Third Session, 42nd Parliament

(2022) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Thursday, March 10, 2022

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 170

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Athletic achievements of Natalie Wilkie and Eve Maxwell

G. Kyllo

Surrey Thunder hockey team

Hon. H. Bains

Statements

Journée de la francophonie

Hon. A. Dix

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill M204 — Crown Land Residential Lease Act, 2022

J. Sturdy

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Kidney disease awareness and Kidney March fundraiser

S. Bond

Community festivals

B. Anderson

International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

T. Wat

Gina Watson and supportive housing

D. Routley

Micah Zandee-Hart and Canadian women’s hockey team

A. Olsen

Richmond Secondary School student service club

H. Yao

Oral Questions

Action on gas prices and carbon tax rebate

T. Stone

Hon. B. Ralston

P. Milobar

Telus Health services

S. Furstenau

Hon. A. Dix

Review panel report on drug toxicity deaths and implementation of recommendations

S. Bond

Hon. S. Malcolmson

L. Doerkson

Health Committee terms of reference and timeline

T. Halford

Hon. M. Farnworth

Tabling Documents

Labour Relations Board, annual report, 2021

Petitions

G. Kyllo

Tabling Documents

Ministry of Land, Water and Resource Stewardship, service plan, 2022-23–2024-25

Motions Without Notice

Membership change to Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act Review Special Committee

Hon. M. Farnworth

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 6 — Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2022 (continued)

B. Banman

S. Furstenau

Hon. M. Dean

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions

Hon. S. Malcolmson

T. Halford

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2022

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: Hon. S. Malcolmson.

[10:05 a.m.]

Introductions by Members

Hon. A. Dix: Today I get to introduce a constituent who is also on the floor of the

Legislature, a former MLA from 1986 to 2001, a former Minister of Finance, a

former Minister of Employment and a former Premier. As I say, he’s a

constituent, so I still have to listen to him quite a bit, and that’s really

a valuable thing. I think everyone will also know he’s a significant

business leader in our province, president and CEO of the Jim Pattison

Group.

More important than that, in my experience of knowing him, which is

about 36 years, 39 years, I think, now — holy mackerel — is that he is a

remarkable dad and now a remarkable granddad. It is an amazing

thing.

I’d like to introduce to the Legislature former Premier Glen

Clark.

M. Starchuk: One thing that I’ve noticed, and one thing that I’ve learned in the

House, is: don’t be late to make an announcement. Next Tuesday, my daughter

is celebrating a birthday. I will not use the age which she’s turning, but I

will say that on Wednesday, she will be closer to 40 than she is to 30. She

will know exactly how to take that.

Shannon, have a great birthday on Tuesday. I hope to enjoy it with

you.

H. Yao: Unfortunately, I think I started a tradition I didn’t

anticipate.

I also have to wish my father-in-law a happy birthday. Tan Yensen’s

birthday is on March 19.

I also want to wish my mom a birthday. Sen Zume — her birthday is on

March 15.

If I don’t say it today in the House, I’ll be in a lot of trouble when

I go back for break week. So thank you for allowing me to have this

opportunity.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to say hello and welcome my friend, a childhood

friend, Kathy Tarny Lockhurst. She’s joined with her mom, Yoland Tarny, and

her dad, Laslo Tarny.

I’d also like to thank members from the Hungarian community here in

Victoria, Judit Szy and Steven Butz. They’ve helped to put together what

will be the first official proclamation to mark Hungarian day, the Hungarian

day of commemoration, on March 15 next week.

We know that there are nearly 60,000 folks of Hungarian heritage in

B.C., and B.C. is home to the second-largest Hungarian community in Canada.

Of course, the community right across the province is diverse, vibrant.

They’ve really contributed so much, and we want to recognize all that

they’ve contributed.

I ask everybody here in the House, as we mark the Hungarian

commemoration day, which looks at the history of British Columbians of

Hungarian heritage — to celebrate their stoicism, contributions to the

prosperity of this province, democracy worldwide — to celebrate in advance.

I ask everybody to wish everybody across British Columbia happy Hungarian

commemoration day on March 15.

[10:10 a.m.]

Hon. M. Dean: It’s my pleasure today to rise and ask the House to join me in

welcoming Ms. Hird’s grade 1 and 2 class at Macaulay Elementary School in my

constituency, who are watching this virtually. In December of last year, Ms.

Hird and her students were kind enough to assist my office in designing our

annual holiday cards. We received so many wonderful designs that we selected

four for our cards, and we posted all the entries up in the office

window.

I want to ask the House to join me in thanking Ms. Hird and her

wonderful students for their absolutely beautiful creative

designs.

Tributes

ATHLETIC ACHIEVEMENTS OF

NATALIE WILKIE AND EVE

MAXWELL

G. Kyllo: Early this week we celebrated International Women’s Day, and I’d

like to take this opportunity to both recognize and congratulate two

amazing, strong young women in my riding of Shuswap.

First, 21-year-old Natalie Wilkie of Salmon Arm, with the Larch

Hills Nordic Ski Club, dominated the women’s 15-kilometre classic race

with a gold medal win. If that wasn’t enough, she followed up with a

second gold medal in the women’s standing para cross-country skiing

sprint event. Two gold medals for a small, little community of Salmon

Arm is absolutely outstanding. That follows up on a total of five medals

that she has won, over her very young career, at 21 years of

age.

Natalie, you make both Salmon Arm and the Shuswap region

incredibly proud, our province and our country. Natalie, congratulations

on an outstanding performance.

Additionally, Eve Maxwell, another young gal — a grade 12 student

at Salmon Arm Secondary, a grade 12 wrestler — captured a gold medal in

the B.C. High School Wrestling Championships, February 24-26, at

Vancouver’s Pacific Coliseum. On top of that, she was actually

recognized for the most outstanding match and given the trophy for

outstanding female wrestler with the event, a score of 10-0 — not one

point scored against her.

These are two incredible, amazing women. I’d like to give special

recognition both to Natalie Wilkie and to Eve Maxwell.

SURREY THUNDER HOCKEY TEAM

Hon. H. Bains: My love and interest for hockey started as soon as I arrived in

Canada in 1971 — there was a guy named Bobby Orr, the Boston Bruins, the

great Canadian teams of the ’70s — and then continued on with Wayne

Gretzky and Mario Lemieux.

Then it was limited to playoff hockey and international hockey,

when Canada was participating, because of family and job commitments,

but that interest, a love, was rekindled again recently. Not by Connor

McDavid or MacKinnon. It’s ten-year-old Brayden Bains, my grandson, and

the team that he plays for, Surrey Thunder Atom A1. They beat a number

of great teams to get to the final tonight.

My colleague the Minister of Jobs and I were able to watch one

game. That day, he didn’t realize, they were beating South Delta.

Tonight they’re playing another good team in the final, the Chilliwack

Bruins. I’m telling you, Chilliwack — watch out.

I want to say this. Their teams can’t just do it on their own.

There’s a great team behind them. I want to start by thanking Jeff

Shelton and Rona Shelton from Surrey Minor, and a great coach that they

have in Brian MacGillivary, along with a number of assistants and other

supporters: Avin Gill, Warren McGrath, Chris Brockway, Cailean Paskall,

Amin Patel, Dalton MacGillivary, Wendy McGrath, Gurpal Siekham and

Sandeep Bains.

I say at the end, please join with me and say: “Thunder, go

Thunder!”

[10:15 a.m.]

Statements

JOURNÉE DE LA FRANCOPHONIE

Hon. A. Dix: Hon. Speaker, I’d just say to the Minister of Labour: you know,

the Minister of Jobs is just two seats over from him in terms of hockey

inspirations. Anyway, we’ll just set that aside.

Our province, as you know, is really fortunate to have such a

vibrant francophone community. Once again this year, March 20, during

our break, will be proclaimed Journée de la francophonie en

Colombie-Britannique. March 20 also marks the International Day of La

Francophonie.

There are more than 70,000 francophones and 300,000

French-speaking people in B.C. A virtual event will take place March 11

at 11 a.m. The theme this year is arts and culture, les arts et la

culture and antidote à la pandémie , which I think is

appropriate today and every other day.

I invite all members of the House, in particular my colleague who

represented francophones so ably on the government side prior to 2017,

the member for Kelowna–Lake Country, to join in the

celebration.

Je vous invite donc à célébrer la Journée de la francophonie en

Colombie-Britannique avec tous les francophones et francophiles de

la province.

Merci.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL M204 — CROWN LAND

RESIDENTIAL LEASE ACT,

J. Sturdy presented a bill intituled Crown Land Residential Lease

Act, 2022.

J. Sturdy: I move that the bill intituled Land Amendment Act, 2022, of which

notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and

read a first time now.

This bill proposes immediate action to address skyrocketing

residential rent increases on Crown land. Residential Crown land

leaseholders are the same as other residential tenants, with the

exception that their landlord is the province of British

Columbia.

All landlords but the province are subject to the

Resi­dential Tenancy Act, which limits rent increases to CPI. For

2022, the maximum rent increase is limited to 1.5 percent. For some

reason, the provincial government does not hold itself to the same

standard, and they have been subjecting tenants to rent increases that

are, frankly, jaw-dropping.

Rent for tenants who live on Crown land is based on a percentage

of assessed value of the property. Because of the booming property

values in places like the Sea to Sky, tenants are seeing rent increases

not of single digits, nor of double digits, but of triple digits. The

Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations has

acknowl­edged the problem and last year commissioned a study.

However, there has yet to be any meaningful change.

Given that there’s no relief in sight and that huge new rent bills

are imminent, I felt it important to propose a solution that will remedy

this systemic policy issue that affects residential Crown land renters

across British Columbia. This bill will resolve the issue by tying the

maximum allowable rent increase for residential Crown land to the policy

set out under the Residential Tenancy Act, which designates maximum rent

increases as deter­mined by CPI.

It’s only reasonable that government play by the same rules that

it imposes on every other landlord in British Columbia. Residential

Crown land renters should be treated fairly, and limiting

government-imposed rent increases to what is allowed by the Residential

Tenancy Act is just the right thing to do.

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

Motion approved.

J. Sturdy: I move that the bill be placed on orders of the day for second

reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill M204, Crown Land Residential Lease Act, 2022, introduced, read a

first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading

at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

KIDNEY DISEASE AWARENESS

AND KIDNEY MARCH

FUNDRAISER

S. Bond: Northern B.C. resident Robin Work is one of many people throughout

B.C. and Alberta beginning to train to walk 100 kilometres in a single

weekend this September. They do this as part of the Kidney March, a

yearly fundraiser to support kidney health and raise awareness for

chronic kidney disease.

Robin Work calls kidney disease a silent killer that can impact

people at any age. He is walking to honour the many people who have been

impacted, including his own aunt, and who live with kidney disease.

Robin’s experience of having a family member with kidney disease is far

from uncommon. Four million Canadians, and one in ten British

Columbians, have some degree of kidney disease, and most don’t even know

it. Many lose up to 80 percent of their kidney function before they are

diagnosed. By that point, it may be too late to act.

[10:20 a.m.]

Today I am happy to lend my support to World Kidney Day, a global

campaign aimed at raising awareness of the importance of our kidneys.

This year’s theme is “Bridging the knowledge gap to better kidney

care.”

I encourage all British Columbians to take the time to learn more

about kidney disease and understand their own kidney health. By

assessing your risk for kidney disease, you can diagnose it early and

often even slow or stop the disease through medication and changes to

lifestyle and diet. B.C. Renal also offers a quick and easy online

kidney self-assessment as well as many other resources to improve your

understanding of kidney health.

Thousands of British Columbians live with kidney disease every

day. I want to say a very special thank-you to our health care workers,

the selfless donors and others in the kidney community for leading the

fight against kidney disease and, ultimately, saving lives.

COMMUNITY FESTIVALS

B. Anderson: This is a shout-out to the architects of fun. Thank you for

creating spaces where we can collectively gather, move, play, express

and connect.

Festivals are starting to announce their lineups and organize

incredible community events in the Kootenays and across the province. I

want to extend my deep grati­tude for everyone that works so hard

to make these events become a reality.

To the organizers, whose vision creates a new world for the

willing participants. To the performers, who have worked hard on their

craft for years to provide us with unforgettable moments. To the staff,

who often work year-round to make the magic happen. To the volunteers,

who are the backbone of the festivals. To the harm reduction teams, who

keep our well-being at the forefront of our experience. To the vendors,

who fill our bellies, quench our thirst and provide an array of

offerings that are both practical and indulgent. To the audiovisual

teams, who heighten our senses. To the cleaning crews, who work like

ninjas to make the experience effortless. To that first dancer on the

dance floor, who draws in the crowd to engage in expression, movement

and play.

Soon the crowd seems to fold into itself as the bass drops and the

beat of thousands of dancers moves rhythmically and flows as

one.

Festivals improve community cohesion, reduce social isolation and

are central to the cultural, social and economic fabric of our

society.

To the architects of fun, thank you. We are so excited to see what

experiences you are going to create for us this season and

beyond.

This is an invitation to come to the Kootenays and enjoy one of

the many incredible festivals that we have nestled in the mountains —

Tiny Lights, Shambhala, Starbelly Jam, Blossom Fest, Nelson ArtWalk,

Kootenay Pride, Nelson International Mural Festival, just to name a few.

I’ll see you on the dance floor.

INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR THE

ELIMINATION OF RACIAL

DISCRIMINATION

T. Wat: On March 21, 1960, police opened fire and killed 69 peaceful

demonstrators in Sharpeville, South Africa, who were protesting against

horrific apartheid pass laws. In recognition of this heinous act, the

United Nations proclaimed this day as the International Day for the

Elimination of Racial Discrimination, in 1966, and called on the

international community to redouble its efforts to eliminate all forms

of racial discrimination.

This is the mission we carry with us to this day here in B.C.

Although we have taken steps to bring forward posi­tive change,

the challenges that racial and cultural minori­ties face in our

communities are still very real.

Racism takes many shapes and forms. It sometimes rears its ugly

head for all of us to see, like the shocking instances of vandalism and

violence and the hate crimes we have seen perpetrated against our Asian,

South Asian, Jewish, Black and Indigenous communities. Acts of racism

can also include the more subtle things that happen in our public and

private institutions each and every day. In the education sector, 75

percent of respondents say they have experienced incidents of racism in

school.

[10:25 a.m.]

These occurrences largely impact young British Columbians. These

same individuals are some of the biggest drivers of change, which is why

we must all embrace this year’s theme, “Youth standing up against

racism,” so that we can empower the next generation and foster a global

culture of tolerance, equality and anti-discrimination.

Together, let’s create a province free of racism and racial

discrimination.

GINA WATSON AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING

D. Routley: I’d like to share with the House an inspiring story of strength

from Nanaimo.

Gina Watson spent years on the street, addicted and without her

children, before ending up at tent city in Nanaimo in 2018. Even while

struggling with her own issues, Gina was known at the camp for being

someone that anyone could turn to if they needed help or support. She

organized garbage cleanups around the encampment; took shifts in the

kitchen, helping to prepare and distribute food; and helped distribute

other donations such as tents and sleeping bags. Even though she had

only a small tent to call her own, she often used part of her space to

hold others’ belongings and to hold and distribute safe supplies like

naloxone kits.

Shortly after arriving at the camp, Gina secured a part-time job

cleaning rooms at a local motel, something she had been unable to do

while on the streets as she had nowhere to store her belongings. She was

happy and ready to better herself and begin to turn her life around.

Unfortunately, she struggled to maintain the job, as she was still

living in a tent without electricity or water.

When tent city shut down and Nanaimo’s new temporary supportive

housing opened, Gina finally secured a place to stay with heat, running

water and a lock on the door. Just those simple things that so many of

us take for granted allowed her to finally break free of her addiction,

gain meaningful employment, save money and, ultimately, as of two months

ago, finally get her children back.

Our CAs do so much work. I’d like to thank Sarah Miller, my CA,

for taking her own time to drive Gina to appointments and to help. All

of our CAs put so much out for our communities.

After almost eight years of struggling with addiction and living

rough, it took only one year in supportive housing for Gina to get her

life back on track — to the benefit of her, her two daughters and our

community.

I know that everyone in this House will join me in celebrating

Gina’s strength and success and say to her: “Gina, we have your back.

Keep on fighting.”

MICAH ZANDEE-HART

AND CANADIAN WOMEN’S HOCKEY

TEAM

A. Olsen: In February, we were lucky to cheer on 215 Canadians competing in

the Winter Olympics, 32 of whom were from British Columbia. Of those 32,

I’d like to talk about one today.

Micah Zandee-Hart is from Saanichton, in my riding of Saanich

North and the Islands, and is now also an Olympic gold medallist in

women’s hockey. Her Olympic journey began watching the Canadian women’s

team win gold in Salt Lake City in 2002. I think a start for many

Olympians is watching their heroes win previously. She’s the first

player from Vancouver Island to be part of the women’s national hockey

team. Micah played collegiate hockey for Cornell.

Her path to securing a spot on Team Canada was made more difficult

in 2021 when she suffered two injuries: a broken hand in January when

she was blocking a shot and then a season-ending shoulder surgery, which

happened in March, that forced her to miss the world championships last

year. After rehab, Micah was healthy and ready to play in time for the

2022 Olympic team.

She made her Olympic debut on February 3 in a 12-to-1 win over

Switzerland and tallied her first Olympic assist in a game versus ROC.

She would go on to add three more assists to her resume over the course

of the games, playing important minutes on a stalwart defensive unit

that allowed only ten goals in seven games. Micah’s Olympic journey

culminated in, of course, that 3-2 gold medal game win over the United

States. This was Canada’s third gold medal in the last four Winter

Games.

Congratulations to Micah and all her teammates on the golden

Canadian women’s hockey team. You have made Saanich North and the

Islands proud and all of Canada proud.

All the best in your future endeavours.

[10:30 a.m.]

RICHMOND SECONDARY SCHOOL

STUDENT SERVICE

CLUB

H. Yao: Noah Berger, Tyson Guilmant-Smith, Serena Chin, Ludi Wang, Sarah

Cao and Katherine Sau are all part of Richmond Secondary School’s

interactive club, sponsored by Ms. Rakshin Kandola. The RSS interactive

club’s motto is: “Service above self.”

The club is a service club and a branch of Rotary that focuses on

connecting student members with opportuni­ties to help the local

community. One of the past projects has been cards for seniors. Student

members write cards with Canada Day and summer themes for local seniors.

Kindness gestures such as care cards help seniors in our community feel

connected. The students prepared and delivered approximately 50

cards.

Another project was a fundraiser for Covenant House. Student

members delivered envelopes to classrooms and asked teachers and

students for their spare change to donate. The club was successful at

raising approximately $70.

On February 1 this year, I was privileged to be invited to speak

to the RSS interactive club over Zoom. Without wasting any time, student

members fired one question after another on topics such as volunteerism,

community leadership, youth engagement, networking and fundraising. I

was shocked and impressed by the student members’ eagerness to learn and

self-improve. I highly doubt they need to learn anything on leadership

from me. Instead of socializing and hanging out with their peers, they

demonstrate their hunger for self-improvement by spending their lunch

time with their sponsor teacher and each other to explore ways to better

themselves.

I was only able to give them one advice: avoid a social pitfall by

trying to volunteer for the sake of volunteering, expanding their

network or be a leader. Instead, live a life filled with adventures,

have courage to ask for help, follow your heart with conviction, and

most of all, believe that you’re already incredible.

Live a life so that you can be proud of yourself, and without

knowing it, you’ll become a leader that everyone else envies.

M. de Jong: I seek leave to make a continuing introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

M. de Jong: Well, I’m glad, because I was horrified to come into the House and see

someone…. [Laughter.] If I find out that Moe Sihota is hiding over there

somewhere….

I am one of the few members who has served in this chamber under two

Premiers Clark, and I suppose I wouldn’t be telling the truth…. I had more

fun under one of them than the other.

That makes Glen Clark’s achievement no less important, to have served

as Premier of the province of British Columbia. We see the pictures that

hang in the hall, but those of us who sit here know how difficult a job it

is — how difficult a job it is to secure and then how difficult a job it is

to do.

It is good to see him here to acknowledge his contribution to this

place and to welcome him on behalf of the opposition.

Oral Questions

ACTION ON GAS PRICES

AND CARBON TAX

REBATE

T. Stone: I think it’s a well-established fact that British Columbia has the

highest gas taxes and the highest gas prices in all of North America. As

gas prices continue to skyrocket, the NDP government is raking in record

fuel and carbon taxes without providing any relief for B.C.’s families.

Despite years of empty promises, the Premier continues to shrug his

shoulders and do nothing.

There is one thing that the Premier could do. One step that he

could take would be to return some of the millions of dollars in gas

taxes that his government is receiving. He could return some of that to

British Columbians through a one-time carbon tax rebate to help lower-

and middle-income British Columbians.

The question to the Premier is this. Will the Premier take this

action to help families who are struggling with these skyrocketing gas

prices?

[10:35 a.m.]

Hon. B. Ralston: British Columbia is not alone in facing higher gas prices. Right

across the country, from St. John’s to Winnipeg to Toronto, and here in

British Columbia, and indeed, around the world…. The war has had a huge

impact on world prices, and just yesterday, President Biden in the

United States has decided to end imports of Russian oil and gas, which

will have further upward pressure on prices around the world.

The federal minister here in Canada, the Minister of Industry, has

called upon the Competition Bureau to protect Canadians against possible

gouging. Unlike the opposition, we believe gas companies should be

accountable for markups and price hikes. We brought in the Fuel Price

Transparency Act to force the companies to come clean.

Interjections.

Hon. B. Ralston: The members chuckle. It’s something that they certainly never did

in their 16 years.

Interjections.

Hon. B. Ralston: Well, let’s just get to it.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. B. Ralston: Their newly elected leader said in 2008: “I don’t want to pretend

that there’s any magic solutions to the fact that fuel prices have

doubled in the past 12 months.”

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, order.

Hon. B. Ralston: He was asked about this question just yesterday, 14 years later —

some time to reflect on what he might do, I suppose. His answer was:

“Yes, this is what I said, and it’s true.”

So you guys got nothing. You got nothing.

Mr. Speaker: Opposition House Leader, supplemental.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

T. Stone: Look at the shiny object. I mean, get serious. Get serious. You

know who’s not going to have much of anything left if this government

doesn’t take action is British Columbians, who are dealing with these

soaring gas prices, and the government is sitting around

shrugging.

Every time this government mentions Kevin Falcon, you know what

goes through our minds? Call the by-election. Call the by-election so he

can sit right here, and you can have the exchange with him in person.

When Kevin Falcon was in government, he brought in the revenue-neutral

carbon tax, which actually offset carbon tax. A revenue-neutral carbon

tax — imagine that.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

T. Stone: Imagine that.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

T. Stone: Imagine taking carbon tax revenues and offsetting that with

personal income tax reductions and small business tax reductions and all

kinds of credits and rebates. You know…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, let’s listen to the question, please.

T. Stone: …the seniors home-renovation tax credit, things like that. What

was one of the first things this government did? They ended the

revenue-neutrality of the carbon tax.

In fact, with these soaring gas prices, the NDP are actually

raking in billions and billions of dollars of extra carbon tax that

they’re taking right out of the pockets of British Columbians. Families

are being hurt by these high prices, these high gas prices, and they

deserve some relief from this government.

One tool, one mechanism, that’s available to this government,

which we’re suggesting here today, would not serve to put additional

profits into the pockets of gas companies…. This government could use

the B.C. climate action tax credit, a tool that Kevin Falcon and the

B.C. Liberals created. The government could provide a one-time enhanced

rebate…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, let’s hear the question.

T. Stone: …that could be implemented in time for the next payment in April.

The government could do that, and that would provide relief to British

Columbians immediately.

The question to the Premier is this. Will he implement this

measure or any other measure that would serve to actually offset these

soaring gas prices to help British Columbia’s struggling

families?

Hon. B. Ralston: Well, the member for the opposition misreads the history of the

carbon tax. It wasn’t revenue-neutral for British Columbians. In fact,

it gave over $2 billion to some of the largest corporations in the

province.

I want to quote…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[10:40 a.m.]

Hon. B. Ralston: …a professor at UBC, Werner Antweiler: “The problem is we have a

situation in the global market, and no amount of changes to taxes will

make that go away. Increasing the carbon tax as planned in April by one

cent a litre pales in comparison to the 20 to 30 cents a litre that is

essentially the Putin tax that’s coming from the invasion of Ukraine by

Russia.”

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, come to order.

Minister, continue, please.

Hon. B. Ralston: Sorry. I was somewhat distracted by that braying from the other

side.

Alberta announced a 13-cent measure. At the same time, the price

of gas in Lethbridge, after that announcement, increased by 14.5

percent, proving the point that I just made.

P. Milobar: Perhaps the Energy Minister is unaware, but the Alberta 13-cent

rebate does not take effect till April 1. It hasn’t even taken effect

yet.

Again, it’s revisionist history at its finest with this

government, because if you look at the budgets and fiscal plans 2017-18

to 2019-2020, where there was still clear and concise transparent

reporting happening, on page 66, on the carbon tax report and plan, it

very clearly shows low-income climate action tax credit per adult, a

reduction of 5 percent with the first two income tax rates, a northern

and rural homeowner benefit for up to $200. The list goes on and on and

on, on how the carbon tax was actually refunded back to people in a way

that actually helped their affordability.

They certainly seem infatuated with Kevin Falcon. I do hope they

actually call a by-election so they could see him in person in this

room, because in 2008….

They like to quote 2008, so let’s look at what the Premier had to

say in this chamber in 2008, when gas was going up. You know what the

Premier was advocating for? A cap of 2½ cents of carbon tax per litre of

gas. April 1, this Premier is going to be charging over 11 cents a litre

for carbon tax.

He likes to talk about having options, this Premier. The Premier

likes to talk about having options, yet he doesn’t tell us what those

options actually are. For 207 weeks now, he has told this chamber he has

a plan to lower gas prices.

With the stroke of a pen, the Premier could help families with a

one-time enhanced carbon tax rebate.

Will this Premier finally act on his words and deliver the relief

that people are looking for through an enhanced carbon tax rebate

cheque?

Hon. B. Ralston: The carbon tax is a tax that’s supported by the B.C. Business

Council. The CleanBC plan has a program which the industry participates

in, and it returns the carbon tax to those companies that achieve a

global standard of carbon emission reductions.

I’m not sure whether what the opposition is saying is that they

want to reduce the amount of carbon tax available for reducing emissions

here in British Columbia. Is that what they’re saying? Is that their

policy?

Mr. Speaker: Member for Kamloops–North Thompson, supplemental.

P. Milobar: Well, the minister seems to…. I guess it’s not surprising. They’ve

ignored their own advice in their budget book about taxes hurting low-

and mid-income families in this budget, but the reality is B.C. has the

highest gas prices and the highest gas taxes in North

America.

We’re about 50 cents a litre currently more expensive than

Alberta, right next door to us. Last I checked, the war in Ukraine is

impacting Alberta just like it is B.C., but it’s 50 cents a litre less

in Alberta. The climate action tax credit, which was created by Kevin

Falcon and the B.C. Liberals, was specifically designed as a tool to

refund carbon taxes to families. The NDP — one of their first acts was

to remove the revenue neutrality of carbon taxes, and now they are

raking in well over $1 billion a year in extra carbon taxes. No one

knows where it’s all going.

Again, the Premier has repeatedly promised…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, let’s hear the question, please.

[10:45 a.m.]

P. Milobar: …action on gas prices.

Why will the Premier not use a very clear tool to get money back

in the pockets of British Columbians to try to help them with their

increased fuel costs in their daily lives?

Hon. B. Ralston: It’s disappointing to hear the member opposite — perhaps not

surprising — to argue against a measure, the carbon tax, that has proven

to reduce emissions and funds investment in low-carbon

innovation.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, order.

The minister will continue.

Hon. B. Ralston: The suggestion is that it was revenue-neutral. They weren’t able

to explain it back in 2008, and they’re not doing any better job 15

years later. They gave over $2 billion to the biggest corporations in

the province. That was their version of revenue neutrality.

TELUS HEALTH SERVICES

S. Furstenau: My colleague and I have been asking the Minister of Health about

the corporate delivery of health care in our province and raised our

concerns about fees that are being charged to patients. So far, we

haven’t gotten clear or direct answers, so I’ll try again.

My question is to the Minister of Health. Does the minister think

that health care delivery by a for-profit telecommunications company

that generates dividends to shareholders is aligned with the spirit of

universal, equitable, public health care?

Hon. A. Dix: For the last several years, we’ve repeatedly taken action to

strengthen our public health care system. The member knows this. That

action has affected the delivery of care to seniors, primary care, every

aspect of our health care system, and it’s involved improving services

for people in terms of their wait time and their access to services.

It’s why we purchased and brought back into the public system MRI

machines.

With respect to the question of the hon. member, what has happened

and what’s happening now is consistent with the rule of law in B.C. The

Medical Services Commission is reviewing those questions — they started

to do that in February — to review and to ensure that everyone in B.C.

is acting in compliance with the Medicare Protection Act.

We took measures, as the member knows, in 2018 to bring in

regulations that had been passed by the previous government but not

brought into force. We brought those regulations into force. We’ll

always defend public health care, and we’re doing it now.

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

S. Furstenau: We’ve looked into the health care services that are provided by

Telus, and there are a few different programs available.

Virtual care is covered by MSP, and patients access a virtual

walk-in clinic. Doctors can prescribe medications, write a requisition,

give advice, but no longitudinal care.

MyCare, also covered by MSP, offers in-person appointments, as

needed, determined by a virtual screening process. For a $1,000 fee,

patients can access annual screening.

Then there is LifePlus. LifePlus offers in-person medical office

visits with access to team-based care, like we have come to expect from

a family clinic. The annual cost of enrolment in LifePlus is $4,000 for

the first year and $3,000 for every year after.

My question is to the Minister of Health. When a for-profit

telecommunications corporation charges patients thousands of dollars for

what amounts to access to a family doctor, is this in line with what the

minister considers to be universal, public, equitable health

care?

Hon. A. Dix: The Medicare Protection Act protects our public health care system

in B.C., just as the Canada Health Act protects it in Canada. It’s not

an issue of amounting to; it’s an issue of ensuring that medically

necessary care is available to all British Columbians regardless of

income. This has been the basis of the system.

If the members are saying. because this has been the development

of public health care in Canada. that it has been defined and provided

often by private corporations, including family doctors, effectively

that, with public pay.

[10:50 a.m.]

That is our public insurance system in Canada, and it has worked

for us well. It requires improvement. It’s why we’ve invested in 56

primary care networks, 28 urgent and primary care centres, delivered

team-based care, added community health centres delivered by non-profit

providers in this province. We’ll continue to support public health care

for everyone in B.C.

REVIEW PANEL REPORT ON

DRUG TOXICITY DEATHS AND

IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS

S. Bond: Yesterday the Premier finally agreed to activate the Select

Standing Committee on Health to work across party lines on the opioid

crisis in our province. This is an opportunity for collaboration between

all parties on a crisis that is killing nearly seven British Columbians

a day.

Critically important will be to build on the work that has been

done, specifically following the blueprint of the death review panel

that was released. This report is the work of 23 public health experts

who have provided urgent recommendations with very specific

timelines.

Today the Premier has had some time to review the report. Will he

now stand and accept the recommendations and timelines for immediate

action?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: The Premier announced yesterday that we’ll be developing terms of

reference for the committee. I look forward to developing those terms of

reference in cooperation with the Premier and his office, and I look

forward to hearing the opposition members’ ideas on how we can work

together to fight the overdose crisis and save lives.

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

S. Bond: As I said earlier, we appreciate the fact the Premier finally said

that he would activate a committee that could have been activated months

ago, as continuously, we heard story after story of people losing their

lives in British Columbia to this crisis.

That minister’s answer means nothing when it comes to the

recommendations that have been provided. They are specific timelines,

specific recommendations. The death panel review provided specific

deadlines from April 11 through to September.

The report itself said that this government has not acted with the

urgency that is required. In fact, what did this minister do yesterday?

Within hours of receiving the report, the minister, despite the fact

that a panel of experts brought the recommendations forward, said: “We

already know that the 30/60/90-day time frame just doesn’t work.” Within

hours of the recommendations brought forward, the minister simply

dismissed it.

Actually, what we do know. We know, and it was confirmed in the

report, that this government’s approach is not working. Seven people a

day are dying in our province.

What could possibly make the Premier hesitate? And today the

non-answer by the minister. Why wouldn’t she stand today and say: “Of

course, we accept the recommendations. We are going to move to meet

those timelines. In fact, this review panel will form the basis of the

work done by the Standing Committee on Health”?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Our government has been acting urgently since 2017. We have

evolved our response to the terrible loss of life and the increasing

toxicity of the drug supply every year since 2017, since the beginning

of the forming of this ministry.

We agree with the policy directions that were identified in

yesterday’s death panel review report. They align with the work that

we’ve committed to and that we have underway: expanding prescribed safe

supply, expanding the treatment and recovery system, expanding drug

testing and the oversight and accountability of the treatment and

recovery sector, in addition to the other work that we’re doing to

decriminalize people who use drugs, to expand supervised consumption

sites, to add inhalation sites as the method of consumption of drugs has

changed and the drug profile and the terrible toxicity has

expanded.

[10:55 a.m.]

As I said yesterday, we’ll work with our ministry to identify

where we can meet the timelines that are recommended by the panel. At

the same time, we’re not going to give people suffering the loss of

loved ones any false confidence about work that we’ve been trying to

implement and expanding and amending every week, which has been over the

last year and a half — that a 30-day timeline or a 60-day timeline is

realistic.

We won’t give anybody in the province false hope. We’ll work as

fast as we can, as we have from day one.

S. Bond: What families in British Columbia who have lost loved ones need is

this minister, instead of dismissing out of hand an expectation around

30, 60 and 90 days created by a panel of experts…. Instead of dismissing

it, she should stand up in this House and tell British Columbians that

we are going to do absolutely everything possible to make it work, to

meet those deadlines. In the meantime — today, tomorrow and next week —

seven people a day are dying in British Columbia.

For the minister’s information, she doesn’t need to take a lot of

time working on the terms of reference. They’re done in this report.

There is a clear road map about what needs to take place.

This is a matter of life and death. It is a matter of

urgency.

Today we are asking this minister to say that she will adopt the

recommendations and, before May 9, will table in this Legislature an

action plan that meets the recommendation of 30/60/90 days provided by

the death review panel.

Hon. S. Malcolmson: I appreciate the work of the panel and of the Coroners Service to

compile the report. It confirms that the work that we have underway is

urgent and vital and absolutely necessary to save lives.

The panel found that the primary cause of death was the increased

toxicity of the drug supply. I’ll remind the chamber again. In the 2019

year, the number of overdose deaths fell for the first year since the

public health emergency was declared. In the first two months of 2020,

deaths continued to fall and spiked terribly, from a 4 to 8 percent

toxicity of fentanyl before the pandemic to, in the last month of 2021,

24 to 28 percent toxicity. That has outpaced the ability of our

government to add services, which we are doing every week.

Prohibition doesn’t work. We’re tackling that also.

All of the measures identified in the panel report are ones that

we are working on urgently. We look forward to the cooperation of all

practitioners and this chamber to carry out that work.

L. Doerkson: These are certainly sad and frightening times, to be honest. The

people of this province want action on this topic. Since we last

discussed this, seven more British Columbians have perished.

The latest death review panel shows that people in my community

are not immune from this opioid crisis. The report highlights that rural

and remote areas still face systemic barriers accessing key services.

The report cites the following challenges: “vast distances between

communi­ties; small service centres; the harsher climate with

poorer transportation systems, remoteness and isolation; and potentially

limited social, educational and employment opportunities.”

Will the minister commit to delivering a 30/60/90-day action plan

by May 9 to actually address the systemic barriers that rural

communities are facing right now?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: We share the same urgency that is reflected in the coroner’s

report, in the death panel review report. We know there is more to do,

and we are adding new services in all regions of the province almost

every week.

At the start of the public health emergency, we focused on scaling

up expansion of naloxone. We then added in medication-assisted

treatment. Later, as the emergency response required, we added

registered nurses, the only place in Canada where they’re allowed to

prescribe medication-assisted treatment. That has got particular benefit

for rural and remote areas.

[11:00 a.m.]

We’re also working with First Nations Health Authority to build

and rebuild eight different First Nations–led treatment and recovery

centres. That’s got particular benefit for remote and northern regions —

the only province in Canada that I’m aware of that is funding directly,

through the First Nations Health Authority, to build facilities and to

also work with Indigenous leaders around land-based

solutions.

In every way, we have modified and expanded our approach, and it

has been outpaced by the increased toxicity of the drug

supply.

I share the member’s concern, particularly about access and

service to rural and remote areas. That’s a foundation of our plan

Pathway to Hope, and it’s something that we’re working urgently, with

Northern Health and with Interior Health, every day to

implement.

Mr. Speaker: Member for Cariboo-Chilcotin, supplemental.

L. Doerkson: I think we’ve discussed this before. Minister, the current

approach is not working, and the results are clear. The North is

disproportionately represented in overdose deaths. The 23 public health

experts of the death review panel said very clearly that a 30/60/90-day

action plan is both realistic and urgently needed.

The question is: will the minister act as urgently as the panel

has recommended and meet the May 9 deadline to present an action

plan?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Our government has been acting urgently. We share the urgency

identified in the coroner’s reports. The report also correctly notes

that one of the impediments to being able to mount a response to this

public health emergency has been impeded by the lack of a system of care

for mental health and addictions.

When we formed government in 2017, it was not in place. We’ve been

acting to fill all of the gaps in the system of care since then. That is

not built in a 30/60/90-day framework. I wish that it could be. We

continue to add treatment, overdose prevention, medication-assisted

treatment, safe supply, anti-stigma campaigns, applying for

decriminalization, working with every health authority.

I’ll take this opportunity to give thanks again to the health

authorities that are fighting two public health emergencies,

implementing a system of care and rolling out an unprecedented

immunization campaign. I think all members in the House would recognize

that we’re asking more of our health authorities than we ever have

before. We wish that they could work faster. We are there with them and

working together.

HEALTH COMMITTEE

TERMS OF REFERENCE AND

TIMELINE

T. Halford: I, like many in this House and many of the families — the 6,007

British Columbians lost, their families — after the report that we saw

yesterday would have hoped and would have expected this minister to come

into this House today and embrace and support the work that was done by

this panel and support the recommendations, the key recommendations that

are to save lives.

Seven people a day, and one of the key findings from the coroner:

a lack of urgency. What we’ve seen from this minister today is a lack of

urgency. I think those families, British Columbians, deserve better than

what they’re getting from this minister today. I will say this, and I

think we can all agree: time is of the essence.

Yesterday the Premier committed to work on the terms of reference

for the Health Committee, and as the Premier knows, this report from the

coroner has specific timelines, timelines that are put in place to try

and…

[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker: Please continue.

T. Halford: …curb the dramatic numbers, the tragic numbers we are seeing every

single month.

[11:05 a.m.]

Can the Premier confirm when the committee will be activated, and

will he use the panel’s recommendations as terms of reference so we can

get to work now, as British Columbians expect, and make sure that we are

doing everything we can to support the recommendations that were put out

yesterday?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question, and I can confirm for the

member that the terms of reference are being worked on. It is our

expectation that they will be tabled, that the motion to activate the

committee will be tabled on the Monday that we return to this House

after the two-week break.

[End of question period.]

Mr. Speaker: The member for West Vancouver–Sea to Sky has a point of

order.

J. Sturdy: I rise on a point of order to clarify the correct name of the bill

which I introduced earlier today. That bill is intituled the Crown Land

Residential Lease Act, 2022.

Tabling Documents

Hon. D. Eby: I present the annual report of the Labour Relations Board for the year

ending December 31, 2021.

Hon. G. Chow: May I ask for leave to introduce a member.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Hon. G. Chow: I’m just as surprised as the member for Abbotsford West to find former

Premier Glen Clark sitting in the House. Certainly, this brought back a lot

of memories for me, because former Premier Glen Clark and former MLA Jenny

Kwan were instrumental in helping Vancouver Chinatown to build a museum

complex that’s attached to the Chinese Cultural Centre. I know the former

Premier probably doesn’t remember, but I remember the sod-turning ceremony

well.

The building of the Chinese Cultural Centre is a very passionate

project of mine from 1970, ’80 and ’90. Of course, Mr. Premier, we upped the

game, and we just, of course, approved the Chinese Canadian Museum. We

funded it to a large sum in order to carry on the history. Thank

you.

Thank you for the opportunity to recognize the former Premier, Glen

Clark.

G. Kyllo: I seek leave to present a petition.

Mr. Speaker: Please proceed.

Petitions

G. Kyllo: I’m presenting a petition that was put together by a hard-working

constituent in my riding, Patsy Vetter, from the community of Enderby, with

over 1,600 signatures calling for the government of B.C. to prioritize

recruitment of a family doctor, noting the large senior population and the

detrimental impacts of residents not having access to a family doctor or

timely access to quality health care.

Tabling Documents

Hon. J. Osborne: I move to table a 2022-23 annual service plan for the new Ministry of

Land, Water and Resource Stewardship. Because my ministry was established

after February 22, a service plan is not required for the ministry this

fiscal year under the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. However,

one has been produced to be consistent with the other service plan

requirements of the act, and in the spirit of transparency and

accountability.

This service plan covers fiscal years 2022-23 to 2024-25, and over the

next 12 months, the ministry will further refine the goals, objectives and

performance measures as our work with First Nations, communities and

stakeholders is undertaken.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I seek leave to move a motion.

Leave granted.

Motions Without Notice

MEMBERSHIP CHANGE TO FREEDOM OF

INFORMATION AND

PROTECTION OF

PRIVACY ACT REVIEW SPECIAL COMMITTEE

Hon. M. Farnworth: By leave, I move:

[That Kelli Paddon , MLA replace Janet Routledge ,

MLA as a Member of the Special Committee to Review the Freedom of

Information and Protection of Privacy Act.]

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Minister of Land, Water and Resource Stewardship, please seek leave to

table this.

Hon. J. Osborne: Mr. Speaker, I seek leave to table the service plan.

Leave granted.

Mr. Speaker: Okay. Now it’s accepted.

Motions Without Notice

MEMBERSHIP CHANGE TO FREEDOM OF

INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF

PRIVACY ACT REVIEW SPECIAL

COMMITTEE

(continued)

Mr. Speaker: Government House Leader, we’ve heard the motion.

Motion approved.

[11:10 a.m.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: In this chamber, I call continued second reading on Bill 6, Budget

Measures Implementation Act.

In the Committee of Supply, Douglas Fir Room,

Section A, I call the

estimates for the Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 6 — BUDGET MEASURES

IMPLEMENTATION ACT, 2022

(continued)

B. Banman: It is a pleasure to again get in the House and debate Bill 6, the

Budget Measures Implementation Act. I’ll just recap a little bit, if I

may. This bill that is before the House has some serious ramifications

for affordability in British Columbia and for British Columbians. This

particular bill, as its name implies, is outlined in the budget of 2022,

and it brings into force some new taxes that this government has decided

to impose upon British Columbians.

Bills like this send a message. They set a tone. This particular

one, as I was saying…. While I’m grateful that there will be some relief

for those that are in my riding and others that were affected by the

floods and that there will be some leeway with regard to the speculation

tax for homes that have been affected with that in those areas, that’s

about the only real positive that I can actually say about this bill,

sadly.

We are going through unprecedented times. Inflation is at an

all-time high; gas prices are at an all-time high. The cost of living is

skyrocketing, and we know that nearly half of British Columbians are

$200 away from insolvency. That was prior to the recent jumps at the

pumps.

What this government has done is to basically levy a bunch of

taxes which they know — in their own report, in the budget itself —

target low-income and middle-class families: single parents that are

trying to get their kids to and from school, families that are trying to

put food on their table and keep a roof over their head.

At the same time, it eliminates the oversight and gives the

ministers and the Premier anywhere from a $20,000- to a $40,000-a-year

raise. There’s a message. It says: “We’re going to help ourselves, and

we’re going to get lower-income and middle-income families to pay for

it. We don’t have to follow the oversight anymore that was applied with

regard to ministers and the Premier. We’re going to get rid of that so

that we can make sure that we get ours.” The lower-income and

middle-class families are going to pay the burden of that

price.

[11:15 a.m.]

It’s shameful. Right now at a time when families are $200 away

from insolvency, what wouldn’t they do with $20,000 extra on their

bottom line? It’s a slap in the face to people. It’s a slap in the face

to families barely clinging on, because it allows this government to

increase their pay while doing little to help affordability, and it

actually makes life less affordable in British Columbia.

One of the taxes will be a one-cent-a-litre increase at the pumps

— like we’re not paying enough already. It also is out of touch. It’s

fine to live in the Lower Mainland and on the southern tip of Vancouver

Island, where a heat pump will actually work. Rather than just

incentivizing that, they’re now going to punish those up north, where a

heat pump just won’t work.

When the weather gets, as we’ve heard, down below 25 below, they

have to have a secondary source of heat to work. Heat pumps just don’t

work there. Even if they did, they most likely are looking at thousands

and thousands of dollars to upgrade their electrical systems to be able

to make them work.

As we heard from one of the previous members that spoke to this

bill, the heating and air-conditioning experts were not even consulted.

It is an oversight that should not have happened. Basically, it punishes

those that live in rural and northern communities and only helps the

people in the Lower Mainland, where this equipment is actually going to

be effective and work.

We’re not saying that a heat pump isn’t a great idea. What we’re

saying is: why penalize some for where they live, those that actually

provide lots of resources that allow those of us in the Lower Mainland

the ability to stay where we are and live here in the Lower Mainland and

on the southern tip of Vancouver Island?

I think one of the most outrageous parts of this is the assessment

to get the sales tax on used cars. We know that those who buy a used car

are lower- and middle-class families, generally. If this government

thinks that you got a good deal, it says: “No, no, we don’t like that

price that you’ve paid. We’re going to tell you how much we’re going to

tax you on it.”

At $200, as some…. I think of a single mom that saved up whatever

she can to be able to buy a vehicle. And then to be hit with a penalty

and then the bureaucracy to prove that that’s actually what she paid for

it and have it assessed, it just won’t be worth the hassle, and

government knows it.

Government knows that people aren’t going to go through the hoops,

the bureaucracy and the paperwork that are required to try to save a few

hundred dollars, which right now means the difference of being able to

get to work that week. It’s outrageous.

We even heard one of the members in this House basically refer to

those types of people as tax evaders. Yet if you pay too much, if you

overpay, they don’t say: “Wait a minute. We’re going to give you a deal

here. We’re going to reduce the PST on this because you’ve paid way over

market value for this particular used vehicle. We’re going to reduce

that.” No, no, no. You’re going to get paid either the highest or what

the government tells you your vehicle is worth. They basically called a

lot of British Columbians cheats. I’ve heard a lot from people that are

outraged.

[11:20 a.m.]

The other one that’s coming in is the marketplace tax, a PST on

marketplace, a PST on used goods. What’s next? Garage sale police? Are

we going to start going around and finding out who’s advertised a garage

sale and start asking them to remit the PST on that? It’s effectively

the same thing.

PST on a used pair of jeans that a single mom needs to clothe her

children. A PST on a used set of pots and pans. The tax was already paid

on these things in the first place anyway. This is an attack on low

income, and it’s an attack on middle-class British

Columbians.

It also is going to add a tobacco tax. While I agree that a tax on

tobacco helps reduce the use of it, it is not lost that most of the

statistics will show you that those who consume tobacco products are

also low income and middle income. Another tax on the poor.

If you’ve got enough money to buy an electric car, if you happen

to be one of the haves and have enough money or happen to be a minister

with a nice pay raise, you can go buy an electric car. There’s no PST on

that. Here’s a news flash: low income wish they could buy an electric

car. They wish they could buy an electric car. Do you think they want to

buy a 15-year-old minivan that you’re now going to tell them how much is

worth? No. They don’t have that option.

It’s bad enough they are paying more at the pumps. Come April 1 —

there’s their April Fools’ joke — there’s going to be another cent, like

the prices we’re paying are not bad enough. This, coming from the

government that brags and says they are all about low income, the

champions of them. As a matter of fact, they give this side of the House

a hard time for being heartless and cruel and thoughtless. Yet in the

budget, it said right there that it is going to predominantly hurt lower

income and middle class, and they did it anyway.

The Finance Minister implemented these knowing full well it was

going to drastically affect low-income and middle-income families. I

would say that would be more in line with some of the words and names

that that side of the House refers to this side of the House with. I

think it’s cruel. I think it’s cruel to hurt low-income families this

way.

One of the things that bothers me, as well, is that the Finance

Minister…. This government has been given the notable award of being the

most secret government. There’s an award I wouldn’t want to have — the

most secretive government. The Finance Minister is now putting in place

that they want to further reduce the transparency of this House and hide

government decisions — or the ability to hide. It doesn’t improve

transparency; it actually reduces it. It’s like the track record of

secrecy that we’ve had thus far hasn’t been bad enough?

The Finance Minister now wants to have the power to make financial

decisions that bypass the Treasury Board. The Treasury Board is there

for a reason. It’s there to make sure that the taxpayers’ dollars are

spent wisely. It’s there as a check. It’s there as a balance.

[11:25 a.m.]

The Finance Minister is in full knowledge, in my opinion, that she

is now bypassing the Treasury Board and will be able to make any

financial decisions behind closed doors without the oversight of the

Treasury Board. It’s a pattern I find extremely disturbing.

I will remind the House that my role, a critic role, is that of

Citizens’ Services, which includes transparency, FOIs and the ability of

being able — for the public, the press, members of opposition, members

of the Third Party — to check the transparency. Good democracy has this

check and balance. Is it tedious? Is it annoying? If I was on that side

of the House, I would say it probably is.

It is probably, to me, the most troubling

part in this entire bill

— the ability for the Finance Minister, without any oversight

whatsoever, to be able to make whatever financial decisions the Finance

Minister sees fit. It’s appalling, and I believe it is a blatant

disregard to the principles that we apply in this House. I think it’s a

blatant disregard of good governance and democracy, and every British

Columbian should be yelling from the rooftops that it’s

wrong.

There are a number of issues in this bill that I find are almost

mean-spirited in a way. What is the purpose of removing the oversight of

the treasury committee if you have nothing that you wish to hide? The

unfortunate thing is now decisions will be questioned because that

oversight has been removed. Every decision this Finance Minister makes,

if it does not go through the Treasury Board, will be open to

skepticism. People will be questioning what the motive was.

Why?

Had we used the systems and committees that are in place…. And

this government has a lack of wanting to do that, but they’re there for

a reason. They’re there, actually, to help protect government. They’re

there to protect the best interests of the taxpayer. They’re there to

actually protect the Finance Minister, because the motives will be

transparent. It will have healthy debate. I find it alarming. I find it

disturbing. I find it a pattern.

The Finance Minister has talked an awful lot about loopholes and

closing loopholes. Yet when it comes to this, this isn’t just a

loophole. This is a blaring, gaping hole. It is. It’s disturbing. I wish

the Finance Minister and this government would give it a rethink. I

think it would be in their own best interest.

Let me review. We’re going to give…. Ministers and the Premier are

going to get $20,000 to $40,000 a year of a pay hike with no oversight.

They don’t have to meet goals anymore. We’re just going to do it, as we

heard one of the members say, “because we’re in tough times, so we

deserve it.” I don’t think that British Columbians think they deserve

it. Rather than tightening their belt along with the rest of British

Columbians, they’ve now imposed new taxes which are going to hurt

low-income families, and they knew it going in.

[11:30 a.m.]

Champions of the poor, indeed. Indeed. Putting a PST on a used

pair of blue jeans, on used clothes, on used pots and pans. That doesn’t

sound like you’re championing anything other than your own

pocketbook.

Well, you get a raise, and then you help your buddies that have

got enough money to be able to go buy an electric car — which is out of

many people’s price range — then punish people for the geographic area

that they live in because we couldn’t be bothered to consult those in

the heating industry as to whether or not this was actually a good idea.

Rather than just add an incentive to a heat pump, as I was saying, this

now will actually penalize people that have to have natural gas in their

homes, by adding a carbon tax and a fuel tax on that.

There’s a lack of thought in this bill. There’s a lack of planning

in this bill. It seems as if it was rushed together. It seems as if this

government does not wish to be transparent. Their actions speak louder

than their words.

It sends a message, all right. It sends a message that ministers

and the Premier will help themselves on the backs of low-income and

middle-income people. That’s what it says. It’s what’s in the bill. It’s

right here. “We’re going to tax you on your used goods on Marketplace

that have already been taxed, and we’re going to give ourselves a pay

hike, because we think we deserve it.”

There’s not much to cheer about in this bill. It certainly isn’t

much to celebrate if you happen to be low income or middle income or if

you live in the North or if you’re trying to get a good deal on a used

car. Like I said, I thank the minister for helping those in my riding

and those that suffered from floods. Other than that, there’s not much

to write home about and celebrate for the average British Columbian in

this particular measure — all done behind the secrecy of closed

doors.

The Finance Minister no longer has to have the oversight of the

Treasury Board. That is incredibly disturbing.

S. Furstenau: I rise today to speak to Bill 6, the Budget Implementation Act.

This legislation comes around every year. It’s

an act to bring into

force and adjust provincial legislation in line with the provincial

budget.

Unfortunately, the bill before us today does more than fulfil the

technical requirement that occurs annually. It continues what I see as a

worrying trend that has intensified over the last year, which involves

restrictions on government transparency, a concentration of powers in

the name of efficiency and an overall lack of respect for democratic

institutions.

Before I address those pieces of the Budget Measures

Implementation Act, I do want to make one thing clear. It is difficult

to address this legislation as wholly good or wholly bad. There are

components of it that are necessary and important, especially as we push

to reduce our emissions and electrify our province.

I speak in particular of the PST exemption for used zero-emission

vehicles, for example. I’m also glad British Columbians will not have to

pay PST when they buy a heat pump for their home. British Columbians

shouldn’t be paying higher fees to reduce their dependence on fossil

fuels. These measures are a good step but nowhere near what’s needed in

response to the climate emergency.

[11:35 a.m.]

A government that treated climate change like the emergency it is

would pass legislation to ensure that no new houses or buildings in B.C.

would be using gas or oil for heating or cooling. It would embark on a

historic effort to create 15-minute communities to ensure that everyone

has access to reliable, affordable and, dare I say, luxurious public

transit.

An appropriate response to the climate emergency would be to end

all subsidies to oil and gas and instead ensure that distributed,

locally produced renewable energy projects are being built in every

region of the province, creating a stable, reliable and affordable

energy network for British Columbians and divorcing us from the fossil

fuel cartel that profits from climate-disaster-creating industries and

contributes to the destabilized geopolitical world that we are living

in.

A government that treated climate change like the emergency that

it is would not hang its hat on a suite of policies designed to

incentivize a slow march of decarbonization. It would orient its entire

agenda around food security, water security, protection of biodiversity

and a recognition that we need to embed equity into a deep

transformation of how we live and work. This government would actually

take the advice and guidance of Mariana Mazzucato and stop measuring our

economy using GDP, which puts weather disasters, highway destruction and

flooding in the net positive because they generate spending.

It would recognize instead that we need a well-being approach to

measuring our economy, a health-for-all goal that values planetary

health. We need strong social foundations that promote equity. We need

to take human health seriously and ensure that “every person can thrive

both physically and emotionally” and that people have “the tools to lead

lives of dignity and opportunity in healthy communities.” Mariana

Mazzucato lays this all out in an extraordinary

article she published on

International Women’s Day.

A government’s budget tells us a great deal about their

priorities. In the times that we are in, these priorities need to be

focused well beyond a four-year election cycle.

Deputy Speaker: Excuse me, Member. If I might, I just want to remind that we’re

speaking on the Budget Measures Implementation Act, as opposed to the

bud­get. Just to stay true to the ruling of the Assistant Deputy

Speaker, we should try and stay focused on the implementation act. Thank

you.

S. Furstenau: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am about to get to specific clauses.

However, what I’m speaking to is the overall scene of the Budget

Implementation Act.

Governments have another duty in addition to treating climate

change like the emergency that it is. That is to uphold democracy and

transparency. We’re not elected because a public wants governments to

have carte blanche to do what they please without oversight. We are all

elected as legislators to work together, to tell the truth and to

protect the public interest.

On that count, we have seen choices being made in the Budget

Implementation Act that continue the trend that we have seen, for

example, with the changes to the Freedom of Information and Protection

of Privacy Act. Buried between the tax breaks for electric vehicles,

there are small technical amendments in this act. In a briefing with

ministry staff, I was told that these changes were to improve

efficiency.

It’s interesting that the institutions of democracy, in their

creation and over their history, have actually put in several ways to

decrease efficiency. There are checks and balances on power that are

built into democratic institutions to slow down the capacity for a small

number of people to make decisions.

Clause 5 of this bill, for example, repeals the requirement for

actual surplus or deficit run by a ministry to be made public. Although

there might not be a meaningful shift in information caused by this

precise clause, the question is: why have it? Efficiency? Communication

control?

[11:40 a.m.]

Clause 8 changes the Budget Transparency and Account­ability

Act, the act that requires government to include, in estimates,

information about major capital projects — which the public has the

right to see and the Legislature has the right to question about — any

project that costs over $50 million.

The question is: what is the intention of these changes? Are they

changing these requirements so that information doesn’t have to be

provided if the government is “planning to announce” a project within 30

days of the budget, so that if government has “plans to have an

announcement” replete with fanfare, they conveniently don’t have to make

that information public as part of the budget?

Why do this? The only explanation is that it’s a tactic to help

control narratives and decide when it is best suited to claim political

capital on big announcements. It’s a tactic to reduce the information

the public has access to in the budget, a tactic allowing governments to

frame capital investments in a way that best suits them on their

timelines.

Clause 11 of this bill also concerns me. It allows the Treasury

Board to delegate any of its powers or duties, and states that any

delegated activity is covered by

section 12 of the Freedom of

Information and Protection of Privacy Act — which, of course, was

amended to suit the government in the fall.

Currently the Treasury Board is not a particularly transparent

aspect of government decision-making. It’s covered by all sorts of

privacy. It’s the arm of government that makes financial decisions, but

it is, as least, an arm of government not solely made up of cabinet

ministers. Current members of Treasury Board include the Ministers of

Finance, Environment, Forests, Children and Family Development, Advanced

Education, Land and Water Stewardship, Energy and Mines, Indigenous

Affairs, and Education. It includes the Minister of State for

Infrastructure and MLAs for Vancouver–False Creek, Maple Ridge–Mission

and Vancouver-Hastings.

According to the changes made by this piece of legislation, the

Treasury Board can delegate all of their decisions to just the chair and

vice-chair, and those decisions would be reviewed later. With these

changes, those two individuals can now, if they wish, make significant

financial decisions of this province without even the limited oversight

of the Treasury Board.

Two people making significant financial decisions for a province

of five million people. Two people decide how public money is spent —

two people who don’t have to answer to my colleagues or members of the

Legislature. Two people whose decisions as representatives of the

Treasury Board are not FOIable or publicized. Two people who don’t even

have to include their plans for projects over $50 million in the

budgetary documents if they plan on announcing it within 30 days of the

budget.

I asked experts about this. I wrote to economists, professors,

lawyers, the Privacy Commissioner. Among their feedback were quotes such

as: “This legislation is confusing,” “We don’t understand why these

changes are being made,” “They seem like silly political changes,” and

“They seem to concentrate more power in cabinet.” I asked the ministry.

I was told that this will improve efficiency.

At committee stage, I will ask the minister: democracies are meant

to have checks and balances on power, and how governments spend money is

definitely an exertion of power. Democracies are meant to ensure that

there is legislative oversight of the executive, that there are

mechanisms for effective representation, that we recognize the

extraordinary burden we all have to upholding the principles of

democracy, the dignity of this institution in our work here.

We are transient occupiers of these seats, but we should all be

totally committed to leaving this place better, more transparent, more

accountable. We should lament every erosion of this in this

Legislature.

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. M. Dean: It’s a real honour to rise in the House today to be able to talk

about the Budget Measures Implementation Act.

Budget 2022 had some significant elements in it that are going to

make a difference to people in British Columbia on a day-to-day basis.

I’d like to start by acknowledging the work of staff and all of the

efforts that go into the work that the staff of my ministry do in making

sure that on a day-to-day basis, children and youth across this province

are well-cared-for and well-supported and are connected to their

families and to their communities and to their culture as

well.

In Budget 2022, our government made a significant multiministry

commitment to young people who have been in the care of government and

who are transitioning to independence. I’ve heard from many of my

colleagues here and friends in community that as parents and as

grandparents, we don’t expect young people to just have to leave home

and have to find their own way from the age of 19. So through Budget

2022, we’re implementing measures to make sure that young people who are

transitioning from government care also receive supports.

I will be talking about the Budget Measures Implemen­tation

Act, but I know that part of the role of talking about the

implementation act is also recognizing the content of the budget and the

influence in outcomes that the budget has as well.

Budget 2022 is supported by the implementation act. There are two

sections in that act that I will get to. One

section talks about non-tax

measures, and then there’s another

section that talks about tax

measures. It’s just an illustration of the different ways and measures

we can put into place that make a difference in lives and the quality of

lives.

For example, to talk about youth leaving care, it’s not just

financial but putting measures in place, extending emergency measures so

that young people are able to stay in their home, so they don’t have the

threat of homelessness or having to find their way in the world in a way

that is particularly stressful and recognizing that there’s already

trauma that has been experienced.

In terms of the Budget Measures Implementation Act, there are a

range of housekeeping amendments that are proposed to the Budget

Transparency and Accountability Act. For example, education and health

sector organizations will have an exemption to report capital projects

over $50 million and to provide for a temporary delay in reporting

capital projects over $50 million where a late commitment has been made

with a 30-day cutoff before the main estimates are presented.

I’m sure members of this House are very well aware that our

government has been investing in capital projects in education and in

health. Indeed, I have the Health Minister here in chambers with me, who

I’m sure would be able to list the number of hospitals that we’re

investing in, that we’re upgrading and that we’re expanding throughout

the whole of the province.

We’ve made a lot of announcements and promises, and we are

delivering on those. We are modernizing hospitals and health care

centres around the province because we know that taking care of British

Columbians is absolutely vital. We’ve seen that not only through this

pandemic, but since 2017, our government has been investing in the

health care sector and in that infrastructure and in the education

sector as well.

We’re talking about the capital plan and capital program of the

Education Ministry. Our government has been investing in a range of

schools and in seismic upgrades. I live in a community that’s probably

the fastest-growing community — not in Canada, but in B.C. We’ve had a

number of new schools. In fact, the high school in my community, Royal

Bay, has had an extension and is now the largest high school on

Vancouver Island. We’ve also been investing, for example, in

playgrounds.

It’s really important that we are able to make amendments to the

capital plan, through this act, in order to support our capital

investments and programming that’s improving the quality of education

for children and young people across British Columbia.

[11:50 a.m.]

There are other amendments as well.

Part 2 of the bill, for

example, really reflects our commitment to addressing the climate crisis

and supports our CleanBC plan, as well. We’ve made various amendments to

tax credits and the provincial sales tax as well. I’ll give you a couple

of examples, hon. Speaker. The bill authorizes regulations to be made in

order to provide two items of PST relief. So a provincial sales tax

exemption for used zero-emission vehicles and for heat pumps.

I’ve heard from a lot of people in my community. They’re very

interested in what they can do as individuals to address the climate

crisis. What people are able to do is to make some alterations,

renovations, modernizations of their homes, for example. Installing a

heat pump is one of those areas that I know people are very interested

in as well.

The act will remove the PST from all electric heat pumps and will

also increase the PST on fossil-fuel-heating equipment. These revenues

would offset the cost of new incentives to make heat pumps more

affordable for homeowners in rural and northern British Columbia. So

we’re thinking about the situation and the homes of people across the

whole of the province.

I know, talking to people in my community, that they see that

providing incentives, such as altering the provincial sales tax, are

ways that people tell us they want government to provide those more

affordable means for people to be able to address their own energy

consumption and make their own contribution to reducing

emissions.

The motor fuel tax is also amended to authorize regulations

expanding an existing exemption for hydrogen, to include hydrogen fuel

used in internal combustion engine vehicles.

Hon. Speaker, what you’re seeing here is a range of measures in

this act that are supporting the CleanBC plan, and the intention, of

course, of the CleanBC plan is to reduce emissions. We know that British

Columbians are absolutely committed to doing their part for the

environment. They expect us, as government, to provide ways to support

them and also to support businesses and to support different sectors and

industries to bring down their emissions and to be able to make that

contribution.

The School Act is amended to remove the industrial property tax

credit on major industry costs for 2023.

The bill also amends the Tobacco Tax Act to remove the PST

exemption for tobacco. We know how harmful smoking is, especially the

younger that you start. We need to find different measures and different

ways of protecting people from such an addictive substance that’s so

harmful and creates ill health for so many people. We have seen that

across so many different societies.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

We have to be very careful. We can’t just implement one measure

and expect that is necessarily going to create the change that we would

expect. There will be unintended consequences, so we have to implement

different measures and evaluate them. So we’re implementing this measure

through this act of amending the Tobacco Tax Act.

The speculation and vacancy tax is amended to temporarily expand

the exemption for hazardous or damaged residential property to apply to

properties that were damaged by the floods in late 2021 and to make the

exemption for strata accommodation properties permanent.

There’s a reminder there that our province has experienced so many

challenges over the past year, not just climate-related. But we have had

the heat dome, wildfires, the floods, as well as the retraumatizing

findings at so-called residential schools. By taking measures in this

act, it’s a further illustration of our approach as a government to

support British Columbians across the province, recognizing all the

challenges not only of two health emergencies as well….

Mr. Speaker: Noting the hour, Member.

Hon. M. Dean: Noting the time, I move adjournment of the debate.

Hon. M. Dean moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported progress, was

granted leave to sit again.

Hon. A. Dix moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1 p.m. today.

The House adjourned at 11:55 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE

DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

MENTAL HEALTH AND

ADDICTIONS

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); B. Bailey in the

chair.

The committee met at 11:14 a.m.

On Vote 39: ministry operations, $24,602,000.

The Chair: Minister, do you have any opening remarks?

[11:15 a.m.]

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Welcome, to my critic and to the members of the

committee.

I am grateful to be on the traditional territory of the

Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking people, the

Songhees and Esquimalt First Nations. I’m also honoured to be elected on

Snuneymuxw land.

I’m also honoured to serve as British Columbia’s second-ever

Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. I’m very fortunate to work

alongside many dedicated, passionate people who are actively building a

comprehensive system of mental health and addictions care to serve

British Columbians throughout the province.

Every day our ministry’s work is informed by the life-saving work

of practitioners and peers on the front line of the toxic drug and

mental health crisis. I’m eternally grateful for their

service.

One of the very dedicated groups of professional people is our

ministry staff. I’d like to introduce to the committee the ministry

staff in attendance today — my deputy minister, Christine Massey;

assistant deputy minister Darryl Sturtevant, sitting behind me;

executive director Lori MacKenzie; along with the ministry’s financial

lead, Tracee Schmidt, to my left. There are others on the phone. I’m

grateful for their support today.

The past few years have been extraordinarily difficult for so many

British Columbians. Not only has COVID-19 put a strain on people in

unexpected and challenging ways, but on top of that, we’ve seen an

unprecedented number of lives lost to the toxic drug crisis. Our

government is dealing with simultaneous public health emergencies, each

having a terribly compounding effect on each other.

Despite these challenges, progress is being made on multiple

fronts. I’m proud of the work our government has achieved so far to

build a comprehensive system of mental health and addictions care where

there was not one in place in 2017. It began with Pathway to Hope, built

on the advice of British Columbians from all parts of the province and

introduced by my friend and predecessor, Judy Darcy, the first Minister

of Mental Health and Addictions for British Columbia — the first in

Canada.

That was 2019. We’ve continued to expand on that system from the

ground up. In March 2020, B.C. became the first province in Canada to

offer prescribed safer supply, a critical step in preventing overdoses

from toxic drugs.

Since we introduced risk mitigation guidance, more than 12,000

people have been helped by this groundbreaking response. Critical

medication has been prescribed by more than 3,000 clinicians, with the

number of prescribers increasing every month.

In addition, more than 24,000 people each month receive

medication-assisted treatment, with 1,700 clinicians prescribing

medication for opioid use disorder. The second phase of prescribed safer

supply is now being implemented in health authorities and federally

funded programs. But that is not all we’re doing.

Our province is also leading the way on decriminalization. Last

year British Columbia was the first province in Canada to apply to the

federal government for an exemption to remove criminal penalties for

people who are in possession of small amounts of illicit substances.

Through decriminalization, we can reduce the fear and stigma that keep

people silent about their drug use, that force them into using drugs

alone — which often, in this terrible time, means dying alone — and

remove a barrier to them accessing the help they need and deserve,

because substance use and addictions is a public health issue and not a

criminal one.

While we look forward to Health Canada’s response to our

decriminalization application, we continue to work with our partners in

Ottawa on this submission, and I know the federal government understands

the urgency. We hope to hear an answer soon.

Safer supply and decriminalization are just some of the tools in

our toolkit in the fight against toxic drugs. We know there is much more

to do.

That’s why, in Budget 2021, our government made a historic $500

million investment in mental health and addictions support across the

spectrum of treatment and recovery, including $97 million for integrated

mental health and substance use care for children, youth and young

adults; $75 million to improve access and quality of mental health

services; $132 million to make treatment and recovery services more

accessible, including withdrawal management and wraparound treatment

services and other supports; $45 million to accelerate responses to the

overdose emergency; $22.6 million to expand safe supply; and $152

million to expand access to treatment services for mental health and

addictions.

In Budget 2022, we are continuing that investment, with $164

million over the next three years to open at least 20 new complex care

housing services to serve up to 500 people across the

province.

[11:20 a.m.]

That’s just to start. Our government will continue to invest in

broader services and supports for people with mental health and

substance use challenges over the months and years to come.

British Columbians are emerging from an unprecedented time. Never

has there been more need to prioritize mental health and substance use

supports. That’s exactly what we’re doing. Step by step, we are

transforming the mental health and addictions care system in British

Columbia so that British Columbians can access the mental health and

substance use supports they need and deserve.

Since I became minister, never have so many people worked so hard

and stood up so many supports. Clearly, these changes cannot happen fast

enough. We’re swimming against a rising tide of need, but we need to

keep going, keep working together. We will not stop working until we

build a comprehensive system of care that works for all British

Columbians.

The Chair: Thank you, Minister, and welcome to your team.

Member for Surrey–White Rock, do you have opening

remarks?

T. Halford: Madam Chair, I want to thank the minister, and I want to thank the

minister’s staff as we are about to embark on this journey.

I will say this. I think that there is no file that is probably

more important than the one that we’re about to discuss right now, given

the current state and the fact that we are losing seven British

Columbians a day.

I look forward to the conversation. I assume that it will be…. I

know it will be respectful, but I’m also hoping that the dialogue for

both is good, in that when a question is asked, we get an appropriate

answer. I will do my best to do the same.

The Chair: I invite the member to begin his questions.

T. Halford: In regard to the death review panel that we saw yesterday, can the

minister confirm that this ministry and the government can meet all the

recommendations and the timelines laid out by the coroner’s report

yesterday?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Our government has been acting urgently to respond to the toxic

drug crisis since we were elected in 2017. The report correctly

recognizes how important a continuum of care is to that — to solve the

overdose crisis. Building a system of care does not happen in 30, 60, 90

days. I wish that it were so. This is a highly complex crisis that has

evolved and changed over the last five years, and our response has

evolved also.

The recommendations confirm that the work we have done and are

doing is vital to ending the public health emergency. That’s why we’re

acting to decriminalize people who use drugs. That’s why we’re the first

province to bring forward a prescribed safe supply. That’s why we have

amended that program twice now and are in the process of implementing it

right now through every health authority. That’s why we’ve made historic

investments to build a continuum of care in the province, where there

wasn’t one before. That’s why we’re acting urgently, within our own

provincial jurisdiction, to meet the rising tide of need.

[11:25 a.m.]

We are committed to do more. We will consider all actions we can

take as a province to end the crisis. Our ministry is carefully

reviewing the recommendations and will be responding to the coroner

directly once that review is complete.

T. Halford: I draw the minister’s attention to recommendation No. 2: “By May

9, 2022, the Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions and the Ministry

of Health, in collaboration with the CEOs of the regional health

authorities, the Provincial Health Services Authority and the First

Nations Health Authority will develop a 30/60/90-day action

plan.”

Is the minister able to confirm today that that recommendation is

not achievable?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: The mandate letters of the health authorities — written both by

myself and Minister Dix, the Minister of Health — outline the health

authorities’ responsibilities in relation to overdose response. My

deputy meets regularly with the CEOs and her counterparts, including

yesterday. I met with the board chairs, all together, at the end of

February. I don’t have a precise date; it was a Friday. I’m meeting with

them directly.

In particular — notwithstanding that their unprecedented expansion

of programs and services to prevent overdoses and respond to them has

been consuming them through the course of the pandemic — they’ve

signalled that pivoting away from a singular, deep focus on COVID, they

want to reactivate their plans and engage in a different way. That will

certainly change the conversation. My staff meets with their

counterparts, collectively, every month. Our ministry’s overdose

emergency response centre meets with the operational staff every month

and has daily conversations. This is long-standing, ongoing and embedded

in all of our mandate instructions.

[11:30 a.m.]

T. Halford: I think the recommendation centres around not building a system

but developing a plan.

Is the answer from the minister that she cannot meet that

recommendation, recommendation 2, that was put forward yesterday? Can

the minister meet that deadline in that target that was put forward

yesterday?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: The plan on overdose emergency response, although initially

implemented in 2017, has continued to evolve as the toxic drug crisis

has evolved. It’s embedded in our overdose emergency response centre’s

plan. It’s embedded in the mandate letters given to the health

authorities. It continues to evolve, and we continue to work with the

health authorities.

We’ll continue to take all advice from people on the front line,

from the practitioners who are working very hard to save lives. The

health authorities, as our service deliverers, are a key partner in

that. That’s why — as my previous answer indicated — we work with them

all the time in regular meetings, and we’ll continue to.

T. Halford: In the question that I asked, I think the minister, in question

period, was a little bit more direct on the specific 30, 60, 90 days. So

I will use that as the basis. My understanding is that that

recommendation cannot be met. I think that’s fair, based on the

minister’s answer in the House, in question period.

I will go to recommendation No. 3, which is: “By April 11, 2022,

the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions,

and the CEOs of the regional health authorities, the Provincial Health

Services Authority and the First Nations Health Authority will review

the 2017 illicit drug toxicity death review panel recommendation 1,

‘Ensure accountability for the substance use system of

care.’”

The recommendations go on. I’m sure the minister is familiar with

recommendation No. 3. The target date is April 11, 2022. Can the

minister meet that date?

[11:35 a.m.]

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Since the release of the 2017 illicit drug toxicity death review

panel report, my ministry and the Minister of Health have worked to

address each aspect of the recommendation.

First, on leadership through the overdose emergency response

centre that my ministry has, new leadership has been established at

multiple levels to escalate the response to the emergency.

In relation to the recommendations on provincial regulations,

amendments to the Community Care and Assisted Living Act have been

brought into force, enhancing provincial oversight powers. A new

regulation has been implemented for registered supportive recovery

residences, introducing new regulatory requirements in areas such as

staff training and competencies, service planning, organizational policy

requirements and tran­sition planning.

In relation to the provincial registry of licensed and regulated

programs, in addition to the new regulatory requirements for

assisted-living residences, changes to the Community Care and Assisted

Living Act that came into force in September 2018 have added a

requirement for the assisted-living registrar to post information about

unlawfully operating residences as well as

summary information about

substantiated complaints against supportive recovery

residences.

A registry of registered supportive recovery services, along with

this new information, is now available online to help people make

better, more informed choices about the types of recovery supported

services, because there’s a great variety in the types of services

offered. There is a website through Ministry of Health that is titled

Assisted Living Residences. In addition, every health authority

maintains a list of licensed programs and a list of all registered and

licensed services across the province. That is a public list, dated

March 2021, on the website of the B.C. Centre on Substance

Use.

Then finally, pursuing the recommendation on people with lived and

living experience, we regularly engage to inform all of our work

underway. Some examples include peer roles embedded within the overdose

emergency response centre; community action teams, which we fund across

the province; funding provided to establish peer coordinators and

supports in regional health authorities and the B.C. Centre for Disease

Control; ongoing engagement with and funding support provided to the PPN

network; and also, last summer, the establishment of — the first in

Canada, we believe — standards of practice and a new curriculum for peer

workers. That was led by peers. It’s going to be a really important part

of our implementation of complex-care housing and other health care

services across every health authority.

T. Halford: For clarification, the minister’s answer…. Was that addressing

recommendation No. 3? Okay. So is the minister saying that

recommendation 3 has been met?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: I’m speaking to the budget, the service plan and the work already

conducted, because that is within scope of the budget estimates

process.

T. Halford: The work and the scope and the recommendations are fairly targeted

at the Ministry of Mental Health, which I imagine is under the scope of

the minister and the scope of the budget and the estimates. So when

we’re looking at recommendation No. 3 and a specific target date, the

question to the minister is: can the minister meet the target date that

was set forward yesterday?

[11:40 a.m.]

Hon. S. Malcolmson: I’ve already answered that question — that that analysis is

underway. So I’m here to speak to our budget and to the programs that we

have in place, the programs we’ve completed, our service plan and

Pathway to Hope.

T. Halford: Forgive me. I’m new to this job. I didn’t hear an answer from the

minister. I thought the question was fairly direct.

The recommendation is fairly direct. The date is fairly definitive

— and the question. What I lined out when I made my opening remarks was

that I was hopeful that we could have a dialogue with the minister that

would actually give definitive answers when a question is

asked.

I asked a question on a specific date that is contained under the

mandate of the Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions — whether or not

that date was achievable. If it’s uncomfortable for the minister to

answer, or she doesn’t have the answer, that is fair. What I’m asking

is: can recommendation No. 3 — with the date of April 11, 2022 — be

met?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: I will repeat again that I’ve answered the member’s question. That

analysis is underway, and I welcome any of his questions about the

budget, the service plan and the Pathway to Hope, which are all the

focus of the budget estimates process.

T. Halford: Does the minister have the budget and the authority to meet the

target of April 11, 2022, on recommendation No. 3? The question is: in

the minister’s current budget, does she have the proper resources to

meet that recommendation? Can she fulfil it?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: That analysis is underway.

The Chair: Member, I’ll just remind you that we don’t want to get bogged

down in the process. So I’ll ask you if you could bring us a fresh

question. Thank you.

T. Halford: Can the Chair define for me what “bogged down in the process”

means?

The Chair: I’m just referring to the question having been asked similarly

three times now. So I’d like to provide a prompt to the member that

we consider a new question.

T. Halford: With all due respect to the Chair, if I get an answer, I’ll move

on to another question.

What I’ll say is this. The minister did indicate…. The minister

did indicate, in previous media remarks yesterday, that she had spoken

with the coroner. Did the minister indicate that the dates put forward

by the coroner were not achievable?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Madam Chair, I will again say that I’m very open to any questions

that the member has on the budget, on our service plan or on the

programs that my ministry has implemented.

T. Halford: Does the minister have the budget…? Does the minister have the

staff required to meet the recommendations, laid out by the death review

panel, that we saw yesterday?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Asked and answered.

T. Halford: Sorry, then I must be a little bit confused. Can the minister

repeat the answer? I didn’t…. Maybe I missed it with the minister’s

remarks. Can the minister repeat the answer on the question I just

asked? I must have missed it.

Hon. S. Malcolmson: I’ll repeat that the analysis of the member’s question is

underway.

[11:45 a.m.]

T. Halford: Can the minister define…? The fact is that she has indicated that

she was briefed on the report by the coroner, that this report is

primarily under the scope of the Ministry of Mental Health and

Addictions, which has staff and which has a budget — which this minister

has indi­cated many times, publicly and in the House — to deal

with the matters that have been put forward yesterday.

I’m asking, with respect, does the minister have the budget

necessary to meet the recommendations put forward? Does the minister

have…? When we’re talking about recommendation No. 3, and she is saying

work is underway…. April 11 is a few weeks away. Can the minister

indicate the timelines for that work and when we can expect to actually

see an indication from the minister whether or not recommendation 3 is

achievable?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: The analysis of the report that was made public yesterday is

underway. I welcome the member’s questions to anything about service

delivery, my ministry’s budget, Pathway to Hope and the service plan

that we have filed, which is the focus of this budget review

process.

The Chair: I ask the minister to move the motion, please.

Hon. S. Malcolmson: I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to

sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:46 a.m.

Copyright © 2022 Legislative Assembly of British Columbia

The Official Report of Debates (Hansard) and webcasts of

chamber proceedings are available at www.leg.bc.ca .

For inquiries contact:

Hansard Services

612 Government Street

Victoria, BC V8V 1X4

Telephone: 250-387-3681

Email: hansardservices@leg.bc.ca

Published by Hansard Services under the authority

of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.