Fourth Session, 42nd Parliament

(2023) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Tuesday, March 28, 2023

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 291

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

South Delta Storm hockey team

I. Paton

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Western Hockey League playoffs and Kamloops Blazers

hockey team

T. Stone

Pharmacists

H. Sandhu

Turning Point Recovery Society

K. Kirkpatrick

King George Dragons basketball team and West End

community

S. Chandra Herbert

Mount Boucherie Bears Robotics Team

B. Stewart

Summit on social economy and role of non-profit

sector

M. Dykeman

Oral Questions

Crime in communities and action on community

safety

T. Stone

Hon. M. Farnworth

Release of data on crime in communities and

handling by justice system

M. de Jong

Hon. N. Sharma

Action on climate change and role of net-zero

concept and carbon offsets

A. Olsen

Hon. G. Heyman

Crime in communities and action on community

safety

E. Sturko

Hon. N. Sharma

Tent cities and government action on homelessness

and community safety

T. Halford

Hon. R. Kahlon

S. Bond

Tabling Documents

Property Assessment Appeal Board, annual report, 2022

British Columbia Utilities Commission, annual report, 2021-22

Orders of the Day

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 16 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2023

Hon. K. Conroy

P. Milobar

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Bill 16 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2023

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 15 — Vital Statistics Amendment Act,

Hon. A. Dix

S. Bond

A. Olsen

Report and Third Reading of Bills

Bill 15 — Vital Statistics Amendment Act,

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Education and Child

Care

Hon. R. Singh

E. Sturko

Proceedings in the Birch Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Children and Family

Development

Hon. M. Dean

N. Letnick

R. Merrifield

TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2023

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: L. Doerkson.

Introductions by Members

M. Dykeman: I’m thrilled to rise in the House today and welcome to the gallery and

to the precinct my friend and mayor, His Worship Eric Woodward, as well as

his outreach and communications director, Hossein Zadoh. They are here for a

full day of meetings and over for another municipal conference.

I was wondering if the House could join me in welcoming them

today.

Hon. A. Dix: I’m glad to welcome to the gallery and to the Legislature

representatives of the B.C. Nurses Union and representatives of nurses from

around British Columbia who are with us today: Aman Grewal, the president of

the BCNU; Adriane Gear, the vice-president; Kath Kitts, the BCNU CMX. That’s

pretty good.

[10:05 a.m.]

Other nurses here: Peggy Holton, from Surrey Memor­ial; Val

Falliardo, from B.C. Women’s Hospital; Maria Huertas, from Royal Columbian

Hospital; and Antonio Ortiz, from Vancouver General Hospital.

I think all of us understand the incredible role that’s played by

nurses in our health care system and also in our communities. We’re

delighted to have them with us in the Legislature.

I know members from all sides of the House will wish to make them

welcome.

M. Bernier: It’s my pleasure to make a couple of introductions today. Some elected

officials, basically from the furthest part of British Columbia away from

Victoria, have travelled all the way down here.

I want to thank some ministers they’ve met with. I know they’re trying

to set up, hopefully, one or two more meetings this week.

I want to welcome to the House the chair of the Peace River regional

district, Leonard Hiebert, and the deputy chair or assistant chair, Dan

Rose, from the Peace River regional district as well. They have come all the

way down here to Victoria.

Please welcome them to the House.

Hon. K. Conroy: I do want to welcome some guests to the gallery. First is Chris

Barlow, the CAO of the city of Castlegar. With him is Maciej Habrych. He is

the airport manager for the city of Castlegar. They’re coming here to meet

with ministers and to do their best to make Castlegar the most accessible

airport in the province.

D. Clovechok: It’s my pleasure to introduce a friend of mine in the gallery today,

Tanya Marie Finley. She’s very active with the Nelson chamber, also a small

business woman. Just an all round really, really great

individual.

Would this House make Tanya feel very welcome.

Hon. J. Whiteside: It’s a real pleasure today to introduce two councillors who are

joining us from the municipality of New Westminster, Couns. Paul Minhas and

Daniel Fontaine.

Paul is a really valued business leader in our community who has been

particularly very supportive of the LGBTQS+ community. He creates space for

that community to come together. We’re very grateful for the work that he

does.

Daniel is a neighbour. We both love our Quayside neighbourhood in New

Westminster. He is very active in the minor hockey association and a

volunteer for all things sport-related in our community.

They are really proud members of a city council that is leading on so

many important issues in New Westminster — reconciliation, inclusion, PACT

teams.

Would the House please join me in making them welcome here

today.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I’ve got three folks from the Ministry of Housing visiting today in

the chamber. We’ve got Dibya Shrestha, Yashir Kajar and Starr

Levesque.

I’m hoping the House can please make them really welcome

today.

S. Bond: I want to join the Minister of Health in welcoming representatives of

the B.C. Nurses Union here today.

One of the things that has been said about nurses is that they are the

heartbeat of the health care system. We want the nurses that are here today

and those around the province to know that we hear them. We hear their

voices. We understand the challenges they are facing, and we are committed

to working together to recognize the exceptional work that nurses in British

Columbia do every single day.

We welcome them to this Legislature. I look forward to the discussions

we will have later today.

T. Stone: It gives me pleasure, as well, to introduce a few guests that we have

with us here today.

First off, I want to welcome Will Davis, who is here today. He’s the

executive director of B.C. Adaptive Snow­sports, which is

headquartered in Vancouver.

I also would like to introduce two city councillors who are here from

the city of New Westminster. We have Dan­iel Fontaine and Paul Minhas,

the first non-NDP candidates actually elected in New Westminster in a very,

very long time. They say that they’re having a lot of fun and enjoying the

work.

I would ask that the House please make Will Davis, Daniel Fontaine and

Paul Minhas very welcome to this chamber today.

[10:10 a.m.]

Hon. S. Robinson: I’d like to let all members know in the House that we have a special

guest who is joining the press gallery today. Justin McElroy is in the

House. It has been five years since he’s been here. He’s covering for Meera

Bains. I bumped into him this morning, and I hope that we all greet him with

welcoming open arms.

I just want to say, with tremendous gratitude, that his work around

reporting for local government I think is absolutely outstanding.

I know that all members of the House will join me in welcoming Justin

back to the chamber.

Tributes

SOUTH DELTA STORM HOCKEY TEAM

I. Paton: One year ago this week I got up to brag about South Delta minor

hockey, how our U18 boys team went to Campbell River and won the

provincial championships. This year the provincial championship for U18

hockey was held in Ladner. We hosted it, and my U18 South Delta Storm

boys hockey team went on and won the championship for the province two

years in a row.

We had teams from all over B.C. We beat up on Cloverdale, Trail,

Peninsula, Williams Lake, Penticton, Cranbrook, Sea to Sky and Fort St.

John.

Congratulations to former Stanley Cup winner and coach of our

team, Ken Priestlay, who played for the Pittsburgh Penguins back in the

day; Tony Marra; and Bennett Stoilen.

Congratulations to the South Delta Storm boys U18 hockey team for

another provincial championship.

Introductions by Members

H. Sandhu: Today I have special guests in the gallery. Along with the B.C. Nurses

Union executive team and incredible advocates, I do have Liana Cole. She is

the regional lobby coordinator for the Thompson North Okanagan region. It is

Liana’s first time in the gallery. She’s holding a role that I used to hold

in that region. Liana is a practical nurse working in long-term care, and

she has been working in nursing for more than ten years. She used to live in

Powell River. Now she works in Vernon.

Scott Duwell is a regional B.C. Nurses Union chair, and he’s from the

Thompson North Okanagan region, worked at Royal Inland Hospital in Kamloops

and is now working at Vernon Jubilee Hospital as an ICU nurse.

Along with them, please, would the House thank all these incredible

advocates from the B.C. Nurses Union for highlighting and advocating for

nurses.

Would the House please join me to thank them for the work they do and

make them very warmly welcomed.

S. Chandra Herbert: Well, first, I want to say happy anniversary and much love to my

husband, Romi Chandra Herbert, of 23 years. Today is 23 years, so thank

you.

Interjection.

S. Chandra Herbert: Well, yes, 23. I met him when I was 12.

I want to also ask the House to join me in congratulating and wishing

a very happy birthday to the Minister of Agriculture.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

WESTERN HOCKEY LEAGUE PLAYOFFS

AND KAMLOOPS BLAZERS

HOCKEY TEAM

T. Stone: Well, this Friday the WHL playoffs are once again upon us, and my

team, the Kamloops Blazers, will kick off round 1 of their playoff

matchup against the Vancouver Giants as they and other teams across the

league vie for the championship and the chance to advance to the

Memorial Cup final — which, incidentally, will be held up in Kamloops

from May 26 to June 4.

Now, while Kamloops is competitive on the ice, we’re competitive

off the ice as well, and I note that we won the rights to host this

year’s Memorial Cup over the Kelowna Rockets. My apologies for that, to

my colleagues from Kelowna.

Back to the Kamloops Blazers, who had another outstanding season

this year. Earlier this month, they won the B.C. division for the fourth

year in a row after shellacking the Kelowna Rockets 7 to 2. Again, my

sympathies to the members from Kelowna.

Back to the Blazers. Vancouver will be the first playoff foe, and

no offence to the members from Vancouver, but you’re going down. Sorry

to say that.

[10:15 a.m.]

Let me tell you this. Kamloops is actually a hospitable place.

We’re Canada’s tournament capital. No matter which team you cheer for,

and even if your team has already been steamrolled by the Blazers this

season, we will welcome you with open arms. We will welcome you. We will

host you for the Memorial Cup in late May and early June, and we urge

everyone to take in this exciting event.

Although I’ve spent a great deal of time here this morning poking

fun at our competitors, hockey truly is a sport that brings everyone

together. The playoffs are, indeed, an awesome time of the year — the

ability to cheer on young athletes as they pursue their goals of

greatness, even perhaps to play in the NHL one day. The coaches will no

doubt have their young guns ready to perform, and how sweet it will be

to once again discuss the actions and the rivalries with friends and

family.

Mr. Speaker, I truly do wish all of the teams all the best in the

playoffs, but especially my beloved Kamloops Blazers.

PHARMACISTS

H. Sandhu: It is an honour to rise today to talk about and pay gratitude to

people who play a vital and sometimes overlooked role in our health care

system. Pharmacy techs and pharmacists are an essential part of our

health care system.

As we know, March is pharmacy awareness month, a time when we take

the time to celebrate the contributions of pharmacists and pharmacy

techs for their commitment to providing safe and effective use of

medicine.

They are front-line workers who work with our doctors, nurses and

other health care professionals to make sure that everyone has access to

medication that they need and ensure their safety. Pharmacists and techs

are trained health care professionals who have an important role in

improving the health outcomes for patients.

They work with other parts of the health care team to provide

patient-centred care. This often includes medication management,

education and much more. The knowledge they have of their patients and

their medication is vital to making sure that the patients receive the

right doses and right direction while making sure that the patient is

aware about potential side effects, allergies or medication

interactions. When we visit a pharmacy, we know that we will be able to

access their services. Pharmacists work tirelessly to make sure that

they can provide great care for their patients.

During pharmacy awareness month and every day after, I want to

encourage everyone in our community to take a moment to acknowledge the

important work that pharmacists and their staff do and show your

appreciation of their role within the health care system. We are

fortunate to have many amazing pharmacies in Vernon-Monashee, and I’m

forever grateful for the exceptional services they provide to

people.

Happy pharmacy awareness month, and thank you for your

service.

TURNING POINT RECOVERY SOCIETY

K. Kirkpatrick: Addiction is a complicated condition, and overcoming it can be

equally as complex, as I learned when I met Brenda Plant, executive

director of the Turning Point Recovery Society.

Turning Point is one of British Columbia’s foremost residential

support recovery service providers with sites for men, women and

transgender people across the Lower Mainland. There are two sites in

North Vancouver, two in Richmond, one in Vancouver and a newly opened

site in Squamish.

Turning Point is a non-profit organization, and their mission is

to provide safe and supportive housing for those with addiction issues

and help those individuals re-enter community and community-based

addiction support services with the goal that they can regain their

independence to reach their full potential in society.

Brenda Plant has been executive director of Turning Point since

2005, and she’s fiercely committed to making recovery a reality for

those who ask for help. Brenda invited me to visit the North Vancouver

women’s recovery house in my riding of West Vancouver–Capilano to

explain the model. While the house looks like any other house in the

neighbourhood, it’s not the same. The North Vancouver women’s recovery

house is a nine-bed facility for women wanting to overcome their

addictions.

Now, I do think we need to get away from the word “facilities”

when we’re talking about places like Turning Point. This home feels far

from that. It’s a house where you’re made to feel welcome, and you’re

made to feel home. The clients typically stay for three to five months

and are immersed in programming and counselling to assist with their

recovery.

It can be a long path, and while clients are not always successful

in their journey, Turning Point is committed to improving the health and

well-being of individuals seeking help for their addiction

issues.

[10:20 a.m.]

Turning Point is a non-profit organization, and having a

background in running non-profits, I have a deep understanding of the

challenge for funding. It relies on generous supporters.

Please look for the Making Recovery a Reality Gala, which is their

main fundraising event every year.

KING GEORGE DRAGONS BASKETBALL

TEAM AND WEST END

COMMUNITY

S. Chandra Herbert: Well something amazing hap­pened on March 11 for the West

End, and it didn’t happen in the West End. It happened in Langley. The

King George Dragons, for the first time in provincial history, our

double-A boys basketball team, won the provincial

championship.

It’s a small but mighty team, friends. It’s a team from the

smallest high school in Vancouver, and they were up against the mighty

Brentwood College of Mill Bay, an independent school which has done very

well over the years. But Darko Kulic, head coach, and a team of

hard-working folks that never want to put themselves first, are always

focused in a humble way on their community, finally, finally,

won.

It’s a team made up of grades 10, 11 and 12. It’s a team of heart.

Now, you’ll see them. When I say they’re humble, they’ll wash your car

for you. Indeed, they do it most weekends to try and raise money so that

they can compete at the level they do. But it’s a team that wouldn’t be

possible without the leadership of Darko Kulic. He’s a fellow that I got

to know at the West End Community Centre. He got to know the kids at the

high school, started to get even further involved, all the way to

becoming their head coach, and he’s been with them for over 16

years.

Friends, I want to say congratulations to the Dragons,

congratulations to their parents, their teachers, their teammates, their

friends, everybody who helped lift them up to achieve what, for many of

them, was seeming to be the impossible. They were ranked tenth, but this

season was amazing. They only lost one game.

Hon. friends, please give it up for the King George Dragons: “We

are the champions, my friends. We’ll keep on fighting till the end.” I

sing that because Darko hated that song for all those years that they

got so close and didn’t get there, but they got there this

year.

Congratulations, Champions.

MOUNT BOUCHERIE BEARS ROBOTICS TEAM

B. Stewart: I rise in the House today to congratulate the Mount Boucherie

Bears Robotics team No. 8338, led by their teacher, mentor and coach,

Mike Boulanger of West Kelowna, on their second-place finish at the

Canadian Pacific regional qualifier in Victoria.

The Bears from Mount Boucherie are a 15-member team of eight girls

and seven boys. This event is one of the largest high school–level

robotics competitions in the country, with over 36 teams and 200 student

competitors aged 15 to 18 taking part. Teams from as far away as

Australia, Taiwan, Michigan, California and Hawaii were competing for a

spot at the world championships in Houston, Texas.

The Mount Boucherie Bears overcame major adversity to make it

through the qualifying rounds. The team had their flight to Victoria

cancelled at the last minute due to an Island snowstorm, which many of

us remember. So the parents and school administration rallied together

and committed to making the 12-hour journey over the Coquihalla, then

across on the ferry, just to get there in time for the competition. This

gave them almost no time to reassemble and test their robot before the

competition, but the team persevered and made it through to the

finals.

The Bears would like to highlight the contributions and support of

their school principal, Scott Sieben, as well as the local community

partners, Discovery Digital Foren­sics, SafetyNow, CenDek

Railings, Minga, West Kelowna Fire Rescue union and Summit Land

Surveying. The team is grateful for their sponsorship and would have not

been able to compete without their support.

Will the House please join me in congratulating the Mount

Boucherie Bears Robotic Team on their impressive second-place

finish.

SUMMIT ON SOCIAL ECONOMY

AND ROLE OF NON-PROFIT

SECTOR

M. Dykeman: It was an honour to travel to Paris, France, last week to be part

of the panel at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development’s summit on Inspiration, Innovation and Inclusion: Shaping

our Future with the Social and Solidarity Economy, where the OECD policy

guide on legal frameworks for the social economy was released. It was a

privilege to be able to share the work that our government has been

doing to grow our province’s social economy and to learn about what

other countries are doing in this area.

[10:25 a.m.]

British Columbia is a leader in this area, and I am so fortunate

to serve as B.C.’s Parliamentary Secretary for Community Development and

Non-Profits, to advocate for non-profits within the provincial

government and for the important work they do for British Columbians, as

well as to look for opportunities to improve their partnership with

government and to support better outcomes for people in our

province.

In British Columbia, the non-profit, charitable and co-operative

sectors deliver critical services to thousands of people every day and

play a critical role in the province. For example, they meet essential

needs around housing, mental health, food security, legal services and

domestic violence. They create vibrant spaces through arts and culture,

and they strengthen communities.

They encourage social inclusion through social groups, community

recreation and sports, faith groups and immigration services as well as

support communities through crises such as pandemic and the climate

events experienced by British Columbia in the recent years, including a

major heat dome, wildfires and catastrophic floods.

Thank you to the OECD for providing the opportunity to participate

in this important conversation.

And thank you to all of the non-profits for the difference that

you make in the lives of British Columbians. Without your dedication,

support of the volunteers who work hard each day, British Columbia

wouldn’t be as robust as it is and have such a diverse landscape of

organizations that are there to help often the most vulnerable British

Columbians.

Oral Questions

CRIME IN COMMUNITIES AND

ACTION ON COMMUNITY

SAFETY

T. Stone: Yesterday British Columbians were horrified by the chilling images

of Paul Schmidt’s fatal stabbing in Vancouver.

This senseless and deadly random attack occurred in broad

daylight. It occurred outside of a Starbucks on Granville Street, a busy

coffee shop that many of us in this chamber, myself included, and

countless British Columbians and visitors to our province have

frequented.

Paul was there with his wife and his young daughter. The images of

his attack and his death are chilling, and they’re nothing short of

tragic. As a father who often visits coffee shops with his wife and

daughters, I’m finding it hard, on behalf of the opposition, to find

words to describe what Paul’s family must now endure. The violence

that’s taking place in our communities is getting worse and

worse.

Random attacks, which used to be a rare occurrence in British

Columbia, have sadly become all too common, almost to the point of being

normalized in our province.

My question to the Premier is this. How many more lives must be

shattered by this abhorrent, senseless vio­lence before we see an

end to these horrific random attacks?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. All of us share the absolute

horror. Words can’t, I think, describe the feeling of just how awful

what hap­pened outside that Starbucks is and how disturbing the

how horrible that must be for the family, friends of the family and for

the public in general.

I also want to make it clear that this is a problem that is not….

This upsurge that we have seen is not something that is unique here in

British Columbia but is something we are seeing, indeed, in all parts of

the country, particularly in our larger cities. I can tell you it is

something that this province and other provinces are working on, on ways

to be able to deal with these situations, particularly because of their

random nature.

[10:30 a.m.]

It’s why we continue to invest in supports that police have been

asking for. It’s why we continue to advocate at the federal level for

changes in the Criminal Code, particularly when it comes to dealing with

weapons — in this case, knives — which is something this province and

other provinces have been calling for.

It also means, as a government, to continue to be committed to

working with local governments, local police agencies, other provinces

and the federal government to come up with new, different initiatives to

keep our public safe, but recognizing that on this challenge in

particular, around random stranger attacks, there has not been, to date,

an easy solution. Certainly, it is one that we are determined to work on

to find a way to ensure that our streets and our communities are safe.

No one should have to feel unsafe.

Certainly, what we saw — as the member said, quite rightly — I

think has shaken all British Columbians. This government remains

committed, and we will do every­thing we can to keep our streets

safe.

Mr. Speaker: Opposition House Leader, supplemental.

T. Stone: Well, people don’t feel safe in British Columbia today. That’s

because they aren’t safe in our communities, certainly not like they

used to be. Tragedies like this require more than

condolences.

The Premier promised “results that people could see and touch and

feel” as a commitment towards addressing these dire public safety

concerns and realities faced by British Columbians, but every single

day, there’s another horrific story of brutal, random attacks and

violence. What’s happening is a direct result of the policy choices of

this government for the past six years. This is happening under the

Premier’s watch — a Premier who was the Attorney General for five years

and now is the Premier of British Columbia.

Last week, it was a series of assaults and knife-point robberies

here in downtown Victoria. A man stabbed a person, and then went on to

randomly rob and assault three others at knife-point in separate

incidents. This brazen, random violence unfolded within five blocks in

the downtown area before police, thankfully, were able to tackle the

knife-wielding suspect to the ground. It’s no wonder that 79 percent of

Victoria residents, in a recent survey, answered that they don’t feel

safe in the downtown here.

Again, the Premier was the Attorney General for five years in this

province. The Premier was, at that time, the person obviously in charge

of our failing justice system, and he is now the Premier. People deserve

better than the Premier’s endless cycle of catch and release.

Again, to the Premier, when will this vicious violence, these

random attacks, finally end in communities across British

Columbia?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member, and I appreciate their

concern around public safety. I also think it’s important we make it

clear, because police have made it clear, that the challenges they face

are multifaceted.

There is the issue of the random-stranger attacks, which we saw so

horrifically yesterday, which leave all of us shaken. As I said, we are

working as hard as we can, with law enforcement authorities and other

governmental authorities, to come up with strategies to try and deal

with that.

At the same time, there are other public safety issues — the

member references those in his second question — where there have been

considerable initiatives undertaken by this government over the last six

years to deal with the challenges that we face here in British Columbia

and, indeed, right across the country.

[10:35 a.m.]

It’s why, in terms of people who have a violent past or who have

committed violent offences in the past, it was this government that led

the initiative to go to Ottawa and to seek changes to the Criminal Code,

on reverse onus, to toughen up bail conditions so that people aren’t

released when they pose a danger.

It was this government that sought as broad a definition as

possible on that reverse onus, so that it includes knives, that it

includes weapons, that it includes bear spray, that it even includes

histories of those who have engaged with a weapon in the past. We got

that commitment from the federal government that they will make those

changes, and the expectation is that those changes are for this

session.

It is this government that put in place initiatives in our recent

budget around specific care teams designed to monitor violent offenders

when they are released from a correctional facility and prior to their

contact with the justice system. It is this government that expanded the

car program, $87 million for additional resources for monitoring of

violent offenders and giving the police additional tools. It is this

government that has put in place the funding over three years to fill

the provincial RCMP vacancies in small and rural communities.

We have undertaken significant initiatives, and we will do others.

But the situation that we have been facing in this province and other

provinces is complex, and we need to understand and recognize that. But

make no mistake and no doubt. We are committed to doing everything we

can to keep our communities safe.

RELEASE OF DATA ON

CRIME IN COMMUNITIES AND

HANDLING BY JUSTICE SYSTEM

M. de Jong: Well, we hear those words again today, “horrible” and “tragic.”

They are all too appropriate, and we are hearing them all too

frequently.

I think, with the greatest respect, Mr. Speaker, what people are

looking for from the government, from the Premier, is acknowledgment

that what they are doing isn’t working. In fact, what they’re doing, in

many instances, has made the situation worse.

I think people understand that there are going to be slight

variations in crime rates. But the fact remains that this Premier, as

Attorney General and as Premier, has presided over a steady and dramatic

increase in random violence in this province, to the point where people

across B.C. no longer feel safe in their neighborhoods.

We heard again here in Victoria. Noah Stinson embarks on another

crime spree, robbing, stabbing — an individual who, over the past few

years, has been charged with assaults, drug trafficking, resisting

police. But he’s out there again, terrorizing people, despite being

wanted on a warrant and despite having a weapons prohibition applied to

him.

Last year, the Premier was dragged, kicking and screaming, into

adopting a new approach to bail. Now, the government claims that it is

tracking closely, that it is monitoring and has data relevant to the

impact that change is having on public safety.

The question is a straightforward one for the Premier. Having

monitored, having that data, will they release that data to the people

who are desperate in this province, British Columbians who are desperate

to see whether or not it is having a positive impact on improving safety

in their communities?

Hon. N. Sharma: I want to thank the member for that important question. As

everybody knows here, we’ve been taking action to improve the safety in

our communities, and that does include issuing a directive to Crown

counsel. That directive was set under the laws that we currently have.

At the same time, we were advocating for changes to that law at the

federal level.

[10:40 a.m.]

Minister Farnworth and I met with Minister Lametti and Minister

Mendicino in Ottawa, who joined ministers from across this country that

were there to seek changes to the bail laws, the unintended consequences

that we’ve seen when it comes to people committing acts of violence

being released on our streets. I’m happy to hear they have made

commitments to those changes, to make those changes as early as the

spring. We’ll be watching to make sure those changes are

made.

At the same time, we’ll be watching and monitoring our directives

and how they’re showing up in this province. We’re using every tool in

our toolkit in our justice system to improve the situation for

communities across B.C.

Mr. Speaker: Just as a reminder to members, when we are mentioning the members

and ministers in the House — not to be named.

M. de Jong: Again, with the greatest respect, the Attorney didn’t address the

essence of my question.

The stories are endless, and that is part of the problem. In my

own community, on the weekend, a prolific offender, notorious prolific

offender, apprehended less than 24 hours after having been released. The

police issued a statement. At the time of Mr. Fontaine’s arrest, he had

just been convicted of possession of stolen property, another stolen

vehicle, yet he was released back into our community not even 24 hours

later.

There is story after story with, all too often, tragic endings

involving innocent victims. The ministry back in Jan­uary, the

spokesman, said in the aftermath of the change directive — which the

government, I have to say, took an awfully long time to adopt, despite

having had a recommendation and support from the opposition almost a

year previously: “We’re monitoring. We have data.”

The minister herself a few weeks later said: “We are monitoring.

We have data.” Well, I can assure the Premier and the Attorney that

British Columbians are interested to know what that data tells them,

because all they see right now is a massive increase in random

attacks.

We FOI’d. We believe the minister when she says there’s data that

they’re monitoring, the ministry spokesman, and we FOI the material.

What do we get back? A refusal. A refusal to release basic information

relevant to determining whether or not safety in our communities is

improving. I can’t reconcile that with a legitimate genuine effort on

the part of the government to convey to British Columbians that they’re

making all of the efforts necessary to improve their safety.

The question is a straightforward one. I hope the Attorney will

answer it today. Having confirmed repeatedly that this information is

being collated, collected, that there is a monitoring, will she

undertake to this House to release that information today?

Hon. N. Sharma: Thanks for the question. The B.C. Prosecution Service is an

independent body that has their own monitoring program. I’ll leave it to

them to answer what data they’re able to release.

What I will say is that this government is not just taking the

steps that I said about advocating to Ottawa. We’re standing up repeat

offenders teams. These are teams of police officers, probation officers

and Crown counsel that are working together in a way that it was in

2012, but unfortunately, that program was cut. What it saw was a 40

percent reduction in repeat offending. We’re using that as an example of

us taking action to stop repeat violent offenders in our

communities.

Those will be operational very soon across the province. It will

be another measure that we’re taking to increase safety in our

communities.

ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE

AND ROLE OF NET-ZERO CONCEPT

AND CARBON OFFSETS

A. Olsen: Last fall the Premier said: “We cannot continue to expand fossil

fuel infrastructure and meet our climate goals.” He was placating

anxious new members with platitudes after he was outpaced and

out-organized in the B.C. NDP leadership event.

When he announced the Cedar LNG project a couple of weeks ago, he

sounded a lot like a former Premier, Christy Clark. He said: “The choice

between protecting the environment and creating good jobs is a false

one.”

[10:45 a.m.]

Shortly after he announced the Cedar LNG project, the Premier

announced his four-pillar energy action framework, and one of those

pillars is a net-zero requirement for new fossil fuel projects. Now to

the United Nations: “Net zero is entirely incompatible with continued

investment in fossil fuel.”

My question is to the Premier. Can he please provide his

government’s definition of net zero?

Hon. G. Heyman: Thank you to the member for the question. I think net zero is

achieved, first and foremost, by a variety of measures that require

independent and internationally accepted methods of

verification.

The first measure, of course, would be to take every step possible

to reduce emissions. That includes actions like our regulation to reduce

methane emissions from the natural gas industry and all industry by

significant amounts by 2030 and near zero by 2035.

Following that, it would be reducing the use of

emission-generating sources of energy. And further to that, it may be

technologies that are being developed, like carbon sequestration and

storage. It may be legitimately accepted offsets that are verified and

proven to take out of the atmosphere emissions that would otherwise go

into it.

Mr. Speaker: Third Party House Leader, supplemental.

A. Olsen: Of course, the best way to reduce emissions is not to go about

diligently creating more, which is what this NDP government is committed

to doing. And now it appears that they are going to be turning to the

accountants and carbon offsets and carbon credits to meet their net-zero

requirements. The problem with carbon credits, of course, is that

they’re just a human construct, just like the soft pillow that we rest

our weary heads on at the end of the day, permitting our destructive

behaviour to continue tomorrow.

Carbon credits don’t exist in nature. They are make-believe.

Reports have found that corporate and government-run carbon offset

programs are basically biosolids. Carbon offsets are unreliable.

Government and corporations are over-accounting their actual emissions

in millions of tonnes. Now the B.C. NDP is ready to use these faulty

programs to justify more fossil fuel expansion. It’s worse than

cognitive dissonance because this government knows much

better.

My question is to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Strategy. Are the B.C. NDP going to bet our future on carbon

offsets?

Hon. G. Heyman: The B.C. NDP, our government, is going to bet the future of

British Columbia meeting its commitments to our citizens, as well as

carrying out our global responsibilities to reduce emissions, through

our CleanBC plan, which the Leader of the Third Party was privy to the

development of when there was a confidence and supply agreement; through

our Roadmap to 2030; and through a variety of very important measures

that we are putting in place, that we’ve committed to put in place —

whether it’s the electrification of transportation; whether it is the

decarbonization of buildings and heating, whether it’s a range of

supports to local governments, communities and First Nations to take

action to reduce emissions; and most importantly, from our new energy

action framework — exactly what I thought the Leader of the Third Party

has been asking for, for months now, which is something to give life to

our sectoral targets, particularly in the oil and gas sector.

What we have committed to is a regulatory cap on emissions to

achieve our sectoral target for the oil and gas sector for 2030. We will

be consulting with industry, with First Nations beginning in April on

the shape of that cap, and then we will be introducing the regulation to

accomplish the emissions to which we’ve committed.

CRIME IN COMMUNITIES AND

ACTION ON COMMUNITY

SAFETY

E. Sturko: So many of the measures that were mentioned by the Attorney

General…. They only impact what happens after another person becomes a

victim in British Columbia. The violence on our streets was created by

the Premier’s soft-on-crime attitude as Attorney General from day one of

this government.

[10:50 a.m.]

Not only are prolific offenders released back into communities

under the Premier’s catch-and-release system, but tent cities have

proliferated under his watch as Housing Minister. I was proud to stand

with hundreds of frustrated citizens in Nanaimo, but noticeably absent

were NDP members, including the MLA for Nanaimo and the MLA for

Parksville-Qualicum, who have been completely silent.

Nanaimo’s mayor, Leonard Krog, has declared that the city is at

its breaking point: “Open drug use, our inability to provide appropriate

housing and continuum of care, what’s referred to as catch-and-release

in the court system, the failure to keep people in custody pending trial

when they’re significant repeat offenders — all of this has come

together. It’s a crisis.”

Local business owner Clint Smith was lucky to survive after being

shot multiple times during a confrontation at an encampment. Clint

sustained such severe injuries that he had to be placed on an induced

coma.

My question is: how many people like Clint have to suffer before

the Premier fixes the results of his policies that he caused?

Hon. N. Sharma: I think we can all agree in this House that everybody deserves to

feel safe in their communities. When you hear about horrific violent

acts that are happening, we all need to stand together, not only to

condemn them but so people of the province can know that this government

is taking action.

Not only, as I mentioned earlier, are we advocating for very badly

needed Criminal Code changes to the federal government, and we’re hoping

for that to happen this spring, but we have a whole series of policies

under our safer communities action plan. That covers mental health

supports, increased resources in policing, more investment in our Crown

counsel, the repeat offenders task force.

We’re listening to community and hearing what they need, and then

we’re responding. There’s no doubt we’re all reeling when we hear about

these traumatic acts, but we’re taking the steps that we need to take in

order to make it better.

TENT CITIES AND GOVERNMENT ACTION ON

HOMELESSNESS AND

COMMUNITY SAFETY

T. Halford: Homeless encampments and the escalation of violence and chaos in

our streets has never been worse. Tent cities are more prevalent than

they ever have been before, and that is under this Premier’s

watch.

Mayor Leonard Krog says: “We’re getting to a breaking point. It’s

a crisis. I’ve been calling it a crisis for a long time, but that crisis

is not getting any better.” This is from a mayor. This is from somebody

who sat in this House for almost two decades, most of which was as

critic for the Attorney General. He understands what this government can

and, more importantly, is not doing to keep his city safe.

My question is to the Premier. How much longer will communities

have to suffer from the crisis called by his failed policies?

Hon. R. Kahlon: We canvassed encampments at great length yesterday. Again, I’ll

reiterate the comments I made, which are that the encampments are not

safe for the people living in them, and they’re not safe for the

community at large.

We know, and we’ve been working actively with communities to deal

with some of the encampments in ways that work for communities, for

themselves. We highlighted on Sunday the plans we have for Vancouver.

We’ve been working actively with the city of Nanaimo to build the

housing that we know is needed, desperately needed. I believe just over

800 units of affordable housing have already been built there, and we’ve

got 556 that are underway. That work is happening.

We’ve also offered and are working with them on funding for a

navigation centre so those that need help can go to one place and get

all the supports that they need. We had two locations that we had found,

worked with them on, that went through the process. Then council came to

the conclusion that perhaps that wasn’t the right site.

We found a location, went through the complete process, and

council decided it wasn’t the right site. We went through another

process. They found…. We’re now looking for a third site. It’s going to

require us to work together to find locations for these people to be

able to get the supports they need. That’s the work we’re doing with

them right now.

[10:55 a.m.]

S. Bond: Well, the reality in British Columbia is that under this Premier’s

watch, homelessness, encampments and public safety have all gotten

worse. This has been the former Attorney General and now the Premier’s

responsibility for years, not months or weeks but for years, and the

results just keep getting worse.

Almost three years ago the Premier’s mandate letter, as Housing

Minister, tasked him with implementing a strategy to address homeless

encampments, but he simply didn’t do his job.

According to the Premier’s transition binder, the NDP cabinet

approved a plan in 2021, but it was never implemented or released. The

note goes on to give this advice to the Premier of British Columbia:

“Encampments are increasing in complexity and numbers across the

province and are not a suitable form of shelter. People deserve safe

homes and stability.”

With results getting worse every single day, why did the Premier

delay releasing the desperately needed provincial strategy that his

cabinet approved years ago?

Hon. R. Kahlon: I think it’s important to highlight that the challenge we’re

dealing with, encampments, is not just a B.C. problem. It’s not just a

Canada problem. This is an issue we’re seeing across North

America.

Recently the Canadian Human Rights Commission wrote a report on

how encampments can be dealt with in communities around the country.

I’ve spoken to colleagues across the country. We’re all grappling on how

we can deal with this. If you look just down south to Washington State,

if you look down to Oregon, if you look down to California, every

community is dealing with this challenge and trying to find

ways.

How we’re dealing with this are examples I shared yesterday around

the Downtown Eastside. We had 200 people in an encampment. We found

housing for 90 of those people. We have 70 more people there, and we

have shelter space available for them. My message to them continues to

be that there is shelter space available. The encampments, with the

fires, with the increase in crime we’re seeing there…. The shelters are

a safer place to be.

That’s the work we’re doing not only in Vancouver but in

communities around the province, working with mayors to find solutions.

I know that all of the members in this House want to find solutions for

those that are the most vulnerable in our society.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Hon. N. Sharma: I have the honour to present the 2022 annual report of the Property

Assessment Appeal Board, and I have the honour to present the British

Columbia Utilities Commission annual report for 2021-22.

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Kahlon: In the main chamber, I call Committee of the Whole on Bill 16, Supply Act

(No. 1).

Then in Committee A, I call Committee of Supply for the Ministry of

Education and Child Care.

In Committee C, I call the Committee of Supply, the Ministry of Children

and Family Development.

[11:00 a.m.]

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 16 — SUPPLY ACT (N o . 1),

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 16;

J. Tegart in the chair.

The committee met at 11:01 a.m.

The Chair: I’ll call the committee to order. We are dealing with Bill 16,

Supply Act (No. 1), 2023, and I’ll invite the minister to introduce

staff.

Hon. K. Conroy: I’d like to introduce Fisnik Preniqi. He’s the executive director

of the Treasury Board staff.

We look forward to the questions from the member.

On clause 1.

P. Milobar: Just a pre-emptive…. Obviously, it’s only three, four clauses. I

really only have a couple of questions around clause 3.

Clauses 1 and 2 approved.

On clause 3.

P. Milobar: And just again…. I mean, this is literally the bill to keep the

doors of government open over the next quarter as we work through the

estimates and the main budget itself.

I guess the question I have for the minister, though, is…. On

clause 1, it’s very clearly a quarter of the amount specified within the

main estimates. In clause 2, it’s a third of the total amount of

schedule B and

schedule C. But in clause 3, it’s just…. Well, not just.

But it’s $1.6 billion. But there’s no percentage calculation from the

consolidated revenue fund that leads us to the $1.6 billion.

Could we just maybe get clarification on how, in this clause, it’s

just a flat dollar figure with no actual corresponding calculation to

arrive at that?

Hon. K. Conroy: It’s traditional to request 100 percent of the revenue transfers,

as these are collected by government, and then they’re flowed to other

entities.

Clauses 3 and 4 approved.

Preamble approved.

Title approved.

Hon. K. Conroy: Hon. Chair, I move that the committee rise and report the bill

complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:04 a.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

[11:05 a.m.]

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

BILL 16 — SUPPLY ACT (N o . 1),

Bill 16, Supply Act (No. 1), 2023, reported complete without

amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. L. Beare: I call Committee of the Whole, Bill 15.

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 15 — VITAL STATISTICS

AMENDMENT ACT,

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 15;

J. Tegart in the chair.

The committee met at 11:07 a.m.

On clause 1.

The Chair: We are dealing with Bill 15, Vital Statistics Amendment Act,

[The bells were rung.]

Hon. A. Dix: Again. There’s always a bell somewhere. I’ll just let the bells

finish in the background.

I just wanted to introduce and thank all the members of the

committee and introduce, to my left, Katherine Thiessen-Wale and to my

right, Jack Shewchuk of the Ministry of Health, who will be assisting

with our deliberations.

S. Bond: I appreciate the opportunity to walk through some questions with

the minister. As I laid out for him yesterday, I really just want to

walk through the mechanics, have a good understanding of what is

happening as we move this initiative from policy to legislation. The

minister has always been…. We have spent a lot of hours together,

sometimes not quite enough, apparently, on some bills, when there are

over 600 clauses. But I digress. This one only has two.

I’d like to begin with just a few general questions, just to get a

sense of the thinking behind creating legislation. Could the minister

just explain for us why moving from policy changes which were announced

some time ago to an amendment of the Vital Statistics Act…. What

motivated that?

Hon. A. Dix: I think, first of all, a number of people who are interested in

this area wanted it to be in legislation, not just a policy change.

Secondly, this is going to be a policy change that we’ve decided and

we’re going forward to. It should reflect the legislation.

[11:10 a.m.]

That’s why we’re making that particular minor amendment, to ensure

that essentially the policy and the law come together and that the

Legislature has an opportunity in this case to review that and give its

support for that.

I think it had support in the community. There has been,

obviously, consultation.

It makes sense. If you want to move quickly with a pol­icy

change, that’s good. Also, having legislation in place makes it clear

for everyone and gives all members of the Legislature a chance to give

their support or not.

A. Olsen: I want to just make a couple of very brief comments about this

bill. The pace yesterday was much quicker than I was able to keep up

with. So I didn’t get a chance to say what I felt needed to be said,

from the perspective of the Third Party, with respect to Bill

I want to acknowledge that the government is taking these steps to

move policy into legislation, as the minister just noted, in making

these two important changes — first, that sex is no longer required to

be on a birth certificate and, second, that people over 12 no longer

need confirmation from a psychologist or a doctor. These are important

steps.

I think we are in the process now of expanding and being more

inclusive in our society, recognizing diversity where it exists,

acknowledging that and celebrating that. I raise my hands to the

government for doing that.

I thank you for the opportunity to just say a few words. I’m

certain my colleague is going to ask good questions on this.

With that, I’ll take my seat.

HÍSW̱ḴE SIÁM.

S. Bond: Happy to have my colleague the House Leader for the Green Party

say a few words. I know he’s madly running between three Houses, and

it’s not an easy task.

Thank you, also, to the minister for that response.

I’m wondering if the minister could articulate for me whether

there has been specific consultation with members of the transgender and

non-binary communities regarding this specific amendment.

Hon. A. Dix: Yes, there were consultations. Obviously, the Ministry of Health

was involved, led by the gender equity office, which is situated in the

Ministry of Finance. There was exactly that kind of consultation to

discuss the legislative changes.

Some of these areas are evolving areas where we want to make our

society and our laws more inclusive, more reflective of that society.

This was a step that had been requested. We made the change. We

consulted. We’re making the change in legislation now, in order to

reflect that. Obviously, if you’re making a change that involves a group

of people, it’s important to talk to them.

S. Bond: Again, just from a general perspective around the amendment. If

individuals have already received an amended birth certificate, will

they be able to request a change to their sex designation under the

amended legislation?

Hon. A. Dix: Yes.

S. Bond: Thank you very much to the minister. Will the amendment of the

Vital Statistics Act impact any other legislation or policies that

relate to gender identity or expression?

Hon. A. Dix: Not in general. There aren’t too many add-on effects under

provincial law. For example, it would be possible, using a change in

birth registration and documents, to request a passport that itself

doesn’t have a gender indicator. That is an expansion, having the core

document reflect that.

[11:15 a.m.]

It will enable people to have further rights and abilities,

dealing with both other governments and, presumably, this government. It

has value in and of itself, but it doesn’t amend anything else or imply

further amendment.

S. Bond: Will there be any additional costs that are associated with

implementing the amended legislation?

Hon. A. Dix: Maybe it would be useful just to take us through the process on

both sides.

If we’re talking about a gender designation change for adults and

minors over 12 who were born in B.C., the required documentation is an

application for a change of gender. They all have application

numbers.

For the people who are listening to us, it would be useful to go

through…. I’ll go through, in a little detail, the whole process, take

the member through the whole process.

It is a VSA 509A. Parental consent and signature are

re­quired for all minors — that’s a difference from minors over 12

and adults; proof of parentage and/or a copy of legal guardianship, if

applicable in those circumstances; a copy of government-issued

identification and any B.C. birth certificates issued prior.

The process is to mail documents to the VSA in Victoria, which is

post office box 9657. It’s $27 for the amendment. This does not include

any new birth certificates. If a new birth certificate is required,

that’s $27 per certificate. The processing time, once received in the

Kelowna office, is two to three weeks. However, current processing times

are one week on average. They’re doing this work efficiently right now.

If a birth certificate was ordered at the time of application, it’s an

additional two to five business days for printing the certificate plus

mail time.

All of that sort of takes you through the process involved. It is

not an expansive process, but it is, obviously, an important one for the

people involved. What isn’t required for that group is the physician or

psychologist’s confirmation of change of gender designation form, which

would be required should they be under the age of 12.

Those are the differences. I thought going through the whole

process might be useful to the member and to people listening to

us.

S. Bond: Thank you to the minister for that information. Can the minister

tell me how the amended Vital Statistics Act aligns with current human

rights legislation in British Columbia and Canada?

Hon. A. Dix: I think it’s fair to say that these two legislative changes bring

the legislation into line with human rights legislation and with the

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in these respects.

It may be that some group will make other challenges. Somebody, an

individual or a group, will make other challenges to the Vital

Statistics Act on other bases. There are other issues — which we may be

discussing, in fact, in estimates with the member for Columbia

River–Revelstoke, who has spoken about some different issues — around

certificates and vital statistics that are really important.

In this case, it brings us into line with them in this respect. It

doesn’t answer all of the questions, probably, that people might have. I

think in both cases, this is consistent with both the Charter of Rights

and Freedoms and human rights legislation and brings us into line with

that in an appropriate way.

S. Bond: Yes, indeed, there are other issues related to things like

certificates — land title, for example. I know that the minister knows….

We’ve brought, for example, an important private member’s bill to talk

about how we make those changes as well. I think there will, obviously,

be ongoing discussion about the other issues.

The minister referenced, I think, two other jurisdictions in his

opening comments, or at least referred to other jurisdictions. I believe

that there is a similar provision in at least Ontario and Nova

Scotia.

[11:20 a.m.]

Would the minister provide for me just what is similar or

different? Are we exactly the same as other jurisdictions? If he could

provide me either similarities or differences.

Hon. A. Dix: Ontario and Nova Scotia have proceeded with genderless birth

certificates, which is the next section. That was the important

comparison. What I’m going to do is share with the member, with

assistance, a list, a jurisdictional scan of where all the jurisdictions

are, which is helpful. Ontario, for example, still requires a medical

certificate, on the clause we’re under, under the age of 17, in that

case. This gives the…. We have the jurisdictional comparison, which will

be useful to the hon. member.

S. Bond: Thank you to the minister. I always appreciate his willingness to

share information, which helps us ask more thoughtful questions and

understand the legislation. I do appreciate that.

Again, as we referenced earlier, this transition to, or the

addition of, a legislative amendment, meant…. The changes, I believe,

came into force, from a policy perspective, in January. Can the minister

tell me whether or not he anticipates whether there will need to be

additional work done — from the perspective of education, training for

government officials to health care workers and, obviously, members of

the public — as this process moves through the stages today?

I recognize, also, that it’s actually in force, from a policy

perspective. Is there any additional work? Were there lessons learned

about what else we need to do to prepare people to actually administer

the changes?

Hon. A. Dix: The member said January. It was January 2022. So the changes have

been in place for 14 months. There were some minor technical changes

required to systems, and so on, but those have essentially already been

done.

We’re continuing to review it. In fact, it may be the next piece

of legislation in the House, introduced by my colleague the Minister of

Jobs, which deals with legislative changes and will deal with some of

this. There is a working group in Citizens’ Services that works on this

very question, which is very, very important to a lot of people in their

engagement with government. It has been in place.

We don’t anticipate significant changes, but this obviously brings

it into force and into law. That has, I think, utility with respect to

the change-of-sex designation cov­ered in this clause.

S. Bond: I want, if the minister could indulge me, just a bit more

information about the fees. Obviously, there are fees attached to this,

and there have been, when a person requests changes to government

identification, for example.

[11:25 a.m.]

I’m wondering if the minister considered removing the fees, just

to remove potential barriers for British Columbians. What kind of

discussion or thought went into the ongoing charging of fees?

Hon. A. Dix: Mr. Shewchuk, who does this work regularly and works with people

regularly, does have the authority, should it be required, to waive

fees. There are lines and considerations in that respect. This is not an

issue that came up in the consultation. It’s something that obviously

could be considered.

Obviously, the process of issuing birth certificates more broadly

is an important expenditure for government. We want people to have

access, and we do have the possibility, if there’s an impediment and the

fee becomes an impediment, to waive that, but that hasn’t been part of

this process.

S. Bond: I just want then…. When we are talking about clause 1, there is a

current $27 amendment fee that is noted in the bill. Obviously, a fee

will continue and will be in place if Bill 15 passes?

Hon. A. Dix: Yes.

S. Bond: I think that what I will do in regard to the other jurisdictions….

I do appreciate the chart. I think it’s really helpful. Obviously, there

are a number of other jurisdictions that have moved in a similar

direction, and I appreciate that information. I was going to ask a

number of questions about that, but I think that the chart will suffice

on that front.

I know the minister referenced this in his remarks yesterday, but

I think it’s important to have it on the record again. Could he identify

for us why 12 was chosen as the age at which a physician’s or

psychologist’s confirmation will no longer be required? I think it’s

important to recognize that the 12-year designation does not change the

requirement that there must be parental, whoever the parent is that has

guardianship or guardians of the minor…. That requirement for consent

remains in place. So if the minister could confirm that and then just

speak to the issue of why 12 years of age.

Hon. A. Dix: The first part of it is yes, the parental or guardian consent is

still in place, which changes the need for a physician or psychologist.

So that’s the change here.

Why was 12 chosen? I think it’s commonly considered sufficient for

individuals to provide consent on their own behalf in the context of

major decisions, to be entitled to notice before an action is taken that

would affect them, be held responsible for the commission of an offence,

have sufficient autonomy to be able to carry out certain

re­sponsibilities or activities such as employment, independent

travel or applying for identification documents. So those are all

things….

I will just give the member some examples, and I will be happy to

share with her…. I have about nine examples where 12 was used. I won’t

give all of them, but I’m happy to share the document with

her.

In the case of an adoption or a name change, the consent of a

minor 12 years or older is required. A court may only make a custody or

supervision order regarding a child aged 12 or over if the child has

provided consent. Children aged 12 and over must be provided with notice

of certain actions to be taken in respect of them, including court

orders for medical examinations. Proceedings in relation to an offence

cannot be commenced against a child who is under the age of 12, and a

child under that age cannot be found guilty of an offence.

Children aged 12 and older can be employed, subject to certain

conditions — as the member well knows, these are much discussed —

applicable to those aged 12 to 14. Children aged 12 and over may apply

for a B.C. Services Card on their own behalf, and children 12 and older,

as was noted, may travel independently on a B.C. ferry. Twelve has been

used in all of these areas, so in this case, it seemed like an

appropriate place to put this for the moment.

There are obviously some who would advocate that it should be less

than 12 and in fact have advocated that. But this was the decision we

made in proceeding with this legislation and the decision we’re asking,

obviously, the House to support.

Clause 1 approved.

On clause 2.

[11:30 a.m.]

S. Bond: Thank you to the minister for the discussion of clause

Clause 2, obviously, is…. We’re looking at a different issue in

the sense of the issuance of a birth certificate. So maybe the minister

could just walk through for me and, more importantly, for the people who

will either look at this transcript or pay attention to this issue, how

the amendment of

section 36 impacts the issuance of birth certificates,

just a general overview, and then I’ll have some specific questions

about the process itself.

Hon. A. Dix: To really summarize it in one sense, it allows for genderless

birth certificates to be requested and provided. I’ll go through it a

little, quickly, just to go through the sort of core of it.

Clause 2 repeals and replaces

section 36(2)(

d) of the Vital

Statistics Act to allow the registrar general of the Vital Statistics

Agency to issue a birth certificate without a sex designation. If an

applicant for a certificate indicates in their application that a sex

designation should not be displayed on the certificate, the repeal and

replacement of this

section is required to enable the legal issuance of

birth certificates without a sex designation. So that’s why the law, in

this case, is different from a policy decision, as we saw in the

previous clause or

section of the bill.

It’s important to do this for obvious reasons. But if you think of

the principles that the government is supplying and the previous

government has provided about ensuring everyone has the right to

expression and, essentially, to self-determination in these matters, I

think it’s important from a human rights perspective that people be

allowed to do that and they have the right to do that. And that’s

important.

It’s also consistent, I think, with the ideas of the Canadian

Charter of Rights and Freedoms, of human rights legislation and others

to allow people this ability to make this decision in their own respect.

So those are the reasons for it, which we discussed at second reading.

And they’re important reasons.

This is why we’ve chosen to amend, in this way, this

section of

the Vital Statistics Act with clause 2. And I think it’s a change that,

obviously, people have requested, and I think it’s a positive change,

which people will be able to use should they wish.

S. Bond: Thank you to the minister. Is the minister at all concerned about

the kind of reaction that people may get making that choice to not

include a designated sex on a birth certificate? Is the minister

concerned about reaction, particularly things like discrimination,

stigma, those kinds of things?

What kind of information or support will be available — resources

— to make sure that people have the ability to make that decision

without facing discrimination or the stigma that may come with that

decision?

Hon. A. Dix: I think one place where we may see some challenges is in other

jurisdictions, and potentially the acceptance in other jurisdictions,

that may take a different view than British Columbia and Canada on these

questions. So that’s something people will obviously need to be prepared

for, because that has the potential to cause stigma.

I think the intent here is to take away that — to reflect, in

laws, the acceptance I think people have in communities. More broadly,

it’s really not about the legislation. It’s about the work that we all

have to do together as leaders.

[11:35 a.m.]

I think there is, if you look at social determinants of health….

For all of the people who are most affected by this legislation, those

social determinants of health are worse than average. People face

fundamental issues of health and support in society, and I think we have

to do more work together, collectively, to ensure acceptance, to

demonstrate that not just in our laws and in our approach and our

policies but in our communities as well.

I think, really, the thoughtful response in the debate by the

opposition critic, by the Third Party critic, by all those who come in

contact with this legislation, who’ve supported this legislation and

have spoken thoughtfully about it, is helpful in that respect. We have

to demonstrate that, and we have to continue to do it.

In dealing with issues of discrimination, there are issues out

there that go beyond this legislation. We’ve got to commit ourselves to

dealing with those issues. On the legislation itself, I think that such

changes are broadly helpful, and we have to continue as leaders in this

area.

This is more a responsibility of the government of Can­ada

than ours in a legislative sense, but I think it’s our responsibility to

citizens to ensure that such opposition to stigma and discrimination is

felt everywhere in the world and not just in British

Columbia.

S. Bond: The minister has referenced this in terms of his comments about

other jurisdictions. I’m interested if there are any other implications

for other government documents or records that require information

regarding sex or gender.

Hon. A. Dix: Partly, I think, we can look to other jurisdictions that have done

this, and gender is not the indicator. It has been sometimes in the

past.

In Ontario, there have been 1,100 such birth certificates issued

in the years since they made the change that we’re proposing to make

today. In Nova Scotia, it has been in place for some time, and in both

jurisdictions, they have not seen such effects. We wouldn’t expect to

see them here.

Should there be problems associated with them, of course, we’d

deal with those. To date, the path taken in other jurisdictions —

sometimes we’re first, and sometimes we’re not; in this case, we’re

third in Canada in doing this, amongst the provinces — assists us in the

belief…. Mr. Shewchuk just told me that this will be dealt with without

significant problems.

S. Bond: I want to just ensure…. Can the minister speak to: are there age

requirements for when a person may request their sex not be included on

a birth certificate?

Hon. A. Dix: There are no limitations except in this respect. Obviously, a

parent would order a birth certificate for a baby and up to the age of

12. You would see that. They would be, essentially, requesting a

genderless birth certificate.

After that point, it would be a child could do that. A minor over

the age of 12 could be able to do that themselves. Obviously, when a

child is…. A parent could choose to go and to proceed with a generalist

birth certificate. That would be their option up to that point. That’s

obvious for small children.

[11:40 a.m.]

S. Bond: I want to go back for a minute to the discussion around passport

applications, for example, and what the implications are there. How

would the decision to remove a gender indicator on a birth certificate…?

How does that align with federal legislation and policies regarding

passport applications? Because it’s one thing to make this decision, and

obviously, an important and significant one that families will think

about. But what happens when it comes to, for example, applying for a

passport? Has the minister considered that?

Hon. A. Dix: It’s a little bit of the answer I gave before, which is that the

federal government will accept this for the purposes of a passport, and

there is the provision for a genderless passport or for other indicators

— M, F or X.

The issue, though…. The federal government does put a warning to

people that some jurisdictions may question that around the world, if

you’re using it. I am not going to comment on jurisdictions around the

world, although the member might well imagine what some of them might

be. But that may have an effect, so there is a warning so that people

understand that. But ultimately, this is compatible with the application

for passport undertaken by the federal government.

S. Bond: It was international travel that I was really concerned about. I

appreciate the fact that a passport isn’t the issue; it’s what happens

when you have your passport and that people need to be careful about

that.

Really, I think I want to ask one additional question, and I ask

this more broadly, related to…. Vital Statistics has a role. It collects

data, and it looks at our demographics. Often, that helps agencies,

governments and others decide policy things. It’s a really important

thing in terms of information collection.

So with the changes, the amended legislation, how will that

change? How does

section 36 change the ability or the process of

collecting data?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, two points. Ontario, for example, which is a bigger

jurisdiction, has had about 250 a year over the four years, adding up to

the 1,100 I referred to earlier. So it’s a relatively small

group.

But in addition, this is the birth certificate. The birth

registration, which is used for Vital Statistics purposes, continues to

be provided. So it doesn’t really affect the statistical thing, which is

very important in our overall assessment of issues, especially issues

around gender, in fact, in our society.

So that’s the impact it has. Really, the legislation is neutral in

that respect. This just provides…. It really takes away what I’d say is

an unfair barrier to a whole group of people in terms of getting access

and having themselves reflected on their birth certificate, which is, as

everybody knows and everybody here knows — we have students in the

gallery — is a pretty important piece of primary

identification.

Clauses 2 and 3 approved.

Title approved.

Hon. A. Dix: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete

without amendment.

The Chair: You’ve heard the question.

Division has been called.

[11:45 a.m. - 11:55 a.m.]

I know that we’re standing between lunch and the vote. The

question is that the committee rise and report the bill complete

without amendment.

Motion approved unanimously on division. [See Votes and

Proceedings .]

The committee rose at 11:56 a.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

BILL 15 — VITAL STATISTICS

AMENDMENT ACT,

Bill 15, Vital Statistics Amendment Act, 2023, reported complete

without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported progress, was

granted leave to sit again.

Committee of Supply (Section C), having reported progress, was

granted leave to sit again.

Hon. L. Beare: I move that the House do now adjourn.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. today.

The House adjourned at 11:59 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE

DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

EDUCATION AND CHILD

CARE

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); H. Yao in the

chair.

The committee met at 11:07 a.m.

The Chair: Good morning, Members. I call Committee of Supply,

Section A,

to order. We are meeting today to consider the estimates of the

Ministry of Education and Child Care.

On Vote 20: ministry operations, $8,835,152,000.

The Chair: Minister, do you have any opening remarks?

Hon. R. Singh: Thank you, Chair, and good morning, everyone. Thanks for having me

here today. I’m here on the traditional territory of the

Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ people and the

Songhees and Esquimalt Nations. I’m so honoured to be participating in

this estimates — my first time as a minister. I really look forward to

answering questions on a wide variety of questions and very important

topics.

Before I start, I just want to say my thank-you — how grateful I

am to my team and the support I get from public servants who will be

working to support me through this process, including deputy minister

Christina Zacharuk and the team of ADMs. I’m also joined by ADM Chris

Brown and other ADMs and executive directors. I’m so fortunate to work

with them. The hard work they put in every day is incredible. I raise my

hands to everything they do.

Along with that, I really want to mention the political staff that

I have: my chief of staff, Kelly Sather; my ministerial adviser, Dulcy

Anderson; my executive assistant, Balkaran Singh; and all the

administrative staff that I get to work with every day and all the work

that they do to make my work easier.

To start with, I just want to mention…. I want to recognize the

staff in our K-to-12 system who make our education system among the best

in the world, from teachers to educational assistants, clerical workers,

drivers to custodians and maintenance workers, as well as school and

district administrators and board trustees.

[11:10 a.m.]

Schools, we know, are the heart of our communities. As a parent

myself whose children have gone through the public school system, I

personally know the positive impact that schools have in our children’s

lives.

As a government, I’m very, very proud to say that we are working

very hard to support students in their growth, whether it’s building

more inclusive schools, supporting the mental health of our students or

making record investments in school capital projects to meet the growing

demand. We know that B.C. is one of the best provinces to live, and we

are seeing a record number of people moving to British

Columbia.

We also know that different school districts, whether it’s Surrey,

Langley, Sooke, Kamloops — the pressure that they are facing. We are,

along with my team, working very closely to address those needs. It

gives me immense pleasure, and it is my honour that Budget 2023 ensures

that our K-to-12 education system will have the highest-ever school

operating funding budget with $8.05 billion for the 2023-24 fiscal

year.

For the first time in this province, we will also be

pro­viding multi-year funding to the school districts that they

can rely on to expand existing meal programs so that kids can eat

healthy, local foods and focus on learning. I know how important it is

for me and every member who is sitting out here, and especially with the

growing inflation, the global inflation that we are facing, it is a

very, very important thing that we as government are doing. It just

warms my heart to mention that.

Finally, I would just like to say that it’s an incredible

privilege to serve as B.C.’s Minister of Education and Child Care. I’m

very, very thankful to work with a great colleague, the Minister of

State for Child Care, who will also get an opportunity to be here today

and speak to the historic milestones that we have reached in child care

till now. I really thank everybody, and I’m really looking forward to

the questions.

The Chair: I now recognize the member for Surrey South. Would you like to

make any opening remarks?

E. Sturko: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to say thank you to everyone for

being here. Thank you for the opportunity to ask questions about this

year’s education budget.

I do have a number of questions that I’ll be asking, but I also

wish to thank everyone who is working to make our education system, K to

12 and beyond, the best it can be at this present time and especially

recognizing the day-to-day work of teachers, education assistants,

janitorial staff, administrators, who are there day in and day out, who

have been there for our children and who continue to be a pillar of our

communities, helping raise up British Columbia’s students.

Keeping that in mind, I am going to ask questions. Maybe some will

be tough, but this is being done in the best interest of making our

education system as strong as it can be and making sure that we’re

providing everything possible to make sure that, going forward, British

Columbia’s students’ needs are being met properly.

The Chair: Thank you, Member. Would you like to start with a

question?

E. Sturko: I sure would. Thank you, Chair.

Literacy skills, like reading and numeracy, are essential in our

information-rich society. Being able to navigate things like the

Internet, sift and process information or to find out and fill

employment applications or assistance applications, they require

literacy.

We know that incarcerated people have higher rates of illiteracy,

but recent years’ stats are lacking. We know that in 2012, 79 percent of

inmates didn’t have a high school diploma, and 82 percent tested lower

than a grade 10 reading level.

The Statistics Canada poverty dashboard in 2022 shows, among

15-year-olds, from 2015-18, that literacy increased by 29 percent, and

low numeracy increased by 13.2 percent across Canada.

Here in B.C., in the 2022 students’ success report, in grades 4

and 7, we see reading and numeracy declining. With literacy rates not

improving, how will this year’s budget improve literacy rates in

B.C.?

[11:15 a.m.]

Hon. R. Singh: To the member, I really want to thank her for the question. I just

want to tell the member that we, our education system, are putting a lot

of resources in the issues that you have raised, especially the numeracy

and the reading skills. I really want to thank the teachers for the

efforts that they are putting into our students every day on an ongoing

basis.

Also, I just want to mention that there’s a way to test those

skills — the FSA test the students are able to take in grade 4, grade 7

and grade 10. What we have seen from the data is that there haven’t been

any significant changes in those rates. We are very comfortable with the

number of students taking those tests and the results that we are seeing

in that.

I can assure the member that I have a lot of faith in the efforts

that our teachers are putting in every day, especially the emphasis that

they are putting in our numeracy skills. Our students should be very

skilled in that, as well as the reading skills. So really thankful for

all the work that is happening in our schools on an everyday

basis.

E. Sturko: I actually find it concerning to hear that the government would be

comfortable with declining literacy and numeracy rates. I did have a

look at the foundational skills assessment, the FSAs, and I did note

that there is a decline in numeracy and literacy. Whether or not these

are considered by the government to be concerning or not, we’re falling

behind other provinces in terms of literacy and numeracy.

I think that any decline in our ability to read, to calculate and

to do things that would be basic functions, to be able to navigate

things like even filling out a job application in B.C. should be

extremely alarming to this government.

[11:20 a.m.]

It’s good to hear you acknowledging that there has been a decline

in literacy and numeracy. But like I said, it is actually quite

disturbing to hear that it’s not a concern to see those rates dropping.

What programs have been established with the 2023 budget specifically to

address numeracy and reading, and how are they going to improve outcomes

and graduation opportunities?

Hon. R. Singh: I just want to mention that from 2017 to 2021, the percentage of

students on track and extending increased.

[11:25 a.m.]

In the 2017-18 school year, we had 79 percent of the students on

track or exceeding in reading, which went up to 85 percent in 2020-21.

For writing in 2017-2018, we had the students on track and exceeding at

80 percent, which went up to 85 percent for the school year

2020-2021.

I also want to just mention that for the year 2021-22, those

numbers did go down a little bit. But I also want to tell you that along

with this testing, the teachers, on an everyday basis, are doing their

assessments in the classrooms. There are different tools so they are

able to assess students’ progress in the classrooms, and that is

happening. So as I said before, I’m really thankful for all the work

that the teachers are doing and the efforts they are putting into our

students.

Along with that, I want to mention the support for the Indigenous

learners. We know the barriers, the challenges, the Indigenous learners

have faced historically. Our government and according to the

declaration…. In accordance with our action plan commitment, we have

invested $584,000 for the literacy and numeracy programs especially

addressing the Indigenous learners. We are hoping that those investments

really bring those learners up as well.

We don’t have the numbers for this school year yet. In the coming

months, I would be more than happy to provide those numbers as

well.

E. Sturko: I was talking specifically to decreases. Really, my most recent

FSAs, looking at, are 2022. We know that COVID certainly would have had

an impact on literacy and numeracy rates.

I think it’s important to clarify what types of expenditures, what

types of programs, what things are being done to help students catch up

and to make sure that our literacy improves in the province.

A recent documentary from Oakland, California, which is a film by

Jenny Mackenzie and a South by Southwest education 2023 film selection,

has a quote from Kareem Weaver. He is a NAACP activist. He

says:

“The question is: what becomes of those kids who don’t have a

foundation in reading? I can tell you what happens to them. Now, the

Lord works in mysterious ways. Kids, as you know, overcome all kinds of

challenges. However, illiteracy is a pipeline to prison, and it’s also a

pipeline to homelessness. And that pipeline is also a pipeline to

unemployment and depression.

“There are also publishing companies that sell popular curriculum

that don’t teach our children to read, making millions of dollars. From

day one I set foot in Oakland, I realized everything that starts, starts

with literacy. Everything starts with reading, math, science, history —

you name it. If you can’t read, you can’t access anything in the

U.S.”

I read this because I believe that that also is appropriate for

here in British Columbia. Everything that we do has a foundation in

literacy and numeracy. My question to the minister is: what approach to

teaching reading is B.C. using? Is it balanced or structured?

[11:30 a.m.]

Hon. R. Singh: Thank you to the member. I want to just mention that literacy and

numeracy are the foundation of our curriculum in all the classes. One

thing I know as a parent, as well, is that every child learns

differently. Your own two children are not the same.

The teachers are teaching more than 20 students in a class. Every

student has specific needs, specific skills, a specific way that they

learn. That’s why I just want to say…. The different tools and different

resources that the teachers employ every day recognize those needs, the

specific needs that every student has, and work accordingly.

There’s no question how important numeracy and reading are. I

completely agree with the member that this is very important — the work

that the teachers are putting in and the emphasis that our curriculum

has on these specific skills. At the same time, we don’t mandate

teachers in the way that they teach students. They are, I think, the

experts in the field, and they know the ways and how to impart that

education.

E. Sturko: Budget 2023 was…. Were the special supports for special needs…?

Were special needs supports in the budget increased or decreased from

2022?

[11:35 a.m.]

Hon. R. Singh: I want to say that the Education Ministry is committed to ensuring

equitable access to learning for all students. We know the learning

disabilities category is included in the basic per-pupil allocation

amount the ministry provides to boards of education for each student

enrolled. This amount includes funds to support general inclusive

education services, such as learning assistance, special health services

and assessments, including for students with learning

disabilities.

Along with that, I want to mention that the per-student funding

for special needs levels 1, 2 and 3 has increased this year by 9.4

percent. I just wanted to mention that.

E. Sturko: How many students with designation G were funded and were in

schools over the last four years?

Hon. R. Singh: We have 21,438 students who are on the autism spectrum disorder in

the system. I hope that is the information the member was looking

for.

E. Sturko: I’ll just ask for a little bit of clarification. Can you let me

know if the per-pupil amount that the minister previously referenced…?

Is that including the G and Q designations of pupils that are currently

in the school system?

[11:40 a.m.]

Hon. R. Singh: Designation G is part of level 2 of special needs. Designation Q

is part of the basic funding that we provide to every student. It is

part of that.

I also want to address the question the member asked previously

about the attendance of the students. The ministry does not keep track

of the attendance. It is up to the school districts and the boards of

education to do that.

But the total number who are designated with autism spectrum, that

number I have already given.

E. Sturko: The minister brought up students who have a Q designation. We know

that 80 percent of learning disabilities are dyslexia. With 82,786

students, I believe, with special needs in the education system, it’s

easy to think that many have a learning disability.

Are all students with special needs receiving the supports they

need for literacy success in the province? Can the minister please

outline the programs that are currently being used to ensure all

students are screened for dyslexia in B.C. schools?

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. R. Singh: I want to say this. Every child should reach their full potential.

That’s what we are focused on in our school system.

It is the work the school communities are doing together — to

recognize the special needs, especially the specific needs that every

child comes with. They are in the best position to find out if there is

any diagnosis that needs to be done or any more testing that needs to be

done.

One thing that we are very clear…. To get specific assistance or

specific resources, a child does not need a medical diagnosis or any

specific diagnosis.

The school communities are, I think, the best judge to…. They are

working with the student community on an everyday basis. They are the

best judge to see what kinds of testing requirements are

needed.

When I talk about…. Every student should be reaching their full

potential. It is not just dependent on the testing. The resources are

provided to the student, even if they are not diagnosed with a

particular issue.

The Chair: I ask the minister to move the motion.

Hon. R. Singh: I move that the committee rise and report progress and ask leave

to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:46 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE

BIRCH ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF

CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT

The House in Committee of Supply (Section C); R. Leonard in the

chair.

The committee met at 11:09 a.m.

The Chair: I call the Committee of Supply,

Section C, to order. We are

meeting today to consider the estimates of the Ministry of Children

and Family Development.

On Vote 18: ministry operations, $1,912,095,000.

[11:10 a.m.]

The Chair: Minister, do you have any opening remarks?

Hon. M. Dean: Yes. I’d like to start by recognizing that we are doing our work

today on the traditional territory of the

Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ people, and that’s

really important to me. I represent the Esquimalt and Songhees Nations

here provincially and also Scia’new Nation as well.

I really want to thank all of the ministry staff, everyone in the

room and everybody who’s out in community delivering services, also the

staff of the Indigenous child and family service agencies and the

community social services sector, the partner agencies who are

delivering services in community as well. It’s actually Community Social

Services Awareness Month, and we just had Social Worker Week as

well.

Today I have with me our deputy minister, Allison Bond; executive

finance officer, Keith Godin; ADMs Cory Heavener, Carolyn Kamper, Denise

Devenny and Kelly Durand.

I want to reflect on…. I’m so honoured to be doing this work, and

our government has supported this ministry since 2017. We’ve actually

seen increases to the budget for this ministry every single year since

then, really demonstrating our support and investment in services for

children and families across the whole of the province. We’ve been doing

some really important work within the ministry as well, making sure that

while we’re increasing investments, we’re actually improving outcomes

for children and youth as well.

Last year, for example, in November, we passed Bill 38, which is a

really significant piece of legislation supporting Indigenous nations

exercising inherent jurisdiction. This year, in Budget 2023, we’ll talk

about it. We made significant increases in caregivers’ rates, and it was

really important in 2019, actually, that we lifted out-of-care payments

to be the same as foster care payments as well.

We’re launching four family connections centre pilots. We’re

making changes to in-care services, so we’re introducing a network of

specialized homes and support services. So if kids do have to come into

care, then they’ll actually have their needs met in the home that they

are provided with. We’re providing comprehensive supports for youth

transitioning from care. We know that leaving government care has been

called the superhighway to homelessness and that outcomes are much worse

than the general population’s. We want to provide supports so that young

people leaving government care are able to thrive.

To show respect for the amazing work that foster carers and

out-of-care carers provide and how they support youth and children in

care and because of global inflation, we have increased the caregiver

rates really significantly. As I said, in Budget 2019, we made the

funding for extended families the same as for foster families, and

that’s really helping us in our vision and our intention of reducing the

number of children and youth in the care system.

In Budget 2023, the lift is $84.9 million, and that is supporting

over 5,000 foster parents and caregivers. The maintenance rate was

increased by up to 47 percent, and the other rates, the service payment

relief care and respite payments, were also increased

significantly.

We heard some really heartfelt stories from foster parents. One

foster family said, “Oh, that’s such a relief. I can now pay for

graduation photos” — for the young person that they were looking after.

Another caregiver from Cowichan said: “Financially, I won’t be spending

out-of-pocket anymore. Emotionally, I feel more like a valued member of

the community. Ultimately, the youth in our care will be cared for in a

way that truly honours their needs.” Karla from Richmond said: “It

alleviates some of the stress around purchasing groceries and

necessities for my family, while showing my work is critical and

appreciated. We feel more uplifted, more supported and more capable when

we have the financial resources to support our children with what they

need to thrive.”

We’re also investing in children and youth with support needs.

We’re investing in interim supports for underserved populations. We know

the way that the services are delivered at the moment leaves too many

children behind.

[11:15 a.m.]

We’ll be evaluating the family connections centre pilot projects

and engaging in deeper consultations with First Nations and the

disability community, stakeholders, advo­cates,

families.

The budget for CYSN in 2016 was $303 million. The budget in 2023,

this year, is $528.9 million. We’re really in­vesting in this

area. We know too many children have been left behind. That includes

partnering on service delivery with communities and Indigenous

leadership and workforce investments.

We’re expanding respite funding and services across the province.

We’re doubling the billing rate cap from $80 an hour to $160 an hour for

school-age extended therapy. We’re providing funds to child development

centres for 90 foundational program therapists and doubling the budget

for the FASD key worker program. There’s also $5 million for an

Indigenous engagement and service delivery model. All of this while

maintaining individualized funding for children and youth with a

diagnosis of autism.

We’re going to learn from engagement. We’re going to learn from

the pilots and the evaluation so that we can eventually build a system

of supports that meets the unique needs of all children with support

needs and that helps them thrive.

As I said, we’re investing in supporting youth and young adults

transitioning from government care. Budget 2023 adds $5.2 million to

continue implementing wraparound supports. We know that young people are

at risk of much more adverse outcomes in lots of different respects in

their future, putting them at a real disadvantage.

We’ve already introduced the no-limit earnings exemption. We’re

already recruiting youth transition workers. We already have 800 young

people on monthly rent supplements of $600 a month, and we’re increasing

that through another intake.

We know that we want all children and youth to have the supports

that they need to fulfil their potential and to thrive, and we want to

keep families together. So we’re working, under the federal legislation

and our new provincial legislation, with Indigenous communities to make

sure that Indigenous children and youth stay connected to their family,

their community and their culture. We know that that’s going to lead to

much healthier and more positive and successful outcomes for

them.

For far too long, Indigenous children and youth have been

overrepresented in the child welfare system. We actually have less than

5,000 children and youth in care now. We have the lowest number of

children and youth in care in 30 years and the lowest number of

Indigenous children and youth in care in over 20 years.

We have a lot more to do. There’s a lot more to do to make sure

that we support all children and youth across the province. My top

priority is to make sure children and youth and families have the

supports that they need to thrive.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I welcome questions.

The Chair: I recognize the member for Kelowna–Lake Country.

Would you like to make any opening remarks?

N. Letnick: Thank you to the minister for her opening remarks and to her staff

for the work that they do.

I have the privilege of being the critic for Children and

Families. I say privilege. Honestly, I’ve…. I’m an adoptive parent. I

know how important it is to provide children with a home and with love.

I hope I’ve done that for my daughter. I will let her be the judge of

that in the years to come.

The home we provide to our children, throughout the province,

through the ministry…. It’s also important to make sure that they have a

good home with love, whether it’s directly with us or through somebody

that has contracted with us.

Given the limited amount of time that we have, that’s really all I

wanted to do as an introduction. I’ll go right into the

questions.

We will have a series of our colleagues who will be asking

questions. Before lunch, I will take some time just to get a baseline of

information. If the ministry staff don’t have the information right away

and want to come back after lunch, that’s fine too. Then my colleague

from Kelowna-Mission will have a few questions before lunch. When we

come back, I would like to talk a little bit about group homes and the

commitment made by the Premier on group homes. I have three other

colleagues who will be asking questions. Then boom, three hours, and we

will be done.

With that, I was looking at the Representative for Children and

Youth report for 2021-2022. On page 63, the representative provides

statistics, since ’16-17, on critical injuries, deaths and totals. In

that time series, the statistics changed drastically around ’18-19 and

’19-20. They’ve expanded the definition of “in-mandate injuries” to

in­clude emotional harm.

[11:20 a.m.]

Two things I want to get a handle on are: do we have numbers yet

for ’22-23 that the ministry can share? I imagine not, but just in case,

if there’s something there. Also, is it possible to get numbers without

the expanded definition? Every time an accountant or somebody else

changes the definition, of course, it’s hard to compare apples to

apples.

For example, critical injuries in ’16-17 were 754; and then 818;

and then they jumped to 1,061, 1,252 and in 2021, 1,825, and in ’21-22,

2,406. It’s something different in deaths, where deaths in ’16-17 were

112; and in ’21-22, not good news in the sense that people are still

dying but good news in the sense that it’s not going up, it was 110.

Again, there’s no change in definition there for “death.”

Death seems to be staying approximately the same — from 112, 110,

95, 110; but it’s quite a rise in critical injuries. If it’s possible to

understand what the critical injuries would have been without the

expanded definition, it will give us a good idea as to whether things

are getting better or worse or staying the same.

Why don’t I just stop there, and perhaps the minister and ministry

staff will have the answer to that. If not, again, after lunch is

fine.

Hon. M. Dean: We don’t have the numbers yet for ’22-23. It might be possible to

get an approximate number for the member. It would take some time. It

would take work internally in the ministry to try and see if we could

pull out what you were asking for that would be without the change of

definition.

N. Letnick: Thank you to the minister. I appreciate that. I knew it would take

some time. So it would be great to have that back.

The other piece that comes clear to me when I look at the

representative’s report, on page 64…. She talks about critical injuries,

provides statistics between Indigenous and non-Indigenous children, and

the percentage. So in critical injuries, she identifies 57 percent total

Indigenous, for injuries, with 43 percent being non-Indigenous. But when

you look at deaths, it’s the inverse. It’s 41 percent Indigenous and 59

percent non-Indigenous. Does the minister have any explanation as to why

that difference in statistics?

[11:25 a.m.]

Hon. M. Dean: Of course, when a child dies, it’s heartbreaking. It’s a tragedy

for everybody who has been in­volved in the life of that child and

youth.

When a child in care, where the government is re­sponsible….

There’s a clear process for making sure that there is a review if that

child passes away — indeed, if that child has received services within

the prior 12 months as well. That immediately triggers lots of steps

that the ministry takes.

The provincial director of child welfare is informed within 24

hours, and a reportable circumstances report is sent to the provincial

director of child welfare. Then there are also other independent bodies

who have information sent to them as well, and a practice review is

conducted as well. The provincial director will also receive all of this

information and will be able to then monitor whether there are any

trends or whether there’s any practice that needs to be

addressed.

N. Letnick: Thank you to the minister. But my question was why the difference

between Indigenous and non-Indigenous. With respect, the minister has

not provided that answer.

While the minister is looking for the answer, perhaps also, how

does that compare with the general population, people in care versus the

general population? If we have those statistics…. Are children dying

just as frequently in the general population as they are in care, and if

they are not, why not? What are we doing that we can do better in

government to take care of our children?

[11:30 a.m.]

Hon. M. Dean: It is important to talk about what happens in individual

circumstances, and that is reviewed, because that’s where, if there are

any trends, they would be identified.

As the member points out, the rates between Indigenous and

non-Indigenous are different, but there are more Indigenous children and

youth who are actually in the care system. It’s clearly more complex

than just looking at numerical trends.

What’s really important to us is that we’re making

im­provements in practice. We’re making legislative changes, and

we’re making practice and policy changes, because we want to make sure

that Indigenous children and youth stay connected to their family and

their community and their culture.

Each individual situation is different and gets looked at and gets

reviewed by the provincial director. The numbers that we have in the

ministry can’t be compared to the general population because a lot of

children and youth are coming into care at an expected end-of-life

stage. Because they have very complex medical needs, they’re actually

coming into care and receiving palliative services. So there can’t be

that comparison with the general population.

N. Letnick: Thank you to the minister. Perhaps to give us an idea as to how we

are doing, maybe when the staff come back and the minister comes back at

some point with the other statistics that we discussed 15 minutes ago,

they can also give us a comparison to other provinces. I see nodding of

heads, so I’ll just leave it there.

That way, we’ll have an idea as to how we’re doing in B.C.,

relative to other provinces, and what we can learn from other provinces

and their actions and their changes to legislation and policies that

maybe we can adopt and share our ways of doing things with them and

improve the state for children all across the country.

With that, Madam Chair, the member for Kelowna-Mission has a

question.

R. Merrifield: I’m going to start on a little bit of a different trajectory using

my critic role in gender equity and inclusion as a framework and talk

more about family violence. As we know, family violence, domestic

violence and intimate partner violence include physical, could include

sexual violence, and it can include emotional and financial abuse.

Really, we’re looking at all demographic and socioeconomic backgrounds

being affected.

There are a lot of costs to our economy, a lot of costs to our

society. Those include things like health care, our justice system,

employers, businesses, social and community services, but ultimately,

injury and loss of life. I won’t get into the Canadian statistics,

because B.C. actually had one of the largest provincial increases in

Canada in 2019. That was a 25 percent increase in the rate of family

violence.

B.C. actually had a rate of intimate partner violence increase by

almost the same amount, and the rate of family violence in B.C. was

actually two times higher in rural areas than urban areas. In rural

areas, the intimate partner violence is 3½ times higher for women than

men.

[11:35 a.m.]

The rate of family violence against children increased 41 percent

in B.C. in 2019 over the previous year. I’d love to say that those

statistics are down, but unfortunately, during the COVID-19 pandemic,

many children and youth who had minimal exposure to people outside the

home — such as friends, teachers, doctors and counsellors — were

actually the victims of violence that was even more hidden.

My question, based on these statistics and from this framework, is

this: could the minister please confirm that the provincial office of

domestic violence was disbanded?

Hon. M. Dean: Just in response to the member’s question about comparisons with

other provinces, British Columbia was actually the first province in all

of Canada to pass provincial legislation supporting the federal act,

supporting Indigenous jurisdiction, and we actually signed our first

coordination agreement in B.C. last week.

On the provincial office that the member was asking about, the

responsibility for that moved over to the Ministry of Public Safety and

Solicitor General some years ago.

R. Merrifield: Could the minister please confirm what year that was actually

moved over to PSSG?

Hon. M. Dean: It was 2018.

R. Merrifield: Thank you so much. That concludes my questions.

N. Letnick: Thank you to the minister for her answers. What steps is the

minister taking to improve the transparency and accountability of the

child welfare system, as well as to regularly monitor and evaluate the

effectiveness of policies and programs in reducing the number of deaths

and critical injuries among children and youth in care?

[11:40 a.m.]

Hon. M. Dean: Thank you to the member for the question. We actually have a

reporting portal, where people are able to go onto the website and they

can actually get access to an awful lot of detail and information. It

was just updated last week. No other jurisdiction in Canada provides as

much information as British Columbia does through a mechanism such as

that.

We routinely provide accountability statements to nations and

Métis Nation B.C. as well. We provide them with information about

financial investments and financial resources that have been spent,

statistics — numbers of children and youth in care — and provincial

statistics as well.

We provide that, proactively, regularly with all nations. We’re

engaging with our stakeholders and partners on our new approach to

quality assurance. We do actually need to make sure that we’re looking

at outcomes and making sure that services are being delivered in the way

and to the standard that we want them to be delivered.

As the member mentioned to begin with, we need to talk to children

and youth, and hear from them. Are they experiencing the love they need

while they’re in government care and in a home that’s supported by the

government? Not just love, but are they getting what they need, and is

the home safe and nurturing, and secure for them?

We also publicly post case reviews. We also publicly post practice

evaluations as well.

N. Letnick: Noting the hour, it’s probably my last question before we

adjourn.

Can the minister expand on the portal? Does the portal provide

typical causes of self-harm or harm? For example, are we seeing more

self-harm? Are we seeing more injuries, or is it…? I’ll just leave that

there.

Will the portal give us more statistics so we can identify how the

outcomes are going? As the minister said, we’re trying to focus more on

outcomes. I’ll just leave it there, given the time that we

have.

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. M. Dean: What we’ll do is we’ll send you a list of all of the types of

information that’s available on the portal, just so you can actually see

all the different ways you can kind of go in and get data and get a

report-out as well.

The provincial director’s office goes through all of the reviews.

The purpose of that is to try and identify if there are any

trends.

With that, I move that the committee rise and report progress and

ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:46 a.m.

Copyright © 2023 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.