Second Session, 42nd Parliament

(2021) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Thursday, October 7, 2021

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 104

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Don Craig

Hon. J. Horgan

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill 21 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2021

Hon. D. Eby

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Lytton fire and response

J. Tegart

National Family Week

K. Greene

Fire Prevention Week

B. Banman

Parkgate Society

S. Chant

Youth mental health and addiction awareness and education

S. Furstenau

Work of Vancouver–West End constituency assistants

S. Chandra Herbert

Oral Questions

Government response to heatwave

S. Bond

Hon. J. Horgan

Government response to Lytton fire

J. Tegart

Hon. J. Horgan

Hon. M. Farnworth

Protests at old-growth forests and RCMP actions

A. Olsen

Hon. M. Farnworth

Government response to communities impacted by wildfires

T. Stone

Hon. M. Farnworth

B. Stewart

Assistance for ranchers impacted by wildfires

L. Doerkson

Hon. L. Popham

Media appearance by Premier

P. Milobar

Hon. J. Horgan

Tabling Documents

Report pursuant to the COVID-19 Related Measures Act regarding Order-in-Council

552/2021, Attorney General

Reports from Committees

Finance and Government Services Committee, interim

report, budgets of statutory offices, August 2021

J. Routledge

B. Stewart

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 19 — Societies Amendment Act, 2021

Hon. S. Robinson

M. Bernier

Hon. S. Robinson

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 14 — Early Childhood Educators Act (continued)

K. Kirkpatrick

Hon. K. Chen

T. Shypitka

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2021

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: H. Yao.

Introductions by Members

Hon. A. Kang: In the gallery today, I would like to introduce my administrative

assistants, Tracy Amande and Ngaire Lord, as well as my executive assistant,

Jocelyn Fan. Also joining us today is my senior ministerial adviser, Michael

Snoddon. Today we are celebrating Michael’s last day in my ministerial

office.

[10:05 a.m.]

I think the word “celebrating” may be the wrong word to use, but he’s

very excited to go on to bigger and better places. I would agree that

“bigger” is the word to use, but “better” might not be, because we really

enjoy having him in my office, and we are the better place for him to be.

But I wish him all the best in his future endeavours.

Michael, thank you so much for being a great friend and a great senior

adviser.

Would the House please welcome him.

P. Milobar: Today I would like to welcome to the House and, in fact, all week…. It

means not only is she a sucker for punishment because she’s been married to

me for 28 years, but she’s come to question period four days in a row —

wilfully, yes. Would the House please make welcome my wife, Lianne, who is

here visiting, whose birthday, actually — 29th birthday, we’ll say — is on

Saturday. My wife and sister-in-law to the member for Shuswap,

Lianne.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I thought you were going to make me wait all

the way to the end, so I appreciate that.

I would like to welcome today to the precinct Red FM. Everyone, I

think, knows Red FM and the significant role they play in helping deliver

important messages to the South Asian community. It’s quite significant,

given the history of this place, to have Red FM broadcasting for the first

time ever live here in these chambers. So can we all please welcome

Kulwinder Sanghera, the owner; Harjinder Thind, the host; Pooja Sekhon,

program director; Nick Chowlia, the technical director; and Kohinoor Kalia,

the assistant producer.

Can the House please join me in welcoming them here today.

S. Furstenau: I have three introductions to make today. First, Jada Lynn Abdulrahim

is a 17-year-old Esquimalt High School student who is committed to bettering

education for herself and her peers with a focus on mental health and the

need for schools to recognize the education of the whole person. Jada wants

to be a youth worker and to turn the loss that she has already experienced

in her young life into helping others. Jada has written a two-minute

statement for better education, and I will be sharing that statement shortly

with this House.

Secondly, Priyanka Singh is shadowing me today. Priyanka earned her

master’s degree in global management at Royal Roads University. She is

extraordinarily active in the community. She’s on the Community Social

Planning Council of Greater Victoria. She’s a director on the board of

Coastal Research, Education and Advocacy Network and the city of Victoria’s

advisory committee on transportation, focusing on how to incentivize e-bike

use. It’s evident Priyanka is an incredible advocate and solution-maker in

the community.

Finally, I’d like to introduce Kaylea Kray-Domingo, who has worked in

our caucus office for two years. Kaylea has brought a wealth of experience,

knowledge, passion and wisdom to her work and her exceptional energy and

care and her most amazing and wonderful laugh. Kaylea is moving on to her

next big adventure, and we’re very excited for her and the path that lies

ahead and incredibly grateful for her hard work, her dedication and her

leadership as part of our caucus team.

Would the House make all three very welcome.

Hon. B. Ma: The Squamish Nation has just completed a historic general election,

the first one under their new electoral and governance structure that was

approved through a community-wide referendum in 2018.

Their new council now

consists of North Shore councillor Shayla Jacobs; Squamish Valley councillor

Joyce Williams; regional councillor Tiyáltelut, also known as Kristen

Rivers; general councillor Sempulyan, also known as Stewart Gonzalez;

general councillor Syexwaliya, also known as Ann Whonnock; general

councillor Chief Dick Williams; general councillor Wilson Williams; band

manager Bianca Cameron; and led under council chairperson Khelsilem, also

known as Dustin Rivers.

[10:10 a.m.]

Would the House please join me in welcoming them to their new

roles.

K. Greene: Will members please join me in wishing Steveston resident Douglas

Milton a 100th birthday. He’s watching from home.

Mr. Milton was born in Saskatchewan, enlisted in the RCAF for World

War II, and during his service, he earned a Distinguished Flying Cross. Mr.

Milton’s son Keith credits his dad’s long life to his love of dancing. Doug

still dances when he has the opportunity.

Please join me in wishing Mr. Milton a happy 100th birthday and

gratitude for his public service.

Hon. J. Horgan: I want to join the Opposition House Leader in praising Lianne for her

years of dedicated service. Nothing quite says, “I love you,” as I said to

my own spouse one time, as an early morning question period.

To Lianne, congratulations, and happy birthday on the

weekend.

Tributes

DON CRAIG

Hon. J. Horgan: I also rise to pay tribute to a public servant who is leaving us

at the end of the week, who will be known to many on the other side of

the House who have been here for some time.

Don Craig, who is the government photographer, a transplant from

California, joined the public service in 2006 after working for a little

start-up called Adobe and also, as a Renaissance man, being trained as a

Vidal Sassoon hair stylist, which was of no value to me. But I know

those who came before me would have benefited from his ability. As Vidal

Sassoon said: “If you don’t look good, we don’t look good.” Don did his

best to work with what he had, in my case.

Don’s an incredible guy. To be a photographer, you have to be

there for the moments. He has captured, over 15 years, the moments of

British Columbia’s history from the government perspective. He’s to be

applauded for that.

I first met Don…. I will always remember him, not just because

he’s an extraordinarily nice guy and extremely talented, but he will

always figure in my first day on this job. That was because we had been

sworn in, and we were going to have an event in the rose garden. I came

out of my office, and members will know, who have been in the west

annex, that there is a big picture window that looks out on the rose

garden.

I came bounding out of my office, I looked out the window, and I

said: “Where is our photographer?” I thought there was going to be a

photograph session with the constituent who was with me. I said: “That’s

the government photographer.” The guard at the door said: “You are the

government.” It was at that moment that I got to meet Don as not the

government photographer but also just a really great guy.

He’s going to take his beloved paddleboard and go somewhere

looking for people who have more hair than you and I, hon. Speaker, and

maybe go back to Vidal Sassoon.

Would the House give a big, big clap for Don Craig.

[Applause.]

Introductions by Members

R. Russell: Just briefly, I have been advised by colleagues not to say I forgot my

father’s birthday, but I certainly forgot to rise and wish my father a very

happy birthday. Without him, I would not be here. I am absolutely

sure.

He turned 80 on Tuesday, so I really, really, with a ton of love, wish

him a happy birthday.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 21 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT

(N o . 2),

Hon. D. Eby presented a message from Her Honour the

Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act

(No. 2), 2021.

Hon. D. Eby: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time

now.

I’m pleased to introduce the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act

(No. 2), 2021.

This bill amends the following statutes: the Adoption Act; the

Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act; the Business Practices

and Consumer Protection Amendment Act, 2019; the Child, Family and

Community Service Act; the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act; the Energy,

Mines and Petroleum Resources Statutes Amendment Act, 2018; the Offence

Act; the Oil and Gas Activities Act; the Passenger Transportation Act;

the Representative for Children and Youth Act; the Safety Standards Act;

the Treaty First Nation Taxation Act; and the Victims of Crime

Act.

This bill also contains transitional provisions.

[10:15 a.m.]

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

Motion approved.

Hon. D. Eby: I move the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 21, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2021,

introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day

for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

LYTTON FIRE AND RESPONSE

J. Tegart: It is with a heavy heart that I stand in the House today to share

a short two-minute statement about an event that changed the lives of

100 people in my riding. On June 30, the village of Lytton burned to the

ground. They lost their hospital, their village office, their RCMP

station, their post office, their fire hall, their bank, their grocery

store, their library. In fact, they lost their whole main

street.

The fire moved so fast that many residents got out with only the

clothes on their back. Two residents perished that day. Hundreds lost

homes. Businesses were burned to the ground. Public services were

incinerated, and the community looks like a war zone.

Neighbouring communities, family, friends and others opened their

homes and arms to welcome victims of the fire. Residents were scattered

to the far regions of the province due to a lack of capacity to house

them close to Lytton. Within the first week, the Premier flew over by

helicopter to view the village. He promised the people of Lytton that

they would be made whole again.

But it has now been 99 days since the fire; 99 days in a hotel; 99

days and still not allowed full access to their homes; 99 days of

restaurant food; 99 days of displacement; 99 days of frustration,

anxiety, disappointment, no answers, no hope, limited assistance; 99

days with no timeline, no path forward; 99 days of people on the ground

doing the best that they possibly can. But 99 days, and where is the

support promised by government? Ninety-nine days, with winter on its

way. Where is the plan after 99 days?

Lyttonites are resilient people who are anxious to move forward on

the path to recovery, but everyone in the community has been

traumatized. I ask government to step up, provide the support that was

promised, and let’s get our people home.

NATIONAL FAMILY WEEK

K. Greene: This week is National Family Week, and it is a time to celebrate

the diversity and importance of families across Canada and right here in

B.C. Families can be the people that you were born to, or families can

be the people that we choose. They can be big or small. They can be

living nearby or across the ocean. It is the connection that we have

with each other, the love and joy we find with one another that makes

our families special.

The theme of this year’s National Family Week is “Connected

families, connected communities.” Going through the last 18 months of

the pandemic has shown us just how important our connection to family

and community is for our well-being.

The first weeks of the pandemic were disorienting and

heartbreaking for families who were suddenly not able to comfort each

other in person. With our families vaccinated, we are now able to

cautiously reconnect and support each other, and the time that we spend

together is even more precious. Our families help us thrive and reach

our potential, which is why this government supports policies that

foster healthy, positive connections that help children, youth, parents

and caregivers.

[10:20 a.m.]

The Sesame Street book, What is Family on Sesame

Street? , explores the idea of family and says: “It’s not just

about who shares your last name or whether your nose, ears, eyes look

the same. Family means more than just who you’re born to.”

So no matter what your family looks like, whether it’s a family of

two or an extended family of 20, whether they live with us or across the

globe, your family deserves to be celebrated this week and every

week.

Finally, I’d like to acknowledge my family, who lift me up so that

I can be here.

FIRE PREVENTION WEEK

B. Banman: This week is Fire Prevention Week. It’s an annual opportunity to

educate British Columbians about the simple but important things that we

can all do to keep ourselves, our loved ones and our communities safe

from fire.

In the case of a fire, seconds can mean the difference between

life and death, so taking measures to avoid preventable fires can and

will save lives. It can also help prevent putting a further strain on

our health care system right now, as doctors and nurses will be diverted

to have to treat burn wounds and other fire-related injuries.

I am a proud father of a firefighter, but I have lost count of how

many times he’s had to respond to a blaze that could have been easily

prevented, had precautions been taken ahead of time. Fire safety

education helps keep our firefighters safe by reducing the number of

calls and situations where they have to put their lives on the line to

help protect people and property throughout British Columbia. After a

long summer which saw horrific wildfires and the entire town of Lytton

destroyed, it has never been more important to take time to teach fire

prevention and safety.

This year’s Fire Prevention Week theme is “Learn the sounds of

fire safety.” It helps bring awareness to the different sounds that

smoke and carbon monoxide alarms make, because knowing what to do when

an alarm sounds will keep you and your family safe. To learn more, to

help spread awareness, I encourage everyone to visit

firepreventionweek.org.

Together we can all help reduce the number of fires in British

Columbia and keep our communities, our loved ones and our firefighters

safe.

PARKGATE SOCIETY

S. Chant: I rise today to bring to the attention of the House a group of

people called the Parkgate Society. Led by the most able Adele Wilson,

this group provides services to members of the Parkgate community, and

beyond, that run literally from cradle to grave.

They have care programs for infants, toddlers, pre­schoolers

— preschool, before school and after school. They have youth programs

that, up until a certain time that we shall not talk about right now,

had dances for preteens and had gatherings. They’ve also got a

skateboard park that is right outside the back door so that you can go

out and skate for five minutes and then come back and do whatever you

were doing. They’ve got access to parks. They’ve got access to the

gym.

Not only do they work with children, but they also work with

families. They bring the families in to do a variety of activities, most

of them fun. They do pottery sometimes. They do a whole variety of

activities with those groups.

They also have the most amazing seniors program that stems from

things for active seniors like walking programs and using the various

options that are around them, to crafts and all those things — also

singing. Then we also have what is called My Parkgate Break, which is

for folks with early-onset dementia. It provides a place for them to be

safe and have activities and be monitored while their caregivers get a

much, much needed break.

Additionally — I said “cradle to grave” — when somebody passes,

there’s always some kind of little something, whether it’s by Zoom or a

small group of people or a memorial card put up.

[10:25 a.m.]

This society has opened its community and offers so many things. I

thank you for this opportunity, and I hope people have the time sometime

to come and enjoy Parkgate.

YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION

AWARENESS AND

EDUCATION

S. Furstenau: Today I’m reading a statement written by Jayda Lynn Abdelrahim,

who is a high school student at Esquimalt High.

“I am addressing the Legislature today with respect and honour in

hopes of bringing Victoria’s youth and their voices together. There is a

huge gap in our education between understanding and proper prevention

skills targeting mental health crises and substance addictions.

“It is true we grow up to make our own decisions, but suicide and

overdoses are never a choice to a youth that has yet to even learn the

full potential of themselves. I want to be able to grow up with my best

friends and watch their beautiful souls grow and evolve. I love where I

am from, and I am proud to live on this Island. However, I am ashamed of

how many of my friends I am losing to the failure of our education in

context to the importance of our mental health and the toxic drug levels

constantly rising on our streets.

“When our youth grow up in such a small community with the known

effects of peer pressures and media influences, the only way to truly

influence youth on drug prevention and mental health awareness is to

bring education to them. How does one-time use turn into an addiction?

Is there such a thing as healthy drug use? If someone I hang out with

uses drugs, are they a bad person?

“Our youth deserve to learn and feel comfortable asking questions

like these, and equally, they deserve the truth, as brutal, emotional or

hard as it may be. This starts with daily conversations, not enforced by

police or scared into them with school etiquette. This starts with our

survivors being given the chance to share their experiences, share how

they got involved with drugs in general, the life they lived, the

decisions they had to make and what motivated them to find their

recovery path.

“Daily education within our school system from trusted crisis

survivors as well as proper engaging with the youth community where we

learn will introduce a healthier perspective on saving our youth without

racism, stigma or false assumption.”

WORK OF VANCOUVER–WEST END

CONSTITUENCY

ASSISTANTS

S. Chandra Herbert: I’m here today to speak about unsung heroes. I’m here today to

speak about my constituency assistants, but I’m sure, Members, you could

say likewise about yours.

I’ve been working with Murray Bilida since 2008. Murray, it’s been

an honour and it is an honour to work with you each and every day. Thank

you. I’ve been working with Christina Rzepa for a bit little less time.

Christina, thank you for your creativity and your care. They both work

so hard for our community in the West End and Coal Harbour. Thank you.

You make a difference each and every day.

On the worst days, we’ve seen death threats. We’ve seen hate

speech, spit, spray paint and even a violent assault. No one deserves

this. But despite it — in fact, because of it — we work even harder for

our community.

But on the best days, we’ve seen tears of joy, as couples who had

battled bureaucratic error finally got the news that they could become a

family — they could have children in their family. As homeless

constituents finally got the news that they could come inside for a

home. As renters who faced incredible stress finally learned that we had

defeated the illegal tricks that tried to force them from their homes.

Or a local business person learned that their business could be saved

after a long fight for justice.

Through the worst days and the best days, our constituency

assistants are helping. They’re listening. They’re acting to make a

better world. In the last months, my constituency assistants have helped

over 100 residents get the building owner that they were fighting to

give them back the tens of thousands of dollars they were owed. They

helped stop illegal rent increases and evictions that affected over 100

constituents. They helped 450 mostly senior constituents print and

laminate their vaccine passports — and while the lineups continue out

the door.

[10:30 a.m.]

I haven’t even included answering the thousands of phone calls,

emails, postage mails, tweets and, of course, my requests too. They will

tell you it was all done by me, but I’m here to tell you, everyone, none

of it would happen without them.

I want to thank our community helpers, our community heroes: our

constituency assistants.

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO HEATWAVE

S. Bond: Words matter. They carry even more weight when they come from the

Premier of British Columbia. British Columbians today expect answers

from a Premier that has managed to avoid answering for his failure to

protect the most vulnerable British Columbians.

In July, the official opposition called for an independent review

of the province’s response to the heatwave that killed almost 600

British Columbians. This week, Human Rights Watch also called on this

government to “urgently investigate the full scope of the heat dome’s

impact, particularly on those most at risk…. Without adequately

understanding the scale of needs, the government will not be able to

respond effectively to populations at risk.”

It was those very populations who were at risk that the Premier

callously dismissed when he said: “Fatalities are a part of life” and

“There is a level of personal responsibility.”

Will the Premier today finally acknowledge that his comments were

completely unacceptable and commit to a full and independent review as

called for just this week by Human Rights Watch?

Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question.

I also want to thank the member for Fraser-Nicola for her powerful

statement, to start us off on question period today, to remind us of the

human cost of climate change, of poverty, of inequality — issues that

didn’t appear yesterday, didn’t appear a week ago, didn’t appear months

ago but have been with us for a long, long time.

We have special moments, like those brought to us graphically by

the member for Fraser-Nicola, very rarely — once in a thousand years,

with respect to the heat dome. Once in a thousand years.

But we all — certainly, we as a government and me, personally, as

the Premier — have a responsibility to make sure that we put in place

processes, procedures, policies to ensure that we’re better prepared for

events like this, because it will happen again. We have seen, in the

short time that I’ve had the privilege of being Premier, three of the

worst fire seasons in our history. We had a heat dome that had 50-degree

temperatures in Lytton the moment…. In minutes, that town

disappeared.

So I agree very much with the Leader of the Opposition that words

do matter. If I offended anyone by talking, at that time when we were

just learning about the magnitude of what this summer would be…. We

were, at that very moment at that press conference, talking about

lifting restrictions on people as result of a global pandemic. It wasn’t

a good day. It was not a good day for Lytton — absolutely not — or the

two lives lost or the hundreds of people who are still out of their

homes. But we need to reflect on that, and we need to make sure we’re

better prepared.

We have been taking steps. The Health Minister has been working

with respect to better preparing our ambulance service, which again, did

not lose its emphasis in four years or eight years or ten years but over

a long period of time.

With respect to a review of events this past summer, the coroner

and the public health officer are doing just that. I have full

confidence in both of those individuals that they will be able to bring

to this House and the people of British Columbia answers to what

happened, how it happened and, best of all, recommendations for

solutions going forward.

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

S. Bond: The Premier has described those moments as special moments in

British Columbia, but those are the moments when Premiers of this

province need to rise and show leadership.

The Premier was forced to admit that he was giddy about the

ability to lift COVID restrictions — giddy. Five hundred and seventy

British Columbians lost their lives. To suggest that it just happened —

the Premier knows that is not true.

[10:35 a.m.]

The Premier commissioned a report that provided him with specific

information that said it was going to happen and even predicted that

hundreds of British Columbians could lose their lives, and this

government did nothing. They were not prepared. As a result, hundreds of

families lost cherished loved ones.

We’ve shared some of the stories this past week of those British

Columbians: Howard Calpas, who lost his three neighbours; 74-year-old

Roberta “Bunny” Lalonde, who died alone in her condo; 69-year-old Ember,

whose disability made her three times more likely to die from the heat;

and assistant fire chief Brian Bertuzzi, who valiantly tried to save the

life of a British Columbian who died in the driveway of a fire hall. In

our British Columbia.

Five hundred and seventy British Columbians died, and they deserve

accountability from this Premier, and a comprehensive independent

review. I understand the role of the coroner in British Columbia. We

want to ensure, as does Human Rights Watch, that all of the aspects of

what happened are considered. British Columbians deserve

that.

Will the Premier today finally acknowledge that his government had

been warned, that they paid no attention and ultimately, British

Columbians lost their lives as a result of the indifference?

Hon. J. Horgan: No words that any of us say today can replace the loved ones that

were lost this past summer. No words that we say in this place can

replace those who have lost their lives as a result of an opioid crisis

that is in its sixth year. No words that we can say can bring people

back and make families whole again, but actions that we do take can make

sure that those lives weren’t lost in vain, and that is precisely what

we intend to do.

We have, for the first time, a minister responsible for Climate

Change; the root — the root — of the heat dome. We have a minister

responsible for Poverty Reduction. The first time ever in British

Columbia. The only part of the Health Ministry that went up more than

mental health and addictions was the ambulance service, because it had

been ignored for far too long.

I appreciate on a day — a solemn day, quite frankly — that these

questions have to come. I respect the member for bringing them forward.

I have full confidence in the coroner. I have full confidence in the

public health office. Any resources they need to fulfill their job, they

will have. Any access to anyone in this place, they will have. I believe

that’s what the people of British Columbia expect, and that’s exactly

what they’re going to get.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO LYTTON FIRE

J. Tegart: When the Premier was being giddy and ignoring the heatwave, it

wasn’t the only tragedy occurring. On June 30, fire swept through the

village of Lytton, destroying the entire community.

The Premier said the right things at the time: “In terms of

rebuilding throughout the system, that’s our job.” But as is the

Premier’s practice, the follow-up has failed to match the

rhetoric.

Denise O’Connor, a resident of the village of Lytton, has heard

the words, but she wants action. She sent a petition 30 days after the

fire. Today, 99 days later, she still is waiting for the Premier to

explain the plan for interim housing.

Can the Premier explain to Denise why he’s failed on such a basic

commitment as interim housing for our Lytton residents?

Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the member for her question, and also, to Denise and other

residents who are still out of their community because it is a dangerous

place to be. There are still toxins on the ground. The member is fully

aware of that. She made reference to her and I flying over, days after

the event. We have been working as collaboratively, I hope, as possible.

I certainly stand ready to work more closely with the member, if that’s

required.

With respect to actions that we have taken, we have been working

with the private sector. We have been working with the Fraser Basin

Management Council to assist in collaborating and bringing together the

needs of Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike in the Lytton area. We

established…. And again these are process pieces, but critically

important to getting outcomes.

[10:40 a.m.]

We created a working group of cabinet, which I chair, that has the

appropriate ministers responsible for housing, the minister responsible

for emergency preparedness, the minister responsible for forestry, as

well as the Parliamentary Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and —

most importantly, in my mind — the member for Boundary-Similkameen, who

at the time of the flood in 2017-18 in Grand Forks was a local

government representative. He, too, is on the committee to better help

us understand the needs on the ground locally, coming from his

perspectives and understandings and learnings from the tragedies that

took place in Grand Forks.

We are doing our level best to bring together the right people to

make sure we can get people back into the community as quickly as

possible. And we will rebuild a storied community with a future, looking

forward to deal with climate change, to make sure the buildings are

adaptable for a future that will be very much like recent

past.

Again, I appreciate the member from Kamloops needs to pop off as

well, but I speak directly to the member for Fraser-Nicola.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: I stand ready to work with her in the community to make sure we

can rebuild as quickly as possible. But the challenges faced in this

area, she knows full well. We are at her side, at the side of the

members in that community, to make sure we can get back as fast as

possible. But it does take time to make sure the cleanup is done

appropriately, to support the municipal leaders who are struggling as

well. The work’s underway. I know the member knows that, and I’m certain

the member from Kamloops south knows that as well.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Fraser-Nicola on a supplemental.

J. Tegart: One week in I was pleased to join the Premier on a flyover of the

village of Lytton. I expected that he would actually follow his words

and his promises to the people. I can tell you that if there are people

on the ground doing the work, the residents aren’t aware. And that is a

tragedy. If you’re doing your level best, my god we’re in

trouble.

Ninety-nine days, four letters to the government, endless emails,

endless requests and the people of Lytton have no idea what you’re doing

in their community. I would suggest this is much more than a

communication problem. I have asked for a team. I have said we need

capacity in the community, and you have the expertise.

Mr. Speaker: Through the Chair, Member.

J. Tegart: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

But we’re in trouble. Can the Premier tell the people of Lytton

when they’ll be given a detailed timeline and what is included in that

timeline?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member, and I want to inform

her that there is significant activity taking place on the ground in

Lytton. In terms of capacity, which she has raised, I can inform her

that the province has been funding the Fraser Basin Council, to work

with the council in terms of the development.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, a question was asked, and the minister is going to give

us an answer. Please listen to him.

Hon. M. Farnworth: In terms of developing that recovery plan, that plan is due on the

15th of October. Once we receive it, I’m happy to share it with that

member.

In the meantime, the Minister of Municipal Affairs has ensured

that there is capacity within the city itself to help deal with the

situation in terms of establishing services and re-establishing their

capacity to function as a village. About nine members have been seconded

there.

At the same time, we brought in a former CAO from Kelowna, again,

to ensure that the village has the supports it needs to be able to

function. We’ve met with the federal government to ensure that not just

the village but the First Nation is in place and that they are able to

have an interim housing plans site for interim housing in place. The Red

Cross has got the supports in terms of ensuring on a case-by-case basis

that people….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Please, continue.

Hon. M. Farnworth: As I said, on a case-by-case basis to ensure that people have the

accommodation and the supports that they need. As the member would know,

emergency social service supports are normally there for three days.

They have been extended until the end of November and, most likely,

depending on how things go, will be extended further.

[10:45 a.m.]

The people know that there is a short-term, a medium-term and a

long-term requirement in terms of building back Lytton. That is going to

take place.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thank you, hon. Speaker. You know, the members asked a serious

question. They wanted to know what supports are available. I’ve been

detailing the supports available, the activities they’re taking on the

ground. They seem more interested in interrupting than they do in

getting an answer to their question.

PROTESTS AT OLD-GROWTH FORESTS

AND RCMP

ACTIONS

A. Olsen: There have been over 1,100 arrests that have been made at the

Fairy Creek old-growth logging blockades. It’s the largest act of civil

disobedience in Canadian history, spurred by this government’s failed

leadership to protect old-growth forests.

The videos of the conduct of the RCMP, our contracted provincial

police force, are difficult to watch, as they cause physical and

emotional trauma. As the tension grew and the violence increased, all we

got was silence from this B.C. NDP government.

B.C. Supreme Court justice Douglas Thompson found the RCMP’s use

of exclusion zones that limited media access to be illegal, calling the

actions of the RCMP regrettable and damaging to our court’s reputation.

He criticized the RCMP decision to remove their identification and the

lack of enforcement of a directive to remove badges displaying the thin

blue line. All summer the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor

General, the minister responsible for policing in this province, has

been silent.

My question is to the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor

General. What specific action has the minister taken to protect the

civil liberties of the protesters?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I’d remind the member that

the issue he’s referring to is currently before the courts, under

appeal. Therefore, I’ve got no further comment in that

regard.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Saanich North and the Islands on a

supplemental.

A. Olsen: What I’m asking about is police accountability. That’s not before

the court. That’s the responsibility of every member in this chamber.

Police accountability is our responsibility, and we bestow that

responsibility on the Minister of Public Safety. It is completely

unacceptable for him to stand in this House today and deflect that,

saying that a matter of an injunction is before the court.

What I’m talking about is protecting the civil liberties of

British Columbians. Justice Thompson refused to extend that injunction

because of the unacceptable behaviour of the RCMP. That matter was

decided. As Paul Willcocks summarized in the Tyee , Justice

Thompson “found the RCMP’s enforcement trampled on civil rights, went

far beyond the terms of the injunction, unreasonably hid the actions

from journalists’ scrutiny and failed basic tests of

accountability.”

The minister has failed to make clear to the public and the RCMP

throughout the summer his expectations of this government. He failed to

demand access for the media, failed to demand officers wear proper

identification and failed to protect citizens in this

province.

We live in a democratic society, not a police state. We must

ensure that it never deteriorates to that by demanding accountability in

this place. Not the House of Commons — here. As Willcocks wrote, and I

agree, if the provincial government refuses to provide oversight, there

is no meaningful accountability.

Our provincially contracted police service is the

res­ponsibility of the Minister of Public Safety. Will he stand in

this chamber today and state publicly his expectation that all police

services in this province uphold the law as outlined by Justice Thompson

in both his decisions?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. Again, as he refers to the

decisions that are under appeal, I have no comment on that and cannot

comment at this point.

But on a more general situation, what I would say is that the

Solicitor General in this province does not direct the police. Nor do we

ever want politicians telling police what they should and should not

do.

[10:50 a.m.]

If there are issues and there are complaints, there are processes

that are well established by legislation where people are able to make

complaints against the police and they are investigated by independent

bodies. Those are in place.

I am aware that complaints were made. I am also aware that those

complaints are being looked into and investigated, which is exactly what

should happen.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO COMMUNITIES

IMPACTED BY

WILDFIRES

T. Stone: When the White Rock Lake fire jumped Highway 97 and ripped through

Monte Lake in Paxton Valley back in early August, these communities were

absolutely devastated. Thirty-two families lost their homes. They lost

everything. In the midst of this year’s fire season, the Premier said:

“We’re prepared to do whatever we can.” But frustration is boiling over

with these residents as they continue to wait and wait and wait for the

supports that they were promised.

Adding insult to injury, the Premier refused to visit Monte Lake

and Paxton Valley. All that these residents got from their Premier was a

quick flyover. He was in nearby Vernon, but he couldn’t make the time to

stop in Monte Lake and Paxton Valley. All the while, the Premier did

have the time to take a vacation in the middle of the hardest part of

the wildfire season in the southern Interior.

The Solicitor General hasn’t had the guts to go to these

communities either. Instead, he’s lectured them, he’s insulted them, and

he’s blamed them. These honest, hard-working, decent people need help

from their government, not blame.

Monte Lake resident Jacqueline Gee said: “Our community was

devastated by this fire. Homes have been lost. Livestock too. It’s been

surreal. We feel like we’ve been left completely alone and, frankly,

just shunned as a community. I’m frankly shocked and disappointed that

there is zero help for those who have lost everything.”

Rob Bouchard and his young family lost everything in Paxton

Valley. He too feels abandoned and angry that his community has been

blamed rather than supported. He said: “It’s … insulting to be portrayed

as the bad guys here. We’re all waiting for the Premier or the Solicitor

General to come and talk to us in person.”

My question is this. What does the Premier have to say to

Jacqueline Gee and Rob Bouchard and the many other impacted residents of

Monte Lake and Paxton Valley who need this Premier to get on with

providing the supports that he has promised them so that they can get on

with rebuilding their homes and rebuilding their lives?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question. In terms of the supports that are

available, we are working very closely with the Thompson regional

district to ensure that support services are in place, working to

determine the number of properties that are insured and those that are

uninsured. Recovery managers are in place to ensure that those supports

are in fact in place. The community has not been abandoned.

In terms of disaster financial assistance, that’s already there.

We work with the federal government to identify what infrastructure

qualifies. That work is underway so that we are able to go back and to

rebuild communities that have been devastated by the significant fires

that occurred this summer. We have been working and we will continue to

work to ensure that that takes place.

B. Stewart: Well, the fires that ravaged my constituency may be out, but the

damage is still being felt today. The White Rock Lake fire caused the

loss of numerous homes and businesses — a total of 84 structures — and

one other home lost in the Mount Law fire. People had to scramble to

safety carrying the few possessions, and they find themselves displaced

across the Interior.

Neal Morgan and his sons lost two homes and a thriving business on

Bouleau Lake Road. Neil is a pensioner who has had to use his entire

life savings to buy a used mobile home and rebuild his

workshop.

Hundreds of residents in Killiney Beach continue to be without

potable water due to the speed that the wildfire ravaged their

community, burning homes and not having proper shutoffs.

My constituents are frustrated by the lack of clear communication

from government as to what services are available and how to access

them. I’m sure the minister would agree that the government should not

be adding stress to those dealing with such catastrophic

losses.

[10:55 a.m.]

Can the Premier tell Neal, his family, the Killiney Beach

residents and my constituents what support is now available to

constituents who lost their primary residence and do not have insurance

or disaster financial assistance, to the people that are on the

community water system at Killiney Beach?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question. As I’ve outlined in terms of whenever a

disaster occurs, as the member knows, fire is considered an insurable

event. There are exceptions to that in terms of the supports that are

available if there is a municipal or a rural fire department agency or

fire insurance is not available or it’s too cost-prohibitive.

What I can tell you is that in terms of the supports that are

available — the recovery individuals on the ground who are able to

assist — we’re working closely with the Red Cross to ensure that if

people have lost their primary residence, there are places for them to

stay, the supports are there, and they will be there well into the

future until they are needed. All of that is taking place, and we will

continue to stand with the community.

Again, in terms of disaster financial assistance, we work closely

with the federal government in terms of what is eligible. There are a

number of programs depending on the kind of structure that was impacted,

whether it’s an agricultural building, an agricultural structure, or

whether it is a civic infrastructure such as water or such as a police

station or such as a hospital — all of those things.

It really is fascinating that when you’re outlining the response

to a question, you get the heckling from the other side. The reality is

that there’s lots in place, and we are willing and ready to assist those

people in accessing those supports.

ASSISTANCE FOR RANCHERS

IMPACTED BY

WILDFIRES

L. Doerkson: The Cunninghams have had a tough summer, to say the least, this

year. Fires have ravaged their land and threatened cattle, and it has

cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars in losses. To survive, they

need to get their cattle back on the range but can’t do it without the

replacement of Crown fencing through disaster financial assistance,

which must be secured by the province.

Kevin Boon of the B.C. Cattlemen’s Association says: “The federal

disaster assistance program, which covers Crown resources such as Crown

fencing, has not yet been approved. That is really big — an important

one — as it will determine our ability to get the cattle on the

range.”

Winter is coming, and if the Premier doesn’t act immediately,

ranchers like the Cunninghams will lose another full year of

grazing.

When will the Premier fight for the ranchers of this province and

families like the Cunninghams to ensure that they get the supports they

need right now?

Hon. L. Popham: Thank you very much to the member for the question. This has been

a really difficult summer for the ranching industry. We feel very

grateful that we have had constant contact with Kevin Boon and the B.C.

Cattlemen’s Association. We’ve had constant contact with ranchers, and

we’re very aware of what’s needed. We have secured a $20 million

AgriStability fund that they can access to try and help financially

recover what they’ve lost. But we know that what they’ve lost is greater

than financial loss.

The issue with the Crown fences is something that I believe my

ministry spoke with Kevin about late yesterday afternoon, and those are

conversations that will continue. But I can tell the member that my

ministry and our government have been responsive to the cattleman and

the ranchers of B.C. We had issues throughout the summer that we were

constantly updated on, and we were able to respond as necessary. It’s a

complicated situation, but we do understand that cattle need to stay in

place, and the issue of putting fences up on Crown land is something

that is a priority.

MEDIA APPEARANCE BY PREMIER

P. Milobar: Well, it has been an interesting week of dodging and avoiding

personal responsibility on behalf of the Premier’s actions.

No accountability on questions around the opioid deaths and

ever-increasing numbers of overdoses. Confusion around naloxone kits and

direction from the CDC and the Solicitor General, both completely

contradicting what the Premier had said about lack of naloxone

supply.

[11:00 a.m.]

Heat dome — zero accountability on that. Three days’ worth of

questions — zero accountability on that about a report that the

government commissioned themselves and ignored. And then they ignored

the questions with any type of proper answer.

A patchwork approach to schools. Complete confusion and anxiety

for teachers, support staff, parents and, most importantly, students. A

lack of data transparency. A lack of timely information being shared

within the school system, yet no accountability from this Premier. And

then today, wildfires. Even more lack of accountability from this

Premier.

Why is that concerning? I think it sums it up best with the media

advisory for the Premier’s media availability today. The Premier yet

again, to dodge accountability and talking to the media, says: “In line

with the B.C. Centre for Disease Control’s physical distancing

guidelines, media must call in rather than attend in person.”

The Premier doesn’t even want to meet with the media in person,

yet Dr. Henry has done that in this building this week. The Education

Minister has done that in this building this week. The Solicitor General

sat across from a radio host this morning in this building. And the

Premier has no problem sitting elbow to elbow to elbow.

To the Premier: once again, are you misspeaking and causing more

confusion, or are you getting to operate under a completely different

set of community guidelines for the Centre of Disease Control that the

rest of the province doesn’t seem to operate or work under?

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, I now have even more heartfelt thanks to Lianne at the start

of question period today.

I will say that I will be accountable for a media advisory that I

was unaware of. Of all of the issues that we could talk about, I’m

grateful that the member brought it to my attention, and I’ll take

immediate action when I leave this place.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[End of question period.]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: All right. Question period is over. Members. It’s over.

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: I have the honour of tabling a report under the COVID-19 Related

Measures Act.

Reports from Committees

FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT

SERVICES

COMMITTEE

J. Routledge: I have the honour to present the first report of the Select

Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services for the second

session of the 42nd Parliament titled Interim Report on Statutory

Offices , a copy of which has been deposited with the Office of

the Clerk.

I move that the report be taken as read and received.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: Member, continue.

J. Routledge: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt

the report.

Leave granted.

Mr. Speaker: Please proceed.

J. Routledge: I move that the report be adopted, and, in doing so, I would like

to make some brief comments. This report summarizes the committee’s

discussions with the province’s nine statutory offices at the spring

update meetings. These meetings are part of the committee’s process for

ongoing engagement with each office and provide an opportunity for

committee members to receive financial and operational updates following

consideration of budget submissions earlier this year.

The committee appreciates the comprehensive updates provided by

all statutory officers and recognizes how the COVID-19 pandemic

continues to impact the operations and work of each office. Committee

members also appreciate how offices are using experiences from the

pandemic to examine the workplace with a view to

modernization.

On behalf of the committee and all members of the Legislative

Assembly, I extend our continued gratitude to all statutory officers and

their staff for their dedication and work in service of all British

Columbians.

[11:05 a.m.]

I would also like to acknowledge and extend our appreciation to

staff in the Parliamentary Committees Office for their support during

this process. Thank you to Jennifer Arril, Stephanie Raymond, Mary

Newell, Karan Riarh, Natalie Beaton and Jenny Byford.

I would also like to express my appreciation to all committee

members for their diligent work and particularly recognize the Deputy

Chair, the member for Kelowna West, for his support and work on this

committee.

B. Stewart: I want to thank you and the members of our committee. I echo the

remarks of the member for Burnaby North, the Chair of the Select

Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services, and thank her for

the important work that she does as the Chair of this

committee.

I also want to say a sincere thank you to all of our committee

members and the incredible legislative staff for their work, both on the

regular functions and operations of this committee and the preparing of

the report introduced today. This includes Karan Riarh, Mary Newell,

Stephanie Raymond, Jenny Byford, Natalie Beaton and, of course, all the

Hansard staff that are behind the scenes.

The report we are presenting today, the Interim Report on

Statutory Offices , is the result of lots of productive

discussion in committee, and we considered the budgets of the province’s

nine statutory officers for the coming year. As this is the interim

report, there’s more work to be done, and I look forward to meeting with

the statutory officers with our committee in November, hearing their

creative solutions as we will see in the updated report.

Motion approved.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading, Bill 19, Societies Amendment Act.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 19 — SOCIETIES

AMENDMENT ACT,

Hon. S. Robinson: I move that Bill 19 be read a second time now.

The Societies Amendment Act, 2021, amends the Societies Act to

refine the act, which came into force back in 2016. The Societies Act

provides the legislative framework for the creation and governance of

British Columbia’s societies.

Societies are not-for-profit corporations and are prohibited from

distributing profits to their members. They’re organized for a wide

range of purposes, from charitable to educational and environmental to

recreational. There are over 30,000 societies in our province. Societies

vary significantly in size, ranging from small volunteer-run

associations that we’re all very familiar with to large professional-run

charities.

This pandemic has certainly highlighted for all of us the

important role that these community-minded organizations play in keeping

us connected, providing mental health supports and supporting those

struggling with income or food insecurity. More than ever, they play a

vital role in our communities, from health and housing services to

sports, cultural and other community-based activities, to environmental

and social advocacy.

Supporting B.C. societies with robust and modern legislation will

further efforts to build communities with the resilience required by

today’s challenges.

The Societies Act came into force on November 28, 2016. The act

provides societies with a new, responsive legislative framework and

allows for electronic filings with the corporate registry. As societies

in British Columbia vary significantly in size and in purpose, the act

helps to balance the sector’s desire for adaptability and relatively

simple laws with the need to ensure transparency and

accountability.

Over the past four years, the government has been monitoring the

new act to ensure it is, indeed, working for societies, for their

members and for the public. In that time, staff have identified areas

for improvement. Additionally, feedback from societies themselves, as

well as legal practitioners and the public, has helped to identify some

inconsistencies, some omissions and clarifications needed about how

certain provisions of the act should be applied.

[11:10 a.m.]

The purpose of the proposed amendments is to ensure that the act

remains responsive, while addressing various issues that have come to

light since it came into force. The amendments will also streamline

processes and remove unnecessary corporate registry filing

requirements.

As the act is still relatively new, these amendments are not

intended to implement any major policy changes. The intent is to refine

the act, to provide certainty as well as clarity for societies and those

who work with societies. These amendments have been developed in

consultation with the public, the sector, the corporate registry,

Indigenous partners and other government partners, as well as an

advisory group of private bar lawyers.

In 2019, the Ministry of Finance invited the public to comment as

well on proposed legislative changes to the act. The government

carefully analyzed the feedback received from societies, from their

members, the legal community and the public in this consultation. The

feedback was considered in the development of these proposed

amendments.

We have been mindful, as well, of the requirements of the

Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act as we have developed

this legislation. We have done an assessment of this legislation as it

relates to aligning with the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous

peoples.

We know that Indigenous peoples have specific interests in the

organizations that provide services in their communities. As a result,

we’ve consulted with Indigenous partners to seek their input and their

perspectives. This has included notifying treaty First Nations of the

proposed amendments and discussing amendments in detail with

Nisg̱a’a Lisims

Government.

The proposed amendments were also discussed with the First Nations

Summit, the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs and Métis Nation B.C. Some

proposed legislation was revised based on the feedback received from

these discussions. We will continue to work with Indigenous peoples as

we move forward with this work in the spirit of

reconciliation.

Among other things, these proposed amendments will make changes to

provisions related to society recordkeeping, the notice and conduct of

society meetings, directors, corporate organizations — in other words,

the dissolution, liquidation and restoration of a society — corporate

registry filing requirements and the duties and powers of the

registrar.

For example, amendments will clarify what information societies

must keep in their registers of members and directors, as well as

establish rules for recordkeeping after a society dissolves. References

in the act to meetings will be amended to specify whether the provision

applies to a general meeting or a meeting of directors.

Also, amendments will clarify what is required in a society’s

notice of a general meeting, a member’s requisition of general meetings

and a proposal. Provisions respecting directors will be amended to, for

example, update their qualifications and will clarify rules for director

conflict of interest obligations and consent resolution

processes.

The amendments will also remove unnecessary corporate registry

filing requirements and make other filings more consistent with the

corporate governance acts. Processes will be more streamlined and

user-friendly, including a new administrative procedure for an

individual to have their name removed as a director of a society or a

company without having to go to court.

This bill will also make some related amendments to the Business

Corporations Act and the Cooperative Association Act, which govern

companies and cooperative associations in British Columbia respectively.

While these other corporate governance statutes are unique, they have

many similarities with the Societies Act regarding the roles of

directors, members and shareholders and corporate registry filing

requirements. The proposed amendments will update and harmonize some

provisions in these acts as well.

Societies serve a vital role in our communities through­out

the province. Through this bill, the government is committed to

providing them with a refined, user-friendly legislative framework. This

will support societies in doing their important work that is key to our

pandemic recovery and building resilience in communities all over

British Columbia. [Applause.]

M. Bernier: I first want to acknowledge it’s an interesting day when we get

applause for not only a misc stats bill that was presented in the House

but now for an amazingly riveting speech on a housekeeping bill that the

minister has brought forward.

But with that being said, I do want to just acknowledge some of

the comments that the minister brought forward. It won’t be a lengthy

speech by any means. I am impressed how the minister was able to talk so

long on this. But I will say that maybe I’ll start from the fact of the

importance of our societies. This act was brought in, as this package

really, in about 2016, if I remember.

[11:15 a.m.]

We have over 27,000 societies in the province. As the minister

rightly highlighted, the majority of those are volunteer groups. These

are people who sacrifice time out of their life, sometimes away from

their families, to work in these societies, and a good portion, if not

all, are to help British Columbia and British Columbians get through

life in a better way when you look at what some of these societies do.

We want to thank them and applaud them for their efforts that they do on

our behalf as well.

As the minister has highlighted, this is mostly a housekeeping

bill. I’ve gone through it in great detail, the 115 sections, and

acknowledge that a lot of it is messaging that we’re hearing back of

on-the-ground work that societies have mentioned that can clean up a few

things around notifications, minute-taking, etc. I think it’s really

important, from this House, regardless of who is in government, to

always be looking at and listening to the different groups who make

recommendations once we put

an act in place, to make sure that we

continue to be fluid in making decisions here to help them on the

ground.

I look forward to committee stage. I thank the minister and her

staff for listening to the societies and bringing this forward. Over the

next week or two, before we get to debate it again in committee stage,

if there are any societies, obviously, that have some concerns, I’m sure

we will be hearing from them and can discuss that further in committee

stage.

Again, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, does the minister wish to close

debate?

Hon. S. Robinson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I want to express how impressed I am that the member for Peace

River South spent last night going over this bill. It’s a significant

bill, and I think it speaks to his diligence in reviewing this. I’m sure

he’s grateful for the fact that we will be going through committee stage

not next week but perhaps the week after and later on in this

session.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I move second reading of the

bill.

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Robinson: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House

to be considered at the next sitting of the House after

today.

Bill 19, Societies Amendment Act, 2021, read a second time and

referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next

sitting of the House after today.

Hon. M. Dean: I call continued Committee of the Whole, Bill 14.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

I will put the House into recess for a few short moments while we

get the appropriate staff in and get this underway. Thanks,

everyone.

The House recessed from 11:18 a.m. to 11:21 a.m.

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 14 — EARLY CHILDHOOD

EDUCATORS

ACT

(continued)

The House in Committee of the Whole on Bill 14;

S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.

The committee met at 11:21 a.m.

On clause 10 (continued) .

K. Kirkpatrick: To the minister and staff, welcome back. I will do my best to

complete this at the end of the morning here.

Continuing on 10, I’d like to give an example and then ask a

question in terms of how it might be dealt with. Mount Royal University

in Calgary has a four-year early learning and child care bachelor’s

degree — or a BA in early childhood studies at Ryerson University.

What’s the process for approving an ECE program from outside of British

Columbia?

[11:25 a.m.]

Hon. K. Chen: For the member’s information, there are currently two institutions

outside of B.C. offering recognized early childhood education programs.

The plan is to transition those programs to be approved ECE education

programs. However, because of interjurisdictional compliance and

enforcement difficulties, it is not anticipated that out-of-province

institutions will be given approval under this legislation.

With that being said, one of the key purposes of this legislation

is to facilitate and streamline the process of credential recognition

for out-of-province applicants who do not qualify for labour mobility.

So we will see an improvement in terms of credential recognition in this

process.

K. Kirkpatrick: Just so I understand this, then, and I’ll give a hypothetical

example again. It’s not really hypothetical, I guess.

Somebody graduates from this BA in ECE program from Ryerson

University. They then move to British Columbia. It’s not on the list of

approved programs for the ECE registry. They make application, and you

will, on a case-by-case basis, be determining if that school would meet

the overall standards required by the registry.

Hon. K. Chen: For applicants who are certified from another province, they are

actually qualified under the labour mobility, which is under the

Canadian free trade agreement.

The Chair: Say that again, Minister.

Hon. K. Chen: We’ll recognize the credential if they are certified in another

province. Just to clarify that.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the minister.

It’s not being certified in another province. It’s actually having

just graduated from a program in another province, having never been

certified, moving to British Columbia, applying to the registrar to be

certified as an ECE worker but not having that education from British

Columbia, or that’s currently under the regulator’s purview.

Hon. K. Chen: In this type of scenario, they would fall out of the labour

mobility agreement. But that is one of the reasons why we’re doing this

legislation, to facilitate people who are outside of that agreement, to

look at the scenarios case by case, to see if they may be temporarily

registered to be able to work in the workforce while we fully recognize

their credential.

[11:30 a.m.]

That being said, we’re not predicting this scenario happening very

often. Most students who are trained outside of the province would be

registered in their province. Then what we would do to support the

applicant is to walk them through their options, whether to support them

to get registered in their province, to get recognized directly by B.C.,

or to do a temporary registration.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the minister.

Many students will actually go away, particularly for these

bachelor’s degree programs. They may live in British Columbia, and they

go to Ontario or they go to Mount Royal in Calgary to get their

bachelor’s degree, and then they come back. So they are not formally or

have never actually been registered anywhere, but they are coming back

with an education that is not registered and approved in British

Columbia.

I’m feeling — and please correct me if I’m wrong in my

understanding here — that there is a distinct advantage to those

institutions outside of British Columbia, in terms of the amount of work

that would be required by those institutions to be considered

appropriate for regulation in British Columbia.

That was a long…. It was all the same topic, but a long question.

Hopefully, it was understandable.

Hon. K. Chen: The main purpose of this legislation is to fix the challenges that

the member is referring to. Basically, we do not recognize the

individual institution that’s outside of our province. The reason for

that is that there are so many across Canada,

whereas we looked at the

applicants’ individual situations and their training case by case. Then

we know that, historically, there is a challenge of recognizing

outside-of-province-trained ECEs, but there’s a shortage here. That is

why this bill actually proposed that we have a temporary registration

process to look at how we recognize that and transfer that

credential.

That being said, in most scenarios we do understand that the

student could, hopefully, easily be recognized in the province where

they were trained. In case that doesn’t happen, this act helps to

facilitate that process, to give them temporary registration, support

them through this process and get them into the workforce as soon as

possible. The main purpose for this is to really have them being able to

work in the field as soon as possible — of course, while ensuring the

health and safety of young children, but facilitate the

process.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the minister.

Would there be a consideration for some kind of

cross-jurisdictional approval ability? If there is a similar registrar

in a different province, rather than having to apply every time an

applicant comes who has out-of-province experience, there could be a way

to accept what other regulators in Canada would have already

accepted.

Hon. K. Chen: Hon. Chair, for the member’s information, we do work really

closely with other registrars across other provinces. That is why we

know, in most cases, that a student trained in a province can be

registered in the province where they’re trained and that then, through

the labour mobility agreement, we can transfer and recognize their

credential.

Also, for the member’s information, we do have an

information-sharing agreement, which allows the registrar to obtain

information from another jurisdiction about an applicant or a

registrant’s suitability to be registered.

[11:35 a.m.]

This also helps to prevent bad actors from moving from one

jurisdiction in Canada to practise in another, by allowing regulators to

share information. Also, of course, that supports the process to help to

streamline the registration and being able to recognize credentials as

fast as possible.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the minister.

Currently if somebody is registered with the registrar as an ECE

and, in this legislation, they’re demonstrating that they have gone

through an approved program in British Columbia…. When that applicant

refiled…. I don’t know if it’s every year that they would be sending new

information in. If the program that was approved at the time they

registered is no longer approved, because they’re in non-compliance with

the act or something else has happened, would there be any concern from

the registrar’s perspective in a program renewal?

Hon. K. Chen: As long as the registrant is…. Well, the training program is

qualified at the time when they were trained and certified, then we

always recognize their registration, and they do renew once in a

while.

K. Kirkpatrick: What about an online program delivered by an institution outside

of British Columbia? How would that be considered, or would that be

considered in the same way that an in-person university program would be

considered?

Hon. K. Chen: You’ll be considered in the same process.

K. Kirkpatrick: Just to dig a little bit deeper on that, if a person is taking a

program here in British Columbia and it’s located outside of British

Columbia, does that program need to be approved under this

registrar?

Hon. K. Chen: If the program is outside of B.C., then the person is considered

the same as an outside-of-province student. They would either go through

the outside-of-province process to register in another province, even

though they are personally in B.C., and transfer to become a registered

and certified ECE. Or they could go through the temporary process to be

recognized.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the minister.

The issue that I’m struggling with here is that there appear to be

more barriers for an institution to be operating in British Columbia, to

be approved, and more reviews and program approvals than there would be

outside of British Columbia. I feel like there’s a bit of an additional

burden or additional administrative piece put onto British Columbia

institutions.

For example, you have CDI offering an early education certificate

program in British Columbia. CDI, or another organization school, may

very well offer that same certificate in Alberta, yet the programs in

British Columbia would have to be asking for approval to do curriculum

changes. They would have to be doing filings, but the other program

wouldn’t.

You’re saying, though, that a person could take that other program

in Alberta, come here and still be registered. So that other institution

would not have to go through….

Sorry, I said the word “you’re.” I caught myself. That other

program with exactly the same course, perhaps, would not need to go

through that same annual process.

[11:40 a.m.]

Hon. K. Chen: From our understanding, different provinces have similar

procedures. B.C. does not really provide or create extra barriers for

this registration process.

That being said, every province has different competencies for

their early childhood education programs, and that is why, because there

are so many institutions and so many different competencies between

different provinces, we focus on the applicant, not so much the

institution. In fact, one of the main purposes of this act reduces that

barrier, to make sure we can facilitate this process. To make sure

there’s alignment, we do work with other provinces as well.

For the member’s information as well, actually, our current

director, Darla here — very thankful for her support and her work, which

is very equivalent to the new registrar’s position — currently chairs

the committee that has registrars from across the province. They meet

every six weeks, and she continues to learn and work with other

provinces on creating alignments, streamlining process, discussing

labour mobility to help to facilitate the future of our early childhood

educators workforce, to help them to come into the workforce.

T. Shypitka: Thanks for the opportunity. I’m just sitting here, and I’m

listening to the conversation. It’s an important one to where I live, as

well as the rest of the province.

I live in Kootenay East, so really tight and really close to

Alberta. We have a really big relationship with those and, of course, a

labour shortage. We’re looking for ECEs all the time. And of course, the

accreditation process is somewhat bureaucratic. It’s rigorous to get

reaccredited to go from one jurisdiction to another. Hearing this

conversation, it kind of piqued my interest a little bit.

I heard the minister say, in regards to a temporary licence, that

those accredited from another university or institution outside of B.C.

can come in through a temporary licence. I just wanted to know what that

process looked like.

Is it somewhat of a mentorship program? Do they come in and mentor

with another ECE that is fully accredited in British Columbia, and they

check them out while they get their other licensing approved? Are there

licensing fees that are associated with that to the ECE that comes in

from outside of the jurisdiction? What does the timeline look like to

get fully accredited with this piece of legislation?

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. K. Chen: There’s no fee for any of the process. I really appreciate the

member’s question, because it also helps to clarify the process, as

well.

Normally, if a person is trained, for example, in Alberta and

registered there, of course the easiest way is to go through the labour

mobility agreement, which is the fastest. But if not, then the temporary

process would require the applicant to submit an application, and the

registrar would be looking at the application and see how we transfer

the credential. If everything looks great and no gaps or other extra

courses are needed, they can be registered right away.

But if the registrar believes that there could be a few courses

that are needed, in order to allow the applicant to complete those

courses, we would give a temporary certificate for them to start working

as soon as possible, while the applicant fills the gap of the full

registration.

That being said, I think it’s important, because we do know the

challenges of how some communities are facing shortages of early

childhood educators but with outside-of-province applicants.

One of the purposes of this bill is to also allow the registrar to

be able to delegate her or his work to other staff in the department.

For example, currently the processing time is about five weeks in those

scenarios. But that being said, because we know some employers cannot

wait for five weeks to fill the shortage, once we’re able to allow the

registrar to delegate her work and responsibilities to other staff, we

may be able to make it faster, depending on the caseload and the

demand.

So we’re hoping to look at less than five weeks, which is

currently what we face. That’s what this legislation, hopefully, will do

to really facilitate that process as fast as possible.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you for the answer to the question.

I just want to confirm. What I understood you to say is that

there’s no fee. I want to confirm if it’s also no fee to the institution

or if that was no fee just to the ECE worker.

Hon. K. Chen: No fee for both.

K. Kirkpatrick: Can I ask what the funding model is, then, for the work that is

being done? My understanding from reading the legislation is that there

is a lot going on with compliance program review. How is that being

funded, if not through the institutions themselves?

[11:50 a.m.]

Hon. K. Chen: You’ll be funded through our annualized budget.

Clause 10 approved.

On clause 11.

K. Kirkpatrick: Clause 11(2). I better make sure this time I’m referring to the

exact, correct clause. Well, I’ll ask you the question, then I’ll make

sure. It requires the institution to give at least 90 days notice of a

change in curriculum related to a competency established under this act.

I’d just like to understand what constitutes a change in curriculum that

would require notification to the registrar.

program, we would not require that notice. But if it’s something to do

with the competency — for example, the learning outcome or the

curriculum of the course, which may affect the competency — then we may

require more information and a notice.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the minister for the answer.

That is relatively vague. So just in terms of a school being able

to make sure that they are in compliance, a change to curriculum, a

change to…. It could be a very minor change to something that focuses on

a different part of a competency. Is there something that’s more

specific in terms of how it would be determined to be substantive enough

to trigger an actual requirement for notification?

One of the reasons, just for context, that I ask…. A lot of these

programs are continuous intake. When things are happening externally….

There are changes in the sector. There are changes in an instructor, who

has, maybe, a different area of expertise. Sometimes these things can

happen very quickly, as opposed to being that it’s 90 days that you need

to give this notice on.

So the question, to clarify — I said I was going to be short here

today — what constitutes something that would be of a magnitude that

would need to require that approval?

Hon. K. Chen: Currently we’d look at the change if it’s more than 10 percent of

the curriculum or the competency. But that being said, with the passing

of this act, if passed, when we’re working on our regulations, we’re

going to be working very closely with post-secondary institutions to

make sure their input and feedback is incorporated to co-develop this

together.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the minister. I flagged this really because it

just….

[11:55 a.m.]

My feedback, should it be considered, is that it really needs to

be defined in terms of if it’s a change to a program, a change to just a

course or a change so that it doesn’t become an administrative burden

and something that probably would be an oversight on behalf of some of

these institutions, and actually not notifying where they should be and

may be not in compliance.

I am not to be the one that asks with respect to time, but I

wonder if I should be continuing. I was told yesterday I couldn’t be the

one who asked.

The Chair: It’s quite appropriate if you want to note the

hour.

K. Kirkpatrick: Noting the hour….

The Chair: You’ve noted the hour, but we will ask the minister to finish

that off. I appreciate that, hon. critic.

K. Kirkpatrick: Wonderful. Thank you. I want to do it the right way.

Hon. K. Chen: Noting the hour, I ask the committee to rise, report progress and

seek leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:56 a.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

The Committee of the Whole, having reported progress, was granted

leave to sit again.

Hon. M. Dean moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1 p.m. today.

The House adjourned at 11:57 a.m.

Copyright © 2021 Legislative Assembly of British Columbia

The Official Report of Debates (Hansard) and webcasts of

chamber proceedings are available at www.leg.bc.ca .

For inquiries contact:

Hansard Services

612 Government Street

Victoria, BC V8V 1X4

Telephone: 250-387-3681

Email: hansardservices@leg.bc.ca

Published by Hansard Services under the authority

of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.