British Columbia Hansard — Monday, March 24, 2014

20140324am-Hansard-v8n6

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session, 40th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) THE HONOURABLE LINDA REID, SPEAKER ISSN 0709- 1281 (Print) ISSN 1499-2175 (Online) Monday, March 24, 2014 Morning Sitting Volume 8, Number 6

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

Rich Coleman Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ......................................................................................................... Hon. John Rustad Minister of Advanced Education ............................................................................................................................................ Hon. Amrik Virk Minister of Agriculture ............................................................................................................................................................... Hon.

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

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

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

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

Suzanne Anton Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation......................................................................................................Hon. Don McRae Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services ................................................................................... Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................Hon.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nanaimo Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal) ........................................................................ Shuswap Lake, Hon. Dr.

Terry (BC Liberal) ....................Kamloops–North Th ompson Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) .........................................Boundary-Similkameen Lee, Richard T. (BC Liberal) ......................................................Burnaby North Letnick, Norm (BC Liberal) ........................................Kelowna–Lake Country Macdonald, Norm (NDP) ....................................Columbia River–Revelstoke McRae, Hon. Don (BC Liberal) ..................................................

Comox Valley Martin, John (BC Liberal) ..................................................................Chilliwack Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ..................................... Prince George–Mackenzie Mungall, Michelle (NDP) ..........................................................Nelson-Creston Oakes, Hon. Coralee (BC Liberal) .............................................Cariboo North Pimm, Hon. Pat (BC Liberal) ...............................................Peace River North Plecas, Darryl (BC Liberal) ....................................................Abbotsford South Polak, Hon.

Mary (BC Liberal) .............................................................. Langley Popham, Lana (NDP) ...................................................................Saanich South Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ................................................................ Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon. Linda (BC Liberal) ..................................................Richmond East Reimer, Linda (BC Liberal) ........................................

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Don McRae Coquitlam–Burke Mountain .....................................................Douglas Horne Coquitlam-Maillardville........................................................... Selina Robinson Cowichan Valley ................................................................................

Bill Routley Delta North ..................................................................................Scott Hamilton Delta South...............................................................................Vicki Huntington Esquimalt–Royal Roads .....................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ...................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Fraser-Nicola....................................................................................

Jackie Tegart Juan de Fuca .....................................................................................John Horgan Kamloops–North Th ompson ............................................ Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Kamloops–South Th ompson ..................................................Hon. Todd Stone Kelowna–Lake Country ............................................................... Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission .............................................................. Hon. Steve Th omson Kootenay East .......................................................................... Hon.

Bill Bennett Kootenay West ............................................................................ Katrine Conroy Langley.......................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Maple Ridge–Mission ..................................................................... Marc Dalton Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ........................................................ Dr. Doug Bing Nanaimo ........................................................................... Leonard Eugene Krog Nanaimo–North Cowichan .........................................................

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hon. Christy Clark Party Standings: BC Liberal 49; New Democratic 34; Independent 2

CONTENTS Monday, March 24, 2014 Morning Sitting Page Orders of the Day Private Members' Statements ................................................................................................................................................. 2259 Support for addictions S. Hammell G. Hogg Small business D. Bing S. Fraser A bumpy ride for recycling in B.C. L. Popham E. Foster Benefi ts of LNG development already being realized in B.C. J. Sturdy R.

Austin Private Members' Motions ..................................................................................................................................................... 2268 Motion 8 — Prosecution of negligence in workplace death and injury cases H. Bains M. Morris A. Dix L. Larson G. Heyman L. Reimer K. Corrigan L. Th roness B. Routley M. Bernier J. Darcy

MONDAY , MARCH 24, 2014 Th e House met at 10:03 a.m. [Madame Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Prayers. Orders of the Day Private Members' Statements SUPPORT FOR ADDICTIONS S. Hammell: A news broadcast in 2006, and updated in 2009, describes a portion of our community that is, regrettably, much the same fi ve years later. [R.

Chouhan in the chair.] "Dozens of homes in B.C. have been turned into rooming houses for addicts who want to kick their habit, but former residents and neighbours complain that some of the privately run 'recovery homes' are overcrowded, unsupervised, dirty and unsafe to live in. [1005] "'Th ere's big money in recovery houses,' said former recovery home resident Glenda Small. 'Th e people who run these places…. Th ey are governed by no rules.

Th ey don't have to answer to no one except their pocketbook.' Several former and current residents told the CBC News that there's a wide range of homes, from ex- cellent to downright dangerous. Th ey say the trouble is they are unregulated in B.C., so there's no way to tell the good from the bad from the outside." Th ese are actually the suburban and rural form of the downtown SRO. Recovery homes provide room and board to recover- ing addicts, and some provide services such as AA or 12- step meetings.

Some recovery homes are funded through the health authorities or through the ministries of hous- ing or of housing and social development. Some receive $30.90 per diem for each client. Th e deregulation of recovery homes happened in 2001, even though some homes continued to receive funding through the health authorities or the Ministry of Social Development. Deregulation, though, eliminated any minimum standards from these homes.

While there are many very well run recovery homes, some unscrupulous or unsafe operators wreak havoc on their communities, off ering nothing to help clients reintegrate into the com- munity and by maintaining crowded and unhygienic liv- ing conditions. Eleven years aft er deregulating recovery homes, the B.C. Liberal government brought in a weakened certifi - cate system for registering recovery homes. It's a very, very soft form of oversight. It's a voluntary registration, and there's no monitoring or following-up inspections, and it is complaint-driven.

Last month there were 60 recovery homes registered with the Ministry of Health in British Columbia, and 36 applications were pending. Recovery home operators and others involved in my community of Surrey believe there are over 150 unregulated homes in our community alone and many, many more around the province. There are regulated homes in Victoria, Vernon, Vancouver, Port Hardy, Coquitlam, Port Alberni, Mission, Langley, Kelowna, Kamloops, Cranbrook, Courtenay and Clinton. Th ese all have some certifi cated houses, but they run from one to two to three to four houses.

In Surrey there are at least 150 unregulated homes. Having that number of homes in any community leads to a huge underplay of people who are trying to recover from drugs and alcohol and being placed in circumstances that are just unacceptable. I have heard from many people in my neighbourhood regarding the recovery homes, those are that are un- regulated. Th ey say that they're overcrowded. Th e neigh- bours say they're dirty, they're unsafe, and the advocates complain there is a lack of control over the number of people in the residence, oft en exceeding fi re codes.

Th e mayor of Surrey has complained, and she has said time and again that municipal councils are not in the health fi eld and they don't have the expertise in it. She says, "We're back to the same old problems, with un- regulated boarding houses, drug overdoses and some- times staff abuses." [1010] Oft entimes these homes lack qualifi ed personnel and do not off er recovery assistance or counselling. Th ere is no regulation of programs or monitoring of clients' suc- cess. Some non-certifi ed homes lack physical resources such as food, telephones and furniture.

Neighbours have complained of drug and alcohol activity going on in some of the homes and victimization of vulnerable individuals, particularly women residing in facilities run by men. We are, in many ways, judged by how we handle those who are most vulnerable in our society.

Clearly, people who are addicted to drugs or alcohol or any of the other addictions that are abundant in our communities need our attention, our monitoring and our assistance to re- cover from something that, in the end, is a scourge on our communities and something we should be engaged in eliminating or supporting the reduction of the behaviour. Th ere are many people in our communities who have become victimized by drugs and alcohol.

We need, as a community, to be there providing reasonable and cred- ible assistance to those people as they are engaged in an eff ort to get away from this disease and to become pro- ductive members of our society. G. Hogg: Th ank you to the member for Surrey–Green Timbers for those comments. I've had the opportunity to visit a number of the group homes that exist in Surrey. I've had the chance to look at some of those which have 2259

British Columbia Debates2260 Monday, March 24, 2014 been regulated and registered — and in the process, prov- incially, of registering close to a hundred of those sup- portive recovery homes. Th ere are clearly some which are not registered and present some issues that the province has been work- ing on. Th e estimate, I think, is somewhere around 130 in Surrey. We've seen, with the issues in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, a number of the people who were in that area moving out to Surrey.

I think we probably have higher needs, in terms of the issues that exist there, than do exist in any other part of the province. We initiated the child and youth mental health plan in British Columbia. We were the fi rst province in Canada, in fact, to have a child and youth mental health plan to start looking at youth as they're coming up. Sometimes we're being — in a notion of being predatory by other users. Th ere are certainly a number of challenges that we face, which are faced right across our country — the issues in terms of prolifi c off enders that sometimes end up in these facilities.

Prolifi c off enders are those who have off ended at least ten times. We have super-prolifi c off enders who have off ended at least 30 times. A number of those exist within the issues of these recovery homes. We're in the process of trying to ensure that more and more of them become registered. Th e municipalities have a responsibility with respect to this, in terms of being able to identify those which are in their neighbourhoods. I recently dealt with the city around one in South Surrey that was presenting some problems to the neighbourhood.

With the support of the city of Surrey we were able to ensure that that one did not proceed and was dealt with appropriately. Houses like Trilogy's three homes and Launching Pad, I think, are very well run, function and should be a model by which we start to address these services in the future. Th ere are a number of options.

I think, as we're look- ing internationally at the delivery of social programs, the whole movement is towards intersectoral models of service delivery, where we start looking at coordinating across a number of diff erent ministries and service pro- viders — whether it's Health, Education, Justice or MSD, that we start to come together in a coordinated fashion. Th e Public Health Association of B.C. recently, in their conference entitled…. Th e theme of it was intersectoral service delivery: how do we look at coordinating more ef- fectively?

Th e corrections association of Canada, at their biennial congress, had the same theme: how do we look at it intersectorally? Th e World Health Organization is doing studies around that looking at that. [1015] I think that in many ways this province, certainly in some of the health promotion models, has led the world. It has received best-practices designations from the World Health Organization for some of the models that we've looked at. We're certainly looking at how now we can have a better coordination, including the municipal- ities, in terms of looking at and addressing the models that grow out of this.

Th ere are some very creative options that start to exist out of there. I noticed that Ontario has just put out an off ering with respect to social impact bonds. Social im- pact bonds are focusing around homelessness, around employment. Th ey're looking at creative ways that they can use a social impact bond to deal with and manage some of these people who have mental health issues, who have employment issues and are burdened with an in- ability to get back into a normal lifestyle, get back into integrated models.

Th e research is showing us that the most eff ective way that people can actually move forward is that they are able to connect with a number of people. Th ose in our neighbourhoods — in fact, the one that I talked about in South Surrey…. Th e people in the neighbourhood who actually can name more of their neighbours feel safer about their community than any other. Th at study has been done in a number of jurisdictions throughout the world: the more of your neighbours you can name, the safer you will feel.

Th is is an issue of safety in the community, particu- larly in those areas which have them that are not zoned because they have six or fewer people within their hous- ing models. We have to look at models for being able to address and manage that. Th e social impact bond model that Ontario is talking about and that we've been work- ing at…. Th ere are lots of options that are available. Certainly, there are issues that continue to face us. We understand that the models…. In terms of the way that society has been shift ing there are a whole bunch of things that we have to look at and manage.

Th is is one of them — that we have a coordinated intersectoral approach to helping to deal with. S. Hammell: I thank the member opposite for his comments and his unique suggestion of a new approach that we could be taking. Aft er 11 years deregulating re- covery homes, we have chaos out there, in some ways. I'd like to read just a little bit of an excerpt from some- one who was living in a recovery house. She says: "Th e house I was living in had 22 people in it, and I was given $500 a month to cook for 22 people." She added that she was kicked out of the house aft er she complained about the lack of food.

According to several current and former residents, the recovery homes are run like private businesses, and more opening every month. Th ey rent out spaces to drug ad- dicts and alcoholics who want to kick their bad habits. Typically, the homes collect room and board from addicts by arranging to have their monthly welfare cheques sent directly to the organization. Residents say they are oft en left to essentially run the

British Columbia DebatesMonday, March 24, 2014 2261 House on their own with little or no direct supervision, and it's just like "animals running the zoo." According to this person and other residents, people who have prob- lems have been kicked out without notice while the re- covery home organization keeps the welfare cheque for the rest of the month. Th ey go on. Also, a discussion of recovery homes inevitably leads to a discussion of the methadone program supported by the B.C. government.

Stories have been raised and aired for years around concerns that unscrupulous operators of recovery homes may be collecting kickbacks from phar- macists for prescribing methadone. Th e methadone pro- gram is a costly program to the provincial government, perhaps costing as much as $50 million a year, and the program deserves to be delivered with professional care for the patient at the centre of the delivery service. I know that if we quote a past Minister of Health, there are concerns about closing down these unregulated homes because the people end up in the streets.

But as the government responsible to the citizens of this prov- ince, they deserve, and we all deserve, to have a system that puts the patient at the centre and delivers a service that is reputable and professional to people who need it desperately. [1020] I think we can do better than we're doing in the re- covery home system, and I think that we deserve better. SMALL BUSINESS D. Bing: I'm pleased to rise in the House today to speak about how our government is working for small business in British Columbia.

In British Columbia small businesses are the backbone of the economy, making up to 98 percent of all businesses. In addition to ongoing business initiatives, our government has also had pur- sued partnerships with business-focused organizations in our communities. The strategic locations of Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows make us a significant centre for economic development. It also provides a wealth of investment opportunities, including tourism, retail, aviation, trans- portation, agribusiness, manufacturing and technology. My wife and I established Pitt Meadows' fi rst dental practice.

As a business owner, I understand the obstacles that small business must overcome in order to succeed. I still recall the anxiety that every new business goes through as you wait for the phone to ring with new cus- tomers. I remember worrying about how we were going to pay our bills and pay back the massive bank loan that we took out to start up the business. I recall sharing the concerns of all new business owners, wondering how you were going to meet the monthly payroll as business fl uc- tuated up and down in those early years.

Like most new small business owners, however, the hard work, long hours and determination paid off , and we did develop a successful business. Being a small business owner also helped me to de- velop relationships throughout the community, and in time the community became my focus and my extended family. Th is ultimately led me to serve on city council, where the concerns of other business owners and the citizens became my concerns. Th is participation guided my goals and priorities as I played a small

part in Pitt Meadows' growth and development into the vibrant and thriving community that it is today. I understand the challenges that small businesses face in British Columbia, and I am confi dent that our govern- ment does as well. Our government has implemented a number of initiatives to help small business face these challenges. One local initiative I'd like to mention is an initia- tive called BusinessSTART. Th is program, launched in Maple Ridge last October, is a free resource program for home-based, small and microbusinesses in the North Fraser region of Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows and Mission.

BusinessSTART is designed to connect entrepreneurs with the information and resources they need to get a solid start. Th e assistance this initiative provides is through a var- iety of products: personalized intake consultation, a cus- tomized resource package, a BusinessSTART kit — free seminars, 24-7 access to the BusinessSTART website, a newsletter and a certifi cate of completion. Our community has already had success stories.

Some of the businesses that have received recognition in both Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows include Lougheed Tire; Jim's Pizza; the Europe Bakery; Pacifi c Owl; the Stomping Grounds café, bistro and catering company; Olá Puppy; and the One Love Skateboard Shop. Th e Small Business Roundtab le, an additional small business resource, has worked to develop programs and initiatives for a better small business environment. One way the Small Business Roundtable has contributed is through regulatory reform. While there is much more to do, our government has decreased the amount of regula- tory burden by almost one-half.

The Small Business Roundtable recently presented Open for Business Awards to seven municipalities that showed exemplary leadership, innovation and support for small business communities, including a $10,000 award to fund a local small business–friendly project. Recently our government released a report called Small Business: Doing Business with Government Project. Th is doing-business-with-government project builds on the key principles of the B.C. small business accord, es- tablished just over a year ago to create long-term growth opportunities for small business through government procurement.

Th is report contains 12 recommendations that reduce barriers for small business and makes it easier for them to conduct business with government. Just like the makeup of our province, our government

British Columbia Debates2262 Monday, March 24, 2014 recognizes the need to respect and honour diversity in small business. Diversity creates more vibrant commun- ities, and it shares diff erent perspectives. It fosters under- standing and compassion for one another and, in turn, creates a more unifi ed community.

Our Premier has shown her unwavering commitment to diversity in small business when, this February, she ap- pointed 11 women from across British Columbia to sit on a women's economic council. [1025] These women will provide advice to the Premier; the Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour; as well as the Minister of State for Tourism and Small Business on issues and economic opportunities for women that will strengthen B.C.'s economy.

Small business drives the provincial economy not only by creating and maintaining jobs but also through its production of goods and services which will support families and stimulate further economic activity. Our government continues to cultivate opportunities to help small business thrive throughout British Columbia. S. Fraser: I'd like to thank the member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows for his thoughtful comments about small business. I do agree with some of his comments that small business is, indeed, the backbone of the econ- omy of British Columbia, so important to communities.

Th e money that is derived by small businesses helps com- munities. It's all spent in communities. So I agree on that point, but I'm going to diverge at this point from the member's comments. His statements about this government understanding the challenges of small business — I don't agree. While issues around reducing barriers and regulatory restric- tions may seem important, they are icing on a cake, and it's a cake that this government has forgot to make. Th is government has led us to continuing to have the worst job performance and job creation in the country.

Th ere are words, there are slogans, and then there are the real- ities, and that hurts everyone in this economy, especially small businesses. I would note that we have the highest poverty rates in the country. We have the highest income gaps in the country, and that means far less people are able to partici- pate in the economy at the local level. Th at's a big prob- lem for small business especially, and the communities that benefi t from small businesses. At the most fundamental level, this government is fail- ing small businesses in every way.

On the high level, on the icing level, they are talking about regulatory restric- tions being removed and reducing barriers, when at the base level of the economy this government has actually mismanaged it in the worst way we've seen possible. In my constituency of Alberni–Pacifi c Rim, for instance, and all over the coast, all over Vancouver Island…. In this place, in Victoria, this government is making reckless cuts to ferry services in the north and all over the coast which will directly and adversely aff ect small businesses.

So this member is missing some of the fundamental premises around how small businesses work and what they need to work appropriately. In both districts 69 and 70, school districts in my constituency, we're seeing school closures. Probably six school closures are being contemplated right now. Losing schools is a part of los- ing the hubs of communities and directly aff ects small business in an adverse way. I would also like to get to a very specifi c issue. I spoke in the House two weeks ago about the importance of lit- eracy and literacy training in British Columbia. I think everyone agrees.

Everyone seemed to agree. Th ey all ap- plauded during my statement, including the minister when I was looking right at him. I was telling this House about the importance for us, as legislators, to recognize protecting literacy programs. Well, this government, this minister, we've learned today, is drastically cutting the funding to Decoda sys- tems — the organization, the glue, for all of the literacy organizations in the province. Without allowing people to raise themselves up….

Literacy is the most fundamental way to raise people up and participate in the economy, in small businesses, by owning small businesses and by using them as clients and as customers.

To not allow them the most basic fun- damental right of literacy — by stripping that away, by taking the funding away from the core organization in the province, Decoda — this government is doing dras- tic and dangerous moves towards hurting the economy of this province, and small businesses will face that fun- damentally. [1030] I want to urge this member to talk to his Minister of Education and get him to reinstate the funding to Decoda and make sure that the funding is there for the programs, for adult literacy programs in my constituency, and that aff ects Port Alberni, Tofi no, Ucluelet and the Bamfi eld community school.

Th ey'll all take hits on that. Th ose people that want to raise themselves up and par- ticipate in the economy and the small business economy of this province are directly impaired by this minister. Th is is a direction that the member across the way could take in his fi nal conclusions here — that he will commit to working with the minister to make sure that funding is reinstated. D. Bing: I appreciate the member opposite's com- ments. However, we clearly disagree on a number of points. One of the objectives of our government is to cut red tape and to increase small business participation.

Th is is not an overnight job. Th is is something that we've been working on and will continue to work on. One of our goals is to improve information and re-

British Columbia DebatesMonday, March 24, 2014 2263 sources to support small business. We would like to pro- mote best practices. We would like to have forms in plain languages. We'd like to reduce red tape. We are trying to implement less paperwork for small businesses. We are getting down to a two-page RFP for small businesses to make submissions. We would like to increase the awareness of opportun- ities to sell to government. We are doing this by improv- ing the B.C. Bid function. We would like to reduce or eliminate fees for this process. We think this will help small business.

We'd like to establish accountability for reporting out on results. Th is would enable small busi- nesses to understand exactly where they stand when they make a submission. Right now there isn't enough man- power to do that. What we'd like to do is have a central resource that small business can consult in doing this. We'd like to reduce barriers facing small business and increase their opportunities. As I have mentioned, it is not easy to be a small business owner. Many small busi- nesses struggle for years.

It takes long hours and hard work in order to succeed, and this government would like to help those members to be successful. A BUMPY RIDE FOR RECYCLING IN B.C. L. Popham: I rise to debate the proposed overhaul to B.C.'s successful recycling program. Th e new system, run by Multi-Material British Columbia, is slated to begin in less than eight weeks. Th e Premier has called the intro- duction of MMBC a bumpy road. For many B.C. busi- nesses, residents and environmentalists, this road is not bumpy; it's utterly impassable.

In my view, this new system will not represent the best interests of British Columbians, B.C. businesses or the environment for fi ve simple reasons. First, incorpora- tion documents reveal that MMBC is a dummy corpor- ation. Although MMBC is registered as a society in B.C., in truth it is neither a society nor British Columbian. It is fully controlled by Robert Chant, the Toronto-based vice-president of Loblaws, and John Coyne, the Toronto- based vice-president of Unilever Canada and their em- ployee. Two impacts are critical to understand. One, loss of competition.

Th ey are setting up a system that is dan- gerously close to monopoly. Th is will inevitably lead to a decrease in quality of services and increase in price. Th e supposed free marketers over there seem to need an eco- nomics refresher. Two, loss of democratic and local control. Municipalities are directly accountable to residents. Councillors and staff hear immediately when there are problems. If those problems aren't solved, councillors pay the price at the next municipal election.

Th e contracts that municipalities have been pressured into signing in- clude inadequate funding formulas, business-killing pen- alties for non-compliance and even a gag clause which prevents them from reporting out on recycling data.

By allowing MMBC to be created as a dummy corpor- ation for Ontario big business, the government ignores that the short-term profi t-maximization ethos of corpor- ate titans will oft en confl ict with the best interests of the people and the environment of our province. [1035] Th e second criticism I want to raise is that the chan- ges the government is pushing through for recycling in B.C. will lead to consumers getting gouged with yet an- other hidden tax. Th is tax is on recycling. MMBC will be funded by applying a uniform new cost to big business, which will pass it on to consumers.

But in many muni- cipalities we already are paying the cost of recycling on our property taxes. Municipalities have been clear that this amount won't be rebated to the taxpayers, but the government did not require this rebate when setting up the new system. Th e slogan for MMBC should probably be: "Recycle once, but pay twice." Moreover, in parts of B.C. people will end up paying the costs of recycling through this hidden tax, but not all will be able to access MMBC services — Kamloops, for example. Th ey will be paying for nothing.

My third point is that the government is allowing profi t to be extracted by the businesses behind MMBC while externalizing much of the business risk onto municipal- ities and small business. Th e monopolistic system this government has set up gives the small players, including our municipalities, no leverage to bargain for fair terms. Small but established companies, like Gibsons Resource Recovery Centre, are watching as their business models are ruined. Stew Y oung, mayor of Langford, says the MMBC plan is fatally fl awed.

He notes that the average contamina- tion of mixed residential recycling picked up by haulers is 13 percent, but MMBC is putting a $5,000 fi ne on loads from haulers if contamination rates are over 3 percent. Y oung says 3 percent is "unobtainable." My fourth point is that this system is fatally fl awed because it fails to create price signals or incentives for consumers to recycle. Th e refundable beverage contain- er program is an excellent example of what does work. Consumers see at the time of purchase the environmental cost of their spending habits and are therefore incentiv- ized to change.

Once the product is consumed, there is a profi t motivation — the deposit — to ensure it's recycled. Th is system has proven successful for years, and yet the government, in its zeal to kowtow to big business, is not expanding it. In fact, the government is allowing MMBC to undermine these established businesses. For example, MMBC will collect refundable containers themselves, pocketing the value of the resource and reducing the market share for established successful businesses, such as Return-It depots. Finally, the government has proposed to change the recycling program.

It fails the most important test of all.

British Columbia Debates2264 Monday, March 24, 2014 Th ey don't address the environmental challenge that led to the recycling movement in the fi rst place. In reality, MMBC won't even capture 50 percent of total recyclables out there. Th e 75 percent number we hear ad nauseam is a soft target for three years from now. It doesn't take into account at least half of the recyclables in B.C., which are generated outside the household.

Furthermore, I challenge the government to pro- vide any evidence that the logic supposedly behind the MMBC change — namely, the concept of extended pro- ducer responsibility — will lead to reductions in pack- aging. It will not. Th e simple truth is that packaging decisions are determined by far more consequential driv- ers than a very tiny per-unit cost which is hidden from consumers. For substantive environmental change, we need to de- mand a policy based on full life-cycle analysis of pack- aging, and then we need a government with the courage to push change based on design-for-environment prin- ciples.

What we have instead is MMBC, a fatally fl awed policy outcome from a government without suffi cient courage to face our environmental challenges. E. Foster: I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this very important topic this morning. Th e purpose of any waste reduction program is exact- ly that — to get waste out of the landfi lls. I've spent a lot of years in local government. I chaired the Solid Waste Management Committee for the North Okanagan regional district. I helped put together the solid waste management plan for the North Okanagan regional dis- trict.

We were leaders in the program around the prov- ince. In the village of Lumby, where I was the mayor — councillor at the time — we introduced voluntary curb- side recycling, and then a year later we went to a two-bag garbage limit. We saw our garbage tonnage drop and our recycling tonnage go up markedly just simply because people didn't have the option. Well, they had the option. Th ey could go to the village offi ce and buy a little tag for a dollar and put it on their extra garbage bags.

By getting into people's conscience and also their pocketbooks, we were able to change their thinking. [1040] In 1986 or '87 — my memory is getting a little slack — I attended an Okanagan Mainline Municipal Association conference in Osoyoos. One of the workshops was on sol- id waste management. I signed up for it because I had no idea what solid waste meant. Ten minutes into it I found we were talking about garbage.

Th ey talked at that time about the eff ect on communities and the environment that solid waste was going to have into the 21st century, and certainly, we're having this discussion here today because of that. Th e purpose of MMBC is to do exactly what it's intend- ed to do, and that's to reduce the amount of waste in the system. Th ere are all kinds of diff erent ways. Y ou look at the Lower Mainland now. Th ey haul their garbage, if you will, their waste, to Ashcroft and dump it. Well, eventually, those landfi lls are going to be full, and we're not going to have an opportunity to do this.

MMBC came forward as an opportunity to change people's way of doing business and to put the onus on the original producers of the waste product or the recyclable product to reduce. It was interesting to hear the member opposite bring up the eff ect on small business and so on. I've been in this House for fi ve years. I would suggest that in that fi ve years I have never seen members of the opposition support any initiative that we've brought forward to help small busi- ness or medium-sized business. So it's quite refreshing to hear them come forward and talk about the benefi ts to small business.

Th e program was initiated back in 2011, or the discus- sion was initiated in 2011, and we made a lot of changes from the original concept. One of the big ones was that, with consultation with small business, medium-sized business, chambers of commerce and municipalities around the province, we changed the criteria. One of the big things for the smaller businesses…. Th ey were concerned and justifi ably so.

Th ere are three criteria that if you meet any one of those three, you're exempt from the program: if you do under $1 million of annual revenue; if you produce under a tonne of re- cyclables; or if you operate as a single point of retail sale and as a sole proprietorship or you're not a member of a franchise or a bigger organization. So for all those smaller businesses, that opportun- ity has changed. We're pleased to see that.

We've got all kinds of validation on this — chambers of commerce, lo- cal government, opportunities for local government to either continue the way they're doing it or to have MMBC put their contractors in there to pick up. It's not going to change the roadside blue box programs. I know that in the village of Lumby where I live there's not going to be any change to the pickup. It's going to be picked up the same as it always was. As far as the taxes go….

To the member who com- mented about in the past there was the opportunity for people within the communities to change their local gov- ernment if they're not happy, if those local governments don't choose to either pass that savings along to their constituents or put that saving into some other type of a program that would see waste going out of the stream, then the folks in the community have the opportunity to change their local government. We do that every three now. In the future we'll be looking at four years. Th ose opportunities are still there. Th at doesn't change anything at all.

Th ank you to the member for bringing this up. L. Popham: I note that the response from the member opposite failed to deal with the information I presented

British Columbia DebatesMonday, March 24, 2014 2265 here today. It's a very complicated issue, and I think one of the problems is that most members don't understand the implications of MMBC. Perhaps the information that MMBC is, in fact, a dummy corporation could have been addressed by the member. As a fi rst step, I ask the member to explain the inclusion of the acronym B.C. in the name MMBC. Th e registrar of societies requires written permission from the government before it allows our province's name to be used, and permission was, in fact, given.

Obviously, there was an error — deliberate, I suspect. [1045] What criteria did the government use to allow this abuse of the province's good name? I call on the govern- ment to either immediately withdraw this permission or ensure that at least 50 percent of the directors and mem- bers of the society reside in B.C. EPR, or extended producer responsibility model, which transfers funding and management to corporate- controlled associations, does not have a record of success in Canada or internationally. Ontario has a 25 percent re- cycling rate aft er years of EPR.

Th e European Union, an early adopter of EPR, has an overall recycling rate of 35 percent. Countries in Europe with successful recycling rates have adopted other measures, such as the deposit system, high tip fees and disposal bans. Th e government would have us believe that business is in support of this plan, and of course, many — like Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola, Procter and Gamble — are, be- cause it advances their interests as opposed to the in- terests of the environment and of British Columbia. But the fact remains that many other businesses are strong- ly opposed.

For example, business associations op- posed include the B.C. Agriculture Council, Newspapers Canada, Community Newspapers Association of B.C. and Yukon, the B.C. Bottle Depot Association and Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters. Th e newspaper industry estimates that MMBC will cost their struggling industry $10 million a year and are refusing to participate, throwing the viability of this en- tire project into question. What will people of B.C. think when they learn the truth behind MMBC? If government doesn't take a step back, B.C.'s recycling system is going to end up in a giant dumpster.

A huge amount of eff ort has been invested into getting people to voluntarily recycle and change their habits. Th is government has put the public confi dence in our recycling system at risk. To conclude, the control of recycling should never have been outsourced to the large corporate interests based in Ontario and abroad. Th is is a profound failure. Th is pro- gram needs to be paused and the entire concept recon- sidered. We owe it to the people of B.C. to get this right. BENEFITS OF LNG DEVELOPMENT ALREADY BEING REALIZED IN B.C. J.

Sturdy: Woodfi bre LNG opened the doors to its new headquarters in Vancouver two weeks ago. It's just another step towards the development of a liquefi ed nat- ural gas industry here in British Columbia. Woodfi bre LNG is a natural gas liquefi cation and export project be- ing developed not in northern B.C. but in Squamish, B.C. Th is is an opportune time for Squamish, and it's an opportune time for British Columbia.

The develop- ment of LNG will create, and already is creating, jobs in this province, and it could create more — tens of thou- sands more jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars of new economic activity. Th is is not something that we're just speculating about. Th is is something that's actually happening right now. Th ere are impacts and benefi ts all around this province.

Woodfi bre LNG is one of only many LNG projects de- veloping plans to export our natural gas to the energy- thirsty Asian markets — other projects like Aurora LNG, Discovery LNG, Douglas Channel energy project, Kitimat LNG, Kitsault Energy, LNG Canada, Pacifi c NorthWest LNG, Prince Rupert LNG, Stewart LNG, Triton LNG, WCC and Woodside. Woodside, as a matter of fact, just signed an agreement with the province in January to ne- gotiate a long-term tenure for an LNG facility on the south side of Grassy Point.

Then just in the paper last week a newly minted Vancouver-based company called Steelhead LNG an- nounced that Mr. Geoff Plant, past Attorney General of this province, will be joining the company. Th e quote I read in the paper was that Mr. Plant recognizes the tre- mendous potential that LNG has to create a wide range of long-term benefi ts for British Columbia, and this gov- ernment agrees.

Although most plants are planned for communities in northern B.C., there will be construction, maintenance, operations and logistics all over the province in explor- ation, approvals, production through transmission to compression and export. Our government's aspirations to build an LNG export industry are taking place with steady and concentrated actions to ensure that British Columbia is ready to compete on a global scale. Policy changes, development of legislation and regulation, pro- motion, training and human resources and much en- vironmental assessment and protection work is taking place.

Our government continues to develop and implement a competitive tax and policy environment critical to de- veloping the LNG industry in B.C. Th e LNG income tax will be a two-tiered tax with a tier 1 tax of 1.5 percent and a tier 2 tax of up to 7 percent, with fi nal rates to be determined in legislation ready for the fall. LNG income tax will apply to the income from liquefi cation of natural gas at LNG facilities in B.C.

British Columbia Debates2266 Monday, March 24, 2014 [1050] Apart from setting up a tax regime, our government's deep-well royalty credit and infrastructure royalty credit program will also help to increase the competitiveness of our province's natural gas sector and support the long- term prospects of the industry. Because of the credits program, companies will in- crease their investments. It's expected that infrastructure alone — for example, the infrastructure royalty credit program — will generate over $320 million in new cap- ital spending by the oil and gas industry.

Over 1,500 jobs will be created by this activity, ensuring that B.C. remains globally competitive in attracting investment for oil and gas development for the benefi t of our economy. Th is government has met with companies and invest- ors from around the world to ensure that they clear- ly understand the opportunity and value of investing in B.C. We're supporting this tremendous opportun- ity for growth with actions which ensure that British Columbians are equipped with the skills necessary to secure new jobs.

Just recently, last December our government, via the Natural Gas Workforce Strategy Committee, provided $75,000 to the Northern Lights College and its centre of excellence to develop a new entry-level program for those who want to work in the industry. Th is program should be ready by July and will be made available for delivery by public post-secondary institutions in B.C. Just last week I visited BCIT and met with faculty and staff to learn how that institution, hand in hand with in- dustry, is preparing for the current job market as well as for jobs of the future.

It's a very impressive facility, and the staff are working hard at developing curriculum to meet the needs of today and tomorrow. Our government is committed to ongoing communi- cations with First Nations and stakeholders to work together, ensuring that we're meeting the highest en- vironmental standards so we can strive to produce some of the world's cleanest liquefi ed natural gas. Each LNG project will undergo an independent environmental as- sessment administered by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and the B.C. environmental assess- ment offi ce.

Ongoing communications with the full spectrum of interests is very important. Th at's why our government is hosting the international LNG in B.C. conference May 21 to 23 at the Vancouver Convention Centre. Th e second annual conference will bring together our com- munity leaders, First Nations leaders, educators, environ- mental leaders, elected offi cials and LNG proponents from across British Columbia and around the world to exchange ideas and build strong partnerships together. Th e LNG industry will create unprecedented econom- ic growth and well-paying jobs, and the opportunity is on our doorstep.

In the case of West Vancouver–Sea to Sky it's already happening, as it is all around B.C. With Woodfi bre LNG in my riding — and many other projects that dwarf Woodfi bre around the province — benefi ts and jobs are accruing as industry invests time and capital towards the development of natural gas production and export infrastructure. Th is government is championing LNG development, and British Columbia will benefi t for generations to come. R. Austin: Th anks to the member for West Vancouver– Sea to Sky for his comments and for bringing forward this motion this morning.

He mentioned, of course, a potential new LNG plant in his riding. I think it's fair to say, as the MLA for Skeena, that I think I'm the person in this Legislature who has wit- nessed the greatest benefi t so far from any potential LNG developments because, of course, this started in Kitimat probably about six years ago now. In fact, the largest project, which has spent the most capital, sits in the district of Kitimat — that, of course, being the Chevron-Apache project. It is truly inspiring to see what has been done and the amount of dollars that has been spent just in preparing the site.

Th ey've essen- tially moved a side of a mountain in order to create the terrain that's required for a site, and some people say that they've spent between $800 million and $1 billion just in pre-preparation. When you talk about LNG, the numbers are quite stag- gering to think of. Companies come in and can invest up to $3 billion, I'm told, and then might even walk away and not make a fi nal investment decision. Th e numbers are staggering, and it's made a lot of people quite success- ful in terms of the jobs that are being created.

I think if you live in the northwest you'll also see the fact that sidelines have happened. We have WestJet com- ing into the Kitimat-Terrace regional airport. It took ten years of us lobbying for a company like that to come in, and now they're here. And why? Th ey're here, largely, bringing workers in and out from other parts of British Columbia to work on these projects. [1055] It will, of course, increase production and exploration in the northeast.

People need to understand that most of the gas that's been brought out of the ground in the last ten or 15 years has in fact been exported to the United States or east to the populated provinces of Ontario and Quebec. Th ose markets are now rapidly drying up as the United States has found so much of its own gas. [D. Horne in the chair.] If we do not have an LNG industry, if one of these pro- jects at least does not come to fruition, we will actually see it hurt the B.C. economy overall and certainly hurt the northeast because of all the infrastructure that's been built up there over the last 20 years.

I think one of the other benefi ts that have been accru-

British Columbia DebatesMonday, March 24, 2014 2267 ing so far, of course, is also the increase in environmental studies that have happened, especially in the northwest of British Columbia, as well as all of the increased con- sultations with First Nations. It's good to see that this is an industry that, by and large, has First Nations support throughout the region — in stark contrast, I might add, to Enbridge and their gateway project of bringing bitu- men through northern British Columbia. We've certainly seen a lot of benefi ts accruing thus far, but let me also speak to the other side of the ledger.

Whenever small communities suddenly see a rapid in- crease in development, it's a huge challenge. And what are we seeing in the northwest? Well, let me go back to WestJet moving in and bringing in workers from all over B.C. I think those of us who live in the northwest want to see the opportunity that LNG brings to us in the re- gion: jobs locally. We have had an economy in the northwest that was devastated by the manufacturing shutdown capacity of the forest industry, and people actually left the northwest over the last ten to 15 years. It's the only part of B.C. that lost population.

So what people are hoping for is that the workers that are currently fi lling the planes coming in to work, for example, on the Alcan smelter rebuild or doing preparation work for LNG…. If an LNG plant comes to fruition, we don't want to see simply loads and loads of workers coming from outside the region. The member for West Vancouver–Sea to Sky men- tioned some major investments in the college in the northeast and at BCIT. What we want to see is that in- vestment happening at Northwest Community College.

We want to see as many people increase their capacity and their skills so that if one of these projects comes to fruition, it is fi rst and foremost local people who bene- fi t from those jobs rather than seeing what we're seeing today, which is planeloads of people coming from out- side the region. We also need to understand that while these compan- ies are spending millions and millions of their sharehold- ers' dollars, the government also has a responsibility to look into some of the infrastructure needs in the region.

I brought this up before, and I'll say it again Th ere is one bridge in Kitimat — one bridge — that takes you from the residential side of the community to all the industrial development that takes place on the west side of the Douglas Channel. Th at bridge is falling apart. When the mayor and the council say that we need some help to fi x this, the government says: "Well, we don't have any dollars coming in yet. We need to have a fi nal investment decision. We need to see actual rev- enues coming in." Th at's way too late to be making these kinds of infra- structure needs.

Th ere are things that need to be done to take advantage of this. J. Sturdy: Th ank you to the member opposite in rec- ognizing that we are generally moving in the right direc- tion and supporting the industry. Y ou know, I can speak best to what's going on in my riding of West Vancouver–Sea to Sky and our little pro- ject called Woodfi bre LNG, which is a very small project — about 1⁄10 the size of any one of those plants proposed for the north. But it is in a great spot. It's on the west side of Howe Sound, an old pulp mill site that badly needs remediation.

Th is LNG project will actually do that remediation job. It's a water-access site only, so there's limited other indus- trial opportunity there — on deep water about six kilo- metres from town. One of the best things is that it does have two high-voltage power lines running through it, which previously fed the pulp mill and could very well be suited towards powering this facility. Speaking to the member opposite, it is in fact in the municipality, so it will provide municipal or local bene- fi ts to the community.

In 2007, when the pulp mill was closed on that site, in one fell swoop the municipality lost $2 million in property taxes and over 600 jobs. Th is project could go some way towards rebuilding some of those employment opportunities and replacing some of those taxation impacts. [1100] It really is impressive how much work has been done over the last several years by Woodfi bre LNG. In February there were three people on the team, and today there are over a dozen, with an expectation of 20 by year-end.

By then it'll be a $40 million investment in the province on the site on remediation — engineers, consultants, biol- ogists, contractors, legal, rent, fuel, vehicles, graphics, web, IT, printing, advertising, hotel, restaurant, marine. It goes on. Th ese economic impacts are felt right now in the community of Squamish. Th is doesn't factor in the work that Fortis is doing in considering how to increase its capacity to supply this export business. Woodfi bre LNG has also signed a development agree- ment with Fortis, initiated a systems impact study with B.C.

Hydro, commenced engagement with the Squamish Nation, obtained export licence approval from the National Energy Board, entered into a process of a federal and provincial environment assessment and had its fi rst round of consultations, set up a head offi ce in Vancouver in the riding of Vancouver–West End and will be locat- ing multiple facilities in Squamish. It just demonstrates how much activity with such a small project is happening right now. If the environment- al assessments are approved, they hope to be in service by 2017, producing 2.1 million metric tonnes per annum of liquefi ed natural gas.

Woodfi bre is just one little project. It's dwarfed by others. We extrapolate it out, and we can see how much activity and benefi t can come to our prov- ince, and the province is working step by step on a daily basis to build the industry for the benefi t of all.

British Columbia Debates2268 Monday, March 24, 2014 Hon. T. Lake: I now call private members' motions. Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 8 with- out disturbing the priorities of motions preceding it on the order paper. Leave granted. Private Members' Motions MOTION 8 — PROSECUTION OF NEGLIGENCE IN WORKPLACE DEATH AND INJURY CASES H.

Bains: I t is my honour to rise today to move the following motion. [Be it resolved that this House urge the Government to pursue prosecutions of corporate executives and directors responsible for workers' health and safety in cases of negligence causing workplace death or serious injury.] Th is can be achieved by adopting the following policies.

(1) A dedicated Crown prosecutor to deal with work- place fatality and serious injury cases. Th is prosecutor will become an expert in reviewing these investigations against

section 217.1 of the Criminal Code and therefore more accurately determining the likelihood of conviction.

(2) Trained police services on

section 217.1 to ensure that the police understand the law and know what to look for in workplace fatality and serious injury cases in order to collect the best evidence to support the Crown coun- sel's decision-making.

(3) Make mandatory police investigations of all work- place fatalities and serious injuries. Police investigations are necessary in order to determine if criminal negli- gence exists. As they are trained to collect and weigh criminal evidence, these investigations must be separate from the occupational health and safety regulatory inves- tigations but can be done in collaboration.

(4) Train WorkSafe B.C. inspectors on

section 217.1 to ensure WorkSafe inspectors conduct investigations into workplace fatality or serious injury cases and col- lect the best evidence to support Crown counsel deci- sion-making.

(5) Crown and police to develop specialized policies for workplace fatality or serious injury cases similar to policies such as for domestic violence. In 2004 Bill C-45, or the Westray bill, was enacted with unanimous support of all the parties in the parliament. Th is was 12 years aft er the tragic Westray mine disaster that took the lives of 26 miners, despite serious safety concerns raised by employees, union offi cials and gov- ernment inspectors. Th e company instituted few changes, and this very preventable disaster occurred. In B.C., on average, 150 workers die at a workplace every year.

Th is is more than 1,350 unnecessary deaths in British Columbia since the Westray bill, and no one has been held responsible for those deaths. Th is motion helps us hold those in authority account- able if they fail to protect workers' health and safety and cause death or serious injury at the workplace. In B.C. we have many of our own Westray disasters along with all those deaths that I mentioned earlier. Babine sawmill and Lakeland sawmill explosions killed four and injured 42 others very seriously. In the Babine case no one has been held accountable so far.

Sarbjit Kaur Sidhu, Amarjit Kaur Bal and Sukhwinder Kaur Punia were farmworkers killed travelling to work in a 15-passenger van. [1105] Mushroom farm workers Ut Tran, Han Pham, Jimmy Chi Wai Chan died while Michael Phan and Th ang Tchen were left with permanent brain damage aft er they were exposed to hydrogen sulfi de and low oxygen conditions in a confi ned space. Sam Fitzpatrick, a 24-year-old rock scaler, died while working on a construction project when a large rock rolled down a slope into his work area. John Wilson drowned on February 28, 2008, while working near Merritt.

John was working in an excavator that tumbled into a tailing pond. Lyle Hewer, a sawmill worker, was asphyxiated in a hopper connected to a hog — a machine that converts wood waste into chips. Th en there are dozens of unknown workers who have been exposed to asbestos while working for certain as- bestos and drywall removing contractors, without ad- equate knowledge of the risk or protection for their safety. Most of these workers were under 18, some as young as 14. Th ey were told to run if they saw a WCB safety in- spector. Th ese are all preventable incidents that I mentioned here.

Th ose responsible for prevention failed, yet no one has been held accountable. We now must do our due dili- gence as lawmakers. It is our duty to ensure workplace accountability by giving the tools needed by our inves- tigators to collect evidence that will be acceptable to the Crown for successful convictions. In closing, we believe this is a necessary step to send a message to employers that their employees are not just an insignifi cant part of doing business. If their safety and well-being are treated with disregard, then there will be signifi cant and costly consequences for doing so.

We have seen too many people die in the workplace because of the negligence of those who have a duty under the law to protect their health and safety. Th en they fail and no consequences. As a result, there's no deterrence. As a result, people continue to die. Th is will help us solve that problem and those people responsible for the health and safety of workers will be held accountable if they fail to do their duty. M. Morris: As the representative for Prince George– Mackenzie, I've been personally aff ected by both of these

British Columbia DebatesMonday, March 24, 2014 2269 incidents up there, and I've got friends and family mem- bers who have been involved in this. It's not government's role to pursue prosecutions. Th at's why we have a Crown counsel agency. Th at's why we have other agencies involved in the investigations of matters such as this. Th e police attend every single inci- dent like these, and their investigation ceases the moment they can rule out foul play. From then on it's the agency responsible for the investigation.

It is, however, our role to ensure that we have eff ective agencies in place to monitor and investigate workplace safety. Th is requires a working protocol, regular and con- sistent, between WorkSafe B.C. and mill owners with an unwavering focus on safer sawmills. Our government expects WorkSafe B.C. and mill owners to comply with safety practices. Th e Minister for Labour has met with senior offi cials from WorkSafe B.C. As well, the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations has met with the forest industry CEO Task Force.

Th ey all agree more needs to be done and that this must be done as the ut- most priority. Th e next step will be a meeting of industry, labour and WorkSafe B.C. so that we can rectify any gaps in ensuring compliance, as well as explore the tools available for use when companies fail to comply. We expect this to occur within the next few weeks. British Columbians expect more from employers in the wake of the tragedies in Burns Lake and Prince George because we all know what the consequences are. On January 31 of this year WorkSafe B.C. concluded a three-month inspection of all active sawmills across B.C.

So 249 inspections were undertaken related to combust- ible dust regulations, and 83 of 144 locations — that's 58 percent — inspected were in compliance. So 61 employers, or 42 percent, were issued a total of 93 orders related to combustible dust, and 11 employers, under 10 percent, were issued a total of 13 stop-work or- ders due to unacceptable accumulations of secondary dust and other violations. One mill has had an $11,000 penalty levied against it.

Penalties are also under con- sideration against more. [1110] Since receiving phase 3 of the sawmill inspections, the province has met with the forest CEO Task Force and WorkSafe B.C. We support WorkSafe B.C. using stop- work orders and penalties against companies who are not in compliance with dust management. With respect to Bill C-45. Since 2004 Bill C-45 has en- sured that the Criminal Code recognizes there are cir- cumstances when criminal liability should be extended to organizations.

Th e bill states that everyone who under- takes or has the authority to direct how another person does work or performs a task is under a legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to that person or any other person arising from that work or task. A corporation charged with an off ence cannot argue that the individuals occupying these positions actually had no real role in setting policy or managing the organ- ization and therefore were not senior offi cers.

Th e defi n- ition of a company's representative in Bill C-45 makes it clear that directors, chief executive offi cers and fi nancial offi cers of a corporation are, by virtue of the position they hold, automatically senior offi cers. Th e legislation further defi nes "representative" to also mean directors, partners, members, agents and contract- ors as well as employees. Th ese representatives must be acting within the scope of their employment at the time of the alleged crime for charges to be considered by the Crown.

As for the intent necessary to fi nd the organization guilty, Bill C-45 requires that the senior offi cer respon- sible, or senior offi cers collectively, must have departed markedly from the standard of care that could be ex- pected. In closing, every member of this House wants to make sure that when British Columbians go to work in the morning, they come home each and every night. We sympathize with those who have lost loved ones in these tragedies. No legislation, fi ndings or penalties can ever compensate for that loss.

Our government takes workplace safety seriously and has made it a priority to examine ways to ensure eff ect- ive, thorough investigations when workplace fatalities occur. We are committed to looking out for the safety of all British Columbians. A. Dix: What the member for Prince George– Mackenzie…. I understand, as he does, having met with families several times from Babine and Lakeland, the pain involved. What the member just did was read, es- sentially, a bill note about Bill C-45. But laws don't just exist on the books. Th ey have to exist in fact. Th ey have to exist in workplaces.

Since this law came into eff ect…. It was much dis- cussed. It was the subject of a royal commission. A dec- ade of work aft er the Westray accident, there have been 1,350 workplace-related deaths in British Columbia, and not one time has anyone been charged under the law. It's important, and it's good that government MLAs understand what the law is. But the law is not being en- forced in British Columbia. We argue — and this motion argues — that that needs to change. In the last number of weeks I've seen and talked about this situation with family members.

Th e member for Surrey-Newton spoke of the men and women who have died — on the road to Abbotsford going to work, on a mushroom farm in Langley, at Babine and at Lakeland and in other incidents from Merritt to Vancouver Island. We talk about those incidents. But the reality of those…. When you think of the Langley farmworkers incident, you think of the fact that the fi nes that were in

British Columbia Debates2270 Monday, March 24, 2014 fact made in those cases were never paid. Y ou think of three men dead, two men permanently injured, 13 chil- dren, their wives and families and communities. Th is is not good enough. Th at is why specifi c changes are required. It was the intent of the federal parliament that the Westray act be enforced in the provinces. In British Columbia it is not enforced. Th at is why, as the member for Surrey-Newton sug- gests, we need a dedicated prosecutor working on these issues. Th at is why we need training for police.

With the greatest of respect to what happened with respect to Babine — and we'll see with respect to charges for Lakeland, although criminal charges have been excluded — ten years into the Westray law this matter was bungled. [1115] All of those interesting things, all the laws and the regulations and the practices were in place, and they bungled the investigation. People died, and they bun- gled. Th at has to change.

Th e idea of ensuring that the Crown, that the government as a matter of policy enforce the law through practical measures as those proposed by the member for Surrey-Newton is an idea whose time has come. It will have, I believe — that's why the Westray law was passed in the federal parliament with enormous cross- partisan support — an impact on workplaces. When people know they'll be held accountable, they change their practices, and in this case, practices need to be changed.

When you have Hampton and the Babine case doing a press release blaming the whole incident on WorkSafe and not taking responsibility, what message does that send? Not a good one. What message does it send that 1,350 cases and zero charges — not zero prosecutions — are laid? What message does that send? Here, I think, of course the responsibility for indi- vidual charges rests with Crown prosecutors. Of course that's the case.

But we need to send a message and a dir- ection that these issues matter, that resources need to be assigned, that change needs to happen, that no justice means no peace, and 1,350 cases and no charges means that the Westray law exists on the books, but it does not exist in the hearts and minds of the government of British Columbia.

Th at's why I ask support of all members of this House for the motion brought forward by the member for Surrey-Newton, a motion that seeks to do what we all wish to do — to ensure that the intention of law exists in fact, to ensure that workers are safe because the laws de- signed to protect them are applied, and when workers are put in jeopardy, when workers are killed, that people are held accountable, as the Westray law committed. L. Larson: Th ere is no one in this government who has not been touched by the tragic fi re and loss of lives at the Babine mill.

Th is government's immediate response of help for the victims, their families and the community demonstrated the high level of concern for all involved and the commitment to help move forward. Both the Premier and the Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills re- sponded immediately and in person to start the process needed to fi nd answers and to work to ensure that both victims and their families could get the assistance they needed to deal with the aft ermath of this tragedy.

Also, this government worked quickly to secure a sup- ply of fi bre, enabling the mill to continue to provide jobs so that the people of Burns Lake would not be forced to leave their community to fi nd employment. In January of this year, when the criminal justice branch clearly stated there would be no likelihood of conviction of any of the possible charges in this case, the Premier acted quickly to have the case reviewed and recommendations made. John Dyble issued his fi ndings and recommendations on February 13, and the govern- ment has been clear that all of his recommendations must be implemented.

Th ey include measures to improve communication between investigating and prosecuting agencies; the improvement of policies, procedures and communications within WorkSafe B.C., including en- hanced training; and the appointment of an independ- ent adviser. Leonard Doust, QC, has been appointed to that pos- ition. Mr. Doust is a well-known Canadian lawyer with expertise in investigations. He will oversee the imple- mentation of Mr. Dyble's report recommendations and provide ongoing input. Mr.

Doust has been clear that the decision of Crown counsel to approve or not approve charges is not a proper subject for a public inquiry based on British Columbia case law. British Columbia's chief coroner, Lisa Lapointe, has announced that she will preside over the coroner's in- quest into the Babine mill explosion.

It is the chief cor- oner's view that the coroner's inquest is the best venue to address the many concerns and questions about how and why this explosion happened and what can be done to prevent a similar event in the future. [1120] Th e inquest will review policies, practices and respon- sibilities related to the mill operation, worker safety and all of the events leading up to tragedy. Th e chief coroner has stated that the inquest will be an open, transparent, fact-fi nding hearing designed to thoroughly review all of the circumstances surrounding this fatal accident.

British Columbians and this government also expect more from employers in the wake of the tragedies in Burns Lake and Prince George. A coordinated eff ort is required to provide consistent protocols between mill owners and WorkSafe B.C. We have approached this issue with an unwavering focus on safer sawmills. Coordinated discussions between the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations; the

British Columbia DebatesMonday, March 24, 2014 2271 Minister Responsible for Labour; the forest industry CEO Task Force; and senior offi cials from WorkSafe B.C. are continuing. Everyone agrees that more needs to be done and that safety is of the utmost priority. Our government will also sit down with employees and their representatives to talk about their concerns and suggested changes. I will be supporting those government agencies and individuals best suited for the task of reviewing and in- vestigating this issue so that they may quickly and, with- out interference, complete their mandate.

I will not be supporting this motion. G. Heyman: It has been ten years since Bill C-45, the Westray bill, was passed. With respect to the member for Boundary-Similkameen, this motion is not about whether or not we have an inquiry. Th is motion is about whether we prosecute eff ectively and put in place the policies and mechanisms needed to prosecute effect- ively — the law of the land — with respect to workplace deaths and injuries.

In 2007 Amarjit Kaur Bal, Sarabjit Kaur Sidhu and Sukhwinder Kaur Punia, three women, were killed on their way to work in a van that was overloaded and fl ipped on the highway — three women who will never again be with their families. In 2008, a mushroom farm, an enclosed space. Ut Tran, Jimmy Chan and Han Pham — three workers who will never see their families again. Th e coroner's lawyer said that the deaths and the injuries might have been averted if the workers had known the risk and if the company had put in place proper safety procedures. In 2012, Robert Luggi Jr. and Carl Charlie at Babine Forest Products.

Shortly aft erward, at Lakeland Mills, Alan Little and Glen Roche. In the days before the explo- sion, workers had raised concerns about the level and ac- cumulation of sawdust and the fact that cleanup workers had been diverted to production. The member for Prince George–Mackenzie would have us believe that things are fi ne, that the government is taking action to ensure that WorkSafe B.C. and other measures are taken to address hazards at work. Th e fact is that things are not fi ne.

Almost half of the mills that were checked by WorkSafe B.C. recently failed an audit to do with the accumulation of explosive dust. In 2011, 17,160 workers suff ered serious injuries or died on the job. Two years ago a worker fell to his death aft er the em- ployer failed to provide safety instruction, training or supervision. What happened in that case? Th e employer was fi ned the grand total of $3,250. Is that what a work- er's life is worth in B.C.?

If people were dying through negligence in car acci- dents on the highways, the public outcry and demand for government to take action to ensure that these cases were properly charged and prosecuted would be deaf- ening. Y et, in the case of workers, it's treated as a cost of doing business. [1125] It's not just the law that needs to be enforced. We need to look at the background.

Beginning in 2002, under this Liberal government, there was a move to deregulate the Workers Compensation Board regulations to remove one-third of the regulations — to remove the words "must," "shall" and "will" beca use they sounded like red tape — and let employers move toward a new form of health and safety action, performance-based as opposed to prescriptive. Clearly, it hasn't worked. Among the regulations changed were fi rst-aid regs, and it was the changes in those regs that were cited in the death of a faller a number of years ago.

In 2012 there's been a 40 percent drop in administrative penalties and fewer inspection hours. Whenever there is a serious accident or a tragic loss of life and the WCB undertakes a strategic industry enforce- ment initiative, it fi nds large numbers of employers who simply are not complying, whether it's mills, in the wake of the explosions, that aren't addressing dust; whether it's gas stations that aren't taking measures for workers working alone; or whether it's farmworker contractors who aren't keeping their vehicles safe. It's time for the government to take action to support the law.

Th is motion does that. Sympathy is not good enough. It is not good enough to treat workers' lives as a cost of doing business. If employers do that, if employ- ers don't take the measures necessary to protect workers' health and safety to ensure that they can return home safe and sound at the end of the day, then the government and every member of this Legislature needs to support this motion to ensure that the law is upheld. L. Reimer: Our government takes workplace safety seriously and has made it a priority to examine ways to ensure eff ective, thorough investigations when workplace fatalities occur.

As government, as hard as it may seem sometimes, we have to respect the central principle of our democracy, which is the independence of the Crown prosecutors and the investigators, who reach their deci- sions based on the law. Th e Criminal Code recognizes there are times when criminal liability should be attributed to organizations, including corporations and their representatives, in Bill C-45,

section 217.1. Th e bill clearly states that every- one who undertakes or has the authority to direct how another person does work or performs a task is under a legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to that person or any other person, arising from that work or task. As for the intent necessary to fi nd the organization guilty, Bill C-45 requires that the senior offi cer responsible, or senior offi cers collectively, must have departed mark- edly from the standard of care that could be expected.

British Columbia Debates2272 Monday, March 24, 2014 While we may sometimes question or disagree with the individual decisions made by these independent branches, respecting those decisions, however, is an es- sential tenet of our democracy, which is why I cannot support this motion. When faced with a tragedy, the important thing is to get the facts and then ensure the appropriate action is taken, and when there are lessons to be learned, that we learn them and we implement the necessary changes to better protect workers.

British Columbians expect more from employers in the wake of the tragedies in Burns Lake and Prince George, because we've all seen the horrendous impact these have had on families and our community. As the member for Prince George–Mackenzie men- tioned, on January 31, '14, WorkSafe B.C. concluded a three-month inspection of all active sawmills across British Columbia. So 249 inspections were undertaken related to combustible dust; 83 of 144 locations inspected, or 58 percent, were in compliance, and 61 employers — the other 42 percent — were issued a total of 93 orders related to combustible dust.

Eleven employers were issued a total of 13 stop-work orders due to unacceptable accumulations of secondary dust and other violations. One mill has had an $11,000 penalty levied against it, and penalties are under con- sideration against more. Since receiving phase 3 of the sawmill inspections, the province has met with the forest CEO Task Force and WorkSafe B.C. Th ere is broad compliance, but we abso- lutely have to do better. [1130] While we are taking the steps to keep workers safe, we do note that overall in B.C. the injury rate is the lowest it has been in 30 years, close to an historic low.

Worker fatalities are down. Between 2004 and 2013 the number of WorkSafe B.C. prevention offi cer positions budgeted increased by 50 percent, from 181 in 2004 to 272 in 2013. During the same period, the number of inspection reports written by WorkSafe B.C. prevention offi cers increased by 150 percent, from 15,940 in 2004 to 39,909 in 2013. Likewise, between 2004 and 2013 the number of orders written by WorkSafe B.C. increased by more than 200 percent, from 21,620 in 2004 to 68,483 in 2013. As we grow our economy together, we have one value that we know we can never change: worker safety. Our message is clear.

Worker safety is paramount, and if saw- mills or any other organizations are not in compliance, there will be consequences. But an ongoing working protocol that is regular and consistent between WorkSafe B.C. and mill owners, with an unwavering focus on safer sawmills, is required. We continue to meet with industry, labour and Work- Safe B.C. to address any existing gaps in ensuring com- pliance and to explore the tools available to us when companies fail to comply. Government is also happy to sit down with employees and their representatives to talk about their concerns and their suggested changes.

Constant vigilance is required to ensure that workers stay safe, and this government is committed to remain- ing so. K. Corrigan: Well, we've had two tragic explosions in this province, at Babine and Lakeland sawmills in the north — not one but two explosions where people's lives were lost, where others were seriously and perma- nently injured. Families have been ripped apart just as surely as the mills where these tragedies took place, as you would expect. When you have these types of tragedies, you would ex- pect the one comfort that could come from that is that justice would be done.

Th e families of those that have been killed and injured have been looking for justice, and they do not feel that justice has been done. We learned at the beginning of this year, earlier this year, that no criminal or WorkSafe charges would be laid in the Babine case. I want to read the Westray law in the Criminal Code.

It says: "Every one who undertakes, or has the authority, to direct how another person does work or performs a task is under a legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to that person, or any other person, arising from that work or task." Th at seems pretty clear and pretty simple to me, so I understand why those families feel like justice has not been done. If you look at that, there is clearly an obliga- tion, and it seems very clear, as well, that that obligation was not met in the case of these explosions — certainly, the Babine case, where we know there will be no charges.

I'm going to support this resolution. I think it's a very simple resolution. Frankly, what we have had…. Th e main reason why that WorkSafe B.C. investigation failed was that it was not, I believe, looking with an eye to pros- ecutions when it went into that explosion site and, there- fore, did not meet the more stringent requirements of that type of investigation. Th us it was barred from using much of the evidence. I think it's a basic approach. It's a basic attitude, as if these are not potential crime scenes, and I think that's indicative of a larger problem.

It's a mindset that is not conducive to protecting workers' lives. I know that government has been doing some work, trying to increase coordination, looking at where the problems were. To give government some credit, the possibility of improvements and coordination and tak- ing some responsibility perhaps was starting. Th erefore, it was completely shocking to learn, just a few months ago, that the most recent inspection reports indicate a continued exposure to unsafe levels of dust to the extent that mills had to be closed. [1135] Nearly half the sawmills of B.C., 61 of 144, still had

British Columbia DebatesMonday, March 24, 2014 2273 dangerous levels of wood dust accumulation two years aft er the fi rst disaster. Inspectors found equipment bur- ied in wood dust, mill sections that hadn't seen a cleanup crew in months and damaged ventilation systems. In 13 cases, the hazards were severe enough to force temporary shutdowns due to the unacceptable accumulations of sec- ondary dust and other signifi cant violations which posed an immediate hazard to the health and safety of workers.

I fi nd it astounding that members on the other side of this House can stand up and say everything is going just fi ne when two years aft er the fi rst tragic explosion we have complete failure in terms of compliance and, ob- viously, continued possibility of tragedy in this province. Th e response that I'm hearing from the other side is simply not good enough. We had deaths in 2007; we had workplace deaths in 2008, as you've heard from my col- leagues, at a mushroom farm; and then deaths in these two mill explosions.

We know that many employers are good and have nothing but the best interests, are concerned citizens who care very much about their employees. But the very fact that we have such high levels of lack of compliance and high levels of dust indicates that the system is sim- ply not working. It seems clear that the only way to ensure compliance is to know that there will be real penalties paid not just by those who were hurt or killed, or their families, but by those who ultimately control and therefore should be responsible for the workplace. Th at is the owners and managers and directors of those companies. L.

Throness: On behalf of my constituents of Chilliwack-Hope, many of whom work in industries like forestry, construction, agriculture and other indus- tries which can pose hazards from time to time, I want to speak to the following motion: "Be it resolved that this House urge the Government to pursue prosecutions of corporate executives and directors responsible for work- ers' health and safety in cases of negligence causing work- place death or serious injury." I certainly appreciate the concern for worker health and safety brought by the member for Surrey-Newton.

I think all members of this House appreciate that and consider the health and safety of our constituents to be of the highest importance. But I can't support this reso- lution, because I don't think the member is approaching the issue in the right way. I want to talk for a moment about the separation of powers, which is a doctrine on which our system of gov- ernment is based here in B.C. We respect a division be- tween the Legislature, the executive and the judiciary so that one branch of the government is not in confl ict with another.

Th ey are independent of each other to ensure that no one branch has too much power. So the courts don't matter to the executive. Th e executive can't tell politicians what to do, and politicians, most importantly, can't tell the judiciary what to do. I would call this a foundational principle of our dem- ocracy, and I think British Columbians would agree with this. If you were to ask British Columbians what they think — "Do you agree that the independence of the courts should be respected?" — I think the answer would, of course, be yes.

Secondly, if you were to ask, "Do you agree that the government has no place telling the justice system who should be charged and stand trial or, just as importantly, who should not be charged and who should not stand trial?" I think British Columbians would agree with that as well. We have to respect the rule of law, no matter how dif- fi cult that might be in some cases. Of course, we recog- nize and have every sympathy for the many situations that this hon. member and other members have brought forward in this debate. It doesn't mean, though, that we can leave behind the independence of the Crown pros- ecutor.

Government cannot interfere with investigators or dictate what should be the outcome of a particular case. I would point out that the tools already exist in a fed- eral statute, the Criminal Code, and under provincial law, as well, to launch prosecutions for negligence, and the Crown chooses to do so if there is a substantial likelihood of conviction. But the point is that here in the Legislature we're not allowed to make that determination.

We can't make that decision, which is not to say that British Columbians expect anything less of our govern- ment than to aggressively promote the health and safe- ty of our workforce. For example, when people think of promoting a safe working environment, I think of pre- vention. What kinds of things are we doing to prevent ac- cidents in the workplace?

I want to bring up a thing like the Prevention Manual from WorkSafe B.C. [1140] It lays out rules covering many categories of areas of prevention that employers must abide by — things like workplace illumination, workplace conduct, chemical exposure, electrical safety, protective clothing, require- ments for machinery and equipment, like rollover protec- tion equipment. Th e list is detailed and very exhaustive. WorkSafe also charges employers higher premiums ac- cording to their rate of accidents, which is an important preventative measure.

And there are other administrative penalties that WorkSafe can impose that give employers a fi nancial incentive to prevent accidents and maintain a safe workplace. We're already doing a lot to prevent accidents. I would point out that the former Speaker said that we do have investigations. We are doing investigations. We're clos- ing mills for non-compliance with WorkSafe B.C. rules, and that's a good thing. It's preventative. In the recent inquiry that took place, there were a number of recommendations that were made by the Deputy Minister to the Premier, and our government accepted them all.

One of them called for closer cooper-

British Columbia Debates2274 Monday, March 24, 2014 ation between investigating and prosecuting agencies, which could, in part, have the very eff ect that the mem- ber wants. Our government is taking ongoing action in terms of prevention and investigation. We're also taking action as far as we can to enhance cooperation between WorkSafe and the judiciary without breaching the independence of the judiciary, which is that important principle. Th e police will always be there to investigate breaches of the Criminal Code.

Th e Crown will always be there to assess evidence and lay charges, and the courts will always be there to conduct trials and come to verdicts in cases of criminal negligence on the part of employers. Once again, we continue in this House to share sym- pathies for the tragic loss and other losses that have oc- curred, and we will continue to support eff orts to rebuild the community of Burns Lake. B.

Routley: I listen to this debate, and we really haven't come very far from the Dirty '30s, when forest workers used to get killed and they would prop them up beside a stump and tell the rest of the crew: "Just work on. Just carry on. Everything's fi ne. It's just the cost of doing business." Workers had to fi ght over the years. In fact, part of the reason there is a union movement in British Columbia was because workers were getting killed on the job over and over and over again. Employers weren't acting on behalf of those workers and their families, so they had to fi ght.

Th ey had to form unions to prevent that kind of behaviour, where it was okay to prop a friend up against a stump. I've talked to the old-timers that actually had that hap- pen to them. I've been through the experience myself in the forest industry. I remember prior to the Westray bill what happened when I was the safety chairman at the Y oubou mill, and 550 people worked there. Y oung Patrick Crutchmeier, 18 years old — he might as well have been left a huge, big mousetrap. It was the incompetence and negligence of that com- pany. Th ere was a new tray system in the veneer plant.

We had written orders that said: "Make sure you put in lockout procedures and train the workers on the new procedures." Y ou know what they did instead? Th ey sped up production. Th ey got the job done adequately enough to be able to crank up production on Monday morning, and they slapped it together. Th at 18-year-old man went in there, and all he did was touch a little piece the size of a pen- cil and down came 2½ tonnes and crushed the life out of that young man. Right there was an example of abso- lute negligence. Th en I went through it again just a few years ago with Ted Gramlich.

We had the forest industry in British Columbia deciding they needed to save a few dollars. We've got sympathetic administration, and that's what I'm hearing over on the other side of the table. It's sym- pathetic administration playing their violin music of: "It's all okay. We're sure the employers are taking care of things. We've got WorkSafe B.C. Oh, we happened to cut a whole bunch of the regulations, but we've got WorkSafe B.C. on the job." Th ey just happen to fail to do any of the things ne- cessary to be able to hold people accountable in British Columbia.

It is totally unacceptable to working people to see the behaviour that goes on, the lack of concern. I'm talking negligence. [1145] Th ere are safe employers. I've seen them myself. But I've also seen this. When the Westray bill came in, you know what happened? I saw a manager of a sawmill who had the audacity, at one time, to go down and tell his crew: "Safety isn't number 1. Production is number 1, and that'll pay for number 2, which is safety." He actually said that to a crew, one of the mills right here on Vancouver Island. But he had a whole new attitude when he was told by his CEO: "Y ou could go to jail.

Th ere's new legislation. Th ere's a new sheriff in town." Well, guess what. We found out the new sheriff is a toothless wonder. In British Columbia we haven't had a single charge of anybody. And it's worse than that. Th e penalty paid in B.C.'s role, on average in 2012, for a death was less than $22,000. In a report by WorkSafe B.C., out of 149 worker deaths accepted for compensation pay- ments in 2012, six prompted fi nes — for a total of less than $129,000. When I think of all of the people that I have seen die…. Ted Gramlich, that faller….

Imagine a faller being sent up to an area to fall trees for heli-logging. But he was above the fog, and when the tree kicked back and crushed him, he was lying there bleeding, his leg crushed beyond belief. He was bleeding. Th at man probably would have lived if the contractor would have had a proper safety plan. No safety plan. Th ey hadn't even thought about the possibility that this man could get hurt and that then you would need a helicopter to get him out of there. No plan. We need this kind of action. We need real action in British Columbia, not a sympathetic administration like we've got over there. M.

Bernier: Th ere's no doubt that workplace safety is a subject that's top of mind for our government, and I know it concerns every member here in this chamber. When British Columbians say goodbye to their families in the morning, obviously, we all in this House want to ensure they get to go home safe — have a good day at work and go home safe to their families. Workplace safety is a subject that this government takes very seriously. We feel for any worker who has ex- perienced a workplace accident, and our sympathies go out to their families and to those who have lost a loved one in a workplace tragedy.

British Columbia DebatesMonday, March 24, 2014 2275 W e know this is a very diffi cult and sensitive topic, and I can't imagine the grief that families go through when they've lost a loved one in a workplace accident. Of course, we're all working together to ensure the work- sites throughout the province are safe and accident-free. However, we must realize that when an accident occurs at a worksite, there's a central principle that needs to be followed to ensure that the investigation is eff ective, that it's thorough and, to me, most importantly, that it's in- dependent.

Our government is committed to ensuring that any workplace accident investigation can be conducted by the agencies and Crown prosecutors free from any form of intervention from government or from political inter- ference. For some people aft er an accident happens, that might be hard to rationalize. However, independence of our Crown prosecutors and our criminal liability investi- gations is a central tenet of our democracy, and it should always remain that way. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be learning when we've had tragedies in the workplace.

In the aft ermath after the Burns Lake and Prince George tragedies, I know for everybody in this House…. I believe we were saddened. We were shocked. In today's environment in British Columbia it might be hard to believe in this day and age that an explosion like that could occur at a mod- ern sawmill. However, since these tragedies, WorkSafe B.C. has con- ducted three-month investigations of all the active saw- mills across British Columbia to ensure the compliance to the workplace safety regulations was being followed, to prevent future accidents.

Th ankfully, we can say that since then, none have occurred. [1150] Consistent monitoring is important, and WorkSafe B.C. continues to increase the number of workplace in- vestigations by increasing the number of preventative of- fi cers, by their positions. We have a 50 percent increase in the number of positions out there, and we have a 150 per- cent increase since 2004 of WorkSafe B.C. written reports. Th ese are real, tangible investments that WorkSafe B.C. is doing here in British Columbia to ensure that we have a safe work environment.

Not to be putting too many stats out there — because I think it's important; it's an emotional issue — we've got the lowest injury rate in this province in 30 years. Here's an important point, I think, that we've missed today. Workers here in British Columbia, if they feel they are in an unsafe work environment due to hazards that could jeopardize their health and safety or work- ers' health and safety, have the right to refuse work.

Th ey have the right to report this to their employer, and they cannot be disciplined or be at risk of losing their position for raising these concerns if they are legitimate and rea- sonable concerns. Everyone needs to be a part of workplace safety, and by working together, employers, workers and government agencies can fi nd solutions and proactively resolve safe- ty hazards and unsafe workplaces here in the province. Th e main point should be: let's do everything we can to avoid the accidents to begin with. Let's continue to keep the dialogue open and fi nd productive and reasonable solutions for safety.

Increasing compliance and putting in place proactive monitoring by employers and workers will help prevent workplace accidents before they happen. [Madame Speaker in the chair.] It is essential that as we grow the economy together here in British Columbia, we are doing so in a safe en- vironment and that our workers can go to work and come home safe. Simply put, safe workplaces are pro- ductive workplaces, and that is what this government is promoting. J. Darcy: I remember like it was yesterday the day of the disaster at Westray in Nova Scotia.

Th ose of us in- volved in working for workplace health and safety across the country were reminded once again of the dangers that workers face when they go to work every day — whether that's in a mine, in a mill, in a health care facility. I remember gathering, months later, with families and members of the community of those aff ected in Pictou county.

I remember very well the resolve, in particular, of the Steelworkers union at that time, saying that they would not rest until there was legislation in this country that ensured that those responsible for ensuring work- ers' health and safety were held to account when there were incidents of serious injury or deaths in a workplace. Th at was in 1992, and it took 12 years before we saw a law that said that. What's happened in the province since the Westray bill was passed? Well, the colleagues who have spoken before me have talked about that in very human terms. What have we seen in British Columbia?

In ten years since the bill was passed: 1,350 deaths in the workplace. Th ese were all workers who kissed their families good- bye in the morning or the aft ernoon or whenever it was they were going on shift . Th ey went to work to do a hard day's work, to bring home pay to support their families. Later on during their shift , whatever that was, their fam- ilies learned the tragic news that that person was not coming home at night — with all the devastation that that means for those families.

Now, we've heard an awful lot from members on the other side about why they should not support the amend- ment that our Labour critic has put forward. We've heard the stats that say things are getting better. We've heard that over and over again. [1155] We've heard about legal issues, about separation of powers. We've heard about the importance of not med-

British Columbia Debates2276 Monday, March 24, 2014 dling in the independence of Crown prosecutors. Th e fact of the matter is that the system is not work- ing. Th e system for ensuring that workers have the right to go to work and know that everything humanly pos- sible is being done to ensure that they can come home safe and sound to their families at night — that system is not working. Otherwise, we would not have 150 workers every single year in British Columbia dying as a re

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20140324am-Hansard-v8n6
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20140324am Hansard v8n6
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7c8365c3235fe6b6eed51d1c6965dff80f6c5606

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