British Columbia Hansard — Wednesday, November 26, 2014

20141126pm-Hansard-v18n8

British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)

Th ird Session, 40th Parliament OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (HANSARD) THE HONOURABLE LINDA REID, SPEAKER ISSN 0709- 1281 (Print) ISSN 1499-2175 (Online) Wednesday, November 26, 2014 Aft ernoon Sitting Volume 18, Number 8

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871) LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Judith Guichon, OBC Third Session, 40th Parliament SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Linda Reid EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council .............................................................................................................. Hon. Christy Clark Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural Gas Development and Minister Responsible for Housing ......................Hon.

Rich Coleman Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ......................................................................................................... Hon. John Rustad Minister of Advanced Education ............................................................................................................................................ Hon. Amrik Virk Minister of Agriculture ........................................................................................................................................................ Hon.

Norm Letnick Minister of Children and Family Development ....................................................................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development ........................................................................................... Hon. Coralee Oakes Minister of Education ..................................................................................................................................................... Hon.

Peter Fassbender Minister of Energy and Mines and Minister Responsible for Core Review .....................................................................Hon. Bill Bennett Minister of Environment ..........................................................................................................................................................Hon. Mary Polak Minister of Finance .................................................................................................................................................. Hon.

Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations......................................................................................Hon. Steve Th omson Minister of Health ............................................................................................................................................................... Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Minister of International Trade and Minister Responsible for Asia Pacifi c Strategy and Multiculturalism ..................Hon.

Teresa Wat Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour ...................................................Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of State for Tourism and Small Business ....................................................................................................Hon. Naomi Y amamoto Minister of Justice ...............................................................................................................................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation......................................................................................................Hon. Don McRae Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services ................................................................................... Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure ......................................................................................................................Hon.

Todd Stone LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Offi cial Opposition ...................................................................................................................................................John Horgan Deputy Speaker .............................................................................................................................................................................Douglas Horne Assistant Deputy Speaker ...............................................................................................................................................................

Raj Chouhan Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ....................................................................................................................................... Marc Dalton Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ................................................................................................................................................... Craig James Deputy Clerk and Clerk of Committees .................................................................................................................................

Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sessional Law Clerk ...................................................................................................................................................Roderick MacArthur, QC Sergeant-at-Arms ................................................................................................................................................................................. Gary Lenz

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS Anton, Hon. Suzanne (BC Liberal) .............................. Vancouver-Fraserview Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal).....................................................................Penticton Austin, Robin (NDP) ................................................................................ Skeena Bains, Harry (NDP) ....................................................................Surrey-Newton Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) ............................................... Cariboo-Chilcotin Bennett, Hon.

Bill (BC Liberal) ...................................................Kootenay East Bernier, Mike (BC Liberal) ................................................... Peace River South Bing, Dr. Doug (BC Liberal) ................................ Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Bond, Hon. Shirley (BC Liberal) ........................... Prince George–Valemount Cadieux, Hon. Stephanie (BC Liberal) ................................Surrey-Cloverdale Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) .................................Vancouver–West End Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...........................................................

Burnaby-Edmonds Clark, Hon. Christy (BC Liberal) ........................................ Westside-Kelowna Coleman, Hon. Rich (BC Liberal) ...........................Fort Langley–Aldergrove Conroy, Katrine (NDP) .............................................................. Kootenay West Corrigan, Kathy (NDP) ..................................................... Burnaby–Deer Lake Dalton, Marc (BC Liberal) ............................................. Maple Ridge–Mission Darcy, Judy (NDP) ..................................................................New Westminster de Jong, Hon.

Michael, QC (BC Liberal) .............................. Abbotsford West Dix, Adrian (NDP)............................................................Vancouver-Kingsway Donaldson, Doug (NDP) ......................................................................... Stikine Eby, David (NDP) ..........................................................Vancouver–Point Grey Elmore, Mable (NDP) ................................................... Vancouver-Kensington Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ............................................................ Port Coquitlam Fassbender, Hon.

Peter (BC Liberal) ................................... Surrey-Fleetwood Fleming, Rob (NDP) .......................................................... Victoria–Swan Lake Foster, Eric (BC Liberal) .......................................................Vernon-Monashee Fraser, Scott (NDP) ............................................................Alberni–Pacifi c Rim Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) ............................................. Abbotsford-Mission Hamilton, Wm.

Scott (BC Liberal) .................................................Delta North Hammell, Sue (NDP) .................................................... Surrey–Green Timbers Heyman, George (NDP) .................................................... Vancouver-Fairview Hogg, Gordon (BC Liberal) ............................................... Surrey–White Rock Holman, Gary (NDP) .......................................Saanich North and the Islands Horgan, John (NDP) .......................................................................

Juan de Fuca Horne, Douglas (BC Liberal) ..............................Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ....................................................Surrey-Panorama Huntington, Vicki (Ind.) ..................................................................Delta South James, Carole (NDP) .........................................................Victoria–Beacon Hill Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ........................................Esquimalt–Royal Roads Krog, Leonard Eugene (NDP) .............................................................

Nanaimo Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ........................... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal) ........................................................................ Shuswap Lake, Hon. Dr. Terry (BC Liberal) ....................Kamloops–North Th ompson Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) .........................................Boundary-Similkameen Lee, Richard T. (BC Liberal) ......................................................Burnaby North Letnick, Hon.

Norm (BC Liberal) ..............................Kelowna–Lake Country Macdonald, Norm (NDP) ....................................Columbia River–Revelstoke McRae, Hon. Don (BC Liberal) .................................................. Comox Valley Martin, John (BC Liberal) ..................................................................Chilliwack Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ..................................... Prince George–Mackenzie Mungall, Michelle (NDP) ..........................................................Nelson-Creston Oakes, Hon.

Coralee (BC Liberal) .............................................Cariboo North Pimm, Pat (BC Liberal) .........................................................Peace River North Plecas, Dr. Darryl (BC Liberal) .............................................Abbotsford South Polak, Hon. Mary (BC Liberal) .............................................................. Langley Popham, Lana (NDP) ...................................................................Saanich South Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ................................................................ Surrey-Whalley Reid, Hon.

Linda (BC Liberal) ..................................................Richmond East Reimer, Linda (BC Liberal) ........................................ Port Moody–Coquitlam Rice, Jennifer (NDP) ........................................................................North Coast Robinson, Selina (NDP) .............................................Coquitlam-Maillardville Routley, Bill (NDP) .................................................................. Cowichan Valley Routley, Doug (NDP) ............................................Nanaimo–North Cowichan Rustad, Hon.

John (BC Liberal) ................................................ Nechako Lakes Shin, Jane Jae Kyung (NDP) ...............................................Burnaby-Lougheed Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ................................... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Simpson, Shane (NDP) ..................................................... Vancouver-Hastings Stilwell, Michelle (BC Liberal) ........................................ Parksville-Qualicum Stilwell, Dr. Moira (BC Liberal) ........................................ Vancouver-Langara Stone, Hon. Todd (BC Liberal) .........................

Kamloops–South Th ompson Sturdy, Jordan (BC Liberal) ..................................West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Sullivan, Sam (BC Liberal) ...........................................Vancouver–False Creek Sultan, Ralph (BC Liberal) ..................................... West Vancouver–Capilano Tegart, Jackie (BC Liberal) ............................................................Fraser-Nicola Th omson, Hon. Steve (BC Liberal) .......................................Kelowna-Mission Th ornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ..........................

North Vancouver–Seymour Th roness, Laurie (BC Liberal).................................................Chilliwack-Hope Trevena, Claire (NDP) .................................................................... North Island Virk, Hon. Amrik (BC Liberal) ............................................. Surrey-Tynehead Wat, Hon. Teresa (BC Liberal) .............................................. Richmond Centre Weaver, Dr. Andrew (Ind.) .......................................... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Wilkinson, Hon. Andrew (BC Liberal) ........................ Vancouver-Quilchena Y amamoto, Hon.

Naomi (BC Liberal) ................ North Vancouver–Lonsdale Y ap, John (BC Liberal) ......................................................Richmond-Steveston LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Abbotsford-Mission ......................................................................Simon Gibson Abbotsford South ..................................................................... Dr. Darryl Plecas Abbotsford West ...................................................... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Alberni–Pacifi c Rim ..........................................................................

Scott Fraser Boundary-Similkameen ................................................................ Linda Larson Burnaby–Deer Lake ................................................................... Kathy Corrigan Burnaby-Edmonds ..........................................................................Raj Chouhan Burnaby-Lougheed .............................................................Jane Jae Kyung Shin Burnaby North .............................................................................. Richard T.

Lee Cariboo-Chilcotin ........................................................................Donna Barnett Cariboo North .................................................................... Hon. Coralee Oakes Chilliwack ......................................................................................... John Martin Chilliwack-Hope ....................................................................... Laurie Th roness Columbia River–Revelstoke .................................................. Norm Macdonald Comox Valley...........................................................................Hon.

Don McRae Coquitlam–Burke Mountain .....................................................Douglas Horne Coquitlam-Maillardville........................................................... Selina Robinson Cowichan Valley ................................................................................ Bill Routley Delta North .........................................................................Wm.

Scott Hamilton Delta South...............................................................................Vicki Huntington Esquimalt–Royal Roads .....................................................Maurine Karagianis Fort Langley–Aldergrove ...................................................Hon. Rich Coleman Fraser-Nicola.................................................................................... Jackie Tegart Juan de Fuca .....................................................................................John Horgan Kamloops–North Th ompson ............................................ Hon. Dr.

Terry Lake Kamloops–South Th ompson ..................................................Hon. Todd Stone Kelowna–Lake Country ..................................................... Hon. Norm Letnick Kelowna-Mission .............................................................. Hon. Steve Th omson Kootenay East .......................................................................... Hon. Bill Bennett Kootenay West ............................................................................ Katrine Conroy Langley.......................................................................................Hon.

Mary Polak Maple Ridge–Mission ..................................................................... Marc Dalton Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ........................................................ Dr. Doug Bing Nanaimo ........................................................................... Leonard Eugene Krog Nanaimo–North Cowichan ......................................................... Doug Routley Nechako Lakes ........................................................................ Hon.

John Rustad Nelson-Creston ........................................................................Michelle Mungall New Westminster ............................................................................... Judy Darcy North Coast......................................................................................Jennifer Rice North Island .................................................................................. Claire Trevena North Vancouver–Lonsdale ........................................Hon.

Naomi Y amamoto North Vancouver–Seymour ..................................................Jane Th ornthwaite Oak Bay–Gordon Head ...................................................... Dr. Andrew Weaver Parksville-Qualicum .................................................................Michelle Stilwell Peace River North ................................................................................

Pat Pimm Peace River South ............................................................................Mike Bernier Penticton............................................................................................ Dan Ashton Port Coquitlam ..........................................................................Mike Farnworth Port Moody–Coquitlam ................................................................Linda Reimer Powell River–Sunshine Coast ................................................. Nicholas Simons Prince George–Mackenzie .............................................................

Mike Morris Prince George–Valemount ................................................... Hon. Shirley Bond Richmond Centre ......................................................................Hon. Teresa Wat Richmond East ..........................................................................Hon. Linda Reid Richmond-Steveston ..............................................................................John Y ap Saanich North and the Islands .................................................... Gary Holman Saanich South ................................................................................

Lana Popham Shuswap ................................................................................................Greg Kyllo Skeena .............................................................................................. Robin Austin Stikine ....................................................................................... Doug Donaldson Surrey-Cloverdale ....................................................... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Surrey-Fleetwood ........................................................... Hon.

Peter Fassbender Surrey–Green Timbers .................................................................. Sue Hammell Surrey-Newton ................................................................................. Harry Bains Surrey-Panorama ........................................................................... Marvin Hunt Surrey-Tynehead ......................................................................Hon. Amrik Virk Surrey-Whalley..............................................................................

Bruce Ralston Surrey–White Rock ....................................................................... Gordon Hogg Vancouver-Fairview ..................................................................George Heyman Vancouver–False Creek ................................................................... Sam Sullivan Vancouver-Fraserview ......................................................Hon.

Suzanne Anton Vancouver-Hastings ....................................................................Shane Simpson Vancouver-Kensington .................................................................Mable Elmore Vancouver-Kingsway..........................................................................Adrian Dix Vancouver-Langara .................................................................Dr. Moira Stilwell Vancouver–Mount Pleasant .........................................

Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Vancouver–Point Grey .........................................................................David Eby Vancouver-Quilchena ................................................ Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Vancouver–West End ...............................................

Spencer Chandra Herbert Vernon-Monashee ...............................................................................Eric Foster Victoria–Beacon Hill .......................................................................Carole James Victoria–Swan Lake.........................................................................Rob Fleming West Vancouver–Capilano ............................................................. Ralph Sultan West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ..........................................................Jordan Sturdy Westside-Kelowna ................................................................

Hon. Christy Clark Party Standings: BC Liberal 49; New Democratic 34; Independent 2

CONTENTS Wednesday, November 26, 2014 Aft ernoon Sitting Page Routine Business Introductions by Members ..................................................................................................................................................... 5597 Tributes ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 5599 Frederick Howard Pinnock Hon. N.

Y amamoto Introductions by Members ..................................................................................................................................................... 5599 Ministerial Statements ............................................................................................................................................................ 5600 Work of Julio Montaner in HIV/AIDS research and treatment Hon. T. Lake J.

Darcy Introduction and First Reading of Bills ................................................................................................................................ 5601 Bill M213 — British Columbia Oil an d Gas Activities Amendment Act, 2014 D. Donaldson Statements (Standing Order 25B) ......................................................................................................................................... 5602 Sea to Sky Gondola J. Sturdy South Vancouver Little League M. Elmore Asante Centre for Fetal Alcohol Syndrome M. Dalton Protection of resident orca population G.

Holman Crohn’s disease and colitis awareness Moira Stilwell Salt of the Earth screening in honour of Buddy DeVito K. Conroy Oral Questions ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5604 Reporting of executive compensation at Kwantlen University and role of Advanced Education Minister J. Horgan Hon. M. de Jong Disclosure of information by Advanced Education Minister to Kwantlen University investigation S. Robinson Hon. A. Virk R. Fleming S.

Simpson Review of Kwantlen University investigation and role of Advanced Education Minister K. Corrigan Hon. M. de Jong Compliance of public institutions with executive compensation rules K. Corrigan Hon. M. de Jong Review of Health Ministry investigation into alleged privacy breach J. Darcy Hon. T. Lake A. Dix Multi-Material B.C. recycling program impacts and oversight G. Holman Hon. M. Polak

Point of Privilege (Reservation of Right) ............................................................................................................................. 5608 E. Foster Petitions .................................................................................................................................................................................... 5608 G.

Holman Orders of the Day Committee of the Whole House ............................................................................................................................................ 5608 Bill 6 — Liquefi ed Natural Gas Income Tax Act (continued) B. Ralston Hon. M. de Jong A. Weaver Personal Statement .................................................................................................................................................................. 5619 Withdrawal of comments made in the House J.

Horgan Committee of the Whole House ............................................................................................................................................ 5620 Bill 6 — Liquefi ed Natural Gas Income Tax Act (continued) Hon. M. de Jong B. Ralston A. Weaver

WEDNESDAY , NOVEMBER 26, 2014 Th e House met at 1:33 p.m. [Madame Speaker in the chair.] Routine Business Prayers. Introductions by Members Madame Speaker: We have in the gallery today a group of individuals who have made a major contribu- tion to ensure that government programs and policies are fairly administered. So 2014 marks the 35th anni- versary of our provincial Offi ce of the Ombudsperson.

With us today to commemorate this anniversary: Karl Friedman, our province’s fi rst, who served in that role from 1979 to 1985; Stephen Owen, 1986 to 1992; Dulcie McCallum, 1992 to 1999; and Kim Carter, our cur- rent Ombudsperson since 2006. They are joined by Ombudsperson staff members.

In addition to the office’s anniversary this week, November 24 to 28 has been declared Fairness Week in British Columbia in recognition of the rights of British Columbians to fair, reasonable and respectful treatment by public authorities. [1335] Would the House please join me in welcoming these guests and in acknowledging the signifi cant contribution they have made and continue to make towards enhan- cing openness, transparency, accountability and fairness in our province’s public service. Interjections. Madame Speaker: It is the week of fairness, aft er all. Hon. M.

Polak: We’re joined in the gallery today by some very special guests from Th e King’s School in Langley, the civics 11 class on their fi eld trip. Joining us are Benjamin Budlong, Max Kai, Isaac Clay, Lisette Clay, Rachel Kbilke, Sonya Liu, Eli Parabeau, Jared Regan, Mac Th ompson, Emma Vanderijk, Taylor Will, Elliott Wooding. Th ey are accompanied by their teacher, Lorena Hensel, who brings her class here every year, faithfully — and Candace Clay as well. Would the House please make them very welcome. C. James: It’s always an exciting day to announce babies in the Legislature.

Th is is a staff person, someone who works in the precinct. Ismael Ribeiro, in Hansard broadcasting services, so I better make sure that I get this right, with his wife, Angela, and his daughter, Isabella — thankfully, there’ll be someone to correct it if needed — are the very proud parents of a new baby boy born at 1:28 a.m. yesterday, weighing in at 8 pounds. I know the entire precinct off ers them best wishes and a few hours’ sleep if possible. Hon. T. Lake: I have a couple of sets of introductions today. First of all, I would like to welcome in the gallery today Dr.

Julio Montaner, the clinical director for the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, and Irene Day, the director of operations. I’ll have a little more to say about Dr. Montaner later. Earlier today we honoured him for the cutting-edge and life-saving research he has done along with the Centre of Excellence in HIV/AIDS here in British Columbia. I would ask the House to make Irene and Julio very welcome in our Legislature today. November is also Crohn’s and Colitis Awareness Month, and another guest in the gallery today is Jill Orsten, who is the director of development for Crohn’s and Colitis Canada.

Here in Canada more than 10,000 cases of Crohn’s and colitis are diagnosed each year. In fact, one in every 150 Canadians suff ers from this disease. Jill was diagnosed in the third grade and, despite the challenges that she’s faced, has gone on to help Crohn’s and Colitis Canada build their reputation as a world leader in research fund- ing and Canada’s largest non-governmental funder of Crohn’s and colitis research. Would the House please welcome Jill to the Legislature today. J. Darcy: It gives me great pleasure to welcome a couple of guests to the House today.

Tara Hornsby is a member of the Hospital Employees Union and a care aide in the Fraser Valley, one of those 35,000 care aides in the province who are really unsung heroes and heroines of our health care system. A few months ago she signed up to be involved in her union’s campaign to learn more about political action. Her name was chosen from a draw, and the prize was a trip to the Legislature of British Columbia and the chance to have lunch with me but mainly to sit in on question period. She’s joined by the communications director of the Hospital Employees Union, Mike Old, a frequent visitor to this House.

Will the House please join me in welcoming them today. G. Hogg: Mark Twain once said that the two most im- portant days in our lives are the day that we’re born and the day that we fi nd out why. As to the birth date, the NHL was born on this day in 1917. It replaced the NHA, and it consisted of fi ve Canadian teams. Legislative assistant Suneil Karod was born on this day in 1982. He replaced previously unused space, and he has, for more than 32 years, fi lled it quite adequately. As to the second day, he’s still searching. Please join me in wishing Suneil a happy birthday. [1340] 5597

British Columbia Debates5598 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 L. Popham: It is my pleasure to welcome Leo Gerard to the chamber, the international president of the United Steelworkers. On Monday night I had the pleasure of making him dinner, and a little bird told me about some of his favourite things. We had four pounds of Quadra Island mussels; Saltspring Island garlic bread; Saanich Peninsula tomatoes; one of his favourites, Vancouver Island kale; and a little bit of B.C. wine. We always appreciate it when Leo visits our province. Th ank you for coming. Hon. C.

Oakes: Today I had the true privilege of meet- ing an inspirational Special Olympian. Ben Vanlierop has won gold and silver medals in swimming. Th is past summer we hosted the Canadian Special Olympics here in British Columbia. It was the largest in our history, and it was a great partnership with UBC. B.C. was successful in the international summer Special Olympics. B.C. makes up over half of the team. Ben, thank you very much for coming. Dan Howe of the Special Olympics, thank you very much for coming. Would the House please make them welcome. G.

Holman: I’m pleased to introduce today three of my constituents from the Southern Gulf Islands Recycling Coalition, a group that provides such an essential ser- vice throughout the Gulf Islands. Th e three representa- tives are Richard Philpot, who also represents the Pender Island Recycling Society; Peter Grant, who manages the Saltspring recycling depot; and Ann Johnston, a long- serving member of the coalition, also representing the Mayne Island Recycling Society. Would the House please make them feel welcome. S.

Hamilton: It’s my pleasure to rise in the House to- day and introduce someone who I just recently met. Th is is an individual who left a very successful career as a soft - ware engineer for Apple. As a matter of fact, he helped design the interface for the many iPads that I’m sure are in the House right now. He woke up one day and decided he wanted to become a mayor. Goodness knows why. But it’s my pleasure to introduce to the House today the new mayor of Saanich, Mr. Richard Atwell. Would the House please make him feel welcome. V . Huntington: I, too, have a couple of introductions today.

I’m pleased to personally reintroduce Dr. Karl Friedman and his wife, Elizabeth, who are with us today. As you noted, Dr. Friedman was the fi rst Ombudsman in British Columbia. I am personally pleased to say they are distinguished constituents of mine. I’ d also like to mention that Brad Densmore is with us. Brad worked in my offi ce as communication and re- search offi cer for three years or more and is now working in the Ombudsperson’s offi ce in their communications department. E. Foster: It gives me great pleasure today to introduce two constituents of mine. Bob and Rosemary Buchan are in the precinct today.

Bob and Rosemary are here to visit their son Wade Grant. Wade is a special adviser in the Premier’s offi ce, so would the House please make them welcome. G. Heyman: It gives me great pleasure to introduce two very engaged constituents in Vancouver-Fairview who are joining us in the precincts today. Ros Kellett is a retired high school teacher. She’s been a great commun- ity activist in Fairview for many years, very engaged in my constituency association and one of many people who have contributed to our democracy by seeking election to this Legislature.

With Ros today is her husband, Neale Adams, a for- mer reporter as well as a former advocate of co-ops, spe- cifi cally housing co-ops, which is how I met Neale many more years ago than I am going to admit in this House. Will the members please join me in making Neale and Ros very, very welcome. Hon. S. Bond: We’re very delighted today to have in the House Nicki Tuttle and her new husband, Connor Blakesly. Nicki is one of two "Nickys" in the front offi ce of JTST. She does a fantastic job. She’s part of our ad- ministrative team, and she’s a true joy to work with.

She does lots of very special things, takes care of us very well. [1345] I should say that Connor is going to do very well, be- cause she makes fantastic cupcakes for our offi ce on a regular basis. We love working with her. We’ d love to wel- come both Nicki and Connor to the House today. D. Donaldson: I have two very special constituents of Stikine here today. Dini ze’ Namoks, hereditary chief from the Wet’suwet’ en, John Ridsdale, is here visiting. John and I are related through marriage in the hereditary system and have worked together quite closely for over 20 years.

Joining him, as well, in the gallery is a member of the Gitxsan, Wilp Gyologyet, from the Lax Gibuu, the wolf clan, Muxs wun buhn. Th at’s Kyhm Yunkws, who is also my son. Would the House, the Legislature, please make welcome these two special guests who are honouring us with their presence today. J. Th ornthwaite: Also joining us in the Legislature to- day are Robert Davidson; George Kaminsky, who’s a con- stituent of the member for West Vancouver–Capilano; and Doug Barber, who’s my constituent. All of them are with the Canadian Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation.

Th is foundation provides education and support for people af- fected by pulmonary fi brosis. Th ey’re here to meet with

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, November 26, 2014 5599 the Minister of Health, myself and other members of the House and raise awareness of the disease and its impact on those who are dealing with it. Would the House please make them welcome. S. Sullivan: On Monday night in New Y ork City a resi- dent of British Columbia won an international Emmy award. His name is Damon Vignale, and his fi lm is Th e Exhibition. He’s not only a resident of my riding, but he also lives in my building. I’ d like to acknowledge his great honour that he brought this province. Tributes FREDERICK HOW ARD PINNOCK Hon. N.

Y amamoto: Earlier this morning my part- ner, Fred’s, father passed away. He was predeceased by his son Stephen but survived by his wife, Shirley; his son Fred; and his two daughters, Claire and Kathy; and sev- en grandchildren. My Fred was named aft er his father and followed in his footsteps in the RCMP . Fred’s dad was a young constable working in P .E.I. when he met his wife-to-be, Shirley. Th is was early in the 1950s. He met her at a country barn dance, where she apparently parked illegally and he was issuing her a ticket.

Anyways, they fell in love, but at that time in the RCMP you actually had to have served for fi ve years at a min- imum with the RCMP before you were allowed to be mar- ried. Plus, you had to have $1,200 in your bank account. Well, he had neither. He borrowed money from Shirley, which he apparently paid back right aft er the wedding. He took a punitive transfer to Ottawa in order to get married. He took that punitive transfer to guard Parliament Hill, which we know now, aft er the recent incidents in Ottawa, is a noble and courageous responsibility.

He retired aft er 35 years with the RCMP , and he spent 28 years in retire- ment. Th ank you to this House for allowing me to recognize Frederick Howard Pinnock. He was a good man, and his was a life well lived. Introductions by Members M. Dalton: I have three guests in the gallery here today. One is Anthony Van Grol, who is the general manager for AdvanTec. It has several hundred employees in British Columbia based out of Langley but includes a large manufacturing unit also, in Maple Ridge. Th ey build spe- cialized modular units for the oil and gas industry.

Also, we have Ron Madill, who is the owner of Spruce Hollow Heavy Haul, from Abbotsford, and from Maple Ridge, Bill Christianson, who’s an engineer with Supreme Structural Transport also based in Maple Ridge. Would the House please make them feel welcome. S. Chandra Herbert: I would like to join with the Minister of Health in welcoming Dr. Julio Montaner and Irene Day from the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/ AIDS, which is housed in my constituency of Vancouver– West End in the excellent though very old hospital, St. Paul’s.

I just want to thank them for their leadership from the ’90s on up. [1350] Th ey’ve led the way in British Columbia and indeed have helped lead the way across Canada and the world. Let’s hope that the Canadian government adopts their programs and brings them nationwide, as Brazil, China and other nations are doing. I want to also acknowledge Keits Morton, a young man who…. I thought how to introduce him. I would just say that probably the greatest honour would be that he’s an engaged citizen, something that we should all as- pire to be and something that more of us need to engage in — citizenship.

Welcome Keits and, certainly, welcome Dr. Montaner and Irene Day. M. Bernier: I think everybody in this House knows and would agree with me that we wouldn’t be able to do what we do if it wasn’t for the dedication and hard work of the staff that we have. So it’s a real pleasure for myself to introduce one of our staff members helping on the gov- ernment side, with us today. I think he’s really excited to be in the House with some friends, to be watching ques- tion period here live, rather than on TV in his offi ce. Will the House please make Blake Hodson welcome. G.

Kyllo: I’m proud to welcome Kathleen De Vere and Graham Stark to the House today. Th ey’re local small business owners in the fi eld of video production. For the last eight years they’ve run the Desert Bus for Hope video game Internet telethon. Th is event started eight years ago in a parent’s basement and, in their fi rst year, raised $22,000. Th is year they raised a total of $635,000 just last week. Th e Minister of Technology and Citizens’ Services and myself were privileged to actually join them on set last week.

Th e charity supplies toys and games to children in hos- pitals and domestic violence shelters, including the B.C. Children’s Hospital and Victoria General. Tens of thou- sands of volunteer hours have gone into putting on this fantastic event. I’ d like the House to make Kathleen and Graham feel very welcome. A. Weaver: As my friend from Peace River South men- tioned, we can’t do what we do without the help of our constituent and legislative researchers, but they can’t do what they do without the help and support from their parents and their friends.

On that note, I’ d like to intro- duce the father and two very close friends of a legislative representative, a research assistant in my offi ce: Terry

British Columbia Debates5600 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 Hartrick and Dan and Susie Taft , who are here in the gal- lery today. Would the House please make them welcome. B. Routley: We have a couple of steelworkers here in the legislative precinct that I want to acknowledge. I want to start with Leo Gerard, the amazing president of the Steelworkers, who has done so much to strengthen the union movement, throughout North America but ac- tually worldwide, in his work. I know it’s more than nine unions that have joined with the Steelworkers.

I know that the Steelworkers are also, ironically, one of the largest unions in wood, and I happen to know something about that. I’ve grown to have great admiration and respect for the work that Leo does. I want to thank you on behalf of all working people for the incredible work that you do to make things better for working people all over the world. Tom Harkins, an amazing…. He spent decades work- ing at the Nanaimo mill. He spent decades representing working-class people and doing things like pounding in signs at federal and provincial elections for candidates — some more deserving than others.

But I appreciate your work on my behalf, even when I wasn’t your fi rst choice. On the other hand, both of these people are incredible in terms of helping working people everywhere, and on behalf of them, I want to thank them and welcome them here to the Legislature. Ministerial Statements WORK OF JULIO MONTANER IN HIV/AIDS RESEARCH AND TREATMENT Hon. T.

Lake: Fellow members of the Legislative Assembly and guests, earlier today I was extremely priv- ileged to have the opportunity to acknowledge and hon- our a British Columbian who has made extraordinary accomplishments in the fi eld of HIV and AIDS research, treatment, care and prevention — Dr. Julio Montaner. Dr. Montaner is joining us here today in the Legislature along with the director of operations for the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, Irene Day. [1355] Th e Centre for Excellence is a world-class organiza- tion that we are fortunate to have right here in British Columbia. As director, Dr.

Montaner has been respon- sible for spearheading tremendous advances in the treat- ment and the prevention of HIV and AIDS, helping British Columbia become the only province where new HIV infections are consistently declining. But even before that, as head of the St. Paul’s AIDS clinic, Dr. Montaner was making a remarkable impact in the field of HIV/AIDS research and care. He was oft en the driving force in the development of what is known as the drug cocktail to treat and manage HIV/ AIDS, giving HIV-positive individuals the opportun- ity to live longer and healthier lives.

Th at cocktail has since become known as the highly active antiretroviral therapy, or HAART, and it has become the international standard of care. Th anks in large part to the work of Dr. Montaner, an HIV diagnosis is no longer a death sentence. HAART can lengthen and improve the quality of life of those with HIV , adding up to 5½ decades of life. HAART treatment also reduces the viral load of those with HIV to virtually undetectable levels, thereby dramatically reducing the likelihood that they will transmit the disease to others.

Th is key aspect of HAART treatment is the principle behind the made-in-B.C. treatment as prevention strat- egy, also pioneered by Dr. Montaner. Th is strategy re- duces the spread of HIV by introducing HAART at the earliest possible stage following an HIV diagnosis. Th is strategy virtually eliminates HIV- and AIDS-related mor- bidity and mortality and, at the same time, signifi cantly reduces the spread of HIV . In fact, treatment as prevention has decreased HIV/ AIDS–related mortality by more than 95 percent and new infections by more than 66 percent.

It’s a strategy that has been adopted internationally — by France, Spain, Brazil, Argentina, the United States and China. In September of this past year the United Nations launched its 90-90-90 treatment target, which has a goal of ending the AIDS epidemic, worldwide, by 2030. Th at tar- get is modelled aft er B.C. ’s treatment as prevention strat- egy and would not be possible without the work of Dr. Montaner and the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS. Dr.

Montaner has deservedly been the recipient of countless awards and accolades, including — just to name a few — the $100,000 Knowledge Translation Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health, two sep- arate fi ve-year $2½ million awards from the National Institute on Drug Abuse at the U.S. National Institutes of Health, induction into the Royal Society of Canada, an honorary doctor of science from Simon Fraser University, the Order of British Columbia, the Albert Einstein World Award of Science and the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal.

Just this year it was announced that he will be inducted into the Canadian Medical Hall of Fame. Today I was honoured to add to this list by presenting him with a certifi cate of recognition on behalf of all grateful British Columbians. Next year, in 2015, Vancouver will host the eighth International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Pathogenesis, Treatment and Prevention. Of course, Dr. Montaner will serve as the conference’s co-chair. In a few days, on December 1, we will observe World AIDS Day, a day that is about more than simply raising awareness about HIV and AIDS.

It is a time for the world to unite in the fi ght against the spread of HIV . As we join together in this fi ght, British Columbians can be particularly proud of the B.C. Centre for Excellence

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, November 26, 2014 5601 and Dr. Julio Montaner. I ask that all of my fellow mem- bers join me in thanking Dr. Montaner for his tremen- dous contribution not just to our province but, in fact, to the entire world. [Applause.] J. Darcy: On behalf of the offi cial opposition, I want to say ditto to everything the Minister of Health said today. All of us who work in public service and all of us who aspire to community service hope to make a diff erence, some small diff erence, in people’s lives. But very few can say, as Dr.

Julio Montaner can say and we can proudly share in saying: be- cause of his work, literally tens of millions of people’s lives have been saved, not just in Canada but around the world. [1400] It’s very rare that this House rises as one to salute someone, but Dr. Julio Montaner is certainly one of those rare individuals who deserve it. I understand from read- ing a profi le of Dr. Montaner just a few months ago that some of his early work was inspired by his father in his native Argentina. Dr.

Julio Gonzalez Montaner, who treated people with tuberculosis, advised his son, I gather, that in treating a stubborn respiratory disease, he shouldn’t use just one respiratory drug; he should use several. That’s some- thing that Dr. Montaner took forward in his early work with HIV/AIDS, working at St. Paul’s Hospital, treating people who came with what was then an unknown dis- ease in British Columbia and Canada and around the world. It was later understood to be a particular type of pneumonia that came from HIV/AIDS, and eventually, as a result of that work, it came to be recognized. Y ears later Dr.

Montaner built on that earlier work and innovated several new treatments. As the Minister of Health has explained, that triple therapy became the standard of care around the world, and for what was once known as a death sentence, the incidence of this disease plummeted by 90 percent around the world. It truly is the case that because of that work that Dr.

Montaner has done with his colleagues and the brilliant work that he’s now carrying out at a national and an inter- national level to treat the infection and to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, truly tens of millions more lives will be saved in this country and around the world. He is truly a great British Columbian, a great Canadian, and we are honoured and humbled by his presence in this House today. Th ank you to Dr. Julio Montaner. Introduction and First Reading of Bills BILL M213 — BRITISH COLUMBIA OIL AND GAS ACTIVITIES AMENDMENT ACT, 2014 D.

Donaldson presented a bill intituled British Columbia Oil and Gas Activities Amendment Act, 2014. D. Donaldson: I move that a bill intituled the British Columbia Oil and Gas Activities Amendment Act, 2014, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read a fi rst time now. Motion approved. D. Donaldson: I’m pleased to introduce this bill that prohibits the conversion of natural gas pipelines to trans- mit oil or diluted bitumen by forbidding the Oil and Gas Commission from granting such an authorization under their permitting authority.

Natural gas pipelines can be converted to use for oil. It’s technologically possible and is central to proposals elsewhere in Canada. Th is bill addresses concerns of many in the province, especially First Nations and other residents of the northwest, that proposed natural gas pipelines could be converted at a future time to trans- mit diluted bitumen from the Alberta tar sands to the north coast.

In fact, the Dini ze’ and Ts’ake ze’ , the Wet’suwet’ en her- editary chiefs on whose traditional territories three nat- ural gas pipelines are proposed, not only support this bill but guided me to introduce it to the Legislature. Th ey are fi rm that the prohibition on converting these pipelines must be made in legislation, not through a watered-down process of regulation. Th e drawbacks of that approach were exposed when the government unilaterally decided through an order-in- council last April to exempt new natural gas production fa- cilities from the environmental assessment process.

Outcry from the Fort Nelson First Nation led to reversal of that decision, but it highlighted how regulation can be created or changed at the whim of a minister behind closed doors. Th is bill gives the certainty needed that natural gas pipelines will not be used to transmit diluted bitumen in an end run around the widespread opposition to Enbridge’s northern gateway project.

Whereas First Nations and northern residents sup- port well-planned and diligently monitored industrial development on their natural landscape, the risks associ- ated with the Enbridge project far outweigh the benefi ts. Th e Minister of Natural Gas Development promised to the Wet’suwet’ en in a public forum in Moricetown that he would put legislation in place so natural gas pipelines could not be converted to transmit oil. I trust that in the spirit of reconciliation with First Nations, I will fi nd sup- port from the minister for this bill.

I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting aft er today. Bill M213, British Columbia Oil and Gas Activities Amendment Act, 2014, introduced, read a fi rst time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second read- ing at the next sitting of the House aft er today. [1405]

British Columbia Debates5602 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 Statements (Standing Order 25B) SEA TO SKY GONDOLA J. Sturdy: Th e Sea to Sky Gondola is the new west coast mountain experience that takes visitors on a scenic ride high above Howe Sound, British Columbia’s southern- most and North America’s southernmost fj ord. Aft er a protracted gestation, some protests and, ultimately, a lo- cation change, the gondola moved beyond being a pro- posal and opened this past May. Since then it has had an astounding 250,000 unique visits.

Nearly 12,000 season passes have been sold, and the business by all accounts has exceeded all expectations. The Sea to Sky Gondola takes visitors on a ten- minute ride up the northwest ridge of Mount Habrich, from a base station nestled between Shannon Falls and Stawamus Chief Provincial Park. At the summit lodge visitors can take advantage of walking trails, viewing plat- forms, a suspension bridge, a restaurant and, of course, a bar — all while enjoying the panoramic views of the Stawamus Chief, Sky Pilot, Mount Garibaldi, the Port of Squamish and the district of Squamish.

Th e gondola has proven to be a signifi cant employer in the area and has shared its benefi ts by increasing visits to many other local businesses and attractions. Not only does the gondola open up subalpine walking trails to seniors and individuals with disabilities; it also provides improved access to the Shannon Creek basin for hikers, climbers, snowshoers and skiers. Previously diffi cult-to- reach trails are now just a ten-minute ride away. Next steps may include a Grouse Grind–type hiking access. Th is is truly one of the most outstanding new attrac- tions in the entire country.

I want to encourage everyone who hasn’t already done so to head for Squamish, and aft er a quick — or not so quick — visit to the Britannia Mine Museum, hitch a ride on the Sea to Sky Gondola, for you will certainly not be disappointed. SOUTH V ANCOUVER LITTLE LEAGUE M. Elmore: In communities across B.C. and Canada kids look forward to the opening day of Little League baseball. I was an avid player in northern Manitoba, and I loved the game so much that I would sleep with my glove under my pillow and run out to the fi eld aft er school.

Little League baseball brings communities together, and this year a special team from my constituency did just that and more. Th e South Vancouver Little League was established in 1956, and for the fi rst time ever they became our provin- cial and national champions and went on to play in the Little League Baseball World Series.

Members, please join me in congratulating the 2014 Canada Little League champions, the South Vancouver Majors All-Stars — 12 team members, which includes two sets of twins: No. 1, Michael Oyhenart; No. 2, Daniel Suarez; No. 9, Matthew Suarez; No. 3, Nico Cole; No. 6, Rod Betonio; No. 10, Josh Matsui; No. 11, Emma March; No. 15 Evan March; No. 12, Ryan Mah; No. 13, Vicarte Domingo; No. 18, Joseph Sinclair; No. 18 Magic Mackenzie; their manager, Brian Perry; and coaches Rick Domingo and Jonathan Mackenzie; and special coach Ed O’Leary. Th anks also to the volunteers and parents who sup- ported them all the way.

Th e South Vancouver Little League is one of the small- est leagues in B.C. and across the country. When I was fi rst elected, in 2009, they told me they were the only league in the Lower Mainland that didn’t have a batting cage yet, so I worked to help them get one, because I knew the kids needed it to become champions. Th e fi rst group to use it and benefi t, at a young age, is this group that went on to the World Series, or as they call it, baseball Disneyland. Past president Graham Randell tells me that they knew they had a special group of talent- ed kids when they were just fi ve or six years old.

Baseball was their number one sport, and they never left the park. Th ey always wanted to be playing. Th ey’re all continuing to do that in the intermediate, peewee and bantam divisions and are also now help- ing with coaching. Th ey will also be speaking in schools to encourage more kids to get involved. Next year the South Vancouver Little League will be hosting the B.C. provincial championships from July 18-26, so I invite all of you to come down to Memorial Park in Vancouver- Kensington to watch some great baseball. ASANTE CENTRE FOR FETAL ALCOHOL SYNDROME M.

Dalton: Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder is an um- brella term that describes a broad range of eff ects that can develop if a fetus is prenatally exposed to alcohol. Due to impaired brain development, individuals with FASD may struggle with learning, communication, attention, memory, reasoning and social skills.

In 1993 a group of concerned citizens in Maple Ridge banded together to take action around FASD and estab- lished the Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Society for British Columbia, a non-profi t organization. [1410] Th e society’s eff orts eventually led to the creation of the Asante Centre, which specializes in providing assessment, diagnosis, family support services, education, training and research.

While public awareness and prevention are key to addressing FASD, the Asante Centre recogniz- es that individuals and families who live with this invis- ible disability will experience a multitude of challenges throughout their lifetimes. Over the years the Asante Centre has expanded its services to address autism spec- trum disorder and other complex development needs.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, November 26, 2014 5603 Recently I attended a retirement dinner for the belov- ed pediatrician Dr. Kwadwo Ohene Asante, who is one of the key individuals behind the centre’s work — hence, the Asante Centre. Dr. Asante was the fi rst physician to bring FASD to the forefront of Canadian medicine, while practising in northern B.C. I should also mention here that Dr.

Asante’s colleagues, including executive director Audrey Salahub, were inspirational in building the original founding team of founders, including public health nurse Pam Munro and Julianne Conry, a registered psychologist. Supported by the government of British Columbia, the Asante Centre in Maple Ridge is now international- ly recognized and has provided training in Canada and countries abroad, including New Zealand, Australia and the French Réunion Island. PROTECTION OF RESIDENT ORCA POPULATION G.

Holman: I rise today to speak for constituents of mine who cannot represent themselves in this House, the resident killer whales — or orcas — of the Salish Sea. Th e southern killer whale population has declined to its low- est level since 1985, with only 78 members remaining in the pod. Th at’s two fewer members than in 2001, when the whales were fi rst proposed for listing under the feder- al Species at Risk Act. Th e hopes raised by the recent birth of a calf, which only occurs every fi ve years for a female orca, have been dashed since the calf has disappeared. Th ese are remarkable animals by any measure.

Th ey live longer than many humans. Th ey engage in complex sonar-based communication. Th ey form lifelong fam- ilies headed by matriarchs. Many of us have seen these magnifi cent animals at a distance, perhaps on a very ex- pensive ferry trip. Some of us have had closer, more dis- concerting encounters, as I did once on what seemed to be a very, very small sailboat. Imagine these awe-inspiring creatures forever extirpated from the Salish Sea.

In 2008 Fisheries and Oceans Canada released a recovery strategy for northern and southern resident killer whales, but despite federal legislation and a related court order, there have been no meaningful actions to address the key risk factors for these whales. About 40 years ago dozens of orcas were ripped from their pods and sold to aquariums around the world. As a result of this and our inaction since then, resident orcas are on the brink of extinction. I believe most members of this House would agree that we must act urgently to avoid the destruction of these iconic animals.

CROHN’S DISEASE AND COLITIS AW ARENESS Moira Stilwell: As you have heard, according to Crohn’s and Colitis Canada, our nation has the highest rates of Crohn’s and colitis in the world. More than 10,000 cases are diagnosed each year. Th at works out to 28 cases every day. Th ese diseases aff ect one in every 150 Canadians and cost the nation $2.8 billion a year in medical expenses and missed work. Crohn’s and colitis are chronic infections that infl ame the lining of the gastrointestinal tract and in- hibit the body’s ability to digest food and absorb nutrition.

Symptoms can include loss of weight, appetite loss, nausea, fever, anemia, fatigue, diarrhea and severe abdominal pain. Th e incidence of both diseases has been rising considerably since 2001, particularly in children under the age of ten. While there is no cure for Crohn’s disease, drugs and sometimes surgery can provide relief. Colitis can be con- trolled with medication, and in some cases by removing part of the colon. Th ese conditions aff ect all aspects of life and can be very diffi cult to talk about, particularly because of the stigma surrounding bathroom diseases.

But there are organizations working hard to change that. In March our government provided $150,000 to Crohn’s and Colitis Canada, B.C.-Yukon division, to help them continue to improve research capacity, raise aware- ness and provide education and resources to people living with these diseases. Crohn’s and Colitis Canada helps suf- ferers take control by learning about their disease and the treatments available, and connects them to other people suff ering from the same condition so that they can pro- vide guidance through experience. [1415] Th is is important work.

By supporting their eff orts, we can help patients overcome embarrassment, get the diag- nosis they need and empower them to take charge of their health and quality of life. SALT OF THE EARTH SCREENING IN HONOUR OF BUDDY DeVITO K. Conroy: Th e Kootenays are full of historical events. Th e showing of Salt of the Earth at the theatre in Castlegar on December 15 and 16, 1954, was one such event. Th e blacklisted Hollywood movie, which was seen by 900 viewers, brought the spectre of McCarthyism to rural B.C.

Th e movie depicted the story of a violent 15-month-long strike in the early 1950s at the Empire Zinc mine in New Mexico and highlighted the powerful role of the miners’ wives in winning the strike. Th e showing six decades ago was sponsored by Local 480 of the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers. Th e union, who represented the workers at Cominco in Trail, felt the story needed to be told and, in spite of the risks, did just that. With this 60th anniversary the historic fi lm was shown at the same location on November 16.

The United Steelworkers Local 480 was again a sponsor, as were other Steelworkers locals and progressive people in the area, ex- cept this time there was no fear of reprisal for either sup- porting the show or attending.

British Columbia Debates5604 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 Ron Verzuh, born in Trail and raised in Castlegar, took the initiative to bring Salt back to the Kootenays. As a historian and Canadian writer specializing in labour his- tory in B.C. and the Pacifi c Northwest, Ron was thrilled to welcome a full house to remember our history, as well as to dedicate the showing to Buddy DeVito, who was at the Castlegar theatre back in 1954. Buddy passed away October 29 at the age of 94. He was born and raised in Trail, working in the family shoe repair business until he enlisted in 1941.

He returned to Trail in ’45 and resumed working in the family busi- ness, retiring in 1985. Buddy was a life member and past president of the Royal Canadian Legion, an alder- man and mayor of Trail and chair of the regional district of Kootenay-Boundary. He also worked for six years in Sudbury, Ontario, for the Mine, Mill union there. He was a strong proponent of peace and a heartfelt so- cialist, never failing to make his opinions known wher- ever he travelled.

Buddy is survived by his longtime partner, Maureen Mitchell, his four children and seven grandchildren, as well as by all of us who knew him and will miss him, as he truly was the salt of the earth. Oral Questions REPORTING OF EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AT KW ANTLEN UNIVERSITY AND ROLE OF ADV ANCED EDUCATION MINISTER J. Horgan: What a diff erence a few months makes in this Legislature here in the province of British Columbia.

Six months ago when we on this side of the House raised questions around the integrity of the Minister of Advanced Education, he characterized the accusations as outlandish. “Outlandish, ” he said, when the member for Vancouver– Point Grey laid out fairly comprehensive evidence of wrongdoing by the board and by the executives at Kwantlen University. Th en a review was done and, as with all B.C. Liberal reviews, “We’re going to get to the bottom of this, ” they declared in the press release.

Months went by, and a re- view was tabled — a review that provoked the comments “troubling” and “disturbing” from the Minister of Finance — but again, no action beyond that. Th is week, when we tabled further information in this House, the Minister of Advanced Education said that he had recused himself from any involvement in any- thing to do with Kwantlen University, which is what you would want from your Minister of Advanced Education I would expect. Th en we discovered that there was not just knowledge of wrongdoing by the Kwantlen board but actual par- ticipation by the Minister of Advanced Education.

Th e Minister of Finance rose on Monday, and he said: “Th e minister, in conveying information to Mr. Mingay, in no way tried to disassociate himself from the role that he played as a volunteer member of that board. ” Th at was the end of the quote. In light of the information that’s now become available to the minister, does he still stand by his assertion that the Minister of Advanced Education was not only complicit but an active participant in violating guidelines? [1420] Hon. M. de Jong: I will repeat for the hon. member what I think I said inside this House and know I said outside of the House.

Th at is, confronted by the docu- mentation that was tabled by the opposition, acknow- ledging that it is relevant to the matter that Mr. Mingay was examining and rendered a report around, it seemed appropriate to me to provide that information to Mr. Mingay and to ask him to analyze whether or not he had seen it before and, if he has not, whether or not it alters either his fi ndings or the recommendations that fl owed from his report. Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a supplemental. J.

Horgan: When the Mingay report, round 1, was tabled, we on this side of the House called for the resig- nation of the Minister of Advanced Education. We were hopeful that he would recognize a British parliamentary tradition and he would do the right thing. Unfortunately, he didn’t do that. In fact — making mat- ters worse — the judgment of the Premier was drawn into question when she said the following: “Th e Minister of Advanced Education is committed to making sure that the rules and the intent of the rules are followed.

I have spoken to him and have absolute confi dence in him and his ability to serve as Minister of Advanced Education. ” Th at was when it was just troubling and disturbing. Th at was just when “Well, he must have known about it, but he wouldn’t have really had any hand in it. ” Now we’ve tabled evidence in this place. We’ve refreshed the memory of the Minister of Advanced Education. He was complicit and involved in circumventing the rules of this place. He deceived the Legislature. He deceived the Minister of Finance. Most importantly of all, he deceived the people of British Columbia.

So again, to the Ministry of Finance: how can you pos- sibly continue to defend this man? Hon. M. de Jong: I have heard the Leader of the Offi cial Opposition quoted, I hope correctly, in describ- ing the work that Mr. Mingay undertook as being good work and professing a measure of reliance in that work. I agree. I also agree that it is entirely appropriate to take docu- mentation that has been presented in this chamber, that does bear on the matters that he was reviewing, and have

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, November 26, 2014 5605 him examine those documents for relevance and to de- termine whether or not they would alter any of his fi nd- ings or any of the recommendations that fl ow from that. But I can also say this, unhesitatingly. I have also watched the Minister of Advanced Education undertake his duties as a minister of the Crown and apply himself diligently and exhaustingly to the task of furthering the interests of students in British Columbia and the inter- ests of the institutions they attend for training and edu- cational purposes.

Madame Speaker: Th e Leader of the Opposition on a further supplemental. J. Horgan: Again, it certainly wasn’t my intention to ask questions of the Minister of Finance today. I had other bear in mind. But the issue at hand, I think, speaks directly to the Minister of Finance, to the Government House Leader. I would think as one of the senior mem- bers in this place, he would understand that integrity doesn’t involve do-overs. Y ou have it or you don’t. Th e question at hand here is…. Misleading once, shame on us. Misleading twice, I would suggest: shame on you and shame on the government of British Columbia.

I don’t believe that the people of B.C. want their children to emulate an individual who says it’s okay to circum- vent the rules as long as you’re not caught, and then when you’re caught, to blame bad briefi ngs for the cir- cumvention. It’s not okay to say: “I had no idea I was so intimately involved. ” It doesn’t work that way in the real world. It shouldn’t work that way in cabinet. Again, I just have to say to the Minister of Finance: I don’t know how you can defend the behaviour of the Minister of Advanced Education. Hon.

M. de Jong: I have also been here long enough to know that the search for perfection is destined to be a search in vain. [1425] Th e Minister of Advanced Education has not ducked responsibility. He has in no way endeavoured to run from the responsibility he had as a member of a board that, in Mr. Mingay’s report, was found to have not conducted the procedure in accordance with all of the requirements. Although the issue here around disclosure…. Mr. Mingay makes clear in his report the matters were dis- closed in one instance but not in conformity with the PSEC guidelines.

Th e Leader of the Opposition, by virtue of the com- ments he has made here today in his questioning of me, I think impliedly says it is unforgivable. It is unforgiv- able not to recall every single e-mail that a person has sent two years…. Interjections. Hon. M. de Jong: That is what the Leader of the Opposition is saying — that it is an unforgivable sin not to be able to recall with precision every single e-mail that someone has sent and no longer has access to, two years aft er the fact. Th at measure of perfection may exist somewhere in the mind of the Leader of the Opposition.

I happen to know that it doesn’t exist in reality. I also happen to know that there are members sitting on the opposite side of the House who know very well that that measure of perfec- tion does not exist in reality. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION BY ADV ANCED EDUCATION MINISTER TO KW ANTLEN UNIVERSITY INVESTIGATION S. Robinson: We’re not searching for perfection, but we are looking for honesty. On Monday we learned that the Minister of Advanced Education misled a govern- ment investigator and misled a Finance Ministry inves- tigation.

On Monday the minister told this House that “the fullest of information available to myself was pro- vided for Mr. Mingay. ” To the Minister of Advanced Education, if the minis- ter was sincerely trying to provide Mr. Mingay with the fullest of information, why didn’t he tell Mr. Mingay that he conducted business as the Kwantlen vice-chair using his RCMP e-mail account and that Mr. Mingay ought to look at his past correspondence there? Hon. A. Virk: It’s certainly no secret that I was, in- deed, a member of that national police force, as I was a volunteer member of that board. I certainly shared with Mr.

Mingay all of the information I had to the best of my ability. In terms of those e-mails, this is some 3½ years ago — the incident the members opposite refer to. I didn’t have access to those e-mails at the time of Mr. Mingay’s interviews, and similarly, nor do I currently have access to those e-mails. R. Fleming: As of this week all British Columbians know, including government members of that side of the House, that the Advanced Education Minister misled a government investigator and misled a Finance Ministry investigation. Let’s go back to Monday. On Monday we had quite a spectacle in this place.

We had quite a spectacle in this place on Monday, where we saw the Minister of Advanced Education, for 90 minutes, huddle with the Minister of Finance aft er he faced questions and before he went out to face the media, when he fi nally went out and acknowledged that he was heavily involved in the Lavack contract negotiations. He said that the emails had suddenly “refreshed” his memory about his role in those negotiations. I want to

British Columbia Debates5606 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 ask the Minister of Advanced Education this, because he’s asking British Columbians to believe that pathetic excuse. [1430] Let me ask him, in his career as an RCMP officer, whether he would have accepted this same excuse from a suspect that he was investigating who had suddenly re- freshed their memory as a convenient way to describe the withholding of evidence? Hon. A. Virk: As I’ve noted a number of times before, the e-mails that the members across the aisle refer to are a string of e-mails from some 3½ years ago.

I did not have access to those e-mails at the time of the interview with Mr. Mingay, nor do I have those today. Certainly, I do not have the specifi cs of those strings of e-mails. Indeed, 3½ years ago my recollection…. I cer- tainly wish my recollection was better, that I had a per- fect memory. But not having access at that time or now — that’s a fact. S. Simpson: We know the bar for a minister is set high in terms of holding to the integrity of the offi ce. We know that in most instances a minister who is under in- vestigation would step aside until that investigation was completed.

We know that in this case the minister has chosen not to do that, and the Premier has chosen not to ask him to do that. Can the minister tell us that if the bar is set high, if he really wants to resolve this, did he not feel any obligation, when Mr. Mingay was appointed, to have at least called Kwantlen and said: “I want you to make every piece of paper available to Mr. Mingay that involved me”? If he had done that, these e-mails would have been made available. Why didn’t the minister support Mr. Mingay’s work and, in fact, ask for all the Kwantlen information to be made available? Hon. A.

Virk: Well, the member opposite knows that Mr. Mingay was asked by the Minister of Finance to con- duct the review. As such, it wasn’t appropriate for me to provide direction to that university or Mr. Mingay on how to conduct that review. REVIEW OF KW ANTLEN UNIVERSITY INVESTIGATION AND ROLE OF ADV ANCED EDUCATION MINISTER K. Corrigan: I fi nd these answers unbelievable. We have a minister who approved and devised a plan to break compensation rules. He was, further, actively involved in a plan to break the disclosure rules and to hide that from government.

When there was a review, he didn’t provide critical evidence in his possession to the investigator. He denied any wrongdoing or minimized his wrongdoing in this House. Finally, on Monday he misled the Minister of Finance and misled this House again when he claimed that he’ d provided all the relevant information. Madame Speaker: Member. I would ask that member to withdraw that fi nal comment. K. Corrigan: I withdraw, Madame Speaker. On Monday, as the Minister of Finance has already said, he wrote to Mr.

Mingay and asked him to review the new e-mails we tabled in the House and determine if they changed the conclusion in his report. What the Finance Minister didn’t do either is he didn’t ask Mr. Mingay to get to the other missing correspondence from the minis- ter’s RCMP e-mail account. Th e Finance Minister didn’t ask Mr. Mingay to access Kwantlen’s archived VP aca- demic search records binders — the very place the last set of e-mails were found. To the Minister of Finance: why should we have any confi dence that Mr. Mingay’s do-over investigation will be any more thorough than his last one? [1435] Hon.

M. de Jong: Well, it’s an interesting observation from the hon. member. Quite frankly, it does — whether she wants to admit this or not — impugn in a very nega- tive way Mr. Mingay, someone who has served govern- ments of all political stripes and who the Leader of the Opposition has described as doing good work. Mr. Mingay will take the material that has been pro- vided to him. He will not happily seek direction from me or anyone else about the manner in which he conducts that ongoing review and assesses the relevance for the report he has prepared.

Look, I get that this doesn’t fi t with the political nar- rative that the members opposite want to weave. But the material has come to light. Th e material has been provid- ed to the author of the report, and the responsible thing is to allow the author of that report to conduct the work that he needs to do. Interjections. Madame Speaker: Th e Chair will hear the answer and the question. Please proceed. COMPLIANCE OF PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS WITH EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION RULES K.

Corrigan: Once again, we have, in the answer from the Minister of Finance, a government which is pre- tending to be honest and open and is doing the very op- posite by limiting the terms of reference. Th at the Minister of Advanced Education misled a Ministry of Finance investigation is one very unaccept- able matter, but the fact that he was part of a broader

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, November 26, 2014 5607 practice of circumventing government compensation rules is another. Y esterday we learned that we can add the B.C. Cancer Agency to the list of public institutions that are fi nding creative ways to get around executive compensation limits. Th is morning the opposition asked the Auditor General to conduct an audit of how many public institutions are skirting PSEC compensation rules. Will the Minister of Finance ask the Auditor General to do the same? Hon. M. de Jong: Well, is there any better example of what’s really taking place here?

Th e member stands up and expects to be taken seriously by referring to a trans- action that the government disclosed in a press release in July of this year. Th e member stands up and concocts this whole conspiracy theory about what’s taking place at the Cancer Agency. Th at whole incident was discussed. It was revealed by the govern- ment during the tabling of the public accounts. Oh, yes, the public accounts that proved something else the opposition said couldn’t happen — the confi rmation of a balanced budget.

I get that the hon. member and her colleagues have purged the memory of that day from their minds, but it happened. It was real. Th at issue was dealt with in a fi scal- ly responsible way, and it confi rms how serious the gov- ernment is about all agencies adhering to the wage and settlement guidelines that we have in place through PSEC. REVIEW OF HEALTH MINISTRY INVESTIGATION INTO ALLEGED PRIV ACY BREACH J. Darcy: Let’s talk about another review that is also casting a shadow on the integrity of this government.

The Premier said she wanted to get to the bottom of the wrongful terminations of eight health researchers who made British Columbia a leader in drug evaluation. She said that in her heart she felt that these fi rings were heavy-handed. [1440] Now we have further confi rmation that she, in fact, didn’t mean any of this because her offi ce was part of these terminations. John Dyble and Lynda Tarras designed a review with one purpose: to protect the Premier’s inner team. Th ey put Ms. McNeil in a box that she, quite simply, couldn’t get out of.

Now Graham Whitmarsh, the man that the Premier blames for this whole aff air, has told Ms. McNeil that he won’t participate in that review. To the Minister of Health: is the minister going to put protecting the Premier ahead of his duty to his ministry by condoning John Dyble’s concocted review, or will he fi nally, fi nally send this matter to the fully independent review that it deserves? Hon. T. Lake: We know that in some circumstances some members that were working for the Ministry of Health were treated in a way that we have considered in- appropriate. We have admitted that.

Some people were treated in a heavy-handed way. We have acknowledged and apologized for that. Th e Leader of the Opposition said that we besmirched people’s reputation and character. Is it just me, or is the irony lost on the members of the opposition? Th ey con- tinue to do that day in, day out to highly dedicated public servants in the province of British Columbia — throwing out people’s names, besmirching their reputations on a daily basis in question period. Ms. McNeil will do her review. I look forward to see- ing that review December 19. A.

Dix: Th e minister says “heavy-handed, ” as if that’s some sort of defence for the government. Th ey fi red sev- en dedicated public servants. Six of those fi rings — six of seven — have been withdrawn and rescinded. Th e word isn’t heavy-handed. Th e word is incompetent. Th e word is mean. Th e word is cruel. On top of that the Premier’s closest public service ad- viser, Mr. Dyble, and one of her closest political advisers, Ms.

Mentzelopoulos, approved the decision to taint these researchers with the suggestion of an RCMP investiga- tion that did not exist — a decision that could not, at the time, have been supported by legal advice, a political de- cision by people in the Premier’s offi ce. It’s why we need an independent review, an independ- ent review that does more than, as the government says, identify process improvements related to HR manage- ment but does what they promised, which is get to the bot- tom of the matter; a review that deals with more than six months of this scandal, the full 29 months of the scandal.

One that compels John Dyble and Graham Whitmarsh and the Minister of Finance and Margaret MacDiarmid to appear before the inquiry. One that relies on docu- ments other than those provided by the government itself. And one that puts Rebecca Warburton, Ramsay Hamdi, Dave Scott, Malcolm Maclure, Ron Mattson, Bob Hart, Bill Warburtonand, of course, Roderick MacIsaac at the heart of the review and not an overthought. Will the government today announce a real public in- quiry into this disgraceful aff air? [1445] Hon. T. Lake: I think what’s disgraceful is the charac- terization of dedicated public servants.

Th eir characters are being assassinated every day in question period. Th e Leader of the Opposition and the other members of the opposition claim to have secret knowledge, and they are the judge and jury on dedicated public servants every day here in question period. Ms. McNeil is an independent labour expert doing a review of HR processes that were utilized. She will be and is interviewing people in the public service. It’s unfortu-

British Columbia Debates5608 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 nate if members outside of the public service do not wish to participate. We look forward to her report December 19. It will be given to the assistant Attorney General. We look forward to making that report public. MULTI-MATERIAL B.C. RECYCLING PROGRAM IMPACTS AND OVERSIGHT G. Holman: Recycling services on the southern Gulf Islands are provided by non-profi t societies operating small depots.

Th ese societies have informed the Minister of Environment that the one-size-fi ts-all funding formula of Multi-Material B.C., MMBC, will cover less than one- third of the real cost of operating these depots. What this means is that recycling depots on the Gulf Islands will cease operations within two years and 25 employees will lose their jobs unless MMBC provides fair funding. Th e question I have for the minister: will the minister ensure that MMBC lives up to its legislated responsibility and ensure the necessary funding to keep these recycling depots operating?

And given the problems that MMBC is creating through- out the province, not just for non-profi t recycling depots but for small businesses such as Syntal, which just closed oper- ations on the Saanich Peninsula, will the minister ensure that there’s an independent review by the Auditor General of MMBC? Will you ensure that that’s authorized today? Hon. M. Polak: First, let’s remember that we began in British Columbia with a tr emendously successful pro- gram of recycling all across the province. But there was one notable diff erence from the way in which things will now begin to operate under MMBC.

Th at is that under the old way of doing things, it was the property tax payer who paid for their blue box services at their home. As a result of the move to make those who produce packaging and printed paper cover the costs of this disposal, the CRD, for example, will receive annual funding of $5 million. It is a new program. It will take time to make sure that things are functioning adequately for everyone across the province. But make no mistake. We believe that the people who produce the packaging should pay to get rid of it. [End of question period.] Point of Privilege (Reservation of Right) E.

Foster: I rise to reserve my right on a point of privilege. Madame Speaker: So noted. Petitions G. Holman: I want to present some petitions here from the southern Gulf Islands, the same islands that won’t be receiving adequate funding to keep their depots operating.

It reads as follows: “We, the residents of Pender Island” — and also there’s another petition here from Mayne Island that has already been presented to the minister; about 1,800 in all — “urgently request that the Minister of Environment enforce the recycling regulation, sched- ule 5, in order to ensure that Multi-Material B.C. provide full funding for recycling depots in isolated rural com- munities that handle the material for which MMBC is now legally responsible. ” [1450] Orders of the Day Hon.

M. de Jong: Continued committee stage on Bill 6. [1455] Committee of the Whole House BILL 6 — LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS INCOME TAX ACT (continued) Th e House in Committee of the Whole on Bill 6; M. Dalton in the chair. Th e committee met at 2:59 p.m. On

section 11. B. Ralston: Th e question I have on subsection 11(2) is the reference to “the following rules” that apply in ap- plying

section 251. Can the minister explain briefl y what that means? Hon. M. de Jong: I try to say all of the provisions in the act are important, and where they adopt provisions from the federal legislation, that is always important. [1500] Th ere is added importance here where, from a practical point of view, it’s understood that we will need specifi c rules for non-arm’s-length transactions. For example, when we talk about transfer pricing, the rules around non-arm’s-length transactions become very important.

Th ey are required for the purposes of the act where specifi c rules for control apply — for example, in claiming a reserve or what the determination of controlled persons is, based on the meaning of “control” under the federal act. As I said, it’s also anticipated that there will be a large number of non-arm’s-length transactions. And under the federal act — and this is where the inclusion of these pro- visions is important — any persons that are considered related parties operate at non-arm’s-length as well as those that factually deal at non–arm’s length. Th is legis- lation, through

section 11, adopts those principles.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, November 26, 2014 5609 B. Ralston: I take it from the focus on this in the act that the minister or/and his staff were anticipating that this particular plethora of non-arm’s-length transactions is something that is likely to manifest itself, given the cor- porate nature of some of the proponents that are global companies, which are integrated companies that control all the steps of the supply chain, whether it’s the upstream, the actual extraction of the gas, the pipelines, the lique- faction and the shipping.

Is that why, in this act, there is a particular focus and concern about non-arm’s-length transactions? Hon. M. de Jong: Y es, precisely. Sections 11 and 12 approved. On

section 13. B. Ralston: We’ve spoken about the reference to trusts earlier. In the survey of the corporate landscape and an- ticipating the way in which proponents may structure their business for tax purposes, is it anticipated…? Obviously, this is, I suppose, not entirely within the knowledge of the government. But analyzing the indus- try and the proponents, is there a sense that trusts will be used as a method of managing the payment of tax in a way so as to minimize it in a way that other structures may not?

Is that the reason for the concern about trusts in the language that’s attached in this particular section? Hon. M. de Jong: I think I understand the member’s question. If I can answer it this way, hopefully it’ll be helpful to him. He has correctly, I think, described the importance and, dare I say, preoccupation with the pro- visions in the previous

section relating to non-arm’s- length transactions. By contrast, I don’t think there’s anything that leads us to believe there will be a widespread use of trusts. But there is a recognition that it is possible and that we need provisions to be able to deal with that eventuality if it were to occur. I would diff erentiate

section 13 and its relevance from

section 12 and its relevance in that way. [1505] Sections 13 and 14 approved. On

section 15. B. Ralston: Th is seems to be a fairly signifi cant sec- tion in the sense that it talks about how a taxpayer’s net operating income and net operating loss from an LNG source are to be calculated. Can the minister explain, I suppose, beginning with (a)…? Perhaps a brief description of the diff erence be- tween net income, net operating income and net oper- ating loss would be in order fi rst, before explaining the operation of this provision on those incomes. Hon. M. de Jong: Th e member is correct.

Th e manner in which these amounts are calculated is important, and there is a precise methodology for so doing. I wonder if the member would be content if I off ered at this time in response to say that the answer to the question about net income is probably best dealt with at

section 54, where there is a description of how that is cal- culated. Similarly, net operating income is defi ned par- ticularly at

section 23 and net operating loss at

section 24. We’re coming up to those two sections rather quickly. Th e general purpose of this

section is to ensure that it is understood the act is to be interpreted in the manner that ensures there is no double counting of any amount in computing income inclusions, expense deductions, tax reductions or tax paid. Th at’s the principle that is sought to be enshrined here. Th en the member’s very legitimate question about how these amounts are calculated might be better examined in the specifi c sections where they are dealt with, as I’ve indicated. Sections 15 and 16 approved. On

section 17. B. Ralston: This part begins, I think, the heart of the matter: the application of the tax and liability for tax. I know that my colleague the member for Oak Bay– Gordon Head said that he had some questions on

section 18, I believe. I may have incorrectly recalled the

section number, but I believe it’s in this part that he will be ask- ing some questions. Can the minister then explain…? I think the starting point of January 1, 2017, is fairly clear. We’ve examined the defi nition of an “LNG source. ” It is conceivable, then, given this defi nition, that a single integrated operation may have for tax purposes a number of diff erent LNG sources? Is that what the implication or the possible ramifi cations of this particular

section are? It ties tax to “in respect of each LNG source. ” Perhaps the minister could just explain how that will work. [1510] Hon. M. de Jong: Th e member has identifi ed the two main provisions, the date being fairly self-explanatory. Th e only correction I would make to the description the member offered, which I think essentially gets it right…. Y ou are obliged to fi le a return for each facility. Th e only correction I might make is — the hon. member referred to integrated operations — that you need not be an integrated operation to have more than one facil- ity and, therefore, fi le more than one return.

It’s conceiv- able that you could be simply the owner of facilities, for example, or, I suppose, of land on which facilities are lo-

British Columbia Debates5610 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 cated, and all of the manifestations that we went through. But you need not be an integrated operator to perhaps be obliged to fi le more than one return. B. Ralston: An LNG source is not required to be resi- dent in British Columbia and not required to have a permanent establishment in British Columbia. Is that correct? Hon. M. de Jong: Th e taxpayer is not obliged to be a resident. B. Ralston: Some of the legal commentary suggests that that, I suppose, legislative eff ort or legislative intent may be subject to some challenge. Perhaps the minister can just explain how such a broad

interpretation is legally sustainable should that be challenged in the future. Hon. M. de Jong: Can the member maybe be a little more specifi c about the nature of the challenge he’s re- ferring to in some of the commentary? Th ese statutes are frequently examined from a variety of considerations. B. Ralston: Th e example that was provided to me was a non-resident third-party marketer of LNG who — even though it’s a non-resident of British Columbia and does not carry on business or have a permanent establishment in the province — could still be required to pay LNG tax. Hon.

M. de Jong: Th e analysis, of course, that has taken place prior to and during the draft ing of this relies, fi rst and foremost, upon the

interpretation of the consti- tution in the powers it aff ords the province to apply dir- ect taxation for activities within British Columbia, which is why the bill is draft ed in the way it is, tying everything back to activities at an LNG facility. Th erein lies the basis upon which the constitutionality of the bill and the juris- diction to apply the taxation measure are established.

Section 17 approved. On

section 18. B. Ralston: Th is

section sets out the rate, a tax equiva- lent to 3.5 percent of the taxpayer’s net income. Th ere’s a calculation of net income that we’ll deal with in more detail later. [1515] Can the minister explain how this percentage of 3.5 percent was arrived at? I think the minister has been fair- ly candid and his colleague the Minister of Natural Gas has been fairly candid that there was initially a proposal that this tax be up to 7 percent, so certainly there was a range considered. I note the minister’s insistence, and I think this is accurate, that he did say up to 7 percent; he didn’t say 7 percent. I accept that.

Certainly the range has come down quite a way. Again, I think that was explained in a very open and candid way. Can the minister explain, then, what considerations at the policy level went into making that calculation? Hon. M. de Jong: Th anks to the member, who, I think, has phrased his question in a fair and generous way. I would say, broadly speaking, two factors account for what we have before us in

section 18, or two processes, if you will. One relates to an ongoing body of work that led to the initial identifi cation of the range that the member re- ferred to, up to 7 percent. Th at is the analysis our offi cials have been doing relating to our competitiveness vis-à-vis other areas of the world who are either engaged in this activity or vying to be engaged in this activity. One of the things…. I think the member probably has it, and I won’t burden him with more paper.

But at the time we announced the details of the taxation measure, I think on the day the bill was tabled, we presented some charts and materials that are our competitiveness com- parator. Y es, it is our work. Is it perfect? Undoubtedly not, and the member may have criticisms of some of the assumptions. Nonetheless, that is the work that has helped inform us, in part, with respect to the settlement of a particular rate.

Th e second body of work — ongoing work — is the discussions that have taken place with proponents as a means of understanding their cost structures and the elements that are perhaps unique to investments taking place in British Columbia. Art or science? I hesitate to say, but those, I can say, are the two areas where work is focused and have taken us, ultimately, to a point in time where we were obliged to make a decision about a rate that we thought was appro- priate, that met the test we had set for ourselves about a fair return but also a fair return for British Columbians that also rendered us competitive.

I won’t go on at length about this being one of many features that contributes to that competitiveness matrix, but clearly this is one element, and an important element. B. Ralston: In the budget this year — the minister, obviously, will be intimately familiar with the budget — there was not a…. It was a topic box in the budget which set out some goals and likely the range that we spoke of, of revenue to be derived from this tax. [1520] Now, we’ve spoken earlier of the competence and ef- fi ciency and insight of senior staff in the ministry, so presumably this wasn’t a decision taken lightly.

I’m won- dering to what degree there was modelling done of pro- spective revenue, given that range, in settling not upon the number that’s in the bill but the number that preceded the bill, the topic box that was in the budget documents last spring.

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, November 26, 2014 5611 Hon. M. de Jong: I’ve got some material that I’m happy to share with the member that relates to modelling at various rates — at 7 percent, at 5 percent, at 3½ percent. No question, the reduction in the rate reduces the rev- enue that will fl ow to the Crown in the event that projects proceed, construction begins and completes, and LNG, liquefi ed natural gas, begins to fl ow. I have some material, for example, for a typical — well, I’m not sure there is such a thing — two-train facility. I think most of our modelling revolved around two-train facilities.

I’m happy to share that with the member to demonstrate how we think the LNG income tax at 7 per- cent would have operated, how it would operate at 5 per- cent and on the graduated basis included now in the bill. B. Ralston: Certainly, the minister and his staff , and the government generally, are aware and have expressed their awareness repeatedly of the requirement to be inter- nationally competitive. Th at awareness would have ob- viously factored into the position that was taken in the spring. I do recall….

I think it’s a study by Ernst and Y oung, which was commissioned as part of that process, which said that the spring document, the range that was proposed in the spring, was indeed competitive, and they compared some North American jurisdictions — Louisiana, Texas, Oregon, I believe, maybe one on the east coast and Australia as well. I suppose what I’m leading up to, and I don’t think this is any secret, is…. I know the minister has given a public answer about this, but I’m just wondering, given the rela- tive short passage of time, seven months, what changed so dramatically.

When you had all this work about com- petitiveness — a very thoughtful, highly professional public service preparing the documents — disclosed publicly, what confi dence did you begin to lose that you didn’t have when you tabled a document with the budget? Obviously, the budget is the paramount and most im- portant document in the government process. Th is is a fairly signifi cant position that was taken last spring. I’m just wondering how that decision came about, and then we’ll perhaps pursue why it changed. [1525] Hon. M. de Jong: I’m trying to answer, particularly the member’s question.

I would say that broadly speak- ing, initially at least, two important features guided the conversation and the internal discussion — and he’s right, an important one — and a vigorous discussion ensued internally. Th e evolving forecasts around revenue, around the price LNG is fetching internationally…. And that con- tinued to evolve through the spring, summer and to some extent, now, although you begin to see reports and fore- casts that have the price levelling out and actually com- ing back somewhat from lower levels. Th at would have been relevant.

It was certainly relevant in the minds of proponents who we were engaged in discussions with. Secondly, the realization that for some LNG taxpay- ers, because of how they were structuring, they would be paying the higher-tier rate as opposed to the 1½ per- cent almost immediately, given the manner in which their operations are structured. Th at, too, bore some relevance to the discussion that was taking place. All of it factored into, again, overall questions of competitiveness relative to what was happening elsewhere in the world in the in- dustry — in an evolving industry. A.

Weaver: Coming back to the revenue projections, I’m wondering if the minister would be prepared to also send me the same information that would be sent to the critic. Hon. M. de Jong: Happy to provide the hon. member with the same material. A. Weaver: Is there a ballpark fi gure as to the pro- jected revenue from a two-train system, say, in terms of the next decade, that the minister is able to share, from the LNG tax rate? Hon. M. de Jong: Th ere is, and again, I’m happy to provide it to both members.

Both members will appreci- ate that there is a series of assumptions tied to those cal- culations — the size of the operation fi rst and foremost amongst them. We have that material, and I’m happy to share it with him. A. Weaver: In the revenue projections that were done, one of the key assumptions would be the future price — or certainly the future spread — of natural gas prices between Asian markets and North American markets.

In 2012 the deputy minister did a presentation at the Generate B.C. conference, where he put forward in this presentation, publicly available, 20-, 30-year projections of an LNG price spread maintaining about the same as it was then. Th at is $16 to $6 or…. It was a $12 spread maintaining essentially in perpetuity. My question to the minister is: in the LNG projec- tions, was this same data used — that is, an assumed $12 to $13 spread in the price of natural gas in Asia versus British Columbia? Or if not, what LNG price spread was assumed, or what variables were assumed in this regard? [1530] Hon.

M. de Jong: What I can provide the member with — and I was casting my mind back — is a chart, a graph that actually projects, or projects as best we could, based on available information, what we believe the spread will be going forward, out to at least 2020, and we may have it for beyond there. It does not, I can tell the member — and I’ll provide it to him — show a constant diff erentiation. It shows a

British Columbia Debates5612 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 growing diff erentiation as you move out past 2015 and into 2020. Rather than me trying to describe it to him, better for me to give it to him. A. Weaver: We don’t have access to PowerPoint in the chamber, unfortunately. Th e one I have before me is showing the projected change going from 2012 to 2046, with the price increasing in North America to just under $8 per million Btu and in the Asian market to just under $18. Th at diff erence, basically, was constant in time.

Th e minister is, then, suggesting that diff erent projec- tions of future natural gas prices were used, such that the spread actually increased with time? My question, on top of that, is: what would happen to the price projections, and has the government actually undertaken modelling studies to refl ect the new Asian market price for natural gas, as signed through the recent China-Russia agree- ments and the U.S. agreement that came through the Gulf Coast, where substantially lower than present prices were done for long-term contracts? [D. Horne in the chair.] Hon.

M. de Jong: A couple of things come to mind, one being…. Well, fi rstly, the information upon which we have been relying, the modelling, is ongoing. As intervening events occur and infl uence that price, part of the challenge, not just for government but propon- ents themselves, is to assess what the impact of that is go- ing to be going forward. Th ere are lots of theories about what that will be.

It probably represents the single biggest challenge, I would say, certainly for government but also proponents who are making decisions around the investment of bil- lions of dollars, who are gazing into that crystal ball and asking themselves: what is the product I produce going to be worth in those marketplaces? [1535] Th ere’s an added feature to this that is relevant for the member to have in his mind when he considers revenue forecasts. Th at is the fact that under the terms of the act the pricing point exists here in Canada at a point at the facility.

Th at, of course, doesn’t mean that the price in an Asian market, for example, is irrelevant, but the forecasts are tied to the pricing point here in Canada. A. Weaver: A fi nal question on this track, then. In light of the uncertainty in future revenue projections from the LNG tax rate, here set at 3.5 percent and then increasing to 5, does the government in its revenue modelling have an estimate as to…? Well, fi rst off , will the money from this be put into general revenue, or was the plan to put it into a prosperity fund?

If so, what time frame does the government believe it needs to have in order to actually get $100 billion into that prosperity fund from this 3.5 percent LNG tax regime? Hon. M. de Jong: I understand both the relevance and the importance of the question. I hope the member won’t think I’m trying to evade either. Th at question is answered directly as part of a budget- ing process in circumstances where we are confronted by the happy circumstance of having the revenue fl ow in. We’ve just done the second-quarter update. I won’t refer to that, because it doesn’t really touch on the future.

But in February we’ll introduce another budget that will have budget forecasts for the next three years, and the member will want to watch closely. In the event that a fi nal investment decision has been taken and we are in a position with some certainty to begin tracking construction activity and ultimate pro- duction, part of the challenge for government will be to start revealing those numbers and project how we think they will begin to fl ow and how we intend to allocate the money.

We won’t be in a position to do that, though, and won’t do that until we have secured a fi nal investment de- cision and see the industry actually taking steps forward — where this legislation that we’re dealing with actually becomes relevant in a practical way. B. Ralston: The minister said that one of the con- siderations that led the government to set the rate at 3.5 was that one proponent, I think he said, in discus- sions or negotiations with them, I suppose, thought that they would be paying the 3.5 percent right away, yet the structure of the act is very diff erent.

Th ere’s an initial 1.5 percent payment, which is deductible against paying the 3.5. Th en there’s also an investment account, from which a statutory rate will be calculated. Th at will be excluded, as I understand it, from the calculation on which the 3.5 percent is made. Can the minister explain, then, how that representa- tion was made, apparently by one of the proponents in discussion with the government — and at least explain it?

I mean, I appreciate there may be some commercial confi dentiality — that’s usually what the government relies upon in these matters — but given that the min- ister has said that, I think there’s some obligation to put some fl esh on those bones. Hon. M. de Jong: Again, it’s a fair question.

I don’t think that in answering I’m revealing any deep, dark trade secrets. [1540] In circumstances where a taxpayer actually hasn’t con- structed a facility — and that is conceivable; they own the gas fl owing through and become a taxpayer on that basis — they wouldn’t have a capital investment account to draw down before paying the higher rate. Th ere likely would not be a period of paying the tax at 1½ percent. Depending on who the taxpayer is and how their in- volvement in the liquefaction process is structured, it’s conceivable that they could be paying the higher rate

British Columbia DebatesWednesday, November 26, 2014 5613 and wouldn’t have the larger investment account to draw down fi rst, in the way that an integrated operator would who has built an LNG facility. B. Ralston: As far as I understand, none of the propon- ents are in a position where they already own a pipeline. I suppose the only one that might be somewhat in that range would be the Woodfi bre operation where the nat- ural gas pipeline to Vancouver Island runs through their property. But that proposal is operating on a scale that is very, very diff erent from the major proposals in Kitimat and Prince Rupert.

As I understand it, there is — with that possible excep- tion of Woodfi bre, which is an anomaly — no propon- ent in that position. Th ey ultimately may build a pipeline, and they may build a liquefaction plant. But in terms of a pipeline to deliver gas to a liquefaction plant, I’m not aware of that. Perhaps the minister could enlighten me. Hon. M. de Jong: To the member’s point, I’m not ac- tually sure that Woodfi bre qualifi es as an exception either. Here’s the diff erence.

If you’ve got an LNG plant, there is certainly a set of assumptions that attach to the owner of that plant, but it’s quite conceivable that the owner of gas will take gas through that plant and will become a taxpayer. Th ey will pay a rent or a toll or whatever to the owner of the facility. But as the owner of the gas, and if that is all they own, they incur a liability related to the transformation, the conversion of the gas, and do not have the capital investment account to draw down. Th at’s the circumstance. It doesn’t relate to the “pro- ponents” who are talking about constructing a facility.

It relates to others who may make use of that facility. B. Ralston: I believe that was mentioned in some of the commentary — that there is a disparity in the appli- cation of the tax in the exact way that the minister has described. Is the minister concerned that some…? I mean, ob- viously from the perspective of revenue, he’s probably, understandably, not concerned. Would that not be a problem in the sense that some will pay the 3.5 percent almost immediately and others, given if you’re making an investment of $10 billion to $15 billion, won’t be pay- ing the 3.5 for some time?

Is that a problem, or is that just the revenue design and the minister is content with that? Hon. M. de Jong: Two things. Primarily, of course, the act and the structure remove uncertainty. I suppose one could also make the point that the agency that doesn’t have the capital investment account to draw down also hasn’t made the multi-billion-dollar investment neces- sary to construct the facility and is, therefore, not deal- ing with whatever costs are associated with sourcing that amount of capital. B. Ralston: Th is is a qualitative question, I suppose.

I’m only dealing with it because the minister has men- tioned it. [1545] To what extent was this a notion that some LNG sources would be paying the 3.5 percent — or if it were higher — right away? To what extent was that deter- minative in the decision to lower the range from up to 7 percent down to 3.5 in the rather dramatic way that that occurred when the legislation was unveiled? Hon. M. de Jong: I think the fairest way I can charac- terize it is that in the course of conversations and discus- sions with proponents, the question of how the structure and the tax regime would interrelate came up.

I wouldn’t want to leave the impression with the member or the com- mittee that this was a determinative factor relating to the rate that was ultimately set and is before us in the section. Th e question of the degree to which the overall struc- ture and the rate might infl uence behaviour or the man- ner in which investors structure their operations would certainly have come up. But I don’t want to overemphasize the degree to which the question we are dealing with to- day ultimately determined the rate before the committee. B. Ralston: Another question as to whether this may have been a factor or not.

Under the B.C. Mineral Tax Act, Crown royalties are deductible against federal income tax, as I understand it, and also British Columbia income tax. As I understand it, the federal government has not taken a position on whether the LNG tax will be deductible against federal income. Th at’s leaving aside the separate question about accelerated capital cost allowances.

Has the minister engaged in any discussion or his offi - cials engaged in any discussion with the federal ministry of fi nance about whether that will come about, or is he aware of any discussions that proponents may have had with the federal ministry of fi nance about the tax becom- ing deductible against federal income tax? Hon. M. de Jong: I don’t have a defi nitive answer for the member. We strongly suspect, of course, that there are discussions taking place between the proponents and the federal government.

Th e member has mentioned an- other area that has engaged their attention vis-à-vis the federal government. We’ve not received a specifi c ad- vance ruling from the federal government to this point, and I’m reluctant to off er an

interpretation of how the federal Income Tax Act would purport to deal with this in response to an application for deductibility. It’s prob- ably premature for me to off er an opinion, unwise for me to off er an opinion, on that matter. B. Ralston: But surely, if the tax is deductible against federal income tax, that’s a major advantage, just as the shift ing to the fast write-off of the depreciation process.

British Columbia Debates5614 Wednesday, November 26, 2014 Rather than 25 or 26 years, it was down to seven, as it is in manufacturing — and have the plants classifi ed as manu- facturing facilities. Th at would be a signifi cant fi nancial advantage. It’s been reported publicly that the compan- ies are seeking that. [1550] As part of the discussions — I hesitate to call them negotiations, although sometimes that language is used by diff erent government ministers — would that not be an important factor to consider in designing where to set the rate?

If the tax is going to be deductible, or if there are other deductions from federal income tax and depreciation allowances that are going to be put in place, would that not be an important factor to know in the dealings with the proponents? Obviously, that could have a very material eff ect in terms of the outcome. But it seems to me that the min- ister is saying we’re setting this rate, and the proponents may gain further fi nancial advantages down the road to minimize their tax, and that’s fair enough, and that won’t aff ect our decision now.

It seems to me a bit shortsighted on behalf of the province and upon the potential revenue not to make those inquiries. Hon. M. de Jong: I don’t know that I’m going to of- fer the member a satisfactory answer in acknowledging this. Th ere are matters over which we have constitution- al authority and jurisdiction and matters that we do not. Th ey are together all relevant, particularly from a pro- ponent’s point of view.

Th ey remind us constantly and validly, in my view, that they are examining and consid- ering this matter on the basis of an overall cost structure and are less concerned with who’s getting what share of the tax take. Y et we are also obliged to be forthright with propon- ents, as I will try to be here, and say we are not in a pos- ition to off er up federal currency and certainly not in a position to provide any measure of assurance about fu- ture treatment from the federal parliament. I don’t, again, want to leave the impression with the committee that we have provided those assurances.

I can say that, with respect to the capital cost allowance issue, we have been supportive of the advances made by pro- ponents and those who wish to be engaged in the LNG sector who have made submissions to federal offi cials. We have lent our voice to those submissions but, again, have not been in a position to say to proponents or guar- antee them a particular outcome. B. Ralston: I appreciate fully that the minister can’t guarantee the outcome of ongoing negotiations, as they appear to be, or lobbying with the federal govern- ment.

But the minister has acknowledged, and I think the Minister of Natural Gas Development has acknow- ledged here in the House, that the government is negoti- ating with proponents project development agreements. I think the Premier has announced that they will be com- pleted by November 30. Th at’s this year, 2014.

It would seem to me to be a reasonable provision in such an agreement, granted that the provincial govern- ment doesn’t control the tax treatment that the federal government may decide to give these projects. [1555] Would it not be prudent in such a negotiation to at least address that in a project development agreement, where it would materially alter, in a favourable way to the proponents, the revenue that they get — contrary to the position that they’re in now. It would seem to me to be a reasonable contingency to include an agreement.

Can the minister tell the House whether, in those pro- ject development agreements with the leading propon- ents who are the ones that are closest to fi nal investment decision, those kind of considerations are taking place? Hon. M. de Jong: To the member, he’s correct. Th ere are ongoing discussions.

In fact, in the case of the project development agreements, I would say you could prob- ably in a certain limited way apply the term “negotiation. ” But I would say to the member that those project de- velopment agreements are being discussed bilateral- ly, between the proponent and the province of British Columbia as a jurisdiction, and we are not purporting — to this stage at least, to this point — to roll into those agreements provisions that would necessarily, to be meaningful, involve making the federal Crown a party to the agreement.

Th at’s a longwinded way of saying that the negotia- tions, discussions, thus far relating to project develop- ment agreements have been between the proponent and the province and have not engaged the direct involve- ment of the federal government. B. Ralston: Well, I do

Document details

Collection	British Columbia — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	20141126pm-Hansard-v18n8
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	20141126pm Hansard v18n8
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	d537819de863c08c4bfccc4c5523362d688450ca

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).