Third Session, 41st Parliament

(2018) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Tuesday, May 8, 2018

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 130

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tributes

George Grills

J. Thornthwaite

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Healthy aging and Fit Fellas activity program

R. Sultan

Youth justice system and services

R. Chouhan

Cycling activities and safety in Sea to Sky area

J. Sturdy

Elizabeth Lewis and legacy of residential schools

B. Ma

Salvation Army emergency services for wildfire evacuees

J. Tegart

B.C. Hydro technicians

B. D’Eith

Oral Questions

Employer health tax impacts and implementation

A. Wilkinson

Hon. C. James

I. Paton

Protection of farmland from speculation and residential development

S. Furstenau

Hon. L. Popham

Employer health tax impacts and implementation

M. Stilwell

Hon. C. James

S. Cadieux

Impact of employer health tax on school districts

S. Bond

Hon. C. James

Traffic enforcement and fine revenues

T. Stone

Hon. C. James

Hon. M. Farnworth

M. Morris

Tabling Documents

Office of the Auditor General, An Independent Audit of Executive Expenses at

School District 61 , May 2018

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 27 — Pill Press and Related Equipment Control Act

Hon. M. Farnworth

M. Morris

S. Furstenau

J. Thornthwaite

N. Simons

S. Gibson

Hon. M. Farnworth

Bill 17 — Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2018

Hon. M. Farnworth

M. Morris

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family Development (continued)

Hon. K. Conroy

S. Bond

L. Throness

TUESDAY, MAY 8, 2018

The House met at 10:05 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

Hon. A. Dix: Today we are, I’m sure, all delighted to welcome nurses to the

Legislature from across B.C. — from rural areas, from urban areas and from

Indigenous communities — to launch National Nurses Week.

I’d like to introduce the nurses who are with us today: Sherri

Kensall; Valerie St. John; Andrea Burton; Alexandra Arndt; Michael Harrison;

Sally Thorne; Lori Campbell; Agnes Black; Jessy Dame; Damen DeLeenheer;

Teresa McFadyen; Joanne Maclaren; Sarah Jesshope; Tim Gauthier; Trudy

Robertson; Karen Levy; Anita Dickson; Jennifer Gill; Brenda Childs; Kathleen

Fyvie; Jacqollyne Keath; Mary Ann Machado; Tess Kroeker; Hannah Macdonald;

Tania Dick; Stefanie Macleod; Christina Berlanda; Elizabeth Butler-Smythe;

Michael Sandler; Sue Peck; Zachary, or even Zak, Matieschyn; Danielle

Daigle; Martha Aviles-Granados; Andrea Azcona Axen; Andrea Taylor; Arielle

Brown; Mary Judith Lynam; Fiona Hutchison; and Aditi Lakshmanan.

I wish everyone to wish them welcome. They know, and everyone knows,

that they can drop by the Ned DeBeck Lounge today between 1:30 and four to

chat with all of these nurses about what they mean in our

communities.

N. Letnick: I also want to rise on the part of the official opposition to welcome

all the nurses in the House. I’d also like to name all their names, but

since the Minister of Health did such a great job doing it in the first

place, I think we can pass on that. Just to say that when we are in need of

health care, we can always rely on our nurses. They are sometimes the first

person that we see when we get to our doctors’ offices or our

hospitals.

I think everyone in this House can join the Minister of Health and

myself and all the members here to say thank you to all the nurses and

congratulations on Nursing Week. Enjoy the Ned DeBeck Lounge. We plan to

come and see you between 1:30 and four o’clock.

Please make the nurses very welcome.

A. Weaver: I’d like to welcome several leaders of the Salvation Army of British

Columbia. In light of this week being Emergency Preparedness Week, I’d like

to acknowledge the significant response and support of the Salvation Army to

B.C. residents, first responders and government. If needed during the 2018

fire-flood season or any other disaster emergency in the province, the

Salvation Army is ready to provide emergency social services.

Please help me welcome Lt. Col. Jamie Braund, divisional commander of

the Salvation Army, B.C. division; Lt. Col. Ann Braund, divisional director

of women’s ministries; Mr. Mike Leland, divisional secretary of public

relations and development, B.C. division; and Mrs. Patricia Mamic, the

public and government affairs director, B.C. division.

M. Stilwell: I’d like to welcome to the House today three constituents who are in

town and who came down for the MLA Prayer Breakfast this morning, hosted by

Leading Influence. I’d like the House to welcome Tyler Cody, Zoe Martens and

Susan Wakefield. Would the House please make them feel welcome.

Hon. J. Horgan: Joining us in the members’ gallery today are two constituents of mine

from Langford–Juan de Fuca. Giuseppe and Diane Scaletta are here. They run

the Queen Mother Veronica project, which the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin

will be talking about in a moment. They are from the great state of

Langford–Juan de Fuca. I’m very happy to have them here.

[10:10 a.m.]

Giuseppe had a very good career in the health care sector,

particularly focusing on vulnerable seniors. It’s great to see him here

today to observe how we conduct ourselves here in the Legislature. Would the

House please make him very, very welcome.

S. Bond: Today was the 12th annual prayer breakfast here in Victoria. I wanted

to welcome to the gallery — although they’re not strangers here — and

specially recognize today Rev. Tim Schindel and Rev. Jason Goertzen, who

have made such wonderful friends and supporters. The breakfast was attended

by yourself, Mr. Speaker, and members from all sides of the

House.

We want to say thank you and express our gratitude for your service,

for your friendship. I urge you to check out the 100-kilometre bike race of

epic proportions where Schindel takes on Goertzen. They’re doing it to

support Leading Influence. I know some of us may want to support them in

that endeavour.

Thank you on behalf of all members for hosting the prayer breakfast

for the 12th year.

M. Dean: Having lived in Ghana 25 years ago, it has a really special place in

my heart. So I am really honoured to introduce here today, with the

Scalettas from Langford–Juan de Fuca, Veronica Abugrago, who is the

Paramount Queen Mother of the Bawku traditional area in the northeast corner

of Ghana. Since becoming Queen Mother, she has worked tirelessly to empower

women and girls in northern Ghana. Please make them very welcome.

Tributes

GEORGE GRILLS

J. Thornthwaite: I’d like to recognize a very good friend, volunteer and respected

community member in North Vancouver who succumbed to cancer recently.

George Grills was a remarkable man, loved by all who knew him,

especially me and my team during parade season, when he drove his ’57

T-Bird, but especially his beloved wife, Lee, and daughter

Karen.

May this House give them the support and love to help them through

this difficult time.

Introductions by Members

Hon. D. Donaldson: I would like to have the assembly welcome the visit to the precinct

today of the board of directors for the Council of Forest Industries, who’ll

be meeting with government caucus.

I also would like to acknowledge that the Coast Forest Products

Association has now become part of the Council of Forest Industries, headed

up by Susan Yurkovich, the new organization.

A. Weaver: I’d like to welcome Jackson Vesey, a political science student going

into his third year at UBC. He has relocated here this summer to learn all

about politics in the province of British Columbia. Would the House please

make him feel very welcome.

J. Rustad: It’s not often I get a chance to introduce a constituent or, as we

know them, a Hoofian. Jessie MacIntosh is here from Vanderhoof. She’s down

visiting her sister Hayley MacIntosh. She’s also attending UBC, where she

will be graduating at the end of May from the pharmacy program. Would the

House please make her welcome.

Hon. B. Ralston: We are joined today in the gallery by the first cohort of Mitacs

Science Policy Fellows. This program, pioneered in British Columbia, matches

a group of highly skilled PhD graduates with ministries across the

government in order to utilize their subject matter expertise and help craft

evidence-based policy, with the goal of improving policy outcomes and making

better services for British Columbians.

I have a short list of names here, and since they’re in the gallery,

I’d like to acknowledge them personally: Kathy Philps, who’s the lead for

internships and fellowships at the B.C. Public Service Agency; Simona

Tajoire, B.C. lead for science policy fellowships at Mitacs; and the fellows

themselves — Anna Maria Giammarco, Caelan Marrville, Duncan Low, Emily Gray,

Gillman Payette, Jessica Carriere, Jyoti Upadhyaya, Kathryn Jastremski,

Natalie Linklater, Noemie Boulanger-Lapointe and Sara Elder. Would the House

please make all of these fellows welcome.

Hon. M. Mungall: Well, my husband, Zak Matieschyn, is here with the nurses. Not only is

he here to inform us of all the good work that nurses do in the province,

but he has a secondary mission, and that is to polish up his dad

jokes.

[10:15 a.m.]

It’s at this time that I ask all members of the House to please not

encourage him in this — Premier? But please do make him welcome.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

HEALTHY AGING AND

FIT FELLAS ACTIVITY

PROGRAM

R. Sultan: I have uncomfortable news. I’ve noticed you’re all getting older.

Encouraging news. You need not become reliant on the Minister of Health.

Experts prescribe exercise, social connectivity, healthy eating and

cutting out the booze and cigarettes.

Fit Fellas of West Vancouver do the exercise and connectivity

part, led by Barrie Chapman, recipient of a West Van community service

award. If you visit our Seniors Activity Centre, twice a week you will

find about 200 men of a certain age in black T-shirts jumping and

bending to a rapid beat, sometimes inspired by an attractive fitness

instructor. They’ve been doing this for about 45 years. It’s just for

guys, except for the occasional trainer, and emphasizes aerobics,

strength, coordination, balance and lots of laughs.

CIHI, the Canadian Institute for Health Information, with

Vancouver YMCA, funded a two-year UBC study of the Fit Fellas model. It

demonstrated the linkage between physical activity, functional capacity

and reduced chronic disease.

Unfortunately, only 13 percent of Canadians over 65 do the

recommended 150 minutes a week of moderate to vigorous physical

activity. Therefore, I have a serious life-saving suggestion. Hon.

Speaker will lead an exercise routine at the beginning of every question

period.

Mr. Speaker: I’m thinking no.

YOUTH JUSTICE SYSTEM

AND SERVICES

R. Chouhan: This week is Youth Justice Week. This provides an opportunity for

us all to recognize the important work being done to assist some of our

province’s most vulnerable youth.

Youth justice services’ primary focus is on both public safety and

the rehabilitation of youth who are in conflict with the law. They

provide community-based services across the province as well as youth

custody services and forensic psychiatric services.

It is critically important to remember that whatever combination

of despair, poor decisions or tragic life circumstances have led someone

down a path to criminal or youth justice involvement, they still have

the capacity to change. They deserve the opportunity to be treated

fairly.

My riding of Burnaby-Edmonds is home to one of two of the

province’s youth custody centres. Last November I had an opportunity to

visit Burnaby Youth Custody Services. At this centre, youth receive all

of the critical programming necessary for a successful reintegration

back into their community. Whether it is through education and skills

training, counselling and psychiatric services, or recreational and

leisure sports, the team at Burnaby Youth Custody Services do an

exemplary job of supporting youth to develop more positive

behaviour.

British Columbia is widely recognized as having one of the most

progressive and effective systems of youth justice services in Canada,

with the lowest per capita rate of youth in custody for the past several

years. This House should be incredibly proud of all efforts to help

shape and strengthen our youth justice system. Let us take time this

week to express our gratitude to those working to support youth in our

communities.

[10:20 a.m.]

CYCLING ACTIVITIES AND SAFETY

IN SEA TO SKY

AREA

J. Sturdy: From the Upper Levels Highway to the Pemberton Meadows to the

Duffey Lake Road, the popularity of cycling is increasing on roadways in

West Vancouver–Sea to Sky. Events like the GranFondo, where cyclists

ride from Vancouver to Whistler in a designated lane on the Sea to Sky

Highway, or Whistler Ironman, now in its sixth year in the region, have

all helped promote the sport for residents and visitors

alike.

There is no question that cycling has become an important economic

contributor to tourism in the province. With longer daylight hours and

spring weather, we’re all seeing more cyclists on our roads. In the Sea

to Sky and around the province, progress has been made on share-the-road

signage and cyclists on-the-road signalling devices, like at Porteau

Bluffs on Highway 99. Shoulder widening and road sweeping are also

contributing to a better cycling experience. But more can be

done.

One approach that has been successful in other jurisdictions has

been the implementation of minimum passing-distance laws. Such laws

require that a motor vehicle pass a vulnerable road user at a designated

minimum passing distance. Over 27 jurisdictions in North America have

implemented safer passing distances, as have several in Europe. In the

West Midlands in the U.K., the enactment of a safer passing law led to

significant safety improvements. The number of serious incidents with

cyclists decreased by 20 percent in the year since the operation

targeting unsafe passing was launched.

Cycling is good for our health, it’s good for the environment, and

it’s good for the tourism economy. A minimum passing-distance law is one

potential tool to make cycling more attractive to people in British

Columbia. I know that I, for one, would welcome this consideration as I

ride the Sea to Sky.

ELIZABETH LEWIS

AND LEGACY OF RESIDENTIAL

SCHOOLS

B. Ma: I rise to share with the House today that Elizabeth Lewis was lost

to a fentanyl overdose last Monday, April 30. She was kind. She was 51

years old, and she had lived a hard life on the Downtown

Eastside.

An intergenerational survivor of the residential school system and

a victim of abuse, Elizabeth lost her parents when she was very young,

and she spent most of her life missing them while struggling with mental

health, disability and addiction. She leaves behind three children,

including Autumn George, 32; Willard Lewis, 25; and Crystal Lewis, 24.

They were all taken from her as babies. The eldest was adopted, and her

younger two children lived their lives as youth in care.

Intergenerational trauma stemming from Canada’s residential school

system continues to impact many, many members in many communities across

B.C. The North Shore community is no exception.

I recently had the privilege of joining school district 44

educators and members of the Squamish Nation at a special viewing of

Indian Horse , which weaves together ice hockey and the

residential school system into what may be the most painfully Canadian

film I have ever watched. Squamish Nation speakers — including district

principal for school district 44 Brad Baker, Adina Williams and

Sempúlyan Gonzales — made clear, in sharing their personal stories, that

the trauma caused by the residential school system continues to follow

them, their families, their communities through generations each and

every day.

The late Elizabeth Lewis’s youngest child, Crystal Lewis, a member

of the North Vancouver community, leaves these words for her mother:

“Although our time together was short, I want you to know that I thank

you every day for giving me a purpose in life by inspiring me to be a

leader to help to break the cycle of intergenerational trauma and

inspire our youth to reach their full potential. Thank you, Mom, for

inspiring me to be the change I want to see. May we all work together to

help those who are hurting and lift up those who have lost their

way.”

SALVATION ARMY EMERGENCY SERVICES

FOR WILDFIRE

EVACUEES

J. Tegart: I rise in the House today to recognize one of the many

organizations that step up whenever they are needed, wherever they are

needed and for as long as they are needed. That group is the Salvation

Army. During last year’s summer fire season, the Salvation Army was

there from day one onward. They deployed the emergency disaster service

mobile kitchens and personnel. They activated their emergency operations

centre to coordinate logistics across the province, and they launched a

fundraising appeal across the country, which brought in close to $1.7

million to help victims of the fire.

[10:25 a.m.]

While crews continued to fight the flames, the Salvation Army

personnel were there to welcome evacuees, feed them, shelter them and

help to meet their immediate needs in 12 designated arrival locations

across the province. In Kamloops alone, 12,766 meals, 55,000 drinks and

38,874 snacks were served. Fifty-six emotional and spiritual care

workers were available, and 433 volunteer workers put in 4,154 volunteer

hours. The Salvation Army also served in Kelowna, Williams Lake, Prince

George, Vernon, Surrey and other locations.

The Salvation Army motto is “Giving hope today.” But I want

everyone to know that they’ve given hope for the future. I’d like to ask

the House to join me in saying thank you.

B.C. HYDRO TECHNICIANS

B. D’Eith: In December 2017, there were two major ice storms that left over

100,000 Hydro customers without power in the Fraser Valley, many of whom

live in Abbotsford and Mission. While most of us went inside to stay

warm, over 450 power line technicians from all over British Columbia

worked around the clock to fix dozens of broken poles, damaged

transformers, ice-encased equipment and wire spans in very dangerous

conditions.

Last week I was very pleased, with the Minister of Energy, Mines

and Petroleum Resources, to present certificates of appreciation to both

the Abbotsford and Maple Ridge technicians for their heroic efforts in

December 2017. I’m sure that everyone in the House will join me in

expressing our gratitude to the technicians, who often go into disasters

first, whether they be ice storms, floods or wildfires.

On the same day, the minister and I, along with B.C. Hydro

president Chris O’Riley, were very pleased to tour the now fully

operational Ruskin dam retrofit. All three new turbines and generators

are running, powering over 33,000 Metro Vancouver homes.

This visit was especially special for me, because Boyd Mason, the

senior project manager, has been one of my closest friends for over 40

years. Boyd explained that building this $748 million Ruskin dam

renovation is kind of like giving your car’s motor an overhaul and

replacing the brakes and tires while you’re driving down the highway.

That’s what they did.

The project presented many challenges. For example, while digging,

the crew discovered a 9,000-year-old First Nations cultural site.

Construction plans were altered, and the site was left in place

according to the wishes of the Kwantlen First Nation.

We live in an electrified world and often take access to

electricity for granted. I think it’s important for us to take a moment

to recognize the importance of our hydro facilities and the many people

who work very hard to keep our lights on.

Oral Questions

EMPLOYER HEALTH TAX

IMPACTS AND

IMPLEMENTATION

A. Wilkinson: It’s an important day for nursing in the Legislature, and of

course, it’s important to point out that the Premier’s new payroll tax

will be taking literally hundreds of millions of dollars out of the

health care system, because it’s applicable to health authorities,

universities, colleges and care homes — all of the employers of

nurses.

I’ve received a copy of a February 22 Ministry of Finance note. It

says that health authorities, school districts and local governments

should be paying the employer health tax. The quote is: “It would be

unfair to give the public sector an advantage by exempting them from

paying this tax.” So taxes are paid to the government and not given back

to the public sector.

One week later the Premier said that the Finance Minister would

“ensure that non-profits and government agencies are kept whole.” The

Premier, yet again, has broken his word. Can the Premier clarify this

for the 50 nurses in the gallery? Do you intend to continue taking

hundreds of millions of dollars out of the health budget and putting it

into a payroll tax rather than to front-line care?

Hon. C. James: I think, really, question period this week, from the Leader of the

Opposition, is a list of all the failures of the other side when it came

to supporting the government in British Columbia, including health

care.

[10:30 a.m.]

In fact, it was the other side that doubled MSP premiums that are

collected from everyone in British Columbia. Unlike the other side, we

are having conversations with health authorities, not-for-profits and

charities. I had some very good meetings last week, while the

Legislature was out — to be able to talk to them about the 50 percent

savings that they have, so we’re making sure we’re tracking that; the 50

percent savings they will have next year, so to be able to account for

that. Decisions will be coming very shortly.

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

supplemental.

A. Wilkinson: I’m glad to see that the Finance Minister is prepared to answer a

question when the Premier is not, because apparently, he doesn’t have

his facts straight.

We see this 2 percent payroll tax being applied to the entire

public sector, to charities, to local government. As the Finance

Ministry memo says: “Any employer with a payroll over $1.5 million will

pay the full rate.” So clearly, there’s no intent to exempt charities.

There’s no intent to exempt non-profits.

At the same time, we have thousands of charities out there saying

they simply cannot afford to pay a 2 percent payroll tax. Of course, the

health authorities, with tens of billions of dollars in budget, will pay

hundreds of millions of dollars in payroll tax back to the government

after receiving the cheque in the first place.

This is at the point of absurdity. The Finance Minister proudly

stands up and says their tax is being cut in half. Nonsense. It’s being

tripled to municipalities.

When are you going to accept the fact that this payroll tax

represents an increase in taxation on the public sector and that it

makes no sense whatsoever?

Hon. C. James: Unlike the member across the way, I’ve been having conversations

with school districts. I’ve been having conversations with charities and

not-for-profits, with health authorities and with others about the

impact of the employers health tax — about the savings they have with

MSP in this year of 50 percent, the 50 percent savings they have next

year with MSP, how they apply those savings towards the employers health

tax.

We are working through the implementation. That’s why we’re

implementing this tax in 2019 and 2020 — so we have time to work through

this implementation. You will see the responses very shortly.

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

supplemental.

A. Wilkinson: This is government in action under the NDP: “Let’s introduce a

speculation tax. But then we’ll change our mind and whittle it back and

then say, ‘Oh no, it’ll still raise the same amount of money.’ Let’s

introduce a payroll tax. We’ll apply it to the whole public sector,

according to our memo from the finance department. But then maybe we’ll

change our mind. Maybe we’ll find some favourites and cut them back and

save them the tax, but the rest of you are going to pay.”

So what is tax policy under this Finance Minister? Is it who makes

the squeakiest noise after the budget is announced, and then she decides

to roll back the taxes? When is this Premier going to show some

integrity in the tax process and stop picking friends and

enemies?

Hon. C. James: I guess that the Leader of the Opposition, now, is saying that

charities should have to pay full, and we shouldn’t look at the

implementation. That’s exactly what I heard from the member across the

way. You will see an implementation plan. I’m also presuming that the

other side wants MSP premiums to stay in place and not save families

$900 and $1,800 as individuals.

I know that the other side has trouble understanding what it means

to take time to listen to British Columbians. That’s exactly what we are

doing. As I said when I brought in the taxes, we are giving time for

their implementation so we can work through the implementation with

groups and organizations. That’s exactly what we’re doing. We’re

listening. We’re working through the implementation, and the answers

will be shortly.

I. Paton: The Premier said on April 5 that the Minister of Finance “is

consulting widely to hear from people about what the consequences of the

employer health tax will be.” The Delta Gymnastics Society, the Delta

Hospital Foundation, the Delta Hospice Society and the B.C. Guide Dog

Services have all written to the minister, telling her that the

consequences of her tax blunder are disastrous.

Will the Finance Minister tell non-profits and charities today if

they will be exempt from her new tax grab?

[10:35 a.m.]

Hon. C. James: I’ll say again to the member that I’ve been having some very good

conversations with many of the organizations around the province,

including, in fact, this past Friday with some organizations from Delta,

to talk about the issues that they are facing in the

implementation.

That’s why we gave a year for the implementation — so we could

make sure we gathered all that information, so we could take into

account the 50 percent that organizations are saving on MSP, to be able

to account for that. That’s the information we’re gathering, and those

decisions are coming shortly.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Delta South on a supplemental.

I. Paton: I’d like to read from the letter these groups have written to the

minister: “Rather than raising our taxes, governments should be trying

to make life easier for local non-profits.” This is a tax blunder that

is causing fear and confusion, and it has gone on far long

enough.

Again, to the minister — a simple yes-or-no response, please —

will front-line non-profit organizations be kept whole like the Premier

promised?

Hon. C. James: Happy to, once again, tell the member that the answers will be

coming shortly. We are working with not-for-profits. We are working with

charities. We are taking a look at the savings that they account for

this year and next in the MSP, how we can make sure that that’s tracked.

We’re looking at that, and answers will be coming shortly.

PROTECTION OF FARMLAND

FROM SPECULATION

AND

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

S. Furstenau: Our agricultural land has been left unprotected from the forces of

speculation and foreign capital. Monster homes are being built on prime

farmland, and farm prices are soaring well beyond the reach of our local

farmers. We need immediate action from this government to protect our

food security and to protect the ability of young farmers to get on the

land.

There are a number of tools this government could use immediately

to put a stop to that speculation on ALR land and protect the future for

young farmers in B.C. Government can protect our farmland from the

impact of foreign capital by restricting foreign ownership of ALR land,

a step that our caucus has been calling for, for over a year. Government

can apply the speculation tax and the foreign buyer tax to ALR land, and

government can create legally binding house size limits to stop

mega-mansions from being built on prime farmland.

My question is to the Minister of Finance. Will you commit today

to using at least one of the measures at your disposal to put an end to

mega-houses on the ALR?

Hon. L. Popham: Thank you to the member for raising this issue. The member raises

valid concerns for sure. Many communities around the province are very

concerned about large homes being built on the ALR and the uses that are

happening on the ALR.

The one thing that building a monster home on the agricultural

land reserve will almost guarantee is that a new farmer will not be able

to afford that land to farm on. We’re very concerned about that, and

that’s why, when we’ve taken on the agricultural land reserve

revitalization project, we are getting feedback from people right across

the province. Richmond has been in the news around this issue, but we’re

hearing it from other communities. In fact, it was one of the top three

issues that came to us within this consultation process.

We’re looking at the data that’s come in, and we’re using that to

allow us to move forward on changes that will address this issue and

also to make sure that the agricultural land reserve is stronger than

it’s ever been.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader, Third Party, on a supplemental.

S. Furstenau: I appreciate that there is a review of ALR land, but time is of

the essence on this issue, and we cannot afford to wait another year

before taking action to stop the building of these mega-houses on ALR

land. As the Minister of Agriculture points out, it removes yet another

farmer’s possibility from moving into food growing.

We need immediate measures to protect the dwindling stock of

farmland and to protect our food security and protect the future of

young farmers. Indeed, Richmond FarmWatch estimates that last year

Richmond alone lost 50 farms due to the construction of mega-mansions on

farmland. The government can take immediate interim measures to protect

agricultural land while they wait for the results of the

review.

My question is, again, to the Minister of Finance. Will she take

immediate steps today to end speculation on ALR land and to protect our

agricultural land for future generations?

Hon. L. Popham: Again, very valid concerns, and we are working as fast as we can.

The revitalization committee wrapped up its consultation last week, and

we are receiving the data that they received.

[10:40 a.m.]

One of the things I think is very important is we’re doing things

differently than the previous government did. What they did with the

agricultural land reserve is they made legislative changes without

consulting with British Columbia. We’ve gone out. We’ve consulted with

the whole province. And we will make changes as we see fit.

I appreciate very much the member’s commitment to the agricultural

land reserve and the commitment to farming. It’s incredibly important to

our province as an economic driver. We need the agricultural land

reserve in place in order to make sure that we have those

opportunities.

We are working as quickly as possible. I know that we have a

meeting booked with the Third Party in order to let them know what we

heard during that consultation. I look forward to the

discussions.

EMPLOYER HEALTH TAX

IMPACTS AND

IMPLEMENTATION

M. Stilwell: The Society of Organized Services has operated in

Parksville-Qualicum for over 50 years. On February 21, their executive

director, Susanna Newton, wrote to the Minister of Finance: “The new

payroll tax would cost us in excess of $43,000 over and above our

current costs. Could you please confirm if this new payroll tax includes

an exemption for B.C. non-profits and registered charities? If there is

no exemption, this payroll tax will have a huge impact on our ability to

maintain our existing programs and services.”

The question to the minister, on Susanna’s behalf, is: will

charities be exempt?

Hon. C. James: Again to the member, I’ve been taking the opportunity to be able

to work with not-for-profits, to work with charities, to have those

discussions around the impact and the implementation. That’s why we’ve

given a year to be able to look at the implementation, and those

responses will be coming shortly.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Parksville-Qualicum on a supplemental.

M. Stilwell: Well, I think it’s fantastic that the minister is taking the time

to consult. She’s not taking time to respond to the email that Susanna

wrote on February 21 and again on April 10. So she doesn’t have enough

time to respond to a simple question.

Will the minister respond today and tell whether non-profits will

be exempt from the tax?

Hon. C. James: I recognize the important work that’s being done. We’re having

those conversations with individual not-for-profits and charities. We’re

talking to groups and organizations across this province. That’s why we

gave a year’s implementation. As I said when I delivered the budget, we

were taking the time to make sure that we accounted for the savings for

groups and organizations that pay MSP, because they are having savings

this year and next. The answer will be coming shortly.

S. Cadieux: Well, it’s not just non-profits, of course, that have a limited

ability to pay the NDP’s unexpected tax increase. It’s universities and

colleges too. George Davidson, the president of the Federation of

Post-Secondary Educators, says: “We should look at an

exemption.”

To the Minister of Advanced Education, she must be hearing the

same things that I am from these institutions and organizations. Has she

conveyed these concerns to the Finance Minister?

Hon. C. James: In fact, I’ve been meeting directly with the universities and

colleges, having those conversations, talking to them about the savings

that they are having in ’18-19 and in ’19-20, how that gets applied and

how we take that into account when it comes to the employers health tax.

Answers will be shortly.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Surrey South on a supplemental.

S. Cadieux: Post-secondary institutions are facing a significantly larger tax

bill with the minister’s replacement of the MSP with the new higher tax.

The additional cost for the University of Victoria alone is estimated to

be at least $2½ million.

Will the minister exempt universities and colleges, or will they

be forced to increase student fees and cut programming to

accommodate?

Hon. C. James: Once again, we see from the other side a long litany, a long list,

of the kinds of travesties that they brought on to British Columbians.

Tuition doubled under the old government. That’s what they gave to

post-secondary institutions, a doubling of tuition.

[10:45 a.m.]

What else did the other side do? The other side decided to cut and

insist that there are tuition costs for adult basic education, for

learning and adult basic education. Not only that, we are actually

providing free tuition for former children in care so they can have

success like every other child in this province.

A lecture from the other side about the kinds of things that they

did is not something that we’re going to listen to on this side.

Instead, we are going to make sure that we provide support for British

Columbians and savings on MSP. We’re having conversations with

universities and colleges, and the answers will be coming

shortly.

IMPACT OF EMPLOYER HEALTH TAX

ON SCHOOL

DISTRICTS

S. Bond: Hardly a lecture; simply another question.

Yesterday the Finance Minister finally provided some clarity for

municipalities. No relief for them from the MSP replacement

tax.

Let’s try for some additional clarity today. On September 24, the

Minister of Education was asked if school districts should stay tuned

for a potential exemption from the employer health tax. His response was

yes. Well, now the B.C. School Trustees Association has passed a motion

calling for new funding to fully cover the cost of the NDP’s new higher

MSP replacement tax.

To the Education Minister, school districts continue to wait. Will

he stand by his comment that school boards will soon receive an

exemption?

Hon. C. James: It was students in British Columbia who had to wait 16 years for

this government to end their fight that they picked with teachers in

British Columbia instead of funding education, 16 years where children

didn’t get the supports they needed, where they were in larger classes

because of this government picking a fight with teachers. We are

providing record levels of funding for education because we know how

important it is. We are having those conversations with school

districts, and the answers will be coming shortly.

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

supplemental.

S. Bond: As a former school trustee, as is the Minister of Finance, she

knows full well that students in British Columbia have the most

exceptional outcomes in the world in terms of the work that’s

done.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, we shall hear the question.

S. Bond: The opposition has asked dozens of questions about the NDP’s

employer health tax on behalf of school districts, municipalities,

non-profits, small businesses. The list goes on. The government, just

like we see today, has been dismissive every single time. In fact,

yesterday this Finance Minister looked municipalities in the eye and

said their concerns didn’t matter. No relief in sight for

them.

Today it’s not just school trustees. The B.C. Confederation of

Parent Advisory Councils has also passed a resolution calling on the

minister to ensure that school districts will be kept whole.

Again to the Minister of Education, will he finally address the

concerns of trustees and, now, parents and fully fund the additional

cost of the NDP’s surprise tax grab? Or will he continue to dismiss the

concerns of parents and trustees?

Hon. C. James: If I were the other side, I wouldn’t be talking about education

funding, because we know the record. Everyone in British Columbia knows

the record. It was despite this government, which is why students

succeeded because of the quality teachers and administrators and support

staff in the province — because of their hard work.

[10:50 a.m.]

We are continuing to work with groups and organizations. It’s why

the payroll tax does not come into play until January 1, 2019. Just to

give an example, the Sooke school district officials aren’t worried

about covering the costs of the new payroll tax. They believe the

elimination of medical service premiums will leave a small amount

underfunded, and I don’t think our district will have a hard time coming

up with it.

We recognize there are implementation issues. That’s why we’re

taking the time to have those conversations. Decisions will be coming

soon.

TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT

AND FINE

REVENUES

T. Stone: To this point, we’ve yet to hear from the Minister of Municipal

Affairs about the critical report on her government’s employer health

tax from her largest stakeholder, the Union of B.C. Municipalities. But

yesterday the Finance Minister’s message to communities was very, very

clear: she doesn’t care. She doesn’t care about the impacts of the

downloading of millions of dollars onto the backs of local governments

and local taxpayers. She doesn’t care that property taxes are going to

go up across this province. She doesn’t care that local services are

going to be cut across British Columbia.

Now the NDP has also advised British Columbians that they’re

bringing back photo radar 2.0 to a community near you. And the Finance

Minister has already advised…. She has already advised….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, thank you. We shall hear the question.

T. Stone: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Finance has already advised the Union of B.C.

Municipalities that she intends to claw back that revenue from local

communities too.

My question to the Minister of Municipal Affairs is this: will she

ensure that traffic violation revenue stays where it belongs — with

municipalities?

Hon. C. James: The member talks about municipalities and the challenge that they

face. We are continuing, as I said, to have conversations with charities

and not-for-profits. As I said yesterday, it’s up to the municipalities

how they determine their budgets. But if we take a look at the net costs

in 2020, after the elimination of MSP premiums and the implementation of

the payroll tax….

If municipalities were to put that entire burden on households, on

residential properties…. Just a few examples. For example, in Duncan,

that would cost an average household, per year, 46 cents. In Kelowna,

that would cost an average household $4.84 a year. In Lake Country, that

would cost $1.43 per year. In Maple Ridge, $10.50 a year — that’s if

they made the choice to put all of those costs onto municipal

properties.

When you are saving $900 a year as individuals and $1,800 a year

as a family, you are better off in British Columbia.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

The member for Kamloops–South Thompson on a

supplemental.

T. Stone: Well, the minister would very likely get a ticket for speeding.

She drove right past the question. The question was about photo

radar.

Interjections.

T. Stone: Clearly, we’ve touched a nerve here. Photo radar 2.0, coming to a

community near you — only under the NDP.

When the Attorney General recently introduced their photo radar

program, he said….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, thank you.

T. Stone: The Attorney General said that “it was not a revenue generation

piece” and that “revenues from tickets will go to local

government.”

[10:55 a.m.]

In fact, traffic violation revenue has gone exclusively to

municipalities for the past 13 years. But the Minister of Finance has

made it very clear that she’s going to grab this revenue.

Again to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, the person who’s

actually responsible for local government in this province: will she

stop this needless NDP cash grab and ensure that traffic violation

revenues stay where they belong? And that’s with the

municipalities.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for this opportunity.

I’d like to make two points. The first is that with local

governments…. They well know that there are changes in terms of how the

red-light cameras are going to operate. What we have said is that we

want to talk to them because of the new changes, which require no

additional costs to municipalities. We want to discuss with them where

that additional revenue goes.

We have indicated to them that there will be no change in the

amount of revenue that they will continue to receive. There will be no

change. But what I find really ironic, what I find particularly

interesting, is that member over there using the term “cash grab” when

they, when he was on this side of the House, plundered ICBC for almost

$1.3 million.

While we’re on the topic of cash grab, how about at B.C. Hydro,

where they took deferral accounts to a new level? They racked up, by

plundering Hydro through deferral accounts, more than all of the other

provinces combined.

In terms of cash grabs, who can forget the doubling of MSP

premiums under that government when they sat on this side of the House?

Who can forget the downloading that they placed on local government when

they wouldn’t fund salary increases for teachers? Again, another cash

grab put onto the backs of hard-working British Columbians.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Finally, that member should not talk about speeding

tickets.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

M. Morris: The minister does as good a job in deflecting the question as a

radar detector does in detecting radar going down the road

there.

The NDP won’t say how much money they will rake in from the new

photo radar program, but they’ve already told municipalities they intend

to claw back the revenue.

The new employer health tax will already put the municipality of

Prince George on the hook for an additional $1.3 million next year, and

now traffic violation revenue of over $1.1 million will be clawed back.

This puts programs in Prince George, like the radar speed camera display

screens that we have in the high-traffic areas, at risk.

To the Minister of Municipal Affairs, will she admit she’s made a

mistake and stop her needless cash grab?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I am a little surprised at that question coming from that member,

because we’ve made it really clear that there will be no clawback of the

revenue. More importantly, let’s look at what the purpose of these

red-light camera activations is all about. Frankly, I hope there’s no

increase in revenue. I hope that there’s no increase, because what we

want is people to start to pay attention, to start driving

safely.

[11:00 a.m.]

I am sure that that member, when he was a police officer, more

than once had to go knock on the door of somebody’s house and tell them

tragic news because somebody had driven drunk, had sped through a red

light or sped over a bridge at a very high speed and caused a tragic

accident. That’s why those changes are taking place. That’s why it’s

being done. And if we don’t see a single cent of increased revenue but

we save lives because of that, I’ll be an extremely happy

minister.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present a report intituled An

Independent Audit of Executive Expenses at School District 61 , from

the Office of the Auditor General.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: In this chamber, I call second reading, Bill 27, Pill Press and Related

Equipment Control Act. In Committee A, I call continued debate on the estimates

of the Ministry of Children and Family.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 27 — PILL PRESS AND RELATED

EQUIPMENT CONTROL

ACT

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading of Bill 27, intituled the Pill Press and

Related Equipment Control Act. I move that the bill now be read a second

time.

It’s my pleasure to rise today to speak about Bill 27, the Pill

Press and Related Equipment Control Act. The proposed Pill Press and

Related Equipment Control Act is part of a suite of public safety

initiatives we are working on to address the opioid crisis. This

legislation is intended to help police interdict the illicit supply of

counterfeit pills by limiting who can lawfully own a pill press or other

equipment used to make illicit pills.

Beginning in 2012, British Columbia began to experience a

significant increase in the number of deaths due to illicit drug

overdose. The increased presence of fentanyl in the illicit drug supply

is correlated with the driving up of the number of overdose-related

deaths to 1,446 for 2017, more than five times the number of

overdose-related deaths in 2012.

Pill presses are used in the production of pharmaceuticals, as

well as a number of other goods. In the wrong hands, pill presses can be

used to make low-cost fentanyl into counterfeit pills, such as fake

oxycodone and Xanax, but quality control is poor, leading to overdose

and death.

[11:05 a.m.]

Not only are pill presses used to make counterfeit pills from

fentanyl; they can also be used to make other dangerous, illicit pills,

such as MDMA. In the case of fentanyl, there’s a large profit motive for

dealers to make counterfeit pills. Prior to this legislation, there had

been no limits on who could own this equipment in B.C.

Restricting access to pill presses is seen as a key tool to help

interdict the supply of illicit drugs. The Pill Press and Related

Equipment Control Act will limit who can lawfully own a pill press or

other like equipment such as encapsulators or pharmaceutical mixers.

This equipment is known as controlled equipment under the

act.

Those with a legitimate business or professional purpose for

having controlled equipment will be amongst the group of authorized

owners. Authorized owners include those authorized under an enactment to

manufacture drugs or natural health food products, health professionals

named in regulation or a licensed pharmacy.

Those who are outside of this group but who have a legitimate

business requirement for the equipment can apply for and be granted a

waiver to be included amongst the group of authorized owners. There is

no intention to impede access to this equipment for those with a

legitimate business or professional need for it.

There is no requirement to seek permission to acquire new

equipment from within the province or from outside it. Instead, the

legislation permits building a registry of equipment through

notifications to the registrar regarding ownership of equipment as well

as its acquisition, sale, loss or destruction.

Another feature of this legislation is the requirement for pill

press sellers to be registered under the act. Registration will involve

making an application to the registrar and agreeing to submit to a

criminal record check.

A registrar will be appointed under the act to administer it. The

registrar will be given a number of powers, including the ability to

appoint inspectors and collect personal information. The registrar can

register those who apply to be pill press sellers and will be able to

grant waivers to those who need equipment for a business purpose not

contemplated in the act.

The legislation also creates authorities for information-sharing

with police for the purpose of administering this act, as well as with

other jurisdictions with a like statute.

Given that we are one of the first jurisdictions in Canada to

create this type of legislation, a key feature of the act will be its

flexibility. The registrar will have authority to waive or modify

requirements under the act, and there are regulation-making powers to

add or modify equipment or set new classes of persons who can be among

the group of authorized owners of the equipment.

The act provides for a comprehensive list of offences with

significant penalties. A key example of an offence is the prohibition

regarding unlawful ownership, possession or use of controlled equipment.

The penalties are high, as they are intended to have a significant

deterrent value. They include a maximum of a $200,000 fine for a first

offence, a $350,000 fine for a second offence and a $500,000 fine for a

third offence or six months’ jail time or both.

The key benefits of the legislation include limiting ownership of

pill presses and related equipment to those who need it for lawful

business or professional purposes; creating a minimal administrative

burden on lawful owners; authorizing police to seize equipment from

those who are not authorized to have it, without waiting for it to be

used by organized crime or drug dealers to make illegal pills; and

setting high penalties intended to have significant deterrent

value.

The Pill Press and Related Equipment Control Act should be seen as

one of many of the tools needed to be put in place for the public safety

sector to address the opioid crisis. I’m pleased to open debate on this

important piece of legislation.

M. Morris: Looking at the legislation, I do understand the impetus behind the

introduction of this particular bill, but I do have some questions. I’ll

leave a lot of the questions for the committee stage.

The frustrating thing for police officers and those that are

investigating these kinds of offences right across Canada is oftentimes

we see duplications of various statutes, which leads to a little bit of

confusion when it comes to prosecution, when it comes to search and

seizure.

You could be conducting an investigation under a federal statute,

and all of a sudden, there are some provincial implications involved

here. So as we move forward through that, I will be looking at the

possibilities of that confusion when it comes to the investigative

level.

[11:10 a.m.]

What I refer to…. The Controlled Drugs and Substances Act is the

statute that the police use right across the country when they’re

dealing with fentanyl, the importation of any kinds of illegal

substances or drugs that we have in the country, including cannabis.

We’ll be doing lots of discussion on that in the days ahead, coming down

the road here.

Section 7 of the federal legislation pretty much outlines a lot of

the things that this legislation speaks about as well. It says: “No

person shall possess, produce, sell, import or transport anything

intending that it will be used (

a) to produce a controlled substance,

unless the production of the controlled substance is lawfully

authorized; or (

b) to traffic in a controlled substance.” It’s a very

broad

section that covers the possession of pill presses or any other

device that might be used in the production of those types of

things.

The act further goes on to describe the importation of those types

of designated devices, and the pill presses are a designated device

under the CDSA, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. It says: “No

person shall import into Canada a designated device unless they register

the importation with the Minister.”

One of the concerns I have with the legislation the way it’s

written right now is the creation of a second bureaucracy. The lawful

importation of the devices by pharmacies, by anybody that legally uses

those kinds of devices to produce pills or vitamins or whatever the case

might be…. There’s a federal bureaucracy that they need to adhere to.

They need to register the importation with the minister, and there’s a

lot of information that’s collected as a result of that.

Now we’re creating a provincial bureaucracy as well. So the lawful

importation…. You know, the pharmacy down the road brings this device

in, registers it with the federal government and now has to do it a

second time to register under the provincial legislation here —

increased bureaucracy. I’m wondering whether or not we’ll get the bang

for our buck out of that.

The information they need to obtain, looking at the substance of

the bill that’s before the House here right now, is much the same as the

substance that’s in the federal legislation: the name of the person

importing the device; the corporation name that’s registered within the

province; the person’s address; the description of the designated

device, including the model number and serial number; the address where

the device will be located as well as the street address where it’s

going to be delivered to; the name and address of the customs office

where the importation is anticipated; and the anticipated date of the

importation.

Once all that is gathered and collected, the minister receives the

information, and he shall register the product and “provide proof of the

registration to the person importing the…device.” It goes on further to

talk about the disclosure of information, the federal

legislation.

The federal legislation allows the minister to disclose to the

Canada Border Services Agency all the information that they collect, but

section 7 also authorizes the disclosure to police services across the

province, so across the country. “The Minister is authorized to disclose

any information submitted under subsection (2) to a Canadian police

force or a member of a Canadian police force who requests the

information in the course of an investigation under this

Act.”

Again, there are provisions to share that information that’s

collected in the registry by all the various police departments in the

country here. So bureaucracy, added workload for legitimate users of

this — and at the end of the day, are we going to see a substantial

benefit from the black market? The black market is never going to

register these kinds of devices. They’re going to try to smuggle these

devices into Canada, as they have for years and years already, as they

do with all the other types of illegal devices and drugs into

Canada.

There are already provisions under this federal legislation to

seize those kinds of devices during the course of an investigation. So

again, a little bit of duplication here. It’s perhaps overkill, but

we’ll see how it works out at the end of the day.

[11:15 a.m.]

The other concern that I have with this added bureaucracy and this

second layer is the cost of administering this particular statute, in

this legislation now. I understand that there is already an entity in

place that will look after the registration of these products, but they

will require additional resources for enforcement or follow-up, so there

will be a cost to that.

I’m also curious as to…. The federal legislation is relatively

new. It was just passed in the House of Commons about a year ago, I

believe. There is relatively new legislation in Alberta that I don’t

think has been tested yet, and we’re implementing this duplication of

the federal legislation.

I’m just wondering. There are going to be challenges made against

the federal legislation, I’m sure. There will be challenges made against

the Alberta legislation. And no doubt there will be challenges made

against the provincial legislation that we have in British Columbia

here, and that is going to be added costs to our court services and

administration, as well as the enforcement of these kinds of

things.

Overall, we’re going to support the bill. It covers all the bases.

There’s no question about it, Minister. It does cover the bases, but I

think it’s an added bureaucracy. I think it’s something that is probably

a little bit premature, pending the outcome of the federal legislation

and the challenges that it may see down the road. If there are

weaknesses in the federal legislation, perhaps a request to the federal

government to amend the legislation — to address those weaknesses that

have been identified in this particular legislation — is a good

thing.

One of the weaknesses that I see with the provincial legislation —

and I spoke about it before when we were in government, when I was in

the chair — is the fact that it’s restricted to British Columbia, and we

have no authority to dictate what happens outside of the boundaries of

British Columbia.

I think that by having that blanket, effective federal legislation

provides a greater tool, a greater opportunity, for police officers in

British Columbia and right across Canada to curtail those kinds of

activities, to seize those types of devices and hopefully reduce the

amount of fentanyl and carfentanil and the other types of drugs that are

entering our system at ease through the production of all these

pills.

At the end of the day, it’s good legislation, it’s comprehensive

legislation, but it’s a duplication of a lot of the things that are

going on provincially and federally.

There are a lot of other technical details within that legislation

that I’ll reserve for the committee stage, but overall, I think the

minister’s staff have done a pretty good job of putting this together.

We’ll just see how it shakes out at the end of the day, and what it’s

going to cost taxpayers at the end of the day, and how much confusion it

may present to law enforcement agencies trying to separate the

provincial from the federal types of legislation.

S. Furstenau: Bill 27, the Pill Press and Related Equipment Control Act, serves

to restrict and regulate the ownership, possession and use of equipment

that can be used to mass-produce illicit drugs. This equipment includes

automated pill presses, gelcap machines and pharmaceutical mixers. It

does not, however, include manual hand presses and manual encapsulators,

which do not have the capacity for mass production.

This legislation was one of the top priorities requested of the

Solicitor General by law enforcement, and it stipulates that legitimate

users of pill press equipment must register their machines and undergo a

criminal record check. Similarly, those wishing to buy or sell a machine

must be registered. Illegitimate use of pill press equipment is thus

criminalized with steep penalties invoked for offences and increased

search and seizure power for police.

This act hopes that these provisions will address the scale of

British Columbia’s drug crisis. There were nearly 1,500 overdose deaths

in B.C. last year, and fentanyl was detected in 81 percent of those

deaths. The intent of this legislation is to provide a means of

interrupting drug circulation prior to its consumption.

Although this legislation offers a useful tool for law

enforcement, it is essential that we ask how we are going to create a

massive suite of solutions to the opioid crisis that we face in our

province. Crackdowns on certain aspects of the manufacturing process

will not ensure that drugs are no longer manufactured. Similarly, it

will not deter the amount of drugs being imported into our

province.

[11:20 a.m.]

It is useful and important to address the drug crisis at its root.

This tabled legislation provides a top-down approach that gives more

strength to law enforcement and hopes that steep penalties for offences

will act as a deterrent, and this is a good step. More importantly, we

should be focused on why people are driven to participate in the illicit

drug industry, and address the social and economic factors that

influence their involvement in drug distribution and manufacture.

Focusing on the equipment alone overlooks the systemic and complex

nature of the issue.

While we are going to support this bill, and we see it as a step,

let’s continue, as legislators, to focus where our attention is most

needed. We need to recognize that the opioid crisis, the overdose crisis

in this province, is linked to a far greater social problem that we have

and that we need to look at solutions to address the root of that

problem, not just the symptoms.

J. Thornthwaite: I’m happy to be able to respond on second reading to Bill 27,

entitled the Pill Press and Related Equipment Control Act, which

restricts the ownership, possession, use and sale of equipment that may

be used to make unlawful drugs. This is an attempt from British Columbia

to crack down on pill presses in a bid to ease the ongoing opioid

overdose crisis gripping our province.

The member from Prince George has already talked about what he’s

going to bring up in the committee stage, with regards to the technical

issues that need to be addressed. I thought that I would mention things,

similar to the member for Cowichan Valley…. I’m referring to the

coroner’s report.

There were 102 suspected drug overdose deaths in February 2018,

this year. It comes to about 3.6 deaths per day of the month. This has

been an ongoing trend for a while — four people a day in this province.

In total, there were just about 1,500 deaths in the year of 2017. This

issue is not going away any time soon.

As the member from Cowichan had mentioned, this does not get to

the root of the problem — why people are using drugs to begin with and

the pain they may be going through. People who cannot find or receive

love in their families or in their communities need to find substitutes,

and that’s where addictions come in.

I read this book. It’s called In the Realm of Hungry

Ghosts by Dr. Gabor Maté. I would recommend for anybody to pick

this up if they have any interest at all in mental health, addictions

and recovery. He says that addictions actually start in the womb and

that injection drug use, more often than not, arises in people who were

abused and neglected as young children.

The addict, in other words, is not born but made. His addiction is

the result of a situation he had no influence in creating. The

prevention of substance abuse needs to begin, actually, in the crib, and

even before then, in the social recognition that nothing is more

important for the future of our culture than the way children develop.

And there has to be much more support for pregnant women.

But there is hope. People are resilient, and with the right help

and treatment, recovery is possible, sustainable and attainable. We

know, all of us know, many people that have been and are going through

recovery.

Going on to what the Dr. Gabor Maté has said, the only way they

can escape drug addictions is if their pain is alleviated and their

emotions are brought back to healthy balance so that they have time to

think about it. It requires a complex, supportive social

environment.

[11:25 a.m.]

Yes, we will be supporting this bill. But I implore this

government to put a better priority on the prevention, the treatment and

the continuum of care that leads to recovery so that all people will be

able to be treated with, and feel, respect in this province, and we

won’t need this bill eventually.

N. Simons: I just rise to express my support for Bill 27, the Pill Press and

Related Equipment Control Act. I acknowledge and respect the words of my

colleagues, who spoke to the issue of prevention and treatment and all

the important ancillary acts that we take as legislators to address

this.

I would say that it is absolutely true: we need to be addressing

the root causes. Those include poverty and abuse and exposure to

circumstances in life that have created problems that are resulting in a

person self-medicating. But I would just say that while we address those

issues, we also need to address some of the other factors. Pill presses

are just one of the many things that we can try to have some control

over.

It’s like saying we know people speed. It’s the behaviour that

needs to change, but that doesn’t mean we focus only on the behaviour

and stop doing the enforcement. We still need to take full advantage of

the authority that we have to control the use of pill press

manufacturing.

I would say that it could be characterized — this legislation has

been characterized — as duplication. But I would say it’s redoubling an

effort that needs to be done. We need to take all measures within our

authority to address this extremely troubling trend in our communities.

Knowing families who’ve lost loved ones, knowing people who have been

affected by overdose, knowing people who have died from drug overdoses,

I think, is the wind in the sails of the legislators to push them

towards finding a range of solutions. I believe this to be one of those

tools.

We don’t have a lot of evidence to say what works completely. We

have examples of things that do work. I’m pleased to say that our

government has been at the forefront of addressing those by the

establishment of a Mental Health and Addictions Ministry. I think it

reconfirms our government’s position when it comes to mental health and

addiction, and it shows we are interested in a full range of services

for people who find themselves in a situation where their health is

impacted by their mental health condition or their

addictions.

The Pill Press and Related Equipment Control Act is an important

and necessary item, an ingredient in the list of ingredients that we

need to put into the mix to address the opioid crisis in British

Columbia. I wholeheartedly support this legislation.

S. Gibson: I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this legislation. I think

we realize it’s propitious that this legislation comes before this

House. Tragically, we wish it were not necessary, but it is the

case.

As a matter of fact, if we look at the number of tragedies,

fentanyl tragedies, over this year and last, we see an ominous trend. As

a matter of fact, Vancouver Coastal Health reports, in the last few

weeks of April, street drugs at higher levels of fentanyl than before.

We can see it’s 74 percent higher than the weekly average of the

previous year.

[11:30 a.m.]

One of the tragedies, I feel, when I look at the need for this

legislation, is that a huge number — 90 percent, tragically — of folks

die at home, suffering an overdose. Four out of five were men, and half

the victims were between the ages of 30 and 49. And 911 calls routed

through the system report that paramedics responded to 250 overdose

calls in a week in comparing it to a previous week. You can see that the

total calls for service are dramatically rising. So yes, we will be

supporting this bill, but there are some queries that probably should be

addressed.

The federal government has a role in this enterprise as well.

They’re watching over these machines, regulating the machines —

tableting machines and encapsulators — since May of last year. They’ve

been doing this for about a year.

When I look at this, I wonder: is there going to be some

redundancy, a duplication of the regulations? It is something to bring

to the government’s attention. I also wonder how legitimate operators

and police will navigate a new layer of the provincial bureaucracy. If

there are loopholes that the provincial government wishes to address,

that’s laudable indeed.

A few technical questions. We see a trend, I think, a little bit,

if I may make a note of concern. As we look at the bill, you can see

there’s a reliance on cabinet making decisions, making some changes,

which perhaps is understandable. But the concern, of course, is that

with anything like this, you’re going to get legislation being moderated

or adjusted privately and less in the public domain, which may cause

some concern.

This may also be explained by the relationship with the Third

Party, but I don’t know that. I’m just speculating. Trying to have

transparency and openness, I think, is desirable.

My understanding is that this legislation is quite a bit more

extensive and has more detail than a similar one in Alberta brought

forward. I’ll be interested in knowing whether the minister had any kind

of expectation that the Alberta experience would benefit us.

What are the costs of administering the act? Has there been some

plan to look at convictions, arrests and how those would be budgeted

for, in terms of the legal process? Those lawful operators of the pill

presses — how will they be affected? I know they have to register their

equipment, but apparently, there’s no on-line procedure to register. So

it looks like there’s going to be mail involved, which is a bit

anachronistic. Will they have to travel to community centres such as

Vancouver and Victoria? I don’t know about that. That seems not to be

identified. It may be useful for the minister to investigate

that.

Records have to be kept. I think we understand the reason for

that. But how long will they be required? Five years? Indefinitely? We

don’t really know. And verifications, the valid permit — what

constitutes that?

There’s a black market here worth millions, probably tens of

millions, and a lot of issues with identification, registries, permits.

So with the criminality involved, this legislation, indeed, is timely.

But what kind of regulations will have to be developed? I guess the

other question is: how will we deal with violators? It seems to be still

something that needs to be honed.

My

summary is that I think government is on the right track with

this. It’s understandable, unfortunate. I might add that in my own

communities of Abbotsford and Mission, the two communities I represent

here in the Legislature…. There is concern, as well, outside Metro —

indeed, provincewide. Yes, I think that we’ll feel comfortable with

this, notwithstanding some of the remarks I’ve made. I’ll close my

remarks here.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, the minister closes debate.

[11:35 a.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I want to thank the members for their comments and the questions

that the members across the way have posed. A number of them we’ll

obviously deal with during committee stage. But I just want to make

closing comments on some of the broader, general issues.

The reason that this legislation has been brought forward is

because we do have a crisis here in British Columbia. There is a

requirement for additional tools. The member is correct that the federal

government did bring in legislation.

One of the things we’ve done since becoming minister in this

portfolio is…. In meeting with the police and meeting with the RCMP,

they identified some significant loopholes that they said really do need

to be plugged, and that’s part of the genesis of this legislation. We

did work with the police on this to identify what those loopholes are

and how they can be plugged. That’s why I’m confident that they will be

able to deal with the issue on the federal side of the provincial

legislation, because they’ve had input in terms of where the issues

are.

The other issue that goes to some comments the member just made is

around…. The penalty system in this is administrative as opposed to a

criminal conviction. So the administrative penalty is easier to do, and

it comes with a significant financial deterrent.

The comments from the member from the North Shore…. Absolutely,

this is not intended to solve the crisis. That is a very complex issue

that requires significant investments in prevention and in treatment and

looking at doing things differently than we have done in the past.

That’s why the government created the Ministry of Mental Health and

Addictions to spearhead that fight and to lead that charge.

Along with prevention, along with treatment, there is also that

need to deal with the criminal element, the enforcement side of things,

and that’s what this piece of legislation is intended to do. There are

people in this province right now who are selling these things. They

know what they are being used for. They are preying on those with

addictions. They are dealing in death, and they know it. All they care

about is a profit.

There have been stories — we have seen them in the media — where

able to be touched. They weren’t doing anything illegal. Even with the

federal legislation, they’re still able to do it, and that’s why this

piece of legislation is intended to plug some of those

loopholes.

I want to thank all members for their comments in the second

reading debate, and I look forward to being able to deal with the

questions, legitimate questions that have been asked by the opposition,

at committee stage.

With that, hon. Speaker, I move second reading.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House

to be considered at the next sitting after today.

Bill 27, Pill Press and Related Equipment Control Act, read a second

time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the

next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading of Bill 17, intituled the Motor Vehicle

Amendment Act, 2018.

BILL 17 — MOTOR VEHICLE

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that the bill now be read a second time.

It is my pleasure to rise today to speak about Bill 17, the Motor

Vehicle Amendment Act, 2018. This bill proposes amendments to the Motor

Vehicle Act to address concerns that the legalization of non-medical

cannabis will negatively impact road safety in this province. The

changes proposed in this bill will establish foundational pieces of an

administrative regime to deter, detect and sanction drivers in this

province whose driving is affected by cannabis or other

drugs.

A key proposed change introduces a zero-tolerance rule with

respect to the presence of THC, the psychoactive ingredient in cannabis,

for drivers in the graduated licensing program. This means that new

drivers who operate a motor vehicle with any presence of THC in their

system, as detected by way of federally authorized and approved

drug-screening equipment, would be subject to an immediate roadside

licence suspension, a fine and driver penalty points. The same is in

place now for any presence of alcohol in these drivers.

These sanctions for new drivers would also trigger an automatic

review of their driving record, resulting in a possible driving

prohibition of up to six months for a first contravention and requiring

a driver to remain in a graduated licensing program for a much longer

period of time.

[11:40 a.m.]

This change was a key finding from the province’s public and

stakeholder engagement on cannabis regulation, and with it comes a clear

message. New drivers in this province must completely separate alcohol

and cannabis consumption from their driving or be prepared to face

serious consequences.

A further key change in this bill would establish a new 90-day

administrative driving prohibition for drug-affected driving. This

change would authorize a prohibition where a peace officer has

reasonable grounds to believe that a driver operating a motor vehicle

while having a blood drug concentration that was equal to or exceeded a

prescribed blood drug concentration, or a driver operating a motor

vehicle while having a concentration of alcohol and a drug that was

equal to or exceeded both a prescribed blood alcohol and blood drug

concentration, or a driver’s ability to operate a motor vehicle is

impaired by a drug or a combination of a drug and alcohol, as determined

through an evaluation by a police drug recognition expert, or a driver

failed or refused to comply with a demand made by a peace officer under

the Criminal Code.

This new 90-day prohibition is a key tool for police. It removes

drivers from B.C. roads beyond the 24-hour period currently permitted

under the act. Moreover, police will be authorized to serve the

prohibition concurrent with pursuing any charges for impaired driving

under the Criminal Code.

The final component of these proposed amendments seeks to

modernize the Motor Vehicle Act to harmonize it with the changes in

federal Bill C-46, which proposes a complete rewrite of the impaired

driving and other transportation-related sections of the Criminal Code.

The amendments to harmonize with Bill C-46 include updating

section

references to the Criminal Code contained throughout the Motor Vehicle

Act, creating an authority to prescribe motor vehicle–related Criminal

Code offences by regulation, and other consequential and housekeeping

changes necessary to ensure consistency between federal and provincial

law.

I want to make a few closing remarks about some challenges related

to the issue of drugs and driving. It is somewhat rare to be standing

before this House and speaking to proposed changes to provincial law

that are dependent on federal legislation that has not yet passed. But

Bill C-46, which proposes new impaired driving offences, as well as new

investigative tools and authorities for police, is still before the

Senate of Canada. A further issue is the federal commitment in respect

of police training and equipment. Discussions continue, and the details

have not yet been finalized.

With the legalization of non-medical cannabis looming, this is not

an ideal situation. It is also not a situation unique to British

Columbia. Jurisdictions across this country are all rushing to address

the monumental changes that are flowing from this legislation. They are

significant, and the time frame under which we are operating is

extremely tight and has caused frustration not only for provinces but

for law enforcement right across the country.

While this bill represents an important first step in B.C. to

address concerns about drugs and driving, the work must not stop here.

What we know about drugs and their impairing effects on driving is going

to evolve as new tools, technology, research and data become available.

There will surely be case law that will impact the changes to the

Criminal Code, as well as changes to provincial administrative regimes.

Without a doubt, whenever there’s legislation of this nature, with the

changes contemplated both federally and then that flow from the province

having to synchronize with the federal, you can bet your bottom dollar

there are going to be many billable hours.

I also know that support for police training and equipment will

continue to be a pressing topic with our counterparts at the federal

level. We view it as crucial. It is an issue that we have raised in

discussions with the federal government and with our federal and

provincial and territorial colleagues right across the

country.

Accordingly, I know we can expect further changes in the near

future that will build off of the foundational amendments proposed in

this bill. Drug-impaired driving is a serious public safety concern. We

believe that this first phase of amendments strikes the right balance

between public safety and administrative fairness. And as we’ve learned

from the decades-long struggle to address alcohol-impaired driving, it

is critical that we send a strong message right from the

start.

We must work together with our federal counterparts to ensure that

police have the tools and resources they need to keep roads safe and

that we continue to educate the public about the dangers of impaired

driving, whether by alcohol or by drugs.

[11:45 a.m.]

To that end, the changes proposed in this bill underscore a simple

but important message that all of us have a responsibility to continue

to deliver. When you choose to mix alcohol or drugs with driving, you’re

putting your life and the lives of others at risk, and it is not going

to be tolerated.

M. Morris: I’ll be supporting this bill as well. I know the minister and his

staff have done a lot of work on this. The IRP, or immediate roadside

prohibition, program in British Columbia has been noted right across the

country for the effectiveness. Since the time that we implemented the

legislation, when we were in government years ago, there has been over a

50 percent reduction in the fatalities caused by impaired driving

because of the effectiveness of this legislation.

It only stands to reason that it be amended to reflect the changes

that are coming from the federal government. I know the legislation is

tied up in the Senate right now, and we’ve been waiting with bated

breath for a long time. It has caused some consternation. So by amending

the legislation now and preparing for the future….

Drug impairment is nothing new. Drug impairment has been around

long before I retired from the RCMP and has caused fatalities and has

caused complications. This recognizes that, and this gives it a little

bit more teeth for police officers to address when they’re conducting

their activities out on the road.

The level of impairment. There are a lot of technical things. As

the minister referred to, there are still a lot of technical details

that have to be worked out as to what constitutes impairment with THC.

But I go back to some basic skills that police officers have right

across the country.

When you’re driving down the road on patrol, you’re looking for

those vehicles that are weaving or driving inconsistently, that are

exhibiting some driving behaviour that is warranting a second look. The

police officers will note that, and they will pull the vehicle over, and

there will be a strong smell of alcohol emanating from the interior of

the vehicle. So they conduct some sobriety tests. They might have a

roadside screening device for alcohol, and they will determine that the

person is impaired and subsequently carry on forward with their impaired

driving charge.

The same applied for years with drugs. You pull somebody over, and

as soon as the door opens, the blue smoke comes wafting out of the

interior of the vehicle, and the driver is obviously stoned. There is a

series of sobriety tests that the police officer will conduct on that

individual, but in addition to that, there is also….

Years ago the police forces across Canada implemented a drug

recognition expert training program. I tell you from experience…. I was

never trained to that level, but I know from experience that these are

very highly trained individuals that can look at an individual, and

after monitoring a few factors and conducting a series of tests, they

can determine whether the person is high on THC or opiates or some other

type of drug. That’s on the impaired driving part.

Go back to the office, get a blood test, do a demand under the

Criminal Code, and you prosecute the person through that process. What

we’re talking about here is the immediate roadside prohibition and the

90-day suspension, which I think is definitely going to get the

attention of a lot of drivers out there that take their chances. So

that’s where the drug recognition experts are going to be earning their

keep.

Right now I know there have been a number of devices that are

being tested for bodily fluids to determine the level of THC or the

presence of THC in the system, as are other drugs. We just have to

determine what that level is. But the drug recognition expert will be

part and parcel to that IRP decision so that we can say with certainty

that that individual is driving under the impairment of THC.

The problem that the minister will be facing, has already

addressed and is already concerned about is the fact that we don’t have

near enough drug recognition experts trained in British Columbia or

across Canada. It’s going to be an impact on our municipalities. It’s

going to be an impact on the police forces across Canada to ensure that

these resources are trained. Of course, as we take these people away and

train them, there are going to be vacancies. There will be overtime

costs. There will be an exponential increase in the costs of doing

business as a police officer in British Columbia.

[11:50 a.m.]

I do like the fact that the minister has alluded to a zero

tolerance for THC for new drivers, much the same as the alcohol side of

that. I know there were some jurisdictions, I think perhaps New Zealand

and Australia, that had looked at zero tolerance — period — for THC in

the blood for driving. I don’t know how that has settled at the end of

the day and whether there have been some challenges there that will

prohibit them from going forward on that. The zero tolerance for new

drivers is important.

The other aspect that police officers are going to be wrestling

with and the ministry will be wrestling with is secondhand smoke. We

might have a driver that says: “I’ve never touched the stuff. I don’t

smoke it myself, but everybody else in the car was smoking it that day.

I’m the designated driver.”

It’s a little bit different than alcohol, where if somebody in the

back seat is drinking a beer, it doesn’t really affect the driver. But

now we’ve got somebody in the back seat puffing on a marijuana

cigarette, and the driver is getting the benefit of that as well. That’s

another technicality that is going to be wrestled with as we move

forward with the legislation. There will be some changes

there.

I recognize…. When we were still in government and I had the file,

I was looking at that file, and I could see the problems associated with

this file. Probably it was a little bit…. I appreciate the workload that

the minister has taken on after I’d seen all of the early problems that

were starting to surface from that. Having said that, we will be

supporting the bill. There are a couple of technical things that we’ll

probably talk about as we go through.

I know we’d like to continue speaking on this, but noting the

hour, I move that we adjourn debate and reserve our right to speak again

on this.

M. Morris moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported resolution, was

granted leave to sit again.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Deputy Speaker: This House, at its rising, stands adjourned until 1:30 this

afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:52 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE

DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

CHILDREN AND

FAMILY DEVELOPMENT

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); S. Chandra Herbert in

the chair.

The committee met at 11:07 a.m.

On Vote 18: ministry operations, $1,792,612,000

(continued) .

Hon. K. Conroy: Just before I start, we have some answers to some questions from

yesterday that I want to give to the member. A follow-up from yesterday

is in response to the question about how many Indigenous children were

placed in Indigenous homes. Of the 243 children that were placed for

adoption last year, 114 children were Indigenous. As I mentioned, this

is a preliminary number as we finalize last year’s adoption placements

information. Of that 114 number, 28 percent, 32 of them, were adopted

into Indigenous homes. Again, this is preliminary

information.

Then, on the number of children available for adoption, we’ve got

updated numbers as of April. Yesterday we had them just until the end of

December. As I noted yesterday, there were 1,260 children eligible for

adoption during the fiscal year. As of April 9, 2018, there are 985

children who are available for adoption. Of these children, 38 children

are on proposal status, which means a family has been identified and a

plan is in place to have the child placed in their home.

Then 242 children are in foster-to-adopt situations, and for 705

children, we are seeking homes. In some circumstances, assessments are

being completed as to the needs of the children so that they’re fully

understood before a potential home is identified.

[11:10 a.m.]

I also wanted to make sure I introduced staff today. I neglected

to yesterday. So Philip Twyford, our EFO; Teresa Dobmeier, our ADM for

service delivery; Cory Heavener, our ADM and provincial director of

child welfare; Denise Devenny, executive lead for Indigenous engagement;

Cheryl May, ADM for policy and legislation; Catherine Talbott, our ED

for strategic initiatives; Christine Massey, our ADM for early years and

inclusion; and our deputy minister, Allison Bond. All are here to answer

the members’ questions.

L. Throness: Thank you to the minister for that update. I’m going to surrender

the floor to the member for Prince George–Valemount for a

question.

S. Bond: Thank you to my colleague for allowing me a few minutes to ask

some questions. I want to speak with the minister about an issue that is

incredibly important to people across British Columbia, but certainly in

my part of the province as well.

I’m hopeful the minister is aware of this file. There is a group

of very dedicated people in Prince George, service providers and others,

brought together with the leadership of someone I have enormous

admiration for. Sharon Hurd, who works with the Phoenix Transition

Society, is a tireless worker on behalf of women, supporting them in our

community through Phoenix and many other ways.

There is an opportunity for the Ministry of Children and Families

to be a partner in a program that would help to support women who have

mental illness and addictions. Currently there is a pilot project in

Prince George called Harmony House. It began in 2017. It’s funded by the

Vancouver Foundation. It does offer services to pregnant and addicted

women. However, there is significant need.

The reason that I’m here in front of this minister is because,

apparently, the Ministry of Children and Families owns several buildings

that this particular group of people would very much like to see

repurposed. In fact, the letter was sent to the minister in

April.

I’m going to quote from that letter: “There is a place in Prince

George that could open the doors almost immediately if the Ministry of

Children and Families and the government are willing to work with this

community group. It is the youth containment centre and Bowron House on

the property. A group of us have requested a tour. Bowron House sits

next to the youth containment centre.” I won’t go into those specific

details.

First, is the minister aware of the request and the fact that the

message being conveyed back to these individuals is that the ministry is

not interested in repurposing those buildings?

[11:15 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: I thank the member for the question. The ministry is very

interested in repurposing. In fact, we’ve had a number of requests from

a number of different agencies in the community, as well as from

different government ministries, that have expressed interest in using,

especially, Bowron House.

I’d be happy to discuss this further with the member when we can

plan a time.

S. Bond: I appreciate the minister’s response, and I appreciate her

willingness to look at this. There is an absolute demand for additional

service for women in northern British Columbia.

As I’m sure the minister is aware, we are the home of Baldy

Hughes, which provides a therapeutic environment and treatment for men.

I have visited there many times, and I am an incredible supporter of

that program.

I’m encouraged that the minister would meet with us. I would only

reflect on, first of all, the incredible group of people who are

interested in this proposal. I would ask that the minister look at the

letter. It was laid out very clearly in terms of a potential use for the

facility.

I guess I would like to just look at a potential example of that.

In View Royal, there is currently a repurposing underway. It was a youth

detention centre there — looking at exactly a similar type of program

for youth, in this circumstance. So I think it isn’t unprecedented, and

I think there are role models that exist.

I know the group is feeling somewhat frustrated. They have written

to the Premier, to everyone they could think of, to actually talk about

meaningful service, an expansion of programs where there are very, very

exceptional professionals who could help provide support.

I want to be very cognizant of my colleague’s time and the need he

has to finish the questions. So with that, I’ll thank the

minister.

I would hope that there would be an effort to reach out to the

organization, particularly through Sharon Hurd, to have meaningful

conversation about a building that’s sitting empty and that with

relatively little renovation, could provide enormous support to women

who are struggling in northern B.C.

I appreciate the minister’s time and her interest in this

file.

L. Throness: I want to continue talking about adoption and foster care in the

last half-hour I have, because that really lies at the heart of what the

minister does. I want to bring back something that she said

yesterday.

I’m happy that the backlog is not larger than it was last year,

although I’d point out that April 9 is a week after the end of the

fiscal year, which is the usual way of counting statistics, so probably

it was in her interest to do so. I’ll be interested to see what it was

as of March 31, when the performance report comes around.

The minister suggested yesterday that First Nations really don’t

want adoption as much as we thought, which implies that she can relax on

adoption, and that might explain why adoptions are down 20 percent this

year. I don’t think that’s really acceptable.

I want to quote to her a recommendation of the Ed John report,

which said this: “MCFD develop, in partnership with Indigenous

communities, a provincial adoption awareness and recruitment strategy

that includes a specific focus on recruiting more Indigenous adoptive

parents from the communities of origin of the Indigenous children in

care.”

How is the minister doing on this recommendation? What is she

doing about that?

[11:20 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: In October 2017, a recruitment campaign was launched to gain more

Indigenous adoption homes. It was directly in response to Grand Chief Ed

John’s report — specifically, recommendation 46, which says: “MCFD to

develop, in partnership with Indigenous communities, a provincial

adoption awareness and recruitment strategy that includes a specific

focus on recruiting more Indigenous adoptive parents from the Indigenous

communities of origin of Indigenous children.” As I said, that’s

recommendation 46 from that excellent report that we are still using to

move forward on.

The specific actions included in this campaign are in response to

this recommendation. The ministry has funded the lifelong connections

adoption and permanency recruitment campaign.

This project is a collaborative project that was coordinated by

the Adoptive Families Association of B.C. and stewarded by several

Indigenous and Métis child and family-serving organizations in B.C.,

including the Indigenous Perspectives Society, the Métis Nation B.C.,

the Métis Commission for Children and Families of B.C., the Vancouver

Aboriginal Child and Families Services Society, the Ktunaxa-Kinbasket

Child and Family Services, the Nezul Be Hunuyeh Child and Family

Services, the Scw’exmx Child and Family Services Society and the

Northwest Inter-Nation Family and Community Services Society.

Eight projects received funding. Examples of the innovative

projects proposed included an art installation created by elders, youth

and a local artist; and a bus tour to educate band, civic and community

leaders about what it means to be a child in care and why there is an

urgent need for permanent homes for these children.

The fund awarded a total of approximately $80,000 to 18 First

Nations, Inuit and Métis child and family-serving organizations from

Chilliwack to Fort St. James, from Golden to Bella Coola.

The fund’s goals were to support community-based initiatives that

educate people about how they can provide permanency to kids in care and

to get more First Nations, Inuit and Métis families involved in meeting

this need.

A new campaign is currently being developed that is informed by

young adults that were formerly in care. This is just the beginning of

this initiative.

L. Throness: Troubling to the opposition is that in the last fiscal year, the

ministry received $3 million extra for adoption, but the results are

still lagging by almost 20 percent. That’s not a little. That’s a lot.

What did the minister do with that $3 million?

[11:25 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: We’re not relaxing on adoption, and we are focusing on the needs

of the children, which is critically important. The campaign to find

children loving homes, permanent homes, was initiated several years ago.

A number of the children that are now waiting for homes have unique

circumstances that need to be addressed.

Some of those circumstances of those kids are sibling groups. We

need to try to ensure that we can keep siblings together, which

sometimes is difficult. A family adopting might not want to adopt two,

three or four siblings.

The age. A number of those children waiting for adoption are over

the age of five or are in their teens, and that can pose issues. A

number of the children have complex medical needs, so we have to make

sure that we can match those needs with the families that are adopting,

and also might have emotional and developmental needs. We are really

focused on finding families who can take care of children in those

exceptional circumstances. I just want to give a number of examples of

why a planned adoption might not have occurred in the last

year.

One example is a child under five years of age who was having

difficulty transitioning from a foster home to an adoptive home and

needed more time to adjust to the plan, so the adoption placement date

was actually postponed for over four weeks and into the next fiscal

year. That meant that number didn’t get carried forward.

[11:30 a.m.]

A plan is in place for a child to be adopted by their foster

parent, and the Indigenous community requested that the cultural safety

agreement be presented to the Indigenous community committee. In keeping

with the spirit of reconciliation and collaboration, that placement date

has also been postponed, because it’s very, very important to ensure

that those traditions are respected and recognized.

Also, another situation is where a change in circumstances

occurred in the adoptive parents’ home, where an adult moved into the

home. This required an update to the home study, so that adoption

placement was also delayed. Those numbers weren’t included in this

year’s numbers, so to speak. No one’s relaxing with trying to ensure

that the adoptions go ahead.

Of the money that the member referenced, $1 million is for

post-adoption assistance to ensure that the families get assistance they

need once the adoption is approved. For the rest of the money, the Pace

program receives $200,000 in funding to support healthy transitions and

deliver services to families who adopt or are the permanent guardians of

children and youth in care in the Lower Mainland. The funding supported

2.5 positions to work with families.

The Adoptive Families Association of B.C. received $250,000 in

funding to secure 500 seats in the on-line adoption education program

and in the Child in the Home on-line program.

A Child’s Song Adoption Support Services received $28,000 to

provide seminars to 250 caregivers, adoptive parents and guardians right

across the province on parenting children who have experienced

trauma.

Then there are also eight positions to assist service delivery

staff to complete documentation tasks associated with the adoption and

permanency for children in care. So very much an ongoing issue and one

that staff are working very hard on.

L. Throness: Well, I appreciate the minister recounting anecdotes, but it’s as

if she wants to make an excuse for why adoptions are down. I would point

out to her that the previous government had all of those types of

problems, too, and was still able to have much larger numbers than the

minister has.

I would appeal to the minister. I’ve not been criticizing the

minister because I want to criticize. I’ve been criticizing the minister

because adoption is at the centre of what she does. It finds forever

homes for children in government care. It’s best for the child. It’s

best for the government. It’s best for the minister. It’s best for the

taxpayer.

I want the government to be successful here. I want the government

to mount an extraordinary effort to find more homes for children and

increase adoption in the coming year, and I’ll be watching closely on

that.

I want to move on to foster care in my last few minutes. The March

2017 performance management report says that in the one year, 2016-17,

we lost 569 foster parents under age 64. That is catastrophic. It is a

drop of 22 percent in one year. How many foster parents under age 64

were active at the end of March this year?

[11:35 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: I just want to clarify something for the member. At the centre of

what we do as a ministry and what I do as a minister is to ensure that

families stay together, that families get the support they need to stay

together, that children get the support they need to stay with their

families, to ensure that we’re there for them and to ensure that the

extended families are brought into the picture. That is exactly what

this ministry should be doing and should be working hard to make sure of

every day.

There might not be as many adoptions because we were able to keep

families together in the long run. I think that’s something that needs

to be clear. I mean, that is definitely what the Aboriginal delegated

agency in Kamloops told me — that those 50 children that had been on the

list are no longer on that list because they are working to ensure those

children stay with their families. That’s at Lii Michif Otipemisiwak, if

the member would like to talk more with those folks in Kamloops. They

are very dedicated to that.

In total, the province has 2,660 foster homes. Under the age of

65, it’s 2,238; over the age of 65, it’s 411. I just want to comment on

how dedicated the foster parents are that I have met and how impressed I

am with the work they do, sometimes in a very difficult situation. The

foster parents in this province are just so committed to the work that

they do, and I just want to commend them publicly for that on the

record.

L. Throness: I want to give a suggestion to the minister. The cost differential

between contracted care and foster care is huge, as she knows.

Contracted care is five times more expensive. I calculated, given my

limited ability, that based on 7,000 children in care, last year we

spent about $140 million on fostering and nearly as much, $125 million,

on contract care, although it represents only 15 percent of placement

days. In other words, we could greatly increase the support we pay to

foster parents, recruit more of them and have money left over for some

contracted care.

This would be, of course, better for children, and it wouldn’t

cost the taxpayer an extra dime. So would the government increase

support for foster parents, mount a big recruitment effort and set as a

goal to recruit enough foster homes so that we need almost no contracted

care?

[11:40 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: I agree with the member. Contracted services cost more and

probably are not the best circumstances to utilize often. We are

transitioning out of a system that has been in place for many years.

That takes time. I also agree that foster care could provide better

care. The bottom line, though, is making sure we can keep kids with

families and providing the support to those families so that we can

ensure that that happens.

Right now we are, I acknowledge…. I mean, foster parents have

contacted me, since the first time I met with them, a number of times.

The fact that they have not had a raise since 2009…. There has been

nothing for foster families as far as that goes. Since that time, the

cost of living for families has gone up in B.C. Also, it was in Grand

Chief Ed John’s report. He highlighted the number of other community

partners that address payment inequities between foster caregivers and

kinship families who step up to care for vulnerable young

relatives.

For this reason — for the rationale around foster parents, around

issues with families, kinship — the government has requested that the

ministry staff undertake a project to do an immediate overview of how

foster families, all caregivers, are paid in this province. It’s a

collaborative review of the payment model that’s done for all types of

family caregivers. This project is looking into all aspects of pay

around the family caregiver payment model, including the linkages with

the federal Canada child benefit as well as child disability

rates.

[11:45 a.m.]

I agree that foster families provide an amazing service, and we

need to look to see how we can ensure that we provide the remuneration

that they require while also looking at ensuring that we support

families that want to support their children and support those kinship

agreements.

L. Throness: I just have one more question. I want to thank the minister and

her staff, as well, for appearing and answering questions here. I only

wish I had longer.

The final question is about my order paper questions. I’ve had

order paper questions now on the order paper for seven months. It’s part

of the process of standing orders. These are factual questions. I don’t

think it’s very respectful of the standing orders, nor is it very

transparent to all MLAs, who would have that information available to

them.

Why has the minister not answered my questions on the order paper,

and will she undertake to do so right away?

Hon. K. Conroy: It’s interesting the member raises this question. I just want to

put on the record that there were never any written answers on the order

paper that were answered by the previous administration, the government

under which this member sat for 16 years. In fact, the last time a

notice of question on the order paper was answered was in

Most recently our ministry did answer questions that were put on

the order paper by the member in the fall. I think the member needs to

refresh his understanding of questions on the order paper, because they

tend to be yes and no answers.

We gave significant answers in the fall, and I think they were

respectful. I think the staff did a very good job in how they responded

to those. We also have compiled a couple of binders for the questions

that the member does have on the order papers.

I would ask the member to refresh his understanding of questions

on the order papers, because they do need to be yes and no answers. It

is actually out of order for questions on order papers to be referred to

in estimates. It’s a very different process. But we do have a couple of

binders here of answers to your questions that we will give to you at

the end of the session today.

I would remind the member that this is the first time ever, since

his government — this member was a member of the former government — had

questions on the order papers. I well remember, because I know our

members put questions on order papers numerous times, and they were

never answered. Now twice, this member has had his questions answered. I

would like to ensure that he connects with the Clerk’s office to ensure

that he has a clear understanding of what questions on the order paper

actually entail.

I, too, would like to thank the staff for their support of

estimates and thank the member for his questions.

Vote 18: ministry operations, $1,792,612,000 — approved.

Hon. K. Conroy: I move that the committee rise and report completion of the

resolution and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:50 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2018: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada