Third Session, 41st Parliament

(2018) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Wednesday, February 14, 2018

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 76

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Stolen Sisters march for missing and murdered Indigenous women

M. Dean

Oceanside

chapter of 100+ Women Who Care

M. Stilwell

Coldest Night of the Year fundraising walk in Burnaby

A. Kang

Coldest Night of the Year fundraiser and community kitchen

S. Cadieux

Real Acts of Caring Week

S. Chandra Herbert

Andrea Paquette and bipolar disorder awareness

L. Reid

Statements

Recognition of service to Legislature by MLAs

A. Wilkinson

Hon. J. Horgan

Oral Questions

Dispute with Alberta on Trans Mountain pipeline and wine industry

A. Wilkinson

Hon. J. Horgan

Dispute with Alberta on Trans Mountain pipeline and North Montney pipeline project

M. Bernier

Hon. J. Horgan

Speculation and tax evasion in real estate industry

A. Weaver

Hon. C. James

Dispute with Alberta on Trans Mountain pipeline and wine industry

J. Johal

Hon. L. Popham

S. Bond

Communications with Alberta government on spill response

announcement

P. Milobar

Hon. G. Heyman

Dispute with Alberta on Trans Mountain pipeline and rule of law

M. Lee

Hon. J. Horgan

Motions Without Notice

Appointment of Special Committee to Appoint an Information and Privacy Commissioner

Appointment of Special Committee to Appoint a Chief Electoral Officer

Appointment of Children and Youth Committee

Appointment of Special Committee to Appoint a Conflict of

Interest Commissioner

Hon. M. Farnworth

Point of Privilege (Reservation of Right)

J. Rustad

Orders of the Day

Throne Speech Debate

S. Chandra Herbert

R. Kahlon

A. Wilkinson

A. Weaver

B. D’Eith

E. Ross

Hon. S. Robinson

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2018

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

L. Reid: Robyn Thomas is the Stigma-Free Society’s community development

manager for all of Vancouver Island. I would ask the House to please join me

in making her extremely welcome. She has presented to thousands of youth and

adults in schools and in the community, sharing her story of resilience and

hope in overcoming mental health challenges. Robyn is also the lead

facilitator for the society’s Teens2Twenties support group for youth living

with mental illness and works to provide mentorship to young people in need

of support. Robyn’s mission is to let others know there is always hope, and

always hope for all those facing great challenges. Please join me in

welcoming Robyn Thomas.

B. Ma: I rise today to make three introductions. With your indulgence, I’ll

begin with the first two. I’ll re-stand for the third.

I understand that I have two constituents actually joining us today

from North Vancouver–Lonsdale. Would the House please join me in making Judy

Coulter and Robert Wilmot feel very welcome here in this House

today.

Hon. S. Robinson: Joining us in the House today is a group of 20 leadership students

from École Banting Middle School, plus three students from Port Moody

Secondary, as well as a student from Gleneagle Secondary and the Langley

School of Fine Arts. They are joined by teacher Harriet Chang, the skill

development teacher at Banting Middle School, two educational assistants and

three parents. They’re in the Legislature today to hear the proclamation of

Real Acts of Caring Week in B.C., which runs from February 11 to 17. It’s

the third time that Real Acts of Caring Week has been proclaimed in the

province.

The leadership students at Central Community School in Port Coquitlam

initiated Real Acts of Caring Week in 2006, when they requested a

proclamation from Port Coquitlam city council. The week has been proclaimed

by municipal councils in the Tri-Cities every year since. Can everyone

please make these students and their teachers and their parents

welcome.

B. Ma: My next introduction is of someone who I actually originally met many

years ago in a former life. At the time, I was a young engineering student

active in student politics, and he was a journalist and editor for The

Ubyssey , which is the University of British Columbia’s student

newspaper. After graduating from UBC in 2011, he joined the

Province newspaper and then moved on to work with Global. He is

here in the House today as CBC’s newest provincial affairs reporter. Would

the House please join me in welcoming Justin McElroy to the chambers today

and every day for as long as he is posted here.

J. Tegart: On behalf of the opposition and, I’m sure, every member in this House,

I had the opportunity today to be on a panel to speak to our new interns.

I’d like to, on behalf of the House, welcome all of them to this place. I

hope your stay is interesting, exciting and career-inspiring.

Welcome.

[1:40 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: I just noticed Harley Rothstein and Eleanor Boyle up in the gallery

today — valued community members in Vancouver and a pleasure to see them

here in the Legislature. I hope we put on a good show for them

today.

J. Routledge: I have a young relative visiting me here this week from London,

Ontario. Elly Fulton is a recent graduate in political science at the

University of Western Ontario. Already she’s discovered that politics are

much more interesting and accessible in B.C. than she’s used to at home.

Please join me in welcoming her to the Legislature in British

Columbia.

S. Chandra Herbert: I just want to wish a very, very special birthday — a happy, happy,

happy birthday — to Dev Juno Chandra Herbert. It’s his first birthday today.

He let me sleep really well last night. He was so excited for today. It’s

been incredible, and thank you to all members for your support and

consideration and celebrations for him. Come drop by. I’ll show you photos

any time.

A. Olsen: I’d just like to introduce a grade 11 Stelly’s student who’s here

doing some job-shadowing today with me, Hunter Alastooka. Hunter is making

himself pretty well known around these parts, actually. He’s already written

the Premier with some ideas on how to get youth more involved and is going

to be meeting with the Minister of Education later today as well, to share

his ideas about how youth can get more involved in the operations of this

place. Would the House please make Hunter feel very welcome.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

STOLEN SISTERS MARCH FOR MISSING

AND MURDERED

INDIGENOUS WOMEN

M. Dean: This Saturday I will join members of my community as we walk

together to remember and honour Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit

people who have gone missing and been murdered. More than 1,200

Indigenous women have been identified as missing or murdered between

1980 and 2012. The actual numbers are likely higher and perhaps much

higher.

This is the tenth year of the Stolen Sisters march in Victoria on

the unceded and traditional territories of the Lekwungen communities,

Songhees and Esquimalt Nations. This Saturday many other marches will be

held across the country.

The message this year, as every year before, is that Indigenous

lives matter. Led by Indigenous women, youth and drummers will march

from Our Place to the front of the B.C. Legislature. Here we’ll gather

to hear speakers, songs and to share food.

We’ll walk together as a community to mourn the losses and stand

for the dignity and honour of Indigenous families. We’ll offer our

support to those whose lives have been touched by tragedy and by the not

knowing of what has happened to their loved ones. We will honour those

who have been taken from us. These sisters, these daughters and these

mothers will not be forgotten.

OCEANSIDE

CHAPTER

OF 100+ WOMEN WHO

CARE

M. Stilwell: My constituency of Parksville-Qualicum is very well known within

its own community for its community spirit and mindfulness. There are a

lot of community groups and organizations doing amazing things which

continue to improve the lives of all those who call the area

home.

One such group I draw your attention to today is 100+ Women Who

Care. This local chapter, founded in January 2017 and which I’m also

honoured to be a member of, has raised an astounding combined total of

$66,000 in just under a year. These funds have been invested into four

very worthy registered charities: Haven Society, the Oceanside Stroke

Recovery Society, Manna Homeless Society and Nanoose Community

Services.

[1:45 p.m.]

While these donations make a huge impact in the local charities,

the process to deliver such a unique gift is quite simple. Members

gather four times a year, for an hour each time. Every member nominates

a charity of their choice and simply adds their ballot to the charity

basket. At each meeting, three charities are pulled, and whoever

nominated the chosen charity presents a five-minute case on why they

believe their charity should receive the funding. At the end of the

presentations, members cast a secret ballot. The most votes win. Each

member pens a cheque for $100, and 100 percent of the members’ donations

go directly to the awarded local charity, which is always more than

$10,000.

It’s a great way to give back for those who don’t have the hours

in their day to volunteer but want to support their amazing community

organizations. Five Oceanside women saw a need in our own community and

founded Oceanside’s local

chapter on January 4, 2017.

I’d like to pay tribute to the talented Judy Miller, Deb

Patterson, Joan Ethier, Patricia Manuel and Melissa Tracey for their

inspiration and commitment to make our community a better place for

everyone to live, work and play. This community initiative goes to show

that simple can be powerful.

COLDEST NIGHT OF THE YEAR

FUNDRAISING WALK IN

BURNABY

A. Kang: I am rising to recognize a joint effort of Burnaby Community

Services and Society to End Homelessness in Burnaby in raising

homelessness awareness. Every year these two organizations in Burnaby

organize the Coldest Night of the Year walk. This meaningful event

raises awareness by offering a glimpse into the challenges faced by

people who are homeless.

Although we may never truly understand the hardship of those who

do not have a place to call home, I hope, through efforts like this,

that we can rally more support to take care of the most vulnerable in

our society.

The walk will take place later this month — on February 24, 2018,

between 4 p.m. and 8 p.m. The walk will begin at Marlborough Elementary

School in Burnaby. There are already 23 teams and 104 walkers signed up.

All my colleagues from Burnaby — Burnaby-Lougheed, Burnaby-Edmonds and,

as well, Burnaby North — will be there joining the meaningful event. We

have our walking shoes ready, and we have our warm jackets ready to

go.

All registered participants will be given a warm but really

cool-looking toque. Participants can choose to walk two kilometres or

five kilometres or ten kilometres. I’ll let people guess which one I’ll

be walking.

I would like to welcome everyone to join the efforts, with

hundreds and thousands of British Columbians around the province, to

walk for a good cause. To find the location closest to you, please visit

the Coldest Night of the Year at cnoy.org for an organization in your

community.

COLDEST NIGHT OF THE YEAR

FUNDRAISER AND COMMUNITY

KITCHEN

S. Cadieux: Like the member from Deer Lake, I, too, will be participating in

the Coldest Night of the Year.

In 2010, the soup kitchen that was being operated by a number of

different church groups had to be discontinued because the building they

were using was being demolished for future development in Cloverdale.

Recognizing that a new home had to be found, community leaders turned to

the congregation of the Pacific Community Church, which was meeting at a

renovated warehouse and had extra space.

It wasn’t long, though, before the reality of the inadequate

facility was evident. Food had to be cooked elsewhere and transported to

the church, and clearly, that was problematic. But the Cloverdale

community was not willing to turn away from the needs of the hungry and

homeless. It didn’t take long for the church to envision and commit to

building a full commercial kitchen with an initial $25,000 and then

applying for a matching grant from the city of Surrey’s Homelessness and

Housing Task Force. The group went on to fundraise the total cost of

$400,000.

The Coldest Night of the Year, the national walk for homelessness

coming up on February 24, last year raised $35,000 to help keep the

kitchen operating. With hundreds of walkers expected this year, the goal

has been raised to $45,000. Today that kitchen serves more than 200

meals a week. It’s become a networking hub where people come together to

learn, to work and to help our most vulnerable to connect with resources

and supports.

Many thanks to Alan Caldwell, Jim Heuving, Matthew Campbell,

Pacific Community Church, Cloverdale Christian Fellowship and Cloverdale

Presbyterian Church, and all the caring individuals and groups that

helped to ensure this vital resource keeps serving.

I’ll be supporting my local events — there are two — on February

24, and I encourage others to join me for that worthy cause.

[1:50 p.m.]

REAL ACTS OF CARING WEEK

S. Chandra Herbert: I rise today to celebrate Real Acts of Caring Week.

It’s a week, formerly known as Random Acts of Kindness Week, that

is all about giving and not expecting anything in return. Students at

École Banting have been running this program for 12 years and are so

proud of it that they’ve managed to convince students across Canada — I

believe a good number in Ontario — to do the same thing. They get

together. They go out. Maybe they surprise somebody with a free coffee

at the coffee shop. Maybe they help somebody who needs hair by cutting

off all of their own.

They’ve told stories about how their kindness and reaching out to

folks who may be different from them have led to, in one case, an

elderly man crying because nobody had been kind to him or even spoken

with him in far too long. That, in turn, made the student almost start

to cry. They didn’t realize, perhaps, the impact that something as small

as saying hello and giving somebody a cup of coffee could

have.

Real acts of kindness are something I think we all do, but we all

need to do more of. It takes bravery, stepping outside of our everyday

circle, maybe stepping into something unfamiliar, but these students are

showing that with that kind of leadership, you can bring communities

together. You can unite people across divides. You can make a

difference.

Real acts of caring are practised in B.C. all the time. I think of

the young man who stepped forward to stand up against racism impacting a

younger Muslim woman on transit a couple of months back. I think of so

many in our communities who give without expecting anything and would be

mortified if their names were ever acknowledged for doing what they do.

They just do it, because it’s the right thing.

So let’s join together, thank the students for showing that

leadership and thank everybody who takes a stand and is kind to another

person, an animal, this province that we call home.

Kindness — it’s a good thing. Happy Valentine’s Day.

ANDREA PAQUETTE AND

BIPOLAR DISORDER

AWARENESS

L. Reid: Andrea Paquette, also known as the Bipolar Babe, created the

Bipolar Babe project in 2009. She’s now president of the Stigma-Free

Society, which she founded in 2010. Andrea is grateful for the support

of MLAs for Vancouver–False Creek, Victoria–Beacon Hill and North

Vancouver–Seymour. The charity’s interactive and powerful website,

www.stigmafreezone.com, gives people a place to connect and find

valuable information and support.

Andrea is passionate about educating today’s youth on societal

stigmas, especially mental illness stigma that negatively affects

people’s perceptions of themselves and others. She shares her personal

story of struggle and triumph since her bipolar diagnosis in 2005. She

is an award-winning mental health activist, educator, facilitator,

author and speaker. It is through her story that she is able to share

her personal views and educated opinions with the community on mental

health and stigma.

In seven years, Andrea has presented her story at hundreds of

schools, workplaces, community organizations and events, reaching

thousands of people. Her message of stomping out stigma and mental

health awareness is engaging, entertaining, enlightening and

eye-opening. Andrea launched the Stigma-Free Zone movement in British

Columbia in partnership with co-founder Mr. Dave Richardson. Andrea

consistently shares her encouraging message that no matter what our

challenges, we can live extraordinary lives.

Take the stigma-free pledge today at

www.stigmafreezone.com.

A. Wilkinson: I’m going to seek leave to make a statement about two of our

colleagues.

Leave granted.

Statements

RECOGNITION OF SERVICE

TO LEGISLATURE BY

MLA s

A. Wilkinson: I’m rising in the House today to take note of the lengthy career

of two of our colleagues here in this House, two people who have

dedicated most of their adult lives to the service of this chamber and

to the people of British Columbia. These are exemplary service

records.

I start with the member for Abbotsford West, who this Saturday

will mark his 24th anniversary as an MLA. He has served in portfolios

ranging from Minister of Forests to Attorney General and, of course,

Minister of Finance. For many years, no matter which side of the House

he sat on, he served as House Leader, and his breadth of experience and

intricate knowledge of the procedures of the House and of the ways of

government have been an enormous asset to all of us on both sides of the

House.

He is relied upon as a wise and experienced mentor to us all, and

I would love to speak his name, but instead, I’ll refer to him as the

member for Abbotsford West.

[1:55 p.m.]

Secondly, an even more notable feat, I think, is the member from

Langley East, who has served in so many different roles. He is a

longtime friend and a longtime colleague of all of us in this House, and

of course, time and again he has stepped up to tasks which others would

be daunted by and succeeded in those tasks. For the past seven months,

he’s brought a steady hand and the kind of leadership needed for an

unexpected role as the interim Leader of the Opposition.

Now, in terms of time spent in the Legislature, he’s only been

here for 22 years, but each of those has been eventful and exciting and

has been a source of inspiration to all of us in terms of his dedication

to the public service and to the interests of British

Columbians.

I’ve had the pleasure of working closely with him over these years

and have learned a lot from him as a parliamentarian and as a lawmaker.

I want to publicly thank the member for Langley East for his service to

the party and to the people of British Columbia and for his lengthy

service in government. It’s his passion, fire and desire to make B.C. a

better place that will remain with all of us after his time has passed,

and I hope that that will be some years to come.

I would offer these two remarkable individuals to the House for

recognition and, I hope, some applause. [Applause.]

Hon. J. Horgan: I want to join with the Leader of the Official Opposition and pay

tribute to two old hands, seasoned parliamentarians. I will note that

the member for Abbotsford West was elected at age six and now after 24

years here is just coming into his own. Of course, to the member for

Langley East, kudos — as I said at the end of the last session — for

stepping into the job of Leader of the Official Opposition as the

members on the other side selected a new leader.

I’ve had the good fortune of working with both of these

individuals over the 12 years I’ve been a member of the Legislature. I

was House Leader for a period of time, and I had both of them as my

opposite numbers during that time. I also had an energy portfolio, in

common with the member for Langley East. Although I don’t think he can

recall me agreeing with him on anything at all during that time, I did

learn a great deal from him. I learned a great deal about how to comport

yourself under duress and in difficult situations. Similarly, that can

be said about the member for Abbotsford West.

Both of them sat in government for a long, long time. I’m coming

on to seven months now, and I realize what an enormous contribution

these two individuals have made since 2001. I could name a number of

other people. I point particularly to the member from Prince George on

that question.

It’s not without humility that I thank the members on the other

side for their work in government and encourage them to practise,

practise, practise at the opposition thing. Over time, you’ll get

really, really good at it. To the two members mentioned, thank you from

this side of the House. [Applause.]

Oral Questions

DISPUTE WITH ALBERTA ON

TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE

AND WINE INDUSTRY

A. Wilkinson: We all know that yesterday’s throne speech contained a variety of

spending commitments but precious little in terms of real plans to

support our economy. In fact, the government has done the exact

opposite.

In recent weeks, the Premier and his Minister of Environment have

succeeded in triggering a completely unnecessary trade dispute with

Alberta. Now in full retreat, he maintains that he was not seeking to be

provocative. However, having already triggered an escalating trade war

with the neighbouring province as well as the condemnation of leaders

from across the country, the Premier has a lot to answer for.

Sadly, it’s the British Columbia wine industry that is taking the

first kick in the shins on this file. It will immediately lose $70

million in revenue because of a decision by the government of Alberta in

retaliation for a provocative gesture from the Minister of Environment

and the Premier. Does the Premier accept that a trade war with Alberta

does not serve the interests of British Columbians at all?

Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the Leader of the Official Opposition for his first

question in that portfolio. I want to congratulate him on taking on the

responsibility.

[2:00 p.m.]

To all members on the opposite side who put their names forward, I

know that was a tremendous sacrifice to your families and to your

communities, and I wish you all well. Certainly, I wish the Leader of

the Opposition well in the days and weeks and months and many years

ahead.

When it comes to standing up and defending B.C.’s interests, I’ll

take no lessons from those on the other side. I believe we are well

within our jurisdiction to stand up and defend our economy and our

environment, and that’s exactly what we’re doing.

The response from the Premier of Alberta was surprising to me, but

I am not going to rise to the bait. I am not going to respond with

anything other than kindness and graciousness in the hope that the

government on the other side will recognize that they have signed

agreements within the Confederation on the new west partnership, the

TILMA agreement and others that restrict their ability to hamper trade

between provinces. I would hope that they would live up to those signed

agreements.

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

supplemental.

A. Wilkinson: Well, the Premier takes a very procedural and legal approach to an

issue that is blossoming in the newspapers and turning into a national

crisis triggered entirely by him. No one is convinced by his response

today, particularly our small wineries, who have been cut off from their

largest export market.

Winemakers like Stella Schmidt from Oliver are facing serious

losses while the Premier tries to find a convenient retreat from this

blunder that he’s engaged in. In Stella’s words: “Our winery is an

innocent victim of a petty dispute between two irrational NDP

governments.” Her message to the Premier is simple: “We can’t afford to

wait this out. Fix this any way you can right now.”

So for Stella Schmidt, what immediate steps will the Premier take

to remedy this problem that he has created through his own initiative?

Will he get on a plane to Edmonton, eat some humble pie and solve this

problem before British Columbia goes into a tailspin?

Hon. J. Horgan: Again, I understand the Leader of the Opposition is not interested

in defending the jurisdictional issues that are at play here. He doesn’t

care about our coast and the consequences of a catastrophic

spill.

It was on the watch of the B.C. Liberals that we gave up our

ability to manage these issues by coordinating with a process that we’re

now told by the federal government is inadequate. The federal government

is now reviving its environmental assessment processes after they made a

decision that disregarded the impacts on the province of British

Columbia.

I will take the criticism from the member of the other side that

I’m working too hard to defend the interests of British Columbia. I’m

fine with that.

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

supplemental.

A. Wilkinson: The Premier seems to be almost entirely isolated in the Canadian

federation in thinking that he is acting in British Columbia’s interests

within the constitutional framework, because the rest of the country

seems to be completely dismissive of his defense. Particularly, he’s

created problems that go well beyond the wine industry.

On February 8, there was a submission to the National Energy Board

from the Alberta Department of Energy that came out in opposition to the

North Montney mainline extension. This is a critical outflow pipeline

for $2 billion worth of natural gas necessary for the eastern markets,

and it comes entirely from British Columbia. This is not a coincidence.

The Alberta government has never expressed opposition to this proposed

pipeline until last week. So we see that this trade war is about to

escalate beyond a $70 million wine industry loss into a $2 billion loss,

with thousands of jobs at stake — all on this Premier’s watch, all

totally unnecessary, all likely outside the constitutional limits of our

federation.

Will the Premier of British Columbia get on that plane to

Edmonton, eat some humble pie, solve this problem and get British

Columbians back to work?

Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the member for his question. I think he’s a bit wrong on

the facts. The application to the National Energy Board to move gas

through Alberta is always open to suggestion and intervention by other

jurisdictions. This is not unique. In fact it’s quite common, and it

will not have the impact that the member suggests.

But I do take his question very seriously, and I believe that the

only isolation in this chamber is those on the other side who don’t

believe that it’s the responsibility of the government of British

Columbia to defend the interests of British Columbians, and that’s

exactly what we’re doing.

[2:05 p.m.]

When it comes to the wine industry…. I just returned from a trip

to Asia, where I was in China, I was in South Korea, and I was in Japan.

At every event, we promoted agrifoods in British Columbia. At every

event, there were B.C. wines being served, delighted to have the product

in those markets — large markets, emerging markets in an area we’re

going to focus our attention.

I know the member will want to keep on this theme for the next

number of days. He’ll be happy to hear the Minister of Agriculture’s

announcements on how we’re going to work to support not just the growers

but the producers of wine in British Columbia over the next number of

days.

DISPUTE WITH ALBERTA ON

TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE AND

NORTH MONTNEY PIPELINE PROJECT

M. Bernier: Only in an NDP world are killing jobs and hurting investment and

making sure people don’t want to come to B.C. actually looking out for

B.C.’s interests.

We have a $2 billion pipeline opportunity here from British

Columbia through Alberta to serve the rest of Canada. As was said, this

is no coincidence — that only last week Alberta finally stepped up and

said no, they want to intervene on this project. So 2,500 jobs are at

risk, over $1 billion of investments that are going to help Canadian

companies moving forward. This is going to benefit British Columbia and

Alberta.

But this Premier, instead of trying to make sure that we work

together to make sure we have a strong economy, is doing everything

possible to put roadblocks in the way to make sure that we have this

unnecessary trade war. Will the Premier, again, stand up, put an end to

this and finally look out for jobs of the people of British Columbia —

the investment that we should be seeing, that we’re not

having?

Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the member for his question. He comes from the Peace

country. He knows full well how the National Energy Board works. He

knows full well what roll-in tariffs are all about and what a producer’s

cost would be to get pipelines going.

This is not unusual, for jurisdictions to intervene at the

National Energy Board. We’ve done it in the past. Alberta’s done it in

the past. Nothing to see here. I will say that it is absolutely

appropriate for the government of Alberta to ensure that the costs

incurred in having pipes go through their territory are borne by the

people who will benefit from that.

Our argument, when it comes to moving diluted bitumen into British

Columbia, is the federal government disregarded the consequences. They

only looked at one part of the benefit here. They didn’t look at the

downsides. In cooperative federalism, which is what I thought we

operated under here in Canada, you should have everybody at the table,

everybody benefiting. That’s not the case with diluted

bitumen.

Mr. Speaker: Peace River South on a supplemental.

M. Bernier: It’s great that he says, “Nothing to see here,” because that’s

what happened in the throne speech yesterday, from what I could

tell.

It’s unfortunate the Premier can’t actually understand the damage

he’s causing here. Alberta was fine with this project up until last

week. They had many opportunities to stand up and oppose this project,

yet they chose not to, probably because they were looking out for the

interests of all of Canada, as well, and making sure they weren’t

opposing what were good jobs, opportunities for B.C. and for

Alberta.

February 8, last week — this is no coincidence — the Alberta

government has stepped up. This is going to hurt the Peace region. It’s

going to hurt the people of British Columbia. And it sends, again, the

wrong message for why people should even want to move here or invest in

our province.

This is completely started and caused by this Premier trying to

pick a school yard brawl with his neighbouring NDP government. Will the

Premier finally put an end to this, do what he says he’s trying to do

and look out for the people of British Columbia?

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, on the 30th of January, we announced that we were going to

consult with British Columbians on the best way to protect our economy

and our environment. That’s what we did.

If the members on the other side don’t want to talk to British

Columbians, if they’d rather listen to interventions at the National

Energy Board…. I wish they’d shown up when the National Energy Board was

looking at Kinder Morgan. Then we might have had a better

outcome.

We can read back the interventions from the member on the other

side, if that’s how we want to spend question period. But the issue at

play here is the ability of the government of British Columbia to stand

up for the interests of this province. I would have thought a former

Attorney General and I would have thought representatives of a former

government would understand that.

This is critically important to our economy and our environment.

We’re doing what we can and what we should to protect those

interests.

SPECULATION AND TAX EVASION

IN REAL ESTATE

INDUSTRY

A. Weaver: Happy Valentine’s Day to the House here today.

[2:10 p.m.]

The recent Fu v. Zhu B.C. Supreme Court case concerning

the purchase of multi-million-dollar homes in Vancouver outlined

questionable immigration tax and real estate schemes occurring right

here under our noses. The judgment states one of the parties “was

sophisticated in lying, including scheming to deceive Canadian

immigration authorities.” Another claimed just $97.11 in worldwide

income, despite owning multi-million-dollar properties and one of

China’s largest manufacturing and distribution companies.

That the parties had no problem outlining so many questionable

activities before our courts shows how little regard these individuals

had for our laws. This government committed to crack down on fraud, tax

evasion and money laundering in our markets, and the Civil Forfeiture

Act allows properties to be seized that are linked to unlawful

activities.

My question to the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General

is this: why aren’t we using civil forfeiture or a similar tool in cases

like this one?

Hon. C. James: Thank you to the member, the Leader of the Third Party, for the

question. Just on the very specific issue of civil forfeiture, I want to

make it clear that the government doesn’t direct civil forfeiture

procedures. Under the act, the civil forfeiture office has no

independent investigative or seizure powers. It’s really up to the

police, who make the determination around investigation, around

priorities, and then they refer the assets that are seized under

criminal law as they deem appropriate.

On the bigger question, on the bigger issue that the member raised

around the issue of fraud, around speculation, the issue of the use of

loopholes to avoid taxes: we are very concerned as a government about

that direction. That’s why we took action, in our very first update in

September, to close loopholes, to act on gathering and sharing

information that’s needed for enforcement — first steps, as you heard

from the throne speech yesterday. There will be more to come in the

budget. Stay tuned.

Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Third Party on a supplemental.

A. Weaver: Even if we can’t use civil forfeiture in cases like this, there’s

an urgent need to address this problem. The current Attorney General has

called B.C. “a jurisdiction where the rules do not apply to white-collar

crime, fraud, tax evasion and money laundering, where, even if the rules

do apply, enforcement is absent.” In opposition, the now government

spoke strongly about this challenge and the urgent need for

action.

My question, again, is to the Minister of Public Safety and

Solicitor General or perhaps the Minister of Finance. If government

isn’t going to use civil forfeiture as a tool for enforcement in cases

like this, what immediate steps are you taking to ensure that the rules,

in fact, do apply to tax evasion and fraud and that we have adequate

enforcement to deal with those who break these rules?

Hon. C. James: To the member, six more days until the budget heads out. You will

see some very specific actions contained in the budget. They were talked

about a little bit in the throne speech. But there will be a

comprehensive plan. It will include action to be able to deal with the

approach around speculation, to deal with the evasion of taxes. Those

are critical pieces. We have a table right now with the federal

government that we are bringing those issues to, because this is an

issue that doesn’t simply impact British Columbia. It, in fact, impacts

across Canada, so we need to make sure that the enforcement happens here

in our province and also happens across the country. We are working on

those pieces, and you’ll see more details in the budget.

DISPUTE WITH ALBERTA ON

TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE

AND WINE INDUSTRY

J. Johal: B.C.’s wine producers rely on the Alberta market. It’s our largest

export destination. In fact, 11 percent of Okanagan wine is sold in

Alberta. A lot of family-owned wineries count on that market, which was

cut off overnight because of the Premier’s political posturing. The

Minister of Agriculture at first said: “One thing for sure, we’ll

fight.” This weekend the minister finally revealed what she had in mind:

newspaper ads.

To the minister: how much has been spent on these ads, and does

she seriously believe this is supposed to provide comfort to any

industry this government has put at risk?

[2:15 p.m.]

Hon. L. Popham: I am so happy that this member brought up our incredible B.C. wine

industry. I’d like to make an announcement to this chamber that we are

proclaiming April B.C. wine month. We’re partnering with our partners in

the B.C. wine industry — our vineyards, our winery friends — and making

sure that we’re standing right behind them, giving them what they need

to grow their incredible industry.

We are also making announcements regarding our government liquor

stores. We’re making more room on the shelves for small-lot wineries.

We’re going to be launching a campaign called “Buy B.C.: Eat, Drink

Local” in May, where all craft alcohol producers will be partnering with

our agriculture industry and our restaurant industry. It’s a good-news

story. We are going to fight for our B.C. wine industry. We know how

important they are.

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

supplemental.

J. Johal: This February will be war on B.C. wine month, I guess.

The Premier and this minister should simply back down and resolve

the NDP trade war. Agriculture jobs in the B.C. wine industry are under

siege, but this government’s response to starting a trade war is to take

out newspaper ads using slogans borrowed from their anti-development

friends. Full-page ads in papers across this province don’t come

cheap.

Again to the minister: how much was spent on newspaper ads instead

of taking any real action to support these jobs?

Hon. L. Popham: I’d love to talk about the numbers in the B.C. wine

industry.

We have almost 1,000 vineyards. Those are family-owned vineyards,

with farmers operating in a viniculture environment. We have almost 300

wineries making exceptional wines that are known all around the world.

We expect to back our wine industry up. We’re giving them what they

need. They know we’re partners.

I encourage the opposition to join me as we Toast the Coast and

celebrate our wine industry.

S. Bond: Well, I hope the minister, in her enthusiasm to name a month B.C.

wine month, recognizes how serious this issue is. We are talking about

the livelihood of British Columbians — jobs, the economy — and the best

that she can offer today is making more room on the shelf and naming a

month. Honestly.

Let’s look at the ads, because so far that’s exactly what she’s

managed to accomplish. The ads, supposedly, support the wine industry

and support agricultural jobs, but in fact, the newspaper ads may well

suggest a very different agenda — nothing to do with good public policy,

all about keeping the Greens on side.

I’m sure the minister is fully aware that #toastthecoast was the

rallying cry of those who opposed the Trans Mountain project. The ads

might as well have been ripped straight from the websites of

Stand.earth, Dogwood and 350.org.

To the Minister of Agriculture: can she explain to British

Columbians why government ads mirror the anti-development slogans of her

friends?

Hon. L. Popham: I would like to assure the member that we take this very

seriously. I understand the wine industry very well. I have a

viniculture background myself, and I can tell you what’s encouraging.

It’s that the consumers of British Columbia recognize what a great

product we have. They have been taking wine off the shelves at an

alarming rate — something that’s very encouraging for our wine folks. We

will do everything we can to support the wine industry, and we are

extremely thankful for the consumers in British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Prince George–Valemount on a

supplemental.

S. Bond: What the wineries in British Columbia want is for this minister

and this Premier to stand up and show some leadership, not talk about

B.C. wine month and making space on the shelves of the liquor

stores.

[2:20 p.m.]

It is clear that this government took action for purely political

purposes. After all, they had to do something. The minister directly

aligned the government with her friends opposed to resource development,

groups who we all know were upset when the province reluctantly allowed

Site C to continue. Now we see the government using tax dollars for ads

to tell their friends: “We’ve got your back.”

Once again to the Minister of Agriculture: what other slogans does

she plan to borrow from her friends in using taxpayer dollars to support

advertising, and how much has she spent already?

Hon. L. Popham: The member says that we don’t understand what the wine industry

needs, but we understand exactly what the wine industry needs, and the

actions we’re taking were asked for by the wine industry.

I am very excited to be partnering with the wine industry and

looking at the ways we can expand our domestic market and our

international market, and we will be making sure that our Buy B.C.

program supports those actions.

COMMUNICATIONS WITH ALBERTA

GOVERNMENT ON SPILL

RESPONSE ANNOUNCEMENT

P. Milobar: It’s very clear the Minister of Agriculture either doesn’t know or

is unwilling to answer the question about how much ads cost, of

taxpayers’ dollars, so we’ll switch gears a little.

The Trans Mountain pipeline has safely operated through my riding

for decades. Residents look forward to more jobs and economic

opportunity as a result of the approved expansion. Unfortunately, the

only NDP leader that our residents have been able to count on to defend

B.C. resource sector jobs has been Rachel Notley. The Premier would have

been aware of Notley’s position if he had done any due diligence at all

before stumbling into this trade war. We know the government did plenty

of outreach, though — outreach to a long list of activist groups opposed

to resource jobs. They all issued congratulatory news releases within

minutes.

The question to the Minister of Environment: can he explain why

the B.C. NDP failed to fully inform the Alberta government of what they

had hatched up in advance of the announcement?

Hon. G. Heyman: It’s interesting to hear members opposite talk about wanting a

government that’ll stand up for B.C. jobs, because that’s exactly what

we’re doing when we speak to the tens of thousands of British Columbians

who have jobs in tourism, jobs in film and television, jobs in fishing —

good, well-paying, long-term, permanent jobs — who say to us they’re

concerned that they didn’t have a government that stood up for them to

defend their rights against the impact of a diluted bitumen spill in our

inland waters or on our coast.

We are standing up for those tens of thousands of British

Columbians, and we’re standing up for the right of British Columbia to

propose and consider and discuss, with stakeholders, First Nations and

the public, measures to protect our environment against the impacts of a

diluted bitumen spill. That’s within our jurisdiction, and that’s

exactly what we’re doing.

Mr. Speaker: Kamloops–North Thompson on a supplemental.

P. Milobar: We’ll stand up for the other 4.8 million British

Columbians.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. The Premier has

badly damaged the reputation of B.C. business with this move. The

Premier has damaged B.C.’s relationship within Canada. The Premier has

triggered an absurd trade war, with no attempt to avoid the conflict.

And the bullet that launched this needless trade war? Premier Notley

said she never saw the announcement until pretty much everyone else had

seen it.

[2:25 p.m.]

Again to the Minister of Environment: why didn’t he think to pick

up the phone and tell the whole story to Alberta before sparking a trade

war with our neighbours?

Hon. G. Heyman: One of the things that we do value in our government is advance

notice and consultation. The government of Alberta was informed, before

the announcement, of the content of the announcement. The head of the

Business Council of British Columbia was informed, before the

announcement, of the announcement, by me. Other members of the business

community were informed of the announcement, before the announcement, by

myself or by other ministers.

When I talked to the Chief of the Tsleil-Waututh, one of the

things she said to me is how grateful she was that a minister of the

government thought to pick up the phone and tell her, for the very first

time, what we were planning to do.

DISPUTE WITH ALBERTA ON

TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE

AND RULE OF LAW

M. Lee: The government seriously overreached last month in seeking to

restrict the transportation of products through an interprovincial

pipeline. This action has started a trade war with Alberta, spooked

investors considering this province and created sweeping uncertainty. It

is clear that this government does not respect the rule of law, as it

tries to undermine the Trans Mountain expansion. The credibility of this

province is at stake.

My question is to the Minister of Environment. How exactly will

the minister restore the province’s credibility that it respects the

rule of law?

Hon. J. Horgan: Now I’m a bit perplexed, and I’m hopeful that I can get some

guidance from the other side. The TILMA agreement was signed by that

government in 2006. The new west partnership was signed by that

government in 2010, ratified completely in 2013. So the issue at play

here is the right of the government of British Columbia to talk to its

citizens about protecting the economy and the environment. That’s what

we’re talking about.

The people on that side of the House, who ratified internal trade

agreements that are being violated right now by the government of

Alberta, are standing with Alberta because they’re petty, they’re

partisan, and they don’t have the provincial interest at

heart.

Mr. Speaker: Vancouver-Langara on a supplemental.

M. Lee: With respect, to the government, this is not about pettiness and

partisanship. This is about British Columbia. When we say we’re standing

up for British Columbia, we are standing up for British Columbia because

the rule of law and the certainty of rules…. People and operations and

companies that come to develop projects responsibly in this province

need to know what rules they’re operating by. We need certainty. That’s

what British Columbians and lawmakers should be adhering to.

After extensive rules, the Trans Mountain project has received its

province with almost 200 conditions. Does the Minister of Environment

respect the rule of law and the federal government’s constitutional

authority in this area?

Hon. J. Horgan: The question of jurisdiction — clearly we have a disagreement

between this side of the House and that side of the House. Based on the

advice that we’re getting — not from the former leader of the Liberal

Party, a noted legal scholar, but others — we are on firm ground to

assert our right to talk to our citizens.

What is indisputable is that there are two trade agreements signed

by the people on that side of the House that bind the provinces to the

free flow of goods and services across borders. That is now in

violation. That’s the rule of law. Why aren’t you standing with B.C. and

wine producers and defending our interest in the internal trade of this

country?

[2:30 p.m.]

[End of question period.]

Motions Without Notice

Hon. M. Farnworth: I have a number of motions that I will be seeking leave to move. I

have shared them with my colleague the Opposition House Leader as well as

the Leader of the Green Party.

APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO

APPOINT AN

INFORMATION AND

PRIVACY COMMISSIONER

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

[That a Special Committee be appointed to select and unanimously

recommend to the Legislative Assembly the appointment of an Information

and Privacy Commissioner, pursuant to

section 37 of the Freedom of

Information and Protection of Privacy Act , R.S.B.C. 1996, c.

The said Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select

Standing Committee and in addition is empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and

to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the

committee and to delegate to the subcommittee all or any of its powers

except the power to report directly to the House;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned,

during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and

during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient;

and

(

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist the

committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any

adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to

deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative

Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the

sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the

Legislative Assembly.

The said Special Committee is to be composed of Doug Routley

(Convener), Anne Kang, Coralee Oakes, Mary Polak, and Dr. Andrew

Weaver.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO

APPOINT A CHIEF

ELECTORAL OFFICER

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

[That a Special Committee be appointed to select and unanimously

recommend to the Legislative Assembly, the appointment of a Chief

Electoral Officer pursuant to

section 4 of the Election Act ,

R.S.B.C. 1996, c.106.

The said Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select

Standing Committee and is also empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees

and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the

Committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned,

during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and

during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be

convenient;

(

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist the

Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any

adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to

deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative

Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the

sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the

Legislative Assembly.

The said Special Committee is to be composed of Jagrup Brar

(Convener), Doug Clovechok, Adam Olsen, Janet Routledge, and Jackie

Tegart.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

APPOINTMENT OF

CHILDREN AND YOUTH

COMMITTEE

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

[That the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth be

appointed to foster greater awareness and understanding among

legislators and the public of the BC child welfare system, including the

specific needs of indigenous children, youth, families and communities,

and in particular to:

1. Receive and review the annual service plan from the

Representative for Children and Youth (the “Representative”) that

includes a statement of goals and identifies specific objectives and

performance measures that will be required to exercise the powers and

perform the functions and duties of the Representative during the fiscal

year;

2. Be the committee to which the Representative reports, at least

annually;

3. Refer to the Representative for investigation the critical injury

or death of a child;

4. Receive and consider all reports and plans transmitted by the

Representative to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British

Columbia; and,

5. Pursuant to

section 30 (1) of the Representative for Children

and Youth Act , S.B.C. 2006, c. 29, complete the comprehensive

review of the Act or portions of the Act by February 28, 2018 to

determine whether the functions of the representative described in

section 6 are still required to ensure that the needs of children and

young adults as defined in that

section are met.

In addition to the powers previously conferred upon Select Standing

Committees of the House, the Select Standing Committee on Children and

Youth be empowered:

a) to appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and

to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the

committee and to delegate to the subcommittee all or any of its powers

except the power to report directly to the House;

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned,

during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and

during any sitting of the House;

c) to conduct consultations by any means the committee

considers appropriate;

d) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient;

and

e) to retain personnel as required to assist the

committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any

adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to

deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative

Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the

sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the

Legislative Assembly.

The said Select Standing Committee is to be composed of Nicholas

Simons (Convener), Sonia Furstenau, Rick Glumac, Joan Isaacs, Jennifer

Rice, Rachna Singh, Michelle Stilwell, Laurie Throness, and Teresa

Wat.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO

APPOINT A

CONFLICT

OF INTEREST COMMISSIONER

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

[That a Special Committee be appointed to unanimously select and

recommend to the Legislative Assembly the appointment of an individual

to exercise the powers and duties assigned to the Conflict of Interest

Commissioner for the province of British Columbia pursuant to the

Members’ Conflict of Interest Act , R.S.B.C. 1996,

c.287.

The said Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select

Standing Committee and in addition is empowered:

(

a) to appoint of their number, one or more subcommittees

and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the

Committee;

(

b) to sit during a period in which the House is adjourned,

during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and

during any sitting of the House;

(

c) to adjourn from place to place as may be convenient;

and

(

d) to retain such personnel as required to assist the

Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any

adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to

deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative

Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the

sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the

Legislative Assembly.

The said Special Committee is to be composed of Rachna Singh

(Convener), Spencer Chandra Herbert, Eric Foster, Mike Morris, and Adam

Olsen.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

Point of Privilege

(Reservation of Right)

J. Rustad: I rise, as this is my first opportunity, to reserve my right to raise

a point of privilege.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call address in reply to the throne speech.

[2:35 p.m.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Throne Speech Debate

S. Chandra Herbert: I move, seconded by the member for Delta North, that:

[We, Her Majesty’s most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative

Assembly of British Columbia in Session assembled, beg leave to thank Your

Honour for the gracious Speech which Your Honour has addressed to us at the

opening of the present Session.]

I also beg leave to thank British Columbians, as it’s their money we

are spending as a government. It’s their programs that we are putting

together. It’s their government, after all. And I know we all, as MLAs, need

to remember that, be reminded about that from time to time.

You know, it gives me incredible pleasure to support this throne

speech, incredible pleasure. I’ll tell you why. Because this throne speech

had hope. It talked about issues that will provide a light at the end of the

tunnel.

Deputy Speaker: Member, you sought the leave — right? — of the House.

S. Chandra Herbert: Sorry. I moved, seconded by the member for Delta North.

Deputy Speaker: Is leave granted?

Leave granted.

S. Chandra Herbert: Thank you, Hon. Speaker. I appreciate that I can continue my remarks

now.

This throne speech had hope. It gives hope to people who have been

struggling for far too long. I think it all lies in one line in the speech

where the government is talking about how “we cannot build a better future

if British Columbians cannot afford to be a part of that future.” You know,

for too long my constituents felt that they weren’t part of that

future.

They would be told that we’re “the best place on earth.” They’d say

they love it. They loved this province, but they couldn’t afford to eat.

They couldn’t afford their rent. They couldn’t afford the kinds of things

that most families would just expect as a given.

If they did afford those things, it was often because of debt. I’ve

often spoke in this House about the high level of personal debt British

Columbians carry. It is a big concern, and this budget acknowledges

that.

Now, as this is the first full throne speech and first full budget

coming for this new Democrat government, with the support of the Green

caucus, it strikes me as important to think back to previous throne speeches

so that I can compare and consider how much has changed.

I started university in 2001. We had a new government at the time,

with many of my colleagues now across the way as part of that government.

The tuition fees went through the roof for university students. Homelessness

quadrupled and then some in our province. And unfortunately, the social

supports that people need to get through life started to unravel and be

pulled apart. More and more people fell through the social safety

net.

It got so bad at one point that the government of the day argued to

folks that they should choose, if they were low income, an upper denture or

a blender. They couldn’t have both if they were poor. They couldn’t eat with

two dentures to actually chew some food. “No,” the government said, “You can

have a blender.” I don’t know why that stuck with me, but it did. Because,

to me, it was an admission, in a sense, that the government just couldn’t do

the job that they needed to do for all British Columbians and were going to

be focused on just the few.

That lasted a long time. I remember, as people would protest and stand

up for those who were struggling…. Indeed, when I first joined this House

back in 2008, I raised these issues in my first speech to the House then.

The response, after throne speech after throne speech after throne speech,

was no. It was: “There’s no money. The fiscal cupboard is bare. There’s no

way to help.”

[2:40 p.m.]

Meanwhile, those who did very well seemed to do even better. It struck

me that a Leonard Cohen song really spoke to that kind of belief — that

nothing would change, nothing could get better. “Everybody knows that the

dice are loaded. Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed…. Everybody

knows the fight was fixed. Everybody knows that the war is lost. Everybody

knows…. The poor stay poor; the rich get rich. That’s how it goes. Everybody

knows.”

That seemed to be the mantra for too long in this province — that the

poor stayed poor, the rich got richer and those in the middle struggled and

got pulled apart. Well, no more — no more. This government has, for the

first time, acknowledged that we need to address the economic prosperity of

every British Columbian, not just those that donate, not just those that

we’re friends with, not just those who think that they are the economic

masters, that they are the so-called job creators who know

everything.

Well, no. There were job creators. There were business people

protesting against the complete lack of care and the complete lack of

consideration given to British Columbians for far too long. And you know

what? I’m hearing from them now — that they’re finally happy to have a

government that is more balanced, that acknowledges that, for prosperity, we

all must be part of it. That’s what this throne speech speaks to.

No longer is resistance futile. “You must accept that homelessness is

increasing. You must accept that children are living in poverty at rates

completely unacceptable, that people can’t afford housing in their

communities anymore, that you can’t get through the congestion in British

Columbia and Vancouver anymore.” No. We’ve thrown that out. We’re now saying

yes to prosperity, yes to addressing homelessness, yes to addressing

poverty, yes to taking action on affordability so that everybody can see the

benefit that our great province can provide.

How do we do that? Well, for years, I had seniors approaching me

saying that they couldn’t pay medical service premiums, the costs of their

pharmacy drugs that they needed to stay healthy. When they were choosing

between rent and paying their hydro, they’d often cut out food. They would

go without, because they just couldn’t make it.

Their Shelter Aid For Elderly Renters program, meant to help

low-income seniors, became less and less over time as the costs went up and

up, and they ended up having to cut more and more out of their daily budget.

So poverty increased. They got sicker, and our communities got

weaker.

Well, our government has decided to cut the MSP in half immediately.

We also decided that we need to increase the Shelter Aid For Elderly Renters

program so seniors can stay in their homes and not be forced out. That’s

incredibly important.

Beyond that, we also have to realize that in order to address the

yawning gap between those who have the most and those who have the least,

you need a poverty reduction strategy. You need to raise the minimum wage.

You need to actually take action on the housing crisis. Constituents will

say to me: “Can you solve it now?” “I’m not so sure,” they will say, because

there have been so many years where the government has refused to do

anything about it. So you’re running from 2,000 yards behind, 200 miles

behind, 2,000 miles behind to catch up.

I’m not going to say it was all the former government’s fault. Indeed,

the challenge of housing affordability really began…. I think if you go back

to the early ’80s, actions by governments at that time, which cancelled out

rental programs, made it difficult to get the rental we need so people have

choices where they live. The federal government pulled out in the ’90s from

building affordable housing, and then, of course, in 2001, the government of

the day here in this province stopped building affordable housing as well

and stopped taking action to ensure renters had protections, and so

on.

That’s changing. Not only are we getting rid of the medical service

premium and increasing SAFER; we’re actually taking action on other issues

that impact affordability.

I mentioned the tuition fee increases that we saw so much of. Well,

unfortunately, those tuition fees came with some of the highest interest

rates in Canada, so students had their debts go up and up and up. Meanwhile,

we were able to give tax breaks to the super rich, but students continued to

struggle.

By cutting the student loan interest rate by 2½ percent, graduates are

now going to be able to get out of debt more quickly and on the path to

their own chosen career and not just stuck in the debt treadmill. There’s

more to do for sure, but that’s a really good first step.

[2:45 p.m.]

tuition-free. Again, if you want to learn a language to be able to succeed

and get the job, we should give you that hand up, not put a barrier in the

way. But for too long, the doors were closed here in this province. The

doors are open to opportunity now. So I am excited to support this throne

speech.

What else? Well, I’m sure many in this House have heard from families

who can’t find child care. If they do have it, they can’t afford it. Well,

this upcoming budget, I’m told, and the throne speech commit to ensuring

that we do make the biggest investment in child care in B.C. history. That

means that we’re going to be able to cut down the cost that families who do

have licensed child care now pay and also to expand the services. There are

a lot of parents who can’t find that child care in this province, and we

need to act. A universal child care program, I believe, is the right way to

go. It’s going to help families all across this great province, this British

Columbia that we call home.

When we come to housing, when I ask constituents what their top

priority is, of course they say: “Housing, affordability, housing, housing.

Oh, and did we mention housing?” Eighty percent are renters, and for 16

too-long years, we had to put up with a government that could barely even

say the word “renter,” and if they did, it was to propose things like

getting rid of rent control completely and allowing rents to skyrocket. If

they were forced to acknowledge renters in my community, as we rallied year

after year to get changes, they would say: “Oh, it’s just a few bad apples.

We’ll get changes at some point in the future.” It never happened, but it is

happening now.

The throne speech says: “Renters are afraid of eviction or unexpected

rent increases that will force them to relocate when prices are sky-high and

vacancies hover at record lows.” Every day in my community office, I hear

this story. Every day since I was first elected — and, actually, before

that, as a housing advocate — we told those stories. Every day when we did

get a response, we were told: “It’s not a big deal. You’re making it up. It

doesn’t really impact too many people. So we’re not going to do

anything.”

Well, here in our throne speech, we’ve made a strong commitment to

renters. We’ve already shown that getting rid of the fixed-term tenancy

loophole and the geographic rent increase clause can happen. It did happen.

It should have happened years and years ago. You know, in my community,

there’s a huge sense of relief that I’m hearing from people, indeed across

the province, where people are going: “I may be able to stay in my home? I’m

not going to face yet another 20 percent rent increase?” That was basically

legalized by the former government — rent increases which they couldn’t

afford, rent increases which, in some cases, forced them out of their homes,

forced them into long-term care or, in some cases, forced them into hospital

because of the stress of it all.

Well, we’ve got your back, renters. That’s what we are saying in this

throne speech. That’s what the government is saying. I want to thank the

cabinet and thank the Premier for taking a special interest in renters and

rental issues. We need more rental housing, absolutely, but we also need to

support the landlords and the renters who do it right, and we need to take

strong action to crack down on landlords who cheat the system to get ahead.

British Columbians need our help. They really need our help on this matter,

and it really gives me hope that in this throne speech it’s acknowledged

loud and clear.

“Safe, decent housing is a right that is under threat by speculators,

domestic and foreign, who seek windfall profits at the expense of people who

work, live and pay taxes in B.C.” That’s the commitment. That’s the

statement in the throne speech that acknowledges a problem, which for too

long was completely invisible in this province. In the last year in

Vancouver, condominium prices are up 20 percent in one year. You get a sense

of why speculators are trying to come into the province. It’s because

they’re making windfall profits now.

Housing should be about housing, not about somebody, somewhere else,

getting rich while you can’t get ahead because you can’t afford it here in

B.C. No, it should be about housing first. It should be about a roof over

your head, a place to lie down and have a sleep, a place to enjoy your

family, a place that you can be secure. Renters haven’t had that security

for a long time. Indeed, now more and more people trying to buy housing, to

have that security, can’t get it either.

Where are they going to afford housing when the speculators have

been let run rampant? When the governments of the past refused to collect

the information we needed to be able to inform really good policy actions?

When governments refused and, in fact, looked the other way, disbanded

corruption inquiry tools through the police and the casinos, and actively

did nothing while prices shot through the roof?

[2:50 p.m.]

Well, now we have a government that has said: “We are going to act. We

take this seriously. We are going after the speculators and those who have

driven costs through the roof, and we’re also going to go after things like

corruption and tax evasion, in partnership with the federal

government.”

British Columbians want everybody to pay a fair share. They don’t

think it’s fair that you get to profit insanely through real estate in this

province and put nothing back. That’s not on. Unfortunately, this crisis has

gotten so bad that folks are now unable to find housing anywhere near where

they work, and businesses are struggling to find workers to do the jobs in

their communities, because of the costs.

This is an economic issue. It’s an economic crisis, and it’s a social

crisis. I think back to the ’30s. Of course, we had the Great Depression.

There were shanty towns set up in Vancouver, set up in and around False

Creek, where people would set up through small cardboard boxes. At the time,

probably it was crates, not cardboard boxes. Unfortunately, we seem to see

that setting up again. In similar areas in Vancouver where back in the 30s

there were homeless camps, they’re there today.

In a province as rich as ours and in a country as rich as ours, there

is no reason for homelessness to happen. There is no reason for mental

health to spiral out of control. There is no reason why there should be

homeless camps in community after community after community.

This throne speech commits to action to address that homelessness,

commits to action to address the mental health crisis and addictions crisis

— and the poverty crisis, which has been driving this issue. As much as you

can get somebody in off the street, if you’re not addressing the root causes

behind it, you’re going to continue to see the problem.

I remember in the days gone past when the then Housing Minister would

say: “Well, you know, we don’t need a provincial homelessness count. I know

the people out there. We’ll go, and we’ll try and find them housing. We

don’t need these numbers.” Unfortunately, because there was no

acknowledgment that the crisis was getting worse, those numbers increased

and increased and increased.

We didn’t address those root causes that are driving homelessness, so

the number of homeless folks in our communities shot through the roof. We’re

seeing that impact today in our health care statistics, legal statistics,

courts, and on and on it goes.

My constituents know it’s more expensive to keep people homeless. They

tell me they are so glad that finally the government is acting, because it’s

not only the right thing economically but it’s the right thing morally. It

not only costs the province money for people to be homeless; it costs us

all, I think, in our souls and in our values, to see it. We are weaker as a

society when we allow that depth of deprivation to continue.

I am glad and I have hope that we are going to take concrete and real

action to address the homelessness crisis, finally. It’s been an issue

that’s been close to my heart a long time.

If you don’t have a roof over your head, if you are stuck sleeping in

Stanley Park in the bushes, as folks, constituents, I’ve talked to have

done…. They are fleeing abuse. They’ve lost their home through illegal

evictions and couldn’t get help because nobody seemed to care…. You need to

take this seriously, and this government is taking this seriously. So I have

hope. I have hope.

I also have hope that finally we’re going to get action to focus to

make the housing market more affordable for those who have been trying to

get into it so they can have that security too. There are too many who have

good incomes and have no chance, because folks who see this as a speculative

investment have more money than them and so shut them out of that ability to

get that housing. That’s wrong.

I’m excited because we’re also going to act to build more new student

housing, when we talk about housing. Students have been coming to me year

after year after year saying: “We want to stay on campus. We’ve got this

land here.” Universities, presidents, trustees, boards of directors have

been saying: “We’ve got land here. We’ve got a paying customer in terms of

the students who will pay to rent in these places, but the government won’t

allow us to build housing.”

This government is saying: “Yes we will. We will allow new campus

housing all across B.C.” That’s going to help students, and that’s also

going to help in the affordability crisis for other renters. When 99.4

percent of the housing is unavailable — no vacancy — and you’re scrambling

to fight over that tiny 0.6 percent…. In many cases, landlords can set the

rents at whatever they want, and you have no choice, because it’s that or no

housing whatsoever. That’s completely unacceptable.

[2:55 p.m.]

I know of many landlords who would love to compete to get customers

in, because, unfortunately, when folks have no choice, some bad practices

grow. Action to crack down on those bad practices will help, but we also

need more housing.

Our rental assistance program is going to help reduce homelessness as

well. I’m glad to see we’ve had that, in addition to the Shelter Aid For

Elderly Renters program, increased. I certainly think that renters need a

break, and I certainly support breaks for renters. I think the renters

rebate idea is a good one, and I’ll continue to advocate so that renters get

a break too.

Property owners have seen large windfall breaks in years past, in tax

breaks, and I think renters have struggled and not had that advocate. I’ll

continue to be that advocate for their solution, for action and for

affordability, so that they too are acknowledged, not just homeowners. I

think renters do need that break.

Working families have not benefitted equally from the work in our

province and from the economic prosperity that we have. A strong economy is

where we all do well, and I’m glad that the speech acknowledged that. If you

can’t invest in your own community because you have no money or if you’re on

the edge or if you don’t have housing, that local economy suffers. I hear it

again and again and again from small businesses that say too many people

feel stretched and are not able to buy what they used to be able

to.

By improving conditions for workers, improving wages and supporting

small businesses to be part of the province by being able to be part of

contracts and to be able to grow their business through provincial

government support as well…. I’m excited at what we can do in this

province.

Hon. Speaker, it won’t surprise you I was excited to see the Human

Rights Commission acknowledged in the throne speech. Our government is

bringing back the Human Rights Commission. You can’t get ahead together as a

community if you fall behind because of racism, because of sexism, because

of discrimination in many forms.

A human rights commission can help inform the fact that we all have a

duty to look out for each other, not just those that look like us or sound

like us but sometimes to go much farther than we have ever known, to

acknowledge the beauty, the diversity and the wonderful variety we have as a

province.

For too long it was used as just quick wins, just a quick win to get a

vote. Diversity and respect for diversity should go much, much deeper than

that — to acknowledge we all learn more and are all wealthier when we do

whatever we can to bring that diversity together, to acknowledge we’re

stronger in our differences but united in our province. We can learn from

that.

So a human rights commission, and I want to acknowledge my colleague

from Delta North for his work to help bring that out, as well, and of course

your work, hon. Speaker, as a longtime supporter of the Human Rights

Commission in this province.

The throne speech talked about the need that we have for family

doctors as well. I talked about a human rights commission and that you have

to be able to have a right to be who you are. But you can’t be that full

person if you’re struggling and you can’t get a doctor, if you can’t get

your health care needs met. Too many in my community still struggle to get a

doctor.

I was excited to see…. I know the Health Minister has advocated for

this for a long time, as has the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions:

the idea of team-based approach, of getting the different specialists and

skilled folks in our health care system working together and supporting each

other. I’ve often gone to team-based care facilities myself and found them

to be incredibly useful — efficient, smart and a better way to deliver

health care.

I’m going to continue to work for urgent health care facilities in my

own community that provide that sort of team-based care. Too many of my

constituents can’t get a doctor, and that means they end up in the emergency

room. That’s incredibly expensive and not the kind of health care that they

deserve and not the kind of health care that ideally anybody should get —

having to end up in an emergency room when you could have prevented the

crisis to begin with if you were able to get into a clinic or an urgent care

centre of some sort.

We’re also going to acknowledge that seniors who are in care need more

time with their caregivers. Every year I go out to Haro Park Centre in my

community and a number of the other seniors facilities in the community. One

thing I know is that the staff work very hard and that the residents care

about it. They really care and feel they’re cared for. But they also know

that they do more with less.

Acknowledging that issue and acknowledging that those that are living

in residential care deserve more attention and deserve that care — I was

happy to see that. I’m going to certainly watch how that rolls outs and

continue to advocate for my own community and the residents there who

deserve that care.

[3:00 p.m.]

Now we move to education — education, the great equalizer, something

that…. You can’t get a community to unite and grow together if they don’t

have the education they need. And of course, the most marginalized in the

community…. I say marginalized. We’ve got to acknowledge that it’s not them

who’ve marginalized themselves; it’s sometimes society that’s made them

marginal.

That’s students, sometimes, with special needs. That’s students who

have different learning styles and abilities. In our school system, for far

too long, they were second thoughts. They couldn’t get the counselling that

they needed. They couldn’t even get their abilities diagnosed, with issues

addressed, sometimes for years at a time.

Our government has acknowledged that and said that we have to do

better, that those students are just as equally deserving of a great

education as everyone else. I look forward to seeing greater support for

those students. We’ll be working with the school board in Vancouver, the

Minister of Education, to try and ensure that those students do get that

extra support they need in order to learn and to be part of the community,

which they are.

Of course, that’s the teaching. In my community, there are also the

buildings that the teaching happens in. It won’t surprise you that I’m going

to continue advocating for a new Coal Harbour elementary school, as our

government is committed to addressing the school overcrowding issues and the

seismic issues.

Now, Lord Roberts — good building, completely full. We need a new

elementary school. Lord Roberts Annex — almost completely full. We need a

new elementary school. A new elementary school in Coal Harbour is exciting.

It’s a great project that I’ll continue to work for.

The idea is to have the school with child care on top — of course,

another huge need that our government is trying to address — and then

affordable housing above that. It’s kind of a triple win, and it shows,

really, the commitment that our government has had to these issues. I’ll

keep working to get that project built because we need the child care, we

need the affordable housing and we need the education. I think it’s a great

project, and I’ll keep advocating for that.

King George Secondary in my community — also full to bursting. You

know what? The school board has put it as one of their top priorities to

build within three to four years from now. I’m going to advocate for it.

It’s a tight timeline. I think we can get it done. I want to get it done.

I’ll keep working and get it to that line where we can get it announced, get

the shovels going and get it building.

It has appeared on the timeline now, all of a sudden. There are many

other projects ahead of it and have been for years. But because of the huge

growth of students in my community, the huge growth of families, the number

of kids and new populations moving in as development seems to grow and grow,

we need that school.

We need a new King George, and we need a new West End Community

Centre. I think the two could go together, working with the city, the school

board and the province. It’s a project that I think is really exciting.

Until recently, I didn’t have any hope that that project would ever get

built in my life — well, probably in my lifetime but not in my lifetime in

this House — as there was such a lack of care for the community that I live

in from the previous government.

King George needs to be upgraded for seismic reasons. It also needs to

be upgraded as its cafeteria can’t serve food anymore. The hot lunch program

has had to end there. Unfortunately, due to seismic issues, I believe, in

the school lunchroom, the place where you actually cook the food, the

kitchen, has been condemned. We need a new King George high school. I’m

going to keep working for that.

Now, we’ve looked at education. We’ve looked at health care. We’ve

looked at affordability. We looked at housing. Another area very close to my

constituents’ hearts is the environment. We live in an incredible part of

the world, surrounded by the ocean, the North Shore Mountains and Stanley

Park. It’s an incredible place to call home — the West End and Coal

Harbour.

One of the challenges to that environment — and the entire province,

of course — is climate change. To see, in a throne speech, a commitment to

reinvigorate the climate change strategy for this province, to actually take

fighting climate change seriously…. I don’t know how much more necessary you

can get. My generation, my son’s generation and future generations we can’t

even imagine are going to feel the impact of what decisions we make today.

Those decisions have to acknowledge that we have to drastically reduce

fossil fuel use in our province and across the globe.

There’s no other way about it. We know the impacts have already been

felt in this province, and they will be felt for years to come. But we have

a choice. Can they be worse, or can they be better? They’re going to hit us,

but they could be much, much worse unless we act today. And every year of

delay, as I said year after year while we were in opposition, is a year

where it gets harder.

[3:05 p.m.]

I’m really glad that the Minister of Environment, his climate strategy

group and others are bringing forward a plan that will help get us there,

because we all have to do it if we’re serious about our commitment to our

grandchildren and our great-great-great-grandchildren.

It’s our duty as a population to make the hard decisions now and to

take the actions so that we can have a hope for that better future and not

one of dystopian fire, fury, anger, war and poverty. As we know, climate

change is, unfortunately, already impacting some parts of this globe in that

way.

So increasing the carbon tax and giving a dividend to families so that

it doesn’t disproportionally impact low- and middle-income folks is a good

thing. I’m really excited to see that plan come forward.

Another area that my constituents, of course, raise with me is the

protection of our waters, the protection of our oceans. To me, and I think

many of my constituents…. They see it as eminently sensible that our

government would actually look to ensure, if you spill diluted bitumen in

the Georgia Strait, the Salish Sea, on our lands, in our rivers across B.C.,

that you actually know how to clean it up, that you actually know how to

address that spill impact.

Until now, we haven’t had a government that’s been that serious to do

that. They played a political game and they said: “Boom, go ahead. We’ll

just accept it. Travel forward, Kinder Morgan.”

My constituents don’t accept that. They don’t want to see our beaches

befouled by oil, by diluted bitumen, to see our coastal economies

devastated. They think that it is our right, as a province, to defend those

industries and to do that investigatory work, to consider that impact and to

make that clear. I think it’s eminently sensible, and it should have been

done a long time ago. But instead, political games were the way of the

day.

A lot of this work is only possible — well, I guess I would say it’s

encouraged rather than possible — because of our government’s commitment to

ban big money, which we did last fall. When you ban big money, you start to

shift government to be one that focuses on the people’s interests rather

than the partisan lobbyist’s interests. You start to focus on communities

across B.C. I think you start to, hopefully, govern more humbly because

you’re relying on so many people in order to get elected — to get your party

funded to do that — that you have to start considering way more interests

than who gave you a $100,000 cheque or something like that.

I’ve always advocated for banning big money, and I’ll continue to

advocate to ensure that citizens’ interests are put first.

Often I get asked by constituents: “So what party are you with? We’re

not sure. We know you’re always fighting for us, but what are you doing?” I

say: “Well, my party, first and foremost, is West End-Coal Harbour.” I’m a

proud New Democrat. But my constituents know that it’s them — regardless of

what their political interests might be — that I have to advocate for and I

do advocate for and I’m honoured to advocate for.

Partisan differences can get in the way. Sometimes I can be partisan,

I agree. Sometimes I can swing a little over-broadly. We have teams in

politics, but I think we need to remember that our team is British Columbia,

first and foremost.

I know it has been a pleasure and unusual for folks to see parties

actually working together. I want to thank my colleagues in the Green caucus

for reaching out and trying their best to make that work as well. I know

members opposite in the Liberal caucus who I hope can do that as

well.

I had the honour, on the opposition side, to be able to work with the

government of the day to get human rights legislation passed. That’s the

kind of thing we should do more of. And I know that on committees I’ve sat

on so far, I’ve been encouraged by that cross-partisan spirit, and I’m

hoping that that continues. It’s the kind of government that I think our

people deserve.

We want to make democracy work better. That’s another commitment that

our government has made. One of the things that I’m excited about this fall

is this upcoming legislative referendum — a referendum on changing our

electoral system so we that we can make democracy work better for us. We can

move to — I would argue for — a proportional system of some sort so that

people’s votes count and every vote counts. It would force us, I believe, to

try and sometimes moderate our positions, listen to each other more and play

less games. That’s my hope.

Of course, people can do whatever they want. But I think a government

of humility that acknowledges we’re here because our citizens sent us here

to do their work, to advocate for them and to find common ground — that’s

the kind of politics we can see by banning big money and changing our

electoral system.

[3:10 p.m.]

I think it’s the right way so we don’t create these false majorities

where I get 2 percent more of the vote than you do and you’re completely

shut out. I think we need to find ways to get parties to work together, to

find that common ground and to negotiate in the interests of their

constituents. So I’m excited for that coming up.

I started off by referencing Leonard Cohen and the idea that everybody

knows that the game is fixed. Well, for many in my generation, they felt —

and some still do, I know — that the politics, the system, is rigged. “The

man,” and “Oh, you can’t ever get change,” and “Oh, those politicians are

all the same.”

I know we’ve all heard those kinds of sentiments. But I also know that

many of the conversations that I’ve had in the last number of months have

been from people saying: “My government listened to me — actually changed

something that I never thought they would change. They actually said they

care about me and the issues that I care about. They actually are taking

concrete steps to make my life better. They are doing things to make my life

more affordable. I never thought I’d see the day.”

For too long government has shut out part of the population, and for

too long they have felt that they had no hope. They thought that the game

was rigged and they had no means to make a difference.

I’ll continue to advocate to change that kind of culture, to see one

where…. I don’t know if it’s “Good day, sunshine,” or if it’s “I’m happy,”

and we’re able to change everything at once. Of course, it’s not that easy.

But I think that spirit of hope and optimism and change — that we can do

that together when we listen, and that we’re better together than we are

apart — is one we need to remember and one that we approach with great

humility.

I say often to my constituents: “I don’t know everything, and maybe I

don’t know the answer to that question. I’m just struggling to make sure

that this works for you. Can you help me? Can we work together to get these

things?” Because we’re only as strong as our community allows us to be and

as our community supports us to be.

I want to thank my constituents in Coal Harbour and West End. I want

to thank the government, the cabinet, the opposition leader —

congratulations on your election — the opposition, the third party, for

doing what they can to try and make this democracy a little better, to try

to make the province that we call home a little bit better.

I’ll say it again. Our provincial motto “ Splendor sine

occasu ” — splendor without diminishment — should be more than just a

motto. It should be how we live. I think we need to think about that every

day. How do we leave this place a little bit better? This throne speech does

that. It leaves B.C. a little bit better and, for many, a lot, lot, better.

I’m proud to support it.

R. Kahlon: I rise to second the motion by the Member of Vancouver–West End that

“We, Her Majesty’s most dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly

of British Columbia in session assembled, beg leave to thank Your Honour for

the gracious speech which Your Honour has addressed to us at the opening of

the present session.”

Interjection.

R. Kahlon: Hear, hear. I guess I will continue.

Well, hon. Speaker, thank you very much. I think it’s an honour to

stand here today to speak in support of this throne speech. It probably will

not be a surprise to many that I support this throne speech. I think it

addresses many of the concerns that I heard leading up to the election and

many of the concerns that I personally have.

Before I get into some of the details of the throne speech, I do want

to start off by addressing two issues that were mentioned in the throne

speech. Just off the top, in the throne speech there was an acknowledgment

of Dave Barrett, this giant of a man who did so much in these halls and made

so much change just in three years.

I’ll quote from the Speech from the Throne: “We remember former

Premier Dave Barrett, whose many contributions to public life are still

enjoyed by British Columbians today.”

Some of those legacies are the agricultural land reserve, PharmaCare,

Canada’s first guaranteed income program for seniors, Hansard, question

period. Things that are just considered normal were because of Dave Barrett

in this Legislature. Full-time MLAs — I’m also grateful to Dave Barrett for

having full-time MLAs so that we all can be here today.

[3:15 p.m.]

Schools were no longer allowed to use the strap on students. A

horrible practice. I spent a couple of years in India when my parents

struggled financially, and I was on the wrong end of that. I can tell you

that it lives with me today, and I’m glad to know that my son and our

children will not have to be facing that wrath from perhaps a teacher who

was in the wrong. I’m not saying the teacher was in the wrong in my

situation, but certainly, I felt that at the time.

I also want to acknowledge Lynn Klein, who is here today and watching.

He often does watch, here at the Legislature. Lynn and I were chatting

yesterday, and he reminded me that Dave Barrett also created the

provincewide Ambulance Service. We know Lynn as a strong advocate for the

Ambulance Service, a strong advocate for paramedics. I want to thank him for

acknowledging that. Where would we be today if we didn’t have a paramedic

system or an ambulance system across this province? It’s quite remarkable. I

think all of us had a moment of silence in honour of the late Dave

Barrett.

The other piece I want to acknowledge is the murdered and missing

women and the rally, the march, that happened today. I would say almost

everyone from our side — and probably many from the others, as well — would

have liked to have been there to show solidarity and support for this

important moment. But we’re there in spirit.

When I was part of the human rights consultations, I met with the

Power of Women at the Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre. It was supposed to

be an hour session to talk about human rights, and it went three hours. I

took my seven-year-old with me. I thought that it would be a good idea for

him to hear the different things that are happening.

He heard more than he’s probably heard before, but I’m grateful. He

asked me questions about murdered and missing women. It was a difficult

conversation on our car ride home, but I’m grateful that I got to have that

conversation with him because his questions were amazing. My answers, I’m

sure, were inadequate. But it’s an important moment, an important piece of

our history, and I think we need to always remember. I was grateful that my

son got a chance to explore that with me.

Well, again, back to the throne speech and on to some of the

substantial pieces. I think it was important that the beginning of the

throne speech captured some of the things that our government has

accomplished. I know many would like to say that was a long time ago. Six

months — man, time flies.

I think I’ll start off with the top. The cutting of the MSP by 50

percent is $900 in the pockets of families. Now, some of my respected

colleagues on the other side will chuckle at that, because they say: “We

would have done it too, if we were in government.” Well, perhaps. Perhaps

they would have done it. We won’t know, will we? But what we do know is that

in the last four years of their government, they doubled MSP premiums.

That’s the history. So I appreciate the chuckling. I appreciate it, and I

have good faith. I have a lot of respect for the member who chuckled. I

think that her intentions would have been to do that. But we don’t know, and

we won’t know, unfortunately.

Bridge tolls. Of course, I can speak at great length about bridge

tolls. I’ve got bridges everywhere in my community. We’re faced by the

traffic and congestion and all that’s associated with bridges. But removing

that toll, saving $1,500 a year for families, has a major, major effect, not

only for the families of those that take the bridge but also for those that

take the Alex Fraser Bridge or the Pattullo, because we’ve seen traffic move

off those bridges. We’ve seen a 5 percent decrease on the Alex Fraser and 4

percent at the Massey bridge. That’s a substantial change.

There’s still traffic congestion. I’m going to acknowledge that we

have something that we need to address. But we have seen a decrease because

we are actually using all of the infrastructure that we have built in this

province to its maximum effect. Of course, we’ve got an additional lane

which will be coming on the Alex Fraser. I think that will also help people

coming from South Surrey, from parts of my community and from elsewhere.

Again, I think some work to do, but I think that the savings from the bridge

toll….

A woman, a few months after we announced that, told me…. Her shifts

would alternate. She said that every Tuesday night and every Thursday night

she would sleep at her parents’ house, away from her kids, because she

couldn’t get home during that time because of the traffic. So in order to

save money on the toll, she would stay there, away from her kids, and then

drive at a different hour.

[3:20 p.m.]

It just shows you how this affected people. I’m grateful that

government took action on a commitment that we made in the

election.

Student loans. Interest rates cut by 2½ percent, so people that are

pursuing their education that already have the debt incurred can start

paying that debt back at a faster rate, more to the amount of the debt as

opposed to interest. I think everybody in this House would support that

notion. I’m grateful that our government took that action.

Something that I’m particularly proud of is the stuff that was done

around adult basic education, in particular to ELL. I just saw this in the

paper: since tuition was introduced to all adult basic education and

course load, enrolment dropped 35 percent. Those 35 percent are people who

want to get ahead for themselves and their families but could not

financially do it. That was a major effect that was felt in my community, in

my entire region.

I had a young woman come to my office. All of us in our constituency

office…. When somebody walks in, it’s usually because they’re either not

happy or they’ve got an issue that they are very frustrated with. She didn’t

thank you. I can go to school and get language training so that I can

advance my career,” means a lot. You don’t get thank-yous very often in this

job, and when you get somebody coming in and saying thank you on something

like that, it’s a very important thing, and it stays with me.

I want to thank the minister for the work she’s doing on that file,

giving people hope, giving them the tools to find hope in their lives and

giving them the tools to advance in their lives. I think there are a few

things that I’m very proud of in our government’s early days, and certainly

the work of the minister is one of those things.

Housing, housing, housing. Everywhere you go, the topic of housing

comes up. It doesn’t matter if you’re in Metro Vancouver, if you’re on the

Island or if you’re in the Interior, some form of housing is a piece that

comes up. I just want to quote from the throne speech. “The single greatest

challenge to affordability in British Columbia is housing. Home is at the

heart of belonging — to a neighbourhood, a community, a province, a country.

Home is a place to hang our hat, to raise a family and feel safe and secure.

When people can’t find an affordable home, that safety and security is taken

away. We become uncertain about the future and our place in it.”

Everywhere I go, that is what comes up. I just recently met with some

folks from the tech sector. They’ve got about 40 employees, and they have

hopes to expand. They see lots of opportunities in B.C. Their number one

reason for not expanding their business was housing. They said they cannot

grow their company because their employees cannot find affordable places to

live.

When we talk about housing, it’s an economic issue. When a tech

company wants to expand and other companies want to expand and they can’t

find space for their workforce to live, that is a substantial challenge for

us as an economy, as a province. So I’m grateful that we’re starting to take

steps to address that.

Another piece around housing that I’m quite concerned about is the

rise of homelessness for seniors. The fastest rate of growth is homelessness

for seniors. I had an opportunity last year where I was travelling to

Williams Lake and I met with some of the folks who were advocating for more

housing. They were raising the same issues there about needing housing for

seniors. So it’s not in one community; it’s all over the

province.

[3:25 p.m.]

In my community of Delta, we have a homeless problem. It’s hard for

people in Delta to acknowledge that they do have a problem. But next weekend

we’ll be walking in the Coldest Night, and we’ll be raising awareness on

this issue. The fastest rise is among seniors.

Demand and supply. It was spoken about in the throne speech. I want to

just touch on the piece there from the throne speech. “We see the results of

speculation in all parts of this province — distorted markets, sky-high

prices and empty homes. Too many British Columbians are paying the price.

Your government believes that people seeking a profit in B.C. real estate

must also contribute to housing solutions” — sounds very practical. “Budget

2018 will put forward new measures to address the effect of speculation” in

the real estate market.

We’ve already taken some steps. You’ve seen just recently, a few weeks

ago, the Minister of Finance announce a levy that would be associated with

companies that do short-term leases, short-term rentals, vacation rentals.

They’ll have to pay their fair share, which some of the hotels right now are

paying, and that will go towards a fund to start to address challenges in

our housing sector.

I think it’s fair to say that we won’t be able to solve all the

problems, but I can say that as a province, as a government, we have to be

part of that solution. This throne speech and the budget to come will lay

out our belief in how we can become part of that solution.

Supply is another piece that came up in the throne speech. Of course,

there will be more details in the budget. Again, I want to refer to the

throne speech on that, because I think there was some substantial language

there. “If we are to make meaningful steps to solve the crisis in housing

affordability, governments must also build the homes people need.” That

means a wide variety of types of homes.

One of the pieces that really jumped out at me — I’m grateful that it

was included — is that starting this year, this government will begin to

make the largest investment in affordable housing in B.C. history — the

largest investment in B.C.’s history. That is music to the ears of advocates

who have been raising this for years and years and years, who were told,

“Well, suck it up; move to another area of the province” — or not

acknowledging that the problem exists. So this is music to many ears. It’s

music to my ears. It will include social housing, student housing, senior

housing, Indigenous housing and affordable rentals for middle-income

families.

You know, I spent some years in banking. The other piece that really

struck me, that I appreciated in here: “We will enable local governments to

plan affordable rental housing by zoning areas of their communities for this

purpose.” That’s bold action — to allow communities to create rental zones,

dedicated spaces for rental. I think it’s something that’s been called for

by municipalities and cities throughout this province. I think it’s a great

step for us in working with our municipal partners to ensure that we have

the supply and in giving them the tools to ensure that we have

supply.

“And working with local governments, we will plan for and build

housing near transit corridors.” I think that’s an idea that everyone in

this House would agree with. If we’re building transit, if we’re investing

in transit, we need density around that. I can’t think of any other

jurisdiction in the world that would have a SkyTrain station and then have

single-family-dwelling homes. I think it’s something that we need to look at

seriously, that I think municipalities and cities need to start looking at.

When we build bus depots, we build density around that. We build social

housing around that so people have access to it. It doesn’t increase

congestion on our roadways, because people want transit.

I just look at my community of North Delta. I think the challenge we

have in this province is…. If we build development and then think about the

social infrastructure after, we are going to have challenges. We are going

to have challenges with social licence. Even when the development is right,

the public does not want it. They want to see transit solutions. They want

to see us invest in community centres. They want us to invest in schools, so

that the private sector can come and develop housing — social housing and

other types of housing — around it. They want to see the social

infrastructure first so that we can develop around it and so that the

private sector can step up and do its part. We’re certainly seeing some of

those challenges in my community.

[3:30 p.m.]

[L. Reid in the chair.]

I think the other piece, which the member for Vancouver–West End spoke

about quite eloquently, is that…. He’s been an advocate for housing — in

particular, for rental housing and renters — for a long time. I have to take

my hat off to him for his advocacy, for his relentless commitment to his

constituents, but also towards this concept.

The other piece I actually just noticed here in the throne speech is:

“Government will ease the pressure on students by helping B.C.’s public

colleges, institutes and universities build new student housing.”

I remember many, many years ago, Premier Gordon Campbell actually said

that he was going to do this. He said that he was going to allow

universities to borrow to build housing so they could meet this demand, and

it never happened. I’m not saying…. It’s not because, probably, he didn’t

intend to. I think his time as Premier ended waiting for that promise to be

fulfilled.

We’re taking that step. Universities and colleges want to address

housing for their students. They don’t want their students to be travelling

hours just to get to school. They want to be able to build housing on

campus, near the universities or colleges, so students can find an

affordable place to live and focus on their studies while they’re

there.

It serves no one’s purpose for kids to be travelling, or people to be

travelling — I won’t say kids; education is not just for kids; it’s for

everyone — long distances to get to school. It’s a barrier for people that

live in my part of the area, who have to travel long distances to get to

university or colleges. So again, I think this is an important piece. It’s

to free up some capital space for universities and colleges to make

that.

Again, one more piece on housing. I mean, I could go on, on housing

for the entire throne speech, but there are so many good things in this that

I want to get to them all. “Starting this year, your government will make

the biggest investment in retrofits and renovations of social housing in

B.C. in more than 20 years.” We have social housing that needs upgrading. I

have seen some of the spaces that we have. We know the need is there. Not

only will this upgrading help preserve our stock. It will also reduce

greenhouse emissions. It will also reduce home heating bills for thousands

of people who are living in social housing.

Not to mention…. I know many people like it to get at job, jobs, jobs.

This is jobs. This is putting people to work. It’s critical that we can

address…. You know, who would have believed over 16 years that you can

create jobs at the same time as caring about people? But we can. We’re

showing that in this throne speech, and we’re going to be showing that in

the coming many, many years that are ahead of us now.

Child care. I’m very excited to see some of the initiatives that are

coming forward on child care. There’s been lots of work done with community

advocates who have had no one to talk to for a long time. For them to be

able to get in a room and share ideas and thoughts and come together on how

to address the challenges of child care is crucial.

I’ll just speak for myself and my peers. It’s a daunting task to think

about child care. It’s a scary thought to think about child care. Many of my

peers are paying — well, like I did — between $1,000 and $1,300 a month.

When you’re paying that much, what goes through your head is…. You think:

“Is it even worth working if that’s how much I’m going to be paying for

child care?”

An overwhelming majority of the time it’s women who have to stay home

and do the child care. So child care will allow women to get into the

workforce, get back into the workforce, in a faster way. Men also, but the

stats and the numbers are overwhelming towards women.

[3:35 p.m.]

The one piece from the throne speech, again, that I highlighted in my

book right when it was being said was: “We begin this year by making a

difference in the cost of child care for tens of thousands of families.” I’m

looking forward to that in the budget. “With this investment comes a pledge

to work side by side with providers, advocates, communities and parents,

with the single purpose in mind: to propel the conversion of unlicensed

spaces to licensed, regulated childcare so that parents can benefit from

savings that the government can provide.”

There’s new legislation coming, as outlined in this throne speech. New

legislation is coming to give families more information about unlawful and

problem providers. I’ll tell you the scariest thing for me was when my son

turned one. My wife and I were sitting down and thinking about this next day

of us having to take my child to a daycare provider — the fear as a parent,

the not knowing. It’s daunting.

My wife is a much stronger person than I, but I lost the draw when I

had to take my son to the daycare. He was crying when I dropped him off, and

then when I got in the car, I was welling up, because it’s a scary thought

to take your child to a provider, to give him to someone that you don’t

really know that well.

It’s a scary thing for many parents. I think everyone that’s a parent

here who’s had to go through this has had that moment. It’s not the best

feeling in the world. But with this new legislation, it gives families and

parents more information about the child care provider that they are going

to be taking their child to. It helps calm and it helps ease some of that

stress of that time. I think it’s a welcome piece of legislation, and I look

forward to it being introduced in the House.

A sustainable and a diverse economy. It’s something that we spoke

about many times in the campaign. I’m grateful that we’ve got some things

here in the throne speech. I know there’s a whole lot of things coming

through in the budget, having had an opportunity to sit down with the

minister and seeing some of the work that he’s working on. I think it’s

quite good, and I’m grateful for his energy there.

I just quote from the throne speech: “Opportunities for people go hand

in hand with economic growth. Business success must translate into progress

for B.C. families and workers. A vibrant, diverse and growing economy

supports the services that communities count on.”

We certainly have some challenges coming up. There’s no doubt. We have

some challenges coming up with the forestry industry. I think members who

represent the Interior and forest-driven communities know that very well.

We’ve got the beetle infestation, we’ve got a trade battle with the U.S.,

and we’ve just gone through the worst fire season.

I’ll start with a fair deal. I think that it was an important step for

the Premier to head to Washington as his first step when becoming the

Premier of this province, to go there and advocate for our forest industry.

It was an important step. It was an important gesture. It’s something that

we often, in our caucus, are talking about. We’ve won so many court cases

battling the U.S. I’m confident we’ll win this one as well. But there is

that challenge of waiting and the unknown, and we’re working away to address

that.

My father worked in the forest industry for many years. The forest

industry of his time is no longer. It is now a high-tech industry. I’ve had

the opportunity to visit various forest mills and so on across this province

in my past work, and I’m just amazed at the amount of technology that is in

the mills at this time. It’s just not that place anymore.

We need to support our forestry industry, to provide the advancements

in technology so that they can compete with the world. At the same time, we

need to help support them in creating new markets for the new products. I

know that we’ll certainly be hearing more of that in the coming weeks and

months from the minister responsible for forestry, about some of the work

that’s happening but also the amount of work that’s been happening with the

tech sector.

Now that I speak of the tech sector — it’s booming. I’m pleased that

it’s booming. I’ve had an opportunity to meet with many people from the tech

sector. The conversation, the optimism, from them is quite refreshing. They

feel like they’re on the cusp of huge growth, and that’s something that

we’re quite interested in supporting.

[3:40 p.m.]

Improving services that people depend on — it was a key plank,

obviously, in our election, and we’ve taken considerable steps to address

that.

I’ll quote from the throne speech: “Too many people do not have access

to the health care they need. Overcrowded hospitals, long waits for

surgeries and the endless search for family doctors have become the norm.

Getting people faster, better health care is a key to getting and keeping

our society healthy. Government will bring together family doctors, nurses,

nurse practitioners” — professionals to offer team-based care.

I think that is critical. I had an opportunity to travel to Prince

George a year ago, where they’ve got a very innovative health care piece

happening in one of the clinics. I think it was an initiative by the

previous government. They’ve got physiotherapists, doctors, psychologists —

everyone under one shop. When somebody walks in that door, everyone is

working together to take care of that person. It’s a model of the

future.

I’ll give credit to the previous government for piloting that project.

But I think it’s something that needs to be expanded and, I think, is

certainly something that the Minister of Health is taking action

on.

Seniors. My first question in question period was about a senior in my

community who was left out in the sun too long and was badly sunburned. The

challenge was not enough staff to keep up with the demand of work. We hear

it so often.

I have so many people come into my office. It’s actually probably No.

2 behind WCB, the second most thought-about issue, where people are

concerned about their parents, whether they are in a care home or whether

the support is at home. It’s something that we certainly feel needs to be

addressed. It’s in the throne speech. I know the Minister of Health is

working diligently on it.

Hospitals. There are demands for hospitals. The Minister of Health was

in Williams Lake recently talking about the work that we’ll be doing in

Williams Lake to address the challenges in the hospital there. Terrace. The

Minister of Health was in Terrace just recently talking about the new

hospital that Terrace is getting. And finally, we’ve allotted money to start

the work on developing a brand-new hospital in Surrey. It’s much needed. The

demand, the population growth is so high.

Of course, we have challenges. We have to find land. We had a perfect

piece of land for a hospital to be built on, but it was sold. It was sold to

a developer to develop housing. Now the people in that community, who are

actually pretty pro-development, are saying: “Wait a minute. We don’t have

the services we need. We don’t have the health care. We don’t have the

schools.”

Again, it goes back to that social infrastructure. You build social

infrastructure. It creates space for the private sector to build some of the

housing that we need.

Just last week the Minister of Health made an announcement around

PharmaCare drug deductibles. I was very impressed with that announcement.

The amount of people that came into my office just to talk about their

concerns about that, and that wanted to share how this has affected them,

was quite remarkable.

There was a newspaper

article this morning or yesterday. It had a

study that was just recently done, and it said almost one million Canadians

give up food and heat to afford their prescriptions. This is happening

across the province. I’m sure the hon. Speaker has had constituents that

come to her office as well with concerns. But that is a sad stat across the

country. The challenge we have is that B.C. is one of the worst. In this

study, B.C. was one of the worst.

I think the step the Minister of Health took was a very important

step. In fact, in this article, the leading researcher that led the study

praised the minister. He said: “Single people and families with net

household incomes under $45,000 will benefit from the changes to the Fair

PharmaCare plan, starting January 1, 2019.”

I am very grateful. I’ve got the

article here. There are a couple of

things I wanted to highlight from the article. The researchers were from the

University of B.C. and Simon Fraser University and tw