Hansard Blues

Legislative Assembly

Draft Report of Debates

The Honourable Raj Chouhan, Speaker

4th Session, 42nd Parliament

Monday, October

30, 2023

Afternoon Sitting

Draft Transcript — Terms of Use

The House met at 1:32 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

K. Chen: I am really honoured to have the opportunity to welcome some special guests here to

the gallery today, joining us from our beautiful community right here in Burnaby-Lougheed,

from Simon Fraser University. As many members would know, Simon Fraser University

is not just an educational institution, but it is really a big community with a lot

of families, local businesses and also lots of stakeholders and partners working together

for this growing community.

Here I'm really honoured to introduce Angie Lamarsh, SFU board chair; Chris Lewis,

adviser for reconciliation and Indigenous initiatives; Nancy Brar, VP, external and

community affairs; Mohamad Assari, director of external relations; Raven King-Stierle,

Indigenous community external affairs and special events coordinator from the SFU

First Nations, Métis and Inuit Student Association; also my good friend Sobhana Jaya-Madhavan,

AVP for external relations, joining us for question period today.

I hope they enjoy their stay in the Legislature and, also, thank them for building

our community stronger.

Hon. J. Osborne: Today in the gallery, we have five guests from Innergex, a leading Canadian renewable

energy company founded in 1990 that specializes in wind, hydro, solar energy and storage

solutions. Representatives from Innergex are here in the precinct today, speaking

to ministers and MLAs about their long-term commitment and investment in supporting

B.C.'s clean energy transition.

I'm pleased to welcome Colleen Giroux-Schmidt, vice-president of corporate relations;

Nicola Vaughan, policy and regulatory specialist; Julia Balabanowicz, senior director

of corporate relations and policy; Jason McIvor, development manager; and Ina Gjoka,

government relations strategist.

Would the House please join me in making them feel most welcome.

[1:35 p.m.]

M. Lee: I just want to join the Minister of Energy in welcoming the team from Innergex. They've

been of great assistance to the province and to our caucus, as well as other members

of the House, in continuing to focus on the importance of partnership and the importance

of independent power production in our province, the pathway forward to meet all the

energy needs of our province, including in partnership with First Nations.

Again, would all members of the House please welcome that team from Innergex.

R. Parmar: As a former constituency assistant to a couple of members on this side of the House,

it brings me great joy to be able to share with you all that I've got three of my

own constituency assistants who've made the long trek from Langford to the chamber

here today. We've got full-time CA, Hudson Copley-Spencer; part-time, Chloe Maher,

who also is acting for the Minister of Children and Family Development as a CA right

now; and Steven MacAskill. I wouldn't be able to do what I do without them.

Will the House join me in welcoming them here for the first time for question period

today.

B. D’Eith: I just wanted to rise today to welcome our mayor, Dan Ruimy, to the House, with his

intergovernmental affairs person, Katerina Anastasiadis. They're here today to do

the hard work — working with their provincial counterparts, meeting with ministers.

Just so people know a little bit of background, Dan Ruimy ran against me in the 2015

federal election, and he beat me, which was a blessing, because that's how I ended

up here. I got to work with Dan when he was the MP, and we were able to do some really

great work together, including getting the final four-laning of Highway 7 through,

which was really exciting. He's here working on the bold new vision for Maple Ridge,

including housing, transportation and climate change.

I would like the House to please make Dan very welcome.

I. Paton: It's fitting that today is Non-profit Recognition Day. A big supporter of non-profits

in my riding of Delta is my wife, Pam, who's here today. Pam is also, as far as non-profits,

the president of the Delta Riding Club — not political riding, as in politics, but

equestrian.

Pam is also chair of the Delta Hospital Foundation. There was a hospital announcement

this summer, and the Minister of Health was there, along with my wife, to make this

announcement. He said: "She is the MVP: the Most Valuable Paton." So there you go.

How about a hand for my wife.

Hon. R. Singh: In the House today, I have a friend who is visiting us from Mexico City. Miriam Antoun

is in the gallery. Miriam has two girls who study here in Victoria, and she's visiting

them.

Would the House please make Miriam very welcome.

M. Dykeman: I have two announcements today. The first one is that joining us in the gallery, we

have non-profits from around the province, of all sizes, who are joining us at the

Legislature today. They came over and spent the morning with the Minister of Poverty

Reduction and me in a round table talking about the challenges and opportunities that

non-profits face.

There are so many of them up there that I cannot list them all, but I do have to give

a special shout-out to a fellow Langleyite, Leslie Gaudette, from the Council of Senior

Citizens Organizations, who is up there. Her advocacy is very persistent, and I always

appreciate having her come to my office. They're thrilled that she is able to join

the other wonderful non-profits that are up there.

They also joined us for the proclamation that today shall be, for the first time ever,

Non-profit Recognition Day and for our wonderful announcement of $60 million in funding

in the Hall of Honour.

I'm wondering if the House could please join me in welcoming these fantastic organizations

that serve so many people across the province, especially the most vulnerable people,

welcoming them to the Legislature today.

My second introduction is that I have two people who are part of my team that are

up there. We really are as strong as the people we have around us, and I have an incredible

team in my constituency office. Joining me today is one of my CAs, Madison Portner,

and one of the volunteers that comes regularly to support me at events, James Loeffler.

[1:40 p.m.]

I was wondering if everybody could please join me in making them feel very welcome

today in the precinct.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 41 — FOREST STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2023

Hon. B. Ralston presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill

intituled Forest Statutes Amendment Act, 2023.

Hon. B. Ralston: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

I'm pleased to introduce Bill 41, the Forest Statutes Amendment Act, 2023. This bill

proposes amendments to the Forest Act, the Forest and Range Practices Act and the

Wildfire Act that fulfil, in part, commitments made in the June 2021 Modernizing Forest Policy intentions paper to transform the forest sector by implementing new tools to strengthen

the social contract and enhance stewardship and sustainability.

The Wildfire Act amendments will enable government to aid First Nations and other

partners with cultural and prescribed fires that are not prohibited by law when requested.

The Forest Act amendments provide greater discretion in the issuance of cutting and

road permits. These will enhance government's ability to be an effective steward and

manage our forests in a sustainable manner for generations to come.

The Forest and Range Practices Act amendments will provide new tools for compliance

and enforcement by ensuring there are consequences for non-compliance and appropriate

tools to encourage voluntary compliance from participants and deter non-compliance.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

Hon. B. Ralston: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the

next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 41, Forest Statutes Amendment Act, 2023, introduced, read a first time and ordered

to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House

after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

ISLAMIC HERITAGE MONTH

A. Singh: The month of October is recognized as B.C.'s Islamic Heritage Month. It's a significant

occasion that allows us to recognize and appreciate the rich and diverse contributions

of the Islamic world to human civilization. It's a time to foster understanding, promote

tolerance and celebrate the cultural, scientific and artistic achievements of Islamic

heritage and to bridge relationships with non-Muslim neighbours through education

and understanding.

The Islamic world encompasses a wide array of cultures, languages and traditions that

have been influenced by their respective regions, from the calligraphy and architectural

marvels of the Arab world to the vibrant arts and music of Persia and the scientific

advancements of the Islamic Golden Age.

During that golden age, scholars in the Islamic world were at the forefront of fields

such as astronomy, mathematics, medicine and philosophy. They developed the scientific

method, which we still use today, and made groundbreaking discoveries which laid the

foundation for many of the scientific and technological advancements we benefit from

today. Just think about the word "algebra" and its roots.

The wonder of Islamic heritage extends beyond the realms of science and art. It encompasses

a deep sense of community, hospitality and a commitment to social justice. Muslims

around the world uphold principles of compassion, charity, and service to others,

guided by the teachings of the Quran and the examples set by the prophet Muhammad.

May the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

In this time of increased racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and bigotry, it's important

to remember this. They remind me of a poem, "Mimesis," by notable Palestinian-American poet and physician and winner of the 2007 Yale series

of younger poets, Fady Joudah.

My daughter

wouldn't hurt a spider

That had nested

Between her bicycle handles.

For two weeks

She waited

Until it left of its own accord.

If you tear down the web I said

It will simply know

This isn't a place to call home

And you'd get to go biking

She said that's how others

Become refugees, isn't it?

[1:45 p.m.]

DINO GINI AND FUNDRAISING

WITH OKANAGAN COLLEGE

COYOTES BASKETBALL TEAM

R. Merrifield: Well, Mr. Dino Gini is a force. When you meet him, you immediately know what he is

passionate about, and that is basketball.

Over the past four decades, Dino has coached and played high school basketball and

club ball, and, for almost the last decade, has coached both the girls' and the boys',

until his son took over, basketball programs for the Okanagan College Coyotes.

In these last years, Dino Gini has done more than he ever thought possible with the

Okanagan College Coyotes basketball team. He surmounted countless challenges, from

lack of sponsorship and facilities to being underestimated from opponents. Dino fundraises

every year for the team's entire cost, which is no small feat.

For years, the campus has lacked a gym or recreational centre, an absence keenly felt

not just by the Coyotes, but by the entire student body. There's been no space for

intramural sports, pickup games or tournaments. Even significant college events, like

convocation and student orientation, lack a central indoor hub.

This glaring absence is what makes a new campaign for a recreation and wellness centre

not just timely, but essential.

Last Thursday I attended a new campaign launch to change that. With a goal of $14

million for the Thrive Here campaign, generous leadership-level gifts have already

brought the Okanagan College Foundation's fund to $9 million. Now the campaign needs

an additional $5 million to cross the finish line. Coupled with the Coyotes' urgent

need to fundraise the rest of their $130,000 by year end, there's a tremendous opportunity

for community members to contribute to transformative change, and by community, that

could be anyone here in this room as well.

The campaign for a new recreation and wellness centre does more than just provide

a home for the Coyotes. It serves as an investment in the well-being and future of

every student at Okanagan College.

As Dino Gini and his teams have shown, the power of community, hard work and passion

can transcend obstacles and make dreams a reality.

NON-PROFIT RECOGNITION DAY

M. Dykeman: It is a pleasure and an honour to rise today to celebrate October 30 as B.C.'s Non-profit

Recognition Day for the first time in our province.

Non-profits are vital to people in the communities in our province. They help people

overcome challenges and make a difference in the lives of so many families. Non-profits

help us deliver housing, health care, cultural and food security support.

British Columbia has more than 31,000 non-profits that make an economic contribution

of $28 billion to the GDP. They are important partners, often delivering services

to the most vulnerable people in all corners of British Columbia. We know that the

past few years have been very tough for people in our province. But they also demonstrated

how British Columbians come together to overcome adversity. The work done by non-profits

in B.C. is really nothing short of heroic.

As an advocate and voice in government for non-profits and charities, I'm committed

to helping non-profits thrive during these challenging times. Non-profit Recognition

Day is about honouring the impactful work of the non-profit sector and showing appreciation

for our ongoing partnerships with non-profit and charitable organizations. Earlier

today I had the pleasure of meeting Ada and Barb, two incredible women whose lives

were transformed thanks to the fantastic work of non-profit organizations.

British Columbia's non-profits are helping raise our quality of life in so many ways

to build a stronger B.C., which is why we are funding $60 million to support non-profits

who are providing key services for people and communities.

Will the House please join me in applauding B.C.'s non-profit sector.

ADOPTION AWARENESS

K. Kirkpatrick: Today I want to talk about something truly special, Adoption and Permanency Month.

November is a time to celebrate and raise awareness about the incredible act of adoption,

a journey that transforms the lives of countless children and families. It's a reminder

that you can build your family in many ways, including the children and teens in government

care who are waiting for permanent homes through adoption, guardianship, kinship placement

or another form of permanency.

Adoption is a testament to the power of love and the belief that family isn't defined

solely by blood. It's a lifelong commitment to provide a loving, stable and nurturing

environment for a child in need. And it's not just a child in need. It's a parent

in need.

It's a time to highlight the countless stories of resilience and hope. It's a month

to celebrate the families that have grown through adoption and to appreciate the diverse

paths that led them to this beautiful connection.

[1:50 p.m.]

Every adopted child has a unique story, and their journeys are filled with challenges

and triumphs. This is a time for gratitude, reflection and advocacy. It's a time to

acknowledge the power of love to create bonds that are unbreakable. It's a time to

remember that every child deserves a chance to thrive, to grow and to be loved.

Let's come together this November and celebrate the beauty of adoption and the countless

lives it touches. Let's create a world where every child can find their place in a

loving family, and let's cherish the extraordinary power of adoption.

Adoption and Permanency Month is a reminder of our collective responsibility to give

every child the chance to thrive in a permanent and loving family.

WESTSHORE REBELS FOOTBALL TEAM AND

CULLEN CUP WIN

R. Parmar: This past Saturday the Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport and I had an opportunity

to be at Starlight Stadium in Langford, with thousands in attendance, for the B.C.

Cullen Cup championship. I should clarify, as the MLA for Langford–Juan de Fuca, I'm

talking about football, not lacrosse.

Two strong teams, the Westshore Rebels versus the Okanagan Sun. A rematch from last

year, as the Okanagan Sun won the Cullen Cup in the previous years. The Westshore

Rebels have had a phenomenal season — undefeated, 11-0.

I just wanted to mention my thanks to all of the players that played from the Okanagan

Suns as well as the Rebels. What we saw on the field there was teamwork, courage and

tenacity. Certainly from the coaches and all of the trainers, we saw leadership and

hustle as well.

I think the Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport can agree with me that it

was a tense game. It was close in the first half, but in the second half, it changed.

Led by incredible all-stars Cairo Berry, Gerren Hardisty, Demar Holstein and Te Jessie,

the Westshore Rebels kicked butt. The final score was 33-19 for the Rebels.

I just want to take an opportunity to congratulate all of the players, but in particular,

president Rob Lervold, general manager Roger Wade, executive members Christine Lervold,

Sue Fournier, Lisa Lowerison, as well as head coach Dexter Janke.

I hope that all, including my members from the Okanagan, will join me in congratulating

both teams but also in giving a huge shout-out to the Rebels, who will now, in a couple

of weeks' time, on November 11, be competing proudly, with B.C. behind them, for the

Canadian Bowl — November 11 at Starlight Stadium. If anyone wants to be there, it's

a great opportunity to be in Langford — one of the best cities in the province, I

might add — for an incredible game and exciting football.

My thanks to both teams.

Go, Rebels, go!

RANCH SUSTAINABILITY

AWARD RECIPIENTS

G. Kyllo: Today I rise in the House to extend my heartfelt congratulations to Werner and Jody

Stump, the well-deserved recipients of the B.C. Cattlemen's Association 2023 ranch

sustainability award.

Their remarkable work at Crystal Lake Ranch in Malakwa , southwest of Sicamous, embodies sustainability in practice. Werner and Jody's dedication

to harmonizing their cow-calf operation is truly inspiring. Their innovative practices

are steeped in their deep appreciation for the land, water and wildlife that not only

benefit their ranch but serve as an example for other ranches across the province.

The Werners have been leaders working with government on the forestry industry on

the concept of silvipasture, which involves seeding domestic grasses and grazing cattle

on forestry cutblocks after timber has been harvested.

An additional project of note involved bioengineering remediation on the Eagle River

that was completed back in 2022, with design and technical oversight of the Department

of Fisheries and Oceans and inclusion of Splatsin Elders, which led to some positive

dialogue in the Secwépemc territory. Their commitment to water source management,

use of high-efficiency irrigation systems and dedication to soil health through practices

like no-till farming are a testament to their continuous quest for improvement.

I had the pleasure of attending Eagle River Secondary in Sicamous with Werner back

in the early '80s. Werner was on honour roll, principal's list. It's no surprise to

me that Werner would be very successful in a career path, whichever it is that he

chose.

He and Jody's dedication to sustainability and innovative practices has been inspiring

and is a shining example of how responsible land stewardship can lead to economic

prosperity and conservation.

[1:55 p.m.]

As he aptly put it: "Sustainability is not defined as a destination. Rather, it is

a continuous process of improvement practices considering soil, water, air quality

and biodiversity."

Would the House please join me in congratulating Werner and Jody Stump, this year's

recipients of B.C. Cattlemen's Association 2023 ranch sustainability award.

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO FEDERAL

CARBON TAX CHANGES FOR HOME HEATING

K. Falcon: Last week the federal government announced a break on carbon tax for home heating

— a break that will apply to provinces back east but won't apply to B.C. families

unless this Premier takes action. As a Premier, I can tell you that I'd eliminate

all home heating taxes immediately, giving British Columbians the relief they deserve

from this NDP government's middle-class squeeze.

The cold weather is here. Furnaces are being turned on right across this province.

Why won't this Premier provide B.C. homeowners the same rate the federal government

is giving people back east and eliminate the carbon tax on all home heating fuels

in B.C. today?

Hon. D. Eby: Last week we saw what was clearly a rushed announcement from the federal government.

It protects a particular type of heating. It doesn't protect people.

Our commitment on this side of the House has been to take strong climate action while

protecting people, providing, for example, carbon tax rebates. Still trying to figure

out with the federal government where they're headed on this issue.

I appreciate that the member opposite now opposes the carbon tax. That's his position

to flip and flop over, but for us, we're going to continue supporting people and take

action on climate. That's what British Columbians expect.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Official Opposition, supplemental.

K. Falcon: Well, let's be really clear about this. This is the government that broke the social

contract that we had with the public that said that this was going to be a tax shift,

not a tax grab.

I remind the Premier that, under us, all revenues, by law, had to go towards reducing

personal income taxes and small business taxes, making it a shift, not a grab. That

ended, of course, in the very first budget of this NDP government. They just couldn't

stomach having any dollars go back into taxpayers' pockets. Now, under the NDP, we've

got a situation where the average family of four…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

K. Falcon: …is stuck paying nearly $500 in net new carbon tax costs while our neighbours in Alberta

and Saskatchewan see up to a $1,000 rebate. That's their record.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

K. Falcon: There shouldn't be a tax grab on something as straightforward as trying to keep your

home warm in British Columbia.

My question to the Premier: why won't the Premier level the playing field and exempt

all home heating in British Columbia from the carbon tax?

Hon. D. Eby: The member knows that's simply not right. A family of four who got $500 last year

will get $900 this year. A single person who got $193.50 last year will get $447 this

year. That's more than double.

As to that ridiculous claim of carbon neutrality, when he sat on this side of the

House, take it from no better source than the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, 2012:

"It's ridiculous for an average taxpayer to be told it's revenue-neutral when they

are forced to pay the ever-increasing carbon tax but have no ability to access the

corresponding tax breaks."

Or maybe the Fraser Institute: "B.C.'s carbon tax is often misperceived and misrepresented

as being revenue-neutral. The carbon tax is currently not revenue-neutral."

The member needs to (

a) remember what he used to say about this issue before, and

(

b) remember what he did before, before he stands up and speaks in this House.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Official Opposition, second supplemental.

K. Falcon: I do actually remember. I remember we had a $30-a-tonne carbon tax that actually got

improved results and lower emissions. I remember.

Now, under the NDP's leadership, more than doubling the carbon tax, we're seeing emissions

go up. We are seeing more taxes hammering families. It is no longer a tax shift. It's

a tax grab.

[2:00 p.m.]

The reality is that after seven years of this NDP government, we now know — the media

is even reporting it — that British Columbia has become the most unaffordable province

in the entire country. That's the reality…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh, Members.

K. Falcon: …of the middle-class tax squeeze that's happening under this NDP government.

We have a cost-of-living crisis, yet in other provinces, you have Premiers immediately

acting to do something about it. Families are simply wondering why is it, when other

provinces are quick to act on something and they're getting a break on the east coast,

that this Premier wouldn't fight to give us a break on the west coast? The answer

is because this Premier repeatedly fails to fight for families.

Will the Premier stand up and lead for once and stop this tax grab on all home heating

in this province, yes or no?

Hon. D. Eby: Now, we absolutely are pushing the federal government to ensure that the exact same

treatment on the east coast applies on the west coast. It's common sense.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Shhh.

Hon. D. Eby: But for this member, the architect of tolls on bridges, the guy who raised the MSP

every year, the guy who raised ICBC rates every year to say: "Standing up for families"?

Give me a break.

Now, if I want to know what this member's position is, I think I'll just have to look

down the chamber and ask what the B.C. Conservative Party position is on the next

issue, because this member cannot make up his mind on anything. Carbon tax, on harm

reduction…. I wonder what it will be next. Maybe I should ask the Conservative Party.

S. Bond: Perhaps the Premier should actually talk to British Columbians who struggle every

day to try to live in the most expensive province, British Columbia, under this Premier's

watch.

Here's what we know. Nearly 40,000 households rely on heating oil, many of them right

here on Vancouver Island, and families right across the province use natural gas to

heat their homes and will pay almost $300 this year alone in carbon tax. These families

deserve a break from this Premier, from his middle-class squeeze, but the Premier

will not agree to that.

Will the Premier stand up today, straightforward, give families a break and exempt

all home heating from the carbon tax, yes or no?

Hon. J. Osborne: Thank you to the member for the question.

Yes, indeed. Last week we saw a very rushed decision by the federal government making

a decision they dropped on us with very little notice at all. We have been pushing

the federal government for better co-delivery of programs to support British Columbians

in the choices that they want to make.

We know British Columbians want to make the switch from fossil fuels to clean electricity

through heat pump rebates. We expect — in fact, we demand — of the federal government

that same support. But we're not going to stop supporting people in delivering more

affordable measures for people. That's why the climate action tax credit…. That's

why we enhanced it, as we already heard, more than doubling it for individuals.

We're going to continue to do this work because we know that's what British Columbians

expect of us. We're going to drive down emissions with some of the strongest climate

policies in North America, while we're supporting people with a more affordable cost

of living.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Prince George–Valemount, supplemental.

S. Bond: What people want to hear from this Premier is less finger-pointing and to see some

action. He could do that today. In fact….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, Members.

Let's get the question, please. Members, let's get the question.

Please proceed.

S. Bond: The members opposite might think it's funny to talk about providing a more affordable

lifestyle in British Columbia. We don't think it's funny, on this side of the House.

Let's be clear to the minister. She knows the facts. Nearly a million households in

British Columbia use natural gas to heat their homes. What they deserve is a break

from the NDP's tax grab.

[2:05 p.m.]

After all of the rebates that we've heard about today, B.C. is one of the only provinces

where a two-income family of four actually loses money on the carbon tax — hundreds

of dollars. Meanwhile, families in Ontario come out ahead by $750, and those in Alberta

and Saskatchewan are better off by $1,000 annually. The Premier could do this for

British Columbians today.

Again, to the Premier, will he do the right thing and exempt all home heating from

the carbon tax, yes or no?

Hon. J. Osborne: We are going to continue to support British Columbians in the work that we know they

want us to do. That is taking action on climate. We're not going to walk backwards

on our climate policies. We're going to stay focused on people, supporting them with

rebates for switching to heat pumps, for example.

Of course, that's not the only action we're taking to support people in this province.

We've reduced ICBC premiums by an average of $500 a year. We have lowered child care

bills up to an additional $900 a month. We're going to continue to put money back

in people's pockets…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Osborne: …to support them where we know they need it. We're going to take action on climate.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Hon. J. Osborne: We're going to continue to do this work.

PROTECTION OF OLD-GROWTH FORESTS

AND CONSERVATION TARGETS

S. Furstenau: Since we're mostly in alignment about the need to address climate change, last week

the province announced the creation of a conservation financing mechanism which will

help the greatest defence against climate change, which is the natural world and,

in particular, old-growth forests. With less than 3 percent of B.C.'s high-productivity

old-growth forests still standing, this is a welcome and necessary step towards protecting

those forests and creating new protected areas.

However, several loopholes remain in the government's conservation financing initiative.

For one, interim measures are missing to ensure that the most ecologically important

areas are not logged while funding mechanisms and long-term forest landscape planning

get underway. Secondly, no mention of ecosystem-based protection.

Without these targets, we might see the protection of alpine and subalpine trees while

the giant, ancient trees continue to be logged, adhering to the province's long-standing

policy of talk and log.

My question is to the Minister of Forests. Will this government commit to ecosystem-based

protection targets?

Hon. B. Ralston: Last week a very important announcement was made with the Premier, my colleague the

Minister of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship and myself, setting forward a conservation

financing mechanism. The government has contributed $150 million, and the B.C. Parks

Foundation has matched that with another $150 million.

B.C. Parks Foundation is led by a number of people. Included among them is Ross Beaty,

a well-known now-philanthropist, someone who made some money in the mining industry

but seeks to advance conservation goals here in British Columbia.

I'm very confident that that new mechanism will lead to good decisions about taking

land that should not be damaged in any way, that should be conserved for the future,

out of any development streams and conserved for all time.

That's the mechanism that we have, and that's what we intend to do.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Third Party, supplemental.

S. Furstenau: Oh my goodness. I did read the press release. I do know what conservation financing

is. I do know what the announcement was. But I asked a very specific question.

I'm just going to point out that this government has been trying to tell British Columbians

that their old-growth harvesting has been at record lows and showed that B.C. is on

the right track. But according to new analysis, instead of falling to the lowest level

on record of old-growth logging, as reported by the former Minister of Forests, old-growth

logging actually increased by 19 percent.

I'm going to try again. My question is to the Minister of Forests. Will this government

commit to ecosystem-based protection targets?

[2:10 p.m.]

Hon. B. Ralston: The old-growth strategic review was initiated by the government and is now being implemented.

We've implemented a number of the measures, the recommendations. There are 14. We've

adopted all of those and begun to implement them, whether it's updating old-growth

maps based on the best data available, the conservation financing mechanisms which

we just spoke of, engaged with 204 First Nations on deferrals.

We implemented deferrals and protections on nearly 2.4 million hectares of old growth.

We've contributed $185 million to support forest workers and communities. We've created

the $180 million B.C. manufacturing jobs fund to help mills retrofit to get off old-growth

logs and manufacture more high-value wood products and shift from industry-developed

stewardship plans.

Formerly, a logging plan was submitted to the ministry without any community consultation.

For that, we've substituted forest landscape plans developed in collaboration with

communities and First Nations.

We're in the process of transforming the forest sector. We're well underway, and I

invite the member to join us in that important work.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO FEDERAL

CARBON TAX CHANGES FOR HOME HEATING

B. Banman: Well, thank you very much. British Columbians are struggling to put food on the table

and fuel in their tank. Mortgage payments are going up, and rents have hit an all-time

high. Every single day hard-working British Columbians are struggling under the burden

of inflation, red tape and punitive taxation imposed by this B.C. NDP government.

This is why the Conservative Party of British Columbia took a stand as the first party

in this House to call for an end to the carbon tax.

Climate change is real. However….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

B. Banman: Let me say it again in case you didn't hear it: climate change is real.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh, Members. Let's get the question.

B. Banman: However, taxing British Columbian families into poverty is not the answer.

My question to the Premier is: will this NDP Premier listen to British Columbians

who are struggling and help them by ending the carbon tax, or will he continue making

life less and less and less affordable for everyday working British Columbians?

Hon. J. Osborne: It's great to hear the member confirm that climate change is real, and it is something

we should take really seriously. He knows it. When he was in the party he used to

represent, they were part of putting a price on pollution as a key method of fighting

climate change, moving our province to a cleaner, brighter, better future.

I think the member understands that there are climate policy experts who will say

that this is widely seen as one of the most efficient, effective and progressive means

of reducing emissions.

In fact, it's been incredibly effective here in B.C. — both at reducing emissions,

making the oil and gas industry less emissions-intensive, for example, but it also

drives innovation. It helps to bolster innovation within industry.

Our goal is to continue working with British Columbians, answering to their call to

meet our climate action targets, but understanding that affordability is a serious

concern, and the member, rightly, raises that. That's why we are taking action across

so many different areas to support British Columbians in the cost of living.

The climate action tax credit…. I'll say it again. With the enhanced tax credit, we've

more than doubled what an individual received back. By 2030, most people will get

more carbon tax back than they paid.

Mr. Speaker: Fourth Party House Leader, supplemental.

B. Banman: The carbon tax increases the cost of fuel, food, building new houses and so much more.

It affects every aspect of the lives of British Columbians, and it does absolutely

nothing to help the environment.

[2:15 p.m.]

The Conservatives are the only party in this House willing to call out this carbon

tax for what it is — a cash grab that goes directly into general coffers of this government.

Recently British Columbians learned that eastern Canadians, as we've heard, are getting

a special exemption from the carbon tax on home heating oil. Once again, western Canadians

are getting the short end of the stick and are being left out in the cold. There will

be no exemption for home heating oil or any other form of heating for everyday, hard-working

British Columbians. Once again, the federal Liberal tax…. The B.C. NDP coalition is

leaving British Columbians out in the cold.

Will this Premier commit to righting this wrong by taking the carbon tax off of all

home heating in British Columbia this winter?

Hon. J. Osborne: Let me just correct the member to say that the carbon tax goes back to industry, to

innovate and reduce their emissions. It goes back to people in the form of a climate

action tax credit. So it's simply not true — the way he characterizes it.

Last week, of course, we saw the announcement from the federal government about the

decision that they took — a decision that apparently wasn't very well-thought-out.

That's why we are asking the federal government to partner with us to deliver better,

enhanced rebates for people to make the switch that they want to make. They want to

switch from fossil fuels to clean electricity.

We're going to continue to push the federal government to join us in this work that

British Columbians are calling for us to do. We're going to continue to take action,

make progress on our climate targets and support people.

R. Merrifield: Don Urban has worked for the same company for 35 years and earns a good middle-aged

income as an airline pilot. But the rising costs of essentials, from groceries to

fuel, means that Don has a shrinking paycheque with nothing left at the end of the

month.

Don says: "The system is not fair as I watch my income being fed upon in interest

rate hikes, climate change taxes, fuel taxes, food, etc." This is the reality of the

NDP's middle-class squeeze that has Don and others referring to the Okanagan as "Brokanagan."

When will the Premier give Don and countless others a break from the rising cost of

everything under the NDP, specifically from exorbitant taxes on home heating?

Hon. K. Conroy: I thank the member for the question.

We recognize that people are facing real challenges when it comes to cost of living,

and global inflation and high interest rates are raising costs. We get that. To that

end, we are trying to support people in many different ways. I think the member was

referring to middle-class families, not middle-aged families, but middle-class families

are definitely feeling real challenges.

We have taken action to try to help those middle-class families and to try to help

all families in this province. Making sure that we have reduced child care has been

substantial. I'm not sure if Don has children that are in childcare, but people that

have children in child care are putting a minimum of $900 back in their pockets —

and it is helping them — a month. That's substantial: up to $900 a month. You know,

that's incredible.

Reducing ICBC rates. I'm sure Don drives, you know, and $400 a year for drivers —

that's substantial.

Building more homes for middle-income people, right across the province. There are

very few places in the province where we're not working hard with municipalities.

I mean, every municipality in the province got a substantial amount of funding to

work towards infrastructure. That funding was going right in, to support those communities,

to ensure that they have the infrastructure to expand on their housing. We know that

all kinds of housing is needed in this province, whether it's low-income people or

middle-income, we know that they need that housing.

We've boosted B.C.'s family benefit. I'm not sure if Don has children, but every family

in this province has had a boost to their income with B.C.'s family benefit.

There are many more options and many more things that we've been doing, and I'd be

happy to expand on it more.

Mr. Speaker: Kelowna-Mission, supplemental.

R. Merrifield: Well, breaking news. B.C. is the most unaffordable jurisdiction in Canada, s

O THAT RESPONSE FROM THE MINISTER WILL BE NOTHING MORE THAN COLD COMFORT TO DON, WHO

HAS HAD TO DELAY HIS RETIREMENT THANKS TO THE NDP'S RECORD-HIGH SPENDING WITH RECORD-LOW

RESULTS.

[2:20 p.m.]

He is far from alone. Tanya Harding and her husband both hold well-paying jobs, yet

they are feeling the pinch of shrinking paycheques thanks to the NDP's record-breaking

inflationary deficits and failed policies. With active young children and aging parents

to care for, Tanya says: "I only buy groceries that are on sale now."

How much worse does it need to get before the Premier admits that the NDP's record-breaking

inflationary deficits are making the middle-class squeeze worse, and will he give

Tanya's family a break on heating their home this winter?

Hon. K. Conroy: I just want to point out to the member that actually, everyday families in B.C. are

paying lower taxes under our….

A family with two children making $100,000 a year pays 34 percent less in provincial

taxes than what they did in 2016. Also, a family earning $30,000 — they don't pay

taxes. In fact, they now get $2,500 back in their pockets, unlike under the former

government.

Yes, big corporations are paying a little more. Yes, they are, and that money is going

right back into supporting average British Columbians right across the province.

I ask the member opposite: what would they cut? Would they cut the child care programs?

Would they cut the supports to people so that they can pay lower taxes?

We get it. Times are tough. Things are expensive, but we are providing supports to

people to help them right across the province.

COST OF LIVING AND

AFFORDABILITY ISSUES

T. Halford: Well, if you're tuning into question period, according to the NDP, everything is fine

in British Columbia, and there's absolutely no affordability crisis.

People cannot even afford the basics, like groceries, without maxing out their credit

cards. This is the reality of the NDP's new normal, where people can't even afford

to heat their homes without breaking the bank.

How much longer will this Premier ignore the desperation of people forced to rely

on their credit cards for groceries due to this NDP's record-breaking failed policies?

Hon. K. Conroy: We recognize times are tough. That's why, under us, we're going to continue to support

people, unlike the other side that used to cut services to people when times got tough.

The family child tax benefit was introduced in 2016, I believe it was, or further

back. It was only to people that had children under six. It eliminated a whole group

of families that have children that are older than six. We extended that so it supports

families that have kids right up to the age of 18.

Again, the more we talk about our child care…. The members opposite pooh-pooh it.

Maybe that's because they cancelled the child care program back in 2001, when the

Liberals were elected.

It is putting significant dollars back into the pockets of people.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Conroy: People are telling me that, in fact, they are taking those dollars they're saving

on not having to pay for additional child care — but they get the full childcare they

need — and they're putting that money back into buying groceries, paying for things

that they need.

We recognize times are tough.

Interjection.

Hon. K. Conroy: The member is saying: "Thank you." I'd ask the Leader of the Opposition…. He cut things

when he was Finance Minister. He was very quick to cut things. There's a whole list

of programs that he cut. So let's talk about…. If he was ever in this government again,

God forbid, would he continue to cut all those programs that we have been putting

in to support people across the province?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO FEDERAL

CARBON TAX CHANGES FOR HOME HEATING

P. Milobar: It's results that people actually want to see from this government. It's a lack of

results that they're getting. After seven years and two elections, all this government

has done…. It has added 29 new or increased taxes, an extra $20 billion in taxation

annually in the province of British Columbia.

If the minister wants to know something to cut, cut the carbon tax on home heating

fuels, like the federal government is doing. This government doesn't seem to know

how to cut a tax. They only seem to know how to raise them.

[2:25 p.m.]

They talk about the climate action tax credit going up. That's because they've doubled

the carbon tax. The climate action tax credit has been around since 2008. Of course

it should go up, because you've doubled carbon tax.

The economic policies of this Premier are tightening the middle-class squeeze. As

of last month, we are officially the most unaffordable jurisdiction in Canada. We

have outpaced the national rate of inflation ten of the last 15 months. There's the

largest inflationary deficit in B.C. history, and these policies are slated to cost

us an estimated $28 billion a year to our overall economy, which will translate to

$5,000 for everybody per year in this province.

Why is the Premier not giving back to families and a break on home heating while still

recklessly driving up the cost of living in B.C.?

Hon. K. Conroy: Just to make it clear, 85 percent of the people in this province are benefiting from

the climate action tax credit. In fact, it's more than doubled for 85 percent of the

people of this province. The member makes comments about B.C.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. K. Conroy: B.C. is actually a fiscal and economic leader in Canada. The members opposite do not

like to acknowledge that. We have added over 51,000 jobs this year in the province.

Interjection.

Hon. K. Conroy: No, last year our job growth was mostly in the private sector, and job growth….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, let's not.

Hon. K. Conroy: In 2022, almost 63,000 new jobs, and almost 55,000 were in the private sector. Let's

compare that to 2012.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Let's not prolong the question period unnecessarily.

Hon. K. Conroy: Thou doth protest too much.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. K. Conroy: In 2012, there were 17,700 total jobs. The member talks about how we're hiring too

many nurses, too many doctors, too many people in the public sector. Do they not want

those people to provide services to the people of this province?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Shhh.

Hon. K. Conroy: My goodness. They don't want us to hire teachers. They don't want us to hire nurses.

So what would they cut? What would they cut?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. K. Conroy: I think that's what we need to ask. What would they cut?

[End of question period.]

Petitions

Hon. M. Dean: I rise to present a petition. It's from Eric Chang from Colwood. There are 454 signatures

asking the House to take such action as will be required to revise the foreign buyers

tax so that presale buyers who committed to property purchases ahead of July 25, 2016,

without knowledge of the upcoming foreign buyers tax, are retroactively not taxed.

Tabling Documents

Hon. R. Kahlon: On behalf of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, I have the honour

to present the environmental emergency program 2022-2023 report to the Legislature,

which covers the accomplishments of the program over the previous fiscal year.

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Kahlon: In this chamber, I call second reading on Bill 38, International Credentials Recognition

Act.

In the Douglas Fir Committee Room, I call Committee of the Whole, Bill 34, Restricting

Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act.

In the third House, committee room C, I call the Committee of the Whole for Bill 31,

Emergency and Disaster Management Act.

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 38 — INTERNATIONAL CREDENTIALS

RECOGNITION ACT

Hon. A. Mercier: I move that the International Credential Recognition Act be read a second time now.

For too long, the international credential assessment process for internationally

trained professionals in British Columbia has been long and difficult.

[2:30 p.m.]

This is why we've introduced Bill 38, the International Credentials Recognition Act,

to focus on removing unfair and unnecessary barriers standing in the way of internationally

trained professionals actually working in the fields that they've trained for in British

Columbia. This act is about promoting transparency, fairness and efficiency in professional

regulatory bodies. It impacts 29 professions and 18 regulators.

[N. Letnick in the chair.]

The fact is that we are in a supply-driven labour market. The labour market outlook

tells us that in the next ten years, by 2032, we can expect to have over one million

job vacancies, a stunning 80 percent of which will require some degree of post-secondary.

And 40 percent of these jobs are projected to be filled through immigration. That's

a pretty significant thing when you consider that most of these job vacancies, two-thirds

of them, are caused by traditional retirement in the labour market.

Now, the fact is that British Columbia is growing. We've added 250,000 new immigrants

to British Columbia, newcomers, in the past two years. This gets talked about a lot

as a labour shortage. But the reality is, I think, that this is far more of a matching

issue that's happening right now, where we have people with the skills, and we have

people with the training, here in B.C., that are unable to practise in their chosen

professions and are effectively barred from it by a maze of very complicated regulatory

processes.

It's not just about economics or the labour market in a real sense. International

credential recognition and the barriers that are in place for internationally trained

professionals are a question of basic fairness. This is, in many ways, a social justice

issue.

Since taking this file on last year, I began with the team in post-secondary, a series

of engagements with internationally trained professionals, immigrant-serving organizations,

professional regulatory bodies, advocacy groups, employers and domestically trained

professionals. Collectively, we talked to well over 1,000 people about a pretty important

topic.

There are a couple of conclusions I drew from that that were pretty stark. One is

that the experience of going through the international credential recognition process

for internationally trained professionals is long. It's complicated. Many people told

me it was demeaning. It stood in stark contrast to what a lot of folks who immigrate

to Canada felt they were promised when they came here, which was…. They immigrated

through a points system that prioritized having professional certifications, like

being an engineer, without it being necessarily transparent how difficult credential

recognition was when they got here.

It's a basic fairness issue, and it really came across that everyone we spoke to,

including everyone that I spoke to that was in a professional regulatory body or worked

for a professional college…. No one I spoke to would defend the system as it stands

now. Everyone agreed that there needs to be significant change. Now, there are disagreements

on the degree of change. But there wasn't a disagreement in kind, which is that what

we have now isn't working.

There are a couple of stories that really stuck with me in particular and, I think,

really went to inform the drafting of this legislation.

I remember speaking, at one of the engagements, to an Iranian engineer. He told me

about every step of the process that he went through to get his engineering licence.

He told me that most immigrants don't come here by themselves. They come here with

their families or with the hope of bringing their families over. It's a big leap,

when you're a trained professional, to leave your vocation and leave your career and

start again, start fresh. There's a huge economic cost to it.

He told me about the years it took to go through the process, all of the red tape

along the way and the cost. To finally get to the end of it, to finally get to the

point where he's proven his competencies, where he's gotten the equivalency of education

recognized and everything else, and to be told at the end: "By the way, you have to

go do a year or more of Canadian work experience."

[2:35 p.m.]

What that means, for the members here…. The Canadian work experience requirement is

a requirement that when you're an internationally trained professional, you work under

the supervision of a Canadian professional for a length of time before your licence

is recognized. It's a catch-22 for a lot of internationally trained professionals

because they have to go and find someone to take them on, which can often mean moving,

if you can find anyone at all, and working at a cut rate.

I'll never forget what he said to me. He said: "Look, I did everything I was told

to do. It was a nightmare to figure out how to become licensed." He did everything

that he was told to do, and then he got to the end of the process, and he was told:

"Your 20-plus years' experience as an engineer abroad weren't worth a single day in

Canada." That really stuck with me.

We heard from so many internationally trained professionals about redundant and expensive

who talked to me about…. He had a master's degree from the United Kingdom. He'd lived

when he went to apply for his licence.

Then, in the period of time it took the regulator to assess whether or not his application

was complete — not assess the application on the merits but assess whether or not

the United Kingdom, where he did his education.

I heard that story or a variant of that story so many times over the course of engagements.

There are so many layered processes, redundant processes and expensive processes that

just add an insult to injury for internationally trained professionals who are just

working so hard to get through this.

When we announced the legislation the other day with the Premier, we had Alice Wong

come and speak, who's an internationally trained social worker that, I think, very,

very aptly summarized the story I've heard now from so many internationally trained

professionals, about just feeling left alone completely to their own devices to navigate

a system that's not advertised to them in any kind of way.

To me, it all really highlighted the difficulty with how Canada holds itself out to

the world with the points system, saying, "We want you because you're a professional,"

and what happens when folks come and go through the certification process. There is

a lot of work that we have to do there, and this bill is a part of that.

I want to say, as well, that regulators play an incredibly important role in all of

this. I think regulators do two really core things. They make sure that public safety

and the public interest are protected, but they also make sure that the integrity

of the profession is protected. That's as it should be. They are there to be partners

within that process. And I heard that time and again across the board.

Sometimes some regulators are comparatively smaller than others and require more assistance

to meet standards and guidelines, and we need to be there for them. That's a message

that was taken away.

Since we came into government in 2017, we have done so much work moving this file

forward. We introduced the credential assessment improvement fund in 2019 that addresses

exactly the issue I just raised.

That is a fund that is there for regulators who are seeking to improve their processes

for international applicants and to engage in projects that streamline or facilitate

the international credential assessment process. Effectively, as government we will

fund those projects so that they can meet those. I think that's a very core fund to

be there, as well, as we put these standards into place.

Just last year in this House, we introduced the Health Professions and Occupations

Act, which sets out a superintendent of health professions, which has authority over

extrajurisdictional applicants policy with a set of health professions that it's applicable

to and provides health oversight. I think that's an incredibly important bill that

does a lot of heavy lifting when it comes to international credential recognition.

[2:40 p.m.]

We need to build that work out. We've focused on the health professions. We've done

a lot on the health professions, and I'll talk about that, but we've focused on them

because of the high importance and salience health takes in our society. We need to

extend that work out beyond that to the rest of the professions.

Just a few months ago I announced, as well, the International Credential Fund, which

is a $1½ million fund administered by a non-profit called ASPECT B.C. That's there

for immigrant-serving organizations specifically, to help with a series of measures

for international credential assessment and to help the internationally trained professionals

going through that assessment.

For instance, one thing that was really identified for us was a need for mentorship,

and a need for mentorship from peers with lived experience going through the process

to help navigate it. That fund is being used for projects like that, which, I think,

is incredibly important as we get into the work of this act.

We are taking action by extending that work that we started with health and extending

that to 29 professions, from engineers and lawyers and architects to paramedics, social

workers and veterinarians. This will touch a significant amount of people and a significant

amount of professions.

I'm going to talk a bit about what this bill does. I don't propose to take too much

time at second reading. I'm going to talk about what this bill does, but I just want

to say first what it doesn't do.

What this bill doesn't do is interfere with or prescribe the substantive ability of

professional regulatory bodies to set criteria related to competencies and technical

knowledge. I think that would be, frankly, inappropriate, and I think most people

would agree with that — that the professional regulatory bodies which are closest

to the professions are the best situated to make decisions on the knowledge and skills

needed for scope of practice.

That being said, there are so many process-oriented steps that need to be fixed. This

is a very process-oriented bill in terms of removing, effectively, bureaucracy around

this. We have had multiple regulators across multiple professions, all of which, over

decades, have evolved their own processes to greater or lesser extents, and there

hasn't been a streamlining or a rationalizing around it.

This act is going to promote transparency, efficiency and fairness in that process,

and it's going to start by doing some pretty significant things. We are going to remove

the Canadian work experience requirements across these professions. That is going

to save years of people's lives before they can go into and work their professions.

The amount of professionals I've talked to who have just given up and walked away

because of barriers like this is staggering. I think this is something really significant

that's going to affect and change a lot of lives.

You know, I was struck by the fact that…. I spoke to a lot of regulators that told

me during the engagement: "Hey, look, we know the Canadian work experience requirement

isn't actually measuring what we want it to measure. We need to move to competency-based

assessments." I think this is going to be a core part of helping make that shift to

a better system.

Another provision here in this act is the limitations and restrictions on redundant

and expensive language tests. You ought not to have to continually prove that you

is going to make sure that that's there.

I can't stress enough — I've said it, but I can't stress it enough — what a big deal

this was for all of the internationally trained professionals I've talked to, that

have talked about just walking away when they're sitting there hitting refresh on

a computer, waiting to see if their application has been assessed, and they're told:

There are also a lot of things in here that are going to help with timelines. In particular,

there will be a responsibility upon regulators, for third parties that they contract

with, to check the veracity of credentials. That's important because it's very clear

to me that a lot of slippage in time happens there, as soon as the work is contracted

out. So it's about making the regulator accountable for that.

[2:45 p.m.]

As well, setting maximum processing timelines on regulators and a whole measure of

requirements to keep the process timely and focused. We're also going to tackle unfair

fee differentials for international applicants and domestically trained applicants

so that it's comparable and based on reasonable grounds.

Something that I think is very significant on the professional regulatory side is

making sure that there are reporting requirements and that there's data collection

that happens. I'm not going to name names, but I did speak to one regulator that told

me pretty frankly that they don't keep data on international applicants.

If you don't have eyes on the problem, then how can you assess how well you're doing

at it? I think this is pretty critically important. There are a lot of regulators

who have really embraced this approach and have used some funds from the credential

assessment improvement fund — I'm thinking of engineers and geoscientists, for example

— to do that work.

Transparency is a key part of this. It sounds so simple, but there are so many internationally

trained professionals that come to Canada…. As I said before, with the points system,

they're told, "Hey, come here; you're an engineer," "Hey, come here; you're a veterinarian,"

and then aren't told or given a clear pathway to credential recognition. This will

require professional regulatory authorities to publish the pathway on their websites

and to issue reports on the progress of that.

Most importantly, and the thing I heard across the board from immigrant-serving organizations,

from professionals, from folks, is that for any of this to work, for any of this to

land where the rubber hits the road, enforcement and oversight are absolutely critical,

which is why one of the core things this act does is set up a superintendent of international

credential recognition.

That superintendent is going to work hand in hand with the superintendent of the health

professions and occupations on establishing guidelines around timelines and best practices.

But the superintendent of international credential recognition is going to have some

fairly significant authorities in order to get to compliance with professional regulators.

We've had some experience with this now in government. We introduced, in a previous

session, the office of the superintendent of professional governance, through the

Professional Governance Act. We intend to leverage the experience of the office of

the superintendent of professional government. We can do this at no additional cost,

using the FTEs we have with the OSPG and in the ministry in order to bring those best

practices to bear and to make sure that we're focused on an education-to-compliance

model so that we can get more folks working here faster.

I think this is long overdue. I'm really excited about it, and I think it's going

to make a lot of positive changes in a lot of folks' lives. I'm looking forward to,

and I welcome, the debate.

G. Kyllo: I'm pleased to rise in the House today to speak on Bill 38. The bill aims to expedite

the international recognition of international credentials here in British Columbia.

For years, B.C. United has consistently advocated for fast-tracking of credential

recognition here in the province of B.C. However, after silence and inaction from

the NDP, it's a welcome surprise that government has finally recognized the importance

of internationally trained professionals to our workforce.

B.C. has long been held in high esteem for our beautiful landscapes and our strong

economy, attracting immigrants who want to call British Columbia home while pursuing

a career in their trained profession. Unfortunately, this has not been the reality

for many.

Foreign trade professionals have been left disappointed as a promise of building a

career here in B.C. has been jeopardized by unnecessarily complex red tape and bureaucracy.

Ultimately, these unfair processes are leading many to give up on the possibility

of working in their previous field and choose alternative careers, diminishing British

Columbians' workforce potential.

[2:50 p.m.]

We're even starting to hear stories of immigrants considering leaving British Columbia

because life is too expensive and the profession that they are trained in is now out

of reach simply due to exhaustive bureaucratic challenges. Streamlining and expediting

the recognition of international credentials is crucial to officially harness the

skills of an ever-growing workforce.

While this bill does have some sensible measures, and we certainly welcome the intention

of streamlining approvals in these 29 professions, there's little in this bill that

gives us confidence that we'll start seeing better results.

This is, in essence, a bill to make international credential approval faster, yet

it contains no target time range in which this will happen, and there's no detailed

timeline that this process will follow.

We see consistently from this government big, bold announcements, but seldom do we

see the homework being undertaken to consult with different industry groups or, in

this case, with the regulators to clearly understand what the current timeline is.

What is the current backlog? What is the number of international trained professionals

that are actually seeking to have their credentials recognized in B.C.?

We certainly have not seen any of that homework being done to understand what the

baseline is. What is the current backlog that exists within the 19 different regulators

that have accountability for these 29 professions? What is the fastest timeline that

an international individual could expect to have their credentials recognized? What's

the longest time period?

Government has failed. I certainly stand to be corrected. But again, the government

has failed to actually reach out to the regulators and have a good understanding of

how big a problem this really is.

My concern with this piece of legislation…. Without that baseline data being established,

how will we know with the new superintendent and the millions of additional dollars

of bureaucratic red-tape to create this new office…? How are we going to have confidence

and in any way, shape or form be able to measure the success of the superintendent

in the years ahead?

We've seen this with the reckless process this government has undertaken around drug

decriminalization. The federal government asked for that baseline data to be understood

so that the federal government could actually have some semblance of understanding

on whether these policies of this NDP government are actually improving the situation

or not.

But they failed to do their homework. This is again yet another example where a big

announcement, millions of additional dollars, a whole new bureaucracy, a new deputy

minister with a whole bunch of additional staff….

I'm quite certain that when this piece of legislation was brought forward to Treasury

Board or to cabinet, there must have been an outset of an established budget, but

we're failing to see any reference to it. The minister failed to answer the question

when the question was posed by the media about what this is going to cost taxpayers.

It's a real challenge, and I think everybody in British Columbia would understand

the concept: if you can't measure it, you can't manage it. Data should drive decisions.

Yet in the absence of the baseline data, how will we know whether this piece of legislation

is actually serving international professionals that seek to have their credentials

recognized here in British Columbia when government has not done that baseline work?

This is all stick and no carrot. Where are the incentives? Where is the collaboration?

Where is the opportunity to work with the regulators to better understand, as the

minister had indicated, the very important work that the regulators undertake as far

as ensuring public safety, the integrity of the profession?

Clearly, the regulator will continue to have full control over the standards and the

guidelines to determine the competencies, the technical knowledge of internationally

trained professionals.

It's quite concerning to see a government that seems to know best. The government

is going to be heavy-handed and start policing the regulators, but again, to my initial

point, it is not establishing that baseline data. So how will British Columbians know

in the years ahead…? How are internationally trained professionals…? How will they

know that the process is actually improving or potentially getting worse?

[2:55 p.m.]

That's certainly one of the concerns, and we'll certainly be looking forward to, in

committee stage, asking more detailed questions about that process.

Now, the only mention of timing specifically in the bill is that it must be enacted

on a "reasonable timeline," yet when we go to the

definitions at the front end of

the bill, there's no definition for a reasonable timeline. So I'm sure that the regulators

will be wondering: what does government understand to be a reasonable timeline? I'm

interested in finding out what a reasonable timeline is. Is that a year? Is it two

years? Is it five years? We don't know.

As we go through the scrutiny of the bill, clause by clause, line by line, it'll be

very important, and I hope that the minister will have the opportunity, to better

clarify what reasonable timeline actually refers to, because that is really the only

clear definition of a timeline that's actually set out in the bill as far as the amount

of time that a regulator may have to undertake to ensure the competencies and the

knowledge and skill set of those internationally trained professionals.

Now, if government's track record is any indication, all we'll see is just another

announcement followed by continued delays, little transparency and, unfortunately,

disappointing results. I'm also left a bit confused at how the government plans to

measure the results of the bill without that baseline data. And how will we know if

it's working as intended and if the approval process really has been sped up?

Furthermore, in a fashion that has become typical of the government, Bill 38 fails

to include key recommendations from the What We Heard report. We understand that there was a significant consultation process that was

undertaken by the ministry, and it was culminated in a report that came out towards

the end of July called What We Heard.

Now, within that What We Heard report implementation, there were eight themes that were actually identified. I think

I'll read those into the record now.

Theme 1: "Streamlining complex processes and shortening timelines."

about the licensure process and requirements."

Theme 3: "Exploring alternative pathways for credential recognition."

Theme 4: "Exploring more flexible approaches to demonstrate language proficiency."

Theme 5: "Introducing performance standards for data and reporting."

Theme 6: "Increasing financial and other supports for internationally trained professionals

and regulatory authorities."

Theme 7: "Improving coordination between government and regulatory authorities at

the provincial and federal level."

Theme 8: "Strengthening collaboration between regulatory authorities, educational

institutions, employers and immigrant-serving organizations to support licensure integration."

So eight themes identified. From what I can see, only three of those themes have largely

been addressed in this legislation.

The important pieces…. This is where I think it's important to take note of the approach

of this government. The opportunities for collaborating, for working with regulators

to try and find workable solutions to better understanding all of the different processes

the regulators go through in ensuring the integrity and the skill set of those individuals

that are coming to British Columbia to have their international credentials recognized

here….

That whole aspect seems to have failed or not been addressed by government. Government

has taken the heavy-handed-stick approach to spend a whole bunch more millions of

dollars, of tax dollars. Put another superintendent in charge with a whole bunch more

staff to come in with the club and to have the opportunity of fining organizations

significant amounts of dollars for those that aren't complying with what we have yet

to understand from this government as far as what a reasonable timeline is.

I think that not just British Columbians and foreign professionals would be concerned,

but I think the regulators also are likely quite concerned. And I'm certainly interested

to find out what true consultation was undertaken directly with the regulators, not

just the general public and those individuals that are sitting and waiting for their

credentials to be recognized here in British Columbia.

[3:00 p.m.]

thoroughness in its approach to international credential recognition. British Columbians

need tangible results. Unfortunately, the NDP believes that the answer to clearing

bureaucratic hurdles is to pile on more bureaucratic government hurdles and more bureaucracy.

Since the NDP took government in 2017, we've seen a 36 percent expansion in the public

service. Think about that — a 36 percent increase in the public service, adding over

137,000 additional workers. The cost is $17 billion a year. Despite the bloated public

service, results are worse across the board. Spending money aimlessly and adding bureaucracy

does not get the results that British Columbians are looking for.

This legislation seems more inclined towards increasing regulations and red tape instead

of fostering collaboration with the regulators, as we've been discussing here this

afternoon, or providing incentives for the regulators to ensure that they have the

opportunity and the supports necessary to achieve a common goal. The common goal is

to increase and ease the opportunity for internationally-trained professionals to

have their credentials recognized here in B.C. without negatively impacting the opportunity

for the regulator to ensure that the public is not put at risk. Ultimately the legislation

comes after years of NDP inaction and fails to provide the urgency that's required.

It's interesting, as we look to finding opportunities for having foreign trade professionals

have their credentials recognized here. I think it's also worth noting, though, that

there are other trained individuals in British Columbia that have been discriminated

against and not provided that opportunity to work here in B.C., largely on account

of the community benefits agreements.

The CBAs put requirements where only unionized workers that belong to a subset, a

very small group of unions, the B.C. building trade unions, are given preferential

treatment for working on public infrastructure projects in B.C. Both in horizontal

and now in vertical construction, it's added and layered on billions of additional

dollars in cost and led to huge cost overruns.

We have a government, on one hand, trying to put pressure on the regulators to expedite

the opportunity for national professionals to have their credentials recognized to

work here in the trained professions in B.C. We have other trained British Columbians

and Canadian citizens who are denied the opportunity to work on government infrastructure

projects because they do not belong to one of the NDP's 19 handpicked unions. That's

unfortunate.

I certainly don't disagree with the opportunity for government to make decisions around

open shop, closed shop. But to go so far is to deny the opportunity for a worker in

B.C., who should have the right to choose to associate, to belong to a union of their

choosing…. To have that right diminished and slashed and downtrodden because some

unions, maybe, are not so supportive of this current government….

The discriminatory behaviour of this government, of establishing a very finite set

of criteria by which if you want to work on a government infrastructure project in

B.C., you don't have the choice of choosing your union to represent you…. If you want

to go to work on a taxpayer-funded project in B.C., you have no choice but to have

to join one of these 19 handpicked unions, which are, of course, NDP-friendly unions.

That is offensive.

[3:05 p.m.]

I certainly look forward to comments from my colleague and from others that may wish

to speak here in second reading. I certainly look forward to the opportunity to have

further scrutiny of this piece of legislation in committee stage.

R. Parmar: I'm particularly proud to stand in this House today as the MLA for Langford–Juan de

Fuca on behalf of all of the people of Langford–Juan de Fuca to speak about a very

important piece of legislation. Though, after hearing the last 15 minutes or so, I

got the sense from the MLA for Shuswap that he doesn't agree that this is an important

legislation that is delivering for people. It's always a pleasure to get to stand

in this House and talk about the value of community benefit agreements and how they're

delivering for people.

I'm going to spend some time actually talking about Bill 38. What I would add is that

it's one of the historic pieces of legislation to be introduced in this House and

again, nation-leading in itself.

I spent a lot of time on the doors this year, knocking on a lot of doors throughout

Langford and Sooke, even out to Port Renfrew, talking to people about the issues that

matter to them, whether that was more housing, access to child care or investments

in health care. This one caught me off guard with the amount of times it came up at

the doorstep.

There was one particular constituent who I came across who lives on El Paseo Place

in the southern part of Langford in the Happy Valley at Latoria area. I remember knocking

on her door. She's from Czechoslovakia, immigrated here over 20 years ago and is a

proud resident of Langford and British Columbia.

She brought with her skills and abilities from her home country and all of the time,

energy and money that she spent getting a master's degree, only to come to Canada,

only to come to British Columbia over 20 years ago and be told that when she was trying

to get her credentials recognized, a master's degree, they would only recognize one

credit. That was a slap in the face to her and to her family and really impacted the

trajectory of her life in so many ways.

That really touched me in a big way. It's something that I often talk to people about

when I'm talking about this legislation — that constituent who really showed me the

need for this type of legislation and the need for government to take action. That's

what this legislation is all about. It's about delivering for people. It's about working

with regulators and working with the private sector and working with business.

When I look at this legislation, this is a job creation tool in so many ways. For

too long, under many governments, going back 30, 40, 50 years, when we had tons of

immigrants coming to this country, we said to immigrants: "We want you to be here.

We want you to be here in British Columbia." But, clearly, we told them that we didn't

want their skills. By bringing forward this legislation, in so many ways we're rectifying

that.

We have a talent shortage in British Columbia. I certainly see that in my community

of Langford–Juan de Fuca in terms of the different business owners that I talk to.

We're particularly excited in Langford–Juan de Fuca, because we're going to be opening

up a new university, a new post-secondary institution, about this time next year.

When I think of the opportunities that that gives to people from the tech sector and

all across many sectors, the opportunity to immigrate here and utilize their skills,

that's good for them. But more so, that's good for us as a government and as a society

— the ability for people to come from all walks of life and utilize those skills and

deliver important services in so many ways.

As you may know, I served as a school board trustee and chair of my school board for

almost ten years. One of the issues that we came across in our local school board

was specialized teachers — in getting access to music teachers and, in particular,

French immersion teachers. The amount of times that I would go into a classroom and

a young student would pull me aside and say, "I'm a French immersion student," and

I'd say: "That's fantastic. I wish I did French immersion. I wish I was trilingual.

It didn't work out, unfortunately. I've got Punjabi, though, so I'm happy about that."

They pulled me aside and said: "I'm a French immersion student, but I want you to

know that I have a substitute today." I'm like: "Okay, cool. Substitutes are great."

They're like: "Do you know what my substitute speaks in class?" I'm like: "French?"

[3:10 p.m.]

Because of the shortage of French immersion teachers we have in British Columbia,

and in particular we were having in the Sooke school district, whenever a French immersion

impacted students at John Stubbs Memorial School; at Belmont; now Royal Bay, which

has the French immersion project; and at a whole host of other schools across the

province.

Look, I'm going to be brief. This legislation is about delivering for people. It's

about taking on an initiative that's impacting families all across the country.

I had an opportunity to be in Ukraine and now meet with many new refugees who have

made British Columbia and Langford–Juan de Fuca their home. They've talked to me about

the challenges they're facing with having their credentials recognized. When they

saw this legislation, they saw hope. They saw an opportunity for their credentials

to be recognized, and they saw an opportunity for them to be recognized for the work

they did in their home country and for them to be able to continue doing that work

here. So it's pretty simple.

After hearing the member talk about this legislation as more red tape and more regulation,

it was great to see, when the legislation was introduced by my friend the Minister

of State for Workforce Development…. Bridgitte Anderson, who is the president of the

Greater Vancouver Board of Trade, simply called it "a commonsense initiative." It's

too bad the Conservative members are not here. I think they would have enjoyed that

quote.

I'm particularly proud of the work that the minister has done. I know that he has

done a lot of engagement in communities all across the province. I'm certainly looking

forward to having him come to my community to talk about this important legislation

and what it's going to mean for new immigrants and for people in our communities.

I'll end by saying that as much as this legislation is important for the next generation,

we have another generation that is not going to get a chance to benefit from this.

To those who have arrived in B.C. over the years — I certainly have many family members

who would fit this bill — and didn't see their hard-earned credentials recognized

or who faced countless challenges that led them to go into a different field because

they didn't want to go through significant waiting periods…. I want them to know that

our government is truly sorry and that I'm truly sorry.

With today's legislation, with Bill 38 introduced in this House and being debated

now…. Hopefully, it will be passed in due course. I want them to know….

We see you, we hear you, and we will deliver for the next generation of British Columbians.

In particular, for the people in Langford–Juan de Fuca, I want you to know that the

conversations that I had, especially with that wonderful woman on El Paseo Place….

We're taking action on the issues that matter to her and on the issue that she raised

with me.

C. Oakes: I rise in response to Bill 38, the International Credentials Recognition Act.

Certainly, B.C. United has consistently advocated for the fast-tracking of credential

recognition and the importance of streamlining and expediting the recognition of international

credentials. We do believe it's crucial to efficiently harness the skills of a diverse

workforce. We certainly support that.

I would like to take a moment, perhaps, just to respond to a few things that the member

for Langford–Juan de Fuca talked about. I do agree. It is critically important that

we look at workforce development. We have labour shortage challenges across this province.

The member talked about this being a piece of legislation that provides hope for people

looking to come and follow that Canadian dream. We want to have that message out there.

I want to talk for a moment about the hope that we can provide to British Columbians.

I want to spend a moment to share what I have heard, across this province, from student

union groups, advocates and people that are looking at following their dreams.

[3:15 p.m.]

The diminishing sense of hope that I've heard from British Columbians with following

their dreams, whether it's to be a music teacher, an engineer, a teacher, an early

childhood educator, a technician, a social worker, a veterinarian, a lawyer, a biologist,

an architect or a chartered accountant…. I could go on and on, on the list that's

recognized here.

I think it's important. First and foremost, we should always ensure that we're providing

every opportunity for British Columbians to have access to that incredibly important

post-secondary education in our province.

I would like to go over some data I've read in this House before that is incredibly

relevant and important. Over the last decade, the total head count enrolments across

all programs in the B.C. public post-secondary system have declined by 3 percent,

from nearly 431,630 people in 2012-2013 to 420,777 in 2021-2022. At the same time,

we've seen significant student growth in our K to 12 as a lot more people move to

British Columbia.

I raise these important statistics…. What they're saying is that we have a generation….

We have students in every part of this province that are deciding not to or, for whatever

reason, are not able to go into post-secondary education and provide critically important

services that all the public in this province rely on.

We look at B.C. colleges. They've experienced domestic enrolment declines over the

last three years. Rural colleges that once offered a full suite of course options

have dramatically reduced program offerings.

Part of the challenge is…. Of course, we went through COVID, and that has dramatically

changed how people access post-secondary education.

How that's relevant to the bill that is before us today is…. We do need to understand

the benchmark and the labour focus needs in each of the areas that have been identified.

I think the first benchmark and the first thing we need to look at is: what is happening

in British Columbia? Where has our workforce gone?

I hear that across this province. How do we instil hope in British Columbia? How do

we make sure our kids know that there are opportunities to not just go into post-secondary

and follow their dreams but that the seats are going to be available to them so that

they can finish their post-secondary education in British Columbia?

A lot of the people that I've talked to in relation to this bill, actually, are British

Columbians that have had to go out of province to complete their education. Now they

are looking at getting their credentials recognized, and this is a good piece of legislation

to help them recognize their credentials.

Perhaps the first question we should be asking, as members of this House, is: are

we doing everything possible to make sure British Columbians have access in each of

those areas to fulfil their educational dreams?

The notary public group is on this list. I had the opportunity to meet with them last

week. One of the things that they mentioned…. There is only one place in British Columbia

where you can actually get certified for training. That's SFU, and there's a limited

amount of seats. They said that one of the things that they could do is….They could

grow the opportunities for British Columbians to get access to that if we had more

seats available in British Columbia.

That was feedback that was brought to us that we could look at. I think it's a reasonable

thing that we could certainly pursue.

I want to absolutely thank the College of New Caledonia Students Union, which I had

the opportunity to meet with last week. They brought forward some very important ideas

that they've asked me to bring forward here to this House.

[3:20 p.m.]

I also had the ability to tour the Aboriginal resource centre at the College of New

Caledonia. Here are some of the things that I learned and some of the barriers that

our local Indigenous students are facing.

One of the challenges is the number of credits that's required to be full-time under

INAC. That creates a barrier for our Indigenous students to pursue…. Whether it's

a technical agrologist or a registered professional forester, there are barriers that

are included today in British Columbia and that we should be looking at.

That was something that our students say: "You know what? When you're looking at bringing

forward legislation and when you're looking at these bills, don't forget about us.

Bring our examples to the floor." I committed to do that, and will commit to work

towards helping them find a reasonable way to reduce barriers for Indigenous youth

on pursuing education. The other thing is about language proficiency. I think that's

a very important piece. I certainly appreciate the fact that it's in this legislation.

Here's something I heard as well at the College of New Caledonia and through the Indigenous

resource centre. They mentioned the fact that one of the challenges for upskilling

in British Columbia is that it's not modular. If you fail one part of the upskilling

or the training piece of that, you have to start from scratch. That was a really good

idea that was brought forward. Again, I committed to bring that forward.

We look at the importance of financial support. One of the things that the students

also raised, across all the student unions, as we look at providing financial incentives

for these types of programs — we talked about the nursing before, but now we've got

this new list — is to make sure that we're also including those supports for the graduates

in British Columbia. That's a reasonable ask that has been brought forward.

I go through this list of what I've heard because, again, the member from Langford–Juan

de Fuca came and talked about what he'd heard on the doorstep. Well, this is what

I'm hearing on the doorstep. I think it's always wise for us to listen to what people

are saying. If there's a way that we can improve things, that's always a benefit for

all of us. I appreciate the opportunity to say that.

One of the things that that comes down to is that I heard we do need to look at the

funding review. If we're looking at making sure we're maximizing the workforce and

making sure everyone has the opportunity for hope in this province, then I think….

Again, I'm going to continue to pressure the government on the long-awaited funding

review that was due…. Well, it's well overdue. Please make sure you move forward on

that, because that's critically important for British Columbia, and it's critically

important for students.

The other piece of that is the international education strategy. I heard from international

students across this province, and I want to spend a moment on this. A lot of international

students right now are really struggling. The first thing I want to recognize is that

our international students from South Asia have a lot of concerns around what is happening

geopolitically. There is a concern about what impact that will have on their education.

The reality is…. It is our hope that the international students that come from across

the globe to get access to our education system decide to make British Columbia their

home. That's what we want. We want to be a welcoming society where international students

can come and know that there is a pathway to citizenship, that there's a pathway to

good-paying, family-supporting jobs here in British Columbia.

That's why the message, too, from the students is: please, to the government, come

forward with the international education strategy, because that's critically important.

[3:25 p.m.]

Going back to this piece of legislation, one of the things I think I heard the members….

I do think it's very important that we look at ways, across government, to streamline,

use simple language and reduce red tape, because it's critically important.

I would like to offer a suggestion to the government. You have, in your public service,

a remarkable team that I had the privilege of working with when I was the Minister

of Red Tape Reduction. They are an exceptional group of public servants that had a

strong lens of how you use commonsense language, how you reduce red tape, with that

whole idea that redundancies and silos amongst ministries can really add costs to

every level of government and ultimately impact our workforce development.

My question, as the government continues to grow bureaucratic systems: have you looked

internally, have you looked to the skill set that we may already have within government

and that could do the same work that is being identified in this legislation, without

creating additional layers of costs? Every time you stand up a superintendent's office

— and we will have the opportunity to explore this, of course, when we go through

the bill debate — is a significant cost. It's a significant cost to taxpayers, and

often the challenge becomes: is it going to create more bureaucratic red tape, as

opposed to streamline and reduce that?

We'll have the opportunity to discuss that when we go through sections of the bill.

I think that's critically important. We want to make sure that the steps that are

being taken will, from a workforce development piece, create results and provide some

support to those gaps that we currently have in the workforce.

I also want to talk to the people who have made British Columbia your destination

of choice and the place to raise your families, raise your children, your grandchildren.

We want everyone to have the ability to fully utilize their skills. I think this is

an important piece to recognize that. We'll go through, and where there are opportunities

to improve upon that, I hope the members opposite will be open, the government will

be open to ideas that we may present that may help improve upon this piece of legislation.

Ultimately, we want to make sure it suits the needs of British Columbians.

The expanded new

definitions — I think it's important to look at what that is. Again,

we'll have the opportunity to go through that. We do have to look at accountability

measures with the superintendent. I think that's critically important. I know that

there are things that have been outlined in the legislation, but how does the accountability

work?

I know that there has been another superintendent office that has been stood up. We

haven't really seen the results of that yet. From an accountability perspective, I

think it's going to be an important piece for us to explore. Going back to those benchmarks,

I think it's critically important that results happen when things get measured. I

think that's an important piece: understanding where we're coming from, what that

benchmark is and how we can move that benchmark.

Of course, at all times, safety, health and welfare are critical. We want to make

sure that those standards are definitely put in place and that nobody is taken advantage

of. We want to make sure that that isn't lost in this new piece of legislation.

We want to make sure, when we're looking at exemptions: well, how does that exemption

process work? What are the decisions respecting those exemptions? What does that look

like? Does that help with transparency? Does that create challenges with transparency?

Those are all pieces that we will be reviewing in the sections.

[3:30 p.m.]

Of course, enforcement. Well, with this legislation that has been put forward, what

happens if it's not achieving the results that we're hoping for? What does that look

like from an enforcement perspective? Depending on the regulations that are put in

place, what powers will the government actually have around the enforcement or the

direction for the superintendent's office? What reprisals are allowed by the regulatory

authorities?

It's a little bit challenging when we don't know what regulation has been put forward.

So that always has become an issue. We've seen a lot of legislation being brought

forward by the NDP, where you get the legislation, but all the regulations will come

after, and we don't really know what those regulations are till after. So it's a little

bit challenging for us to debate on that. That will be an important piece that we

will be reviewing when we go through the legislation on this. So I think that's important.

But in closing, I do look forward to the opportunity to go through this piece of legislation.

I think having what we heard as an initial document and having gone out and talked

to people across British Columbia is important.

I will put in another…. I will ask kindly that…. There is an important group, a secretariat,

out there that sometimes is forgotten about. That's the small business secretariat.

The reason I mentioned this is because they've done incredible work over a number

of different governments. They cross a large segment of society. It has the opportunity

to have that small business lens on legislation and things that are being brought

forward to provide….

It's one thing for us as legislators to say: "This looks like a good idea, but how

does it actually work on the ground? That common sense. When you roll things out,

what are the repercussions? What are the unintended consequences? So having another

organization, such as the Small Business Roundtable, have a review of some of this

type of legislation, anything around workforce development, is important.

That comes back to the commitment that we had made — B.C. United — when we were in

government about the small business accord. Every piece of legislation that is being

brought forward has that small business lens on it, because we understand that if

you are increasing red tape, and if you are increasing the challenges with regulations,

it can drive up costs to everyday British Columbians and have unintended consequences.

What we don't want in this piece of legislation being brought forward is to have the

real impact on what I talked about around the workforce and the students today who

are studying and want to pursue their dreams of the list that has been identified

here. We don't want those types of unintended consequences.

Finally, it is always very important to have that strong lens of red tape and what

it means to the average British Columbian, having simple language, having transparency,

making sure that the redundancies are removed from all pieces of legislation. Just

because one ministry says X, and then you have that duplication, it has real consequences.

We're seeing that across the board in government, everything from health care to housing.

This piece of legislation…. Because it talked about red tape reduction and streamlining,

I thought it warranted me to talk about our perspectives as B.C. United around reducing

red tape and the impacts it can have on British Columbians.

In closing, I look forward to having the opportunity to review this legislation. I

appreciate the member's comments that have arisen. At the end of the day, getting

an education here in British Columbia and following your dreams in British Columbia

and having hope for a future in British Columbia is what we want.

We want, internationally, our reputation to be that British Columbia is that wonderful,

affordable place where you can follow your dreams, and you can pursue your education,

and at all times, the services, whether it's health care or education or housing,

will be provided to you.

[3:35 p.m.]

J. Sims: It is a pleasure today to rise and speak in support of Bill 38, International Credentials

Recognition Act.

I want to thank our minister for the amazing job he did leading up to this piece of

legislation. I wanted this legislation in place, let me tell you, quite a few years

ago when we formed government.

But it takes time. It takes time to consult not only with the different professional

groups and British Columbians, but it also takes time to work with the regulatory

bodies so that we can bring forward legislation that will serve British Columbians

and will serve British Columbians who live here now and those who will become British

Columbians when they move here in the future.

There is no dichotomy in my mind about international recognition of credentials. In

1975, I chose to make Canada my destination home. In 1977, I arrived in B.C. — a teacher.

But because I arrived from England via Quebec, I got my credentials almost straight

away. Unheard of nowadays, but in those days, it was super fast.

But I can tell you. It's not like that with everyone, and that's what I want to focus

on: the human side of this legislation.

I heard my colleague, who I have a lot of respect for, talk about red tape. If anybody

dislikes the word "red tape," it's me, because it was in the name of reducing red

tape that a certain government, the party that sits on that side, when they sat on

this side, gutted support for special needs kids when they took away all the criteria

for designations and then just made it a pooled amount of money, because those designations

used to drive funding.

As a classroom teacher and then as the BCTF president, I fought on that issue tirelessly.

So for me, red tape is synonymous with that.

I'm so pleased to see that this piece of legislation is about streamlining. It's about

making it easier. It's about providing support to people who want to get their credentials

recognized both financially and through process as well.

I'm not telling any tales when I tell you that our immigration system is disjointed.

When people apply to come, it used to be the points system. Then it became the skilled

workers class.

Here you are sitting in, let me choose, New Delhi — surprise, surprise. Or you're

sitting in London or sitting in Dublin, and you fill out an application to emigrate

because, for whatever reason, you want to go to beautiful, beautiful Canada and head

to British Columbia. When they fill out those forms, based on their education and

their work experience…. You get points that then help to qualify you — that's how

I got here — to come to this country.

But the vast majority who have come over the last number of decades, currently as

well…. They come here based on their credentials, and you should see the shock on

their faces when they get here and find out those credentials cannot be used to get

a job.

If ever there was a Monty Python sketch in the making, this one is it. It's a huge

disservice. People feel duped. People feel misled. When they get here, they think

they're going to be a practising doctor. They think they're going to be a teacher.

They think they're going to be an engineer. After all, the Canadian government selected

them based on that criteria.

When they get here, taxi driver. It's not bad being a taxi driver, not bad working

at different jobs. But when you spent your lifetime and lots of resources to train

in a certain field and that's your passion, imagine how it feels. Very human cases.

[3:40 p.m.]

I started to hear about this long before I became a Member of Parliament or a member

of the Legislature. I first started to hear about this when I was a teacher from other

teachers who couldn't get their credentials, or it would take so long and be so expensive.

Later on, when I moved to Vancouver and I would be sitting in a certain Yellow Cab

— I'll say it — when I was sitting in a cab, I would be listening to the drivers telling

me: "I'm a doctor. I'm an engineer. I am a lawyer. I am this. I am a nurse." "You're

driving a taxi," and they said: "Because I could not get anything else."

The road to getting your credentials recognized is long and arduous and very, very

expensive. No new immigrant that arrives in a new country ready to settle has the

wherewithal — or a very rare one does — to have the financial resources. After all,

they've got families to support too. They're coming to a new country, and there are

all the challenges that come with it. I've experienced those. I spoke the language,

and I had a job in my field. But many do not.

I will always remember this particular, I will say, young man — at my age, everybody

is young now — telling me how he used to be a doctor in Morocco. He was a heart specialist

there. He was driving a cab here in B.C. because he, one, could not work out the process,

and two, when he got helped with the process, could not afford it.

He would basically have to spend three to four to five years, he told me, in order

to be practising something he used to practise in a nationally recognized, internationally

renowned hospital back in his homeland. Yet he could not get a job in the health sector.

Let me tell you a story about a constituent of mine who came to see me when I was

a Member of Parliament. She qualified, and so did her husband, to come to this country

mainly based on their credentials. She was a doctor in Islamabad at a teaching hospital.

She was head of the surgical ward. She was teaching other doctors.

After years and years of butting her head trying to get in the system, she gave up.

She gave up, because she could see no way that she could practise her profession.

She felt betrayed, and that's the word she used. "I came here. I got accepted to come

to Canada, to B.C., because I had the right kind of education. I had the credentials

for a job area that they needed. But once I get here, I can't work in my specialty

area."

She is not unique. If I had 12 hours, I would not run out of specific stories I have

heard over the last 20, 30 years.

I think, because of that alone, I really want to do a shout-out to our Premier, who

directed the minister, who did his work and has brought this legislation forward.

It's long overdue, because it's the right thing to do. We made promises when people

applied to come here, and then we broke them once they got here. We undervalued them.

Many of them went into depression.

Now when they see this…. I've had at least three, once we announced this, come into

my office and say: "I'm so happy for the new ones. It's been 30 years for me, 20 years

for me, 15 years for me. I'm not sure how this will work for me, but I'm so happy

that others who come here as professionals with skill sets will not have to have the

fight with regulatory bodies or with getting their credentials recognized."

[3:45 p.m.]

When I think of the progress we've made there, it's huge.

I absolutely agree that our students in British Columbia need to have spaces in our

post-secondary institutions, but it was a bit rich coming from the other side when

I remember what they did to the post-secondary institutions in the way of funding

and the number of seats that disappeared.

Also, let me tell you about something as simple as gutting the apprenticeship program.

For three decades…. Sorry, 2½ decades. My math wasn't my strong point, but I lost

it there for a second. For about 2½ decades, we had our skilled trades gutted. The

apprenticeship programs were renowned across Canada and North America.

I was a high school teacher and a counselor, and I worked with students who started

their drafting, did auto mechanics, did woodworking, made beautiful cabinets, and

a student who designed my house using the CAD program, which he learned at school.

All wonderful things we used to have, and we watched all of those disappear.

Once again, I am so happy with the work that's been done in growing our trades and

growing for the future, but also, the trades that are recognized here in foreign credentials

will also go a long way to growing a productive and much-needed workforce. I absolutely

agree.

I heard just yesterday about a young woman who wants to go into nursing, and I encourage

her. I told her how our government has created 600 new seats since we've been in government.

More to come. We've grown the number of seats at UBC in the medical school, both in

residency and the undergrad, but here is the clincher. We also have a new medical

school that will be opening in Surrey, and they've already started to work with internationally

trained medical doctors to get their credentials on the go.

Lots needs to be done, but I would say that we have done a lot already. I always agree

that international students who come here — they put a lot of trust in us. But they

also bring a lot of credentials with them that go unrecognized right now. Sometimes,

their undergraduate credentials go unrecognized. Sometimes, if they've been teaching

overseas, it goes unrecognized, and this will open up some of those doors for them

as well.

As my colleague from Cariboo North said, British Columbia is one of the fastest-growing

provinces. I come from the city of Surrey, and I disagree with my colleague from Langford–Juan

de Fuca. I believe Surrey is the most vibrant, the most diverse and an absolutely

amazing city to raise your kids, to live, work and play — all of those things. Absolutely.

The city of Surrey is where it's at.

By the way, every one of us who sits in here wants and knows that the riding we come

from is the best there is, and so it should be. It doesn't matter where you sit, because

we are representing those constituents, but because my riding is so diverse, it also

has so many people — a large percentage who have experienced the very issue we're

trying to address here, which is recognition of international credentials.

By the way, I want to say I know my colleague across the way talked about funding

for post-secondary and the international students getting a fair playing field here.

I agree with that. I think that they should get their classes if they've been promised

classes. That they shouldn't come here and then have to wait six months to a year

to get into a physical class while they're paying what I would say is very hefty student

fees.

[3:50 p.m.]

I will also say this. For all who come here from another country, if we are saying,

when we assess whether we're going to admit you into this country or not, if we're

using those credentials at that stage, then we should also have a pathway for recognition

of those credentials when they get here that are not an unbearable burden.

I'm going to tell you about a dentist who moved here from Mexico — 15 years of practice

in Mexico, four years of practice in the U.S. Yet when he comes to B.C., what he was

told was that it would probably cost him, in total, just over $200,000 to get his

credentials with the courses he had to take — and giving up an income.

Mr. Speaker, I don't know about you, but when I arrived in this country…. Both my

husband and I are teachers, and we both came to teaching jobs. But what we came with

was less than $1,000 in our bank account, and we were the lucky ones.

There are those who arrive here with maybe $20, $25, and there are those who, when

they arrive here, don't have a job. So they're landing here thinking: "I'm a doctor.

I'm a dentist. I'm a teacher. I'm a nurse. There's a huge shortage in Canada. They're

going to hire me straight away. I don't have to worry, because I'll be earning." And

then we throw curveball after curveball at people so they can't practise their profession.

I don't have to tell anybody in this room, because you have business people in your

community as well…. Whether it's health care, whether it's teachers, whether it's

the trades — all levels of employment — I have employers coming to tell me: "We're

finding it hard to recruit. We've got empty places."

I am so proud of the work that the Health Minister has done on recruitment of international

nurses but also on recognizing and giving a pathway to those who are here so that

they can get their credentials in nursing. In the same way, with the doctors, now

with the assistant doctor model, people will be in an earning mode much earlier than

they would have been otherwise.

What this particular piece of legislation does…. I have to take on one thing. A person

said to me: "I see you've got real estate agents on this list." This legislation isn't

about one thing. It is about looking at all the regulated professions and making sure

that we are removing the barriers.

That doesn't mean Canada is now going to go start recruiting real estate agents or

any of the other lists that are on there. What that list shows, and it's a very comprehensive

list, is that those are the regulating bodies we have right here, outside of the health

sector right here in B.C., and those will be streamlined for credential recognition.

That is a good thing. In case anybody ever comes in the future who's got credentials,

because we've allowed them into this country, then they have a right to work here.

Then they can use the credentials they have.

Let me say that there was a time we would have been saying: "What about the standards?"

And I still say that. This is not about lowering the standards. This is not about

reducing the level of care. The qualifications still have to be there.

What this is about is how we recognize those credentials, creating pathways, removing

barriers — I like that word better than red tape — and then making sure that people

know how to go about it. When I say "removing barriers" — both reducing them in the

financial area as well as in the process.

[3:55 p.m.]

If I was a young nurse arriving from the Philippines right now…. And I actually have

a daughter-in-law arriving from the Philippines any day. If a nurse arrives, unless

they know someone here, it would be very, very difficult for them to navigate the

system to get their credentials recognized. I'm so happy that British Columbia — our

Health Minister — has put a process in place that helps to guide people and navigate

them through the process. That is an example of how we not only reduce barriers but

how we move forward in recognizing these talents.

B.C. is a wonderful place to live, but we know that our strength comes from our diversity,

and our diversity comes from every corner of this planet, from many parts. They come

here for many reasons. Some came as refugees. Some come as students and then get work

permits and then get permanent residency. Some come directly because they have the

skill set, and they get the required number of points to come here.

Whichever path they come in, I believe it behooves any government to make sure that

once these people are here, that we are there to assist them so they can be their

best, so they can contribute to a vibrant British Columbia in the fields of their

choice, in the areas of their profession.

We are, as a province, dependent upon people coming here from other countries. As

a country, we are dependent on bringing people here from other countries. Because

of that, we have to make sure that we don't promise them one thing when they are sitting

way over there in their homeland, practising their profession and having a fairly

good lifestyle, and then once they come here, they find out that that lifestyle cannot

be maintained because they can't practise their profession.

I have been urging the federal government that there needs to be a look at the point

system, at the skilled worker section, to make sure the promises and commitments we

make to people over there, once they arrive here, are kept.

One of our commitments nationally is to our international students — that once they

have finished, they do have a pathway to permanent residency. We have to make sure

that that pathway to residency is supported and we are opening doors and not siloing.

One thing I've always loved about Canada: once you are here, you are a Canadian. Once

you get your citizenship, a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. We have Canadians

right now who are qualified doctors, qualified nurses, qualified teachers, qualified

engineers — I could go on — who are not being treated equally. This piece of legislation

will go a long way to international credential recognition, and we'll live up to the

commitment we make to people when we try to entice them to come to Canada.

As I said earlier, I have lots more to say, but I am going to stop with this. I can

tell you that people in my riding and people in every riding, I would say, in the

Lower Mainland, and I can speak especially for every riding in Surrey, will be looking

at this piece of legislation and saying "about time." We need this.

I can tell you something else. There are those who are not immigrants, either now

or over the last ten years, and they will be saying: "This is common sense. We have

all these doctors sitting here not being able to practise. We have all these nurses.

We have all these teachers. We have all these other health care workers. We have engineers.

We need them." We need them, and this legislation will go a long way.

[4:00 p.m.]

Once again, thank you to the minister for the stellar job he did in consultation.

I also want to do a huge shout-out to every regulatory body that has cooperated with

us. It would not have happened without their support and cooperation. This is a collaborative

effort, and because it is collaborative, we have to do a huge shout-out to everyone

who has played a role in this.

I want to thank my colleagues across the