British Columbia Hansard — 22 July 2020, p.m., Issue 346 (41st Parliament, 5th Session)

20200722pm-Hansard-n346

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session, 41st Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES (HANSARD) Wednesday, July 22, 2020 Afternoon Sitting Issue No. 346 THE HONOURABLE DARRYL PLECAS, SPEAKER ISSN 1499-2175

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Janet Austin, OBC Fifth Session, 41st Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Darryl Plecas EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................... Hon. John Horgan Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance............................................................................................................................Hon.

Carole James Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Training..................................................................................................... Hon. Melanie Mark Minister of Agriculture.........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Lana Popham Attorney General.................................................................................................................................................................Hon.

David Eby, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ............................................................................................................ Hon. Katrine Conroy Minister of State for Child Care...................................................................................................................................... Hon. Katrina Chen Minister of Citizens’ Services...................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Anne Kang Minister of Education ............................................................................................................................................................ Hon. Rob Fleming Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources ..................................................................................................... Hon. Bruce Ralston Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy............................................................................................. Hon.

George Heyman Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development ..............................................Hon. Doug Donaldson Minister of Health .....................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Adrian Dix Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation ......................................................................................................... Hon.

Scott Fraser Minister of Jobs, Economic Development and Competitiveness.............................................................................Hon. Michelle Mungall Minister of State for Trade...............................................................................................................................................Hon. George Chow Minister of Labour ...................................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Harry Bains Minister of Mental Health and Addictions............................................................................................................................ Hon. Judy Darcy Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.................................................................................................................. Hon. Selina Robinson Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ........................................................................................................... Hon.

Mike Farnworth Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction..............................................................................................Hon. Shane Simpson Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture.....................................................................................................................................Hon. Lisa Beare Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure................................................................................................................ Hon.

Claire Trevena LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition................................................................................................................................Andrew Wilkinson, QC Leader of the Third Party .................................................................................................................................................................Adam Olsen Deputy Speaker................................................................................................................................................................................

Raj Chouhan Assistant Deputy Speaker............................................................................................................................................................. Simon Gibson Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ................................................................................................................ Spencer Chandra Herbert Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ...........................................................................................................................................

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

Artour Sogomonian Clerk Assistant, Committees and Interparliamentary Relations ..............................................................................................Susan Sourial Senior Research Analyst ................................................................................................................................................................. Jennifer Arril Senior Research Analyst ...................................................................................................................................................................

Karan Riarh Acting Sergeant-at-Arms..................................................................................................................................................................Greg Nelson

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal) ......................................................................... Penticton Bains, Hon. Harry (NDP)................................................................ Surrey-Newton Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) .....................................................Cariboo-Chilcotin Beare, Hon. Lisa (NDP)..............................................

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

Surrey South Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) .......................................Vancouver–West End Chen, Hon. Katrina (NDP)...................................................... Burnaby-Lougheed Chouhan, Raj (NDP) .................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Chow, Hon. George (NDP).................................................Vancouver-Fraserview Clovechok, Doug (BC Liberal) ..................................Columbia River–Revelstoke Coleman, Rich (BC Liberal) ................................................................ Langley East Conroy, Hon.

Katrine (NDP)...........................................................Kootenay West Darcy, Hon. Judy (NDP) ............................................................. New Westminster Davies, Dan (BC Liberal) ........................................................... Peace River North de Jong, Michael, QC (BC Liberal) ..............................................Abbotsford West Dean, Mitzi (NDP)................................................................ Esquimalt-Metchosin D’Eith, Bob (NDP) ................................................................Maple Ridge–Mission Dix, Hon.

Adrian (NDP)....................................................... Vancouver-Kingsway Donaldson, Hon. Doug (NDP)...................................................................... Stikine Eby, Hon. David, QC (NDP).............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable (NDP).........................................................Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Hon. Mike (NDP) ........................................................Port Coquitlam Fleming, Hon. Rob (NDP) ......................................................

Victoria–Swan Lake Foster, Eric (BC Liberal).............................................................Vernon-Monashee Fraser, Hon. Scott (NDP) ..................................................Mid Island–Pacific Rim Furstenau, Sonia (BC Green Party) .............................................Cowichan Valley Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) ...................................................Abbotsford-Mission Glumac, Rick (NDP).........................................................Port Moody–Coquitlam Heyman, Hon. George (NDP) ................................................Vancouver-Fairview Horgan, Hon.

John (NDP) ................................................ Langford–Juan de Fuca Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ........................................................ Surrey-Cloverdale Isaacs, Joan (BC Liberal) .......................................... Coquitlam–Burke Mountain James, Hon. Carole (NDP).................................................... Victoria–Beacon Hill Johal, Jas (BC Liberal).................................................Richmond-Queensborough Kahlon, Ravi (NDP)............................................................................... Delta North Kang, Hon.

Anne (NDP)......................................................... Burnaby–Deer Lake Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal)..............................................................................Shuswap Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) .............................................. Boundary-Similkameen Lee, Michael (BC Liberal) ........................................................Vancouver-Langara Leonard, Ronna-Rae (NDP) ..................................................... Courtenay-Comox Letnick, Norm (BC Liberal).............................................

Kelowna–Lake Country Ma, Bowinn (NDP) .....................................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Malcolmson, Sheila (NDP) ........................................................................Nanaimo Mark, Hon. Melanie (NDP) .......................................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Martin, John (BC Liberal)....................................................................... Chilliwack Milobar, Peter (BC Liberal)..................................... Kamloops–North Thompson Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ........................................... Prince George–Mackenzie Mungall, Hon.

Michelle (NDP)......................................................Nelson-Creston Oakes, Coralee (BC Liberal) ............................................................ Cariboo North Olsen, Adam (BC Green Party)............................ Saanich North and the Islands Paton, Ian (BC Liberal).......................................................................... Delta South Plecas, Hon. Darryl (Ind.) ........................................................... Abbotsford South Polak, Mary (BC Liberal) ............................................................................. Langley Popham, Hon.

Lana (NDP)............................................................... Saanich South Ralston, Hon. Bruce (NDP) ............................................................Surrey-Whalley Redies, Tracy (BC Liberal) .......................................................Surrey–White Rock Reid, Linda (BC Liberal) ................................................. Richmond South Centre Rice, Jennifer (NDP) ............................................................................. North Coast Robinson, Hon.

Selina (NDP) .........................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Ross, Ellis (BC Liberal)................................................................................... Skeena Routledge, Janet (NDP) ....................................................................Burnaby North Routley, Doug (NDP) ................................................. Nanaimo–North Cowichan Rustad, John (BC Liberal) ................................................................Nechako Lakes Shypitka, Tom (BC Liberal) ..............................................................

Kootenay East Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ......................................... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Hon. Shane (NDP)..................................................Vancouver-Hastings Sims, Jinny (NDP) ........................................................................ Surrey-Panorama Singh, Rachna (NDP) .........................................................Surrey–Green Timbers Stewart, Ben (BC Liberal) ................................................................. Kelowna West Stilwell, Michelle (BC Liberal)...............................................

Parksville-Qualicum Stone, Todd (BC Liberal)..........................................Kamloops–South Thompson 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 Thomson, Steve (BC Liberal)......................................................

Kelowna-Mission Thornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ...............................North Vancouver–Seymour Throness, Laurie (BC Liberal) .......................................................Chilliwack-Kent Trevena, Hon. Claire (NDP) ................................................................North Island Wat, Teresa (BC Liberal) ................................................. Richmond North Centre Weaver, Dr.

Andrew (Ind.)................................................Oak Bay–Gordon Head Wilkinson, Andrew, QC (BC Liberal) ................................Vancouver-Quilchena Y ap, John (BC Liberal)............................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission............................................................................Simon Gibson Abbotsford South....................................................................... Hon. Darryl Plecas Abbotsford West......................................................................

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

Janet Routledge Cariboo-Chilcotin .............................................................................Donna Barnett Cariboo North.................................................................................... Coralee Oakes Chilliwack ............................................................................................... John Martin Chilliwack-Kent ...............................................................................Laurie Throness Columbia River–Revelstoke .........................................................

Doug Clovechok Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.................................................................. Joan Isaacs Coquitlam-Maillardville ...................................................... Hon. Selina Robinson Courtenay-Comox................................................................... Ronna-Rae Leonard Cowichan Valley .............................................................................

Sonia Furstenau Delta North.............................................................................................Ravi Kahlon Delta South ..................................................................................................Ian Paton Esquimalt-Metchosin ..............................................................................Mitzi Dean Fraser-Nicola .........................................................................................

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

Steve Thomson Kelowna West ..........................................................................................Ben Stewart Kootenay East.......................................................................................Tom Shypitka Kootenay West........................................................................ Hon. Katrine Conroy Langford–Juan de Fuca .............................................................. Hon. John Horgan Langley .....................................................................................................

Mary Polak Langley East.........................................................................................Rich Coleman Maple Ridge–Mission.............................................................................. Bob D’Eith Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows............................................................Hon. Lisa Beare Mid Island–Pacific Rim................................................................ Hon. Scott Fraser Nanaimo......................................................................................

Sheila Malcolmson Nanaimo–North Cowichan............................................................... Doug Routley Nechako Lakes........................................................................................ John Rustad Nelson-Creston ................................................................... Hon. Michelle Mungall New Westminster........................................................................... Hon. Judy Darcy North Coast ...........................................................................................

Jennifer Rice North Island.............................................................................. Hon. Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale................................................................... Bowinn Ma North Vancouver–Seymour........................................................Jane Thornthwaite Oak Bay–Gordon Head............................................................Dr.

Andrew Weaver Parksville-Qualicum.......................................................................Michelle Stilwell Peace River North ................................................................................... Dan Davies Peace River South ................................................................................ Mike Bernier Penticton ................................................................................................. Dan Ashton Port Coquitlam...................................................................... Hon.

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

Shirley Bond Richmond North Centre..........................................................................Teresa Wat Richmond-Queensborough.........................................................................Jas Johal Richmond South Centre ......................................................................... Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ...................................................................................

John Y ap Saanich North and the Islands .............................................................Adam Olsen Saanich South .............................................................................Hon. Lana Popham Shuswap...................................................................................................... Greg Kyllo Skeena........................................................................................................... Ellis Ross Stikine....................................................................................Hon.

Doug Donaldson Surrey-Cloverdale ................................................................................ Marvin Hunt Surrey-Fleetwood.....................................................................................Jagrup Brar Surrey–Green Timbers........................................................................Rachna Singh Surrey-Guildford......................................................................................Garry Begg Surrey-Newton ..............................................................................Hon.

Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ...................................................................................... Jinny Sims Surrey South ................................................................................ Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Whalley ......................................................................... Hon. Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock .............................................................................. Tracy Redies Vancouver-Fairview.............................................................. Hon.

George Heyman Vancouver–False Creek........................................................................ Sam Sullivan Vancouver-Fraserview...............................................................Hon. George Chow Vancouver-Hastings ............................................................... Hon. Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington....................................................................... Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..................................................................... Hon.

Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara................................................................................ Michael Lee Vancouver–Mount Pleasant..................................................... Hon. Melanie Mark Vancouver–Point Grey ............................................................Hon.

David Eby, QC Vancouver-Quilchena........................................................Andrew Wilkinson, QC Vancouver–West End .....................................................Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee ....................................................................................Eric Foster Victoria–Beacon Hill.................................................................. Hon. Carole James Victoria–Swan Lake.................................................................... Hon. Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano...................................................................

Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky................................................................Jordan Sturdy Party Standings: BC Liberal 42; NDP 41; Independent 2; BC Green Party 2

CONTENTS Wednesday, July 22, 2020 Afternoon Sitting Page Routine Business Tributes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 12155 Gerry Reimer Hon. C. James J. Tegart Dave Ravenhill Hon. R.

Fleming Introductions by Members................................................................................................................................................... 12155 Tributes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 12156 Gerry Reimer A.

Olsen Presentation of Estimates ..................................................................................................................................................... 12156 Supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021 Introduction and First Reading of Bills.............................................................................................................................. 12156 Bill M205 — Building Amendment Act, 2020 S. Cadieux Bill M206 — Home-Based Craft Food 2.0 Act I.

Paton Statements (Standing Order 25B) ....................................................................................................................................... 12157 Sm̓ algya̱ x language revitalization J. Rice Fraser Canyon highway J. Tegart Virtual music festivals and events in Maple Ridge and Mission B. D’Eith Infrastructure in Cultus Lake area L. Throness Community response to COVID-19 J. Routledge Response to opioid crisis A.

Olsen Oral Questions....................................................................................................................................................................... 12159 Impact of changes to workers compensation system J. Johal Hon. H. Bains M. Polak Forest management practices and sustainability A. Olsen Hon. D. Donaldson Protection of old-growth forests A. Olsen Hon. D. Donaldson Impact of changes to workers compensation system S. Bond Hon. H.

Bains M. de Jong Tabling Documents............................................................................................................................................................... 12164 Office of the Representative for Children and Y outh, report,Invisible Children: A Descriptive Analysis of Injury and Death Reports for Métis Children and Youth in British Columbia, 2015 to 2017 Ministerial Statements .......................................................................................................................................................... 12164 Allan Y oung Hon. M. Farnworth M. de Jong

Petitions .................................................................................................................................................................................. 12164 Hon. D.

Eby Tabling Documents............................................................................................................................................................... 12164 Civil resolution tribunal, annual report, 2016-17 Civil resolution tribunal, annual report, 2017-18 Civil resolution tribunal, annual report, 2019-20 Orders of the Day Committee of the Whole House.......................................................................................................................................... 12165 Bill 14 — Municipal Affairs and Housing Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020(continued) T.

Stone Hon. S. Robinson Reporting of Bills................................................................................................................................................................... 12177 Bill 14 — Municipal Affairs and Housing Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020

WEDNESDAY , JULY 22, 2020 The House met at 1:36 p.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Prayers and reflections: M. Hunt. Tributes GERRY REIMER Hon. C. James: I wish to acknowledge the passing of a legislative employee, a former reporter, a father and a friend, Gerry Reimer. Gerry passed away peacefully on May 8 after a brief but courageous battle with cancer. Gerry worked in Hansard broadcasting since 2013, fol- lowing a long career in television broadcasting with CBC, CTV , Shaw, Global and APTN, and managing his own film production company.

Gerry had an unreserved, outgoing personality and a deep-seated sense of caring, friendship and fairness that made him friends wherever he went. He was always there to help anyone, from a co-worker to even a stranger on the street, in whatever way he could, even if it meant a smile or a quick joke. I never passed by Gerry without remembering that smile; without Gerry stopping to ask how you were doing, how your family was doing, how your friends were doing. Then he’ d take a quick minute to talk about whatever cause he felt was important on that day to him and to the people of his community.

Gerry is going to be missed by so many whose paths crossed with his. He is survived by his children, Megan and Liam; his parents, Weldon and Virginia; and his brothers, Randy, Don and Brad. J. Tegart:I would just like to echo the words of the Fin- ance Minister. It is hard to lose a colleague and a friend. Our hearts go out to Hansard today.

Most people don’t know what Hansard does, but I can assure you that MLAs know that Hansard makes us look good, makes us look professional and does everything they can to make sure that the people’s work is done in a transparent way. [1:40 p.m.] To Gerry’s family and friends, to his co-workers, our deepest and sincere sympathy. I know he will be missed. DAVE RAVENHILL Hon. R. Fleming:I’ d like to take a moment in the House today to pay tribute to an education and sports hero from greater Victoria.

Dave Ravenhill was a husband, a father, a gifted teacher, a coach and a former professional soccer player who died suddenly on July 20 this week. Dave cofounded a legendary high school sports aca- demy in school district 61, the Reynolds Centre for Soccer Excellence. He was a proud member of both the Gorge soccer club and the UVic alumni team. He played pro- fessionally for the Victoria Vistas in the Canadian Soccer League, and he played in matches against teams like Chelsea FC and Dundee United. Dave gave himself selflessly and wholeheartedly to his students and athletes. They called him Raves.

That’s how he was known. He was everything we could hope for in a teacher. He was generous, kind, encouraging and groun- ded by deep integrity. Tributes pour in from his former students, who are in shock just two days after his sudden death. One theme emerges in those tributes that we’re seeing. They credit Dave with developing their character, for which sports was just a vehicle to do so. There are so many highlights of Dave’s decades in the teaching profession that illustrate his commitment to his students. I’ll offer just one.

Last month, of course, during the COVID-19 pandemic, Dave made and organized house visits to ensure that student achievement awards and ceremonies were delivered in grand style with a teach- er parade, school mascot, ceremonies and balloons, celeb- rating the students on their front lawns with the Reynolds teaching staff. Reynolds is asking anyone who wants to send a message to Dave’s family to drop letters in the mailbox at the front door of the school between July 23 and August 7. Given the health and safety measures around the pandemic, Dave’s family is holding a private memorial service.

The Reynolds School community is planning for a much larger celebration when it’s safe to do so. Dave Ravenhill is gone far too soon at the age of just 57. He has left a lasting legacy of passion and excellence for generations of students who were so lucky to call him teacher, coach and mentor. On behalf of the Legislative Assembly, I ask that this House send our deepest condolences to Dave’s family, his friends, his colleagues and students at Reynolds secondary school, in Saanich, and to the entire soccer community of greater Victoria.

To Dave’s friends and family, I say: “Y ou’ll never walk alone. ” May Dave rest peacefully forever. Introductions by Members J. Thornthwaite:I have three guests that are actually in Victoria, but because today is today, they’re not physic- ally in the building, unfortunately. I was able to meet them earlier for lunch. I’ d like Victoria and the House to please make my friends from North Vancouver very welcome: Cheryl McBride and Linda Sebo and Susan Simone. J. Sims: I want to introduce two very special young 12155

women in my life. When I became a mother, I really thought there wasn’t going to be a delight greater than that till my first granddaughter was born, Emily Sims. When I held her in my arms, instant love. Then, of course, when Emily gave me my great-granddaughter, the delight was even greater. This week they have joined me in Victoria — not actu- ally in the Legislature, but they are in the precinct. I’ve been able to spend some time with them in the evenings. Please help me welcome two of my favourite women to Victoria. Tributes GERRY REIMER A.

Olsen:I also want to rise to honour the passing of Gerry, as my colleagues have done. I want to acknowledge that he also had an impact on the B.C. Green caucus, as we would run into each other often in the hallways. I wanted to raise my hands to all of the people in Hansard for the loss here in the legislative precinct and to acknowledge the fine words of my colleagues here from the other two parties. [1:45 p.m.] Presentation of Estimates SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING MARCH 31, 2021 Hon. C.

James presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: supplementary estimates (No. 2) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021. Hon. C. James moved that the said message and the estimates accompanying the same be referred to the Committee of Supply. Motion approved. Introduction and First Reading of Bills BILL M205 — BUILDING AMENDMENT ACT, 2020 S. Cadieux presented a bill intituled Building Amendment Act, 2020. S. Cadieux: I move that a bill intituled Building Amendment Act, 2020, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read a first time now.

In doing so, I’ d like to quote Thea Kurdi. She’s a Cana- dian expert in accessible design. “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and our human rights code were changed 35 years ago. The fact that our national building code has been exempting residential housing from access- ibility requirements since then has created the accessible housing crisis that we face, not just in British Columbia but across the coun- try.

Anyone interested in sustainable design will know that if we look at our demographics, there is nothing more sustainable than accessibility in all design. “For housing, that not only means ensuring all housing is built to be accessible or, at least, adaptable so that it’s affordable to ren- ovate as owners’ or new owners’ needs change.

It also means it 100 percent needs to be visitable so that all our loved ones, neighbours, friends, business associates and family with disabilities can come over for a meeting, a cup of coffee, a barbecue, to babysit or for a visit. ” I know the House will know that I’ve said many of these things before. Without action on the part of the provin- cial Legislature, this shortage is only going to grow. One size doesn’t fit all. It’s clear from the numbers of disabled people who can’t find accessible housing and from the high demand for grants to fit adaptations to inaccessible homes that this continues.

This bill would require that all new multi-unit housing built would consider accessibility. A percentage of all new housing would be required to meet the criteria for “access- ible” in the Canada standards act,

section B651-18, or be adaptable or be visitable. Mr. Speaker:The question is first reading of the bill. Motion approved. S. Cadieux:I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill M205, Building Amendment Act, 2020, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. BILL M206 — HOME-BASED CRAFT FOOD 2.0 ACT I. Paton presented a bill intituled Home-Based Craft Food 2.0 Act. I.

Paton: I move that the bill intituled Home-Based Craft Food 2.0 Act, notice of which has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read for the first time now. Around our province are farmers, families and indi- viduals who seek greater opportunity to supplement their income and start new businesses, many through the pro- duction and sale of low-risk food products right from their own homes and farms. The act has been updated to include the ability to make and sell temperature-controlled food, provided the increased FoodSafe course is com- 12156 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, July 22, 2020

pleted, bringing even more opportunity for farming famil- ies to share their products. At present, home-based food products can only be sold at a farmers market. If someone is hoping to sell their products anywhere else, they are subject to strict rules and regulations that a small operation would not be able to meet.

The Home-Based Craft Food 2.0 Act would change this, allowing small, home-based businesses making food products — like jams, candy, pies, pickled vegetables, saus- ages, pizza, honey or bread, among other things — to sell throughout the year across B.C., simply by obtaining a loc- al business permit and a FoodSafe certification.

This legis- lation is about opening up new opportunities and enabling farmers to increase their incomes by using products from their own farms or their neighbours’ . [1:50 p.m.] This bill is about fostering new microbusinesses that could grow and create value-added opportunities for farmers and all British Columbians without impacting valuable farmland. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on employment, it is more important than ever to support microbusinesses that are good for the eco- nomy, good for farmers and good for B.C. Mr. Speaker:The question is first reading of the bill. Motion approved. I.

Paton:I move the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting after today. Bill M206, Home-Based Craft Food 2.0 Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Statements (Standing Order 25B) SM̓ ALGY A̱ X LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION J. Rice: Ama Sah. Good afternoon. As the members of this chamber know, B.C. is home to dozens of different Indigenous languages.

But like much of the Indigenous culture across Canada, these languages have been victims of centuries of colonial efforts to eradicate them in favour of English language and culture. First Nations communit- ies, including those in my riding, are now fighting to keep their languages alive for future generations. Most are doing so through traditional education, their nation or through B.C. ’s public school system, but some are using technology and other innovations to ensure the survival of their lan- guage. Brendan Eshom is a recent high school graduate from Prince Rupert’s Charles Hays Secondary School.

He is a member of the Gitga’at First Nation and a student of the Sm̓ algya̱ x language. When he was in grade 12, he wanted to take aSm̓ algya̱ x language course but could not accom- modate the course in his timetable. Instead of giving up on learning his ancestral language, last fall he decided to build a website, smalgyaxword.ca, to learn his language and keep it alive. But simply building a website was not enough for him. He took his idea an extra step further. With funding from the Gitga’at First Nation, he de- veloped a mobile app called Sm’algyax Word, based on his already successful website.

As of last week, his app had gone viral on the Apple app store, becoming the 104th most popular app on the app store. His app will help keep the Ts’msyen culture alive. In his own words: “IlluminatingSm̓ algya̱ x means revealing a world view that is unique to Ts’msyen culture. ” It’s humbling to witness the ongoing revitalization of the language, thanks to its speakers, learners and advocates.

I’ d like to recognize and thank Brendan for his amazing work of helping to revitalize theSm̓ algya̱ x language, and I’ d like to encourage those who wish to learn more about Ts’msy- en culture to download his app to practise yourSm̓ algya̱ x. T’ oyaxsat’nüün.Thank you. FRASER CANYON HIGHW AY J. Tegart:I want to ask members today: do you have a favourite highway in British Columbia? I know I do, and I’ d like to share with you why I consider it my favourite route. A number of years ago I was fortunate enough to spend a few weeks on the Oregon coast. No doubt it was beau- tiful.

But I have to say I drove home to Ashcroft up the Fraser Canyon, and the Oregon coast has nothing on our Fraser Canyon. The next time you want to take your family on a great day trip out of the Lower Mainland, might I encourage you to consider driving up the Fraser Canyon. The mighty Fraser River itself is incredible, as it winds its way through the canyon. It’s hard to believe they used to take paddle-wheelers to transport goods and services to Y ale, to service the Gold Rush Trail. Y ale Historic Site is a great first stop to experience and learn about the gold rush and its impact on the canyon people.

They have a great tea- house, which is lovely for lunch, and a visit to the Chinese cemetery is a must. [1:55 p.m.] From Y ale, you begin to travel through a series of tunnels through to Boston Bar. Think about stopping at Hell’s Gate and experiencing the thrill of riding the tram across the Fraser River and learning about the history of Hell’s Gate. If you like to hike, turn off at Alexandra Bridge and take a stroll over the old bridge, over the river. Y ou’ll see hik- Wednesday, July 22, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12157

ing trails all through the canyon that will take you to vis- tas, high in the mountains, to look down upon the canyon. It will remind you of how fortunate we are where we live here in British Columbia. As you can tell, I’m a passionate advocate for travel through the Fraser Canyon. It’s a great way to take Dr. Bonnie Henry’s advice: stay close, stay outside, and stay safe. VIRTUAL MUSIC FESTIV ALS AND EVENTS IN MAPLE RIDGE AND MISSION B. D’Eith: For some of these festival organizers, this pandemic has meant cancelling events.

However, some groups managed to adapt their events to our new reality with virtual programming. Today I wanted to highlight some of these great events that are continuing in my community. I want to first give a special shout-out to Michelle Demers and the entire board of the Mission Music Folk Festival Society, and volunteers, for producing this coming weekend’s virtual Folk at Home. Thanks to their dedica- tion, Mission homes will be filled, for yet another year, with amazing music. The folk fest is deeply committed to highlighting new voices.

Of nine performers, five this weekend will be led by or include female artists, and every artist on Saturday is Indigenous. I’m also thrilled to be, on Friday, introdu- cing the night’s headliner, the amazing funk-soul group Raincity, whose drummer happens to be my eldest son, Sheldon. Streaming live music will also be heard in Maple Ridge with Country Fest. Country Fest has been going strong since 1901. This is the first occasion during peacetime when Country Fest won’t be an in-person concert. It’s worthy of note that Country Fest continues to give back.

In fact, select artists will be given two days of free studio time at the amazing Studio Downe Under. So even now, Coun- try Fest is giving back to the community. I’ d also be remiss if I didn’t mention the Fraser River Indigenous Society for hosting their virtual National Indi- genous Peoples Day. They put together an incredible video production featuring Indigenous dance, song and art. Also, earlier this month, I had the honour to participate in virtual Canada Day celebrations with the city of Maple Ridge and the district of Mission.

On that day, I also was honoured to be able to play the piano, even though it was virtually. I played “ Amazing Grace” and Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah” on the piano for the reverend and worship- pers of the Holy Spirit Anglican Church in Whonnock during the Canada Day services. These organizations have shown an awe-inspiring amount of resiliency. I want to thank all of them for con- tinuing, virtually, during this very difficult time. INFRASTRUCTURE IN CULTUS LAKE AREA L. Throness:My constituents in the Cultus Lake area are experiencing the growing pains of popularity.

Well over a million tourists flock to its beaches every year, and new residential projects are popping up around the lake. Over the past few years, we’ve enjoyed real success in improving access to this region. We’ve built a $12 million bridge over the Vedder River, added two roundabouts that move traffic efficiently in and out of the lake and provided a new emergency exit through Soowahlie territory. I’m working on a number of other projects. Many non- residents park on Columbia Valley Highway and then walk to the beach.

We need to find a way to accommodate these people without compromising their safety and that of the driving public. Cultus Lake residents rely on a large, and failing, septic system, so I’m working to obtain an infra- structure grant to construct a modern system that won’t contaminate the lake. A

section of Columbia Valley Highway runs right next to the water. This summer there was a serious accident there. I’m committed to improving the safety of that stretch of road. Columbia Valley, just south of the lake, has its own issues. I’ve been working with a private provider to bring high-speed service to that area by obtaining access to federal funds. Maple Falls Road has a problem with annual flooding, and eventually we’ll need to have a community discus- sion about a second access route to and from the Colum- bia Valley.

Finally, the lake itself is under the threat of eutrophic- ation, as high amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus feed into it from several sources, including a million tourists every year who visit Cultus Lake Provincial Park, served by an increasingly outdated septic system right beside the lake. [2:00 p.m.] I want my constituents to know that I’ll work hard to ensure that residential development is well managed, that aquatic life is preserved and that both tourists and resid- ents have safe access to one of the most beautiful places B.C. has to offer. COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO COVID-19 J.

Routledge:Before COVID, I used to host monthly coffee meetings in my community office. I miss those meetings. They anchored me, as a representative, in the life of my community and gave me confidence that we were on the right track. Last Saturday we were able to restart our coffee meet- ings. Now we meet by Zoom, and I’m happy to say that a lot of new faces have joined us. As you can imagine, we had the same conversation everyone in B.C. is having right now. We shared anecdotes about people and businesses 12158 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, July 22, 2020

who just might not be following Dr. Henry’s guidelines, and we asked ourselves: whose job is it to enforce COVID compliance? That is an important conversation, because it acknow- ledges that so much of the polite behaviour we take for granted, like shaking hands, sharing food and crowding up to make more room for others, may no longer be appropri- ate. It also encourages us to reflect on how we internalized social norms in the first place. How, in the age of COVID, do we consciously and delib- erately change behaviours that are largely unconscious?

How do we make it second nature to maintain a distance of six feet from those outside our bubble? How do we remember to disinfect our hands after we’ve touched a door handle or pushed an elevator button? How do we remember to take face masks with us when we go out? Then there’s the question of enforcement. Do we start by issuing tickets and imposing penalties in order to change behaviour, or do we go there only as a last resort, when voluntary compliance and our sense of the greater good aren’t equal to the threat? How we answer those questions might very well define us as a society or redefine us.

In choosing a path forward, let’s be motivated more by love than by fear. RESPONSE TO OPIOID CRISIS A. Olsen:In April 2016, B.C. ’s provincial health officer declared a provincewide public health emergency. Since the declaration, more than 3,700 British Columbians have died from a preventable overdose. Overdose deaths have become the leading cause of unnatural deaths in B.C. since 2016. The societal stigma associated with drug use leads many to use drugs alone and hidden, increasing their risk of dying.

Overdose deaths in the province have become so pervasive that there has been a measured decrease in life expectancy at birth for all British Columbians. Overrep- resented subpopulations in these deaths are Indigenous peoples and males 30 to 59. One substantial factor in the ongoing overdose crisis is B.C. ’s highly toxic illegal drug supply. There is widespread global recognition that the failed war on drugs and the res- ulting criminalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs have not reduced drug use but instead increased health harms.

The predominantly criminal justice–based approach that channels people who use drugs into the criminal justice system does not address what is ultimately a health issue. These quotes came from the April 2019 reportStopping the Harm: Decriminalization of People Who Use Drugs in B.C. They are the words of our widely acclaimed provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry. In the 15 months since that report was published, more than 1,709 more British Columbians have died from an overdose.

The report notes: “ A growing number of public safety officials are critically re-evaluating the current approach of prohibition and criminalization of people who use controlled drugs in Canada. ” It’s time we act on Dr. Henry’s single urgent recom- mendation to decriminalize the people who use drugs in our province. I believe we should go further.

Let’s ensure that they have a safe supply of pharmaceutical-grade alternatives, needed to further minimize the threat of poisonous street drugs, that is truly accessible to those who need it. [2:05 p.m.] Oral Questions IMPACT OF CHANGES TO WORKERS COMPENSATION SYSTEM J. Johal:At a time when small businesses are at the most vulnerable, the Minister of Labour is choosing to make it more difficult for job creators.

The business community is pleading with this government: “Surely you can appre- ciate the harm Bill 23 poses, through the imposition of additional long-term costs, to employers as they continue to cope with difficult operating decisions, reopening chal- lenges and other considerations surrounding whether they will survive. ” To the Labour Minister: will you stop being dismissive of small businesses and listen to their serious concerns? Hon. H. Bains: Let me say this. Injured workers in this province have not seen any improvement in benefits through WCB in the last 20 years.

They have come to almost every MLA ’s office, and they have made it clear to all of us, time and again, that the system is not fair. It’s not working for them. Their families have contacted our offices — that the system is letting them down. We are taking small steps in improving their benefits and modernizing the WCB system, at the same time ensuring that the employers’ premiums will not rise. I think that is a prudent approach. That is a balanced approach. That is the right approach. That’s why we’re taking it. Mr. Speaker:The member for Richmond-Queensbor- ough on a supplemental. J.

Johal:This is also about survival of these very busi- nesses. These employees, these people, have to have jobs to go back to. That’s what we’re talking about here. Just three weeks ago — I remind this minister how he mis- handled the layoff policy and had to do a U-turn. I remind him of that. The minister talks about consulting. He did that yester- day. The problem is he doesn’t listen. That’s the problem here. Only 16 percent of B.C. businesses have any confidence in this government in helping them succeed. I have the Wednesday, July 22, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12159

survey right in front of me. It’s done by the Greater Van- couver Board of Trade, the B.C. Chamber of Commerce and the Business Council of B.C.: 16 percent. Not even one out of five businesses feel that this government is working for them. I have here a quote from the homebuilders associ- ation. They sent in a letter to this government saying: “Many businesses are not in a position to pay back the many taxes and fees that have been deferred, let alone bear any new costs. ” Will this minister finally listen to hard-working small business owners and press the pause button? Hon. H.

Bains: Let me remind this member, as well, who the workers are that we are talking about. These are our front-line workers. They are risking their health and their families’ so that they can go there and take care of our loved ones and provide care to those who are sick with COVID-19. What the opposition is saying is: “We expect you to go and care for our loved ones, but God forbid, if you con- tract COVID-19, you’re on your own. ” That is the wrong approach. We’re going to stand with those workers. We’re going to provide them the support that they need during the toughest time that they’re going through.

At the same time, we are not raising premiums for the employers. It’s the right approach. It’s a balanced approach. M. Polak:To listen to the member, you’ d think that the concerns being raised are somehow being raised by name- less, faceless corporations. That’s just not the case. We’re talking about family businesses. They aren’t sure if they’re going to even survive through the pandemic. One of those is Western Pacific Enterprises. It employs 1,000 British Columbians. This is a family business. It’s a family business that has grown into one of western’s Canada’s largest electrical contractors.

President David Fettback says: “I am writing to express severe and signific- ant concerns, and I ask you to protect all the workers and employers of B.C. from this undue risk and not make the contemplated changes as proposed. ” Will the Labour Minister finally listen to employers like David and their significant concerns? Hon. H. Bains:When COVID-19 hit us unexpectedly, our government acted very quickly to provide support to businesses, because many them…. Interjection. [2:10 p.m.] Hon. H. Bains:The member said we haven’t. A $5 bil- lion package was brought in by our Minister of Finance — $5 billion.

Out of that, $1.8 billion for businesses, $700 million in a property tax break, a permanent break, for the whole year. That’s one of the largest tax breaks in the his- tory of this province for businesses. Wake up, Member. We have been working with busi- nesses. We are listening to them. That’s why all of the other benefits for employers, supports for employers, deferred taxes, cut taxes…. Mr. Speaker, when you take a look…. In addition to what I’ve said, we have worked very hard with the federal government to make sure that they get the 75 percent wage subsidy.

We allowed restaurants to purchase alcohol at wholesale prices, saving them 25 percent. We provided $10 million in grants to tourism organizations to support marketing campaigns for the summer. On top of that, the WCB has allowed employers to defer their premiums for six months and waived premiums for certain other employers. And they will continue to enjoy subsidized rates. The government has done so much for businesses. Y es, we understand we need to do more — $1.5 billion also set aside for reopening our economy. We work with businesses. We care about businesses.

At the same time, we are not going to ignore the health and safety and the rights of workers. That is a balanced approach. That’s why we’re taking it. Mr. Speaker:The member for Langley on a supplemen- tal. M. Polak:Well, just as with the issue around the tem- porary layoffs and the questioning and the answers that the minister gave at that time, his answers today show he doesn’t understand the concerns that businesses are rais- ing. He clearly doesn’t. David is particularly concerned with making COV- ID-19 a

schedule 1 presumption. Here’s a place where the minister might want to listen to some of the consultations, because 92 percent of the submissions on that issue have been from employers who don’t support the measure. Here’s what David writes: “This statutory intervention sig- nals your support for a manifestly flawed policy measure that has no scientific or medical evidence to support it. This is unacceptable. ” This is not the opposition making up concerns from business. These are real people with real family businesses who may not be able to stay in business.

Minister, what that means is they may not be able to continue to employ these people. They need their jobs. Will the minister relent, finally — don’t wait as long as you did for the last issue — and pull this? Listen to these people. Hon. H. Bains: I have a letter from the employers groups, Monday. I have another letter from representatives of the workers. There are over two million workers work- ing today to keep our economy going. The representatives of the workers are saying this, on the other hand. 12160 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, July 22, 2020

Employers said that they are concerned about their costs. We recognize that. We understand that. That’s why we are bringing in a package that is very modest. We are not proceeding with the recommendations that came from Mr. Parr. Had we gone ahead with Mr. Parr’s recommend- ations, it certainly would have cost employers money. It would have cost $700 million to the WCB accident fund. We didn’t proceed with that. We are proceeding with the recommendations that will not raise employers’ pre- miums. Here is what the other side is saying. In 2002, the B.C.

Liberal government brought in changes that continue to have a profound and devastating impact on benefits to injured workers and their families. That resulted in a 13 percent loss of benefits to injured workers. From 2002 to 2005, they’re saying the rehab budget was slashed by 98 percent and has never recovered to pre-2002 levels. [2:15 p.m.] They’re saying that at the same time, the subsidy to the employer continues on. Between 2007 and 2018, it was val- ued at $1.8 billion. They’re saying that while Bill 23 makes meaningful improvements for injured workers and their families, there is much more work to be done.

Bill 23 rep- resents an initial set of revisions that only begin to repair the damage done by the previous government. We, as a government, have a responsibility to balance the two opposing interests here. That’s why we’re bringing in a package that is modest and that is measured. It will not raise premiums for the employers. In the meantime, it will provide health and safety protection for the workers and give them support when they are injured or they need sup- port from WorkSafeBC. FOREST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND SUSTAINABILITY A.

Olsen: I think it’s important to get on the record that the $5 billion that was approved was approved by every member of this House. It was a multipartisan effort to ensure the people of British Columbia were supported during this COVID-19 crisis. This government has promised to bring in reforms to the Forest and Range Practices Act, which governs how forestry is done in British Columbia. The regulations and legislation that govern forestry in B.C. are entirely focused on maximizing timber supply.

Values like biodiversity, water quality and wildlife can all be managed for, yes, but only without unduly reducing the supply of timber. This fundamentally undermines our ability to manage forests and our forestry industry sustainably. Reforms are absolutely essential to begin to shift our management regime away from an exclusive focus on timber supply to the detriment of all other values and towards sustainable management of our forests for all the values they hold. Y et so far, the government won’t bring them in.

My question is to the Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. Will he introduce the necessary changes to the Forest and Range Practices Act by this fall session to begin the shift towards more sustainable management in our forests? Hon. D. Donaldson:Thank you to the interim Leader of the Third Party for the question. I’m happy to discuss our plans around forestry reform. We’re committed to reforming the forest sector. That’s to improve public trust in how we sustainably manage forests, public trust that was damaged under the previous government.

We’re committed to ensuring that the pub- licly held natural resource, the forests, benefit, first and foremost, communities and workers. We’ve taken policy, regulation and legislative actions in the three years we’ve been government. We’ve created fibre recovery zones so that less waste is left on the forest floor after harvesting. We’ve focused on increasing value over volume out of the forest with our mass timber ini- tiatives. We’ve ensured that forest stewardship plans must be updated, at minimum, every five years. We’ve also embarked on five forest landscape planning pilot projects around the province.

We are committed to introducing more positive changes, including legislation, as a government and as the unpredictable events created by COVID-19 permit. Mr. Speaker:The Leader, Third Party, on a supplemen- tal. PROTECTION OF OLD-GROWTH FORESTS A. Olsen:Thank you to the minister for the response. Working around the edges is not enough on this. Forestry in B.C. is broken, and it needs fundamental reform. Over the past number of decades, we’ve seen the loss of tens of thousands of forestry jobs as well as the continued liquidation of some of our most pristine and highly productive old forests.

Y et this government is delay- ing bringing in the basic, preliminary reforms to legisla- tion to start us down a better path. We’ve spent this past week asking the government what steps it’s taking to reform the industry, protect old growth and support workers in communities to transition. While the minister has acknowledged some of the problems before us, nothing has changed on the ground, and we don’t see a plan for the future.

In fact, a friend recently recounted to me that he has personally witnessed recently old growth being “hammered on our coast. ” The longer that this government delays on changing course, the worse the outcomes in our forests and forestry- dependent communities are. [2:20 p.m.] Once again my question is to the Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resources Operations and Rural Develop- Wednesday, July 22, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12161

ment. We’ve heard lots of words in the last couple of days; I’m looking for just one. Will his government pause log- ging in old-growth ecosystems at the highest risk until a plan is in place, yes or no? Hon. D. Donaldson:Once again, I am happy to answer questions around the management of the forest resource in the province. Our government is absolutely committed to implementing a new, sustainable and comprehensive old-growth management strategy. That’s why we commis- sioned the old-growth strategic review. The panel toured the province and provided a very comprehensive report.

As I said in my response to the member’s question on this topic on Monday, we’ve committed to publicly release that report within six months of receiving it. We received it at the beginning of May. We’re on track to meet that com- mitment. As for any actions that will arise as a result of the report, it’s important to remember that the terms of reference clearly outline that we will engage in a government-to- government consultation with First Nations before setting policy direction in response to the report. That’s in the spirit of respect.

Acting unilaterally without first conduct- ing those government-to-government discussions would not be respectful. IMPACT OF CHANGES TO WORKERS COMPENSATION SYSTEM S. Bond:To use the Labour Minister’s own language, the person that needs to wake up is the Minister of Labour. He touts his work with businesses, yet that has resulted in another nine-page document where businesses express significant concerns. That’s the second time in mere weeks that he has been called out. The minister just doesn’t get it. Workers need jobs, and this bill means thousands of jobs are potentially at risk.

Y esterday the Labour Minister even called the significant concerns expressed by busi- nesses across British Columbia an “ideological block, ” once again being dismissive. Those representing the hardest hit sectors in our eco- nomy have also signed the letter: the Retail Council, Res- taurants Canada, the B.C. Hotel Association and the Tour- ism Association of B.C. In fact, here’s what the Tourism Association said just yesterday: “More than 90 percent of the tourism businesses won’t make a profit this year. We are at the edge of the cliff. ” The tourism sector has been devastated. They are des- perate.

Maybe the Tourism Minister will stand up today, stand up for the sector she’s supposed to represent, and ensure that her government does no more harm. To the Tourism Minister, will she stand up and tell her colleague about the devastation this bill could cause her sector? Hon. H. Bains:As I said before, we are very, very con- cerned about the economic situation that we’re all going through. It’s a worldwide pandemic. It is hitting us all. We are doing everything that we can to listen to busi- nesses and work with them. There is the Premier’s Eco- nomic Recovery Task Force.

Those issues are discussed there: how we help them to restart the economy. I think we should be proud in this province, due to the leadership of Dr. Bonnie Henry and the leadership of our Health Min- ister and of our Premier. We’re listening, and we are then moving ahead to help businesses to restart the economy. That help is there. I must say that’s why our package that we have brought in is very modest. It will not increase costs of the premi- ums to the employers. At the same time, it will improve workers’ health and safety. Protecting workers’ health and safety should be everyone’s concern here.

We should all support that. When they are injured or become sick at the workplace, they need support. We must provide them with that support. The system that we have is 20 years old and isn’t working for the workers right now. That’s why those changes are being recommended. [2:25 p.m.] I know the B.C. Liberals have an ideological block when it comes to workers’ rights in this province. Their track record is clear. Y ou don’t help workers by ripping up their collective agreements. Y ou don’t help workers in this province by eliminating benefits for injured workers. We are going to support the workers.

At the same time, we’re going to work with the employers so that their cost doesn’t increase. That is the right thing to do. That’s why we’re doing it. Mr. Speaker:Members, before we move on to the sup- plementary question by the member for Prince George– Valemount, did anyone find that her talking was over- ridden by background noise? An Hon. Member:Y es. Mr. Speaker:Because it is, we perhaps can offer the member another question as well. Okay. Thank you. The member for Prince George–Valemount on a sup- plemental. S.

Bond: Well, you know, it’s one thing — it’s pretty rich — for the minister to stand up and talk about seeking advice and input. It’s a completely different thing to actu- ally listen to it. In fact, this minister has a track record as well. He simply ignores the concerns that are expressed by businesses and job creators across the province. Let’s look at the numbers. One hundred thousand full- time and part-time jobs have already been lost in the tour- ism sector alone. They’re warning that a further 120,000 jobs are at risk. It demonstrates just how fragile the eco- nomic situation is for the tourism sector.

That is why the tourism association signed the letter that says, and perhaps 12162 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, July 22, 2020

the minister will want to listen to this part: “Bill 23 will add significant costs…. It is ill-timed, ill-considered and ignores broad-based and repeated requests from the busi- ness community to do no harm. ” Again to the Tourism Minister, will she stand up and tell the Labour Minister that Bill 23 will add significant costs for the tourism sector and that now is not the time to add costs and put thousands more jobs at risk? Hon. H. Bains: Mr. Speaker, the background noise really, really helps me get up and answer the question. It seems like there is some sawing going on in the back, and some people are working.

Let me say this. There are two sides to this. There are workers; there are employers. Both have opposing interests. Both have taken different positions on Bill 23. The workers’ representatives are saying that Bill 23 doesn’t go far enough, that the damage of the last 20 years isn’t going to be fixed by Bill 23 and that we need to do more. Businesses, of course, on the other side, are saying that they’re concerned with their costs.

That’s why we, as a gov- ernment, are taking a responsible, balanced approach to make sure that the businesses’ cost isn’t increased and that, at the same time, improves the health and safety and the concerns of the workers, as I say. That’s why we’re doing what we’re doing. Let me read you a statement. It says here: “Our con- tinued ask has been to help business reduce red tape and administrative burdens. Today’s changes are on the path- way to achieving reduced administrative burdens to help employers and employees.

More needs to be done, but this is a good start. ” This comes from the second-largest board of trade in the province, the Surrey Board of Trade. M. de Jong:I think we just heard the adversarial nature that is characterizing the minister and the government’s approach into this important matter.

The cards and letters continue to flow in today from the British Columbia Con- struction Association, which writes: “Now is not the time to introduce measures that increase costs, add to the reg- ulatory burden or create further uncertainty for B.C. employers. ” [2:30 p.m.] It’s not just added costs, because, you see, the minister and the government also want to impose new rules regard- ing directors’ personal liability, which are going to make it even more difficult for small non-profits and community service agencies to retain and recruit the directors they need. Who was asking for that change?

Who on earth was ask- ing for that change, and why does the minister think that the ideal time to introduce a new element of uncertainty by dealing with an issue that, quite frankly, nobody knew was a problem — doing that in the middle of the worst recession in living memory? Hon. H. Bains: That provision exists in the Employ- ment Standards Act right now. That provision existed in CRA. It is enabling WorkSafeBC to collect unpaid premi- ums from the very few employers who don’t do that. It is to create a level playing field, and I think they would agree with that.

There are employers who pay their bills on a timely basis. They obey the rules. But there are a few who don’t. WorkSafeBC requires certain additional tools so that they collect those unpaid premiums by giving them these extra tools. Let’s talk about some of the other changes that we are talking about. Allowing WorkSafeBC to provide preventa- tive medical treatment, which could save the whole system money. Providing such health care to a first responder, for example, on a timely basis, could help a claim that would end up being more severe for the injured worker, more costly for the workers compensation system.

This mean- ingful change is good for the whole workers compensation system. All of those recommendations that we are talking about came through four different reports that we commis- sioned. They consulted widely. They came back with a recommendation by Mr. Parr. He combined all those recommendations in his consultation and came back with the recommendations, but understanding the tough times, the challenging times that business and the economy is going through right now, we did not proceed with the costly recommendations that they recommended.

That’s why we went with only those that will not increase the cost to the employers but at the same time have meaningful support for the workers when they need it and enhance their health and safety. That’s what the pur- pose is behind this bill. It is the right approach, and it is the prudent approach. M. de Jong: Well, that’s not what community service organizations think. Let’s say I am one of those organizations in Langley, Prince George, Cranbrook or Surrey, for that matter. I need volunteers to help guide my organization.

It’s already tough, because in the midst of the recession, people are worried about whether their business is going to survive. They’re worried about their job. They’re worried about the safety of their family. Now I have to tell a prospective director that the min- ister and the government have decided to create new legal tools that will impose an additional personal liability that will allow WorkSafe to come after them personally if there is an issue involving WorkSafe for that community service organization.

Well, what does the minister think the answer is going to be from these people, and how do you think community service organizations are going to fill those directorships, with people confronted by that additional challenge? Again, I ask him, who asked for this? Who asked for this, what is the urgency, and what is the minister’s argu- Wednesday, July 22, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12163

ment for imposing this additional uncertainty in the midst of the worst recession in living memory? Hon. H. Bains: It came through consultation. I did not…. It came through consultation. The recommenda- tions…. Interjections. Hon. H. Bains:Y ou see, when the truth hits them, how they react, because they’re not used to it. [2:35 p.m.] Workers of this province have not seen improvement for 20 years. That’s why we are taking small steps to promote and enhance their health and safety at workplaces, because a healthy workplace is a productive workplace.

We all want all workers to go to work and come home safe and healthy at the end of their shift. That’s the goal. That’s why we are making these small steps at a tough time and, at the same time, supporting the employer, the businesses, by not rais- ing their premiums. It’s a balanced approach, and I know every time we talk about improving workers’ health and safety, giving addi- tional benefits to the workers, they howl that the sky is going to fall. But that’s their track record. We’re not going there. We’re going to support the economy, the employ- er and the workers and their health and safety.

That is the right thing to do. It’s expected of the government to do. Workers of this province expect us to do it. That’s why we’re doing it, because it’s the right thing to do. [End of question period.] Tabling Documents Mr. Speaker:Members, I have the honour to present a report from the Representative for Children and Y outh intituledInvisible Children: A Descriptive Analysis of Injury and Death Reports for Métis Children and Youth in British Columbia, 2015 to 2017. Ministerial Statements ALLAN YOUNG Hon. M. Farnworth:I rise to make a ministerial state- ment.

Notice has been provided to my colleagues on the other side and the Third Party. It is with heavy hearts that today we mourn the tragic loss of Const. Allan Y oung, a 16-year member of the Abbotsford police department, remembered for his love and devotion to family and friends, his thick Scottish accent and a wonderful sense of humour. Constable Y oung served in the British Royal Navy and immigrated to Canada in 1997, where he joined the Toronto police ser- vice in 2000 and served for four years. Allan moved to British Columbia and joined the Abbotsford police depart- ment in 2004.

We are all filled with grief at this sudden and tragic loss. Today our thoughts go out to Constable Y oung’s fam- ily and colleagues in the Abbotsford police department. Police officers across this province and across this country, and our colleagues in this House who are themselves former peace officers…. Whether on or off duty, police have an unwavering commitment to our safety and protec- tion, and we sincerely thank all our women and men of law enforcement and give gratitude as they put their lives on the line for all of us.

I know that yesterday one of the legislative precinct security members who protect this place, who had been in the police force, commented to me that as a police officer, you never truly leave the job behind when your shift ends. Y ou are always on duty. Sadly, Constable Y oung paid that ultimate sacrifice doing just that. Our thoughts today are with the family, friends and col- leagues of Constable Y oung at this very difficult time. I would ask this House to send our sincere condolences to his family.

M. de Jong: Allan Y oung’s sense of duty, as we have just heard from the Solicitor General, to serve and pro- tect our citizens transcended the uniform that he wore so proudly. Tragically, he has paid the ultimate price for acting upon those instincts on a day when he was under no obligation to do so. Our thoughts and prayers, of course, are with his family, his extended family and his co-workers at the Abbotsford police department. He left us in the service of others, but he left us too soon. Petitions Hon. D.

Eby: I rise to present a petition from BCDia- betes with over 12,800 signatories in favour of Pharma- Care coverage for glucose monitors for type 1 diabetes. [2:40 p.m.] Tabling Documents Hon. D. Eby: I also rise to table reports from the civil resolution tribunal for 2016-17, ’17-18 and ’19-20. Orders of the Day Hon. M. Farnworth:In this chamber, I call continued Committee of the Whole for Bill 14, Municipal Affairs and Housing Statutes Amendment Act, (No. 2). 12164 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, July 22, 2020

Committee of the Whole House BILL 14 — MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2020 (continued) The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 14; S. Gibson in the chair. The committee met at 2:43 p.m. The Chair:As we know, the division was deferred to later on today for

section 3, so it’s my understanding that this will be stood down,

section 3, and we’ll now proceed with

section 4 today.

Section 3 stood down. On

section 4. T. Stone:Section 4 of Bill 14 deals with some changes to rules around depreciation reports. [2:45 p.m.] My first question to the minister would be this. The minister has mentioned several times, in comments that she’s made in and out of the House, about the changes in this

section addressing the reality that the previous gov- ernment left a supposed loophole with respect to depre- ciation reports. Y et while there are some changes here related to the depreciation reports in

section 4, in

section 12 of this very same bill, there are regulation-making powers that the government will have with respect to depreciation reports. I’m just wondering if the minister believes that referring to the closing of loopholes in this provision, when the minister is actually still going to allow for exceptions to the changes she’s proposing through the new change in sec- tion 12 later in the bill…. I’m wondering if she feels that it was legitimate and fair criticism to refer to loopholes in the legislation prior to these changes here today. Hon. S.

Robinson: Encouraging stratas to repair and maintain their common property and assets, we know, will help to alleviate insurance costs. We also know that stratas that have and act on depreciation reports are likely to get lower risk and, at the end of the day, save owners money in the long run. Prescribing this information by regulation will allow government to create more stringent, robust and flexible depreciation reporting requirements to encourage stratas to repair and maintain their common property and assets.

Far too many strata corporations were exempting themselves, and this has contributed to the problem that we have before us. For example, depending on further consultation — this is, I think, what the member was referring to — regula- tions could be introduced to limit or eliminate the ability of the strata corporation to waive or defer a depreciation report requirement by a three-quarter vote or introduce a more consistent template for reporting. So there’s cer- tainly some consultation that needs to be done.

We want to enhance the depreciation reports so that, at the end of the day, strata corporations have a more robust understand- ing what the needs are, going forward, that will help with insurance rates. I have to say that enhancements to depreciation reports have been recommended by the Condominium Home Owners Association as well as the Insurance Bureau of Canada. T. Stone:Thanks to the minister for that. I guess the challenge in understanding the govern- ment’s intent here….

When the minister, on the one hand, has made a lot about the fact that, through this particular section, the government has decided to “close a loophole” that currently allows for the deferral of depreciation reports, only to allow for the prescribed regulations, which would be determined at some later date, to allow for exactly that — the deferral of depreci- ation reports — it is a bit confusing. The minister, in her last response, used both…. In describing the regulations that will be developed after fur- ther consultation, she uses the words “stringent” and “flex- ible” in the same sentence.

That’s somewhat confusing. [2:50 p.m.] I’m wondering if the minister could walk us through what the circumstances might look like that would be provided for in these prescribed regulations and that would allow for stratas to continue to, in some cases, defer the depreciation reports. Will that be based on the type of strata? Will she take into account the very different realities of the different types of stratas — the condo, apartment-style strata versus a bare land strata, which has a different reality wrapped around it?

Will the prescribed regulations that determine these circumstances be based on the appraised dollar value of the strata, on the strata’s common property asset, on the size of the strata and the number of units involved? What would those circumstances look like that would, again, through a prescribed regulation, enable the deferment of a depreciation report? Hon. S. Robinson:The member talked about different types of stratas — they’re quite varied — as well as differ- ent sizes of stratas. We recognize that it is a varied strata landscape.

It’s for that reason that we are going to be doing a robust consultation to make those determinations so that we can get a very balanced perspective. That information will be reflected in the regulation. T. Stone:As the minister and her team in the ministry develop these prescribed regulations, will the minister Wednesday, July 22, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12165

be taking into account the realities that smaller stratas have unique circumstances and characteristics? They are often very well governed, but because of the unique cir- cumstances of their size, being very small, many of them need flexibility with respect to depreciation report requirements. Hon. S. Robinson:The answer is yes. T. Stone:Will the minister ensure that the absolute requirement of depreciation reports doesn’t create an unnecessary financial burden on strata corporations, strata owners, that are already facing significant finan- cial distress due to the realities of soaring strata insur- ance costs?

Hon. S. Robinson:Again, the intent here, of course, is to encourage stratas to repair and maintain common prop- erties and assets. The idea behind the depreciation report is to understand exactly what investments need to be made — again, to save owners in the long run. [2:55 p.m.] That’s, I think, something we can all agree on in this House: that the value of depreciation reports is about mak- ing sure that buildings are maintained and that repairs are done so that, at the end of the day, the strata corporation and, of course, the strata owners can save money in the long run. T. Stone:Well, I understand that.

But to the minister, what protections will she be building into these pre- scribed regulations to ensure that the absolute require- ment to do the depreciation report, which she says is closing a loophole, is not going to add additional finan- cial burden to strata corporations that are already strug- gling due to the soaring strata insurance costs that they’re having to deal with? Hon. S. Robinson:Like I said, this is what the consulta- tion is for.

This is why engaging with various stakehold- ers to identify how to best move forward with this so that we can, at the end of the day, really get robust depreci- ation reports where they’re needed so that we can get the investments needed in the right place…. That would also lower risk and so reduce insurance premiums as well as have well-maintained buildings. That, at the end of the day, will reduce costs as well. T.

Stone:Is the minister contemplating, as part of the new requirement for depreciation reports, that there would be a flexibility around the dates that those depre- ciation reports would have to be submitted? Or will there be a universal deadline that all stratas will have to work towards and meet? Hon. S. Robinson:How this actually gets implemen- ted is a key focus of our consultation with all the stake- holders. We’ll have that question as part of our consulta- tion process. T. Stone:Will there be any kind of transition period for this requirement?

More specifically, when would a strata that has just recently deferred a depreciation report be expected to commission and conclude a depre- ciation report? Hon. S. Robinson:As I said earlier, we’re going to con- tinue, certainly, consulting with our partners in the strata sector this fall so we can develop the necessary regulations. We want to move quickly on this. This is a priority file for us. A phase-in period will be necessary so that strata cor- porations and depreciation report providers do have time to adjust. We need to remember that depreciation reports now typically happen on a three-year cycle.

But I also want to say, for the record, that stratas should not be waiting for these changes to come into effect to really act proactively to address any maintenance deficits. They really ought to be improving their risk profile so that it makes them, certainly, more attractive to insurers and saves strata owners, of course, in the long run. [3:00 p.m.] T. Stone:Well, I understand that. I think the issue that we’re hearing from a lot of strata corporations, a lot of strata owners, is what the new world is actually going to look like. Again, in this

section 4…. The minister, with a lot of fanfare, has pointed to it as the closing of a loophole. In reality, the loophole has not been closed, because in sec- tion 12, which comes later in the bill, there is a new reg- ulation-making power for the government to develop and implement prescribed regulations that would outline the circumstances by which depreciation reports would not be required, presumably. I think it’s incumbent on the minister to provide, if not the fine details of what she and her government are thinking here, at least some general guidelines that will guide the process of consultation.

The minister has acknowledged there’s a wide variety of different types of stratas. I want to really emphasize the importance, there- fore, of understanding what the government’s intent here is, because the depreciation report requirement, the universal requirement that the minister says she wants to impose, barring some exceptions that will be made through regulation, is going to impact different stratas in very different ways. The minister knows well that one of the most common types of stratas that’s growing rapidly around the province are bare land stratas, where you have the common prop- erty asset mix.

It’s a very different look and feel and a very different reality from the common area asset mix in a 20 or 30 tower condo building. A townhouse complex that 12166 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, July 22, 2020

might have four units side by side is, again, a very different profile. So the requirements in a one-size-fits-all approach are just not going to work for some of these stratas. When can the minister confirm that the consultation that she refers to…? When is that consultation process going to begin? When is it going to end?

When will the government actually be making decisions on this piece — i.e., fleshing things out a bit so that everyone in the strata sector understands exactly what the new prescribed regu- lations are going to be, relating to depreciation reports and under what circumstances exceptions would be allowed? What would be the timing for the implementation of these new rules? Will there be transition timing? Will there be protections built in to ensure that this doesn’t become an onerous additional financial burden?

When can we expect some answers and details on all of the above, which presumably will come as part of a con- sultation process in the weeks ahead? [3:05 p.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:We are and have been in consulta- tion with the sector in the development of this legislation. Consultation is going forward. We’re prepared to start imminently, with the intent of bringing in regulations this fall. I just want to point out, you know, that the member has recognized there are very diverse types of stratas, dif- ferent sizes. These are all things that we’re very alive to.

That is why we need to do the consultations so that we can find the right balance — recognizing the variety of strata frameworks, different strata types — so that we can have a more robust system that works better on the ground for these folks who live in different types of stratas. T. Stone:Well, recognizing that this

section comes into force only after the regulations are developed, that will be, again, at some point in the future. A two-part question for the minister. First, what is the exact timeline or deadline that she has set for the consulta- tion to be done, for the regulations to be developed and for strata corporations, strata owners, to know what the rules are pertaining to depreciation reports? And secondly, recognizing that that’s likely weeks, if not months, down the line, how does this

section provide any immediate relief for strata owners who are facing soaring strata insur- ance costs here and now? Hon. S. Robinson: We’ve been moving quickly on this because it is a critical bill. We believe we need to move quickly. I think there’s a desire on all sides to move quickly to address this problem. As part of developing this regulatory model, our intent and our plan is to not make it a linear process but to consult as we develop so that it’s a parallel process so that we can move as quickly as we can on this.

We know that we need to move quickly, and we’re putting every element in place to do it as quickly as we can. T. Stone:Well, one word I don’t think would be right to describe the minister’s pace or the government’s pace on bringing forward solutions to address this strata insurance crisis is “quickly. ” The minister used that word many times in her last response. I certainly have heard many words of frustration from strata owners around the province who are facing these massive increases in their insurance premiums and deductibles and related monthly strata fees and one-time special assessments in many cases.

Nobody is commenting or noting that the government is moving quickly on any of this. [3:10 p.m.] We even tabled an amendment yesterday that would put on the table a strong commitment from government, a sig- nal from government that it would be willing to pursue the whole concept of self-insurance in this space — again, as a creative solution to say to strata owners we recog- nize the magnitude of the problem, and we’re going to put some ideas on the table. The minister was not interested in that.

So I wouldn’t say “quickly” is a word that describes the government’s approach to addressing the challenges in strata insurance. I’m going to ask again. I do think that in light of the fact that the vast majority of this bill…. Fourteen of 16 sections don’t kick in until regulations are developed, and there’s more consultation and engagement to be held. When are the details going to be determined in the prescribed regu- lations that relate to depreciation reports? This is a really important piece, a self-declared piece of the government’s action plan. People have a right to know when. What is the target date?

To say, “We’re working on it quickly. We want it to happen as soon as possible, ” is not good enough. Are we talking weeks? Are we talking months? Are we talking before the end of the year? Are we talking next spring? What does that timeline look like for the creation of the prescribed regulations around depreci- ation reports? Hon. S. Robinson:I already said that our intent is to — we’ve been in consultation — carry on these regulatory conversations imminently, and our intention is to have regulations in place this fall. T. Stone:Okay. So this fall. We’ll hold the government to that.

I would encourage, on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of strata owners out there, moving as exped- itiously as possible. Let’s try to get these regulations developed sooner than the fall, if possible. That concludes my questions on

section 4, Mr. Chair. The Chair:Are there any further comments by mem- bers on

section 4? Are there any further remarks to address

section 4, Members? Wednesday, July 22, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12167

Section 4 approved. On

section 5. The Chair:Any comments on

section 5, Members? T. Stone:One question on

section 5. If the provisions in

section 5 are meant to encourage repairs, what is the timeline that we might see this provision have a meaning- ful impact on strata insurance rates? [3:15 p.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:Again — we spoke about this yes- terday — we need to recognize that the dynamics driving these increases are playing out in the private insurance industry and that government itself doesn’t regulate pri- cing. The issue of insurance is complex, and it is impacted by many factors, including the cost and availability of rein- surance in the global market. This amendment and others….

What it aims to do is to give strata owners and corporations more transparency and tools so that they can plan and be more proactive. They can do the investments that they need to do. That will deal with the high costs of strata insurance, and it will bring relief over time. This is an important step. I try to imagine that if, ten years ago, some of this work had been done, perhaps there wouldn’t be such challenges today. T. Stone:Well, even three years ago, we weren’t seeing increases in strata insurance premiums in the neighbour- hood of 30, 40, 60, 100, 500 percent like we are today.

This crisis has unfolded on the minister’s watch. It has unfolded on the government’s watch. The solutions, the suggestions that we’ve been trying to bring forward, including the amendment that has been proposed by the member for Abbotsford West yesterday, were to urge the government to seize this opportunity to signal the need for some significant change here, to be proactive in positioning some significant change. That’s what we’re trying to do. The government has opted not to embrace that suggestion. I guess my last question on this

section 5, just kind of a recurring theme through the back and forth we’ve had on this bill up to this point, is: what aspect of this partic- ular change, what aspect of this

section 5 is actually going to provide strata owners relief in the immediate or in the short term? [3:20 p.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:First of all, I want to say that the sug- gestion that we canvassed yesterday won’t provide imme- diate relief, as the member somehow seems to suggest. As I pointed out yesterday in my comments on that previous section, it would actually make things worse, not better. Right now there is opportunity for self-insurance, and we are in conversation with…. And we’ve heard, certainly, from private organizations that are interested in exploring that further.

That’s certainly an opportunity, going for- ward. So for him to suggest that their suggestion somehow is the magic pill or the silver bullet, I think, is not accurate, because that, too, would pose some significant challenges. Having said that, I think that with this particular sec- tion, what we’re doing here is that the majority vote requirements, as opposed to the usual three-quarter vote requirement, will help to support the maintenance and repair of the common property and common assets of the strata corporations.

Some strata owners have argued that the use of the phrase “as recommended in the most current depreciation report” means that the majority vote threshold, permitted under

section 96(b)(i)(A)(II), only applies during the same year that the depreciation report estimated that an action was needed. For example, the depreciation report may advise that the windows are expected to require repla- cing in, let’s say, 2025, given their estimated service life. Deleting the word “as” removes the implication that the estimated year is essential to the ability to proceed with the majority vote. Stratas need a more clear and flexible legislative author- ity to repair or replace items, regardless of the date estim- ated in the depreciation report.

Without needing a three- quarter vote of the owners, it allows stratas to do the neces- sary repairs. That, I have to say, will make a difference in the risk assessment, and that, in the long run, will certainly be a benefit to them on their insurance rates. T. Stone:I’m not wanting to debate the amendment that was tabled yesterday. We’ll have a vote on it later today. But again, I come back to the very different approaches here. We have tried, on the one hand, to offer some suggestions that would provide some immediate financial relief.

We suggested the waiving of the 4.4 percent insurance premi- um tax on strata insurance premiums. The minister and government have said no to that. We suggested an extension of the property tax defer- ment program to include strata owners under significant financial distress. No interest in doing that with govern- ment. We’ve suggested a water damage prevention program that would help strata owners make the kinds of invest- ments in maintenance and upgrades to prevent major water damage events from occurring in the first place. No interest in the government in doing that.

On a separate track, yes, we did suggest yesterday, through the amendment from the member for Abbotsford West, a concept that would represent systemic change. It’s a very proactive suggestion that, if examined, would result in systemic change, as opposed to the minister’s approach, the government’s approach, which has been to, effectively, focus on tinkering with the Strata Property Act through sections like this one. 12168 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, July 22, 2020

The minister cannot say it would provide immediate relief because it doesn’t provide immediate relief. There’s nothing in this bill that provides any relief here and now for seriously financially distressed strata owners. That’s highly regrettable. [3:25 p.m.] With that, I don’t have any further questions on sec- tion 5, Mr. Chair.

Section 5 approved. On

section 6. T. Stone:Section 6 is the

section that will enable strata corporations to access their contingency reserve funds in order to obtain and maintain insurance. My first question to the minister would be this. We’ve heard — and I’m sure she has as well — from a lot of strata owners who have said: “Great. We are facing a 200 percent increase in our premium this year. Sure, there’s a $70,000 gap in what we had budgeted for insurance this year as a result of that, versus the actual costs that have come in.

So sure, let’s go and access our contingency reserve fund. ” The strata in question might have the dollars in their reserve fund to do exactly that in the first year. The question to the minister is: what do they do in the second year? What do they do in the third year? What do they do beyond this first year if, in actual fact, a strata corporation has substantially depleted or even entirely depleted their contingency reserve fund in order to pay for insurance?

What are they supposed to do in the subsequent year, barring the unimaginable reality of these international insurance companies coming forward next year and say- ing: “Oh, good news. We know we hit you with a 200 per- cent increase to your premium last year. We’re going to give that all back to you and reduce your insurance premi- ums this forthcoming year by a couple of hundred per- cent”? What are stratas supposed to do beyond that first year, where they likely have significantly depleted their reserves that are in that fund? [3:30 p.m.] Hon. S.

Robinson:I think it’s important to note that the act does require that the strata corporation obtain and maintain property and liability insurance. Their bylaws may require other coverages as well. But in some cases, the necessary expenditures to get insurance can exceed what was approved in the budget. Strata corporations may also be made aware of changes to insurance coverage without enough lead time to give proper notice and draft resolu- tions to be voted on at a general meeting. They have to bring everyone together, and that can take a significant amount of time to do that.

This amendment would clearly indicate the prevention of significant loss. That includes expenditures required to obtain and maintain required insurance. This is available in future years as well. This is when they haven’t budgeted sufficiently for insurance, and they need to act. There is an opportunity here for them to do so. [R. Chouhan in the chair.] T. Stone:Well, I understand that. My question was: what is the strata corporation supposed to do in year 2 if, in year 1, they substantially depleted their contingency reserve fund in order to cover insurance costs?

What are they supposed do in subsequent years if their insurance rates continue to remain at that high level or, God forbid, continue to increase further? Hon. S. Robinson:Again, I know that strata corpora- tions spend time putting together a budget based on good data about what the costs are going to be for the coming year. That is how they develop what strata fees are. This particular amendment is…. Should there have been a situ- ation where there hasn’t been sufficient budget….

I do imagine that many that have been challenged with the insurance premiums are getting good data around what they can expect for the coming year so that they can budget appropriately. This is a change so that, should it not be sufficient, they can access their reserves in order to cov- er those costs. The Chair:The member for Kamloops–South Thomp- son. T. Stone:Thank you, Chair. Welcome to the chamber. Okay.

To the minister, I’m again just looking for an answer to the question. [3:35 p.m.] Considering that the minister has made such a big deal about the ability that this legislation provides, or will provide should it be passed, for a strata corporation to be able to access its contingency reserve fund to pay insur- ance costs, when you run the numbers on any one of the scenarios, the hundreds of stratas that have contacted us — I know the minister is receiving the same letters, because they typically are sent to her and copied to me or vice versa — this will result in a lot of these strata corpor- ations depleting their contingency reserve fund.

They won’t have anything in that contingency reserve fund, or they certainly won’t have the ability to access those funds in a subsequent year. Perhaps this measure is not the panacea. It’s not the viable solution to the skyrock- eting insurance challenge that’s facing so many strata cor- porations. Does the minister agree? Hon. S. Robinson:I never said that this was a panacea. What we said was that we were going to give stratas tools to address a current situation, based on an interim report. There’s more information coming with the final report, but Wednesday, July 22, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12169

in the meantime, we felt it critical to act to give strata cor- porations more tools, to bring in more transparency. This is one more tool to give strata corporations the flexibility that they need to manage their budgets and to address the maintenance of their buildings. T. Stone:Let the record show that the minister was not able or willing to answer the question: if a strata corpor- ation depletes their contingency reserve fund in the first year, how are they supposed to access it the second year if their insurance costs haven’t gone down — or, God forbid, have gone up?

My next question on this point would be this. We just spent a considerable amount of time talking about depre- ciation reports and the minister’s decision to remove the ability to defer a depreciation report, except for some pre- scribed circumstances which we won’t know about for many months. The whole argument that the minister makes about the underlying policy rationale for removing the ability to defer depreciation reports — again, as she says over and over — is about ensuring that strata corpor- ations are investing in the maintenance and the upgrades of their buildings.

That requirement in this bill seems to be greatly at odds with the provisions of this

section 6, where the minister is essentially saying, “Strata corporation, go ahead and access your contingency reserve funds, ” the very funds that are supposed to be there for strata corporations to be able to fund unplanned or significant upgrades and maintenance issues that take place in their buildings. Does the minister agree that there is a conflict here, in terms of the underly- ing policy purpose of the new depreciation report require- ments, as detailed in sections 4 and 5 of this bill, and the contingency reserve fund provisions of this

section 6? Is there a contradiction here, Minister? [3:40 p.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:This

section is about giving strata corporations flexibility. If they haven’t been adequately putting reserves away, then they really do have difficult decisions to make, but this gives them some flexibility in the short term to help get them on the right track. The other thing I think it’s important to recognize…. This is the tension. The member is accurate. There’s ten- sion between these two principles. But it’s also why, as part of consultation, we need to talk about a phase-in period so that stratas have the time to adjust. We recognize the importance of doing that. T. Stone:Enough said, I suppose, on this

section — oth- er than to say again that there does seem to be tremend- ous inconsistency in the depreciation report changes that this bill includes, as well as the contingency reserve fund changes. They seem completely at odds with one another. That concludes my questions on

section 6. If there’s no one else that has questions on

section 6 — I don’t have any questions on

section 7 either — I’ d be happy to move to

section 8. Sections 6 and 7 approved. On

section 8. T. Stone:This

section deals with an important change to the current requirement of insurance coverage being in place that provides for full replacement-cost coverage. I have a few questions here. I guess the first question would be: what would be the circumstances that the minister might have in mind that would allow for not requiring insurance at full replace- ment value? [3:45 p.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:This

section is about ensuring that strata councils that are unable…. We’ve been hearing about some that are unable to get full replacement insur- ance, through no fault of their own, and are no longer compliant with the Strata Property Act. I want to make it really clear to the House that this is not lowering the replacement-value requirement. We expect that strata councils will make every effort to get full replacement coverage, if possible.

This change is being made to acknowledge the current market realities and prevent strata councils from being non-compliant with the Strata Property Act through no fault of their own. T. Stone:Just to be absolutely clear, the intention here is for stratas to go out and seek 100 percent replacement cost coverage. If they can’t obtain that…. We know that a growing number of stratas are finding themselves, as the minister says, offside with the legislation. They’re finding themselves in a position of not having full replacement- cost coverage.

I think the latest numbers I saw, industry analysts were suggesting that there’s a growing and significant number of stratas that are kind of in that ballpark of 60 to 70 percent coverage that they’re able to attain, leaving a 30 to 40 percent gap. Is it then going to be a continued expectation that stratas will seek 100 percent replacement-cost coverage and that only in the situations where they can’t obtain it, there will be some provisions that will allow for that to happen and for the strata to not be offside with the requirements in the Strata Property Act? Hon. S. Robinson:That’s correct. T.

Stone:What does the minister believe is an adequate level of replacement cost coverage, if it’s not 100 percent? Let me back up and rephrase that. First, does the minister believe that 100 percent replacement-cost coverage is absolutely the required ideal on a go-forward basis? 12170 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, July 22, 2020

[3:50 p.m.] Hon. S. Robinson:We certainly do believe, of course, that 100 percent is the ideal. This amendment is about, again, keeping strata corporations from being offside of the legislation. So it does reflect current market realities. Having said that, we do have work to do to get the mar- ket working better so that stratas can get 100 percent cov- erage. That’s work that we’re continuing to do. We’re look- ing forward to the final report from the BCFSA that will help to do that, as well as continuing to consult with all sides of this current situation to address the significant increase in insurance rates.

I have a sense of where the member might be going, so I’ll wait to hear his next question. T. Stone:Well, we’re in big trouble if you can read my mind, Minister. My next question would be this. If it’s the minister’s view that 100 percent replacement cost coverage is the ideal, and there is, I think, some intent here to provide a bit of a stopgap measure so that stratas that can’t obtain that 100 percent are not offside with the Strata Property Act…. If 100 percent is unattainable, what is the minister’s view of what an acceptable level of replacement cost coverage would be?

Certainly, there must be some consideration in terms of what that prescribed regulation would actually say. Will the ministry and the government be good with 60 percent replacement cost coverage, 70, 80? What level of replacement cost coverage would the minister deem to be acceptable if it isn’t 100 percent? [3:55 p.m.] Hon. S. Robinson: Stratas have the opportunity to determine what they’re most comfortable with in terms of their insurance needs. This is about making sure they’re not offside.

What I can share with the member is that we’ve certainly been hearing that the Insurance Bureau has been working very closely, one-on-one, with strata corporations that are struggling to get full replacement value. They’ve been bringing partners to the table to get as much insur- ance as they can. Really, at the end of the day, it’s up to the strata corporations to make the decisions that best meet their needs. T. Stone:What replacement cost coverage percentage is the minister comfortable with?

I appreciate that she has said that strata corporations will have a comfort level in terms of a level they’re comfortable with. What level of comfort will the minister have with respect to a per- centage of replacement cost coverage that is less than 100 percent? Again, we really tried to hammer this point home in second reading. The reality is that strata corporations, strata owners, are making these gut-wrenching financial decisions, like, now.

They’re making significant decisions that impact the financial realities of their strata corpora- tion now, in light of the massive increases in their premi- ums and so forth. It’s cold comfort to these folks to hear that there is going to be a consultation. There’s going to be engagement. It’s going to be months down the road before we know where this is going to land. If it’s not 100 percent, again, is the minister comfort- able with 80 percent? Is she comfortable with 60 per- cent? What is that percentage that the minister would be comfortable with, for replacement cost coverage, if it’s not at 100 percent?

Hon. S. Robinson:The member was talking about the tough decisions that strata corporations need to make. They are tough decisions. They’re very, very difficult. This amendment is about not wanting to add to their stress by not only having to make tough decisions, but we don’t want them to be offside of the act. This is about making sure that they’re not offside of the act and reducing some of that stress. I want to be really clear. It’s not about my comfort level. It’s about how stratas…. Making sure that they’re not doubly burdened, and this relieves them of that burden. T.

Stone:The reality is that strata corporations, strata owners, are making financial decisions as we speak and are making them based on what the current rules provide for. [4:00 p.m.] A change in the full replacement cost coverage amount — presumably, it should have an impact on the premiums that are charged to that strata corporation and, through the corporation, the strata owners by their fees. Under- standing what percentage the ministry, the minister, will consider acceptable….

At the end of the day, it’s the min- ister and the government that she’s part of that will make the decision around when those prescribed regulations are developed — what that acceptable percentage of full replacement cost coverage will be if it’s not 100 percent. I think that’s the clarity that we’re striving to achieve here. I guess a related question would be this: what process does the minister envision putting in place that will facilit- ate this piece? As the minister has explained, to this point, the intention will continue….

She can correct me if I’m wrong on any of this, but what I’ve heard is that the inten- tion for a strata to seek to obtain 100 percent of full replacement cost coverage will still be there. However, if they’re unable to obtain it, there will be provisions that will ensure that they’re no longer offside with the act. What does that process actually look like? What is the minister contemplating? A strata corporation finds out from their broker that they’re no longer covered at 100 percent. The best that can be offered is now, you know, 70 percent cost coverage.

Is that strata going to have a certain timeline that they have to go to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, to advise them in writing? Is there going to be an Wednesday, July 22, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12171

adjudication process or some kind of evaluation process? What does the timeliness of that look like? Can the minister speak to the process of how this — let’s call it an exemption from the 100 percent full cost replace- ment coverage requirement — would actually, in practical terms, be rolled out for strata corporations that are unable to obtain the 100 percent? Hon. S. Robinson: The strata council will have to make every effort, and they have to demonstrate to their members — they are accountable to their members; that means the owners — that every attempt has been made to get full replacement value.

If a member doesn’t believe that that’s been the case, then they can go to the civil res- olution tribunal. Again, this is about unburdening them. We’ve heard from just a handful of councils that they were unable to get 100 percent coverage, so in this case we said: “Okay, we’re not going to hold you to the legislation, but you still have to make best efforts. ” And they have to be accountable to their members, because that’s ultimately who they’re accountable to. [4:05 p.m.] T.

Stone:Well, again, just for clarity here, I think we all understand that the councils are accountable to their members, or the owners of the strata. What does the pro- cess look like, in practical terms, for a strata corporation being essentially deemed by the province — through the Strata Property Act, presumably, or in related regulations — to be off the hook insofar as meeting the 100 percent replacement cost coverage requirement? What does that process look like?

If it’s the government’s intention to maintain the 100 percent replacement cost coverage requirement, all the while allowing for exceptions where a strata council or a strata corporation cannot obtain the 100 percent, at what point…? How does the process actually unfold, in prac- tical terms, that provides the strata corporation, from gov- ernment, with, essentially, a green light that the corpora- tion can proceed with less than 100 percent replacement cost coverage? Hon. S.

Robinson:The strata corporation will have to demonstrate that they’ve made best efforts, and they’ll have to communicate that to the members. There’s another item later on in this bill that speaks to material changes and communicating clearly and early with members so that they have an understanding about what the material changes are, as well as demonstrating to their membership their best efforts to receive as close to 100 percent as pos- sible if they could not get 100 percent coverage. They need to be able to demonstrate that, again, to their membership. T.

Stone:Is the approach of government, then, going to be that the 100 percent replacement cost cove

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20200722pm-Hansard-n346
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20200722pm Hansard n346
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7ce1a5db4d9ff95fc513ab279136b12a22be4437

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