British Columbia Hansard — 18 November 2021, p.m., Issue 133 (42nd Parliament, 2nd Session)

20211118pm-Hansard-n133

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session, 42nd Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES (HANSARD) Thursday, November 18, 2021 Afternoon Sitting Issue No. 133 THE HONOURABLE RAJ CHOUHAN, SPEAKER ISSN 1499-2175

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

Mike Farnworth Minister of Advanced Education and Skills Training...........................................................................................................Hon. Anne Kang Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries......................................................................................................................Hon. Lana Popham Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Housing .............................................................................................Hon.

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

Lisa Beare Minister of Education .................................................................................................................................................. Hon. Jennifer Whiteside Minister of Energy, Mines and Low Carbon Innovation ........................................................................................Hon. Bruce Ralston, QC Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy............................................................................................. Hon.

George Heyman Minister of Finance .......................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Selina Robinson Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development ................................................ Hon. Katrine Conroy Minister of State for Lands and Natural Resource Operations................................................................................. Hon.

Nathan Cullen Minister of Health and Minister Responsible for Francophone Affairs.............................................................................Hon. Adrian Dix Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation .......................................................................................... Hon. Murray Rankin, QC Minister of Jobs, Economic Recovery and Innovation....................................................................................................... Hon.

Ravi Kahlon Minister of State for Trade...............................................................................................................................................Hon. George Chow Minister of Labour ...................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Harry Bains Minister of Mental Health and Addictions.............................................................................................................. Hon.

Sheila Malcolmson Minister of Municipal Affairs ............................................................................................................................................. Hon. Josie Osborne Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction........................................................................................... Hon. Nicholas Simons Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport .................................................................................................................. Hon.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONTENTS Thursday, November 18, 2021 Afternoon Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members..................................................................................................................................................... 4161 Standing Order 35 ................................................................................................................................................................... 4161 Response to severe weather events P . Milobar P . Alexis S. Furstenau K. Paddon S. Bond H. Sandhu J. Sturdy M. Dykeman M. de Jong Hon. L. Popham J. Tegart A. Olsen Hon. M.

Farnworth Orders of the Day Committee of the Whole House............................................................................................................................................ 4171 Bill 23 — Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2021(continued) J. Rustad Hon. K. Conroy L. Doerkson C. Oakes I. Paton A.

Olsen Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of the Whole House............................................................................................................................................ 4185 Bill 22 — Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act, 2021(continued) T. Stone Hon. L. Beare B. Banman S. Furstenau

THURSDAY , NOVEMBER 18, 2021 The House met at 1:04 p.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Introductions by Members M. Dykeman: I have the honour today of introducing and welcoming to the Legislature an intern, right up there: Ty Huston from KPU. He is with my office for a little bit, and I have the privilege of hosting him here today. In Feb- ruary, he’s off to my alma mater of Macquarie University to study international studies. I was wondering if the House could please make him feel very welcome. [1:05 p.m.] Standing Order 35 RESPONSE TO SEVERE WEATHER EVENTS P .

Milobar:I move: [That, pursuant to Standing Order 35, the House do now adjourn for the purpose of discussing a matter of definite and urgent public importance — specifically, the response of the Government of Brit- ish Columbia to the emergency flooding and landslide situation that has unfolded across our province.] Mr. Speaker:Continue. P . Milobar:Thank you. As the member who put forward the submission to hold this emergency discussion, I want to set the stage for why it’s so important and the types of issues that require can- vassing at this point in time.

Over the past few days, we’ve observed a number of fail- ures on the part of this government, which has tried to absolve itself, once again, by using terms like “unpreceden- ted” to describe this event. The Premier, the Solicitor Gen- eral and other ministers have tried to convince British Col- umbians that the magnitude of this event could not have been predicted. However, there were, indeed, warnings.

On Friday, CTV Vancouver quoted an Environment Canada weather statement, which read: “ A series of mois- ture-laden systems associated with an atmospheric river from the Pacific will begin arriving Saturday evening and bring heavy rain to the south coast. ” Sounds like a pretty accurate and ominous prediction to me. Washington state clearly took the situation seriously. On Sunday, November 14, only two kilometres from the Sumas Prairie, Whatcom County issued an emergency proclamation due to flooding as a result of national weath- er service forecasts.

By 3:40 that day, a flood warning for the Nooksack River was issued by the National Weather Service division in Seattle. By Monday, November 15, you could hear the flood sirens from Sumas and Abbotsford, two kilometres away. At 11:31 that morning, the National Weather Service divi- sion in Seattle highlighted record levels on the Nooksack River. By 3:30 that day, the river had reached flood stage. Governor Jay Inslee then issued a severe weather emer- gency proclamation. Keeping an eye on what was happening in Washington state should have been critical to the B.C. government.

They should have known the danger that could follow if the Nooksack River overflowed. And do you know why? Because they were warned about that as well. The city of Abbotsford issued a report a year ago outlining this very concern. Unfortunately, that’s not the only report this govern- ment has chosen to ignore. We know there was a climate change risk assessment report that this government com- missioned and received in 2019. That report warned of this very thing. It was also ignored by this government.

We know that the report was clear about the dangers and risks we face in British Columbia, but we don’t have any indica- tion this government has taken any action of that report. Speaking of the lack of action, and given the multiple emergencies of this past year, one has to wonder why B.C. has never used the Alert Ready system. After all, when we look at other jurisdictions…. Since 2019, these alerts have been issued 80 times in Alberta, 101 times in Saskatchewan and 202 times in Ontario. That’s just in the last two years. Here in B.C., the system wasn’t used after the forest fires of 2018.

Nor during this summer’s wildfire season, where we saw fire destroy Monte Lake and nearly the entire vil- lage of Lytton, which also tragically claimed two lives. Nor during the deadly heat dome. That event tragically took 600 lives in British Columbia, 600 people who were mainly frail and elderly residents. And now, in the midst of abso- lutely devastating flooding and slides and other damage, it hasn’t been used yet again.

We are in a situation here in British Columbia where not only does this government pretend it has been warned about impending disasters; it doesn’t even take action on prevention, on reducing the impacts of these events on communities. It hasn’t taken action to employ the very warning systems that, during an emergency, can stave off additional complications and damages. [1:10 p.m.] British Columbians are losing faith in this government’s ability to handle a crisis and to have their backs when the worst happens.

On so many fronts these days, this govern- ment seems to want to take a “government knows best” approach. However, when it comes to disasters, this gov- ernment is nowhere to be found, preferring to leave resi- dents and communities to fend for themselves. In short, this government hasn’t been doing enough, 4161

and it must do more. It has to stop blaming others and start taking responsibility to help residents in the throes of a disaster. It’s my hope, through this emergency debate, we’ll get to the bottom of why that is and how we can fix it. P . Alexis:I would first like to acknowledge that I’m speaking to you from the traditional territories of the Lək̓ ʷəŋin̓ əŋ people, the Songhees and the Esquimalt First Nations.

In a year and a half that has seen the people of this great province face so much — a pandemic, a heat dome, swarms of devastating wildfires and more — we now see that Mother Nature was not quite done with us yet. In the midst of all the chaos and loss we’ve seen as a result of the catastrophic flooding in the Fraser Valley, I was moved by the speed and passion in which so many answered the call to yet again help.

I consider myself lucky to stand with my colleagues here, where I know I’m a stone’s throw from ministers and their staff, all who will hear me out and understand what’s happening right now in the valley and the help that we need. That’s not who I want to talk about today. Today I want to talk about the people that we serve. I say “we” specifically, because the courage and generosity we have seen on display luckily have no respect for our con- stituency boundaries. We see it from neighbour to neigh- bour.

The people of Abbotsford and Mission once again proved their generosity and commitment to community and volunteerism. I spoke with the Abbotsford mayor yesterday. He’s stunned at the offers of help pouring in. The Abbotsford switchboards are getting jammed with 2,000 calls a day by people wanting to give of themselves for their fellow man. This morning at 7:30, the mayor, at the press conference, announced that he had set up, on the city website, a place to donate. There are so many…. There’s just an outpouring of generosity.

Y esterday I had a call from a large-scale veterinarian who was wanting to volunteer to help. I connected him with the right people. We see it in the Hope Pizza Place, owned by Rupinder and Dewan Davesar, who went above and beyond to help, firing up the restaurant’s one gas oven amid a power out- age. They baked pies, and with the aid of local volunteers, delivered them for free, in the rain, to the occupants of cars stranded, thanks to the mudslides. We see it in our farmers helping their fellow farmers.

As the Sumas Prairie region of Abbotsford was ordered to evacuate, farmers and neighbours joined together, using motorboats, canoes, dinghies and jet skis to move dozens of trapped cows, one by one, to the safety of higher land. I shared one of the stories on Facebook. The poster had talked about how emotional she was to see each trailer come, carrying the single cow or calf that had been just through an incredible ordeal — just unbelievable and remarkable endeavours.

We’ve seen it city to city — 300 volunteers, many from the Chilliwack-Abbotsford border, working all night to make a sandbag wall protecting a pumphouse from taking on additional water. This crucial work bought just enough time so additional people could be rescued — 184 of them that night alone. So many volunteers showed up that crews were overwhelmed. In Surrey, dozens of volunteers came together at the Gurdwara Dukh Nivaran Sahib to prepare and cook over 3,000 meals on Tuesday. These meals were flown out to Hope on Wednesday by a helicopter that was rented, thanks to countless generous donations.

I want to add that we know many of these stories because people shared them on social media. There they spread like mercury. For all the misinformation and self- promotion and out-and-out nonsense these sites often host, this was a testament to their true power, a power that can still be used for good. Finally, I must acknowledge and thank our first respon- ders, our volunteers and our municipal and federal part- ners who have gone above and beyond in service to their communities.

This is an absolute crisis, one whose true impact is still unknown and one from which we will spend years recovering. [1:15 p.m.] I can’t say enough about how well everyone worked together, a true spirit of cooperation. In fact, yesterday the mayor of Abbotsford assured citizens that he had, indeed, everything the community needed from the province. All these stories and examples serve as a reminder that when the chips are down, people, at their core, are still good. I don’t know how you can be any manner of a public servant and not hold on to that belief, but it’s still so grati- fying to see it confirmed.

I can’t wait to get back to Mission tonight and meet in Abbotsford tomorrow with community leaders and stakeholders and continue getting them the help that they need. More than that, I can’t wait to speak with the people on the ground to hear what they’ve been through and to do my part to help. No matter how bleak or catastrophic a situation may appear, it does not entirely own or rob us of our shared humanity. It cannot take away our freedom to respond and our power to take action. I’m proud to stand here with those who took action decisively and quickly in service to their province.

There is no higher calling, no greater duty. S. Furstenau:It really is impossible to capture how dev- astating these floods are. We will all be coming to grips with the loss and grief over the months and years to come. But let’s be clear. This emergency is a climate emergency. In his book A Good War, Seth Klein talks about what an actual emergency response to the climate emergency 4162 British Columbia Debates Thursday, November 18, 2021

would be. There are four key markers, he argues: spend what it takes to win, create new economic institutions to get the job done, shift from voluntary and incentive-based policies to mandatory measures, and tell the truth about the severity of the crisis and communicate a sense of urgency about the measures that are needed to combat it. I will argue that No. 4, telling the truth, is absolutely essential for the other three to occur. On this, we have failed. In this Legislature, climate change is talked about as if a suite of policy tools will be all that’s needed to mitigate and prepare for what’s coming.

In this Legislature, 83 MLAs stood up over and over again in 2019 to support legislation that provided a $6 billion incentive package to LNG Canada to increase our methane and greenhouse gas emissions. In this Legislature, both the government and opposition parties permitted Site C, which will wipe out some of our best agricultural land in this province and the capacity to provide food for up to one million people.

This project also undermined what we should be doing, which is to create local clean energy production in our communities so that we might have a level of local energy security in the face of these worsening and increasingly disruptive storms. In this Legislature, the truth about climate change is being ignored when we ignore the impacts of clearcut log- ging — the loss of biodiversity and the extirpation of spe- cies — and the need to treat the land with the respect it needs if we want it to help us survive these very not nat- ural disasters.

These disasters have been literally fuelled by our collective inability to act as though climate change is an emergency. The truth is that our world is going to continue to change at an accelerating rate.

It’s either going to be at a pace that we attempt to control — because we rapidly transition our economy so that our neighbourhoods, com- munities and, most importantly, our natural systems all require a fraction of the energy we use now; and that we are no longer knowingly wasteful; and that we are able to endure these storms that will keep coming regardless because we have put every decision, every policy and every piece of legislation through the lens of the climate emer- gency — or our world is going to change because the storms, droughts, fires, heatwaves become more frequent and more powerful, which they will.

Infrastructure will continue to fail, supply chains will continue to falter, and our resilience will continue to erode because we just aren’t able to generate the political will for the transformation that needs to happen. If we truly believe that we are in a climate emergency, then we don’t need amendments to forestry legislation in here. We need an absolute transformation about how we think about forests and how we must manage them, because we are in an emergency. Do we want more forestry jobs? Then no more clearcuts.

Only selective logging and Indigenous-led restoration, in every part of this province, of the ecosystems to restore biodiversity, carbon capture, water capture, habitat and the web of life that should exist in all forests. That’s decades of jobs that will make all of our communities more resilient and stronger. [1:20 p.m.] As humans, we have yet to truly rise to the truth and reality of climate change, but in emergencies, we rise to our very best selves. There will be endless stories of generosity, sacrifice, compassion and kindness from this disaster.

We are truly designed to operate in community in connection with each other. If we are to be truthful about climate change, then we need to orient our thinking and our behaviour in all ways towards that collective, community-oriented, compassion- ate and cooperative mindset. We must let go of the story that we are in competition with each other and embrace the truth that we need each other, that we need to see our communities as being only as strong as the people who are struggling the most.

Climate action has to be about a reorientation of how we see ourselves in society, not as individuals in competition but as people connected to each other in countless ways and connected to the natural world around us. It shows up in these emergencies. So let’s not let it go in between. K. Paddon: I’m always honoured to rise and speak about the amazing communities of Chilliwack and Kent. I’m privileged to be able to serve on the traditional, unceded territories of the Stó:lō people, including the Ts’ elxwéyeqw, the Pilalt and the Tait tribes, and I’m grateful to work for the communities there.

Today, as I rise, it is under different circumstances, as we’re all aware of the past days and the water and the land- slides that have hit the Fraser Valley, as well as the dif- ficulties around the province. When I left my home on Sunday to come serve here with my colleagues, there was no way for anyone to know that the storm and ensuing emergency would physically cut me off from my family, my kids, my home. Since Sunday, we have seen the dev- astation from the storm, flooding and landslides.

We’ve seen people stuck, cut off and scared, animals lost and trapped, livelihoods threatened and destroyed, fear, worry and anxiety. Although I hear the rain is falling in the Fraser Valley and we are still in the midst of this, I’m hearing progress. Thanks to all the work that was so quickly done, there are now routes for my family and my community to travel into town, and the incredible amount of work that has been done on the No. 7 Highway means that supplies and essen- tial travel from Vancouver can reach our Chilliwack and Kent communities once again.

We saw the Canadian air force helicopters and Search and Rescue rescue those stranded on Highway 7 as well. We saw people from the Chilliwack area rush to the aid in the sandbagging and protection of Barrowtown pumps Thursday, November 18, 2021 British Columbia Debates 4163

because they know how critical it is to our neighbours and to us. An entire road was built to help. The sandbags? They wouldn’t have been there if not for the path on Highway 7. My office has been reaching out to as many people and organizations as possible to check in to see what people need, to make sure that people are safe. It’s important that we all check in with each other, because maybe the person you’re connecting with needs something. Or maybe they don’t, but they probably know someone who does. That’s the thing about Chilliwack and Kent: we support each oth- er, and we look out for each other.

The regular official channels are working hard, this gov- ernment is working hard, and the amount and intensity of the work being done — across ministries, across regions, across municipalities — is staggering and inspiring. Great work is happening in official spaces, but it’s also happening in between the official spaces. As leaders serving our com- munities in real time, we’re texting each other to collabor- ate at all levels — mayors, chairs, councillors, Members of Parliament — and I’m grateful for my partners that help me serve my neighbours.

There are no lines, no barriers to us working with our communities. It’s relationships and a commitment to serve. I have had many opportunities to rise in this chamber and share about great things being done by good people in my community. Despite the ongoing situation and reality, I want to do the same today. We have some really incredible neighbours, and I’ d like to take some time to share with this House, as well as with the people back at home, just some of the stories I’ve been hearing about who we are in Chilliwack and Kent, and thank as many as I can in this short time.

Thank you to Squiala First Nation for opening the roads so that residents of Cultus Lake could get home and could get supplies. Thank you to Seabird Island for supporting the staging area necessary to work on a blocked highway. Thank you to the Chilliwack Chamber of Commerce and the Chilliwack Economic Partners Corp. for all you’re doing to organize volunteers, services and resources for those who need it most. [1:25 p.m.] Thank you to Molson Coors Fraser Valley Brewery for the donation of 100 tonnes of grain to feed animals that are being hosted on various farms around the community.

Thank you to the farming community for rallying around each other to house livestock, including at Heritage Park. Thank you to people from around Chilliwack and Kent who donated feed for the animals in those big barns. Thank you to the people of Agassiz and Harrison who stepped forward and still are helpfully bringing food, sup- plies and offering shelter. More than 275 people, including 50 kids, received warm, dry clothes, mental health support and shelter in the Agricultural Hall in Agassiz. Facebook, which is often a place where we get a lot of negativity, is doing some amazing things in my com- munity.

People are openly sharing where others can find necessities, encouraging each other to shop responsibly. People are opening their homes to strangers. People are offering to assist others who are at risk. They’re finding volunteers. Thank you to Camp Squeah in Hope, as well, for hosting our minor hockey players as they came off a gold-medal win from Kelowna. There are so many, and there is not enough time. I just want the people of Chilliwack-Kent to know that although I can’t be with them right now, I’ll continue to work here with the ministers and with the ministry staff.

I’ll continue making sure that their voices are heard, that the work is done quickly and that Chilliwack-Kent is represented here. S. Bond: As extreme weather events once again take a serious toll on people and property, it is our responsib- ility, as elected officials, to stand up and get people the help they so desperately need right now. There are Brit- ish Columbians everywhere stepping up to help friends, neighbours and complete strangers in these trying times.

From volunteers sandbagging the Barrowtown pump station, to generous supporters in gurdwaras feeding stranded drivers, to emergency responders putting in long hours, we thank them. Each and every one of you — along with the countless people evacuated, or those facing floodwaters and serious damage — deserves the government to step up. The ques- tions and concerns the opposition is raising should by no means undermine the courageous work and expertise on the ground by staff working around the clock, including right now.

But after a summer of wildfires, which saw an entire town destroyed just 141 days ago, and a devastat- ing heat dome that took the lives of nearly 600 British Col- umbians, people have lost trust in this government’s abil- ity to show leadership or properly communicate and warn people of impending disasters. Why has the government consistently failed to learn from past mistakes? Why has this become a pattern, time and time again, with the NDP? Why was the Alert Ready system once again not used in a time of crisis to warn British Columbians of impending dangers?

As noted by our House Leader, since 2019 there have been hundreds of emergency alerts used. Y et in British Columbia, not once has the Alert Ready system been used. People should be able to rely on government to clearly communicate in times of crisis. That is simply not happening here. When scientists warned government of the coming heat dome, why weren’t vulnerable British Columbians warned, with the Alert Ready system, of the severity of the coming temperatures?

When meteorologists warned government of the atmospheric river, and officials in Washington state and Alberta warned citizens of the coming flood and land- slide risks, why was the government missing in action, content in their belief that Twitter was the best way for British Columbians to get information? We all know it’s simply not good enough. Nor was the minister’s pledge to have the Alert Ready system ready for 4164 British Columbia Debates Thursday, November 18, 2021

next spring. There has been broad, governmental, systemic failure, and the demand for reviews and inquiries into this government’s constant failures is starting to pile up. British Columbians need to have full confidence that their government will communicate the risks as extreme weather events become more common in the coming years. The NDP waited until a regularly scheduled cabinet meeting on Wednesday to discuss whether declaring a provincial state of emergency was necessary.

We can say that that’s at least a slight improvement from the weeks of pressure — from the opposition, the media and a petition — that was required to get the NDP government to declare a state of emergency to help combat wildfires. [1:30 p.m.] On behalf of everyone who is shocked, terrified, by the events of this week, the heat dome this summer or the wildfires that raged until not that long ago, I am ask- ing this government to step up, show some leadership and commit to doing better, because British Columbians deserve better.

I do want to recognize that we appreciate the fact that the government agreed to this important emergency debate. I certainly look forward to hearing from ministers that are engaged in this process. We have three recommendations that we hope the gov- ernment will similarly agree to. One, we ask the govern- ment to initiate an all-party working group to review the provincial government’s response to emergencies and dis- cuss ways to improve government communications, dis- aster preparedness and emergency response protocols.

That is important, because government would benefit from the expertise and lived experience of members from across the House who live across the province. While our previous offers to work across party lines on vital issues like the opioid crisis and reconciliation have been rejected, now, if ever, is the time for the NDP to finally show lead- ership to collaborate with all parties. British Columbians deserve that and so much more.

Secondly, as of tomorrow, we ask the government to begin to hold regular public briefings to outline specific details relating to disaster coordination, emergency res- ponse and recovery. This would allow the media and all British Columbians to access expert officials and receive up-to-date information. Why is that important? Because we believe British Columbians deserve timely, accurate, detailed information. Finally, we ask that the government immediately exped- ite the actions and procedures to ensure that the Alert Ready system is activated and ready for use. Next spring simply isn’t good enough.

Together, let’s work to get British Columbians the help they need now and work to restore public confidence going forward. H. Sandhu: Before I start my remarks, I would like to extend my thoughts to everyone affected by recent ex- treme weather events — people who are currently evacu- ated, farmers who have lost their livelihoods. I also want to share my support for all my colleagues in this House from all sides whose ridings are deeply affected. I appreci- ate them for their ongoing efforts and tireless work to sup- port their constituents.

I have hundreds of relatives, friends and immediate family members — including my sister, her family and my in-laws — who live in the Fraser Valley, and some are deeply affected by these floods. I have been constantly in touch with my family and friends for the last few days, to check in and to hear their concerns. I was talking to my sister and some other family members and friends. They all told me that they are doing okay, staying calm and have full appreciation and trust in all levels of government and the emergency management team efforts.

My sister told me three days ago that they showed her three children the efforts of support, cleanup and mitiga- tions that were being made by our governments, contract- ors and volunteers. She said that the reason for them to do so was to teach her kids to be grateful and to count on their blessings for the systems we have in place. She said that gratitude, reassurance and calmness is so important when people, and especially children, are going through such crisis. Every single person I’ve been talking to is so grateful and understanding.

We even have friends whose farms are washed away, yet they are still so grateful for the efforts that have been put in place. They also felt so relieved to hear about our government’s recent relief funding an- nouncement. People who were stranded in Hope who came back also shared with me and my other colleagues that they’re so grateful for the supports they had received, including the essential supplies and food that was being delivered to them by helicopters.

However, they have expressed their thoughts and said that they do not want anyone to politicize this devastation to cause fearmongering, as these tactics never help people who suffer. It only adds to anxiety and panic-buying. Those are their words. I have also been in touch with my staff at my office — my constituents — and reached out to our local leaders to check in about the effects in the Interior and the supply chain issue.

I was notified that the supply chain is being restored through Alberta and other routes that are being opened. [1:35 p.m.] I was also so amazed to hear from local community members and leaders yesterday that they’re doing good, they’re appreciative and they want us to continue to focus in the areas that are deeply affected. We all know that the years 2020 and 2021 brought us so many challenges. It’s been a very tough time for everyone, but the people of British Columbia have proven repeatedly how resilient, strong, caring and dedicated they are. Thursday, November 18, 2021 British Columbia Debates 4165

Many Sikh temples from around the province are cook- ing and bringing meals for people. People lend their boats and equipment to help rescue citizens and livestock. Search and rescue teams have been working around the clock in challenging conditions. EMBC staff have been working tirelessly. They, too, had a few tough months. First it was fires and now this situation. We often get too caught up in finding fault and trying to criticize and forget to thank people working at all fronts.

Therefore, I would like to thank our EMBC team members and everyone involved from all government levels, the Canadian Armed Forces, equipment operat- ors and volunteers. I’ve seen my colleagues, MLAs from the affected areas, working around the clock. Some worked all night — yes, all night — to support people, and they still show up the next day to continue their work. I want to say to all of you that your work is not being unnoticed, and we are here to support you in any way we can.

I would like to conclude my remarks by saying thank you, everyone, for coming together, for supporting one another and for showing your support and resiliency. We will get through this again. As they say, what doesn’t break you will make you stronger. My life has taught me this les- son, and it was proven. Take care and thank you. J. Sturdy:Over the last few days, our province has seen incredible devastation.

We experienced a historic rainfall event that has caused widespread flooding, mudslides and debris flows in many part of the province, while washing away infrastructure that is so critical to connecting our communities. During these terrible events, we’ve seen communities inundated, people requiring evacuation, devastating im- pacts to agriculture and, worst of all, a loss of human life on the Duffey Lake Road, just north of my home in Pem- berton. My heart goes out to the family and friends of that individual.

Before I begin discussing what we think needs to hap- pen going forward, I do need to commend and acknow- ledge the actions of our first responders, local officials and everyone who gave their best to those in need. British Columbians are resilient and will come out of this stronger and more united than ever, but only if we better plan for the future and work harder to anticipate these events. The need to repair critical infrastructure will require a detailed plan and rapid execution. It will require strong and decisive action from government.

The steps it takes to repair infrastructure and rebuild communities and support those in need will be closely watched, not just in British Columbia but throughout our country. All major routes connecting the Lower Mainland to the rest of the province have been affected. We’ve seen sections of the Coquihalla Highway and Highway 1 sim- ply vanish, along with significant damage to major rail infrastructure. This is, for good reason, deeply concern- ing to British Columbians. Shelves in food stores across the province are being emptied.

To ensure supplies reach communities in need, this government will need to ensure our transportation corridors are operational as soon as possible. In the past, this government’s lack of leadership has been as glaring as this government has been unapologetic. The lack of forewarning and action during the heat dome and the Lytton fire highlighted a broad and systemic gov- ernment failure. Far too many lives were tragically lost. Hundreds are still waiting for appropriate supports months later. So far, this government’s anticipation and response to this week’s events have been all too familiar.

As we look to the future and the long road to recovery, all available resources must be deployed to ensure this process is not unduly delayed. [1:40 p.m.] Government must act swiftly and reach out to all con- tractors that are in a position to mobilize, not just pick and choose from those with preferential status. Troub- lingly, we understand that many road builders have yet to be contacted to understand equipment inventory and mobilization potential.

I really hope, for the sake of British Columbians, that this time around delay is minimized and that govern- ment takes the swift action needed to rebuild the critical infrastructure that citizens, communities and businesses rely on. Fires and the heat dome demonstrate that there is good reason for distrust in the minds of British Colum- bians. Repairs of this damaged infrastructure will likely take months, and knowing that, this government has a responsibility to all British Columbians to be prepared and have a detailed plan on how that recovery will look, going forward.

According to data from University of Calgary professor of economics Trevor Tombe, it’s estimated that between $300 million and $350 million is traded between British Columbia and the rest of Canada per day by rail or road. That’s roughly $2 billion to $2½ billion a week. So I cannot stress enough how critical it is that the road and rail cor- ridors be re-established with all dispatch. Going forward, I hope that this government will learn from its mistakes and better plan for the recovery.

It must work harder to anticipate these types of events, as our neighbours have; warn communities in advance; work to mitigate impacts; limit the damage to infra- structure where possible; and ensure that we are better prepared for events of this magnitude when, not if, they take place again in the future. Most of all, this government must work to prove to Brit- ish Columbians that they have their backs, that they have a plan, that they’ll work on behalf of British Columbians 4166 British Columbia Debates Thursday, November 18, 2021

and that British Columbians will feel taken care of during this response, during the recovery and into the future. M. Dykeman: I’m really honoured to have the oppor- tunity to stand here today and to talk about the challenges faced but also the important good-news stories that have taken place within my community of Langley East, and to thank the government for such a coordinated response. I’m recalling the night that the floods had really started to impact the Fraser Valley. My community has quite a bit of farming within it. As a new MLA…. I know that there was mention of being engaged in the process.

I think that MLAs are prob- ably some of the most engaged people in the process. We’re the ones that know our communities and reach out. What I was really struck by was the support from the ministries and how, when I called my community to identify where there were challenges still being faced, the support was there, within the ministries, to come together. I had the opportunity to spend the evening on the phone with Mayor Jack Froese and MP John Aldag. I had the opportunity to speak with farmers like David Davis from Davistead Farms. His family has farmed the historic Hudson’s Bay farm for over 100 years.

He helped to identi- fy all the other farms that it would be good to check in with. I was able to relay that back, as an MLA, to the government — able to just go back to ministers and say: “These are the challenges in our community. ” David Davis — his father Hugh remembers, actually, when Sumas was a lake, having been there for so long. He remembers the 1948 floods and all the challenges that have happened. One thing that kept coming back to me was how coordinated the communities were in getting ditches ready, getting streets cleaned and trees cut back to ensure that passages were still safe.

They talked about how they knew that there would be the support from the govern- ment, because people like our Minister of Agriculture were there to ensure that farmers knew what they needed to draw on. As we speak, right now, for instance, ministers are speaking to affected mayors. These are important things.

It’s really easy to sort of sit back and say: “Okay, well, I think this isn’t working. ” But I think it’s really important to listen to people who are on the ground, who know how it’s working. [1:45 p.m.] One of the things, too, that I was really struck by was that right now, there are over 20 emergency support ser- vices reception centres open. That’s an incredible, amazing coordinated effort in such a short period of time. This didn’t just happen by magic. This happened by a govern- ment that’s been committed to building capacity, building a plan.

Y ou have this coordinated effort by provincial and local governments. B.C. Housing, for example, is directly in- volved with getting people sheltered in Chilliwack, Hope, Abbotsford, Coquitlam, Kelowna, Kamloops and Prince- ton and getting people out of Merritt. They’re working tire- lessly to ensure that those emergency beds are available to people. These are more examples of the government com- ing together. I know that in my community, when I called back and spoke to people who work in the social services areas, they were clear. They have a coordinated effort.

They feel that they’re able to manage the needs of people in these difficult times. One thing that I did want to take a moment for — I see I have about a minute left — is to just highlight some of the really good news stories in my community. The Lang- ley Farmers Institute set up immediately a page to try to identify…. It’s easy to identify people that have an asso- ciation, but it’s harder to identify those smaller farmers. So the Farmers Institute, which I previously was presid- ent of, came together immediately and set up a page where you could come if you had something and also post if you needed something.

We had farmers like Tanya Shields Meade, who came in and said she could take horses, cattle, sheep and goats. We had Marie Elizabeth Branbit, who talked about hav- ing room for other livestock. Thunderbird equestrian centre took in horses. We had people come forward with offers of grain. But the most important thing was that as the MLA, working with the ministry, I was able to identify where those smaller groups were that maybe weren’t on the radar. That’s the role of a government that works together. It’s to fill in the gaps and make sure we have the resources there.

I can say that as the MLA for Langley East, I was proud to be able to work with such an understanding, committed and empathetic government through this. Nobody wants to see a disaster like this happen, but what I can say is that our community sure has felt suppor- ted. M. de Jong: Look, I’m glad we’re having this debate, that we’re taking this hour to assess the situation. I don’t actually know how many people are watching. The people most directly impacted are a little busy right now.

But if they are watching, and when they watch, I expect that as happy as they’ll be to have heard the expressions of pride about people coming together and the stories of heroism — which are, as always in these circumstances, remarkable and worthy of recognition — they’re really looking for two things today. They’re looking for information, and they’re looking for answers. Because we’re not through this yet. The water is rising again on Sumas Prairie.

So when this parliament adjourns its business and says, “Let’s devote ourselves to considering this, for only an hour…. ” We’re now down to ten minutes left, and we haven’t heard from a member of the executive council — not one — who are charged statutorily with providing the direction and who are the best placed to provide some of the answers and the information that people require. Thursday, November 18, 2021 British Columbia Debates 4167

[1:50 p.m.] Whether folks want to accept this or not, there is, in at least one part of this province, the

part I and the mem- bers for Abbotsford South and Abbotsford-Mission call home, an abiding feeling that someone dropped the ball because they didn’t get the information or the notice that would have allowed them to take the steps necessary not to entirely prevent but to alleviate the extent of the tragedy. Their neighbours on the other side of an international bor- der had an extra 48 hours. These families, these farmers who care so deeply about their animals — their cows, their chickens, their pigs….

That 48 hours wouldn’t have prevented, entirely, the mor- tality of their herds and their flocks, but boy, it would have made a difference, and they didn’t get it. They’re going to want to know why. People are already talking about, those that have been around…. One of the other members talked about 1948. In 1948, the dike in the Fraser River burst. But in those circumstances, in the absence of technology, herds were relocated. The notice was given, and herds were relocated to the Abbotsford airport and saved. That didn’t happen.

And although people are preoccupied today with cleaning up the mess and dealing with, potentially, further trauma, based on what we’re hearing now, they will want answers. They would like the government and members of the executive council to tell them today what steps are being taken to requisition the food and the water that they need to care for their livestock and their flocks. They haven’t heard that. They haven’t heard a thing. “Thank you; we’re proud, ” doesn’t help when you’ve got to feed your animals.

This is the opportunity to demonstrate and provide that information to the people who have been devastated by this event. I’ d never heard the term “atmospheric river. ” It sure doesn’t sound good. We now know it wasn’t good. I am desperately hopeful that we will hear from a mem- ber of the government, the cabinet, and that they will actu- ally provide some information that is useful and some answers for why the ball was dropped. Mr. Speaker:Members, keep an eye on the clock. Our debate hour will expire at 2:05. Hon. L. Popham:I’m happy to join this debate.

Unfor- tunately, I wasn’t here for the entire thing because we were on an emergency call with mayors of the southern province, one of two calls with mayors that we’re having today — the second, for more northern mayors, later this afternoon. I had to leave the meeting early, but I let them know that this was an important debate and that they could contact me to continue to get the information I was giving to them on that call. These have been an extremely difficult few days, a dis- aster that is continuing to unfold for the farming com- munity in the Fraser Valley.

We also see areas in other parts of British Columbia suffering due to the incredible amount of water that has come onto us over the last few days. We were just talking to a mayor up in the Cowichan Val- ley who was letting us know that farmers are suffering up there. We had some incredible offers of support from other mayors, like the community of Bulkley-Nechako wonder- ing when would be the time to send supplies. I can tell you, from the Ministry of Agriculture, we are continuing to assess what is needed by working with all commodity associations, individually with farmers.

There is not one moment in our day that we’re not connected to the communities that are affected and to the farmers that are still undergoing such a crisis. We know the water levels are rising again, and it’s an extremely stressful time. [1:55 p.m.] We have seen that in some areas, as the water receded over the past day, their access into barns is becoming avail- able. We know that we need to get food and water to barns. Some trucks were able to get through to some difficult routes, to some poultry barns.

And over the day — well, since yesterday — we’ve been managing a plan to airlift feed and water to dairy barns. Some of the city’s waterlines have come back on, and tests are being done to see if the dairy barns are able to get that water. If not, then we do have a plan in place to airlift containers and then to contin- ue using helicopters to charge those containers as needed. We know the next step is getting feed to those partic- ular barns. We have secured feed. We know many areas that are willing to send us feed right now, including feed that was secured at the Port of Vancouver that was on its way to China.

It looks like we may be able to reverse that and get it back into the Fraser Valley. The outpour- ing of support across the nation is incredible. Everybody is pulling together. It’s my request…. I have a request in this chamber, and I know that it’s easy to be partisan here. But what we need is information. We don’t want people to slip through the cracks. We have direct lines to the ministry that are avail- able. We have my own social media. I’ve asked people to directly message me so we can get back to them, and we’re doing that immediately. We also have an emergency management number: 1-800-663-3456.

It’s for folks that are looking to either donate or that need help. We are gathering information. I ask my colleagues across the way to please continue to give us information. That’s the best way we can move forward with the plan. When I’ve called many farmers, over the last few days, I asked them: “What do you need?” We know it’s water. We know it’s feed. We know it’s access. But really, they don’t know what they need for the future, because this situation is still unfolding. So as we assess the damage, as the emer- gency begins to subside, we will be with farmers to help them rebuild.

The province, the federal government, min- isters across Canada — everyone has pledged that we will 4168 British Columbia Debates Thursday, November 18, 2021

help these farmers get back up on their feet. Our job won’t be done until they do. I stand here. It’s an emotional day, but I also feel that our farming communities are resilient. They will be able to rebuild, but it won’t be without help from every single one of us in this chamber. J. Tegart:I appreciate the opportunity to speak in this debate today to outline some of the experiences of my constituents and to highlight the immediate supports they need so desperately from government. My riding is like ground zero.

An incredible heatwave setting the highest temperature across North America cul- minating in a fire that burned the community of Lytton to the ground. Wildfires in every corner of the riding this last summer and now floods that have the entire community of Merritt evacuated and every major highway leading into the Interior closed, with an uncertain number of possible losses of lives. People scattered and stranded between highway washouts. Communities hosting hundreds as supplies become limited. I find that I, unfortunately, have the experience needed to speak to this motion today.

So 141 days ago the lives of the people of Lytton were changed forever when a wild- fire ripped through their community. People escaped with only the clothes on their back. Two residents perished in the fire. As devastating as fire is, you can put it out. What we’re finding is that that was the easy part. It is the recov- ery, the support, the rebuild that has been the biggest chal- lenge to date.

The lack of government support and leadership, waiting for action, the need for support for local leaders, the dis- placed people who have moved numerous times, including those who were in Merritt during the flood and have had to move again. The desperate requests for planning and for information-sharing and transparency. Just 141 days — a community gutted by fire, and now those who were in Merritt are evacuated once again.

Y ou wonder how much people can take. [2:00 p.m.] Now my heart breaks for the people of Merritt and for the thousands of British Columbians currently displaced by catastrophic floods this past weekend. My greatest con- cern, as the water recedes, is that this government’s res- ponse to this event will follow the same pattern that people in my riding have seen in the last six months. All the right things are said in the moment but little action as time goes on. I hope I’m wrong. Please prove me wrong. But my experience makes me question the ability and commit- ment to deliver.

For weeks and months, my constituents have sat in motels, slept on couches, waiting for a plan and a timeline from this government on when they’ll see the supports promised to them. They want to know what steps are being taken to restore their communities and allow them to return home and within what sorts of timelines they can expect to see these promises carried out.

Now not only do these questions persist in the minds of the people of Lytton; they persist in the minds of thou- sands of other British Columbians who have lost their jobs, their homes, their farms and their communities to this second major disaster in six months. There must be fundamental changes to how we respond to emergencies, how we communicate to those impacted and how we support people in their greatest need. This is not something that can happen through drawn-out gov- ernment deliberations behind closed doors. We cannot tell people to hold tight or wait and see.

The government must learn from the mistakes of the past and improve our pro- vincial response and recovery and deliver the supports and actions that British Columbians deserve. I, again, ask the government to give serious consider- ation to the three points made by the opposition leader: an all-party working committee, public briefings in a time- ly way to everyone in British Columbia who is interested in knowing what is happening and, again, expediting the Alert Ready system. Thank you very much for the oppor- tunity to speak today. A.

Olsen:I appreciate the opportunity, with what little time we have left, to just make a couple of comments. I’ve been listening to this debate with interest. I heard a member here say that what doesn’t break you makes you stronger. I would have to say, from what I’ve heard from my constituents and people across British Col- umbia, that that’s just simply not the case. Many people are feeling very broken right now in communities in the north, south, east and west. We’re not feeling stronger after what we’ve gone through in COVID-19.

We’re not feeling stronger with what we’ve gone through with respect to the heat dome and the fires and now the floods. We need some reassurance, as the members have been talking about, that the emergency response is learning from one disaster, unnatural disaster, to the next. They need to know and be confident that the government understands that the decisions we make in these chambers have very real implications on the life and well-being of the citizens, the flora and the fauna in this province.

They want to know that if we are going to be making decisions to invest in fossil fuel extraction, we have a plan to deal with the impending climate impacts of those decisions. They want to know that if we are going to con- tinue clearcutting the mountainsides of this beautiful province, we have a contingency plan for the landslides that are inevitably going to follow. Everything that I’ve seen is that people don’t feel stronger from the process that this government has rolled out.

It’s like government after government after govern- ment has been rolling the dice, hoping that it will be the next government that confronts the particular challenge that this government today is facing. Thursday, November 18, 2021 British Columbia Debates 4169

[2:05 p.m.] We need to stop rolling the dice. We need to start put- ting in place the real mechanisms that are going to help British Columbians be resilient through the climate crisis, the climate emergency that we’re going to face. That includes making sure that British Columbians know the information. They need to know it when they need to know it, and they need to know where they need to go and when they need to go there. They need to be able to be prepared well in advance of an evacuation, not just mere seconds before they need to evacuate.

The challenge that is in front of this jurisdiction, in this House — this democratically elected chamber and every chamber across this country and, indeed, the House of Commons — is not a small challenge. It is a massive challenge. But it will not be embraced and we will not achieve it if we are not honest about the situation that we are in. That is why I’m asking that this government start with an honesty about the climate crisis that we are confronted with. HÍSW̱ ḴE SIÁM. Thank you. Mr. Speaker:Members, as per the Standing Order 35, although it only grants one hour of debate…. Hon. M. Farnworth:Hon.

Speaker, I noticed that when the member sat down, there was still, I think, a minute and 34 seconds on the clock, on the time. I would take that minute and 34 seconds on the clock, if there is…. Mr. Speaker:We can ask the House. Leave granted. Interjections. Hon. M. Farnworth:Someone said nay? Okay. Mr. Speaker:Y eah, please proceed. Just be short. Hon. M. Farnworth:I will be very short. I want to thank the comments made by both sides of the House in this important debate on the catastrophic weath- er events that we have had over the last number of days.

I have heard, carefully, comments that opposition mem- bers have made. I can inform, because I do know that there was some question as to where executive council members were. I can tell you that I was on the phone with mayors, who have been showing leadership in their communities in dealing with these events — the kind of leadership that all of us need to show in this House. There were questions to me around supply chains into the North and the central and on the Island. They were relieved to know that those supply chains were open.

They wanted to know what they could do, which is to amplify the message to the private sector what government is doing, which is those supply chains are in place and that people do not need to hoard and that people are working as hard as they can to get supplies to them. More importantly — more importantly — whenever there is an event like this, we must learn from those les- sons. We know that climate change is real. We under- stand that there are more and more events like this. That’s why government has been proactive in taking sig- nificant work underway. The member has raised three important points.

Well, she well knows that we have said that we are bringing in an Alert Ready system. Most importantly, the fundamental way in which we deal with emergencies in this province does have to change. That’s why we’re doing this significant rewrite of the Emergency Program Act so that we are able to deal with these significantly better in the House. That takes all of us, and that’s what every one of us in this chamber needs to do. Mr. Speaker:That ends the debate. Kamloops–South Thompson. T.

Stone: Happily, there was unanimous consent to extend the debate beyond the hour that is usually provided for by the standing order. Mr. Speaker:No. No, Member. T. Stone:I would seek the same consideration to parti- cipate in this debate as well. Mr. Speaker:Members, Standing Order 35 is very clear. Extension of time is not going to be allowed, so we regret to advise the member: that ends the debate now. Member. [2:10 p.m.] T. Stone:I’m seeking leave to participate in this debate. Leave not granted. Orders of the Day Hon. M.

Farnworth:In this chamber, we call Com- mittee of the Whole on Bill 23, Forests Statutes Amend- ment Act. In the Douglas Fir Room, committee on Bill 22, FIPPA act, continues. 4170 British Columbia Debates Thursday, November 18, 2021

Committee of the Whole House BILL 23 — FORESTS STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2021 (continued) The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 23; S. Chandra Herbert in the chair. The committee met at 2:12 p.m. The Chair:Thank you, Members. We’re going to take a short recess as we prepare for the committee stage of Bill 23. The House is in recess for five minutes. The committee recessed from 2:12 p.m. to 2:19 p.m. [S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.] On clause 33(continued). The Chair:Let’s draw this committee into session again, now that everybody is here and all well-met. We are on clause 33, which won’t be a surprise to any- one. J.

Rustad:I believe, before lunch and the emergency debate, we were talking about private land and that por- tion of the landscape planning. I’m just wondering, in terms of landscape plan, established by an order, takes effect…. [2:20 p.m.] I noticed here under subsection 2.21(4), it says: “ A forest landscape plan does not apply in relation to a woodlot licence. ” I’m just wondering what that means. Does that means woodlot licences would be excluded from forest landscape plans? Is that what that is suggesting? Hon. K. Conroy:Y es. J. Rustad:I’m very tempted to ask why, because it’s a one-word question.

That’s good to know in terms of woodlot licences being excluded. It is a little curious, of course, because there could be, obviously, restrictions. We’ll get to talking about some of the components that would potentially be in a landscape plan. But obviously, having holes in the middle of a landscape plan that could be — whether it’s part of fire mitigation or other types of activities…. So I will ask the minister why, but from a perspective of: as these plans develop and obviously could impact the areas around a woodlot licence, why would woodlot licences not be considered as part of the planning pro- cess?

Hon. K. Conroy:Woodlot owners have their own plan- ning processes. I think the member probably knows, hav- ing his own woodlot. They have their own process, so there’s no need to include them in the landscape planning process. Most are quite small. J. Rustad: I have to ask another question, though, around that, because woodlot licences aren’t the only licence that has plans. Community forests have plans. Woodlot tenures have plans. Tree farm licences have plans. Those, if I’m correct, are included in landscape planning.

So I’m just wondering why the difference in how a woodlot is managed versus other area-based tenures. Hon. K. Conroy: Woodlot licences, First Nations woodlot licences, community forest agreements under 800 hectares on the coast and 1,200 hectares in the Interior operate under woodlot licence plans due to their small size. That’s why they’re not included in this legislation. [2:25 p.m.] J. Rustad:That’s good to know in terms of that, for my own personal perspective but also, I’m sure, for wood- lot licence owners around the province.

Obviously, when there is a shift in plans and a shift in process, that can cre- ate a tremendous amount of angst and additional work. So thank you for that clarification. I’m just going to make sure that this question isn’t going to be asked in a different spot, although I think it will be. I think when we get to it, a little bit later, I’ll be curious, just in terms of the overlap between existing plans and the forest landscape plan, just in terms of the transition.

Obviously, if this is going to be a ten-year period, there’s going to be lots of time where people will want to be renewing, whether it’s forest stewardship plans or other types of plans, on their various licences. So there will be, obviously, an overlap, and you might end up with a period where a forest landscape plan is being worked on, but at the same time, a stewardship plan might have to be sub- mitted six months before the landscape plan may come into place, in which case the work wouldn’t be required, because you’ d have this new plan over top.

If this question needs to be asked at a different spot, let me know, but because we were just talking about the other area-based tenures, it made me ask, maybe, one of the questions about how the licences will be notified of pending landscape plans, how you’ll deal with that trans- ition so that you don’t end up forcing or causing this tre- mendous amount of work to be done once and then have to be updated into a new operational plan. Like I say, if that comes later, I can re-ask the question later, but if you want to deal with it now, that’s fine. Hon. K. Conroy:Y es, the member is right.

This is fur- ther along in clause 33. It is under 2.48, and it’s getting into the forest operations plan, so we can have those discus- sions when we get to that. Thursday, November 18, 2021 British Columbia Debates 4171

J. Rustad:I suspect, especially with my colleague from Saanich North and the Islands and also my colleague from Cariboo-Chilcotin, that we may be jumping around a little bit in

section 33, but I will do my best to try to walk through, as opposed to jumping back and forth, as we go with those questions. I appreciate the minister letting me know about where we should be asking that question. [2:30 p.m.] As we go through…. Okay. The other area-based ten- ures are part of that. I asked this question back under the

definitions, when we started talking about an area, the landscape area. I asked about the size and structure of landscape plans, but I want to ask that question again, just before we go into the preparation of the forest landscape plan and the components that go into it. Before I start asking questions about that, just to be clear in my mind, a landscape plan for tree farm licences would be a separate landscape plan. Is that correct? Or will landscape plans go across multiple tenures, poten- tially, depending on, I guess, some sort of process that per- haps the minister could outline?

And is the area of those landscape plans something that is a negotiation factor with First Nations, or is that something that’s brought to First Nations and asked for agreement on? Hon. K. Conroy:The intent is to have the forest land- scape plan align with the tree farm licence area or the timber supply area. And the issues the member raised around working with Indigenous nations is further on in clause 33. J. Rustad:Thanks for that clarity from the minister. It’s good to know because that’ll help to bring some continu- ity, in terms of management, particularly on things like tree farm licences.

As we go into the next requirements, which is the pre- paration of the forest landscape plan, there are objectives that are laid out in that plan. The role of the chief forester historically, if I am correct, has been…. When they do a timber supply review, there are a number of objectives that are provided from the minister’s office to the independent office of the chief forester outlining the priorities in terms of the minister making a determination for a cut. What I’m wondering is: are those the same priorities? Will those go through now to making the decisions on a forest landscape plan?

Or will there be variations between those priorities that may go into the development of a tim- ber supply review versus the development of a forest land- scape plan? [2:35 p.m.] Hon. K. Conroy:Just so the member recognizes, the timber supply review is under the Forest Act and not under FRPA, and when preparing the forest landscape plan, there are five objectives that people must consider. It’s on No. 2.22. I can list them for the member: “(

a) supporting the production and supply of timber in the forest landscape area; (

b) supporting the protection and conserva- tion of the environment; (

c) managing the values placed on forest ecosystems by Indigenous peoples; (

d) managing the values placed on forest ecosystems by local communities; (

e) preventing, mitig- ating and adapting to impacts caused by significant disturbances to forests and forest health, including wildfire, insects, disease and drought. ” J. Rustad:The purpose for asking the previous question is because you may end up with a conflict in terms of pri- orities that may be lined out under doing a timber supply review versus a forest landscape plan in terms of the prior- ity and the weighting of those priorities.

In some cases, for example, there may be a heavier emphasis on supporting a production and supply of tim- ber within an area because of a pest infestation or for other values or other components that the minister may direct the chief forester on. That’s why I’m curious. It’s because, as those TSRs come up, those timber supply reviews — I should be careful not to use acronyms, I suppose — they may come up aligned with development of a forest landscape plan, or they may come up separate at different times.

Y ou may end up with changing priorities between how a plan is developed and the underlying information that makes the assumptions around a TSR — timber supply review; sorry. That’s why I’m wondering how those two are aligned. I know that one is in a different act to this act, but the two both provide the same type of direction, such as support- ing production and supply of timber in the forest land- scape area. That is directly from the timber supply review, or very similar to the timber supply review direction as it is to a landscape plan.

This is why I’m wondering how those two are coordin- ated and whether or not there’s consideration of align- ment or how potential conflict may be resolved between the two directives. Hon. K. Conroy:The forest landscape planning frame- work and timber supply review are related in iterative forest management processes. The timber supply review process provides an annual allowable cut for a given land- scape area. The forest landscape plan provides direction associated with where, when and how harvesting in the same area could occur.

The outcomes of the forest landscape plan help to inform future timber supply processes and will directly inform future annual allowable cut determinations. [2:40 p.m.] J. Rustad:Where I see some potential conflict — I guess maybe it’s just confusion on my part — is where you have an objective of supporting the production and supply of timber in a forest landscape area. But where you have that direction that comes in the timber supply review in an area, and then further down in the landscape area, in sup- 4172 British Columbia Debates Thursday, November 18, 2021

porting the protection and conservation of the environ- ment, you may end up in a situation where have a tim- ber supply review that does not take into consideration the direction or potential restrictions that could come under a landscape plan. Under a landscape plan, you could end up netting out area…. At least, if you’re not going to be netting out area, that would be good to know. But you could end up netting out area that has already been accounted for as part of a timber supply.

In other words, you will end up with an overall cut that could be at a higher level for a landscape plan than what the landscape plan ends up allowing, because of the netted-out area. There is potential for some challenges or some issues associated with that. Because landscape plans are in for ten years and TSRs are done and updated, I guess, every five years, there is a chance for some adjustments as that goes, but there is that potential issue. That is why I’m ask- ing about the priorities and how these sorts of things work together as they get developed. Hon. K.

Conroy:Just a correction to what the member said. The timber supply review legislation is legislated to be done every ten years, but it can be done sooner for sus- tainability reasons. What the forest landscape plan does is it defines the forest management regime for that area and becomes current practice, which is then reflected in future timber supply reviews. J. Rustad:Has there been any consideration given to aligning the timing of doing TSRs, timber supply reviews, as well as forest landscape plans, since both have ten-year windows? Hon. K. Conroy:Potentially. J. Rustad:Potentially.

In other words, it could poten- tially align, and there might be some adjustments, but it might not align. Okay, that’s fine. [2:45 p.m.] The first value, value (a), is “supporting the production and supply of timber in the forest landscape area. ” One of the things…. It’s a small portion, but it’s a critical portion when it comes to timber coming out of a supply area, and that is salvage.

In salvage logging, when you have beetle infestations or you have development or other types of things that isolate pockets of wood that would not normally be large enough to be able to be considered to go after, whether it’s timber sales or forest companies or others, salvage comes in and is able to harvest that wood and capture some value and bring that into the supply. It’s an important piece, espe- cially given the amount of infestation and the amount of challenges that we have, particularly in the Interior.

I’m just wondering what provisions have been thought about as part of landscape planning to be able to make sure that there are opportunities for those who are engaged in salvage harvesting to be able to access fibre within a plan like this without having to go through the larger process of operational plans and other types of access. Hon. K. Conroy:There is nothing that precludes sal- vage harvesting from happening how it does today. J. Rustad:The reason I’m asking about this, particularly in terms of a forest landscape plan, is there are actually challenges today with salvage harvesting.

There are places in the province — I can give examples in my own riding — where you have these very small, isolated little pockets of timber that are 60-percent-plus dead that are isolated, from a geographic perspective, from roads and other com- ponents around it and that get applied for. Salvage loggers go through the process to make the application for it, only for it to be turned down because a First Nation may decide that that might be something they’re considering doing or harvesting themselves in the future. Because of that, I’m wondering.

With the engagement that you’re going to be having on landscape plans with First Nations in terms of how these plans are developed, it’s going to be important to be able to identify things like salvage logging as an activity with- in a landscape unit that doesn’t necessarily end up getting blocked because of another interest, particularly a First Nation interest.

There’s an opportunity here, through the engagement with First Nations in developing the land- scape plan, to make sure that that is a consideration as part of the plans so that there can be this salvage logging going through without being blocked because of other potential interests. That’s why I’m asking about salvage logging and wheth- er or not there’s an opportunity within landscape planning to, I guess, bring that in as a consideration as part of the discussions with First Nations. [2:50 p.m.] Hon. K. Conroy:As the member knows, any permit- ting application needs to be consulted on with First Nations.

That duty to consult stays the same. That is not changing. With respect to forest landscape plans, it could be an opportunity for discussions around salvage harvesting. J. Rustad:I don’t want to move that as an amendment for consideration. I am happy to hear that there is an opportunity there, because it is a pretty big frustration. Small operators, just mom-and-pop guys, are going out there and trying to identify a little bit of wood here and there that they might be able to go after. That does a great value to the forest sector, because it brings that wood in. It’s also a difficult, lengthy process.

After going through that process, it is pretty disappointing to find that it gets blocked at a First Nation consultation level because there Thursday, November 18, 2021 British Columbia Debates 4173

may be an interest by a First Nation to go after it. We’ve got a stand that is 60-percent-plus dead. Who knows when that opportunity may arise? [2:55 p.m.] If, as part of these discussions…. Developing the land- scape plan is, obviously, a very detailed engagement between First Nations and the chief forester’s office to talk about how the landscape will be managed. This is an important little piece.

It’s not so much important in terms of the larger operators, but it’s a very important little piece for the small operating individuals who would like to try to continue with their efforts to identify those small pieces of wood. That’s why I’m happy to hear the minister say there’s an opportunity around that. I guess I want to ask the question. How can we make sure?

Is there a way to be able to make sure that that consideration will actually be put on the table, as part of the discussions between the chief forester’s office and First Nations, to try to alleviate some of those potential issues that have arisen in the past? Hon. K. Conroy:As per

section 2.22(d), where it says, “managing the values placed on forest ecosystems by local communities…. ” That would come into this situation that the member is referring to. So if it is raised as a community value, it has to be part of the discussion that could lead to a decision. J. Rustad:When we’re looking at managing the values placed on the ecosystem by local communities…. Of course, these are individuals. It’s not necessarily a com- munity. A community, I’m assuming, means mayor and council or an organized structure, perhaps even a regional district.

These would be interests that are brought forward by individuals. I’m not quite sure how those interests come to the table here. So perhaps if the minister could elaborate on how an individual interest, such as small-scale salvage, would be able to be raised into this. Hon. K. Conroy:If an individual salvage operator had an interest in this, they could either go to their local com- munity and have those discussions with the community, when these issues are being raised, or go to the office of the chief forester and raise them there. J. Rustad:That’s interesting to know.

I haven’t read in here or anywhere where there’s that opportunity for indi- viduals to go to the chief forester’s office. It makes me wonder. There are, obviously, a lot of indi- viduals that have a lot of different interests on the land base, whether it be hunting interests or fishing or whatever it may be. I am pretty sure the chief forester’s office wouldn’t want all of those individuals coming in to provide the input. Maybe I should ask the question of the minister.

Is that the intention of this process — to be able to allow a wide variety of individuals to be able to come to the chief forest- er’s office with their particular interests? [3:00 p.m.] [N. Letnick in the chair.] Hon. K. Conroy:The intent is to make the draft forest landscape plans publicly available for comment, and those comments would come to the office of the chief forester. J. Rustad:I know some of these things can sound tedi- ous as we go through them, but they’re very important for the individuals, obviously, that are undertaking that work, which is why I feel compelled to ask about that.

Maybe if the minister could then just confirm. The plans will be made, the plans will be engaged between the First Nation and the chief forester, given the priorities that have been laid out here, and then once those plans are made, then there is an opportunity for an individual to come in and express their concern or interest or desire for consid- eration as part of the plan. Is that what I’ve just heard the minister say? Hon. K. Conroy:That’s the intent. J. Rustad: We’re talking about managing the values placed on the forest ecosystem by local communities.

A way an individual or a group could go around that pro- cess to be able to have input into the design phase, as opposed to having input into the commentary after a design is made, would be to actually go through a First Nation or a community? Hon. K. Conroy: The intent is that the public would respect the government-to-government discussions with Indigenous nations. Again, this is about reconciliation. J. Rustad: I understand the intent there, and First Nations, of course, being independent, will make their decisions as to what the values are that they want to bring forward.

They may or may not seek input from other indi- viduals. That, of course, would be their prerogative in terms of being able to do this engagement.

At a community level, mayors and councils, of course, are open to public input, people coming in, expressing their perspectives or views or what they would like to have a community bring forward in a plan like this. [3:05 p.m.] Is the minister suggesting the way forward for indi- viduals such as small-scale salvage or other interests is to have an engagement with their community to try to make it a priority for the community in terms of their input to this initial process of the values for designing a forest landscape plan? 4174 British Columbia Debates Thursday, November 18, 2021

Hon. K. Conroy:Y es. The Chair:Don’t we like those easy answers? Member. J. Rustad:Thank you, hon. Chair, I was just trying to be nice to the individuals who serve us so well in this Legis- lature, as I jumped up. My apologies for that. I also didn’t want to pass up on the opportunity to continue the debate on clause 33. Having lived through part of landscape-level planning, landscape management plans that happened in the ’90s and early 2000s, there’s obviously a lot of interest by a lot of individuals on the landscape in terms of the values that go into those plans.

I can see very clearly that there will be a similar level of interest that will come into forest landscape plans, even though the forest landscape plan is over top of these other plans that are still there as part of it. There may be individuals such as small-scale salvage or others that have a keen interest in wanting to be able to engage.

As the minister said, one avenue for them is going to be going to the municipal level, the community-level govern- ment, which means that you may end up seeing a situation where community-level governments are holding public meetings, public consultation, having this process of gath- ering information. I think communities that have a keen interest in their community and the surrounding areas may very well want to do that. Certainly at a regional dis- trict level, they may hear that. That is a fair bit of time and a fair bit of expense associated with the process that would be undertaken.

Is the ministry contemplating any opportunity to be able to provide resources to communities, whether that be professional advice or whether that be financial resources, to give them the opportunity to be able to have that engagement, to be able to bring more informed inform- ation forward in terms of what the community priorities would be? Hon. K. Conroy:Unlike what happens under the cur- rent legislation, communities and the public will have an opportunity for input. Communities that I’ve talked to are looking forward to this.

They’re quite passionate about it and believe in the opportunity to do that as part of their work. Our staff will always be available for providing input and consultation. J. Rustad:I need to ask the question again. I’m happy to hear that staff potentially could be made available to be able to help, because not all communities are able to have the resources to be able to have forestry experts, ecology experts or habitat experts at their disposal as they put for- ward what their priorities are within an area. Certainly, as I mentioned, this is a fair bit of expense.

I’m just wondering whether this is an expense that has to be borne by the community or whether the ministry would consider providing resources to communities so that they would not have to incur this expense and that the taxpayers would not have to incur this expense. Hon. K. Conroy:No, that’s not a piece of the legislation. What we have said is that we would offer that support. We would offer the input from staff. We would offer that expertise to help those communities. I’ve heard loud and clear from communities that they definitely would appreciate this.

I’ve heard from com- munities that have been very frustrated over past legisla- tion that hasn’t allowed them to have input into what’s hap- pening in their own backyard. J. Rustad:I don’t think we’ll bother debating, at this point, whether they’ve had input or not. There have obviously been opportunities for community input, whether it’s forest stewardship plans or other types of plans in the past. [3:10 p.m.] That isn’t what we’re here to debate, in terms of this bill, although, apparently, maybe it is.

Maybe there are all kinds of things we could put into the debate on this bill and in this section, although I’m trying my hardest not to stray too far from what we’re here to discuss. It is significant input. I’m thinking about, whether it’s a small community like Granisle that really struggles with any kind of resources…. They have a community forest. There is going to be a landscape plan around that. It’s a small community of 390, plus or minus, individuals. They’re going to want to be able to provide input. They don’t have the professionals and the resources.

They will draw, certainly, on the ministry’s resources, but they may want to have a consultant to be able to help so that they can make sure they’re providing informed information into a process…. I take the process very seriously. I’m sure the minister and the chief forester take this process very seriously as well. Communities are going to want to be able to provide that. Communities like Vanderhoof, which, fortunately, has got one councillor who has got a very extensive forestry background.

Many communities won’t have that, in terms of what the potential… They have to be able to understand the ramifications of the input they’re bringing in and to be able to make informed recommendations. Ultimately, this is about their future. This is about…. Whether it’s the protection of their community from a fire perspective, which we’ll get into in terms of some of those priorities, or whether it is the protection of the community from a jobs perspective and being able to support the local mill…. They’re going to want to be able to have that oppor- tunity to provide that advice.

Since it’s one of the key pieces — one of the five pieces that comes into the components that are a critical part of deciding on landscape plans — that is going to guide Thursday, November 18, 2021 British Columbia Debates 4175

the chief forester’s office, I think it is not unreasonable for communities to be able to ask for some resources to be able to support them. My hope is that when the minister makes a request through the budgeting process, there is a consideration for grants of some kind to communities. I’ll just maybe add that we will talk…. I want to ask the question about grants and support for First Nations to be able to engage in this process. I think that support will likely be there for First Nations.

Is there going to be that consideration to be able to provide those resources so that there is an equal opportun- ity for communities to be able to put the information for- ward to the chief forester? Hon. K. Conroy: We’re not asking for detailed pro- fessional input from communities. We’re asking com- munities what values are placed on the forest ecosystem around their communities, what happens with the forests around them. [3:15 p.m.] Again, our staff is only too willing to provide that tech- nical expertise, that support. Communities won’t have to be hiring foresters. Our staff is there.

Regional staff throughout the province are only too willing to help com- munities to move forward. Once regulations are completed, we’ll go through the budgetary process, if any further funding is required. J. Rustad:We talked about regulations once before, and I just need some clarity from the minister. Could the min- ister describe, once again, when the regulations will be completed? Hon. K. Conroy:We’re hoping to have the regulations completed within the next year or two. The member well knows how government works. We always want it to move quicker than it normally does.

I think the member is well aware of that. J. Rustad:I believe that’s what the minister had said before — that it could be over the next year or two. I do fully understand how challenging it is for the bur- eaucracy to move these things through and the process. There is a lot on people’s plates, particularly in that min- istry that you have the honour of being part of. FLNRO covers off a lot of things. There are a lot of pieces on every- body’s desks. That comes back to the question we talked about earlier. As these plans come forward over a ten-year plan…. There are pilots that are happening right now.

There is more that the minister talked about adding. That creates a question to me, which is: how do you move forward and complete, potentially, landscape plans before regulations are put in place, and how is that relationship between those two? Hon. K. Conroy:Because the plans will take probably two to three years to complete, they won’t be fully com- pleted before the regulations come into effect. We feel the regulations will come into effect first, as the work is ongo- ing. We will also ensure that there’s alignment with the reg- ulations when the forest landscape plans are completed. J.

Rustad:Thanks for that, from the minister. Back to this issue for communities and the values that they bring forward. I’m happy to hear that there may be a consideration for resources for communities to be able to support…. Obviously, we just finished talking about the great work that is done in the bureaucracy but also how busy everybody is in the bureaucracy.

It’s tough sometimes to be able to get them to be able to provide all of the resources. [3:20 p.m.] There is also, in some communities, the desire for inde- pendent advice as opposed to advice that might be con- nected directly to a ministry or to the chief forester’s office, for that matter, which may have an objective in mind. To that end, as I say, there’ll be opportunity for people, like small-scale salvage or recreation, snowmobilers, whatever it may be.

Once a plan is developed, they’ll be able to give some input — once a plan is developed between nation to nation, between the First Nation and the chief forester’s office. But there is this avenue that you could see communities, potentially, advocating for various values that they want to see through this initial process that goes into the development of that plan. Will the ministry be providing guidance to groups, such as small-scale salvage or other groups, about the various avenues or opportunities that they might have for influ- ence and input into forest landscape planning? Hon. K.

Conroy:We will be communicating the aware- ness and opportunities around the planning process, so that will be available to any interested parties. J. Rustad:Will that specifically include opportunities to engage at the community level for that input up front, or is that only going to include giving notification that after a plan is developed, they can give input?

It’s an important piece, because obviously, people that are passionate about landscape and being involved with the landscape will want to be in right at the ground level in terms of having communities advocating for their interest, if they are aware that is one avenue that they could be choosing. My concern is you will have some communities that are very engaged and want to go out and do that, and then there’ll be other communities that may not know or may not engage, and then you’ll get people coming and saying: “How come I didn’t get the opportunity to be involved?” There’s a window here. I’m hopeful that….

My sugges- tion around this to the minister is that there will be an opportunity for the minister to be able to provide guid- 4176 British Columbia Debates Thursday, November 18, 2021

ance, provide notification, to stakeholders and people who are engaged or interested in forestry and forestry activity that they have these two opportunities to be able to influ- ence what goes into a forest landscape plan. [3:25 p.m.] Hon. K. Conroy:We’re well aware of people’s passion when it comes to engaging on the management of our forests, and the intent is to give those opportunities at the start of the process and throughout the process.

For instance, in the Lakes District, where we have a pilot pro- ject — the member might be well aware of this; it’s up in his area — the community actually put out advertising asking people, if they wanted to be part of a working group, to come and discuss the community values as they relate to the forest around that pilot project, and it’s been working well. J.

Rustad:I’m happy to hear that that’s happening, and I know that the folks in the Lakes District and in Burns Lake are very engaged, very aware, because they’ve got two very large community forests, and they have, obviously, a lot of stakeholders and engagement. But there are other com- munities in the same district, such as Granisle, that may not be as engaged. Y ou may have communities, where Vanderhoof may be very, very engaged, and Fraser Lake isn’t as engaged.

There may be an inequity in terms of that level of engagement and community interest and how it influences particular landscape plans or the input that goes into landscape plans. I’m particularly thinking you might end up in a situ- ation where you’ve got communities that are at odds or dif- ferences between their values that they want to bring for- ward on the landscape. Some other parties may be more heavily into forestry; some may be more heavily into con- servation values. I know those will be issues that the chief forester will have to deal with as the input comes in.

It’s not an enviable job, but congratulations on being thrown that hot potato. Regardless of that, it is still…. People need to be made aware of this. The question that I had asked was whether or not there is going to be a process that the ministry goes through to be able to advise people that a forest land- scape plan is about to commence, and a process about to commence, and where the opportunities for input are — whether that’s through communities, where that might be working with First Nations, or whether that be after the process, in terms of comments added to a plan that might be in place. [3:30 p.m.] Hon.

K. Conroy: Like any other processes that gov- ernment is involved in, we’re going to make sure people are aware that the forest landscape process has started and is underway. That’s the intent of the legislation. That’s what we heard loud and clear from communities that they wanted to have happen. J. Rustad:The minister keeps missing the point of the question. Will there be notification that goes out to indi- viduals about the ways that they can engage, including being able to engage at a community level? Hon. K.

Conroy:If the member is asking if the ministry is going to reach out to every single person interested in the process around forest landscape planning…. I think that’s a bit hard to ask. What we will be doing is ensuring that the community has the notification, that they know that this process is happening. We will be well engaged with Indigenous nations. They will, of course, know. The process, the intent of the legislation, is to ensure that the affected communit- ies, the people involved, will have the notification that they require. J.

Rustad:I’m not suggesting the minister go out and individually notify everybody of the opportunity. But there are organizations such as the snowmobile organiza- tions, such as the wildlife organizations, such as the guide- outfitter organizations, such as the agricultural organiza- tions, such as the recreational organizations, etc. My ask of the minister is whether or not there will be notification that goes to these organizations and, poten- tially, notification, whether it’s online or through other media outlets, to notify them of the multiple ways that they can engage in a landscape planning process. Hon. K.

Conroy:That is the intent of the legislation. J. Rustad:There are many values that have been talked about under 2.22 that go into this and that are, obviously, very important values. But there are a number of values on the landscape that aren’t listed as part of this, such as wild- life values, whether that’s levels of ungulates, whether that’s dealing with predators or other types of components. I’m wondering why wildlife values are not mentioned here as a key component of forest landscape plans. [3:35 p.m.] Hon. K.

Conroy:Wildlife is a key value that Indigenous nations hold, so that would be part of the process through that. It also comes into the values of many communities. It also comes into 2.22(b), “supporting the protection and conservation of the environment, ” which includes all of those issues, including wildlife. J. Rustad: I appreciate that when talking about the environment and talking about the forests…. Obviously, that’s talking about all components that are in forests. The reason for asking specifically about wildlife and wildlife values is….

Obviously, there are a lot of pretty sig- Thursday, November 18, 2021 British Columbia Debates 4177

nificant issues to a lot of people in the province of Brit- ish Columbia. So that’s why I was just asking why that was excluded in terms of the list. The minister has defined wildlife under environmental values. So that’s fine. I won’t bother pursuing that any fur- ther. But it is a little disappointing in terms of that. There are other values, of course — values for recre- ation, values of hunting and fishing, guide-outfitting — in terms of tourism opportunities. Those are also key values that our forests provide for the use of the citizens of this province and visitors and others. Values of water, as well, are linked to the environment. Particularly, there are a number of communiti

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20211118pm-Hansard-n133
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20211118pm Hansard n133
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	7d873e5cd2c2ad24d2ad8f65963714898f0147c6

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