Fifth Session, 41st Parliament

(2020) REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS

(HANSARD)

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY,

SECTION A

Virtual Meeting

Friday, July 10, 2020

Morning Meeting

Issue No. 7

ISSN 2563-3511

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Committee of Supply

Proceedings in

Section A

Estimates: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

(continued)

T. Stone

Hon. S. Robinson

Estimates: Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture

(continued)

Hon. L. Beare

T. Wat

FRIDAY, JULY 10, 2020

The committee met at 9:34 a.m.

[R. Leonard in the chair.]

Committee of Supply

Proceedings in

Section A

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

MUNICIPAL

AFFAIRS AND HOUSING

(continued)

On Vote 37: ministry operations, $120,978,000

(continued) .

The Chair: Good morning, everyone.

[9:35 a.m.]

I want to acknowledge that I am participating today from the

homeland of the

Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking peoples, today known as the

Songhees and Esquimalt Nations. We extend our appreciation to them

for the opportunity to undertake the work before us on this

land.

We are meeting today to continue consideration of the

estimates of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and

Housing.

T. Stone: Good morning to everyone. The sun is shining here in Kamloops.

Hopefully, it is wherever you happen to be today.

We’ll continue with some housing questions this morning. I want to

ask a few questions related to the recent acquisitions of hotels, either

through purchasing or leasing. We know that the government has acquired

hotels in Vancouver and Victoria and other parts of the

province.

I guess my first question to the minister would be this one: what

is the plan for hotels once they’re no longer used as temporary

shelters? Furthermore, as part of that plan, are there budgeted costs

that the minister can share with us that would be associated with

remediating those hotels?

[9:40 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: The member asked a question about the purchase, recently, of a

number of hotels. First of all, I think it’s important to refer to the

context of, certainly, a COVID response. We’ve been leasing a number of

hotels and motels as well as community spaces around the province as a

result of COVID.

I want to just do a thank-you to local governments, non-profits

and partners that worked with us to make sure that we could keep people

who were living in shelters safe and make sure that we didn’t have the

same kind of challenges that other jurisdictions had, particularly in

Ontario, where lots of vulnerable populations were getting quite ill. So

I’m grateful that we were able to do that.

In this particular instance, these opportunities presented

themselves. There have been numerous opportunities over the last number

of years to make these significant purchases with the long-term view of

redeveloping those properties.

These are real opportunities to deliver on our 30-point plan, and

that’s what these purchases were about: in the interim, to use them as

temporary homes for people who are vulnerable within this current

context, with a long-term vision of redevelopment. Of course, as part of

that, we’ll be working with the community and local governments in

identifying how to best make use of these investments.

T. Stone: Again, to the minister: what are the budgeted costs for

remediating these hotels? I’ll ask a few…. Actually, I have questions

that she can maybe bundle together. But what are the costs? There must

be a budget for the remediation.

Two: will the staff in these hotels be kept on, or will B.C.

Housing be parting ways with them? Three…. Well, actually, I’d

appreciate just a quick answer on those two. Those are kind of

budget-related items. Thank you.

[9:45 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: In terms of remediating costs, I just want to make sure I

understand the question. These are usable spaces as we purchase them, so

we don’t need to remediate in order to use them. So I just want to make

sure I understand what the member is referring to when he says

remediation costs.

In terms of staffing in hotels, a lot of these hotels are closed

and don’t have staff available. But wherever there were staff available

to work, they were always invited to continue. In fact, in the Comfort

Inn, nine or ten staff did stay on. Then layered in…. The professional

staff that provide supports to vulnerable people were added as part of

the staffing complement.

T. Stone: Just for clarity for the minister, I was looking for budgeted

remediation costs once the hotels are no longer required to be used for

the purpose for which they were acquired or leased in the first place.

But I’ll throw out the next question in here too.

There are five hotels in Vancouver and Victoria: the Howard

Johnson, the Buchan Hotel, the American Hotel, Paul’s Motor Inn and the

Comfort Inn, the latter two being in Victoria. The total purchase price

for those five hotels in question, by my records, is $125.8 million. I

would like the minister to please confirm that I’ve got that number

right.

I also understand that the combined assessed value of those five

hotels is $84.2 million. So it would appear that the province has paid

50 percent above the assessed value for these five hotels. When you then

divide that total purchase price by the number of rooms, the number of

beds that are available in those five hotels combined, it works out to

about $343,000 per room.

Can the minister confirm that those numbers are correct? In the

context of paying 50 percent over assessed value, does the minister have

any concerns about paying so much over the assessed value of these five

hotels? Is that the approach that the province will be taking, moving

forward, with respect to the potential acquisition of additional

hotels?

[9:50 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: The $125 million is correct. I want to remind the member that

assessed values and market values for commercial don’t always line up.

They’re very, very different. Of course, the assessed value is just a

bookmark, a point in time, but market value is a very, very different

concept and operates differently.

What we do in order to do our due diligence is we get a

third-party appraiser. That’s exactly what we did in this case, as we do

in all cases. We paid either at or below the independent appraisal value

for these properties to ensure that we get good value.

The other thing that I think is important to acknowledge, as part

of this overall package, is that these are long-term redevelopment

opportunities. So while the member might be doing a calculation on

current number of rooms and doing this division exercise, it’s not an

accurate assessment of what the potential is. That’s what we’re doing

here. We’re investing in properties that have redevelopment potential to

build the kind of permanent housing that people need. We’ll be working

with these communities to deliver that.

The other thing is that on two of these properties we also

purchased parking lots, recognizing that those are redevelopment

potentials as well. We will get, actually, a significant number of homes

for people to live for the long term. These are 50-year, 60-year

investments that we’re making for the people of British

Columbia.

T. Stone: I just wanted to point out to the minister, again, that I didn’t

hear an answer with respect to the remediation costs.

There have been commitments made to hotel operators that all the

hotels will be remediated to their original condition, so for any damage

that’s done, any work that would need to be done to bring that hotel

back to the state it was in prior is done. We do know that there have

been reports of thefts and damage done at a number of these sites. So

looking for what the budgeted amount is for that remediation

work.

Related to that, will those costs be all absorbed by the Ministry

of Municipal Affairs and Housing, or will other ministries be sharing in

those costs? If the minister could provide those details, I would sure

appreciate it.

[9:55 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: I thank the member for asking the question. Again, I neglected to

get the information that he was asking.

As part of all standard leases, when we use hotels or motels for

emergency purposes, as part of the lease, we make the commitment to

repair the damage, if there is damage, and bring it back to its

condition in which we rented it. At this point, it’s really hard to

assess specifically, because it’s an active file with a number of hotels

that we’re using. There are 3,000 spaces — hotels, motels and community

centres.

At this point, I don’t have a specific number for the member. But

no other ministries. This will just sit with the Ministry of Municipal

Affairs and Housing, and specifically, B.C. Housing will be responsible

for repairing those hotel and motel rooms.

T. Stone: Just to confirm, the minister is saying that the ministry doesn’t

have a budgeted or projected amount for remediation costs? I mean, we

went through this yesterday morning, with all due respect, for an hour

and 45 minutes before we finally got to some numbers insofar as the

COVID-related impacts on recoveries internal and external to the

ministry.

Again, I don’t think anyone would believe that there is no

budgeted amount, no sense of a projection as to what remediation costs.

You’ve barely purchased half a dozen hotels at this point. So we’re not

talking about dozens and dozens of hotels.

[10:00 a.m.]

Again, I’d ask the minister to please provide a number. What is

that projected cost for the remediation of these hotels to bring them

back to their original condition?

I totally recognize it would be notional at this point. It’s a

projection. It will evolve and change, especially as the province may

acquire additional hotels, but again, surely there must be a budgeted

number. Could the minister please share that with us?

[10:05 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: I apologize if it takes some time. Because of COVID, I have staff

in many different places, and it means calling different staff and

thinking that someone who I think might have the answer doesn’t have the

answer and they need to call someone else. Under normal circumstances,

we’d have everybody in one space. But we’re doing our best to keep

distance here.

I want to make sure that it’s clear that this isn’t…. For hotels

that we’ve purchased, we don’t have a remediation budget because we own

them. So for these hotels, we have a line item of $4.8 million as an

allocation. Again, it’s a notional allocation. We have never been in a

situation here where we’ve had to do what we’re doing. So that might be

subject to change, given what we learn and how things play out and how

long the pandemic lasts.

T. Stone: I thank the minister for her last response. We also know that with

some of these hotels — not all, but in some situations — when the hotels

are purchased, there are businesses that exist in those hotels. A couple

of quick questions on that.

Can the minister confirm that the province, B.C. Housing and she

was aware of businesses that have leases inside of the hotels that have

been purchased? What is the ministry’s approach or policy or protocol,

in terms of dealing with organizations that might have leases in these

buildings when they’re acquired? Obviously, the lessees would not have a

say in the sale of the building and so forth. But the purchase by the

province for the purposes of providing the housing in question may have

some impacts on those that are leasing space in these

buildings.

I’m just wondering if the minister could provide some detail on

what the government’s approach is, what her approach is, to working with

those tenants that have leases inside of these buildings when they’re

acquired for the purposes of social housing.

Hon. S. Robinson: Yes. We are aware of the businesses that are in the hotels that we

purchase, and we approach them on a case-by-case basis. We respect the

existing leases. As tenants, they get to make choices about what makes

the most sense for them, given the new relationship.

T. Stone: I appreciate that last response. I’m wondering, again, back to the

assessed value versus the market value…. And I do very much understand

the difference. I’m just wondering if the minister could answer this

question.

[10:10 a.m.]

Why not try to purchase these assets closer to that assessed

value? Fifty percent above assessed price is a huge increase in costs to

the taxpayer, so why not make best efforts to purchase closer to that

lower assessed value?

How many more hotels does the minister anticipate the province

purchasing over the coming months and years? Does she have a budget

allocation, a notional allocation, for the acquisition of additional

hotels? If she does, how much is it?

Hon. S. Robinson: First of all, I want to remind the member…. You know what? We’re

really good negotiators. Our team at B.C. Housing are really good

negotiators. Landowners want market value. So the negotiation goes back

and forth. I’m sure the member well knows how that works.

The third-party appraisal is the key component here. That helps to

inform the negotiations. In each of these cases, these purchases were

made at or below the third-party appraisal.

The other question had to do with future plans. We certainly have

our 30-point plan, and as part of that $6 billion capital commitment,

there are opportunities. We’re always looking for opportunities. I

think, as good stewards, it’s important that we look for availability of

land that we can identify that can be redeveloped to deliver on the

housing that people need.

I want to take the opportunity to let the member know that the

federal government very much has expressed interest nationally in

looking at how to make these kinds of purchases, and we’ve been in very

good discussions with the federal minister and looking to identify other

opportunities to have partnerships to deliver on this kind of housing in

this way.

T. Stone: I want to just ask a few questions about public engagement and

consultation with neighbourhoods. Again, I think that all of us in the

Legislature, on all sides, understand the critical importance of the

broad range of housing that is provided to folks who have a broad range

of needs and challenges.

[10:15 a.m.]

It’s also important to make sure that neighbourhoods are consulted

and engaged and that there’s a respect for the input of folks in

neighbourhoods and that there’s a response to or an acknowledgment of

challenges and issues that may arise and a response to those issues and

challenges.

The member for Coquitlam–Burke Mountain asked a number of

questions yesterday about the hotels that have been purchased in

Yaletown and the issues that have arisen there. Our understanding is

that B.C. Housing representatives were invited on three separate

occasions to attend a town hall with concerned Yaletown residents and

did not attend.

I’m just wondering if the minister could explain why that would be

the case. I guess, more importantly, moving forward, will the minister

commit to presenting a public plan for the future of social housing

hotels in the Yaletown area and then utilize that approach for public

engagement in other parts of the province where similar situations of

very negative challenges are occurring? Could the minister please

respond to that?

Hon. S. Robinson: I think, again, in this context, we need to remember this is a

pandemic. We have been diligently working in communities to identify

emergency spaces.

Again, I think there’s tremendous pride that we can take, as

British Columbians, in the fact that not only have we flattened the

curve. Certainly, we have been able to respond to ensure that those who

are most marginalized, who don’t have a place to separate themselves out

from the public sphere, have had the opportunity to be safe.

This is a health and safety issue. Unlike Ontario, where they’ve

had a significant outbreak of COVID among the homeless population and

vulnerable people that was absolutely ravaging in that population…. We

have been able to avoid that because of our swift action. So, in the

context of COVID, we did move people directly into spaces so that they

could be safe.

Having said that, we have been in dialogue with the community

through numerous channels around what’s going to be happening and how

things are going to be operating. And now that we have made these

purchases, just like we do with anything else, we are engaging in the

community dialogue process. We’ve formed a community dialogue group.

That’s just been formed. It is made up of people in the

community.

[10:20 a.m.]

In relation to the gatherings that the member was saying, my

understanding is that those were MLA-led town halls. Just as practice

and protocol, B.C. Housing doesn’t participate in political forums like

that one, but they do host community engagement dialogues.

We did that with every single project. We’ve done that in

Kamloops. We’ve done that in Kelowna. We’ve done that in Richmond. In

Richmond, I think there were 11 or 12 different dialogue opportunities.

We did it in Marpole. They do it in every single place where we’re

delivering housing for people. That is part of the process. There is an

existing process that’s worked quite well.

Again, we’ve had a significant response as a result of COVID. We

needed to get people housed, so we took swift action. Now we’re

continuing to move forward because we know that this is going to be a

more permanent situation in terms of permanent housing for the long

term.

T. Stone: Well, I’m certain that the residents of Yaletown, the hundreds of

people that attended the town halls that I mentioned, will be

disappointed to hear the minister say that B.C. Housing wasn’t there

because they were “partisan events.” They were not partisan events. They

were events that MLAs of all parties hold that are non-partisan in

nature.

There are many, many issues where we check our partisan politics

at the door — I know the member knows what I’m talking about — where

it’s important to recognize we’re there to support and serve every one

of our constituents. So I find it disappointing that there was an

opportunity on three occasions for hundreds of residents in the impacted

neighbourhoods in Yaletown to engage with B.C. Housing, and the

opportunity was not embraced.

Similarly, back over to the Island, in Victoria, three of the

hotels requisitioned…. There are a number of hotels requisitioned by

B.C. Housing that are located in the Burnside Gorge neighbourhood of

Victoria, specifically the Howard Johnson and the Travelodge, and then

the province has purchased the Comfort Inn.

In response to significant neighbourhood concern, community

concern, in 2018, B.C. Housing signed a memorandum of understanding

committing to no additional supportive housing projects and shelters in

the Burnside Gorge area. However, all three of the properties I just

listed are leased or purchased in the Burnside Gorge area.

The question would be this: how can neighbourhoods, the people who

live in these neighbourhoods, community associations, community advisory

councils, and so forth, trust the minister that B.C. Housing will uphold

its commitments when it signs MOUs and then overrides those in the

months and years beyond?

[10:25 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: I was getting some more detail. It was a little slow coming in.

We’re on different tools and phones and stuff. So I appreciate your

patience with this process.

I think it’s fair to say that with the MOU, we have been in

ongoing conversation with the Burnside Community Association. We’ve met

with them, reiterating our commitment to the MOU.

Again, I want to remind the member that the current use of these

spaces is as part of an emergency response. The community understands

that, and the community is looking forward to working together with us

for the long-term permanent use of these sites. That’s an exciting

opportunity for this community — to have affordable housing available to

people in the region.

T. Stone: Well, I would encourage the minister to actually go and meet with

neighbours who live in this community. That’s not how they see the

situation. I know that there are a tremendous number of people that live

there who absolutely have big hearts, who absolutely understand the

critical importance of a wide range of housing products to be made

available for those who really need those supports and services. But

what’s lacking here is the upfront engagement and consultation with the

community.

The minister keeps talking about the pandemic we’re in. We all

know we’re in a pandemic. One of the hallmarks, I think, of how we’ve

all managed to work our way through this pandemic has been exceptional

communication on the part of Dr. Bonnie Henry and the public health

community. That communication is the piece that is so critically

important to bringing everybody along with you, especially when you’re

in the middle of a crisis like a pandemic.

That’s the piece that is missing when it comes to the

neighbourhoods within which a number of these supportive housing

projects are being located and where the decisions are being made.

They’re being put in, and then, after the fact, there may be some

discussion and engagement efforts made, by which time it’s too

late.

These communities are also feeling that their concerns — the

issues of crime, property crime in particular — and the worries around

public safety and their own health and so forth…. There are some very

significant concerns that aren’t being addressed. Again — communication,

communication, communication. It’s why the forums in Yaletown were so

important, to get hundreds of people together so they could ask

questions.

By the way, I want to note for the record that those Yaletown

public hearings, the public townhalls that the minister claims to have

been partisan…. The city of Vancouver sent representatives, and so did

the city of Vancouver police department, neither of whom thought that

those meetings were partisan at all. So I would strongly hope that the

minister will focus on engagement and consultation with these

communities more up front.

This brings me to my next question that’s specific to Kelowna. The

mayor there, Mayor Colin Basran, has indicated that the province used

paramountcy to skip public consultation on a rezoning application for a

supportive housing project in the downtown core, specifically a project

on Ellis Street.

A two-part question. Can the minister confirm that, indeed, that

was the case — that the province used paramountcy to skip public

consultation on the rezoning application for this particular project?

Secondly, what is the province’s criteria for exercising paramountcy in

order to skip or override local development processes?

[10:30 a.m. - 10:35 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: I think it’s really important to get on the record that when we’re

making a permanent investment and delivering a permanent housing, we

always consult with the community. We always engage with the community.

Especially when we’re moving quickly in a crisis, we act as quickly as

we can, but we still do our best to communicate as efficiently as we can

with the community.

In fact, we got a note from a resident of the community that the

member was mentioning, Burnside Gorge. This is what they

said:

“Thank you for your thoughtful letter to the neighbourhood regarding

your purchase of the property and existing hotel facility. As a resident

of the Hudson building, the street community have been my neighbours

since I moved into the building last year. I’m so glad to hear that

you’ve been able to secure a site to aid the folks who are members of

that community and to provide services alongside housing for those who

were previously underserved.

“I’m looking forward to news pertaining to how your plan evolves,

first with an operator and, hopefully, eventually with a redevelopment

plan, as I’m sure that adapting an aging hotel facility into supportive

housing is unideal. Thank you for the work you and your colleagues do

for the members of our community and our city.”

I think there is certainly an appreciation for our attempts as we

move quickly to house people under a crisis situation. We do communicate

with them. We let them know. This particular person was very grateful to

have received a letter communicating what was happening in his

neighbourhood and understood that we had long-term developments that we

would be considering as time evolved, and that we would involve the

community. And we’re committed to doing that.

As for the situation in Kelowna, I want to assure the member that

we received a request from the mayor and council. They had a vote to ask

the province for paramountcy. This came from the community. It came from

the representatives who know their communities best and who came to us

and said this is a temporary modular project. Their assessment has been

that they have a significant homelessness problem after years of neglect

and lack of investment. They were struggling to address the significant

homelessness challenges in their community. I’m sure the member has seen

the waterfront and the challenges that they were having in parks in

their community.

They came to us and asked if we could bring in paramountcy to

assist them. Again, this is a temporary project. So we said: “Because

it’s temporary, we’ll certainly work with you to do that — to deliver in

the interim while you take a look at the long-term plans for this

community.”

T. Stone: Okay. I didn’t hear from the minister what the criteria are or the

protocol that kicks into gear when the province decides to implement or

use its tool of paramountcy, if we can call it that. Perhaps she can

clarify that for me in her response.

I wanted to focus on an issue that’s quite specific to my

constituency and my hometown of Kamloops. I’m speaking specifically of

the West Victoria Street corridor in downtown Kamloops. At the present

time, there are three very important supportive housing projects,

services that are available to people.

To refresh the minister’s memory, there’s the Mustard Seed, which

is at 181 West Victoria Street. This is a live-in men’s sobriety

program. I believe it has about 17 beds and so forth. The second project

is run by the CMHA. It’s Emerald House. This is a facility that provides

very important shelter beds for homeless women and children. The third

project, which is the newest of them all, is Rosethorn House.

[10:40 a.m.]

Emerald House is at 271 West Victoria. Rosethorn House is at 259

Victoria Street. Again, this is run by the Canadian Mental Health

Association. It has 42 units. It opened up in January of

The issue here is that there…. Well, there are certainly community

concerns that there wasn’t enough up-front engagement and so forth. But

the bigger challenge is what is happening in this corridor, particularly

since the Rosethorn House opened its doors last January: the very

significant increase in crime, property crime, folks feeling threatened,

damage that has been done to properties, businesses where employees and

their customers just don’t feel safe. Their customers don’t feel safe

patronizing the businesses in the same volumes anymore, and staff are,

in many cases, fearing for their own lives.

I want to just ask a couple questions. One, could the minister

provide for us these details…? With respect to the Rosethorn project,

how many FTEs are assigned to this project? How many nurses are

available at this site 24-7? What does that FTE count look like? How

many staff who are mental health professionals are on site 24-7? What

does that FTE complement look like for Rosethorn House?

It was pitched as a 42-unit modular project with 24-7 supports, so

I’m looking for a confirmation of those details with respect to this

project: total number of FTEs assigned to this project, how many nurses

are available at the site 24-7, and how many staff who are mental health

professionals are on site, again, 24-7?

[10:45 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: The Rosethorn supportive housing just opened up a few months ago,

pre-COVID. The CAC, the community advisory committee, has met once. It

hasn’t been able to meet because of COVID. Of course, police participate

in that as well as community members. The member can certainly get more

information from them. It is a 24-7 staffed facility. The CAC takes a

look at how to build community support and pays attention to what’s

going on in the community.

I think it’s important for the member to understand that we’ve

been at this now for a couple years in different communities. We’re

seeing a real pattern and an understanding about how things play out. I

can give him the example of Marpole. When Marpole was first being

proposed and being established, there was certainly a lot of community

angst. These were new neighbours that were coming to the neighbourhood.

There were certainly concerns expressed, just like what we hear in other

communities, because it’s change. It’s change to the

community.

What we find is that when we develop a CAC, a community advisory

committee, where the police can attend, the service providers are there

and the community members are there, they talk about ways to do

integration and bringing people together. The focus is really on how we

support people on getting healthy. One of the things that we find is

that after a few months of everyone settling in to new neighbours,

things really do settle out.

In fact, in Marpole, they do community events together. I mean,

this is pre-COVID, of course. There were community barbecues. Neighbours

were coming to help out. There are schools around, and the school

children were involved. They’ve really been a tremendous success in

bringing communities together.

Our approach as a government is really to bring people together.

How do we find ways to make space for new neighbours? How do we support

our new neighbours so that they can be successful in their housing? How

do we work with people who are new to the neighbourhood to respect the

neighbourhood and participate in its overall well-being?

It’s really a two-way street, and we work to build collaboration

and support. That is, I think, the way through to success, rather than

dividing people and seeing them somehow as not worthy of living in nice

neighbourhoods or not worthy of participating in communities. It’s not

an approach that we think works for anybody. We find that by building a

strong community advisory committee, finding ways to bring people

together, it is really enriching for everybody.

The other thing. The member asked again about, sort of, who’s

working there. I don’t have the specific FTEs. I hope the member will be

okay with us getting that to him. If he doesn’t mind, after estimates, I

can dig that up. Getting the right person here who has that detail is

just going to take too long, and I know the member has other questions.

I can commit to getting that to him in writing.

What I will say is that many of our non-profit housing providers

hire mental health workers. I’ll read for the member a recent job

description for different supportive housing. But this is an example of

the skill set that does get hired as part of the 24-7 staff

complement.

I want to make a distinction between clinical services and support

services. Clinical services are available for clients as they need them.

So whether it’s a nurse practitioner or a psychologist, those are

available on an as-needed basis. But the 24-7 support workers are people

who participate in case planning with clients and health care providers.

They have a range of skill sets.

[10:50 a.m.]

In this particular job description that I have, they need a

minimum of two years’ post-secondary education in mental health and

addictions and a minimum of two years’ experience in a similar setting

with a mental health and addictions–related agency.

They have to have extensive working knowledge of psychosocial

rehabilitation approaches and services, including individual service

plan development and implementation and life skills training. They have

to have a solid background and knowledge of concurrent disorders, with

related work experience. Two years of experience working with people

with mental illness or those at risk of homelessness. They need to be

able to provide medication support. They provide, of course, meal and

program support; social-economic, recreational and educational services.

They have to be able to facilitate client physical, recreational,

educational and employment needs.

It’s quite broad-based, and there’s someone with that skillset, at

least one — I believe it’s often two — to support these

residents.

T. Stone: Well, the member did read the job description of the mental health

professional into the record yesterday. So we got that. I do want to

emphasize…. I’m being somewhat cheeky here, for sure, but Marpole is not

Kamloops. I didn’t ask about Marpole. I’m asking about the West Victoria

Street corridor in Kamloops.

I also don’t think that we should have to go and talk to the

community advisory group to try to get answers, when they’re the very

ones that are approaching us saying that they can’t get answers. They

are struggling to understand where B.C. Housing is and the supports from

government that are needed.

I’ve got another question or two on that. But just to the

minister’s point about not having FTEs available at her fingertips

today, fine. We are winding down in our time for these estimates this

year. But I would like to just read into the record what I would hope

the minister could commit to providing to us in written form as soon as

possible after our estimates are done today.

I would appreciate having the following. How many FTEs are

assigned to the project? How many nurses are available on site 24-7? How

many mental health professionals are available on site 24-7? If nurses

and mental health professionals are not available on site 24-7 for a

project, then what are their contact hours that are specific to each

project?

I would like to request that information for all of the

government’s modular supportive housing programs — specifically, the

facility in Maple Ridge at 22534 Royal Crescent; the facility in Maple

Ridge at 11749 and 11761 Burnett Street; in Nanaimo, 2020 Labieux Road;

in Nanaimo, 250 Terminal Avenue; in Kamloops, the project we just spoke

about, at 259 Victoria Street; in Kamloops, at 317 Tranquille Road; in

Kamloops, at 777-817 Mission Flats Road; in Terrace, at 4523 Olson; in

Vancouver, the Howard Johnson, the Buchan Hotel, the American Hotel; and

in Victoria, Paul’s Motor Inn and the Comfort Inn.

I’ve put that into the record. Again, I would ask that the

minister provide a written response with the number of nursing and

mental health FTEs that are on site 24-7, or, if not, what that

complement of nursing and mental health resourcing looks like for each

of those projects. Actually, one final thing on that, the budget that is

provided: what’s the budget for the nursing and the mental health

resources, as I’ve just asked for, for each of those sites? Is that

entirely the responsibility of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and

Housing, or are those funds coming from other ministries in government

or other agencies?

I’ll leave that piece there. I did want to just…. Back to the West

Victoria corridor in Kamloops, the importance of the communication that

is needed, moving forward — I cannot underscore enough.

[10:55 a.m.]

What is happening to this neighbourhood is heart-wrenching and

needs to be the focus of the minister and government moving forward. I

will just read a couple of comments from a couple of the small business

owners that are in this corridor.

The first one is from the Spoke Bike and Ski shop. This is Carolyn

Barry and Paul Barry, the co-owners. They write:

“We are writing to you to express our concern with the state of

Victoria Street W and the continued deterioration in the area, due to

all of the supportive housing projects that have put in to accommodate a

variety of clientele. We are subject to break-ins, vandalism, theft and

unlawful use of our private property daily. We, as a small business,

have had to spend a lot of money just to secure our business, repair

damages caused by these residents and clean up messes left by them —

needles, human feces and garbage — on a daily basis.

“We have been threatened in our own business when we have denied

entry or have asked these people to leave. We have arrived to an entire

bin of garbage emptied all over our parking lots, camp-outs in the back

of our building. We were broken into, most recently, a month ago. We had

our phone lines cut in an attempted break-in, in spring of 2019. We’ve

had an attempted break-in through the back of our building. We’ve had an

attempted break-in through the roof of our building. Fires started in

trailers beside our building. We’ve had bikes stolen while our staff

were preoccupied with others.

“We need a solution to this ongoing issue. Our staff feel

threatened. Our customers are being affected as well as cost in cleanup.

This is the reality we’re dealing with at Victoria Street W.”

This one is from Reid Hamer-Jackson of Tru Market Truck and Auto

Sales:

“I’ve had multiple vehicles stolen recently from people that came

across from their property. Vandalism, fires set, needles disposed of,

people camping out, people stealing power to charge their devices, being

cased out by residents for future theft, building break-ins, gas

siphoned, the list goes on and on.

“I have spent thousands upon thousands dollars out of pocket for

these damages. I’ve had to get several different insurance companies, as

they don’t want to insure my property anymore. I fear for my employees’

safety. I will not leave my female employees alone in the building

without it being locked.”

The last one is from David Ramunno of Riversyde Motors. He

says:

“The reason I’m writing to you today is to advise you of the

situation regarding the problems we are experiencing along the corridor

of West Victoria. For the last few years, we’ve noticed the crime rate

explode in the area. From needles and garbage to break-ins and

vandalism, our employees and our customers are both expressing concern

regarding the safety of their vehicles and ability to walk from our

business to the downtown core while having their services done at our

shop.

“My family and I are very concerned about the value of our property,

and we’re very concerned about the safety of our employees and

customers.”

Those are just three of about 15 letters that I have from this

corridor, and it has really reached a crescendo over the last year. I

want to have that on the record so that the minister can, hopefully, be

more aware of this situation, which we’re hearing is happening in

communities all over the province and really requires a focused effort

on the part of government to address.

There’s the front-end consultation. There’s coming into these

communities and engaging with the small businesses, with the residents

and bringing everybody together to address the issues that are happening

that are very real and impacting people’s lives.

If the minister would like to comment on that last piece, I’d be

happy for her to do so. Then I have one final question before we will be

concluding our canvassing of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and

Housing estimates today.

Hon. S. Robinson: I certainly appreciate the concerns that are being raised by the

members of the community in Kamloops. The reason I did talk about

Marpole is because we had similar concerns, in the very early days,

raised there — and similar ones, I believe, in Surrey.

These investments in these people and the supports…. It does take

a while for people to settle down and to get, sort of, a routine

established with the community and with the residents. These are early

days, and I know it’s hard. I also know that we see change happen over

time, and we work together with the community to do that.

[11:00 a.m.]

I will flag this with our B.C. Housing team to make sure to put a

special eye to this and identify how we can best support the

community.

Again, I want to point out that typically, we have opportunity to

meet more regularly with our CAC, our community advisory committee. In

this particular instance, COVID struck six weeks after it opened, and

that’s created a real barrier for being able to work together to resolve

this. But I certainly will give direction to B.C. Housing to pay

particular attention to this particular project and listen to the

residents to make sure that we have the things in place that need to be

in place.

The other thing that I think is important to say on the record is

that part of what we are seeing is that, as we’re doing these

investments and people are finding their feet, finding their health,

finding themselves, we have to do more. Often what happens is that if

there are still others that are yet to be housed, it continues to create

a sense in the community that there’s still activity happening. Here we

are, we’ve invested, 40 people have moved into the neighbourhood and

there are still people who aren’t housed, and as a result, there are

challenges.

If anything, when I hear these stories, it makes me want to work

harder to deliver more because I know that there are still so many who

have yet to be housed, and we still have a lot of work to do. I hope

that the members will continue to help us deliver on that.

The other thing that I think is important to note is that as we

house more and more people and we’re doing follow-up…. We do follow up

with everybody. We do a follow-up on every single project. If the member

would like, we certainly, as this particular project unfolds and

establishes, would be happy to send our follow-up evaluations to the

member so that he can see the impacts this is making and the results

it’s having in the community. I think that is really good to

understand.

We’ve seen results in our Surrey investments and our Vancouver

investments where people are healthier, where people are getting a

handle on their mental health. People are going into treatment for

recovery. We are seeing people who are taking medications, and they’re

stabilizing. That’s a good thing. Police calls are down. Their

interaction with the criminal justice system dropped significantly. The

demand on the health care system dropped significantly. These are all

worthwhile things.

I think it’s important, and we’ll certainly be sure to share that

with the member as well. I think it is important that he have that

information.

T. Stone: I will look forward to receiving that information. I thank the

minister for that.

To sum up on this particular issue, I think we all understand the

challenges. We all understand the need. We all understand the need for

more supports. We all want to see true 24-7 care be inherently existent

within these facilities so that people can get the support and the

services they need and so that, most importantly, they can get

better.

All we’re trying to say here, on behalf of a lot of folks in the

province, is that there are communities of interest and neighbourhoods

that are, and will continue to be, significantly impacted, and that

requires attention too. Small businesses being constantly broken into,

small businesses worrying about the safety of their employees and their

customers, neighbours being terrified in their neighbourhoods — these

are all very real issues and challenges that require more effort, more

attention, more focus, not less. Certainly, we’ll be paying close

attention to this moving forward.

I wanted to just make absolutely certain that the item that I read

into the record previously, looking for the FTE counts on the modular

facilities and supportive housing facilities, both for the nursing and

the mental health…. I just wanted to confirm that the minister is

willing to follow up with us on that and provide us with those numbers

following this estimates process.

[11:05 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: I’d be happy to. The member has given us a significant list, and I

know that staff watching have been writing it down. We’ll get the

information to the member as soon as we can.

T. Stone: Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you, Minister.

With that, this will be my final question. It’s, I think, a quick

one. So I will also take this opportunity to thank the hard-working men

and women in the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing as well as

B.C. Housing and all the other agencies and organizations for which the

minister is responsible. I do appreciate everyone’s professionalism,

hard work and dedication to their jobs.

Frankly, the dialogue that we had here over the last couple of

days is a very important one for a lot of people in the province. So I

thank the minister as well for her time and for sharing the information

that she has today.

My final question would be this. It just goes back to an item I

forgot to ask, with respect to the acquisition of hotels that we talked

about at some length earlier this morning. I just wanted to ask a very

specific question. Did B.C. Housing price the lease revenue into their

purchase of the properties that they have purchased to this

point?

With that, again, thank you for everyone’s time today.

Hon. S. Robinson: I, too, want to take time, given that this is the last question,

to thank the member for his questions. It’s always a pleasure. I’m glad

he’s safely back in Kamloops, and I hope his family continues to be well

through this COVID experience that we all seem to be sharing. I look

forward to…. I know we’ll be busy in the House in the next couple of

weeks, and we’ll see him there.

The answer is yes. Yes, we did.

Vote 37: ministry operations, $120,978,000 — approved.

Vote 38: housing, $505,858,000 — approved.

Vote 50: Auditor General for Local Government, $1,806,000 —

approved.

[11:10 a.m.]

The Chair: The committee will now take…. I think I’ll make it a

ten-minute recess, but no later than that. We’ll start another

estimate for the Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture.

The committee recessed from 11:12 a.m. to 11:23 a.m.

[R. Leonard in the chair.]

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

TOURISM, ARTS

AND CULTURE

(continued)

On Vote 42: ministry operations, $155,323,000

(continued) .

The Chair: We are currently considering the budget estimates of the

Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture. It was begun back in March,

so we’re going to continue on.

Given the length of time that we’ve had since these estimates

began, rather than restarting with opening remarks, we’ll give you

15 minutes, if you’d like, to just sort of restart the

process.

If the minister would like to make some opening

remarks.

[11:25 a.m.]

Hon. L. Beare: No, I’ll waive opening remarks, but I’ll introduce my

team.

We have Shauna Brouwer, deputy minister, and David Curtis,

assistant deputy minister and executive financial officer. We have

Claire Avison, ADM tourism, arts and culture; Suzanne Ferguson,

executive director for tourism; Amy Schneider, executive director for

creative, sports and multi; and Kim Reid, executive for arts and

culture. And we have Debbie Chiu, director of financial planning and

reporting, alongside me.

Looking forward to re-having the debates from March.

T. Wat: Although I cannot attend in person, it’s truly an honour to be

able to come before this committee again for another year of budget

estimates.

British Columbia is blessed with so many qualities, one of which

being our rich cultural diversity and strong belief in equal opportunity

for all, regardless of religion, ethnicity or cultural

background.

Although our multiculturalism is a key part of our identity as a

province, our communities are not immune to incidents of racism and

racial intolerance that strive to undermine our values and our identity.

Throughout this past year, events have unfolded both within and outside

our province that have been a grim reminder of the many challenges our

cultural minorities continue to face every day.

Globally, the Black Lives Matter movement has brought so many

underlying issues into the forefront that are present even here in B.C.,

including racial profiling against African Canadians and other minority

groups. The spike in vandalism and racially motivated attacks against

Asian Canadians has shown us how these acts can have a long-lasting

impact on individuals and communities.

The recent investigation into allegations of racial profiling in

our health care system, particularly towards Indigenous people and

communities, highlights that racism is taking place in every aspect of

our society, including our public services, and is being experienced by

every culture and minority group in our province. All this has reminded

us just how easily racism and intolerance can take hold, how many

different forms it can take and how easily it can grow.

Part of our duty as elected members is to defend and promote our

identity as a province that embraces a multicultural identity, and it is

the responsibility of this minister to be the leader in this

mission.

Over the next hour, I look forward to consulting with the hon.

minister to hear what she has done to engage with our multicultural

communities, what forums she has created for consultation and dialogue

and what actions she has taken to fight against the growing sentiment of

racism in our province and promote our cultural diversity and

heritage.

We, as British Columbians, have many challenges ahead of us, but

none of us should ever face more because of our culture and ethnicity.

We must do everything we can to ensure that we move forward together as

a province and offer the same help and support to all who call B.C.

home.

I’ll start off my debate with the Chinese-Canadian museum. The

minister hosted a fanfare event on November 8, 2019 at the Chinese

Cultural Centre with several ministers and the Vancouver mayor present

to announce the $1 million funding to the city of Vancouver to establish

a project office to further develop plans for the Chinese-Canadian

museum.

Since then, it’s really, really strange that nothing has been

announced or mentioned by either the Minister of State for International

Trade, who oversees this project, or this minister on the progress of

the Chinese-Canadian museum.

[11:30 a.m.]

The Minister of State for Trade told Sing Tao after last

November’s announcement that a detailed plan of the museum would be

available early this year. Now it is July, more than half a year past.

The minister should have the information ready to share with us on the

detailed plan of the Chinese-Canadian museum — the location, the

governance model, the operation model, the budget, etc.

Hon. L. Beare: I want to thank the member for her opening remarks. I know she’s

going to have a number of questions along all the topics she listed

throughout the remarks. Specifically, the question was on the

Chinese-Canadian museum. We did hear from people all across the province

that they want the museum to showcase all Chinese-Canadian history and

culture, combining the past and the present.

The member participated in our trilingual public consultation on

the museum, where more than 480 people attended community meetings in

Vancouver, Richmond, Kamloops, Nanaimo and Victoria. A number of

feedback forms were submitted. There were over 8,700 visits to the

engagement website.

Our government is continuing to work with the members of the

Chinese-Canadian community to establish the Chinese-Canadian museum in

British Columbia. I will let the member know that it is still in

development, but I and the Minister of State for Trade will be sharing

some very good news in the very near future. I look forward to letting

her know about that soon.

T. Wat: Thank you to the minister for reciting all of what she has done

and what the minister has done in the past several months. But the

minister hasn’t answered, really, my question.

My question to the minister is…. The Minister of State for Trade,

who oversees this project, told Sing Tao , clearly, that a

detailed plan would be available early this year. That’s what I asked in

my last question. Now it’s July. From the minister’s answer just now, I

fail to see any detailed plan that she can share with this

committee.

Hon. L. Beare: I just answered the previous question. We have some exciting news

coming soon, and I hope she’ll be happy and look forward to

participating with us.

[11:35 a.m.]

T. Wat: Again, the minister has not given this committee any plan. Let me

quote the 2020 throne speech: “In the future, people will be able to

visit renewed cultural institutions…as well as a new Chinese-Canadian

museum.”

Can the minister tell British Columbians when they can visit the

promised Chinese-Canadian museum?

Hon. L. Beare: To the member, we have answered this. This is the third time now.

There is great news coming. I’m looking forward to sharing it in the

near future. I look forward to sharing that with the member.

T. Wat: I also want to put on the record that this is the third time that

I’m asking the minister to share the detailed plan. The Minister of

State for Trade made it very clear to the Chinese-language media that

the detailed plan of the Chinese-Canadian museum would be available

early this year. I did not make that up. It is on record.

Now it is July. Where is the detailed plan? I put it on record

again that I keep asking, and I get a “no” answer from the minister. Is

the answer still the same?

Hon. L. Beare: The member has to absolutely recognize that we have had COVID over

the past three months. There were exciting plans that would have been

announced earlier. We’re now in a situation, as we are in phase 3 here

in British Columbia, where those plans, these types of announcements,

can now start happening.

I will let the member know again that we have some exciting news

coming soon. She will have to stand by. It’s exciting, and I know she’ll

be excited.

The Chair: Just a reminder that we would like the questions to move along

and not be repetitive.

T. Wat: I put it on record that I have nothing from the minister regarding

the detailed plan, even though the Minister of State for Trade made it

clear that a detailed plan would be forthcoming early this year. For the

record, for the minister’s information, COVID-19 started in March. Early

this year should be before March.

I guess I got nowhere from probing this question. So I’ll move to

the next question.

Eight months have passed after the $1 million announcement. What

of progress on the project office at the Chinese Cultural Centre in

further developing plans for the Chinese-Canadian museum, as we have

this fanfare announcement event at the Chinese Cultural

Centre?

Hon. L. Beare: We did open the project office in December, as the member did

indicate. It was very exciting. This is a great milestone for the

community. Again, to the member, we have had delays due to COVID from

March until now, but there are announcements coming soon. There is

exciting information coming soon. I’m going to be really happy to share

that with the member in the coming weeks.

T. Wat: It looks like every response to every question I ask is “because

of COVID-19.” Does that mean that the ministry does not have to do

anything because of COVID-19? I hope not.

[11:40 a.m.]

I’m asking for the progress of this project office. Let me try

another way to get some information from the minister. Is the city or

the ministry overseeing the operation of this project office? As the

news release says, as all of you spoke at the event, this project office

is making plans for the Chinese-Canadian museum. It’s crucial for the

planning of the museum.

What is the line of authority here? Please provide more details,

such as the office budget, the operation and the staffing. I’m sure,

with COVID-19, the ministry should have this kind of information

available.

Hon. L. Beare: This is a close partnership with the community, the city and the

ministry. The ministry provided the $1 million to the city last year and

has been working closely with the city to build out the project office

and the associated work around that.

T. Wat: Thank you to the minister for the non-response.

My question was asking…. The budget, the $1 million, I understand,

is given to the city of Vancouver. Then what’s the line of authority?

Who is staffing that project office? What’s the budget for this project

office?

This is a very simple question to answer. I don’t understand why I

cannot be given that kind of information. This is operational

information only.

Hon. L. Beare: We did provide the $1 million to the city. All the member’s

questions do fall within the city. That is where the budget is residing,

and our ministry office is working very closely with them.

T. Wat: I understand that the $1 million is given to the city of

Vancouver, but then this is a joint partnership. All I’m asking is: what

is this $1 million for? I guess you don’t just give the money to the

city, and you forget about it. Then it’s not the minister’s

responsibility.

[11:45 a.m.]

Has the city of Vancouver hired any staff to oversee the project

office? Or is it on a voluntary basis? How many staff are there? I’m

sure this ministry’s staff are extremely professional. They must be in

communication with the city of Vancouver to understand whether this $1

million is well spent, whether the city of Vancouver just takes that $1

million and is not doing anything. I think this is the taxpayer’s money.

British Columbians deserve a clear answer from this minister.

Hon. L. Beare: We did sign an MOU with the city of Vancouver. There is a grant

agreement in place. I am happy to provide the member…. You know, we will

go back, take look at the Hansard and what the member is

specifically asking and provide her all the details we can from the city

of Vancouver and our MOU. We can provide that in writing for

her.

T. Wat: I guess I will not get any response at this session, so I’m really

waiting for more information. I think it’s necessary for the minister to

be answerable to British Columbians on whether this $1 million is well

spent or not.

The next question is also on this announcement. The project office

will feature a pocket gallery. This pocket gallery, located at the

Chinese Cultural Centre, is open to the public. But even though I pass

by the cultural centre practically once a week, or a few days a week, I

hardly see any human traffic.

What’s the point of having this pocket gallery if neither the city

of Vancouver nor the ministry have done any promotion? Why waste the

money? Is the pocket gallery the same as the project office, and what

function does the pocket gallery really serve?

Hon. L. Beare: The function of the pocket gallery is to stimulate interest in the

project. It is very exciting and was a great addition to the

community.

Of course, these are unusual times right now. Chinatown has been

significantly impacted by COVID. There isn’t the level of traffic. I

know the member is saying she is walking by there every day, but the

traffic levels just aren’t there right now.

Hopefully, in the future, as we’re now in phase 3 and as people

are now being encouraged to travel across the province, since about two

weeks ago, we’re going to have more interest in our cultural

institutions, as they are one of the backbones of our society and really

help with health and wellness.

[11:50 a.m.]

We look forward to increased interest in the pocket gallery as we

move towards a new normal.

T. Wat: Yeah. I’m not talking about after COVID-19, Minister. I’m talking

about after the announcement in November.

There are a few months, especially during the Christmas period,

and I don’t see any traffic. I want to get some statistics, through the

minister, on how many visitors there were to the pocket gallery in the

first four months after it was open, from the day of the

announcement.

I think this is very important. It is necessary to see whether the

ministry has done enough promotion work to promote this legacy, because

this pocket gallery is to try to pave the way for the establishment of

the Chinese-Canadian museum.

Hon. L. Beare: As the member knows, the opening of the pocket gallery had 250

people attend. It was very exciting for everyone in the community. The

Christmas and winter season were upon us immediately.

It was open, and then we ended up in a COVID situation. I know the

member doesn’t like that as an answer, but that’s what it is. So I will

just have to let the member know that. That traffic we would have hoped

to see generated isn’t there.

As for the future and promotion, we have exciting announcements

coming up very soon which will generate a lot of interest in the pocket

gallery, and we look forward to seeing it become a busy hub

quickly.

T. Wat: I just want the minister to know that it does not matter whether

your response will make me happy or not. We have to be answerable to

British Columbians. I don’t see any promotion of the pocket gallery,

except that particular day, on that day of the announcement.

I put it on the record that the minister should provide me with

some information on the visitors to the pocket gallery for the first

three months that it was open and whether there’s any promotion of this

pocket gallery.

I move on to the next question. The minister said at last year’s

debate that once the museum consultations are complete and the

consultation report finished and brought back to us in June, she will be

extremely happy to have those conversations with her federal

counterpart. The consultation report was released in July last

year.

In the last 12 months, how many phone calls or conversations has

the minister had with her federal counterpart regarding the

Chinese-Canadian museum? How many emails did she write to her federal

counterpart? How many letters has she sent to her federal counterpart?

What’s the progress and the outcome of the conversation?

[11:55 a.m.]

Hon. L. Beare: We have to continue to engage the federal government. I don’t have

the numbers that the member is specifically looking for — a list, a

count of emails or anything. Happy to provide that to the member after

this.

For example, Minister Guilbeault was in Victoria. I met with him

personally. We had a conversation about this one-on-one. These are

things we are continuing to engage our federal counterparts with, as we

were building out what the project would look like. We have some

exciting announcements about that coming soon, and that gives us the

opportunity to really continue connecting with our federal counterparts

moving forward on what the project could be.

T. Wat: Thank you to the minister for the response, but I haven’t heard

about any outcome yet, because in the minister’s ministry budget, I

don’t see any budget allocation for the museum. If the ministry doesn’t

have enough funding for this museum, it might be a good idea to get the

federal government’s financial support.

Is there any pledge of funding for this museum in your discussion

with the federal minister?

Hon. L. Beare: We’ve not secured a commitment yet. We continue to work with

them.

The Chair: We have time for one more question. Recognizing the member for

Richmond North Centre.

T. Wat: Is the minister aware of the federal government’s pledge of half a

million dollars for a Chinatown story­telling centre?

Hon. L. Beare: Yes, we are.

The Chair: Thank you. I would ask the minister to make the

motion.

Hon. L. Beare: I move that the committee rise, report resolution and completion

of the estimates of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and

report progress on the estimates of the Ministry of Tourism.

Motion approved.

The Chair: Thank you, Members. This committee now stands

adjourned.

The committee adjourned at 11:58 a.m.

Copyright © 2020 Legislative Assembly of British Columbia

The Report of Proceedings (Hansard) and webcasts of

committee 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.