Fifth Session, 41st Parliament

(2020) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Monday, March 2, 2020

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 319

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

Burrard Thermal

R. Glumac

P. Milobar

“Each for equal”

J. Tegart

S. Malcolmson

Child poverty

M. Dean

M. Hunt

Good governance

R. Sultan

J. Routledge

Private Members’ Motions

Motion 3 — Government action on economic inequality and affordability

B. D’Eith

S. Bond

M. Elmore

S. Cadieux

J. Brar

D. Davies

J. Rice

J. Thornthwaite

R. Singh

J. Rustad

J. Sims

MONDAY, MARCH 2, 2020

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: L. Larson.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

BURRARD THERMAL

R. Glumac: Last Friday the Premier joined me in my constituency to go on a

tour of the Burrard Thermal generating facility.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

We were there to see how the future of these lands could change

and be better utilized, how perhaps clean tech and clean energy

companies could use these lands to advance their cutting-edge

technologies, how the area could be potentially transformed to be a

centre for world-leading innovation to address climate change. These are

all possibilities.

Burrard Thermal was first opened in 1961 and operated for over 50

years as a fossil-fuel-burning power plant. When running at full

capacity, it could generate enough electricity to power 10 percent of

the entire province.

[10:05 a.m.]

In its final years, it operated strictly as a standby plant,

providing emergency power and peaking power for a few days in the winter

when demand was at its greatest.

The plant had undergone many environmental improvements over the

years, including a $150 million upgrade to its catalytic converters to

reduce nitrogen oxide production. Many stakeholders at the time opposed

the closing of the plant, including prominent local environmentalist

Elaine Golds, local politicians and outspoken former

employees.

Certainly, the facility had value as an emergency backup plant

located close to the source of the greatest electricity demand in the

province, but the previous B.C. Liberal government was not interested in

hearing about their opinions and shut down the facility in 2016. It was

shut down in order to make a case for entering into expensive power

purchase agreements with independent power producers.

In a recent government review on these purchase agreements, it

states that: “B.C. Hydro was instructed” by the B.C. Liberals “to be

self-sufficient and then to over-buy generating capacity and energy from

independent power producers to ensure surplus insurance power was

available and to make up for the firm energy that would be lost from

Burrard Thermal.”

These purchases, the report estimates, cost British Columbians

$16.2 billion over 20 years in overpayment for electricity. That’s

overpayment. That’s a premium above the cost of electricity. It’s in the

report — a premium that we each have to pay, every one of us, every

person in this province. That’s the legacy of the previous government,

and Burrard Thermal was part of that. That’s why it was closed. Once it

was closed, the previous B.C. Liberal government had no plans for its

future.

Deputy Speaker: Member, let’s keep the speeches non-partisan, please.

R. Glumac: As we stood on those grounds — it was a cold day, and the rain was

coming down — we could see a better future, a brighter future. While the

facility still operates as a synchronous condenser providing voltage

regulation until at least 2025, a significant portion of the land is

already vacant and unutilized and has many positive attributes. It would

be very desirable to accompany wanting to advance innovation in clean

technology — access to the electricity grid, for example; access to the

water in the Burrard Inlet.

In my work as Parliamentary Secretary for Technology, I’ve come

across many innovative clean tech and clean energy companies in this

province doing cutting-edge work that could be instrumental in reversing

climate change. Some of them need space to expand in order to advance

these technologies. Some need industrial land, which can be hard to

find. Burrard Thermal lands would be a great option for these

companies.

It’s important to acknowledge the strength of our clean tech

sector in B.C. We’re leading the world in many ways. We have nearly 300

clean tech companies in this province, employing 16,300 people. It’s

growing every year — nearly 17 percent of that growth is during our term

in government. These are companies that focus on everything from clean

energy generation to building efficiency, to electricity transmission

and storage.

Breakthroughs in this sector could have a significant impact in

reducing greenhouse gas emissions around the world. I know, from the

many conversations I’ve had locally, that there’s a strong desire to see

Burrard Thermal lands be used for something that will bring good,

future-looking jobs to the Tri-Cities, help to move us forward into the

green economy and build back the $1.3 million tax base that was lost

when the power plant was shut down.

I’m very excited about the opportunities we are creating under our

CleanBC plan. The Burrard Thermal lands can make the Tri-Cities and B.C.

a clean energy leader, and it’s time to unlock that

potential.

[10:10 a.m.]

P. Milobar: It’s my pleasure to rise to the topic around Burrard Thermal. It’s

interesting. It’s almost like Groundhog Day . The member that

just spoke and myself had this similar exchange about Burrard Thermal

almost a year ago, when you read through Hansard .

It’s interesting because that conversation was around IPPs and

Burrard Thermal. Although I can totally appreciate and understand and

get why the MLA for the area would be advocating for new uses for that

land and wanting to see development happen on it — I think that’s an

appropriate response for any MLA to take — I’m a little confused by the

messaging around it.

On the one hand, the previous speaker is condemning IPPs —

independent power production — and those things that come with it and,

in the same breath, saying that they want to see green energy be created

on the Burrard Thermal site, while still simultaneously criticizing the

previous government for shutting down a fossil-fuel-burning energy

production site on that site, while still saying: “But we need to

attract more independent power production type companies to create green

energy on that site.” So I apologize if I’m a little confused by the

circuitous logic of the member’s piece here.

I would note that the $16 billion is out of a very….

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

P. Milobar: Would the member prefer to have a few more minutes, Mr.

Speaker?

Deputy Speaker: He’ll wait for his turn.

P. Milobar: I would point out, though, that the $16 billion the member refers

to was referred to last year, as well, out of a very flawed and very

partisan-created Zapped report around independent power

production. Although that $16 billion is spread out over 20-plus years

and includes many deals with Indigenous nations for their independent

power productions that they created — which, in the spirit of UNDRIP, I

would think would be celebrated by this government — I would point out

that an extra $8.8 billion a year, every single year of extra taxation,

is a little bit bigger of a burden on people than trying to create clean

energy. That, I guess, is at its core.

I understand why the previous speaker would like to see green

energy projects on a site that used to be a fossil-fuel-burning site.

That’s understandable. But that comes, by the way the member was

speaking, with government subsidies, with government help to some

company going in there yet, at the same time, criticizing independent

power production contracts with companies that were doing exactly that —

trying to make sure that we could generate clean electrical power in

this province to maximize that.

That is where there’s a contradiction with this presentation

around Burrard Thermal. You cannot have it both ways. We are either

recognizing that in the early days of green energy…. It still is early

days in terms of getting it to a price point that works with what our

cost structure for hydro is. The reason it works in other parts of the

world is that what you pay for kilowatt hour of electricity is much more

than you pay in British Columbia, so the technology and the business

case for that technology starts to work,

whereas in British Columbia, it

doesn’t, which was why you need to start trying to have some

incentives.

I do hope the member can clarify whether, indeed, he is now saying

that independent power productions and green energy, especially on the

Burrard Thermal site, should be receiving government subsidies or not,

because there seems to be a contradiction of those

statements.

I think it’s important that people understand that clarity from

the member — as to what exactly they are advocating for. Given that

there is nowhere near enough money going into CleanBC from the increased

carbon taxation — the bulk is actually going into general revenue — and

the tight budgets that we see, I’m not sure where the money is supposed

to come from to actually help people be able to have that incentive to

create green energy and IPP, as it were, on the site of Burrard Thermal,

and create all those jobs in the member’s riding that he’s hoping to

create — understandably so.

Hopefully, the member can shine some light on the extra $8.8

billion a year taxation that we’re seeing happening right now and where,

exactly, the money would come from. Or is it just that certain IPP

projects are worthy of taxpayer’s money, but not all? Is it that

Indigenous projects are not worthy of the money, but others are? Those

are the type of questions, I think, that we need to have some clarity

around, because there seems to be very contradictory language coming out

around Burrard Thermal and IPPs in particular.

[10:15 a.m.]

I look forward to hearing the response and to hearing any clarity

or any certainty whatsoever as to what the new policy direction of the

government is — if it is, indeed, to actually support and subsidize

clean energy products or if it to beat up on them.

R. Glumac: Burrard Thermal could play a key role in addressing climate change

through innovation and clean technology. Our global temperatures have

already risen one degree above pre-industrial levels. Already we’re

seeing devastating hurricanes, record droughts, massive forest fires.

Events that should be happening every 500 years are happening every

year. We’re seeing destruction of coral reefs and other ecosystems and

the loss of iconic salmon runs, and we are only at one

degree.

No one can deny that we’re on a dangerous path. How much hotter is

it going to get — one degree, two degrees, three degrees? What does the

future look like for our children? This trend will not reverse unless we

take action.

We’re playing our part with CleanBC, but setting greenhouse gas

reduction targets is just one part of the solution. The real

transformational power of CleanBC is in how it can transform the entire

economy to become an economy that embraces the future, rather than one

that looks backwards. We don’t have to keep repeating the tired old

narrative that addressing climate change has a negative impact on our

economy; it is the economy. All around the world, governments, companies

and people are looking for opportunities to reduce emissions and new

innovations to help them to do that.

These innovations can be developed right here in B.C. We can lead

the world in making the world a better place. CleanBC can provide the

catalyst that will spur world-leading growth in the clean tech sector

right here in British Columbia. Burrard Thermal lands are now available

to help in that goal. These underutilized lands, with access to the

province’s electricity grid, could be the place where a company develops

a technology that could change the world right here in British Columbia,

and the local community will benefit with good-paying jobs and an

increase in property tax to offset local taxes. But the potential

benefits could extend far beyond the local community.

I have two children that are growing up with an uncertain future.

If I could snap my fingers and make the future safe for them, I would.

We can’t just snap our fingers, but we can take full advantage of

opportunities when they come up. Our government didn’t shut down Burrard

Thermal. It’s there, and it can’t be reopened. We can utilize these

lands to advance clean technology that could change the world. That is

what we should do.

“EACH FOR EQUAL”

J. Tegart: This Sunday, March 8, is International Women’s Day, and this year

the theme is “Each for equal.” The “Each for equal” campaign supports

this simple message: individually, we’re all responsible for our own

thoughts and actions every day, all day. We can actively choose to

challenge stereotypes, fight biases, broaden perceptions, improve

situations and celebrate women’s achievements. Collectively, each one of

us can help create a gender-equal world. Let’s all be each for equal. To

me, this simple notion speaks volumes.

I know that the women in this room have faced all of these issues

and challenges, but I also know that we are all in this together and

that we are all role models. We are here together in 2020. Movements

like Me Too and Time’s Up and the significant global rise in

International Women’s Day activities in every corner of the world

highlight changing attitudes and opinions. Maintaining the status quo is

not good enough, so women and allies are standing together to create a

better world.

However, there is still fear, prejudice and barriers to an equal

world, but really, an equal world is an enabled world, a world where

ceilings are shattered and where success for everyone is the goal. When

women and girls are able to live a life on their terms and their virtues

and are enabled by a society around them, there is no stopping

them.

[10:20 a.m.]

A major issue that arises with any sort of social and cultural

change towards a more inclusive society is a misunderstanding that in

order for someone to rise, someone else needs to fall. The rise of women

is not about the fall of men. That is an opinion of weakness and

prejudice.

Equality is about strengthening bonds. It’s about changing

dynamics and breathing life into a society that sees potential for what

it is, regardless of gender. You see this in small measures: when more

men are staying home with children while women return to the workforce;

and more female leaders in an assortment of fields in business, science,

politics, entertainment, trades and technology, entrepreneurship and

countless other avenues.

The reality is that gender balance is not just a women’s issue. It

is also an economic one. More opportunities and more equality are good

for everyone and the economic success of the world. Collectively,

everyone everywhere can strive for women’s equality and continue to make

positive gains.

We here in this House are blessed to be surrounded by incredible

women. My female colleagues on either side of the aisle are testaments

to this point. Our experiences, triumphs, sometimes our failures and our

successes have gotten us to this point.

I see our previous female Premier and the increasing number of

women in high-level positions of government. I see female House Leaders

of the Third Party and the official opposition. I see female staff in

leadership roles everywhere in this building, from our

communi­cations director and our new chief of staff to legislative

assistants, researchers, communication officers, admin staff, political

staffers, building staff, security, maintenance, dining room staff, the

Clerk’s office and even members of the press gallery. There is no end to

examples that I’m inspired by on a daily basis.

This House has not always been that way. But now, today in 2020,

this is a space where women are celebrated. That is something that I’m

truly proud that we can showcase to the rest of B.C. and the world.

Stereotypes are being challenged, and the more diverse representation of

women is more evident constantly in our society.

However, there is no doubt there is still continuing work to be

done. That is why I’m happy that we here can continue to set that

example. That being said, the work continues. Women are still subject to

crippling cultural and societal expectations and constructs that keep

them down, rather than allow them to thrive as all people should. I do

hope that as attitudes change, this will be reflected in the workplace

and the home.

Women are leaders, mothers, sisters, daughters, partners, friends

and heroes. Let’s make sure that it is not just March 8 that we let the

women in our lives know that. We are each equal, so let’s remind each

other of that.

S. Malcolmson: Thanks to my colleague for the very positive and constructive

intervention in the House. On International Women’s Day, we celebrate

the incredible accomplishments of the feminist movement, the labour

movement and honour the work of people all over the world who have

advanced women’s equality, fought sexism, fought gender-based

discrimination, harassment and violence every day. A stronger and fairer

and more inclusive province means a better life for everyone.

I’m reminded often, but especially on International Women’s Day,

of the words of the late, great Rosemary Brown. She was a New Democrat.

She was the first black woman elected to any legislature in the country.

She’s got a lot of powerful quotes, but I love this one. She says “We

must open the doors, and we must see to it that they remain open so that

others may pass through.”

[10:25 a.m.]

I want to take my time here in the House to talk about who is

passing through those open doors. I loved being here in the Legislature,

back in the spring session, with Ella and Sophie one day, with Anneka

and Charlotte another day, both young women, all in high school, who

shadowed me through the day and got to meet the constituents that I was

meeting with, got to be in on meetings, sitting in the gallery, seeing

the behind-the-scenes look at how this place operates.

At the end of the day, all four of them said: “We now have had our

eyes opened to the mechanics of governance. We can imagine ourselves now

as a researcher or a Clerk or a House Leader or an analyst or a member

of the Legislature or a Premier.”

I didn’t have that exposure when I was that age, and I’ve now been

able to serve in three different levels of government. I can only

imagine, though, with the early start that these young women are

getting, how far they’re going to move and how they’re going to change

the country.

Equal Voice had a fantastic program that I was part of in 2017 in

the House of Commons, and young women who took their seat in the House

of Commons did incredible things. I was blown away when Arezoo, who had

worked very hard to get a place to be able to represent her riding spot,

made the amazing choice to leave her seat empty to represent the women

who are unable to participate in public life because of domestic

violence and sexual harassment. It was a very powerful

statement.

I was inspired, also, back in my own riding and constituency, in

Nanaimo. Ruby Barclay is just a mind-blowing young leader. She is one of

the people that went through Vancouver Island University’s tuition

waiver program for youth who had had experience in the foster care

system. She graduated from VIU because of that program. She is now a

mentor and a navigator for others going through university and now also

works with the Nanaimo Aboriginal Centre — another amazing young woman

leading right now and changing our province and our

community.

I also, along the way, had an experience of about to go into the

House of Commons and ask a question about lack of access to abortion

services in Prince Edward Island. Two young women from the University of

Toronto’s Women in House program said, “You need to rewrite that

question to be more specific. You need to name PEI specifically. You

need to talk about what it is,” because one of them had had experience

in Prince Edward Island in that way.

They were then sitting in the gallery and able to watch me ask the

Prime Minister the question that they had written. That will, I hope,

get them to a place like this or to serve in whatever way that they

choose to change the country.

Equal Voice Central Vancouver Island has just started a mentorship

program, and 30 women in Nanaimo have volunteered to step up and allow

young leaders, women leaders, to shadow them in their occupation. On

Sunday, International Women’s Day, 1:30 at the Grand Hotel, people are

invited, both young future leaders and mentors, to launch this

incredible program.

When we get more women in these seats in decision-making powers,

we know what difference and impact it has. We are investing, our

government, in child care. We’ve increased the minimum wage. We’ve

repaired contract flipping that led to the single greatest layoff in

B.C.’s history of women — 9,000 people laid off. Paid leave for domestic

violence. When women come into the House and make decisions — in our

case, in a gender-balanced caucus — we change lives.

J. Tegart: Thank you to the member opposite.

As we continue this discussion, I’d like to talk about the wage

gap. Last year an Angus Reid poll outlined that seven in ten Canadians

support equal pay legislation. The poll outlined that, though more women

than men think the gender pay gap is a serious issue, the majority of

men and women would support an equal pay law that certifies companies

provide equal pay for equal work. According to a 2017 Statistics Canada

report on average hourly wages, women still only earn 87 cents for every

dollar that a man earns.

[10:30 a.m.]

As I highlighted earlier, we have all had the opportunity to work

with many talented and hard-working women, who make up 60 percent of our

workforce. Unfortunately, there is still a wage gap between women and

men. That needs to be addressed, and we’re at the level where we have

the opportunity to do that.

Last year and the year before that my colleague from Surrey South

introduced private members’ bills aimed at addressing just this issue.

The Equal Pay Reporting Act was intended to start a conversation in the

business community about how to achieve pay equity. The bill would have

required businesses that employ 50 or more people to provide an annual

breakdown of the mean and median regular pay and bonuses provided to all

male and female employees. By publicly declaring this information,

companies would be encouraged to improve pay equity and to correct this

undeniably unfair practice.

In the spirit of International Women’s Day and the commitment to

“Each for equal,” I hope that these are the types of measures that we

here in this House can adopt to further progress change in our province

and create a more equal playing field for the future female

leaders.

To our daughters, granddaughters, sisters, aunties, moms and women

mentors, we have an obligation to continue this work, each for

equal.

CHILD POVERTY

M. Dean: I’m sure we can all agree that child poverty needs to be

eliminated. We know from years of research that child poverty puts

children at a disadvantage for the rest of their lives and has a

detrimental impact society-wide. It won’t surprise anyone here that

evidence demonstrates that growing inequality creates social failure for

provinces.

In societies of high inequality, there are higher rates of illness

— mental and physical — higher rates of violence, imprisonment,

substance misuse and other social issues. Associated with these issues

are poor educational performance, limited social mobility and lower life

expectancy. Social cohesion decays in communities with high rates of

child poverty. It is clearly an indicator of social health, which we

need to monitor and we need to correct, if necessary.

What do we know about child poverty here in B.C.? There are half a

million people living in poverty in our province, and that’s not

acceptable for a province that’s as wealthy as ours is. B.C.’s child

poverty rate, until recently, has for years been above the national

average, with approximately 99,000 children living in poverty in B.C.

For every year between 2000 and 2017, British Columbia has had a higher

child poverty rate than Canada, based on the census family low-income

measure after tax.

In 2017, about one-third of B.C.’s poor children were under the

age of six. That was actually better than the Canadian average, but

obviously we still need to make improvements. We must also remember that

poverty rates are significantly higher for immigrant children,

Indigenous children, racialized children, children with

disabilities.

Children of lone parents are also overrepresented among the

population of kids living in poverty. Children who live in single-parent

families are more than three times more likely to live in poverty than

children in two-parent families. This is exacerbated by the gender gap,

as women-led lone-parent households earn about 72 percent of the median

income for men-led lone-parent households, and we know the majority of

single-parent households are led by women.

Challenges in B.C. facing parents who are living in poverty are

also compounded by the costs of housing and of child care. Too many

families are stuck in a trap of being unable to work due to child care

needs and not being able to enhance their careers and climb out of

poverty. These trends indicate that there are structural issues that

government can tackle and address.

For years, we heard the way out of poverty was a job, yet our

economy has full employment and there are still people living in

poverty. Almost 40 percent of people living in poverty are working. They

have a paycheque coming in but still can’t make ends meet.

[10:35 a.m.]

I remember going to a conference many years ago, probably around

2010, of the Federation of Community Social Services of B.C., when I was

an executive director of a local non-profit organization. We had a

presentation from the organization First Call, and they emphasized that

B.C. had the worst record on child poverty and had no poverty reduction

strategy. They highlighted how they’d been monitoring this and how the

situation for children in B.C. hadn’t changed in a decade and how they

wanted to see more action and commitment, going forward.

As an immigrant, I was shocked by the statistics and how poorly

children in B.C. were served to enable their families to get out of

poverty.

A couple of years later we had the report that a quarter to a

third of users of food banks were youth — again, a shocking statistic.

That led to a few of us locally meeting to get together to try and

tackle this issue, especially for youth in our community and in our

education system.

Fast-forward. At least now we are seeing that parents are being

helped to climb out of poverty, and we do have a provincial poverty

reduction strategy, TogetherBC. It sets targets, and it works across

ministries to reduce poverty for all affected British Columbians. It

delivers on affordable housing, supports for families and children and

youth. It expands access to education and training, provides more

opportunities for people, improves income supports and invests in social

inclusion.

We have set a target to reduce child poverty by 50 percent by

2024, and this is being achieved through a number of initiatives that

tackle inequality and poverty. For a start, let’s look at the housing

crisis. British Columbia now has a 30-point housing plan that directly

addresses the affordability crisis in our province. So 23,000 new,

affordable homes are completed or underway throughout the province, and

we’re taking action to make renting fairer for people in British

Columbia.

B.C. parents now have a universal, affordable, high-quality early

childhood education strategy. We’ve already created thousands of new

spaces, and thousands of parents are accessing $10-a-day, or less, early

childhood education. Nearly 27,000 families with incomes under $45,000 a

year will eventually pay little or nothing for child care.

Over the last two years, we have incrementally raised the minimum

wage, and this significantly supports women in the workforce. They are

overrepresented in that population, as are visible minority groups,

people with disabilities and new immigrants, for example. We’ve

increased income and disability assistance rates twice. We’ve increased

the earnings exemption for people living on social assistance or

disability. We’ve eliminated MSP premiums.

The 2018 Canadian Income Survey demonstrates that TogetherBC, the

province’s first poverty reduction strategy, is working. We set a target

to reduce the overall poverty rate by 25 percent by 2024. B.C.’s overall

poverty rate was 8.9 percent in 2018, compared to 12 percent in 2016.

And B.C.’s child poverty rate declined to 6.9 percent in 2018, from 12

percent in 2016.

M. Hunt: I want to thank the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin for her

statement. I certainly appreciate her heart and her message.

It goes without saying that all members of this House want to see

the improvement of everyone here in the province of British Columbia. We

all want to see a reduction in child poverty rates, and we all want to

see people of this province given the chance to succeed. We would note

that poverty rates are on the decline. This is good news, and it is a

trend that we hope continues.

There is a lot to celebrate as poverty rates continue to drop.

There are those who would claim that it is their drive towards

affordability that has created this result. Well, it’s interesting that,

at the same time, we have stated many times that affordability is

somewhat of an amorphous term that is touted in this House on the backs

of 23 new and increased taxes. It is not something that can be

accurately claimed as a reality here in British Columbia. Life is not

more affordable. And with poverty rate reductions, the idea that efforts

by this government to achieve these rates is a bit

misleading.

Deputy Speaker: Member, non-partisan.

M. Hunt: I’m trying to be.

Deputy Speaker: Yeah. Try a little harder.

M. Hunt: I’m working with the information that was given.

[10:40 a.m.]

I think it’s important for us to lend some light on the facts and

the figures, not the rhetoric, so we can all understand the success that

we’re facing. I’ll use exactly the same sources the member used in First

Call B.C.

First Call B.C. said that the child poverty rate rose from 15.5

percent in 1989 to 25.3 percent in the year 2000. That’s during the

1990s — whoever was in government at that time. We saw, in fact, a 10

percent rise in the poverty rate, which then dropped to 19.8 percent in

2014. These are the stats that this statement was made on.

Then we changed how we calculate poverty, and we noticed that the

general poverty reduction has, in fact…. The numbers have gone down from

2015 to ’18, with a decrease from 14.8 percent to 8.9. That is in the

general poverty rate. That is a marked difference that shows a trend

that is absolutely in the right direction, which is great

news.

More importantly is that the child poverty rate has, in fact, as

you mentioned at the very end, dropped from 12 to 6.9 percent in that

same window, which is a reduction of 5 percentage points, or a reduction

of more than 40 percent. That is incredible. It’s something that we

should all hope continues to drop. The fact is that it has been

consistently dropping since 2001, and 2018 is a continuation of that

very trend.

The only issue, as was pointed out last week, is that TogetherBC

is being credited for this, but TogetherBC actually wasn’t launched

until March of 2019. So by rationally and correctly looking at the data,

it’s very clear that these reductions are not a result of TogetherBC.

These reductions really are an example of the continued legacy of a

previous government, a government that lifted people out of poverty by a

strong economy and a jobs plan that invested in British Columbia and

brought people out of poverty. These reductions came off the heels of

programs and focuses taken by that government.

I would also note that the biggest decrease actually happened as a

result of the federal child tax benefit. It played the largest role in

that entire reduction going down. As for TogetherBC’s poverty reduction

plan, which wasn’t unveiled until 2019, for the member to claim that

their plan somehow retroactively influenced 2018 is rather

illogical.

It should be noted again by myself on behalf of my colleagues that

we’re very encouraged to see the poverty rate continue to decline.

Although we may differ on our

interpretation of how and when these

results came to fruition, we can all agree on one thing, and that is

that these results are great for this province.

We look forward to seeing the results from the first year of this

program when they’re unveiled later this fall. We will continue to stand

up for measures that lift people out of poverty so that no child in B.C.

will have to experience it.

Deputy Speaker: The Chair has provided lots of latitude with people make

statements, but please do not try to cross the limit. The first hour is

supposed to be non-partisan. Let’s keep it that way.

M. Dean: Thank you to the member for Surrey-Cloverdale for sharing our

commitment to eliminating poverty and working hard to eradicate

poverty.

This is something that we’ve been working on since 2017, for

example, with our plan to tackle the crisis in housing, our rollout of

universal child care and increasing assistance rates as well. This is

something that’s been important to us and we’ve been working on since

2017, and now we can see that Statistics Canada data are confirming that

our strategy is working to make life better for people. It’s really

encouraging, and there is still more work to do as we roll out this

strategy. Looking ahead we will have more initiatives that will further

reduce inequality and support children living in poverty.

I want to just highlight, for example, the new B.C. child

opportunity benefit. It’s going to come into effect from the first of

October, 2020. It offers tax-free payments for families with children

under and up to the age of 18. It will help families with basic

necessities as well as create opportunities like sports and arts

opportunities.

[10:45 a.m.]

For one child, a family will get up to $1,600 a year; three

children, up to $3,400 a year. The highest benefits will go to the

families most in need. So this will also lift thousands of children and

their families out of poverty in British Columbia.

Combined with B.C.’s affordable child care benefit and the fee

reduction initiative for licensed child care spaces, families with one

child might save up to $20,000 a year. Families with two children could

save up to $28,000 a year. These statistics are really encouraging and

confirm we’re on the right path, and there is still more to

do.

Over the next five years, we’re going to be working with all

sectors, community organizations, business, labour, Indigenous people

and all levels of government as critical partners in this work. We’ll be

investing about $4 billion over the next three years.

Keep in mind that some of the initiatives are broadly accessible

programs — child opportunity benefit, childcare B.C., affordable

housing. All of these programs are helping many people lift themselves

out of poverty. We can break the cycle of poverty and build a better

B.C. for everyone.

I want to thank the Minister for Social Development and Poverty

Reduction, who’s here in chambers today, for all of his work and

everybody who has supported the poverty reduction strategy here in

British Columbia. Together, we can make a real difference in people’s

lives.

GOOD GOVERNANCE

R. Sultan: Canada’s first constitution, the British North America Act,

declares our federation is to be built on a foundation of peace, order

and good government. These words define parliament’s overarching

jurisdiction.

Are the words relevant today? I say more than ever before, because

our current provincial government, when faced with serious threats to

stability, prosperity and civil society, shows scant regard for peace,

order and good government.

In first-year constitutional law classrooms, the acronym used for

peace, order and good government is POGG. They may now want to introduce

a new acronym more accurately describing British Columbia today. That is

CDNG, signifying contention, disorder and no government. Why is CDNG the

de facto situation today?

Deputy Speaker: Member.

R. Sultan: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Deputy Speaker: The Chair has cautioned all members. We have to keep non-partisan

— all statements, all comments. Thank you. Carry on.

R. Sultan: Thank you.

With respect to contention, we have many quarrelling factions. On

one side: project proponents, elected First Nations and the majority of

ordinary citizens. On the other side: Indigenous chieftains by divine

right of birth, unelected; plus climate activists; plus project

opponents; plus a political network foreign-funded.

With respect to disorder — the second element — we have blockades

in North America’s third-largest seaport, blockades of freight trains

from coast to coast, blockades of commuter rail in Toronto and blockades

of highways in Quebec, plus burning tires on the rail tracks. We have

people trying to derail mile-long CN freight trains roaring by at 50

kilometres an hour. We prevent ordinary citizens from attending the

Legislature. We see disorderly harassment of our Premier at his private

home in Langford. Shameful.

With respect to no government, we ask the judiciary to issue

injunctions against illegal acts. But when they’re granted and breached,

we make no effort to enforce them. So they are meaningless. We are not a

society of laws when government allows them to be routinely ignored

without consequence.

Add it up — contention, disorder and no government. We are

dangerously close to anarchy. How did this happen? Did concerned

citizens living on Bowen Island suddenly write letters to the editor?

Well, actually, no.

[10:50 a.m.]

This is a highly coordinated, professionally planned attack on our

country, its transportation system, its provincial institutions of law

and order and its economy. The hive has issued killer bees. It is an

attempt to kill projects, wreck our international reputation as a haven

for investment, destroy trust in one another and cause our partners to

doubt our reliability.

This is not my personal impression. It is what the activists at

the forefront have publicly proclaimed: “Shut down Canada.” That is

what, to a surprising degree, they have accomplished in key areas from

time to time.

Who could conceivably be motivated to shut down Canada? We try so

hard to be nice to everyone. Well, we could start with the list of

foreign-funded organizations pouring millions into the effort: the

Sierra Club; West Coast Environmental Law, which, incredibly, has its

home office at taxpayer-funded University of Victoria; the Western

Canada Wilderness Committee; Leadnow; and Stand.earth. That list is a

pretty good beginning.

This Legislature is in the front line. In years past, we have seen

many demonstrations on the lawn of the Legislature. Think of the

estimated 30,000 protesting Bill Bennett’s economic plans in 1983, for

example. But this time is different. In Bennett’s day, the Legislature’s

doors were never locked. Protesters did not wear face masks. Protesters

did not bar MLAs, staff and visitors from entering the building. They

did not spray-paint the walls of our Premier’s office, demanding that he

quit. They did not build a bonfire on our front steps. They did not

bloody the noses of bystanders. And security did not report significant

foreign infiltration.

This is not a one-off event. This has been a rolling series of

events across the country. It has all of the earmarks of a centrally

planned project to harm our economy, alarm our partners, demoralize

governments, set security forces back on their heels, do permanent

damage to the goodwill and trust that we have in one another in Canada

and alienate communities being used as pawns.

I would not rule out foreign influence. After all, who would have

thought any outsider would dare try to influence American presidential

elections? If there are those in this Legislature who find this all

rather fun, they should step back and consider the permanent damage

being done.

J. Routledge: Thank you to the member for West Vancouver–Capilano for his

passionate reflections on good governance.

This is a timely topic. According to international organizations

that monitor freedom around the world, democracy is in retreat around

the world. Not surprisingly, the countries that continue to be ranked

most democratic are the Scandinavian social democracies, while our

powerful neighbour to the south is ranked far behind at 25. In fact, the

United States has been designated a flawed democracy. We should be

careful about what countries we choose as role models.

There is no better time but the present to reflect on what good

governance looks like. There are eight characteristics. Good governments

are participatory, consensus-oriented, accountable, transparent,

responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follow

the rule of law.

Let’s see how the government of British Columbia shapes up,

starting with participation. Right now we are conducting 19 open and

ongoing public consultations. An additional 29 consultations have been

completed since we formed government. Whether they participate on line

or by attending interactive meetings, British Columbians can be

confident that their input will be considered by lawmakers. Good

governance is consensus-oriented.

This is a minority government, the first in B.C. since 1953.

Minority governments are notoriously short-lived, yet this one continues

to survive. Why? Because we work collaboratively with our partners in

the Third Party, honouring a relationship constructed on the principles

of good faith and no surprises.

[10:55 a.m.]

As the member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head said at the time, this

“government is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to do politics differently in

British Columbia.”

Good governance is accountable. The third bill that we introduced

as a new government was the Election Amendment Act. We ended the Wild

West of election financing. We made it illegal for corporations and

unions to donate to political parties, and we put a cap on individual

donations. Voters can be confident that government is accountable to

them alone and not to some shadowy corporation buying guarantees that

labour will be cheap and natural resources will be

bottomless.

Good governance is transparent. This government is shining a light

into the back rooms of government and business. We have new lobbying

transparency regulations. The Land Owner Transparency Act requires that

hidden ownership be disclosed. The Fuel Price Transparency Act forces

oil and gas companies to turn over pricing and supply data.

Good governance is responsive. Our legislative agenda continues to

be shaped by what we hear on the doorstep, on the phone and in the

streets. That’s why we created a Minister of State for Child Care.

That’s why we launched a ten-point plan to make housing more affordable.

That’s why we took our fight to protect our coast all the way to the

Supreme Court of Canada.

Good governance is effective. Our implementation plans are

starting to see results. Child poverty is finally in decline. Fewer

people are dying from the opioid crisis, while at the same time, we have

been balancing four budgets in a row.

Good governance is equitable and inclusive. Why is that important?

Because when marginalized groups see their faces reflected in leadership

roles, they are more likely to vote and more likely to run themselves.

We make better policy when a diversity of experiences are heard around

the table. Our cabinet is 50 percent women and come from a variety of

backgrounds.

Finally, good government follows the rule of law. In other words,

it is vigilant in ensuring that law enforcement is independent of

politics. It refrains from using law enforcement to make inconveniences

and embarrassments go away. Have you been following the latest political

drama in Washington? The Department of Justice is in revolt. Many career

personnel are resigning in protest. Why? Because political appointees

are inserting themselves in a criminal case to get leniency for the pal

of the president.

Let me conclude by again thanking the member for West

Vancouver–Capilano for introducing such a timely topic for debate.

Everyone should be asking these questions of themselves.

R. Sultan: I would like to commend the member for Burnaby North for her

remarks. I find them encouraging, and a little bit of politics aside, I

can virtually endorse every word she said. But Americans — and the

member has referred to shenanigans in Washington — watch what’s going on

upstairs in their attic very closely. We may not realize it, but they

certainly pay attention.

[S. Gibson in the chair.]

Here’s what the influential Washington Post had to say a

few days ago:

“Since much of the moral indignation fuelling the Canadian

Indigenous rights movement is rooted in opposition to an enormous

historical fact — the conquest of North America by non-Indigenous

peoples — it’s easy for them to reach an equally enormous conclusion:

the land should be given back.

“Taken literally, the idea is obviously impossible. Canada’s 35

million non-Indigenous citizens — the settler community in Indigenous

rights parlance — cannot be patriated back to their historic homelands.

But what if the Canadian settler state were dismantled

instead…?

“There’s much to suggest this project of post-colonial dissolution

is the path Canada is currently is on…. Revolutions rarely begin from a

cold start; instead, they usually arise after piecemeal reforms fail to

appease a group of critics, while still justifying their

criticism.

[11:00 a.m.]

“…the Canadian state has embarked upon a remarkable social

experiment of gradually devolving its responsibility to uphold the broad

national interest — particularly the approval of economically critical

natural resource projects — to anyone who claims to speak for Canada’s

1.7 million Indigenous residents.

“This is a risky and radical political idea, and it should be

treated with the sort of skepticism all risky and radical ideas deserve.

Absent any threat of genuinely revolutionary violence — which a few

blockaded train tracks certainly do not represent — it should never be

forgotten that the Canadian state is only as powerless as it chooses to

be. Why has Canada chosen this?”

End of Washington Post

commentary.

Well, let me speak for myself. I have no wish to be involved in a

“remarkable social experiment,” and “risky and radical” ideas find

little support in my community. We much prefer peace, order and good

government. I take no comfort whatsoever but, rather, dismay in the

Premier’s solution, duly recorded in Hansard last week: “Leave

the kids to figure it out for themselves.”

Hon. S. Simpson: Hon. Speaker, I ask that the House consider proceeding with

Motion 3, standing in the name of the member for Maple

Ridge–Mission.

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

with Motion 3, per the minister’s comments, without disturbing the

priorities of the motions preceding it in the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 3 — GOVERNMENT ACTION ON

ECONOMIC INEQUALITY AND

AFFORDABILITY

B. D’Eith: I move:

[Be it resolved that this House support the government’s actions

taken to reduce economic inequality and increase affordability, thereby

lifting people out of working poverty and lowering the number of people

living paycheque to paycheque.]

When I started running as an MLA, I was shocked to hear that half

a million people are living in poverty in British Columbia. That’s not

acceptable in a province as wealthy as British Columbia. Poverty has

actually become entrenched due to ignoring and underfunding of social

priorities, and the lower- and middle-income people are also struggling,

often living paycheque to paycheque. I heard this, this weekend,

door-knocking. People are having a hard time living paycheque to

paycheque.

Now, the previous B.C. Liberal government ignored concerns of

British Columbians and left people behind. They cut taxes to the rich,

their rich donors — cuts — and then ignored and underfunded the programs

and services that people rely on. This led to B.C. having the

second-worst poverty rate in Canada.

The B.C. Liberal way of approaching this is a job. You get a job,

and that’s the way to get out of poverty. But if that’s the case, why do

40 percent of people living in poverty have jobs? They work so hard, but

their pay­cheques don’t make ends meet. So many middle-income

people are also having a hard time because of the cost of living in

British Columbia. Now, the B.C. Liberals repeatedly rejected all calls

for a comprehensive poverty reduction plan. Well, we have a poverty

reduction plan now, and we have

an act, the Poverty Reduction Strategy

Act. This act requires the government to reduce overall poverty rates by

25 percent and the child poverty rate by 50 percent by 2024.

Also, the TogetherBC program brings together investments across

the government. This is continuing the work that was started right away

in 2017 to reduce overall poverty in the province to meet these targets.

Now, this work is a substantial piece of work, and it outlines what the

province has done and what the province is going to be doing to reduce

poverty.

We have increased assistance rates by $1,800 a year. We’ve

increased the earnings exemptions. We’ve enhanced education and training

options. On the homelessness front…. We’re seeing this at home in Maple

Ridge. We had over 100 units of social housing built, and we were able

to resolve a long-standing tent city. That not only helped those people

get the help they needed, but it also really helped the community. It’s

very important work. Social assistance caseloads are being reduced

because funding is being put in. The minimum wage is now $13.85, and it

will go up to $15.20 by June of 2021.

[11:05 a.m.]

Now, of 400,000 people working on minimum wage, 1,500 of these

people are working below the poverty line. This will help lift those

people. It is working.

The Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction, in

quoting the 2018 Canadian income survey…. B.C.’s overall poverty rate

was 8.9 percent in 2018 compared to 12 percent in 2016, while B.C.’s

child poverty rate declined to 6.9 percent in 2018 from 12 percent in

2016. I’m pleased to see the Statistics Canada data confirming that our

poverty reduction strategy is working to make life better for people,

but there’s a lot more work to do.

We also have to look at low- and middle-income people, because

they are struggling in this province. What did our government do? One of

the first things was to get unfair tolls off the bridges. It’s making a

huge impact in my community on the Golden Ears Bridge. Eliminating MSP

premiums — that’s the single biggest tax cut in a generation for people.

In fact, people are paying less tax in middle income and low income than

they were under the B.C. Liberals.

Game-changer. The B.C. child opportunity benefit that’s coming out

October 20 will help 300,000 families do better, and it’s going to help

kids right up to the age of 18. Of course, child care — it’s

transformational. We have a couple of prototype sites in Mission and

Maple Ridge: the Heritage Park Childcare Centre. Parents are paying no

more than $200 a month. This is an amazing benefit for

people.

The housing crisis — a 30-point housing plan. We’re building

housing in Mission with the seniors housing. We just opened a Lookout

low-income housing in Mission. I’m really excited about that. Students

are so excited about the elimination of interest on student loans and,

of course, the new needs-based student grants.

I want to say that our province is on a better path today and is a

place where everyone counts, and we’re implementing a clear path to

tackle poverty, making life better for British Columbians and reducing

their costs.

S. Bond: I want to thank the member opposite for giving us the opportunity

to talk about what his government said they would do and what they’re

actually doing. There has been a lot going on in British Columbia, and

perhaps he thinks British Columbians haven’t been paying attention to

the budget that was tabled and the impacts that it will have on them,

but he would be wrong about that.

Just over two years ago, this member and his colleagues made

promises to British Columbians. In fact, there were glossy brochures and

banners with words like “affordability” and a whole lot of promises.

Promises for a universal $10-a-day daycare program that has not and will

not happen. Renters were promised relief with a $400 grant. That has now

disappeared, apparently because the Green Party members didn’t like it.

So another broken promise.

At the same time, this is a government that has loaded on 23 new

or increased taxes in their short time in office — four alone in this

budget. In fact, if you do the math, without the revenue from these

taxes and significant cuts to ministries and important programs, there

would be no surplus. Yet this government continues to ramp up the debt

load for the province and for families. To quote a recent media story:

“Families are being clobbered with new taxes, and the government is

still racking up more debt.”

The thing I find most astonishing is that this member and

government fail on a daily basis, including in the remarks made today,

to make the connection between increased taxes, their broken promises,

out-of-control spending, program cuts, a softening global economy and

the impact that all of this has on British Columbians. It is creating a

growing lack of affordability. The situation is made even more acute by

the absence of any semblance of an economic or job creation strategy or

a plan to diversify the economy.

[11:10 a.m.]

Here’s what we know. There is little incentive for B.C.’s tech

sector and no attention paid to manufacturing and the service

industries. Small businesses are burdened with taxes and regulation.

Little or nothing to support the natural resource sector. MSP premiums,

to correct the member opposite, were replaced with another tax: the

employer health tax, which transfers costs to consumers and small

businesses. The list goes on.

What does this all add up to? Taxes are up. Small business

confidence is down, exports are down, consumer spending is flat, and

housing supply is down. In fact, just recently we learned that there is

a 60 percent drop in new condo and townhouse units coming to the market,

and highrise construction has dropped by a whopping 76 percent. The

government is behind on their promised housing units. In fact, it will

take more than 98 years at this rate to complete that promise. Believe

me, British Columbians are not holding their breath on another broken

promise.

It’s time this member and his government made the connection

between the choices they have made…. And make no mistake about it; it is

about choices. As a result of the choices this government has made,

there is growing financial pressure on families and job creators in our

province. Here’s the key question: are British Columbians better off

today than they were 2½ years ago? The simple answer is no, they aren’t.

[Applause.] So good clapping on the “no, they aren’t”

question.

The only revenue generation plan that this government has is the

back pockets of taxpayers. Every day we learn more about some of the

hidden gems in the budget, and all of them impact British Columbians.

Believe me, I’m sure people are aware of the sugary-beverage tax, the

Netflix tax. But do you know the government is now doing a survey to see

if you’re willing to pay a tax on your hiking boots, your mountain bike

or your outdoor equipment?

This government just keeps on reaching into the pockets of British

Columbians and then stands, in this House and outside, to try and

convince you that things are more affordable. I’m sorry. It just doesn’t

add up. Talking about affordability and doing something about it are two

completely different things. What we see here on a daily basis is a

government that is all about talk, with no action when it comes to

affordability. I can tell you this: British Columbians deserve much

better.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and speak in favour of the motion moved

by my colleague from Maple Ridge–Mission: “Be it resolved that this

House support the government’s actions taken to reduce economic

inequality and increase affordability, thereby lifting people out of

working poverty and lowering the number of people living paycheque to

paycheque.”

We know — and I think British Columbians share the sentiment —

that it’s unacceptable that we have half a million people living in

poverty in our province. How did we get here? It didn’t happen overnight

or over one year. It happened over many years, the result of having

social priorities ignored and underfunded. The previous government chose

to ignore the concerns of British Columbians and left people behind.

They left the majority of people behind and gave tax cuts to their rich

donors.

We’ve heard that — and as well, in remarks from the other side —

their plan to address poverty was for folks to get a job, but that flies

in the face of that our economy was running at full employment. There

are still people living in poverty, and now we know that almost 40

percent of people living in poverty today are working and that some have

more than one job. It’s been years of ignoring and underfunding the

programs that people rely on that has led to B.C. having the

second-worst poverty rate in Canada.

We know that the previous government had the worst overall poverty

in Canada for 13 years, the worst rate of child poverty in Canada for a

decade, the highest income inequality, with many working families living

in poverty. The previous government, as well, left B.C. being the only

province with no provincewide poverty reduction plan.

When our government came in, we made a commitment to bring in a

poverty reduction plan. We held consultations across the province with

people living in poverty — with lived experience, really — as the key

contributors, hearing their experiences. Our government is committed to

making life more affordable for everyone in this province, not just

those on the top.

[11:15 a.m.]

We know that our plan — TogetherBC, the province’s first poverty

reduction strategy — is working. Our government is making decisions to

invest in people. We’re rebuilding social programs. We know that

thousands of people have moved into new affordable housing, right across

the province. Their daycare costs are reduced, MSP premiums eliminated,

and the minimum wage is going up. This is taking us in the right

direction, but there’s more to do. We not only have a plan; it’s

legislated. We have legislated targets to reduce the overall poverty

rate by 25 percent and the child poverty rate by 50 percent. We are

making progress towards that.

What are the steps that we have taken? We’re not just talking

about it. We’ve increased income and disability assistance rates. We are

building new affordable homes. We are taking action to make renting fair

for people. We know that we have this year the B.C. opportunity benefit

coming into effect in October, expected to help 290,000 families. We’ve

eliminated MSP premiums and are increasing the minimum wage.

We hear from the other side. They complain about tax hikes, money

coming out of the pockets of families. They’re correct. It’s an

increased tax rate on the top 1 percent. You know, the government is

saying that the top 1 percent can pay a little bit more, and we’re going

to support those British Columbians who need the most help. That’s a

fact.

Is life more affordable? Go out and ask British Columbians. Are

they paying MSP premiums? No. Do they have to pay tolls on bridges? No.

Do more families have access to dental care and Pharmacare? Yes. Do

students have to pay loan interest on their loans? No. Do they have to

there a new access grant for students to be able to pursue their

education? Yes.

These are questions that when you ask, those are the answers that

you’ll hear from British Columbians. We know that we can’t do this

alone. It’s not only in the purview of the provincial government. We

need to partner with our federal government, municipalities, the

business community, communities and organizations right throughout

British Columbia.

We know that British Columbians share the desire to reduce

inequality. This is not the society we want to live in. Our government,

the B.C. NDP, is committed towards investing in people, ensuring that

life is more affordable, that there are opportunities for all British

Columbians — not just those at the top 1 percent, the top donors to the

B.C. Liberals, which the previous government had really put as their

priority. We are making investments in people to bring down poverty in

British Columbia.

S. Cadieux: I’m pleased to speak on behalf of this motion. But I do find it

troubling that the members of the opposition — at least the last member

— continue to state fake facts in relation to the history. The reality

is that there are three provinces and territories within the country

that don’t have poverty plans. That’s just a fact.

It’s also true that B.C. didn’t have the highest rate of child

poverty for the last number of years. It was middle of the pack. Was it

too high? Absolutely. I, along with all of the speakers who’ve come

before me, will recognize and do recognize the importance of reducing

inequality, increasing affordability and lifting people out of

poverty.

When my colleagues and I were in government, we worked hard to

make sure that this was a reality. As such, it’s difficult to see the

government taking action for work that wasn’t theirs. The government

claimed last week that TogetherBC — their poverty reduction plan, which

was tabled in March of 2019 — affected 2018 incomes. It certainly makes

me wonder about the government’s understanding of time, of the economy

and of the cause-and-effect relationships of decisions that are

made.

Last week government was very busy patting themselves on the back

for their achievements, but in reality, child poverty rates have been

consistently dropping since 2011, when we were on the opposite side.

With the exception of a blip after the recession in 2008 — in fact,

during our whole time in government — we reduced the poverty rate by 53

percent from the height left to us by the last NDP government of 24

percent — lifting approximately 29,000 children out of poverty during

that time.

The declines in child poverty between 2011 and 2016 were largely

the result of a strong economy and a plan to get people into

better-paying, family-supporting jobs. But I think it’s important to

recognize the considerable role that the federal child care benefit has

played in the latest decline in rates.

[11:20 a.m.]

The child tax benefit came into effect in 2016, when the federal

Liberal government took office. We were aware this change would

significantly increase rates. I’m aware of this because I was the

minister responsible for six years. I followed it incredibly closely.

The new federal child benefit was expected to lift 16,000 children out

of poverty in 2017. I think we’re seeing the effects of that with the

report laid before us last week.

Now, I should be clear that no matter who is responsible, we can

all celebrate fewer people living in poverty. It’s the kind of change we

want to see. It’s a hugely important part of being an elected official.

Our social welfare system was good when it was designed many decades

ago, but over time, it’s been asked to do things it wasn’t intended to

do. The rules have been twisted and duct-taped to adapt to a changing

world and changing needs, and we have to recognize that now it’s kind of

broken. It traps people in poverty. It prevents them from overcoming

their circumstances. It fails to be the safety net it was intended to

be.

I think it needs a rethink and a redesign, and that’s why I

championed the single-parent employment initiative when I was in

government. The purpose was to remove the barriers that were keeping

single parents on income and disability assistance, providing them with

the training that they needed to secure long-term employment. It was

working. In 2017, 4,500 people had participated and had access to good

employment that they wouldn’t have had otherwise. It’s the kind of

change we want to see in society — people that can support themselves

and people given the opportunity to succeed.

Unfortunately, I do fear we may not continue to see this, because

while well-intended, I am certain the efforts of this government and

their choices are crippling our economy. Housing starts are slowing by

22 percent. B.C. has lost 3,200 jobs in the last eight months. It’s a

clear downward trend. Retail sales are virtually flat. Business

investment is slowing. The most recent stats on income data, the same

that show the improvement in child poverty, also show that median

incomes across the province have dropped for the first time since the

recession of 2008.

I just want to state that I really hope that that trend does not

continue. I do hope that as government has, with the poverty reduction

plan, set a target to reduce poverty by 50 percent by 2024…. I hope they

succeed. I do find it fascinating, though, that their target had almost

been 50 percent met by the time they took office in 2017, through that

2016 blip thanks to the federal tax benefit. In fact, their target now

will see a slower rate of decline than in any year under the B.C.

Liberals.

Numbers are fascinating. I know the NDP is not good with numbers,

but the reality is that 50 percent fewer kids are in poverty thanks to

our 16 years in government. The rate went from 24 to 12.8. That’s 0.7

percent a year. The NDP plan will see 50 percent fewer over eight years

— rate going from 12.8 to 6, or 6.25 percent per year. That’s even with

the gimme of including that entire federal benefit.

Let’s not make this a partisan issue like they did for their 16

years in opposition, suggesting how awful we were, doing nothing, while

reducing the rate by 50 percent. Numbers don’t lie, and we actually

reduced that rate faster than they’re targeting. We all care about this

issue, and I truly believe that.

J. Brar: I’m really pleased to rise in this House today to support the

motion introduced by the member for Maple Ridge–Mission, focused on our

commitment to reducing economic inequality and increasing

affordability.

The sad reality is that there are half a million people living in

poverty in our province. It’s hard for people to imagine that in a

province as wealthy as ours, we had 170,000 children living in poverty

in 2014. It’s hard for me to believe that over 100,000 British

Columbians used food banks in 2016, and almost one-third of those using

food banks were children. That is not acceptable for a province as

wealthy as ours.

[11:25 a.m.]

Poverty has become deeply entrenched in our province because of

the bad choices made by the B.C. Liberals. I know they don’t want to

accept that, but that’s the reality. The previous government chose to

ignore the concerns of British Columbians and left people behind, while

at the same time, they gave the biggest tax breaks to their rich

friends. So greed remained, basically, the driving force of their policy

for 16 years.

For 16 years, we heard from the other side that the only way out

of poverty was a job. That’s it. That was their belief then, and that is

their belief even today. They don’t believe at all that the state has

any responsibility to address inequality and poverty. Rather than

developing such a plan to reduce poverty, they did the opposite. When

the B.C. Liberals first came into power in 2001, they implemented a

series of cuts to programs and services available to individuals and

families living in poverty. As a result, poverty rates

skyrocketed.

Now, these are the effects. B.C. had the worst rate of overall

poverty in Canada for 13 years. B.C. had the worst rate of child poverty

in Canada for nearly a decade. Under the B.C. Liberals, this province

had the highest inequality in the country. B.C. was the only province

with no provincewide poverty reduction plan, and more than four in ten

British Columbians were living paycheque to paycheque. That was a

reality, and clearly, their approach didn’t work during the 16 years

they were in power.

In fact, the situation became bad to worse under them, due to

their bad choices. We have a wealthy province, and we can do better. I

think the people of British Columbia want us to do better. Our

government is committed to making life more affordable for everyone in

this province, not just the people at the top.

We are taking real actions to reduce poverty. We have developed a

poverty reduction plan called TogetherBC, with clear targets and clear

timelines. As my friend said, the TogetherBC word came, actually, the

very first day we came into power. That was absent for 16 years when

they were in power. We set a target to reduce the overall poverty rates

by 25 percent and the child poverty rate by at least 50 percent by 2024,

based on 2016 data.

We have eliminated MSP premiums. This will save individuals up to

$900 a year and families up to $1,800 a year. Our government is

implementing the new B.C. child opportunity benefit. Starting October 1,

a family with children under 18 will receive up to $1,600 for the first

child, up to $2,600 for families with two children and up to $3,400 for

a family with three children.

We have also launched the Childcare B.C. program to bring

affordable, accessible and quality child care to B.C. families. In less

than two years, the government has funded more than 10,400 new child

care spaces in the province.

I’m proud to say that our government has increased assistance

rates — which the other side never did — by $1,800 a year and increased

earnings exemptions so that people can keep more of the money they

earn.

In just two years, we have 17,000 new affordable homes either

built or underway in nearly 19 communities throughout B.C.

I fully support the motion introduced by my colleague, and I hope

the members on the other side will also support the motion.

D. Davies: I rise in this House today to speak on this motion that this House

support the government’s actions taken to reduce economic inequality and

increase affordability.

My goal, as I’m sure every member of this Legislature, is to

promote exactly what is being suggested here, but this motion raises

many questions. Living paycheque to paycheque is the sad reality right

now for far too many British Columbians. I would not be standing in this

House today if I did not truly want to see a provincial government that

creates a more affordable province for everyone.

I live in a riding that represents a lot of people that used to

call Newfoundland their home. One phrase that often comes to mind when

someone is blown away by a comment or hears something ridiculous is:

“Lord tunderin’ Jesus ‘b’y.” That is exactly what I think when I see

this motion that has come out this morning.

[11:30 a.m.]

What I have seen over my last three years as the representative of

Peace River North is the exact opposite of affordability. It’s been

anything but. Life is less affordable than it has ever been. Even more

of my constituents and British Columbians are facing the harsh reality

right now of living paycheque to paycheque. Since my time in office, I

have seen the cost of basic amenities go even higher as the years go on,

while many of the promises to reduce poverty and to make life more

affordable have completely fallen by the wayside.

Taxes are up for businesses and families. Gas prices have gone up.

The carbon tax is up 35 percent in the last couple of years. Home prices

are up. The cost of insurance for homes and vehicles is up. The average

cost of rent is up. Infrastructure projects are drastically over budget.

The debt-to-revenue ratio is up. Job losses have been on the rise for

the last seven months You’re even getting taxed on your Netflix and

other streaming devices. They’re reaching into your pocket deeper and

deeper, taxing your Diet Coke. I mean, it’s got to stop.

The saddest thing that is going up again under this government is

that British Columbians are living cheque to cheque. One-quarter of

British Columbians now say their debt situation is worse than it was

five years ago, up 7 percent. So 46 percent of British Columbians are

living $200 away or less from insolvency, 26 percent say that they

already cannot meet their monthly bills, and only 12 percent of families

in urban areas like Vancouver can afford to own a home — the worst in

the country.

The only things that are going down are all the wrong things.

Housing starts are down. The same with our unemployment rate. The GDP

growth rate — down. Small business confidence in B.C. exports — down.

The provincial surplus has been squandered away until our province now

sits on the verge of deficit.

How can this government expect this House to stand with any

actions or promises when so many have failed to come to fruition? Where

is the $400 renters rebate, the $10-a-day daycare? Broken promises, just

like the portables in Surrey. Where are the promised 114,000 homes, the

relief on the crippling tax rates on small business? None.

I can’t help but note the irony of the motion, because this

government has actively blocked so many proposed actions intended to

reduce economic inequality and poverty. When small businesses asked for

a solution to the ever-rising tax rates that they’re enduring, members

of this side of the House offered them one in the form of a private

member’s bill, the Assessment (Split Assessment Classification)

Amendment Act, 2019. These solutions were offered in time to relieve

small businesses for the 2019 tax season. But it was this very same

government that stonewalled the bill and offered nothing in

return.

Now they have offered a solution that we’re hearing from business

associations, municipal governments and stakeholders is not the solution

that they need. We’re seeing the very same in addressing strata

insurance corporations across the province. Stakeholders like the

Condominium Home Owners Association have approached this government for

a solution as insurance costs continue to go through the roof with

skyrocketing increases, premiums, deductibles and monthly

fees.

In fact, we just recently introduced another private member’s bill

as a solution to this problem, designed in consultation with

stakeholders. Has this bill been called for debate? No, it has not.

Instead, we’re standing here, talking about supporting the government’s

actions to relieve a crisis like this one without ever hearing what

those actions are.

Finally, and most worrisome, this government has no plan to grow

the economy. There is no support for forestry, oil and gas, mining,

agriculture, and these are the industries that truly provide for all of

us in this province. Good-paying family jobs.

While it is still my mission every day, and as an MLA in my

community, to promote actions that will reduce inequality, I cannot put

my faith in this government at all. British Columbians have been let

down far too many times by this NDP government.

J. Rice: It’s not acceptable for a province as wealthy as ours to have half

a million people living in poverty. These aren’t just numbers in a

report or the numbers on my page, but we’re talking about half a million

real people’s lives. Poverty has become deeply entrenched in our

province, and it’s the result of having social priorities ignored and

underfunded.

[11:35 a.m.]

The previous government chose to ignore the concerns of British

Columbians and left people behind while giving tax cuts to their rich

donor friends. Now, I have nothing against rich people, but I don’t

support giving them tax breaks while the rest of British Columbians

struggle to put food on their table or to pay for their

prescriptions.

For years, we heard that the only way out of poverty was a job.

Yet our economy has the lowest unemployment rate in the country, and we

have the fastest-growing economy. There are still people living in

poverty. Almost 40 percent of people living in poverty today are

working, and many are working more than one job. They’re working two and

three jobs. The paycheque is coming in, but they’re still not making

ends meet.

Years of underfunding programs that people rely on have led to

having B.C. have the second-worst poverty rate in the country. But

things are improving under this new government. This government is

committed to making life more affordable for everyone in this province,

not just those at the top.

The 2018 Canadian income survey demonstrates that TogetherBC,

which is the province’s first poverty reduction strategy, is working.

Our government is choosing to invest in people. We are getting rid of

mean-spirited policies that keep people trapped on social assistance and

trapped in poverty, like forcing senior citizens on assistance to apply

for their CPP early, something that reduces their lifetime pension

benefits.

Our province is on a much better path today, a place where

everyone counts. We have already taken action to rebuild our social

programs, and people are seeing a difference. Over the last year,

thousands of people have moved into new affordable homes and had their

daycare costs reduced, their MSP premiums eliminated and their minimum

wage, if they’re on minimum wage, go up.

Two local examples I’d like to provide. An elderly gentleman came

into my office last year. He was so stressed because the government was

not taking money out of his bank account. Now, how funny does that

sound? He was so anxious, because normally his PharmaCare premiums that

would come out of his account were not coming out. He actually had money

in his bank account, and he was so worried that, one day, the government

was going to claw that money back.

After taking some time to work out his personal situation, we

discovered that he no longer had to pay PharmaCare premiums. He was

ecstatic when he left my office. He was hugging my staff because he no

longer had to pay. He no longer had to make the choices between

prescriptions and food on his table.

Another woman in my office, Mary, was in a market rental. We sat

down with her and worked with her to realize that she qualified for the

SAFER program. That’s the Shelter Aid For Elderly Renters. She’s now

saving $200 a month — $200 a month that she can pay for food, pay for

other expenses that she was going without.

Here are some recent examples of what we’re doing to tackle

poverty and help make life more affordable for people from our recent

budget. We eliminated the regressive MSP premiums. As of this year,

individuals no longer pay MSP premiums. This will save individuals up to

$900 a year and families up to $1,800 a year. These regressive flat-rate

premiums have been replaced with the employer health tax, which collects

more from those who earn more, who make more.

A new personal income tax rate for incomes above $220,000,

effective January 1. A new top personal income tax bracket. Income

exceeding $220,000 a year will now be taxed at a rate of 20.5 percent

versus the previous rate of 16.8 percent. This change will affect the

highest-income 1 percent of British Columbians, half of which are

millionaires.

The B.C. child opportunity benefit. This budget implements the new

B.C. child opportunity benefit starting October 1 of this year. This

will provide a monthly tax-free payment to support nearly 300,000

families. Families with children under 18 will receive up to $1,600 for

the first child, up to $2,600 for families with two children and up to

$3,400 for families with three children.

[11:40 a.m.]

J. Thornthwaite: It gives me great pleasure to speak to this motion in support of

recognizing that affordability and economic inequality are major issues

in this province that require immediate action.

Affordability continues to be a major concern across the province,

and sadly, people have seen little to no relief from this government.

Right now almost half of British Columbians are $200 or less away from

insolvency — up since last year. Over a quarter of British Columbians

say they cannot even meet their monthly bills. Another quarter say their

debt situation is worse than it was five years ago.

With statistics like this, we have to ask: what has this

government done to address the crisis? Let’s look at what the government

said they would do to help British Columbians get ahead. In terms of

housing affordability, the government promised struggling families they

would build 114,000 housing units. They also promised a $400 annual

renters rebate.

Today it is clear that their goal to build 114,000 units in the

span of ten years isn’t going to happen. With only 2,430 units built as

of their latest report, it will take nearly a century to complete their

lofty goal. People don’t have 98 years to wait for the NDP to deliver on

their commitments. Housing developments are projected to drop by 22

percent this year alone. When fewer homes are built, housing becomes

more expensive, and that is exactly what’s happening today.

As for the NDP’s campaign promise to introduce a renters rebate,

it is nowhere to be seen in Budget 2020 — a mere campaign slogan.

Instead, since the NDP took office, the average Vancouver renter is now

paying over $2,000 per month. Rental affordability is not an issue

exclusive to Metro Vancouver or Victoria. People across this entire

province are paying more as rents skyrocket under this

government.

Then there are the skyrocketing strata insurance fees. We’ve seen

no relief from this government, and they’ve even ignored the bill that

our side produced that just might be a start to fix it. Housing is just

one of many examples illustrating the lack of affordability and economic

equality experienced by people in this province.

The NDP’s employer health replacement tax has shifted the

financial burden to businesses, municipalities, school districts and

non-profits. People aren’t actually benefiting from this. The average

restaurant owner will tell you that they are paying an extra $2,500 per

month in EHT. This is causing small businesses, the job generators in

this province, to lay off staff, charge more for their products or just

downright close. How does this help lift people out of

poverty?

Another alleged priority for this government was to put families

first. Take the infamous $10-a-day daycare, for example. We can now see

this is just another broken promise. By 2020, under this government,

households will be paying almost $4,700 more in taxes per year. This is

simply unaffordable. Every day life continues to get more

expensive.

Under this government, average ICBC premiums have gone up from

$1,500 to $1,900. These increases make it harder for people to stop

living paycheque to paycheque. With 23 new or increased taxes, four of

which were introduced in this year’s budget, money is being taken out of

the pockets of hard-working British Columbians.

Despite the increase in revenue, no relief was felt by the people

of this province. They are barely balancing the budget on the backs of

British Columbians. Make no mistake: under this government, life

continues to become less affordable. If you don’t believe me, check out

Rob Shaw today in the Vancouver Sun .

This side of the House firmly believes that an economic blueprint

is needed to create more opportunities for all of B.C., rather than this

ineffective tax-and-spend approach this government has taken. With rents

on the rise, ICBC’s rates sky-high, unemployment and job losses up,

housing developments stalled and taxes increased, people are left

wondering how long they will have to wait for the government’s promise

of affordability to become a reality. I’m not holding my

breath.

R. Singh: It gives me so much pleasure to speak to this motion today, and

I’m really thankful to my colleague the member for Maple Ridge–Mission

for bringing this motion. This is something very important, and this is

something that I hear in my community every day.

[11:45 a.m.]

I want to tell you that when I was running for election in 2017

and I was going out in my community talking to people, the one thing

that resonated at almost every doorstep that I went to was

affordability. People were being left behind. People were feeling that….

They were all working people. They were earning. They were getting their

paycheques, but they were living paycheque to paycheque. They were

working poor. They just could not manage to afford the things that

matter most to them.

This was the result of 16 years of neglect that government. The

priorities of the previous government were not bringing or lifting

people up. They were trying to help the people at the top, but the

people at the bottom or in the middle were being left behind. This is

something that we all, when we formed the government…. All my caucus

members advocated for this thing, and that was affordability and making

an equal and just society that we all deserve, that we all believed

in.

The first thing we started…. And I am so proud of the fact. One of

the first decisions that our government made after becoming the

government was the elimination of the Port Mann Bridge tolls, which we

did. That was the unfair toll that was put on people who were across the

Fraser River — people who were living in Surrey, people who were living

in Maple Ridge or people living in Abbotsford or in Mission. Those were

the people who had to pay this toll. This is what we had promised them,

and we fulfilled our promise.

Then another thing — I hear about this in my community every day —

is elimination of the MSP premiums. British Columbia was the only

province that had to pay. British Columbians had to pay this unfair tax.

We started the process by making the MSP premiums…. We reduced them to

half in 2019, and in 2020, starting January 1, they are fully

eliminated. I can see the results of that.

I want to tell a very short story. I go and shop at my local

markets. There’s a local meat market that I go to very often. The people

working there, most of them, are new immigrants working at minimum wage.

One of those persons who was working there came up to me when I was

visiting, and he thanked me and our government for bringing this, the

extra $1,800 that his family will get with this elimination.

Talking about the minimum wage, that is something that our

government has also done. We know that living on the west coast…. It is

one of the most expensive provinces, with housing costs which are going

up — that, also, thanks to my colleagues on the opposite side, who did

not do anything to curtail that. We brought the minimum wage

up.

I remember when we were running for election, when the talk about

the minimum wage came, I heard from the members opposite, or the people

who were running for the B.C. Liberals, talking about how only students

work at minimum wage. That was the thing that they were trying to spread

— that it is just a very small number that are working at minimum wage.

But I think they were so disengaged with the reality of British

Columbians, where more than 50 percent of people getting the minimum

wage are working families. That’s why it was so important.

I’m so glad about the work that our Minister of Labour has done.

By 2021, we will raise the minimum wage to $15.20.

The things that came up in this budget…. I really want to commend

the efforts that we’re making every day to bring people up, whether that

is elimination of the interest on the….

Interjections.

R. Singh: Students loans. Thanks for that.

Also now the new B.C. access grant that we have just announced in

our budget. We made a formal announcement this last Friday. I know a lot

of families…. We know that education is a great equalizer, and we want

the students to get that benefit. But we know that a lot of students

were not able to access post-secondary education because of the barriers

put on by the high tuition fees.

I know my time is almost up, but I really want to tell you that

the efforts made by us to make life affordable will go a long way to

create a better B.C.

[11:50 a.m.]

J. Rustad: Here’s a number to start with: a 43 percent increase in child

poverty. That was the record of the NDP in the 1990s. It took a long and

hard effort by the B.C. Liberals to bring that rate down to levels that

were not seen since the early 1980s. That is what we did to this

province by focusing on making sure that families could have a job and

making sure that we had an economy that could support people.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

I want to start with another saying as well. You can’t tax your

way to prosperity. That certainly seems to be the approach that this

government is taking in terms of adding 23 new or increased taxes. The

other piece of this, quite frankly, which is most disturbing when you

look at this budget that was brought in and all the reductions across so

many ministries, reductions in services and the things that are not

funded…. They’re learning the hard way that eventually you run out of

other people’s money.

When you look at this motion coming forward, everybody wants to

see life more affordable and improved for people. But what I see from

this government, particularly in my riding, is something very

different.

Go to the people who have lost their jobs in the forest sector and

say that you’re making their life more affordable. Go to the people who

were on strike for eight months with no help and no support from this

government — that had to go to those food banks to be able to live and

had to have the good people step up for Loonies for Loggers to be able

to have food on the table and be able to actually provide something for

their children at Christmas — and tell them how you’re making life more

affordable for them and how you’re improving their quality of

life.

Go to the people in Chetwynd, whose forest land base has now been

gutted — by this government in agreement — who are about to lose their

jobs with a mill closure, and tell them how you’re making life more

affordable.

In my riding, a young entrepreneur…. He’s got four trucks, hiring

people for logging and gravelling and other types of other activities.

He’s finding it incredibly difficult now to hire a new driver. Why?

Because the changes at ICBC have dramatically increased his rates. How’s

that making life more affordable for a young individual who’s now trying

to go out and become a driver and get into the business when they can’t

find jobs because the rates and the costs have gone up absolutely

through the roof?

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

J. Rustad: It is absolutely crazy that this government thinks that is somehow

a way to be able to get to prosperity.

Interjection.

J. Rustad: When you look…. The member who moves this motion said that we

created that. No, we didn’t create that, Member. I tell you what. These

increases….

Mr. Speaker: Member. Member, you’re out of order.

The member for Nechako Lakes.

J. Rustad: Thank you, Hon. Chair. I do hope to be able to participate in this

budget, but obviously, I’m hitting a nerve to the people on that side

when you talk about what’s actually happening on the ground as opposed

to this fairy tale that the NDP keep on pushing out there.

They talk about the reduction recently, and by 2018. None of that

had anything to do with their poverty plans — nothing. Their poverty

plan didn’t even come in until 2019. It all had to do with the economic

foundation that was laid that helped to make those improvements in our

society in British Columbia.

That speaks, I think, to the last point I really want to touch on

— what’s happening with B.C.’s economy. When you look at every

statistic, B.C.’s economy is going down. What is that going to do to

poverty rates in this province? What is that going to do to families

that are struggling, when unemployment rates start going up? And they

are going up. They’ve lost jobs in this province for the last eight

months, and those numbers are only going to get worse in the coming

months ahead.

Is it a social safety net that’s going to help those people? It is

going to be important, because there won’t be anywhere else to go. But

it’s the job that helped to lift them up and helped to bring them out of

poverty. It’s the job that helped to be able to provide for their

families. I can tell you this: it is the job and the economy that are

going to give government the ability to have taxes to help people. You

can’t just keep adding taxes on and not pay attention to the very

economic engine that helps to fuel the revenues that government needs to

spend.

[11:55 a.m.]

This is where this government just does not get it. They don’t

understand the basics, the fundamentals, of how an economy works. They

don’t understand the fundamentals of how people get engaged in the

economy and work and employ to be able support their families. That’s

why, quite frankly, it’s disappointing to see a motion like this come

forward without understanding of those basic realities.

J. Sims: It’s my pleasure today to rise and speak in support of the motion

from my colleague, the member for Maple Ridge–Mission.

I’m reminded today…. As I look at this motion, which talks about

how many British Columbians are living from paycheque to paycheque….

Listening to my colleagues from across the way, you would think that all

happened over the last few years. They want to kind of wash their hands

of what happened during 16 long years while they were in

government.

I’m reminded of a quote that I’ve often used. We judge our

society, or we should, by how well we look after our young, our seniors,

our sick and those who cannot look after themselves. I can tell you that

for 16 years, people sitting opposite failed every single one of those

markers.

I start looking at what happened in education alone — all the cuts

to public education when the collective agreements were stripped and

vulnerable students with special needs lost the supports they needed.

Four thousand teachers lost their jobs the following year. That

obviously did not improve income equality or improve the poverty level

for those in British Columbia.

I remember the HEU and the legislation that was targeted at health

care workers. Men and women, who were working hard day and night and

making a decent wage, losing those contracts, losing those conditions

they had for work and going back to working at next to minimum wages.

That is what increased the income inequality even further. What happened

while they sat in government was that the gap between the rich and poor

grew, and the income inequality got greater than it was

before.

I could go on. As a teacher, I can tell you that during those

years…. I wasn’t in the classroom myself. But I did hear from teacher

after teacher how more and more kids were coming to school hungry. Do

you know what the response from that side was? It was easier for

children to go to work. So we dropped the child working age, as if that

was going to increase or reduce child poverty.

I am not going to take any lessons from people on the other side

when it comes to addressing income equality or addressing child poverty.

There is no reason why a country like Canada should have child poverty.

Not only are children poor right across the board, but I will say that

in our Aboriginal communities, we have even greater issues of children

living in poverty, and we have lots of work to be done.

How do we break that poverty cycle? This should really be a

non-partisan issue, because we know that when we break the poverty

cycle, it’s good for the economy. It saves us money in health care. It

bodes each and every one of us to work together to get rid or to reduce

poverty as fast as we can.

When you lift people out of poverty, everybody gains. When people

can have decent-paying jobs that support their families, they pay taxes,

they go out and buy goods. That’s what’s good for the economy. Keeping

people…. Suppressing, which is what the other side did, the minimum wage

year after year was not the way to address or break the poverty

cycle.

I am proud of the steps this government has taken. One of the

earlier steps we took was to look at the social assistance rates and

also the rate given to people with special needs. But there was

something else. We also took off all tuition for children in

care.

If you really want to start addressing poverty, we should be

taking a look at what we are doing in education. We now made…. Student

loans are interest free.

[12:00 p.m.]

Now, with the introduction of the new grants in the 2020 budget,

we are taking steps towards breaking that poverty cycle that we so need

to do. But it’s not just that. It’s addressing minimum wage as well,

which the Labour Minister has done. It’s not as much as we need to do.

We need to do more. We do not need to have the working poor. Everyone

who gets up in the morning, goes to work and puts in a hard day’s work

has a right to shelter, to food and to a decent lifestyle.

B. D’Eith moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Simpson moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 12:01 p.m.

The Official Report of Debates ( Hansard ) and webcasts of

proceedings

are available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on

television.

Copyright © 2020: British Columbia

Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada