(c).

Section 17 provides that the board of the Chartered Professional Accountants of British Columbia, the new board, will be able to make bylaws respecting members, including “(

c) certifi cation or licensing requirements for members to provide speci- fi ed types of accounting services. ” I was asking questions when we fi nished off yesterday about whether that meant there was the possibility that there could — like in spec ialties in the medical profes- sion, above and beyond the MD or somebody being a generalized doctor — be specialists and whether or not that could happen as well. My understanding is that that is the case. Maybe we’ll just start off with a reconfi rmation that that’s where we fi nished off yesterday. Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th e premise that this is based upon is that the accounting profession is becoming more and more complicated as the decades go by and that we are already seeing some degree of subspecialization with- in the fi elds of accounting, which they have recognized with various subqualifi ers such as international tax spe- cialization. Th is leaves the door open for them to create formal categories of that nature. K. Corrigan: Just to be clear, although it’s not defi nite, it is foreseen that what this will provide for….

It could very well happen that there will always be the overall designation as a CPA, but there could be additional spe- cialties that could be required. As well, the audit function — I can’t remember where we ended up on this, actually — is something that would be seen as part of the basic designation in all cases, or could it be a specialty, as well, that is above and beyond the CPA designation? Hon. A.

Wilkinson: I think the point we reached yes- terday was that auditing, as stated in the core competen- cies that the training program requires the students to go through, is one of the components of basic, shall we say, accounting training and the threshold requirement to re- ceive the chartered professional accountant designation. It will be up to the profession to decide, within its own parameters, who actually is prepared to or is designated or qualifi ed to sign off on fi nancial statements. Obviously there may be subsets of that, ranging from small, local enterprises through publicly traded companies.

It will be up to the profession to determine the thresholds of train- ing and experience that will qualify an individual to sign off on a variety of fi nancial statements.

British Columbia Debates6372 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 K. Corrigan: I’m wondering if the minister…. Th is might require some speculation. Is it possible that the fact that…? Th e purpose of this bill is to merge the CAs, the CGAs and CMAs — the merging of the three. Th is ability that is being given to perhaps have specialties — is it possible that wouldn’t have been required if the three had stayed separate? I guess the question for the minister is: is it because the three are coming together that it’s needed to have these specializations, or would that have happened anyway? [1435] Hon. A.

Wilkinson: In fact, this isn’t a change of any substance, in that we’ve already seen, in the fi eld of char- tered accountants, that they are starting to self-desig- nate in terms of certain specialties and qualifi cations — to have subspecialties. As we covered yesterday, the CMAs have not had an audit function to date. Th e member’s very valid concern, I think, is whether the auditing function will become uniform amongst these newly branded accountants now that they’re CPAs. Once again, we leave that up to the in- terim board of this new body to sort that out.

In the new designation, we expect that there will be some parameters around that, which will be imposed by the profession itself. K. Corrigan: Now, I know that the minister said, es- sentially, that it was decided to leave the consultation up to the practice itself. Th ere was a certain amount of re- viewing of that consultation by the ministry before this was draft ed. In this move to try to bring everybody on board from all three disciplines, is there a concern that perhaps some of this was not fully explained or under- stood by the members, who may have expected: “Okay, we’re going to merge.

We’re all called CPAs”? Th en suddenly, down the road, we’re going to end up with specializations, which will mean that some of those that are within that subset will say: “Th is is not what I ex- pected, because now I am seen as a lesser or less important part of this subset because they have specializations which we don’t have. ” I don’t know if that’s been considered. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e arrangement is that with this new designation, the existing members of the three profes- sional bodies will be grandfathered in.

Th ere will be a tran- sitional arrangement so that they can determine the scope of their individual practice within the CPA designation. As the member opposite has suggested, it may well evolve that they do become subspecialized and perhaps limit their practice to international tax or auditing public companies or auditing energy companies, for all we know. Th at could be the kind of thing that they determine needs some kind of specialized training or subspecialty desig- nation, which is what

section 17(

c) is designed to provide. I think it’s also very important in this profession, more than almost any other I can think of, that they are acutely aware of the reputational risk and the liability associated with making errors. K. Corrigan: Well, using the comparison, again, of the medical profession, those that have the designation as be- ing MDs, doctors, being physicians…. My understanding is that they don’t make nearly as much money, generally, as the specialists do. I guess one of the concerns, then, is that these mem- bers will come together believing that they’re all equal.

But specializations could, partially as a result of this merger, emerge or be decided on by the group. Some of those specializations say “an advanced audit function, ” or whatever that is. Th ose people could be paid signifi - cantly more and create dissension in the ranks, or splits. It’s certainly been the case in the medical profession. It’s created a certain amount of angst. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th is is indeed an interesting ques- tion in a publicly funded medicare system, because some specialties make it a point of noting that they make sig- nifi cantly less than other general practitioners.

In this fi eld, of course, this is a completely market- driven phenomenon, in that the ability of the account- ant to charge a particular fee depends upon their degree of experience, respect, etc., which they have to build up over a whole career. Th is is, I think, in large part a self- resolving issue because the market will determine what they can charge and what they can pay. Clients will have a significant say in that. So the actual compensation scheme for this variety of accountants who will emerge underneath the CPA designation will probably be very similar to what it is today. [1440] K.

Corrigan: Actually, I don’t have any more questions for that section.

Section 17 approved. On

section 18. K. Corrigan:

Section 18 provides that the board can make bylaws respecting professional accounting corpora- tions. My question is: do these accounting corporations exist now, and can the boards of the various three profes- sions now make bylaws respecting the issuance of per- mits to professional accounting corporations? Hon. A. Wilkinson: In fact, at the current time the chartered accountants are in a position to incorporate their personal practice and conduct their aff airs accord- ingly. Th is would mean that there would be a uniformity amongst accountants, that they would all then, once they receive the CPA designation, have the capacity to form a personal accounting corporation.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6373 K. Corrigan: So right now it’s only the chartered ac- countants and not the CMAs and not the CGAs that can have corporations? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th at is correct. K. Corrigan: Is there any understanding that this cre- ated any kind of controversy or concern? Or was this something that was welcomed by all three bodies? Hon. A. Wilkinson: This is something that was agreed upon amongst the three professional groups.

I suspect it’s largely a matter of the signifi cant costs in- curred in incorporating a professional corporation that may have led the CMAs and the CGAs to not get around to it. K. Corrigan: I guess I’ve got a general question about sections 18, 19 and 20. It talks in those three sections — and forgive me for putting sections together — about the ability, in this section, about making bylaws with regard to accounting corporations. Th e next one is with regard to registered fi rms, and the next one aft er that gives the board the ability to create bylaws respecting limited lia- bility partnerships.

I’m just wondering…. I think I have a fair understand- ing, or some understanding, but perhaps the minister could explain the diff erence between those three with regard to the accounting profession. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Of course, accounting corpora- tions in this circumstance provide that an individual may incorporate their practice and thereby get the benefi t of the federal taxation regime applicable to corporations. Th en, of course, any funds that they pay out to them- selves as the shareholder would be subject, again, to the tax regime.

In terms of fi rms, this will be dealing with issues such as how fi rms name themselves and the need to have the fi rm name registered. Perhaps the accountants will ex- plore the issue of whether one can name one’s accounting practice in a way that does not include the names of the practitioners. So it would be Advance Accounting fi rm rather than Jones, Smith and Wilson.

In terms of limited liability partnerships, these have been a beast created by the federal government about ten years ago, and there has been a signifi cant move of pro- fessional groups to move into the LLP category so that they can manage their aff airs accordingly. K. Corrigan: Th e diff erence between an accounting corporation — which is, I guess, a company — and a limited liability partnership is that one has decided to become a company, and the other one is that a group of people have formed a partnership.

My understanding would be that the major diff erence would be the tax im- plications of those two types of arrangements and not in terms of how they work together. Maybe I can get some clarifi cation on that. [1445] Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e member is correct. At the heart of the matter…. In most of these circumstances I believe they would be driven by the tax eff ects, but they also have ramifi cations in terms of distribution of liabil- ity, the issue of winding up and how the entities are cre- ated and how they are regulated.

So it is quite a diff erent regime depending on whether one or one’s group de- cided to form a limited liability partnership or to form a corporation or to remain in the traditional individual fi rm format. K. Corrigan: Th ere is nothing, then, other than our discussion earlier about accounting corporations and the fact that previously only chartered accountants could have accounting corporations…. Apart from that, there is nothing in these three sections that is particularly dif- ferent from the practice that previously existed. Is that correct? Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th e member’s query is answered by saying yes with respect to chartered accountants. And the other two bodies are now moving to a uniform struc- ture that’s the same as that enjoyed by chartered account- ants already. Sections 18 to 20 inclusive approved. On

section 21. K. Corrigan:

Section 21 allows the board of the pro- fessional accountants to “make bylaws respecting desig- nations, including (

a) the use and display by a member, a professional accounting corporation or a registered fi rm of a designation and the initials signifying that designa- tion under this Act…. ” Is it expected or anticipated that there are going to be major changes? Or is that going to be left up completely to the new board or the interim board to decide about the use of the designation, the CPA designation? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e premise here, of course, is that the accounting profession is built on public trust and must do everything it can to maintain that public trust.

And that public trust is summarized or expressed or branded or advertised with one of the designations that they have used historically. Th is, being a new desig- nation, is already in visible use, as the member noted yes- terday, and has become nationally recognized. It is up to the interim board to sort out how they are going to integrate the legacy designations with the new designation. Presumably, in a small, perhaps individual,

British Columbia Debates6374 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 accounting fi rm, if they’ve ordered 1,000 pages of station- ery that says CGA, they’ll probably have to stamp CPA aft er every single one of those designations — if that is what the interim board determines. As I say, this is primarily directed toward making sure that the public are assured that the individuals they are dealing with are in fact what the public think they are. K.

Corrigan: I remember reading somewhere, as I was preparing to debate this bill and ask questions about it, something about a timeline — it may be in another sec- tion of the act — a discussion about a ten-year period for the use of the designation. I’m sure I read that some- where. It may have been in the submission that was made by the Chartered Accountants, the Certifi ed General Accountants and the Certifi ed Management Accountants of B.C. Anyways, is there a period?

Is there anything that’s going to happen in regulation under this act that is going to limit the amount of time that somebody could, for example, use a CGA designa- tion? Or is that something that’s going to be left com- pletely up to the profession themselves? [1450] Hon. A. Wilkinson: The premise here is that we understand there is a ten-year transition period for the use of these suffi xes to their name to demonstrate their professional designation. Th ere’s also, in

section 70, a regulation-making power in the event that the profes- sion calls upon government or government decides that there’s a need to step in and sort this out. Th e goal is to have this ten-year grace period resolve itself. K. Corrigan: Th e idea would be that for ten years a company or an individual who had been a chartered ac- countant, a certifi ed general accountant or a certifi ed management accountant could use the CGA, the CMA or the CA alone. Or would it always have to have the CPA designation attached to it? Hon. A. Wilkinson: It’s a very valid question.

Th e basis for this is that they will be required to use both. If they have an historical or a nostalgic aff ection for their old designation, they can carry on with that for up to ten years. But they will be required to use the new CPA desig- nation so the public can be assured and clear on the face of it which legislation applies to them. K. Corrigan: Th e minister just referred to, for example, a company — say, a CGA company, a certifi ed general accountant company — having letterhead. If there was letterhead, 1,000 pieces of letterhead, as was suggested could be the possibility….

We do know accountants and lawyers and so on have a lot of letterhead around and write a lot of letters. My understanding is that you wouldn’t be able to use that letterhead because it would just have CGA on it. Unless you in some way stamped on the CPA, you would not be allowed to continue to use that. Is that correct? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear enough with my rubber-stamp metaphor before, but that’s exactly correct. Th e individual will have to put both designations on their visible components of their prac- tice, whether it’s a sign on the door, their letterhead or a webpage.

So the member opposite is correct. I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear earlier. K. Corrigan: Y ou probably did. It probably just didn’t quite make it to me. Getting back to the ten year, it appears that that’s agreed on. I’m just wondering where that comes from and whether or not that is…. I think my original ques- tion was: is that something that is going to be enshrined in some kind of legislation or regulation, or is it expected that this has been agreed on and it’ll be in the bylaws or regulations of the CPAs? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e latter part of the member’s statement is entirely correct.

Th is has been agreed upon nationally in the professions, and it will be part of their bylaws to institute this ten-year grace period.

Section 21 approved. On

section 22. K. Corrigan: Again, this whole

section that we’re deal- ing with right now is all dealing with giving the power to the CPA board and the ability to make bylaws. Th is

section gives the board the ability to “make bylaws re- specting practice reviews, investigations, hearings and extraordinary suspensions. ” I have a fair amount of interest in that area, but because it’s going to be dealt with later in the act, I won’t get into the specifi cs of that. Just confi rming that that’s the pur- pose of it — simply to give the board the ability to make bylaws — and not getting into the specifi cs of it at this point in the act. Is that correct? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th at is correct.

Section 22 approved. On

section 23. [1455] K. Corrigan: With respect to

section 23, again, this

section gives the board the ability to “make bylaws re- specting reviews on the record of an order of a panel of a disciplinary committee. ” It refers to disciplinary com- mittees and the ability to review.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6375 Again, that will be covered later in the act. Just a con- fi rmation that this simply gives the power to the board to make bylaws with respect to those reviews. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th at is correct.

Section 23 approved. On

section 24. K. Corrigan:

Section 24 provides that the board can make bylaws respecting the tariff of costs to partially in- demnify the board for the expenses it incurs to conduct an investigation, a hearing, a review on the record or ex- penses it incurs concerning a proceeding, with regard to an extraordinary suspension. I’m wondering if these types of powers were invested in the former three boards before the merger. If so, all three? I’ d like to know what the landscape was before. Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th ese capacities or abilities were invested in the chartered accountants body, the institute of chartered accountants, but not in the other two. Once again, they’re seeking a uniformed approach to this issue and have requested that the approach taken by the insti- tute of chartered accountants be adopted for all of them. K. Corrigan: Can I assume, then, if this was the prac- tice of the chartered accountants, that the CGAs, the cer- tifi ed general accountants, and the certifi ed management accountants or their representatives are in agreement that this is a good way to go? Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th at is correct. K. Corrigan: Maybe just a bit of an explanation about how the tariff of costs would work. Who would be paying the tariff ? How would it be? What is the setup as it exists now, I guess? I’m just trying to get a sense of exactly what these tariff s cover and how they are charged. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e answer is that much like Law Society hearings, the legacy legislation for the institute of chartered accountants and the new legislation provides that either the CPABC or the respondent can be entitled to costs as a result of the hearing.

Clearly, if the respond- ent is vindicated, they may seek costs against the CPABC and vice versa. K. Corrigan: Th e tariff s. Would this be a charge that goes on all CPA fees, a very small charge that then goes into a fund in order to cover those kinds of costs? I’m just wondering what the source of the funding is. Hon. A. Wilkinson: It turns out that this is much like the Law Society arrangement, in that the member’s an- nual fee will cover the entire administrative cost of the CPABC, including any tariff costs that may be assessed against them by one of their committees. K.

Corrigan: Th e CGAs and the CMAs did not have this tariff system. How was it handled in those two bod- ies previously? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th ere was no cost regime within the CGA and CMA investigation and disciplinary ar- rangements. Th ey simply did not have access to this tool. [1500] K. Corrigan: I’m wondering if these types of investi- gations, hearings and reviews and the costs associated with an extraordinary suspension…. Th ey could all cost money. Does the minister know how the costs for these processes were covered, or did they simply not have those processes? Hon. A.

Wilkinson: All three of the legacy bodies most certainly had disciplinary processes and hearings and so forth, but only the Institute of Chartered Accountants was able to assess or recover costs during those processes. K. Corrigan: Where would the money come from to cover that? Would it be from…? Th e minister said that the tariff is part of the costs of the organization and would be part of the annual fees. So where would the money come from for the CPAs and the CMAs, then? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e member opposite referred to CPAs and CGAs, but I’ll assume she meant CMAs and CGAs.

It was indeed from their general revenue that these amounts were paid. Th is is an evolving scheme, obviously, with professions. Th ey fi nd the costs of hearings are suffi ciently high that there has to be some kind of cost recovery process. Th is legislation provides explicitly, in

section 24(2), that it is not to provide for the recovery of members of a commit- tee or the employees of the CPABC. It’s essentially de- signed to recover disbursements on a tariff rather than on actual outlays. K. Corrigan: Okay. I guess I’m not quite understand- ing the concept of tariff then. Th e money comes into the organization — all three organizations — in the form of the annual fees that the members pay. What has been said here is that now those annual fees are going to pay for all these diff erent types of hearings.

But it sounds to me like there’s only one source of funding, which is the annual fees that the members in all three professions previously paid or in the unifi ed profession will pay now. I’m trying to understand what it is about the tariff scheme which is diff erent than just paying in money and then using that to pay for these types of hearings.

British Columbia Debates6376 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 Hon. A. Wilkinson: I think the best parallel is prob- ably to the superior court’s process where, when one en- gages in litigation, at the end there’s a costs award. Here that is done on a tariff . Most of us are familiar with the tariffs that have evolved over time in the B.C. Supreme Court rules. Th is is a similar kind of arrangement. Th e tariff is not charged to each and every member.

Th e tariff is available and may be applied by a committee to either itself when it’s con- cluded that the hearing process was unnecessary, or that tariff can be applied to the respondent accountant who is being investigated. If, for instance, an accountant is found to have some- how erred in a signifi cant way that requires professional investigation, that investigation is conducted. Th ere then may be a hearing. Th ere then may be a review on the re- cord. At each stage, the bill for disbursements would pile up.

Th en, if the respondent accountant were found to be guilty of the professional misconduct in question, they would be assessed a bill on the tariff of costs for a portion of the costs of running the hearing. K. Corrigan: I understand now. Th is is like an award of costs, essentially, in a legal hearing — the same way. I thought it was something that was awarded in every sin- gle hearing, regardless of who was found to be at fault or who was found liable. What you’re saying is that there can be costs awarded to the successful party. Okay, I under- stand that. Th anks very much. Th at makes more sense.

Th en subsection (2), which says, as the minister has re- ferred to, that the tariff of costs must not provide for the recovery of remuneration of members of a committee or employees or legal expenses “other than those incurred to conduct a proceeding before the committee. ” In other words, that’s listing the types of costs that would be associated with a hearing or an investigation or whatever. Th ose costs cannot be included in the tar- iff . Is that correct? [1505] Hon. A. Wilkinson: Again, the member is on the right track.

Th is is much like a bill of costs in litigation in the courts in that it does not apply to the fees of the indi- viduals involved in the disciplinary process itself. Th ey will be there as part of their membership of a committee, much like benchers of the Law Society. Th e premise here, of course, is that the cost of these hearings could become astronomical. To an unsuccessful defendant or respondent, it could be ruinous. Th e tariff premise is designed to provide for a signifi cant cost re- covery, but not complete cost recovery, and no cost re- covery to members of the committee or to employees of the CPABC.

K. Corrigan: Having a tariff of costs…. I want to reiter- ate, then, that where the CGA and the CMAs did not have that kind of scheme, they’re satisfi ed that this is the way to go despite the imposition — the change that it could be? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th at is correct.

Section 24 approved. On

section 25. K. Corrigan: Again, this gives the board another type of ability to pass bylaws. In this case, they can make by- laws respecting insurance against professional liabil- ity claims — something that would be expected. Is this something that previously existed in this form with all three of the professions that are being merged? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Not surprisingly, as the profes- sion has evolved and become more convoluted, diffi cult and expensive, all of the legacy bodies have had insur- ance requirements, and this is a reconciliation of their requirements so that the professional bodies can require members to carry a certain level of insurance, much like the Law Society does.

Section 25 approved. On

section 26. K. Corrigan: Th is is another

section giving the board the ability to make bylaws, in this case particularly, with respect to chapters, branches and affi liations “for the social and educational welfare of its members and stu- dents” and “authorization of the CPABC to enter into contracts…to affi liate with a body. ” Was this something that existed in the past with the three organizations that are being merged? Hon. A. Wilkinson: This turns out to be a com- posite of the three legacy bodies in that the Chartered Accountants Act made no bylaw-making powers. It didn’t provide for them regarding chapters, branches or affi lia- tions.

Th e CGA act provided for chapters and branch- es and for affi liation with other accounting bodies in Canada. Th e CMA act provided for affi liation with other accounting bodies of any jurisdiction, with no provision for chapters and branches. Clearly, they have come to a composite view that is expressed here. K. Corrigan: Th e way it’s worded is interesting. It says “for the social and educational welfare of its members and students. ” I’m just wondering if the minister could explain what those types of chapters or branches would be. Would it be expected that it would be a chapter…?

I’m just not sure what kind of chapters those would be. Is there any thought of what they would be? [1510]

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6377 Hon. A. Wilkinson: The working premise is that, much like the Law Society, there would be a Cariboo branch, a Kootenay branch, a Vancouver Island branch, so that these could be designed to encourage the pro- fessional development of the members in a social en- vironment, one would presume. Being accountants, one would hope that these would be very sober and numer- ical occasions. Sections 26 and 27 approved. On

section 28. K. Corrigan:

Section 28 provides: “ A bylaw must be confi rmed at (

a) a special general meeting called for the purpose of considering the bylaw, or (

b) the next annual general meeting, ” which is pretty typical. But this is the part that I’m interested in. Th e board has to “fi le a copy of a bylaw with the minister within 30 days” aft er confi rmation and the bylaw then “may be dis- allowed by the minister within 45 days aft er the bylaw is fi led under subsection (2). ” I am wondering if the minister had the ability to veto bylaws in the past for any of the three organizations and why it is felt that the minister should have the ability to veto bylaws of the accounting profession. Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th e premise here is that, although it would seem highly unlikely, nonetheless, it’s important that the public interest be protected through the statu- tory and regulatory regime that government maintains.

If, through some bizarre combination of circum- stances, the joined accounting professions decided to pass a bylaw which was particularly self-serving — in order to protect themselves from liability or to constrain others from entering the profession, for instance — gov- ernment would have the option of limiting that activ- ity, the practical eff ect being that once the bylaw were made known to government, it would be suggested that the combined professional body may want to reconsider.

It’s rather unlikely that government would actually be overriding these potentially troublesome bylaws, but that power does exist to protect the public interest. K. Corrigan: Well, the explanation is fair enough. Th e minister spoke about the public interest or something that might be self-serving. I can certainly understand that explanation. But I’m not sure why it is that, if those are the concerns that the minister has, it would be such an encompassing and absolute power — to simply say that the minister can quash.

Just like the minister might be concerned about a bylaw which is self-serving or inappropriate in some way and must be limited, one might think that the power of the minister to quash those bylaws should in some way be limited as well. I’m wondering why there were absolutely no param- eters, no type of limitation put on that ability. Th e way it reads now…. I’m not saying that this minister or any particular minister would willy-nilly quash bylaws, but it is an absolute power.

I wonder if there is any thought about putting some kind of structure around that, some type of limitations on the types of bylaws that would or could be quashed by the minister. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th is is actually essentially repro- duced from the Health Professions Act and seems to be the trend and the mechanism by which government regu- lates professional bodies.

Th e practical eff ect of this is that it is rarely if ever used, because of the internal balancing that occurs between the professions and the ministry involved, so that we’re aware of only one such quashing or refusal of a bylaw, which has occurred in neither the health nor the legal nor the accounting professions. K. Corrigan: Does the minister have examples — any examples — of when a bylaw under the Health Professions Act or that profession has been quashed? [1515] Hon. A. Wilkinson: We are not aware of any such oc- currences under the Health Professions Act. K.

Corrigan: It seems like a very wide power and al- lows a great deal of discretion. I’m sure it wouldn’t be abused, but certainly the ability is there. I would have thought maybe some parameters about unreasonable- ness or inappropriateness or things that break the law or something like that would be appropriate. Maybe I’ll ask the question. Was the inclusion of this fairly extensive power discussed with representatives from the merged profession? Was there full agreement, or was there concern about this? Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th is is consistent with the prior legislation aff ecting the three legacy bodies, and no con- cerns were expressed about this. It’s also consistent with engineers, the Health Professions Act and so forth.

Section 28 approved. On

section 29. K. Corrigan: I’m wondering if…. Maybe I’ll just give the minister the opportunity to explain exactly what this

section does. Hon. A. Wilkinson: The premise here is that pro- fessional accounting corporations, which are designed, essentially, as a tax vehicle for the benefi t of the account- ant, will be subject to some degree of scrutiny through the bylaws of the CPABC. If the minister forms the view

British Columbia Debates6378 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 that the bylaw is not adequately protecting the public, the minister can take some action to correct the situation. Th is is perhaps refl ective of the prior section, in that, if the profession were to pass some bylaws that were un- duly permissive — to permit, shall we say, accounting corporations to avoid ongoing liability aft er they’ve been wound up, leaving the member of the public exposed — the minister could step in accordingly. K. Corrigan: With regard to amending or repealing or being made…. Th e general power that we talked about under

section 28(3), which allows the minister to dis- allow a bylaw, would not cover all these circumstances. Is that correct? Hon. A. Wilkinson: One can imagine a scenario, ob- viously, in a dark place and probably a diff erent country, where the profession passed a particularly self-serving bylaw, and the simple fact of changed economic and commercial circumstances meant that disallowing that bylaw would not accomplish the necessary task. In fact, an affi rmative bylaw would be required to protect the public interest.

As the member has noted, this would provide the power for that positively stated bylaw or an amended bylaw to be put into place, if necessary — although this seems to be a vanishingly small likelihood. K. Corrigan: I thank the minister for that explanation and the one previously about the operation of the section. I’m just wondering. Is there some kind of precedent that has been set, some kinds of problems that have oc- curred in the profession in the past, that there would be a very specifi c focus on professional accounting corpora- tions, as opposed to the limited partnerships or fi rms?

Is there something specifi cally that’s happened? Maybe a little bit more elucidation. I know there was reference to the possibility that there would be an in- appropriate tax benefi t. Is this referring back to Enron and all that kind of stuff ? Just maybe more explanation of why this is necessary. [1520] Hon. A. Wilkinson: My recollection is that the vogue of professional corporations came on strong in the 1990s with the changed tax rules. Of course, one can imagine that there might be a bit of adventurous activity as people try to do creative things with that new authority.

Th is authority actually exists in the prior Chartered Accountants Act and has eff ectively been adopted by the other two legacy bodies so that it can be uniform amongst all of them. Again, this is obviously a good-faith exercise where they seek to regulate themselves, but of course the public, through the mode of elected govern- ment, must retain the ultimate authority to regulate the profession. K. Corrigan: Okay. I’m glad to hear that this is some- thing that was already there. Just getting back to the question before, I’ll maybe re-ask a bit of it. Is this as a result…?

It may have gone back many years, but is it, to some degree, a recognition of the real problems that hap- pened in the accounting world with Arthur Andersen and Enron and those scandals that shook the foundations of the fi nancial world in the United States? Is that part of what this would address? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th is, fortuitously, is not related to those major accounting scandals that occurred around the turn of the century.

Th is is actually a refl ection of the ongoing situation in British Columbia and Canada where, fortunately — and perhaps it’s a testament to the strength of the profession — those have been extremely isolated to the point where they have not been of eco- nomic consequence. Nonetheless, in anticipation of what the member op- posite points out could emerge, this leaves the author- ity with the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council to correct such a situation. K. Corrigan: Has this section, because it was in previ- ous legislation prior to merger, been used before? Hon. A.

Wilkinson: We’re not aware of any use of the predecessor

section aff ecting chartered accountants.

Section 29 approved. On

section 30. K. Corrigan: Th is is a new part to the bill.

Part 3 deals with students and membership, which is a really important part of the process for professional accountants.

Section 30 provides that the board may determine requirements for enrolment, curriculum of studies, standards of skill and competency and the rules for examinations or other evalu- ations. It is an important piece of the legislation. I’m wondering if there’s any…. Maybe looking at sev- eral sections that deal with the educational programs, examinations and equivalent examinations and so on, are the requirements or the provisions that are in this act similar to the provisions that were in the previous acts governing the three merging organizations? Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th e three legacy bodies each had provisions in their legislation dealing with this, but this represents a joint view of the three bodies about how to modernize this, and in particular with the recognition of examinations held by other bodies, given that they are seeking to come to the highest common denomin- ator on this. If they’re going to accept any qualifi cations from an- other Commonwealth country or from Quebec or, for

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6379 that matter, another common-law province, this provides them with the tools to actually acknowledge or reject those prior examinations and qualifi cations. [1525] Th is is recognition that the accounting profession is in- creasingly crossing boundaries and that we need to make sure that standards are maintained. K. Corrigan: I’m wondering if the minister could just give me a very short explanation of how it works.

Section 31 — I guess I am skipping ahead. For example: “Th e CPABC may establish educational programs in account- ancy for students. ” I’ve been reading some of the back- ground information. I’m just wondering if I could get an explanation of exactly what that educational program will likely look like. The students will have had a certain amount of education, probably an undergraduate degree in an area. It may be accounting, maybe not. It can be a variety of things.

Exactly how much control does the profession then have with regard to the enrolment and training and the course of studies, the curriculum and all of that? Does it control everything? Where are the courses done, and who actually puts the courses on? Th ose kinds of things. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e working arrangement which is falling into place as a common approach to this is something that’s evolved over the last decade. Th e current expectation is that there will be an under- graduate degree with specifi c course content require- ments.

Th at may not be a bachelor of commerce; that may be an economics degree with some accounting overlay. Th en aft er that there will be a three-year CPA edu- cation program, which would be conducted part-time, and a minimum of two years of practical experience fol- lowed by what the chartered accountants currently call the uniform fi nal examination. I think most of us know from life experience that this is a particularly harrowing and demanding course of study. It’s to ensure that stan- dards are met.

Th e legacy bodies have had a variety of paths to entry to professional designation over the years, and they have landed on this as a common approach. Given the increas- ing complexity of the world, it would seem this is quite a sound approach that we’re observing. K. Corrigan: Well, the discipline of accounting is a dif- fi cult one and requires signifi cant training and expertise and competencies. I’m just trying to get a sense of who actually conducts the courses or will be conducting the courses under this merger.

To learn to do an audit, to gain the competencies in taxation and fi nance and fi nancial accounting is very dif- fi cult, so I’m just wondering how it is that the students get those competencies. Say if they came from an economics degree, which was my undergraduate…. Th ere’s no way I could have been an accountant — that’s for sure. I’m won- dering who actually puts the courses on, delivers them and puts the content together, and how it’s delivered. Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th ese two provisions, sections 30 and 31 — well, 32 is included in that, of course — will enable these bodies to put together a rather elaborate training and examination arrangement whereby some of this will be acknowledging university courses from rec- ognized universities. Th at would be accepted to be the qualifi cation for a particular component. They are contemplating the introduction of a CPA western school of business, which will conduct some of the course components on line.

Th e premise is that this will be available to accounting students in the four west- ern provinces and the Yukon territory so that the studies can be in a uniform standard, whether they’re conducted in a university or college, whether they’re conducted on line or whether they’re conducted face to face. All three of those components will be built into this program of study aft er the undergraduate degree is obtained. K. Corrigan: Well, thank you. Th at’s helpful. Th e CPA western school of business doesn’t exist yet. Is that correct? [1530] Hon. A.

Wilkinson: I’m gratifi ed to report that this is an outgrowth of the comprehensive education program that the institute of chartered accountants off ered to date. Th e curriculum has already been agreed amongst the three legacy bodies. Th is new delivery vehicle is, I suspect, being created for revenue and governance reasons so that the new institute for chartered professional accountants can have substantial control over content. K. Corrigan: Th e CPA Western School of Business is going to be an on-line school, and it’s going to be con- trolled by CPABC. Is that correct?

People would pay to take their courses, and then CPABC would get the money for that? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e understanding is that the CPA Western School of Business will be both virtual on line and face to face, that it will convene programs, much as the old Law Society bar admission program used to do before the introduction of PLTC. In addition, the revenue stream for the CPA Western School of Business, as far as we know, is not part of the legislation. Th at’s been left with the professional bodies.

Whether they will decide to have the principal for the articled student liable for those fees, as is the case with the Law Society, or whether they will impose some fees on the students themselves remains to be seen.

British Columbia Debates6380 Wednesday, March 4, 2015 K. Corrigan: Just to be clear, the CPA Western School of Business doesn’t exist yet. Is that correct? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Our understanding is that the CPA Western School of Business is already underway, much like the CPA designation has already been ad- vertised in anticipation of this legislation passing. We would always be concerned that they’re being presump- tuous, but under the circumstances, it really represents a rebranding of the institute of chartered accountants training program that’s been in existence for many years. K.

Corrigan: Th e Law Society courses have always been, in my understanding…. Certainly, when I was taking the bar courses, they were not seen as a money- making operation for the Law Society. Th e fact that these courses could go on line and could be available, presum- ably, to individuals around the world if they wanted to take them…. Is this seen as a way to make money, or is it non-profi t? Do we know? Hon. A. Wilkinson: The CPA Western School of Business is designed as a break-even operation. Th ere is to be no net profi t.

I suspect, being accountants, they will provide for some retained earnings which they’ d reinvest, but we leave that up to them. K. Corrigan: Th en with regard to making arrange- ments with a post-secondary institution, is it the case that a signifi cant portion of the courses that the students take now are courses that are off ered through post-secondary institutions? I’m just trying to really understand where the competencies are coming from. Hon. A.

Wilkinson: Th e working premise is that in- stitutions will be off ering courses in a variety of compe- tencies, including things like audit accounting, and that the newly merged CPA training regime may accept some of those for full-course, advanced-standing value. For others they would require complementary training. It depends on the course and the institution. But the member’s premise is correct. Students will be able to save some steps by taking courses in university that will give them credit in the downstream program. [1535] K.

Corrigan: It is expected that the courses that we’re talking about would be courses that would be taken while the student is a CPA student, aft er they graduate. Th is is not something that it’s expected that they do before they apply. Is that correct? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e premise is that they could do them either before arriving at an accounting fi rm for their articles and taking on the training program or during the training program. Some of them will have to take more courses during their training than others, de- pending on what they’ve done prior to arriving at the training program. K.

Corrigan: Th en the other component of enrolment and training that is contemplated in these sections is the involvement of the student in a fi rm. Will that remain the same? My understanding is that it’s a period of two or three years, and of course, somebody has to pass the exam at the end. Will that essentially remain the same as it has for chartered accountants over the years? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th e new regime is essentially identical to the chartered accountants regime as it now stands. I think we’re all aware that the duration of ac- counting articles has increased over the last 25 years. K.

Corrigan: Is it expected that the equivalent or a new iteration of the uniform fi nal examination will continue to exist, that there will be some kind of fairly rigorous examination that will come at the end of the training for these students? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th at is correct. Sections 30 and 31 approved. On

section 32. K. Corrigan: Again, in this part that deals with stu- dents and membership,

section 32 provides that the board “must hold examinations for admission as a member, or arrange that examinations for admission as a member be held, at least once a year. ” Is this anything new, or is this just the way it’s been in the past for the three legacy professions? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Th is is a continuation of the cur- rent arrangement.

Section 32 approved. On

section 33. K. Corrigan: Again, is this something new? This provides that the board “must by bylaw establish the conditions under which persons who have passed the examinations of other corporate bodies that have the same or similar objects may be admitted as members. ” Are we talking about other jurisdictions here? Maybe a bit of an explanation of what is contemplated in this section. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Just to clarify , this is part of the compliance obligation for labour mobility under the Canadian national agreement on internal trade. Of course, the professions have largely anticipated this because their

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, March 4, 2015 6381 members do move between jurisdictions as work appears and declines. They’re also, obviously, increasingly in- volved in transactions across provincial borders. Th is is designed to ensure that there’s suitable equiva- lency and a perhaps limited recognition of equivalent examinations. If one had done an examination in Quebec dealing with the Quebec income tax act, clearly that’s not very useful in the rest of Canada because Quebec has its own regime.

But if an individual has completely quali- fi ed in Saskatchewan, then there should be a great deal of equivalency because their corporate and tax regime would be very similar to that in British Columbia. [1540] K. Corrigan: I certainly recall from the background reading that I’ve done and looking at the history of this merger between the CAs, the CGAs and the CMAs that part of the impetus for this was the intent to harmonize the regimes in diff erent provinces. And not only that — to have some harmonization around the world with the globalization of the accounting profession, like other professions.

Th is is not new, I take it, though. Or is this a new pro- vision in this act? Hon. A. Wilkinson: All three of the legacy acts have similar provisions. Of course, they’ve matured over the last 30 years, and this represents the current state of the art. I also note that provision 33, subsection (2) provides that they must be reasonable so that the CPABC would not have the option of creating some absurd trade barrier to protect the incumbent members from visitors. K.

Corrigan: Y eah, I did see subsection (2), which says that the conditions under which somebody is admitted from another body “must be reasonable and are subject to amendment by the Lieutenant Governor in Council” — cabinet, basically. So that particular power previously existed for subsection (2)? Hon. A. Wilkinson: It turns out that the legacy legisla- tion for chartered accountants did have a virtually iden- tical provision in

section 11, and the other two acts had no provision for this. K. Corrigan: I’m wondering if there has been any hist- ory of there being — with the chartered accountants who had this provision — any instance of the conditions that have been set by the chartered accountants being over- ruled or amended by cabinet. Hon. A. Wilkinson: Not to our knowledge.

Section 33 approved. On

section 34. K. Corrigan: A similar question as I’ve asked on many other sections. Is this simply transferring a process — in this case to do with appeals and provisions with regard to appeals? Is it simply bringing this into the merged group? Hon. A. Wilkinson: Once again, the institute of char- tered accountants legislation provided for this. Th e other two did not. So this is unifying and harmonizing those statutes. K. Corrigan: It’s interesting.

Th e pattern that we seem to see here is that a lot of these processes that are included in Bill 4 and that will govern the chartered profession- al accountants were already included in the governing legislation for the previous chartered accountants, so I’m just wondering. Has this created any kinds of problems? I know I’ve kind of asked that question before. It just seems that many of the processes are transferring over the chartered accountants governing legislation, so I’m just wondering whether that has created any problems in trying to merge the three, as far as the minister knows. Hon. A.

Wilkinson: It turns out that the chartered ac- countants legislation is the most recent of the three. It was heavily amended in 2003 and, perhaps, is a more mod- ern iteration of an increasingly sophisticated and trans- boundary practice. [1545] Th e other two legacy bodies have come to the con- clusion that they would like to move up to that highest, best standard rather than to remain with their prior ar- rangements.

Section 34 approved. On

section 35. K. Corrigan:

Section 35 provides that the board must admit a person to membership in the CPABC if the per- son passes examination, satisfi es the board that the per- son is of good character, pays the appropriate fees and meets any other requirements for admission specifi ed in the bylaws. Is this, again…? Well, I’m going to just touch on another su

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20150304pm-Hansard-v21n1
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20150304pm Hansard v21n1
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	6c3fbf9a6254094f9b14f8939aaf9916f5be7535

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).