British Columbia Hansard — 16 April 2026, p.m., Issue 155 (43rd Parliament, 2nd Session)

20260416pm-Hansard-n155

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Second Session, 43rd Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES (HANSARD) Thursday, April 16, 2026 Afternoon Sitting Issue No. 155 THE HONOURABLE RAJ CHOUHAN, SPEAKER ISSN 1499-2175

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Wendy Cocchia, CM, OBC Second Session, 43rd Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Raj Chouhan EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ................................................................................................... Hon. David Eby, KC Minister of State for Local Governments and Rural Communities .......................................................... Hon.

Brittny Anderson Minister of Agriculture and Food ..............................................................................................................................Hon. Lana Popham Attorney General and Deputy Premier ............................................................................................................... Hon. Niki Sharma, KC Minister of Children and Family Development ......................................................................................................Hon.

Jodie Wickens Minister of Citizens’ Services ......................................................................................................................................Hon. Diana Gibson Minister of Education and Child Care ............................................................................................................................Hon. Lisa Beare Minister of Emergency Management and Climate Readiness ................................................................................ Hon.

Kelly Greene Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions .................................................................................................................... Hon. Adrian Dix Minister of Environment and Parks .................................................................................................... Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson Minister of Finance ......................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Brenda Bailey Minister of Forests .......................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Ravi Parmar Minister of Health ........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Josie Osborne Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs ...........................................................................................................Hon.

Christine Boyle Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation ........................................................................Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert Minister of Infrastructure .............................................................................................................................................. Hon. Bowinn Ma Minister of Jobs and Economic Growth ...................................................................................................................... Hon.

Ravi Kahlon Minister of State for Artificial Intelligence and New Technologies .................................................................. Hon. Rick Glumac Minister of Labour .............................................................................................................................................. Hon. Jennifer Whiteside Minister of Mining and Critical Minerals .....................................................................................................................Hon.

Jagrup Brar Minister of Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills ........................................................................................Hon. Jessie Sunner Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ........................................................................................................ Hon. Nina Krieger Minister of State for Community Safety and Integrated Services ........................................................................ Hon.

Terry Yung Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction ...............................................................................Hon. Sheila Malcolmson Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport ............................................................................................................. Hon. Anne Kang Minister of Transportation and Transit ................................................................................................................ Hon.

Mike Farnworth Minister of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship ............................................................................................... Hon. Randene Neill Minister Without Portfolio ..............................................................................................................................................Hon.

Grace Lore LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Official Opposition ......................................................................................................................................Trevor Halford Leader of the Third Party .................................................................................................................................................Jeremy Valeriote Deputy Speaker ......................................................................................................................................................................

Mable Elmore Assistant Deputy Speaker .................................................................................................................................................Lorne Doerkson Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ......................................................................................................................George Anderson Clerk of the Legislative Assembly....................................................................................................................................Kate Ryan-Lloyd Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel ......................................................................................................................Seunghee Suzie Seo Deputy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly...............................................................................................................

Artour Sogomonian Clerk of Committees .............................................................................................................................................................. Jennifer Arril Committee Clerk ......................................................................................................................................................................

Karan Riarh Committee Clerk .........................................................................................................................................................................Darryl Hol Senior Legal Counsel .................................................................................................................................................................Hayley Hill Sergeant-at-Arms ..................................................................................................................................................................

Ray Robitaille Director of Hansard Services .......................................................................................................................................D’ Arcy McPherson Legislative Librarian ...............................................................................................................................................................Peter Gourlay

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS BY PARTY BC NDP Anderson, Hon. Brittny ........................................... Kootenay Central Anderson, George ................................................ Nanaimo-Lantzville Arora, Rohini ....................................................................Burnaby East Bailey, Hon. Brenda ................................Vancouver–South Granville Beare, Hon.

Lisa .......................................Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Begg, Garry .................................................................Surrey-Guildford Blatherwick, Jennifer ....................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Boyle, Hon. Christine .............................Vancouver–Little Mountain Brar, Hon. Jagrup ......................................................Surrey-Fleetwood Chandra Herbert, Hon. Spencer ..................... Vancouver–West End Chant, Susie .............................................

North Vancouver–Seymour Choi, Paul ..................................................Burnaby South–Metrotown Chouhan, Hon. Raj ................................. Burnaby–New Westminster Chow, George ....................................................Vancouver-Fraserview Davidson, Hon. Tamara / Laanas ...........North Coast–Haida Gwaii Dhir, Sunita .............................................................Vancouver-Langara Dix, Hon. Adrian .................................................. Vancouver-Renfrew Eby, Hon. David, KC .......................................

Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable ................................................. Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Hon. Mike .................................................Port Coquitlam Gibson, Hon. Diana ........................................Oak Bay–Gordon Head Glumac, Hon. Rick ...................................... Port Moody–Burquitlam Greene, Hon. Kelly ..............................................Richmond-Steveston Higginson, Stephanie ........................................Ladysmith-Oceanside Kahlon, Hon. Ravi .............................................................. Delta North Kang, Hon.

Anne ......................................................... Burnaby Centre Krieger, Hon. Nina ...............................................Victoria–Swan Lake Lajeunesse, Dana ..............................................Juan de Fuca–Malahat Lore, Hon. Grace .................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Ma, Hon. Bowinn ................................... North Vancouver–Lonsdale Malcolmson, Hon. Sheila .........................Nanaimo–Gabriola Island Morissette, Steve ...................................................Kootenay Monashee Neill, Hon. Randene ............................

Powell River–Sunshine Coast Osborne, Hon. Josie ....................................... Mid Island–Pacific Rim Parmar, Hon. Ravi ...............................................Langford-Highlands Phillip, Joan / Amshen .....................................Vancouver-Strathcona Popham, Hon. Lana ........................................................ Saanich South Rotchford, Darlene ...............................................Esquimalt-Colwood Routledge, Janet .............................................................Burnaby North Sandhu, Harwinder ......................................................

Vernon-Lumby Shah, Amna ............................................................. Surrey City Centre Sharma, Hon. Niki, KC ....................................... Vancouver-Hastings Sunner, Hon. Jessie ....................................................... Surrey-Newton Toporowski, Debra / Qwulti’stunaat .......................Cowichan Valley Whiteside, Hon. Jennifer ...................New Westminster–Coquitlam Wickens, Hon. Jodie ............................. Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Yung, Hon.

Terry .................................................Vancouver-Yaletown CONSERV ATIVE PARTY OF BC Banman, Bruce .......................................................... Abbotsford South Bhangu, Harman .................................................. Langley-Abbotsford Bird, Rosalyn ............................................. Prince George–Valemount Block, Lynne ..............................................West Vancouver–Capilano Chapman, Brent .................................................................Surrey South Clare, Sheldon ....................................

Prince George–North Cariboo Davis, Pete ..................................................................Kootenay Rockies Day, Brennan ........................................................... Courtenay-Comox Dew, Gavin ..................................................................Kelowna-Mission Dhaliwal, Mandeep .......................................................... Surrey North Doerkson, Lorne .....................................................

Cariboo-Chilcotin Gasper, Reann .......................................................Abbotsford-Mission Giddens, Kiel ..............................................Prince George–Mackenzie Halford, Trevor ......................................................Surrey–White Rock Hartwell, Sharon ..............................................Bulkley Valley–Stikine Hepner, Linda ................................................Surrey–Serpentine River Kindy, Anna ........................................................................North Island Kooner, Steve ............................................Richmond-Queensborough Loewen, Kristina ..........................................................

Kelowna Centre Luck, Tony ..........................................................................Fraser-Nicola Maahs, Heather ......................................................... Chilliwack North McCall, Macklin .........................................West Kelowna–Peachland McInnis, Scott ......................................... Columbia River–Revelstoke Milobar, Peter ............................................................

Kamloops Centre Mok, Lawrence ...........................................................Maple Ridge East Neufeld, Korky ............................................................Abbotsford West Neufeld, Larry ...........................................................Peace River South Paton, Ian ..............................................................................Delta South Rattée, Claire .................................................................................Skeena Rustad, John ...................................................................Nechako Lakes Stamer, Ward .........................................Kamloops–North Thompson Tepper, Br yan ............................................................

Surrey-Panorama Toor, Jody ............................................................Langley-Willowbrook Van Popta, Misty..............................................Langley–Walnut Grove Warbus, Á’a:líya ..............................................Chilliwack–Cultus Lake Wat, Teresa .........................................................Richmond-Bridgeport Williams, David ...............................................Salmon Arm–Shuswap Wilson, Donegal ............................................Boundary-Similkameen BC GREEN PARTY Botterell, Rob .......................................Saanich North and the Islands Valeriote, Jeremy .....................................

West Vancouver–Sea to Sky INDEPENDENT Armstrong, Tara .....................Kelowna–Lake Country–Coldstream Boultbee, Amelia .............................................Penticton-Summerland Brodie, Dallas .................................................... Vancouver-Quilchena Chan, Hon ..................................................................Richmond Centre Kealy, Jordan ............................................................. Peace River North Sturko, Elenore .........................................................

Surrey-Cloverdale PARTY STANDINGS Total seats – 93 BC NDP – 47 | Conservative Party of BC – 38 | BC Green Party – 2 | Independent – 6

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF RIDINGS A Abbotsford-Mission ........................................................Reann Gasper Abbotsford South ........................................................... Bruce Banman Abbotsford West .............................................................Korky Neufeld B Boundary-Similkameen .............................................Donegal Wilson Bulkley Valley–Stikine ............................................... Sharon Hartwell Burnaby Centre ...........................................................Hon.

Anne Kang Burnaby East ......................................................................Rohini Arora Burnaby–New Westminster .................................. Hon. Raj Chouhan Burnaby North ..............................................................Janet Routledge Burnaby South–Metrotown .................................................. Paul Choi C Cariboo-Chilcotin .......................................................Lorne Doerkson Chilliwack–Cultus Lake .............................................. Á’a:líya Warbus Chilliwack North ..........................................................

Heather Maahs Columbia River–Revelstoke ...........................................Scott McInnis Coquitlam–Burke Mountain .............................. Hon. Jodie Wickens Coquitlam-Maillardville .................................... Jennifer Blatherwick Courtenay-Comox ............................................................ Brennan Day Cowichan Valley ....................... Debra Toporowski / Qwulti’stunaat D Delta North ................................................................Hon.

Ravi Kahlon Delta South ...............................................................................Ian Paton E Esquimalt-Colwood ................................................Darlene Rotchford F Fraser-Nicola .......................................................................... Tony Luck J Juan de Fuca–Malahat ...............................................Dana Lajeunesse K Kamloops Centre ............................................................. Peter Milobar Kamloops–North Thompson .........................................

Ward Stamer Kelowna Centre ........................................................... Kristina Loewen Kelowna–Lake Country–Coldstream ......................Tara Armstrong Kelowna-Mission ..................................................................Gavin Dew Kootenay Central ............................................ Hon. Brittny Anderson Kootenay Monashee ....................................................Steve Morissette Kootenay Rockies................................................................... Pete Davis L Ladysmith-Oceanside ........................................

Stephanie Higginson Langford-Highlands ................................................ Hon. Ravi Parmar Langley-Abbotsford ....................................................Harman Bhangu Langley–Walnut Grove ..............................................Misty Van Popta Langley-Willowbrook ............................................................ Jody Toor M Maple Ridge East ............................................................Lawrence Mok Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ........................................Hon. Lisa Beare Mid Island–Pacific Rim ........................................ Hon.

Josie Osborne N Nanaimo–Gabriola Island ..........................Hon. Sheila Malcolmson Nanaimo-Lantzville ................................................. George Anderson Nechako Lakes ....................................................................John Rustad New Westminster–Coquitlam .................... Hon. Jennifer Whiteside North Coast–Haida Gwaii ............Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson North Island ........................................................................Anna Kindy North Vancouver–Lonsdale .....................................Hon.

Bowinn Ma North Vancouver–Seymour ...............................................Susie Chant O Oak Bay–Gordon Head ......................................... Hon. Diana Gibson P Peace River North ..............................................................Jordan Kealy Peace River South ............................................................Larry Neufeld Penticton-Summerland .............................................. Amelia Boultbee Port Coquitlam ................................................. Hon. Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Burquitlam ........................................Hon.

Rick Glumac Powell River–Sunshine Coast ............................. Hon. Randene Neill Prince George–Mackenzie ...............................................Kiel Giddens Prince George–North Cariboo ......................................Sheldon Clare Prince George–Valemount ...............................................Rosalyn Bird R Richmond-Bridgeport .......................................................... Teresa Wat Richmond Centre .................................................................. Hon Chan Richmond-Queensborough ............................................

Steve Kooner Richmond-Steveston ...............................................Hon. Kelly Greene S Saanich North and the Islands ....................................... Rob Botterell Saanich South ......................................................... Hon.

Lana Popham Salmon Arm–Shuswap ................................................David Williams Skeena ..................................................................................Claire Rattée Surrey City Centre ...............................................................Amna Shah Surrey-Cloverdale .......................................................... Elenore Sturko Surrey-Fleetwood ....................................................... Hon. Jagrup Brar Surrey-Guildford .................................................................

Garry Begg Surrey-Newton ........................................................ Hon. Jessie Sunner Surrey North ............................................................Mandeep Dhaliwal Surrey-Panorama ..............................................................Br yan Tepper Surrey–Serpentine River ................................................

Linda Hepner Surrey South ..................................................................Brent Chapman Surrey–White Rock .......................................................Trevor Halford V Vancouver-Fraserview .....................................................George Chow Vancouver-Hastings ........................................ Hon. Niki Sharma, KC Vancouver-Kensington ...................................................Mable Elmore Vancouver-Langara .............................................................Sunita Dhir Vancouver–Little Mountain ............................. Hon.

Christine Boyle Vancouver–Point Grey .........................................Hon. David Eby, KC Vancouver-Quilchena ......................................................Dallas Brodie Vancouver-Renfrew ................................................... Hon. Adrian Dix Vancouver–South Granville ................................ Hon. Brenda Bailey Vancouver-Strathcona ..................................... Amshen / Joan Phillip Vancouver–West End .......................Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert Vancouver-Yaletown ..................................................Hon.

Terry Yung Vernon-Lumby ....................................................... Harwinder Sandhu Victoria–Beacon Hill ................................................. Hon. Grace Lore Victoria–Swan Lake ................................................Hon. Nina Krieger W West Kelowna–Peachland ..........................................Macklin McCall West Vancouver–Capilano ................................................Lynne Block West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ...................................... Jeremy Valeriote

CONTENTS Thursday, April 16, 2026 Afternoon Sitting Page Routine Business Tributes ............................................................................................................................................................................. 6493 Isabel Hogg and Susan “Beth” Bennett Scott McInnis Joel Connelly Hon.

Adrian Dix Orders of the Day Second Reading of Bills .................................................................................................................................................. 6494 Bill 14 — Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2026 (continued) Lynne Block Jordan Kealy Darlene Rotchford John Rustad Lorne Doerkson Hon. Ravi Parmar Bill 16 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2026 Hon. Niki Sharma Steve Kooner Hon.

Adrian Dix Reporting of Bills ............................................................................................................................................................. 6512 Bill 11 — Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2026 Third Reading of Bills ..................................................................................................................................................... 6512 Bill 11 — Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2026 Second Reading of Bills .................................................................................................................................................. 6512 Bill 16 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2026 (continued) Hon.

Adrian Dix Larry Neufeld Hon.

Nina Krieger Rob Botterell Tony Luck Debra Toporowski / Qwulti’stunaat Linda Hepner Reporting of Bills ............................................................................................................................................................. 6528 Bill 15 — Environmental Assessment Amendment Act, 2026 Third Reading of Bills ..................................................................................................................................................... 6529 Bill 15 — Environmental Assessment Amendment Act, 2026 Royal Assent to Bills ........................................................................................................................................................ 6529 Bill 2 — Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2026 Bill 6 — Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2026 Bill 8 — Civil Forfeiture Amendment Act, 2026 Bill 10 — Labour Statutes Amendment Act, 2026 Bill 11 — Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2026 Bill 12 — Safe Access to Schools Amendment Act, 2026 Bill 13 — Safe Access to Places of Public Worship Act Bill 15 — Environmental Assessment Amendment Act, 2026 Bill M214 — Firefighters’ Health Act

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room Committee of the Whole ................................................................................................................................................ 6529 Bill 15 — Environmental Assessment Amendment Act, 2026 (continued) Sheldon Clare Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson Jeremy Valeriote Proceedings in the Birch Room Committee of the Whole ................................................................................................................................................ 6543 Bill 11 — Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2026 (continued) Claire Rattée Hon. Christine Boyle Rob Botterell

6493 THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 2026 The House met at 1:01 p.m. [The Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Tributes ISABEL HOGG AND SUSAN “BETH” BENNETT Scott McInnis: It’s with sadness that I express the loss of two very important constituents in Columbia River– Revelstoke. First of all, Mrs. Isabel Hogg passed away at the age of 94 just a few days ago. Isabel was a neighbour of mine, two doors up. She is survived by her husband, George, who is a famous painter of Indigenous artwork in the East Koo - tenay and western Alberta. In October, they’d celebrated their 75th wedding anniversary.

I’m just at a loss with Isabel. I’ve known her since I moved to Kimberley in 2010. It’s just very sad knowing that George survived Isabel. I know they’re very faithful and that she’s in a very happy place now. I have to tell a quick story. During COVID, our street was helping the Hoggs get groceries so that they could stay comfortably at home. I received a beautiful handwritten grocery list one day. It was the cutest thing. There were two apples, six slices of bologna and some other items. But George and Isabel — I’ll never forget this — each had their own flavour of ice cream I had to get.

George liked choco - late sauce, and Isabel liked butterscotch. So it was just a very cool memory that I’ll always have. The second is the passing of Beth Bennett, a constitu - ent of mine, on a beautiful Easter Sunday at the age of 69, surrounded by her friends and family. Beth was just a wonderful woman. Anybody who has had the opportun - ity to meet her knows just how wonderful and kind and loyal and loving she was. Beth is survived by her husband, Bill, who is known very well in the House here. He served as the member for Kootenay East for 16 years, as well as a cabinet minister — Bill Bennett.

It’s a very sad loss not only for the Bennett family but for Columbia River–Revelstoke. My heart and prayers and thoughts are with both Isa - bel’s family as well as the Bennetts at this time. JOEL CONNELLY Hon. Adrian Dix: In this moment of our tributes in our Legislature, I wanted to pay tribute to a significant fig - ure who passed away this week in Washington state. The person’s name is Joel Connelly. Mr. Connelly was a very significant journalist in Wash - ington state. He wrote for the Seattle P-I for something like 50 years.

He was the leading voice — he was the voice, really — of political analysis in Washington state. Many of us who follow both Washington state and U.S. politics and who are interested in Washington state and U.S. politics would have learned a lot of what we knew about Washing - ton state and U.S. politics from Joel Connelly. [1:05 p.m.] Interestingly, Mr. Connelly had an extraordinary rela - tionship with Canada. He started working at the Seattle P-I in early 1970, and one of his first stories — his mother was a journalist; it was in his blood — was to come to Vic - toria.

One of his first major front-page stories involved former Premier Dave Barrett. Mr. Connelly came here to British Columbia from Washington state, on behalf of the Seattle P-I , because Premier Barrett wanted to take action and was demanding that the National Energy Board take action on the price of the export of natural gas, which was then a Crown corpor - ation in B.C. Mr. Barrett was using the 1974 energy crisis — these things repeat themselves — to pressure the Na - tional Energy Board to hike the price of natural gas south of the border.

British Columbia was a very important source of nat - ural gas for Washington state, and the two very power - ful U.S. senators from Washington state — Henry “Scoop” Jackson and Warren Magnuson at the time, Democrats from Washington state — demanded that the Canadian government intervene to stop the Premier of B.C. So Mr. Connelly came up as a young journalist and was invited into the Premier’s office to hear the Premier’s response in Victoria. This is from Mr.

Connelly’s words, in his obituary to Dave Barrett: “Over in Victoria, Barrett fumed to a visit - ing Yank reporter that any red-blooded American worker would want his Canadian counterpart to be paid the going rate for gas. The Premier got carried away and offered an on-the-record response to Maggie and Scoop. Dave Bar - rett delivered a Bronx cheer and raised the middle finger of both hands.” Back at the newspaper — you can imagine a 23-year- old reporter coming home and getting this story to the newspaper, and they were obviously looking at his notes — Mr.

Connelly explained what was happening, and the newspaper characterized Mr. Barrett’s statement as “a ges- ture of defiance.” In any event, Dave Barrett, who had, as a paper-boy, delivered the Seattle P-I — many know he went to Seattle University — had shared that in common with Mr. Connelly. Mr. Connelly wrote a beautiful obituary of Dave Barrett. Often in our lives and Canadians’ lives, we think we don’t have the attention of the United States, and we pay a lot of attention to the United States. When I grew up, the majority of the channels on cable TV were American channels — ABC, KOMO news. We knew the American

6494 B ritish Columbia Debates T hursday, April 16, 2026 reporters on all the different local affiliates — KOMO, KING, KIRO and, of course, KCTS. Joel Connelly paid attention to Canada. From his first articles, he wrote articles about Canada, and he informed Washington state residents about Canada. He loved Can - ada. He travelled in Canada. When the COVID-19 pan - demic ended, he wrote a beautiful column about ten places to visit in B.C. and encouraged Americans, once the border was reopened, to come here. He really cared about this place. He influenced it as well.

He led an American campaign to get Victoria to treat its sewage, which was a controver - sial issue for a long time in this town and had a huge im - pact. People will remember Mr. Floatie, I think. Joel Connelly had a lot of influence, but he was also an admirer and a lover of Canada. His last column was about the election of Avi Lewis as leader of the NDP. He wrote beautifully about it, covered B.C. politics, brought B.C. people, towns, communities and parks to Washing - ton state people.

I think it’s important to remember, in a time when re - lationships between Canada and the United States are so difficult, that the ties binding those of us who live in Brit - ish Columbia and those who live in Washington state are profound. They’re ties of people, not just fans of the Sea - hawks but people of communities. Joel Connelly, who was born in Bellingham and wrote about British Columbia and, of course, Washington and United States politics for 50 years, had a profound influ - ence. He was a great contributor to American democracy and, in his own way, a great contributor to our own.

I had the honour to know him and to admire his work, and I wish on behalf of the Legislature to pay our best to his family. [1:10 p.m.] Lynne Block: I would appreciate finishing my speech on forestry. The Speaker: No, hold it. We’re not there yet. Orders of the Day Hon. Brittny Anderson: I call second reading on Bill 14, Forests Statutes Amendment Act. In the Douglas Fir Room, I call Committee of the Whole on Bill 15, Environmental Assessment Amend - ment Act.

In the Birch Room, I call Committee of the Whole on Bill 11, Residential Tenancy Act. [Mable Elmore in the chair.] Second Reading of Bills BILL 14 — FORESTS STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2026 (continued) Deputy Speaker: All right, recognizing the MLA for West Vancouver–Capilano. Lynne Block: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I’m always reminded to stand up. If nobody’s standing, stand up quickly. So I’m standing up again. But thank you for your leniency. I just would like to finish up on speaking to Bill 14 — just a few little points.

First of all, we cannot talk seriously about this Bill 14 without confronting the reality of our wildfire crisis. In just eight years, British Columbia has experienced five cat - astrophic fire seasons. Experts featured in documentaries point out that decades of fire suppression without active fuel management have left our forests unnaturally dense and laden with combustible fuel. Fire suppression with - out prescribed burning or thinning has permitted surface fuels and ladder fuels to accumulate, setting the stage for unprecedented fire behaviour.

I was hoping that this Bill 14 would address this issue more emphatically, especially because it costs millions of dollars for these wildfires and impacts water, impacts communities. It’s unnecessary. So I was hoping that this current model that we have right now — which I believe is more reactive, where we wait for fires to start and then we throw every resource at fighting them — would have more of a proactive approach in this bill. We know that fire science, prevention and prepared - ness through active fuel management, landscape-level thinning and strategic prescribed burns work.

Hopefully, that will happen in the future. But right now, Bill 14 places far more emphasis on ad - ministrative control rather than on embracing science- based, preventative measures being used in other jurisdic - tions, like California or any other place in North America, to build forest resiliency. I think this is really an import - ant part of this bill. We want forest resiliency — also eco - nomic resiliency. So I believe that’s an important omission. We cannot continue to behave as though wildfire risk is simply a natural disaster that we must endure. It is as much a policy outcome as a natural phenomenon.

We have the tools to change it if we make the right choices. So I’m hoping that subsequent amendments for this bill will address this issue. After pointing out some of the issues I find with this bill and explaining why they are perhaps detrimental, like always, I like to finish on a positive note. So I respectfully add that this government could have some inclusions or some recommendations for future amendments.

Thursday, April 16, 2026 B ritish Columbia Debates 6495 In order to rebuild this — what I call — renewable in - dustry and protect our forests, this government could take a very different path, and it’s a path grounded in expertise, accountability and long-term vision; a path which would not only benefit this bill but, ultimately, the forestry sector. One of the issues that I think is really important…. We need to streamline the permitting process and remove the “tougher than the law” discretionary mandates that encourage confusion rather than compliance.

Now, this would help this government to provide a climate for the forestry industry where there are stable rules, not shifting regulatory goal posts. [1:15 p.m.] Another suggestion is: enhance this bill by ensuring that we address the systematic supply issues that are for - cing mill closures, align permitting processes with allow - able cut targets and ensure fibre flows predictably to the market. Another suggestion.

In this bill, shift policy emphasis from reactive suppression to proactive, science-based fuel management, including thinning; prescribed burns; and other strategies that reduce wildfire intensity and protect communities, watersheds and ecosystems. This is an important part of this bill — embed financial transparency. Ensure that in this bill, every dollar spent by B.C. Timber Sales is fully accountable to taxpayers, sub - ject to regular audits and performance evaluation. Forestry is a renewable resource and should be a point of pride for B.C.

It should be a source of stable employ - ment for rural communities, global export strength and ecological resilience. It should be. But right now, Bill 14 treats our forests as if they were a sector to be microman - aged, regulated into compliance and administered from a distant office, rather than nurtured, understood and stew - arded with both scientific integrity and economic realism. The reality is that while this sector faces global chal - lenges, the declines are happening under this government, and their specific policies have made them worse.

This bill needs, because of that, specific amendments in commit - tee stage. We cannot afford more turnover, more uncertainty or more mill closures. We cannot afford to ignore expertise in favour of bureaucracy. It is time for this government to stop adding complexity and start working with the in - dustry and committing to policies that recognize that a healthy, managed forest is our best defence against both economic decline and the threat of wildfire. I am looking forward to the committee stage of this bill.

That will ensure that critical amendments to this bill will be successful and thus, moving forward, the forestry sec - tor will become more robust and more successful in itself. Jordan Kealy: I rise today on behalf of the hard-working families, loggers, truckers and millworkers of Peace River North to speak on Bill 14, Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2026. I’m not here to play political games or score points. I’m here because of my riding, Peace River North, that is being hit hard by years of NDP mismanagement of our resource sector.

This bill is just one more of the same, tinkering around the edges while our communities bleed jobs and opportunities. As a farmer and millwright, I live and breathe the real - ities of northern British Columbia every single day. I know what it means when the mills go quiet, when the logging contractors have to park their equipment and when fam - ilies have to consider leaving because work is scarce. I am one of the few MLAs that have worked in mills, and there is a good chance that I would have been one of the ones out of a job, too, if I was still working in that sector. In Fort Nelson, we lost mills.

The pulp mill that I worked for in Taylor closed. The sawmill in Fort St. John just previously, last year, closed. Thousands of jobs lost. Let’s be clear about what this bill actually does. The NDP government wants to expand the role of B.C. Timber Sales, their own government-run timber sales program. They’re creating new contract logging authorizations so that the province can directly hire contractors to cut down timber without giving anyone real tenure. They’re letting the minister implement stricter-than- normal terms and conditions.

They’re broadening the BCTS stewardship role and giving themselves more flex - ibility to spend money from the timber sales account. They’re calling it a win for fibre supply, wildfire risk re - duction and First Nations partnerships. [1:20 p.m.] If this was the bold action our industry needed after 31 mills closed in the last five years, I’d be the first one cheering. But it isn’t. This is the classic NDP progression — more government control, more red tape, more uncer - tainty, dressed up as progress. For the people I represent in the Peace, it falls horribly short.

In Peace River North, our region depends on for - estry as a foundational industry. The combined timber supply area for the Peace has an allowable annual cut of around 4.7 million cubic metres, but we’ve watched the Canfor sawmill in Fort St. John shut down, costing over 220 direct jobs and thousands more in the supply chains. Truckers, fallers, equipment operators and small con - tractors in Taylor, Fort St. John, Fort Nelson, Hudson’s Hope and up the Alaska Highway are the backbone of our economy. When fibre doesn’t reach the mills, those fam - ilies feel it first.

Yet this bill does not fix the real problems choking our sector — chronically low harvest levels, end - less permitting delays, old-growth deferrals that lock up viable timber and investment chill created by this govern - ment’s own policies. Bill 14 entrenches more bureaucratic oversight through BCTS. Why should the government be getting bigger in

6496 B ritish Columbia Debates T hursday, April 16, 2026 the logging business when private operators and tenure holders are the ones who actually know how to run a sus - tainable, private, profitable operation? Northern operators already face sky-high transpor - tation costs, harsh winters and thin margins. Adding stricter terms and conditions that go beyond existing laws — whether it’s extra environmental standards, more consultation requirements or compliance with outside standard bodies — only drives up costs and drives away investment. That’s not helping wildfire risk reduction.

That’s layering on more red tape that makes it harder to get work done. Let’s talk about what this bill conveniently ignores. It says nothing about keeping logs in British Columbia for local processing. While our mills starve, raw logs still head offshore. It does nothing to meaningfully raise the provincial harvest target or slash the regulatory burden that has addled so much of our industry. Worst of all, it does nothing to address the elephant in the room, the un - certainty created by the NDP’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, also known as DRIPA. I know this file well.

Last year I stood in this House, and I introduced my own private member’s bill to repeal and reset DRIPA, because this government has turned what it was supposed to be — a path to unity — into a tool for division and delay. In Treaty 8 territory, right in my riding, cumulative effects of rulings, overlapping consultations and unclear jurisdictions have created a veto-like chill on resource projects.

Bill 14 talks about partnerships with First Na - tions, but without clear rules, faster timelines and respect for existing treaties, those partnerships become just more process, more lawyers and more uncertainties for con - tractors and workers on the ground. The people of Peace River North want fair, transpar - ent relationships built on respect, not endless red tape that shuts down various projects that create shared prosperity. This bill also quietly expands ministerial powers over fees and spending from the BCTS account.

British Col - umbians want accountability, not blank cheques for more government programs. Taxpayers and industries alike deserve to know exactly where the money is going and whether it is actually creating jobs or just growing the bureaucracy in Victoria. The NDP love to talk about sustainable forestry and climate leadership, but the results in northern British Col - umbia tell me a different story. Investment and confidence is in the toilet. Mills are closing.

Young people are leaving, and families who have worked in the bush for generations are wondering if there is a future here at all. [1:25 p.m.] I attended the COFI forestry conference recently. The room was packed with people desperate for solutions, real solutions, not more government-managed salvage pro - grams while the core allowable cut stays suppressed and the rule book keeps growing.

What Peace River North needs, what all British Colum - bians need is a government that trusts the private sector, cuts the red tape, raises sustainable harvest levels where science supports it, prioritizes local processing and pro - vides regulatory certainty instead of ideological experi - ments. We need to repeal DRIPA and replace it with legislation that actually works for all British Columbians. We need faster approvals, not more ministerial discretion, and we need to stop treating our resource workers like they’re the problem and start treating them like the solution that they are.

Bill 14 is not the real answer. It is a modest administra - tive tweak that entrenches more government involvement without delivering the fibre, the jobs or the confidence of our industry that northern communities desperately need. The loggers, the truck drivers, the mill families in Fort St. John, Fort Nelson and across the Peace deserve better than another half-measure from a government that has al - ready decimated this sector.

Let’s stop tinkering, and let’s start the real work of re - storing forestry as the economic backbone of this prov - ince and think about a future of forestry where instead of just looking at it as forestry management, we can actually look at it as farming our forests. It really is the only sus - tainable resource we have. Farmers, on a regular basis, harvest crops annually in my region. We do it sustainably. We do it respectfully of the environment, and we do it very efficiently. We can do the same with our forests. It’s just a longer turnover for the crop.

I look forward to seeing what this bill brings in the committee stage. I want to thank the Forests Minister for coming up to my riding and being able to meet with me to discuss some of the concerns about this. I went to school to become a millwright. I hear the gov - ernment praise how they’re promoting apprenticeships. It took me a while to get my apprenticeship ticket to be able to work in these mills, and they’re disappearing.

I took the time to get a second trades ticket to make myself more valuable, and it would make it even harder now to get into some of these mills, because so many tradespeople are having to go to other provinces to be able to find jobs. Darlene Rotchford: Good afternoon. It’s a privilege to rise in this House in strong support of Bill 14, the B.C. Timber Sales legislative amendments. I’d like to thank the minister for bringing this forward and being a champion for this sector. For many of you who may not know, I’m actually not originally from British Columbia.

I’ve said in this House that I’m from a very small town in Nova Scotia, which was a mill town. We’re an industry-based town. I’ve seen first-

Thursday, April 16, 2026 B ritish Columbia Debates 6497 hand how a mill closing of 650 people overnight can ac - tually affect your community, how an industry that dies can affect your community. For those who don’t know, that’s also where the We - stray mine disaster happened. So I take industry and all that comes with it very seriously when we’re talking about community, jobs and what we’re doing within them. At its core, this legislation is about people. It is about men and women, people, working in the bush, often in challenging conditions, who rely on the steady opportun - ities to support their families.

It is about the workers on mill floors who depend on a consistent, predictable sup - ply of fibre. And it’s about the communities across Brit - ish Columbia whose economies are built on forestry and whose futures depend on us getting it right. For anyone who has ever taken a tour of the Legislature and you go up in the rotunda and you look, one of the key people standing there is in forestry, because we were built on the forestry industry here in British Columbia. Bill 14 recognizes that reality.

It responds with practical, mean - ingful action. [1:30 p.m.] But one of the most important aspects of this legisla - tion is that it expands timber sales options in a way that directly supports good-paying jobs, something I think we can all agree on in this House. By creating a wider range of contract opportunities through B.C. Timber Sales, we are opening the door for more contractors, including small and medium-sized operators, to participate in this sector. These are not abstract policy changes.

They are real op - portunities for people to bid on work, to grow their busi - ness, to invest their equipment and to hire and train work - ers. For many contractors who do not hold long-term ten - ures and rely on access to fibre through the open market, these changes represent a significant and long-overdue improvement. They mean better access to market-priced fibre. They mean great participation in the forestry econ - omy. They mean more stability in an industry that has ex - perienced too much uncertainty over the years.

We’ve heard clearly from stakeholders across the sector that access to fibre is one of the most pressing challenges they face. Without reliable access, mills cannot operate at capacity. Without capacity, jobs are at risk. Without jobs, communities suffer. Bill 14 addresses this challenging but improving fibre flow across the province. By expanding the types of tim - ber sale licences available and increasing the flexibility of B.C. Timber Sales, we are ensuring that the right log gets the right mill at the right time.

This is particularly important for value-added manu - facturers, who often depend on specific types of fibre and have historically faced barriers to accessing it. In fact, these changes are expected to significantly increase the amount of fibre available to the sector. This includes not only the overall increase in supply that has already been discussed but also targeted improvements that will help ensure that fibre is distributed more efficiently and equitably. Another key component of this legislation is the focus on salvage logging and the recovery of damaged timber.

In recent years, British Columbia has experienced devas - tating wildfires and other natural disasters that have left significant volumes of timber damaged but still usable. Without timely action, that fibre is lost, representing both an economic loss and a missed opportunity to reduce fuel loads and improve forest health. Bill 14 addresses this by streamlining access to salvage opportunities, some - thing people have been asking for. These new approaches will allow for faster recovery of damaged timber, increasing the amount of usable fibre that can be brought forward to market.

They will support mills, particularly in the pulp sector, that rely on that type of material. They will create additional work for contract - ors who are ready and able to take on these projects. Importantly, this work also contributes to building a more wildfire-resilient landscape, something I think we can also all agree on. By removing damaged and high-risk material, we are taking proactive steps to reduce future fire risk and protect communities. This legislation is also about strengthening long-term forest outcomes. For too long, aspects of our system have been focused primarily on short-term harvest cycles.

While that approach has delivered benefits in the past, it is not sufficient to meet the challenges we face today. Bill 14 supports a shift toward full-rotation forest management. This means looking at the entire life cycle of a forest, from initial harvest through replanting and ongoing steward - ship, all the way to future harvest. By empowering B.C. Timber Sales to play a strong role across that full cycle, we are improving our ability to plan for the long term. We are shaping future forests for resili - ence, for health and for high-quality timber.

We are pro - viding greater certainty for workers, for communities and for investors who are dependent on a stable, predictable supply of fibre. This long-term approach also reinforces B.C.’s position as a global leader in sustainable forestry practices. I also want to highlight the importance of partnership in this Legislature. We know that the future of forestry in B.C. must be built on collaboration. This includes collab - oration with First Nations, with our local communities, with industry and with workers. Bill 14 enables more flexible and meaningful partner - ships by giving B.C.

Timber Sales the tools it needs to work differently than in the past. It allows for approaches that are tailored to our local priorities and that support shared stewardship outcomes. [1:35 p.m.] We’ve already seen encouraging results in this direc - tion. The comments before me about repealing UNDRIP

6498 B ritish Columbia Debates T hursday, April 16, 2026 and prioritizing different things…. I want to remem - ber that it’s about partnerships with First Nations, hav - ing helped bring additional fibre to the market, while supporting capacity-building and economic participa - tion. Because again, it’s about collaboration and working together. These are the kinds of outcomes we need to con - tinue to build on. The support for these changes extends across the for - estry sector, industry associations, labour organizations.

As someone who has represented many labour organiza - tions in my time, including being the president of Vic - toria Labour Council and representing the Island and the Sunshine Coast in the B.C. Federation of Labour and the Pacific region for the Canadian Labour Congress, it’s an area I’m very familiar with. Representatives of value-added manufacturers have all recognized the importance of improving fibre access and creating more flexible opportunities with B.C. Timber Sales. They’ve spoken about the need for stability so that contractors can invest in their workforce and modernize their equipment.

They’ve emphasized the importance of ensuring that mills have access to cost-effective logs so they can continue to operate and support families, sup - port jobs — good jobs, good jobs in our community, good jobs in the province. They’ve highlighted the role that in - creased fibre availability plays in strengthening the com - munities across our province. This broad support reflects a shared understanding that we need to act. Bill 14 is a meaningful step in the right direction. It’s also worth noting that the changes we are advan - cing today build on real, measurable progress.

We’ve al - ready seen an increase in timber sale volumes, improved access to fibre for value-added manufacturers and ex - panded stewardship activities here on the ground. We’ve seen innovative approaches, including the use of new technologies to support forestry professionals and improve outcomes. These early results demonstrate that when we give B.C. Timber Sales the tools they need, they can deliver. Bill 14 takes that momentum and builds on it. It strengthens B.C.

Timber Sales as a more flexible and re- sponsible supplier of fibre, including those without trad - itional tender, and it ensures that we continue to balance economic opportunities with strong environmental stew - ardship and public interest outcomes. Because again, we all need to work together as we work together to ensure that British Columbians have everything they’re going to need. Forestry is not just an industry in B.C. It is a corner - stone of our economy and a foundation of many of our communities, especially in our rural areas.

The decisions we make in this House have real consequences for people who depend on it. We have heard of those communities who are strug - gling, mills closing across the province — in the North and here on the Island. Bill 14 is protecting those com - munities. It’s about supporting those workers. It’s about making sure that little kid has got what they need to play baseball, that that parent has enough money to afford groceries, that they can afford their mortgages and they can afford everything they’re going to need to live a good life in their community so they can stay here in British Columbia.

I don’t want to have to look at someone who did what I had to do and left their home province. I want to en - sure whatever we do gets to keep those people here. It’s important. We’re ensuring that our forests continue to provide economic, environmental and social benefits for many generations to come — for me, for my daughters, for their kids and for generations after. We’re building a forestry sector that is more resilient, more inclusive and more sus - tainable. We’re doing so in a way that reflects the values of British Columbians. We cannot control global markets.

We cannot control the policy of other countries or stupid people in different levels of government. But we can take action here at home to strengthen our own system, support our own work - ers, our own government and to make the most of the re - sources we do have. Bill 14 does exactly that. It improves access to fibre, supporting good jobs. You will never not hear me stand up here in this House and talk about good-paying jobs for British Columbians, because it’s at the heart of who I am. It’s not just about my community.

It’s about making sure that there are good-paying jobs, again, for generations and generations to come. It enhances stewardship. It sets the stage for a more stable, prosperous future for British Col - umbia — something, again, that I think all sides of the House can agree on. [1:40 p.m.] For all of those reasons, I am proud to stand here in support of this legislation. I would be remiss if I didn’t talk about some of those unions who are also fighting the good fight, who unfortu - nately have lost their jobs.

We need to get a path back for them — our Steelworkers, our Unifor members, people who’ve stood the test of time, long-standing union activ - ists. I stand up here quite regularly and talk about those workers. I was on a labour council that was established in 1887. Guess what one of the first unions was — forestry workers. It talks about them and the work they did. They helped build this province and, again, the very building we’re in. We could not do it without them today, then and in the future.

I encourage all members of this House to join me in supporting Bill 14 and supporting workers, commun - ities, families, the forests themselves that it will benefit —

Thursday, April 16, 2026 B ritish Columbia Debates 6499 not just today but for future generations, for those of my kids and for their little friends and perhaps whoever they marry, because hopefully, they will stay in B.C. Hopefully, you’re watching this one day, and you choose to stay here. Again, I’d like to thank the minister for bringing this bill forward. I think this bill is helping us move in the right direction to continue all the things I have stated before. John Rustad: Happy to get up and speak to Bill 14.

I ap - preciate the applause, especially from my longtime friends from the other side of the House. It’s a pleasure to get up and share a few words. Bill 14 is another version of forest legislation coming forward from this province with lots of promise, as the member previous just said. You know, it’s going to be sus- tainable forest management. It’s going to create jobs. It’s going to have fibre flow. It’s going to do all these wonder - ful things for our forest sector. It has been a decade of hearing these from the NDP, and I just want to go a little bit down memory lane.

Way back then, they used to talk about secondary manufac - turing. Imagine that. How did those results turn out? Well, we’ve seen secondary manufacturing plummet after policy and policy came forward from this government. Then they said: “Oh, it’s all about value-added. We’re going to make sure we add value to the logs.” Well, you’ve got to actually log to actually add value, and the logging is cut in half. There has been no value-added. All we’ve seen are jobs lost and mills closed. They promised they were going to get rid of log exports. Well, how has that worked out?

Yeah, they have stopped some log exports simply because they haven’t made any wood available, but it certainly hasn’t declined the amount of wood that’s actually being exported from this project. Then there was the promise of more jobs per cubic metre. We’ve got to be getting our true value and gener - ating all those jobs. Well, how did that turn out? Clearly, we’ve seen a massive loss of jobs in the forest sector.

We have seen policy after policy come forward from this government with no measurable results, only negative results, to the place today where our chief forester says we should be logging 62 million cubic metres. That’s what is sustainable in the forest today — 62 million cubic metres. Yet in this budget that this government has brought for - ward, they’re estimating that they’re going to cut 29 million. I actually think they’re being optimistic.

I don’t even think they’re going to get to that — less than half of what is allowed to be cut sustainably, properly, under world standards in this province — because of policies like this one that have been brought forward. Policy after policy has driven up prices and killed our forest sector in British Columbia. We’ve seen…. Deputy Speaker: Member, just a moment. Misty Van Popta: I seek leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members Misty Van Popta: In the chamber today, or up in the gallery just seated now, are friends of mine from Langley Christian School.

They’re one of three groups here that’s coming through. The first classes are from Ms. Hogg and Ms. Wessner, and they are here as grade 5. My kids were also members of Langley Christian School, a good school focused on quality education. I wanted to also recognize all the parent chaperones up there as well — an old colleague of mine, Matthew Groot, and a really good friend of mine, Dorothy Boessenkool — also in the House today. Will you please make them feel welcome. [1:45 p.m.] Debate Continued John Rustad: Great to see students here learning about our democracy in British Columbia, how the process works.

I was talking about all the job losses and the struc - ture that we’re seeing here in British Columbia. Imagine this. B.C. Timber Sales was set up to make available about 20 percent of the fibre in British Columbia so that we could have a proper market pricing system. It worked for a while, but over the last ten years, what has happened? In my area of Nechako Lakes, which I’m honoured to have the chance to get up and speak on behalf of, there was a period of three years where there was zero volume put out by B.C. Timber Sales — zero.

They’ve got more than 20 percent of the volume and it’s just gone, not even being put out for bid in the market. B.C. Timber Sales has consistently undercut. They’ve consistently not met their targets of fibre that’s available for British Columbia. As a matter of fact, I wouldn’t even be surprised, and we’ll have to see in terms of the budgets when you really look at the numbers, if B.C. Timber Sales actually loses money in terms of their cost versus the rev - enue they generate on the fibre they put out on the market.

Such a great organization that is unable to put fibre out, that isn’t contributing financially in any significant way to our forest sector…. Our Ministry of Forests is cost - ing more than the revenue that’s being generated today in the forest sector. And now we have a bill that is going to give them the ability to get into logging, to get into sorting and creating sort yards, and there’s merchanting and this whole side of things. I was talking with people in the forest sector. They say:

6500 B ritish Columbia Debates T hursday, April 16, 2026 “Are these guys kidding? They haven’t got the expertise. They haven’t got anybody in the organization that knows how to do it.” As a matter of fact, there’s only a handful, maybe ten people in the entire province, that have some of the skills that these people say they’re going to be able to do in B.C. Timber Sales. How’s that going to work out? Well, let’s look at the record. The record says it has been failure after failure, yet somehow, this is the solution for the forest sector. This will help us get the right log to the right mill.

I’m sorry, but evidence speaks far louder than spin coming from this government and that minister. And spin is what we’re seeing non-stop. If you listen to the speeches from them, you would think that they’ve got this great, wonderful forest sector that’s going. We just heard the member previous speak — not the reality of a forest sec - tor in crisis, a forest sector on the verge of collapse, thou - sands of jobs being lost, mills being shut down all over the province. The member previous said: “Yes, this bill will help us be able to access fire-damaged wood.” Well, excuse me?

There has been permit after permit that have gone for - ward for fire-damaged wood, and they’ve been blocked by this government. We’ve had mills that have shut down and had to lay their people off because they can’t get the wood, and they’re in the heart of where there are millions of cubic metres of damaged wood that could be harvested — mil - lions. And they’ve sent their workers home because they can’t get access to fibre. Wood that only lasts three to five years, and then it falls down and it’s no longer salvage - able…. You go to Alberta and they can get those permits in three months, not three-plus years.

This is the forest sector that is the NDP’s version in British Columbia, and we have another bill coming in. Oh yes, BCTS is going to ride to the salvation of the forest sec - tor. It’s going to make more fibre available. It’s going to get the right log to the right mill. Well, I find that somewhat disingenuous, for this min - istry and this government to actually believe that that is what they’re going to do. It’s just going to be yet another layer.

Now, if they really wanted to help our forest sector, if they really wanted to actually get more fibre, get more value from that fibre, create more jobs, get the mills open again in this province, you know the first thing they should do? A core review of their costs and slash all of the input costs that this government has created for our forest sector. Layer upon layer of bureaucracy and process, time and expense. [1:50 p.m.] You can’t compete when you are way, way out of whack in a cost structure. No one’s going to invest in this prov - ince when that is what is being created in British Columbia.

It’s not just the cost. We need major stumpage reform. Stumpage…. Quite frankly, I don’t even know why we still use this system. The market pricing system is clearly not working properly, because BCTS is not getting the volume out on the market, and they’re certainly not getting that percentage of our forest going. Why are we so concerned about how the Americans will respond? Excuse me? Who cares about what they’re going to do? We need to get our forest sector working. We need to get the people back to work.

They’re going to do what they’re going to do regardless of what we do, so let’s focus on making sure that British Columbia comes first. Let’s change our stumpage system. Let’s make things work. Fibre availability. This is really simple. You’ve got a chief forester, independent, one of the most skilled people in the forest sector, with a whole division of people who are saying that you can cut 62 million cubic metres. Get the permits out the door. Allow that to happen. Don’t take three years to get permits; take three months to get permits.

It’s process upon process that’s being added that pre - vents that wood from actually flowing, to the place where companies like Canfor just throw up their hands and say: “There’s no point trying to do business in British Colum - bia. You can’t operate here.” When I read through this bill and looked at it, I had to chuckle a little bit. Throughout this, in many, many sec - tions, it says: “Terms and conditions included in a forest licence to cut may set requirements or restrictions that are more stringent than the requirements and restrictions that apply to the holder under this act.” Think about that.

We already have the most difficult jurisdiction in North America, and likely in the world, to actually do anything in forestry, and this act is talk - ing about making things more stringent, more restrictive, more difficult. How exactly does that work and match with the rhetoric that has come from the minister and others that have spoken to this? I don’t get it. It doesn’t make any sense. But then again, that is the definition of the NDP and this government. They don’t make any sense. Interjection. John Rustad: I am being nice. Believe me, I’d love to use better words. Interjections.

John Rustad: It’s not even getting late in the afternoon, where the usual chirping starts up, Madam Speaker, but that’s okay. It’s always good to be able to heckle back and forth a little. This bill also talks a little bit about wildfire and salvage logging. Certainly, we do need to do more. Quite frankly, we need to be doing more to access all the fibre. But when your sawmill is shut down, the pulp mills aren’t getting

Thursday, April 16, 2026 B ritish Columbia Debates 6501 chips and the pellet plants aren’t getting residual fibre, there’s no incentive to invest in doing anything else with the fibre that is available. It’s great to talk about salvage of this fibre, but how does that work if there isn’t anybody to take it? We used to have power plants, and we still do have power plants, but they were strangled by this govern - ment in terms of the pricing structure. Most of them are struggling just to keep open. I visited one just last sum - mer down in the Falkland area, I believe it was, down in through that area.

They were wondering if they could even stay open, because they couldn’t get a proper con - tract to cover the cost to be able to do their fibre recovery. Now, think about this. If a pulp mill shuts down and you don’t have a pellet plant, how does the sawmill stay open? Where do you send your chips? You can’t operate. Chips are a major revenue stream for sawmills. But at the same time, if the sawmills are shutting down, how does the pulp mill stay open? They can’t just continually be grinding whole logs for chips. They need that residual to be able to be affordable and be competitive.

This is a huge problem that has happened in this. I actually got to a place where I asked the forest sector. I said: “How do you restart?” If we end up with these hor - rible policies, and both sides of our sector — the primary breakdown and the other components that are using it — shut down at the same time because they can’t operate in this province, how do you get them up and running again? [1:55 p.m.] Who comes first? How do you get a pulp mill without sawmills? How do you get sawmills without a pulp mill?

The damage that has been done to this forest sector is going to take decades to reverse, because you can’t just suddenly go and start up a new sawmill. You have to bring the whole industry up as you go. It just doesn’t work. This bill is not going to do anything to solve any of that side of things. One of the big challenges, I think, in terms of this, is certainly just permitting in general. Where is it in this bill that actually says: “Permits will get done in three to six months. We’re going to strip out all the bureaucracy and process to get to that place”? It’s not in here.

They talk about wanting to have fibre moving faster and that whole side of things. I don’t want to go on too much. But I did want to say, because…. The reason I’m speaking particularly to this bill is that forestry is near and dear to my riding, where I have seen all of the major mills shut down in my rid - ing, most of the major mills permanently. There are still a number of the sawmills that are up and running, and they are significant job creators in our communities. They’re an important fabric of my riding. But Houston has lost both its sawmills. Fraser Lake has lost its sawmill.

Vanderhoof has lost its major saw - mill. These are foundational mills for the communities that are gone, and they’re not coming back — not coming back until we get a government that actually respects and champions the forest sector. That’s what is needed from this government, an actual champion — not somebody who wants to go out and do a goodwill tour and go off and give some speeches but some- body who fundamentally believes in the forest sector and that these are the most renewable, the most environment - ally friendly products that we could be producing for the world.

Get out there, sell the products, fix the problems, drive down the costs, and actually have a healthy sector. The member previous talked about members in the Steelworkers and the other unions in this province. I’ve talked to them too, and I’ll tell you what. They keep telling me the same thing. They are sick and tired of transition, of bridging to retirement or retraining. They just want to work. They want to do their jobs. They want to provide for their families. They want to be able to carry on with the lives that they’ve had in the past. They want their mills open. They want fibre to flow and to have access.

There’s so much that could be done to our forest sector to improve things. Yes, we’ve got a problem with our neighbour south of the border. That’s a big issue. We’ve got to solve that, and we’ve got to find ways to put pressure on to solve that. But at the same time, there are things that we should be doing in British Columbia for our forest sector. The best thing that the minister could do, quite frankly, is not just to go out on a tour and give some speeches but to actually put some action in place to what he hears.

Come back into this Legislature with a list of the things that the industry is telling him — sector by sector of it, mill by mill, union and non-union, companies coming forward saying: “Please, just please give us a break. Give us an opportunity to actually be successful.” Come into the Legislature and read their list. Read their list and then commit to doing it. This government in this past budget came out and said that they’ve got an aspirational target of 45 million cubic metres. My gosh.

The industry is saying, “Hallelujah, we might actually get to 45 million cubic metres,” while the chief forester is saying we could be cutting 62 million. Strange — very, very strange — to think of what happened to our forest sector. The sad

part is that we’ve seen this before. This is what happened in the 1990s. I’ll never forget a cartoon I saw at the end of the 1990s where the forest industry came in to talk to the Premier of the day, begging and pleading for them to lift their boot just at least a little bit off of their chest so that maybe they could breathe, maybe they could operate a little bit. The cartoon said…. The government of the day said: “No way. We are not doing anything until you create those 30,000 jobs I promised.” The caption underneath is:

6502 B ritish Columbia Debates T hursday, April 16, 2026 “When’s the next election?” And the response was: “Not soon enough.” [2:00 p.m.] We’re in that same boat today with our forest sec - tor. We need significant changes. We need a government that’ll actually listen to them. We need a government that actually cares about the jobs and communities that our forest sector needs and that our forest sector supports. Nechako Lakes has gone through some tough times when it comes to forestry. Nechako Lakes has come through some tough times, as well, even with wildfires.

I look at Bill 14 and I think: “If this is the best the govern - ment can do, we have huge problems ahead.” I just want to repeat something, as well, about the B.C. Timber Sales. They do not have the expertise to do what the minister is promising. So what will happen? They’re going to have to hire a bunch of people. They’re going to have to set up all kinds of protocol and process. They’re going to add huge expense.

They’re going to come out and celebrate that something gets up and running, but they’re not going to look at the bottom line — which is actual jobs, the costs and what it actually means for com - munities and operations that need fibre. I can tell you something about sort yards and bringing in whole logs. I think it’s a great idea to do that. Let the private sector do it if the business model is there. Because what ends up happening is that the government is going to celebrate this, they’re going to bring in the fibre, and they’re going to cream off the best stuff.

And yes, that’ll go off to be processed here and there. But what happens to the rest of it? There’s no market for it. There’s no place to send it. So what happens? It piles up, and it piles up. Then they have to apply for permits just to burn it. Because there’s no access. There are no jobs. There is no secondary manufacturing. There’s no need or use for it. You’ve got to create the demand before you cre - ate that supply. And they’ve killed the demand. What’s next? Are they going to actually start investing in that kind of operation so that they can use the fibre as well?

Does government want to try to take over the whole operation of our forest sector? Back in 1987, the Ministry of Forests thought it was a great idea…. Well, this is all the way leading up to 1987. That’s when the change was. But before then, the Ministry of Forests thought it was a great idea for governments to look after tree planting, because they would get it right. They would make sure the forests would be reforested. What were the stats? A 65 percent success rate and 20 to 25 years to get to free-to-grow. After 1987, it moved to the private sector. The govern - ment of the day did the right thing.

They said: “No, no. We don’t do this well. We’ll move it to the private sector.” When it moved to the private sector, you know what the numbers became? A 98 percent success rate and 11 to 14 years to free-to-grow — remarkable change, remarkable improvements. We’re getting our trees planted, higher- quality trees being planted. They’re getting free-to-grow. They’re getting to a place, quite frankly, where they can be counted on for the next generation of harvesting, instead of wasted time going back and replanting, slow growth.

That’s what I’m afraid of, that we do what we used to do way back then by having government look after doing it. The private sector are the ones that can make it work, and if they can’t make it work, they won’t do it. The government doesn’t have that mandate. If they can’t make it work, they’ll just throw more money at it. Well, we’re not making money in this province. We’re run- ning a $13.3 billion deficit. We can’t throw more money at it. We need the private sector to make it work so that we can generate revenue to help pay down our deficit and get in a better place in this province.

The people in Nechako Lakes are proud of their for - estry background and their forestry history. That com - bined with agriculture and the mining that’s going on, the bit of tourism and other manufacturing that goes on and the small businesses…. It’s a very proud riding. But they are very uncomfortable and upset about what has hap - pened to our forest sector. They’re looking for hope.

Bill 14 is being billed like that, but I can’t see anything in here that I can go back to my riding with and say: “This will bring you hope.” Lorne Doerkson: I have a few brief remarks, too, that I want to make regarding Bill 14 and the Forests Statutes Amendment Act. I certainly share a number of similar opinions with the members for Nechako Lakes and also Peace River North. [2:05 p.m.] I guess I’m always happy to hear that we’re in a position to speak about forestry in this chamber and bring com - ments from some of the rural ridings.

But I think what often gets forgotten in this room is that this really has an incredibly serious effect on the entire province. You just have to fly into the Vancouver Airport one time and look below in the Fraser River and see how much of our for - estry products are sitting in that river. This is so serious throughout the province. While I appreciate the fact that we have a bill before the House that has a goal of solving some of the issues with respect to BCTS, B.C. Timber Sales, I really don’t see it as a fulsome solution to our challenges in the forest industry in general terms.

First off, BCTS is being asked to do more, certainly, at a time when they’re already struggling to deliver on their core mandate. They’re already facing challenges deliv - ering existing volume. Planning, permitting, operational constraints remain unchanged. Adding new responsibil - ities like wildfire and thinning…. Those types of things, frankly, are outside of the scope of what BCTS should be doing.

Thursday, April 16, 2026 B ritish Columbia Debates 6503 Frankly, this really puts the government in the seat as a general contractor when we’re surrounded by extremely well-outfitted loggers and mill operators through the en - tire province. Peace River North had pointed out earlier that there are 31 mills that have closed in this province. So when we talk about this bill having some sort of potential great im - pact on the province, I can’t wait to hear in committee — potentially, we’ll hear it in closing remarks today — what kind of volume is expected here.

The member for Nechako Lakes touched on what is the mandate of the Forests Ministry in this province — to generate 45 million cubic metres. I don’t want to throw out a whole bunch of numbers, but the budget shows 30 for the next couple of years. I’m very concerned about that, because that just doesn’t feel like a commitment to me. More importantly, the chief forester has made a num - ber of comments around that 60 million range, which should be sustainable from my understanding. I’m not a forester, but I have to believe the people that are in those places to certainly determine those numbers.

What I will say is this. Cariboo-Chilcotin is on pins and needles about bills like this one. I have to paint a bit of a picture about my riding. The reality is that it stretches from the West Chilcotin all the way to Savona, Cherry Creek, almost to Kamloops town. When you come to Williams Lake from Kamloops, you’ll encounter a mill in Savona. You’ll encounter a closed mill in Chasm. You’ll encounter a closed Norbord plant in 100 Mile House and now a closed West Fraser — which just closed, obviously, more recently, something that we’ve shared in this chamber before.

When you come to Williams Lake, you will see seven milling operations within the boundaries of our city. We had eight, but we just lost a pellet plant. So when you think about the thoughts that are on the minds of Cariboo-Chilcotin, what we are hoping for is im - proved processes. I can appreciate what Bill 14 is trying to do with re - spect to gaining access to all of the fibre that it proposes to get at. But I guess what I’ll be asking of the minister and hoping to better understand is: how is this different than what we’re doing now?

If you come to Williams Lake and, certainly, tour any of our forests or some of the forests around, you will no - tice that Tsi Del Del, companies like that…. The minister has been there, and we’ve certainly shared a conversation about this. Some of the thinning that has been done is absolutely amazing. This bill talks about doing thinning work. That work is happening now, in my mind. [2:10 p.m.] But the challenge around that is, honestly, permits. Permits that are applied for in September are still not ap - proved in April.

The Forests Minister has done incredible work to help on that, but we had to bring it to the Forests Minister’s attention. One of the members here mentioned the seasons and how things have changed. Roads get soft in the spring. You’ve all of a sudden lost a few weeks of productivity. We’re dealing with wildfire like we’ve never seen before in the province, but certainly, in Cariboo-Chilcotin. Again, you lose that time. You lose that opportunity to conduct some of this work. The challenge is not necessarily accessing it through BCTS. We just have to be able to access it — period.

The specific permit that I’m speaking about was in a place that was already…. It had been consumed by fire. We were try - ing to access that. I just think that Bill 14, probably more than ever, really puts BCTS in a spot to be a general contractor. Trust me when I say this, and I’ll certainly look for clarification on that. But if the notion is that BCTS will hire someone like San Jose Logging or Hytest logging to do that work and then retain the logs, then it would strike me that there’s going to be another level of cost in there. Now maybe the permitting process doesn’t improve. Maybe the permit…. I don’t know.

We’ll look for clarity on that, obviously, in committee stage. But we have amazing contractors in our area: San Jose, I just mentioned; PHL; Hytest Timber; AI Logging; the McNeil family in the south. We have some incredible log - ging families that have been literally doing it for genera - tions, and they’re good at it. I’ve been to second-genera - tion growth areas that we can absolutely log again. I’ve seen how modernized logging has become in some areas throughout our riding.

The one that I’m just abso - lutely amazed by is one that the Williams Lake First Na - tion did through Borland Creek Logging, where they’ve contemplated everything. They’ve contemplated leaving blinds for the wildlife to be protected in hunting. They’ve contemplated berry picking on the side of the road so that it’s accessible to Elders that might not be able to get around that much. I guess the point that I’m trying to make is that these logging companies have done such an amazing job, but where they’re finding a pinch point is getting through some of the paperwork.

I think the member from Vanderhoof mentioned the absolute costs that all of these companies are dealing with. It’s not just…. We talk about stumpage. Yes, stumpage is a challenge for sure. But it’s everything else. The cost of diesel, the cost of everything else has risen so much, and it is having a very serious effect. There was never a time more important than right now for us collectively as a province that we have to be com - petitive. We have to engage that world market. We defin - itely have to get our costs down. I don’t see how this bill will actually do that. I’ll hope for some clarity on that.

I want to talk a little bit about wildfire as well. I know

6504 B ritish Columbia Debates T hursday, April 16, 2026 that there is some interest in getting to some of those blocks quicker. I can appreciate that very much. I think that it is a very important part of the process. It’s not just cleaning up what is out there in the hinterland, but it is also a matter of getting planting, getting on that. I do know that in places like the Elephant Hill fire in Cache Creek…. That fire burned in 2017. We only got to it two years ago. That is a very serious concern. When you think of that area, Madam Speaker…. I don’t know if you’re familiar with it, but if it pleases the House….

It would take you a couple of hours to drive across that area. It burned in 2017, and here we are clean - ing it up two years ago. Honestly, shame on us. We talk about this being sus - tainable. We talk about it all the time. And it is. I’ve seen it with my own eyes. But for us not to be motivated to get that done is shocking to me. [2:15 p.m.] There are so many other things happening on the land - scape. It’s not just replanting the trees. We’re seeing weeds that we’ve never seen before. We’re seeing a landscape that, really, is in chaos itself. I just don’t know how this bill is going to help with that.

I speak often about permitting, and the reason I speak about it is because I know that it is a very serious chal - lenge. I’ve spoken many times to you about Dan Perrin, but it really is valuable to make that comparison over and over. Nothing happens without a permit. I’m talking about employment. I’m talking about revenue to the province. I’m talking about all of the things that come because that permit is approved. The second it’s approved, contract - ors start spending money. They start hiring people. They start buying equipment. All of that is revenue to this prov - ince. It’s all taxable. It’s income tax.

It’s tax on equipment. It is all taxable. So we really need to move these permits through this House. And I just…. Deputy Speaker: Member, just a minute. Misty Van Popta: I seek leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members Misty Van Popta: In the gallery up behind me here is the second group of grade 5 students from Langley Chris - tian School, a great school in Langley that my kids were also a part of. We’ve got Ms. Barkowsky’s class and part of Ms. Wessner’s class, and they’re here today to witness democracy in action.

Now, I did tell them that they missed question period when we’d be banging on our desks, but they are here to witness debate on Bill 14, which is the forestry bill. So if my colleague from Cariboo-Chilcotin wants to bang on some desks just to add some extra theatre to it, that would be fantastic. Will the House make them feel welcome. Debate Continued Lorne Doerkson: I will get to the forestry conversation right now. Welcome to all of our youth and everybody in the chamber. I’m going to close with a couple of quick comments.

First off, I can appreciate that this is a different ministry, but it makes my point with respect to permitting. This is a letter received by someone who is a placer miner. It says: “It’s highly unlikely that your application will be reviewed and approved in time for this field season. We have been telling placer applicants to expect process - ing times of up to two years.” Okay. That’s not something new. That is a recent letter, and we’ve been dealing with that for a while. It’s a chal - lenge in every part of our industry right now, and it has to get cleaned up. We have talked….

Many times, in this place, I’ve talked about things like making better use of the piles that we burn. And here we are. We have a bill here that will create access to do some of this work. I sure hope that that is being contemplated as well, be - cause I have shared photos of piles that we have burned that are shockingly huge, that could have been used for something. Frankly, it could have been used for firewood to heat people’s homes in some areas. But we can’t seem to move the needle on so much of that. I hope that this will help with some of that, but I just don’t see it. I don’t see it.

I appreciate the time today and look forward to hearing closing remarks from the Forests Minister and, certainly, committee stage of the bill. Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, I’ll ask the Minister of Forests to close debate. Hon. Ravi Parmar: I know some of my colleagues are eager to get on to the next piece of legislation, which is very important, but I do want to provide an opportunity to be able to respond to all of the comments and discus - sion that has occurred on Bill 14. [2:20 p.m.] Forestry is so much about people and place. I know that you’ve got lots of beautiful trees in Langley.

Langley is a very beautiful community, but British Columbia is a beautiful province. Ninety-five hectares covered in forests. It’s a province that has a sector, forestry, that built this province. Forestry paid for this building. Forestry paid for

Thursday, April 16, 2026 B ritish Columbia Debates 6505 our communities. Forestry paid for the schools that we all call home in our communities. I’m so very proud to be part of a government, led by our Premier, that is working hard every single day to restore confidence in this sector. I want to thank all of my colleagues across the way, in particular the critic for forestry for his words and for his perspectives. It’s fair to say that we don’t agree on many things, but I will never question his passion for the file. I say that from all of the comments.

I had an opportunity to be able to either watch or read the transcripts of all of the remarks, including the re - marks from some of my own colleagues. In particular, a shout-out to the member for Ladysmith-Oceanside, who has a deep, deep understanding of forestry as it relates to her community. I think of the member for Juan de Fuca–Malahat, who talked about the blood, sweat and tears that he has shed working in the logging sector. I think of my colleague for Cowichan Valley and the work that she has done in the last number of months to support her community through some really trying times.

Forestry, like I said, is about people and place. But let me be very clear. I was enjoying the conversa - tion and enjoying the dialogue. I will not be lectured by the member for Nechako Lakes. The member for Nechako Lakes, the former leader of the official opposition, knows nothing about forestry. We have to get the guy to show up in his community, to actually talk to forestry workers, to actually talk to mill operators. That community has been devastated by mill closures and curtailments.

Let’s remember that on the day that the Canfor mill in Vanderhoof closed, instead of reaching out to the local mayor and council, instead of reaching out to the forestry workers, what did the former leader of the opposition do? Deputy Speaker: Member, just a reminder. Keep re - marks specific to the bill. Hon. Ravi Parmar: Absolutely, Madam Speaker. What did that member do? Went and set up a podium and started giving speeches. Never once reached out to that mayor. Bill 14 is a very important piece of legislation. By no means does Bill 14 fix all of the challenges that exist in the forest sector.

We are talking about a sector that needs to change, desperately, to be able to meet the needs of British Columbians today. Bill 14 takes important steps down the road of ensuring that B.C. Timber Sales — an organiza - tion that we can all acknowledge has not been performing these last number of years — can perform. I heard from my colleagues across the way that they are supportive of the desires of our government as it relates to full-rotation forest stewardship. They’re excited about the opportunity to see more access to fire-damaged timber.

They’ve got some reservations about contract logging, and I think it’s completely fair for them to raise those concerns. We have had pilots in the past — that was referenced in the members across the way’s remarks — in the late ’80s as well as the ’90s. But the forest sector looks entirely dif - ferent today than it did in the ’90s and ’80s. For example, as we talked about in my remarks, First Nations, in 2003, had 3 percent access to the annual allowable cut. Today they have 22 percent access. They are going to be strong partners in this work.

When I think of the remarks from my colleague across the way from Cariboo-Chilcotin, who, I might add, has done an outstanding job advocating for his community…. It is always a delight to be able to work with him. He raises concerns. He brings forward issues. I put that offer out to him, and I put that offer out to anyone across the way. If you have permits that are caus - ing difficulties, bring them forward. It’s my job to ensure that my ministry is responding in an appropriate manner.

We’ve had those conversations, and I think, in many ways, we’ve been able to address those challenges because permitting is not an issue from a ministry perspective. It’s all the work that goes into developing a permit for consideration. That’s the work that we’re doing right now, and Bill 14 is a part of that. Bill 14 is about speeding things up. Bill 14 is not about creating more jobs in the Ministry of Forests. Bill 14 is about taking advantage of the loggers and con - tractors throughout British Columbia and creating jobs and opportunities for them.

When you have a member across the way who is a for - mer B.C. Liberal, part of a record that lost 100,000 jobs when they sat on this side of the House…. I am sorry, but I am not going to take any lectures from that member across the way. [2:25 p.m.] I am proud of a government that is seeing investments. Bill 14 sends investor confidence in our forest sector. It’s not just me. It’s not just my colleagues on this side of the House that have spoken to it. Let me read some quotes.

Todd Chamberlain, general manager of the Interior Logging Association, says: “The Interior Logging Asso - ciation strongly supports the BCTS review and proposed legislative updates. These changes are critical to providing contractors with the stability they need to invest in their workforce, modernize equipment and sustain the com - munities that depend on forestry.” Kim Haakstad, from the Council of Forest Industries, says: “This is a step forward that builds momentum to im - prove wood flow and support jobs.

We remain committed to working with government on the next steps to ensure predictable and economic access to fibre and to move to - ward an annual 45 million cubic metre harvest.” Geoff Dawe, the president of PPWC, a union that has faced big challenges….

6506 B ritish Columbia Debates T hursday, April 16, 2026 Deputy Speaker: Excuse me, Minister. Point of Order Larry Neufeld: With respect to the minister, I would like to raise a point of order that we are speaking to Bill 14, and I’m not hearing that in the conversation to the point where I think we should. Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member. Minister, just a reminder to keep your remarks relevant to Bill 14. Debate Continued Hon. Ravi Parmar: I’ll refer to the members opposite that there were some validator quotes provided in support of Bill 14. I’m happy to send the link over to the member across the way.

I’ll just continue with a couple more. I think it is im - portant for the members opposite because they’re going to get an opportunity to vote, in a moment, on Bill 14 — whether to send it to the next stage, and that is committee. I want the member across the way from Peace River South to know that Geoff Dawe, the president of the Pri - vate and Public Workers of Canada, said about Bill 14: “These changes to B.C. Timber Sales are a positive step for - ward for workers across the pulp and paper sector.” I could go on. There are lots of quotes.

Lenny Joe from the First Nations Forestry Council said: “The forestry council supports the current BCTS legislative amend - ments, as they align with First Nations’ long-term stew - ardship and ensure more flexibility with the program.” Look, I know it’s difficult for members to come in here and debate legislation. There are lots of questions. That’s why we’ve got committee stage. I’m looking forward to the opportunity to participate in that committee stage. Let me be very clear. We have a sector here that is strug- gling.

We also have a sector filled with thousands of work - ers, over 100,000 workers, that are working hard every single day. On this side of the House, we lift those workers up. We do not talk down to those workers. We do not talk down to this sector. Canfor — an organization, a company here in British Columbia — shared at COFI that they have invested $900 million in British Columbia since 2019. Bill 14 is not going to solve all the challenges, but it is one important step.

It is one important tool, one import - ant initiative that we are taking on in the Ministry of For - ests and in the government of British Columbia, led by our Premier, to restore confidence in the sector and be damn sure that we’re going to fight like hell for every forestry worker in every forestry community. I am proud to stand and close debate on Bill 14. I’m proud to be on the side of a government that is com - mitted to forestry workers and committed to forestry communities. With that, I encourage all members to support Bill 14. I look forward to the questions.

Introductions by Members Deputy Speaker: Before we proceed to the vote, I just want to take a moment and recognize that we’ve got friends from the Filipino Legacy Society. I hope they all enjoyed the visit: Warren Flandez, the chair; Maj Yee, the vice-chair; Lorentz Sy, the treasurer; Christine de Castro, secretary; Matthew Remedios, legal counsel; Allan Jiang with the legal team; and David Decolongon, director. Thank you for your service to the community. Debate Continued Deputy Speaker: Members, the question is second reading of Bill 14, Forests Statutes Amendment Act, 2026. Motion approved. Hon.

Ravi Parmar: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House at the next sitting of the House after today. Motion approved. Hon. Brittny Anderson: I call second reading on Bill 16, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act. BILL 16 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2026 Hon. Niki Sharma: I move that the bill now be read a second time. [2:30 p.m.] This bill amends several statutes. I will begin with two amendments to the Judicial Review Procedure Act. First, a new

section is being added to respond to recent court decisions that risk intruding on cabinet confiden - tiality by requiring government to produce a list of cab - inet materials in certain judicial review proceedings. This

section is similar to legislation in other jurisdictions, in - cluding the Canada Evidence Act, but narrower in scope, as it only applies to judicial review proceedings, not to all litigation. [Lorne Doerkson in the chair.] This

section allows a designated person to certify that information is a confidence of the executive council or Treasury Board. Once this certification is made, no one can be compelled to disclose the information. This

section ensures that cabinet can continue to maintain a sphere

Thursday, April 16, 2026 B ritish Columbia Debates 6507 of confidentiality that the Supreme Court of Canada has recognized is essential to good government. Second,

section 11 of the JRPA is being repealed. This provision is being repealed to make it clear that the time - line for bringing a judicial review should be governed either by the common law or the governing statutory scheme. This change will bring predictability and cer - tainty about the applicable timelines for bringing a judi - cial review. Proposed amendments to the Fuel Price Transparency Act support the continued delivery of the act by enabling a shift to a sustainable, industry-funded model for adminis - tration.

Since its enactment in 2019, the act has improved transparency, competitiveness and public confidence in British Columbia’s transportation fuel market by requir - ing fuel suppliers to report pricing data to the B.C. Util - ities Commission, which publishes information to help the public understand fuel price movements. The amendments do not change the act’s core purpose. They enable the recovery of administration costs from in - dustry by authorizing the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make regulations and the B.C.

Utilities Commission to set and collect fees from fuel market participants, creating a sustainable funding model for the program. Next, amendments to the Zero-Emission Vehicles Act increase the supply of ZEVs in British Columbia to reduce emissions and air pollution. It will also encourage auto - makers to offer more affordable and accessible ZEV op - tions, supporting a clear transportation transition for all British Columbians. The province recognizes the need to recalibrate targets, considering recent market changes.

The proposed amend - ments lower the 2023 ZEV sales targets from 100 percent to 75 percent and remove the 2035 prohibition on the sale of non-ZEVs to give British Columbians more choice in finding a vehicle that best suits their needs. The amendments also remove the 2026 and 2030 ZEV sales targets from the legislation, keeping these targets in regulation to allow for greater flexibility to respond to emerging federal policy and future market fluctuations.

Overall, the amendments ease short-term ZEV sales re - quirements while retaining a pragmatic, long-term target that aligns with the Canada automotive strategy — bal - ancing pressures on automakers with the need to sustain progress towards a cleaner transportation future in Brit - ish Columbia. The proposed amendments to the University Endow - ment Land Act will provide the University Endowment Lands with a modern bylaw enforcement tool, namely mu- nicipal ticketing, which is commonly used by local gov - ernments in British Columbia.

Currently the UEL lacks effective tools for enforcing minor bylaw contraventions, such as parking violations or nuisances, which means that many of these offences that are routinely ticketed across local governments are not enforced under the UEL. The proposed amendments will allow the UEL to set out ticketing offences and penalties up to $3,000 in a by - law, in accordance with the municipal ticketing frame - work established in the Community Charter and regula - tion. Fines collected via ticketing may offset some of the operational costs of enforcement through ticketing in the UEL.

This legislation addresses a community request for im - proved bylaw enforcement in the UEL and will recognize better compliance with the UEL bylaws. Amendments are being proposed to the Local Govern - ment Act,

An Act to Incorporate the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District, Vancouver Charter and the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Author - ity Act. These amendments will give the province regulatory authority to designate any additional types of develop - ment for which local governments and TransLink could choose to waive or reduce development cost charges.

These charges are one-time fees on new development that help pay for essential infrastructure, transportation, water, sewer and parks so that the costs of growth are shared fairly between new development and existing taxpayers. [2:35 p.m.] Advancing the amendments now ensures the province is ready to act quickly on the federal government’s provin- cial and territorial stream of the build communities strong fund, announced as part of Budget 2025, which commits funding across Canada for housing-enabling and post- secondary infrastructure.

The proposed federal requirements are that provinces and territories must match federal contributions, signifi - cantly reduce development charges and avoid new taxes or fees that could hinder housing supply. The goal is to ac - celerate stalled housing projects by lowering upfront costs for developers. Currently British Columbia only allows development cost charge waivers for affordable rental housing and green building projects. The specific criteria for future provincial regulations under the new authority will be shaped through ongoing federal-provincial discussions.

The bill also includes two housekeeping amendments to the Residential Tenancy Act and the Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Act that clarify the admissibility of evidence in residential tenancy branch administrative penalty proceedings and replace inoperative amendments that affect the RTB’s authority to review decisions in or - ders rendered in a facilitated settlement process. Finally, proposed amendments to the Correction Act will support the facilitation of involuntary care for those held in custody of B.C. Corrections.

In some circum - stances, clinical staff require assistance from security staff during the administration of involuntary treatment. The proposed amendments to the Correction Act will formally authorize corrections officers with the ability to assist

6508 B ritish Columbia Debates T hursday, April 16, 2026 health care providers when delivering involuntary psychi - atric treatment under the Mental Health Act. Proposed amendments to the Correction Act will also seek to better reflect the authority of the Attorney Gener - al’s investigations and standards office to conduct inspec - tions and investigations and review disciplinary hearing appeals made by B.C.

Corrections, reflect the ISO require - ment to report to the Attorney General and to make re - ports public, refine the inmate complaint process to make it more accessible and give the director broader discretion about whether to investigate a complaint. With that, those are my comments. Steve Kooner: I rise as the official opposition critic for the Attorney General to speak to Bill 16, the Miscellan - eous Statutes Amendment Act, 2026.

I’d just like to state from the outset that when we’re dealing with miscellaneous statutes amendments, they’re perceived as a good thing because what we are doing is dealing with housekeeping legislation. A lot of times, things get missed or new situations pop up and older legis- lation may not address those new situations. So a lot of times, we have these housekeeping bills coming through the Legislature where many different subject matters are taken into consideration and some loose ends are actually tied up.

To that extent, I think most people, most members of this House, would agree that housekeeping bills are a good thing and we should encourage more of them to come to this House. With better legislation…. When you’re in - volved in the court process and you’re involved with any sort of litigation, sometimes things come down to inter - pretation, and sometimes things come down to legislation that’s not that clear. A lot of time in the court gets wasted upon dealing with figuring out what the meaning of the law was and trying to interpret that law.

To the extent that we are bringing miscellaneous stat - utes housekeeping bills to this House to address clarifi - cation issues, to address new situations that were not contemplated when the original legislation was brought forward, it’s actually a good thing, because we do have a backlog in our court system. We do have a lot of ineffi - ciencies within our court system. There are issues with re - sources as well.

One thing we can do to support the court system is make sure that we are making the process with legislation the most efficient as possible. [2:40 p.m.] To that extent, whenever we see miscellaneous statutes amendment bills, it’s always a welcome thing to see. That’s what I want to state from the outset. Miscellaneous stat - utes amendment bills, when used properly, serve a legit - imate purpose. They are meant to tidy up legislation. They action items such as housekeeping, technical fixes and minor updates that improve clarity and the administra - tion.

Like I said earlier, that is something all sides of this House can generally support. But there is one aspect of this bill that was very con - cerning, that really caught my attention. It was

part 1 of this bill. Now,

part 1 of this bill deals with the Attorney General amendments. It specifically deals with the Judi - cial Review Procedure Act. It’s clause 2 that actually is the meat and substance of this particular part. Clause 2 actually deals with this. It deals with disclosure of confidence of the executive coun - cil. There are

definitions in here. It talks about the cabinet. It talks about ministers. It talks about cabinet secretaries. It talks about deputy cabinet secretaries. It also talks about secretaries to the Treasury Board. Basically, what this clause does or is purporting to do is, essentially, any information that gets certified as con - fidence of the executive council that’s brought forward by, say, a minister or a cabinet secretary or a secretary to the Treasury Board…. That information can be certified as confidence. What does that mean?

That means if there is an appli - cation for judicial review in our court — say if there is a regulatory body and there’s a decision made by that regu - latory body and one of the parties wants to make an appli - cation for judicial review because they do not agree with the decision of that regulatory body — they would now be dealing with this particular clause that is now being put forward. It’s very important. When we’re dealing with regula - tory bodies and we’re dealing with mechanisms of judi - cial review, it’s very important to understand the aspect of administrative law.

The aspect of administrative law is a little bit different than…. Say you’re dealing with civil liti - gation matters that involve trial matters, where you have a trial and then you can appeal that trial decision to a Court of Appeal. At the Court of Appeal level, you will look at whether the decision was properly made, and you could even canvass and look at some of the evidence. But when we’re dealing with applications for judicial review, we’re dealing with administrative law measures.

When we’re dealing with regulatory bodies and having an appeal mechanism that is judicial review, the extent of ap - pealing, the mechanism of appealing, becomes a little lim - ited in terms of if you’re looking at it with a legal lens. So judicial review seems to be more of a limited amount of an appeal mechanism. Now, if we’re looking at it from this lens, that now this clause is going to apply to applications for judicial review that already have a limited extent of an appeal mechanism, it’s a little bit concerning. Because what would happen in this case….

When somebody doesn’t agree with a regula - tory body’s decision, they may want to rely on evidence that came out of a cabinet decision to support their appli - cation for judicial review. Now, what this particular clause will do is that anyone

Thursday, April 16, 2026 B ritish Columbia Debates 6509 — a minister, a cabinet minister, a secretary to the Treas - ury Board, a secretary to the cabinet — can just certify information as confidence. [2:45 p.m.] Certifying information as confidence will automatic - ally limit disclosure in regards to what can be disclosed in an application for judicial review. When a particular party is looking to get at evidence that is in the realm of the cab - inet, that is highly relevant. That is really concerning.

Just to go a little bit further into this clause, I’ve just kind of set the premise of this clause, but what this clause does is…. Deputy Speaker: Sorry to interrupt you, Member. Point of Order Misty V an P opta: I’m just rising on a point of order. I don’t think we have quorum here. Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member. You are correct. [The bells were rung.] Thank you very much, Member. You were quite right. Debate Continued Steve Kooner: As I was saying…. I was talking about clause 2 in Bill 16. In practice, what this clause will do….

A person may not be compelled to disclose, in an application for judicial review, information certified as confidence. That’s infor - mation that a cabinet minister or a secretary to the cabinet or a secretary to the Treasury Board may have labelled or certified information as confidence. A person may not be able to use that or may not be compelled to produce that information in an application for judicial review. An even more concerning aspect of this particular part of the bill is in clause 3. What clause 3 does is that it states that

section 23, which clause 2 actually puts into the Ju - dicial Review Procedure Act…. Clause 3 states that sec - tion 23 of the Judicial Review Procedure Act applies in relation to an application for judicial review commenced before, on or after that

section comes into force. This is a very troublesome part. A lot of times, there will be ongoing proceedings already that are in court. There are probably already applications for judicial review. Those proceedings are already happening, and now this law is going to get passed — if it gets passed by this House.

If that situation happens, the people that are currently in litigation — that knew nothing about this legislation, that are currently in litigation, that properly prepared their cases, went to court arguing their cases, now are in active litigation — are now going to have to deal with a new piece of legislation that is going to come their way that they did not contemplate, that they did not get to pre - pare with or prepare for. Now they’re going to get hit in the litigation process with a new piece of legislation that is being now entered in this House. There’s an aspect of….

In law, we talk about proced - ural fairness. We talk about fairness in the justice system. We talk about natural justice in the legal realm. When you have a law that’s being proposed now, it’s not only going to apply to future events. It’s actually going to apply to events that already exist right now, that are ongoing, that were happening even prior to this legislation being intro - duced. That, in very essence, appears to be very problem - atic because it goes against the notion of natural justice, procedural fairness. That is very problematic. How do you do that?

Litigants have gone out of their way to properly prepare the cases based upon the existing law, and now a certain element of this legislation is going to apply to their situa - tions. So we have to make sure…. Deputy Speaker: Member, I’m terribly sorry to inter - rupt you again. [2:50 p.m.] Misty Van Popta: Sorry to my colleague. I seek leave to make an introduction. Leave granted. Introductions by Members Misty Van Popta: In the gallery is the third and final group from Langley Christian School, grade 5 students from the Langley area. It’s a fantastic school which my kids also went to. This is Mr.

Toy’s class and Ms. Wessner’s. I did tell them about the bell system, I believe, when I was meeting with them earlier, so I’m glad they got to hear one of the bells, although it’s not for a vote. It’s because we didn’t have enough people in here. Will the House please make them feel welcome. Depu

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20260416pm-Hansard-n155
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20260416pm Hansard n155
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a25964cc2f3be6f27afe94710c3119b67d2500e8

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