Second Session, 41st Parliament

(2017) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Monday, October 30, 2017

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 46

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

Aging with dignity

A. Kang

R. Sultan

Registered disability savings plan

S. Cadieux

A. Weaver

Global warming

R. Glumac

J. Johal

Small business and rural recovery

C. Oakes

J. Rice

Private Members’ Motions

Motion 11 — Money laundering in casinos

R. Singh

A. Wilkinson

B. D’Eith

G. Kyllo

M. Dean

P. Milobar

D. Routley

M. Polak

B. Ma

M. Morris

L. Krog

MONDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2017

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

AGING WITH DIGNITY

A. Kang: Today I rise, with humility, to pay respect to all the seniors of

our province. They play so many different but crucial roles that touch

every aspect of our daily lives. They are our parents, our grandparents,

our great-grandparents, our friends, our neighbours, our teachers and

our mentors. Seniors have dedicated their whole lives, building our

province and strengthening our province. There is no better way to show

our gratitude than to help them age with dignity.

[10:05 a.m.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

I care deeply about the seniors in our community because while I

was growing up, they taught me valuable life lessons, provided me with

guidance and encouraged me to reach for the stars. They treated me as

one of their own — their daughter, their family. Of course, they were

not considered seniors 20, 30 or 40 years ago. Time is our most

merciless and our most inevitable enemy. It is also the enemy that our

society has to face together, as it slowly strips us of our health, both

physical and mental.

Most of us here will become seniors. Well, some of us already are

but definitely still young at heart and strong enough to help build a

better B.C. But when the day comes when we can no longer be our own

voice for our own concerns or stand up for ourselves, we all need

someone to be our voice, to advocate on our behalf and to be the support

that we can lean on. I want to be that support and that voice

now.

When I served on Burnaby city council, I worked closely with

senior citizens in our community. With many of our former colleagues, I

was deeply involved in planning and creating accessible environments and

community centres for people of all ages. I’m especially proud of our

55+ seniors centre at Bonsor, and the new seniors lounge in Edmonds

Recreation Centre. Now I’m honoured to have the opportunity to work with

my former colleagues, as well as my new colleagues here in this chamber,

to serve the seniors across all of British Columbia.

Our province is at a crossroads. Not only are we facing tremendous

population growth, but our population is also aging at an accelerated

rate. According to Statistics Canada, the population growth in British

Columbia between 2011 and 2016 — that means the five past years — is

approximately 250,000, or 5.6 percent, higher than the national average

of 5 percent.

Out of the four million people in British Columbia, approximately

700,000 people are above the age of 65, and the number continues to be

on the rise. The Business Council of B.C. has released a report with a

projection that the senior population will double by 2030. This will

create immense pressure on our health care system and social programs,

and we must ensure that our seniors will continue to receive good,

quality services that support healthy aging.

I am proud of B.C.’s health care system, and I am confident that

the Minister of Health will continue to improve our health care system.

We also have incredible health care workers that we can count on. But we

cannot take everything that we have for granted. Caring for our older

citizens involves more than providing the best medical care. In a

province such as ours and very diverse, our seniors have diverse needs.

It is important to learn and understand what those needs are. This means

providing our seniors with services that are culturally sensitive and

making information accessible in different languages.

Providing culturally sensitive care to our seniors has become an

important and emerging issue in our culturally diverse province. We

many are unable to communicate on their own behalf.

This is also an issue that is dear to my heart. For example, we

all know the importance that food plays in our daily lives. We all have

our personal cravings of comfort food, especially when we are stressed

out or emotionally stretched. To some, comfort food may mean clam

chowder, ketchup-flavoured chips or dark chocolates, or they could just

be my own. But to others, they may be kimchi , curry, rice, piri

piri chicken or bannock.

Seniors have been telling me that they hope to be able to retire

and live in a place where they can enjoy the food that they love. They

also hope to live and celebrate each day with the food, music and social

activities that they are familiar with. Bringing more awareness to

culturally sensitive retirement life is an important aspect of retiring

with dignity.

I’m committed to caring about all aspects of our seniors’ lives —

economic situation, mental and physical well-being, as well as housing

and transportation. That is why I have been speaking to the seniors

advocate, senior ambassadors, families with seniors and community groups

and visiting senior homes — communicating with and treating our seniors

like my own family.

[10:10 a.m.]

I have senior-aged parents, and my grandfather is 93 years young.

I want to make sure our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents

receive high-quality health care services and retire with dignity. The

seniors have done their part for the province, and now it’s time for the

province to take care of them. I hope that you will tell your parents,

your grandparents, seniors and mature adults around you that they can

count on me to be their voice in this House.

R. Sultan: Aging with dignity. I don’t know why they pick on me for this

topic, but I’ll do my best.

When my father was born, the average age at death in America was

only 34 years. Almost 140 years later, in B.C., the average age at death

has doubled, to 75. The question is: will it double again over the next

140 years?

Well, I wouldn’t rule it out. Thanks to our clean environment;

healthier living; technology from the likes of Genome B.C., which

visited us a few days ago; and as the member for Burnaby–Deer Lake

points out, a superb health system; and yes, more emphasis on walking,

simply walking, B.C. newborns today will routinely live to

In international comparisons, only Switzerland and Japan have a

higher longevity than babies born in British Columbia today. Longevity

is galloping forward, but the question is: can we gallop with dignity?

To do so, I believe the world of work must play a larger role, both

healthwise and money-wise.

Money-wise, the Globe and Mail a couple of days ago had a

story on household finances headlined that the new retirement age is 70

and that, frankly, we should dismiss those mutual fund ads touting

“Freedom 55.” Well, folks, having been in the business myself, lots of

luck with that one.

Healthwise, idleness is the curse of old age. As Minister of State

for Seniors a number of years ago, I toured about 100 seniors care

facilities, mostly paid for by the government. Today we look after about

4 percent of B.C. seniors in publicly subsidized facilities. These are

seniors no longer able to look after themselves — and even some who are

not seniors. Staring at the same four walls day after day after day is

not healthy.

The client base has evolved. Government-supported care homes are

no longer places where seniors can park their cars in the garage

underground and flit down to the mall from time to time for a shopping

spree. The facilities today are increasingly difficult to distinguish

from hospitals for the extremely frail and the demented.

If this represents the future for 4 percent of us, what about the

rest? Another 1 percent or so will receive high-end care at strictly

private-pay institutions, such as Amica and Revera. Well, that still

leaves 95 percent of us.

For them, the seniors strategy, which I was briefly involved with

in implementing years ago comes into play: “Better at home”. As the

slogan implies, most seniors as they age will in fact be looked after

where they live, often living alone and often helped by families and

friends, supplemented by respite centres from time to time, such as

those created by my friend Inge Schamborzki, who heads the Health and

Home Care Society.

If government has a role, and it must — and it’s a big one — it is

to help organize and subsidize home care. These are the avenues by which

we shall age with dignity. Retirement policies must adjust accordingly.

Employment contracts forcing retirement at age 65 are, as I understand

it, already essentially illegal in B.C.

Tax measures which encourage retirement savings must be expanded.

Costly defined-benefit pension plans will be forced to face up to their

actuarial and investment return realities.

[10:15 a.m.]

It will be harder and harder to accept the injustice in a society

embracing two worlds simultaneously: one of taxpayer-assured, fully

funded financial security and another one of seniors living on food

banks and cat food. British Columbia, get ready for the super seniors

demanding full and fair dignity of treatment, for they are visible in

large numbers on the not-distant horizon.

A. Kang: Thank you to the member for West Vancouver–Capilano for your

response. I can see that we both have similar passions for this

topic.

I do not take my responsibility lightly. I have been researching

and learning from community partners and seniors about their concerns

and how we can do better. I have been visiting senior homes and speaking

to families and care providers about what we can do for our seniors here

in British Columbia.

We all play an important role in making sure that our seniors age

with dignity. There are some things that we can learn from other

countries around the world and some things that we can learn from each

other. Our civic gathering places are a great place of cultural

exchanges, and so are our senior centres. Our lives are further enriched

because of our beautiful multicultural diversity here in B.C.

We can challenge the negative stereotypes about aging. We must

remind ourselves that many of today’s seniors have played a key role in

shaping our province and have fought for many of our rights that we

enjoy today. Many remain active in the community and politically,

regardless of physical abilities. Our seniors continue to make a

difference.

There are also small things we can do to prepare ourselves for

aging. We can make plans for ourselves about where and how we want to

live as we grow older. We can also think about what we might need in our

life in case we need daily support, and identify people who we trust,

who will honour our health care wishes if we cannot make decisions for

ourselves. It is also helpful to keep a list of important contacts,

including professionals, family members, friends and loved ones, in an

accessible place.

Our doctors, health care professionals and our loved ones are here

for us to discuss the kind of care we want for ourselves. We can also

reach out to our local senior and community centres to learn about the

services they offer. Public libraries are also great places to visit for

local community resources.

Share the information with friends, neighbours and family members

so they know that they are not alone. If you have older neighbours who

live alone, check in on them from time to time and ask them if they are

getting the support and services that they need to live well in the

community.

Small, kind gestures like this can make a big, meaningful impact.

It is also a reflection of our values, because in British Columbia, we

believe in taking care of each other. We believe in the unity of our

community. Together we can make a difference, and together we can make

sure that our seniors age with dignity.

REGISTERED DISABILITY SAVINGS PLAN

S. Cadieux: On December 1, 2008, the late Jim Flaherty, the then Minister of

Finance for the federal government, did a remarkable thing — a

forward-thinking, first-in-the-world thing. He responded to the advocacy

originating from South Surrey by Al Etmanski and the Planned Lifetime

Advocacy Network folks, and he introduced the registered disability

savings plan, or RDSP. The first of its kind in the world, this new

tax-deferred savings vehicle was designed specifically to assist people

with disabilities and their families for planning for the long term for

financial security.

I won’t need to tell members of this House about the reality that

people with disabilities have higher rates of poverty and unemployment

than their temporarily able-bodied counterparts. I hope I don’t also

need to educate this House on the reality that living with a disability

can add significant costs and expenses not faced by those who don’t have

a disability.

While there are many social programs designed and provided by

governments to assist, some of those programs are only available to

individuals whose sole source of income is government benefits. Another

less-known reality is that there are far more people with disabilities

that are not dependent on — or even eligible for — government benefits

than those who are.

That’s why the RDSP vehicle is so important. An RDSP allows you to

save money for the future without paying tax on the earnings. The

federal government will contribute as much as $90,000 to an individual’s

account. It’s estimated that 500,000 people across Canada are eligible

for the benefit.

[10:20 a.m.]

The future impacts of the RDSP go well beyond a simple planning

tool. They provide a path for security, for choice — for individual

choice. So far, since first becoming available in 2008, over 100,000

RDSPs have been opened. I’d like to read for you the Plan Institute’s

top-ten list, the top ten reasons why people with disabilities or their

carers should open an RDSP.

(1) You choose where to invest your money. All of the major

Canadian banks are offering RDSPs.

(2) The government contributes generously. For every dollar saved,

they will match up to $3.

(3) If you have a low income and can’t invest yourself, the

government will still save for you.

(4) An RDSP will not affect your disability benefits.

(5) It’s an easy way to save for big items like mortgage down

payments, home renovations or cars.

(6) There are no restrictions. You can spend the money on anything

you choose.

(7) When you close an RDSP, your contributions and investments

gained are yours.

(8) With savings tucked away, the future becomes yours to

imagine.

(9) You become more powerful economically. Decision-makers need to

take you more seriously.

(10) The whole world is watching. What happens here in Canada may

determine the future of people with disabilities in other

countries.

As of December 2015, the total value of RDSPs in B.C. is over $460

million. British Columbians have personally contributed $163 million to

their RSDPs, leveraging an additional $297 million in federal grants and

bonds. I know, with talking with financial advisers and having financial

planning education myself, there’s no better deal out there. People have

nothing to lose and so very, very much to gain.

In 2015, British Columbians held 18 percent of all RDSPs in

Canada, yet made up only 14 percent of eligible Canadians. Currently 12

percent of all people with disabilities under 50, or 22,500 people, in

B.C. have an RDSP, higher than in any other province, which is great.

But another 60,000 people in this age group could benefit, and they

should.

Like most financial products, the rules are complicated, but there

are plenty of experts available to help. It doesn’t need to be

overwhelming. People should not be afraid to ask for help. There is too

much to gain, especially if you have a low or modest income.

As an example, also from the Plan RDSP website, if an individual

with an annual net income of $26,000 contributes $900 per year, they

will earn $2,300 in federal RDSP grants and another $1,000 in a bond

every year. So over your lifetime, you could receive $250,966 from your

RDSP by contributing $18,000 in contributions, garnering $20,000 in

federal bonds, $46,000 in federal grants and $166,000 in earned interest

at 3 percent a year.

Understanding that even coming up with an initial contribution

could be a challenge for some people, there are grants available through

the endowment 150, which offers eligible people with disabilities a

one-time savings grant of $150 to help get their RDSP, or registered

disability savings plan, started and growing.

There’s no better time than now. October is RDSP Awareness Month.

The government of British Columbia has been a leader across the country

in supporting the efforts of the advocates and the federal government in

ensuring that British Columbians were first and most apt to take up this

challenge. B.C. was first to exempt the income and earnings from an RDSP

from affecting disability benefits, and on so many fronts, B.C. has been

leading the country when it comes to providing supports to people with

disabilities and looking to find ways to ensure that people with

disabilities can claim their economic position, as well, in our

society.

I think it’s tremendous. There’s a tremendous amount of work that

has gone on. The RDSP action group, made up of advocates and groups that

support people with disabilities, is doing a tremendous job making sure

that British Columbians with disabilities stay at the forefront of this

program so that B.C. continues to have the biggest uptake of RDSPs in

the country. But there are so many people that still haven’t taken

advantage of this vehicle and should, because they only have everything

to gain.

[10:25 a.m.]

A. Weaver: Thank you to the member opposite for her compelling narrative

about the importance of the registered disability savings

plan.

Unlike some other provinces, the province of British Columbia does

not actually protect RDSPs from creditors. It’s something that I think

we could expand upon — the leadership that British Columbia has shown.

Twice over the last couple of years, I brought in a bill to ensure that

RDSPs, like RESPs and RRSPs and RIFs, are protected from creditors. It’s

the case where, through no fault of their own, somebody who is relying

upon an RDSP, perhaps once their parents pass away, can have that taken

from them because it can be accessed by creditors.

Now, the reason why that occurs is nothing more than for

historical reasons. The RDSP is a relatively new tool. It was predated

before that by the RESP and the RRSP. While we have no problem in

British Columbia and Canada, that’s why protecting RRSPs and RESPs in

some provinces — certainly RRSPs and RIFs…. The RSDP is not protected.

There’s a national organization, whose name slips me at this moment, who

has been pushing for this provincewide. Some jurisdictions, like

Alberta, are taking a proactive response here.

I completely agree with the member opposite about the importance

of RDSPs, allowing people to put aside some resources in case they need

to be accessed sometime in the future. Fundamentally, those resources

should be used for the purposes that they’re used, and they should not

be used in terms of creditors potentially having access to

them.

The analogy with RESPs is direct. A child may have an RESP.

Through no fault of their own, they might get into financial difficulty.

In B.C., RESPs are not protected either. What can happen, then, is

creditors can go after those designed specifically for the education of

a child down the road. In the case of the disability plan, it’s

analogous.

As we move forward, in light of the presence of the new government

here, I hope that we can actually work across party lines to build the

support for RDSPs that we’ve just heard, in terms of why they’re so

important, to build support from all parties to bring credit protection

for those in British Columbia blessed to have an RDSP so that they are

protected not only for today but also for tomorrow. They’re there for a

specific reason.

With that, I thank the member opposite for her comments. I agree

wholeheartedly with her comments, and I hope that we can take that to

the next level and protect RDSPs for present and future and

generations.

S. Cadieux: Thank you to the member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head for his comments.

There are probably, I would say, few things that we have been in

agreement on in recent days. Yet, like the member’s desire to see us

work towards basic income pilots, which I agree with him on, I certainly

agree with him on the need to look to expand creditor protection for

RDSPs. These are, in my mind, no-brainers as we look to modernize and

ensure that all of our citizens engage fully in their economic

citizenship as well as their social citizenship.

The reality is that the RDSP is such a significant tool for

long-term financial security. Someone saving $1,500 a year over 30 years

could find their RDSP worth nearly half a million dollars. An RDSP

allows you to save money for the future without paying tax on the

earnings, and I can think of no other program where the federal

government will contribute as much as $90,000 to an individual’s

account.

It’s true for many people with disabilities who rely on government

benefits that saving even a small amount can be too challenging, but it

doesn’t mean that you can’t have an RDSP and benefit from the tax-free

savings vehicle and the government’s contributions and the compounding

interest. And compounding interest is just a beautiful thing.

[10:30 a.m.]

In fact, the reality is that this vehicle is extra beneficial, in

that anyone can contribute to an individual’s RDSP. Family, friends,

neighbours, charities, foundations and organizations can all contribute

dollars to an individual’s RDSP. The federal government encourages these

contributions by matching each dollar contributed with up to $3,

depending on the RDSP owner’s annual income.

This is an opportunity for us, as elected members, to use the

platforms provided to us to amplify the message, to use our voices and

our collective non-partisan voices to do our best to ensure that people

with disabilities in our communities are aware of the RDSP and, for

those who need it, that they’re aware of the grants available through

endowment 150.

In case there’s any doubt from members in this House on who is

eligible for an RDSP, it’s people who are eligible for the disability

tax credit federally, who are under the age of 60 and who are Canadian

residents with a social insurance number. So it’s relatively easy for a

person with a disability to qualify.

If people have any questions at all, in October 2014, the

provincial government created the RDSP action group. Their goal is to

maintain B.C.’s position as the province with the highest per-capita

uptake of RDSPs. They have a toll-free hotline and step-by-step guides

to help people plan and even a dedicated website.

This will truly be a step forward in the journey to full inclusion

for financial security for people with disabilities. It’s now up to

people with disabilities and their allies to take the fullest

advantage.

GLOBAL WARMING

R. Glumac: Global warming and climate change. There is no issue that will

affect more people on this planet in our lifetimes. We spend a lot of

time talking in the House. We talk about the bills that we’re bringing

forward. We talk about the challenges that we face, but we don’t spend

enough time here in the House putting our thoughts and our words to the

most important problem that humanity faces.

We know about climate change, but we can’t see it until we see the

disasters — the wildfires that burn out of control, the storms and the

floods that destroy lives and communities. These disasters are happening

with increased frequency but, apparently, not frequently enough for us

to collectively and globally put forward the resources that are needed

to deal with this problem.

So today I’m going to take us all on a little journey of what our

future looks like here in B.C. according to the latest projections, if

we don’t take action. The year is 2050. The temperature outside is warm.

In fact, it’s warm almost every day. More than half of the days of the

year, the temperature reaches 18 degrees Celsius. Today that happens 49

days of the year on average. The air conditioner is probably on, and the

average energy needed to cool your home is six times greater than it was

in 2017.

If it’s a nice day, you can go to the beach, but the beach might

not be there — eroded away by rising oceans or more frequent storms. If

you look up to the mountains, you may not see any snow. The average

snowpack in the summer will be 11 centimetres, compared to 73

centimetres today. This, of course, will mean less water for our rivers

and streams.

Our wild salmon may find that when they return to the rivers, the

rivers are too low and too warm, making it harder and harder to sustain

salmon populations with each passing year. And the low flow in our

rivers and streams means less water replenishing our reservoirs in the

spring and the summer — less drinking water and less ability for the

dams to store energy.

Yet in the fall, there’s 30 percent more rain than we see today.

And when it rains, it rains a lot harder. The wettest days can be 60

percent more wet, which can mean a lot more flooding. In order to

protect against the flooding, we’ll need to have spent at least $10

billion to upgrade the dikes in Metro Vancouver alone — a heavy cost to

the taxpayer but a fraction of what it would cost if we had a major

flood.

[10:35 a.m.]

Today we have rare flood events, one-in-500-year events, but these

events will happen much more frequently in 2050, with more probability.

If it does occur, it could cause $20 billion worth of damages to homes,

businesses, public infrastructure and interruption of cargo shipments.

Although there’s more rain in the fall, there’s less in the summer — 20

percent less than today — and the dry spells will be 20 percent longer.

This will make things harder, in many ways, for B.C. farmers. Although

the growing season is longer, more droughts will mean lower crop yields,

and warmer winters mean more pests will survive. Of course, there are

going to be more wildfires.

As you know, this year the provincial government spent more than

$500 million combating wildfires that burned 1.2 million hectares of

land. Insured damages topped $127 million, and 50,000 people were forced

out of their homes.

In 2050, the fires will be bigger. They’ll be more expensive to

fight, and the damages will be more costly. Insurance costs have been

based on historic patterns. All of this is going to be thrown on its

head. Increasing severity of extreme events will increase insurance

costs to homeowners, business owners, farmers and many others. Insurable

damages across the country last year for wildfires, floods and severe

weather reached almost $5 billion. This cost will keep rising

exponentially.

Back in the ’70s, the federal government spent $40 million on

disaster relief. Recent numbers hit $1.4 billion. Just imagine what the

costs will be in 2050 if we don’t act today.

This is just a little snapshot of what life will be like in B.C.

in 2050, and life in many other places in the world will be much worse.

We have to act. All of us — in every part of the world, in every level

of government, in every business from small to large — need to take

action. We can’t wait any longer.

J. Johal: It’s an honour today to speak about global climate change. There

are many important issues discussed and debated in this great House, but

in a global context, climate change truly is the greatest challenge of

the century.

As the member across had mentioned, one only has to look back to

this summer and see the devastating impacts of the wildfires or watch

and read about the tropical storms and their impacts on the United

States. It is fair to say there is a growing consensus that climate

change is a clear and present danger to humanity.

The numbers are quite striking. In the northern hemisphere, the

last 30 years have been the warmest since Anglo-Saxon times. Atmospheric

concentrations of greenhouse gases are at levels not seen in 800,000

years, and the rate of sea level rise is quicker now than at any time

over the last two millennia. Since the 1980s, the number of registered

weather-related loss events has tripled, and inflation-adjusted

insurance losses from these events have increased from an annual average

of around $10 billion in the 1980s to around $50 billion over the past

decade.

The evidence is quite clear: human activity and consumption are

most likely the main drivers of global climate change. A human-induced

warming trend of two-tenths of a degree per decade has continued since

the 1970s. The evidence is clear, so we must play our part and be a part

of the solution.

I’m proud British Columbia is one of the few jurisdictions,

globally, that introduced a carbon tax many years ago. We’re also a

province, thanks to the leadership of W.A.C. Bennett, that built a

network of hydroelectric dams that provide clean energy to our vast

province. It’s bold thinking that required leaders to look beyond

traditional horizons. It meant looking beyond a business cycle or even a

political cycle.

Fighting climate change means British Columbia has to play its

part, but we must also remind ourselves, it has to done in the context

of other global players and the impact it will have on B.C.

families.

Removing the revenue neutrality for the carbon tax is a move that

we believe will harm B.C. business and consumers. The previous system

saw our carbon tax revenue returned to business and individuals to

reduce their tax burdens. This meant that carbon was being taxed, not

economic growth. Our revenue-neutral carbon tax required any increase to

be offset by a reduction in personal and business taxes. It was not a

tax grab.

[10:40 a.m.]

This increase will take an estimated $500 million out of the

pockets of taxpayers over the next three years, which hardly makes life

more affordable. We must understand the fight against climate change has

to be seen within a global context. B.C. taxpayers and businesses, being

one of the few jurisdictions in the world that pay a carbon tax, cannot

shoulder the financial responsibility alone.

When we discuss energy transition, we must take a few things into

consideration beyond our borders as well. First, the world population

will grow. There are currently over seven billion people on the planet,

and the UN expects that number to exceed 11 billion by the end of the

century. Secondly, all those people will seek to improve their living

standard. That could mean a first car, or it could mean a first

lightbulb. All of it will involve the consumption of energy.

When you combine these two factors, it makes it likely that the

transition will take place against the backdrop of an energy system that

is doubling in size. That leads to the third founding fact. The world is

going to have to meet much more demand while significantly reducing

greenhouse gas emissions.

The challenge would be complicated enough if only those three

factors were at play. But there is more to it. The population of Asia,

for example, is predicted to rise 900 million by 2050, with its energy

demand increased by around half.

Now, when you dig into the numbers a little deeper — the UN

projections, if you look though them — another thing that hits you

quickly is that 3.2 billion of the 3.8 billion extra people we can

expect on this planet by the end of the century will be in Africa, with

the vast majority in sub-Saharan Africa. That has big implications for

the energy system and for emissions too.

None of that lets Canada and the developed world off the hook over

climate change. What happens in B.C. is important. But what happens in

China and India, home to nearly 40 percent of humanity, is at least as

important. These fundamental global facts mean that simple solutions and

slogans are not good enough.

There is no doubt wind and solar are being added to the world’s

energy system. Growth of renewable energy has been explosive, and that

is great news for humanity. We must remind ourselves that “modern

renewables…are growing from a tiny base and are often less dependable

than dirtier power generators that do not rely on the weather.” Wind and

solar power accounted for just “4.4 percent of global electricity in

2015, and big battery systems can only store enough power to satisfy a

few seconds of global electricity demand,” says the International Energy

Agency. Electric vehicles last year were just 0.9 percent of all

vehicles sold.

There are, however, many bright spots globally when it comes it

comes to the emerging energy transition.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Johal: Wrap up?

Deputy Speaker: Take a seat.

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you. We understand that.

R. Glumac: Climate change will result in water shortages; food shortages;

severe droughts; acidification of our oceans; melting of our polar ice

caps; increased frequency of severe storms, flooding and wildfires; the

collapse of long-stable ecosystems; and massive migrations of people. So

what are we going to do about it?

The previous government convened a team of experts in 2015 to

answer that question and came up with 32 recommendations, which

established greenhouse gas reduction targets and expansion of B.C.’s

carbon tax and numerous recommendations for industry, transportation,

buildings and communities. But the recommendations were not followed.

Instead, the recommendations were rewritten, in Calgary, with

representatives from the oil and gas industry.

Seven of the original members of the climate leadership team wrote

a letter expressing concern over the lack of action. They

wrote:

“B.C. is in no position to delay or scale back its efforts. The rest

of Canada and the rest of the world have been taking action since B.C.’s

initial climate plan in 2008, and B.C.’s increasing carbon pollution is

taking us in the wrong direction.

“The climate leadership team recommendations implemented in their

entirety provide the blueprint for a B.C. climate plan to put the

province back on track for the 2050 and interim 2030 targets. Anything

less is not climate leadership.”

[10:45 a.m.]

Last week this government followed through on its promise to renew

the climate leadership team within the first 100 days of being in

government and created the Climate Solutions and Clean Growth Advisory

Council, with a mandate to provide advice on implementing the 32

recommendations of the previous climate leadership team and further

advise government on how to do this while growing a sustainable economy

and creating jobs.

Climate action and job creation go together, hand in hand. B.C. is

poised to be a leader in climate action once again. And maybe, in 2050,

things will be just a little bit cooler.

SMALL BUSINESS AND RURAL RECOVERY

C. Oakes: It is an honour for me to talk today about small business

recovery.

As many British Columbians are all too familiar, this summer we

experienced the worst ever wildfire in our province’s history. In

addition, many of these areas also experienced floods and slides. People

in my riding of Cariboo North and the neighbouring ridings of

Cariboo-Chilcotin and Fraser-Nicola have been hit the hardest. Some

people were wiped out completely. Many more lost their homes and their

livelihoods. The trauma has inflicted long-lasting economic damage,

especially to small businesses.

In many instances, we’re talking about those who rely on the

summer for the lion’s share of their annual revenues. This is especially

critical for our tourism sector, where fear and misrepresentations

harmed the tourism sector right across this province. Even those areas

that were not affected in the fire zone experienced challenges. An early

estimation of cost on the tourism sector is $23 million in the first

five weeks. I will go into a little bit more detail later.

In order to assess the needs in Cariboo North, I held a listening

forum at the Quesnel seniors centre to learn what people need most. My

purpose was to meet with people that work in all of the vital sectors

like agriculture, forestry, mining, tourism, retail and small business

in general. In follow up, I know that my colleagues from these areas,

MLAs, and folks from our areas have had the opportunity to speak with

many others.

I think it’s best for me to share, perhaps, some of the stories

that we have heard from our small business sectors to help us understand

the steps that we need to take in order to support these small

businesses. The first story is from a rafting company.

“2017 was a year beyond what anyone could have imagined, starting

off with an amazing June and with more multi-day bookings throughout the

summer than we have ever had. We were confidently looking forward to our

best season yet. Then a few things out of our control happened, starting

off with the washout on Highway 20, which completely cut off our access

to the Chilcotin River and caused many cancellations, as well as much

hard work on the backs of the tourism sector, the Cariboo-Chilcotin

Coast Tourism Association, local and provincial governments to get the

message out that we were still open for business. We just had to shift

our operations temporarily.”

Within days of Highway 20 reopening, the wildfires began. The fire

weather conditions meant that the fires grew quickly and with extreme

intensity to a large size. Again, the cancellations poured in. Within a

few days, it was apparent that the weather wasn’t going to change soon

enough to allow these fires to be manageable.

Between the highway closures, both Highway 97 and 20, and

evacuations of the communities that approximately 60 to 70 percent of

their clients are from, their business was severely impacted — 70 to 75

percent of revenue lost and significant business impact.

This, of course, has trickle-down effects due to approximately

$70,000 to $80,000 per year that their business spends regularly at

other local businesses. Uninsurable loss, access cut off, as well as

tenured areas damaged by the fire. These areas of Crown land are unable

to be insured.

[10:50 a.m.]

Businesses themselves that were not evacuated were not able to go

through…. They were also uninsurable. These were completely out of these

business’s control. Long tenure timelines, as well, for these businesses

— over one year for an amendment to be processed, due to heavy workloads

of the land office — and tenured areas severely damaged.

Another business, Stewart Fraser, a local guide and outfitter who

had significant loss on their property, as well, due to the wildfires.

Trappers who had had 60 to 70 percent of their tenure affected by the

wildfires. A local farmer who contacted us because he has a private

power pole but still is without electricity, because in order for hydro

to go in, the danger trees must be removed. The costs of removing these

dangerous trees often are falling on the private small

business.

These are the effects that small businesses are currently dealing

with in our riding and in ridings around the region. They’re concerns

that are important that we find an opportunity to address. I share these

personal stories because it reminds us that the economic support that we

require in the region needs to be developed with an individual in mind.

It is important that the types of programs that are developed from the

ground up need to address the very significant day-to-day operations of

our small business.

An initial survey estimates that $23 million in lost business

occurred in the first five weeks after the fires. Roofed accommodations,

hotels, motels, bed-and-breakfasts, campgrounds, RV parks, dining and

food service businesses, attractions, tours, festivals and events

throughout the region were all affected. These numbers, cautiously, are

just the first ones in.

As we move forward, we need to make sure that as we work with the

communities…. We need programs like loan support, diversification tools,

procurement support for small business, capacity support for

organizations that work on the ground — like Community Futures, which

does business support — financing support, training, access to

employees. There is other work to be done, like manuals for fire

evacuation, evacuation for agricultural areas, funding for people who’ll

have to diversify, compensation for individuals without insurance and

who lost properties and structures. There’s so much more to

do.

J. Rice: Thank you to the member for Cariboo North for relaying the

experiences of her constituents. She shared two stories, but in fact,

there are many more stories of people impacted all across the province.

I think she’s been a great advocate for her community and for small

businesses in the Interior. I’d also like to acknowledge the members for

Cariboo-Chilcotin and Fraser-Nicola. They have been truly representing

their constituents’ voices and explaining the often dire situation that

people impacted by wildfires have faced this season.

As you know, it’s been an extraordinary fire season. We’ve seen

more evacuees. We’ve had the longest state of emergency in provincial

history. We had over 65,000 people displaced by wildfire alone, compared

to the 2003 wildfire season, where we had 45,000 people displaced.

Thousands more — over 2,000, 2,500 people — were displaced due to

flooding earlier in the season.

It’s been an extraordinary season in its length, in its intensity

and widespread impacts compared to 2003. In 2003, for example, we lost

about 260,000 hectares, while this year alone, this summer, we lost 1.2

million hectares to fire. The last provincial state of emergency lasted

43 days or about six weeks. This year, starting on July 7, we had a

state of emergency for over 70 days. It was ten weeks long. In April,

emergency management B.C. paid out over $3 million to emergency social

services, to the voucher program. That’s only the numbers till

April.

[10:55 a.m.]

Normally, the processing of these forms is handled by one

employee. This year alone we had to get in at least 16 and then further

employees to manage just the input from this wildfire season.

As a province, we are grateful for all the contractors and the

local businesses and the important job that they had to play in this

wildfire season. It’s estimated that about 800 contractors provided

services during the wildfires.

I just want to acknowledge that we have a plan for rural

development in the longer term. We’ve put in resources now in the short

term. We’ve been gathering the input from local governments and from

businesses and from individuals, and we are working now on a longer-term

strategy.

We’ve actually seen a decline in jobs in small communities since

2008. In growth, last year alone we saw jobs growing in Vancouver, Lower

Mainland and Victoria. But we’ve seen a decline in rural areas. Rural

areas are already facing the impacts, and then to be compounded with

this year’s wildfire season, it is a huge challenge. The Ministry of

Forests, Lands and Natural Resources now has the words “rural

development” in its name, and it’s there for a reason. The plan is to

have a long-term plan.

The member talked about her listening forum in Quesnel, and I hope

that she takes the feedback that she’s had and brings that back into the

broader provincial consultations that are just starting now with EMBC

and with the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources so that we

can be better prepared for next year’s fire season.

The member before her spoke about global warming and climate

change. The wildfires are an inevitability that we must cope with, adapt

for and mitigate to the best of our abilities. Her feedback, the

feedback that she’s gathering, is tantamount to the process, and I

really hope that she contributes the feedback.

C. Oakes: I want to thank the member opposite for her comments today and for

her support. We’ve had a number of conversations, and I appreciate

that.

I do want to talk a little bit about the plan for rural

development and the long-term strategy, as well as the comments around

the broader consultation. It is my hope that the members in opposition

have the ability to be a part of the consultation. As it stands right

now, it’s led by local communities and local government agencies. The

MLAs, to this point, have not had the ability to participate, and I

think our offices have very valuable input, from what we are hearing

from our constituents.

I also raise the small business recovery, because the first thing

I know is that our small business community is incredibly resilient. I

know they that will be strong leaders as we look to economic recovery in

our region.

The challenge that we face, as we’ve gone through the estimates

in, now, a variety, whether it was Agriculture; Forests, Lands, Natural

Resources, rural economic development…. We’ve gone through Finance.

We’ve gone through all of the estimates, and we’ve asked, specifically,

the dollar amount, just how much is actually in place right now for this

rural economic development plan.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Currently the task at hand is looking at next year’s budget cycle.

We need to find other opportunities, other programs that currently exist

within government to help support small business recovery now. We need

to look at ways where we have programs, where we can diversify those

programs to allow small business to have access into them.

Many of the programs we have, while local governments can apply

for funds, while organizations can apply for funds, while First Nations

can apply for funds — the current gap that we have in the framework for

small business support is that there is no framework currently in

existence with the government to look at how small business can help

access funds.

For example, we have about 150 placer miners in our region who can

only work for about five months of the year, due to weather conditions

and freshets. Most placer miners lost their entire season, yet they

still have bills to pay. They depend on the Ministry of Forests, Lands

and Natural Resources to facilitate permits in their operations. Yet, of

course, ministry staff had to be pulled away, understandably, from the

regular duties due to the wildfires. This will issue in the delaying of

issuing permits.

[11:00 a.m.]

Permits are critical for most of the small businesses that exist

in our sector. We heard, through estimates of Forests, Lands and Natural

Resources, that there will be no additional staff to support this. This

is going to have significant impact on a variety of small businesses in

our sector.

We talked about trappers. Some of the other areas…. For example,

Horsting’s Farm normally has 400 to 500 visits a day. This year they saw

ten to 15 cars.

Hon. Speaker, much more work to be done, much more work to support

our small businesses. They are a resilient bunch. We just require a

little support for our small businesses.

Hon. M. Mungall: I call Motion 11, which is on the orders of the day.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to

proceed with Motion 11 without disturbing the priorities of the motions

preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 11 — MONEY LAUNDERING

CASINOS

R. Singh: It is my honour to move:

[Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly urge the government to

take seriously the allegations of money laundering in casinos.]

Since the release of an MNP report by the Attorney General last

month, we have seen that the previous Liberal government was not taking

the issue of money laundering seriously and was allowing warning after

warning to go unheeded. The early warning was made in 2009 in an RCMP

report on money laundering, which was titled Extent and Scope of

Illegal Gaming in British Columbia and was prepared for the

integrated illegal gaming enforcement team, IIGET for short.

“A

section of the report says that Canadian casinos are at high risk

for money laundering, and ‘the integrity of gaming in B.C. could also be

impacted by the presence of influence of organized crime figures at B.C.

gaming facilities.’

“The 2009 threat report said known gangsters were gambling in B.C.

casinos and that Asian organized crime groups, Italian crime groups and

Hell’s Angels operate illegal casinos in B.C. Some of these underground

operations are linked to crimes, including prostitution, extortion,

loansharking and kidnapping.

“The 2009 report made a number of recommendations, including ‘that

IIGET be the central repository for all gaming-related criminal

information.’

“The report also said that IIGET should take a leadership role to

combat organized crime in gambling, similar to the role played by the

Ontario Provincial Police’s organized gambling unit.

“In April 2009, then B.C. gaming minister Rich Coleman,” now member

for Langley East….

Deputy Speaker: Member, only refer to members by their constituency

names.

R. Singh: Okay. The member for Langley East “shut IIGET down” right after

the team had issued such an important warning about the threat of

organized crime. Following the disbanding of IIGET in 2009, the retired

commander of the force, Fred Pinnock, went public with the concerns over

the decision and the leadership within the RCMP and government. Over the

following years, Pinnock’s warnings were proven time and time

again.

In 2010, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of

Canada fined BCLC $650,000 for a persistent chronic failure to comply

with the law regarding the requirements to report large money

transactions. In 2014, it was reported that, over three months, $27

million worth of suspicious cash transactions went through two Lower

Mainland casinos.

The B.C. government has committed to get to the bottom of this

matter, and the Attorney General has appointed an independent expert to

conduct a review of British Columbia’s anti-money-laundering policies

and practices in gambling.

[11:05 a.m.]

A. Wilkinson: This, of course, is a very important issue for all of us to be

aware of because it affects the widespread role in our society of both

gaming, which has become the norm, and also the ability or the

possibility for money laundering to occur in our society, which is

something that we have to be very vigilant about.

Most of us will remember that gaming was illegal in this country

until about 1976. Some of us are old enough to remember people

celebrating winning the Irish sweepstakes because they’d bought a

lottery ticket from Ireland. In 1976, to pay for the Olympics, the

phenomenon of lotteries was legalized across Canada. Subsequently,

people realized that we were letting an awful lot of revenue travel to

Las Vegas and Reno rather than being invested here in Canada. As gaming

developed over those decades, then gaming became a structured part of

our society.

Of course, here in British Columbia, it is very tightly regulated,

and it is an industry that has grown up to be, really, part of the

fabric of our society. We’re glad, of course, that people enjoy gaming

and spend their money here rather than in the United States. That whole

business of the free bus service down to the Tulalip Casino seems to

have disappeared because we did a better job of running the industry

here than they did in Washington state.

As we have watched the emergence of this industry, there’s

obviously concern about this possibility of money laundering. These

stories in the media are largely based on work that’s been done by the

authorities in the past, and we, of course, have to have faith in the

ability of our authorities to address these questions.

It’s dealt with by national bodies such as FINTRAC, and we’ll come

back to the jurisdiction of this, which is largely federal. It’s done by

local law enforcement agencies, which are largely administered by the

RCMP, and it’s done by the gaming policy and enforcement branch here in

the government of British Columbia.

The history of this has evolved. In 2009, the integrated illegal

gaming enforcement team was actually disbanded on the advice of a study

that was done that found it was an inefficient allocation of resources.

It was disbanded by the agreement of the board of directors, which

included a number of chiefs of police and representatives from the

provincial police services branch.

These things have to evolve. They cannot remain static. The

perpetrators who are trying to engage in money laundering continue to

evolve around us, and we have to catch up with their

activities.

There has been ongoing investigation related to these issues. Of

course, the release of information to the public could have and may have

jeopardized investigations, which none of us want to see happen. It’s

very important these investigations be allowed to unfold in the normal

fashion, without political interference. So our role in this is, of

course, as the opposition, to make sure that the government is taking

this matter seriously and that these investigations are allowed to

proceed without undue influence.

Now, the company involved, Great Canadian Gaming, which is the

subject of the media reports, has been around since 1982 and has about

6,000 employees across Canada. They, of course, are cooperating in any

investigation because it’s in their interest to maintain their

credibility both as an entertainment industry and also with the

authorities in our country so that they can continue to operate without

undue hindrance. At the same time, they have a great interest in

catching the perpetrators. They, of course, do not want to be involved

in any kind of crime, whether it’s organized crime or not.

The anti-money-laundering protocols are set out in federal

legislation. They are actually a result of the federal Proceeds of Crime

(Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, which is administered

federally. A significant part of that regime is FINTRAC, which is also

federally regulated. Those of us who have been in legal practice have

abundant experience with FINTRAC and the role it plays in monitoring the

flow of significant amounts of money both in and out of Canada and

within Canada in certain circumstances.

The compliance of FINTRAC is a federal phenomenon. When issues

arise, whether in the gaming industry or otherwise, they have to be

pursued by the appropriate level of authorities. That, in general, in

this country, is the RCMP. They take on this role in conjunction with

the gaming industry itself.

River Rock is subject to about 25 compliance reviews per year by

the B.C. Lottery Corporation gaming compliance officers. FINTRAC, of

course, has its own audit regime. What the gaming industry does is feed

them information. They’re required to collect and retain information and

to feed it to the authorities, and the authorities have to process it

and decide what to do in terms of pursuing investigations and,

potentially, prosecutions.

The gaming industry itself is hardly in the business to prosecute

anybody. That’s up to the authorities. What they do is provide data and

evidence to the authorities, who have to process it in a sensible way so

that the appropriate kind of investigation is conducted and, where

appropriate, charges are laid. Now, those transactions pile up in terms

of the data set and the evidence that’s provided to the B.C. Lottery

Corporation. Then it provides an independent assessment of whether to

proceed with any further investigation or any prosecution.

[11:10 a.m.]

The Attorney General recently released a report commissioned by

the gaming policy and enforcement branch that is now two years old.

Since that time, there has been significant activity in terms of

pursuing the issue, collecting evidence and pursuing the possibility of

prosecutions.

B. D’Eith: I’m going to talk a little bit about public safety and the issue

of money laundering. On September 22, 2017, more than a year after the

report about possible money laundering at Richmond’s River Rock Casino

was delivered to the Christy Clark government, the Attorney General

released the MNP British Columbia Gaming Policy and Enforcement

Branch: AML Report , dated July 26, 2016, which I’ll refer to as

“the report.”

This report and its troubling findings were buried by the previous

government. Quite frankly, the suggestion from the member for

Vancouver-Quilchena that it was simply because of not wanting to

interfere with or jeopardize the investigation is just weak.

The report set out a number of findings that show that the public

was put at risk. The report says: “Reasonable grounds to suspect money

laundering activity through the use of unsourced funds has been

confirmed by the service providers and BCLC through the EDD processes.

Interviews have confirmed that players are indeed wealthy non-residents,

or business persons with interests both in Vancouver and China, coming

to Vancouver to gamble.”

It also says, “River Rock staffs have fostered a culture of

accepting large bulk cash transactions” and that “the use of possible

underground banking operations using large volumes of unsourced cash

have become increasingly common and accepted as a convenient feature for

VIP players who may not be able to send funds to Canada due to currency

restrictions in their own country.” And finally, that “BCLC’s current

systems and technology do not allow for analytics or system alerts for

activity which is deemed to be suspicious or excessive.”

The previous government’s inaction on this file is unconscionable,

given that they’ve been aware for years that known organized crime

figures are gambling in B.C. casinos — something that raises serious

public safety concerns.

Paul King Jin, a 50-year-old spa owner who resides in Richmond, is

the heart of the controversy. Postmedia News alleges that his associates

used an illegal money transfer business in Richmond to lend suspected

drug dealer cash to high-roller Chinese gamblers recruited from Macau,

who — with troubling ease — used massive wads of small cash bills to buy

chips at River Rock Casino. The network is suspected of including over

500 accounts.

There are also allegations that this money laundering is also tied

to the distribution of fentanyl. These underground finances are

suspected of being connected to international drug dealers. From January

to August 2017, fentanyl was detected in approximately 81 percent of

illicit drug overdoses.

If the money-laundering scam is linked to the international drug

trade, then the previous government’s failure to act on the findings and

recommendations of the report could be seen as not only allowing our

publicly administered casinos to launder drug money but also allowing

the drug trade in fentanyl to continue and flourish in British Columbia,

and that puts B.C. lives at risk.

The Attorney General has moved quickly to appoint Peter German to

investigate this matter. But while casinos, through their association,

took steps to tighten their own security and procedures, the previous

government did not act on the recommendations of the report.

Why didn’t the previous government act? Is it because B.C. casinos

bring millions of dollars into the government coffers? Was the

government willing to turn a blind eye to public safety in order to help

to balance the books? Perhaps was the previous government not wanting to

rock the boat with wealthy non-residents spending money in our province,

buying our real estate? Or was it that the government didn’t want an

embarrassing scandal to come out before the provincial

election?

Maybe there are reasons that we have yet to learn, but I can’t

find any reasonable excuse for ignoring the report and not acting on it.

The previous government had a duty to act to protect public safety and

chose not to act. That’s not acceptable in anyone’s books.

G. Kyllo: It’s my pleasure to rise in the House today on behalf of the

hard-working constituents of Shuswap. Money laundering is a serious

criminal offence, one that should be non-partisan. I think we can all

agree that countless British Columbians from all corners of our province

work hard day in, day out to earn their pay.

[11:15 a.m.]

Anyone who circumvents the law in order to obtain money through

illegal means should not be allowed to use that money, let alone to

filter it through legitimate businesses like our B.C. casinos. To ensure

that money laundering isn’t a problem in our province requires

appropriate action, not only from law enforcement officials but action

from members of this House.

As representatives, we’re all elected to create legislation that

accurately reflects the core values of our constituents and work to

ensure that we are improving the lives of British Columbians. With that

being said, our job is not to intervene and demand answers from law

enforcement officials but to take information that they provide and use

their knowledge to inform and create legislation that protects the

public and allows law enforcement officials the necessary means to carry

out their duties. When we step outside of the boundaries of our publicly

elected duties and release information about ongoing investigations, we

run the risk of jeopardizing investigations in their

entirety.

Recently there’s been a slew of stories in the media regarding

foreign nationals making large cash transactions in casinos using funds

from unknown sources. Given the sensationalism of the stories, the large

amounts and the ambiguity surrounding the source of these individual

incomes, it is easy for outsiders to draw conclusions. However, these

stories in the media are based on work currently being done by the

authorities. We need to have faith in their abilities to handle criminal

investigations without political input or interference.

Any input or disclosure of an ongoing investigation could not only

create a public prejudice but also could influence the investigation in

a negative way. Giving criminals any knowledge of the depth or speed at

which an investigation is proceeding could provide them an advantage to

stay ahead of law enforcement officials.

Officials are still actively investigating money laundering

through our casinos, and releasing information to the public could have

and still might jeopardize the very investigations that those are

working on closely.

As members of this House, it is our job to trust the judgment of

the professionals that are currently working on this file. These are

sophisticated criminals, and I know that the RCMP are working as hard as

they can. I am confident that our law enforcement officers will get to

the bottom of this in a timely and appropriate manner.

M. Dean: Gambling establishments have been operating in B.C. for many

decades. Gambling in British Columbia is a source of entertainment for

adults, a revenue driver for the province and an attraction for

tourists. There are thousands of British Columbians employed in this

industry, and it also contributes to local economies.

For example, there is a casino in View Royal, in my constituency.

The company that operates this reports that 141 local vendors are used,

with $9.4 million spent in the local economy. The View Royal Casino

supports a number of local municipalities. They disbursed $4.1 million

in gaming revenues in 2015-16 and contributed $320,000 to View Royal in

municipal taxes.

On the occasions that I’ve had to visit and tour our local casino,

I’ve actually learned how it’s a major social hub for many seniors from

our community. During the day, they’re the most frequent customers. They

spend very little money, spending time mixing socially with their

friends and acquaintances.

The casino is often used for community or business events, and

it’s expanding. It’s going to actually build an entertainment venue for

the region. However, unregulated or under-regulated gambling or

inadequate compliance can lead to problems with organized crime, fraud,

violence and addiction. These are problems that no community wants to or

should have to deal with.

The NDP has been warning about the danger of money laundering in

casinos for years. We raised it six times here in this House. Now in

government, we have taken real action to address this problem. July 18,

2017, gaming moved from Finance to the Attorney General’s ministry to

remove the conflict of interest between revenue and enforcement and

problem gambling. September 28, 2017, the Attorney General released a

July 2016 report, which the B.C. Liberals sat on, and appointed an

independent expert to conduct a review of British Columbia’s

anti-money-laundering policies and practices in the gambling

industry.

[11:20 a.m.]

I’m very pleased to see that Attorney General David Eby has done

this. “We’re going to make sure the gaming policies and procedures that

protect the interests of British Columbians are in place and are being

followed,” the Attorney General said. “There are concerns about money

laundering that have been growing for years. Our government is taking

action to deal with them quickly and thoroughly.”

The Attorney General has asked lawyer Peter German, a former

deputy commissioner of both the RCMP and Correctional Service of Canada

and the author of Canada’s leading anti-money-laundering law textbook,

to conduct an independent review and make recommendations, if necessary,

for reform. He’s asked German to determine whether there’s an

unaddressed or inadequately addressed issue of money laundering in

casinos and the history, nature and extent of any of these issues that

he finds.

As part of the review, German will meet with government’s gaming

policy and enforcement branch, the B.C. Lottery Corporation, the Joint

Illegal Gaming Investigation Team within British Columbia’s Combined

Forces Special Enforcement Unit, casino service providers and employee

organizations at any identified facilities, as well as with any other

parties who would like to assist. He’s also been asked to provide advice

to the Attorney General about connections between any identified issues

in other areas of the economy or provincial laws or policies that may

require attention as a result of the information he gathers.

The review will be completed by the end of March 2018, and he’s

been asked to make recommendations to government as they are identified,

rather than waiting for a final report so that any changes can be

implemented in a timely way. I urge the government to take seriously

these concerns and the allegations of laundering and to pursue

appropriate action in the interest of all British Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member. Just a reminder that we only refer to members

by the name of their constituency.

P. Milobar: It’s my pleasure to rise in the House today to speak about this

serious issue. The allegations of money laundering through B.C. casinos

requires action from law enforcement officials and from members of this

House. We take these matters very seriously, as the repercussions of

these investigations will undoubtedly affect the lives of many British

Columbians.

The revenues generated by the B.C. Lottery Corporation provide a

significant percentage of the provincial budget, and these contributions

have provided us with the means to allocate funding for health care,

education, community programs and many other services. The fact is, as

we’ve heard from previous speakers, the evolution of gaming in British

Columbia is long and continues to evolve to this day.

As someone who comes from a city who has the B.C. Lottery’s

headquarters in from day one…. We take gaming very seriously in the

Kamloops region and do realize the benefits it can bring to the province

and the seriousness of what happens as politics get into the play of

gaming.

In order to maintain the integrity of BCLC, it’s important that we

are able to verify that the funds that go through the BCLC, be it

through casinos or other gaming measures, are coming from legitimate

sources. We cannot in good conscience allow the proceeds of criminal

activities to be filtered through any of our gaming products that we

have within the province of British Columbia.

In order to ensure that we are appropriately charging those

responsible and protecting the innocent, law enforcement officials need

to be able to conduct a thorough investigation without outside or

political interference. This is fundamental to any type of investigation

going on within the criminal elements that we see out there, but with

gaming in particular, which we’re talking about today, it’s every bit as

important.

As I’ve mentioned, we’ve seen gaming evolve over time. I can

remember back when I was much younger going into smoke-filled bingo

parlours in Kamloops for hockey fundraising or in Nanaimo for hockey

fundraising in that particular bingo hall, and from there we’ve evolved

where the youth groups no longer have to go in to sell but are still

able to access those funds.

We’ve also seen what happens when there are questionable

activities around gaming and gaming licences with regards to political

interference. It wasn’t that long ago, when you think back to things

happening around bingos or the North Burnaby Inn casino licensing. We

always have to make sure that political interference is not getting in

the way of our gaming rules and our gaming regulations.

That’s where we shouldn’t underestimate the sophistication of

these criminals. They’ve obviously put a lot of work into their

money-laundering operations, and I know the RCMP and other agencies are

working as hard as they can to make sure that if there is wrongdoing

going on, it is being investigated, charges will be brought forward in a

timely fashion and changes will be made.

[11:25 a.m.]

Any input or disclosure of an ongoing investigation, as I said,

not just in gaming but in any style of law enforcement, creates a public

prejudice but also can influence the investigation in a very negative

way. Doing so runs the risk of jeopardizing the investigation in its

entirety, especially in this day and age of legal challenges. By the

time charges get brought forward, sometimes we can see that because of

other political manoeuvring going on, those words then get used against

the government and the Crown when the charges do indeed get brought

forward.

I view a lot of the commentary around money laundering. It’s

troublesome in that respect because I do know many times I would have

constituents come to me and want something done with, say, a particular

drug house in their neighbourhood. You’d have to assure them that the

RCMP are well aware of it, they’re working on it, and you have to be

patient.

It takes a long time to build a criminal case, and their

investigation is ongoing. Usually, once charges were finally brought

forward, the public would find out that half of the traffic or a good

portion of the traffic they saw coming in and out of that drug house was

actually undercover police officers coming in to do a buy to build that

evidence that they need to be able to shut down those types of

operations.

These investigations into money laundering should be taken just as

seriously by both sides of this House and to make sure that the

investigators have that freedom to employ every tool they have possible

to make sure that any wrongdoing is brought to light, as well as making

sure that afterwards we review our policies and our procedures to figure

out how we change them to reflect what is going on in real time as the

sophistication of the criminal keeps expanding.

In short, I think that members of this House are in favour of

making sure that we’re always looking at changing and updating and

making sure things are being done to a very high level. However, we do

have serious apprehensions around doing that in a very public political

realm when it comes to gaming, because as we’ve seen in the past,

political interference is not a good place within gaming.

D. Routley: Let’s be very direct about what’s happening in British Columbia.

Money, drug money, is being laundered through our casinos in hundreds of

millions of dollars. It’s being wired overseas, being used to purchase

drugs in Mexico and Peru. It is actually being wired to Iran where it is

suspected to be funding terrorism links. That is happening in British

Columbia right now, and it has been happening in British Columbia for

the past eight years at least — back before the time the government

decided to disband the original investigative unit. That’s what is

happening in British Columbia.

In an interview with Sean Holman, the person who was in charge of

the file for so many years said, as reason for disbanding the unit:

“Sometimes you pick one and it just doesn’t work.” It never got staffed

up. He cancelled it in a quest, he said, to discover how we could do

things better.

Well, the clear talking points from the government presenters —

the last speaker said it at least seven times — were that there

shouldn’t be political interference in investigations. That’s

hogwash.

What’s happened is there was a political interference that

suspended an investigation. The report that we’re talking about here was

provided by the RCMP to the government with an expectation that

government would take action. What did they do? With a history of

cancelling the investigative unit because there wasn’t funding, on

February 18 in 2009, the RCMP were told that funding pressures and

criminal enterprise activity as well as other operational priorities

wound up cancelling that unit.

Now, this is outrageous. How could anyone having been briefed on

what was happening in our casinos, particularly anyone with policing

experience, then ignore what’s happening? Now as an excuse for turning

the other way, for looking the other way and whistling while this was

going on, the government claims that they didn’t want to interfere in an

investigation.

[11:30 a.m.]

Again, that’s hogwash, and it’s coming directly from the member

who is most involved in this — the member for Langley East, who had the

control over that unit and cancelled it. That member has enough policing

experience, surely, to realize that hundreds of millions of

dollars….

Drug dealers were going to a house in Richmond with duffel bags

full of money. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were then taken directly

into the casinos and loaned to high-roller gamblers who were recruited

from mainland China. These people were gambling $100,000 to $1 million

in a weekend.

That’s the reality of what was happening. How could anyone in the

previous government look the other way while this was happening? This is

outrageous. The people of B.C. finally have a government that’s going to

investigate this and get to the very bottom of what was

happening.

The implications for anyone — anyone — who allowed this to happen,

who knew it was happening and took no action…. That defines the

government’s response to this. That defines the response of the member

for Langley East, who in fact took this file with him through several

ministerships.

I think there are several questions that need to be answered by

the previous government. This investigation will likely show that in one

year alone, this money house wired over $300 million to international

bank accounts in China — over 600 accounts connected and controlled by

that money house. They laundered at least $220 million through the

casinos in that year. One year, over half a billion dollars from one

illegal trade.

This is B.C., beautiful B.C. Has B.C. been made a gangster’s

paradise? We can’t allow this to happen and look the other way. This

government won’t. This government is investigating, and it will be

unafraid in challenging the situation and showing British Columbians

what’s truly happening and showing them how responsible the previous

B.C. Liberal government is for allowing that to prosper.

M. Polak: When you become a government minister, there are many things that

you learn. One of the things I learned very early on was that when you

are a minister in charge of anything regulatory, it’s very important

that you don’t begin forming conclusions based on partial

information.

It also becomes a real challenge, as a minister in charge of some

kind of a regulatory body, when things find their way into the media and

you as minister are not able to discuss matters that are confidential,

that might jeopardize something that is potentially going to be before

the courts or before law enforcement. Great care must be taken. It is

the flip side of the regulatory piece where aggressive action can go on,

but commentary from ministers needs to be very, very careful and

restrained.

In light of the previous speaker, I think it’s important that we

start to piece this together from a basis of fact, and that would be

using the report itself. People have spent a bit of time today talking

about things they have read in the media. That’s all well and good. We

all value good investigative reporting. But in this House, it’s also

important for us to respond based on the facts.

I’m going to quote a couple of pieces from the MNP report. First,

this:

“Although a specific compliance effectiveness review of gaming

operations was not within the scope of this review, MNP did review a

number of processes and did not observe anything material to suggest

that the compliance program in effect at B.C. Lottery Corporation and

River Rock Casino Resort is not functionally suitable to meet

obligations under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and TFA and

implementing regulations.”

Further, it says this:

“This engagement was not designed to, nor does this report provide

any analysis about whether money laundering or terrorist financing is

actually occurring, nor does it provide any analysis about the potential

that money laundering or terrorist financing will occur through the

organization in the future.”

So let’s be very careful that we approach this discussion from

where we are and not leap in a speculative manner beyond what the facts

present at this point.

[11:35 a.m.]

Why is that important? Well, it’s important because the things we

say in this House don’t just have political effect. I mean, often we say

things here for political effect. Question period is all about political

effect. But our words here have an effect on the outside world. Saying

things without proper caution and restraint when it comes to

investigations of this nature can be potentially dangerous.

When I look at our casino operations, I recognize there are two

sides to this coin. There’s the community facility, such as the casino

we have in Langley, Cascades Casino — wonderful place. All manner of

people go there, including my father. My father doesn’t gamble. Why does

he go to the casino? Well, because, as somebody else pointed out,

casinos can often be a place of socializing for people in the

community.

Many seniors go to the casino to do just that. My father found out

early on that they have free coffee that they give out there, so he goes

and has his free coffee and sits and talks with people. And a lot of

seniors do that kind of thing. My own grandparents, back in the day,

used to take the bus trip down to Reno and enjoy themselves at a casino

in Reno.

Then there are those unsavoury characters who will seek to find

any way possible to engage in their nefarious deeds. Here is where we

all, in this House, need to be supporting our law enforcement agencies

and following along with the advice that they give us. We know that the

criminal element, especially when so much money is involved, will

continue to change and shift and evolve their tactics such that they can

elude the arms of law enforcement. They will constantly be doing

that.

That is why our law enforcement agencies, together with the

support of government, need to be doing the same. They need to be

constantly evaluating their effectiveness. They need to be able to shift

in a nimble manner when the technology and the strategies and tactics of

the criminals…. When those change, law enforcement, supported by

government, needs to be able to change too.

That isn’t always suitable for good politics. Sometimes what

happens is that you support the law enforcement agencies to the extent

that they can do their job, and sometimes at the expense of being able

to score a political win. That’s where all of us should be very

careful.

This is a serious matter that we should all be addressing, and I’m

supportive of the motion.

B. Ma: As my colleagues have all eloquently discussed, something smells

rotten in this House, and it’s coming from that side. The recent

investigative journalism by Sam Cooper of the Vancouver Sun has

revealed a deep and dark undercurrent of crime, corruption, money

laundering, mischief and disregard for the law in B.C.’s

casinos.

The more that’s uncovered, the more it appears that despite

knowing exactly what was going on, the former government consistently,

insistently failed to take action, even making decisions that appear to

exacerbate it. There is evidence that the B.C. Liberal government had

been receiving warnings about potential money laundering in B.C.’s

casinos since as early as 2003 yet did nothing about it.

In 2009, the RCMP integrated illegal gaming enforcement team

issued a threat assessment, warning of the potential influence of

organized crime in B.C. Lottery Corporation–regulated casinos. The

report was titled Extent and Scope of Illegal Gaming in British

Columbia, 2005 to 2008 . The enforcement team was asking for an

expanded role to investigate money laundering in casinos.

Instead, the then Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General

of British Columbia of the B.C. Liberal government, currently the member

for Langley East and Leader of the Opposition, disbanded the entire

force. What followed since have been ever-escalating signs of serious

trouble within the B.C. Lottery Corporation.

In 2010, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of

Canada, also known as FINTRAC, fined the B.C. Lottery Corporation for

what they called a “persistent and chronic failure to comply with the

law.” This fine gave the B.C. Lottery Corporation the new-found

notoriety of being the only provincial gambling body to be fined for

failing to report suspicious or large transactions at casinos. But the

current Leader of the Opposition, the then Minister of Public Safety and

Solicitor General, continued to defend the embarrassed Crown

corporation, despite the evidence, saying: “We have a very well-run

company here. They’re doing a good job. Nobody’s done anything

wrong.”

[11:40 a.m.]

The escalation of suspicion peaked in 2015, when the RCMP

investigation into underground banking and alleged laundering of drug

cash revealed suspicions of terrorist financing through British

Columbia’s casinos. Yet the allegations were still not investigated —

not by the current Leader of the Opposition, the then Minister of Public

Safety and Solicitor General, and not by the current Opposition House

Leader, the then Minister of Finance. I guess the laundering of drug

cash and terrorist financing just wasn’t a concern for them.

The member for Esquimalt-Metchosin has outlined, in detail, all

the work that the current government has already undertaken. So in

contrast, our government has been quick to take action. Mere months into

forming government, this government’s Attorney General appointed lawyer

Peter German, a former deputy commissioner of both the RCMP and the

Correctional Service of Canada, as well as the author of Canada’s

leading anti-money-laundering law textbook, to conduct an independent

review and to make recommendations for reform.

This government has done more in its first 100 days to address

money laundering in casinos than what the B.C. Liberals have done in

nearly 14 years. It’s another item on a long list of scandals under the

B.C. Liberal government that has eroded the public’s trust in the

ability of that government to make decisions on behalf of the public

interest.

The people I talk to about this in my community don’t even bat an

eye now at the news of another example of unlawful activity, benefiting

the rich and powerful, being swept under the rug by their government

anymore. The failure of the previous B.C. Liberal government to take

these kinds of matters seriously has undermined the credibility of

governments to behave in the best interests of the public and seriously

damaged public faith in our democratic institutions. This damage will

take years to repair.

Thank goodness we now have a government that is ready to work to

turn the tide to regain the public interest. So I guess it’s not so

critical that the Legislative Assembly urge the government to take

seriously the allegations of money laundering in casinos, because we

already have.

M. Morris: I listened to the discussions here this morning and the members of

government that have been espousing how poorly the police and the

enforcement agencies have been dealing with illegal gaming, with money

laundering, with terrorist activities in the province of British

Columbia.

I find it shameful that they can make these allegations, based on

a newspaper

article that has been recently written, with information

that hasn’t really been verified. I’ve heard them a couple of times

refer to a report from 2000, dealing with intelligence that the RCMP and

the police agencies in British Columbia had with respect to organized

crime and the proliferation of organized crime right across the

province, dealing with money laundering.

Of course, we’ve seen an influx of terrorist activities and the

funding of terrorist activities across Canada and around the world. All

are issues that the RCMP and law enforcement agencies take very

seriously.

They reference some of the changes that were made back in 2009,

with the integrated illegal enforcement team, which they accuse the

member for Langley East of shutting down. I can assure this House, and I

can assure the people of British Columbia, that no minister has the

authority to shut down anything operationally within the police

environment. When I was the Solicitor General, those decisions were made

by the operations within the police services branch, within the

Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia or CFSEU or whatever the

respective unit would be.

It was determined at that time in 2009…. There were a number of

changes that the RCMP and police forces were going through at that

particular time to address the proliferation of organized crime in the

province. That was to develop an organization like the Combined Forces

Special Enforcement Unit–British Columbia, which would target those

prolific organized crime figures to try to put an end to their

activities. They had to take resources out of the existing milieu of

units and whatnot that the RCMP and the various police forces had and

redirect that expertise into the organized crime element.

[11:45 a.m.]

That’s exactly what happened at that particular time. It just so

happened that the member for Langley East at that time, and now our

leader…. He happened to be the Solicitor General, and the decision was

made to go with that.

As the police started focusing on the prolific offenders in

organized crime, organized crime became very much aware, and they

started changing their tactics as well. They’ve become a little bit more

sophisticated. So we see the sophistication of organized crime rising as

the police techniques increase.

That report that was referenced by my colleague a little while

ago, by MNP, basically highlights a concern that was brought to them by

provincial gaming and the concerns that perhaps the RCMP had brought to

their attention as a result of their investigations. I think the

Attorney on the other side probably should reflect a little bit on his

decision to make public some of these issues around illegal gaming and

this particular report. The investigation that was ongoing, and is still

ongoing, at that particular time was international in scope, was very

sensitive and involved a lot of high-level, perhaps undercover,

operations.

I’m just speculating here, but based on my experience as an

investigator in the RCMP and as a senior manager, there are probably all

kinds of techniques — technology that’s been used in this particular

investigation that is sensitive. There are probably people’s lives at

stake, which is very sensitive, depending on the kind of information

that gets released and gets out there.

There’s a lot of speculation taking place right now as a result of

that newspaper

article and as a result of the horrendous things that the

members in government are saying right now that could actually

jeopardize the prosecution of that particular case if and when it ever

gets to that particular stage. The members have to be very cautious and

very careful about what kind of information they put out there, for

political gain or whatever their motivation might be.

It could have a dire effect on the consequences of what could

literally be a multi-million-dollar investigation, and that money would

be all for naught at the end of the day. So I caution the members to be

very careful. I know they’re reading from prepared statements on

information that they’ve been provided to try and make some political

gain, but I caution that.

L. Krog: I’m always delighted to hear the official opposition urge patience

as being such a virtuous activity, when, after 16 years of B.C. Liberal

government, this government has inherited all of their many, many

problems, a myriad of which are coming to light so quickly that one can

barely do a count.

Now, let’s draw us back to what the resolution actually says. “Be

it resolved that the Legislative Assembly urge the government to take

seriously the allegations of money laundering in casinos.” Emphasis on

the word “seriously.” I have heard a litany of excuses this morning

about the possibility of substantive investigations, about being part of

a massive international investigation, all of these things.

I think the member for Langley said it best, though, and she said:

“This is a serious matter.” She is absolutely right. This is a very

serious matter. But it happens to have been a very serious matter for a

long time in British Columbia. You’d have to be a turnip that just

rolled off the back of the truck if you live in a community that has a

casino where the public wasn’t raising these issues from time to time.

And there seemed to be, in the public’s mind, a fairly lax regime, in

cooperation with FINTRAC, the RCMP, and the B.C. Lottery Corporation, in

dealing with what most people understood was happening in their own

communities.

When known drug dealers wander into casinos and wander back out,

you’ve got to get the feeling they’re not just there for recreation.

They’re not just there for recreation. They’re not going in to have a

free coffee with the seniors that everyone has talked so eloquently

about this morning. Yes, we’re delighted to have casinos in our

communities. The casino in my community supports the city of Nanaimo and

a lot of very important activities.

But let us not be unrealistic. Let us not turn a blind eye to what

is, pretty clearly, a method for organized crime, for those who are

guilty of criminal activities, to launder their money. And it’s big

money. It’s very big money.

[11:50 a.m.]

I was surprised, honestly, that somehow the members opposite were

trying to make a virtue of, you know, keeping suppressed the report that

the Attorney General made public. Now, I do recall this government

promising openness and transparency, so when a succeeding government

actually delivers on openness and transparency, suddenly it’s no longer

such a virtuous thing to do.

Is there anything actually wrong with the concept that the public

be apprised of — be made aware that notoriety be given to a serious

matter that affects public policy in this province, that affects

communities across this province, that affects people, that allows

organized crime to carry on its nefarious activities and to launder the

money that it’s gained from illegal activities? Is there something

wrong, somehow, with doing that? I think not, with great

respect.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

I’m surprised at the members opposite, although I would give them

credit for attempting…. I’m surprised at the members opposite over there

this morning, making every effort they possibly could to pretend that

somehow things would be all right in the end.

As year after year has passed in British Columbia, millions and

millions of dollars have been laundered. Organized crime has been

allowed to increase its operations. People engaged in illegal activities

have been able to continue to make their profits, while that government,

as they formerly were and now the official opposition, somehow pretend

that just everything was fine. It was all part of a grand

investigation.

Eventually the guilty would be punished and the innocent rewarded

and the good work of every organization involved would somehow come to

fruition and we’d all be so terribly pleased.

Well, with great respect, if you’re bleeding to death and the

surgeon is determining which is the best suture to use, it’s not a happy

occasion. The fact is that there was trouble in our system. People knew

it. That opposition knew it when it was government, and they didn’t do

as much as they could have, if they did much at all. That’s the problem.

I come back to the use of the word “seriously” — to take seriously the

allegation of money laundering.

This government is taking seriously the allegation. This

government is finally putting some emphasis where it needs to be put to

send a message to organized crime in British Columbia, to send a message

to those engaged in illegal activities, that they are not going to be

able to do it without enforcement, without their activities being

stopped, without a government that takes seriously its responsibilities

to the people of British Columbia.

I am just surprised this morning that we have had this continuous

defense of: “Nothing to see here. Just move on. Nothing to see here.

Just move on. Everything is fine.”

Well, perhaps that’s another reason that they’re over there

instead of over here.

L. Krog moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Mungall moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:53 a.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2017: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada