2015 Legislative Session: Fourth Session, 40th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Monday, March 23, 2015

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 22, Number

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)

ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Jean Scott

S. Hammell

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Steve Nash

Hon. Michelle Stilwell

Introductions by Members

Tributes

Millie Mitchell

S. Chandra Herbert

Statements

Hockeyville

G. Holman

Introductions by Members

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill 15 — Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2015

Hon. S. Anton

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

Alzheimer's disease

M. Bernier

Phyllis Nash and social work

M. Mungall

Terry Fox

L. Reimer

Water protection

S. Chandra Herbert

B.C. Pharmacy Day

D. Bing

Soil health and farmland protection

L. Popham

Oral Questions

Appointment of B.C. Treaty Commission chief commissioner

S. Fraser

Hon. J. Rustad

C. James

M. Farnworth

Office of Auditor General for Local Government

S. Robinson

Hon. C. Oakes

S. Simpson

L. Krog

D. Eby

M. Mungall

Tabling Documents

Office of the Ombudsperson, public report, In the Public Interest: Protecting Students Through Effective Oversight of Private Career Training Institutions , March 2015

Orders of the Day

Committee of the Whole House

Bill 16 — Supply Act (N o . 1), 2015

Hon. M. de Jong

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 16 — Supply Act (N o . 1), 2015

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 13 — Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2015

Hon. M. de Jong

C. James

K. Corrigan

B. Ralston

D. Routley

H. Bains

M. Elmore

L. Krog

Hon. M. de Jong

Bill 17 — Guide Dog and Service Dog Act

Hon. S. Anton

M. Mungall

J. Thornthwaite

L. Krog

Hon. T. Lake

L. Popham

S. Hamilton

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation

Hon. J. Rustad

S. Fraser

A. Weaver

D. Donaldson

S. Robinson

C. Trevena

[ Page 6781 ]

MONDAY, MARCH 23, 2015

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Hon. T. Lake: I have two sets of introductions today. First of all, I'd like to welcome Murray and Melody MacRae from the city of Kamloops, constituents of mine visiting Victoria. Murray is a real estate agent in Kamloops. In fact, we went to elementary and junior high school together. Would the House please make Murray and Melody very welcome in the gallery today.

[1335]

Tributes

JEAN SCOTT

S. Hammell: Dr. Jean Scott, an honorary doctorate recipient and a well-known community activist and feminist who made her mark both nationally and locally, was 102 at the time of her passing on February 25, 2015.

Jean was born one week after the sinking of the Titanic in 1912. She shared her 21st birthday with Queen Elizabeth but liked to note that she had seniority over the Queen. She was a social activist longer than most people have been alive. She devoted her life to causes that promoted social justice, women's equality and the rights of the common person.

She had a strong commitment to community service. During a time in Chilliwack she was involved with the Ann Davis Transition House, the Chilliwack Museum, the Academy of Music, the New Democratic Party and Carmen United Church, along with many other causes and organizations.

She was a true treasure to all of us and to all of us who knew her. She was loved by many and will be missed by all.

Introductions by Members

Hon. T. Lake: All that talk of elementary school — I thought I'd been sent to the corner.

Today is B.C. Pharmacy Association Day. It has been proclaimed Pharmacy Day in British Columbia. To help us learn more about the role of pharmacists — the role they play in our health care system in British Columbia — the B.C. Pharmacy Association is in the precinct today to meet with MLAs and staff.

I'd like to take a moment to recognize some of their representatives in the gallery today: Geraldine Vance, CEO of the B.C. Pharmacy Association; David Pavan, the president of their board of directors; board members Mark Dickson and Nemanja Filipovic; and Dr. Corey Nislow, assistant professor with the UBC faculty of pharmaceutical sciences. They're also joined by 11 other association members and student ambassadors. Would the House please join me in welcoming them to the House today.

L. Krog: It's spring break in school district 68, Nanaimo, and that affords an honest opportunity for my friend Avery Valerio to join us once again in the chamber. Would the House please make her welcome.

D. Horne: It's a great pleasure today that I rise and introduce Rob Thiessen from the Hope for Freedom Society. The Hope for Freedom Society in the Tri-Cities area provides excellent services for those with mental health and addiction issues. As well, Rob was instrumental in creating the wet weather map program for the homeless in the Tri-Cities area. I would hope that the House would make him truly welcome.

B. Routley: It is great today to have the opportunity to welcome a couple of guests. I had a nice lunch with Sonia Furstenau and Lori Treloar, who are both here. Sonia represents the Shawnigan Lake CVRD and the Shawnigan Lake community.

They're here today to tell us about their concerns about the water potentially being contaminated in Shawnigan Lake. They have concerns about the environmental risk that may still exist. I think they're seeking a meeting with the Ministry of Environment.

They did meet with me, and we had a nice lunch. We got to hear from them their concerns, and I want you to know that we're listening.

Tributes

STEVE NASH

Hon. Michelle Stilwell: I'd like to take a moment to honour a great Canadian athlete and British Columbian. This past weekend, Victoria's own Steve Nash announced his retirement from the National Basketball Association after an amazing 18-year career. Like many people, I believe Steve is pretty much the best point guard in the game, and he is one of my own personal sports heroes.

Raised in Victoria, he played for and led St. Michaels University to the 1992 B.C. boys basketball championship, and he was named the B.C. boys basketball player of the year. In 1996 Steve Nash was the 15th selection to the first round of the NBA draft by the Phoenix Suns, starting his successful career. During his playing career he was named the NBA MVP twice — the first Canadian to be given that honour. He finished his career with 1,217

[ Page 6782 ]

games played, 17,387 points scored, and 10,335 assists. Phenomenal.

[1340]

Like me, Steve is a proud Canadian and Olympian, representing Canada on the world stage. He played in the 2000 Sydney Olympics with the Canadian men's team, placing seventh. He continues his commitment to Canada by serving as the general manager for the Canadian men's basketball team.

Steve Nash is a first-class athlete and an all-around great person. Today's Canadian players in the NBA — Anthony Bennett, Andrew Wiggins, just to name a few — consider Steve a mentor and a role model. Canadian basketball is thriving today because of Steve Nash. Fans of the game, I'm sure, will miss Steve, but I, for one, can't wait to see what comes next for this amazing athlete.

Please join me in thanking Steve Nash for all that he's done and wish him the best of luck in the future.

Introductions by Members

B. Ralston: It's my pleasure to welcome to British Columbia and to our House a delegation of visitors from Vietnam.

Joining us in the gallery this afternoon are Mr. Thanh, deputy auditor general, State Audit Office; Mr. Hung, vice-chair, Economic Committee, National Assembly; Mr. Quang, standing member, Finance and Budget Committee, National Assembly; Mr. Son, secretary of the deputy auditor general, State Audit Office; Mrs. Ngoc, who's the official of the international relations department in the State Audit Office; and Ms. Caroline Jorgensen, director of international relations, Canadian Comprehensive Auditing Foundation.

They're in the gallery to observe proceedings and will have an opportunity to engage in some dialogue with members of the Committee on Public Accounts as they continue with their CCAF international study tour.

Will the House please make them welcome.

S. Hamilton: Joining me in the House today are two good friends, Delta residents. One is a longtime-serving Delta Parks commissioner, Mr. Don Sangster, and his business associate, Mr. Sid Keay. Could I ask the House to please make them welcome.

A. Weaver: It gives me great pleasure to welcome today Rowena Hendriks and ten guests from Carlton House, a premier retirement residence in Oak Bay. Would the House please make them feel very welcome.

Tributes

MILLIE MITCHELL

S. Chandra Herbert: I rise today to mark the passing of Millie Mitchell. Millie was an incredible businesswoman and an incredible activist from Merritt. I met her, actually, just a bit over a week ago when she was out organizing communities concerned about biosolids dumping in their backyard.

Millie was the long-time CA, constituency assistant, for Harry Lali, the former member for Fraser-Nicola, and just a force of nature. She passed away at the age of 83, tragically, in an accident, where she was out standing up for her community, seeking to find some pollution that she'd heard had been put in a distant back road. Unfortunately, she didn't make it out.

She was an incredible woman, never gave up. She joked to me not long ago that she came out of retirement so many times to make a difference, to make change, to stand up for her community, that she never should have considered going into retirement in the first place.

I just want to honour Millie Mitchell. She has a special place in many people's hearts and was an incredible leader in her community. I hope the Speaker might pass on our condolences to her family.

Madame Speaker: It will be done.

Statements

HOCKEYVILLE

G. Holman: I wanted to inform the House today that there are two communities in British Columbia which have made it into the top ten rankings for the Hockeyville competition. The voting — you can go to khv2015.ca. And an interesting democratic reform concept — you can vote as often as you want up until 9 p.m. tonight.

I'd really like to wish all the success to Dawson Creek and also the Saanich Peninsula rec centre. We've got an opportunity to have an NHL exhibition game at these facilities and win $100,000 for the local ice rink.

Introductions by Members

D. McRae: It's my pleasure to introduce today in the House for her first visit to question period the 2013 B.C. Liberal candidate to Nanaimo–North Cowichan, Amanda Jacobson. Amanda is a single mother of two children and works as a mortgage broker in Ladysmith. Would the House please make her welcome.

R. Fleming: It's a pleasure to introduce a school group from my constituency. With us today are 30 students in grade 11 from Reynolds Secondary School, with their teacher, Ms. Shannon Walsh. There are two parents with this group as well. Many of them are here in the buildings for their very first time. I'm delighted to have them here.

[1345]

I also haven't had occasion in this legislative session to sing the praises of Reynolds Secondary School, as I regu-

[ Page 6783 ]

larly do. For the members, just to refresh their memories, this would be the school that regularly wins the regional slam poetry competitions. It's a regional sports powerhouse, with a soccer academy. It shatters the records for Cops for Cancer and is known for academic excellence in arts and science.

That's the school I'm talking about once again in the House. Would the House please make these students and their teacher welcome here today.

M. Bernier: I'm quite excited today. It's the first time, actually, since I've been elected to this House that I have the privilege of welcoming my wife, Valerie, who's joining us today, and my youngest son, Trevor. My daughter Michaela is visiting us again with her friend, Jericho Hancock. I'd like to have the House please make them welcome.

Before I sit down, I also want to thank the member for Saanich North and the Islands for the plug for Hockeyville. As we know, the Premier, representing the province, has been encouraging and supporting both communities. I, on the other hand, can be a little bit more shameless, not as gracious, and ask everybody here, up till nine o'clock tonight, to vote for Dawson Creek. It's a good competition.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 15 — MOTOR VEHICLE

AMENDMENT ACT, 2015

Hon. S. Anton presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2015.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Anton: I'm pleased to introduce a bill that proposes a number of amendments to the Motor Vehicle Act.

The main goal of this legislation is to strengthen and support the province's comprehensive strategy to combat high-risk driving behaviour on B.C. roads, including making amendments to the life-saving immediate roadside prohibition program. We believe the changes preserve the integrity of the programs by balancing fair administrative review processes with operational efficiency. Moreover, the amendments ensure the highest levels of safety for all road users in British Columbia.

Madame Speaker and hon. Members, the focus of this bill is to strengthen the administrative review components of the immediate roadside prohibition program by allowing the superintendent to make timely review decisions. This bill also establishes more certain and transparent mandatory remedial requirements for drivers who meet established alcohol- and drug-driving-related thresholds. Further, this bill creates regulations governing early release of specific designated vehicles from the vehicle impoundment program.

These amendments are intended to maintain the success of the proven life-saving suite of programs by ensuring that drivers, police and the public continue to have the utmost confidence in a strong, fair and efficient road safety framework.

This bill also gives full force and effect to the decision announced in May of 2012 to end the AirCare program by December 31, 2014.

Finally, the bill includes amendments to road safety and enforcement by providing clear direction on the use of the leftmost lane on multi-lane highways, providing authority to prescribe winter tire and traction device specifications in regulation and allowing municipalities to regulate motorcycle parking near traffic control signs and signals.

I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 15, Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2015, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE

M. Bernier: I remember my first kiss. I remember spending my summers in Campbell River fishing with my dad. I remember seeing a young, beautiful girl across the restaurant in Terrace when I was visiting there. Then, a few years later, I remember marrying that same girl. I remember the days my kids were born, when they first learned how to ride their bikes and when they graduated from school. I have amazing memories of my life, and I hope I'll have more.

[1350]

Another memory I have is watching my grandmother disappear right in front of my eyes. The sad

part is that she, too, had an amazing life, amazing memories. But because of Alzheimer's, those amazing experiences and amazing stories disappeared from her forever. Imagine forgetting your childhood, forgetting you were married, forgetting you had kids and grandkids, forgetting you were in love.

I know everybody in this House has amazing stories. I hope you keep them with you until you leave this earth. That's what life's about: making great memories.

[ Page 6784 ]

On this day I want to thank everybody with the Alzheimer Society who volunteers, who does research and who supports this important cause. I also want to thank Jeff Shea and those with Investors Group in Dawson Creek who every year spend a lot of time sponsoring and bringing awareness to this cause with the Walk for Memories.

One day I hope a memory I do have is the day that I was told that nobody will ever again have to suffer from Alzheimer's disease.

PHYLLIS NASH AND SOCIAL WORK

M. Mungall: Each year during March social workers and millions of Canadians celebrate all that social workers do for our society, during National Social Work Month. This year's theme is "Social work: profession of choice."

Nelson's own Phyllis Nash embodies this year's theme to a T. She has been a force of light and love in countless people's lives and has gone above and beyond in contributing to community, to B.C. and to Canada.

Hailing from Prince George, Phyllis first started working as a ministry social worker in northern B.C. over 45 years ago. She was there when countless families found themselves in crisis and when children had nowhere else to turn. Phyllis was one of the many unsung heroes on the front lines of social work.

During those days, Phyllis garnered much experience and knowledge and took that to the front of the social work classes at the University of Victoria. In the 1980s the Kootenays had the good fortune of acquiring Phyllis when she began teaching at Selkirk College.

Although she retired from teaching in 2004, she did not stop working. In 2010 the Association of Social Workers here in B.C. celebrated her career and contributions after she stepped down as president of their board. She is still serving, though, and is active on both the provincial and national boards of social workers.

But I know Phyllis as the incredible community volunteer. She is active on the boards of Nelson CARES, Nelson Social Planning Action Network and the Kootenay Boundary Community Services Co-operative.

She also continues to serve as the co-chair for the Nelson Committee on Homelessness, and it is from here that I know Phyllis best. As her former employee, Phyllis taught me much about life, work and pursuing social justice.

Phyllis, thanks is not enough for all that you do and for all that social workers do for our province.

TERRY FOX

L. Reimer: On behalf of my constituents in Port Moody–Coquitlam, I am honoured to rise in the House to speak about Terry Fox and the 35th anniversary of the Marathon of Hope.

In April 1980 Terry boarded a plane to Newfoundland, where he began his Marathon of Hope. In preparation, Terry often ran a ten-mile route through the Tri-Cities, sometimes two or three times a day. He would log 101 running days in a row — with the exception of Christmas Day, to make his mom, Betty, happy.

Terry's dedication was unfailing. In fact, he logged over 5,000 kilometres of training runs, which is almost as far as his actual Marathon of Hope took him. To honour his dedication, the Terry Fox Foundation will be hosting a ten-mile, or 16.1-kilometre, run, which follows his training route, on April 4, likely the date of his last training run 35 years ago. The run will take participants from Port Coquitlam, through Coquitlam and out to Port Moody and back again.

After the run and the dedication ceremony, there'll be a short walk through Terry's neighbourhood. The Terry Fox Training Run and Community Walk is an opportunity to continue raising awareness for cancer research and literally follow in Terry's inspirational footsteps.

Last year I had the honour to be a part of the government's decision to proclaim Terry Fox Day the second Sunday after Labour Day. Today we celebrate what he achieved and what we as Canadians have achieved in his name.

Terry once said: "Even if I don't finish, we need others to continue. It's got to keep going without me." I'm proud to see my Tri-Cities community and all British Columbians keeping Terry's dream going and his legacy alive. Please join us on April 4.

[1355]

WATER PROTECTION

S. Chandra Herbert: Water is life; life is water. Indeed, we are all made up of approximately 60 percent water. Our society can't function without it, but it's under threat. That's why British Columbians united to celebrate World Water Day on Sunday, a day to reflect on better protecting one of our most important life-giving resources and to take action — and take action they have.

Currently over 100,000 people have signed a petition demanding that we treat our water with more respect and not give it away for just $2.25 per million litres. But it's not just the giveaway of water people are concerned about. What is rushing strongly all across B.C.? A demand that we treat our water with respect, use the best science and involve the community that relies on it.

In Chilliwack citizens are trying to protect the mighty Fraser from a proposed toxic waste recycling facility. In Likely citizens are continuing to raise the alarm about the impact of the Mount Polley mine disaster on their water. In Spallumcheen's Steele Springs citizens are speaking out after lax rules and enforcement led to cow waste making their drinking water undrinkable.

[ Page 6785 ]

In Shawnigan Lake residents are fighting to protect their water from a waste dump approved for their watershed. And, of course, in the Nicola Valley we've recently heard residents fighting to protect their wells from a proposed decision to put human waste, composted, above the wellhead.

These are just a few communities taking action. As the Council of Canadians pointed out, B.C. has the most boil-water advisories per capita in Canada. It's a shocking statistic and clearly points to the need for action.

We've seen what's happening down south in California, where they have just one year left of water in storage after some of the driest years in recorded history. We know that climate change is impacting our water now and that it'll only get worse. We must all take action to better value our water, involve our communities and respect it and protect it. Water is life; life is water.

B.C. PHARMACY DAY

D. Bing: Today, March 23, has been designated as B.C. Pharmacy Day in recognition of the pharmacists' role in our province's health care system. It is also a day to encourage others to enter this valuable profession.

More than 4,800 pharmacists and 1,100 pharmacies provide vital, convenient and accessible health care to communities across our province. Pharmacists also provide knowledgable advice about the safe and effective use of more than 65 million prescriptions annually. They are committed professionals who strive to achieve and maintain the highest standards and promotion of good health for all British Columbians.

In recent years our government has expanded the scope of pharmacists' work, giving British Columbians even more health professionals to choose from when they need health care services. A popular example of this is that during the past flu season more than 425,000 British Columbians received their influenza vaccine from a pharmacist, and in 2014 B.C. pharmacists vaccinated more than 6,000 young women from the human papilloma virus. Pharmacies also have medication return programs, ensuring the proper disposal of old and unused medications.

British Columbians have come to rely on pharmacists' knowledge and experience as part of their overall health care team. Today is British Columbia's opportunity to recognize the integral role that pharmacists play in the delivery of health care in our province.

SOIL HEALTH AND

FARMLAND PROTECTION

L. Popham: Some say politics is a dirty business, and some believe that politics is about dirt. "As generations become further removed from an agrarian lifestyle, and as we lose community, I fear that civil society becomes less civil. It is at our peril that the great cities of the world forget that civilization relies on the health of the soils upon which it rests." Those are the words spoken by our own Lieutenant-Governor, Judith Guichon.

"Many of the first ranchers, such as the Guichon family, came to British Columbia 150 years ago, chasing their dreams of gold," she said. "They came for the gold but then stayed for the grass."

The 68th United Nations General Assembly declared 2015 the International Year of Soils. The most widely recognized function of soil is to support our food production, and 95 percent of our food is directly or indirectly produced on our food-growing lands.

[1400]

Specific objectives of the UN International Year of Soils are to raise full awareness among society and decision-makers about the profound importance of soil for human life and to educate the public about the crucial role soil plays in food security, climate change adaptation and mitigation, essential ecosystem services, poverty alleviation and sustainable development.

In British Columbia we've been trying to protect our food-growing soils for over 40 years. Up to the 1970s, nearly 6,000 hectares of prime agricultural land were being lost each year to urban development and other uses. The provincial government responded to this erosion of the agricultural land base by introducing B.C.'s Land Commission Act. On April 18, 1973, an agricultural land reserve was established, reserving 5 percent of this province for food growing.

Some say politics is a dirty business. It isn't always, but when you see what's happened to our agricultural land reserve lately, I'd have to agree.

Oral Questions

APPOINTMENT OF B.C. TREATY

COMMISSION CHIEF COMMISSIONER

S. Fraser: The work of the B.C. Treaty Commission is fundamental to achieving reconciliation with many First Nations in this province. Chief commissioners have included Miles Richardson, Steven Point and Sophie Pierre, who will be leaving that position in one week.

Last September, based on the agreement of the province, the First Nations Summit and the federal government, the Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation recruited Mr. George Abbott on behalf of the Premier, proposing that Mr. Abbott take over the role of the chief treaty commissioner.

What changed between the province recruiting Mr. Abbott to the chief commissioner position in September and its sudden decision not to approve the appointment last Wednesday, one week before Mr. Abbott was due to take over?

[ Page 6786 ]

Hon. J. Rustad: Thank you to the member opposite for the question.

Mr. Abbott served this province well and with distinction for a long period of time, both as an MLA and as a cabinet minister, as well as his roles that he has done outside of government. We appreciate the work that Mr. Abbott has done.

However, over the last number of months we have been thinking about the B.C. treaty process, about the role of the B.C. Treaty Commission, and we're looking forward to having a discussion with our principals — the First Nations Summit, the federal government, the province — to talk about what that future is and to talk about ways that we could be thinking about perhaps accelerating or revitalizing the process so that we can see more success for more nations.

Madame Speaker: Alberni–Pacific Rim on a supplemental.

S. Fraser: I have a supplemental, yes. Not surprisingly, the First Nations Summit was shocked by this betrayal by the province. Based on the agreement of the other parties, the summit passed a resolution in October formally confirming their support for Mr. Abbott's appointment. Barely a month ago they invited Mr. Abbott to a summit meeting with other treaty commissioners and included him on the agenda as the next chief commissioner.

What changed between the province agreeing with its Treaty Commission partners that Mr. Abbott would be a good appointment and its sudden decision last Wednesday to break faith and not approve that same appointment?

Madame Speaker: Members, the Chair will hear the answers and the questions.

Hon. J. Rustad: We remain committed to the treaty process. There has been much success that we have seen in the treaty process for the number of nations that have gone through and completed. We also remain committed to working with our principals.

Reaching long-term reconciliation is important, but we also recognize that after 22 years it's time to be thinking about this process. It's time to be thinking about how we can try to accelerate and have more nations be successful through this process.

With the departure of Sophie Pierre…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Rustad: …whom I want to thank for her years of dedication and hard work in this position, the time is appropriate to have this conversation with our principals about the things that we could be thinking about to improve the process.

[1405]

Madame Speaker: Alberni–Pacific Rim on a final supplemental.

S. Fraser: This isn't about having a conversation with the principals. This is about blindsiding the principals.

The relationship between the provincial government and First Nations in this province is key to our economic and social progress now and in the future. The Premier has said, and I'll quote: "The gold standard for provincial relations with First Nations is treaty. Ideally, I want to get to a place where we are concluding more treaties." The minister has said: "We want to be true partners" — we just heard that again — "with aboriginal people, and that will only be possible by listening to each other."

To the minister: how is this the act of a true partner when you ask a question and you don't listen to the answer, essentially blindsiding your First Nations partners?

Hon. J. Rustad: We believe that we need to continue to move forward with our relations with First Nations. We feel that treaty is an important component of that. Beyond that, treaty is just one component. Not all nations want to proceed down the path of treaty.

Just in the last short while, we now have more than 16 incremental treaty agreements with nations. We had a number of new agreement-in-principle offers, which is stage 4 of the treaty process, that have gone out to nations. We're working through, in final negotiations, two other treaties with K'ómoks and In-SHUCK-ch.

There is a whole host of things that we're doing. We also recognize that it's important to move with other nations as well. We've gone now, just over the last two years, from around 150 non-treaty agreements to almost 300 non-treaty agreements as we advance our relationships with First Nations.

Working with the principals and working with First Nations is important. Strengthening what we can do around the treaty process is important. We plan to continue working closely with First Nations partners to make sure they have full opportunities to not just expand and have their opportunity around the economy but also to reach long-term reconciliation.

C. James: I first want to remind the minister. He says he wants to work with First Nations. Well, if the minister and this government wanted a real relationship with First Nations, they wouldn't have started by cancelling the appointment that they were going to put in place three months ago.

The B.C. Treaty Commission was clear in its view of events of this last week. Chief Commissioner Sophie Pierre said that the parties to the Treaty Commission

[ Page 6787 ]

have legal commitments to the process and each other. "This retraction of the chief commissioner selection…raises questions about B.C.'s commitment to the treaty negotiations process." The First Nations Summit political executive also said that the province's blatant disregard for the agreement we had among principals and processes already undertaken is wholly unacceptable.

Again, my question is to the minister. How do you explain this last-minute breach of faith to the province's partners in the Treaty Commission?

Madame Speaker: Through the Chair, Members.

Hon. J. Rustad: As I said earlier, we remain committed to treaty. We remain committed to working and building our relationships with First Nations. There's been a process that started about 22 years ago that has seen more than $600 million that has been expended furthering relations and furthering the treaty process, and we now have eight nations under four treaties.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Rustad: There has been some great success with those nations that have reached treaty. There has been some great success in the incremental approaches that we've taken with First Nations. But it is time that we take a look at this process and we say: "How is it that we can revitalize it, that we can find ways to accelerate it so that more nations can participate in the success that treaty can bring?"

Madame Speaker: Victoria–Beacon Hill on a supplemental.

C. James: The minister says he's committed to the principals and committed to the process, yet one week before the appointment was to take place, they pulled the rug out underneath George Abbott — an appointment that was approved by the parties.

[1410]

The government made a commitment to the federal government, which was ready to approve this appointment on April 1; to the First Nations Summit, who acted in good faith by formally confirming their support of the appointment; to the Treaty Commission, which spent time and effort beginning the transition process with Mr. Abbott based on the government's assurances that he was acceptable.

Again, my question is to the minister. When did the Premier inform the minister that the province would be breaking faith with its treaty partners and pulling Mr. Abbott's appointment?

Hon. J. Rustad: We said last September in the all chiefs meeting that we wanted to find a new path. We wanted to look at new ways to work with First Nations. We were at a signpost in the road, and we had a choice as to the path that we could take.

Over the last number of months we've been thinking about our relationships with nations, how we can work with First Nations differently. We've come to the realization that the B.C. treaty process has been very successful for the nations that have made it through, but we need to be thinking about how we can revitalize it, how we can move forward.

We plan to engage with the principals around those discussions, with the First Nations Summit and with the federal government, to talk about what we can do, with treaty, to revitalize it. It's an important discussion. It's critical for the future with First Nations as well as for the Crown. It's an important discussion to go through that is unfettered and to be able to come up with the right path forward.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members, the Chair will hear the answers and the questions.

M. Farnworth: The minister said he wants to look at the process, so let's look at the process. He wanted to appoint George Abbott — offered him the position. It was agreed to by the feds. It was agreed to by the treaty nations. It was agreed to by this government in doing so. They've pulled that appointment. They have pulled that appointment and blindsided the parties in the process.

That's not about building confidence. What that has done is seen a minister humiliated for having to pull an appointment, a government that has lost the confidence of treaty nations, lost the confidence of the feds, lost the confidence, clearly, of cabinet. He may still have the confidence of the Premier, but I'd really like the minister to be able to tell this House how he intends to move the treaty process forward when he clearly has the confidence of only one person.

Hon. J. Rustad: Thanks to the member opposite for the question. I want to tell a brief story, if I may. I want to talk in particular about the Lower Kootenay band. I went and visited the Lower Kootenay band in this past year, and we talked about what they wanted to see and their vision for moving forward. As a band, historically, they've always had access to the lake, but under the reserve system, they've never been able to get back and have access to the lake.

We actually took an approach of an incremental treaty with them to be able to make some land available, which is now being signed to move forward. For the first time in well over 100 years, they now have access again to the

[ Page 6788 ]

lake. Treaty process is about how you can reach long-term reconciliation, but in this particular case, it was something that we actually did as an incremental process that even wasn't in the standard six-step process.

It's that kind of success that we need to embrace. We need to think about how to move forward. I want to talk to the principals in terms of how we can develop the B.C. treaty process and further what we're able to achieve through it to be able to meet long-term reconciliation for the nations.

Madame Speaker: The member for Port Coquitlam on a supplemental.

[1415]

M. Farnworth: We're talking about George Abbott, who was to chair the Treaty Commission. That's who we're talking about, an individual who had the support of all the parties in the Treaty Commission. That's something the minister doesn't seem to want to acknowledge.

The question is really simple. How can anybody participating in the treaty process have any confidence in anything this minister has to say on a subject, given the events of the last few days?

Hon. J. Rustad: The Tsilhqot'in decision has set the stage for thinking about how we can do things different in the province of British Columbia and how we need to shape relationships.

But we have, over the last two years, signed close to 150 new agreements. We're now up to 300 agreements between First Nations and the province of British Columbia, furthering that reconciliation — many of those new agreements just in the last year alone.

We have new offers of agreements-in-principle in the treaty process that are out to nations. They're going out and looking at it. I'm hopeful that we will have some announcements on that in the near future.

We're still working with a number of other nations, talking about how we're advancing things like incremental treaties. Those that are in agreement-in-principle…. We're talking to them about how to walk forward and how to actually get through to the completion of their treaties — how we can look at accelerating things.

We need to take that success, work with our partners in this, to find ways to renew and rejuvenate the treaty process so that it can be successful in a shorter period of time for a greater number of nations.

OFFICE OF AUDITOR GENERAL FOR

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

S. Robinson: Three weeks ago I asked the Minister of Community Development to explain why the Auditor General for Local Government had only succeeded in producing one audit over two years at a cost of $5.2 million. The minister told us that all was well. On March 9 the minister told the House: "We are working with the Auditor General for Local Government" on a revised plan. This morning we learned that the minister has sacked Basia Ruta.

My question is to the minister. Why did it take three weeks for her to come clean with British Columbians about the turmoil in the Premier's pet project?

Hon. C. Oakes: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. It remains fundamentally important that we have a strong, functioning, accountable and transparent Auditor General for Local Government office.

We remain disappointed by the performance and the lack of performance audits that have been achieved. That is why we have taken steps to address that, to ensure that the fundamental principles of the Auditor General for Local Government are achieved.

Madame Speaker: Coquitlam-Maillardville on a supplemental.

S. Robinson: Disappointment is hardly being accountable. The minister had no intention of telling British Columbians the truth about the waste and dysfunction at the Auditor General for Local Government office until she was forced to.

Today she tells us that she sacked Basia Ruta on the advice she received from the audit council back on March 19, but the truth is that the minister knew about these problems for many months. The audit council asked her for help on February 6. We understand that this was their second attempt to get the minister's attention.

My question is to the minister. Will she confirm that in January the audit council told her that they had lost confidence in the AGLG?

Hon. C. Oakes: Actually, some of the information is critically incorrect. I think it's important for us to understand that it was necessary to ensure that we had a formal process, that we have worked through a process, to evaluate and work with the audit council to resolve the lack of performance of the performance audits.

[1420]

I make no apology for ensuring that proper process was followed, that we are addressing human resource concerns and that the proper, appropriate officials…. The Public Service Agency was appropriate — not a political person — to make those decisions. We had a process that was necessary to follow.

I would actually like to thank the member opposite for her work on this file. It's not too often in this House when we do have the opportunity to look at how we improve upon functions of this government. We strongly believe in the Auditor General for Local Government. We understand that it was a grass-roots….

[ Page 6789 ]

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members, Members.

Hon. C. Oakes: Hon. Speaker, if I may. This was a grass-roots movement that I was involved with in the 2000s, long before I was a minister. There were stakeholder groups from across British Columbia that understood the importance and the necessity of having an Auditor General for Local Government.

This will provide tools for local government — tools so that they can share best practices, tools and abilities to really help support taxpayers achieve great value. We believe in this. We had hoped for a different conclusion, but we are moving forward.

S. Simpson: The minister has said that she's disappointed by all of this. But taxpayers don't really want her to be disappointed. They do want her to be accountable for the waste of $5.2 million. They want her to be responsible for the expensive legal fight that's pending.

The minister has known for months that she had a mess on her hands, and she ignored the problem until it was raised in this House. Will she confirm that the audit council wrote her in January and told her they had lost confidence in the Auditor General for Local Government?

Hon. C. Oakes: Again, the former Auditor General for Local Government's obstruction of an intended review — reviews that the audit council had been trying to seek with the Auditor General for Local Government for some time — has created an intolerable work environment. That has led to the decision of me to ask….

I sought the audit council's recommendation regarding the removal of the Auditor General for Local Government. The audit council considered my request and issued a recommendation to remove the Auditor General for Local Government, and this morning I recommended that the auditor's appointment be rescinded.

Madame Speaker: The member for Vancouver-Hastings on a supplemental.

S. Simpson: The problem is this. This is a minister who has stood up in this House and told us that everything was fine. She covered up a report written by her director of human resources that said the Premier's pet project was in turmoil. Then she said she was working cooperatively to put an end to the waste and dysfunction. Then she sacks Ms. Ruta and saddles the taxpayer with, certainly, many legal bills.

Again, why did she ignore the audit council when they told her three months ago that this wasn't working and that they had lost confidence in the auditor general?

Hon. C. Oakes: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. We followed proper procedure and the procedures outlined in this act.

L. Krog: This should come as no surprise to the government. The opposition warned the Premier that her pet project would turn into a mess, and sadly, for taxpayers, it has. So much for saving taxpayers' money.

[1425]

In 2012 we told the Premier that she should expand the role of the Auditor General and allow the office to provide advice to local government — good advice not taken by the Premier. Rather than throw more money at this mess, will she finally take our advice and roll the AGLG into the Office of the Auditor General?

Hon. C. Oakes: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. Adding this role to the office of the provincial Auditor was a consideration at the beginning, but after consulting with local governments and working through the mandate, it was decided that the current structure would be a better fit with the type of audits that would be undertaken.

There are many of us who have local government experience. We understand that the AGLG's performance audits are quite different than audits done by the current office of the provincial Auditor.

That said, it would absolutely be prudent at this time to take a look at the legislation and the different structures in case improvement can be made to preserving the independence of this office.

Madame Speaker: The member for Nanaimo on a supplemental.

L. Krog: Well, I think we heard the first glimmer of an apology from this government for wasting $5.2 million.

But what the minister doesn't seem to understand is that she and this government and the Premier have failed the taxpayers of British Columbia. The AGLG fell apart under her watch. She's responsible for the $5.2 million.

Again to the minister, will she put an end to the Premier's pet project, roll this into the Auditor General's office like we told them to do three years ago?

Hon. C. Oakes: In this time of transition, we will be looking at options to ensure that the Auditor General for Local Government is the best structure to meet the mandate.

I would like to remind the members opposite that this was really a grass-roots movement. It was a movement of stakeholders from across the province that looked at ways that we can improve and provide tools to local government to ensure…

Interjections.

[ Page 6790 ]

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Oakes: …accountability for taxpayers.

Should we be evaluating, always analyzing and looking at ways that we can improve legislation and the way that we do things as government? That is what we should be doing as government. I remain committed, I remain determined, and I remain focused to ensure that this Auditor General for Local Government's office is going to be successful.

D. Eby: Three years ago the opposition told the government to roll this local government audit function into the Auditor General's office. The Auditor General has the capacity, the expertise and is a nationally respected office. Surely the minister isn't saying that she doesn't have confidence in our Auditor General to have the ability to do this job?

Hon. C. Oakes: In case what I said before wasn't heard clearly, I'll read the line again. What it said is that the role…. This is important because this….

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Oakes: The role of the office of the provincial Auditor was considered at the beginning, but after consulting with local governments and working through the mandate, it was decided that the structure would be a better fit if this type of audit were undertaken. We respect local governments, we listened to local governments, and we implemented what they asked.

Madame Speaker: Vancouver–Point Grey on a supplemental.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members will come to order.

Please continue.

D. Eby: I'm sure in the minister's lines it doesn't say that local government asked for this mess.

Can the minister please stand up and explain exactly what it is about the Auditor General's office that is not compatible with doing audits of local governments in British Columbia?

[1430]

Hon. C. Oakes: The process of implementing the Auditor General for Local Government was an exhaustive process that reached into every single community. Stakeholders right across British Columbia had the opportunity to put forward their ideas and recommendations on what an Auditor General for Local Government office would look like.

When options came forward to local governments and they were asked whether they would like to see the function of this office be within a provincial auditor or their own separate auditor for local government, they asked to work through a separate mandate. It was their request, versus the provincial Auditor General, to look at an independent performance audit office of the provincial auditor. That is what we have implemented.

M. Mungall: Well, I dare say that if anybody in this House looked up the word "failed" in the dictionary, they would see the Premier's pet project Auditor General for Local Government. Time and time again we uncover more information from this minister, only to find out every step of the way that she has utterly failed B.C. taxpayers and wasted $5.2 million.

That's just the start. Legal fees are absolutely certain here. My question is a simple one to the minister. Will the taxpayers be paying Ms. Ruta's legal bills?

Hon. C. Oakes: Again, if I may correct the statement, this process was a grass-roots movement of stakeholders from across British Columbia.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Oakes: It was a policy that was put forward. If you look at the B.C. Chamber of Commerce policy manuals from the 2000s, they asked for a municipal officer of local government.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Oakes: Our government were the ones that listened to grass-roots communities across British Columbia and implemented this very important office.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present the Ombudsperson's public report No. 51, In the Public Interest: Protecting Students Through Effective Oversight of Private Career Training Institutions .

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: In Committee A, Committee of Supply, for the information of members, it's the con-

[ Page 6791 ]

tinued estimates of the Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and in this chamber, beginning with committee stage on Bill 16, interim supply.

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 16 — SUPPLY ACT (N o . 1), 2015

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section

B) on Bill 16; D. Horne in the chair.

The committee met at 2:35 p.m.

Sections 1 to 4 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

Hon. M. de Jong: Hon. Chair, I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 2:35 p.m.

The House resumed; Madame Speaker in the chair.

Report and

Third Reading of Bills

BILL 16 — SUPPLY ACT (N o . 1), 2015

Bill 16, Supply Act (No. 1), 2015, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. M. de Jong: Madame Speaker, I call second reading on Bill 13, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 13 — FINANCE STATUTES

AMENDMENT ACT, 2015

Hon. M. de Jong: I move that Bill 13, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act, be read a second time now.

I'll endeavour to provide the committee with a slightly more detailed description of the provisions. Many of them are quite technical, so I'll endeavour to provide more of an overview.

I'm hopeful that the hon. opposition critic has had an opportunity to receive a more detailed briefing. She's indicating that she has, which I think will assist this and the subsequent committee stage debate.

Bill 13 makes a number of amendments to the administrative and enforcement provisions of a number of statutes: the Carbon Tax Act, the Motor Fuel Tax Act, the Provincial Sales Tax Act and the Tobacco Tax Act. The amendments are intended to bring greater consistency to similar provisions that exist within those acts, reducing the chance that provisions will be applied differently and decreasing the complexity and administrative burden for both taxpayers and government.

In addition, a number of the amendments are intended to clarify existing provisions to improve the fairness and effectiveness of their administration — including the application of tax to parts used on interjurisdictional conveyances, the authority for refunds to be provided to PST collectors, and the required timing of payments under the acts — while removing the prohibition on making bulk sales and allowing for collection bonds to be requested at the time of registration or varied when circumstances change.

There are technical amendments contained within the bill that have been made to the Provincial Sales Tax Act to expand the circumstances in which out-of-country businesses may voluntarily register to collect and remit B.C. PST. As business models change, I can advise the House, more out-of-country businesses are using local suppliers to fill orders for B.C. customers. These amendments will allow these businesses to register and also allow out-of-country businesses that ship commercial goods into B.C. to register, enabling these businesses to better serve their customers, who will no longer be obligated to self-assess PST.

[1440]

The bill also includes provisions, originally amended by the PST transitional regulations, that are required to be brought into legislation in order to remain effective beyond April 1, 2016. These amendments allow the Minister of Finance and the courts to determine the fair market value of a good, software or taxable service on appeal.

The Tobacco Tax Act amendments allow for British Columbia's participation in the federal tobacco stamping regime. In 2011 the federal government implemented a new tobacco stamping regime that offers improved security features and specific provincial markings, including identification features and unique stamp colour for provinces that choose to adopt the regime The stamps make counterfeit tobacco products more difficult to produce and, just as importantly, easier to identify.

Tobacco manufacturers and importers are already complying with the new stamping requirements federally and in other provinces that have implemented the new regime. The excise stamps adopted for B.C. will replace the tear tape currently required on packages of cigarettes, as well as loose, fine-cut tobacco, and the green stamp required on imported tobacco intended for taxable sale in the province.

This bill also amends the Financial Administration Act to allow for broader sharing of debtor information.

[ Page 6792 ]

Currently the Ministry of Finance is unable to share information about a debtor — such as name, birth date, address and amount owing — between non-tax programs or from a non-tax program to a tax program. As a result, debt collection activities are not as efficient or effective as they could be.

For example, when attempting to collect an unpaid debt, it is not always possible to see if a more recent address for the debtor is available under another program. As well, refunds are being issued under one program while the recipient has a debt outstanding under another program.

The amendments will, we believe, lead to improved debt collection, an increased opportunity to offset refunds against other debts owed to government, and internal cost savings and increased efficiency by reducing the effort needed to locate debtors.

The amendments to the Financial Administration Act will also expand the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia's power to refuse to issue a driver's licence or corresponding number plate to debtors who have defaulted on prescribed debt to government. Defaulted direct-lend student loans are an example, and non–motor vehicle court fines are another example of what is currently being contemplated in this regard.

The collection tool will increase collections and reduce costs to government but will only be used where circumstances warrant. Debtors will always be notified before any licence action is taken, and any debtor who is making regular payments or has demonstrated financial hardship will not be impacted at all by these provisions.

The amendments to the Income Tax Act ensure that the act continues to be harmonized with the Income Tax Act of Canada, as required under the Canada–British Columbia tax collection agreement. Technical amendments to the credit for mental or physical impairment, qualifying environmental trust tax and tax credit, B.C. seniors home-renovation tax credit, and child arts credit ensure that these provisions continue to align with parallel federal provisions and do not change existing policy. Amendments also adopt various federal penalty provisions and provide for electronic mailing of notices.

The Mineral Tax Act amendments are, we hope, consistent with our attempt to improve its confidentiality provisions in two ways — first, by simplifying the administration of resource-revenue-sharing agreements entered into with First Nations by allowing aggregate mineral tax information to be shared with government staff, who are responsible for implementing and administering the agreements, without the need for mine operators and government to enter into and manage complex consent agreements.

[1445]

The amendments — again, to the Mineral Tax Act — also will strengthen revenue certainty for First Nations by eliminating risks associated with requiring consent agreements from mine operators.

Second, the proposed amendments will improve consistency with the confidentiality provisions of other provincial taxation acts by allowing information collected under the acts to be disclosed for the purpose of assisting other government officials in the administration or enforcement of other taxation statutes.

Access to mineral tax information for this purpose will improve service delivery to businesses, while reducing administration costs, and further expand the sound and transparent management of government finances.

The amendments to the Real Estate Services Act enhance, we believe, consumer protection by helping to ensure that consumers are fairly compensated for loss caused by licensee misappropriation and that all moneys received by a licensee are handled appropriately.

Changes to the Real Estate Council's composition will enable the appointment of another member to its board to provide additional representation for the views of the nearly one million strata property owners in British Columbia.

Finally, amendments to the Real Estate Foundation framework will help support its grant program to non-profit entities for the betterment of land use by enhancing its revenue stream and by allowing for appointment of additional board members.

I know that several of the provisions of the act have attracted commentary attention. I'll look forward to the contributions of members to the discussion. As I said at the outset, many of the provisions are fairly technical in nature, but there, too, may be comments and, I'm certain, at committee stage, questions about their operation. I look forward to entertaining those questions and answering them as best I can.

I move second reading.

C. James: Thank you to the minister for that overview. As the minister has said, Bill 13 really is compiled of a number of technical amendments to the act. I want to thank the minister and thank his staff for taking time to walk through each of the sections very thoroughly with myself and my research staff and our other critic.

We really appreciated the opportunity to be able to look at the specifics. As the minister has said, this is a very varied bill. It really does cover a number of pieces that are housekeeping and a few pieces that I want to talk a little bit more about.

I think it's also really important when we take a look at a bill like this to look at the questions around what impact this will have on British Columbians. I think people often take a look at a finance statute amendment act and presume that it's dry and boring and that it will have no effect on British Columbians — that it's simply technical in nature, as the minister has said. I also think that it's important to take a look at whether there are winners and losers in each of these pieces in the bill. Is there any

[ Page 6793 ]

positive or negative impact on British Columbians or on businesses themselves?

Certainly, as I said, I believe that there are a number of routine changes in this bill, but I'd like to go through the specifics in each section. As the minister has said, I'll certainly have more questions as we go along at committee stage as well.

The number of sections in this bill — if anyone is following along — that deal with refunds and collections and assessment appear to be the Carbon Tax Act changes, the Income Tax Act changes, the Provincial Sales Tax Act changes, the Motor Fuel Tax Act changes and the Tobacco Tax Act changes. Most of these, as I mentioned and as the minister mentioned, are pretty straightforward. They're focused on consistency between acts — looking at opportunities to find that consistency between acts.

On the Tobacco Tax Act changes, as the minister had mentioned, B.C. is now going to join other provinces that have already moved in this direction — to join the federal stamping program, which will hopefully cut down on counterfeiting and address some security issues. That's certainly something that we're in support of. In committee stage we'll talk a little bit about why B.C. is a little bit behind and why that occurred. It's a pretty straightforward piece that I think most people would agree with.

[1450]

In taking a look at the Provincial Sales Tax Act changes, again, in discussions and in taking a look at the act itself, it appears very straightforward. It appears that, in fact, the main change is to allow businesses outside British Columbia who are shipping into British Columbia to be able to actually collect PST themselves rather than asking the customer who is receiving the goods to do it.

As we know, with an increase in the use of the Internet and the use of on-line shopping, this is something that occurs more often, and we don't see a challenge with the businesses collecting that PST rather than the customer having to do it. In fact, it's probably an efficiency that makes sense. Again, we'll have some questions when we get to committee stage, but it looks pretty straightforward.

I just have to say, though, as an aside that any changes to the PST are certainly something that raise eyebrows and something that we feel is important to review and examine. I don't think anybody forgets the HST debate and discussion and the going-back-to-PST debate and discussion. This is an area where we have asked questions, and we'll continue to ask questions to make sure that there aren't any other exemptions or changes on goods and services, but it certainly doesn't appear that way in the bill that's coming forward.

On the Income Tax Act changes, it looks at consistency between the federal act and ours provincially and, again, appears neutral to British Columbians. It appears that it basically takes changes that are already made in the federal Income Tax Act and coordinates that act with the provincial act, so again revenue-neutral to British Columbians — just coming back to the importance of taking a look at these impacts and whether they do impact British Columbians or British Columbia businesses positively or negatively.

The Carbon Tax Act and the Motor Fuel Tax Act changes, again, appear routine, as the minister has said. It looks to ensure consistency for people who are doing business outside British Columbia — so trying to make sure that there's a level playing field for people where they're collecting that tax, either inside or outside of the province.

On the Mineral Tax Act changes, I think there was a little bit of a pause in taking a look at those changes, because they talk about improving and strengthening confidentiality, which isn't always a positive. If you take a look at acts coming forward from government, I think anything that talks about ensuring confidentiality raises some eyebrows or some red flags around what that confidentiality is related to. But it appears from the discussion and from the act itself that, in fact, this act actually opens up in some respects opportunities for information to be shared with First Nations around revenue-sharing agreements that they may be entering into.

So again, I think there'll be some specific questions at committee stage, but it appears that this speaks more to disclosure and what gets disclosed than it does to protecting information and keeping information confidential. It appears to actually provide opportunities for specific information to be shared around revenue-sharing with First Nations. That certainly appears to be a positive, from our perspective.

The minister also mentioned the Real Estate Act changes. Again, they appear fairly technical, related to brokerage trust accounts, as the minister has said, to ensure that the money is there if people feel that they have not been treated fairly and have recourse to go forward and look at real estate transactions that were not done properly — that the money will be there to be able to resolve that.

There are two very small amendments that are related to strata changes in this act as well. One is related to the strata owner representation on the real estate council, which again is a positive. But I am concerned that it simply comes across as, "We're just taking care of the strata council people. We're putting in a representative there," rather than looking at some of the major changes that need to occur around the issue of stratas, enforcing bylaws, the rules of the strata corporation.

I understand that the issue of strata gets divided between two acts. We're speaking here about the Real Estate Services Act, which is the piece that comes forward in Bill 13. There are also strata issues that get dealt with through the Strata Property Act. But I think there are some specific changes that, certainly, I would have liked to see come forward around the Real Estate Services Act related to strata that weren't in the act.

[ Page 6794 ]

[1455]

One of those, of course, is the issue of strata managers. This is something that strata corporations have been bringing forward for a long period of time in this province. Currently the act treats strata managers the same as they treat realtors.

There isn't anything within the current Real Estate Services Act that actually provides a specific code of conduct for strata managers or a specific requirement for strata managers to actually follow the Strata Property Act, which is pretty basic when you're looking at a strata manager. You would hope that there would be a code of conduct for them, and you would certainly hope that they would have to follow the Strata Property Act. But under the Real Estate Act, which is what we're talking about as part of Bill 13, in fact, there isn't anything in there. They're treated the same as real estate agents.

From my perspective, it's a missed opportunity that the government could have looked at bringing forward much-needed changes to the Real Estate Act that would have helped in the area of strata. When you take a look at the number of individuals who live in stratas now, I think it's pretty critical that these pieces get looked at.

We still have outstanding the civil resolution tribunal system for stratas. Again, that's a piece that hasn't been implemented, that came forward in the past but hasn't been implemented yet, that is causing all kinds of challenges. I would hope that those discussions are ongoing with strata councils on both acts, on the Strata Property Act as well as on the Real Estate Act.

That just brings me to the final

section of the bill, which I believe is probably the most controversial — in a bill that's pretty straightforward and that's pretty technical — and certainly raises the most red flags. That's changes to the Financial Administration Act regarding debt collection by government. I heard the minister say that they hope that this will increase efficiency and that it'll provide the opportunity for government to be able to better collect debt from those debtors out there who have not paid.

While those are certainly important goals to look at…. They're certainly an important direction that we on this side would support. We believe that when someone has a debt, they need to be paying back their debt and that that needs to be as efficient as possible. But I have to say, in reviewing Bill 13, I have a lot of unanswered questions and a lot of concerns about whether, in fact, the changes that the government is bringing forward are actually going to do that, are actually going to either increase the amount of debt that's collected or make it more efficient.

The changes in this bill basically allow for the sharing of information for the purpose of debt collection by the government, sharing information between ministries but also sharing information with ICBC and expanding ICBC's opportunity to be used as a debt-collection tool. Again, I think that raises some real questions.

I think the other real question in this

section in the act is that the act is written with an enabling approach. The minister mentioned that the current focus…. The areas that are contemplated right now are court finds and student fees. Those areas are not mentioned in the act because the act basically is enabling and allows the government, through regulation, to be able to determine what other areas are going to be collected and what ICBC would be used for.

I think, again, that raises red flags in a number of ways. The act actually speaks to…. I'll just read it because I think it's important for people to understand how broad this

section of the act is.

It talks about, for the Minister of Finance, that for the purpose of recovering debts or obligations owed to the government under any enactment or a program from government, to collect and use debtor information in the custody or control of the Ministry of Finance or to request other ministries to disclose debtor information, regardless of whether that information was collected under a confidentiality clause and regardless of the purpose for which that information was originally collected.

As you can see, that's about as broad as you can get. It basically says that it doesn't matter whether you signed a confidentiality agreement when the information was collected to say that this is only collected for this purpose.

[1500]

This basically says: "We, for the purpose of collecting debt through the Minister of Finance or designate, will have the ability to be able to utilize that information." It speaks specifically to overriding privacy provisions that may have been signed when that information was collected. So I think that's a big concern. That's something that can't be taken lightly, that needs to be reviewed and that needs to take a look at the personal information that's being collected.

Again, another

section of the bill says: "(

a) despite any provision of a non-tax enactment that requires a person to keep information collected…confidential, (

b) despite any agreement or representation made with respect to a program of the government that a person will keep information collected…confidential…, and (

d) regardless of the purpose for which, or the circumstances under which, debtor information was originally collected."

Again, that's about as open ended as you can get. It provides opportunity for information — regardless of how it was collected, regardless of whether you signed a confidentiality agreement, regardless of the onus on the person who collected that information to keep it confidential — to be overridden by this bill and by the Ministry of Finance or designates.

There have been concerns, certainly, raised around freedom of information and protection of privacy. Again, we'll have some specific questions as we get into that discussion. This change really provides an opportunity for the sharing of information, which is a concern and often is a concern raised with government — that information has been shared.

[ Page 6795 ]

We saw that example when we went through the sharing of information through the ICM system put in place with the Ministry of Children and Families, where sometimes information was shared that wasn't supposed to be shared. There were things that occurred during the implementation of that computer system that caused all kinds of red flags — information that shouldn't have been shared between ministries. I think it's reasonable to have some real concerns about the sharing of information.

I think the other additional piece, because the change in the act is talking about ICBC and debt collecting specifically, is to remember that the government actually privatized and farmed out debt collecting to Hewlett-Packard, who have the contract around debt collecting. Again, you're talking about another party involved in all of this. You're not talking about straight information. You're talking about the sharing of information across jurisdictions, through contracts, through ministries, and that, again, raises red flags.

Whenever you're talking about overriding confidentiality provisions, I think that's very concerning. As I've said, we'll have some questions around what questions were raised with the Information and Privacy Commissioner before this legislation came forward — what kinds of consultations and what kinds of protections are in place. I think some really basic questions need to be answered to have any kind of comfort about this.

I think the other piece, as I mentioned, is the fact that specific debts are not included here — that the act, in fact, is open ended. The minister mentioned today student loans, as he has mentioned previously, and perhaps some court fines. I wouldn't imagine that the Finance Minister would not be there, but if there was another Finance Minister some day that might be in place…. Or perhaps another minister may decide that they want to add additional government debt in here.

What would that do? What specific changes would occur for that? Would we move to MSP? Would there be MSP included? Would people have their driver's licences and their plates withheld if they didn't pay their MSP premiums? I think it opens the door to all kinds of questions and all kinds of concerns about what other debts could be added and if this is just the opening by government to look at debt collection and using ICBC.

Now, I did hear the minister…. And it does say in the act, as well, that some protections are in place. The minister mentioned that 30 days' notice to a debtor is included in the act. There is a discussion that says if the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Finance's designate is satisfied that the debtor will experience great hardship or financial difficulty in paying back the debt without a licence or without plates, that provision could be waived.

[1505]

Again, that clause in itself in the bill raises all kinds of questions. Who makes that determination? Who will decide what is hardship? Who will decide what is financial difficulty? Who will make a decision about whether the person needs a vehicle to be able to pay back their debt? I think that's a great concern. What will be the process?

It says as well in this act that the Minister of Finance can delegate all of the powers and the duties and the functions. As I mentioned, Hewlett-Packard right now holds the contract for most of the debt collection in British Columbia. There are going to be all kinds of questions raised — and we'll certainly raise them at committee stage — around process, around authority. Who has that authority? Will it be the independent company that is contracted to do that debt?

Will they be the ones to receive the authority from the Ministry of Finance and then make a decision about whether hardship is there or not, or will it actually come back to government and to the ministry to make that determination? That's a very important question when we're taking a look at this.

There's also a huge question around process. I'm certain that MLAs on the other side of the House, just as we on this side of the House, get a lot of concerns and a lot of calls in our community offices from individuals who are either in arrears on MSP payments — they may have left a job that had benefits; they're now on their own; they're waiting to get their bills; they don't get anything around MSP — or they receive a huge bill for MSP premiums that they've already paid or they've already done.

Anyone who tries to get through to MSP, or through the contracted company, will know what a challenge and what a nightmare it can be for individuals trying to get through. Often those individuals come to us in MLA offices to say: "We've tried and tried and tried. It's months now. We're not able to get a straight answer. We can't get a straight bill. We're still struggling. We're worried about our credit rating, because we're getting this bill that we've already paid or it isn't the right number or we're not sure how that got to be there."

Well, I just imagine that…. You're now adding in student loans, and you're now adding students who may have paid their student loan or may be in difficulty and are trying to get through to be able to put forward their case that they need their car to be able to pay back their student loan.

Well, if it's that efficient for MSP, I have to say that I worry about what that could mean for students, what that could mean for student loans. Given the challenges that students have with student debt in British Columbia, certainly from our perspective, it would have been much better energy spent trying to look at bringing back student grant programs and other opportunities for students instead of looking at how to make it more difficult for students.

This

section of the bill, certainly from our perspective, will have a number of questions raised. We have grave concerns about the direction that we're going.

Thank you to the minister, again, and his staff for the briefing. As the minister has said, there are a number of

[ Page 6796 ]

parts of this bill that are very straightforward, that really are housekeeping and simply look at coordinating acts, but there are a couple of pieces, in particular the piece around debtor information, that have raised all kinds of concerns on this side of the House, and we'll have more questions when we come to committee stage.

K. Corrigan: I'm pleased to rise and speak on this bill as well. I'm rising mostly in my official opposition spokesperson role with regard to advanced education.

I'll tell you that I have certainly heard from a number of students and former students and organizations representing students who are very, very concerned about the provision in this bill that allows ICBC to refuse to issue or renew drivers' licences in order to collect student loan debt. I've certainly heard from a lot of students.

I think it's interesting that the minister was interviewed and said when talking about…. It is a considerable amount of money, $186 million in defaulted student loans. I understand that that's significant, and I think everybody agrees that students should pay back their student loans. I recall having significant student loans from undergraduate years. I lived away from home from the time I was 17 years old and went to university. My student loans were very significant — not nearly as high as they are now for students, because you could get some grants as well. But it was tough paying them back, undergraduate and law school. It was very difficult.

[1510]

The minister said: "For folks that graduate, get a job and are working and decide they just don't want to take their obligation to repay their student loan seriously, this would be a mechanism to remind them."

I'm sure there are some students that are in that position, that simply don't want to pay off their student loans, and that's not appropriate. But I believe that the vast majority of the students or ex-students who would be caught by this would fall more likely under the category of students who had maxed out on their credits in many ways. They had significant student loans but, in addition, had significant other debt.

We certainly know that BMO's assessment was that in British Columbia, where students have the highest debt load in the country, it's about $35,000 a student. That's a lot of money. I believe that in more cases, what we're going to be chasing after are students who have graduated and have not just the student loan debt but credit card debt and maybe other personal debt — very significant debt.

They come out of university. They think they're going to have a well-paying job, and it doesn't happen. Or they have a market entry–level job, and it's hard for them to pay the rent and support themselves every month. I believe that that is more often the case. Those are the students or ex-students that I'm particularly concerned about.

When you consider that government says the average student debt is $20,000…. We know that's a serious understatement. Students certainly, when surveyed leaving school, said it was significantly higher than that. As I said, the BMO student survey, which surveys students when they leave school, have pegged it at the highest in Canada at $35,000 a student.

When you consider that B.C. charges the highest interest rates on student loans at prime plus 2.5 percent…. When you consider that some provinces have eliminated interest entirely on student loans…. Manitoba, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and P.E.I have gone that way.

When you consider that tuition has more than doubled since the year 2000-2001, so 103 percent since the present government came into power…. When you consider that the needs-based grants have been entirely been eliminated by this province, and that happened in 2004…. It's difficult for students.

I find it concerning when students are paying more and more at the same time as, unfortunately, university programs and college programs are being closed. Many are being closed because of underfunding. When you consider that students are paying more and more and having to pay more, like everybody else, for MSP, hydro and so on, I don't think these are students that are coming out and, to quote the minister again, deciding they "don't want to take their obligation to repay their student loans seriously."

I think for the most part that students who finish university, or leave university or colleges or institutes, are hard working, and they want to pay their loans. I worry about the punitive nature for some of those students. I'm certainly not saying every student, but I think, when you look at the debt that is on the backs of students in British Columbia more than any other province, that it's a concern.

I also am concerned about, as has been mentioned by my colleague, what exactly could be included. The minister has certainly singled out student loans as being one of the main targets but has also said that there are other possibilities where this provision could be used — in other words, where ICBC could refuse to issue a driver's licence or renew a driver's licence or plates. I am concerned about what other ways this could be used.

[1515]

I have a general concern about using ICBC which is related to driving and using the powers of ICBC to say: "We are going to collect on different types of debts." I'm not positive about that being wrong, but somehow it just rubs me the wrong way.

It seems that it makes a certain amount of sense to have fines related to driving being collected by ICBC. But to then extend this into some unknown number of areas — student loans being the first one that we are clear about but possibly MSP, possibly income tax; who knows what else it could be used for — I've got concerns about that. I've got concerns for the same reasons that others do.

[ Page 6797 ]

One of those concerns is certainly the privacy concerns. The privacy concerns were shared by the Information and Privacy Commissioner, who sent a letter to the minister with regard to Bill 13. It says:

"The linking of personal information between government agencies and ministries raises privacy concerns. This is because it often involves disclosing personal information which was collected for one purpose and using that information for a different purpose.

"Where government has been given the statutory authority to compel the collection of personal information, that authority is accompanied by an obligation to limit the subsequent use and disclosure to those purposes that are truly necessary. Privacy concerns arise particularly where the sharing of personal information may result in an adverse action being taken against the individual the information is about."

It goes on to talk about data linking.

So I do have those concerns. We are in a bit of a new world in terms of the use of data, the availability of data. But we know from experience after experience in the Legislature and in this province that we need to be very careful when we are embarking on that kind of exercise.

It has already been mentioned that they are concerns, that the enforcer, the private company which will be doing the revenue collection, is a private company, which then again raises issues of integrity of the data. Where is it going to be stored? Is it stored in Canada? Is it stored in the U.S.? In this case, I believe that it's stored in Canada, but when you're opening up this field, you have to be concerned about the storage of data and availability and whether or not there can be hacking and so on.

I want to go back to concerns about students particularly. I know that the legislation provides that notice has to be sent out if ICBC is going to refuse to issue or renew a driver's licence, and that's a good thing. But I think students are in a particularly vulnerable position. We talked about that students more often are younger people, and this group of people who haven't paid their student loans off. I believe they are more likely young people who don't have a lot of money, and they are more likely to be moving around. They are more likely to not receive a notice.

So it could be that it is a complete surprise to students, and they could suddenly find that their licence is gone or is about to go without them having received that notice. I think that's a realistic concern for students, who certainly do move around.

I am concerned about this. I, like my colleague, am looking forward to asking more detailed questions when we get to the committee stage of this bill. I think that we should be concerned about it. I'm very concerned about it.

[1520]

I think that the target, in this case, is students. We're already making it very difficult for students to go through the education system. Education is becoming less and less accessible. I don't believe that most students are out there trying to fleece the government. I think they're mostly young people who are trying to pay off their loans but are finding it very difficult to do so. For that reason, I am concerned about that particular

section of this bill.

With that, I will take my place.

B. Ralston: I don't propose to address this bill at length. My colleagues, the members for Victoria–Beacon Hill and Burnaby–Deer Lake, have addressed many of the significant aspects of this bill. My colleague from Burnaby–Deer Lake has raised the letter written to the minister, and disclosed publicly, from the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

When the government, a few years ago, said that it was renovating or modernizing the collection of information and its use of databases for the purposes of governing, there was a fair degree of self-congratulatory rhetoric about that. But one thing that the Information and Privacy Commissioner did warn about at that time was the issue of the linking of databases — data that is collected for very disparate purposes and then, by the action of direction and information technology, links two very disparate databases.

This appears to be exactly what is contemplated here, with strong language in the legislation giving the government the authority to override the riders on the initial collection of information limiting its disclosure. The Information and Privacy Commissioner has said — and I'm quoting from her letter:

"The linking of personal information between government agencies and ministries raises privacy concerns. This is because it often involves disclosing personal information which was collected for one person and using that information for another purpose. Where government has been given the statutory authority to compel the collection of personal information, that authority is accompanied by an obligation to limit the subsequent use and disclosure to those purposes that are truly necessary."

I think another important point in what is said here is that the obligation to disclose the information necessary to obtain a driver's licence is compulsory. If you don't provide that information, you will not receive a driver's licence. Therefore, you're compelled to give it.

I suppose one could say that driving is a privilege, not a right, and that you have the right, if you don't want to disclose that information, not to have a driver's licence. But in a modern society, notwithstanding our debate about public transit, the act of having a driver's licence in rural areas, in suburban areas and in many areas of the province is absolutely essential to either get to and from work, to get to and from health appointments and even to buy the groceries every week. Having a driver's licence is essential. To provide that information — you're compelled to do it.

That is the concern that the Information and Privacy Commissioner is expressing in this letter. I think it's a valid one. One can see, I think, a connection between driving offences and driving fines and the 55,400 drivers who have unpaid fines for Golden Ears, the Port Mann Bridge, TransLink tickets and family maintenance payments, perhaps, but this seems to extend that logic even further afield to an utterly disconnected activity.

[ Page 6798 ]

I think my colleagues will doubtless pursue this at the committee stage, but I think it's an important principle. This was, I think, a warning that the Information and Privacy Commissioner gave at the time that this overarching, enabling legislation was passed setting this out.

She goes on to say: "If Bill 13 is brought into force, it's my office's intention to examine how the new authorities under this bill are being exercised, whether the personal information is being used by the ministry or ICBC for any other purpose and how long the personal information is being retained."

[1525]

Now, the language in the legislation is vague. The minister, in his public statements, has given the example of student loans. But it's not entirely clear, given that these data-linking exercises will be performed by order-in-council — that is, by the cabinet in the confidentiality of the cabinet room and then only released to the public later — what other database linking is contemplated here. I think citizens, especially in this era of the debate about C-51, the federal legislation, are rightly concerned and have expressed a lot of public concern about the use that private information that citizens are required to provide to the government might be used for in the future.

That's not to say that there are not legitimate uses of government information for the proper administration and collection of legitimate fees. I'm not disputing it to that extent. I think this example that the minister…. I hope and I'm sure he will want to explain more thoroughly how personal privacy is going to be protected in these circumstances and why he thinks it's necessary in the example of student loans to pursue those particular citizens when there are other avenues of collection.

Indeed, the government pays HP systems $80 million a year in a contract to collect debt. I'm not sure that the efficacy of that collection effort will be improved by undertaking this measure, but certainly, the privacy of individual citizens may well be violated in a way that's not necessary and, I think, that many people would reject.

With those comments, I conclude.

D. Routley: I will rise to give comment on Bill 13. Similar to several of my other colleagues, my concerns are based on the

section pertaining to the collection of debts through the withholding by ICBC of driver's licence and licence plate privileges. These are very concerning steps being taken by the government primarily, according to the minister at this point, directed towards students who have defaulted on their student loan, student debt.

This is troubling in a number of ways. It's troubling in its action specifically but also against a troubling backdrop, the context of students in British Columbia already having the highest debt per capita at over $30,000 per student upon graduation and in a province with the highest poverty levels in Canada and in a province with the highest cost of living in Canada.

It seems that while government has failed to adequately address the needs of students, has failed to adequately address income inequality in B.C., they are taking a step to now punish people who have found themselves in the trap of both of those circumstances — in fact, using the power of government to withhold government services to collect a government debt. This seems contrary to the notion that government should be serving the very people that we're talking about here.

There was an old joke about student loans, that the American government had wasted a lot of resources from the CIA and the military in chasing down Osama bin Laden and that if they really wanted to find him, all they had to do was to sic the student loan people on him. He'd be holed up in a cave in Afghanistan. The satellite telephone would ring, and on the other end of the line a voice would say: "Hello, Mr. bin Laden? We'd like to talk to you about your student loan."

It seems to me that government has never had very great difficulty in collecting student loan debts. Already steps have been taken to prevent people who have student loan debt from writing that debt off in bankruptcies. That has been prevented by previous government action.

[1530]

Now the government is considering withdrawing services from citizens in order to collect a debt when, in fact, government has failed to address the basic circumstances in which people find themselves — students graduating in British Columbia with the highest per-capita debt in a province with the highest levels of poverty and the highest costs of living. This is a very troubling development and something that concerns this side of the House and many British Columbians who are aware of what this bill implicates.

The bill is also very unclear in the way it defines debt. It's essentially labelling…. The minister has targeted student loan debt in his commentary, but this bill, in fact, empowers government to collect any government debt through order-in-council — to define it as a debt that this bill would affect.

The bill reads in

section 23(16.1)(2): "For the purpose of recovering debts or obligations owed to the government under any enactment or a program of the government." It says, in effect, that any program of government that could create debt for a citizen could find its way to being enforced through the measures of this act.

This act would allow a collection officer to "collect and use debtor information in the custody or control of the ministry of the Minister of Finance." It would allow a collection officer to "request an appropriate officer or employee of a ministry" — any ministry — "to disclose debtor information, respecting one or more specified debtors, in the custody or control of the ministry to which the officer or employee belongs." Essentially, this empowers a collection agent contracted by government to override any measure of any ministry to collect infor-

[ Page 6799 ]

mation on British Columbians in order to collect a debt.

I suppose this is both an overempowerment of collection officers and their activities but also a disempowerment of bureaucrats and ministry officials in protecting the information of British Columbians that they have collected and is in their care.

Under the basic principles of privacy protection, under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, British Columbians assume that personal information that's collected by government is collected for a specific purpose, will only be used to satisfy that purpose and will only be stored for the length of time required to satisfy that purpose. This bill essentially overrides that principle of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act of British Columbia.

It's very troubling, because this government has in so many instances undermined the privacy protections of British Columbians. The Information and Privacy Commissioner of the province has repeatedly warned that these underminings of privacy protections in the act will aggregate to a complete disempowerment of privacy protection in British Columbia.

The government seems to ignore those warnings and charge full speed ahead with measures like these that, from so many different angles, undermine the protections of a basic right that British Columbians expect their government to protect. The right to privacy in a modern democracy is as important as the right to a fair trial and the right to free speech. The right to privacy is an essential right, and the government is recklessly imperilling that right of British Columbian citizens.

The debt collector contracted by government will also have the power to acquire all sorts of information from any ministry, including home and employment or business contact information. They will have the right to collect information on a person's assets from any ministry of government — all information that has been collected for quite disparate purposes and now will be aggregated by a private collector under contract of government.

[1535]

There's no assurance in this bill as to where this information will be stored. Will it be stored in Canada? Will it be stored in the United States, which would be directly in contravention of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act? What measures will be put in place to ensure that that doesn't happen? None of that is described by this bill.

It also completely overrides agreements that people have signed when it comes to confidentiality of their information. If a person has surrendered their personal information to government in order to qualify for a certain service — be it from the Ministry of Social Services, the Ministry of Health, any ministry of government — that information then becomes accessible by the collector contracted by government.

I know that the Speaker is sensitive to these issues, having sat on committees reviewing these matters in the past. I assume he shares the concern I have that the specific architecture of legislation that protects the rights to privacy of British Columbians is not simply principle-based; it's specific, it's regulated, it's written into laws, and it is in ministry policy. And this bill, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure you'll see, in fact overrides and undermines those protections.

In the words of the act: "despite any provision...that requires a person to keep information collected under that enactment confidential." Despite any provision, any agreement that's been signed between a citizen and a ministry in accessing services that will keep their information confidential — this bill has overridden that or will do upon enactment.

It says: "despite any agreement or representation made with respect to a program of the government that a person will keep information collected in relation to the program confidential." So it again overrides any confidentiality agreements signed by or depended upon by citizens of this province, which is, in fact, a trust agreement with their own government. That will be breached by this act.

This act becomes retroactive. If any citizen of this province has surrendered personal information in order to acquire a service from government in the past, that information now becomes subject to this act and open to access by collection agencies and then open to be exchanged and shared without their knowledge, without their consent — in fact, directly opposing their consent, directly in opposition to any agreement they've signed limiting their consent.

This is, to me, a complete dismemberment of what people expect and what they have, in fact, agreed to when they've signed confidentiality agreements with government ministries.

This act also applies to information collected before the person became a debtor of government. So if this government decides to extend this act to the collection of ambulance fees, for example, any information that a citizen has shared in the past then becomes accessible to a collection agency. That is a direct contravention of the principles and, in fact, the architecture of the legislation protecting privacy in this province.

The information is available "regardless of the purpose for which, or the circumstances under which, debtor information was originally collected" — so something entirely disparate from the purpose of acquiring a student loan or taking an ambulance ride, information that was shared for a completely different purpose, maybe in quite a distant past. A person might not even remember having signed a consent form to have their information collected by a government ministry for a specific purpose. That information will now be available and accessible under this act. This is directly contrary to the basic principles of privacy protection.

[1540]

[ Page 6800 ]

It is up to the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council to "make regulations respecting any matter for which regulations are contemplated by this section." So it is entirely up to the governing council, the cabinet of the government, to determine what matters this regulation will be applied to.

It is far too open-ended. It raises great concerns, concerns that were addressed by the Information and Privacy Commissioner of British Columbia, Elizabeth Denham, in her letter of March 2, 2015, to the Minister of Finance. The Information and Privacy Commissioner says that Bill 13 "allows the Minister of Finance to share the personal information of debtors of the provincial government with the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia.

The bill amends the Financial Administration Act to allow ICBC to refuse to renew a debtor's driver's licence or vehicle insurance until a debt to government is paid or satisfactory arrangements for payment have been made by the debtor or the minister is satisfied the debtor will experience great hardship or financial difficulty without a driver's licence."

Now, that does offer some hope for someone who would be directly and drastically affected to the point that they aren't able to pay the debt because they don't have a driver's licence, but the act does not describe how that will be determined, who makes that judgment and under which circumstances.

This is a real concern. I mean, in a democracy we expect there to be checks and balances on the power of government. This

section of this bill seems aimed at disabling the checks and balances that exist to protect people from the power of their own government, particularly where it pertains to the collection of their private and personal information.

You know, the questions have been asked. Who decides? Who decides when a person is in enough distress financially that the provisions of this act be waived and they be allowed to have a driver's licence because they would be so drastically impacted? Who decides that?

The bill orders that the government must not take action if the debtor has paid the total amount. How often have people paid bills to government and then taken months and months to have those payments registered? There have been many cases come through the doors of our constituency offices of people who have paid debts yet still receive collection notices for a debt they've already paid. It takes them months in order to force government to acknowledge payment of the debt, even when bank records are available to prove payment.

This would suggest that a person could be denied their driver's licence and then quite possibly continue to have that denial enforced even though they have paid their bill.

The

section of the act applies until the date the Minister of Finance, under subsection 84.1(9), directs the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia to disregard the notice. What will trigger the Minister of Finance to make that notification and direct the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia to disregard the original notice? What kind of delay will there be in normal course of business? As I indicated, when there are mistakes made, how will people address that? None of that is a subject of concern for the government in this bill but certainly will be for anybody who's caught up and trapped in a mistaken process.

The government has indicated that this notice would be given to the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia — the notice to disregard the original notice to deny a licence — as soon as practicable after directing ICBC to disregard the notice.

[1545]

"As soon as practicable" is language that is reminiscent of some of the language in the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and has become the subject of much contention as government has delayed and delayed taking action that supports British Columbians but is obviously quite prepared to take punitive action very quickly when people are not supporting their end of a bargain.

I'm concerned that this

section of the bill represents a punitive action against the citizens of British Columbia, a punitive action specifically against students and, in the commentary of the Finance Minister, a punitive action against any citizen that might find themselves indebted to government.

It takes the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia — a Crown corporation that the government routinely uses as an ATM to help balance its books, routinely takes, I think, this past year $400 million from ICBC in order to balance their books. Now, ICBC will be used as a collection agency as well. It is going to be used in conjunction with private collection agencies to share information that British Columbians shared with government under specific confidentiality protections — overriding those and allowing access when people have assumed that their consent really meant something.

This

section appears, convincingly, to make that consent meaningless.

Finally, I am very concerned about the government of British Columbia withdrawing services from any British Columbian for any reason other than criminal fraud. I am very concerned that a government that has a long track record of diminishing public services, of diminishing the benefit to British Columbians that they would derive from being a citizen of this province and from services of government, is now, with this bill, threatening to withdraw services based on debt and income insecurity.

This is in a province with the highest poverty levels in the country. This is in a province with the highest cost of living in the country, the highest student debt in the country. And rather than address those basic sources of systematic inequality in British Columbia, this government chooses to become punitive and punish people

[ Page 6801 ]

for falling into a circumstance that is well beyond their control.

This seems to me to be the antithesis of what government ought to be doing. Government ought to be supporting particularly citizens who find themselves without income, particularly citizens who find themselves in this trap of income insecurity, poverty and diminished circumstances.

I'm very concerned, from the point of view of my spokesperson area, which is concerned with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, but also from the basic concept of what democracy should mean and what the role of government should be in the lives of British Columbians.

Government should be supporting the people of this province, not issuing punitive dictates that entrap them and prevent their full participation in this society because of income inequality and income insecurity.

H. Bains: It's always an honour to stand here and speak on some of the issues that are really important and will affect people that we represent. Bill 13, Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2015, touched on about five different areas. It has amendments to the Real Estate Services Act, Mineral Tax Act, Income Tax Act, Financial Administration Act and consumer taxes — which also include the PST, carbon tax and motor fuel tax.

[1550]

I'm not going to touch on many of the other areas except the one area that is of real concern to me. Many of the concerns have been laid by my colleagues before me.

It's around the Financial Administration Act. The changes that are being made in sections 23, 24 and 25 of this act allow information-sharing among government for the purpose of collecting debt and allow for orders to be issued to ICBC, which will then be required to refuse to issue or renew drivers' licences to people until they clear up their debt to the government — a big issue here.

The second issue is: who are they targeting through this bill? Although much of that information is not clear here in this act, most of those decisions will be made through regulations, which means the minister and the cabinet will make those decisions. We don't know how far they could go with those powers given to the minister. I think the minister has been quoted in the media saying that student debt is one of the areas that the minister can use to go after those students who have debt to the government.

Those are some of the concerns, but I will elaborate in detail on each of those areas. One is the intent behind this act, which is sharing of information among government and using that information to deny the driver's licence or renewal of the driver's licence to those who may have a debt owed to the government.

The Privacy Commissioner raised those concerns, as well, in her letter to the Minister of Finance. I will quote one paragraph from that letter. It says:

"While the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act provides authority for public bodies to collect and disclose personal information relating to government's ability to collect a debt from an individual, the linking of personal information between government agencies and ministries raises privacy concerns."

She goes on to say:

"This is because it often involves disclosing personal information which was collected for one purpose and using that information for a different purpose."

That's a very serious concern. I think many, on the surface, can say: "You know, I think we have tight enough language, and it will not happen." But it has happened, and there are many examples out there. It can happen again, and I think that's one of the concerns that the Privacy Commissioner is raising.

She went on to say: "Where government has been given the statutory authority to compel the collection of personal information, that authority is accompanied by an obligation to limit the subsequent use and disclosure to those purposes that are truly necessary."

I could just elaborate how sometimes unintended purposes behind these acts can lead to situations where they are totally unrelated to the intent but the information collected for one purpose being used for a different purpose can be harmful to those individuals on whose behalf that information was collected.

In my previous life I dealt with labour relations in the forest industry, many of those issues involving what in those days we called the Workers Compensation Board. Although it's clear, under the terms of the information collected to process claims under the Workers Compensation Board, that information cannot be shared except for the benefit of processing the claims, there are people out there that find a way to collect that information for other purposes and use that information against that individual.

For example, when a potential employee goes to a potential employer to apply, there's always…. There used to be; I think there still is. One of the questions is: "Have you ever had a claim with workers compensation?" If you don't answer that question, chances are you will not get hired.

[1555]

Then all of those agencies that work with the WCB will prepare you, because you may not be able to work in that particular industry any longer, and say: "Don't disclose that information. You don't have to disclose that information to a potential employer."

If they leave that out or provide some of the information, general information, and the person gets hired, the next time that person goes on a claim again, all the employer has to do is challenge and appeal that claim. As a result, they are entitled to all of the information. They used to call it a file dump. The employer will get all of the information, whether it's related to that particular claim or not. The entire history of that information, what they call a file dump, is included in that information.

[ Page 6802 ]

It's not necessarily that they're getting that information to appeal that claim, but that's the purpose they use to collect that information. Now the employer will see: "Oh, aha. I looked at your application. You did not provide us this information to get this employment. Now we've got the information that you had a WCB claim that you did not disclose to us at that time." Failure to disclose truthfully to acquire employment can be subject to termination, and many people got terminated as a result of that.

That's just one of the examples that I could use. Information collected for one purpose — when you allow that to be shared with other government agencies, it can be used for a different purpose. I think that's the real concern that is listed here by the Privacy Commissioner.

That's a serious issue here. I don't know. The minister may have an explanation how to protect individuals from that type of abuse, if you call it, of using that information for a different purpose than it was collected for. That's a serious issue.

Let me move on to the area that the government is targeting — at least, listing as one of the areas they want to go after. These are the students who have incurred debt as a result of them trying to enhance their ability in their life to move ahead and be the best at what they can do during their work life.

Here we go. First, we made it difficult or impossible for many, many students to get to the higher education, the post-secondary education, by way of raising tuition fees and many of the costs that come with it. Then, of course, the students are in a position of incurring huge debts. Not only the debts alone but the way they charge interest on that debt is another question of how we are making it difficult for those students to survive.

I think what needed to be done, if the government really had good intentions to help our future generation coming out of high schools to get the higher education — post-secondary education, skills and training….

We all know — the government will admit to this, and everyone else will admit to this — that all future jobs, 80 percent of the future jobs, will require some sort of post-secondary education degree or diploma. That's a fact right now. We should be encouraging our students, our people coming out of high schools, to acquire as high a level of education or skills training as they can, but the barriers are there as a result of the policies of this government.

As a result, we have the highest student debt in the country. The numbers are $27,000, on average, to $34,000 and $40,000 for some others. These are huge debts that our students are incurring. It is actually a detriment to our youngsters to come out of high schools and get into that kind of debt in order to just survive.

[1600]

Then on top of that, now this government is saying: "Well, you incurred that debt thanks to our policy, but if you are not able to pay, we're going to come after you." We will basically make you unable to acquire any employment because you won't be getting your driver's licence — if you need a driver's licence in order to secure a job somewhere else, even if it's not in your own field.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

I think that what needs to be done is to minimize the need to actually incur any debt for the students. That's what the government should be working on. Instead of that, they have brought in policies in the past where student loans continue to go up, debt continues to rise and tuition fees continue to rise.

As a result of those heavy debts, many students are not, although they want to…. Who doesn't want to pay their debt? They want to. They have all the good intentions to do that. But if they don't have a job, then it's very, very difficult for them to pay that debt. Now, through this bill, a hammer comes. If you weren't able to get a job before and, as result, you weren't able to pay that debt, now we are going to make it even more difficult for you because now you will not have a driver's licence.

I think that's not the right approach. Many of my colleagues talked about inequality in our society. I think generations before, in Europe, and many people who came before us, they looked at this. How do we keep the inequality to a minimum? They realized a long time ago that education was the one area, the one determinant, through which you can minimize inequality.

If every student, every child has that opportunity for the education that they deserve and need, and they are able to attain that education, then their earning powers almost are the same, and therefore the inequality will be minimized.

That's not the direction this government is going, unfortunately. Now, on top of that, they are saying that this is what they are going to do. Bring the hammer, take their driver's licence away, and then it will be even more difficult for them to acquire a job.

I want to give you a little bit of history on how difficult it is for the people that they're going after. Tuition fees have doubled at B.C. colleges and universities since 2001 — doubled. It will cost the average UBC student at least $10,000 more in tuition to complete a degree.

The average college student in Prince George is paying about $1,150 more per year. Graduation tuition has almost tripled between 2001 and 2006. It increased by 184 percent. Then there are new tuition fees for apprentices and for adults completing their high school education.

In 2002 the B.C. Liberals eliminated grants for first-year students and in 2004 eliminated the grants program entirely. No wonder we have the highest debt load for students in British Columbia — for graduating students. The B.C. loan reduction program for high-needs students was discontinued in 2008.

You can see why our graduating students have incurred such a high debt. Rather than helpi