Hansard Blues

Legislative Assembly

Draft Report of Debates

The Honourable Raj Chouhan, Speaker

4th Session, 42nd Parliament

Tuesday, October

24, 2023

Morning Sitting

Draft Transcript — Terms of Use

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: T. Wat.

[10:05 a.m.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. P. Alexis: It's my honour and privilege to introduce 15 leaders from B.C.'s agriculture community

who have travelled here today to celebrate B.C. Ag Day. Each October the province

proclaims B.C. Agriculture Day, a day to celebrate and put a spotlight on our farmers

and ranchers who work hard every day, 365 days of the year, to feed and provide for

their communities.

It's no secret how resilient B.C. farmers are despite the challenges brought on by

climate change, inflation and supply chain issues, among other factors. They are the

backbone of communities in all corners of the province, and their dedication is truly

inspiring.

We all look forward to meeting with them today. We've got a very full day.

Some of the wonderful people joining us today are: Glen Lucas from the southern Interior;

Sukhdeep Brar, also from the southern Interior; James Lockwood from Cobble Hill; Kelly

Coughlin from the Fraser Valley; Craig Cherrett from Vancouver; Dave Sept from Langley;

Michel Benoit from Langley; Andries Quik and his son Jordan Quik from Chilliwack.

I want to thank Jordan particularly for the PowerPoint presentation he gave me personally

yesterday on the future of agriculture. I was so incredibly impressed with Jordan's

work. Jordan is ten.

Thank you again for that, Jordan.

Alex Vandereyk from Langley; Heather Stretch from Central Saanich; Erick Rodriguez

Vázquez from Abbotsford; John Baily from the Okanagan; Sukhpaul Bal from the Okanagan;

and Les Willms from Fort St. John.

Good to see you again. Thank you, and welcome all.

J. Sturdy: Joining us in the gallery this morning are two mayors from the Sunshine Coast: my

friend John Henderson from Sechelt and Mayor Ron Woznow from Powell River here for

meetings, in no small part, I'm sure, with ideas on how to fix a broken ferry system.

I'm sure the House will join us all in making them feel welcome.

J. Routledge: In the gallery today is Michelle Di Tomaso, co-founder of Dense Breasts Canada, an

advocacy group committed to the earliest detection of breast cancer. Joining her is

her daughter Isabella, her son, Dominic, and her mother, Joy Davies and the Ladysmith

Probus seniors.

Please join me in giving them a very warm welcome.

B. Anderson: Today is a very special day. It is a day that we celebrate the most powerful woman

in the province, also known as my political mother, the minister from the Kootenays.

I would like to wish you a very happy birthday. I'm sure that you're not pleased with

me right now. Happy birthday.

[10:10 a.m.]

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 39 — ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2023

Hon. J. Osborne presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill

intituled Zero-Emission Vehicles Amendment Act, 2023.

Hon. J. Osborne: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

I'm pleased to introduce Bill 39, the Zero-Emission Vehicles Amendment Act, 2023.

The bill amends the Zero-Emission Vehicles Act, and the proposed amendments will implement

the new, accelerated light-duty vehicle sales targets committed to in the CleanBC

Roadmap to 2030; address lessons learned from the first two compliance periods under

the ZEV Act; and align, where possible, with other jurisdictions, including Quebec

and California.

I'll be pleased to elaborate on the nature of these amendments during the second reading

of the bill.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

Hon. J. Osborne: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the

next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 39, Zero-Emission Vehicles Amendment Act, 2023, 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)

AGRICULTURE DAY AND

ROLE OF FARMERS

I. Paton: In 1978, the late American radio broadcaster Paul Harvey delivered a moving speech

to the Future Farmers of America, and today is Agriculture Day in B.C.

"On the eighth day, God looked down on his planned paradise and said: 'I need a caretaker.

I need somebody willing to get up before dawn, milk cows, work all day in the fields,

milk cows again, eat supper and then go to town and stay past midnight at a meeting

of the school board.' So God made a farmer."

God said it had to be "somebody who'd plow deep and straight and not cut corners,

somebody to seed, weed, feed, breed and rake and disc and plow and plant and tie the

fleece and strain the milk…and finish a hard week's work with a five-mile drive to

church. So God made a farmer. Somebody who'd bale a family together with soft, strong

bonds of sharing, who would laugh and then sigh and then reply, with smiling eyes,

when his son says he wants to spend his life doing what his dad does. So God made

a farmer."

The speech goes on to list the never-ending duties faced by the never-resting farmer.

Farmers every day wear many hats in this province. They need to be many things. Farmers

need to be mechanics, veterinarians, engineers, environmentalists, salesmen, bookkeepers

and even architects.

Under the wing of my dad and my grandfather, I learned the trade and became a third-generation

dairy farmer. Our family was just one contributor to B.C's diverse agriculture industry,

which includes so many products, such as dairy, beef, tree fruits, berries, vineyards,

greenhouses, vegetables, poultry and seafood.

Farmers, ranchers and processors across our province use creativity every day to solve

problems, improve efficiency and contribute to our economy. We have certainly seen

our farmers in B.C. overcome a lot in the last few years: floods, fires, drought,

avian influenza, mudslides and the rising costs of inflation, production and interest

rates.

Agriculture Day is not only a great day to connect legislators with farmers, but the

day also increases awareness of agriculture's positive impact on the local economy,

while giving farmers and ranchers the opportunity to share ideas and solutions to

the sector's challenges with MLAs here in Victoria.

COMMUNITY INCLUSION MONTH

M. Dykeman: I'm honoured today to acknowledge October as Community Inclusion Month in British

Columbia. For the past 25 years, the province has proclaimed this month to highlight

the rights, achievements and contributions made by people in our communities living

with developmental and intellectual disabilities.

October has been a month to celebrate inclusion and diversity, as well as a time to

recognize the dedication of the volunteers, individuals, self-advocates, families,

friends and caregivers who continue to provide support and care while working to create

inclusive communities for all British Columbians.

During this month, communities across the province held events to build awareness

about inclusion for people with diverse abilities. The last three years have been

exceptionally challenging, especially for British Columbians living with developmental

and intellectual disabilities, who face an increased risk of poverty and isolation.

Inclusion. B.C. has been a long-standing champion for Community Inclusion Month, and

this year, they are shining a light on the importance of inclusive housing, employment,

health and well-being, and Indigenous culture.

[10:15 a.m.]

They work with community partners to enhance the lives of children, youth and adults

with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families. They also help

build relationships and support vibrant, diverse and inclusive communities, where

everyone can feel that they belong.

I would like to invite all members to join me in recognizing October as Community

Inclusion Month as we work together to make our province a champion of inclusion.

TRAILS WITH RAILS

J. Sturdy: Imagine yourself on a bike ride, pedalling along a gentle 2 percent grade through

some of the most beautiful and rugged terrain in the world. You stop to rest your

legs in a small town and strike up a conversation with the owner of a local establishment

while enjoying a seasonal sandwich or potentially some other fine craft product.

Perhaps you're a Canadian enjoying a few restful days of summer vacation, or maybe

you're visiting from further afield. Either way, you came specifically for a world-class

trail network that allows you to explore and experience all the beauty and majesty

that British Columbia has to offer.

We have the opportunity to expand this story in terms of a reality by establishing

a trail network alongside the B.C. Rail alignment from Squamish to Whistler, through

Pemberton, along the shores of Anderson and Seton lakes, to Lillooet and through the

Fraser Canyon and on to Williams Lake. Building trails alongside existing rail lines

represents an enormous opportunity to enrich community enjoyment, bolster healthy

tourism and amplify our connection with nature and each other.

The rail line in the Sea to Sky corridor is barely used. The Rocky Mountaineer runs just one train each way per week, six months of the year. That's it. So 48 days

a year, for a few minutes, a train runs by. The rest of the year, the tracks in the

right-of-way are empty and could be used for all sorts of outdoor activities, including

cycling, walking, running, cross-country skiing or snowshoeing.

However, establishing trails with rails requires the will and the drive to find a

way. It will require community and stakeholder buy-in. CN and Transport Canada are

both key partners whose support would be needed to design and implement the necessary

safety regime.

I invite Transport Canada, CN, and the province, as the owner of the right-of-way,

to share my excitement with this remarkable opportunity and to commit to action on

how we can enrich our province by building trails with rails.

SS Moyie

B. Anderson: Sometimes it's hard to get everyone on board in this room, and that's okay. But I

think I'm going to be able to get you all aboard today to celebrate the 125th anniversary

of the SS Moyie , a sternwheeler that used to sail across Kootenay Lake.

On Sunday, I was able to attend the 125th community celebration of the SS Moyie . I think Elizabeth Scarlett, the MC that evening, said it best. It takes a village.

The room was packed with people that had worked hard to preserve, restore and tell

the history of the sternwheeler. I was invited by Mayor Suzan Hewitt. We took a tour

of the sternwheeler before our dinner.

The last time I was on the SS Moyie , I was with Premier John Horgan. We basically had to pry him off of the ship, because,

as a history buff, it was not his first visit. He was completely enthralled by Daniel

Belanger, who was describing in great detail all of the work that had been done and

that was still needed to restore and preserve the ship.

After the delicious dinner, Robert Turner gave a very detailed presentation of the

history of the ship and its importance in the Kootenays. Kit Ashenhurst was a board

member who led the project. Sarah Sinclair is the current president of the Kootenay

Lake Historical Society. Gillian Froese is the immediate past president, who worked

tirelessly on the project as well.

I would like to thank the entire SS Moyie 125th committee for all of their work that they have done to preserve and to celebrate

the ship. I had an absolutely wonderful time.

I would like to thank our whip, who encouraged me to attend, as his son was RCMP Officer

Beggs, who was stationed in Kaslow. The community is grateful for his compassionate

service.

[10:20 a.m.]

COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE

IN SOUTH VANCOUVER

M. Lee: Last Friday, at the South Vancouver Neighbourhood House, I attended the community

forum on the neighbourhood equity report by the Neighbourhood House and SFU on social

infrastructure gaps in South Vancouver, including Marpole.

The presentations and impact stories at the forum underlined the disparities in South

Vancouver, including for public transit, health care and child care. Findings in the

report indicate that more residents of South Vancouver, including Marpole, rely on

public transit to get to work, at 32 percent, which is the highest level in Vancouver,

while public transit access is lower in South Vancouver, including Marpole, compared

to transit access across Vancouver. Stronger transit networks are needed in South

Vancouver, including on 41st, 49th and 57th Avenues.

As for health care, the report indicates that there are fewer urgent and primary care

centres and walk-in clinics in South Vancouver, including Marpole, with only three

in the entire area, and only one community health care centre, at 49th Avenue and

Knight, serving South Vancouver, including Marpole, from Granville to Boundary, below

49th Avenue to Marine Drive, which is still scheduled, currently, to close with the

consolidation to a site at George Pearson. Clearly, more investment is needed in community

health care facilities and services in South Vancouver.

The report also indicates that licensed child care and after-school facilities are

sparse in South Vancouver, including Marpole, as compared to the number of children

and youth in the area, and less money is being invested in daycare facilities in South

Vancouver, including Marpole, compared to citywide. Again, clearly more investment

in child care and after-school care is needed in South Vancouver.

In the face of the growing population of South Vancouver, including at Oakridge, with

a second town centre for Vancouver, the Cambie corridor, George Pearson and Marine

Gateway, we need community infrastructure that serves the needs of our community,

including for families, seniors, children and youth.

BREAST CANCER AWARENESS

J. Routledge: October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and we honour those who have lost their

lives to breast cancer and those who are currently undergoing treatment or have undergone

treatment in the past. There is no cure for breast cancer. So our best chance for

survival and our best chance to avoid aggressive treatment and surgery is early detection.

British Columbians are fortunate to live in a province where women can self-refer

for mammograms at the age of 40, but mammograms may not detect cancer in dense breast

tissue. Women on both sides of the aisle have worked together in our communities to

raise awareness and urge action. As a result, British Columbia became the first province

to notify women of their breast density in the mammogram result letters mailed to

them.

Since we instituted notification in this province and gave women with dense breasts

access to follow-up ultrasounds covered by MSP, seven more women out of 1,000 have

learned they have cancerous breast tumours and have been able to get early treatment.

Now other provinces, like Alberta, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island,

have followed our lead.

But the women of B.C. have more work to do together. According to the B.C. Radiological

Society, there just aren't enough breast imaging sites, equipment and technologists

to handle the increased demand for diagnostic breast imaging, and the wait time has

become dangerously long.

The member for Prince George–Valemount has already spoken in this chamber, earlier

this month, about the importance of early detection, and I thank her for that. I hope

that she and women on both sides of the aisle and in our communities will continue

the work we started together in 2018 to ensure that breast cancer is detected before

it's too late.

[10:25 a.m.]

Oral Questions

SHORT TERM RENTALS AND

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

K. Kirkpatrick: We all know that the Premier flipped his Victoria condo for a profit right before

he'd be hit with having to declare a speculation tax. What the public hasn't been

told is that this wasn't just any condo. It was a building known as the Juliet, a

building with non-conforming-use exceptions for Airbnb.

Now listen to this quote from the building's own literature: "We have an on-site B-and-B

management company to handle your bookings." So while people struggle to make ends

meet, the Premier exploited the housing crisis to make a quick buck.

Can the Premier please tell us how much he personally profited from selling his condo

as an Airbnb opportunity?

Hon. R. Kahlon: This session we have a new party that ask questions that are completely over the top.

Now we have a B.C. United party that says: "Hold my cup."

We are in a housing crisis, and the steps we've taken when it comes to addressing

short-term rentals and having them in our primary residence is an important step.

In fact, it's being applauded across the country.

We've had other provinces that have reached out and said, "Can we talk about this

legislation? Can we talk about how we can work with you?" and learned from some of

the things we've done to ensure that they can also use tools like this to help address

the challenges they're facing. This is not just a B.C. challenge; it's a North American

challenge.

The steps we've taken are about making sure that the housing stock we have is available

to the people of British Columbia who are desperately needing it. We will always be

on the side of the people of British Columbia, not just those who are looking to make

money off of investments.

Mr. Speaker: Member for West Vancouver–Capilano, supplemental.

K. Kirkpatrick: It should concern us all that this minister doesn't understand that these questions

are completely relevant right now. While the NDP continues to hunt for housing scapegoats,

the Premier himself personally capitalized on an opportunity to profit from the explosion

of short-term rentals under his watch.

I have the very listing when he sold his Juliet condo. In a building named Juliet,

the Premier found not star-crossed love but a lucrative Airbnb opportunity that earned

him $150,000 profit. He marketed the property in the advertising with a clear tag

line: "Unrestricted rentals."

Why the blatant double standard? One rule for him and another for everyone else.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Again, we are in a housing crisis right now. We have people that are living in RVs,

working full-time jobs, that can't find a place to live. That's why it was so important

for us to put forward the legislation around short-term rentals.

It's not only these measures. We're making historic investments in building actual,

affordable housing for people, which was not done in this province for far too long.

There was a time not too long ago where there was a Housing Minister from the opposite

side, this other party that is raising questions now, who said: "If you can't afford

it, just leave. Just go somewhere else."

That's why we are in the challenge we are now. This was not an issue that wasn't important

to them. I appreciate now that they think this is an important issue, and I hope they

will provide some positive ways for us to be able to address the housing crisis.

In the meantime, we're going to continue to do what we're doing: addressing short-term

rentals, addressing the challenges in our housing crisis, investing in housing that's

critically needed across British Columbia.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Member, second supplemental.

K. Kirkpatrick: As this minister admits, we are in a housing crisis, which makes this behaviour even

more egregious.

This NDP government had the chance in 2018 to implement commonsense rules for short-term,

but they chose not to do it at that time. Instead the Premier's Juliet condo listing

boasts of "unrestricted rentals and floor-to-ceiling windows that overlook your private

green space, 200-square-foot patio with gas barbecue hookup and a concierge to manage

your B-and-B short-term vacation rentals."

What really gets people is this NDP housing hypocrisy. They do nothing. The Premier

personally profits, and now they are hunting for scapegoats for their failures in

housing.

[10:30 a.m.]

How can the Premier possibly defend this hypocrisy of cashing in with his Airbnb condo

flip?

Hon. R. Kahlon: There's a trend that happens in this place. There's a new trend that's happening in

this place, and this trend is that the opposition supports us on legislation until

they hear that the B.C. Conservatives are against it.

When they hear that the B.C. Conservatives are against something…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Shhh, Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: …then all of a sudden, they are against it as well. This is a trend.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

That's enough, Members. The minister has the floor.

Hon. R. Kahlon: This is a trend that we're seeing with all legislation. So now I understand what's

happening here. The B.C. Conservatives decide they're going to vote against it, and

now they're looking for an excuse to vote against it as well.

Well, we're going to continue to do what we believe is the right thing, which is finding

ways for the housing stock, the valuable housing stock that we have — to make sure

that housing stock is available for the people of British Columbia.

R. Merrifield: Seven years, two elections, and what do we have to show for this NDP's housing hypocrisy?

Well, we have the highest rents in Canada and the worst housing affordability in all

of North America.

Since 2018, the NDP have been consulting, while short-term rentals have exploded.

Why? Well, the NDP have collected over $80 million in taxes, and the Premier made

sure he took full advantage. His Airbnb condo flip let him pocket a cool $150,000.

Why does the Premier have one set of rules for himself and another set of rules for

the regular people who just want a break from the NDP middle-class freeze?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Hon. Speaker, 1,971 affordable units built in Kelowna alone.

The member talks about action. There's a story in the Vancouver Sun today talking about how students are struggling to have affordable housing in British

Columbia, vulnerable students, because they can't find access to housing close to

university campuses. So 138 units is what they invested in 16 years in government

–– 138.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Not only that, but they had a Housing Minister who said: "If you can't afford it,

just leave." That was the mentality of the government at the time. And now they have

the hypocrisy to say: "Not enough." And they're saying: "Why so late?"

I mean, one questioner says: "The actions you've taken are too strong." The other

one says: "You didn't do them fast enough." They cannot make up their mind on what

they want to see in British Columbia when it comes to housing.

We have a clear plan. We are showing action on all the key items that we've identified

and that the Premier laid out, and we're going to continue to do that until we address

the challenges we have ahead of us.

Mr. Speaker: Kelowna-Mission, supplemental.

R. Merrifield: Well, this minister is all over the map.

While the minister and the Premier are quick to try and find housing villains, guess

who the biggest customer of Airbnb is in the province. Spoiler alert. The NDP government.

They spent nearly $100,000 on Airbnb accommodations in the last year alone, and of

course, we have the Premier as condo king, cashing in and taking home a $150,000 profit

from his Airbnb condo flip.

When will the Premier finally own up to his hypocrisy and double standards and answer

for exploiting the housing crisis for personal gain?

Hon. R. Kahlon: Clearly, they've run out of material for question period, and we're only a few weeks

in.

Let me be clear.

[10:35 a.m.]

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh, Members.

Member, that's enough.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Let me be clear here. The Premier has never rented his property out for Airbnb. This

is just a false statement. Honestly, they're into conspiracy territories here. It

shows you how much they're….

Interjections.

Hon. R. Kahlon: What's important here, and I certainly hope they've read the legislation, is that

short-term rentals are still allowed in British Columbia. They still are allowed.

Tourism-dependent communities can continue to have short-term rentals.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Communities under 10,000 can have…. Short-term rentals will be available for people

throughout the….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, there's no need for a commentary on every single comma and dot.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member. Member, shhh.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Please continue.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Short-term rentals will continue to be available for people in British Columbia. What

we have done is strike a balance. We've said that those who buy three, four, five

properties just to put them on short-term rentals…. We're saying we need that housing

stock for people that need it in British Columbia. Those that have an extra bedroom

suite or want to rent out a garden suite in their backyard can continue to do that.

We're finding a balance to ensure that tourism can continue to happen but that, at

the same time, we have that valuable housing stock available for people in British

Columbia.

RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF NURSES

AND USE OF PRIVATE AGENCIES

S. Furstenau: We've seen a massive erosion of public health care in our province. Ongoing staffing

shortages have forced ERs across the province to close, primarily due to nursing shortages.

Burnout, staff shortages and difficult working conditions for nurses have led hospitals

to rely on private, for-profit agencies to fill the gaps. Contract nursing was supposed

to be a short-term solution, but this government has failed to create the working

conditions needed to retain nurses, who are invaluable to the well-being of our health

care system and our province.

To the Minister of Health, when will this minister take the steps needed to not only

recruit but retain nurses in the public health care system?

Hon. A. Dix: In this calendar year, up to September 15, we've added 5,212 net new nurses in British

Columbia. We've done this by improving pathways for internationally educated nurses,

by training more nurses and by supporting nurses who are working in the community.

One example of that, for example, is the relational security officers that we've added,

on a proposal by B.C. nurses and health care workers. We said that in a year, we'd

add 320. The year is almost over. We've added 310.

A new system for that, which helps support nurses working in the health care system,

in the public health care system in British Columbia. Every one of those relational

security officers is an employee of a health authority.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Third Party, supplemental.

S. Furstenau: The 5,212 is a number that the minister likes to talk about, but let's talk about

some other numbers. In 2018-2019, the province spent $8.7 million annually on contract

nurses. By 2021-22, the spending jumped to $64 million.

Contract nurses are paid more and have better working conditions than staff nurses,

making the transition to private far more appealing. Our public health care system

is losing staff, while public funds are lining the pockets of private, for-profit

staffing agencies. The minister claims to be a champion for universal public health

care, yet under his watch, we've seen an exponential increase in public funds going

to private, for-profit companies.

My question is to the Minister of Health. Is the corporatization of health care the

legacy that he wants to leave to British Columbia?

Hon. A. Dix: Since becoming Minister of Health, we got rid of Bills 29 and 94. The Green Party

called for an end to fee-for-service. We've moved from fee-for-service to a new payment

model for doctors.

We've added, net new in the public health care system, 38,000 workers in the time

I've been Minister of Health. We've repatriated health care workers across the health

care system. We've brought back into the system MRIs and surgical centres. This has

been an area of progress for public health care.

[10:40 a.m.]

We have been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, which did lead to an

increase in the use of agency nurses. We had more to do. When we were doing contact

tracing and adding in immunization centres, we didn't want to give up people in the

public health care system who were also needed.

We have added to public health care. We've consistently done that. Yes, we're doing

a record number of new projects, not one of them a P3.

FARMLAND IN COWICHAN VALLEY

J. Rustad: Weeks ago this NDP Agriculture Minister was caught red-faced when she claimed she

was unaware of the impending flooding of prime agricultural land in the Cowichan Valley.

Can the Minister of Agriculture please explain why her NDP government was prepared

to ignore the ALC and its mandate in order to turn 100 acres of food-producing B.C.

farmland into a marsh?

Hon. P. Alexis: There are pressures on agricultural land all across the province. I recognize the

importance of preserving suitable agricultural land so the B.C. agriculture sector

can continue to grow in terms of food security, economic activity and community strength

throughout the province.

The Agricultural Land Commission has a mandate to preserve agriculture land and encourage

farming, which can include both traditional agriculture and on-farm value-added activities.

The project that the member mentions would require a non-farm-use application to be

granted by the ALC. As of today, no application has been made.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Fourth Party, supplemental.

J. Rustad: It's interesting that this government has given $1.5 million for the project without

even asking for the application. Clearly, this NDP government is prepared to destroy

productive farmland.

Right now there are thousands of acres of marginal agricultural land available in

British Columbia where homes could be built. To the Minister of Housing, why is this

government more concerned with creating homes for ducks than creating homes for people?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I appreciate the question. When I travel throughout the communities, I hear from people

who say: "Well, you know what? We have agricultural land. Why don't we just build

homes on it?" In fact, I've heard the Leader of the Opposition suggest something similar

as well.

Our message to folks is that land needs to be used for agriculture purposes. We need

to ensure, coming out of the pandemic…. We learned, clearly, from the experience of

the pandemic that having the ability to grow food locally is vitally important to

handle pandemics, to handle any economic challenges we have in the future.

There are ways to build housing that don't touch agricultural land, and that's what

we're doing here. We're finding ways to get greater opportunities for housing around

transit, to build it around the infrastructure that we already have in our communities.

We're going to continue to do that work.

TRESPASS PROTECTIONS FOR

AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY

I. Paton: We all know the Premier is responsible for the catch-and-release justice system and

has done absolutely nothing to stop it. Let's not forget another broken promise, one

that he made to a room full of farmers, pledging to protect them from trespassing

by radical activists.

I certainly remember that evening very well. I witnessed this firsthand, right here

in Victoria, back in 2019, as did many of the BCAC members that are likely here today.

Yet despite his promise four years ago, nothing has changed.

Will the Premier explain to farmers today why he has taken virtually no action to

protect them from trespassing by radical activists?

Hon. P. Alexis: Thank you, Member, for the question.

Our government fully respects the rights of British Columbians to peacefully protest.

At the same time, we expect protesters to follow the law. Threats of violence against

farm families, sabotaging farm equipment and trespassing are completely unacceptable.

We will continue to take action to support the safety and security of B.C. farms.

Mr. Speaker: Delta South, supplemental.

[10:45 a.m.]

I. Paton: Well, this response certainly doesn't cut it, considering that a lot of the activism

by radical activists is happening right in her constituency of Abbotsford. Farmers

and their children, like those in the gallery today, are scared to death, targeted

by radical protesters who threaten their families.

This is also a major risk to biosecurity on our farms and the health of our farm animals.

The B.C. Agriculture Council says that farmers and ranchers have been subjected to

more and more online bullying and harassment, as well as trespassers.

After years of inaction, will the Agriculture Minister finally listen to farmers,

take action and explain, up to the promise, and enhance trespass protections for our

farms in British Columbia?

Hon. P. Alexis: Farmers, ranchers and food processors in British Columbia must be able to conduct

their work free of harassment and intimidation. We have strengthened protections for

farms and farmers by amending the Trespass Act to explicitly include livestock buildings.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. P. Alexis: We will continue to take action to support the safety and security of B.C. farms.

FERRY SERVICES AND MANAGEMENT

J. Sturdy: Despite record-high spending, British Columbians continue to see record-low results

from the NDP, especially with critical services like B.C. Ferries. Stories abound

of nine- or ten-hour waits, daily late departures, breakdowns, no reservations, staff

shortages — a litany of failures that have become the NDP's new normal.

In the gallery today, we have mayor John Henderson of Sechelt and mayor Ron Woznow

of Powell River, leaders who have witnessed firsthand the NDP's ferry failures.

Can the Premier tell these mayors why the NDP thinks that expanding B.C. Ferries'

bloated executive ranks by four more VPs is more important than delivering reliable

service?

Hon. R. Fleming: Thank you to the member for the question. What is most important to the travelling

public, who have experienced frustrations — we had extreme difficulties during the

summer period — is stabilizing the company and making service more reliable on B.C.

Ferries.

That's why we rushed funding towards the company to be able to stabilize rates and

engage in recruitment and retention of employees. That is now an international search

that is having results. B.C. Ferries has recently come through the largest hiring

period of activity in the company's history — 1,200 new employees, safety-certified

mariners from around the globe, now coming to work and build careers on our coast.

That is what we're doing to stabilize service in B.C. Ferries.

There is some evidence, after the difficulties of the summer, that activity is improving.

The fall results on sailings are now back up at 99.1 percent of all scheduled sailings

sailing on time and as scheduled. We'd dipped down to 98.3 percent in the summer,

and that left a lot of people stranded. Their vacation plans were interfered with.

We know the frustrations. We have to get back up to a higher level of reliability.

That's why we took the occasion last year, with year-end funding, to infuse dollars

into the company, to be able to support the hiring activities that will stabilize

the company. It's disappointing that the opposition voted against that funding that

will precisely stabilize the company to serve all of our coastal communities better.

Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental.

J. Sturdy: Well, this government has politicized B.C. Ferries by installing a chair, Joy MacPhail,

notorious for her role in the fast ferry fiasco. The NDP has handed over multiple

bailouts, including the $500 million blank cheque, and still delivers terrible results.

This is now the B.C. NDP's new normal.

[10:50 a.m.]

Over the Labour Day weekend, routes up and down the coast were plagued by cancellations,

including multiple sailings cancelled between Saltery Bay and Earls Cove. Ken White,

a longtime resident of Powell River, says: "The B.C. Ferry Corp. held this community

hostage."

When will the Premier stop holding British Columbians in ferry-dependent communities

hostage?

Hon. R. Fleming: Now, it's interesting to hear the opposition talk about ferries, because of course

they have a record when they were in office. They made ferries more expensive. They

cut hundreds of routes to ferry-dependent communities, to Indigenous communities up

and down the coast of British Columbia. They jacked up rates at sometimes five times

the rate of inflation.

At a time when people are struggling with the costs of food, with record-high inflation

rates across the globe, with lending rates going up, we're protecting coastal communities

residents and the movement of goods up and down the coast by preventing double-digit

increases in fares that would make the cost of everything go up on Vancouver Island

and coastal communities. They voted against that.

By the way, they should recognize that the number of vice-presidents in 2016-2017

is exactly the same as today. You know what's different? Under their watch, the CEO

of B.C. Ferries — this is an embarrassment — was paid $1 million a year. So to hear

them talk about runaway executive perks is laughable. Executive compensation is down;

hiring of crew is up. We're working on stabilizing the system.

It's been difficult after a pandemic. God knows what they would have done if they

were in charge of the ferry service. If they were in charge of the ferry service during

the pandemic, you can imagine how many thousands of workers they would have furloughed

and destroyed the ferry system.

We're in recovery mode. We infused the money to do it. They voted against it, and

coastal residents are never going to forgive them for their record on rate increases

when they were in charge.

P. Milobar: The back bench may like the minister's rhetoric, but the travelling public don't

buy it, because they're the ones sitting in lines for multiple ferry waits, hours

after hours, day after day, under this government's record. Record-high spending,

yet B.C. is seeing record-low results.

This is what Linda from Sechelt says about the time that this government has been

in office. "What a difference six years has made. Before that, not one cancellation,

dropped reservation or late boat more than 15 minutes. Now it's mind-boggling."

How about Broden from Powell River, who says: "Nearly every weekend, there's a cancelled

key sailing due to lack of staff."

That's this minister's and this Premier's track record. When are they going to actually

improve things at B.C. Ferries, instead of just bringing back recycled politicians

that failed with B.C. Ferries in the first place?

Hon. R. Fleming: As I said to the opposition, and they know this, B.C. Ferries has just been through

a record hiring period: 1,200 new employees, international skilled mariners from around

the globe, coming to work here, build careers and raise families on our coast. We

have an employee program that reaches out to Indigenous employees and is recruiting

people who have lived and built their lives on the coast to come and work for B.C.

Ferries. That is happening right now, and that is happening thanks to the $500 million

investment that this Legislature approved, without their support.

There is more work to do, absolutely. Are we turning the corner? The evidence says

yes, and 99.1 percent of sailings went in the month of September. We had some difficulties.

We got down to 98.3 percent in the summer, but we are turning the corner. We are making

investments to be able to do that.

The transportation industry across the globe…. Including in Canada, air and passenger

rail transportation have all suffered coming out of the pandemic. They had a wave

of retirements during the COVID restrictions that has made life difficult. The HR

freeze to skilled mariners goes back 12 years into their watch. We're making up for

those seven-year training lags that weren't done under that side of the House. We're

going to do it. We're going to invest in the company. It's happening now.

If people want to look to that side of the House for ideas about B.C. Ferries, well,

let's review what they were: "Let's charge seniors."

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Let's let him continue.

Thank you.

Hon. R. Fleming: Well, they undid W.A.C. Bennett's commitment to give seniors a break.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you.

Hon. R. Fleming: They raised fares on every single route up and down the coast.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you.

Hon. R. Fleming: We're protecting fares and affordability. They voted against it.

Keep it up. People are watching that opposition's lack of ideas on B.C. Ferries.

[10:55 a.m.]

T. Halford: Does this minister have any idea of what is going on with B.C. Ferries? Any idea?

This minister gets up and he mentions seniors. We had two seniors sleeping in their

car because this minister and this Premier could not get their act together when it

came to B.C. Ferries. That is how bad the situation has gotten. Four new executives

making upwards of $460,000. That is this minister's, this Premier's priority when

it comes to B.C. Ferries.

The minister says, "You know how we're going to solve it? We're going to do $7,000

fines," which actually do not start…. All the sailings that we missed this weekend,

those don't count. Apparently, the minister has no problem, going forward, with B.C.

Ferries right now. What the minister doesn't realize, what he doesn't say, is that

the people that are suffering every single day to access an essential service…. So

$7,000 fines.

Why don't we do this? Why don't we take the $7,000 fines and have them paid by the

executives, the executives handpicked by this minister, and actually try and get some

results when it comes to B.C. Ferries?

Hon. R. Fleming: As I've said to the member opposite, to the members opposite in general, we have acknowledged

the problems. I know there are people who miss sailings, who have experienced frustrations.

We've said to the company that this government stands ready, willing and able to finance

plans to recover the company from the HR problems they experience that were related

to the pandemic, that were related to, quite frankly, a decade of underinvestment

in skilled crew.

We're working with the federal government on international, creative immigration strategies

to bring in skilled mariners, understanding there is a worldwide shortage of those

skills. They are coming here. We have hired 1,200 new staff for B.C. Ferries, the

largest in this period. We have the Ferry Commissioner reviewing right now the largest,

most ambitious new program to build vessels to invest in terminal infrastructure to

make the ferry service more efficient.

You know what? Every single time we take a bold manoeuvre position with the ferry

corporation to fix things, they vote against it. They snipe against it. Coastal communities

want to work with this government. They want to work with the ferry company to make

things better, and things will get better thanks to the investment that this government

is making and that they're voting against time after time.

[End of question period.]

Petitions

B. Banman: It is my honour to present to this House the aforementioned petition from the residents

of Surrey imploring this government to keep the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in Surrey.

Hon. G. Lore: It's my honour to table this petition on behalf of my constituent Lavinia Rojas and

20 other concerned citizens asking this House to ban rodent glue boards.

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Kahlon: In this chamber, I call third reading of Bill 27, Money Judgment Enforcement Act.

Third Reading of Bills

BILL 27 — MONEY JUDGMENT

ENFORCEMENT ACT

Bill 27, Money Judgment Enforcement Act, read a third time and passed.

[11:00 a.m.]

Hon. R. Kahlon: In this chamber, I call continued second reading debate on Bill 34, Restricting Public

Consumption of Illegal Substances Act.

In Douglas Fir Committee Room, I call continued debate on Bill 31, Emergency and Disaster

Management Act.

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 34 — RESTRICTING PUBLIC

CONSUMPTION OF

ILLEGAL SUBSTANCES ACT

(continued)

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: We're on Bill 34, Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act. The member

for Prince George–Mackenzie had the floor — yes, that beautiful part of the province.

M. Morris: Well, thanks very much, Speaker, for that.

As I was alluding to yesterday, there've been a number of comments made from various

speakers — I've heard it outside as well — with respect to arresting our way out of

the situation we have right now. That's definitely not the case. That has never been

the case for police services anywhere in British Columbia, trying to arrest their

way out. Their hands are literally tied with the soft-on-crime approach that this

government and this Premier have taken with respect to the catch-and-release program

that we have.

The persons that are severely addicted…. They might commit the odd crime. They might

be committing theft in order to help support their habit. They might be doing other

things to try and help support their habit. That's understood by the police forces

right across British Columbia here.

I think, in the experience I've had and the things I've seen on the street-level enforcement,

that police officers probably do more to help a lot of the folks that are suffering

from the severe addictions that we see than just about any other agency that we see

out here.

Government's approach on ensuring that people…. They might not be able to consume

drugs, under this particular amendment, in some public places here, but it's nebulous

legislation. It's a nebulous amendment as to what the police powers are in this to

try and move individuals along from some of these locations here. It's not working.

When we look at the fact that we've only added about 240 new, additional treatment

beds across the province in the last seven years, those are very poor numbers. Treatment

is something that is missing. The availability of somebody, when they feel that they're

ready for addictions treatment…. There's a lengthy recovery period ahead of them to

try and get out of the cycle of addictions that they've been in for a number of years.

The opportunities just aren't there.

To keep providing people with opiates — they call it a safe supply; no such thing

as a safe supply, in my estimation; I think that's a misused term here — to keep providing

people with safe injection sites and areas to use drugs — all we are doing is continually

allowing people to stay in an advanced state of intoxication and perpetuating that

addiction.

I think the government has been going in the wrong direction here for a number of

months now, a number of years, in this province by not providing the necessary recovery

and treatment centres that we need.

This amendment in Bill 36 that we see here is too little, too late. It perpetuates

this government going in the wrong direction still. There's nothing to address the

crime that's associated with the drug use on the streets — the trafficking, the traffickers

that are taking advantage of street-level, addicted individuals to push their narcotics

out there — and not allowing the police to seize those small amounts.

[11:05 a.m.]

I go back…. When this was discussed, all kinds of figures were put out there as to

how much quantity of drugs should be left with the individual who might be addicted

and would need that for his own personal supply. I heard figures anywhere from the

2½ grams that we see today up to ten grams and more. And ten grams of fentanyl is

enough to kill a lot of people, at the end of the day.

Instead of allowing these kinds of things to happen…. I have to throw it out there.

How many grams have the police seized in no-case seizures? There are no charges involved

in any of these prior to this decrim coming into place. How many grams have they seized

that were fentanyl-laced, that would kill an individual because there was too much

fentanyl in that particular dose that was seized? How many lives have the police ultimately

saved, over the number of years, by making those small, no-case seizures in all of

our communities?

Those numbers aren't out there. They're just not there, but it's something that needs

to be considered. The number of people that are passing away as a result of opiate

overdoses hasn't changed any. In fact, it's getting worse all the time. The consequences

of overdose after overdose after overdose are showing up with increased mental health

issues on our streets in a far greater number than we used to see back in my day when

I was policing.

I think that's associated with the dangerous drugs that we see on the street with

fentanyl. I think it's associated with the increased use of drugs like crystal meth,

which are known to cause psychosis in a number of people — paranoia. There are a number

of things associated with that, and I've seen that in individuals that I'm personally

familiar with.

Where has the help been for those individuals? Where has the help been to try and

get those individuals off of the addictive narcotics that they're on so that they

can be properly assessed in a mental health situation and provided the therapy and

the recovery processes that they need to recover from their mental health issues,

outside of the addictive issues as well?

There's nothing that I see on the table for that. This is something that this particular

government has completely overlooked in bringing this legislation in, in allowing

drug use in open places in our communities, in allowing safe supply, in allowing safe

injection sites. Everything that they've done has been leading to increased use of

the opiates.

The term "safe supply" is…. I think it's probably leading individuals to look at safe

supply as: "That must mean that it's okay, that it's safe to use." In fact, I've seen

that, and I've heard that from individuals before.

There is nothing that this government has done to educate the public on the harms

associated with opiate use and the overdoses, with the use of crystal meth, with the

use of all of the different drugs out there. The dangers that it provides to youth

that are just starting and venturing into experimenting with these types of drugs

and calling them recreational drugs. Well, they're not recreational drugs. They're

drugs that are going to harm you physically and mentally, down the road, if you become

addicted to them, at the end of the day.

I don't see any programs that this government has initiated that are going to help

educate children and youth in school, and the public, as to the harms associated with

these kinds of drugs. All we hear about is: "We have to get more safe supply locations

out there. We have to include more safe injection sites."

I was talking to an individual in our community not too long ago who was involved

in providing that. I said: "What happens to the individuals when they come in? They

shoot up whatever they're going to shoot up within your safe injection site, and you

monitor them. But when they go away, what happens to them?"

There are no records kept. It's a free environment. We're not going to record anything.

We're not going to track anything. So we don't know exactly how effective these programs

have been. We don't know how many people might have been saved, at the end of the

day, as a result of that.

[11:10 a.m.]

Yet these organizations that provide this service are still asking for more government

money in order to keep perpetuating this supply and these locations where they can

take their drugs in a safe manner, I suppose, if you want to call it safe. I don't

think it is safe. It just perpetuates the whole problem that we see.

This has been a social experiment that has been going on for decades along the west

coast of North America. It's failed utterly in many locations south of the border.

It's been an utter failure in British Columbia, when we see the number of people that

are dying every day and every month in British Columbia.

Like I mentioned yesterday, briefly, when I look at the number of brain injuries associated

to overdoses that the B.C. Centre for Disease Control compiled — some of their statistics

— it's tens of thousands of individuals every year that suffer from acquired brain

injury associated to drug overdoses and opiate overdoses.

You multiply that by the years that this has been going on unchecked, the years that

this has been going on without the availability of a recovery centre for addictions

and recovery centres for those suffering from psychosis and the mental health issues

associated to that. I think it's negligence on behalf of government not to have looked

at that years ago and put facilities in place and brought the experts and the health

care workers in place to provide that level of service for them.

This legislation is lame-duck legislation. It doesn't provide the police with anything.

It doesn't provide the public with any assurances of safety. It doesn't assure them

that their children are going to be safe in public washrooms and other locations scattered

throughout our many communities in British Columbia where we see this open use of

drugs and opiates everywhere we look.

I think this legislation is not pointing us in the right direction, and a lot of work

needs to be done in order to rectify the disaster that we've seen taking place here

over the past number of years, where we see people dying all the time, and nothing

appears to be done about it other than telling the police that we can't arrest our

way out, which, like I said, we haven't been doing.

The police do not arrest drug addicts. They arrest criminals. They arrest people that

they see committing an offence or have reasonable probable grounds to believe they

have committed a criminal offence, and not just a minor offence. These are serious

offences that we see where individuals may be picking up a weapon, may be jeopardizing

the health and safety of people walking within a community. It's a balance act that

they have to look at.

The police also have no place to take an individual. If they arrest somebody, all

they have available to them is a cell block to put those individuals in, and that

doesn't work. The police know that more than anybody else knows that. So all they

can do is come by and try and mitigate the situation that the individual is involved

in and ask them to move along. Most times they do; sometimes they don't.

Other than that, there's not a lot that the police can do, because there are no facilities.

There's no infrastructure in place, and there's no ability for them to start pointing

these people in the right direction.

This is poor legislation. The amendment doesn't go near far enough to help the communities

and the municipalities deal with these situations they see in their communities, and

I think government could have done a lot better in this whole situation here. So I'll

leave it at that, and I look forward to whoever else is speaking.

A. Olsen: I rise to speak to Bill 34, the Restricting Public Consumption of Illegal Substances

Act.

I just want to frame my comments using a motion that was tabled by the Government

House Leader: "That, consistent with the Report of the Select Standing Committee on

Health intituled Closing Gaps, Reducing Barriers , this House affirm its support for a spectrum of addictions care, such as life-saving

harm reduction measures — including safe consumption sites, decriminalization and

safer supply — and for a rapid, unprecedented expansion of drug treatment and recovery

spaces."

[11:15 a.m.]

That is the intention of this government. Unfortunately, that's not what we've seen

be delivered. So here we are debating this bill, Bill 34, the Restricting Public Consumption

of Illegal Substances Act.

I just want to read, also, a couple of comments that were made by my colleague yesterday

in a news release that we put out, because I think that it frames the context with

which we approach this.

"If we want to achieve a true sense of public safety, we cannot adopt an out-of-sight,

out-of-mind approach. British Columbia is capable of implementing evidence-based solutions

and must do so immediately."

It makes supporting this bill very difficult when the necessary and evidence-based

services are not in place. Safe consumption sites are not in place. Funding for communities

to help their residents with living and support — inadequate. A lack of support for

regulated treatment centres.

I'm sad that this government, my B.C. NDP colleagues, have fallen into the trap that

has been set by some extremist fearmongers, these new politics, these new conservative

politics. The health and well-being of our friends and relatives, our neighbours,

our children, our nieces and nephews, our grandchildren are being used as leverage

for politicians for the pursuit of their own power.

The most vulnerable people in our society, those stricken with a terrible affliction,

a health crisis, are being preyed upon by the privileged for their own selfish gains.

It's disturbing. It's sickening.

Nobody wants to see what we're seeing in our society. Open drug use is absolutely

a problem, but it's not the problem. It's a symptom of the problem, and we cannot

arrest our way out of this problem. The goal of the decriminalization pilot is to

ensure that the treatment plan for a health crisis is not delivered by the criminal

justice system. Turning sick people into criminals makes no sense. It's a waste of

everyone's time and money, yet that is what we've been doing.

This is not a soft-on-crime approach. Unfortunately, what we've been seeing is a soft-on-health-care

approach. Decriminalization alone does not work. It needs to be done in concert with

the ramping up of regulated free treatment services. It needs to be supported with

safe consumption sites in every city, town and village, supported with treatment services.

It needs to be done alongside the provision of a safe place for people to live, places

for people to sleep without the threat of being assaulted. Programs that offer a supportive

community to help people through their most challenging moments. Our local government

colleagues have found solutions like The Village project in Duncan, a project that

needs a reliable provincial partner.

Instead of delivering a compassionate and comprehensive response, this B.C. NDP government

decriminalized the possession of small amounts of illicit drugs and then, frankly,

took a rhetorical victory lap. What they did was expose the most vulnerable people

to a political movement that appears to have no issue with attacking them.

Now we see…. Have we lost our humanity and our dignity? Now, this B.C. NDP government,

whose intentions were good, have failed to deliver the comprehensive programming that's

necessary. I've spoken about the negative impact of stigma of people who use, abuse

and suffer from drug addiction. It was a pathway, as I've been very public about,

that I narrowly escaped.

As a result of this B.C. NDP government's inability to deliver the coordinated plan

they've been promising, it appears from the outside that there are a few key members

in cabinet that are not on board with this compassionate response. The result is that

with this bill, we're taking major steps backward in the destigmatization of people

who use, abuse and are addicted to illicit substances.

The result is this bill has the potential of making this situation worse. While this

government celebrated the decriminalization pilot, they were telling British Columbians

about the record investments they were making in mental health and addictions services

and supports.

[11:20 a.m.]

It turns out they made better sound bites than actually improving the response to

this public health emergency, which has been ongoing, in which more than 11,000 or

12,000 British Columbians have perished.

As my colleague pointed out, there is one thing that our Crown governments are good

at: segregating undesirable classes of people, dispossessing them of the place they

belong and stigmatizing them for political purposes. My Indigenous relatives are more

likely to be impoverished, more likely to be homeless, more likely to be incarcerated,

more likely to die from illicit drug poisoning and more likely to be impacted by the

changes in this bill.

Rather than ramping up access to housing and other social services to support people

through their health crisis, this government has succumbed to the political pressure,

and they're doing just what Crown governments and politicians have been doing since

the beginning of this country and this province, pushing marginalized people further

into the darkness.

Do those who oppose the initiative of decriminalization feel this bill is going to

solve the problem? This bill relieves the pressure building on politicians from doing

their job, and it pushes the pressure back into the discretionary hands of police

and bylaw officers.

The minister suggests that our front-line public safety people will encourage people

to go and use a safe consumption site. As my colleague clearly outlined yesterday,

it appears that the Minister of Public Safety has not made it out of the Lower Mainland

recently, because he should know that what he offers as a solution is not a solution

for most of the communities in British Columbia. For most of the geographic area of

British Columbia, what he is offering is not a solution.

He should be informed that his colleague the Minister of Health has not provided the

safe consumption sites in a vast majority of those cities, towns and villages. I think

this government needs to take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask themselves whether

further marginalizing the most vulnerable people in our society is something they

can celebrate.

The people who we are talking about have literally nowhere else to go. The members

of this B.C. NDP government need to ask themselves if, when they signed up with that

political party, they believed they would be doing anything other than delivering

the social services that people need and the social services that they've been claiming

are going to be delivered with the record spending that's going to be happening that

communities, communities in my riding, have no access to.

There's seemingly no way to get a hold of the money that is being spent. We have tried

multiple times through multiple iterations of the Mental Health and Addictions Ministry

to get access to the front-line community services that my communities need, communities

like Saltspring Island, in a complete bureaucratic vacuum.

Yet I hear on a daily basis in here, or on a regular basis in here: "Now, don't worry.

We're spending more money than we've ever spent before." Money that apparently is

going somewhere, but we can't tell where it is because the volunteer community support

people, the people with lived experiences who are there to support folks are not getting

the funding they need to do their good work.

Pushing this issue back into the darkness will not solve it, but it may give some

in our society who cannot afford to see it, cannot bear to see it, some comfort. However,

this bill has the potential to cost people their lives, further add pressure on front-line

public safety and paramedic first responders.

[11:25 a.m.]

This B.C. NDP government's response has been incoherent and fragmented, and it is

costing them the success of the projects they have celebrated, like the decriminalization

pilot. By walking it back and bringing in this bill, they are feeding a dangerous

political narrative in the process. Until this government delivers on that promise,

they're increasing insecurity for the most vulnerable people in our society.

This bill doesn't help fix the situation. It makes it worse.

T. Shypitka: Thank you to the member previous. Thanks to anyone who speaks to Bill 34, Restricting

Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act.

There's so much to be said about this. I've got absolutely no notes. This is going

to be cold and off the cuff. I'm in this uncomfortable position because I believe

our province is in an uncomfortable position right now. This bill really drills into

the public safety of vulnerable people, whether it's those that are drug-dependent

or those that are exposed to those folks that are drug-dependent.

Listening to the previous speaker…. He speaks about vulnerable people. Of course,

that's what we're dealing with here with Bill 34.

I'd also like to explain that there are other vulnerable people in our society, young

children, predominantly, from what I see, from what we've experienced with the experimental

process of decriminalization.

I'll bring it back to last January. Last January I wrote a letter to the editor. I

don't know if I've got it here somewhere. It was a short 300-word letter to the editor

that basically called out what this policy is now becoming well known as, and that

is an experiment.

The NDP sanctioned or went after Health Canada to have an exemption to decriminalize

here in the province of British Columbia, the only province, I might add, in Canada

that has this current exemption.

There were requirements that came along with this deal — and I'll speak to those requirements

treatment. That was number one. The second one was greater engagement with key stakeholders

and Indigenous partners. Those first two…. I have not yet seen any movement on that

at all.

The third was an increase in public education and communications. Now, that one is

an issue where I kind of have to chuckle a little bit. Outside our community, in Cranbrook….

I believe this was throughout the province. There were billboards, which were outside

and safe drug supply, which I'll go into a little bit later. It, I believe, is an

oxymoron that was used by this government and still continues to this day.

The billboard said: "Got dope?" It was a reference to the old marketing campaign from

the dairy association, which had: "Got milk?" That is a reference to…. Drink healthy.

Be healthy. The dairy association approves of a healthy society. "Got milk?" was a

great campaign. What the government did was…. They took that healthy campaign, and

they twisted it into "Got dope?"

It has been stricken down since then. The government has taken that down. The impression

it leaves, with the hundreds and hundreds and thousands of people that drive by that

billboard every day…. Once again, referring back to our vulnerable population, which

is children, that see this…. They get mixed messages on this type of thing.

[11:30 a.m.]

The questions are asked. Are drugs clean and safe? Are they legal? Those mixed messages,

to a 12- or a 13- or a 14-year-old, who is just coming into their own and who is going

through life's changes and experimenting and things…. If they see "Got dope?" billboards

and they hear decriminalization…. If they see "clean and safe" attached to drugs,

without worldly experiences, they seem…. I've got kids of my own. I only say this

because I've heard it firsthand. "Dad, are drugs clean and safe? Is heroin clean and

safe? Is it legal to do that now? I see billboards all over the place. I see people

using it everywhere."

This is what I'm talking about as being vulnerable. I think these children are children.

Once they are exposed to addiction…. I can talk from both sides. My brother died of

what this government would call a clean and safe drug supply. He didn't overdose,

but the damage was done after years of drug dependency. He died of what's called a

pulmonary edema, essentially had a seizure. His heart was like Swiss cheese. It wasn't

pumping oxygenated blood, and of course, it resulted in a seizure. That was from what

the government now calls clean and safe drugs. That to me is an oxymoron.

I stood in this House two years ago and said this exact same thing, and I challenged

the words "clean and safe." In some regard, I was ostracized from media and other

people saying: "How can you be so insensitive? We're trying to reduce the toxic drug

supply in the province that's coming in from outside." I agree. You can call it less

toxic. You can call it anything but clean and safe in my opinion. So I have a real

problem with that.

This experiment…. I use that word "experiment" of decriminalization, because it hasn't

been tried anywhere else in Canada before, and it did come with guardrails or requirements

in place needed to make it a successful program.

I'll keep going with the requirements. The one I just talked about, increase in public

education communications — I have to give that a big fail. Ensuring the readiness

and capacity of the health and social systems — well, that's clearly a fail. The next

one would be: increase training and support for law enforcement. I'm not even sure

what that actually means, other than an RCMP officer handing a pamphlet to where the

next treatment bed could be, which we don't have. I'll go into that a little later.

We lost six rehab beds in Cranbrook. We've got none. Our closest rehabilitation is

in Castlegar. It's three hours away.

So increase training and support for law enforcement. I'm not even really sure if

I've seen that. I'm not even sure what that even means.

The last one was the development of monitoring, applied research and evaluation models

to measure the success of the program. Okay. I'd love to see that research and evaluation

on how this program has been a success. Obviously, it's not a success if we're here

in this Legislature right now, amending this bill that was put forward not that long

ago.

On all the metrics that the government had to adhere to, to get the exemption in the

first place from Health Canada, has been a complete failure, and the proof is in the

pudding, because we're standing here and debating this bill right now in trying to

amend where folks can use drugs.

Now, I agree with what government is trying to do. Destigmatize — absolutely. Use

harm reduction as a tool of recovery — 100 percent. But without those other pillars

in place, without the pillars of prevention, treatment, enforcement….

If we lean too heavily on the one leg of harm reduction, as I feel we're doing, we're

going to fall. It's like a four-legged stool. You need all four legs in place to be

able to sit upright and to support yourself. If you cut three of those legs around,

it's only so long you can balance yourself on that leg before you come crashing down.

[11:35 a.m.]

I think government is seeing that, and I think that's why we have this bill in front

of us right now, to right the wrong. This government was very adamant to fast-tracking

decriminalization in 2020. Now here we are, three years later, back-pedalling and

trying to say: "Whoops. I guess we didn't really think this one out very good."

I know we've all heard the stories of children finding methamphetamines and crack

cocaine in schoolyards. We've all heard the stories of people stumbling upon unused

needles at beaches and playgrounds. I mean, what risk…. We talk about vulnerable people.

Please, I don't want this to sound like I'm discrediting people with addictions as

not being vulnerable. Of course they are. I've announced I've had family members that

fall into that category, so I'm alive to that.

But where is the thought for our vulnerable children? Where does that come into play?

I guess we're seeing that now. I guess we're seeing how government is back-pedalling

and going: "Oh, I guess we forgot that innocent children could be impacted by all

of this."

I don't want to just make complaints. There are solutions, and the B.C. United did

make some recommendations. They do have a platform. They did come out with a Better

is Possible plan several months ago.

We are still experiencing record numbers of opioid deaths in this province every single

month. We are losing close to seven people a day. Still no progress, no end in sight

to one of the key campaign promises by the NDP: to tackle drug addiction.

They set up a ministry. They seem to be doing all the right things, but there are

just zero results from it. We're not seeing any progress, and somebody has to be accountable

to this. I believe it's government.

Government can point fingers and say: "Oh, it's because of previous governments,"

and "Oh, look. It's because of a COVID pandemic, and this is rampant across the country."

I don't know if that means that they don't want to be responsible for this crisis

or not. Government has a responsibility to take care of public safety. They are clearly

not doing that. Once again, it's proof, because we're debating this bill right now.

They understand that they have put the public at risk. There's no other way of saying

it.

They know the public is at risk, because of this bill, and it's because of their own

experimental drug policy that they brought in without thinking it through or without

putting the proper guardrails or requirements in place, in the first place. They need

to be held accountable to that.

So 11,000 people in British Columbia have lost their lives since 2016 — 11,000. I

just want that to resonate. They are your fathers and your sisters and your brothers

and everybody that you know. I know that there's not one person in this Legislature

or in the gallery or in Hansard or anywhere that hasn't been touched by this crisis

one way or the other. Everybody has. And they continue to rise.

One of the first foundations of the Better is Possible plan is affordable, accessible

treatment now. Like I said, in my community, we've lost treatment. We've lost treatment

in a time when we have the biggest crisis on our hands.

"Eliminate user fees at publicly funded addiction treatment beds and provide direct

government funding for private beds through surge capacity agreements to ensure no

one faces financial barriers to treatment." That's one of the foundational promises

that we're making.

"Build a minimum of five regional recovery communities for addiction treatment where

residents can stay up to a year with individualized, holistic, long-term residential

treatment, including Indigenous-specific care." That's another promise.

Another one. "Create a virtual opioid dependency program to ensure immediate access

to life-saving medications like Suboxone or methadone for those who don't have a doctor

and can't get into a walk-in clinic."

[11:40 a.m.]

This is that treatment now. This is a form of harm reduction. We're not opposed to

harm reduction, but it needs to be measured, and it needs to be in place for those

that need it immediately.

Another promise: "Building on the model of the single-parent employment initiative,

support those struggling with addiction with residential treatment, counselling and

job training for one year." This is giving the hand up, not the handout. This is getting

people a better place to live.

Another promise: "Designate living units inside correctional centres as treatment

centres, staffed with therapists alongside corrections officers. This will allow inmates

to participate in addiction treatment while their sentence is served and improve the

chances of re-integration into society following their sentence."

This is in rebuttal — or in addition, I guess — to the Green member's comments that

we shouldn't be criminalizing and we shouldn't be putting those with addictions into

jail, as much as we need the treatment. This helps both. If you are charged with an

offence, you will go into a facility that provides that treatment. I think there are

some national, federal bills that are going to be brought forward that will actually

give involuntary care for those with addictions, so that they must take treatment.

I don't know how that's going to work out, but we'll be watching.

Another pillar of our Better Is Possible plan is compassionate care for complex mental

health needs. This is: "Triple the beds at the Red Fish Healing Centre at Riverview

and build additional regional centres using that model in the North, Thompson-Okanagan,

Kootenays and Vancouver Island to ensure that those requiring highly specialized mental

health support can receive it closer to home."

This is important because support isn't just the facility you go into. It's the support

that you have close to home that can assist in that long term care that addiction

is required to have. It's important to regionalize it so that it isn't 1,000 kilometres

away and over six or seven mountain passes, where the family can never visit you when

you need them the most.

"Bring forward legislation allowing the limited use of involuntary treatment to keep

our most vulnerable youth and adults at risk of harm to themselves or others safe

at modernized, compassionate facilities with 24-7 psychiatric and medical supports."

Now, involuntary treatment is always a last resort. It's when that person will be

doing harm to themselves or to others that this has to be considered and this has

to be implemented, not just for the safety of the most vulnerable, the ones with addictions,

but also of their family members and all those ones that surround them.

I can tell you. just from personal experience, that it's a pretty ugly thing when

a person is going through rehab and is drying out. They will do almost anything to

get the drugs they need. They will lie to you; they will steal from you; they can

harm you. When push comes to shove and every other option is exhausted, involuntary

care is an option, and I support it.

We endorse the plan proposed by Dr. Julian Somers of Simon Fraser University in July

2021, providing an effective roadmap to address street homelessness with a focus on

evidence-based services, partnerships with Indigenous organizations and a highly effective

model of person-centred services.

Another pillar: awareness and prevention. Once again, drilling into those four foundational

elements of recovery.

We've got an introduction.

Hon. L. Beare: I want to thank the member for pausing his remarks for a moment so that I have the

opportunity, on behalf of my….

Deputy Speaker: Is the member seeking leave?

Hon. L. Beare: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.

Introductions by Members

Hon. L. Beare: I have the honour right now to introduce a class from John Howitt Elementary School.

This is on behalf of my colleague the member for Mid-Island–Pacific Rim. They are

accompanied by their teacher, Diana Bouchard.

We have 25 grade 4s and 5s in the room with us, and I just want to say a big welcome.

Thank you, everyone.

[11:45 a.m.]

Debate Continued

T. Shypitka: Welcome to the class that's here today and taking in all there is about legislation

here in B.C.

Of course, we're speaking to legislation right now that does impact people in that

classroom right now and trying to protect those children from exposure to the ugly

side of society that is actually…. It's a reality. I've lived it. It's real, and it's

there.

We have to address both sides of the equation. We have to take care of those that

are most vulnerable with mental health and addiction issues. We also, at the same

time, have to make sure we're not putting at risk the public safety of our children

and making sure that they have safe places to go. They can go to a school yard, go

to a playground, go to a spray park, all those really fun things — going down the

water slides. Who doesn't like that?

It has to be in a safe place. I don't think anybody in this House argues that. We

want to make sure that our future generations, our future leaders that are sitting

up there have a safe pathway to education and being safe and secure.

Keep working hard, you guys up there. Listen to your teacher now.

Anyway, awareness and prevention is another one of those things of the four pillars

of recovery. Prevention, I said. Treatment, enforcement, harm reduction — all important

parts.

B.C. United has put forward the Better Is Possible platform. One of those things under

awareness and prevention is: "Create programs to support families struggling with

addiction, recovery system navigation, general questions and supports for impacted

family members. These programs will provide therapy and ongoing support as they work

to help their loved ones recover."

Now, this is part of the destigmatizing of what we need to see in this province. When

we have supports that are created for family members and friends to gather around

and to talk it out and to have that secure support network in place, instead of….

What we're seeing now is that those with addictions sadly die of overdose alone in

the basement of their home somewhere because of the stigmatization that is associated

with it.

My son — God love him. He's a red seal electrician. Works up north. Does all the great

things. He's got a wife, and I've got two grandkids from him. Awesome. Love it. But

he has seen firsthand how some people that get into some of these higher-paying jobs,

that are isolated from family members, that are away from home, do fall into drug

addiction.

This is not a situation or an issue in British Columbia that is in the back alleys

of Hastings Street. This is all over. This is every demographic you can imagine. And

those — predominantly males — that work in some of these high industrial jobs find

themselves with addiction issues. Thankfully, my son is not one of them, but he has

got friends that are. We have to make sure that awareness and prevention are part

of the plan. That family support is critical.

"Establish detailed data systems to track provincewide performance measures and targets

and clearly benchmark the number of publicly funded mental health and addiction treatment

beds available to British Columbians. This will measure performance outcomes and ensure

standardization of care."

B.C. United is committed as a result-driven party…. Reasonable, responsible, result-driven.

That is what B.C. United stands for. This Better Is Possible plan highlights an accountability,

I guess you would call it, to the problems that we have here in B.C. with addictions.

We've got time for some more. I'll hand the floor over to my colleague, I believe,

from Peace River North, unless somebody from the NDP side…. I'm surprised we haven't

seen many from the NDP side speak to this, because this is critically important. It's

about public safety.

[11:50 a.m.]

I've noticed the B.C. Conservatives aren't making any comments either. I wonder why.

This is super important stuff. It addresses not only the mental addiction issues in

British Columbia, but also those vulnerable people that we see in the gallery here

today that we want to keep safe.

With that, I'll take my place and welcome the next speaker.

M. Bernier: Maybe I'll start, as well, by welcoming the students that are here today.

As part of the democratic process of debating bills and as we're talking about Bill

34…. Bill 34, which we have in front of us, just so those watching know, is the Restricting

Public Consumption of Illegal Substances Act.

It's a tough discussion. It's a very, very difficult discussion for us to be having

right now. There are a lot of emotions at play. This is one of those topics that,

frankly, touches all of us. My colleague from Kootenay East was talking about his

personal situations, talking about how it touches his family and those of everybody

in the House. I think it touches everybody that's in here right now.

When we look at what's happening in our society…. We'll bring it home to British Columbia

specifically right now. I apologize to the students who are in here, because this

is tough. But when government is saying that drugs are safe, that is the wrong message

to be sending to our kids, to our youth. There is no such thing as safe drugs.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

I remember when I was in school that we used to be proud, as a government, to be putting

out information and commercials that drugs are bad. I remember those commercials on

TV — "This is your brain on drugs," as you crack an egg into a frying pan. That was

the message we used to send to our youth. I remember that very, very well, growing

up as a child.

Now, I also want to be fair and clear that nobody in this House, no political party

is trying to endanger our youth or endanger people in society. I say that with due

respect to my colleagues that have put this bill forward.

I don't have much time, and I'll be concluding my remarks after lunch, but I think

it's important that this topic really be addressed. I'm glad there are some youth

in here today, and I hope there are people watching this. We, collectively in this

Legislature, need to make sure that we are sending the right message to the people

in the province of British Columbia. The students won't be here, I'm sure, but after

lunch I want to talk about how important this is, about making sure we have supports.

There are people who struggle. I'll say mental health and addictions, but I think

it's important that we remember that they can be two different things. There are people

out there that struggle with mental health challenges, and we have to have supports

for them. There are people out there that struggle with addictions issues, and we

need to have supports for them. There are some people that struggle with both. We

need to make sure that the supports are there for the people that are on our streets,

in our communities or in our homes and that are struggling.

This bill that we're debating right now and discussing…. We're not debating the fact

that there are people that are struggling, the fact that we've heard that 11,000 people

since 2016 have, sadly, died in our province from an overdose. Nobody is taking away

from that. We just want to ensure that the right message is there and the supports

are there, which I will get into after the break.

With that, I reserve my place, noting the hour, and move adjournment of the debate.

M. Bernier moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Committee of the Whole (Section A), having reported progress, was granted leave to

sit again.

Hon. L. Beare moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. today.

The House adjourned at 11:54 a.m.

Top

NOTICE: This is a DRAFT transcript of debate in one sitting of the Legislative Assembly of

British Columbia. This transcript is subject to corrections and will be replaced by

the final, official Hansard report. Use of this transcript, other than in the legislative

precinct, is not protected by parliamentary privilege, and public attribution of any

of the debate as transcribed here could entail legal liability.

Copyright © 2023: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada