British Columbia Hansard — Monday, February 22, 2016 (40th Parliament, 5th Session) (20160222pm-Hansard-v33n2) (20160222pm Hansard v33n2)

20160222pm-Hansard-v33n2

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Fift h Session, 40th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) THE HONOURABLE LINDA REID, SPEAKER ISSN 0709- 1281 (Print) ISSN 1499-2175 (Online) Monday, February 22, 2016 Aft ernoon Sitting Volume 33, Number 2

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Judith Guichon, OBC Fifth Session, 40th Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Linda Reid EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council .............................................................................................................. Hon. Christy Clark Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural Gas Development and Minister Responsible for Housing ......................Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ......................................................................................................... Hon. John Rustad Minister of Advanced Education ............................................................................................................................... Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Minister of Agriculture ........................................................................................................................................................ Hon.

Norm Letnick Minister of Children and Family Development ....................................................................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development and Minister Responsible for TransLink ................ Hon. Peter Fassbender Minister of Education ............................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Mike Bernier Minister of Energy and Mines and Minister Responsible for Core Review .....................................................................Hon. Bill Bennett Minister of Environment ..........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Minister of Finance .................................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations......................................................................................Hon. Steve Th omson Minister of Health ............................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Minister of International Trade and Minister Responsible for Asia Pacifi c Strategy and Multiculturalism ........................................................................................... Hon.

Teresa Wat Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour ...................................................Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of Justice ...............................................................................................................................................................Hon. Suzanne Anton Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ...................................................................................................................................Hon.

Mike Morris Minister of Small Business and Red Tape Reduction and Minister Responsible for the Liquor Distribution Branch ........................................................................................................ Hon. Coralee Oakes Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation..............................................................................................Hon. Michelle Stilwell Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services ................................................................................................ Hon.

Amrik Virk Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................Hon. Todd Stone Minister of State for Emergency Preparedness .................................................................................................................... Hon.

Naomi Y amamoto LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Offi cial Opposition ...................................................................................................................................................John Horgan Deputy Speaker .............................................................................................................................................................................. Richard T. Lee Assistant Deputy Speaker ...............................................................................................................................................................

Raj Chouhan Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ............................................................................................................................................ Pat Pimm Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ................................................................................................................................................... Craig James Deputy Clerk and Clerk of Committees .................................................................................................................................

Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sessional Law Clerk ...................................................................................................................................................Roderick MacArthur, QC Sergeant-at-Arms ................................................................................................................................................................................. Gary Lenz

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Anton, Hon. Suzanne (BC Liberal) .............................. Vancouver-Fraserview Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal).....................................................................Penticton Austin, Robin (NDP) ................................................................................ Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP) ....................................................................Surrey-Newton Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) ............................................... Cariboo-Chilcotin Bennett, Hon.

Bill (BC Liberal) ...................................................Kootenay East Bernier, Hon. Mike (BC Liberal) ......................................... Peace River South Bing, Dr. Doug (BC Liberal) ................................ Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Bond, Hon. Shirley (BC Liberal) ........................... Prince George–Valemount Cadieux, Hon. Stephanie (BC Liberal) ................................Surrey-Cloverdale Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) .................................Vancouver–West End Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................

Burnaby-Edmonds Clark, Hon. Christy (BC Liberal) ........................................ Westside-Kelowna Coleman, Hon. Rich (BC Liberal) ...........................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .............................................................. Kootenay West Corrigan, Kathy (NDP) ..................................................... Burnaby–Deer Lake Dalton, Marc (BC Liberal) ............................................. Maple Ridge–Mission Darcy, Judy (NDP) ..................................................................New Westminster de Jong, Hon.

Michael, QC (BC Liberal) .............................. Abbotsford West Dix, Adrian (NDP)............................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Donaldson, Doug (NDP) ......................................................................... Stikine Eby, David (NDP) ..........................................................Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable (NDP) ................................................... Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ............................................................ Port Coquitlam Fassbender, Hon.

Peter (BC Liberal) ................................... Surrey-Fleetwood Fleming, Rob (NDP) .......................................................... Victoria–Swan Lake Foster, Eric (BC Liberal) .......................................................Vernon-Monashee Fraser, Scott (NDP) ............................................................Alberni–Pacifi c Rim Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) ............................................. Abbotsford-Mission Hamilton, Wm.

Scott (BC Liberal) .................................................Delta North Hammell, Sue (NDP) .................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Heyman, George (NDP) .................................................... Vancouver-Fairview Hogg, Gordon (BC Liberal) ............................................... Surrey–White Rock Holman, Gary (NDP) .......................................Saanich North and the Islands Horgan, John (NDP) .......................................................................

Juan de Fuca Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ....................................................Surrey-Panorama Huntington, Vicki (Ind.) ..................................................................Delta South James, Carole (NDP) .........................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................Esquimalt–Royal Roads Krog, Leonard Eugene (NDP) ............................................................. Nanaimo Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal) ........................................................................ Shuswap Lake, Hon. Dr.

Terry (BC Liberal) ....................Kamloops–North Th ompson Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) .........................................Boundary-Similkameen Lee, Richard T. (BC Liberal) ......................................................Burnaby North Letnick, Hon. Norm (BC Liberal) ..............................Kelowna–Lake Country Macdonald, Norm (NDP) ....................................Columbia River–Revelstoke McRae, Don (BC Liberal) ............................................................ Comox Valley Mark, Melanie (NDP) ...........................................

Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Martin, John (BC Liberal) ..................................................................Chilliwack Morris, Hon. Mike (BC Liberal) ........................... Prince George–Mackenzie Mungall, Michelle (NDP) ..........................................................Nelson-Creston Oakes, Hon. Coralee (BC Liberal) .............................................Cariboo North Pimm, Pat (BC Liberal) .........................................................Peace River North Plecas, Dr. Darryl (BC Liberal) .............................................Abbotsford South Polak, Hon.

Mary (BC Liberal) .............................................................. Langley Popham, Lana (NDP) ...................................................................Saanich South Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ................................................................ Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon. Linda (BC Liberal) ..................................................Richmond East Reimer, Linda (BC Liberal) ........................................

Port Moody–Coquitlam Rice, Jennifer (NDP) ........................................................................North Coast Robinson, Selina (NDP) .............................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Routley, Bill (NDP) .................................................................. Cowichan Valley Routley, Doug (NDP) ............................................Nanaimo–North Cowichan Rustad, Hon. John (BC Liberal) ................................................

Nechako Lakes Shin, Jane Jae Kyung (NDP) ...............................................Burnaby-Lougheed Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ................................... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Shane (NDP) ..................................................... Vancouver-Hastings Stilwell, Hon. Michelle (BC Liberal)............................... Parksville-Qualicum Stilwell, Dr. Moira (BC Liberal) ........................................ Vancouver-Langara Stone, Hon. Todd (BC Liberal) .........................

Kamloops–South Th ompson Sturdy, Jordan (BC Liberal) ..................................West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Sullivan, Sam (BC Liberal) ...........................................Vancouver–False Creek Sultan, Ralph (BC Liberal) ..................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Tegart, Jackie (BC Liberal) ............................................................Fraser-Nicola Th omson, Hon. Steve (BC Liberal) .......................................Kelowna-Mission Th ornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ..........................

North Vancouver–Seymour Th roness, Laurie (BC Liberal).................................................Chilliwack-Hope Trevena, Claire (NDP) .................................................................... North Island Virk, Hon. Amrik (BC Liberal) ............................................. Surrey-Tynehead Wat, Hon. Teresa (BC Liberal) .............................................. Richmond Centre Weaver, Dr. Andrew (Ind.) .......................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Wickens, Jodie (NDP) ..........................................Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Wilkinson, Hon.

Andrew (BC Liberal) ........................ Vancouver-Quilchena Y amamoto, Hon. Naomi (BC Liberal) ................ North Vancouver–Lonsdale Y ap, John (BC Liberal) ......................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission ......................................................................Simon Gibson Abbotsford South ..................................................................... Dr. Darryl Plecas Abbotsford West ...................................................... Hon.

Michael de Jong, QC Alberni–Pacifi c Rim .......................................................................... Scott Fraser Boundary-Similkameen ................................................................ Linda Larson Burnaby–Deer Lake ...................................................................

Kathy Corrigan Burnaby-Edmonds ..........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Lougheed .............................................................Jane Jae Kyung Shin Burnaby North .............................................................................. Richard T. Lee Cariboo-Chilcotin ........................................................................Donna Barnett Cariboo North .................................................................... Hon.

Coralee Oakes Chilliwack ......................................................................................... John Martin Chilliwack-Hope ....................................................................... Laurie Th roness Columbia River–Revelstoke .................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley.....................................................................................Don McRae Coquitlam–Burke Mountain .......................................................Jodie Wickens Coquitlam-Maillardville...........................................................

Selina Robinson Cowichan Valley ................................................................................ Bill Routley Delta North .........................................................................Wm. Scott Hamilton Delta South...............................................................................Vicki Huntington Esquimalt–Royal Roads .....................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ...................................................Hon.

Rich Coleman Fraser-Nicola.................................................................................... Jackie Tegart Juan de Fuca .....................................................................................John Horgan Kamloops–North Th ompson ............................................ Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Kamloops–South Th ompson ..................................................Hon. Todd Stone Kelowna–Lake Country ..................................................... Hon. Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission .............................................................. Hon.

Steve Th omson Kootenay East .......................................................................... Hon. Bill Bennett Kootenay West ............................................................................ Katrine Conroy Langley.......................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Maple Ridge–Mission ..................................................................... Marc Dalton Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ........................................................ Dr. Doug Bing Nanaimo ...........................................................................

Leonard Eugene Krog Nanaimo–North Cowichan ......................................................... Doug Routley Nechako Lakes ........................................................................ Hon. John Rustad Nelson-Creston ........................................................................Michelle Mungall New Westminster ...............................................................................

Judy Darcy North Coast......................................................................................Jennifer Rice North Island .................................................................................. Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale ........................................Hon. Naomi Y amamoto North Vancouver–Seymour ..................................................Jane Th ornthwaite Oak Bay–Gordon Head ...................................................... Dr. Andrew Weaver Parksville-Qualicum .......................................................Hon.

Michelle Stilwell Peace River North ................................................................................ Pat Pimm Peace River South ..................................................................Hon. Mike Bernier Penticton............................................................................................ Dan Ashton Port Coquitlam ..........................................................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Coquitlam ................................................................Linda Reimer Powell River–Sunshine Coast .................................................

Nicholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie ....................................................Hon. Mike Morris Prince George–Valemount ................................................... Hon. Shirley Bond Richmond Centre ......................................................................Hon. Teresa Wat Richmond East ..........................................................................Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ..............................................................................John Y ap Saanich North and the Islands ....................................................

Gary Holman Saanich South ................................................................................ Lana Popham Shuswap ................................................................................................Greg Kyllo Skeena .............................................................................................. Robin Austin Stikine ....................................................................................... Doug Donaldson Surrey-Cloverdale ....................................................... Hon.

Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Fleetwood ........................................................... Hon. Peter Fassbender Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton ................................................................................. Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ........................................................................... Marvin Hunt Surrey-Tynehead ......................................................................Hon.

Amrik Virk Surrey-Whalley.............................................................................. Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ....................................................................... Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Fairview ..................................................................George Heyman Vancouver–False Creek ................................................................... Sam Sullivan Vancouver-Fraserview ......................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Vancouver-Hastings ....................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington .................................................................Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara .................................................................Dr. Moira Stilwell Vancouver–Mount Pleasant .........................................................

Melanie Mark Vancouver–Point Grey .........................................................................David Eby Vancouver-Quilchena ................................................ Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Vancouver–West End ...............................................

Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee ...............................................................................Eric Foster Victoria–Beacon Hill .......................................................................Carole James Victoria–Swan Lake.........................................................................Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano ............................................................. Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ..........................................................Jordan Sturdy Westside-Kelowna ................................................................

Hon. Christy Clark Party Standings: BC Liberal 48; New Democratic 35; Independent 2

CONTENTS Monday, February 22, 2016 Aft ernoon Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members ................................................................................................................................................... 10557 Tributes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 10557 Dave MacKinnon J.

Shin Introduction and First Reading of Bills .............................................................................................................................. 10558 Bill 18 — Miscellaneous Statutes (Minor Corrections) Amendment Act, 2016 Hon. S. Anton Statements (Standing Order 25B) ....................................................................................................................................... 10558 Scout-Guide Week E. Foster Steel and Oak craft brewery J. Darcy Equal Voice and women in politics L. Larson Martin Mars waterbomber S.

Fraser Animal abuse prevention and regulation of animal breeders J. Th ornthwaite Fields Forward initiative in Creston Valley M. Mungall Oral Questions ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10560 Budget priorities and funding for LNG advocate and website J. Horgan Hon. R. Coleman B. Ralston S. Simpson Hon. S. Bond Drinking water quality and testing in schools J. Rice Hon. T. Lake J. Wickens Disability benefi ts and bus pass program changes M. Mungall Hon.

Michelle Stilwell Orders of the Day Budget Debate (continued) ................................................................................................................................................... 10565 H. Bains Hon. M. Morris M. Elmore D. Plecas R. Austin Hon. T. Stone G. Holman M. Dalton M. Mungall On the amendment M. Mungall Hon. A. Wilkinson

MONDAY , FEBRUARY 22, 2016 Th e House met at 1:34 p.m. [Madame Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Introductions by Members V . Huntington: I’ d like to welcome David and Susan Jones to the House today. Th ey’re longtime friends and constituents of mine. If the House would make them wel- come, I’ d appreciate it. Hon. T. Lake: We have a Plant in the gallery today. Th e executive director of the Turning Point Recovery Society, Brenda Plant, is here with us.

Brenda is a recipi- ent of the Queen’s Jubilee medal and does tremendous work with Turning Point, providing addiction recov- ery services in the Lower Mainland for over 30 years. With over 3,000 men and women participating in their programs, they currently operate three facilities in the Lower Mainland. [1335] My daughter and I had the privilege of attending the Turning Point Gala last year. Jim Belushi was the key- note speaker. We were able to provide $1 million in sup- port to the society to assist in their eff orts supporting some of our province’s most vulnerable people.

Would the House please join me in welcoming Brenda to the gallery today. J. Horgan: It was my great privilege today to give a tour of this building and have a lovely lunch with two individ- uals. Th e fi rst is David Williams, who’s the president of the Friends of the Nemiah Valley. David is joined today by another Williams, without the “s. ” Th at’s Chief Roger William of the Xeni Gwet’in First Nation in Tsilhqot’in territory, who, all members of the House will know, was the groundbreaking fi rst person to take title to the Supreme Court and win with respect to First Nations rights and title.

It’s just wonderful to have Chief Roger William in the House with us today, and I know all members of the House will want to wish David Williams and Chief Roger William a very warm, warm welcome. Hon. S. Bond: Th ere’s a young woman in the gallery today who has done just a tremendous job. She used to work in our offi ce. Kim Haslett is here today. She and her family relocated, and she is now working elsewhere. But she did an incredible job, was someone incredibly wonderful to work with, always saying, “How can I help, Minister? What can I do?” — all of those kinds of things. So, very appreciative.

She’s a very busy mommy of twin girls now. I just wanted to make sure she knew how much we appreciated the eff ort she made and to welcome her here to the precinct today. S. Robinson: I have a number of visitors today from Coquitlam-Maillardville. We have students from Our Lady of Fatima School joining us. It’s rather quiet up there, so I’m assuming that they have yet to make it into the gallery. But we have Miss Melissa Mobilio’s grade 5 class and Mrs. Stephanie Hoyer-Wright’s grade 5 class. We have a total of 45 students and 20 adults joining us. Th ey’re certainly here in the precinct.

I would ask all members to give them a warm welcome. J. Th ornthwaite: Today we have members from Scouts Canada joining us. It is a great pleasure to introduce Alamin Pirani, executive director for Scouts Canada. Alamin is from the Yukon and has been with Scouts Canada for 27 years professionally and 24 years as a youth member in Kenya and as a volunteer in Canada. Bruce Hallsor is the legal counsel for Scouts Canada. Bruce is also from the Yukon and has been scouting for 31 years. Denyse Koo, deputy area commissioner for great- er Victoria has been scouting for nine years.

Eric Chow, the deputy area commissioner for greater Victoria, has been scouting for 14 years. Would the House please make them feel welcome. Tributes DAVE MacKINNON J. Shin: A week ago, on Valentine’s Day, New Democrats bid our farewell to a dear friend and my constituent, Dave MacKinnon, who left us all too ear- ly at age 69. A hard-working man, Dave spent most of his earlier days in various jobs, including a nickel mine and a logging camp, before going on to serve as a trade unionist and an industrial relations officer with the Ministry of Labour.

Dave was also the president of the federal NDP from 1996 to 2001 and our candidate in the 2004 federal election. His family recalls Dave’s passion for a number of things, most of all his family and his home, but also his other loves that are all tying for a close second, they say: playing cards, a good feed of lobsters and the NDP . He is lovingly survived by his wife, Susan, and his children, Nicole, Craig and Gail; his stepchildren, Jessie, Devin and Sarah; his grandchildren, Mike, Alex, Emily, Nicholas, Ben, Isla and Maya; as well as siblings Estelle, Dan, Maureen, Justin, Betty and Ken and their families.

Dave was apparently the favourite uncle of dozens of nieces and nephews. So to Dave, thank you for your love for life and for people. Y ou will be sorely missed. 10557

British Columbia Debates10558 Monday, February 22, 2016 Introduction and First Reading of Bills BILL 18 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES (MINOR CORRECTIONS) AMENDMENT ACT, 2016 Hon. S. Anton presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Miscellaneous Statutes (Minor Corrections) Amendment Act, 2016. Hon. S. Anton: I move that Bill 18 be introduced and read a fi rst time now. Motion approved. [1340] Hon. S. Anton: I’m pleased to introduce Bill 18, the Miscellaneous Statutes (Minor Corrections) Amendment Act, 2016.

Th is bill is a collection of minor corrections and technical housekeeping amendments to various statutes. As part of the statute revision process, the offi ce of legislative counsel routinely identifi es and brings for- ward these types of corrections. Th e minor corrections in this bill are part of the routine process to ensure that B.C. statutes are orderly and correct. I’ d like to take a moment at this time to recognize the tremendous work done by the offi ce of legislative counsel for this House.

I extend my sincere thanks to all the draft - ers, editors, coordinators, support staff and the others in that offi ce for their dedication and public service. Th is is meticulous work. It’s careful work. We rely on it in this House. More importantly, the province relies on it to be done well and done properly, and they do that every day. I move that the bill be placed on the orders of day for second reading at the next sitting of the House aft er today.

Bill 18, Miscellaneous Statutes (Minor Corrections) Amendment Act, 2016, introduced, read a fi rst time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second read- ing at the next sitting of the House aft er today. Statements (Standing Order 25B) SCOUT-GUIDE WEEK E. Foster: It is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize Scout-Guide Week, which is taking place across Canada from February 15 to 22. Scout-Guide Week is a celebration for Scouts Canada and Girl Guides of Canada, a time when both organ- izations can get together in the spirit of friendship and fellowship to honour their shared heritage.

It’s also a great opportunity for all Canadians to recognize the limitless potential of our youth and acknowledge the work scout- ing does to instill values such as teamwork, leadership and public service. For more than a century, these values and life skills have been taught through exciting outdoor programs which are developed and maintained by energetic and dedicated volunteers. Th ese people give their time self- lessly to help youth learn to cooperate, strive for excel- lence and give back to the community.

For millions of Canadians, adventure, teamwork and good citizenship started with lessons learned and mem- ories made through Scouts and Guides. In fact, more than half of our country’s leaders participated in scout- ing and guiding in their youth, proving that not only do these organizations help to build stronger communities; they also shape future leaders. I want to thank Scouts Canada, Girl Guides of Canada and their enthusiastic volunteers for working tirelessly to prepare young people for future success. I ask the House to join me in wishing them all the best and a strong and a strong and vibrant future.

STEEL AND OAK CRAFT BREWERY J. Darcy: In 1862, the fi rst brewery in mainland British Columbia opened its doors in New Westminster. For 143 years, beer fl owed within the Royal City, until the last of a long line of breweries, Labatt’s, shut its doors in 2005. In 2014, those doors opened again as Steel and Oak brewing company brought the noble tradition of brewing back to New Westminster.

Steel and Oak symbolizes the modernness of today while paying homage to the craft s- manship of years long past. “Materials of strength and dur- ability — steel and oak — house, protect and nurture what we stand for most: exceptional-tasting craft beer. ” Th ose are the words of Jorden Foss, co-owner with James Garbutt of Steel and Oak, both proud New Westminster residents. Head brewer Peter Schulz studied brewing in Germany, and their beers combine German, English and North American brewing styles, techniques and ingredients.

They opened with a red pilsner, smoked hefeweizen, hopped ESB and an English pale ale, but they now have many more types. Their beers are unfiltered and un- pasteurized. Th eir tasting room, which is always packed, off ers growler fi lls, bottle sales and tours. Their beer is on tap at 18 New West restaurants and pubs, dozens of locations throughout the Lower Mainland and in Kimberley, Qualicum Beach, Courtenay, Kamloops and Kelowna too. Th ey now employ 19 people, and they’re growing. Th ey have a food truck out back, as well, on Th ursdays, Fridays and most Saturdays.

Th ey are strong supporters of our community and of a sustainable economy. Each week they deliver 1,600 kilos of spent wheat and barley to a small, family-run farm to feed their heritage pigs. In November 2015, they won the fi rst prize in the amber/ dark lager category at the B.C. Beer Awards.

British Columbia DebatesMonday, February 22, 2016 10559 As co-owner Jordan Foss says: “Our beers are kind of like children. Y ou love each one for a diff erent rea- son, and the dark lager has always held a special place in my heart. Congratulations to Steel and Oak. Y ou make New Westminster proud. [1345] EQUAL VOICE AND WOMEN IN POLITICS L. Larson: Equal Voice is a national, bilingual multi- partisan organization dedicated to electing more women to all levels of political offi ce in Canada. Founded in 2001, Equal Voice brings women from across the political spec- trum into its nine chapters across the country.

Th e UBC Alma Mater Society branch of Equal Voice worked with the Speaker’s offi ce this year to produce a women in the Legislature program for a day to give young women a chance to shadow a woman MLA. Th is year, on February 17, nine young women from political science studies and law programs at UBC paired up with MLAs from both sides of the House to take a look at the inter- nal workings of the Legislature through a diff erent lens. Th ey were privileged to be able to witness the swear- ing-in ceremonies of two women MLAs — historically, the youngest female and the fi rst Nations woman — a rare privilege.

Equal Voice is an organization that stress- es the importance of equality and multipartisanship and strongly encourages young women from all facets of the political spectrum to take

part in this project. Th ey are confi dent that their women in the Legislature program will also serve the interests of aspiring female politicians, of which there are many. Th eir goals are to increase the number of women nominated as candi- dates, promote changes that would increase the number of women in politics, conduct outreach to inspire and engage women, encourage and equip women to run for offi ce through an on-line campaign school and celebrate women who are in politics.

With a female Premier, a female Attorney General and Madame Speaker, our Legislature represents a strong fe- male face to politics in British Columbia and leads in representation across Canada. Thank you to Ava Ashrafian and Natasha Mahail, presidents of Equal Voice at UBC, and to all the mem- bers who participated. We look forward to hosting more young women from Equal Voice. MARTIN MARS W ATERBOMBER S. Fraser: Well, sadly, it looks offi cial. Th e last of the Martin Mars waterbombers will be put into a forced re- tirement.

Only last year, the Mars was brought into the service when the worst fi re season in the history of this province was well underway, and it performed fl awlessly. Th e Martin Mars waterbombers stationed at Sproat Lake near Port Alberni have been instrumental in fi ght- ing wildfi res in B.C. for decades and have saved incalcul- able values of property and forest resources and, arguably, lives. Nothing else can come close to hitting a wildfi re with the punch of the Mars and its massive payload. Th e Mars waterbomber has been accurately described as B.C. ’s Smokey the Bear.

In the Shasta Lake fi res in 2008, the Mars deployed 436,000 litres in a seven-hour fl ight period for several days in a row. When the Mars hits a fi re, this massive payload smothers it with a swath measured in acres. It can extinguish a fi re at its inception. By my calculations, if the Mars had have been under contract to fl y at the beginning of last year’s devastating season, a minimum of four fi res on the coast that I’m aware of could have been knocked out at their inception. Th at’s what the Mars has always done best. We in B.C. owe so much to the Mars aircraft and those involved in the Mars program.

Th ese aircraft have fl own over 4,000 missions and dropped in excess of 8,000 loads, and there has never been and will never be a fi re-fi ghting aircraft that can come close to the impacts these giants have had in protecting British Columbia. I would like to off er thanks to all those involved in the Mars program for all you have done in protecting this province, and to all of my constituents and British Columbians for your support of these iconic and still incredibly valuable fi re-fi ghting aircraft . To the Mars: I salute you. ANIMAL ABUSE PREVENTION AND REGULATION OF ANIMAL BREEDERS J.

Th ornthwaite: In recent weeks, animal lovers across British Columbia, including myself, were shocked to learn that a large number of cats and dogs were being born and raised in deplorable conditions. I would like to thank the B.C. SPCA for taking immediate action to res- cue a total of 84 dogs and cats from one facility in Surrey and 66 dogs from another in Langley. British Columbians deserve to know that when they take a companion animal into their home, that animal has been born and raised a in secure and caring environment.

Th ough British Columbia already has some of the tough- est laws against animal cruelty in the country, we can and must do more. Th at’s why today our government an- nounced it has begun taking action to target irresponsible commercial breeders of dogs and cats in this province. [1350] Th e fi rst step we are taking is to recognize the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association’s code of practice as gen- erally accepted practices for registered cat and dog breeders in the province.

We are also consulting with stakeholders, like the BCSPCA, to determine how new laws can help them proactively monitor and take action against irresponsible breeders. We’re also working with responsible breeders, including the Canadian Kennel

British Columbia Debates10560 Monday, February 22, 2016 Club, to ensure that any new measures will only pun- ish those who fail to raise animals in safe, humane en- vironments. We cannot accomplish this without the public’s help. Buyers of companion animals must be diligent and in- formed about the conditions their pets are born and raised in. We are committed to raising public awareness and promoting responsible breeders in our province. We are confi dent these measures will ensure that companion animals will be protected and treated with the love, care and respect they deserve.

FIELDS FORW ARD INITIATIVE IN CRESTON V ALLEY M. Mungall: Th is isn’t the fi rst time I’ve spoken in this House about the amazing agricultural sector in the Creston Valley, and it certainly won’t be the last, because Creston fi elds are going forward. Funded by the Creston and district community- directed funds from the Columbia Basin Trust, Fields Forward is a new initiative that launched in January, with 80 stakeholders, at a two-day forum in Creston.

Bringing together a broad group of community partners that in- cludes First Nations, local government and non-profi ts, this partnership will boost economic development in the agrifood sector and improve local food security. Using the Vermont state farm-to-plate program as a model, Fields Forward plans to see the same positive results — job creation, new food and farm businesses, locally grown food served at schools, care homes and hospitals, new and upgraded processing facilities and additional and improved training programs.

Using the concept of strategic doing, where partners focus on small, achievable goals rather than big talk and big ideas that oft en stop before they start, the Creston Valley is poised to make this all happen. And it will happen. As I have said many times before, the Creston Valley grows the best food in B.C., with Kootenay waters and some of B.C. ’s richest and best lands in the agricultural land reserve. Our community of hard-working farm- ers, business people and creative thinkers is equally rich, and they are ready for the tasks ahead of them.

As Jesse Willicome says in his report on the launch forum, Creston’s agricultural sectors know that many hands make the load light. To be sure, with the many hands of Fields Forward, Creston’s agricultural sector and the lo- cal economy are heading forward. Oral Questions BUDGET PRIORITIES AND FUNDING FOR LNG ADVOCATE AND WEBSITE J. Horgan: Before the last election, it was all LNG all the time. We were going to have a $100 billion prosper- ity fund, 100,000 jobs. Th ere was going to be an LNG plant running last year, according to the time frame of the B.C. Liberals.

Well, that’s all gone terribly, terribly sideways, even to the point where the Minister of Finance went back on his initial commitment to not put any money in the so-called prosperity fund until there were revenues coming from LNG. He disregarded that in this budget and somehow found $100 million in MSP premium increases to put into the Premier’s photo op fund. It’s not just the photo opportunity fund that got a bit of a boost by this govern- ment. We also see that the Premier’s own LNG advocate, Gordon Wilson, was just re-upped again, by order-in- council, to another $150,000 a year to advocate for LNG.

My question to the Minister of Jobs. Although we don’t have 100,000 jobs for British Columbians, we seem to have $300,000 for a former MLA. Can the minister jus- tify $300,000 to advance LNG when there’s no LNG to advance? Hon. R. Coleman: Now, I know that the leader oppos- ite, the NDP opposition, whatever you want to call him, is no to natural gas development, no to LNG, has been all along, will continue to be that way. [1355] Y our question, frankly, isn’t surprising to me, hon. Member, because you don’t want to recognize that there are 20 proposals in British Columbia today for liquefi ed natural gas.

Y ou don’t want to admit that there are 17 ap- proved export permits for LNG in B.C. Y ou don’t want to admit the fact that there has been close to $20 billion already invested in LNG in British Columbia. Y ou don’t want to admit the fact that 11,000 to 13,000 jobs in north- eastern British Columbia are still there today because of the drilling and activity of people being prepared to ac- tually drill out the resource and get it ready for LNG as they come through the fi nal investment decisions.

I know the member opposite relishes the fact that we may not have one today, because he wants to say some- thing negative about the future of British Columbia, but I believe in the people of the northwest. I believe in the people in the northeast. I believe in the First Nations communities I’ve sat down with and across from in this fi le. Th is is a generational opportunity. It can change the future for them. We are going to continue to work for its success until such time as we’re successful, because it’s their future, hon. Member, that’s important to me.

Madame Speaker: Leader of the Offi cial Opposition on a supplemental. J. Horgan: It’s always nice to have a contribution to this place from the minister of gas, but I think the only people who have a future so far, with respect to LNG, is Gordon Wilson. Now, when the Premier appointed Mr. Wilson, he had the task to “work with major proponent

British Columbia DebatesMonday, February 22, 2016 10561 companies to encourage them to place procurement op- portunities on the LNG–Buy B.C. on-line tool”— an ap- propriately named device, on the Internet. In fact, Mr. Wilson was supposed to have had that done by September 2014, reporting to the Minister of Jobs. Well, I went onto the LNG–Buy B.C. on-line tool today, and I’ve been going on it for the past two years. I click on “opportunity” as most British Columbians would. What do I fi nd? Do I fi nd a welding job? Nope. Do I fi nd any- thing for engineering fi rms? Nope. How about environ- mental consultancies?

Nope. Nothing, zero, zilch, nada — not a single opportunity on the LNG tool that was supposed to be populated by the former member of this place Mr. Gordon Wilson. Again, the only opportunity that I can determine from the order-in-council passed by the Minister of Jobs this week is to Gordon Wilson. Why is it that we don’t have money for bus passes, but we’ve got $300,000 to promote a website that’s got zero on it? Hon. R.

Coleman: I know the member opposite doesn’t like the idea that a portion of the work that’s being done in LNG is to connect B.C. businesses into the op- portunities and companies for them to be able to do busi- ness in LNG. Mr. Wilson has been around the chambers of commerce around the province of British Columbia, getting them to have the opportunity. I’m actually surprised at just how uninformed the Leader of the Opposition is. If he wants to look for a trade, he should go look at Find Y our Fit. Th at’s where we’re connected to people with jobs and trades and op- portunities in B.C.

At the LNG conference last year, over 3,000 young people went through Find Y our Fit. I actually saw some First Nations youth take it, just in January, go through Find Y our Fit to connect them to jobs and training and education so that they will have a future in northern B.C. — which you don’t support. Y ou’ d rather have those com- munities not be successful… Madame Speaker: Th rough the Chair. Hon. R. Coleman: …than have a generational oppor- tunity for jobs and training and a future for their small communities. J. Horgan: Again, let’s bring the minister back from his fantasy land. Th e photo ops will come.

Y ou’ve got your 100 million bucks out of taxpayers’ pockets so you can continue to fabricate things over the next 12 to 24 months. But let’s go back to the issue at hand: Mr. Wilson. I mean, he had one job to do. He was supposed to con- nect businesses to opportunities. Th ey created a website for just that undertaking — so a complete absence of suc- cess on this front. I’m thinking to myself: “Why is it that there’s such a commitment to Mr. Wilson?” Why is there such a commitment to Gordon Wilson? If there’s anyone we should be saying no to, it’s him.

He said, before the last election, that everyone should vote for the Premier. Maybe that’s why you’re so con- nected to him. Or maybe it’s because his wife is writing a biography about the Premier. Maybe that’s why we’re so committed to him. [1400] Or maybe it’s because of his foresight. Before he be- came the LNG advocate, this is what Mr. Wilson, in 2013, had to say. “Th e most compelling reason to be concerned about relying on this golden goose is the fact that the LNG markets…may not materialize as we think.

Even if they do, the prices they are prepared to pay for our product may be well below what is anticipated. ” Well, it sounds like he’s saying no to something. But yet he’s go- ing to get another $300,000 from B.C. taxpayers. My question is to the Minister of Jobs. Is the only job out of the 100,000 jobs promised the one that Gordon Wilson got? Hon. R. Coleman: Y ou know, maybe the Leader of the Opposition could go talk to the Haisla First Nations, whose unemployment rate has dropped almost to zero because of the involvement in this industry.

Now, I know the members’ “rule of no” really means: “We don’t want to help First Nations change their opportunities or abilities and have them participate in a generational opportunity. ” I know that there are actual trades trainers up in the north right now connecting young people with their edu- cation, to upgrade them to grade 10 so they can actually be in trades today. Th at’s going on as we stand here and speak today. Th ere are 600 businesses that have already signed on to the tool that Mr. Wilson’s doing — 600 businesses that he has done.

I also know that as we come through this year, you’re going to see more and more advancement on LNG. Th at will be no problem for them, because they don’t want the economic opportunities. Th ey don’t want the success. Th ey don’t want the jobs. Th ey’re opposed to anything that will actually give somebody a future and take them out of distress in some very poor communities to actually improve their job opportunities in the northwest part of this province, which I think is something to fi ght for and pursue. We’re pursuing it in LNG. We’re going to continue to pursue it in LNG. Interjections. Hon. R.

Coleman: I know you don’t like it. I know it drives you crazy. What also drives you crazy is that it’s a former NDP cabinet minister that’s actually found a life and come over to the side of free enterprise. Interjections.

British Columbia Debates10562 Monday, February 22, 2016 Madame Speaker: Members. All members will direct their comments through the Chair. B. Ralston: I want to be fair. I have to correct my col- league. Th ere are, in fact, others benefi ting from the B.C. LNG web tool. In fact, it appears that the second-great- est benefi ciary of this program is a company called FCV Technologies, which the B.C. Liberals paid $850,000 to build the on-line tool.

Can the minister tell the House why she paid a tech fi rm just short of $1 million to build a web tool that doesn’t actually connect B.C. businesses to LNG opportunities? Hon. R. Coleman: Th ere are…. Interjections. Madame Speaker: Members. Hon. R. Coleman: Th ere are 13,000 people in British Columbia today — particularly in the northeast part of the province, but across the rest of the province as well — working in factories, for camps and those sorts of things, whose jobs are important to this government.

To pursue LNG will actually stabilize that opportunity for them to continue to work in the industry long term, because with- out a place to send our gas, who’s going to explore and who’s going to pursue? Th e reality is these guys are just opposed to that. Th ey’ d rather see those 13,000 people out of work rather than admit to the fact that it’s worth pursuing a generational opportunity on behalf of British Columbians. When you do that, you actually build the fundamentals to deal with it. Y ou sit down with the companies and look at what the competitive nature is worldwide.

And while you do that, you actually do it on the basis that you want to do what’s good for British Columbia, with a vision for the future. Something else they also don’t have is any vision for the future. Th ey just want to whine about somebody who’s doing a good job on behalf of British Columbia, connecting businesses to the opportunity. I’ve been in the room and watched in a small First Nations com- munity when Mr. Wilson has presented and have seen the input. I’ve seen the activity. I’ve seen the engagement by these people. Y ou should accept the fact that that’s a good idea. [1405] B.

Ralston: Hardly a spirited defence of Gordon Wilson, I’ d say. B.C. Liberals always make sure their friends are taken care of. Clearly, Gordon Wilson has been taken care of, and so has Johann Starke. And who is Johann Starke? He’s the CEO of FCV Technologies. He’s the man who ran digital advertising for the B.C. Liberals in the 2013 campaign. He’s one of the select group invited by the Premier to attend her cab- inet swearing in. Why are taxpayers funding friends of the B.C. Liberal Party to fund an on-line web tool that doesn’t actually do anything? Hon. R. Coleman: I wouldn’t sweat it, hon. Member.

In May 2017, we’ll be government again anyway, because you’re not going to get there being no, no, no to British Columbians — to economic activity, jobs and opportun- ities for the youth of the next generation. Y ou will not be successful, simply because British Columbians see through that “no” as you only being in- terested in your friends and insiders and not interested in the economy of British Columbia, not interested in pursuing a generational opportunity on behalf of com- munities and not about changing the lives of people.

Y ou actually pursue that opportunity with success as we go forward to create the jobs, the economic activity and the activity in British Columbia. I know you don’t support any of that. Y ou’ d just rather keep those people, particularly those 13,000 people today who work in the oil and gas industry, out of work because you’ d rather us not pursue the opportunity to send gas to Asia to keep their jobs stable. S. Simpson: So far, the success of this website is 300,000 more dollars for Mr. Wilson and $850,000 for Mr. Starke’s company. Other than that, we can fi nd no success in this website at all.

We submitted an information request on this site. We asked for any and all opportunities that have been posted on the government’s LNG–Buy B.C. website. And what did we get back? Th e response from government staff was: “No records were located in response to your re- quest. ” No records were located. How bad can it be when government staff can’t fi nd a single opportunity on the LNG–Buy B.C. website, where nobody is prospering from this, other than Mr. Wilson and Mr. Starke? Where are those opportunities? Hon. S.

Bond: We’ve been very clear about the import- ance of making sure that British Columbia businesses get the opportunity to take advantage not just of liquefi ed natural gas in British Columbia but of other major pro- jects that take place in this province. I can tell the member opposite that if we looked at the jobs plan that the members had, we’ d have one number that we’ d have to look at, and that would be the number zero, because in fact… Interjections. Madame Speaker: Members. Hon. S. Bond: …it’s no to LNG, it’s no to mining, it’s no to forestry, and it’s no to major transportation pro- jects.

It’s no to Site C.

British Columbia DebatesMonday, February 22, 2016 10563 We should be clear. On the website, there are 600 busi- nesses that have registered — at the last time we looked at them. Mr. Wilson has worked around the province of British Columbia to talk to businesses, to talk to non- aboriginal and aboriginal alike, to say, “What can we do to remove barriers?” to ensure that they have the oppor- tunity to participate in the economy. Mr. Wilson has done good work. We intend to con- tinue to see him do additional work. DRINKING W ATER QUALITY AND TESTING IN SCHOOLS J.

Rice: Last week the Minister of Health told this House that his staff discovered highly elevated lead levels in school drinking water in Prince Rupert through “routine testing. ” We now know that simply was not true. Th e sad fact is that the minister’s staff discovered this serious issue as a result of a school classroom experiment in Kitimat. [1410] Can the minister tell the House why he waited four years after discovering elevated lead levels in school drinking water in Kitimat before he decided to test the water in Prince Rupert? Hon. T. Lake: We canvassed this quite extensively last week.

I’m happy to repeat that as soon as the offi cials in Northern Health knew there was an elevated level of lead in the schools in Prince Rupert, mitigation strategies were implemented. Th e parents were made aware. Dr. Kendall has said that the studies, through the Centre for Disease Control, have indicated there is no widespread concern in terms of lead ingestion. Where we are notifi ed of concerns, mitigation meas- ures are taken to ensure that children are kept safe. Th at is what’s happening in this situation. Madame Speaker: Th e member for North Coast on a supplemental. J.

Rice: Th at answer is not good enough. Prince Rupert has the oldest housing stock in British Columbia. Th e minister’s own staff said that when equivalent concen- trations in residential water were considered, water more than doubled typical daily intakes.

I don’t know what’s more troubling: the fact that the minister waited four years to test the water in Prince Rupert, the fact that the minister pretended that they discovered the problem through “routine testing” or the fact that the minister says this is a common problem in older schools in the northwest, and he still won’t commit to testing other communities in my riding. Can the minister tell the House why he just doesn’t seem to care about the health of other northwest com- munities and test the water for school children in Masset, in Skidegate or in Bella Coola? Hon. T.

Lake: We know that with older infrastruc- ture, issues of leaching of metals into water is a concern. Th at is why we have a $12 billion infrastructure invest- ment program on this side of the House. If that member wanted new infrastructure in her city, she would actual- ly support a growing economy in her city to enable that to happen. Infrastructure investments have to be made to address older infrastructure problems in British Columbia… Interjections. Madame Speaker: Members. Hon. T.

Lake: …which is why I know the members opposite will vote positively for a budget that invests $12 billion in infrastructure around the province of British Columbia. J. Wickens: Here are the facts. Th ey discovered elevat- ed lead levels four years ago. Th e minister’s staff wrote a paper about it two years ago and recommended that the minister implement a program of provincewide testing. Th e minister didn’t do a thing until one of his staff tested the water in Prince Rupert two months ago. Why did the minister ignore his own staff for two years? Hon. T.

Lake: As soon as issues become apparent, medical health offi cers take action. Th at’s what they did in this particular case. It’s what we do in the Ministry of Health. When concerns are raised, action is taken — in this case, mitigation measures, fl ushing system fi lters on the fountains, to protect the children. As I said, it’s important…. Although the members op- posite like to spread fear among parents around the prov- ince, Dr. Perry Kendall, who I actually have great respect for, and I think the members opposite do too…. Interjections. Madame Speaker: Members. Please continue. Hon. T.

Lake: I think the members opposite have great respect for Dr. Perry Kendall and medical health offi cers around the province of British Columbia. Dr. Kendall has said testing from the Centre for Disease Control shows that there is no concern in terms of widespread elevat- ed lead exposure causing harm to children in British Columbia. Madame Speaker: Coquitlam–Burke Mountain on a supplemental. [1415]

British Columbia Debates10564 Monday, February 22, 2016 J. Wickens: Th e province’s chief medical health offi - cer was surprised that this government had not tested for lead in schools in the northwest. Th e medical health offi cer for the northwest said: “It is not our mandate to be testing all schools across the north. ” Let’s recap. Th e minister claims that he does “routine testing” of school drinking water.

His staff at the Drug and Poison Information Centre urged him to do routine testing of school drinking water, and his medical health offi cer says she does not have the mandate to test school drinking water. Why is the minister so indiff erent to the safety of school drinking water in the northwest? Hon. T. Lake: It’s important for people to understand what’s happening in terms of the water source that is be- ing provided by the municipality. Th at is not the issue. It’s where you have older infrastructure.

We know that in the past, before we had modern testing, modern availability, lead pipes, under some circumstances, will leach into water. Th is has been dealt with in infrastructure around the province for many years. Th e medical health offi cer was not aware of the situa- tion in this particular school district at the time. As soon as they were made aware of it, mitigation measures were taken.

Again, the medical health offi cer for the province of British Columbia has assured parents that because of the low amount of water being consumed from those fountains around the province of British Columbia, it is not a concern in terms of exposure to lead. Having said that, where we know there’s a problem, action is taken. Th at is what’s happening. DISABILITY BENEFITS AND BUS PASS PROGRAM CHANGES M.

Mungall: Aft er all the chaos and all the confusion that the Liberals created with bus passes for people with disabilities, we now know for certain that they are char- ging an annual $45 administration fee plus an additional $52 a month for the actual bus pass. So that’s a $624-a- year jump in costs for people with disabilities who are also living in poverty. Interjections. Madame Speaker: Members. M. Mungall: Th ose are the facts of the matter. Th e Liberals can try to say it’s something that it’s not, but that’s what it is. Th at’s the reality for people with disabilities.

Th e minister says that it’s all about freedom of choice. Just what kind of choice does the minister imagine people receiving disability have? Is it a choice between bus passes and limousines, walking or hitchhiking? Or is it a choice between going out or being homebound? What choice do they actually have? Hon. Michelle Stilwell: Th e member opposite is sim- ply wrong. She’s the one spreading misinformation. Let me try again, as I did last Th ursday. Let me clari- fy and make things perfectly clear. Th e bus pass is still available to people with disabilities on assistance who choose to have it.

Th ose who choose it will receive a $25 increase to their rates. Th e $45 administration fee was the same administration fee that was there prior. It’s the same administration fee that they will pay now if they choose a bus pass. For 45,000 individuals with a disability receiving as- sistance in this province, they will receive a $77 increase to their rates. The change that we have made in this budget not only creates equity and fairness across the sys- tem to allow everybody in the system to receive the same amount of money no matter where they live.

It also cre- ates an opportunity for them to make their own choices. We believe people deserve to make their own choices. Madame Speaker: Th e member for Nelson-Creston on a supplemental. [1420] M. Mungall: I just listened to what the minister had to say, and it sounds a lot like I was right. She just said exactly what I did. Th ere’s a $45 annual administration fee. It has always been there, and it’s still there. And they had the audacity with this budget to add an extra $624 a year to the cost of a bus pass for people with disabilities. I don’t know why they refuse to admit to that. Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members. All members will come to order. Interjections. Madame Speaker: All members will come to order. Please continue. M. Mungall: Th ose are the facts of the matter. I mean there’s really no dispute. I don’t know why the Liberals try to draw up that line. Maybe it’s because they’re still on the game of trying to make it look like they’re doing the right thing but refusing to do the right thing. Th at kind of shell game with people’s well-being is not okay. It is wrong. No wonder advocates, groups and people with dis- abilities were stunned last week.

Th is chaos and confu- sion that have been created by the government’s false announcement have left people in every corner of the province infuriated. If the minister doesn’t think they are, she only needs to look at her own social media accounts to know that that’s the case, because they get it. It’s cruel. It is cruel to increase the cost of bus passes for people with disabilities on assistance by $624 a year. Th ey

British Columbia DebatesMonday, February 22, 2016 10565 have enough barriers in life. Why is this minister adding more barriers to people with disabilities who rely on this government for supports? Hon. Michelle Stilwell: Th e member opposite is simply wrong with her facts. Th is policy change is an investment of $170 million of new money to disability assistance rates. Th e investment that we are making builds on the policy reforms and changes we’ve already made that are helping to break down barriers and increase independence for people with disabilities.

Th is is providing choice to people with disabilities, providing them with an increase to their rates, as well as providing fairness across the system. We are a government who continues to grow the econ- omy so that we can make these investments: $1.2 billion in the next three years in social programs. Th at’s some- thing to be proud of. Th at’s something I’m proud of. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon. T. Stone: I call continuing budget debate. [R. Lee in the chair.] Budget Debate (continued) H.

Bains: It’s always good to stand and entertain the minister from Vancouver — somewhere out there. [1425] This is my second opportunity, after I started on Th ursday, to fi nish off my budget speech. What I said on Th ursday was that the one thing that’s very clear in the budget: the top 2 percent in British Columbia will con- tinue to get tax breaks from this government. So $230 million last year, $230 million this year, two more years — a total of $1 billion tax break for the top 2 percent.

Th en you look, on the other side, at the ordinary work- ing people, the middle class — those who don’t have means and a fi xed income. B.C. Hydro continues to go up for them. MSP premiums continue to go up. B.C. Ferries continues to go up. Park fees continue to go up. ICBC premiums continue to go up. Th at’s the tough choice that this government has made. As they have said — minister aft er minister, speaker aft er speaker — they had to make some tough choices. Th ose are the choices — choices very clearly…. Th e top 2 percent in the country get tax breaks.

And those hard- working middle class and people on fi xed incomes? Th is government continues to go deeper and deeper into their pockets. Th at is exactly what is happening. Now, let’s take a look at what they are doing to some of the real issues that we all face out there. Th ere is noth- ing about aff ordability. Interjection. H. Bains: I’m talking about aff ordability. Th e Minister of Advanced Education hasn’t got a clue what we are talk- ing about when we talk about aff ordability. Th at’s very clear as he’s chirping away. Th ere is nothing — no an- swers to the public transportation…. Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members, order. Order. H. Bains: I think they will have their opportunity to speak. Th ey have nothing to say. Th ey keep on chirping away at other people. Th at has been the history of these two ministers at least. Th ey chirp away out there. When their opportunity comes, they have nothing to say — nothing to say. Let’s continue on. Th ey have nothing — no answer here for a public transportation extension in Vancouver or south of the Fraser. Th ere’s nothing to combat crime in British Columbia, especially south of the Fraser in Surrey, where we had 60 shootings last year.

Th ere’s noth- ing to deal with the forest industry that is on its knees under the watch of this government. Th irty-one thou- sand fewer people are working in the forest industry to- day than when they took over in 2001. Th ere’s nothing to deal with the wait times at Surrey Memorial Hospital or other places anywhere in the province.

Here is one for the minister of post-secondary educa- tion — nothing to deal with all those students who need to go to post-secondary education and get their skills and training upgraded in order to get jobs in the future, because 80 percent of future jobs will require some sort of post-secondary education degree or diploma. Th ere’s nothing. It’s becoming more and more diffi cult for stu- dents to get post-secondary education. Tuition fees con- tinue to rise. Th at is the record of this government.

Let’s talk about some of the real issues, outside of these, that are faced by hard-working small businesses em- ployed in the taxi industry and in the trucking industry. Interjections. Deputy Speaker: Members. Members, order. H. Bains: Let’s take a look at the taxi industry fi rst. Let’s take a look at that. I know they don’t want to hear this, and I know they don’t want to hear about the truck- ers issue either. I know that. Y ou’ll see that when the truth comes, this government, especially those minis- ters who were involved in it, will just shy away and walk away from this issue.

Let’s talk about the taxi industry. Th ere are over 2,000 families who depend on the taxi industry in the Lower Mainland; 2,000 licences are out there. Y ou multiply by

British Columbia Debates10566 Monday, February 22, 2016 two, and you’re talking about 5,000-6,000 families that depend on the taxi industry. Th ey mortgage their homes to buy those jobs. Th ere are many drivers working in the taxi industry. [1430] What does this government do? About a year and a half ago, they were just playing political games with the taxi industry. Th at’s not the way to operate and come up with policies to deal with hard-working small businesses and hard-working people of this province. In 2014, the Minister of Transportation said “no way” to Uber.

If Uber wants to come in, they must come through just like every taxi company and every taxi owner went through, to get their taxi licence. Th at was said in 2014. Guess what. Uber is very, very rich — a $62 billion company. What do they do? Like they have done every- where else, they went to the top. They went into the Premier’s offi ce and hired two of her high offi cials: prin- cipal secretary Dimitri Pantazopoulos and Carling Dick. Guess what. Now they have a direct line to the Premier’s offi ce.

And they are working for a company called Maple Leaf Strategies which is lobbying, on behalf of Uber, this government. Now the ministers are meeting with them, and I want to say this. One meeting took place July 21, 2015, with the Minister of Technology, who was chirping away here because he didn’t want to hear the truth. What happened aft er that? Minister of Transportation Stone changed. From “no way” to Uber, he went on to say, “It’s a mat- ter of when, ” not if. “Uber is inevitable. ” Th at’s what the Minister of Transportation said aft er that meeting that took place with the Minister of Technology.

Something happened there, and the Minister of Technology has a lot of explaining to do to the taxi in- dustry. Many of those people live in his riding. He has to come out and explain what it was that he said to Uber. What was it that he did in his capacity? Did he support his taxi industry? Or did he support Uber and start lob- bying his government on behalf of Uber? He has to come up and have some answers on that. He has not said any- thing about that. But the facts here are clear. Aft er that meeting, things changed. Th e minister is saying that now it’s inevitable. It’s a matter of when, not if.

When there was a lot of pres- sure from the taxi industry and the local communities, then the government said: “Well, not anytime soon. ” Th e minister was taking two or three diff erent pos- itions. When he went to the South Asian media, he had a diff erent position. When he went to the mainstream media, he had a diff erent position. But at the end of the day, the Premier took that fi le away from the Minister of Transportation and gave it to the Minister for TransLink.

Lo and behold, now we fi nd out that his chief of staff ’s daughter is Carling Dick, who is employed by Maple Leaf Strategies, which is lobbying this government on behalf of Uber. Clear confl ict. I might say, it’s not a fault of Carling Dick or her mother, who was the chief of staff with the Minister for TransLink. It’s the minister. It’s his responsibility. He must know what those confl ict-of-interest rules are. He must ensure not only that he must not be in confl ict of interest but that there should be no perception. He left no doubt in anybody’s mind that clearly there’s a confl ict of interest.

Now the minister is saying: “Well, you know, we will not do anything until the election. ” What a comfort to the taxi industry. He didn’t say that we will ensure that there’s a level playing fi eld. Whether it’s Uber or somebody else or the taxi industry, they must come in through the same level playing fi eld as far as the transportation rules and regulations are concerned. He didn’t say that. He said: not until the election. What does that say? Th at clearly says: “Y ou dare elect us again, and we will bring Uber in. ” And the taxi industry knows that.

Th ey know that the jobs are in danger and they will be bankrupted by a stroke of a pen by one of these ministers. Th ey know that. Th at’s one thing — how they’ve played games with the hard-working small businesses in favour of a multinational. Th at’s the record of this government. [1435] Now let’s talk about truckers. If you remember, there was a long strike at the port — the container truck oper- ators. Th ey were out for weeks. They would not do anything when it was brought to their attention by Unifor, the union that represents many of those truckers, the UTA, the United Truckers Association.

Th ey would not listen to them, because they were warned time and again since 2005 that the shut- down was imminent. Th is government would do nothing. Th is government will say: “Well, it’s the federal govern- ment. ” Th e federal government will say: “No, the provin- cial government has to deal with this. ” And when they get together, they say: “Well, the port has to deal with this. ” So they are throwing this thing all over the place except for taking on responsibility themselves. Y es, there was a port shutdown. I believe it was six weeks. Many businesses lost big-time as a result of that.

Th ose truckers lost big-time. Even during the strike, this government continued to say: “Well, it’s their fault. We will talk to them if they go back to work fi rst. ” Lo and behold, what happened? When we fought on the side of the truckers and this government brought in back-to-work legislation without even settling the issue, we were fi ghting here on behalf of the truckers. Th en there was a settlement.

Th e same government, the ministers who were saying that it was the truckers’ fault — that it wasn’t this gov- ernment’s fault — were tripping over each other to get it in front of the camera that they settled this dispute. Well, everyone was happy that the dispute was settled, and they promised that the truckers would get retroactive pay. Th ey are guaranteed rates now. But guess what. Th ey’re still waiting for the retroactive pay — still.

British Columbia DebatesMonday, February 22, 2016 10567 Not only that, now the commissioner is in court over an agreement that this government signed, the Premier signed, the federal government signed, and the truckers are refusing to pay retro. Many did, but there are a few still out there, and the government is in hiding — not do- ing anything now, because they got their photo op. Th en the commissioner was appointed through legis- lation here. Th e port went ahead and hired new trucks. Th ey brought in a new process to bring in the truckers who would qualify to come and work at the port. Y ou know what?

Again, a grade 5 student can do a better job. What did they do? Th ey put in a process, and they put in a deadline that by that date, all those who wished to work at the port make an application, and these would be the prerequisites. Th ey all signed on the prerequisites. Th is is what they did during their process. Before the deadline was over, many applied, and they said: “Y ou must have four points to qualify, out of ten. ” Th ey have a number of criteria. Th ey give you points. If you get four, you’re in. But before the process was over, before the deadline was over, they raised the threshold to six points.

Many people with fi ve points were left out when people with four points were in. Th ey had to go to the court to have that thing thrown out. This is how badly they treat the truckers, and this government comes for photo ops, comes across as if they support the truckers, but once the photo op is over, they’re nowhere to be seen, and those truckers are left to fi ght their own fi ght. Th ey were left with the under- standing that this government somehow had solved their problems. Th en what? It didn’t even end there. Now there’s the issue of truck age — that those trucks cannot be more than ten years old.

Here’s what the truckers have to say. I’ll read you the letter…. Mr. Ranjit Barn wrote this. [1440] He said: “Here are some of the issues concerning the container truck owners and operators about the age limit on their trucks and the environment concerns imposed by the port and the TLS. One, Fraser Surrey Docks, Surrey, Fraser River. Many heavy hybrid trucks are using these facilities for many purposes from container yards, lumberyards, steel, metal.

Th e users of the container yards are being forced to operate their trucks in accordance with the TLS requirement to meet the environmental concerns they have imposed. Th e users of the lumberyard and the steel and metal yard are not being forced to upgrade to make any changes to their trucks. ” Anyway, they can simply continue to use the existing trucks that do not meet any of the requirements imposed by the port. The TLS has not said anything to the users of the lumberyard or the steel and metal yard users. Also, the container yard equipment…. Th ey call them the yard hustlers.

Th ose are the machines that they use within the yard to move those containers around. Th e machinery is quite old, and we are pretty sure that this equipment and machinery does not meet any of the TLS requirements for their environmental concerns. Clearly, this shows how this is not fair to the outside users of the container yard. Two, Lynnterm — North Vancouver, North Shore, Burrard Inlet. Th ese properties are also used by many trucks. As well, there’s no TLS truck age environmental requirement in place similar to what is used above with the Fraser Surrey Docks.

Three, Vanterm and Canterm Terminals on Com- missioner Street. On Commissioner Street, there is Rogers Sugar, West Coast Reduction, Columbia Containers, VersaCold, Ocean Fisheries and many more business- es. Again, any truck is able to access these businesses, which are located on the same street as the Vanterm and Canterm terminals, but to access the Vanterm and Canterm Terminals, you need a truck that meets the TLS truck age and environmental requirements.

So you can see this clearly isn’t fair to the trucks using the Vancouver ports, as these regulations put in place are not fair and don’t really resolve any issue with environ- mental concerns that they are imposing. Clearly, on many areas of the Vancouver ports, only the container truckers are required to go with these restrictions: the age of the truck and the environmental equipment that they have to have. It’s not fair. Th ose are some of the things that are clearly, again, before the courts. Now, let’s talk about some of the other issues. We have serious issues about WCB. PTSD.

Th ere are so many fi rst responders who go through trauma, and there’s hard- ly anything for them when they are suff ering from that trauma. Th ey are left on their own. Th at’s not how you treat our workers — the way this government is treating them. I’m told that my time is running out. Th at’s not very good. I’ve got so much to say. Th en we have our educa- tion system. I have a lot more to say. I probably will speak again. My time ran out. Hon. M.

Morris: I’ve been listening, off and on, to the members opposite over the last couple of weeks, and some of the comments concern me, some of the com- ments that they make. I think there’s an inherent responsibility with all elect- ed offi cials, whether they be municipal local government, provincial or federal, to support our public institutions, like police and like many of the other institutions that we have. I’ve heard some information coming from across the House that’s not factual. In fact, I think it’s embel- lished purposely to promote fear into constituents.

I can’t think of any other reason why some of the information would be presented in the fashion that it has other than to do that — and probably, you know, politically motiv- ated rather than to consider the public good. I’m going to concentrate on policing. Th e member for Vancouver–Point Grey made some comments, as other members have, with respect to Surrey crime. Th ere have been broad statements about the shootings and the issues that are going on over there.

British Columbia Debates10568 Monday, February 22, 2016 Th e police are dealing with that in a very professional manner. If the members opposite wanted to get some of the factual information, all they have to do is ask. I haven’t had one request from the members opposite coming into my offi ce to give them an update on what’s going on with the Surrey crime, with organized crime, with street-level crime throughout the province. I would welcome them, if they wanted to get an update on that, to come in and talk to me, and we can give them the actual facts.

I think it’s incumbent upon the members opposite, as it is for any other elected offi cial, to assure the public that the institutions that we have in this great country of ours are doing the job necessary to keep everybody safe. [1445] I am going to talk about policing a little bit, because it does consume a fairly signifi cant part of our provincial budget and municipal budgets. Th e municipalities are spending in excess of $1 billion a year on policing. Th e province is spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year on policing as well for the provincial jurisdictions.

Police offi cers spend their entire life dealing with other people’s problems. Th ey’re protecting the public from liars, cheats, thieves, scoundrels of all types that prey upon the vulnerable citizens in our communities. Th e police are intervenors in domestic violence and all other types of societal violence that aff ects every individual that resides in our communities.

We deal with the fallout and the worst-possible cir- cumstances associated with substance abuse or mental illness that’s aggravated by substance abuse or aggra- vated by individuals who don’t take their medication or don’t take it frequently enough. Th e police are called in to deal with that. Th e police investigate the nefarious deeds done by those intent on taking advantage of people right across our society, right from the lowest folks that are strug- gling in the sociodemographics that we have to the rich- est ones. Crime knows of no boundaries.

When the police aren’t dealing with issues like that on a day-to-day basis, they’re protecting the public from one another. Oft entimes, I’ve heard it described as baby- sitting. What I’m talking about…. A couple of examples. Th e police are admonishing those who disobey speed laws and ignore road and weather conditions. Th at leads to hundreds of unnecessary deaths and debilitating in- juries. We’re admonishing those who persist in texting and reading while they’re driving, whose actions also contribute to hundreds of preventable deaths and injur- ies across the province.

Police provide impromptu counselling for those that are airing their problems in public or don’t know how to get along with one another, and subsequently, the police are called in. Oft entimes, it’s dealing with personal re- lationship issues. It’s dealing with marriage. It’s dealing with parenting. It’s dealing with behavioural modifi ca- tions, perhaps, for siblings or for children at home — a multitude of issues that the police are dealing with on a day-to-day basis.

Police in British Columbia respond to tens of thou- sands of calls from the public and have tens of thousands of interactions with the public on a daily basis. Th ey’re the default. Th ey’re the ones that people call when they know of no other organization that can come to them with help. Th e police are front and centre in our com- munities, and I think they need the support of everybody in this House. Th ey need the support of all the elected offi cials to ensure that they’ve got all the tools necessary to do their job. When they do that job, they do it in this fantastic coun- try of ours to the rule of law.

Th e rule of law has been developed over centuries, and here in British Columbia — we’re no diff erent than many of the other provinces — we covet that right in Canada. Th e rule of law has been developed to the point where it prescribes exactly how a police offi cer conducts their investigation, the steps that they need to take. Th ose steps are…. Y ou can’t rule any of them out. Y ou have to take the steps as prescribed by the various courts and tribunals in this country. If you don’t, you stand the chance of losing a case when it does get to court.

Now, I remember a number of years ago that I used to do a lot of reading on various court decisions and court cases and tribunals that exist. I was reading about a con- vention. I believe it’s the Law Society of Upper Canada, but I could be wrong. It was a Supreme Court justice that was at this event, and he was making a keynote speech, and in that speech he said: “Th e main event is no longer the guilt or innocence of the accused.

Th e main event is now the integrity of the investigation. ” Th at puts a lot of weight on the police offi cers — the men and women that are out there conducting those in- vestigations — to make sure that they follow the rule of law in order to get successful prosecutions at the end of the day. [1450] During that process, the defence counsel oft entimes has the opportunity to test the integrity of the witnesses that attend — not only police witnesses but the victims of crime, the witnesses that happen to be around when a situation like that would take place.

I think that leads to a lot of victims that we have out there, with not only sexual assault but domestic violence, to become silent. Th ey don’t want to be forced into the rigour that we have within our court system to ensure that we are adhering to the letter of the law. Th at adds more burden to police resources. We’ve got the victims of crime. We have all kinds of support units that go out and help these people through some of the traumatic situations they’re in. Th ose police budgets cer- tainly get used up in situations like that. Police in B.C. are funded in various ways.

For com- munities of 5,000 people and under, the province accepts responsibility for that, and the province pays for 70 per-

British Columbia DebatesMonday, February 22, 2016 10569 cent of the policing costs with the RCMP , as the provin- cial force in British Columbia. Th e federal government pays for 30 percent. If we get into communities that have 5,000 people or more, then that ratio goes, and it’s turned over to the local government, where they spend 70 per- cent of their local budget on policing and the federal gov- ernment will kick in 30 percent. Th en we get into the communities with 15,000 people and more, like Surrey, where they pay 90 percent of the policing costs and the federal government kicks in 10 per- cent.

Of course, we have our independent police offi ces throughout the Lower Mainland and British Columbia, where they cover 100 percent of the policing costs. I just looked at Surrey. I’ll use that as an example, be- cause it’s been raised in the House here over time, and it’s been in the news — you know, the Surrey crime rate and whatnot. Th e Surrey crime rate has actually gone down. Violent crime in British Columbia, violent crime across Canada, has gone down signifi cantly over the last decade.

We did have a spike in Surrey last year, which is very concerning for us as government, but it’s just as concern- ing for the municipality of Surrey. It’s as concerning, or more, for the police in those communities. Th ere’s noth- ing that will garner the attention of the police quicker than gunshots in a public place. And there’s nothing that will guarantee an up-close, personal relationship with the police than being the one that pulls the trigger in a situation like that.

Th roughout the Lower Mainland, a number of years ago, we had the Organized Crime Agency of B.C. looking at organized crime — which is, you know, quite prolifi c in British Columbia. It has morphed into the Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit, which is a group of police offi cers from all the departments in the Lower Mainland, all the RCMP detachments. Th e province is funding that to the tune of $60 million a year, which is largely spent in an urban environment.

Most of the policing costs are covered by the municipal- ities, but the province saw this as a priority for us, and we’re putting a lot of eff ort into it to try and bring the street-level crime to a halt, to do everything that we can there. We’re doing that. Of course, what we’ve done since we formed this group…. Th ey’ve established a lot of diff erent strategies and whatnot, and they’ve learned that these organized crime groups are connected right across the province. Th ey’re quite prolifi c here in the Lower Mainland, but they are as prolifi c throughout the province here.

Coupled with the investigative capability of this par- ticular unit, they’ve also established some anti-gang activ- ities that try and dissuade young men, mostly — but there are young women involved in that — from joining these gangs and carrying on with those gangs. Th e combined forces special unit has done a great job in attending our prisons, connecting with these individuals on a regular, routine basis and off ering them a way out of that kind of a lifestyle. Th ere have been some successes to that.

To criticize the police throughout the province here, throughout the country, for not doing anything, I think, is wrong. Th e more support we put in their direction, I think, the more successful we’ll be, and the more under- standing everybody will be, with what’s going on here. [1455] Now, the member for Vancouver–Point Grey was also talking about Osoyoos. He had some comment…. I don’t have the paper in front of me with the exact quote. Basically, he was saying that Osoyoos is very depressed because of the Okanagan correctional centre that is be- ing built in that particular area.

We do need a place to put these street-level crooks that the police are doing such a great job in apprehending. Th ey’re going to be serving their time in jail to answer for the crimes that they’ve committed. Th e Osoyoos correctional centre — the province has put $200 million into that facility in capital to build that state-of-the-art correctional centre. We’re going to be employing 250 new corrections employees at that facility — 250 new people coming into the community, living in the south part of the Okanagan and contributing to the local economy. Th ose are the direct jobs.

Th ere are many more indirect jobs that are related to the corrections cen- tre that’s put there. As a result of that…. I was meeting in that commun- ity not too long ago. House prices have gone up or main- tained their value, but have been going up in many areas there. Employment opportunities. Th ey’ve seen an in- crease in the population there. Th at’s been signifi cant. So to say that Osoyoos is depressed, I think, is not factual. It’s something that this government is very proud of, to go and build a facility like that in partnership with the First Nations groups that are there.

I recently met with the mayor of Surrey. Th ere have been comments about this government not responding to the request to put more police offi cers into Surrey. Number one, the number of police offi cers in a municipal area with more than 15,000 people — actually, with more than 5,000 people — is the responsibility of local government. Last May the mayor of Surrey requested 100 more of- fi cers for the city of Surrey. I can tell you that, as of today, I believe there are about 83 or 84 offi cers that are on site.

Th ere are another fi ve that have been identifi ed, and the rest should be identifi ed prior to the end of this fi scal year. I think that’s remarkable, coming from that organ- ization myself and knowing how the HR system works within the RCMP . To throw 100 more resources into that community when they were only requested in May of last year, of 2015, I think is a remarkable feat. Th e mayor is ecstatic. She’s very happy with the response that she got from this government and from the RCMP in ensuring that those resources are there.

Our Premier announced an additional $5 million for guns and gangs in the province here at UBCM. It’s been

British Columbia Debates10570 Monday, February 22, 2016 included in this budget for 2016-2017. Th at money is being geared towards activities like we have in Williams Lake, for an example. We’ve had a spike in street-level gang activity up there. We’ve put our Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit into Williams Lake to try and get a handle on those activities there. Th ey’ve had some successes so far. We’re going to make sure that that money is utilized to address the street-level gang activity right across the province and enhance what our combined special forces unit is already doing.

In addition to that, B.C. has done a remarkable job in developing integrated units. Our integrated homicide unit is one fi ne example there, where we do have resour- ces from all the police departments and detachments in the Lower Mainland working collectively, along with sig- nifi cant provincial resources, to address the homicides that we have in the province here and throughout the Lower Mainland, with some signifi cant successes there. Th ey are also supported by what we call the Real Time Intelligence Centre that we have in Surrey.

Th is is a centre that gathers real-time intelligence from throughout the Lower Mainland that aids investigators to make on-the- spot decisions. In fact, the police offi cers have been able to predict, in several instances, where a crime might take place, and they’ve gone and been able to thwart the activ- ities before anything really serious happened. [1500] Th e Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit…. Th ey’re tailing these gang members around. Th ey’ve iden- tifi ed who the main prolifi c off enders are.

Oft entimes — in fact, it’s occurred several hundred times over the last fi ve years — this group has received information where the life of another gang member has been threatened. Th ere’s imminent danger for that particular individual, and they have a duty to inform. Th ey’ve done that hun- dreds of times. Th ey’ve gone and let a rival gang mem- ber know that this was a possibility up there so that they could take the appropriate action to stop that.

Th is shows the level of engagement that our police of- fi cers have in the Lower Mainland with gang activity and trying to subdue the street-level gang, the drug traffi cking and the things that place the vulnerable people in jeop- ardy throughout the province here. I thought I would bring those points up because it’s important that MLAs and government offi cials on all sides of the House, at all levels of government, support the institutions that we have.

Whether it be police — in this case, because that’s part of my responsibility — or corrections or health or any other fi eld that we have, we have dedicated bureaucrats throughout the province that are working tirelessly to keep everybody in this province safe and healthy and out of harm’s way. Further to the budget, in January of this year, I host- ed the 13th annual Natural Resource Forum for British Columbia. Th at was an outstanding success. We had 800 preregistrations for it. We ended up with 1,000 people at- tending. Th ere was a trade fair.

Th ere were people from all across North America that were attending this event. Th ere was optimism in the air, despite the commodity prices that are down. Despite all the pressures that we have worldwide, on economies right around the world, there’s still optimism there. A lot of that optimism had to do with the level of inter- est that our government has taken into diversifying our economy to make sure that we’re not reliant on any one particular part of the resource sector. We have forestry, which has been a mainstay in British Columbia now for decades.

It has helped build our schools, our roads, our hospitals and other social infrastructure that we have. Mining has been another terrifi c part of it. Th ey’re ex- periencing a downturn in commodities, as has happened in the past. We’ve seen that the tech sector has really grown in this province. Agriculture has really expanded in this province. Aquaculture has expanded in this prov- ince. Th ere are a number of things now where we have…. Everybody’s out there working, contributing to the great economy that we have, which has led to a triple- A credit rating.

Th e triple-A credit rating is something that people probably don’t really grasp. We’re the only jurisdiction in Canada right now that enjoys that triple- A credit rating. Th at gives us…. Y ou know, if we were to have the same credit rating as some of the other jurisdic- tions in the country here, we would be spending, prob- ably, an extra $2 billion a year on interest. We can take that $2 billion and we can put it into poli- cing. We can address the guns and gangs issues, like we have. We can put it into increased access for persons with disabilities. We can put it into social housing.

We can do a number of things with that money, which is exactly what we’ve done. Th at comes from a strong economy. Th ere’s been criticism about the amount of debt that jurisdictions across the country have. Th e debt that we have…. I guess the way I’ve explained it to people back in my constituency — and family members, quite frankly, when they ask me about it — is that I try to turn it into something personal that everybody experiences. We go to work every day, and we get a paycheque every two weeks.

We take that money that we get every two weeks, and we decide how much we can aff ord aft er we’ve paid for our groceries. Can we buy a house? If we can buy a house, then that’s a mortgage. Can we buy a car? Th ose types of things. When we look at our debt-to-GDP ratio…. Th e banks look at our income versus our debt when we go to the bank for a mortgage. Th at’s similar. We’ve got signifi cant revenues coming into this province. We are investing in construction. We’re putting, I believe, $12 billion into infrastructure spending over the next number of years here now.

Th at is going to benefi t the children and our grandchildren of the future. [1505]

British Columbia DebatesMonday, February 22, 2016 10571 We are paying down the operational defi cit that we’ve had in this province now for decades. In this fi scal fore- cast that we have here, we’ll get it down to a very work- able $2-point-some billion here within the next couple of years. But we have the opportunity to pay that off , prob- ably, within the next fi ve, six or seven years or so, which will be the fi rst time since the late 1960s, I believe, which is signifi cant.

If we take the interest that we’ve been paying on that operational defi cit over the past number of years, it could have gone a long way towards paying for some of the so- cial programs that we have. Th at’s the track that we’re on. We’re making some great headway. I think this budget is an excellent budget. It shows that we are serious about addressing some of the socioeconomic needs that we have within the province here with those that need it the most.

At the same time, we’re going to make sure that we provide a strong environment for industry to come and work and for our resource sector to fl ourish so that they, in turn, can provide jobs for British Columbians and that we have a future for our children, our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren down the road here. We’re going to leave this province in a state where they’re not going to be paying for things that we’re get- ting today.

Th ey’re not going to be paying for the grocer- ies — as our Finance Minister puts it — that we use today in ten, 15, 20 years down the road, like we have been the past number of years. I wholeheartedly support this budget. I think that we’re making great strides. We’re an economic force to con- tend with, in the province here, and we will continue to be that economic force. We’re going to continue to grow our economy and continue to pay attention to the people within our society that need the help the most. M.

Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise, speak and give my response to the budget on behalf of constituents in Vancouver-Kensington. I’m going to be speaking against the budget. I feel that it does not meet the concerns of British Columbians, families in Vancouver-Kensington and small businesses throughout Metro Vancouver or the province. I’ d like to start with a few comments about the com- munity in Vancouver-Kensington and what are, I think, some of the real strengths of the community and also how the 2016 budget misses the mark in terms of ad- dressing the priority concerns and issues that have come forward to me.

Th roughout the last year…. We have a very vibrant and resilient community in Vancouver-Kensington, and I think some of the organizations that really contribute to building such a strong community…. It is one of the most diverse in Metro Vancouver. We have a high proportion of constituents who have immigrated to Canada from all over the world, and we have nearly three-quarters who call themselves immi- grants and speak a second language — so, very diverse. We’re really seeing that refl ected in many community or- ganizations and thriving businesses in the area.

I enjoy, in Vancouver-Kensington, a high proportion of small businesses in some of the real developing areas in Vancouver — very dynamic in terms of businesses along Fraser Street, represented by the South Hill Business Association or along Victoria Drive, in the Victoria Drive Business Improvement Association. I just wanted to mention that through the many cele- brations marking lunar new year in Vancouver and, real- ly, across the province…. It was during the occasion that I visited and talked to many small businesses along the area.

I heard from them many concerns about how it’s diffi cult to run a small busin ess and to be successful. It takes long hours. It takes a lot of work, and it’s really a full-time commitment.

One of the comments that made a mark on me was from a business along Victoria Drive. [1510] I was speaking to the owner, who has been in business for over 15 years but was commenting that now they fi nd it’s becoming increasingly diffi cult — diffi cult not only in terms of the day-to-day challenges of running a suc- cessful small business but also having to cope with the increased costs, with making rent and the increasing B.C. Hydro fees and other fees that were just becoming an increasing burden.

Th is is also a recurring theme that I’ve heard from business owners throughout the area in Vancouver-Kensington, and I’ll be addressing some of those, as well, in my remarks. Also of mention, particularly in Vancouver-Kensington, is that the South Vancouver community policing centre has a new permanent home there, thanks to Vancouver city, and a lease for a building. Th ey’ve been looking for a permanent building since their last lease ran out, and it was through cooperation with the city of Vancouver that they were able to secure a new building, have it renovated and move in.

Th is has been a very popular and successful program, supported by the community. We’re also look- ing to open up a satellite offi ce on Fraser Street. Continuing along remarks of when I talk to families and when folks come into my community offi ce, I hear a number of stories with respect to the challenges that indi- viduals and families are facing in Vancouver-Kensington around making ends meet. One of them…. I think it’s really laid out, the contrast, around what was presented in Budget 2016. It doesn’t meet the needs and the prior- ities and concerns of families.

I think that to really characterize a very stark contrast that refl ects the values of the government being out of sync with British Columbians…. It is refl ected in what we’re seeing — a continuation now of the tax cut for the top 2 percent. A tax cut, unsolicited and unrequested but, nevertheless, continued by this B.C. Liberal gov- ernment for the wealthiest 2 percent, will see, over four

British Columbia Debates10572 Monday, February 22, 2016 years, $1 billion given to the wealthiest 2 percent in British Columbia. Th at’s in the face of what we’re seeing — and to really contrast it to what is a very cold-hearted move: the re- moval of support for bus passes for people with disabil- ities. So on the one hand, we see, over four years, a tax cut to the wealthiest 2 percent — $1 billion. Th ey’re con- tinuing with that, on the one hand, and where are they taking it from?

From people with disabilities and their ability for transportation, clawing back the support for a bus pass for people with disabilities. As well, we see announced recently the creation…. We heard it as a campaign promise by the Premier in the 2013 election: the establishment of a prosperity fund. Th is was a prosperity fund — one of the promises, if you recall — that would be funded by revenue from our li- quefi ed natural gas industry. We are still waiting for the first facility to be up and running. Nonetheless, that doesn’t stop this government, the B.C.

Liberals, from proclaiming and assigning $100 million to this prosper- ity fund, which has been characterized as a fantasy fund. So $100 million, and not one dollar is actually coming from revenue of liquefi ed natural gas. Y ou may ask yourself: “Now, where does the $100 mil- lion come from?” Th is $100 million for the Premier’s fantasy fund is coming out of the pockets of British Columbians through a continued increase in medical services premiums.

We are seeing a fantasy fund creat- ed not out of revenue — which was the initial promise — from the LNG industry but coming out of the pockets of British Columbians, coming out of the increases this year to the MSP premiums. [1515] Th is is really some of the contrast around the priorities and values of this government, refl ected in the budget speech. We see the continuing tax cut to the wealthiest British Columbians, which will equal $1 billion over four years. We see the announcement that $100 million for the Premier’s fantasy fund will come not out of the industry but from the pockets of British Columbians.

We’re see- ing, as well, increasing fees that British Columbians are being subjected to — and families. We see that there are increasing fees, not only in terms of medical services premiums…. We have an announce- ment that there will be some relief for families with MSP premiums — positive steps — that children will be ex- empt and that the threshold is being raised in terms of MSP premiums. However, the families and individuals will have to wait until 2017 before they see that relief. We are seeing, overall, that those increases are con- tinuing.

Th e 4 percent MSP premiums are continuing to increase this year and next year. Th at is a steady real- ity for families. In addition, we’re seeing not only increases in MSP premiums to families; we’re seeing increases in ferry rates, increases to ICBC, increases to hydro and to park fees. Th ese are impacting the ability of individuals and fam- ilies to basically meet their daily budgets, their monthly budgets, and it’s creating a hardship on my constituents in Vancouver-Kensington and individuals and families right across British Columbia. I was disappointed that there was a lack of support for education.

We did not see the needed support for educa- tion in this budget. Th ere are a couple of diff erent areas that I want to address with respect to a shortfall in edu- cation funding. We see that the Vancouver school board is facing cuts up to $24 million. Th is is due to downloading of costs and, really, accumulating cuts that have come onto the school boards over a number of years due to underfund- ing and off -loading of the provincial government onto school boards, unfunded costs that are downloaded to school boards.

Th ese are going to result in cuts to servi- ces and putting increasing pressure on Vancouver school board. We see that in the budget, under the Ministry of Education, funding for public schools is not even cover- ing the cost of infl ation, let alone covering the increase in student enrolment that is expected over the next year. In addition to that, with only a 1 percent increase in fund- ing, it falls short of matching the cost of infl ation. We see also a decrease in the budget, a $21 million cut to capital spending on schools. Th is adds to the shortfall.

We see that funding for public schools is falling behind and is not enough to make up even for the cost of infl a- tion, as well as to account for the cuts that have taken place over the last number of years and, as well, reduc- tion in capital spending. We see an increasing pressure and an inability to re- verse the increases in class size and composition that are becoming more and more complicated and are becoming more compounded. And this is in the face…. Just over a year ago, we heard from the Premier that class compos- ition was the number one priority.

We’re not seeing that refl ected in this budget, and I’m very concerned about the impact in Vancouver and in Vancouver-Kensington. Th is is an issue that needs attention. We’re talking about a public education. Th at’s kindergarten to grade 12. [1520] I want to address, as well, the shortfall in post-second- ary education.

When we talk about the ability of British Columbians to access opportunities, we know that jobs, now and in the future, require people to have not only grade 12 education but to upgrade their skills in voca- tional schools or post-secondary education or other in- stitutes to gain more skills and to have an opportunity for good-paying jobs in our economy. We see that with this Budget 2016 and post-secondary education, the increase does not even keep pace with the cost of infl ation — with the increase scheduled this year, only 1.2 percent.

It doesn’t keep pace this year, and it also doesn’t make up for the cuts that have been imposed on

British Columbia DebatesMonday, February 22, 2016 10573 post-secondary education over the last three years. Th at’s just with the ability of post-secondary institutions to of- fer courses to students. On top of that, we have the issue of high student debt. We don’t see resolve or anything in the budget to address that or the high cost of tuition. Th is budget falls short in providing adequate levels of funding to post-secondary education. It does not address the issue and the diffi cul- ties of students who have high student debt. It also fails to address the rising tuition fees. Th ese are disappointing.

In our economy and the need for post-secondary education, it really creates more bar- riers for students to have the opportunities in our job market. It burdens students with a high level of student debt. In addition to the shortfall in the Ministry of Education and the shortfall in the ministry of post-secondary edu- cation, I also have concerns with the continuing lack of funding for adult basic education. Adult basic education is education for adults. It ranges from basic literacy and numeracy levels up to high school completion. Adult basic education had been tuition-free in B.C. since 2007.

At that time, the Minister of Advanced Education, Murray Coell, and the Minister of Education at the time, Minister Bond, stated: “This expansion of adult basic education will help more learners im- prove their literacy skills and prepare for better futures. ” However, we saw a cut in December 2014. Th e provin- cial government announced a $6.9 million cut to adult basic education programming in B.C. and removed the tuition-free adult basic education mandate.

Since January 1, 2015, public post-secondary institu- tions were allowed to charge up to $1,600 per term in tuition fees for full-time adult basic education courses. Provincial governments will no longer fund school dis- tricts for tuition-free upgrading courses for graduated adults. We know that adult basic education, when it was brought in…. Th e principle was that it should provide and increase the literacy and numeracy skills of indi- viduals to be able to access the job market. Th at was a sound principle then, and it remains today.

It has even more importance because we have such a demand for skilled labour. We know, from the government’s own projections, that less than 5 percent of new jobs created over the next ten years will only require high school completion. So, cer- tainly, there’s an importance for individuals to have the opportunity to upgrade their skills. Adult basic education programs are an investment in the future, and it’s an in- vestment that we can make now, on the front end, that will show benefi ts not only for individuals but strengthen our economy into the future. It’s a very shortsighted cut.

Research shows that adult basic education course completion lays the needed groundwork for success in post-secondary education and labour market attachment. We know the value of adult basic education. [1525] I have, just down the street from my community of- fi ce, the South Hill adult education centre, which off ers excellent courses and provides that upgrading opportun- ity. I’ve met with many students and instructors about the value and benefi t of being able to upgrade their skills, complete their diplomas and really transition into col- lege courses.

We know that the graduation rate now is about 80 per- cent for high school completion. Th at’s the graduation rate, so we have 20 percent of students now that don’t graduate grade 12. Th is is a gap that is a priority and is important in terms of ensuring that these students who come out of the school system every year have an oppor- tunity, through diff erent life experiences and diff erent re- alities, to access courses that will allow them to upgrade their skills and be able to fi nd a job that is meaningful and that is important for our economy.

We know, as well, that adult basic education aff ects disproportionately the working poor. Th ese are the in- dividuals that are impacted. Now, with the cuts to adult basic education, the government has put in place a cap for tuition per term, which is $1,600 per term, which is equivalent to tuition for some master’s courses. We see that that’s a barrier, as well, for students who are seeking to upgrade their skills. Th e charging of tuition fees for adult basic education learners creates another barrier for those struggling to improve their already life-challenging circumstances.

We know that B.C. has one of the highest rates of poverty in Canada and is the last province in Canada to have an anti-poverty plan. Th at is also missing from the budget. Th is policy — the cancelling and continuing to not fund adult basic education — will exacerbate the already high levels of poverty and income inequality in British Columbia. In addition, people on welfare are not allowed to access adult basic education. Adult basic education programs are an important com- ponent of ensuring the participation of marginalized groups in B.C. ’s economy.

It has been shown that access- ibility to adult basic education is important to help trad- itionally marginalized people gain the skills necessary to earn a living wage and contribute to the economy. This is an example of an investment that the B.C. Liberal government can make.

It’s $6.9 million that would clearly benefi t not only the 20 percent of students who do not graduate every year but, as well, individuals who want to re-enter the workforce — new immigrants, as well — to gain the skills that they need to enter post-secondary or trades training or certifi cate training courses, to be able to upgrade their skills and have better opportunities in our workforce. Th ey feel that this is a very unfair and very shortsighted cut. It creates a big gap of opportunity for individuals to access opportunities.

British Columbia Debates10574 Monday, February 22, 2016 Now, $6.9 million — let’s look at that and compare that. Th is government cannot fi nd $6.9 million to reinstate adult basic education courses, but the Premier could fi nd $100 million for her fantasy fund out of the pockets of British Columbians. So $100 million in the fantasy slush fund for the Premier and a lack of willingness or political will or commitment to ensure that marginalized British Columbians have the opportunity to fulfi l their educa- tional goals and to be successful in our workforce. [1530] It’s a very shortsighted view. It just shows….

It really illustrates the lack of commitment and really exposes the priority of this government. On the one hand, the Premier sees fi t to create a $100 million slush fund, a fantasy fund, but on the other hand, refuses to invest in what is characterized by economists, instructors and businesses across the board as a good, solid investment in our education system. It provides the foundation to allow individuals to learn the skills that they need to be successful. So a shortfall of this government taking responsibility to lay the founda- tion to allow British Columbians to be successful.

I also want to address the crisis of aff ordable hous- ing that we see in Metro Vancouver and right across this province. Th e lack of action that this government has taken over the last number of years really continues with the lack of commitment that we’ve seen in this budget. We know that the government record…. We look at: why is there a crisis in housing? Why is there such a crisis in aff ordable housing in Metro Vancouver? It didn’t just appear overnight. We didn’t see it come up over the last month or few years. It’s actually been building and de- veloping ov

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20160222pm-Hansard-v33n2
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20160222pm Hansard v33n2
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	9b1041fff202875b01295fdf50e0022669528391

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