Fourth Session, 42nd Parliament

(2023) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Thursday, February 23, 2023

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 273

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill M209 — Electoral Districts (Renaming) Amendment Act, 2023

D. Davies

Bill M210 — Preserving Brunswick Point for Agriculture and Migrating Waterfowl Habitat Act, 2023

I. Paton

Bill M211 — Emergency Program Amendment Act, 2023

T. Stone

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Harper’s Trail Winery

T. Stone

Wine industry

R. Russell

Jack Brown and contributions to agriculture

I. Paton

Community preservation of fisheries and forest resources

A. Olsen

Community board game fundraiser in Port Moody

R. Glumac

Oral Questions

Government action on issues

K. Falcon

Hon. R. Kahlon

Government action on affordable housing

K. Falcon

Hon. R. Kahlon

Affordable housing for families and protections for renters

K. Kirkpatrick

Hon. R. Kahlon

Economic development funding for Island and coastal communities

A. Olsen

Hon. B. Bailey

Affordable housing for families and protections for renters

E. Sturko

Hon. R. Kahlon

Affordable rental housing and B.C. Housing units

M. Bernier

Hon. R. Kahlon

R. Merrifield

Government action on housing affordability and student housing

P. Milobar

Hon. R. Kahlon

Ministerial Statements

War in Ukraine and one-year anniversary of invasion

Hon. A. Kang

T. Stone

A. Olsen

Tabling Documents

Office of the registrar of lobbyists for B.C., Determination Decision

23–01 , Domtar Inc., designated filer: Daniel Buron, January

9, 2023

Office of the Representative for Children and Youth, report, Key

Components of Effective Service Delivery for Children and Youth

with Support Needs and Their Families: A Research Review and Analysis ,

February 2023

Orders of the Day

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 19 — Appointment of Special Committee to Appoint a Representative for Children and Youth

Hon. R. Kahlon

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 7 — Land Owner Transparency Amendment Act, 2023 (continued)

A. Singh

Hon. B. Bailey

Hon. K. Conroy

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2023

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: J. Sims.

[10:05 a.m.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I have two sets of introductions I’d like to

make — one, some guests that are visiting you and are your guests. I’m going

with them first to make you happy, hon. Speaker. We have some of your guests

that are visiting from Toronto and the Lower Mainland. I know that you’ll be

hosting them in your VIP room, having lunch, I’m sure.

We have Hardam Mangat, Yadwinder Sodhi, Sanjeev Grewal, Taj Toor and

Kuljit Pandher. He and I worked together at the Royal Bank many, many years

ago.

Will the House please make them all welcome.

We also have two visitors here from the Non-Profit Housing

Association. I want to thank them for the work that they do to support and

grow our amazing not-for-profit housing sector. We have Ian Cullis and Bryan

Woo.

I’m hoping the House can join me in welcoming them today as

well.

Hon. H. Bains: My most favourite hockey player, Brandon Bains, No. 2, and his Surrey

Thunder team, after winning a gold medal in Nanaimo and a gold medal in

Abbotsford, are now moving into the playoffs. I just want to say their

success depends on the coaching staff they have, led by Brian MacGillivray;

assistant coaches, Gerry MacGillivray, Avin Gill, Justin Gill, Justin

Sayson; and on-and-off-ice helpers Matt Welsh, Gurj Randhawa and Donny

Malhotra.

It’s not only that they develop the skills and what is needed to be a

good hockey player. The head coach has the unique ability to identify the

strengths and skills of each hockey player and then take it to the next

level. Along with this, he teaches life skills to his athletes, like

leadership qualities, discipline, honesty and integrity, all key aspects in

helping each athlete achieve their hockey dreams.

Please join with me and send deep gratitude to this coaching

team.

I say to Brandon and his team: play hard, have fun and be respectful

to each other on the ice.

A. Olsen: It’s my honour to introduce two of my constituents from Saltspring

Island in the House today. Jon Cooksey and Pam Tarr are here. They are

important change-makers in the community, and I’ll be looking forward to

having lunch with them later.

Will the House please make them feel very welcome here.

S. Furstenau: In the gallery today is Mike Nierychlo. He and his wife, Robin, own

Emandare Winery in the Cowichan Valley.

Would the House please make him feel

most welcome.

[10:10 a.m.]

Mr. Speaker: Member for Peace River…. North.

D. Davies: It’s funny, hon. Speaker. This is part of my bill today that I’m going

to be talking about.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL M209 — ELECTORAL DISTRICTS

(RENAMING) AMENDMENT

ACT, 2023

D. Davies presented a bill intituled Electoral Districts (Renaming)

Amendment Act, 2023.

D. Davies: I move that a bill intituled Electoral Districts (Renaming)

Amendment Act, 2023, of which notice has given today in my name on the

order paper, be introduced and read now for the first time.

Today I rise to introduce, for a second time, a bill that would

change the name of my riding to better reflect its regional composition.

The Northern Rockies regional district is a very important part of my

riding that should be highlighted in its name. It is a place that I am

incredibly proud to represent along with the entirety of my

riding.

The federal electoral district to my provincial riding also

reflects Northern Rockies specifically. In fact, it had its name changed

in 2013, from Prince George-Peace River to Prince George–Peace

River–Northern Rockies which…. Northern Rockies is not even located near

the Peace River.

The regional municipality of Northern Rockies comprises roughly 10

percent of British Columbia’s land mass, which is a major part of the

landscape of our province. It also includes Fort Nelson, which is the

largest community in the regional municipality.

The Northern Rockies is home to some of the most important

resources in our provincial economy, being home to one of the largest

natural gas plays in the world, incredible potential for timber supply

and opportunities for mining. More recently it has become known for its

potential in geothermal and hydrogen, and we must not forget about the

vast opportunities for tourism in this incredibly beautiful part of our

province.

As the electoral boundary commission is in its final stages for

their report, the timing to request this change is perfect. I believe

that it is important for Northern Rockies to be recognized and

represented in this Legislature, as well as to help people not mix up my

fine colleague from Peace River South with Peace River North, which

often happens.

Mr. Speaker: The question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

D. Davies: 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 M209, Electoral Districts (Renaming) 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.

BILL M210 — PRESERVING BRUNSWICK

POINT FOR AGRICULTURE

AND MIGRATING

WATERFOWL HABITAT ACT, 2023

I. Paton presented a bill intituled Preserving Brunswick Point for

Agriculture and Migrating Waterfowl Habitat Act, 2023.

I. Paton: I move that the bill intituled Preserving Brunswick Point for

Agriculture and Migrating Waterfowl Habitat Act, 2023, of which notice

has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and now read

for the second time.

Today I rise to introduce this bill for the third time. The

history of Brunswick Point has been lengthy and painful for several

Delta families. Starting in 1968, a proposal for a coal terminal at

Deltaport and a railway line through Delta farmland was brought forward.

This project came with the expropriation of 4,000 acres of prime

farmland in west Delta. However, more than 600 acres of Brunswick Point

farmland that is being held by the Crown has not yet been sold back to

the original owners. Instead, it has been offered back to the families

through short-term leases.

Brunswick Point is a triangular-shaped piece of land that borders

the ocean and the Fraser River at Canoe Pass and includes seven

kilometres of dike walking trails. The land also boasts exceptional

class 1 soil that grows B.C.’s very best potatoes. But most importantly,

the area is world-renowned as a resting stop for migrating birds,

including Canada geese, snow geese, swans and snowy owls. The resting

birds are well nourished by the leftover morsels of potatoes, grain and

corn. The

section of land is also only two kilometres away from the

Reifel Bird Sanctuary.

Being precariously close to the Deltaport coal and container

terminal and a massive warehousing development next door at Tsawwassen

First Nation, it is vitally important that this precious 600 acres of

farmland continues to be held by the Crown, be kept in agriculture and

wildlife habitat in perpetuity and be sold back to local farmers or

offered back with long-term leases. It is essential that the farmland

and the bird habitat be protected from any development in the

future.

Therefore, I present this bill with the hope that the government

can honour its own mandates and work together to protect our beautiful

province and do what is best for the people of British

Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: The question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

I. Paton: 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 M210, Preserving Brunswick Point for Agriculture and Migrating

Waterfowl Habitat 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.

[10:15 a.m.]

BILL M211 — EMERGENCY PROGRAM

AMENDMENT ACT,

T. Stone presented a bill intituled Emergency Program Amendment Act,

T. Stone: I move that the bill intituled the Emergency Program Amendment,

2023, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be

introduced and read a first time now.

Although the extreme climate events of 2021 are behind us, the

impacts continue to be felt, and we must acknowledge the reality that

these occurrences are becoming more frequent, with increasingly

devastating consequences. This is leading to increased costs for

disaster victims and the inability to access insurance in high-risk

areas.

The purpose of disaster financial assistance is to help

individuals who are unable to purchase insurance coverage.

Unfortunately, the program has remained largely unchanged over the last

50 years, and it’s failing to fulfil its intended purposes in a world

experiencing climate change. There is a desperate need to update the DFA

program to proactively address these new challenges, fill gaps and

ensure that it does not incentivize the continued downward spiral of

increasing insurance costs and shrinking coverage.

This bill calls on government to take measures that will address

emerging issues and better protect homeowners and business people,

including streamlining and simplifying the DFA claim process; setting

and defining an affordability metric for the DFA’s reasonably and

readily available insurance criteria; expanding the scope of DFA to

address issues pertaining to micropockets of the province, where no

insurance coverage is available for a given disaster event; extending

the application deadline, which is now set at 90 days from the date DFA

was authorized; extending the appeal process to address applications

rejected due to missing information; removing an exclusion that will not

grant DFA support for costs related to any contents located in

basements, crawl spaces or similar low-lying storage areas, unless these

areas are being used as essential living areas for homeowners; and

developing a government grant program for homeowners in high-risk areas

to help offset the high cost of insurance and incentivize individuals to

purchase it.

As I reintroduce this bill, I urge the government to consider

changing the regulations and close existing gaps in DFA eligibility in

high-risk areas. With another wildfire season upon us in a matter of

months, it’s imperative that the government act quickly.

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

Motion approved.

T. Stone: I move that the bill be placed on orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill M211, Emergency Program 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)

HARPER’S TRAIL WINERY

T. Stone: Members, I want to take you on a trip down memory lane — 16 years,

in fact. No, I’m not talking about those 16 years. We’ll save that for

another day. I’m talking about the 16 successful years that Ed and Vicki

Collett of Harper’s Trail Winery have spent in the wine business up in

Kamloops.

Ed recalls that through his travels to wine regions around the

world, particularly Australia and Chile, he was struck by how their

climates were similar to that of the Thompson River valley. The

observation sparked a dream that led to the couple opening Kamloops’s

first winery in 2012. They have enjoyed a very successful business,

growing Harper’s Trail to a 5,000-case brand, producing 100 percent

estate wines grown on the property’s 25½-acre vineyard.

Over the span of ten vintages, their wines have garnered many top

honours in prominent national and international wine competitions. But

importantly, they helped put Kamloops on the map as a legitimate wine

territory in B.C.’s landscape, and I will suggest that they’ve added one

more element to Kamloops’s longstanding rivalry with that wine

powerhouse in Kelowna.

Last week Ed and Vicki announced their impending retirement. They

will open their tasting room for a final month this May, and they’re

inviting the community to come and help them celebrate and savour their

final vintage. They also plan to release an exclusive collection of

library wines.

Ed and Vicki have listed their winery for sale and hope to find a

reputable successor to take Harper’s Trail to that next level — a very

tempting next career choice, perhaps, for some. But in all seriousness,

they will leave behind a tremendous legacy, and the people of Kamloops

and the surrounding area wish them the very best as they pursue the next

chapter in their lives.

[10:20 a.m.]

WINE INDUSTRY

R. Russell: Building nicely upon that, it’s my honour today to be able to rise

in this House to share some of the challenges and opportunities for B.C.

wine with members here. From the conversations that I’ve had across my

riding, as well as some in the member for Penticton’s riding — I suspect

the member for Kelowna West might have some opinions on this as well —

there is an enormous amount of momentum within the industry, but that

potential needs some help from those of us here in this

House.

For the context of that, wine is one of the highest-value-added

agricultural products in B.C. The sector nearly doubled in less than ten

years prior to the pandemic, contributing $3.75 billion to B.C.’s

economy in 2019.

But visits to vineyards like Kismet and CheckMate make apparent

the reality of climate change impacts on varietal selection and yield.

Heat domes, extreme cold snaps and smoky summers have thrown an

unpredictable storm of challenges at these producers. A nod to our

efforts to reduce emissions via our CleanBC commitments in the

operational value of regenerative ag, but that’s another

conversation.

Exciting ventures such as the District Wine Village in Oliver

serve as a wine hub of sorts, enabling new entrants into the business.

Visitors get to explore the diversity of great operations like Canter

Cellars, nice wines and many more, but our permitting regime constrains

their opportunities, and they need our help. Similarly, TIME Winery and

Kitchen highlighted for me how creative entrepreneur models of small

vineyards are being unreasonably constrained by policies that were

written for a different reality than we’re in today around both real

estate and packing restrictions.

The pandemic also highlighted challenges around many distribution

networks, including wine, and there are opportunities for small

producers with centralized distribution centres, but we need to work

towards creating that change. Visiting Noble Ridge and Covert farms made

clear the value of farm-gate wine tourism and the need to grow our wine

tourism marketing, as well as needs to streamline and right-size

permitting on our end here in this place.

I don’t even have time to get to the Similkameen wines or excise

tax issues today, but I just want to say that B.C. wine is full of

opportunity, and the industry is ripe with creative energy. We here can

help unlock more of that potential.

JACK BROWN

AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO

AGRICULTURE

I. Paton: I rise today to speak to the life of an outstanding Surrey farmer,

community member and agrologist, Mr. Jack Brown.

When speaking of the Brown family, one must dial back, way back to

1877, when the Browns became one of the first families to settle as

farmers in the east Delta and Colebrook areas of Surrey. The Brown

family also purchased farmland on 168 Street in Surrey — where Jack grew

up and, like many of us, joined 4-H and, after high school, worked the

family farm full-time.

Besides being an avid supporter of agriculture, Jack also had a

long tenure with the Cloverdale Volunteer Fire Department, where he was

a firefighter and the chief for over 30 years. Jack’s involvement with

the Cloverdale jaycees helped him in the early years for him to develop

the skills that helped him achieve multiple leadership roles in various

organizations. As time went on, Jack began to take on the role of a

leader in the farming community, serving on various committees, panels,

associations and boards.

To name just a few, Jack sat on boards and committees such as the

Canadian Federation of Agriculture, the Canadian Horticultural Council,

the B.C. Coast Vegetable Marketing co-op, the Minister’s Council on the

Food Industry, the B.C. Cattlemen’s Association, the B.C. Angus

Association, the Surrey Dyking Commission, the B.C. Cranberry Marketing

Commission and the Cloverdale Senior Citizens Society. Known as a good

listener and one who could see past his own direct interests for the

good of all, Jack was a consensus-builder and an approachable

leader.

My earliest connection to Jack Brown was a complete dispersal

auction of his farm equipment that my dad and I conducted in 1991, when

Jack sold his farm, which became the now-famous Northview golf course.

After selling the Cloverdale farm, Jack and Lorrie bought the north

Langley farm and began to raise purebred red Angus cattle. Jack also

worked for the Surrey Dyking Commission as manager for five

years.

His growing involvement with the cattle side of things also fed

his lifelong love of the Cariboo. There were few things Jack liked

better than a trip to the Interior for a bull sale or just to visit.

Many never realized how many hats Jack actually wore.

He may be gone now, but he will always be remembered by farmers

and ranchers for his legacy of connections, education, experience and

mentorship to all who knew Jack Brown.

[10:25 a.m.]

COMMUNITY PRESERVATION OF

FISHERIES AND FOREST

RESOURCES

A. Olsen: Last night MLAs had the privilege to taste the incredible bounty

of our oceans, food that has sustained coastal communities and people

since time immemorial. The event was hosted by Fisheries for

Communities. They continue to ask the same question we asked in our wild

salmon report a few years back: how can we ensure that the people who

fish the waters benefit from the wealth of the ocean, like they once

did?

The privatization of our fisheries has had devastating

consequences. Decisions made in foreign boardrooms and decisions made in

boardrooms here in Vancouver net huge wealth for few, while leaving the

fishers in the communities with little.

Last night former B.C. NDP Fisheries Minister Corky Evans gave a

rousing sermon. He reminded us that our report on wild salmon is a

repeat of reports from 30 years ago, yet today we are even less

protective of the commons and more protective of individual wealth and

pursuits.

He highlighted how the prevailing philosophy is that fisheries and

forests cannot be left to local people because they will overharvest,

and only privatizing them will protect them. But it is only local people

who look after resources, the resources they count on for survival.

“Don’t leave here with regrets,” he said, “because you will stew over it

for decades.”

The ocean still produces a bounty, and we have a responsibility to

ensure that the fishers and their communities benefit from their work.

The same goes for the forests, and the people and communities they

support. For too long, we have allowed massive corporations to extract

billions each quarter and send their lobbyists into these halls, cap in

hand, claiming they’re poor — the same cycle for decades. Enough is

enough.

COMMUNITY BOARD GAME FUNDRAISER

IN PORT

MOODY

R. Glumac: Many families come together to play board games. In my own family,

my 16-year-old holds the title for Ticket to Ride champion — and will

never be unseated, I don’t think. But today I’d like to talk about

another family in my community, the family of Evan and Alexandra Chan,

whose love for board games is only matched by their love for their

community of Port Moody.

Evan says: “Family game nights are a way a lot of fami­lies

bond, and a community game day is a good way for our community to bond.”

The Chans are organizing a game day at the Venosta train car at the Port

Moody Station Museum on March 25, and the money they raise at the event

will be donated back to the museum. This is an idea that was sparked

only a couple of months ago and has already grown to a sold-out event.

Even after spilling out of the train car and adding tables onto the

train platform itself, it’s still sold out.

In the true spirit of community, several local businesses have

also stepped up to support the event. Participants will be organized in

tables of four to meet others living in the area that share an interest

in board games and tea. They’ll be asked to refrain from using cell

phones and to use cash only, to reflect the era of the 1920s, when the

train was operational.

Their philosophy is simple. They say: “We liked the idea of having

an environment where people can come together, meet others and learn

from people in the community who they may not normally interact with. It

helps everyone grow.”

To find out more, check out Board Games and Tea on

Facebook.

[10:30 a.m.]

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON ISSUES

K. Falcon: The Premier promised results that people can see and feel, but the

NDP’s last 100 days have yielded the same terrible results as the last

six years — by every measure.

People are literally dying because they cannot get basic health

care. Crime is getting worse. Just today, we saw the news of a pair of

vicious random assaults in Richmond by a violent prolific offender as

the latest example.

Life has never been more unaffordable — we are paying the highest

taxes, the highest fuel prices in North America, and we’ve got the

highest housing prices in North America — after six years of NDP

government. But wait, there’s more. According to a new report, with the

exception of Mexico City, Metro Vancouver now has the worst traffic

gridlock in all of North America, another low. We find that drivers are

now spending an average of 200 hours a year stuck in rush-hour

traffic.

After six years of worsening results, we’ve now witnessed 100 days

of hot air. The question to the Premier is this: when will his rhetoric

and empty promises start matching the results so that people can

actually see some improved results somewhere, anywhere, in British

Columbia?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I thank the member for the question. Of course he leaves out many

important facts. Strongest economy in the country. He forgot to mention

that in his comments.

Strongest population growth. People are coming from all across the

country, from different parts of the world to make British Columbia

home, because they know this is a place of opportunity. They’re seeing

the investments we’re making in people here. They see the investments

we’re making in things like child care, which has ensured that we are

now leading the country in having the most amount of women being

employed into the labour market.

Years of underinvestment have created many challenges in our

province. We are making investments to support people now and into the

future.

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

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON

AFFORDABLE

HOUSING

K. Falcon: Actually what they’re seeing are the worst results in North

America — not just in the country, in North America. No amount of empty

rhetoric or announcements is going to change the fact that results

really matter, and we’re getting terrible results.

You know, this Premier and this minister have failed to deliver

better results, especially when it comes to housing. Instead of results,

we’ve seen what we call the housing flub, and families like Steven and

Tara are paying the price.

Steven and Tara and their children are barely surviving in a

toxic, leaky and poorly insulated two-bedroom mobile home. Their

daughter must use the dining room as a bedroom, and they’ve surrounded

it by curtains to create a makeshift third room. Sixty-seven percent of

their income goes towards their rent, and they’re constantly battling

black mould caused by the leaky mobile home.

Yet when this Merritt family turned to the B.C. housing flub for

help, instead of help, the Premier’s affordable housing project

prioritized subsidizing Airbnb rentals in Merritt over the basic needs

of struggling families like Tara and Steven.

One can imagine how those announcements they keep hearing ring

hollow for couples like Steven and Tara. What does this Housing Minister

have to say to them?

Hon. R. Kahlon: We know there’s a challenge with affordable housing across the

province. The member should know that we are seeing record numbers of

rental starts in British Columbia right now. We know that we need more

investments into housing. That’s why we’ve been urging the federal

government to get into the game to join us, join our record amount of

investments.

But for the member to stand up now and to suggest that this

problem has just arrived, when, for 16 years, they were in government.

He was the Minister of Finance. Very little action was taken to address

housing.

[10:35 a.m.]

In fact, when he was the Minister of Finance, we only saw 2,000

rental units built in this province. Their solution was: why don’t we

have rent increases happen as CPI plus 2 percent? Because somehow that

will help the people he’s talking about.

We have taken action to ensure that rent increases are decreased

so that people can get into the housing market and continue to afford

their places.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Please continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: The truth hurts. I’m sure the member has lots of other questions,

and I’m happy to answer them.

The problem we have now…. If you talk to housing experts, they

will tell you that it is decades of underinvestment in housing in

British Columbia. We’re making the investments that are needed. We’re

going to continue to do that.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR FAMILIES

AND PROTECTIONS FOR

RENTERS

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the minister for that overview. I would like to

remind, perhaps, MLA members that 70 percent of these new rental units

built under this NDP government have actually come from the demolition

of existing rental units and not new construction.

Now the Premier’s housing flub is harming families. When Victoria

Walsh was expecting a child, the last thing she expected was a crippling

20 percent hike in rent, but that is exactly what’s happened under this

NDP government. Victoria is outraged. My baby “shouldn’t be treated like

a roommate, and I feel it’s very unfair. Twenty percent is just not a

reasonable increase. It’s way too much.”

Despite her plea for help, the only response from the Housing

Minister is to merely shrug his shoulders and say that that rent

increase is permitted. There’s nothing he can do. And the Premier

responded: “It seems strange to me.” Talk about a lack of

empathy.

Will the Premier tell Victoria why he is allowing her to be

punished by a 20 percent rent increase for having a baby?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Certainly I can imagine how stressful it is for that family to

have a child and then have their landlord increase their rent by 20

percent. I think we all in this House can agree that that is

unacceptable, and I certainly hope that that landlord considers their

actions.

That’s not what the tenancy act was designed to do. It’s certainly

the same as when the opposition was on this side of the House. Nothing

has changed there. This is the case where, I think, the landlord should

do the right thing and ensure that the contract that’s in place is

targeted to the people it’s supposed to be targeted to and not to young

families.

Mr. Speaker: Member for West Vancouver–Capilano, supplemental.

K. Kirkpatrick: Appreciating that it’s difficult for this family is not enough.

The Premier should not have actually found this strange because it was

when he was Housing Minister that the exact same thing happened to

another young family, where their rent was hiked when their daughter was

born a year ago. Back then the response from the then Housing Minister

was: “It seems bizarre.” How clueless and ineffectual…. This is just as

lost today.

Patrick Marston has called the now Premier to take action, back in

March of 2022, and today he says: “I basically got a form letter back

from the then minister, now the Premier, and saw no action.”

When a major housing flub, just like with newborn children causing

families to be evicted from stratas…. The Premier is making life even

worse for struggling families with rentals. Will the Premier finally

take responsibility for the ongoing housing crisis and explain to young

families, like Patrick and Victoria, why he has failed to deliver

results for them?

[10:40 a.m.]

Hon. R. Kahlon: Again, I know that this is a challenging situation for this

family. That is not what the rental tenancy laws in this place are

supposed to be about. They’re the same laws that were in place when the

previous government was in place.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Again, my call to this landlord is to ensure that they do the

right thing and support the people that are living in that unit and not

use that 20 percent private agreement that they had in place for the

wrong purpose.

We have been supporting renters in historic ways on this side of

the House. When we put in the caps to ensure that rents can be not

increased dramatically, we did that…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, Members.

The minister will continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: …because we knew the challenges we’re facing right now are high. I

just find it a little rich hearing from the opposite side. When they let

rents go as high as they wanted, they thought it was a great thing. In

fact, the Leader of the Official Opposition was just talking about that

very thing on radio — talking about how putting the caps…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Shhh.

Hon. R. Kahlon: …for rent increases is wrong because it’s going to hurt the

private sector. He was talking about that.

I just don’t understand the line of questioning today when we’ve

taken historic steps. We’ve got 14,000 rental units being built this

year. Two thousand units a year were being built when they were in

government. We have 14,000.

The member also made an assertion that somehow units are being

displaced when we’re building new units. Just for student housing

alone….

Interjections.

Hon. R. Kahlon: He says, “Here we go,” because he knows the facts already. But I’m

going to tell him again. So 130 beds of student housing…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: …they built in the 16 years that they were here. We built 7,700

units. What that does is….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: What that means is that students are going to be able to live

closer to campus, which means that they’ll be able to save some money

from transportation and other costs. It means that it will create more

capacity in communities. That’s just one step. But I am happy to talk

the entire question period on this topic, because it’s such an important

topic.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUNDING FOR

ISLAND AND COASTAL

COMMUNITIES

A. Olsen: On Tuesday, I asked the minister responsible for economic

development whether it should be recapitalizing the Island Coastal

Economic Trust. In response, the minister pointed to a $33 million

REDIP, or the rural economic diversification and infrastructure program,

as a replacement for the trust. However, I think the minister knows that

this is a false equivalent. The REDIP is not an appropriate replacement

for the ICE-T, and I think the minister knows it.

In 2006, the provincial government created investment tools for

regions across the province. The southern Interior region received $692

million. The central northern region received $287.5 million. These

funds were designed so that the principal was never touched. However,

for the Island and coastal communities, they put $50 million into a

trust that was designed to be a sinking fund. The REDIP is available to

all rural communities to apply, across the province. The Island and

coastal communities are competing against those rural communities that

also have access to money from their regional trusts.

It’s inexplicable that the minister thinks that she has provided a

viable, long-term, sustainable alternative. That’s not even mentioning

the fact that the REDIP funds provincial priorities and the ICE-T funds

local priorities. To the Minister of Jobs: does she still think that the

REDIP is a fair and equitable replacement for the ICE-T?

Hon. B. Bailey: Thank you to the member opposite.

Unfortunately, you’ve taken my words out of context. I certainly

wasn’t implying a replacement.

Economic development is very, very important to this government

and very important to my ministry. There are many different ways to do

economic development. I pointed to REDIP as one of those great ways, one

of those opportunities and one of a number of supports that we’re

putting in place as we continue to ensure that there are good jobs

available everywhere in our province. That’s the point of

REDIP.

[10:45 a.m.]

Mr. Speaker: House Leader, Third Party, supplemental.

A. Olsen: The effect of mentioning a $33 million fund is to deflect away

from the fact that this government has dragged its heels for months on

recapitalizing the Island Coastal Economic Trust.

It was to put a big number out there to suggest that the

government is doing something to support these communities when in fact

the thing that they could be doing is following through on the

comprehensive environmen­tal, social and governance investment

strategy — a 25-year, fully costed business plan with detailed financial

statements that was provided to this government back in September of

2022. This plan proposed to this government to transform it into a

first-of-its-kind model across the country, founded on co-governance

with Indigenous communities and built on well-being as its core

principle.

They want to turn this into a permanent trust, so it’s not a

sinking fund, that will generate between $7 million and $12 million for

the rural communities that members in this place represent. The impact

will be profoundly posi­tive: $1 billion of economic impact for

the rural communities on the Island and for coastal communities over the

next 25 years. This economic trust serves 500,000 British Columbians, 32

percent…

Mr. Speaker: Question, Member.

A. Olsen: …of the rural population of the province.

Will the minister commit today to recapitalizing the trust with at

least $150 million, turning it into a permanent fund and supporting our

community leaders that need these resources?

Hon. B. Bailey: Thank you to the member for the question. Positioning me as

somehow anti this fund is just incorrect, Mr. Speaker. These folks have

done great work, and we know that. I’ve heard from many of my colleagues

about the important work of this fund.

The reality is that they brought a proposal forward. We’re doing

due diligence on that proposal, and we’re working with them right

now.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR FAMILIES

AND PROTECTIONS FOR

RENTERS

E. Sturko: The Premier’s repeated housing flubs are hurting families. The

families feel hopeless. They feel trapped in abysmal rental situations

because they can’t afford to move someplace else.

I’ve heard from Kristen, a mother with her two young children, who

lives in an RV park without any protection and faces constant housing

insecurity; and from Charlene and her family, who are at constant risk

of homelessness if they’re evicted. As Charlene puts it: “It’s hard to

constantly feel like we’re nobodies and we have no help.”

The seniors and single mothers reaching out to my office every day

deserve better than the Premier’s housing flubs. With his abysmal

record, can the Premier tell Kristin, Charlene and their families why he

has failed to deliver the results that they desperately need and what

they deserve?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Certainly, I’m aware that those that are living in RV parks, in

particular, and that are living on leasehold land have particular

challenges. I can share with the member that I’ve met with folks who

have highlighted those challenges for us. My colleagues on this side and

across the aisle have also raised this issue.

Where it is right now: the contracts are between a private party

and the folks that are staying on the land. What we’ve heard from them

is that they want more transparency on how costs go up and how they can

plan, and we’re going to continue to work with them. We know that

there’s a real challenge. I’ve already highlighted the fact that we have

major challenges that we’re dealing with.

We have, right now, global inflation. We have high interest rates

going up, which is putting a real challenge on. The record population is

what we need. We need people coming at the numbers that are coming, but

we also need to be able to house them. That’s what I’ve said to the

federal government as well.

We’re making historic-level investments — $1 billion to build the

housing we need, because we know that housing is needed. We also need

the federal government to come in, and I’ve said to them: “We don’t need

you to go more than us. We’re just saying to match us.” The population

increase needs the supports to be able to be successful when they get

here, and that’s what we’re going to continue to do.

[10:50 a.m.]

AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING

AND B.C. HOUSING

UNITS

M. Bernier: Doreen is another person, from Tumbler Ridge, tired of the

Premier’s housing flub.

She is desperate for affordable housing, a place to live, but

Doreen can’t find an affordable place to rent in Tumbler Ridge, despite

the fact that there are six empty B.C. Housing units in that town. This

government is now an absentee landlord with empty homes, rather than

renting the properties to help people like Doreen, who are in dire need

of housing.

Unfortunately, it gets even worse. B.C. Housing has now said that

due to the lack of funding, rather than renting these places out, they

have applied for a demolition permit for all of the B.C. Housing units

in Tumbler Ridge, saying they can’t afford to keep them open.

They’re going to tear them down, taking away rental possibilities

for people in that community. So instead of building the affordable

housing that’s needed, they’re actually going backwards now in this

province and tearing housing down that’s going to help people in my

region. Why is the Premier leaving people like Doreen hopeless and

actually homeless under this housing flub?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Again, $1 billion a year investment being made to build the

housing we need.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Decades of underinvestment, not enough investment in our existing

housing stock to make sure that the existing housing stock….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, let’s hear the answer.

Please continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you, hon. Speaker.

Decades of underinvestment in housing has led us to this problem.

Not only underinvestment in new housing but underinvestment in making

sure we maintain the existing stock. I can’t speak to….

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: It’s okay. Shhh. Calm down.

It’s okay. Let him continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: The member raises a specific issue in his community. I’m happy to

talk to him about that specific issue after question period.

R. Merrifield: It’s time for these excuses to stop and the blame game to end.

It’s this government’s failed plan to quell demand. It’s the NDP that

wanted to stop demand. It’s the 19 new taxes that were to end demand

that have resulted in rental rates being the highest in North

America.

Kelowna is another victim…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members, please.

R. Merrifield: …of this Premier’s housing flub, with one of the most unaffordable

rental markets in the country. Last week an 81-year-old senior reached

out to my office in utter despair, forced to live in their car, with no

options left. Despite a lifetime of hard work, paying taxes, doing the

right thing, this senior has been abandoned by a government that’s

promised better results.

This senior has been registered for the B.C. Housing plan for two

years and exhausted every source to find housing. Do you know what they

have to show for it? Nothing but homelessness and no hope.

I wish this was an isolated case. But nearly 10,000 seniors are on

waiting lists for subsidized housing under this NDP government. That’s a

50 percent increase in the last five years. How much longer will seniors

suffer before the Premier finally delivers the results he

promised?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I think it shouldn’t be news to any member of this House that

coming out of the pandemic, we’ve seen global inflation; we’ve seen

higher interest rates. It has put pressure on not only Kelowna, not only

Victoria, not only Delta — communities not only across the country but

across North America. This is an issue that’s being felt

everywhere.

That’s why we’re making the historic investments we’re making.

That’s why we put in place things….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Hon. Speaker, the member, the Leader of the Official Opposition,

chooses to continue to heckle. He fails to acknowledge that actions such

as bringing the speculation tax have actually helped bring 20,000 units

back onto the market.

I know he opposes that because he thinks it’s unfair that people

have multiple homes, and they’re not renting them, leaving them

empty…

[10:55 a.m.]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. R. Kahlon: …when people, like the member who raised the issue in Kelowna,

don’t have a place to stay. I know that he finds that unfair, but it

shows who he is fighting for.

Now my friend across the way who asked this question should know

that we’ve got 1,300 units that we’re funding in Kelowna — 1,300 units.

Out of that, 916 are complete, and we have almost 400 of them that are

just under construction.

So we’re making those investments. We’re building that housing

that’s been needed for more than two decades. And yes, we are behind.

Two decades of underinvestment. We are behind, but all these investments

are going to make a difference to support people, and we’re going to

continue to do that work.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON

HOUSING AFFORDABILITY

AND

STUDENT HOUSING

P. Milobar: Well it’s not just the opposition’s evaluation of this

government’s 30-point housing plan over the last six years that views it

as a failure. This government’s throne speech viewed it as a failure and

pointed out it has to be blown up and reworked over the next six

months.

Despite our Premier being the former minister for the last 2½

years of housing and this new Housing Minister, the Premier had to bring

in a new consultant to write the report over the next six months because

these two ministers apparently don’t know what to do with housing over

this period.

The plain, simple fact is housing programs have been a disaster

under this government. The 30-point plan is nothing but taxation. It has

failed. People with kids being met with a shrug because they’re going to

be evicted by this government not taking action. The housing flub

program — it has been pretty good for Airbnb and their investors, not so

good if you’re a family with young kids trying to have an affordable

place to live that’s safe.

Over 1,200 units in Burnaby not being funded by B.C. Housing while

this Premier smacks municipalities over the head for not doing their

part on housing. And now we hear that in Tumbler Ridge, B.C. Housing

can’t even figure out how to fund six or seven housing units, so instead

they’re going to demolish them all and take them out of the rental

pool.

We have problems in Kelowna. We have problems all over this

province. What did this all culminate in? We need a forensic audit of

B.C. Housing, and this minister dares to stand in this House and say

everything’s great with housing in British Columbia under their watch.

Not only that, they refused to allow that audit to come forward to the

Public Accounts Committee so it can be properly vetted in a public venue

and have B.C. Housing answer actual pointed questions about

it.

Since they won’t allow that to happen, will the Premier actually

confirm if the audit is actually complete or not? Because it wasn’t that

long ago he said it would be in the spring. And if so, when is the date

it’s going to be released? If it’s not done, when is it done?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I find this line of questioning interesting. We have an opposition

now that was in government for 16 years.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Imagine spilling milk and then asking the new folks that come in:

“Why hasn’t been cleaned up enough already?” Decades of underinvestment

in housing.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Just in that member’s riding, 986….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order, Members. Members, let’s have order.

The minister will continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Their heckling means that they have no more questions to ask, and

they’re trying to run the clock.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Shhh.

Member for Abbotsford West and other members. Members, that’s

enough. That’s enough.

The minister will continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: As I’ve said, we have got a housing crisis. We know that. We’re

dealing with a crisis.

[11:00 a.m.]

Our efforts are not only on the demand side. It’s also on the

supply side. We are supporting the construction of thousands of homes

across British Columbia in every community across this province. We’re

also taking steps to address demand. I know when the hon. member across

the way mentions taxes….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: When they say they don’t like taxes, don’t like the increased

taxes, they’re talking about the speculation tax. It’s important for the

viewers at home to know that what they oppose is a tax that ensures that

people who have multiple homes, that choose not to rent them and leave

them empty, have to pay additional fees. That’s increased the amount of

units by 20,000 units in British Columbia.

So we’re going to continue to invest in new housing. We’re going

to continue to take action to address the speculative practices that are

driving up prices. It’s important work that we’re going to continue to

do.

Mr. Speaker: The Chair will recognize Kamloops–​North Thompson for a

supplemental.

P. Milobar: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, the finish to the minister’s answer there sounds exactly

like the scenario his leader, the Premier, was doing with his two houses

for his family for work purposes, and then he decided to sell one off

that was sitting empty right before the speculation tax came in. It

seems to be okay for the Premier to do that, but no one else apparently

can do that.

I would point out to this caucus of the government…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Keep it short, Member.

P. Milobar: …they’re the ones that have all the landlords, if you check the

disclosure statements, not this side of the House.

The reality is no one believes the government when it comes to

their housing numbers.

Mr. Speaker: Member, ask the question, please.

P. Milobar: They’ve already acknowledged in their throne speech that their

30-point plan for housing has been a failure after six years. It has

delivered less than 10 percent of the housing it was supposed to

deliver. This is the government’s own acknowledgment…

Mr. Speaker: Ask the question.

P. Milobar: …and the minister continues to cite student housing numbers that

are factually incorrect.

So the question to the minister. Given that in Kamloops alone, on

Thompson Rivers University, there was a dormitory built with over 500

housing units in it during our time in government, and the minister

continues to insist…

Mr. Speaker: Member, what’s the question?

P. Milobar: …there has only been 130. Can the minister table for this House

how they arrived at the 130-housing-unit number so that we can actually

start providing accurate numbers to the public instead of misleading

numbers to the public about what’s really happening on our campuses in

this province?

Mr. Speaker: The Chair heard that member is accusing the minister of

misleading.

P. Milobar: Thank you, Mr. Chair. No, I was not accusing the minister of

misleading. I was saying the numbers themselves are painting a

misleading picture.

Mr. Speaker: Minister.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I don’t know where to start with this

member, but I will say…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Shhh.

Hon. R. Kahlon: …they want numbers, so I’ll share some numbers with

them.

We have ten times the housing underway by this province than when

they were in government. We have 21,000 units that are under

construction right now. He mentioned the student housing. They claim

they built more than 130 student housing…. I would love to see…. Maybe

he’s claiming 138.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I can tell….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Member, you asked for an extra question, and the Chair provided it

to you. Let’s finish it off now, please.

Minister.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Again, the opposition leader continues to heckle, which is

disappointing. But I will say that we know that there’s a housing

crisis.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Conclude, please.

Hon. R. Kahlon: We know that there’s a housing crisis. We know that people are

facing challenges. That’s why we’re making the investments we’re making

right now. That’s why we’re seeing a historic amount of rental units

being built across this province. We are putting supports in to support

people through this challenging time. We’re going to continue to do

that.

[End of question period.]

Ministerial Statements

WAR IN UKRAINE AND

ONE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF

INVASION

Hon. A. Kang: I rise today to make a ministerial statement.

I rise today on the one-year anniversary of Russia’s unprovoked

and ongoing attack on Ukraine. I know all members of this place stand

with the people of Ukraine against Russia’s illegal invasion. In the

face of this aggression, Ukrainians have suffered unimaginable losses

while demonstrating incredible strength and courage.

[11:05 a.m.]

My heart goes out to all those who have left everything they loved

to find safety here and abroad.

In November in Vancouver, a few of my colleagues and I were able

to attend a Holodomor commemoration event. Together with the Ukrainian

community, we embraced each other, we listened to each other, we shared

stories, we hugged, and we cried. Amidst so much suffering and

uncertainty, Ukrainians stand strong and resilient.

It is important that we stay with them, unwavering in our efforts

to provide safety and support. International catastrophes remind us that

a nation’s value is reflected by how quick its people are to offer

support. Over the last year, more than 11,000 Ukrainians have arrived in

B.C. British Columbians were among the first to offer a hand when

Ukrainians fleeing violence needed it the most.

Since British Columbians opened their hearts and their homes, it

was only fair that the government did the same. That is why, from the

very beginning, we have coordinated across government work and have

worked closely with a wide range of immigrant support services and

Ukrainian cultural organizations to coordinate services and

support.

We provided $15 million to bolster the B.C. settlement sector and

support for Ukrainians. We provided Medical Service Plan coverage and

100 percent coverage of eligible prescription costs. We provide

short-term housing supports for those first arriving. We cover the

payment for the federally mandated medical examination. We expanded

services through bc211 and through a dedicated Welcoming Ukraine

website. We also supported access to free employment

services.

I’ve been inspired to see faith and cultural organizations pooling

their resources to make a difference. I’ve been inspired to see our

settlement services working long hours to make sure that calls for help

do not go unanswered. I’ve been inspired to see ordinary people and

their families open their hearts and their homes to do whatever they can

to support Ukrainians fleeing violence.

I want to thank organizations like SUCCESS, like Mennonite Central

Committee in Prince George and Kamloops Immigrant Services, who have

opened their hearts and their homes to those fleeing this war. I want to

thank everyone who has provided support for their community and for the

incredible compassion, empathy, tenderness and humanity. For fellow

British Columbians looking for help, the best place to start is to

contact the United Way of B.C., our partner in coordinating offers of

help for Ukrainians.

I will end with one final note. Only hours after Vladimir Putin

launched his full-scale invasion, Ukrainian President Volodymyr

Zelenskyy remarked: “When you attack us, you will see our faces — not

our backs, but our faces.” One year later his statement is a reminder of

our province’s role in this international humanitarian crisis. For

Ukrainians that are fleeing violence, we must have their backs. We

continue to support and stand in solidarity of support.

T. Stone: A year ago I stood in this House to deliver a ministerial

statement in response as Europe was once again plunged into conflict —

an illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine by Russian dictator

Vladimir Putin. Like people all around the world, British Columbians

were horrified.

We feared for the people of Ukraine as war crimes were committed

on their sovereign soil against their sovereign people. We watched

intentional bombing of civilian targets like apartments and hospitals —

torture, rape and mass graves, countless Ukrainian children literally

ripped from their families and forcibly taken to Russia. We watched in

horror as images of tanks and artillery rounds destroyed village after

village.

[11:10 a.m.]

As of January 30, there have been a recorded 18,817 civilian

casualties, including 7,155 civilian deaths. Those are stats according

to the United Nations. Of course, reports indicate that there are

probably far more that have perished in this terrible war.

While pundits played clips of air raid sirens in Kyiv and

ruminated on the inevitable demise of the democratically elected

government of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, British Columbians and folks around

the world also watched people rise up. These pundits said it was only a

matter of time before the powerful Russian military captured the

capital, annexed territory and installed a new Putin-friendly regime.

One year later I think we’re all immensely proud and grateful that those

pundits were wrong.

The strength and the resilience of the Ukrainian people, combined

with an outpouring of support from countries all around the world, not

only stemmed the tide of Russian invasion but, in many places, pushed it

back. One year since that invasion, Ukraine still stands free and proud,

a sovereign nation against the military aggression of Putin and the

Russian Federation.

We’re all proud of how the citizens of British Columbia have

played their part, our

part in this, stepping up to provide assistance

day after day, month after month since that dark day in February of 2022

— individuals and organizations throughout our province stepping up to

volunteer and help in countless communities like Prince George, Kelowna,

Victoria and Vancouver, opening their doors and welcoming Ukrainian

refugees fleeing the violence and the atrocities in their home

country.

Those fleeing the war crimes of Putin have been arriving in our

province, many having spent their last dollars on airfare just to get

here. Karmen McNamara, the spokesperson for Help Ukraine Vancouver

Island, says that in the past six weeks, the number of people arriving

every week has nearly quadrupled. Volunteers are indeed scrambling to

find hosts and emergency hotel rooms for people arriving and, for the

first time ever, they are actually being forced to, regrettably, turn

people away.

Two hundred Ukrainians have made Kamloops their new home since the

war began. Asked how many people and for how long Ukrainian refugees can

be accommodated in Kamloops as the war carries on, Min-Hsien Chang,

settlement team lead at Kamloops Immigrant Services, said it is

difficult to determine. But she also said this: “Our heart is with them,

so we will continue to support them. Doesn’t matter how many; we will do

it.”

On this solemn anniversary, we must pledge to continue to do all

we can to help those looking to make a new home here in British

Columbia. When we stood in this House one year ago, we committed to

doing whatever it took. Well, there is still more to do, and I know that

all members of this House stand willing to do whatever we can, as

elected officials, to uphold that promise and continue to help Ukrainian

refugees coming to British Columbia.

To those who remained in Ukraine: you are on our minds. We

continue to stand with you.

We condemn, in no uncertain terms, this unprovoked Russian

invasion and the horrific crimes against the Ukrainian people that have

occurred in this past year of brutality. This is indeed a time when we

must stand in solidarity against unchecked militarism and violations of

the peaceful international order that so many have fought and died to

secure.

One year later, while much has changed on the ground, one key

thing remains the same here in this House: we stand for democracy. We

stand for freedom. We stand for Ukraine.

Slava Ukrayini . Glory to Ukraine.

A. Olsen: I rise today to offer just a few words to the ministerial

statement eloquently provided by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and

responded to from the Opposition House Leader.

[11:15 a.m.]

A year ago we stood in this House to speak of the illegal and

unprovoked invasion of Ukraine by Vladimir Putin’s Russian regime. We

recognized the uncertainty that was in front of Ukrainians and, indeed,

all of Europe, and the uncertainty that was going to be in terms of what

was going to be needed from us in order to support people who were being

terrorized by this terrible atrocity.

Last year the length of the war was unknown, and we watched on TV

screens and heard the stories while living in the peaceful jurisdiction

that we have here. Any time a dictator invades a democratic country, it

feels dystopian. We saw the videos of cars fleeing, families hunkered in

bomb shelters and in subways, videos emerging. Then we also saw the

videos of the spirit of Ukrainian people.

The whole world continues to watch. The recent speech that was

done by Putin and the response from the western world continues to have

us concerned about what may yet be to come for that region, and as well

for us, and the level of support that we’ll need to continue to

provide.

I want to just say that I think it’s important to acknowledge, as

the minister highlighted, the many programs and services and ways that

the provincial government supported. The B.C. government here moved

quickly. When we in our constituencies were hearing about challenges in

accessing services, there was no delay in ensuring that the people that

were coming, the refugees that were fleeing that war, received the

support they needed.

I raise my hands to the ministers and to the public servants here

who made sure that any challenges they faced were going to be a very

short in time and the least challenges that they could face.

We now have thousands of Ukrainians living here in British

Columbia, and we continue to provide that support, just as the allies of

Ukraine continue to provide diplomatic and military assistance to

Volodymyr Zelenskyy, ensuring that, in the words that the House Leader

from the opposition so eloquently said: they can stand and protect their

right to a free country and a democratic country.

With that, I would just want to raise my hands to the government.

I just want to echo the sentiments that we stand with Ukraine and that

we’ll do everything we can here, in our provincial government, to

support the people who are fleeing that war to the best of our

ability.

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Members, I have the honour to table the registrar of lobbyists

investigation for determination decision 23-01 and Representative for

Children and Youth report Key Components of Effective Service Delivery

for Children and Youth with Support Needs and Their Families: A Research

Review and Analysis .

K. Falcon: I would seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

K. Falcon: Today in the gallery, I’m really thrilled that we’re joined by Jina

Sodhi and her daughter Ricky, who are visiting here from Surrey.

I would ask the House to please make them welcome.

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Kahlon: I call Motion 19 on the order paper.

Government Motions on Notice

MOTION 19 — APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL

COMMITTEE TO APPOINT

A REPRESENTATIVE

FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH

Hon. R. Kahlon: I move Motion 19, of which notice has been given in my name on the

order paper.

[That a Special Committee to Appoint a Representative for Children

and Youth be appointed to select and unanimously recommend to the

Legislative Assembly the appointment of an individual as the

Representative for Children and Youth for the province of British

Columbia, pursuant to

section 2 of the Representative for Children

and Youth Act (S.B.C. 2006, c. 29).

That the Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select

Standing Committee and in addition be empowered to:

a. appoint of its number, one or more subcommittees and to

refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Special

Committee and to delegate to the subcommittees all or any of its powers

except the power to report directly to the House;

b. sit during a period in which the House is adjourned,

during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and

during any sitting of the House;

c. adjourn from place to place as may be convenient;

and,

d. retain such personnel as required to assist the Special

Committee.

That the Special Committee report to the House as soon as possible,

and that during a period of adjournment, the Special Committee deposit

its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, and upon

resumption of the sittings of the House, or in the next following

Session, as the case may be, the Chair present all reports to the

House.

That the Special Committee be composed of the following Members:

Kelli Paddon (Convener), Mike Bernier , Kelly

Greene , Coralee Oakes and Nicholas

Simons .]

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

Motion approved.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I call continued debate on Bill 7.

[11:20 a.m.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 7 — LAND OWNER

TRANSPARENCY

AMENDMENT ACT, 2023

(continued)

A. Singh: This is my continued time from yesterday when we adjourned. I’m

speaking, for those who weren’t here and who are listening out there in

the world, about the Land Owner Transparency Act.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

What we’re trying to pass is Bill 7, which is the Land Owner

Transparency Amendment Act. What that does…. Again, I’ll be very brief

in explaining, just so folks who have joined us online or on TV can know

what we’re actually talking about here. The Land Owner Transparency Act

was a first of its kind legislation in Canada. It created the land owner

transparency registry — a publicly searchable database of information

about beneficial ownership of land in British Columbia. What we’re doing

today in Bill 7 is making some minor amendments.

Generally, again, explaining to the public out there, when a piece

of legislation is passed, especially a new piece of legislation that

tackles a problem that hasn’t really been tackled before — and the

drafters that we have are phenomenal; the lawyers that we have are

phenomenal; they’re great legal teams — necessarily, because it’s

something new, some things get missed out. So it’s fairly commonplace

for us to come back with amendments to fix any of those gaps that we may

have. That’s exactly what this is.

The Land Owner Transparency Amendment Act fixes some of those. It

addresses some minor legislative interpretive and technical issues that

came about since that legislation was first brought into practice. When

this debate started, our friends on the other side waxed poetically for

a long time about why are we debating this. Why are people from the

government side standing up and talking about this? I’m actually not

sure if they agree with this or not — if they’re for this act. I presume

they are. “There’s no point actually debating this.” Well, I disagree

wholeheartedly. I think, as legislators, as representatives and as

advocates for our constituents, that is exactly what our responsibility

is.

The people of Richmond-Queensborough need to know why I’m standing

here and why I vote in favour of this. Obviously I support the Land

Owner Transparency Amendment Act, Bill 7. But why do I support this? For

me to not stand up here and not explain why would be a disservice to my

constituents. So again I absolutely disagree with the perspective on the

other side. I think this is part of our whole democratic system, for

members on this side and that side to be able to get up and speak about

this.

I invite the members on the opposite side to participate in our

democratic process and to explain to their constituents whether they

oppose it or are in favour and the reasons why they do that. Why did the

act come into place in the first place? Why are we making these

amendments? That’s really, really interesting because we’re coming from

question period, where a lot of questions were about housing and about

the dismal place that we are in British Columbia in housing and in all

of Canada.

Again there are historic reasons for that, and my friend, the

Minister of Housing, repeatedly mentioned those historical reasons.

Underfunding for two decades while members of the opposite sat on this

side of the chamber. Underfunding is one of those reasons that we’re in

this housing crisis, but one of the other specific reasons is money

laundering — an investment by criminal activities and criminal gangs in

the real estate market in British Columbia.

We’re in this housing crisis. Not only does it affect real estate

in British Columbia, but it’s also at the crux of the toxic drug supply

that we have and lots of other criminal activity. When I started

speaking about this yesterday, I spoke about Bugsy Siegel and Murder,

Inc. I talk about this just so people…. They may not be as familiar with

what happens today, but we’ve all seen those movies about casinos and

the Flamingo and Bugsy Siegel and Murder, Inc. Well, Bugsy Siegel was a

gangster in the U.S. who made his money off of prohibition.

[11:25 a.m.]

When alcohol became illegal, the mafia and other gangs were born,

and then when alcohol was legalized, they moved on to other things, in

order to…. When you peddle drugs, as I said this yesterday as well,

you’re not peddling drugs, you’re not doing crime for the….

Deputy Speaker: If the member could help the Chair understand the connection to

the bill, that would be great.

A. Singh: Absolutely. We’re talking about money laundering and crime and

getting to the crux of crime. You know, criminal activity done by

criminal gangs is not done for the purpose of doing the criminal

activity itself. It’s done for profit, and that profit has to go

somewhere. This is illegal cash, and money laundering is how criminal

gangs clean…. The wording is self-descriptive. Money laundering is how

they clean, whitewash their money and make it legal.

British Columbia had a massive problem with money laundering. Bill

7 and the Land Owner Transparency Act attack the crux of that because

the real estate market and land owning was one of the main areas where

money was laundered.

I’m just going to refer to a great

article that the BBC did in

2019, and it’s titled: “How Gangs Used Vancouver’s Real Estate Market to

Launder $5 billion.” Again it’s a bustling city on the western coast of

Canada. It was known for its stunning views, the Pacific Ocean, lush

ancient forests. Also, Vancouver’s real estate market was attractive as

a laundromat for some of the most notorious criminals because we didn’t

have the legislation in place. We didn’t have the mechanisms in place to

look at money laundering, to look at who owned land and who actually

were the beneficial owners.

We’ve all spoken about the Cullen report and other experts, and

they estimated…. The report says itself that this is probably an

underestimation, but they estimated that $5.3 billion — again, $5.3

billion — was laundered through real estate in the province of British

Columbia, mostly funneling through Vancouver, the largest and most

expensive city. That represents 5 percent of the real estate

transactions. How that was done is through shell corporations, through

trusts, through putting different beneficial owners on. That’s exactly

what the land owner transparency registry was supposed to get

after.

The panel believed that British Columbia, but Vancouver

especially, was a hotbed for money laundering. Just to put it into

perspective, in 2018 it was estimated that across Canada about $46.7

billion of money was laundered across this country, and $7.4 billion of

that was laundered in British Columbia. In 2018, B.C. made up about 13

percent of Canada’s GDP, but 17 percent of all laundered funds were

laundered in British Columbia. Again, the reports and the panel have all

said that that was likely low.

Out of that seven-point-something-billion dollars that was

laundered, over $5 billion was laundered through real estate

transactions. That’s exactly what the Land Owner Transparency Act itself

and the amendments that we’re making right now attack. It allows public

safety officials to be able to look at the landowner, to be able to look

behind who the actual beneficial owners are, who they were before and

when they’ve sold it or transferred their shares or transferred their

interests in a trust, and who the new beneficial owners are. It allows

public safety officials to be able to see patterns that show criminal

activity happening in the real estate market.

I urge constituents out there to look at that

article because it

sort of summarizes everything, what the lay of the land was before we

brought in the act. It’s an

article from May 2019 from the

BBC.

What was happening before the original act was brought in was that

a hodgepodge of lawyers, shell corporations, intermediaries and

sometimes relatives would be the face of these illegal

transactions.

[11:30 a.m.]

For those who don’t understand or who may not know why

corporations or trusts are involved, it’s because if you’re ABC Inc.,

and you own a house in Victoria and someone wants to buy that, they

don’t actually have to put their name on it. All they have to do is buy

the shares that are ABC Inc. That can happen multiple times.

What was happening — what was found out and what was discovered —

is that properties…. That was happening. Some properties were sold

multiple times, but the properties were overvalued. The shares in those

corporations were overvalued. The beneficial ownership was overvalued.

That added to the housing crisis that we have today, making it

unaffordable for regular people to be able to afford houses.

There were even more nefarious things — paying construction bills

in cash and loaning themselves mortgages. So under showing…. Again,

without knowing who the beneficial owners are, who they were or who they

are now, public safety officials weren’t able to really see what was

happening. They weren’t able to identify what could be, possibly,

criminal activity.

Since the land transparency act came into effect, hundreds of

thousands of transparency records have been filed with the registry. It

allows public safety officials to be able to look at those transactions.

When they see a pattern that possibly can show…. Of course, they’re the

experts in this. They know what patterns to look for. If there’s a

pattern of criminal activity, they can follow that pattern, and they can

maybe find that.

Over the last few years, we found that there were some gaps. What

Bill 7 does is…. It clarifies the filing requirements when a reporting

body is both a partner in a relevant partnership and the trustee of a

relevant trust — what the responsibilities of the partner in that

partnership are, what the responsibilities of the whole partnership are

and what the responsibility of the trust is, in terms of filing. It also

creates the ability to submit a corrected transparency declaration,

which is a legal document that identifies whether a transparency is a

reporting body under the original act itself.

What’s happened is…. At times, human error has resulted in

incorrect information being included in one of those transparency

records. Right now the legislation doesn’t currently allow that

reporting body to file an updated transparency record. So really, really

sort of housecleaning.

The amendments also ensure that certification requirements capture

entities that are neither individuals nor corporations. The way that the

act was originally drafted…. It didn’t contemplate certifications by

entities that aren’t considered corporations, such as a corporation’s

sole trustee. These amendments ensure that certification provisions

apply to all sorts of entities that are going to be completing these

transparency records and showing who the beneficial owners

are.

The amendments also remove the requirement to indicate on a

transparency report the date on which an individual ceased to be an

interest holder. Currently the legislation only requires information

about current interest holders in transparency records and transparency

reports. This means that if you get rid of your property…. It’s not a

requirement to indicate when you ceased to be an interest

holder.

An interest holder can be…. You own the property itself. You own a

share in the corporation that owns the property, or you’re a beneficiary

of the trust that owns the property. Right now there’s no need to

indicate when you came off. We’ll see when someone came on. So you can’t

really trace who’s coming on and who’s coming off.

Again, what it does is…. It gives public safety officials a more

transparent record and a larger picture. They can see those patterns

that occur, and they can recognize when criminal activity has bled into

our real estate system.

Now what the amendments do is…. When interest holders change, the

date that they change, the date that they seize and become…. That’ll be

required. It’ll be part of that record. It also removes the requirement

for a trustee of a relevant trust to file a transparency report if all

interest holders are registered on the title.

[11:35 a.m.]

The way that a trust works is…. A trust is like a…. I’m thinking

back to my law school years. I won’t try and explain it, but a trust has

a trustee who administers the trust, who manages it. Then there are

interest holders, who are the beneficial owners of that trust, who

actually own the piece of property or own whatever it is that the trust

is for. Whatever property the trust has…. They’re the actual

owners.

The administrator is just the person that manages who rents and….

There may be 20 owners of that trust. You don’t want all 20 people

deciding who the rental is or dealing with the everyday things. An

administrator or a trustee is usually the person that does

that.

The trustee doesn’t have a beneficial interest in the trust

itself. They don’t actually own anything. What it does is…. If all of

the registered interest holders, if all of the people that benefit from

it and that have the beneficial ownership of that trust…. If they’re all

entitled, then the trustee doesn’t have to be on that title.

Essentially, if there are no hidden owners, then it’s not necessary to

identify anyone in a transparency report.

These are all amendments that, again…. When the act was brought

into force, it was fairly comprehensive, but in administering it over

the last two years or so, some gaps have been shown. These are there to

address those gaps. There may be more gaps that come up, and

conceivably, we may come back here again and debate another amendment to

the act as well.

Lastly, the amendments also allow the surveyor of taxes to submit

a transparency declaration to the registry on behalf of someone that

transfers property. What this does…. It ensures that basic information

about a property and the person that transfers that property — they’re

called a transferee — is captured when a property that was forfeited to

the province is returned to the former owner.

For example, if you don’t pay your property taxes for a long

period of time, the province can take your property. So a property

that’s forfeited to the province and is returned to the former owner….

Once all those outstanding taxes are paid, the surveyor of taxes can

properly go in and show who the beneficial interest holder is —

basically, the original property owner.

These amendments don’t change anything. They don’t change the crux

of the act. They don’t change the meaning of the act. They don’t change

the intention of the act. What they do is…. They’re minor technical

amendments to improve the efficiency.

Again, the intent of this act is to get at criminal activity, to

get at that money laundering. These are gaps, technicalities. Some of

these records were falling through, and we weren’t really finding out

who the beneficial owners were. These amendments deal with closing that

gap. The whole purpose of this is to allow public safety officials to be

able to see those patterns so they can identify when criminal activity

has bled into the real estate market.

Right before I close…. You know, these crimes are not victimless.

There are really two big victims here that I’ll mention.

One is just regular families. What happened, under the

recklessness or wilful blindness of the past government, is that

property prices went out of control and were overinflated, and money

laundering had a lot to do with that. The second thing is: where does

that dirty money come from? We’re in the middle of an opioid crisis, a

toxic drug supply crisis. That’s where a lot of that money came

from.

Hon. B. Bailey: I’m happy to rise today to speak about the Land Owner Transparency

Amendment Act, Bill 7.

The Land Owner Transparency Act is the first legislation of its

kind in Canada. This created a public, searchable registry about the

beneficial ownership of land in British Columbia, and it has been a

resounding success.

[11:40 a.m.]

Hundreds of thousands of transparency records have been collected

and input into the registry since its inception. This has been a key aid

and was identified by the expert panel on real estate as the single most

important measure to combat money laundering. The amendments in Bill 7

are coming out of listening to stakeholders, and they will improve and

streamline the process and help better protect quality data.

I’m going to talk a little bit about the technical changes in this

bill. It clarifies the filing requirements when a reporting body is both

a partner in a relevant partnership and the trustee of a relevant trust.

It creates the ability to submit a corrected transparency declaration, a

document identifying whether a transferee is a reporting body under the

act.

At times, human error — everyone makes mistakes — has resulted in

incorrect information being included in a transparency record, and the

legislation does not currently allow a reporting body to file an updated

transparency declaration. This change ensures that the certification

requirements capture entities that are neither individuals nor

corporations.

The way the legislation is currently drafted, it does contemplate

certifications by entities that are not considered corporations under

the act, such as a corporation sole. The amendments will ensure that the

certification provisions apply to all types of entities that will be

completing the transparency records.

It removes the requirement to indicate in a transparency report

the date on which an individual ceased to be an interest holder.

Currently the legislation only requires information about current

interest holders in the transparency report, so this means there’s no

need to indicate the date that a person ceased to be an interest holder,

as there is always a requirement to update the transparency report when

interest holders have changed.

Bill 7 removes the requirement for a trustee of a relevant trust

to file a transparency report if all interest holders are registered on

title. If there are no hidden owners, then it is not necessary to

identify them in a transparency report.

Bill 7 also updates

schedule 1 of the act, which sets out

corporations and limited liability companies excluded from the

definition of a relevant corporation to more closely reflect language in

the Business Corporations Act regulation. This proposed change ensures

consistency across the two acts. It allows the surveyor of taxes to

submit a transparency declaration to the registry on behalf of the

transferee. This change helps ensure that basic information about a

property and a transferee are captured when a property that was

forfeited to the province is returned to the former owner once all

outstanding taxes have been paid.

I want to speak a little bit about some of the implications of

Bill 7. I want to explore the kinds of important issues that the Land

Owner Transparency Amendment Act can help us with in understanding

beneficial ownership and transparency, and I want to do this in the

light of geopolitical issues. So let’s discuss this a little bit. When

does money laundering occur? One example is when nefarious state actors

are moving money out of a state because they’re mitigating the risk of

their government falling. Bill 7 can help us with that.

I’ll share with you that this issue has arisen with some urgency

in my riding. I’m hearing firsthand about this right now in regard to

the political circumstances in Iran. Bill 7 can help us with this. I

have been attending numerous marches and protests in regard to the

circumstances in Iran and in support of the people in Iran. We know that

the international relations file properly lives with the federal

government. We also have a role to play, though, in making sure that

corrupt government officials from dictatorships under international

sanctions are not washing their dirty money here in our B.C. real estate

market.

[11:45 a.m.]

It’s a serious concern, and it’s one that’s raised regularly with

my office in Vancouver–False Creek. This government, the government of

Iran, is a government that is systematically harming its own

citizens.

The death, while being retained by the Iranian morality police, of

Mahsa Amini in September of last year has led to enormous protest

throughout Iran. There have been more than 10,000 identified individuals

that the federal government have put on a permanent ban list for

Canada.

This bill, Bill 7, is able to help us with this very challenging

issue. When a government has been in a place of power for a long time,

as is the case of the government in Iran, the opportunity to take

extreme resources, significant resources, out of the country, in fear

that their government is going to fall, is a serious risk for the people

in that country. We know that this happens. I’m hearing directly from

members of the diaspora, the Iranian community, Iranian Canadians,

people in my riding, that they’re seeing this, and they’re very

concerned about it.

Bill 7 can help us with this very challenging issue. What’s

happening in Iran is an absolute travesty. They’ve turned on their own

people. The writing is on the wall. It’s very possible that this

government will fall. It’s concerning to us in British Columbia that

members from that destructive, misogynistic regime could wash money

pulled out of that regime in our real estate market. It’s a serious

concern.

You’ll see that I’m wearing blue and white today. In fact, it was

a year ago that Putin invaded the Ukraine. This is another example of

geopolitical circumstances that Bill 7 can help us with. We have to ask

the question: do we want members of the Russian oligarch to wash money

in our real estate market? I’m sure that both sides of the House would

agree that, in fact, we do not. Bill 7 helps us very much with that

issue.

I’ve spoken a little bit about the importance of Bill 7 and the

work that we’re doing to ensure that our real estate market, for

example, is not used inappropriately for money laundering. What did the

other side do? Here’s what the Cullen commission concluded about the

previous government’s role in money laundering: “What was lacking prior

to 2018 was not the identification of an appropriate policy response,

but rather the will — on the part of both government and industry — to

take on the kind of decisive action that was necessary to effectively

respond to the problem.” Bill 7 helps us with exactly this.

Also from the Cullen commission: their direction to BCLC “failed

to go far enough, in that it did not require that the BCLC immediately

cease accepting the highly suspicious cash that had been commonplace in

the industry. I note that, at the September 2015 briefing” — the member

of the other side mentioned in this — “was presented with the example

directives that would have achieved this objective.” It was right there

for the taking. “Despite having recognized by 2015 that there was a need

to refuse at least some suspicious cash, BCLC continued to accept it in

substantial quantities over the next three years.”

We, historically, have a challenge in regards to money laundering

and washing money in our real estate market as well. Bill 7 is an

important contributor to how we address this. What I hope I’ve

highlighted in my few words here today is that the significant threat of

what’s happening geopolitically has to be addressed.

And although that file does live, and appropriately so, with the

federal government, there is an opportunity for our government, too, to

stand up against this type of corruption and to not allow our real

estate market to be used for money laundering, for washing money from,

frankly, corrupt regimes that shouldn’t be taking money out of their

countries for their own benefit, but we know that they do.

[11:50 a.m.]

This bill will help us ensure that that’s not happening in British

Columbia. With that, I will take my seat.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, I recognize the Minister of Finance to

close the debate.

Hon. K. Conroy: I just want to thank everyone for their comments on Bill 7. I

think it’s really important that the House has heard the significance of

the amendments to this bill and what they will do. I want to thank

everyone for that.

With that, I move second reading.

Motion approved.

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

to be considered at the next sitting of the House after

today.

Bill 7, Land Owner Transparency Amendment Act, 2023, read a second

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

next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. K. Conroy moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Deputy Speaker: This House is now adjourned. The House, of course, will resume

sitting at 1 p.m. today.

The House adjourned at 11:51 a.m.

Copyright © 2023 Legislative Assembly of British Columbia

The Official Report of Debates (Hansard) and webcasts of

chamber proceedings are available at www.leg.bc.ca .

For inquiries contact:

Hansard Services

612 Government Street

Victoria, BC V8V 1X4

Telephone: 250-387-3681

Email: hansardservices@leg.bc.ca

Published by Hansard Services under the authority

of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.