20200727pm Hansard n348

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Fifth Session, 41st Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES (HANSARD) Monday, July 27, 2020 Afternoon Sitting Issue No. 348 THE HONOURABLE DARRYL PLECAS, SPEAKER ISSN 1499-2175

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Janet Austin, OBC Fifth Session, 41st Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Darryl Plecas EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ............................................................................................................... Hon. John Horgan Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance............................................................................................................................Hon.

Carole James Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Training..................................................................................................... Hon. Melanie Mark Minister of Agriculture.........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Lana Popham Attorney General.................................................................................................................................................................Hon.

David Eby, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ............................................................................................................ Hon. Katrine Conroy Minister of State for Child Care...................................................................................................................................... Hon. Katrina Chen Minister of Citizens’ Services...................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Anne Kang Minister of Education ............................................................................................................................................................ Hon. Rob Fleming Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources ..................................................................................................... Hon. Bruce Ralston Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy............................................................................................. Hon.

George Heyman Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development ..............................................Hon. Doug Donaldson Minister of Health .....................................................................................................................................................................Hon. Adrian Dix Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation ......................................................................................................... Hon.

Scott Fraser Minister of Jobs, Economic Development and Competitiveness.............................................................................Hon. Michelle Mungall Minister of State for Trade...............................................................................................................................................Hon. George Chow Minister of Labour ...................................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Harry Bains Minister of Mental Health and Addictions............................................................................................................................ Hon. Judy Darcy Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.................................................................................................................. Hon. Selina Robinson Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ........................................................................................................... Hon.

Mike Farnworth Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction..............................................................................................Hon. Shane Simpson Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture.....................................................................................................................................Hon. Lisa Beare Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure................................................................................................................ Hon.

Claire Trevena LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition................................................................................................................................Andrew Wilkinson, QC Leader of the Third Party .................................................................................................................................................................Adam Olsen Deputy Speaker................................................................................................................................................................................

Raj Chouhan Assistant Deputy Speaker............................................................................................................................................................. Simon Gibson Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ................................................................................................................ Spencer Chandra Herbert Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ...........................................................................................................................................

Kate Ryan-Lloyd Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel.............................................................................................................................. Seunghee Suzie Seo Clerk Assistant, Parliamentary Services...........................................................................................................................

Artour Sogomonian Clerk Assistant, Committees and Interparliamentary Relations ..............................................................................................Susan Sourial Senior Research Analyst ................................................................................................................................................................. Jennifer Arril Senior Research Analyst ...................................................................................................................................................................

Karan Riarh Acting Sergeant-at-Arms..................................................................................................................................................................Greg Nelson

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal) ......................................................................... Penticton Bains, Hon. Harry (NDP)................................................................ Surrey-Newton Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) .....................................................Cariboo-Chilcotin Beare, Hon. Lisa (NDP)..............................................

Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Begg, Garry (NDP) .......................................................................Surrey-Guildford Bernier, Mike (BC Liberal) .........................................................Peace River South Bond, Shirley (BC Liberal)...........................................Prince George–Valemount Brar, Jagrup (NDP).......................................................................Surrey-Fleetwood Cadieux, Stephanie (BC Liberal)........................................................

Surrey South Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) .......................................Vancouver–West End Chen, Hon. Katrina (NDP)...................................................... Burnaby-Lougheed Chouhan, Raj (NDP) .................................................................Burnaby-Edmonds Chow, Hon. George (NDP).................................................Vancouver-Fraserview Clovechok, Doug (BC Liberal) ..................................Columbia River–Revelstoke Coleman, Rich (BC Liberal) ................................................................ Langley East Conroy, Hon.

Katrine (NDP)...........................................................Kootenay West Darcy, Hon. Judy (NDP) ............................................................. New Westminster Davies, Dan (BC Liberal) ........................................................... Peace River North de Jong, Michael, QC (BC Liberal) ..............................................Abbotsford West Dean, Mitzi (NDP)................................................................ Esquimalt-Metchosin D’Eith, Bob (NDP) ................................................................Maple Ridge–Mission Dix, Hon.

Adrian (NDP)....................................................... Vancouver-Kingsway Donaldson, Hon. Doug (NDP)...................................................................... Stikine Eby, Hon. David, QC (NDP).............................................. Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable (NDP).........................................................Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Hon. Mike (NDP) ........................................................Port Coquitlam Fleming, Hon. Rob (NDP) ......................................................

Victoria–Swan Lake Foster, Eric (BC Liberal).............................................................Vernon-Monashee Fraser, Hon. Scott (NDP) ..................................................Mid Island–Pacific Rim Furstenau, Sonia (BC Green Party) .............................................Cowichan Valley Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) ...................................................Abbotsford-Mission Glumac, Rick (NDP).........................................................Port Moody–Coquitlam Heyman, Hon. George (NDP) ................................................Vancouver-Fairview Horgan, Hon.

John (NDP) ................................................ Langford–Juan de Fuca Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ........................................................ Surrey-Cloverdale Isaacs, Joan (BC Liberal) .......................................... Coquitlam–Burke Mountain James, Hon. Carole (NDP).................................................... Victoria–Beacon Hill Johal, Jas (BC Liberal).................................................Richmond-Queensborough Kahlon, Ravi (NDP)............................................................................... Delta North Kang, Hon.

Anne (NDP)......................................................... Burnaby–Deer Lake Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal)..............................................................................Shuswap Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) .............................................. Boundary-Similkameen Lee, Michael (BC Liberal) ........................................................Vancouver-Langara Leonard, Ronna-Rae (NDP) ..................................................... Courtenay-Comox Letnick, Norm (BC Liberal).............................................

Kelowna–Lake Country Ma, Bowinn (NDP) .....................................................North Vancouver–Lonsdale Malcolmson, Sheila (NDP) ........................................................................Nanaimo Mark, Hon. Melanie (NDP) .......................................Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Martin, John (BC Liberal)....................................................................... Chilliwack Milobar, Peter (BC Liberal)..................................... Kamloops–North Thompson Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ........................................... Prince George–Mackenzie Mungall, Hon.

Michelle (NDP)......................................................Nelson-Creston Oakes, Coralee (BC Liberal) ............................................................ Cariboo North Olsen, Adam (BC Green Party)............................ Saanich North and the Islands Paton, Ian (BC Liberal).......................................................................... Delta South Plecas, Hon. Darryl (Ind.) ........................................................... Abbotsford South Polak, Mary (BC Liberal) ............................................................................. Langley Popham, Hon.

Lana (NDP)............................................................... Saanich South Ralston, Hon. Bruce (NDP) ............................................................Surrey-Whalley Redies, Tracy (BC Liberal) .......................................................Surrey–White Rock Reid, Linda (BC Liberal) ................................................. Richmond South Centre Rice, Jennifer (NDP) ............................................................................. North Coast Robinson, Hon.

Selina (NDP) .........................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Ross, Ellis (BC Liberal)................................................................................... Skeena Routledge, Janet (NDP) ....................................................................Burnaby North Routley, Doug (NDP) ................................................. Nanaimo–North Cowichan Rustad, John (BC Liberal) ................................................................Nechako Lakes Shypitka, Tom (BC Liberal) ..............................................................

Kootenay East Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ......................................... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Hon. Shane (NDP)..................................................Vancouver-Hastings Sims, Jinny (NDP) ........................................................................ Surrey-Panorama Singh, Rachna (NDP) .........................................................Surrey–Green Timbers Stewart, Ben (BC Liberal) ................................................................. Kelowna West Stilwell, Michelle (BC Liberal)...............................................

Parksville-Qualicum Stone, Todd (BC Liberal)..........................................Kamloops–South Thompson 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 Thomson, Steve (BC Liberal)......................................................

Kelowna-Mission Thornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ...............................North Vancouver–Seymour Throness, Laurie (BC Liberal) .......................................................Chilliwack-Kent Trevena, Hon. Claire (NDP) ................................................................North Island Wat, Teresa (BC Liberal) ................................................. Richmond North Centre Weaver, Dr.

Andrew (Ind.)................................................Oak Bay–Gordon Head Wilkinson, Andrew, QC (BC Liberal) ................................Vancouver-Quilchena Y ap, John (BC Liberal)............................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission............................................................................Simon Gibson Abbotsford South....................................................................... Hon. Darryl Plecas Abbotsford West......................................................................

Michael de Jong, QC Boundary-Similkameen...................................................................... Linda Larson Burnaby–Deer Lake....................................................................... Hon. Anne Kang Burnaby-Edmonds................................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Lougheed .................................................................... Hon. Katrina Chen Burnaby North .................................................................................

Janet Routledge Cariboo-Chilcotin .............................................................................Donna Barnett Cariboo North.................................................................................... Coralee Oakes Chilliwack ............................................................................................... John Martin Chilliwack-Kent ...............................................................................Laurie Throness Columbia River–Revelstoke .........................................................

Doug Clovechok Coquitlam–Burke Mountain.................................................................. Joan Isaacs Coquitlam-Maillardville ...................................................... Hon. Selina Robinson Courtenay-Comox................................................................... Ronna-Rae Leonard Cowichan Valley .............................................................................

Sonia Furstenau Delta North.............................................................................................Ravi Kahlon Delta South ..................................................................................................Ian Paton Esquimalt-Metchosin ..............................................................................Mitzi Dean Fraser-Nicola .........................................................................................

Jackie Tegart Kamloops–North Thompson .............................................................Peter Milobar Kamloops–South Thompson..................................................................Todd Stone Kelowna–Lake Country .....................................................................Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission ..............................................................................

Steve Thomson Kelowna West ..........................................................................................Ben Stewart Kootenay East.......................................................................................Tom Shypitka Kootenay West........................................................................ Hon. Katrine Conroy Langford–Juan de Fuca .............................................................. Hon. John Horgan Langley .....................................................................................................

Mary Polak Langley East.........................................................................................Rich Coleman Maple Ridge–Mission.............................................................................. Bob D’Eith Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows............................................................Hon. Lisa Beare Mid Island–Pacific Rim................................................................ Hon. Scott Fraser Nanaimo......................................................................................

Sheila Malcolmson Nanaimo–North Cowichan............................................................... Doug Routley Nechako Lakes........................................................................................ John Rustad Nelson-Creston ................................................................... Hon. Michelle Mungall New Westminster........................................................................... Hon. Judy Darcy North Coast ...........................................................................................

Jennifer Rice North Island.............................................................................. Hon. Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale................................................................... Bowinn Ma North Vancouver–Seymour........................................................Jane Thornthwaite Oak Bay–Gordon Head............................................................Dr.

Andrew Weaver Parksville-Qualicum.......................................................................Michelle Stilwell Peace River North ................................................................................... Dan Davies Peace River South ................................................................................ Mike Bernier Penticton ................................................................................................. Dan Ashton Port Coquitlam...................................................................... Hon.

Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Coquitlam.......................................................................Rick Glumac Powell River–Sunshine Coast....................................................... Nicholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie....................................................................Mike Morris Prince George–Valemount ..................................................................

Shirley Bond Richmond North Centre..........................................................................Teresa Wat Richmond-Queensborough.........................................................................Jas Johal Richmond South Centre ......................................................................... Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ...................................................................................

John Y ap Saanich North and the Islands .............................................................Adam Olsen Saanich South .............................................................................Hon. Lana Popham Shuswap...................................................................................................... Greg Kyllo Skeena........................................................................................................... Ellis Ross Stikine....................................................................................Hon.

Doug Donaldson Surrey-Cloverdale ................................................................................ Marvin Hunt Surrey-Fleetwood.....................................................................................Jagrup Brar Surrey–Green Timbers........................................................................Rachna Singh Surrey-Guildford......................................................................................Garry Begg Surrey-Newton ..............................................................................Hon.

Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ...................................................................................... Jinny Sims Surrey South ................................................................................ Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Whalley ......................................................................... Hon. Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock .............................................................................. Tracy Redies Vancouver-Fairview.............................................................. Hon.

George Heyman Vancouver–False Creek........................................................................ Sam Sullivan Vancouver-Fraserview...............................................................Hon. George Chow Vancouver-Hastings ............................................................... Hon. Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington....................................................................... Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..................................................................... Hon.

Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara................................................................................ Michael Lee Vancouver–Mount Pleasant..................................................... Hon. Melanie Mark Vancouver–Point Grey ............................................................Hon.

David Eby, QC Vancouver-Quilchena........................................................Andrew Wilkinson, QC Vancouver–West End .....................................................Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee ....................................................................................Eric Foster Victoria–Beacon Hill.................................................................. Hon. Carole James Victoria–Swan Lake.................................................................... Hon. Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano...................................................................

Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky................................................................Jordan Sturdy Party Standings: BC Liberal 42; NDP 41; Independent 2; BC Green Party 2

CONTENTS Monday, July 27, 2020 Afternoon Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members................................................................................................................................................... 12197 Tributes ................................................................................................................................................................................... 12197 George Jones Hon. S.

Simpson Introductions by Members................................................................................................................................................... 12197 Statements (Standing Order 25B) ....................................................................................................................................... 12198 Salmon enhancement in Mill Hill Regional Park area M. Dean Richmond Sunset Rotary Club J. Y ap Tri-Cities Local Immigration Partnership and racism awareness R. Glumac Events and volunteer activities in Cariboo-Chilcotin area D.

Barnett Snuneymuxw First Nation hosting of Tribal Journeys events S. Malcolmson South Okanagan irrigation canal system L. Larson Oral Questions....................................................................................................................................................................... 12200 Government purchase of hotels for supportive housing and impact on businesses T. Stone Hon. J. Horgan Tent cities and services at supportive housing facilities J. Thornthwaite Hon. S. Robinson COVID-19 response and mental health services S. Furstenau Hon. J.

Darcy COVID-19 deaths and response to opioid crisis S. Furstenau Hon. J. Darcy Liaison positions with Wet’suwet’ en Hereditary Chiefs J. Johal Hon. J. Horgan Blue River encampment and community engagement in area P . Milobar Hon. M. Farnworth Hon. S. Fraser Wet’suwet’ en Nation representation and negotiation of agreements M. de Jong Hon. S. Fraser M.

Polak Orders of the Day Third Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................................................................... 12205 Bill 14 — Municipal Affairs and Housing Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020 Second Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................................................................ 12205 Bill 24 — Municipalities Enabling and Validating (No. 4) Amendment Act, 2020 Hon. S. Robinson L.

Throness Committee of the Whole House.......................................................................................................................................... 12207 Bill 24 — Municipalities Enabling and Validating (No. 4) Amendment Act, 2020 L. Throness Hon. S. Robinson

Reporting of Bills................................................................................................................................................................... 12207 Bill 24 — Municipalities Enabling and Validating (No. 4) Amendment Act, 2020 Committee of the Whole House.......................................................................................................................................... 12207 Bill 4 — Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2020 M. de Jong Hon. C. James S. Bond S.

Cadieux Reporting of Bills................................................................................................................................................................... 12225 Bill 4 — Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2020 Third Reading of Bills ........................................................................................................................................................... 12225 Bill 14 — Municipal Affairs and Housing Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020(continued)

MONDAY , JULY 27, 2020 The House met at 1:35 p.m. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Introductions by Members D. Routley:It’s my pleasure to introduce Michael A. Pickup to the House. Michael begins an eight-year term as Auditor General of British Columbia today. He was unanimously recommended for this position by the Spe- cial Committee to Appoint an Auditor General. On March 23, the Legislative Assembly adopted a resolution for his appointment.

As Chair of that special committee, I did not have the opportunity to personally present the committee’s report to the Legislative Assembly in the March 23 special sitting, so I am particularly happy to do so today. Before doing so, I would like to thank my Deputy Chair, the member for Richmond-Steveston; as well as the member for Prince George–Valemount; the member for Burnaby North; and the member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head for their collabor- ative approach to our work on the appointment process. The members of the special committee recognized that British Columbia will be well served by Michael Pickup.

He served as Nova Scotia’s Auditor General since 2014 and was with the Office of the Auditor General of Canada for 25 years before that. He brings a strong commitment to accountability, public service and supporting Indigenous reconciliation. I have to say as the Chair that we were so impressed by the efficiency of the shop that Mr. Pickup ran in Nova Sco- tia, as well as his overriding commitment to public service. It was with unanimity and confidence that the committee has recommended Mr.

Pickup, but also a desire that Brit- ish Columbians be aware of the excellence of the people in public service that we are so fortunate to enjoy. Tributes GEORGE JONES Hon. S. Simpson: Thank you for the opportunity to speak a little bit about my father-in-law, George Jones. George passed away on May 25 at the age of 86. First, I really want to express our thanks to the wonder- ful staff at the Cridge and Kiwanis for the outstanding care that they provided to him over his illness.

Family was always George’s foundation: seven children, eight grandchildren, two great-grandkids, and of course, his soulmate and the love of his life, Linda. George Jones, QC, had a distinguished 50-year law career, establishing one of Victoria’s largest firms and being recognized as one of Canada’s leading tax lawyers. Even more important, though, for George was his belief in people, in community and in giving back. His commitment to the Victoria community was unwaver- ing and widespread, very often reflected in his work with amateur sports.

George founded the Velox rugby club in Victoria, supported the rights of men and women rugby players across Canada and established the Cana- dian Rugby Foundation, which today presents a scholar- ship in his name. Add endless hours coaching and man- aging youth soccer, baseball and rugby teams, and this led to George being inducted into the Victoria Sports Hall of Fame in 2012. He came from privilege. His father led the Canadian Navy during the Second World War, and his grandfather was the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia.

George understood that privilege, and throughout his adult life embraced social justice, challenged economic disparity and inequity and worked to ensure that everyone was sup- ported and represented. This was reflected in his commit- ment to pro bono work as an attorney and as a mentor to many young people. I remember George for his positive attitude, his smile, the sparkle in his eye, the impish character that often drove his family a little bit crazy.

But I know for the literally thousands of people whose lives he’s touched, he will be remembered and loved for his belief in humanity, in com- munity and his tireless efforts to lift people up and give them a chance to realize their dreams and to succeed. A life well lived, George Jones. [1:40 p.m.] Introductions by Members M. Stilwell:Today joining us in the House are some special guests on a special day. My husband Mark and my son Kai are here today celebrating their dual birthdays. Mark is at the age where he probably doesn’t want to talk about his age.

Kai, on the other side, is turning 19 today, so he’s screaming it from the rooftops, because today he’s officially legal to vote. Hopefully, my vote count will go up in the next election. He can enter a binding contract. He could get married without my permission. He can buy lot- tery tickets. He can gamble. He can even buy liquor and get a credit card. So my world is about to change now that I officially have a 19-year-old in my house. Would the House please make them both feel very wel- come and wish them a happy birthday. J.

Y ap:I’ d like to, first of all, add my words of welcome to the new Auditor General for British Columbia, Michael Pickup. I appreciated the welcome from the member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan, who chaired the selection committee, and I had the privilege of being the Deputy Chair. We’re delighted that Michael Pickup has now taken 12197

on the mantle of Office of the Auditor General, and we all look forward to working with him. I’ d also like to welcome to the Legislature three con- stituents who are following proceedings today remotely. They are Magdalen Leung, Michael Chiu and Peter Botti. Would the House please extend a warm welcome to these virtual guests. Statements (Standing Order 25B) SALMON ENHANCEMENT IN MILL HILL REGIONAL PARK AREA M.

Dean:I recently had the pleasure of visiting Mill Hill Regional Park to see a new project in development to cre- ate an ambitious fish ladder and provide access to coho sal- mon to more than seven kilometres of additional habitat. As a result, we hope that 3,000 more fish will return to the stream to spawn annually. This would not have been possible without all the work of the Goldstream Volunteer Salmonid Enhancement Association.

In partnership with local governments like the town of View Royal and the city of Colwood, they have spent over 20 years and thousands of volunteer hours improving fish access upstream from tidewater to Atkins Road. This included overcoming five barriers to upstream migration, providing 2016 returns of 700-plus coho sal- mon adults. But at the Atkins Road

section of Millstream Creek, there was a four-metre-high perched and inaccess- ible culvert. Now, here is the science bit. The engineering design is clearly based on expert knowledge of fish needs and beha- viour. The culvert was filled with concrete and velocity baffles so that the fish have resting places and back eddies to make their way up. Leading to the entrance of the cul- vert, they’re building a fish ladder, a curving, stepping-up waterway. Environmental monitoring is being undertaken by pro- fessional biologists of the Peninsula Streams Society.

The province of B.C. is supporting the project through a $250,000 community gaming capital project grant. Thank you to everybody who is working so hard to get this done — the Pacific Salmon Foundation, the con- tractors and the many, many, many volunteers from across Esquimalt-Metchosin and the region that have come together to make this fishway a reality. RICHMOND SUNSET ROTARY CLUB J. Y ap:I rise to talk about the extraordinary work of the Richmond Sunset Rotary Club. Since 1998 this club of community-minded and altruistic volunteers have worked to make a difference around the world and closer to home.

Over the years, Richmond Sunset Rotarians have assisted people needing help in Africa, South Asia and in southeast Asia. The club’s signature multi-year project has been the Refilwe community in Lanseria near Johannesburg, South Africa, which serves people in poverty, providing educa- tion, skills training, child care and an orphanage. [1:45 p.m.] The club has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars, and Rotarians have travelled to Africa to assist with specif- ic projects, bringing along Richmond high school students who gain unique international volunteer experiences.

The club has also supported humanitarian projects such as cleft lip, plastic and life-saving heart surgeries in rural com- munities in China. Striving to uphold the Rotary motto “Service above self, ” members have raised funds for many local causes, including Richmond Hospital Foundation, Rick Hansen Foundation, Richmond Christmas fund, Richmond Community Foundation, Gateway Theatre and Rich- mond school district scholarships. Recently the club donated surgical masks to support B.C. health care workers amidst the pandemic.

Every December the Rotarians help decorate the atrium of the Richmond city hall with festive Christmas trees for the annual Winter Wonderland, featuring local musical performances to celebrate the holiday season and bring the community together. I’ d like to commend the club president David Ip, mem- bers Joanna Ko, Magdalen Leung, Michael Chiu, Jackie Lau, Kirby Graeme, Drew Antrobus, Judy Smith and oth- ers for their remarkable volunteer service. I ask all members of this Legislature to join me in recog- nizing and thanking the Richmond Sunset Rotary Club.

TRI-CITIES LOCAL IMMIGRATION PARTNERSHIP AND RACISM AW ARENESS R. Glumac:It’s our job as people, as parents, as residents of B.C. and for all Canadians to combat racist behaviours and discriminatory practices wherever we can. This is from the Joint Statement on the Impact of COVID-19 on Vulnerable Groups, written by the Tri-Cities Local Immig- ration Partnership and signed by multiple cities and organizations.

COVID-19 has shown us the importance of coming together, but at the same time, it’s also brought out fear- based racist responses against our Chinese and Iranian neighbours as well as worsening inequities and racial ten- sions that many of our Black, Indigenous and people of colour experience on a daily basis. The concept of racism is often misunderstood. It’s actu- ally much more pervasive than we think it is. That’s why the work of the Tri-Cities Local Immigration Partnership is so important.

They’ve been hosting webinars to explore topics such as: what does racism look like, why does racism still exist and how do we address racism in our 12198 British Columbia Debates Monday, July 27, 2020

community? This powerful series gives a voice to those that have experienced racism and the opportunity to dis- cuss lessons and to brainstorm concrete actions that we can all take. The Tri-Cities Local Immigration Partnership are unsung heroes working with many others in our com- munity to address racism in all its forms. I would like to acknowledge and thank them for their compassion and dedication. EVENTS AND VOLUNTEER ACTIVITIES IN CARIBOO-CHILCOTIN AREA D. Barnett:In the Cariboo-Chilcotin, we are blessed to have a number of volunteer organizations at the heart of every community in my riding.

We are even more blessed to have such highly dedicated people who work quietly behind the scenes to make life better. They spend a great deal of precious time organizing festivals, sporting events, art displays and, of course, rodeos, just to mention a few. These volunteers and their organizations pour a great deal of effort into defining a lifestyle that local residents and visitors alike can enjoy, come winter, spring, summer and fall. For a region that also depends on tourism, these organ- izations not only provide social opportunities but strong economic ties too.

Tourists come from far and wide to par- take in our famous Williams Lake Stampede. Y outh take

part in Junior A and B hockey, and even a few old-timers take to the ice once in a while. There are ball tournaments, soccer tournaments, seniors indoor bowling, fall fairs, car shows, mountain biking, hiking, camping, fishing — just a few more — and even garlic festivals. There is a lifestyle. Cariboo-Chilcotin can accommod- ate anyone. Unfortunately, the COVID pandemic spares no community, and many annual events have had to be cancelled. This is disappointing to the public.

Volunteer organizations have been hard. [1:50 p.m.] However, the people of the Cariboo-Chilcotin face everything from wildfires to flooding, and they know how to display resolve in the face of adversity. Many are highly innovative, like Williams Lake stampede and rodeo asso- ciation. They put on a drive-through breakfast on Canada Day, donations only. This weekend, August 3, to celebrate B.C. Day, the 100 Mile Wranglers hockey team will be holding a drive- through barbecue, all served in style, by donation. There are lots of ways we can help our volunteer organizations.

SNUNEYMUXW FIRST NATION HOSTING OF TRIBAL JOURNEYS EVENTS S. Malcolmson: Today was supposed to be Snun- eymuxw’s 2020 Tribal Journeys landing, right here in Nanaimo, with a theme of honouring the salmon. I woke up and saw a message from Emmy Manson on Facebook that said: “I’m missing Journeys and how important this annual event has played into my healing journey for myself and many of my family members. It truly is a healing journey. ” I can imagine it. Tribal canoes from Alaska, from Wash- ington state, from all over the B.C. coast all coming togeth- er.

This year it was Snuneymuxw who had the honour of being invited to host — first time in 30 years. Y ou can imagine what happened with, especially, family coming from both sides of the border. Chief Wyse said: “Our community, with heavy hearts, had to postpone. We did not want to take any risks during this critical time dur- ing COVID. We look into the future to propose a new date to host in Snuneymuxw. ” But because it isn’t happening, I want to give everybody across B.C. a picture of what this hot summer day might’ve been like if we weren’t in the pandemic still.

Here’s Fran Tait’s description: “When you hear the drums and you see the dancing, it’s just another awakening, because a lot of us have not had a chance to live with our peoples.

So this is community for us. ” Adam Manson said: “When you’re on Tribal Journeys and I watch my little nephew walk around and everyone taking care of each other and everyone being safe and fol- lowing the teachings of being drug- and alcohol-free, it’s the closest it can bring me to all the stories I’ve heard in my Elders’ times. ” Chris Beaton, from Nanaimo Aboriginal Centre, said: “With the passing of every day, you can witness youth growing connection to their own culture, their songs, their dances.

It’s a day with the best energy to paddle for hours each day and then share culture into the early hours each morning. ” We’re so proud of Chief Wyse and Snuneymuxw for being willing to host and all of the partners they organized to work with them, and we look forward to having the canoes land here on Nanaimo’s beaches in another time, in a better year. SOUTH OKANAGAN IRRIGATION CANAL SYSTEM L. Larson: The town of Oliver recently unveiled a plaque, recognizing the 100-year anniversary of the South Okanagan irrigation system.

In 1919, the Premier of B.C., John Oliver, created the soldiers’ settlement project to provide work for return- ing World War I veterans and supply them with viable settlement lands. The project would begin with the building of a dam at the south end of Vaseux Lake to divert water from the Okanagan River. The first water improvement district in the province of B.C. was estab- lished to manage the system. One hundred and fifty men would work on this project for seven years, completing 40 kilometres of canal stretch- Monday, July 27, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12199

ing from Vaseux Lake to the U.S. border. Eight thousand acres of desert land became productive agricultural land. Today the system is just under 20 kilometres in length, providing more than 600 irrigation water services for approximately 5,200 acres. The South Okanagan has seen incredible growth as a result of this canal system. Oliver was once the cantaloupe capital of Canada and now, rightly, takes its place as the wine capital, with wines that have gained recognition on the world stage. But everything that happens in the South Okanagan depends on a reliable source of water.

In recent years, a rockslide did extensive damage to this canal system. The previous Liberal government committed funds to the repairs, and the current government has honoured that commitment. While the province did set aside funds to help with the repairs, access to capital from other sources was impossible. Water systems for agriculture do not qualify for capital infrastructure or appear to be part of any minister’s responsibility across the country.

This system and other agricultural water systems contribute millions of dollars to the economy of B.C. and Canada and are vital for food security. [1:55 p.m.] Congratulations and thank you to all the people of Oli- ver and the regional district, who, for the past 100 years, have managed, maintained and financially supported this incredible water system. Oral Questions GOVERNMENT PURCHASE OF HOTELS FOR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND IMPACT ON BUSINESSES T. Stone:This morning the Premier said that the city of Victoria should “step up” in reference to the tent city in Beacon Hill Park.

Byron Loucks, who owns West Coast Appliances here in Victoria, believes that the Premier should step up and stop blaming others. Byron had this to say: “The changes have been so extreme. This was a very quiet neighbour- hood. Now, 24-7, we have a highway of people who walk from the Comfort Inn through our parking lot at all levels of intoxication, clothing optional, often screaming profanities at the customers and staff.

Just recently my truck was broken into at 2 p.m., and someone stole my wedding ring. ” To the Premier, the decision to warehouse vulnerable and at-risk people without the needed on-site mental health, addiction and recovery supports is clearly not working for the people who need that help the most. It’s also failing small businesses and people like Byron. Will the Premier step up and help Byron? Hon. J. Horgan:I thank the member for Kamloops– South Thompson for the question. These are extremely challenging issues. I don’t think that’s a surprise to any member of this House or any British Columbian.

We have had a serious public health emergency for half a decade when it comes to opioids and the impact they have on people with mental health and addictions chal- lenges. That leads to encampments and has led to signi- ficant challenges for cities and the province over the past decade, quite frankly. We’ve been doing our level best to meet that demand in the time of a global pandemic by asking people to all work a little bit harder to find new ways to be a little bit more patient with those that are vulnerable, those that have sig- nificant health issues.

We do have wraparound services available to the individuals that we rehoused from Pandora and from Topaz Avenue in Victoria, as well as those that were in Oppenheimer Park in Vancouver. That does not for a minute dismiss the impact on neigh- bourhoods. That does not for a minute dismiss the chal- lenge we have going forward. But I ask all members of the House and all members of the public that are participat- ing today: we all need to recognize that the most vulner- able among us need a hand up. We need to do that togeth- er, cooperatively, to the best of our ability. Mr.

Speaker: The member for Kamloops–South Thompson on a supplemental. T. Stone: Sadly, by failing to provide these supports that are needed by the vulnerable and highly at-risk group here in British Columbia, the Premier’s decision, his gov- ernment’s decision, is putting many other people at risk. Byron’s employees are at risk. His customers are at risk. Byron himself and the entire surrounding neighbourhood are also at risk.

While the Premier is busy surrendering parks and fail- ing to provide the needed supports that this vulnerable and at-risk population needs, he also said this morning: “There needs to be some leadership at the municipal level. ” Well, people like Byron would like to see some leadership from this Premier and from this government. Byron also had this to say: “Last week our store was broken into when a large steel bollard was thrown through our front door. I now have to confront intoxicated, screaming individuals. My entire life is tied to this busi- ness.

I now fear that because of our location, we may be forced to close for good. ” If Byron was here with us today, this is the question that he would ask the Premier himself directly: “We didn’t bring the problem to the area, Mr. Premier. Why should we be the ones forced to suffer from your government’s decision, and how will you make this right?” Hon. J. Horgan:Again, I appreciate the member of the Liberal caucus bringing this issue to the floor of the Legis- lature so that we can have a discussion and a dialogue 12200 British Columbia Debates Monday, July 27, 2020

about how best for all of us…. Regardless of where we sit on the political spectrum, regardless of who we are in a community, how do we all work together to address a fun- damental crisis in our communities? I know the member from Kamloops can talk about his community equally passionately as he’s just done of Vic- toria, my community. This is not something that we dis- miss lightly. I know the member is genuine in bringing it forward. [2:00 p.m.] But you need to be genuine, also, in reaching out to Byron and others and saying: “Y eah, this is a problem for right now.

How do we collectively work together on solu- tions?” One way would be for municipal governments to be more rapid in their turnaround on things like ensuring that we can build the houses that are appropriate for hard- to-house individuals. That speaks to every municipal council across the province. These are challenges for those municipalities, but we need to work together in tandem to come up with solutions. To say “it’s not my problem” is not a solution. That’s what the Liberals did for a long, long period of time. We’re not prepared to do that. TENT CITIES AND SERVICES AT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FACILITIES J.

Thornthwaite:No, that’s incorrect, Mr. Premier. The government’s lack of a mental health and addictions plan is a complete failure. There are new tent cities and homeless camps throughout the province, from Vancouver’s Strathcona Park to Langley city to Parksville to Campbell River to Vic- toria’s Beacon Hill Park. What’s the Premier’s response? “Not my problem. ” A petition with over 21,000 signatures wants the Premier to step up and show some leadership when it comes to tent cities, warehousing the homeless and the impacts on local neighbourhoods.

Again, to the Premier, what is the plan to address the Beacon Hill tent city? Hon. S. Robinson:I appreciate the member’s question. Of course, we have, from day one…. In 2017, we started a rapid response to homelessness. Do you know why, Mr. Speaker? It’s because the previous government ignored it. They had no plan. So we brought in thousands and thou- sands of units. Over 2,000 people have been housed to date — more than 2,000. Another 900 homes, with supports, are being provided in the coming months. Y ou can’t fix 16 years of bad in just a couple of years.

But we’re well on the road, and I look forward to continuing to house people and bring the supports that they need. Mr. Speaker:The member for North Vancouver–Sey- mour on a supplemental. J. Thornthwaite:Well, if that was true, then we wouldn’t be having these problems right now after three years of a separate Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions. The government’s lack of supportive housing with on- site supports for our most vulnerable citizens is now put- ting everybody at risk. Don’t just take my word for it. Dr.

Bill MacEwan, who’s a psychiatrist who has worked in the Downtown Eastside for years, says: “It is not helpful to pre- tend that the needs of this population can be met by simply providing them a room in social housing. ” Again to the Premier, will he admit his approach is fail- ing and provide the vulnerable people in our society with 24-7 wraparound supports that they desperately need? Hon. S. Robinson:Well, you know, I find it absolutely fascinating, because the B.C. Liberals’ preferred model is to ignore the problem, which is what they did.

They left people to be homeless, without supports, and we’re saying: “Come on inside. Let’s provide you with supports. Let’s provide you with a roof over your head. ” Let me provide an example. Interjections. Mr. Speaker: Members, the minister has the floor. Thank you. Minister. Hon. S. Robinson:Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Let me just read into the record what one operator from Turning Points Collaborative Society in Vernon had to say. The site manager said this: “Honestly, the successes we have experienced here….

They exceed what my expecta- tions were or what I was thinking was going to happen. ” A year after this program started, this is what she had to say: “The importance of having a roof over their head, where they’re not in survival mode and they’re not worried about staying dry and keeping warm or having food in their belly, gives them the opportunity to address other areas of their life where they haven’t had the space or the time to address it. ” She provides examples of people who are now getting medical attention, who are getting psychiatric attention, who are going for counselling because they now have the supports.

They now have access to the services. They now have food in their belly. They now have the peace of mind that comes with having housing. I think our approach to housing people, to provide them with supports, is a far better approach than the approach that the B.C. Liberals had, which was to leave people on the streets with nothing. [2:05 p.m.] Monday, July 27, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12201

COVID-19 RESPONSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES S. Furstenau:To the conversation that’s just happened, I do want to say that in Cowichan, we have really appre- ciated the collaborative efforts of B.C. Housing and the minister on addressing the very serious needs of people without homes in our region. Here in B.C., we have been lauded for our tremendous response to the COVID-19 pandemic. By working togeth- er, using current research and fast, active and effective communication, we’ve largely been able to keep the virus in check.

Unfortunately, citing emerging data, the United Nations recently declared that a mental health crisis is looming and will be the pandemic that nations will have to confront. Indeed, for many British Columbians, this pandemic is already taking a huge toll on their mental health and well- being. Data from the B.C. Psychological Association — where over 200 registered psychologists have been donat- ing their time to provide care during this health emer- gency — reported that two-thirds of their 800 callers are experiencing either moderate or severe levels of distress.

These findings are also consistent with government’s recently released data that indicates 47 percent of the nearly 400,000 people surveyed say that their mental health is currently worsening. My question is to the Minister of Health. I expect that the minister agrees that health is not just the absence of disease but, rather, includes physical, social and emotional well-being. Given this, what immediate steps are being taken to incorporate this definition, which includes mental health, into our health care delivery? Hon. J. Darcy:Thank you to the House Leader of the Third Party for her question.

There is absolutely no doubt that COVID-19 has affected the mental health of the entire province, of the country, of the world. It has been very, very traumatic, especially for people who are already struggling with mental health and addictions issues. Those issues have become exacerbated as a result of this crisis. That’s why, within three weeks of the pandemic being declared, we had worked with our partners, with CMHA B.C., with community counselling agencies and very closely with the B.C. Psychological Association in order to stand up access to virtual services. I take my hat off to the B.C.

Psychological Association because they stepped up with 200 psychologists offering free counselling to people across the province. They’ve done incredible work, and it has made a difference. We know — as with natural disasters like floods or fires and this pandemic — we’re not out of it yet. We know that people are still struggling with mental health issues. We know that substance use and use of alcohol are going up. We know that we can expect what is referred to by the experts as an echo pandemic.

That’s why, literally as we speak, in our ministry and working across government, we are working to put in place plans about what further supports we need for people struggling with mental health issues as a result of COVID-19 going forward. Some of the supports that we put in place are available for the entire population, families struggling with kids at home, but also with a specific focus on health care work- ers because they, as we all know, have been doing abso- lutely yeoman’s duty and taking a lot of the stress, ten- sion and anxiety onto themselves.

We’ve stood up some particular programs that are about support for health care workers. We will continue to support them and make sure that we have programs in place going forward to support British Columbians. I’m happy to hear the member’s ideas about what that looks like. Mr. Speaker:The House Leader of the Third Party on a supplemental. COVID-19 DEATHS AND RESPONSE TO OPIOID CRISIS S. Furstenau:I appreciate the minister’s response. We will be coming forward with ideas over the course of the week.

Since the first COVID-19 case was diagnosed, 16.5 mil- lion people around the world have contracted the virus, and tragically, 650,000 have died. Even in the time since we drafted this question on Friday, that number went up by two million cases. The trajectory on COVID-19 is a very distressing one. Worryingly, new modelling in the United States estim- ates that an additional 75,000 deaths will occur due to sub- stance abuse and suicide as part of the COVID-19 fallout. This is already a reality in our province, with June setting a horrific record of 175 deaths from toxic drug poison- ing.

How we’ve dealt with the COVID-19 global pandem- ic juxtaposes our treatment of the opioid pandemic that is ravaging our province. So far in 2020, 728 people have died from toxic drug poisoning — mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, friends and neighbours. [2:10 p.m.] My question is to the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. Can the minister identify the areas that lacked the support to help avoid this tragedy and what immediate steps government is taking to ensure that the coming months don’t set any more unwanted records? Hon. J. Darcy:Thank you again to the member for the question.

I think the member is very well aware that the coroner has been really clear that the primary cause of the spike in deaths is as a result of a toxic drug supply, more toxic than ever before — lethal combinations of drugs. We know that we were making progress. Dr. Bonnie Henry has certainly acknowledged that we were moving in the 12202 British Columbia Debates Monday, July 27, 2020

right direction as far as the supports that we were provid- ing people, and the BCCDC estimated that 6,000 deaths were averted as a result of the interventions of this govern- ment and of the thousands of people on the front lines. When it was clear that the threat was there of the num- bers going back up, again we moved very, very quickly, as the member knows. We brought in risk mitigation guid- ance so that we could improve access to a safe supply of prescription alternatives to the poisoned drug supply. It was critically important to separate people from that poisoned drug supply on the street.

At the same time, we are working on building a better continuum of care. We’ve just announced new treatment beds. We’ve announced substance use integrated teams, because what we’ve learned, also, from the coroner, is that in the past year, often before people died of overdose, four out of five of them had been in contact with the health care system — four out of five. We need to connect with those people. We need to stay connected with those people. Sub- stance use integrated teams, which will be in place across the province, are going to do exactly that.

Later this week we’ll be making some more significant announcements. I don’t want to make the announcement before we make it, but we’ve been working really hard with the First Nations Health Authority on new treatment facilities, a Chilliwack youth centre. There’s much more to come. We know we need to strengthen the continuum of care, which, frankly, was left in very, very bad shape by the pre- vious government, at the same time as we respond to this overdose crisis. We are not taking our foot off the gas, and we won’t until we turn the tide on this terrible crisis.

LIAISON POSITIONS WITH WET’SUWET’EN HEREDITARY CHIEFS J. Johal:On May 30, 2019, the Premier stood in this House and said that he has asked Murray Rankin, at no cost — he’s working pro bono, because he is a Member of Parliament currently — to be our Wet’suwet’ en emissary. Last week we found out that taxpayers have paid the former NDP politician over $122,000 in fees and nearly $6,600 in expenses. A question to the Premier. Can he explain why he led everyone to believe that his Wet’suwet’ en emissary was at no cost to the public? Hon. J.

Horgan:At the time I made the statement, Mur- ray Rankin was a Member of Parliament, as you said in your

preamble. He said: “I will not need any compensation while I’m a member of the House of Commons. ” He’s now not a member of the House of Commons. He’s a member of the bar, not unlike the tested Leader of the Official Opposition. He’s doing this work on behalf of us, and we’re paying him compensation for that. Mr. Speaker:Richmond-Queensborough on a supple- mental. J. Johal:It’s rather obvious that with this NDP gov- ernment, friends and insiders are riding the gravy train here — it’s pretty obvious — and they’re going first class.

This government is spending nearly a quarter million for two former NDP politicians to hold talks with the Wet’suwet’ en. NDP insider Nathan Cullen is being paid $250 an hour. He has been paid more than $87,000 in fees plus $2,600 in expenses for what works out to two months of work — good work if you can get it. Now put that in context. The average British Columbian makes $50,000 a year, yet this minister calls this, “a reas- onable average. ” Does the Premier agree this taxpayer-fun- ded quarter-of-a-million-dollar payout to NDP insiders is reasonable? Hon. J.

Horgan:Well, Nathan Cullen was the Member of Parliament for the area where the Wet’suwet’ en are. Nathan Cullen was acceptable to the Wet’suwet’ en to come to a resolution to an intractable problem that had existed for 25 years. But that’s not my point. It’s not that he was wildly qualified and accepted by all parties. [2:15 p.m.] I harken back to the swearing in of a B.C. Liberal gov- ernment back in 2001. What did that government do? They picked the president of the B.C. Liberal Party to be a deputy minister. Without merit, they just appointed him. As luck would have it, he’s sitting right there.

BLUE RIVER ENCAMPMENT AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN AREA P . Milobar:It’s interesting listening to the Premier try to talk about 2001. The residents of Blue River and the North Thompson Valley are worried about the here and the now. They’re not worried about 2001. What they’ve watched over the last two years is an encampment set up in the middle of their town, falling on deaf ears from this government to provide any help, on a pipeline route that this government has vowed to use every tool in the toolbox to stop.

At the same time that they’re spending $250,000 on NDP insiders to hold discussions up with the Wet’suwet’ en, they have sat on their hands for two years, using the residents of Blue River as if they are the last tool in the Premier’s empty toolkit.

To the Premier, why is there not any proper engage- ment, discussions, resources — any of that — being put to the residents of Blue River, the Simpcw First Nation and the protestors to try to get rid of the problems and the headaches that are being experienced in Blue River when you have nothing but money to spend on NDP insiders on a pipeline you want to see move forward? Hon. M. Farnworth:I want to thank the member for Monday, July 27, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12203

his question. We are aware of the situation that is taking place up in Blue River. As the member knows — we have spoken about this issue on a number of occasions — we have attempted to and are working with the community to deal with this particular situation. Previous efforts have required…. The RCMP have increased resources in there that have helped in dealing with that situation and in trying to get it resolved.

In fact, I believe this Friday the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation is engaged in meetings with First Nations in the area to try and come up with a solution to what is, as the member will acknowledge, a very complex problem between the First Nation whose territory it’s in and a group that is at odds with them. We are going to continue to work with them to find a solution. As the member knows, the RCMP also have the ability to take action if they deem it necessary. Mr. Speaker:Kamloops–North Thompson on a supple- mental. P . Milobar:It’s unfortunate the Premier doesn’t want to answer.

The Premier is the one who has been getting the letters. The Premier got the letter from the Chief of the Simpcw last week. Actually, on January 20 of this year, they informed the Premier and the Indigenous Relations Minister that they wanted the government to take action. When I asked the minister on July 17, the minister said: “The request for formal engagement has only been received recently…. ” I guess seven or eight months is what this government con- siders recent.

Here’s another gem from the Premier, to quote out of the Chief ’s letter. “In response to a reporter’s question last Thursday, July 9, you stated that people here could call the cops. Were you not advised that there is no RCMP detach- ment in Blue River?” The Chief also says: “It is vitally important that you understand the smaller communities that you serve.

We all have a voice. ” Again, to the Premier, why has this government sat on their hands for two years, pitted three different communit- ies against each other, while dumping hundreds of thou- sands of dollars on NDP insiders over the last few months on a pipeline they want to see move forward and using the residents of the North Thompson Valley as the last tool in their toolkit to try to stop Kinder Morgan construction? Hon. S. Fraser:We understand and share the very sig- nificant concerns that have come in from Kúkpi7 Loring and Kúkpi7 Casimir from the Simpcw and the Kamloops First Nation.

We received the letter within the last week. [2:20 p.m.] My office is currently working to

schedule a meeting with them as soon as possible to discuss the situation and to determine if there are maybe ways that we can work together to address their concerns. That work is underway. WET’SUWET’EN NATION REPRESENTATION AND NEGOTIATION OF AGREEMENTS M. de Jong:My question is also to the Minister of Indi- genous Relations and Reconciliation. Who represents the Wet’suwet’ en First Nation? Specific- ally, who has the legal authority to negotiate and enter into an agreement with the government of British Columbia on behalf of the people of the Wet’suwet’ en? Hon. S.

Fraser: As the members all know, I think, including the member that just asked the question, there’s significant discrepancy within Wet’suwet’ en about gov- ernance. In the MOU that we were able to achieve with the Hereditary Chiefs earlier in the year, we were able to put into the MOU, collectively, the governance work that needs to happen and the work that needs to happen around bringing together the communities, so that there is a voice of governance that is consistent and represented. Mr. Speaker:The member for Abbotsford West on a supplemental.

M. de Jong: I may have just asked the minister the easiest question ever asked in a question period, but he couldn’t give the answer. The answer is: the duly elected chief and council of the people of the Wet’suwet’ en First Nation. The minister can’t give that answer because he and his government are in the midst of negotiating a jurisdictional agreement that covers all of the traditional territories of the Wet’suwet’ en First Nation. In fact, they are telling us that they will announce the results of that negotiation in just over two weeks.

They have, remarkably, embarked upon that path by excluding the very people who the Wet’suwet’ en elect to represent them. The elected leaders of the Wet’suwet’ en First Nation made their opposition to this process clear back in May.

They have done so again, as recently as June 24, where they said this: “Regarding the MOU negotiations, we have repeatedly and forcefully advised Canada, British Colum- bia, the Office of the Wet’suwet’ en that we had been excluded from those negotiations, have not been consulted in any way whatsoever about their impacts on our interest and have given no mandate to anyone to negotiate the matters contemplated in the MOU on our behalf. ” To the minister, what gives him and the government of British Columbia the right to unilaterally decide that the duly elected leaders of the Wet’suwet’ en First Nation are no longer entitled to speak on behalf of the people of the Wet’suwet’ en First Nation?

Hon. S. Fraser:The member should know that I am in conversations with the elected chiefs also. The member seems to have a relatively short memory of where we have come to and why we’ve come to where we have. But that 12204 British Columbia Debates Monday, July 27, 2020

notwithstanding, the memorandum of understanding is a first step towards resolving the difficult and complicated issues around Wet’suwet’ en rights and title. These issues, the member should know, remain unresolved for over the last 25 years, since the 1997 Delgamuukw-Gisday’wa decision. It is important to remember, I think, that this is the start of a negotiating process, and we have a great deal of work to do. As I’ve mentioned, reunification with the Wet’suwet’ en Nation is essential for this work, if it’s going to move forward successfully.

That is why that has been built right into the memorandum of understanding — that the reunification work and governance work needs to occur. M.

Polak:Not only has the Wet’suwet’ en First Nation leadership advised in the letter that they have been com- pletely excluded from all of these negotiations, but they point out something else, and maybe the minister needs a reminder. [2:25 p.m.] They point out this: “We must also remind you that your ministry has previously acknowledged, in writing, the strength of claim of Wet’suwet’ en First Nation to Abori- ginal rights and title in our territory. ” How does this government possibly reconcile their writ- ten acknowledgment of the Wet’suwet’ en First Nation gov- ernment as the leadership, as the duly elected negotiators on behalf of their people, with their continued exclusion from the MOU process?

Hon. S. Fraser:I have always recognized the important and significant role that the elected chiefs and councillors, the Wet’suwet’ en elected band council, play. The negoti- ations that we have with them are continuing, whether it’s with forest agreements or whatever. What we have now is engaged a memorandum of understanding, which is the very first part of a step in trying to address the incomplete work, really, that we were left with from 25 years ago with the Delgamuukw-Gisday’wa decision.

Of course, as I said already, that needs to be an inclusive process, in the sense that we have built into the memor- andum of understanding the necessity to address the gov- ernance issues and controversy that exists within the Wet’suwet’ en people and the governance structures that need to reflect that. That work is underway. I’m hopeful that that is the right direction. [End of question period.] Orders of the Day Hon. M. Farnworth:I call third reading, Bill 14, Muni- cipal Affairs and Housing Statutes Amendment Act.

Third Reading of Bills BILL 14 — MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2020 Hon. S. Robinson:I move third reading. Mr. Speaker:Division has been called pursuant to ses- sional order adopted on June 22, 2020. This division will be deferred until 30 minutes prior to the sitting day. Hon. M. Farnworth:I call second reading on Bill 24, Municipalities Enabling and Validating (No. 4) Amend- ment Act.w Second Reading of Bills BILL 24 — MUNICIPALITIES ENABLING AND V ALIDATING (No. 4) AMENDMENT ACT, 2020 Hon. S.

Robinson:I move that the bill be now read a second time. [2:30 p.m.] The proposed amendments to the Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act (No. 4) seek to validate and enable certain parcel taxes that were established by the Fraser Valley regional district with a procedural error. These amendments were requested by the Fraser Valley regional district. Since 2017, the regional district has applied parcel taxes on approximately 700 properties to fund local water and sewage services.

The regional district will have collected approximately $1.4 million in parcel taxes from these properties by the end of the 2020 tax year. These taxes were used to deliver water and sewer services that are available to these same properties. While the regional district has the statutory authority to impose the taxes, through an oversight, it didn’t establish a parcel tax review panel as required under the Community Charter. This review pan- el provides an opportunity for property owners to dispute the applicability of the tax to their properties and must authenticate the parcel tax roll.

In addition to this oversight, one of these bylaws did not comply with the Community Charter requirement to identify the parcel tax roll in the bylaw. The proposed val- idating amendments will address the procedural error by validating the taxes imposed from 2017 to 2020 without having established the parcel tax review panel. The bill will require the regional district to establish a parcel tax review panel retroactively, so that property own- ers subject to the parcel taxes have the same opportunity to dispute taxes as if the parcel tax review panel had been established at the outset.

Additionally, one of the bylaws is Monday, July 27, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12205

validated to address the error of not identifying the parcel tax roll in the bylaw. The bill also enables the regional district to establish the parcel tax review panel for future years to allow for the continuation of parcel taxes supporting the water and sewer services to these properties.

This validation of the existing bylaws and the requirement of the establishment of a parcel tax review panel in respect of past and future years will afford the property owners paying these taxes their statutory opportunity to dispute the inclusion of their properties on the tax roll in accordance with the Com- munity Charter requirements. The enabling amendments allow the regional district to establish the parcel tax review panel for future years. The parcel taxes support a local water and sewer service for specific properties to which the service is available.

Regional districts fund services locally, and this parcel tax allows for the funding of the specific service now and in future years. The Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act, or MEV A, is intended to validate and enable local govern- ment actions and authorities in unique circumstances or where the local government has no own-source tools to address the issue. MEV A has previously been used to val- idate similar procedural errors.

The proposed validating and enabling amendments will ensure that past services are funded and that the regional district can continue to impose the taxes, supporting the essential water and sewage services to the recipient properties. I hope that everyone here joins me in support of Bill 24, the Municipalities Enabling and Validating (No. 4) Amendment Act, 2020. With that, I move second reading. L. Throness:It’s a pleasure to speak to Bill 24 today, the Municipalities Enabling and Validating Amendment Act. I’ll be the only speaker on our side to this bill.

I’m just going to take a few minutes to speak in favour of the legis- lation so that any of my constituents who may be wonder- ing about it will understand what it’s all about. In basic terms, this bill corrects an injustice to prop- erty owners living in Cultus Lake and Popkum, in my riding, which occurred over a period of several years since 2017. The correction was requested by the Fraser Valley regional district, and I have communicated with both of the relevant regional district area directors about this, namely Bill Dickey and Taryn Dixon, both great people who serve their communities well.

They’re in agreement with this legislation. I know that the regional district staff have been communicating with ministry staff about this for some time now, and I’ d like to convey their thanks to the ministry and to the minister for the cooperation they’ve enjoyed. [S. Gibson in the chair.] The regional district passes bylaws called parcel taxes that allow for the taxation of property owners for things like water and wastewater services. In this case, these bills amount to about $200 per year per property.

The amounts levied were equal on all the properties, and they fell on properties in the area of Popkum, Cultus Lake and also Lake Errock, which is in the riding of my colleague the member for Abbotsford-Mission. These taxes were imposed from 2017 on. Over the period 2017 to 2020, there were a total of six bylaws passed related to sewer and water, directing that these funds be collected from about 700 property owners in total. As the minister said, those property owners duly paid out a total of $1.4 million in taxes over the period.

But the Community Charter directs that there be a local parcel tax roll review panel established for these types of taxes. [2:35 p.m.] In an oversight, the review panel was never established, so the legal validity of the bylaws themselves is put into question. It also means that amounts in taxes that the regional district has already collected from them are also in question. This is a sizeable liability for the district, even though the services were long ago delivered.

Furthermore, if a property owner at the time disagreed with the amount or even whether the tax should have been levied at all, he or she would have had nowhere to turn, because there was no review panel available. I sup- pose there’s a political appeal, but I never heard about this issue in my office. Nevertheless, this represented a poten- tial injustice to those property owners. What does Bill 24 do? Well, it does two main things. First, it retroactively confirms that all six of the bylaws passed since 2017 are valid and that the amounts collected from the parcel taxes have been legally collected.

That’s fine, but if it was left there, this bill would still be vul- nerable to a legal challenge. So to complete the package, there’s just one more significant change, and that is to establish a three-member parcel tax roll review panel for those prior years as soon as practically possible. Moreover, the bill requires that the regional district publish that the panel has been struck and, further, notify all 700 property owners by mail that the panel has been established. On appeal, the panel has the power to direct that refunds be made by the regional district where the tax was improperly levied.

So if property owners today look back in their records, realize that they should not have been charged these taxes or were charged too much, they’ll be able to appeal them retroactively, and that’s where the injustice is corrected. Further, this bill also establishes a tax review panel for the future so that the matter will be taken care of in the ’21 tax year and into the future. To me, this bill is not a controversial piece of legislation. We should get it done and move on to more weighty mat- ters about which we could have a lively debate in this Legislature.

I and my colleagues will support this bill, and 12206 British Columbia Debates Monday, July 27, 2020

I want to thank the minister for bringing it forward on behalf of the Fraser Valley regional district. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to Bill 24. Deputy Speaker:Any further commentary on this? Motion approved. Hon. M. Farnworth:Notwithstanding Standing Order 81, I ask leave of the House to permit Bill 24 to proceed to committee stage forthwith. Leave granted. Bill 24, Municipalities Enabling and Validating (No. 4) Amendment Act, 2020, read a second time and ordered to proceed to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House BILL 24 — MUNICIPALITIES ENABLING AND V ALIDATING (No. 4) AMENDMENT ACT, 2020 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 24; S. Gibson in the chair. The committee met at 2:39 p.m. On

section 1. [2:40 p.m.] L. Throness:I do have a couple of general questions to the bill. Would it be all right if I asked them now, and then we could go through the sections? The Chair:That’s correct. We are on committee stage. L. Throness:My first question would be to the minister. Must the review panel established for past issues be a dif- ferent one than future issues, or can just one parcel tax roll review panel with the same three members be established for both past and future years? Hon. S.

Robinson:There is nothing here in the legisla- tion that determines that there needs to be two different for past or for future. It’s really up to the regional district to make that determination. L. Throness:I just have one more question. What is the mandate of the past review panel in terms of time? Will property owners have a limited period of time in which they’ll be able to appeal the taxes levied under these six bylaws between 2017 and 2020? And what would be that deadline? What would be that time period if there is a deadline? [2:45 p.m.] Hon. S.

Robinson:Under normal circumstances, when a review panel is struck, a notice is given. Typically, it’s a 14-day notice for when a property owner can come before the panel to make their case. So this would be no different. For historical, a panel will be struck, and a notice will be given to the property owners so that they that can come before the panel to make their case. Sections 1 to 6 inclusive approved. Title approved. Hon. S. Robinson: I just want to take a moment to thank staff for their diligent work on getting this done. I move that the committee rise and report Bill 24 com- plete without amendment.

Motion approved. The committee rose at 2:48 p.m. The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair. Reporting of Bills BILL 24 — MUNICIPALITIES ENABLING AND V ALIDATING (No. 4) AMENDMENT ACT, 2020 Bill 24, Municipalities Enabling and Validating (No. 4) Amendment Act, 2020, reported complete without amendment, to be considered at the next sitting of the House after today. Hon. M. Farnworth:I call committee stage debate on Bill 4, Budget Measures Implementation Act. [2:50 p.m.] Committee of the Whole House BILL 4 — BUDGET MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION ACT, 2020 The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 4; S. Gibson in the chair. The committee met at 2:51 p.m. On

section 1. M. de Jong: The sequencing around when the Budget Measures Implementation Act — in this case, Bill 4 — is Monday, July 27, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12207

being considered, relative to the budget, is a little differ- ent this year than it has traditionally been. I wonder if the minister can briefly explain the relationship between Bill 4, the Budget Measures Implementation Act, and the budget itself. Hon. C. James: Thank you to the member. I look for- ward to committee stage. I think, no question, this is a very different time than when the budget was tabled and when these measures come forward basically imple- menting the budget. This isn’t new material. This is material that would have been tabled for the budget.

There are some changes, no question, and we’ll go through those as we go through committee stage. Life has changed and, therefore, some of the pieces of the budget, the timing of measures coming in. But basically, this is the implementation of what we saw in the budget that was tabled — with, as I said, the context of COVID, as everything has now. M. de Jong:To be clear, the budget that was tabled on, I think, February 18 of 2020, by the minister….

This would be the legislation that was introduced almost immediately thereafter and would be the operationalization of some of the decisions that the minister laid out both in her budget speech and in the budgetary documents of February 18. Is it fair to say that the forecasts that are part of the budget…? When I say the budget, I mean that document and collection of documents that the minister tabled on February 18. The budget forecasts are generally influenced or made with the assumption that the legislation in the budget implementation bill is passed by the parliament. [2:55 p.m.] Hon. C.

James: Y es, I used the word “implementa- tion. ” It’s the implementation, basically, the detail that was in the budget and the implementation, as the mem- ber said, presuming those measures will go forward that were in the budget. Y es, that’s correct. Certainly, yes, a budget is made with the assumption that the measures that are in the so-called implementation bills will go ahead. So yes, changes to that impact the budget and impact what the first quarterly and other reports will be over this coming year.

M. de Jong: Is it fair to say — for the purpose of this question, let’s leave aside the rather dramatic change in landscape that has occurred as it relates to COVID-19 — the accuracy of the forecasts included in the minister’s budget would be compromised if the House opted not to endorse and pass the budget implementation legislation — in this case, Bill 4? Hon. C. James:Y es, just as with every budget every year, the assumption is built on the measures that are coming forward and built on the assumptions that are put forward in February with the budget.

M. de Jong:The most expeditious way for me to do this is to offer up a statement. If I describe the process incor- rectly, then the minister will correct any part of it that she deems necessary to correct. When the Finance Minister and the government are considering changes to taxation-related measures, my sense — some of it based on a measure of experience, I suppose — is that the Finance Minister will receive advice about the possible fiscal impacts of those changes. Maybe she can explain to the committee how and when that gen- erally occurs. I’m not speaking about any specific taxation measure now.

I’m speaking more about the general budgetary pro- cess — the confirmation that she would receive, briefing- note material. When the decision is made to change tax- ation amounts or rules, the minister does so armed with advice about what the likely impact will be. Sometimes that’s not an entirely precise exercise, but she would at least have the benefit, from her able staff, of a range, depending on the taxation instrument we’re talking about, of either increased revenues or decreased revenues. She would have the benefit of advice about what the likely impact of taxation changes would be.

Is that a fair statement? [3:00 p.m.] Hon. C. James: There is no question — the member knows this well, having gone through it many years him- self — that, of course, you get advice from your able staff. We are very fortunate. I say this often. The people of Brit- ish Columbia are very fortunate to have able staff in the Ministry of Finance who provide exactly that, who provide their advice. That happens through the fall, as you go into building your budget. M. de Jong:Okay. Let’s, then, maybe move to something a little more specific. The first

section of the bill we’re deal- ing with…. In fact, I think the first five sections deal with the carbon tax. I say that, and I’m not sure. It has been a while since we’ve had this kind of a conversation. The carbon tax, as we’ll discover here, accounts for a sizeable amount of revenue. In general terms, what is the carbon tax? What does it do? Hon. C. James:I think, in a very brief overview of the carbon tax…. The member will know this well, having been in government during this time period. It sends a price signal.

It sends a price signal to discourage emission- intensive fuels — business, individuals, the province. M. de Jong:Is it a good tax? Hon. C. James:Y es, it’s an effective tax. 12208 British Columbia Debates Monday, July 27, 2020

M. de Jong:Why? Hon. C. James:For exactly the reason that I mentioned, the reason that the tax is there. It sends a price signal. It discourages people from using emission-intensive fuels and provides an opportunity for people to look at chan- ging their behaviour, using carrots and sticks. M. de Jong: My sense is that, therefore, the minister embraces the concept and the construct. That wasn’t always the case. She knows that, and I know that. Has something changed about the tax that alters her opinion of it? At one time, she was less enthusiastic.

What has changed about the carbon tax that renders it a more acceptable form of taxation? Hon. C. James:The member knows this isn’t related at all to any of the specifics in the bill, but I’m happy to have this conversation with the member, if he wishes to have this conversation. I felt very strongly that the carbon tax needed to look at both industry and individuals and that we should start with industry, as other provinces have done. People have looked at different kinds of a carbon tax — whether you look at industry, whether you look at individuals, how you divide that. I felt there wasn’t enough of a balance.

The election made it very clear. People felt that the car- bon tax was a positive, and here it is. [3:05 p.m.] M. de Jong:In the budget document…. I’ll refer to this a fair bit over the next few moments. It’s the table, 1.3, on page 28. I don’t know if the minister has…. I’m sure some- one in her line of communication has access to it. At the time she tabled the budget, am I correct, and am I read- ing the documents correctly, that she and the government were anticipating revenues of $1.954 billion from the car- bon tax. Is that correct? Hon. C. James:Correct.

M. de Jong:Now, this next question is a technical ques- tion, and it may require the minister to spend a little more time consulting with her staff, in fairness. How is that forecast arrived at? By the way, again, in fairness to the minister, we will speak in a moment about some of the changes that have taken place since the budget was tabled. But that original forecast, which represented a roughly over $250 million increase from the year previ- ous…. How is that forecast arrived at?

What is the mech- anism by which the minister and her team decided that the revenue from the carbon tax would go from 2019-20, where it was estimated to be $1.69 billion, to 2020-21, $1.954 billion? Hon. C. James:Again, I’m sure the member knows this. There are economists, as he knows well, in the Ministry of Finance that provide us with the estimates for the numbers that are in the budget. And the estimate, of course, for the carbon tax we based on the volume of fuels that have been sold and the rate of the increase.

M. de Jong: It’s that last part that I think, happily, the minister has verified early in the conversation. It is, essen- tially, a forecast that takes the amount of the tax and mul- tiplies it against the amount of carbon emissions eligible to be taxed. Is that, essentially, correct? Hon. C. James:Y es, that’s, essentially, correct. [3:10 p.m.] M. de Jong:Bill 4 proposes some changes to the carbon tax. In the span of sections 1 through 5, this might be the best time to pose the general question to the minister.

What is the nature of the changes Bill 4 proposed at the time she tabled it in the Legislative Assembly, either on the day of or the day following the presentation of the budget? Hon. C. James:I think we can get into the aligning with the government rates when we get to that section. It’s com- ing up. It’s one of the next sections. I’m presuming the member is talking about that change, which is one of the changes that was there on budget day, which is aligning with the federal rates. That’s coming up, I think, in sections 2, 3, 4 or 5.

The other piece, of course, on budget day was our com- mitment that we’ve already made around the $5-a-tonne increase. M. de Jong:I think for the purpose of our conversation at the moment, again, the minister has indicated there was an increase and that the details of that are set out in sub- sequent sections.

In deciding to move forward with the increases that she has alluded to and present themselves legislatively in subsequent sections, and in keeping with the conversation we just had about the general preparation of the budget, would it be correct for us to assume that the minister was provided with an estimate of the impact those changes would have on the revenue government collected from the carbon tax? Hon. C. James:Y es. M. de Jong:The amount set out in table 1.3 on page 28, the figure I referred to, $1.954 billion….

Does that include any incremental revenue that would have been collected as a result of the increases to the carbon tax? Hon. C. James:Just as we’ve already talked about, fore- casts are based on the volume of fuel sold and the rate increase. Of course, that includes that. Monday, July 27, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12209

[3:15 p.m.] M. de Jong:I think the minister has answered yes, that any incremental revenues attributable to the increase are captured by that figure. Maybe I’ll ask the same question a slightly different way. Without the increases that are referred to in the sub- sequent sections of the bill, would the figure in the budget document, table 1.3, be $1.954 billion minus the incre- mental revenues? I suppose, to save us all time, I’ll just ask: what was the estimate of the incremental revenues derived from the increases? Hon. C. James:I can get the number for the member.

It was, I know, part of the report that was released by the Ministry of Environment, so I’ d be happy to get that infor- mation for the member. M. de Jong:Fair to say that the figure would be less, that the tax…? The calculation of the impact of the increases led to the anticipated collection of more revenue, not less? Hon. C. James:Y es. M. de Jong: In tracking the impact of changes in taxa- tion post budget, or tracking the data related to the collec- tion of a tax like the carbon tax, what kind of data does the minister and the ministry have at its disposal?

How frequently does it receive data? [3:20 p.m.] Hon. C. James:As we talked about at the very start of these discussions in committee stage, it feels like estimates. I almost called it estimates, because that’s really the kind of discussion we’re having. On the issue of data related to carbon tax, in a normal year, as the former minister would know well, you would be looking at last year, you would be looking at this year, you would be taking into account the overall GDP , and you would be looking at the returns coming on carbon tax being paid that would come in each month. Obviously, some of that has shifted.

The assumptions, as the member will know from the update on the economy that I put out, will have to be based on what we know now, the data we know now. Who knows six months from now? Whether you’re talking to economists or others, assump- tions are simply that: assumptions. We are getting some returns in, even though the carbon tax returns and the payments don’t have to come in until September 30. There are a number of people who are still putting those in, so we’re using some of that data. We’re looking at, obviously, fuel sales and where the fuel sales have gone in the last little while.

Macro analysis, certainly, no question, is the work we’re doing — what is the overall GDP growth? — to be able to look at the assumptions that we use both in the work that we did in the economic state- ment and also the work coming in the first quarterly. [3:25 p.m.] M. de Jong: So as always, a combination of examining actual data with the forecasts and estimates for how that might impact or be a trend developing for the future. Does the minister today have…? We’re very nearly in August.

Is she in possession or is the department in possession of actual data for the months of March, April, May and, pos- sibly, June at this stage? Hon. C. James:Just to clarify: on the carbon tax, spe- cifically, the member is asking? As I said, the usual process would be to look at the returns coming in, to look at the carbon tax that’s paid and to be able to use that to have an assumption about what we’re looking at for the rest of the year. We are, as I’ve said, in a very unique time in our province, in our world, when it comes to COVID.

We are not seeing those returns come in with the same kind of volume that you would expect if people were required to. At this point, the assumptions are simply being made on, as I mentioned earlier, macro numbers, volume sales, GDP growth, etc., because there are less than half of the returns that have come in. Again, depending on whether those will be large returns or small returns, it wouldn’t give a good sense of what we’re looking at. So this will be another one of those pieces, as I mentioned, in the July statement as well as coming in Q1.

We’ll be taking a look at the macro data and be able to make assumptions based on that. [3:30 p.m.] As I’ve said, I think the motto for all of us — certainly, more particularly, for people in the Ministry of Finance — will be “Subject to change. ” Whether, as I said, it’s a nation- al economist, a local economist, business folks or others, who are all trying to guess what we’ll be seeing in econom- ic growth in our province…. Everything will be subject to change, depending on what happens with the second wave, or no second wave.

How fast we see the economy returning — we’ve already seen that employment data had a pickup — whether the pickup will continue or if we see a shift in that, all of that data will need to be considered. M. de Jong: Are the returns in for March 2020 — that being the last month of the last fiscal year? Just so the minister knows, to what degree can she say whether or not the same uncertainty that is plaguing forecasts today and going forward may have had an impact for fiscal year 2019-20, which is referred to in the budget? [R.

Chouhan in the chair.] The anticipation was $1.69 billion in carbon tax reve- 12210 British Columbia Debates Monday, July 27, 2020

nue. My recollection is that the ministry would be in pos- session of the data now for the last month of the fiscal year and would know, with a fair measure of certainty, whether that target was hit. Can the minister advise the committee in that regard? Hon. C. James:As the member knows, that will come out in the public accounts, which will be out shortly. M. de Jong: I’m going to press a little bit, since we are talking about the budget implementation and budget- ary…. I’m not asking for a specific figure.

But I think it is fair to ask the minister whether the pressures that are making budgeting and forecasting complicated today and going forward…. The circumstances that have given rise to that actually began in February and March. Are those cir- cumstances impacting in a negative way on revenues for 2019-20? Hon. C. James:Y es, there were impacts on the budget in ’19-20 and impacts that happened in March. The details of that will be coming out in the public accounts. M. de Jong: Okay, I’m not going to dwell at length on that.

I will ask, I guess, an obvious follow-up question to the last answer, as it relates to the budget as a whole and the impacts of the pandemic and the impact that it has had on revenue. I’ll try to ask a fair question, or to ask the ques- tion in a fair way. [3:35 p.m.] I’ll preface this: given where we are today and the mag- nitude of the impact that the minister has begun to quanti- fy in her update and elsewhere, the order of magnitude may pale by comparison.

Is the minister concerned — because of the impacts of COVID, the pandemic, the eco- nomic slowdown that began towards the end of February and into March — that the budget may have slipped out of balance for ’19-20, in advance of the present fiscal year? Hon. C. James: I’ve been asked this question many times in the public and in the realm, and those details will come out in the public accounts. M. de Jong:The numbers in the budget for anticipated carbon tax, for both fiscal year ’19-20 and fiscal year ’20-21, are not correct, and the minister has not tried to avoid that reality.

Is she able to tell the committee today what the figure would be for the 2019-20 fiscal year? For the budget estimate for 2021, for the moment, is it the best thing we can do to take her information from her fiscal update of July 14 and subtract, from the figure in the budget, the number she disclosed with respect to the car- bon tax? When she talked about the carbon tax, fuel and carbon taxes, she talked about a reduced figure of $353 million. I take it that it’s for more than just the carbon tax, so we can’t just subtract that figure from the carbon tax. Is that correct? Hon. C.

James:I know we’ll get back to committee stage eventually and on to the direction that’s in front of us. But the ’19-20 numbers will come out in the public accounts. As the member knows very well, those have to be audited, and we have to go through that process. That number will come out in the public accounts shortly. On the number that was utilized in the assumptions that we put together for July, the economic update, the number that the member refers to is for both fuel and carbon tax. M. de Jong: I hope the minister understands that this may well….

We’re dealing with the budget implementa- tion bill at a time when the budget has changed dramat- ically, for reasons we are all familiar with. To the extent that we spend a little bit of time on not just the numbers that have changed dramatically, this is really the oppor- tunity to do that. [3:40 p.m.] Bill 4 purports to change the carbon tax, and I think it’s entirely appropriate to canvass what the anticipated reven- ues from that instrument of taxation would be. If the min- ister were tabling her budget today, what would the num- ber for carbon tax revenue be? It would not, apparently, be $1.954 billion.

What would it be? Hon. C. James:The member knows well — I’ve had this discussion when we came out with the statement in July — that at this stage, we are making the best assumptions based on the information that we all have now. To take a look at the year ahead, we will be coming out with the Q1, which will have a little more information. We’ll have a little more data, and we’ll be able to bring for- ward some of those numbers. Again, everything is going to be subject to change. This is going to be one of those years. I’m not going to guess today. As I said, we’re working on Q1.

We’ll be bringing out an additional assumption in Q1, and we’ll have the opportunity for that discussion. M. de Jong: When she did her fiscal update and just repeated that a moment ago, the minister told the world that anticipated revenues from fuel and carbon taxes will be $353 million less. All I’m asking for is the portion of that figure that relates to carbon taxes. She has indicated that it is an estimate. I think most people understand that; I certainly do. But she has disclosed that there will be $353 million less from fuel and carbon taxes. What portion of that is from the carbon tax? [3:45 p.m.] Hon. C.

James: We’ll have the information shortly, so I can get back to it, if the member wants to go to on to another question. Monday, July 27, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12211

M. de Jong:On a similar bent…. I’m just trying to make sure I understand the manner in which I should be read- ing the information that the minister provided at the fiscal update vis-à-vis the budget document that was presented in February. For example, still on table 1.3, when she held her press conference on July14, the Finance Minister indicated that personal income tax revenue was anticipated, estimated to decrease by $999 million, almost $1 billion. Does it follow, then, that today the best estimate for personal income tax revenue is $11.771 billion minus $999 million? Hon. C.

James:Again, I can provide some information, but I would ask the member their relevance to the bill that we’re debating currently. I understand the carbon tax–related questions. Now we’re going into other data from the July statement. I expect that there will be lots of those questions through estimates, and we’ll have the opportunity. I’m just asking the member the relevance to this issue. The Chair:Member, from the Chair, just for clarifica- tion, it seems like…. The Chair has been very generous to the member on

section 1. But many of the questions seem like they’re not even in the bill. Maybe the member can focus more so on the bill or

section 1. M. de Jong:Thank you, as always, hon. Chair. It’s why I had the brief exchange with the minister at the very outset. The bill is the statutory instrument by which the budget that was tabled in this House is brought to life. The min- ister, in fairness, has made it clear that the numbers in the budget…. This is very unusual, and this is not a deliberate function of anything the minister has done. The numbers in the budget that Bill 4 relate to are no longer accurate. The minister is asking the House to endorse and pass Bill 4.

In the ordinary course of events, we would know that endorsing and passing Bill 4 should give rise, if the minister is correct, to what is in the budget she has just tabled. But to the minister’s own credit, she has said that is not the case any longer. Circumstances have inter- vened so that we cannot have confidence that passing Bill 4…. In fact, the one thing we can be confident in is that notwithstanding the passage of Bill 4, these num- bers are not correct.

So it is, I would submit, entirely legitimate, in advance of asking members to vote on this legislation, to ask the min- ister to disclose what she can about the accuracy of those numbers. It is the essence of the budgetary process. This is the budget implementation bill. [3:50 p.m.] The change is profound, and I’m going to ask the min- ister several questions to put on the record here in this House — not in a press theatre somewhere, but here in this House — the impact of what has taken place over the last four months. I think it is very relevant. I think it goes to the heart of the budgeting process.

The question was not meant to trick anyone. When the minister spoke outside of this House, I thought what she was trying to convey was that today, armed with the best information that she and the government and the treasury branch have, they are anticipating, in the various categor- ies, reduced revenues of $6.3 billion. I want to make sure I’m understanding that correctly. I hope the minister doesn’t think that is somehow inappropriate in a debate about legislation that is all about breathing life into the budget. She acknowledged that a few moments ago. I’ll ask the question again.

Is the minister’s best guess today that she will be collecting — as part of the budget, in the area of personal income tax — essentially $1 bil- lion less? The Chair:Minister, I just want to say this. The com- ments the member has made — the Chair respects that and appreciates it — it sounded like they were more well- suited for the second reading of the bill. I leave it up to the minister, if the minister wants to continue to answer. Hon. C. James:Thank you very much, Chair.

The member, more than probably many in this House, knows exactly the process that occurs when we go through the budget process and when we set budgets. He also rec- ognized, at the start — as others have done and as every- one knows in our province — the kinds of challenges we are all facing with COVID-19, the kinds of difficulties, the unknown that’s ahead of us. The July statement that we made, as I made very clear to the public, is a scenario of what could happen based on the current information that we had then.

It’s com- pletely subject to change, recognizing that the world could change again in another six months, when it comes to health, when it comes to the economy, when it comes to a second wave, when it comes to supports for individuals and businesses. Y es, July was a scenario of what could happen based on the information. Based on that information, the member has those numbers. He knows exactly the kinds of numbers that are there. Does that mean those will be the numbers at the end of the year?

It’s simply a scen- ario of what could happen, based on the best informa- tion that the best people in the Ministry of Finance are putting together now. M. de Jong:I accept all of that. But I also make the pro- position to the minister that it is entirely fair, as part of the budget process, which is what we’re in here…. Bill 4 is part of the budget process. We know that. We established it, to our mutual satisfaction, as part of this conversation. Budgets are always about estimates and about forecasts.

So was the document that the minister tabled on Febru- ary 18. 12212 British Columbia Debates Monday, July 27, 2020

[3:55 p.m.] Surely, in asking Members of the Legislative Assembly to vote in favour of Bill 4, it is appropriate for Members of the Legislative Assembly to prod the minister to disclose, as best she can, how the numbers have changed in the intervening four months. Surely that is not unfair. Surely that is our job. Surely we’re expected to do that. I can ask this basic question.

Section 1 and the changes to the carbon tax were designed to assist in achieving what the minister and the government then thought would be a balanced budget. That’s not going to be the case anymore. The minister has not confirmed that on the record in this chamber, yet she continues to ask for members to support what is, in large measure, outdated legislation. Again, what has happened is not the minister’s fault or the government’s fault with respect to the pandemic.

But surely it is appropriate to at least ask the minister to share with this assembly, on the record in here, what she believes the impact could be. I haven’t asked for anything more than that. There is a list of areas where revenue is expected to decline. We’re dealing, in sections 1 through 5, with the carbon tax. The minister and her staff, by now, will have that number. They’ve provided to the minister a scenario and said: “In this scenario, we believe that the number that was included in the budget tabled in February is no longer accurate.

We think it could be reduced by as much as X. ” I expect the minister’s staff now has that number. Maybe I should take my seat, and hopefully, she’ll be able to disclose that number. Hon. C. James:The member knows full well — in fact, coming forward with an economic statement — that the information is public, that we’ve had much discussion and that there are many opportunities to continue that discus- sion. We’ll have it, I’m sure, through this process, we’ll have it through our next bill, and we’ll have it through estim- ates.

I think that’s important to note. [4:00 p.m.] Then just on the specifics that the member asked for, of the $353 million, $236 million is carbon tax, and $117 million is fuel sales. That would be reduced volume, obvi- ously. That does not take into account the amount of the impact of not moving ahead with the increase in the car- bon tax. That’s in another part of that economic statement, and that’s $146 million. M. de Jong: I just want to make sure that I heard that correctly. Of that $353 million figure, $236 million would relate to the carbon tax. Is that correct? Hon. C.

James:So $236 million for the carbon tax, $117 million for fuel sales, comes to the $353 million; and then $146 million that was also not the full moving ahead on the carbon tax increase on April 1. M. de Jong: Okay. That’s helpful and likely saves us some time. If I went through a similar exercise for personal income tax, corporate income tax, employer health tax and took those estimates that the minister released on July 14 and subtracted them from the numbers — the fiscal year ’20-21 in table 1.3 of the budget — that would be the best guess today for what anticipated revenues from those sources would be.

Would that be a fair statement? Hon. C. James: I’m going to go back again, because I think it’s important to emphasize that this is simply a scenario. As the member knows from the document that was released, there are other scenarios that are possible depending on what will occur. So the information that was in the document in July is the scenario based on the assumptions of the best information we have at that time. M. de Jong: Thank you to the minister.

In deciding whether or not to vote in favour of the legislation that implements the budget, Bill 4 being the budget imple- mentation bill, is there anything other than that scenario of July 14 that Members of the Legislative Assembly can look to, to derive some notion of what the new numbers are? [4:05 p.m.] Hon. C. James: Again, coming back to the July state- ment, the member will know from this statement that was released that it’s very clear that this is, again, the best assumption based on the information that we have at the time. It is the most up-to-date information that we have at the time.

We will continue…. We said clearly in the statement that it is simply a scen- ario, not a full fiscal statement, because there isn’t at this point the kind of data that we need for a full fiscal state- ment. Q1 will come out, and we’ll continue to make revi- sions. As the world changes, as the economy continues to grow, as we continue to see those shifts, those will be accounted for in the quarterly reports. M. de Jong: Again, I’m not quarrelling with anything the minister has said, and I recognize that in the ordinary course of events, Bill 4 would have come and gone months ago.

The minister would have tabled her budget. Within a few days, we would have debated Bill 4, and it would have related to a budget that the minister was still commend- ing to the House, that was still accurate. That is not the case this year. The minister knows that. I know that. Most people know that. The budget that Bill 4 originally referred to showed a modest surplus. On the record in this chamber to the people who are asked to vote for or against the legislation that implements the budget, can the minister disclose what her expectations are about the final outcome of the budget for fiscal year 2020-2021?

It apparently will not be bal- anced. Can she put on the record what her expectation is Monday, July 27, 2020 British Columbia Debates 12213

about the budgetary deficit that members of the assembly should anticipate? Hon. C. James:Again, I’m going to emphasize, just as I did in the public announcement that I made in July, on the assumptions and the scenario based on the best infor- mation we have…. As the member knows full well in that scenario, because it was made public, $12.5 billion was the estimate based on that current scenario. That could shift.

We included, in fact, a number of risks in that docu- ment, risks that could be positive or negative, depending on this situation, depending on what happens with health, depending on what happens with second waves, depend- ing on what happens with economic growth. So the July statement, as the member knows, the public statement, included $12.5 billion. M. de Jong: Has anything changed in the intervening two weeks that would lead the minister to want to advise the members of the assembly of changes to that estimate?

With all of the caveats that she has attached to it, has any- thing occurred or has she become aware of information between then and now that would cause her to adjust that estimate? [4:10 p.m.] Hon. C. James: Y es. As the member will know again, not only because it’s tabled as supplementary estimates in this House but, in fact, will be debated in estimates and also was announced publicly. The federal government has put in place recovery dollars and an opportunity to be able to receive funding from the federal government if it is matched at the province.

So supplementary estimates has included an additional $1 billion to that number. M. de Jong:To be clear, then, on the record, the poten- tial deficit, with all of the caveats that the minister has laid out, instead of $12.5 billion, would now be $13.5 billion. Hon. C. James:Again, it’s simply an assumption based on the information we have currently. It’s simply a scenario put forward. M. de Jong: I guess I’m curious because maybe I’m missing something.

I think that in advance of asking mem- bers to vote on budget implementation legislation and sec- tions that relate to taxation, it’s fair and appropriate to have that information from the minister in this chamber. I hope the minister agrees with me, but I sense she feels that I am somehow being obstructionist in trying to draw that infor- mation out of her in this forum. Hon. C. James:I’m prepared for another question. M. de Jong:In the update just prior to….

I’m not going to go through all of the various areas of reduced revenue, because the minister has provided, I think, a satisfactory blanket answer about how we take the numbers from her update and apply them to the budget document. But I do note that when you compare slide 12 with table 1.3 of the budget document, there is an estimate of change for virtually every category — for personal income tax, cor- porate income tax, employer health tax, provincial sales tax, property transfer tax, carbon tax.

The only one that I didn’t see on slide 12 of the update related to the insurance premium tax, which, in the budget, is anticipated to collect revenues of $660 million. Is there a reason that that particular source of revenue, $660 million, wasn’t included in the fiscal update on slide 12? [4:15 p.m.] Hon. C. James:There was no inclusion of the insurance premium tax, presuming at this stage, based, again, as a scenario, on the information that was available. Not good data on whether there would be a shift in people’s beha- viour when it came to buying health insurance or property insurance.

Again, information will come forward and will be adjusted as we continue bri

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20200727pm Hansard n348
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20200727pm Hansard n348
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a12250263783fa8d7ce39ca65495d17ad8e20072

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