British Columbia Hansard — 23 March 2021, a.m., Issue 38 (42nd Parliament, 1st Session)

20210323am-Hansard-n38

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

First Session, 42nd Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES (HANSARD) Tuesday, March 23, 2021 Morning Sitting Issue No. 38 THE HONOURABLE RAJ CHOUHAN, SPEAKER ISSN 1499-2175

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Janet Austin, OBC First Session, 42nd Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Raj Chouhan EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................... Hon. John Horgan Minister of Advanced Education and Skills Training...........................................................................................................Hon.

Anne Kang Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries......................................................................................................................Hon. Lana Popham Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Housing .............................................................................................Hon. David Eby, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ....................................................................................................................Hon.

Mitzi Dean Minister of State for Child Care...................................................................................................................................... Hon. Katrina Chen Minister of Citizens’ Services.....................................................................................................................................................Hon. Lisa Beare Minister of Education .................................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Jennifer Whiteside Minister of Energy, Mines and Low Carbon Innovation ........................................................................................Hon. Bruce Ralston, QC Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy............................................................................................. Hon. George Heyman Minister of Finance .......................................................................................................................................................... Hon.

Selina Robinson Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development ................................................ Hon. Katrine Conroy Minister of State for Lands and Natural Resource Operations................................................................................. Hon. Nathan Cullen Minister of Health and Minister Responsible for Francophone Affairs.............................................................................Hon.

Adrian Dix Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation .......................................................................................... Hon. Murray Rankin, QC Minister of Jobs, Economic Recovery and Innovation....................................................................................................... Hon. Ravi Kahlon Minister of State for Trade...............................................................................................................................................Hon.

George Chow Minister of Labour ...................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Harry Bains Minister of Mental Health and Addictions.............................................................................................................. Hon. Sheila Malcolmson Minister of Municipal Affairs ............................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Josie Osborne Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ........................................................................................................... Hon. Mike Farnworth Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction........................................................................................... Hon. Nicholas Simons Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport .................................................................................................................. Hon.

Melanie Mark Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure................................................................................................................... Hon. Rob Fleming Minister of State for Infrastructure ................................................................................................................................... Hon.

Bowinn Ma LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition...................................................................................................................................................Shirley Bond Leader of the Third Party .......................................................................................................................................................... Sonia Furstenau Deputy Speaker..........................................................................................................................................................

Spencer Chandra Herbert Assistant Deputy Speaker..............................................................................................................................................................Norm Letnick Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole .......................................................................................................................... Ronna-Rae Leonard Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ...........................................................................................................................................

Kate Ryan-Lloyd Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel.............................................................................................................................. Seunghee Suzie Seo Clerk Assistant, Parliamentary Services........................................................................................................................... Artour Sogomonian Clerk of Committees.......................................................................................................................................................................

Jennifer Arril Clerk Assistant, Committees and Interparliamentary Relations ..............................................................................................Susan Sourial Senior Research Analyst ................................................................................................................................................................... Karan Riarh Acting Sergeant-at-Arms..................................................................................................................................................................Greg Nelson

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Alexis, Pam (BC NDP) ............................................................Abbotsford-Mission Anderson, Brittny (BC NDP) .........................................................Nelson-Creston Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal Party) ............................................................... Penticton Babchuk, Michele (BC NDP)...............................................................North Island Bailey, Brenda (BC NDP).................................................. Vancouver–False Creek Bains, Hon. Harry (BC NDP).........................................................

Surrey-Newton Banman, Bruce (BC Liberal Party) ............................................ Abbotsford South Beare, Hon. Lisa (BC NDP) .......................................

Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Begg, Garry (BC NDP).................................................................Surrey-Guildford Bernier, Mike (BC Liberal Party) ...............................................Peace River South Bond, Shirley (BC Liberal Party).................................Prince George–Valemount Brar, Jagrup (BC NDP) ................................................................Surrey-Fleetwood Cadieux, Stephanie (BC Liberal Party) .............................................

Surrey South Chandra Herbert, Spencer (BC NDP).................................Vancouver–West End Chant, Susie (BC NDP) ..............................................North Vancouver–Seymour Chen, Hon. Katrina (BC NDP) ............................................... Burnaby-Lougheed Chouhan, Hon. Raj (BC NDP).................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Chow, Hon. George (BC NDP) ..........................................Vancouver-Fraserview Clovechok, Doug (BC Liberal Party)........................Columbia River–Revelstoke Conroy, Hon.

Katrine (BC NDP) ....................................................Kootenay West Coulter, Dan (BC NDP) .......................................................................... Chilliwack Cullen, Hon. Nathan (BC NDP) ................................................................... Stikine Davies, Dan (BC Liberal Party)................................................. Peace River North de Jong, Michael, QC (BC Liberal Party)....................................Abbotsford West Dean, Hon. Mitzi (BC NDP) ...............................................

Esquimalt-Metchosin D’Eith, Bob (BC NDP) .........................................................Maple Ridge–Mission Dix, Hon. Adrian (BC NDP) ................................................ Vancouver-Kingsway Doerkson, Lorne (BC Liberal Party) ........................................Cariboo-Chilcotin Donnelly, Fin (BC NDP) .......................................... Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Dykeman, Megan (BC NDP)............................................................... Langley East Eby, Hon. David, QC (BC NDP).......................................

Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable (BC NDP) ..................................................Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Hon. Mike (BC NDP) .................................................Port Coquitlam Fleming, Hon. Rob (BC NDP) ...............................................

Victoria–Swan Lake Furstenau, Sonia (BC Green Party) .............................................Cowichan Valley Glumac, Rick (BC NDP) ..................................................Port Moody–Coquitlam Greene, Kelly (BC NDP) ........................................................Richmond-Steveston Halford, Trevor (BC Liberal Party) .........................................Surrey–White Rock Heyman, Hon. George (BC NDP) .........................................Vancouver-Fairview Horgan, Hon. John (BC NDP) ......................................... Langford–Juan de Fuca Kahlon, Hon.

Ravi (BC NDP) .............................................................. Delta North Kang, Hon. Anne (BC NDP) .................................................. Burnaby–Deer Lake Kirkpatrick, Karin (BC Liberal Party) ........................West Vancouver–Capilano Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal Party)....................................................................Shuswap Lee, Michael (BC Liberal Party) ..............................................Vancouver-Langara Leonard, Ronna-Rae (BC NDP)...............................................

Courtenay-Comox Letnick, Norm (BC Liberal Party) .................................. Kelowna–Lake Country Lore, Grace (BC NDP)........................................................... Victoria–Beacon Hill Ma, Hon. Bowinn (BC NDP).....................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Malcolmson, Hon. Sheila (BC NDP)........................................................Nanaimo Mark, Hon. Melanie (BC NDP).................................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Mercier, Andrew (BC NDP) ........................................................................

Langley Merrifield, Renee (BC Liberal Party)......................................... Kelowna-Mission Milobar, Peter (BC Liberal Party) .......................... Kamloops–North Thompson Morris, Mike (BC Liberal Party) ................................. Prince George–Mackenzie Oakes, Coralee (BC Liberal Party).................................................. Cariboo North Olsen, Adam (BC Green Party)............................ Saanich North and the Islands Osborne, Hon.

Josie (BC NDP)........................................Mid Island–Pacific Rim Paddon, Kelli (BC NDP) ................................................................Chilliwack-Kent Paton, Ian (BC Liberal Party) ............................................................... Delta South Popham, Hon. Lana (BC NDP)........................................................ Saanich South Ralston, Hon. Bruce, QC (BC NDP) .............................................Surrey-Whalley Rankin, Hon.

Murray, QC (BC NDP) .............................Oak Bay–Gordon Head Rice, Jennifer (BC NDP) ...................................................................... North Coast Robinson, Hon. Selina (BC NDP)...................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Ross, Ellis (BC Liberal Party)......................................................................... Skeena Routledge, Janet (BC NDP) .............................................................Burnaby North Routley, Doug (BC NDP)...........................................

Nanaimo–North Cowichan Russell, Roly (BC NDP).................................................... Boundary-Similkameen Rustad, John (BC Liberal Party)......................................................Nechako Lakes Sandhu, Harwinder (BC NDP) .................................................Vernon-Monashee Sharma, Niki (BC NDP)..........................................................Vancouver-Hastings Shypitka, Tom (BC Liberal Party) .................................................... Kootenay East Simons, Hon. Nicholas (BC NDP).........................

Powell River–Sunshine Coast Sims, Jinny (BC NDP) ................................................................. Surrey-Panorama Singh, Aman (BC NDP) .............................................Richmond-Queensborough Singh, Rachna (BC NDP)...................................................Surrey–Green Timbers Starchuk, Mike (BC NDP) ......................................................... Surrey-Cloverdale Stewart, Ben (BC Liberal Party) .......................................................

Kelowna West Stone, Todd (BC Liberal Party) ...............................Kamloops–South Thompson Sturdy, Jordan (BC Liberal Party) ............................. West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Tegart, Jackie (BC Liberal Party)....................................................... Fraser-Nicola Walker, Adam (BC NDP) ....................................................... Parksville-Qualicum Wat, Teresa (BC Liberal Party) ....................................... Richmond North Centre Whiteside, Hon. Jennifer (BC NDP) .........................................

New Westminster Wilkinson, Andrew, QC (BC Liberal Party)......................Vancouver-Quilchena Y ao, Henry (BC NDP) ..................................................... Richmond South Centre LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission................................................................................. Pam Alexis Abbotsford South...............................................................................Bruce Banman Abbotsford West......................................................................

Michael de Jong, QC Boundary-Similkameen........................................................................ Roly Russell Burnaby–Deer Lake....................................................................... Hon. Anne Kang Burnaby-Edmonds......................................................................Hon. Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Lougheed .................................................................... Hon. Katrina Chen Burnaby North .................................................................................

Janet Routledge Cariboo-Chilcotin ..........................................................................Lorne Doerkson Cariboo North.................................................................................... Coralee Oakes Chilliwack ...............................................................................................Dan Coulter Chilliwack-Kent .................................................................................... Kelli Paddon Columbia River–Revelstoke .........................................................

Doug Clovechok Coquitlam–Burke Mountain...............................................................Fin Donnelly Coquitlam-Maillardville ...................................................... Hon. Selina Robinson Courtenay-Comox................................................................... Ronna-Rae Leonard Cowichan Valley ............................................................................. Sonia Furstenau Delta North................................................................................... Hon.

Ravi Kahlon Delta South ..................................................................................................Ian Paton Esquimalt-Metchosin .................................................................... Hon. Mitzi Dean Fraser-Nicola .........................................................................................

Jackie Tegart Kamloops–North Thompson .............................................................Peter Milobar Kamloops–South Thompson..................................................................Todd Stone Kelowna–Lake Country .....................................................................Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission ...........................................................................

Renee Merrifield Kelowna West ..........................................................................................Ben Stewart Kootenay East.......................................................................................Tom Shypitka Kootenay West........................................................................ Hon. Katrine Conroy Langford–Juan de Fuca .............................................................. Hon.

John Horgan Langley .............................................................................................Andrew Mercier Langley East....................................................................................Megan Dykeman Maple Ridge–Mission.............................................................................. Bob D’Eith Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows............................................................Hon. Lisa Beare Mid Island–Pacific Rim............................................................ Hon.

Josie Osborne Nanaimo.............................................................................Hon. Sheila Malcolmson Nanaimo–North Cowichan............................................................... Doug Routley Nechako Lakes........................................................................................ John Rustad Nelson-Creston ............................................................................. Brittny Anderson New Westminster.............................................................. Hon.

Jennifer Whiteside North Coast ........................................................................................... Jennifer Rice North Island................................................................................... Michele Babchuk North Vancouver–Lonsdale......................................................... Hon. Bowinn Ma North Vancouver–Seymour...................................................................Susie Chant Oak Bay–Gordon Head..................................................Hon.

Murray Rankin, QC Parksville-Qualicum........................................................................... Adam Walker Peace River North ................................................................................... Dan Davies Peace River South ................................................................................ Mike Bernier Penticton ................................................................................................. Dan Ashton Port Coquitlam...................................................................... Hon.

Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Coquitlam.......................................................................Rick Glumac Powell River–Sunshine Coast..............................................Hon. Nicholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie....................................................................Mike Morris Prince George–Valemount ..................................................................

Shirley Bond Richmond North Centre..........................................................................Teresa Wat Richmond-Queensborough..................................................................Aman Singh Richmond South Centre .......................................................................... Henry Y ao Richmond-Steveston ............................................................................

Kelly Greene Saanich North and the Islands .............................................................Adam Olsen Saanich South .............................................................................Hon. Lana Popham Shuswap...................................................................................................... Greg Kyllo Skeena........................................................................................................... Ellis Ross Stikine........................................................................................ Hon.

Nathan Cullen Surrey-Cloverdale .............................................................................. Mike Starchuk Surrey-Fleetwood.....................................................................................Jagrup Brar Surrey–Green Timbers........................................................................Rachna Singh Surrey-Guildford......................................................................................Garry Begg Surrey-Newton ..............................................................................Hon.

Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ...................................................................................... Jinny Sims Surrey South ................................................................................ Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Whalley ................................................................. Hon. Bruce Ralston, QC Surrey–White Rock .......................................................................... Trevor Halford Vancouver-Fairview.............................................................. Hon.

George Heyman Vancouver–False Creek...................................................................... Brenda Bailey Vancouver-Fraserview...............................................................Hon. George Chow Vancouver-Hastings ..............................................................................Niki Sharma Vancouver-Kensington....................................................................... Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..................................................................... Hon.

Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara................................................................................ Michael Lee Vancouver–Mount Pleasant..................................................... Hon. Melanie Mark Vancouver–Point Grey ............................................................Hon. David Eby, QC Vancouver-Quilchena........................................................Andrew Wilkinson, QC Vancouver–West End .....................................................Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee .....................................................................

Harwinder Sandhu Victoria–Beacon Hill............................................................................... Grace Lore Victoria–Swan Lake.................................................................... Hon. Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano...........................................................Karin Kirkpatrick West Vancouver–Sea to Sky................................................................Jordan Sturdy Party Standings: BC NDP 57; BC Liberal Party 28; BC Green Party 2

CONTENTS Tuesday, March 23, 2021 Morning Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members....................................................................................................................................................... 945 Statements (Standing Order 25B) ........................................................................................................................................... 945 Spring freshet and flooding J. Tegart Resilience of arts sector B. D’Eith Salmon population and pinniped predation J. Sturdy Inclusive language S.

Chandra Herbert Medical travel service for Tumbler Ridge M. Bernier Volunteers in Richmond K. Greene Oral Questions........................................................................................................................................................................... 948 Addiction services in Interior Health Authority and status of Pathways Centre S. Bond Hon. S. Malcolmson T. Halford Government involvement in Supreme Court case on rights of municipalities A. Olsen Hon. D. Eby Impact of proposed U.S. legislation on cruise ship industry M. de Jong Hon. M. Mark T.

Stone COVID-19 response for tourism industry and report recommendations T. Wat Hon. M. Mark Orders of the Day Committee of the Whole House.............................................................................................................................................. 953 Bill 10 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2021 M. Bernier Hon. S. Robinson A. Olsen

TUESDAY , MARCH 23, 2021 The House met at 10:04 a.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Prayers and reflections: K. Kirkpatrick. [10:05 a.m.] Introductions by Members J. Tegart:We are joined in the House today by a dear friend to many members of this House, Lynn Klein. Lynn is a long-serving public servant, former paramedic, ambu- lance service employee, historian, author and champion of the first cardiopulmonary resuscitation program in Canada. While living in Victoria, Lynn had an exemplary attendance record in visiting the proceedings of this House.

Lynn and his wife, Sharon, now reside in the Cowi- chan Valley. We’re so very happy to have Lynn join us here today. B. Stewart:It gives me great pleasure to wish my sister Andrea McFadden a happy birthday on her 60th birthday today. Andrea is unique in the sense that she is following in her grandfather’s footsteps. Her grandfather Richard John Stewart was a horticulturalist, lover of roses and breeder of the Royal Stewart. Andrea founded and operates Okanagan Lavender Farm, which has received global recognition for the products that it produces.

She also is well known as a world-class blogger, from eye rejuvenation pads to bug hotels that can be built anywhere. Andrea is an adventurer, risk-taker, mischievous, with a twinkle in her eye, animal lover, kind and loves her fam- ily. Married to David McFadden, children are Rory, and Alyssa and Lachlan; Keely, and Fabien and their newborn son Sebastian, or “Sebby” for short; and Liam, who’s the new proprietor of Steephouse products. Andrea is business savvy, has incredible leadership skills and minimizes her footprints in the world. I just want to wish Andrea a happy 60th birthday today. C.

Oakes:I, too, would like to recognize Lynn and just say how much I have appreciated his contact and his emails over COVID. It means a lot that you care so much about the Legislature and the MLAs in it, so thank you. Joining us today in the Legislature virtually is the Simon Fraser Student Society, a student-led, non-profit organiz- ation that represents over 25,000 undergraduate students from across the three campuses of Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, Vancouver and Surrey, British Columbia.

Their mission is to advocate for students, build student power and provide resources and services that represent, connect and benefit their membership. Would the House please welcome all of the Simon Fraser University students in the Legislature virtually today. Hon. M. Mark: Joining us from the gallery today is my constituency assistant and friend Amanda Bouchard. Amanda joined my constituency team last year. She stepped up to support my constituents in a pivotal moment during this COVID-19 pandemic. She has a long history as an advocate for women in the Downtown East- side as the founder of the Vancouver

chapter of PEERS, which supported women exiting the sex trade. She is also an extremely successful business consultant, supporting people to realize their entrepreneurial dreams. I’m so hon- oured that she’s joining us today on her birthday. Amanda, congratulations on this important milestone. Would the House please join me in welcoming Amanda and wishing her a very happy birthday. Statements (Standing Order 25B) SPRING FRESHET AND FLOODING J.

Tegart:I’m pleased to rise in the House today to talk about an event which happens with yearly regularity throughout my riding and your ridings too. [10:10 a.m.] It’s not an event that many in my riding are looking for- ward to, due to the most recent experiences which have occurred in the communities. The event is spring freshet. It is the time of year when residents, community leaders and community volunteers watch the water flow with keen interest. My riding has been severely affected over the past five years by unusually high flows of spring runoff.

There have been many theories as to what the cause is, but whatever your theory is, the reality is that every spring, people who live on or near a stream, a river or a lake watch with trepidation as the water begins to rise. Mountain pine beetle logging, wildfires, climate change and land usage have all affected the ability of the land to absorb water. Rules about equipment use in waterways. Inability to clear blockages without multiple levels of per- mission. Lack of recognition of the importance of prevent- ative work. Another year goes by, and we are into flooding season again.

It affects communities, waterfront com- munities, agricultural areas, to name a few. We all talk about climate change, but people in the rid- ing of Fraser-Nicola are asking for action from all of us in this House. We lost a beloved fire chief in a flood. We are losing waterfront homes. We are losing infrastructure, such as highways. And still we only talk. We seem to have the dollars to react. Let’s flip that over and start working on prevention. 945

RESILIENCE OF ARTS SECTOR B. D’Eith:It’s very nice to rise in person in the House to highlight the amazing resiliency the arts sector has shown during this difficult time. When the pandemic hit last spring, I was asked by the Premier to talk to arts groups. One of those groups was the Cultch in East Vancouver. The Cultch is a cultural hub that champions artistic expression and diversity. They bring world-class performances to the heart of East Vancou- ver. Like so many arts centres across the province, they’re doing their best to respond to the new normal and keep people safe.

They stopped performances and closed the theatre. They told us they needed to keep the lights on, and they also asked for flexibility. We listened. The B.C. Arts Council advanced operating funding to arts organizations across the province and allowed organ- izations the flexibility to pivot their programs to adapt to the pandemic. So did Creative B.C., pivoting the Ampli- fy B.C. $7.5 million program to sustain and stabilize the music industry, including a program that provided hun- dreds of microgrants to artists and musicians.

Relief and support in the right places allowed these resilient organ- izations to keep creating incredible content and covering their overhead. The Cultch was among many organizations that shifted their presenting during the program. Actually, according to theGlobe and Mail, they’ve become the leading cultural organization to provide streaming live performances in Canada. Heather Redfern — she’s the executive director — said: “When we were faced with uncertainty, getting sup- port from the province was vital. ” The Cultch is not alone.

So many organizations have found new and innovative ways to connect with their audi- ences. As the Parliamentary Secretary for Arts and Film, I’m honoured to be working with the Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport to support this amazing sector. Together we will help the arts and culture sector weather the storm. I’m so looking forward to the day that we can all enjoy performances together again in person. But for now, I encourage everyone, please, enjoy the virtual art that these amazing, resilient organizations are presenting. SALMON POPULATION AND PINNIPED PREDATION J.

Sturdy:Last week I explored the lack of a science basis for the federal government’s ill-informed decision to curtail recreation fishing for chinook around Howe Sound and the south coast during the 2020 season. The concern remains that this restriction will be repeated again this year, despite chinook stocks being virtually absent during this chinook fishing prohibition. What is not absent, however, is the overwhelming presence of pinnipeds. [10:15 a.m.] Seals and sea lions have been hunted by First Nations for millennia and by others since contact. However, since the 1970s, they have been protected.

According to Rob Bison, fisheries stock assessment biologist with the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, pinniped populations in the Strait of Georgia have increased from, in the 1970s, less than 10,000 animals to more than 80,000 animals today. Over that same period, chinook and coho salmon populations have had a converse trajectory, with smolt survival during transition to open ocean appearing to be tremendously affected.

According to Carl Walters, professor emeritus at UBC’s Institute for Oceans and Fisheries: “Most of the drop in survival of chinook and coho in Georgia Strait since the 1980s is likely due to seals eating juvenile fish during their first summer in the ocean. ” Estimates suggest that seals may be consuming five million juvenile coho each year, or about half the area’s annual juvenile population. Up to 15 million chinook juveniles meet the same fate, or about a third of that juvenile population.

In terms of returning spawners, any recreational fisher among you will have the experience with pinnipeds when you have a fish on your line. While freshwater con- ditions, ocean conditions and marine competition for feed are very relevant, pinniped predation is by far the most impactful variable on the survival of chinook and coho, from smolts to spawners.

Predator management for critically endangered prey species, while difficult to embrace, must be given serious consideration as a tool by DFO as we collectively support the survival of resident orcas and the traditional salmon culture of British Columbia’s First Nations. INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE S. Chandra Herbert:I was in kindergarten, and I ended up in the principal’s office. Why was I in the principal’s office? I said something which I shouldn’t have. A kid had told me that I should call another kid “gay, ” so I did. The teacher, after the kid complained, said: “Well, gay means happy. Gay means joyous.

Don’t worry about it. But you still have to go to the principal’s office. ” I don’t think I learned very much that day. My whole life would have changed if we’ d actually talked about many of these other issues. But that being said, I want to talk about words: words we use, words that matter, words that change cultures, words that invite inclusivity and words that exclude. In the role of Deputy Speaker, I listen a lot, as do you, hon. Speaker. I speak personally, but some of the language I hear, I consider probably ableist. I have asked friends with dis- abilities, and they agree.

Words like “lame, ” a word that, I checked, we used 14 times in the House in the last ten years. Not that much, but enough to suggest that having a physical impairment, like lameness, is a bad thing. I don’t 946 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, March 23, 2021

think we should use that phrase. If we want to talk about something that didn’t work, let’s say it didn’t work. Other word we use. We often talk about people turning blind eyes, deaf ears. We spoke about people who are actu- ally blind 71 times in the House. We used the word “blind” or “blind eye” 204 times in the last ten years as a negative. If you’re blind, how do you think that makes you feel? If you’re deaf, we talked about the deaf community 92 times. We used it as a negative 80 times. Again, probably not very helpful. “Crazy, ” we used 206 times.

Again, we should be talking about mental illness and not using some- one’s physical or mental difficulties as something to slam each other with. We can do better. I hope we all work hard to understand that our language matters and make sure it’s inclusive. MEDICAL TRAVEL SERVICE FOR TUMBLER RIDGE M. Bernier:After the coal mines shut down in Tumbler Ridge, many workers and families moved away. But many also found this beautiful community to be a great place to retire. That, however, has brought other challenges for an area that has not kept up with the medical needs of its cit- izens.

Around 20 years ago, a small group of people in Tum- bler Ridge saw their neighbours struggling to get to neigh- bouring communities like Dawson Creek, Grande Prairie and Fort St. John for critical medical appointments.

So they stepped up to ensure that those that were sick or eld- erly would not be forced to miss out on the services they so desperately need. [10:20 a.m.] TR CARES was formed, and volunteers came forward to drive community members that were unable to take them- selves to their medical needs in other communities, some- times driving hundreds of kilometres in a day, regard- less of the weather or conditions. Over the years, they’ve served hundreds of people who otherwise would have struggled or been forced to even move away from the small community.

As with most volunteers for non-profit groups, they’re always spending time looking for help and for donations. One of my personal highlights as an MLA is taking

part in the annual TR CARES charity golf tournament. Those who have golfed with me know that I probably spend the majority of that time getting chased by grizzly bears and looking for my ball in the bushes. Tumbler Ridge, though, has survived so many setbacks over the years thanks to the passion of the people who live there. TR CARES is completely volunteer. I want to thank the over 100 people who have come forward over the years to give up their time, especially the current board: Aman- da Coulson, Christine Vandeburgt, Gail Newman, Rose Snyder, Angie Robertson, Erin Wanvig and Floyd Frank.

I want to give a big shout-out and a big thanks to all of them for their dedication to the people in their com- munity. VOLUNTEERS IN RICHMOND K. Greene: The Richmond Cares, Richmond Gives Volunteers Are Stars Awards are just around the corner. Sadly, we are not able to join each other in person this year, but there are no shortage of amazing volunteers who not only uplift members of our community but also inspire others. The Nova Star Award nominees. Maisy Debray, Mamas for Mamas Vancouver. Maisy has helped mothers, families and children in need with supplies, food and emotional support.

She’s also organized community support to meet these needs. Patricia Lang, auxiliary Richmond RCMP . Patricia has volunteered over 4,800 hours to help Richmond residents in the areas of community safety and property crime prevention. Jat Puri, West Richmond Community Association board and RCRG board. Jat is an RCRG Y outh Now ment- or for young board members. He has trained hundreds of volunteers and is on the board of Heart of Richmond AIDS Society. Jat’s optimism is uplifting. Rowena Silver-Bridson, Kehila Society of Richmond and Beth Tikvah Congregation.

Early in the pandemic, Rowena started a weekly food service delivery program for seniors and other isolated individuals in need. She also supports families going through Jewish life-cycle events. Don Taylor, West Richmond Community Association board. Don is president of WRCA and has helped organ- ized all the signature events at WRCC. Don is always the first to volunteer with a smile on his face, and his upbeat attitude is contagious. Ray Wang, RCRG board. Ray is on the RCRG board and also volunteers with the Richmond Christmas fund.

He also volunteers with the Better at Home shop-by-phone program, where he fills grocery orders for seniors to sup- port their well-being. Rosina Yip, Chimo Community Services. Rosina has helped over 400 vulnerable residents access community services and is known for embodying Chimo’s vision. Ros- ina continues to volunteer, even after her 2018 ALS dia- gnosis. I wish I had the time to say more about the great work these amazing people have done. Please join me in thank- ing these star volunteers for their contributions to Rich- mond. We are so fortunate to have them.

Tuesday, March 23, 2021 British Columbia Debates 947

Oral Questions ADDICTION SERVICES IN INTERIOR HEALTH AUTHORITY AND STATUS OF PATHW AYS CENTRE S. Bond: The mayor of Penticton feels that his com- munity is being bullied by this government. Here’s what he had to say: “My community went berserk. The Attorney General instigating people to break the law. That’s not right. That’s unethical. We are losing trust in our ministers. I’ d like to beg the Premier to please talk to the minister and cool him down. ” That’s not all. Now it’s the Pathways Addictions Resource Centre that is being defunded by this govern- ment.

Here’s what Dawn Swanson had to say: “Pathways has kept my body and my soul together for many years. I thought I would lose my daughter, and I didn’t know how to cope. I lost my son this July in Calgary to fentanyl. My husband, my daughter, myself — they have kept us togeth- er. I just can’t have them go away. ” The minister refuses to take responsibility, so perhaps the Premier can stand up today and take some action. Will the Premier today commit to maintaining the funding and ensuring that the Pathways program, so des- perately needed and so effective, continues? [10:25 a.m.] Hon. S.

Malcolmson:That front-line organizations in the non-profit sector held together British Columbia’s tenuous system of care for both mental health and addic- tions for such a long time is a testament to their service and their dedication to looking after people in their deep- est time of need. Pathways has been a valued member of the Penticton community, and we are grateful for their contracted ser- vice to Interior Health.

As I’ve said last week and, I believe, the week before, Interior Health is confident that no one is going to be left behind by the action of bringing the services that Path- ways used to provide in-house, making them available along a much wider continuum of care and making them available to people throughout the South Okanagan region. There will be no disruption while the service is transferred in-house. I’ll remind the members opposite that this is the call we hear from people so often.

We want to bring mental health and addictions inside the health care system so that when people reach out for help, whether it’s a physical injury or a psychic one, they’ll be able to get the help they need. That is the work that is at hand. Mr. Speaker:The Leader of the Official Opposition on a supplemental. S. Bond: Well, it’s interesting. The minister stands in this House and speaks in glowing terms about an organ- ization that has been a lifeline for people in Pentic- ton and beyond. Instead of standing up and making a decision to preserve those resources, she explains that Interior Health may be confident.

Well, the residents of Penticton are not, and it is this member’s responsibility to stand up and do something. Here’s what Gord Portman had to say. He has ten months clean. He’s got a support group. He has a counsel- lor. Now this government has decided, in the middle of a pandemic, to shift the services provided to the people of Penticton. Here’s what Gord had to say: “I don’t like this situation. I am happy with where I am at Pathways. There are good services.

I know the people, and I trust them. ” What Gord would say to the minister today is that it’s time for her to stand up and ensure that the services that have made a difference in his life and so many others are preserved — not stand and make a case on behalf of Interi- or Health. It’s her job to stand up and take responsibility for services provided to the people of Penticton. Pathways has been serving people for nearly 50 years. They serve more than 1,200 people a year. Somehow this minister and Premier think it’s appropriate, in the middle of a pandemic, to shut the doors on this vital service.

It’s time for the Premier to stand up today and ensure that this vital program, the Pathways program, continues. Hon. S. Malcolmson:There will be no disruption to the service that people in Penticton have been receiving for mental health and addictions counselling. We, as a gov- ernment, are doing the work to build up a system of care where one did not exist before, where people can enter the system and receive all of their primary care and mental health and addictions services in one place. This is going to benefit the South Okanagan region.

Because the population of the South Okanagan has grown, because we need to be able to expand services and reach people in a new way, bringing it inside the health authority is the evidence-based decision that the Interior Health Authority has made. I’ll remind the member, too, that we are expanding ser- vices in that region in other ways. The urgent primary care centre that is opening right now in Penticton is particu- larly dedicated. It has mental health and addictions sup- port as its primary focus. This is the way we’re building a system of care.

This is the way we’re moving forward, knowing there is much more to do. [10:30 a.m.] T. Halford:The fact is that this minister is not expand- ing services. She’s actually closing services. The Premier said: “Trust me. The service is going to improve. ” Pathways is closing. Keremeos is not reopening. The Sequoia and Alder youth recovery homes in Vancou- ver are closing, despite the government actually promoting 948 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, March 23, 2021

them as resources. Carrier-Sekani — stopped by this gov- ernment. There is a pattern here. This government has reduced services and taken away treatment options for people in need. The minister and this Premier say that people in need and those suffering from addictions should be pleased with the services brought in by this government. I disagree. My question is to the Premier. Will he do the right thing and stop the defunding of Pathways and unveil a plan that actually sees a real expansion of services? Hon. S.

Malcolmson:This government is building a full system of care for mental health and addictions where none existed four years ago. Interjections. Mr. Speaker:Members. The minister will continue. Minister. Hon. S. Malcolmson:The opposition’s continued mis- characterization of the accessibility of mental health and addiction service does a disservice to the people that are seeking care in a greater way than they ever have. The pandemic has pushed more people into overdose crisis. It has pushed more people into mental health crisis.

Those people are reaching out for help, and we are building and expanding services every year of our four-year mandate and every year of our four-year mandate ahead — both behind and ahead. I’ll implore members to be very careful in a mental health and addictions crisis. To mischaracterize the inac- cessibility of services…. It’s dangerous to suggest to people that help is not there for them when they need it. Mr. Speaker:The member for Surrey–White Rock on a supplemental. T. Halford:A disservice is closing a facility that people are depending on. That is a disservice, Minister.

I’m going to read you a quote. “Many of our clients who have accessed service years ago will often need to access service again, as the struggle is always present. To be able to call the same place, speak to a familiar counsellor who worked with you in the beginning brings comfort to those who struggle. ” Those words are from Daryl Meyers, the executive director of Pathways. Minister, let’s talk about priorities. It costs this govern- ment $500,000 a year for Pathways to stay open. That’s actually less than you guys have spent on a toilet in Van- couver.

Instead of defunding Pathways, why doesn’t this Premi- er simply keep the program operating and increase sup- port for the Interior Health so that there’s actually a net boost in services? Hon. S. Malcolmson:In fact, as part of the work that is ongoing to build a system of care for mental health and treatment support, here are the new services that Interi- or Health is offering that have been…. Some of them just opened this month. Ten government-funded youth treatment beds came online in the Interior. They’re helping people right now.

Five new innovated integrated treatment teams throughout the Interior — Kamloops, Cranbrook, West Kelowna, Enderby, Salmon Arm areas — all moving out into the community to meet people where they are at, people that haven’t been able to access treatment because of shift work or lack of transportation or daycare com- plications, for example. There are 200 government-funded adult treatment beds in Interior Health, and the work con- tinues. Is there enough? No, there is not. Are we adding more services every month? Y es, we are. [10:35 a.m.] GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN SUPREME COURT CASE ON RIGHTS OF MUNICIPALITIES A.

Olsen:In 2018, the Ontario government unilaterally cut the Toronto city council from 47 members to 25. Just last week the Supreme Court of Canada heard the city’s arguments that the province infringed on the Charter rights when they did that. The province of British Colum- bia is the only province or territory in this country that intervened in the case. We are the only province or territ- ory that intervened in that case.

Martha Jackman, professor of constitutional law at the University of Ottawa, says: “The B.C. government’s posi- tion relies on an ‘extremely regressive’ reading of the Con- stitution of Canada. ” She goes on to say that she’s disap- pointed to see a social democratic government proposing the same very regressive, conservative and narrow reading of charter rights that Ontario argued. My question is to the Attorney General. The Attorney General stated: “The relationship between provinces and municipalities is an ongoing dialogue between the province and our cities.

It’s an issue that should be decided in discussions with cities rather than through the B.C. Supreme Court or the Supreme Court of Canada. ” Does the Attorney General still believe this to be true, and if so, why has the government decided to intervene in the case from Ontario? Hon. D. Eby:I read the sameTyeearticle as the member did. The member will know that it’s a difficult thing for an Attorney General to comment on a case that’s in front of the court, which the member acknowledges is the case.

I will certainly say that I agree with the quote from me that the member read out… Tuesday, March 23, 2021 British Columbia Debates 949

Interjections. Mr. Speaker:Members. Hon. D. Eby: …that we are better off working with municipalities about how we work together, rather than having the court decide that for us. It’s an important issue that’s in that case. I look forward to the court’s decision. I’ll just note that we’re the only province intervening in favour of the federal carbon tax as well. Simply because we’re the only province is not an indication of the province’s position or the progressiveness of that position. What is, is our arguments in front of the court, and we look forward to the court’s decision. Mr.

Speaker:The member for Saanich North and the Islands on a supplemental. A. Olsen:I remember the time that I was at the local government table. In fact, I’m a member of this assembly because of the frustration that I felt at the top-down rela- tionship between municipalities and the province. Some will say that municipalities are creatures of the province and that, as such, gives us the ability to kind of do whatever we want from this tower that we sit in here. Municipalities are not our junior partner, nor is local government the training ground for provincial or federal politicians.

They are our partners in delivering democratic governance. Brian Frenkel, president of the Union of British Col- umbia Municipalities, has stated that B.C. ’s argument is in conflict with the “intent of the Community Charter and the Local Government Act, which recognizes B.C. ’s local governments collectively as an independent, autonomous and accountable order of government with- in their jurisdiction. ” This government has touted that it wants to build a bet- ter relationship with local governments. Frankly, this is a remarkable way to do that.

If the Attorney General is of the mind to sidestep my general question about relationships with the municipalit- ies, then perhaps it’s best for me to simply ask my former colleague from local government tables, the Minister of Municipal Affairs. What does this government’s interven- tion mean to the relationships with local governments, and should local governments be expecting an even more top- down approach from this province going forward? Hon. D. Eby:Y ou know, the member does raise import- ant questions about that case and about the province’s involvement.

I look forward to having that discussion with the member once the court has issued its decision. I’ll note that the evidence for our province’s approach to municipalities was best demonstrated this week in the city of Victoria, where we entered into an MOU around our respective areas of jurisdiction. This cooperative approach with a city is not unique. We’re in similar discussions with Vancouver, Grand Forks, Hope, and we were in Penticton. It doesn’t always go well, but our spirit of cooperation is there, and for those cities that want to work with us on the difficult issues of the day, we are there.

I know my col- league the Minister of Municipal Affairs is there as well. I look forward to working with our partners in muni- cipal governments, wherever we can do it. [10:40 a.m.] IMPACT OF PROPOSED U.S. LEGISLATION ON CRUISE SHIP INDUSTRY M. de Jong: In the U.S. Congress, legislation has been introduced that could have a devastating impact on B.C. ’s cruise ship–related tourism sector even after borders reopen, as they most surely eventually will.

The Alaska Tourism Recovery Act would allow cruise ships from Seattle to completely bypass B.C. ports like Victoria, Van- couver and Prince Rupert, which would cost tourism oper- ators hundreds of millions of dollars as a result. Tourism operators are hanging on by their fingernails already and desperately looking forward to better days ahead. Those better days are now facing an entirely new challenge.

What assurance has the Premier received from Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski, who’s sponsoring the legislation in Congress, that rule changes allowing cruise ships to entirely bypass B.C. ports will not become permanent? Hon. M. Mark: I appreciate the question from the member opposite. The member is fully aware that the federal government is in charge of our borders. We are working with the federal government to advocate for a robust return to cruise ships and other industries when it’s safe to do so.

Right now our focus is on the rollout of our vaccina- tions, the safety of British Columbians and our borders here in B.C. When it’s safe, we’re going to open up inter- national borders, but that’s not up to me, and the member knows that. The member knows that it’s up to the federal government. It’s their mandate and jurisdiction to manage border control. The advocacy…. Interjections. Hon. M. Mark: I don’t know why the members are heckling about border control and jurisdiction. We’re in a federal state. Interjections. Hon. M. Mark:Because we are not allowed….

It is not up to me as the provincial minister to open up the borders. But the advocacy…. What we are doing in British Colum- 950 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, March 23, 2021

bia is advocating for the vaccination rollout, for people to be safe and then to open up the borders. Mr. Speaker:The member for Abbotsford West on a supplemental. M. de Jong:Well, that’s a troubling response on all kinds of fronts if the minister doesn’t understand that the essence of the question is that when borders eventually do open up, people won’t be coming here anymore. They won’t be coming because of a legislative change being pres- ented in Congress, in Washington, D.C. Alaska is our neighbouring state. I hope the minister knows that.

Alaska is our neighbouring state, and the Pre- mier of British Columbia received a copy of a letter written by the Alaska congressional delegation almost a month and a half ago, seeking engagement on this matter that is so important to B.C. tourism operators. Now they’ve upped the ante. They’ve upped the ante by introducing legislation that could cost our struggling tourism sector hundreds of millions of dollars every year, on a permanent basis.

My question to the Premier: has he spoken to Senator Murkowski, has he written to Senator Murkowski, has he written to the Alaska congressional delegation, has he engaged with them, and if not, why not? The stakes for B.C. ’s tourism sector are incredibly high and require engagement by this Premier and this government. Hon. M. Mark: I appreciate the question from the member opposite. We will do that advocacy with the fed- eral government on borders reopening and international travel. The member opposite knows full well that they have made the decision about the cruise ships. Interjections. Mr. Speaker:Members.

Hon. M. Mark:The member opposite wants to remind me about geography, and the member opposite wants to remind me about cruise ships. It is an international border. It is up to the federal government to make those rules. Interjections. Mr. Speaker:Members, let’s listen to the answer, please. Hon. M. Mark:We are going to do the advocacy. The Premier and our government will do the advocacy with the federal government to advocate that the borders be open. We are on the best coast; we’re on the west coast. Interjections. Hon. M. Mark:Y es, it is. Mr. Speaker:Members. [10:45 a.m.] Hon. M.

Mark:The members opposite want a lesson in geography around Alaska and B.C. They are two different countries. International rules apply around international waters. The advocacy from the provincial government will deal with the federal government and the Prime Minister. Interjections. Mr. Speaker:Members. That question and answer are over. Let’s listen to the next one. T. Stone:Well, for the minister’s benefit, what we’re talk- ing about here today is called the Jones Act. She might want to go and look it up and maybe read it or have her advisers tell her what it’s all about.

This is a significant threat to the tourism sector in British Columbia and to the cruise sector in particular. The nature of the questions here today is not about working with the federal government to reopen the bor- ders or not. The question is: does the B.C. government have a plan for when the borders do reopen, so that there’s still a cruise industry here in British Columbia? That’s what we’re trying to get at here today, Minister. The issue is very clear. Alaska is sending some very strong signals — well, not even signals. They’re being very, very upfront about it. They want to protect their cruise industry.

They were mys- tified at the lack of engagement on the part of the B.C. and the Canadian governments, when the borders were closed. They’re now saying that they’re prepared to move forward without us. The question to the Premier is this. Has the Premier sought guarantees or assurances from his American coun- terparts that B.C. will not be permanently bypassed as a cruise destination when the pandemic is over? Hon. M. Mark: What our government is going to do right now, in the middle of a global pandemic, is focus on the vaccination rollout. We’re going to focus on people being safe and being healthy.

Then when we’re able to open up the borders and have people come to the best destina- tion in B.C., we need…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker:Members. Minister, just a second. Hon. M. Mark:Hon. Speaker…. Mr. Speaker:No, Minister. Take your seat. Members, you’re wasting your time. The Minister will continue. Tuesday, March 23, 2021 British Columbia Debates 951

Hon. M. Mark:I was saying, before I got laughed at by the opposition, that of course we care about the tourism sector. Of course we care about cruise ships and Destina- tion B.C., and being a destination for international travel- lers to come here to British Columbia. Right now we’re in the middle of a global health crisis. The focus of the provincial health officer is to get the vac- cinations rolled out, so that we’re all safe to travel across B.C., across all the regions, in all the area codes. We will do the advocacy with our federal partners and our border partners.

Of course, we’re going to do that work, but right now, the focus is on the vaccination rollout. T. Stone:I think there’s a reason — a very good reason — here to be skeptical about the effectiveness of this gov- ernment and this minister in particular, when it comes to looking out for the tourism sector. The tourism sector asked for $680 million in support almost a year ago. They got 50 million bucks. The tourism sector asked for tangible actions to help them survive, and they got a task force report, which has a bunch of recom- mendations that haven’t even been implemented yet.

They’ve asked for a relief on fixed costs, and they haven’t received that. Now, the cruise industry is saying: “We are seriously concerned that we may not exist as an industry if the United States, Alaska in particular, goes ahead in bypassing B.C. ’s ports — specifically Vancouver, Victoria and Prince Rupert. ” Every cruise ship that pulls into Van- couver is worth $3 million in economic activity. I’ll remind the minister that this industry employs 20,000 British Col- umbians. Again, the question to the Premier is: does he have assurances? Does he have guarantees?

Has he had any recent conversations, with his U.S. counterparts in Alaska, that would provide some comforts to the cruise industry in British Columbia, to the thousands of people that work in the sector that we will not be bypassed if the Alaskans move forward with the plans that they have indicated they’re going to do? [10:50 a.m.] Hon. M. Mark:The member opposite talks about the task force. Our government called together a task force. I hope that the member opposite is not mocking their expertise and their advice to government. They gave advice. They gave seven recommendations.

We received the report on December 9. On December 23, we rolled out…. The member opposite is not quite accurate with his math. He says $50 million; $100 mil- lion was devoted to the tourism industry. We value the tourism industry. We listened. We’re moving on the recommendations. The industry is asking for certification, safety certifica- tion. They’re asking for dedicated funds to the Indigenous tourism sector, which was thriving before the pandemic. That work is underway. The members opposite can mock all they want about responding to advocacy and implementing recommenda- tions from a task force.

We’re going to continue doing the work. We’re going to continue valuing the tourism sector and make sure that they’re better than ever after this pan- demic is over. COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR TOURISM INDUSTRY AND REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS T. Wat:Here’s another example to show the incompet- ence of this government, this Premier and this minister. I hope the minister listens carefully to my question. Two weeks ago we asked the Premier why travel agen- cies who have been shut down are still being forced to pay government licensing fees.

Instead of providing an answer to the hundreds of travel agencies who are asking about these fees, the minister chose to quote Michelle Obama and told us that implementing all the tourism task force recommendations was “impossible. ” So what was she talk- ing about — the task force just now? Small businesses have been pleading for relief for months. My question is to the Premier. Will the Premier fix his Tourism Minister in action and waive these fees? Hon. M. Mark: The member opposite, if we go back to the transcripts, will hear that you can’t do everything at the same time.

The priorities of the seven recommend- ations…. We moved on the first three. I can spell out the math — one, two, three. The first three recommend- ations have been implemented. We are working through the recommendations because we value the task force. We value their advice. The industry has had a direct seat at the table with our great Dr. Bonnie Henry. She’s heard directly from the sector about their needs, what the challenges are with this pandemic. The advocacy and work are being done with the ministry…. Interjections. Mr. Speaker:Members, let’s listen to the answer, please. The Minister will continue. Hon.

M. Mark:Thank you, hon. Speaker. The member opposite is not accurately reflecting the actions that our government has taken to implement the task force recommendations. The experts asked our gov- ernment to dedicate $100 million. Money has gone out the door; $40 million has gone out to some of those tourism, small business operators throughout this province. It is not accurate for the member opposite and the members of the opposition to reflect that action isn’t being 952 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, March 23, 2021

taken, because we are working with the sector. We’re at the table. Dr. Bonnie Henry is hearing directly what the con- cerns are. We’re moving the dial slowly as this vaccination is rolled out. Mr. Speaker:The member for Richmond North Centre on a supplemental. T. Wat:The minister claimed two weeks ago that: “We can’t move any quicker than we are. ” Dennis from Optimal Travel says: “The travel industry was hit the most since the beginning of the pandemic, with zero revenue but countless cancellations. We can’t sustain our business. ” Thousands of dollars in licence fees are due in just seven days. Just one week.

Let me try the Premier one more time, on behalf of all of the suffering travel agencies. Will the Premier waive these licensing fees, or will travel agencies pay for his incompet- ence? Interjection. Hon. M. Mark:The member opposite’s yes or no…. [10:55 a.m.] The members opposite think that…. They have their experience with, you know, this idea of duffle bags and ATMs and $20 coming out of nowhere. We are working with the budget process. We are doing the advocacy to get the money out the door through treasury. There is a pro- cess to advocate for those resources. We are working closely with the industry.

We value the tourism sector. There are grants available to the tourism industry, up to $45,000, which was a call to action — grants, not loans — and we’re going to continue doing the work. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon. M. Farnworth:I call committee on Bill 10. [11:00 a.m.] Committee of the Whole House BILL 10 — SUPPLY ACT (No. 1), 2021 The House in Committee of the Whole on Bill 10; N. Letnick in the chair. The committee met at 11:01 a.m. On clause 1. M. Bernier:I didn’t know if the minister was going to start with the bill, so I’ll jump right in here, as I am very eager to do so.

Let me just start off by maybe highlighting some of the comments that we’ve heard over the last few days in this House. I’m going to get to some in detail a little bit later throughout the proceedings here and the debate in com- mittee stage on Bill 10. But, really, why we’re here…. And some of the comments that have been made are quite not factual. But let me start with the fact that we are dealing with something out of the normal.

The minister and her col- leagues have continually — for good reason, I’ll give them that — over the last few weeks that we’ve been sitting, con- tinued talking about the challenges and the stresses that the pandemic has brought on. Everyone on this side of the House actually acknowledges that. Through the course of the debate on Bill 10, I would have thought, if the minister and the members opposite were listening to the comments from opposition and even third-party members, that it was very evident that we understood the unique situations that government is facing.

Throughout this entire debate, we also understood the fact that the continuation of government is important, that spending in critical areas is important. Let me back up, though, by saying that we are in a situ- ation because of this government — their inability of get- ting a budget presented in this House when it should have been, by legislation. Granted, old legislation, because this government had to change it to meet their needs of not being able to get a budget put forward in time, but we’re in this situation because of their inaction.

We’re in a situation now where we have a bill in front of us where they’re asking for almost $13.5 billion on one piece of paper. There is no information about where it’s going to be spent. That’s kind of where we’ve been going with our comments during debates, and our questions are going to come up during estimates. It’s incumbent on us to ask these. It’s incumbent on the minister to show transpar- ency around accountability of this House on how money is going to be spent.

But let me say that every single member in opposition, when they stood up, recognized that, yes, we’re in a sad situation of this government not being able to follow the rules and get a budget presented in time, so they’re here asking for money. We acknowledge that. We understand that. We understand that they weren’t able to do their jobs. And because of that, we also understand that they’re here having to ask for money to continue paying the bills on April 1. [11:05 a.m.] I think every single person that spoke here acknow- ledged that.

I think every single person that spoke acknowledged with gratitude the work of front-line workers, our caregivers, our teachers, our doctors — everybody who has stepped up during this time, during this pandemic. Tuesday, March 23, 2021 British Columbia Debates 953

I’m going to give the minister, I think, my first question. I’m going to give the minister an opportunity maybe to correct, apologize or withdraw, at her choice, some of her comments in her closing arguments on this bill in

section 2, when the minister said that members on this side of the House had said that we were against health care workers getting paid on April 2, that we were against teachers get- ting paid on April 2, that we were against doctors and oth- er people who have stepped up getting paid on April 2. I’ve looked throughHansard. I haven’t heard that or seen that from one person on this side of the House. Can the minister start with my first question of giving me the names of the members, or tabling in this House, during the course of the debate on

section 2, the mem- bers that said that they don’t want to see anybody get paid as of April 2? Hon. S. Robinson:I certainly heard members opposite say that they did not support the bill, so to me that indic- ates that they did not support people getting paid. We cer- tainly saw that during…. I had to call division because there was certainly somebody on the other side who held up an X.

Unfortunately, I didn’t get to see who it was, but there was certainly an X flashed on the screen, which sug- gested to me that I was confirmed in my assessment that members on the other side had said that they did not sup- port the bill. To me, this bill is about making sure that people get paid. To me, that’s quite clear. Let me say that I’m looking back through history a little bit and have had the opportunity to take a look at interim supply bills, historically here in this chamber.

Going back to 1986, the year of Expo, Socred government, and a sup- ply bill was passed in the House on March 27, for example, here in this House. Then again in ’87, and ’88, March 24, another interim supply bill. And then again in ’88, ’89, and so on and so forth. In fact, every year a supply bill is passed in this House, recognizing that budget estimates haven’t been done. I recognize that the members are frustrated that a budget isn’t being presented until April 20. I appreciate that.

That’s why the supply bill before us is based on last year’s estimates, so that people can see and the members opposite can see exactly where spending will happen until we present our budget, debate it and hopefully pass it in the House. M. Bernier:The minister made some interesting com- ments. Have no fear to the minister because we’ll have lots of questions around the comments that she just made around history, around what’s normal, around the process of this House, the legalities and the legislation and the pro- cess that guides this establishment, and how work is sup- posed to take place here.

Again, I just want to go back, just for the record, to acknowledge that the minister can try to put words in people’s mouths, and she can try to guess what people on this side of the House said. But not one person on this side of the House said that they were against anybody getting paid on April 2. Not one person. The minister can make assumptions all she wants, but her closing arguments were very disingenuous. They were not accurate. We’ll get into this a little bit later, in a second here, on some of the technicalities of why I know she’s inaccurate.

I’ll give the minister one more chance, because every single person on this side of the House when they spoke — and I listened very carefully to those comments — they were speaking against the process. They were speaking against the fact that this government has been unable to do their jobs. They’ve been speaking out for transparency and accountability. [11:10 a.m.] That’s what people were speaking for.

That’s what people are against, the fact that this government is not following through with their obligation as an elected government — the roles and responsibilities of putting a budget forward, the duty of being accountable and transparent with that budget in a timely manner. That’s not for the benefit of opposition. We have a job to do on behalf of the people of British Columbia, our constituents, to ask the questions, to ask for that accountability — to do our jobs to make sure that that’s presented here in the House, that it’s scrutinized, so the public can see where money is being spent. It’s their money.

We owe that to them. That’s why members on this side of the House were speaking against the bill. Almost every member also said that they recognized that the government has a majority, that they’re going to use that majority and they’re going to push this through regardless of any conversation that we have in here, unfortunately. But her comments were not accurate. I’ll give her anoth- er chance to clarify and withdraw them. Hon. S. Robinson: Well, the member just said that people did not support the bill. That’s what he just said — that people were speaking out against the bill. That’s what this bill is about.

It’s about paying people. While I appreciate the members opposite…. I can appreciate that the member across the way feels defensive. I know that the member has expressed some concern when I called the division yesterday, because I did see an X on the screen. I wish I had documented exactly which of their members was not interested in supporting the bill with their X showing. I guess it’s the downside of the tech- nology. Y ou put the X up in front of your face, and it’s too far away, the screen, for me to see who it was. Again, to me, that speaks volumes. I know that the member was a little surprised by that.

I was too, frankly. But it goes to show that either members didn’t understand what we were debating…. I don’t for a second believe that 954 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, March 23, 2021

there are members in this House who don’t think that people are doing good work on our behalf, keeping us safe, keeping our children safe, keeping our seniors safe. We need to remember what this bill is about. This bill is about making sure those people get paid. So when I have heard members say, “I’m speaking against this bill; I don’t support this bill, ” that is what I hear. I hear that they don’t believe that people should get paid. That is what I spoke to. Now, I haven’t gone through all ofHansard over the last number of weeks. I could certainly do that. I understand we’re going to be here for a few days.

I would be happy to go overHansard, should I find the time. For all I know, there might be people scurrying around that are looking forHansard right now. But at the end of the day, making sure that the good people doing the work on our behalf as citizens, that chil- dren have access to good learning opportunities, that seni- ors are cared for in the homes in which they find them- selves, that people who are doing incredible work getting millions of us vaccinated as quickly as possible so that we can get back to normal…. We are the ones, government, that pays them to do that important work.

I do believe the member opposite wants to make sure they get paid. But in terms of the debate that I certainly heard in this House, I heard members opposite saying that they don’t support the bill. Their vote yesterday pointed that they did. I was really glad to see that. I do think it is incumbent on us as representatives of our constituents to recognize that our constituents want these people to get paid. They value that and they recognize that, so I’m pleased to see that all members in the House sup- ported it.

Their words didn’t necessarily suggest that that was the case, because I did hear members say that they don’t support the bill. I’m glad that the members opposite clarified the record with the voice vote yesterday. [11:15 a.m.] M. Bernier:Again, let’s be clear. There are obviously, for good reason, parts of this bill that many members would say that they don’t support. My point is that nobody said they don’t support the continuation of people getting paid. Interjection. M. Bernier:Pay attention. I’ll give you lots more infor- mation. Y ou can heckle on later. The Chair:Through the Chair, please. Thank you. M.

Bernier:I always appreciate the fact that at the very beginning, one question in, we already get the heckling. It obviously shows the uncomfortableness that members opposite have with this bill as well. In fact, I don’t know if they’ve even read the bill. I listened to their speeches during the debate — their speeches where they stood up and talked about this. Obvi- ously, they didn’t read the bill. Y ou could tell during this. I always love the fact that we get under their skin with one simple question around accountability, and they get defensive.

But I’ll move on, because I know I’ll bring up lots more opportunity for the member to heckle me when I actually highlight all of the flaws that he and his govern- ment have brought forward here with this bill. He can stick around and enjoy the show because he’ll have more to talk about. Let me just continue on with the thought process that I have around some of the minister’s answers as we talk about people getting paid as of April 2, about a process that we have here, in the House, of the government asking for money to do so. The confusion, obviously, with some of the NDP members….

I want the minister to maybe help explain process to the House here. NDP ministers and MLAs during their second reading comments claimed that not passing Bill 10 would cause government workers not to be paid. The NDP members are the ones that said this — that if this bill does not pass, workers will not get paid on April 2. We didn’t say that. The NDP themselves said that. In fact, the Attorney Gen- eral said we’re seeing gamesmanship around supply bills like this in the United States as well. “How does that end up? Government workers go unpaid. Essential services are shuttered.

The only people who hurt are the people in the communities…. ” The member for Courtenay-Comox said, “I’ d like to recall the recent experience south of the border, ” also high- lighting the United States — under a different system, I’ll remind the minister — and some of the issues they have. “I’ d like to recall the recent experience south of the border with the former leader of that nation. His refusal to sup- port paying of the bills with similar interim supply legisla- tion, ” like this, “paralyzed a nation. ” My question to the minister: are those comments accur- ate? Hon. S.

Robinson:Well, the member knows that the interim supply bill provides temporary legal authority for government to continue programs and services into the new fiscal year.

That’s what the purpose of this bill is — to give government the authority to continue. [11:20 a.m.] It’s not just government workers but all of the transfers that are made to the social service sector — all of those people doing amazing work taking care of those most vul- nerable; all of those in the housing sector that are making sure that people continue to have a roof over their heads; all of those workers that are supporting those with devel- opmental disabilities, frail seniors, home support workers. We’re talking about making sure that all of those ser- vices can continue. That’s what a supply bill does.

It’s cer- tainly one that I debated here in the House when the mem- Tuesday, March 23, 2021 British Columbia Debates 955

bers opposite were on the government side. Supply bills would come in. There would be debate. They would pass so that all of that work could continue to happen. All of the work that takes care of our citizens, that makes sure that they have what they need — the services that government provides continue. I expect that this, too, will pass. We certainly had second reading. It passed unanimously in this House, which was a good thing. It certainly warmed my heart to see everybody supporting this bill. I look forward to seeing its enactment so that the people that are doing the good work can continue doing that. M.

Bernier:Y ou know, I don’t argue with most of what the minister just said — the reason of bringing a supply bill forward. I’ll ask some questions specifically around the supply bill a little later on, the technicalities, the timing, etc. I know she’s well aware of that and probably anticip- ating those questions when they come up. But this specif- ic question was: did she agree with the comments of NDP cabinet ministers and MLAs who said that if this bill did not pass, that as of April 2, front-line workers, doctors and services would not be paid?

Is that actually what happens in this province if this bill was not to pass — that people would not get paid? Hon. S. Robinson:Again, having the legal authority to do the work on behalf of the people is why we’re here. It’s why we’re here. This bill gives government the legal authority to make sure that those people — the people that we all care about doing their work — continue to get paid. M. Bernier:It’s a very simple question. I’m unsure why the minister is not willing to step forward and answer it. The simple question is: is the member for Courtenay- Comox right?

Will government not be able to pay its bills on April 2? Is that actually what happens if this fails? Is the Attorney General right in his comments when he says that we’ll turn into American-style systems if this bill does not pass, and people will not get paid? That’s what I’m trying to understand here, on behalf of the people in British Columbia, because they heard cabin- et ministers and they’ve heard government MLAs put the fear into people that if this bill was not to pass, they would not get paid on April 2. I’m just trying to ask the minister if that’s factual. Were those members in her government right?

Hon. S. Robinson:Once again, we bring forward a sup- ply bill every year to make sure that government has the legal authority. My understanding is that supply bills pass — making sure that government has the legal authority to pay the people doing the work. This interim supply bill is no different. It provides tem- porary legal authority for government to continue pro- grams and services into the new fiscal year. [11:25 a.m.] M. Bernier:Well, the minister has read, a few times now, her speaking notes on what a supply bill is. We understand what a supply bill is.

We understand that sup- ply bills are brought in, typically every year, for the con- tinuation of spending for government services. We’re not arguing that. We’re very well aware of it. When we were in government, we understood we had to bring supply bills forward for this exact same purpose. That’s not my question. I’m not asking the minister to explain to me what a supply bill is. I’m asking her to explain to this House the process if this supply bill was to fail. If the ministers and MLAs on the government side of the House are right, does that mean that if this was to fail…?

I know the minister says it’s going to pass. I know they have a majority government, and it’s going to pass. I know it’s going to pass. So what happens if it fails? Do people not get paid on April 2? Hon. S. Robinson:Again, I listened to the rhetoric on the other side. This place is filled with rhetoric. We’ve got plenty of rhetoric, too. I’m not castigating it all on that side of the House, but this is a piece of it. The member is throwing up hypotheticals. The member gets to do that, I suppose. But what I’m here to do is to make sure that we continue to deliver the services that people count on.

That’s why, on this side of the House, where we do have a majority, we’re going to make sure that this bill passes. Actually, after witnessing what I thought was an unusual move by the opposition in seeing somebody throw up that they did not support this supply bill, which surprised me, I thought: “Who’s not going to support the supply bill?” Somebody did put it up on the screen. But when we had the voice vote, we heard that everybody in this House sup- ports this bill. I know that we’re in committee stage to get to some of the nuts and bolts of this bill. I look forward to that.

We’ve had our second reading debate on this bill. Everyone sup- ported it. That’s good. That’s good for the people of Brit- ish Columbia. I’m proud of this government and, in fact, all members of the House for supporting it, because what it means is that we care to make sure that everybody gets paid and government can continue to deliver services. M. Bernier:It’s unfortunate that the minister wants to consider good questions on behalf of the people of British Columbia rhetoric, because these are important questions.

The minister — I’m not sure why — does not want to explain the technicalities of a supply bill that we have here in front of us. The whole point of having a supply bill is to have the discussions around the process, the practicality, the information that’s within it — in this case, very little. I’ll assist the minister. I’ll make it very easy for her, then, 956 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, March 23, 2021

to say yes or no. If the supply bill was to fail, is that con- sidered a confidence motion, a confidence vote? [11:30 a.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:The members are certainly talking hypotheticals and what-ifs, but the reality is we have a majority. This supply bill is going to pass, because that’s what we’re elected to do. We’re elected to do the good work on behalf of the people of this province. It’s why I put my name forward. I know it’s why the other members who are here in the House, those who are on the screen…. Even yourself, Mr. Speaker — I know that’s why you put your name forward.

It’s to do the good work on behalf of the people of this province. We’re going to get the supply bill passed, because we do have a majority. Every member on this side of the House knows that this is what we need to do, in order to keep doing the good work. Based on what I saw and wit- nessed here in this House yesterday, I know that mem- bers on the other side, too, are going to be supporting this supply bill. We all know how important it is to make sure that those services continue for the people of this province. A. Olsen:Thank you to the minister for the response.

I’m somewhat dismayed, because in all of the conversation about rhetoric that’s just been happening, the suggestion that — specifically, from the Third Party — I and my col- league were doing anything but what the Minister just said…. That was our job — to ask questions about a supply bill which was not the same as supply bills of the past, which have passed, but which does have some differences in it. The government was not readily forthcoming in the uniqueness and the impact of that. It’s very challenging for me to hear that the government is doing its job and that they’re going to pass this supply bill.

Y et the second read- ing speeches that we delivered, the concerns that we raised in the minister’s closing comments yesterday, were profiled that we were against supporting the good services that this government produces. There is a disingenuity, at least, in this — that the minis- ter would stand up and suggest that by asking the import- ant questions in this place about the differences, to draw out the uniqueness of the supply bill, would then be mis- construed in the closing comments of that debate as any- thing less than what it was.

Never once did I mention, never once did my colleague mention, that we were against supporting these good ser- vices. In fact, we’ve been in support of this government in developing many of those services that were mentioned. It’s very, very difficult to sit in here and to digest this, in that context.

Perhaps the minister can provide a little bit more detail on how it is that we can reconcile the government doing its job by passing this, almost no questions asked, and the work that we in the opposition have to do — to ask the questions and then have those questions be misconstrued as anything but what they are, which is an honest attempt to understand what is going on — with this supply bill, with this budget cycle, with this government in its first attempt to bring a budget before the people of British Col- umbia. Hon. S.

Robinson:Again, I want to qualify my response — my closing comments, second reading — because I did hear from numerous members that they did not support the bill. They said that. “We don’t support the bill. ” “I’m speaking against the bill. ” I take that seriously. [11:35 a.m.] Now, if they said, “I’m going to support the bill, but I have concerns about this and this, and I look forward to committee stage, when I’m going to ask these questions, ” I appreciate that. That is the job of opposition. I spent four years doing that work. It is important work.

When people say, “I don’t support the bill, ” and then don’t qualify it, or they say, “I like the bill. I like that it’s going to be paying everybody, but I have questions, ” I absolutely appreciate that. They should have questions. But I did hear from a number of members across the way that they did not support the bill, and I take that wholesale. I take people at their word. Now, if they meant something different, fair enough, and they should qualify that. Again, I’m going to come back to the fact that I did…. I wish I could go back and play rewind in my mind and identify the X that I saw on the screen.

But I did see some- body visually not support second reading of Bill 10, which suggests to me that there’s at least one member of the opposition that doesn’t support what this bill does. And that’s disappointing. That is very disappointing. I’m very happy to take members’ questions around how this supply bill is different from previous years. It’s still a supply bill doing the same thing that supply bills have done in the past, which is to keep government services and programs going. I know that the member appreciates how important that is.

It is different, because the budget for this upcoming year isn’t being presented until April 20. I appreciate that. That’s why this bill is based on last year’s estimates so that there is a basis for it that allows us to get through the important work that we’re going to do here when we do present the budget. We have the process of estimates, and I’m sure all mem- bers of the House will be asking questions of every min- ister around what they’re going to be doing in order to continue to deliver services for British Columbians, and they should do that, because that is their job. That is about accountability.

No one is disputing that. But I’m going to come back again to the fact that there were members…. Perhaps it’s new members, and I can cer- tainly recognize that, as new members would say, “I don’t support the bill” and then go to their speaking notes and Tuesday, March 23, 2021 British Columbia Debates 957

specify. But it’s the words when people say, “I don’t sup- port the bill” or “I’m speaking against the bill. ” I hear that as wholesale. If I misinterpreted it, I’ll take responsibility for that, but that is what I heard here in this chamber from members opposite, and I took that to mean that they don’t support folks getting paid. Perhaps they didn’t understand what the bill was about, and I can appreciate that.

I remember being a new member of this chamber in my first supply bill debate and perhaps not really appreciating what it was about and having to ask questions, because it is all new when you are all shiny and not tarnished like…. Well, there are a couple of shiny people that are still here, for different reasons, perhaps. So I do appreciate that — if people did not understand what this bill is about. I hope that through the process over the next, it sounds like, number of days, they are going to get a real good understanding of the supply bill.

But again, speaking directly to the member’s question, I know that he understands the nature of supply bill and what it’s about. I’m here to certainly answer any specific questions that the member might have for the rest of the number of days that we’re going to be here. M. Bernier:It’s interesting listening to the minister’s comments about what she heard and taking them at their word. So using that same analogy or same thought process that the minister just said, I go back to my com- ments, then, that we had a few moments ago, where the member for Courtenay-Comox and the Attorney Gener- al….

Is the public supposed to take them at their word? Does that mean if this bill does not pass on April 2, the doctors, the nurses, the teachers and all the people of British Columbia that rely on a paycheque from this government…. If this bill does not pass, do they get paid or stop getting paid on April 2? [11:40 a.m.] The members talked about — that it will turn into a U.S.-style system, where people don’t get paid.

So I’m just kind of curious if that’s actually what happens, because that’s the feeling now that the people in the province of British Columbia have, based on a minister of the Crown’s comments here in this House. We have another minister of the Crown, the Minister of Finance now, that can set the record straight. Is it possible that on April 2…? Let’s just say that we were in a minority government situation. The minister has already said: “We’re in a majority. ” They’re going to push this through regardless. People are going to contin- ue to get paid. There’s no fear there. She has said that.

Y es, we might be talking about hypotheticals, but I’ d like the answer, on behalf of the people in the province, about that hypothetical. If we are in a minority government situation, then, if this bill did not pass, like any other supply bill in the last previous years, what happens on April 2? Hon. S. Robinson:It sounds like the member wants to debate hypotheticals. Well, I’m not here to debate hypo- theticals; I’m here to debate reality. The reality is that we have a bill before this House that provides government with the legal authority to continue to pay for these ser- vices and these programs.

I look forward to continuing do that work and making sure that we’re talking, grounded in reality, based on what’s presented here in this House in Bill 10, to continue government’s work. We do this debate here, and the people outside of this chamber who are doing the work — they’re also dealing in reality. For me, making sure that government gets the leg- al authority so that they can do their real work is the most important thing for us to be doing right now. M. Bernier:I’ll make it easy for the minister, then. I’ll ask a real question. Is the supply bill a confidence vote? Hon. S.

Robinson:This bill is going to pass. We cer- tainly have seen here in this House yesterday the commit- ment from everybody in this chamber. I look forward to taking the member’s questions, given that we are in com- mittee stage on this bill. I fully expect that we will be passing it later this week. M. Bernier:I’m not sure why the minister is not will- ing to answer just a basic simple question around pro- cess in the House. She said it’s going to pass. Last night we all acknowledged that it’s going to pass by voting in favour to move forward to committee stage so that we could ask these questions.

We signalled, and we under- stand, that bills need to be paid. I’m just asking a simple question. We have, every year, supply bills. Are supply bills confidence votes? [11:45 a.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:Again, what we have here before the House at committee stage is a bill that is to provide gov- ernment with an appropriation to spend money. I look for- ward to getting into the meat of the bill. I don’t believe that dealing in hypotheticals is helpful. The member oppos- ite has even said that he fully expects all members of the House to support this bill.

I know, based on the voice vote that we heard yesterday, that it has become apparent that every member in this chamber supports the bill. I do recognize that the member for Saanich North and the Islands had some questions to ask about process. I look forward to those specific questions. I think we need to recognize, at the end of the day, the supply bill…. It happens every year in this chamber, albeit it’s a little bit different this year because a budget hasn’t been presen- ted yet. It will be in three short weeks, a little over three weeks, and that is unusual.

However, government, every year, brings forward a supply bill to make sure that those people who do the good work continue to get paid until the budget can 958 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, March 23, 2021

be properly reviewed, estimates can happen and a new budget adopted. M. Bernier:Looking at the clock, it’s unfortunate. I thought I had asked a very simple question, around pro- cess, about a bill that this minister tabled in the House. I assumed that I was just going to get an easy “yes” answer and that we were going to move on to the next questions. Believe me, I have lots of questions around this. Let me help the minister, then, and she can correct me if I’m wrong. Supply bills are — from my understanding — a confidence motion, a confidence vote.

The minister, I assumed, would have just stood up and said that, because those are the legislative facts of a monetary bill like the supply act that we have here in front of the House. I’m not sure why she’s not willing to just acknowledge that. It wasn’t a trick question. It wasn’t a rabbit hole I was trying to take the minister down. I was just trying to get it on the record: if we were in a different situation, what are the processes that would take place? Members on that side of the House, and cabinet ministers, have alluded to people not getting paid on April 2 if this bill failed.

I was just trying to help the people of British Columbia and put their fears to rest that those comments weren’t accurate and that, actually, people will continue to get paid. Even if a supply bill fails — this is where the minister will only have to spend a few moments to correct me if I’m wrong — it’s a confidence motion. An order-in-coun- cil through a special warrant would be used to continue paying for the services of government, and the people’s paycheques would still flow, but we would be going to an election if this were to fail. Now, we know that’s not going to happen.

The minister has acknowledged that they’re going to use the majority government to push this through. We’ve acknowledged that we want to ensure that people get paid. I was just ask- ing, for the technicalities, if that were factual. Is what I said on the process…? If this were to fail, would people still get paid on April 2, yes or no? [11:50 a.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:Well, you know, the member sug- gests that it’s not a rabbit hole, that the question is out of curiosity, perhaps. Although, at the same time, the mem- ber did say what he knows to be true.

So if that’s the case, the member can just put on the record what he knows to be true. And that would be, I would imagine, sufficient. Again, what we call money bills are about confidence. But, again, that’s hypothetical. That’s a hypothetical per- spective about whether or not this bill is going to pass. Right? That’s a hypothetical because we saw, in this House, after second reading, that everybody said they support this bill, with a voice vote. That was good to hear. It was good to witness. It’s not what we heard in second reading, so it was nice to hear.

I appreciate that the members have questions as well around the specifics of this bill. I look forward to getting into the specifics of this bill. But, again, what is before this House is the legal authority to continue to do the spend- ing that government needs to do so that those people who are doing incredible work continue to get paid. And I’m really pleased. And I want British Columbians to know that everybody in this House supported that. That’s really, really good to hear, yesterday.

I know that all the members appreciate the work that people are doing on our behalf, on our collective behalf, making sure that we’re safe, making sure that our kids are being taught, making sure that our seniors are cared for. That’s what governments do. Noting the hour, I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. Motion approved. The committee rose at 11:54 a.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. The Committee of the Whole, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again. Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House. Motion approved. Mr.

Speaker:This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon. The House adjourned at 11:55 a.m. Tuesday, March 23, 2021 British Columbia Debates 959

Hansard Services, Reporting and Publishing DIRECTOR D’ Arcy McPherson MANAGER OF REPORTING SERVICES Laurel Bernard MANAGER OF PUBLISHING SYSTEMS Dan Kerr TEAM LEADERS Mike Beninger, Kim Christie, Barb Horricks, Paula Lee, Julie McClung, Karol Morris, Glenn Wigmore EDITORS Erin Beattie, Janet Brazier, Sophie Crocker, Tim Ford, Jane Grainger, Betsy Gray, Iris Gray, Mary Beth Hall, Kendra Heinz, Sophie Heizer, Louis Henderson, Bill Hrick, Jennifer Isaac, Quinn MacDonald, Anne Maclean, Claire Matthews, Jill Milkert, Sarah Mitenko, Erik Pedersen, Janet Pink, Robyn Swanson, Antoinette Warren, Heather Warren, Kim Westad INDEXERS Shannon Ash, Robin Rohrmoser RESEARCHERS Hannah Curran, Brooke Isherwood, David Mattison TECHNICAL OPERATIONS Pamela Holmes, Daniel Powell, Patrick Stobbe Copyright © 2021 Legislative Assembly of British Columbia TheOfficial Report of Debates (Hansard)and webcasts of chamber proceedings are available at www.leg.bc.ca.

For inquiries contact: Hansard Services 612 Government Street Victoria, BC V8V 1X4 Telephone: 250-387-3681 Email: hansardservices@leg.bc.ca Published by Hansard Services under the authority of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20210323am-Hansard-n38
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20210323am Hansard n38
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	71375f6bf1198ce069daf4c88d6aa9e9571ec21c

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