First Session, 43rd Parliament

Official Report

of Debates

( Hansard )

Wednesday, April 2, 2025

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 31

The Honourable Raj Chouhan , Speaker

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

Members’ Statements

Eva Hilborn and Wonderful World of Books

Stephanie Higginson

Autism Awareness and Acceptance

Elenore Sturko

Dana Lajeunesse

Moby Dick Fish and Chips

Trevor Halford

411 Seniors Centre Society

Mable Elmore

Royal Canadian Legion in Peachland

Macklin McCall

Speaker’s Statement

Use of Electronic Devices During Question Period

Oral Questions

Government Response to Deaths of Children and Youth in Care and Action on Report Recommendations

Amelia Boultbee

Hon. Jodie Wickens

Scott McInnis

Education Funding

Jeremy Valeriote

Hon. Lisa Beare

Hon. Anne Kang

Safety of Health Care Workers

Elenore Sturko

Hon. Josie Osborne

Government Response to Deaths of Children and Youth in Care and Action on Report Recommendations

Heather Maahs

Hon. Jodie Wickens

Trevor Halford

Child Death and Injury Cases Related to Substance Use

Bruce Banman

Hon. Ravi Kahlon

Reann Gasper

Hon. Jodie Wickens

Death of Indigenous Youth in Government Care

Á’a:líya Warbus

Hon. David Eby

Tabling Documents

Office of the registrar of lobbyists, determination decision 25-01; Atira Women’s

Resource Society; designated filer: Donna-Lynn Donnie Rosa-Brailsford; January 31,

Office of the registrar of lobbyists, determination decision 25-02; Arts Club of Vancouver

Theatre Society; designated filer: Peter Cathie White; February 5, 2025

Office of the registrar of lobbyists, determination decision 25-03; Vancouver Humane

Society; designated filer: Amy Morris; February 20, 2025

Petitions

Harwinder Sandhu

Orders of the Day

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 11 — Membership Change to Public Accounts Committee

Hon. Mike Farnworth

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 7 — Economic Stabilization (Tariff Response) Act

Hon. David Eby

Peter Milobar

Hon. Niki Sharma

Steve Kooner

Hon. Adrian Dix

Kiel Giddens

Hon. Ravi Kahlon

Rob Botterell

Trevor Halford

Hon. Ravi Parmar

Harman Bhangu

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Emergency Management and Climate Readiness

Hon. Kelly Greene

Macklin McCall

Gavin Dew

Hon Chan

Brennan Day

Ward Stamer

Ian Paton

Misty Van Popta

Rosalyn Bird

Estimates: Ministry of Citizens’ Services

Hon. George Chow

Rosalyn Bird

Wednesday, April 2, 2025

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: Hon. Christine Boyle.

[1:35 p.m.]

Introductions by Members

The Speaker : Before we recognize members for introductions, I have a very special introduction

to make.

Hon. Members, I’m pleased to welcome to our chamber a friend and a fellow presiding

officer, the Hon. Nathan Cooper, Speaker of the Alberta Legislative Assembly. He was

first elected in 2015 to represent the people of Olds–Didsbury–Three Hills, then elected

Speaker in 2019 and re-elected in 2023.

Our new members may not know that our own Legislature’s cat, Macey Hansard, is related

to Speaker Cooper’s own cat, Hansard. Unfortunately, he didn’t bring her here, so

next time.

Members, would you please welcome Speaker Nathan Cooper from Alberta.

Hon. Diana Gibson : It’s my great pleasure to introduce here today on the floor the Hon. David Eggen

and his partner, Somboon, in the gallery.

Hon. Eggen is the MLA for northwest in Edmonton and the shadow minister for Advanced

Education in the province of Alberta. He is the longest-sitting MLA in the Alberta

Legislature right now. He and I worked together in Alberta when he was the head of

Friends of Medicare.

He’s an incredible advocate for things that we hold dear around health care, housing,

anti-poverty and building a more just society. He has been an incredible inspiration

to me as a leader.

Please welcome Hon. Mr. Eggen and Somboon.

Dana Lajeunesse : It’s an honour for me today to welcome a few of my former local government colleagues

to the House. We’re fortunate to have several members of the Union of B.C. Municipalities

executive joining us.

They are, in no particular order, Sarrah Storey, mayor of Fraser Lake; Sheila Boehm,

city councillor from Williams Lake; Aimee Grice, councillor from the town of Oliver;

Pete Fry from the city of Vancouver; and last but not least, Gord Klassen, councillor

from Fort St. John.

Please give these fine, dedicated folks a warm House welcome.

Hon. Josie Osborne : It’s my pleasure to introduce just 19 representatives from the B.C. Nurses Union

who are joining us in the north gallery today. This includes vice-president Tristan

Newby.

I won’t read the other 18 names, but you are all so very welcome here.

B.C. has had the fastest-growing nursing workforce of any major province since 2017.

The B.C. Nurses Union represents over 48,000 professional nurses and allied health

care workers, providing vital care in our hospitals, long-term care facilities and

in our communities.

Would the House please join me in making them feel very, very welcome today.

Ian Paton : I am so pleased to have my daughter Jamie Paton here today. She grew up on our farm

in Delta.

Jamie did some great humanitarian work over the years. She has done Habitat for Humanity

in Fiji, in Brazil and in Nicaragua and then taught school for two years in Japan.

She is back home again, teaching school in Richmond, elementary school.

Mark Cantu, a young man from Texas, is her partner. He just got his PhD from SFU in

environmental toxicology, whatever the heck that is.

Please make them feel welcome.

Hon. Brittny Anderson : It is my absolute pleasure today to welcome here executive members of the Union of

B.C. Municipalities. The work they do to represent communities across British Columbia

is so, so important. I am delighted that they are going to be here today in the Hall

of Honour from 7 p.m. until 9 p.m.

[1:40 p.m.]

Everyone in this House is welcome to please join them. It is led, of course, by president

Trish Mandewo, but there are people from across British Columbia, local government

representatives, that do absolutely incredible work.

Can you please all welcome them to the House today.

Lorne Doerkson : I want to join with members that are welcoming people from across our province that

represent UBCM, but I do want to single out one individual, and that’s Sheila Boehm,

who is from Williams Lake.

She is the past president of NCLGA. She is the current director of UBCM. She is a

city councillor in Williams Lake, but she is an amazing advocate for Cariboo-Chilcotin,

and I’m proud to know her. I’m grateful for her work that she does all year round.

Thank you very much, Sheila.

Make her very welcome here today.

Hon. Christine Boyle : I would like to introduce my two EAs, Tyler Trupp and Bella Devereaux, who are in

the House, usually watching from an office while they are working very hard.

I am glad to have them here and want to acknowledge the important work that our staff

all do in building relationships and advancing important work across this building

and far beyond.

Will the House please join me in thanking and welcoming Tyler and Bella into this

House.

Korky Neufeld : Two short introductions, if I could.

Would the 23 students from SFU please stand?

I think they’re behind us in the back there. I had the privilege to briefly meet with

23 SFU political science core students. These students represent a diverse background

of people from nations and cultures, and they have different passions for entering

the deep waters of sometimes muddy politics.

Let us members who are sympathetic to that cause make them feel most welcome.

Also, I’m excited to be meeting this afternoon with the B.C. Federation of Students.

I know they’re in the precinct.

Would all members please make them feel most welcome as well.

Hon. Randene Neill : In welcoming our local governments, I would like to add a couple of extra folks who

are in the House today: the mayor of Peachland, Patrick Van Minsel; and Coun. Dave

Collins.

We had a really great meeting yesterday about the great work you’re doing on the watershed.

Please help me in giving them a warm welcome.

Bruce Banman : On the way here this morning, I had the pleasure of bumping into a huge number of

members from the B.C. Nurses Union. In particular, I want to give a shout-out to my

local, Abbotsford — Lily.

I just hope they’re still here. They said they were going to be here all day. I just

want to thank them for the hard work they do for us every single day.

Will this House please welcome them and give them the round of applause that they

so richly deserve.

Hon. Bowinn Ma : As I look up into the gallery, I see my good friend, Kath-Ann Terrett, a long-time

activist and leader within the BCNU nurses union — really, truly a champion of nurses

across the province.

Would the House please join me in making her feel very welcome.

Macklin McCall : I, as well, would like to welcome the mayor of Peachland, Mayor Patrick Van Minsel.

Mayor Van Minsel is here to meet with ministers to discuss things that matter most

to Peachland.

Will this House please join me in welcoming Mayor Van Minsel to the chamber.

Hon. Jodie Wickens : Today, April 2, is Autism Awareness and Acceptance Day. I know many members of this

House are impacted and touched by autism. My little guy was diagnosed with autism

and epilepsy when he was four.

I just want to give a shout-out to the families who experience the joy and the challenges

and to the service providers.

In my capacity as Minister of Children and Family Development, I understand firsthand,

and I hope we all learn something about autism awareness and acceptance today.

Lynne Block : Nowruz, the Persian New Year, marks the arrival of spring and is celebrated by millions

worldwide. It begins on the first day of Farvardin, around March 20, and symbolizes

renewal, joy and family gatherings.

[1:45 p.m.]

The festivities last 13 days, ending with Sizdah Be-dar, a day spent outdoors to embrace

nature and ward off bad luck. Families picnic and release sabzeh, sprouted greens,

into water, symbolizing a fresh start for the year ahead.

To the 68,545 Iranians living in B.C., Happy Sizdah Be-dar.

Hon. Ravi Kahlon : I’ve got some amazing folks here today from the Ministry of Housing and Municipal

Affairs.

I want to welcome Cassidy Harbottle, Melia Walker, Justin Bedi, Rashi Aggarwal, Shannon

Oberholtzer, Carolyn Wilcher, Benjamin Gregory, Juliana Ko, Jake Plan, Yashar Ghajar

and Anna Wren.

Please join me in welcoming them all into the chamber today.

Gavin Dew : I was pleased to hear Coun. Pete Fry acknowledged in the chamber. Pete and I started

our relationship and our political careers at the same time, in 2016, by both being

soundly defeated by the former Minister for Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation,

Melanie Mark.

We all got to know each other quite well during that time, and every time I see Pete

or Melanie, I’m reminded of the importance of collegiality across party lines and

the recognition that although this is an adversarial system, we are all unified in

our desire to make things better for the people in our communities and in British

Columbia.

Harwinder Sandhu : I would like to introduce our local great leaders who are here today: our local mayor

of Vernon, Mayor Victor Cumming; mayor of Lumby Kevin Acton; as well as Salmon Arm

city councillor Louise Wallace, who I have the honour to work together with. I admire

the work they do together for the betterment of communities.

Would the House please join me to extend our sincere gratitude and make them feel

very welcome here.

Kiel Giddens : It’s great to see so many local government leaders in here, and particularly the

UBCM executive.

Thank you for everything you do.

It’s great to see the North so well represented with leaders like Cori Ramsay from

the city of Prince George, Gord Klassen from Fort St. John and my very good friend

Sarrah Storey from the village of Fraser Lake.

Would the House please join in another welcome to all of them.

Mable Elmore : I’m really pleased to look up and see a good friend, Baljit Fajardo. She’s here with

the B.C. Nurses Union and does terrific advocacy.

Really, in Vancouver-Kensington, I want to recognize her for her leadership. She’s

regarded as a community leader supporting young nurses, student nurses. She’s really

someone who’s known for fostering and building efforts to bring the community together

in Vancouver-Kensington.

I ask everybody to please give her a very warm welcome.

Rohini Arora : I’m just so excited to see the students from the SFU Political Science Student Union.

The main building for SFU is in my riding, so I’m stoked.

As a fellow poli-sci nerd, I can’t wait to connect with you folks later — quite soon,

actually.

Please make them feel welcome.

Harwinder Sandhu : I want to make another very important introduction, and I want to add to the Minister

of Health.

On behalf of the MLA for North Vancouver–Seymour and myself, we would like to again

welcome fierce advocates and the most caring people in this province, the delegation

from the B.C. Nurses Union, who I admire so much and who I had the honour to work

together with to strengthen and make our health care system better.

Would the House please join me again to thank them for everything they do and to make

them feel very welcome.

Jordan Kealy : I just wanted to introduce to the House a fellow councillor from the energetic city

of Fort St. John, Mr. Gord Klassen.

Also, when it comes to the UBCM, I know them familiarly. They’re friends of mine that

I previously sat with as a regional director.

I just want to wish you welcome.

It’s great to see…. People may not actually appreciate the distance that people have

to travel from the North when it comes to politics. It’s not always an easy feat.

Thank you very much, Gord.

[1:50 p.m.]

Jennifer Blatherwick : I would like to have the House make welcome president Trish Mandewo from UBCM, who

is also a city councillor in Coquitlam, where I reside, and Coun. Craig Hodge, who

are here in the building today.

Both of them are incredibly dedicated public servants who serve with knowledge, compassion

and a great deal of enthusiasm.

I would like to have you all join me in making them welcome.

Members’ Statements

Eva Hilborn and

Wonderful World of Books

Stephanie Higginson : Today is International Children’s Book Day, and that means that it is the perfect

day to celebrate a wonderful person and a charity that she started in the riding of

Ladysmith-Oceanside. Ninety-eight-year-old Qualicum Beach resident Eva Hilborn founded

the Wonderful World of Books because she believes that reading to children builds

lifelong language skills and a love for learning.

The retired Qualicum Beach school district teacher says the idea came to her in part

after reading about Dolly Parton’s foundation, the Imagination Library, which gifted

over 150 million books to children around the world. Eva decided to do the same thing

on a smaller scale in her own home community and started the Wonderful World of Books

in 2021.

The foundation started by delivering a book a month for free to families with children

two and three years old living in Bowser, a community about 20 minutes north of her

home of Qualicum Beach. Over the years, the age and delivery area slowly expanded,

and now the Wonderful World of Books delivers free books to children from birth through

to four years old.

Eva believes that by promoting early literacy through the 24 or more books that children

have the opportunity to receive through her foundation, it will set them up to succeed

in life. Her goal is for every child in her community to have their own library before

they start school.

All the books are purchased locally, and the Wonderful World of Books is a registered

Canadian charity with over 40 volunteer drivers who are mostly retired teachers.

Eva Hilborn is a fierce woman that I have had the honour to get to know as the local

MLA. Eva and the volunteers that support the Wonderful World of Books are a living

example of the famous Margaret Mead quote: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful

and committed individuals can change the world. In fact, it is often the only thing

that ever has.”

To Eva, I say: thank you for the incredible work of the Wonderful World of Books and

the incredible lifelong impact it has on the children and families of the Oceanside

area.

Autism Awareness and Acceptance

Elenore Sturko : Today we do recognize that it is World Autism Awareness and Acceptance Day, a global

initiative to foster understanding, acceptance and inclusion for individuals on the

autism spectrum.

Established by the United Nations in 2007, this day aims to shine a light on the unique

strengths people with autism have and some of the challenges they may face, while

raising awareness about neurodiversity. People on the autism spectrum differ from

other neurotypical people, sometimes having differences in communication and social

interaction and also having remarkable talents in areas like art, music or problem-solving.

This year’s theme emphasizes empowerment, ensuring people with autism have access

to education, employment and opportunities to thrive.

Awareness isn’t just about knowledge; it’s about action. It’s about dismantling stereotypes,

advocating for accommodations and listening. We are extremely fortunate in British

Columbia to have many advocacy groups, not-for-profit organizations and service providers,

as well as many parents and families of people with autism in B.C. I am grateful that

they have been fighting for services, fighting for funding and the rights of people

with autism, particularly children.

I am grateful, and I would hate to think where we would be in this province without

them. Especially, I am grateful for them standing their ground for individualized

funding.

As British Columbians, we can build a province where sensory-friendly spaces, flexible

systems and genuine respect are the norm, not the exception.

Today let’s commit to learning more, challenging our assumptions and supporting initiatives

to uplift people with autism. World Autism Awareness and Acceptance Day isn’t just

a date. It’s a call to create a more inclusive province.

[1:55 p.m.]

Professional Network Conference

2025 conference.

This event brings together some of the most inspiring minds and dedicated individuals,

all united by a common goal to create a world without barriers. I found the energy

and enthusiasm of all participants truly contagious. From the insightful discussions

to the innovative ideas shared, it was abundantly clear that we are moving in the

to making a difference was palpable, and it was encouraging to see so many people

passionate about driving change.

March 21 marked the 40th anniversary of Rick Hansen’s Man in Motion Tour. Clearly,

his efforts to raise global awareness about removing the stigma surrounding people

living with disabilities continues to this day. The Rick Hansen Foundation remains

a beacon of hope and progress, and being part of this conference reinforced my belief

in the power of collective action. Together we can break down barriers and build a

more inclusive society.

I wish to once again thank the organizers, speakers and attendees for making this

event a resounding success. Their dedication and hard work are truly commendable.

I’m confident that as a society, we will continue to collaborate, innovate and inspire

each other as we move forward in our journey toward a more accessible world.

Moby Dick Fish and Chips

Trevor Halford : I rise today to pay respect to a White Rock institution that is now celebrating their

50th anniversary, as of yesterday. It’s Moby Dick fish and chips in White Rock.

I saw that. A few fans in attendance today.

Moby Dick was actually started by Peter Mueller. He was born in Germany, later residing

in Switzerland. He worked as a chef at a five-star seafood restaurant before eventually

finding his forever home in Vancouver. He arrived in Vancouver in 1973 with just his

car, which he had shipped over, and he explored the cities until he found White Rock.

He worked as a chef at the cannery, but he realized his own dream was to open a restaurant

on the White Rock waterfront.

It was his wife, Claudia, that told him and reminded him of his own goal to operate

a restaurant by the time he turned 30. Encouraged by her faith and their shared dream,

Peter set out to find the perfect location, which they did. They brainstormed, and

it was a novel that Claudia was just finished reading, which was, obviously, Moby-Dick . They opened the restaurant on April 1, 1975.

Now, the first week they made a choice where they did not serve fish and chips, and

they almost went bankrupt. So they quickly corrected. Not to their surprise, they

were flooded by people, even as of today.

Peter operated this restaurant until 1999, when his wife, Claudia, passed away. He

did not want to continue doing this. This was a partnership that they had done, so

he sold it. It is now in the hands of Sasha and Yuriy, who proudly operate the restaurant

today.

I invite anybody that wants to come down, please do. If you’re in White Rock, stop

by Moby Dick and enjoy fish and chips on the beach.

411 Seniors Centre Society

Mable Elmore : The 411 Seniors Centre Society, established in 1977, has been a cornerstone in Vancouver’s

seniors community. It’s an inclusive, versatile and dynamic drop-in space for older

adults, and over the years, they’ve maintained a steadfast commitment to advocacy,

support and community-building. They offer essential services tailored to vulnerable

seniors, including information referral, digital literacy, emergency response and

preparedness and a variety of engaging recreational and social activities.

In spring 2023, the centre embarked on a new

chapter by relocating from their location

at 411 Dunsmuir Street to a vibrant neighbourhood at Fraser and 19th Avenue in Vancouver-Kensington.

They have got a new seniors centre, including affordable seniors housing units, and

are just a great addition to the neighbourhood.

[2:00 p.m.]

In 2023, Marion Leslie Pollack, the past president of 411, was honoured with the Seniors

Leadership Award by the Simon Fraser University Gerontology Research Centre, recognizing

her dedication to advocating for affordable housing and social justice for seniors.

Marion has also felt that what 411 provides to seniors are essential services.

We know from the leadership and example of 411 Seniors that by improving health and

well-being, seniors centres help older adults live more fulfilling lives. They do

incredible programming, including a kitchen that provides over 5,000 subsidized meals

to seniors every year. They have active membership of over 1,000 members. It’s just

an incredibly dynamic organization.

They lead by example to really demonstrate to us that when seniors are engaged and

supported, they’re less likely to require health interventions and they’re more likely

to contribute to their communities. And seniors centres create a positive economic

impact by reducing health care costs, supporting independent living, fostering social

connections and enhancing local economies, and they’re just a great addition to our

neighbourhood.

I ask everybody to please give a very round recognition to the great work of 411 Seniors

Centre Society.

Royal Canadian Legion in Peachland

Macklin McCall : Today I arise to speak about the Royal Canadian Legion in Peachland. This institution

is more than just a building; it’s a symbol of the sacrifices made by our veterans,

both past and present. For decades, the legion has been a cornerstone of our community,

providing a place where veterans, their families and the local community can come

together in remembrance, support and solidarity.

The Royal Canadian Legion in Peachland has served as a home to our veterans. It is

a space for them to gather, share stories and find comfort among those who understand

their sacrifices.

Each Remembrance Day this community honours those who fought for the freedoms we cherish,

standing at the cenotaph with pride and reverence. The legion has supported countless

initiatives, ensuring that veterans and their families are never forgotten and that

their contributions are always celebrated.

However, recently this valued institution and other local businesses fell victim to

a senseless act of vandalism. Windows of the legion were egged, leaving behind not

just a mess but a deep emotional wound. The president of the legion expressed the

pain that this act has caused, saying it really hurts. This type of behaviour has

no place in our community.

It is important that we come together and show respect for the institutions that support

our veterans and our way of life. The men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces made

great sacrifices to ensure that we have the freedoms we enjoy today. The least we

can do is respect the places that honour them.

I ask all members of this House and all citizens of our province to stand with the

Royal Canadian Legion and to reject acts of vandalism and disrespect. Let us ensure

that our communities are places of support, dignity and respect — places that reflect

the values we hold dear.

Speaker’s Statement

Use of Electronic Devices

During Question Period

The Speaker : Members, during question period, no electronic devices are to be used.

Oral Questions

Government Response to Deaths of

Children and Youth in Care and

Action on Report Recommendations

Amelia Boultbee : On January 28, Chantelle Williams was released from hospital late at night while

in the care of the Ministry of Children and Family Development. She was found unresponsive

blocks from her group home and was later pronounced dead. She was found by a passer-by

at 5 a.m.

Chantelle’s death is not an isolated incident. Last year 103 children died while receiving

services from MCFD. In spite of this death toll, the government has only implemented

nine of the 72 recommendations from the Representative for Children and Youth.

Chantelle’s family is here in the gallery. They have been trying for months to get

communication and answers from this government about Chantelle’s death. It has been

64 days since Chantelle’s death.

My question is: how many more children have to die before this government implements

the remaining 63 recommendations?

Hon. Jodie Wickens : I first and foremost want to give my condolences to the family that is here today.

Your loss is devastating. I am sorry. Your family member mattered. She was important.

And what has happened is unfair.

I have cleared my

schedule this afternoon. I would like to meet with the family if

they would like to meet with me.

[2:05 p.m.]

I have provided information to the members opposite about our Child, Family and Community

Service Act. Under that act, as the Minister of Children and Family Development, I

am not able to publicly share information that I obtain under that act. I understand

that this is frustrating. When I was in opposition, it was frustrating for me.

What I can say is that in general, in my ministry, any time a child dies, we review

the circumstances around that death. We do a comprehensive review. We work with third

parties from this Legislature, like the Representative for Children and Youth, like

the Coroners Service, like the police. We work with those independent bodies to provide

the information necessary. Wherever we can, we work with families.

I understand that it is a very difficult process. Throughout that process, my expectation

is that we provide families with support, that we pay for funerals, that we provide

food support and counselling support. This is an unimaginable circumstance for any

family, and my heart goes out to the family today.

The Speaker : Member, supplemental.

Amelia Boultbee : The report Don’t Look Away outlined the horrific death of a child in foster care and was released 258 days ago.

Following that report, this government admitted that the system is broken and pledged

to implement all nine of the recommendations in that report. This government stood

in this House and made that commitment. And here we are, following the death of yet

another child.

My question is: why has this government not implemented these recommendations, and

when can the public and families expect action?

Hon. Jodie Wickens : We absolutely are implementing recommendations of the Representative for Children

and Youth. I meet the Representative for Children and Youth regularly to talk about

the progress that our ministry is making on those recommendations. I also have provided

comprehensive information to the member opposite on her questions and will do so with

any member in this House.

I hate talking about numbers. Every single child is a child that mattered. Their life

was worth something, and it was important. I do have to correct the member, because

she continually talks about 103 children. I’ve provided her with the breakdown of

that information. I have provided her with the information available. Of those children,

89 were receiving services.

What that means is that a child who is with their parent, who might be receiving something

like speech and language services or counselling services, is counted in how we report

child deaths in this province. Of the number that the member mentioned, 14 children

who were in government care passed away.

In each one of those situations, we do a review. We ensure that recommendations are

followed up on. We take these deaths very seriously. I am committed to working every

single day.

The member opposite also sits on our Select Standing Committee for Children and Youth,

with the Representative for Children and Youth, and talks to that committee on the

progress that we are making on those recommendations.

We are making significant progress. We have struck a deputy ministers project board.

We are working across government on a comprehensive child and youth well-being plan

and outcomes framework.

I am committed to that work, and I am committed to doing better for children and youth

in this province.

Scott McInnis : According to the last report from the Representative for Children and Youth, approximately

500 children go missing every year while in government care. No one was even looking

for Chantelle Williams the night she died alone.

When will this government get serious about the safety of kids in its care and implement

the 72 recommendations from the representative?

[2:10 p.m.]

Hon. Jodie Wickens : I can assure the members in this House that there is nothing more important to me

than the safety and well-being of every single child in this province. I am a mom

of a 19-year-old and a 15-year-old. Every day that I wake up in this role, I think

about the safety and well-being of children.

We are implementing the recommendations that the Representative for Children and Youth

has made. We also invested $321 million into the ministry budget this year because

we understand that these services are vital to ensuring that children and youth are

safe. We have increased our direct workforce working alongside families by 20 percent.

We have invested in services for young people who have aged out of care.

There is more work to be done. I am committed to doing that work. This government

is committed to ensuring that vulnerable people in this province are kept safe. That

is my commitment.

I am willing to work with any member in this House on this issue. This is a non-partisan

issue. The well-being of children and youth is my top priority.

The Speaker : Member, supplemental.

Scott McInnis : Well, that sounds good, but the minister stands here and talks about money, action

plans and working on it. Meanwhile, children are still vanishing from care.

Chantelle Williams was missing. Was anybody even looking for her?

How many more children will B.C. lose before this government treats them like they

actually matter?

Hon. Jodie Wickens : Every child in this province matters. Every single day that I wake up in this role,

every single day that I go to bed, I think about the children in this province. I

think about the reports. I work diligently with the Representative for Children and

Youth. I meet with families, with community members. I have worked in community. I

have worked alongside families. I understand the frustration.

I understand that there is always more work to be done. I will wake up every day and

put every effort and every molecule in my body that I have to ensure that we are doing

better, that we are responding to recommendations that are made, that we are working

in community, that we are ensuring that we have strong oversight, that we are continually

doing better.

I will never, ever give up on doing the right thing for children and youth in this

province. There is always better to be done.

My commitment to the children, youth and families in this province, the service providers

that provide crucial support and to the members opposite and every member in this

House: that I will never stop that work.

Education Funding

Jeremy Valeriote : Education is the foundation of a healthy society and a functional democracy, but

it has been deprioritized by consecutive governments in British Columbia. B.C. ranks

ninth of the ten provinces in per-pupil funding. Chronic underinvestment has left

teachers unable to do their work effectively, undermining the opportunity for young

students to get the education they deserve.

When schools are inadequately funded and students spend their education years in portables,

a clear message is sent to our youth. “We are not sufficiently investing in you during

the formative years of your life.” Despite persistent inequities, no B.C. government

has adequately addressed these issues in over two decades.

To the Minister of Education, when will this government modernize operational funding

for public kindergarten-to-grade-12 schools?

Hon. Lisa Beare : I want to thank the member for the question. We have a shared passion for public

education.

I don’t know if the member knows, but I actually was a school board trustee, and that’s

what brought me to my role here as an MLA, because I was passionate about improving

the public education system.

I remember a little guy, Lucas, who came to present to us at the school board — ten

years old, his glasses. He came and sat in front of a table of a dozen adults to tell

us what our budget meant for him at the time. This was in 2016.

Lucas told me about how he suffers from anxiety and other mental health issues and

how he desperately needs a counsellor some days in school. One day he went to his

teacher and said: “I’m not having a good day. I need to see my counsellor.” And the

teacher looked at him and said: “I’m sorry, Lucas. It’s Tuesday. We don’t have your

counsellor till Thursday. Can you just hold it in?”

That’s the day I decided to run for MLA. I will work every day to ensure that we are

improving our public education system for kids like Lucas.

[2:15 p.m.]

We have increased our funding, year after year, since we’ve formed government, and

we will continue to do so. We will continue to make commitments around education,

because we know how important this is for kids.

The Speaker : Member, supplemental.

Jeremy Valeriote : The B.C. Federation of Students points out that this chronic investment is felt not

only in K-to-12 education but also across post-secondary institutions.

Our priorities should clearly be with the students of today and the workforce of tomorrow.

If we want to improve health care, build more housing, grow our economy and create

strong communities, we have to start with world-class, affordable post-secondary education

and skills training.

Public post-secondary institutions are in peril. Programs are being cut, faculty and

staff laid off. The government started a funding review in 2022 that would have brought

problems with the funding model to light and proposed solutions.

When will you release the results of consultation and complete the post-secondary

funding review?

Hon. Anne Kang : Thank you so much to the member across for this question.

Post-secondary institutions are an economic driver in this very challenging time that

we have here. I’m very proud of the 25 public post-secondary institutions we have

in British Columbia, and we continue to support them in the best way that we can.

The unilateral decisions the federal government has made with our international students

have really crippled the way that we are funding our post-secondary institutions.

I have been meeting with presidents, faculty, staff and students about the challenges

they are facing right now.

We are there for them. We are working with them, hand in hand, and making sure that

any financial challenges are not crippling the programming we are providing for them.

We will continue to support them, and we will continue to make sure that we have high-quality

education here for our post-secondary institutions.

Safety of Health Care Workers

Elenore Sturko : Last month a young nurse took her own life after being attacked twice on the job,

one incident happening while she was alone. The Health Minister responded to questions

from media by placing blame, saying her expectation is that the health authorities

follow the rules for safety.

Front-line workers tell me that it’s chronic NDP staffing shortages that are placing

nurses and other health care workers in danger on a regular basis. If the minister

is looking for someone to blame, she need only look in the mirror.

When will the Premier and the Health Minister truly take the safety of front-line

health care workers seriously?

Hon. Josie Osborne : We all know that hospitals and health care facilities are places where people go

to seek help and support to feel better and that our nurses, who are truly health

care heroes, are doing their very utmost and deserve a safe workplace to be.

Just this morning I had the opportunity to meet with front-line nurses and hear firsthand

about experiences that they have had.

With respect to this nurse that the member opposite refers to, it is simply a devastating

situation. I think every single person in this place, their hearts go out to her friends

and her family. We have heard and seen that she was an important part of her community,

giving so much, and this has got to have huge ripples across her workplace and across

her community as well.

Violence has absolutely no place in the workplace, and that’s why we’ve taken steps,

together with the B.C. Nurses Union and health authorities, to add security resources

into hospitals. In establishing the relational security initiative program, we have

made the commitment and have hired 320 of these relational security officers. We have

over 750 of them placed in facilities across British Columbia.

We’re going to do more. We need to do more, more in terms of violence prevention and

the curriculum and the training that people have access to, to make sure that patients,

nurses and all health care workers are safe.

The Speaker : Member, supplemental.

Elenore Sturko : The first time 33-year-old nurse Roseanne Wallace was attacked in the psychiatric

unit where she worked, her shoulder injury required surgery. The response to that

attack was to install a panic button.

[2:20 p.m.]

I am going to ask every member on that side of the chamber to imagine being a nurse.

Imagine being choked, punched, kicked, attacked by a violent patient. Now imagine

having to push a panic button because there aren’t enough staff to restrain that patient

and there aren’t any security officers posted to that unit.

My question is: how many minutes do you think it’s acceptable to have to wait for

help to arrive?

Hon. Josie Osborne : The member is correct in that we need more nurses on the floors here in British Columbia.

That’s why we’re taking the actions that we are to build the nursing workforce across

British Columbia. We’ve had the fastest-growing workforce across Canada here in B.C.

since 2017. We’re only behind P.E.I.

We’ve added 1,500 more nurses in the last year alone. We’ve made commitments around

a minimum nurse-to-patient ratio, which we know is making a big difference in places

like Smithers, where nurses told me this morning that they’re beginning to meet those

nurse-patient ratios. That’s making a real difference on the floor for nurses there,

and we’ve got to keep doing that work.

That’s why we’re going to continue working in partnership with the Nurses Union. We’re

going to continue to create better working conditions for nurses across British Columbia.

They are big challenges, but it takes all of us in partnership, working together.

We’re going to get this work done, because we know that nurses deserve better. We

know that British Columbians deserve health care when they need it and where they

need it, and part of that, so much of that is delivered by our nurses.

Government Response to Deaths of

Children and Youth in Care and

Action on Report Recommendations

Heather Maahs : More than 6,000 children have died or suffered critical injuries this past year on

this government’s watch. We know that a disproportionate number of those incidents

involved Indigenous children, which is, tragically, a repeating pattern.

How many more children will be put in harm’s way or die before this government implements

all 72 recommendations?

Hon. Jodie Wickens : We are absolutely committed to implementing the recommendations of the Representative

for Children and Youth. I meet regularly with the Representative for Children and

Youth to discuss where we are at with those recommendations.

Some of those recommendations have been implemented. They are immediate recommendations,

like timelines that social workers visit youth who are in care. Those have been completed.

The Representative for Children and Youth also has made recommendations that are systemic

and take longer to complete. Those recommendations are recommendations like a comprehensive

child and youth well-being plan and outcomes framework, a whole-of-government approach

to how we support families. When families interact with my ministry, they are at some

of the most difficult times of their journey.

There are multiple things that we need to do to address those challenges. It’s very

important work, it is work that I take incredibly seriously, and it is work that we

are committed to. We are transforming our child welfare system — working with Indigenous

communities, Indigenous governing bodies, on the resumption of jurisdiction of their

children and families.

This is very important work, and it’s work that we’re committed to.

Trevor Halford : After being released from the hospital to her group home, Chantelle Williams should

have had support, and she should have had supervision. She clearly did not have either

of those things. Instead, she was able to leave undetected, was then found unresponsive

hours later and passed away.

This government stood in this House almost one year ago and committed to implement

these critical, important recommendations. Today, nine out of 72. That’s not good

enough. That is not good enough for the children of this province, and it wasn’t good

enough for Chantelle. The family can’t even get basic answers on what happened when

she left the hospital.

My question to this minister, my question to the Premier, is a very simple one: what

are they waiting for to get these recommendations done, completed, to protect our

children today?

[2:25 p.m.]

Hon. Jodie Wickens : Again, the safety and well-being of children is my number one priority. I am committed

to working with the Representative for Children and Youth. We meet biweekly. I work

with her closely on her recommendations.

I want to correct the member opposite. Of the 72 recommendations cited, 44 of them

are directed at the Ministry of Children and Family Development, and 29 of those are

complete or already in progress.

This is very important work. I’m happy to work with any of the members opposite on

what we’re doing and provide more information to the members opposite on how we’re

doing that work — again, committed to working with the Representative for Children

and Youth and her independent office from our government.

I thank the member for the question.

Child Death and Injury Cases

Related to Substance Use

Bruce Banman : Thirteen-year-old Brianna MacDonald died of an overdose in a homeless encampment

in Abbotsford. She was just 13, a life ahead of her.

Brianna struggled with mental illness and addiction, and after being bounced between

the Children’s Hospital, Surrey hospital, doctors, counsellors and therapists, Brianna

wound up homeless in an encampment in Abbotsford. Her parents begged, pleaded for

help, but the system, this NDP government system, ignored them.

Will the Premier stand in this House today, especially considering there is a family

present who lost a loved one, and admit that under his government, under his leadership,

the B.C. NDP are failing the very children they swore to protect, or will he yet once

again shamelessly leave it to one of his ministers to apologize and answer on his

behalf?

Hon. Ravi Kahlon : My heart goes out to the family as well. When we hear of anyone being in an encampment,

in any community in the province, we know how difficult of a situation that is. We

know how it’s unsafe for the people that are living there, and it’s not really safe

for the community at large.

I have been working closely with communities like Abbotsford to try to scale up supportive

housing. I really hope we get to a place where we all in this House can stand up and

speak about how important supportive housing is for our communities, because that’s

the opportunity where you can get people indoors, you can get them the supports that

they need. Having people sleeping in encampments and in parks and in tents…. You can’t

get them the supports they need there. You need to give them shelter. You need to

be able to provide the wraparound supports.

That’s why we’ve been scaling up supportive housing in communities at record pace,

because it’s not acceptable to have somebody living in an encampment. It’s not acceptable

to have someone living in a tent.

Again, my heart goes out to the family. We’re going to continue the work to scale

up supportive housing opportunities so that young people, seniors, anyone that needs

a home can go there and get a place and get all the supports that they need.

Reann Gasper : Children deserve to grow up in safe homes and safe communities, but under this NDP

government, they aren’t.

In my own riding, a five-year-old girl — yes, I said five — had to be rushed to the

hospital after overdosing on fentanyl. What should have been a normal evening routine

turned dire when she reportedly handled a jar of fentanyl.

What kind of province have we become when children aren’t safe in their own homes?

How can the Premier claim to be protecting our children when they are being rushed

to the hospital for fentanyl overdoses?

Hon. Jodie Wickens : What the member describes is horrific and awful and should never occur. As a mom,

I am devastated by that story. I think we are all devastated by that in this Legislature.

We have a Child, Family and Community Services Act in this province that governs making

sure that children are safe and protected.

[2:30 p.m.]

The member is right. Every child deserves to live in a safe home, in a loving home

and in a healthy home. My expectation is that my ministry does everything possible

to ensure that that occurs.

When there is a safety concern for a child, we are required by law — whether that

be in a hospital, in a community, in a school — to provide that information. Any circumstance

where a child is at risk, a social worker has the ability to investigate that situation,

and then there’s a process that occurs out of that.

What the member describes is horrific, and I am appalled to hear of it.

Death of Indigenous Youth

in Government Care

Á’a :líya Warbus : What we’ve heard today in the House is a terrible string of events that’s happening

to our most precious asset that we have in this province. That’s our children.

Over and over again, this government has failed children in their care. It’s heartbreaking,

and it’s infuriating that this government cannot do the job it’s committed to — that

is, to keep children in care safe.

There’s a family that made the long trip today from their community to come here.

They’re sitting in the gallery, and they’re mourning the loss of their family member.

This is fresh for them.

Her brother is here. They were in the care system together. They were separated. I

know he carries a heavy weight on his shoulders because of that separation, but they

came here today so that they could be heard. They’ll never see their family member

again.

I’m asking the Premier today to stand up and speak not to me, not to the opposition

but to the family of Chantelle Williams. Please tell them why their family member

died in the cold, alone, when she should have been safe and warm in the care of this

government.

Hon. David Eby : I thank the Opposition House Leader for the question, and I thank the opposition

for providing the family the opportunity to be heard here today.

The minister has outlined the frustrating legal constraints on us, preventing us from

talking about any particular case. But it doesn’t constrain me from saying to this

family that this was a precious child. She shouldn’t have died.

Any time that a child dies in care, it is a failure. We need to learn all we can to

prevent the deaths of any other children in care.

I can assure you, and I assure all British Columbians, that this death will be investigated

independently and that you will get the answers that you need. There are not one but

two independent offices set up — independent of us, independent of the minister —

to get you the answers that you need and that you deserve.

I just want to underline that the minister has, in fact, cleared her

schedule to meet

with you, to talk with you one-on-one. I hope you take her up on that offer.

Regardless, thank you for making the trek here. Thank you for having the courage to

share this story. It’s important for all British Columbians to hear, and you have

my assurance that we will get you the answers that you deserve.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

The Speaker : I have the honour to table three reports from the registrar of lobbyists. The first

one is determination decision 25-01, Atira Women’s Resource Society. The second one

is 25-02, Arts Club of Vancouver Theatre Society. The third one is 25-03, Vancouver

Humane Society.

[2:35 p.m.]

Petitions

Harwinder Sandhu : I want to present a petition signed by 479 people and organized by our community

advocate Fraser Young, who I’ve been working closely with.

This petition is asking to extend B.C. Transit bus route 97 to include UBC route 90,

which will help many commuters in the region.

Orders of the Day

Hon. Mike Farnworth : I call Motion 11 on the order paper, which has been standing in my name.

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 11 — Membership Change to

Public Accounts Committee

Hon. Mike Farnworth : I move Motion 11, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, regarding

the membership of the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts. It has been shared

with the Opposition House Leader and the Third Party House Leader.

[That Larry Neufeld replace Tara Armstrong as a member of the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts.]

The Speaker : Members, the question is the adoption of the motion.

Motion approved.

Hon. Mike Farnworth : In this chamber, I call second reading on Bill 7, the Economic Stabilization (Tariff

Response) Act.

In

Section A, the Douglas Fir Room, I call estimates debate for the Ministry of Emergency

Management and Climate Readiness and after that the Ministry of Citizens’ Services.

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 7 — Economic Stabilization

(Tariff Response) Act

Hon. David Eby : No, I know it’s not the usual course of business, but it is an honour to be here

to speak to the economic stabilization act.

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Today is an important day for British Columbians and Canadians. We’re hearing the

latest in a series of tariff announcements from the President of the United States.

Deputy Speaker : Excuse me, Premier. I’m sorry. Can you move second reading?

Hon. David Eby : Absolutely, Chair. I move second reading of the economic stabilization act.

Deputy Speaker : Thank you. Sorry for the interruption.

Hon. David Eby : Thank you for the note, Chair.

Today is an important day for British Columbians, for Canadians. We are going to hear

from the President the latest of a series of announcements in relation to tariffs

that he plans to impose on countries other than the United States.

Now, it’s important to recognize that these tariffs will be devastating for families,

for businesses on both sides of the border. We see already the impact on stock markets,

the impact on consumer confidence, the impact on prices for families on both sides

of the border. But the real impact will be on communities, on families feeling that

economic insecurity, the threat of unemployment, the threat of losing a home after

losing a job.

Right now people in B.C. are moving from anger and shock to determination, to resolve.

You see the Canadian flags all over, people checking labels, buying Canadian, buying

local, supporting local businesses. Businesses are working fast to build alliances

both nationally, across the country as we move to remove barriers that prevent them

from trading across the country, as well as internationally. In the face of this unprecedented

threat, our government will do whatever it takes to protect British Columbians — protect

our jobs, businesses, families and our communities.

Now, it’s clear that our work to date has been finding traction. We’re starting to

see American senators and congresspeople on the Republican side speaking up about

the impact of the President’s attacks on Canada, on tariffs, talking about the impact

on their constituents.

They are raising concern in Alaska. A Republican state senator is moving a resolution

against the President’s annexation threat to Canada. In D.C., we’ve seen Republican

senators from Maine, Alaska and, yes, even Kentucky begin to caution publicly about

the impact of these tariffs. Our resolve and our swift opposition to these tariffs

are having an impact, and we cannot let up now.

Here in B.C., we are not waiting for the latest post on Truth Social. We’re taking

action. This bill is part of that action. We’re taking action to strengthen our economy,

to diversify our trading partners and to respond resolutely and firmly to the President’s

threats.

Strengthening our economy at home is fast-tracking major projects to ensure that there

are jobs, especially in rural parts of the province that are going to be disproportionately

impacted by the President’s threats and, ultimately, tariffs.

[2:40 p.m.]

We are diversifying our trading partnerships internationally, and we will be accelerating

the work to remove any barriers to trade with other provinces. It shouldn’t be any

harder to trade with Nova Scotia than with Washington state.

A diverse coalition of leaders from business, labour and First Nations has joined

the fight. We’re working together as a part of a coordinated committee, because they

all know what we know here. We’re stronger working together.

Fewer than 100 days into the Trump presidency, we’ve faced escalating threats on our

country’s own sovereignty and the border. Whether it is the threat to the border itself

or threats to our water, what we are seeing is, in addition to that, direct threats

to jobs, the threat to destroy our economy in order to force us into economic servitude

to the United States.

That’s why we tabled this important piece of legislation — to make sure our province

has all the tools we need to respond to this threat, to help us build a more resilient,

tariff-proof economy here in British Columbia.

The President is moving fast. We have a responsibility to arm ourselves to move just

as quickly to defend British Columbians. His threats do change one day to the next,

one hour to the next, but one thing is certain. Our relationship with the United States

is fundamentally changed. The scales have dropped from our eyes. We can never again

be so exposed to the whims of one person in the White House.

This law will enable us to move quickly to break down trade barriers within Canada.

It’s so important to businesses to be able to trade with other Canadians easily and

quickly, without red tape, to strengthen our counter-measures until Trump’s threats

are gone for good.

That includes measures to exclude U.S. companies from procurement. In other words,

when people are at the grocery store, they’re buying Canadian. They’re buying B.C.

Our government will be doing the same.

We’ve already started this work. B.C. Hydro has taken steps to exclude Tesla from

rebate programs. We’ve removed American alcohol from our government liquor store shelves,

and there’s more we may need to do. In these uncertain times, we may have to do things

differently. We certainly have to act faster than ever before to protect British Columbians

and secure our economy. This is a trade war. We didn’t ask for it, but we sure aren’t

going to shrink from it. We must be ready for whatever gets thrown at us.

In times of great peril, we have to come together to protect the country and protect

the values that we share. To do that, we have to be prepared to put aside differences,

to listen and learn from people with diverse backgrounds and with unique perspectives.

I’d like to thank the members of this Legislature, the members of the business community,

the Third Party in particular, for sharing feedback, for coordinating, for thoughtful

conversations on the right path forward for this legislation.

With the feedback carefully considered from members of this House and outside this

House, it’s my hope that we can pass this bill quickly, so we can deliver generational

change on internal trade here in Canada and ensure we have everything we need to respond

to this threat from a position of strength.

It’s not a fight we started. It’s not one we wanted. But we won’t back down. We’re

going to keep our elbows up. We’re ready for today, and we’re ready for what will

come tomorrow.

These tools will help us not only meet this moment but seize the opportunity that

it presents to address some long-standing issues. We can build a brighter future for

people in this province, a future of our own making, one that’s stronger and more

prosperous than ever.

Peter Milobar : I rise to speak to Bill 7. I will be our designated speaker.

I would point out I wasn’t sure if I was going to be, because I thought we would see

some amendments that repealed

section 4, which is the most contentious part of this

bill. Despite press releases, nothing.

This Premier and this government seem to think that the appropriate response to a

legislature is to issue decree by press release with no substance to ever back anything

up.

It was February 28. It was Friday when this Premier held a press conference and said

they were repealing

section 4 of the bill that we are debating here today. Then he

alluded to, “Well, maybe I’ll just amend it; well, maybe I’ll bring it back at a later

time,” with no certainty. And you know what happened? All the groups that were opposed

suddenly said: “Wow. Thank you. Thank you for getting rid of the

section that gave

us the most heartburn in this bill.”

[2:45 p.m.]

But it’s not removed. It’s not even amended. In fact, one would think, between Friday

and Wednesday, for a bill that this government says is urgent, and the Premier just

said he wants it passed quickly, they would have worked with the opposition. They

keep talking about this Team Canada approach; they can’t even work within this chamber

cooperatively.

A Friday press release…. All day Saturday the only communication we get from the government

late Saturday is that they want to rush through a carbon tax repeal bill on Monday.

They don’t show us the bill ahead of time, but they tell us they want to rush that

through on Monday.

They then grumble that we’re here till two o’clock in the morning on Monday dealing

with the legislation that they insisted had to be dealt with on Monday. But they don’t

provide us with any update on Bill 7 in terms of amendments that the Premier talked

about on Friday.

Sunday comes, nothing from this government. Monday comes. We get the Standing Order

81 debate in this chamber Monday morning where the government insists, for urgency’s

sake, they have to deal with the carbon tax bill on Monday. We wrapped that up at

two in the morning, even though the government side is quite unhappy they had to stay

late at their own making.

They still can’t actually explain to us where the missing $2 billion of revenue is

going to come into this budget. Is it going to be more deficit? Is it going to be

spending cuts? Is it going to be a combination? They can’t tell us, because they were

in such a hurry to deal with the legislation, they couldn’t actually have a financial

plan to match their legislation. Also, no update on Bill 7 for the opposition. No

update on Tuesday for the opposition.

All we had to work on yesterday, because there’s no other legislation in this place

to work on, despite the fact we have been here since February 18…. There’s a budget

measures implementation bill with a few tax changes, predominantly for the film industry.

That’s about it. That’s what we have left on the legislative docket.

We’re halfway through this session, facing a tariff war, and the best this government

has for this Legislature to work on is a bill that on Friday they said they were going

to amend, but they still haven’t actually provided any of the amendments or what they’re

going to do with this bill.

A budget measures implementation bill which essentially adjusts a few tax rates for

a budget that no longer has any accuracy because it has a $3 billion revenue hole

in it, and they haven’t made any adjustments on the expense side to tell us or the

public whether or not that budget is even relative to the budget estimates that are

going on right now.

That takes us through to yesterday. Yesterday afternoon we find out Bill 7 is coming

back today. The Premier stands in this place and says he wants it through fast. The

Premier should know that it’s actually scheduled for second reading all day today,

all day tomorrow. There are 41 of us in the B.C. Conservative caucus. We are all going

to be speaking. That’s 20½ hours.

I pointed that out on the carbon tax Standing Order 81 debate as well. And we actually

worked with the government in terms of trying to move that along, that bill, and cut

back our speaker list and dropped people on a moment’s notice from speaking for half

an hour each to five minutes each, just so they could get their points out quickly

on behalf of their constituents and we could move to committee stage, thinking we’d

be wrapped up by 10:30, 11 o’clock that night.

Unfortunately, the Finance Minister refused to answer any questions relative to the

bill and we found ourselves till 2 a.m. still with no actual answers, and that’s what

the government wants us to treat Bill 7 like as well. Well, it’s not going to happen.

Bill 7 is not a tax measure. Bill 7 is an authoritarian overreach by a Premier that

wants to grant himself the powers of an emperor. It is beyond ridiculous.

I went on today knowing how this place works. For the viewers at home, we have what’s

called standing orders, the orders of the day. If you go in, and you can click online,

you can look up to see what the orders of the day are for the next time that we’ll

all meet in this place, in advance.

[2:50 p.m.]

As a normal matter of practice, government has to amend their pieces of legislation

from time to time when they realize there have been some errors — some formatting

errors, some typographical errors, a dating error, all those types of things.

What they typically do, when they know they have to amend it ahead of time, is give

this House notice of what those amendments are, and they put it on the orders of the

day. In fact, there’s even a section, in Orders of the Day , that says “Proposed Amendments on Notice.”

Well, this is the most current copy, because we get a new, fresh copy every time we

come and sit down in this place. It’s dated and timed for 1:30 today. An interesting

thing: “Proposed Amendments on Notice” is blank.

I started checking online today at around 11 o’clock this morning. It was blank at

11 o’clock this morning; it was blank at 11:15 this morning, and so on. Then I thought:

“Well, you never know with this government how shifty they want to be or not.” So

I did make sure. I have got a few screenshots on my phone or my iPad from checking,

because those would have the date and time on them for when I was on the legislative

website.

I have full confidence in the Clerks, but they can only post the information and update

it as they get handed it by the government. I wanted to make sure we protected the

Clerks if there were a last-minute update of amendments that we were expected to stand

up and debate in this House, on something as significant as Bill 7 and the powers

it contains, and we tried saying that we had literally one minute’s notice to start

trying to debate it, that we had the receipts to back it up.

Well, fortunately for the Clerks and unfortunately for democracy in B.C., it’s still

blank. It would have been preferable if we’d had one minute’s notice, because at least

it would have meant that they were actually changing the legislation they purported

to say they were going to change on Friday, February 28.

That is what we’re supposed to, as a population, put trust in — the actions, for a

government, on

section 4 of Bill 7, that would enable the Premier to override this

Legislature — full stop — until 2027. In fact, that provision for a sunset clause,

if it maintains itself in Bill 7, and if clause 4 stays in Bill 7…. As soon as it’s

law, that’s a law on the books of B.C.

That means the provision to override all laws would kick in, and the sunset clause

is irrelevant, because the government, by an order in council, by the Premier’s signature

or a cabinet minister’s signature directed by the Premier’s office, could get rid

of the sunset clause.

That’s how fraught with danger Bill 7 is, in its current form. Now, the Premier says

“taking action” in his brief comments. Again, it’s very rare for our Premier to stand

up and deliver second reading on a bill, let alone talk for five whole minutes. He

provided the public of B.C. five minutes of his valuable time to share his valuable

insights on Bill 7, without any amendments, or even actually referencing the overreach

section 4 in the bill.

Let’s look at the urgency this government has exhibited. We started sitting on February

18 in this place — February 18. The government talks about acting with urgency. There

was little to no legislation brought forward until the budget on March 4.

There was one piece of legislation that dealt with mapping updates for B.C. Parks,

which happens every single year as they get better mapping. That’s considered a housekeeping

bill, because it comes up every single year as GIS mapping gets better for B.C. Parks.

We had one two-clause bill to deal with the Conflict of Interest Commissioner hiring

process.

[2:55 p.m.]

We had one bill. The last time this government actually consulted with anyone about

it was in 2022. Yet they brought it forward, despite objections by everybody that

it was going to impact, saying: “Could we have some time to understand the implications

of this?”

It’s because it has a retroactive clause that means businesses that provided contracts

to people two years ago could now find themselves having broken the law for the last

two years, without even knowing the law was going to be changed two years in the future.

If that sounds a little convoluted, it is, but the government exhibited no worry about

retroactivity in legislation at that point.

We had a supply bill that came forward and that we just dealt with the other day,

on Monday. Opposition told the government we would deal with that quickly, we would

take about an hour, and we would make sure the doors of government stayed open on

April 1 as we kept debating the full budget. We lived up to our word. We’ve lived

up to our word all the way along on this.

We have a budget measures implementation bill which, like I said, has a few tax changes

in it. That happens in every single budget: updating tax rates and things of that

nature. I would point out in most years, it’s about an inch thick. This year it’s

about a quarter-inch thick, and it’s predominantly to do with the film industry, so

there are not a lot of changes going on there.

Then we had Bill 7, which is what we have today, and we had the carbon tax bill that

they rushed through on Monday. Folks, that is all this government has brought forward

to this Legislature since February 18. That’s it.

The Premier has the gall to stand up in this place and say they are acting with urgency.

Bill 7 wasn’t even brought to this house till March 13. Then conveniently for the

Premier, everyone left here for two weeks because as of March 14, everyone had to

go for two weeks. It was so urgent the Premier didn’t want to interrupt his holiday

and call the Legislature back, even though it was within his power over those two

weeks to come back here and work.

The B.C. Conservatives kept saying: “Call the Legislature back. Let’s deal with Bill

7.” The government didn’t want to. They didn’t want to interrupt their holidays for

two weeks because it was important for them to have their holidays.

Fair enough. But then don’t stand here on the moral high ground, giving yourself a

nosebleed because you’re so high up, saying that you’re the only ones trying to act

with urgency in this place. The facts simply don’t match the rhetoric. You should

never have government by press release, let alone in the middle of the tariff threat

that we have.

On March 13, the bill gets introduced. The business groups that first came out and

said they can support Bill 7, because they really had only had enough time to digest

the first part, which deals with interprovincial trade barriers, then had enough time

to actually dig into the bill and immediately backtracked, rightfully so, and said:

“Hang on a second. We still believe in removing interprovincial trade barriers, but

every other part of Bill 7 needs to go.”

Part 2 needs to go, around procurement, because it’s fraught with problems.

Part 3,

around trying to toll trucks between B.C. and Alaska, needs to go because of the economic

threat it will unleash on B.C., on top of the fact of the overreach around privacy,

around the fact they could start tolling anyone, anywhere, at any time under that

legislation, not just trucks from Alaska, and the fact that they would not only be

able to collect private information, but they could disperse private information.

They don’t even refer to the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act in that bill.

In every other bill, when this government brings forward stuff that talks about collecting

private data, they make sure they mention that it is subject to those provisions.

They didn’t in this bill.

Part 4 would give unlimited power to the Premier, through his office, to pass whatever

law he wants at any time he wants and simply give this place an update once every

six months — not an update asking us our opinion, just an update telling us what they

did over the last six months of the laws, including taxation law. That means that

Monday debate on carbon tax wouldn’t have been needed; they could have unilaterally

decided to cut out the $3 billion of tax revenue.

[3:00 p.m.]

We’ve been calling for the removal of carbon tax all along, so don’t get me wrong.

We agree the carbon tax needed to go. In fact, we voted for that to go. We also were

asking for, and the minister refused to give, any answers about what happens with

the missing revenue on the other side of the ledger in the budget.

Does the deficit increase? That’s kind of an important part, because we just had two

different credit agencies today give us a credit downgrade attached to our out-of-control

record deficit. That was before the potential extra few billion dollars gets added

to the deficit because of the carbon tax removal.

They were important questions, but the minister said “not relevant” — not relevant

to the bill. “Why do you need to know what would happen to the taxation revenue and

expenditures to support a bill or not?” Well, how can you support a bill if you don’t

know the consequence of the bill?

Bill 7 removes the need for the government to even pretend to want to answer a question.

In theory, we wouldn’t even have to sit here, because they could actually change the

Budget Transparency Act that says they have to present a budget every year. They could

just change that, stroke of a pen, if Bill 7 goes through.

There are provisions in there based on when this NDP were previously in government

back in the ’90s and they had their fudge-it budgets to protect people with transparency.

The quarterly update needs to be presented by a certain date every year after the

first quarter is done so the public knows what the state of our finances is.

Why that’s even more important is that when I was pressing the Minister of Finance

to answer where the missing revenue would be made up for in the budget, the answer

was “Don’t worry. You’ll see it in the first-quarter updates.” Not if Bill 7 passes.

They could remove the requirement to disclose the state of the finances in B.C. on

a quarterly basis — stroke of a pen. And on and on it goes.

Why people should be worried is that the lack of trust exhibited by this Premier as

it relates to Bill 7, as it relates to the carbon tax, Bill 8, is one where what gets

said at a press conference never matches up with what gets delivered to this Legislature

to work on. The Premier just said they’re fast-tracking projects for energy. So 4½

months ago it was made clear that when the government first said they would be fast-tracking

those projects, they needed to bring legislation to this House to deal with the energy

regulator to be able to fast-track those projects.

I’ve listed off all the legislation that’s in front of this chamber to work on. Did

anyone hear anything to do with the energy regulator? Well, they wouldn’t need it,

because under Bill 7, they could just have a stroke of a pen. Aided by the Green Party,

junior members of the partnership, they could wipe away anything to do with the energy

regulator. How is that good governance?

Instead of doing the work and getting the legislation to us a month and a half ago

so we could have actually already been fast-tracking these energy projects, they have

spent the last 4½ months talking about speeding up projects without actually doing

anything to speed up said projects. That’s the speed this government works at. That’s

what this government considers efficiencies.

[3:05 p.m.]

Bill 7 — they’d be able to cloak all that. I mean, heck, when I asked about the carbon

tax and said: “If we’re not collecting $3 billion and having to audit and having to

track and make sure regulations are being followed on the carbon tax, $3 billion….”

It’s a complicated way they collect it and have to audit. Surely there must be some

savings within the bureaucracy. There must be fewer people needed in the auditing

department. There must be fewer people needed in the collections and all of those

areas.

The answer from the Minister of Finance was: “No, there’ll be no efficiencies there.

They have other work they can still do.” Then you ask again: “Well, where are we going

to make this up? Will there be cuts?” “Well, wait for the first-quarter update. We’re

looking for efficiencies in government.”

Well, if you’re looking for efficiencies in government, one might suggest that if

you had $3 billion worth of auditing and tax collection work for people and that no

longer exists, maybe that’s a good place to start with finding efficiencies — off-limits

to this government. And that’s the lack of transparency we’re supposed to trust with

Bill 7 with the massive overreach of

section 4.

Now, I have zero faith or trust in this government as it relates to Bill 7. Since

I have the time, I want to make sure we get on the record our objections on some of

the other sections before I come back to

section 4. For all I know, this is the way

the Premier likes to operate, and he’s hoping opposition will spend all our time talking

about why

section 4 is so horrible, because it is, and then they’ll come in at the

eleventh hour and remove

section 4, and then we’ll have to start all over again.

They’ll probably hope that we’ll be fed up by that point. But no, procedurally, because

it’s an amendment, at that point, we would be able to all speak again for another

half hour on those amendments. They won’t get off the hook that easily.

We’re here till the end of May. We’re here for 6½ more weeks, at a minimum. I say

a minimum, and I’ll get into that later, but minimum 6½ more weeks. Bill 7 — the way

it stands, we will still be debating Bill 7 in 6½ weeks. That I can guarantee.

It is simply unconscionable that a Premier could stand up in front of the provincial

media on Friday, that his office, which got more of a budget lift than the whole Ministry

of Environment did this year…. In fact, the Ministry of Environment got a cut in their

budget, and the Premier’s office got an increase so they could hire more communications

staff. In fact, the Finance Minister, when talking about austerity and hiring freezes,

made it very clear that political communications staff were exempt and, in fact, could

still even be hired, not just frozen or downsized but hired.

Let’s see. Friday the Premier holds a press conference saying and giving the illusion

that

section 4 of Bill 7 will be removed. He clarifies a little bit with some political

doublespeak about bringing it back at a future time, wanting to rework it, wanting

to make sure they actually do consult this time, because it’s very urgent. So him

holding off till November apparently is okay; that’s what he’s saying later in the

day on Friday.

Within all of those hundreds, and they are hundreds, of government communications

staff, none of them caught that there might be a misunderstanding out there of what

the government’s intentions were. There were no clarifications issued, official clarifications,

to the media and the public.

Instead, everyone came to this place on Monday expecting that we would see amendments

from the Attorney General on her bill about Bill 7. Then we thought: “Okay, it got

lost in the business of carbon tax, and the Attorney General is holding up the amendments,

so isn’t that wonderful that they tabled them?” I’m not sure when she’s trying to

tell me she tabled them, but she didn’t table them before we started the debate.

I’ll happily ask for a recess so we could have the amendments distributed so I don’t

waste another hour and 35 minutes debating a bill that may or may not even be accurate.

This is the problem with this government that it’s saying they want.

That’s great. We will get that amendment tabled, and we will literally have the expectation

from the government to debate in detail what the amendments mean to the bill and the

complexities of a bill that was supposed to give overarching power to the government.

[3:10 p.m.]

The government — despite the fact I launched into this 27 minutes ago, pretty clear

that I’ve been talking about

section 4 the whole time — decided to sit and let it

play out for a good 30 minutes because the Premier couldn’t be bothered to introduce

the amendments that he said on Friday he was going to do when he opened up the bill

for debate, knowing full well the order of debate is: the NDP goes, then we go.

How did the Premier, who used to be an Attorney General of this province, actually

think these amendments were going to be presented to this House in any time for the

opposition to properly scrutinize them if he decided to kick off second reading, speak

for five minutes, scurry out of here and leave it for his Attorney General to come

back in?

Only because of a side comment do we know there’s even an amendment supposed to be

coming, because it’s not on the order paper like it normally would be. In fact, this

Attorney General has made many amendments on the order paper in advance for us to

actually review.

In light of that, I would suggest it’s appropriate for this chamber not to have a

five-minute recess. We shouldn’t be coming back here for at least a half an hour,

so we can actually digest what this government is trying to do with Bill 7, to make

sure they’re not trying to sneak something by the public yet again, with a massive

overreach of power.

I will reserve my right to continue and ask to adjourn debate for the time being.

Deputy Speaker : Member, thanks for reserving your right.

I will have a brief five-minute recess to make a decision on what the member is asking.

This committee will stand in recess as of now.

The House recessed from 3:11 p.m. to 3:40 p.m.

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker : Members, we are going to call this chamber back to order.

I just want to clear up the record. Before I called a recess, the member for Kamloops

Centre inadvertently said the term “adjournment of debate.” I know exactly that he

meant to call for a recess, which I did call for — a 20-minute recess to better understand

some documents that have been tabled.

So we will continue debate on Bill 7.

Peter Milobar : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And yes, I will take full ownership of that slight procedural

faux pas on my part, which essentially is very minor. I’ll say that because I really

wish the government would actually take some ownership of this whole process.

The Premier likes to fling things out sometimes, talking about “clown car” this or

“circus tent” that when he’s talking about other parties in this chamber. I can’t

think of anything that resembles a circus more than what we’re seeing with Bill 7

in this government.

It is absolutely ridiculous that a piece of legislation that wants this type of all-encompassing

power has been handled the way it has by a government and a Premier who literally,

before I started speaking, was stood up and was talking about how they’re taking action

and taking it seriously and everyone rowing in the same direction and we all have

to work together.

So let’s recap where we’re at. I can appreciate that the amendments don’t actually

get discussed and brought in until committee stage, but as I referenced several times

in my first half hour, the government usually signals ahead of time that there will

be amendments, especially when a Premier holds a press conference on a Friday saying

there will be amendments.

You would think that between Friday and Wednesday, they could have actually got them

on the order paper in time before we started so we could actually see, and the public

could see, what those amendments were. Despite the Premier’s taking action, that wasn’t

done.

Despite the Premier taking action and actually standing up to speak to second reading

as the first speaker for the government, he didn’t want to take any ownership. He

didn’t want to say: “By the way, opposition, there will be amendments. They should

be distributed shortly. But don’t worry. We’ll deal with those at committee stages.”

Everyone in this place knows what happened procedurally. No, he spoke for five minutes

and scurried out of here. That’s the level of actions that we’re supposed to trust

by this Premier and this government.

You know, the Premier made a big deal about how he cancelled his trip to Disneyland.

Well, talk about Mickey Mouse.

Just for the viewing public at home to understand this, the opposition…. We will all

be speaking to this bill as it stands, not as it’s amended, because that doesn’t happen

until we get to committee stage. So we will be discussing a bill that the Premier

has now finally indicated what exactly he thinks he will do with amendments.

Again, the government…. If they missed the timeframe to get it to the Clerk’s office,

the amendments, to get it on the order paper of the day…. I have every confidence

and I 100 percent believe this has absolutely nothing to do with the Clerk’s office

whatsoever. This is 100 percent at the feet of the Premier and his office.

So despite the cutoff to get it on the orders of the day paperwork in advance of today,

which I believe would have been yesterday…. They would had to have it in by the end

of business yesterday. Fine. They missed that deadline.

Apparently, they don’t know how to get a hold of the opposition ahead of time to say,

“We made a bit of an error; here are the amendments,” like they just did. So obviously

they have that ability.

[3:45 p.m.]

“Here you go. Don’t worry, they will be on the order paper long before we’re finished

second reading debate.” They didn’t do that either. They couldn’t be bothered to let

a 41-person official opposition know what their plans were, as they talk about everyone

rowing in the same direction and working together.

I don’t know how they handled the three independents. I’m going to guess the same

fashion. That leaves the two Greens, who have been in those same press conferences

or quoted in the same time frame talking about how they were going to work, as part

of their agreement with the government, on some amendments.

I can only assume that the government felt it was more important that a two-person

party actually know what the amendments are ahead of time than 41. Yet the Premier

stands here and lectures us about how we’re not trying to work with government.

We’ve had a private member’s bill on the table in this place for a month now, Free

Trade and Mobility Within Canada Act. We’ve been trying to get the government to take

care of interprovincial trade barriers for over a month, with a piece of legislation

built on the legislation that Nova Scotia did, which is telling, because in the Premier’s

five minutes that he came down from on high to share with us his thoughts about Bill

7, he referenced Nova Scotia.

One would think if he’s going to reference the same province that we designed a private

member’s bill from, the Leader of the Official Opposition, and tabled in this place

a month ago…. If we’re trying to take action and work urgently, and the one thing

everyone agrees on is interprovincial trade barriers — the business groups, everyone

— we could have dealt with interprovincial trade over the last month. But no, no.

This Premier is going to take action.

He’ll stand in here, and he’ll point out that we’re not. We’re the ones impeding things,

because we are trying to follow a proper legislative process about a bill that wants

to override legislative processes. But we should just trust the Premier.

Well, I have zero trust. That trust has been completely wiped away. I do have respect

for certain members on the other side of the floor. I take them at their word. I don’t

take the Premier.

I have no faith that the amendments will actually be brought forward by the government.

They’ll be on the order paper. It doesn’t mean the government wants to call them.

It doesn’t mean that, as we are in committee stage, the government wants to.

At the same time, again, in the spirit of working together and taking action and standing

up for B.C. and all of Canada…. At the same time the Premier is saying that, he doesn’t

reference that they want to bring in seven — seven — different amendments to Bill

7. That’s how flawed this bill is, by the government’s own admission.

As the official opposition, we’re saying just remove the bill completely. They had

to back down on, I think it was, Bill 12 last session, remove that. This government

makes a habit of introducing legislation and having to walk it back.

Remove Bill 7 completely. Let’s debate the private member’s bill, Free Trade and Mobility

Within Canada Act, that’s based on the Nova Scotia free trade legislation and get

on with interprovincial trade barriers being removed in Canada.

That would actually be leadership within Canada, not a press conference by the Premier,

puffing out his chest, resulting in very little action. It would actually result in

something.

The Premier says he hopes this bill will pass quickly. So let’s take a look. We’ve

got 6½ weeks to go. We have roughly 20 hours a week of debate time. That’s assuming

we go till nine o’clock every night, because the government has already extended the

hours, despite not having any legislation to work on.

[3:50 p.m.]

In any given chamber, you have roughly 20 hours, at most, a week. We have about 120

hours left of debate time for Bill 7. Sounds like a lot. There are 40 people in opposition,

so there’s 20 hours gone just at second reading. I’m not sure how many the government

is going to want to put up. Usually, when they say they want to pass something fast,

they try not to put a bunch of speakers up so that it can move along, but we’ll see.

Then remember when I said that we’ll see if we’re not still debating this on May 29?

We still have all the budget estimates that we have to get through, scrutinize and

question a budget that was presented on March 4 and, on Monday, fundamentally changed

completely so that document we’re actually debating isn’t even an accurate financial

document.

That’s the competency we’re dealing with in this session right now: a budget that

has no financial accuracy on the backdrop of two debt downgrades today, Moody’s and

S&P; and a Bill 7 that has been handled so ham-fistedly by this government, it is

shocking, especially given that the Premier was the Attorney General of this province.

So that’s 40 hours. Then you get to committee stage. That’s, again, assuming the Greens

don’t speak, the independents don’t speak. Those five people are all within their

rights in this Legislature to speak and take their full allotted times as well. I

am just talking on behalf of the official opposition.

That is not even counting if there are any government members who are wanting to speak

for any length of time. That’s their right to do it as well. If their backbenchers

have some concerns about this, I would suggest that they should probably try to speak

on this and what their concerns are. That is what they were actually elected to do:

serve their constituents, not serve the Premier.

But we’re back to the 40 hours of opposition. Then you get to committee stage. Well,

at committee stage, we’ll stand up, our Attorney General critic will stand up, and

he’ll start asking questions all about

part 1, definition for this part, and get explanations

and all those. That actually takes quite a bit of time.

Then we’ll eventually get to whatever the government’s purporting to amend, if they

still bring that amendment forward. Some of them, now that I’ve had a chance to take

a quick glance, are pretty fundamental to the bill. They would change the bill dramatically

if the government is true to their word.

Every time there’s an amendment, everyone can speak. Now I’m speaking for two hours,

but only one of us can speak for two hours, and everyone else has a half-hour limit.

But on an amendment, everyone can speak for 15 minutes. So again, for the official

opposition, that’s ten hours per amendment, and seven amendments on the bill. It is

that flawed that this government, before we even get to committee stage, has had to

acknowledge that they need seven amendments.

We don’t know if the Greens are going to try any amendments from the floor, and frankly,

we don’t know if the official opposition might want to amend some other remaining

sections or introduce the same amendment the government is suggesting, if the government

refuses. But every time an amendment gets added that’s another ten hours of debate,

on top of all the others, and we have about 120 hours, at best, left.

When the Premier says he wants it to move quickly and expects everyone to row in the

same direction, and shame on anyone that doesn’t…. It would have been nice if he had

worked with us since Friday till now, ahead of time.

It would have been nice that instead of the government holding behind-closed-door

meetings with the Green Party, purporting both of them to be defending democracy while

they meet in secret, discussing what they want to do in secret, they might have asked

for somebody from the B.C. Conservatives to sit in on those meetings and figure out

what the heck we were doing in response, a joint response to a trade war.

Those might have actually been some actions matching the words from the Premier. They

didn’t do that. Okay, fair enough.

[3:55 p.m.]

Is the Premier’s office saying that the amendments were so last-minute and agreed

upon that they weren’t ready by end of business day yesterday to get them to the Clerk’s

office? I would ask when they were drafted, but when I did that on Bill 8, about the

carbon tax, the Minister of Finance said: “There’s no need to know when things get

drafted around this place. In fact, it’s client-solicitor privilege. We can’t talk

about that.” It’s a state secret, apparently, when this government even works on things,

for a date.

We’ll undoubtedly ask that when we get to committee stage: just exactly when these

amendments were signed off on. Based on the evasive answers that I got on Monday,

on the bill that I was asking similar questions, who knows how long that could take

to get a non-answer out of this government?

This is going to be the confusion for the public at home, because they’re going to

hear us continually talking about

section 4 and the dramatic overreach…. I referenced

that at the beginning, that I didn’t want to lose sight of some of the other sections

of this bill that we still have big problems with and that the broader community still

has big problems with.

We’re going to continue to debate. I’m certainly going to continue to debate with

the full bill intact, because procedurally, we have no other choice. We’re not allowed

to debate the amendments. We’re not allowed to really even talk about the amendments

in any detail right now, because that’s not how this place is structured. And given

how this government used Standing Order 81 to ram through a bill on Monday, one would

think the government knows how the procedure in this place works.

Let’s see. On Friday, the Premier had a choice to make when he stood at a podium and

said he was making massive changes to Bill 7. They could have come to this place on

Monday and withdrawn Bill 7 and introduced a new bill that dealt with interprovincial

trade. They could have introduced the seven amendments on Monday so we could actually

get a better understanding and the broader community could get a better understanding.

Remember, when they first introduced Bill 7, the initial response was lukewarm support,

and then as the two-week holiday…. Actually, the Premier wished he had called the

House back a little faster. But as people actually had a couple days to digest what

the implications of Bill 7 really are, everyone started to stick their hand up and

say: “This isn’t right. This is gross overreach.”

No other province in the country is doing this — none. Winston Churchill did not do

this in Britain during World War II. That is how extreme Bill 7 is.

The Premier says it’s to respond to President Trump. Bill 7 gives the Premier more

executive authorities than President Trump has. How does that make any sense? And

to build the level of trust he expects, to have that much power, this is how he handles

Bill 7 with this chamber.

Again, clause 1,

section 1,

part 1 — whatever we want to call it — deals with interprovincial

trade barriers. Now, we fully support interprovincial trade barriers coming down.

The problem with the government’s version of this is that there are still a lot of,

essentially, asterisks of: “We want interprovincial trade except for…. We want interprovincial

trade but the ability to override this. We want interprovincial trade barriers to

be gone unless it’s in this situation.”

That’s why we don’t have this problem solved across the country, because that’s what

every province does. That’s not leadership. That’s hoping that every other province

will take the bait while B.C. doesn’t act in the same good faith as Nova Scotia did,

saying: “We’re good. We’re going to wipe away interprovincial trade barriers if everyone

else does it. They’ve got to wipe away them all.” Bill 7 doesn’t do that.

[4:00 p.m.]

You’ll hear conflicting

interpretations from government, from business groups, from

people that have a vested interest, frankly, in making sure things are opened up,

and if they see that their industry or their situation is opened up in this bill,

they will be okay with it.

If they feel that they’re still exposed and that they’re not opening up, they might

not be as happy with it. If they feel they might have an unfair competitor coming

at them, they might want that safeguard that the government is giving themselves the

ability, under regulation, to still put up.

There are fundamentally massive problems within the interprovincial trade barrier

section of this bill, but it is a step in the right direction. I will give the government

that. But a step is not leadership. Leadership, if you’re true to your word of getting

rid of interprovincial trade barriers, is opening up B.C. to the rest of the country

and challenging all the other provinces to get on board.

We are, rightfully so, very worried about the 25 percent tariff threat from the United

States. I say “threat” because it looks like it’s on pause again today. That’s a good

thing. But B.C. is running record deficits that have led to credit downgrades today.

We need our economy firing in B.C. regardless of what’s happening down in the States.

Interprovincial trade barriers in B.C. create a 23 percent tariff-equivalent drag

on our economy in B.C. So when the government says we have the most diversified trade

partners in terms of international exports, they are right about that. A lot of that

work was done for years with our trade offices in Asia, which this government then

closed down in 2019. But those connections were made, and it did help diversify our

B.C. economy.

Except with interprovincial trade, we are the second-worst exposed. In other words,

the second most negative impact to a provincial economy from interprovincial trade

barriers is to B.C. We are every bit protectionists in our province, to the detriment

of our economy, as they are saying about what is happening down in the States with

tariffs being levied. Yet the Premier, in Bill 7, wants the same power as that government,

and somehow our economy is going to get firing, and that’s going to protect us.

Park the whole international tariff issue on hold, and just look at interprovincial

trade barriers. Record deficits — we need to get our economy going to try to get out

of those record deficits. We know that a 25 percent tariff levied by the United States

is about a $69 billion hit over the next three years to the province. One could reasonably

assume that a 23 percent tariff-equivalent of interprovincial trade barriers being

removed would have a similar positive impact to the B.C. economy.

Let’s assume, with good wishes and hopes, that we keep getting the American tariffs

put on pause by the White House. We remove those interprovincial trade barriers, and

our British Columbia economy starts to get moving again in a meaningful way. It starts

to chip away at that structural deficit that this government has racked up.

Between 2007 and 2017, B.C. experienced seven straight credit upgrades. Our borrowing

kept getting cheaper and cheaper on the international markets. Today we just received

our fourth credit downgrade in a row by S&P.

I’ll tell you, under the NDP, it’s pretty standard that we get poorer. Those four

credit downgrades have all happened while this Premier has been the Premier. From

2007 to 2017, we kept seeing our credit rating improve. In 2017, until this Premier

took over under John Horgan, they stayed flat.

[4:05 p.m.]

This Premier has demonstrated yet again another reason why he is most definitely not

John Horgan. Four credit downgrades in a row under his watch as Premier — I believe

that spans three of his Finance Ministers. Under this Premier’s watch, he has had

three, if memory serves correctly. That’s the backdrop to why interprovincial trade

barriers are so critically important to B.C., especially under this Premier, especially

with what’s going on with our economy, our credit downgrades and our deficits.

Credit is going down. Deficits are going up. Debt-to-GDP is skyrocketing in B.C.,

way faster than the rest of the country. It doesn’t matter what the measurement is

that you want on the economy of B.C. If it’s a negative measurement, it’s going up.

If it’s a positive measurement, it’s going down under this Premier, not really a recipe

for success.

We have a bill with seven and counting — hopefully, it’s only the seven — amendments,

which means the Premier got it completely wrong with this bill. Just remove the bill.

This government has backtracked, so many times that I’ve lost count, on pieces of

legislation over the eight years they’ve been government.

I mentioned the late Premier Horgan. When he knew he really messed it up with the

museum, what did he do? He took ownership of it, and he cancelled it. He cancelled

the billion-dollar boondoggle of the museum and took ownership of it. He didn’t dangle

ministers out to take the heat. He took the heat. He owned the mistake.

Bill 7 is a mistake. A real leader in the Premier’s office would acknowledge that,

remove it and bring forward meaningful and real interprovincial trade barrier legislation

so we could deal with that. That’s what a real leader would do. A real leader wouldn’t

come in here, speak for five minutes, not provide any depth or detail of anything,

use language about everyone rowing in the same direction and on the same team and,

essentially, try bait-and-switch with the legislation. That’s not what real leaders

do.

You get to

section 2,

part 2, “Procurement Directives” — again, fraught with issues

and, conveniently for the Premier, dealing with procurement through press releases.

The Premier likes to go on about executive orders from the United States being a problem.

Part 4 of this bill would confer more power to him than those executive orders. When

he decides on February 20 or February 1 to talk about changing the procurement in

B.C., he makes sure his photo op is him signing an executive order. Talk about FOMO.

On February 1, the Premier, again by press release…. This is urgent, folks, so I’m

going to issue a press release saying that I’m directing government agencies to stop

purchasing U.S. goods and services. Wonderful. Then he must have realized legislatively

he’s opened them up to a whole lot of potential lawsuits and those purchasing agents

are opened up to a whole lot of lawsuits by doing that. You know how I know that?

Because then they had to bring it into Bill 7, but they don’t introduce Bill 7 till

March 13.

The Premier’s leadership to the government staffers out there and all these various

agencies is: “Stop buying U.S. products and contracts. Trust me; it’ll be okay. Keep

signing those contracts in contravention potentially of international trade law, and

oh, by the way, on March 13, I’ll introduce a piece of legislation that if passed

might indemnify you from that, from the previous month and a half.” Except we’re another

half a month later, so now we’re two months since the Premier’s big press release

about that and photo op signing an executive order.

[4:10 p.m.]

We’ve had public servants out there, with no legal protection, being told by the Premier

what to do in regard to purchasing. It doesn’t sound like leadership to me. It sounds

like he’s hanging a whole lot of people out to dry, depending on what happens with

this legislation.

Then when you jump forward in Bill 7, you jump to I believe it’s clause 29, the repeal

of the act. Let’s say the government actually does, for once, keep their word and

repeal this. It’s interesting, because it repeals sections 6, 7 and 10. That’s all

to do with procurement. So directives get repealed.

Definitions get repealed. General

powers get repealed.

In general powers, 10(2): “A directive issued on or before June 30, 2025 under this

Part may be made retroactive to February 1” — the same date the Premier had his press

conference — “or a later date and, if made retroactive, is deemed to have been issued

on the specified date.”

Well that’s great, but that would disappear. That protection disappears May 28, 2027,

according to Bill 7. They’re identified for the next two years. Does that continue

on indefinitely on a contract they signed, especially between February 1 and whenever

the heck this gets passed — potentially, the end of May?

You can’t govern by press release. That’s all this government has done. That’s what

he has done in this trade war. One second he’s pulling liquor off the shelves. Then

it’s back on the shelf. Then it’s back off the shelf — only from red states, though.

Then two days later: “Oh no, you know what? Maybe we’ll do it for every state.”

Maybe the Premier realized that a lot of California wineries are actually owned by

companies in red states. I don’t know. I don’t know why the Premier is worried about

Democrats versus Republicans. Last I checked none of them can vote for him. If he’s

worried about the protection of the British Columbia public, maybe worry about that

instead of playing these games. That’s the procurement, where we have a procurement….

Sorry, it has been a bit of speaking this week for me — much to the delight of government,

I know.

Then we get to

part 3, “Tolls, Fees and Charges,” another one of these great brainchildren

of the Premier that he flung out there. I can’t even remember when. It was right at

the very beginning. There’s not a lot of support in the public for this. This is a

piece of Bill 7 that essentially says the government is allowed to toll any road,

at any time and any vehicle that they want, for any reason. By the way, they can collect

personal information, for any reason, attached to the vehicle.

It’s interesting. We’ve asked for years for the ability, if someone from Alberta gets

a speeding ticket or a dangerous-driving ticket or puts people’s lives at risk on

our highways, that the government follow that ticket and go back after the person

in Alberta. We have no ability to do that right now.

The government has refused to change that law, but we are somehow supposed to believe

that, under Bill 7, they’re going to magically start worrying about chasing down a

truck driver that crossed the border into Alaska that they may or may never see again.

They’re going to hunt that person down but not the one that was driving recklessly,

that got tickets or helped cause accidents.

Again, “Collection and disclosure of personal information” in clause 17, “The minister

charged with the administration of the Transportation Act may, directly or indirectly,

collect personal information for the purposes of this Part,” and: “

(2) The minister

charged with the administration of the Transportation Act may disclose personal information

for the purposes of this Part.”

Disclose to whom? Disclose when? Why? This is a clause that in most legislation —

when the government talks about collecting data on people, personal information —

there’s a whole bunch of other clauses, and they start to reference the Freedom of

Information and Privacy Act.

[4:15 p.m.]

I’ll read the whole

section again, and, to anyone watching, tell me if you hear “freedom

of information” and “protection of information.” “The minister charged with the administration

of the Transportation Act may, directly or indirectly, collect personal information

for the purposes of this Part. The minister charged with the administration of the

Transportation Act may disclose personal information for the purposes of this Part.”

So you think, well, it must be a different…. Certainly, it’s got to be a different

clause that talks about protection of people’s private information. Nope. Sixteen

has nothing: “Rights and powers and advantages of minister.”

Definitions. Coastal

Ferry Act gets referenced.

No other acts gets referenced in a

section where they’re talking about giving themselves

the ability as a government to collect personal information at will, and not just

on trucks crossing the border from the United States into Canada. This

section allows

the government tolls, fees and charges, the ability to do it on any road at any time

for any reason to any person.

Again, it’s a massive overreach. Let’s see what the consequence of this brainchild

of the Premier has been that he flung out there, obviously, without consulting with

the trucking association or others.

It’s about a bit of a risk and reward. I’m all for putting up a fight when it comes

to the tariff fight. I absolutely am. There’s also a risk and reward factor when you’re

a population of five million going up against the largest economy in the world. When

you are a subnational government going up against a national government, you have

limited things you can do.

What has been the Americans’ response? To immediately talk about not allowing cruise

ships into Victoria and Vancouver, allowing them to circumvent having, by law currently,

to come into port.

We’ll put a bit of a fee on a few thousand trucks. I believe it’s a couple thousand

trucks a year, they figure, that come through B.C. up to there, up to Alaska. And

we will decimate our cruise ship industry forevermore, because once the Americans

finally change that law, it’s done.

There’s the threat of retaliatory treatment of trucks coming out of Mexico with our

produce to come up to British Columbia. Given that most people aren’t buying U.S.

produce right now…. If you go to Walmart, if you go to Costco, if you go to Save-On,

any of the stores, if it’s not B.C. produce, it’s Mexican produce or Chilean or pick

your country down in Latin America. What happens then? Another massive risk.

I would suggest there are a few more trucks’ worth of produce that come up from Mexico

in any given year than of equipment being shipped through Canada up to Alaska. Going

to go on a limb on that one.

What other retaliatory measures could happen? Well, it wouldn’t take much. The president

has shown a penchant for doing this with states, that if he can’t actually by executive

order compel them to do one thing, he tells them if they do something else, he will

withhold money. If they don’t do what he wants, he’ll withhold money of projects that

he can withhold from them. It doesn’t make it right. That doesn’t mean he hasn’t done

it.

Our film industry could be dramatically exposed, depending on what they do or don’t

do in the United States as a retaliatory measure, all because the Premier is desperate

to look like Doug Ford. Except he won’t do anything about our energy because we need

the energy from the States.

We need the aviation fuel from the States or YVR shuts down. That’s another risk.

Thirty percent of our hydro comes from the States. We need that, and then we also

need them to buy our excess at the other times of the day, otherwise your hydro rates

will skyrocket. That’s a cold, hard reality.

We won’t even get into the fact that most of it’s coal fire, and the Premier likes

to wrap themself in the GHG emission flag about how clean our energy is when 30 percent

comes from coal-fired plants outside of the province. Anyways, I digress. That’s another

exposure.

The cold, hard reality that the premier doesn’t want to face…. And this is why they

can’t tell us what pieces of legislation specifically they would like to change to

combat threats to tariffs in the here and the now.

[4:20 p.m.]

They will say: “Well, we’re not sure. We’re not sure.” It’s because provincial governments

have very little autonomous power over international trade agreements that were negotiated

by our federal government. Last I checked we are a part of Confederation. We were

a little late to the game, but we’re still part of it.

The U.S. government…. It’s why the softwood lumber dispute has been dragged on for

eight years. It’s why there’s a national group of provinces dealing with softwood

lumber, in conjunction with the national government, to try to get a deal down in

the United States. Unfortunately, B.C. walked away from their seat at that table and

turned it over to the Maritimes to chair, even though we have more to lose.

There has been an interprovincial trade committee, set up federally, whose sole purpose

is to get rid of interprovincial trade barriers. It was set up in 2017, the same year

this government took office. Its membership? The trade minister from every province

and the federal government.

They have one agreement I can find that has any recent overlay at all. It was a pilot

for interprovincial trade barriers related to trucking. Now, it was signed in September,

and we were in a writ period, so I will give the government that. However, B.C. still

hasn’t signed that agreement. We’re one of the only provinces that hasn’t, which is

why it keeps getting called a pilot. Yukon has signed it; Alberta has signed it.

I would love for someone from the provincial government to explain to me how people

trying to get through on interprovincial trade barriers, trying to supply Whitehorse,

Dawson City, Old Crow and all the mining and everything that goes on there, and they

get supplied out of Edmonton, what good that agreement does when B.C. is not part

of it. To drive from Edmonton to the Yukon, you’ve kind of got to go through B.C.

It’s a beautiful drive; I’ve done it many times. I have family that lives up in the

Yukon.

We’re not even 100 percent clear, on the tolls, fees and charges with the Alaska Highway

agreement, if the Premier can legally even do it. It created a nice photo op and sound

bite for the Premier but hasn’t resulted in any action. Again, if this is all about

action, why are we standing here on April 2 talking about things that the Premier

first started talking about back in January and February? We’re talking about them

for the first time in this chamber.

The government says: “It’s urgent; it’s urgent. We need to do this; we need to do

it urgently.” Well, they showed on Monday that whether the opposition likes it or

not, they have procedural tools, within our standing orders, to get things done within

a day.

Carbon tax got presented to this place at — what was it? — 10 a.m. By 2:30 that afternoon,

we were debating it. By 1:30 in the morning, two o’clock in the morning, it had been

given royal assent, a $3 billion item that will have long-lasting ramifications.

It’s not just the $3 billion for this year. In the financial plan presented on March

4, it represents $10 billion, with a b, all dealt with in one day.

When COVID first hit, there was a $5 billion care package approved by this Legislature

in an afternoon. Everyone was recalled on a moment’s notice. You know what happened

then? This was with the late Premier Horgan at the reins.

What happened was that there was outreach between the government and the official

opposition ahead of time to say: “This is what we need to do. Is there agreement?”

There were discussions within the caucuses, there was an agreement, and in fact, because

we weren’t sure how many people, we agreed, en masse, to waive quorum and how many

people. I think we sent five people here, and the government sent seven, or something

like that, total.

[4:25 p.m.]

We were working together in those early days. That’s what actually working together

for the betterment of everyone in B.C. looks like.

To this Premier, working together looks like standing up and lecturing us for five

minutes, “It’s critical we all work together, and shame on you if you don’t. I’m not

going to mention that I have amendments for my own bill,” which is a complete disaster.

“I’m not going to give the opposition a heads-up that those amendments actually even

exist. We couldn’t be bothered to get them on the order paper,” which is normal operating

procedure. “Despite that, we couldn’t be bothered to hit ‘Send’ on an email between

two House Leaders’ offices that communicate.”

I used to be a House Leader in this place, communicating probably a dozen times a

day, especially staff-to-staff. A dozen times yesterday, probably a good half a dozen

after the deadline came and went, they still were communicating about stuff.

This morning between, say, eight o’clock, when most people get to this building, and

when we sat down here at 1:30: not enough time to send over the paperwork, which is

going to be public anyways. It’s not a state secret. That’s the level of trust this

Premier is expecting us to still have, on someone that is playing games with a bill

that purports to be necessary, to the likes that we’ve never seen before.

Let’s remember that this all started back on the throne speech on February 18. Who

can forget that gem of a throne speech that was rife with wartime imagery and language?

What are the actions following that language and that bluster of the throne speech

on February 18 — which, remember, was four months after the election when we finally

got back here, almost to the day. That’s the urgency.

February 18, wartime imagery about the looming threat of tariffs.

March 4, a budget that, although it talks about tariffs, actually isn’t designed to

help support or help British Columbians with tariffs.

March 13, we finally get Bill 7 presented to this House, before everyone leaves for

two weeks, two weeks of the Premier refusing to back down or call the Legislature

back to work on the bill.

March 28, the Premier is saying he i