2016 Legislative Session: Fifth Session, 40th Parliament

HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Monday, May 2, 2016

Afternoon Sitting

Volume 38, Number

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)

ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

CONTENTS

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

Bill 25 — Miscellaneous Statutes (General) Amendment Act, 2016

Hon. S. Anton

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

School counsellors

Moira Stilwell

Burnaby Festival of Learning

K. Corrigan

Abbotsford Christian School

S. Gibson

Cystic fibrosis awareness and fundraising walk

S. Simpson

Old Hastings Mill Store Museum event on Chinook Wawa language

S. Sullivan

B.C. Centre for Aquatic Health Sciences

C. Trevena

Oral Questions

Roadside prohibition program adjudication system and role of legal services branch

J. Horgan

Hon. S. Anton

M. Farnworth

Oversight of Banks Island gold mine operations

J. Rice

Hon. B. Bennett

N. Macdonald

West Fraser and Canfor activities and donations to B.C. Liberal Party

H. Bains

Hon. S. Thomson

D. Eby

Children and Family Development Ministry response to Plecas report

M. Karagianis

Hon. S. Cadieux

N. Simons

Tabling Documents

Office of the Ombudsperson, special report No. 37, Strategic Plan, 2016-2021

B.C. Oil and Gas Commission, service plan, 2016-17

Orders of the Day

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Health

Hon. T. Lake

J. Darcy

K. Corrigan

S. Chandra Herbert

C. Trevena

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (continued)

A. Dix

Hon. T. Stone

[ Page 12563 ]

MONDAY, MAY 2, 2016

The House met at 1:34 p.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Hon. C. Oakes: I’m truly delighted to have some very special guests in the audience today from Quesnel.

[1335]

They are youth ambassadors in our community who have collectively put in over 2,500 hours of community service since February of 2015. Today joining us we have a 2015 Quesnel princess, Maneesha Johal, who plans on going into criminology and wants to take my job, which I’ll support her in doing. It’s great to see young women wanting to get involved. Also, a 2015 Miss Quesnel princess, Courtney Moore, who is going into teaching, and 2015 Miss Quesnel Telise Gauthier, who is going to do a bachelor of arts. As well, joining them is the program director, Ashley Schmidt, who has recently been nominated for citizen of the year in our community.

I asked the young ladies what they think is the most powerful opportunity for them as youth leaders. I talked about the opportunity of creating confidence, public speaking, the fact that they get to meet people in the community, have better connections, be able to provide good role models for the community. It’s a very diverse program.

This year there’s a young lady with Down syndrome. Last year there was a young lady with autism. They’ve had candidates that have come from First Nations communities. It’s a really fantastic program that our community is proud of. They have 53 more days till graduation, and I know that they’re going to do a spectacular job in whatever they choose to do. Would the House please help make them welcome.

N. Macdonald: I’d just like to introduce my wife, Karen. She’s here visiting, and with her is my daughter, Danielle, who has not been here — if ever — for a long, long time. She’s from the people’s democratic republic of Alberta. Whatever you hear about it, I just want you to know that last time I filled up there, gas was 80 cents a litre, so it’s not quite as dire as you would think there. There are still lots of advantages.

Please join me in making them welcome. And thanks to the Speaker as well for your….

Hon. T. Lake: It’s my pleasure to introduce and welcome to the House today some visitors that are here to mark the proclamation of the month as May as Ehlers-Danlos syndrome — or EDS — Awareness Month. EDS is a genetic disorder involving mutation in connective tissue. About one in 5,000 people worldwide are affected.

It’s characterized by instability and dislocations of the joints; skin that bruises, scars and tears easily; and arterial and organ rupture, causing internal bleeding, shock, stroke and premature death. You can understand how serious an ailment this is. It’s one of these rare diseases that we certainly need to research and look for answers.

EDS Canada is a non-profit organization that provides knowledge, advocacy and support to adult individuals and their families living with EDS in Canada. We have 27 members of EDS Canada here with us today. I won’t introduce them all individually, but I would hope the House would please join me in welcoming them here today.

N. Simons: I am very pleased to have in the House one of Canada’s really, really good musicians. He happens to be my brother. Mark’s visiting from Montreal. He’s adjudicating the provincials in all the provinces for the Canadian Music Competition, which I think is in its 58th year. My brother, Mark, is a brilliant clarinetist. He’s also, I think, Canada’s sole expert in the chalumeau. Now, if you look that up, you’ll find “blowtorch.” He’s not an expert in the blowtorch. The chalumeau is an ancient cousin of the clarinet. He didn’t bring it here today. He’d get kicked out of the gallery if he tried to play it anyway.

It’s my pleasure to introduce him. Sitting with him is, of course, my partner, country musician Slim Milkie. Would the House please welcome my guests.

Hon. S. Anton: I’d like to welcome to the House and have the House make welcome the Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia. Bentley Doyle, who’s the director of communications; Carla Terzariol, staff executive director; Wes Shields, table officer and chair of the government relations committee; Aseem Dosanjh, president — a well-known name in this House — and Keri Grenier, first vice-president.

The Trial Lawyers Association, of course, does a terrific job for persons in British Columbia who need representation. They are excellent partners of ours in moving forward to improve access to justice and, indeed, justice for all British Columbians.

[1340]

Also visiting us today is the Lord Justice Briggs, who started his career as a lawyer and is now a Lord Justice of Appeal, to which position he was appointed in April 2013 in the U.K. On the first of January, 2016, he was appointed deputy head of civil justice.

Like us, in the U.K., they are very interested in justice reform. He is here in British Columbia to learn about the civil resolution tribunal, which they are very interested in, in the U.K.

I will say that he’s no stranger to British Columbia. He’s been here a number of times, including taking some quite interesting adventures through our more wild areas, and

[ Page 12564 ]

he’s a great yachter so appreciates the waters of British Columbia as well.

Would the House please make welcome the Trial Lawyers Association of B.C. and Lord Justice Briggs.

L. Krog: I, too, want to extend my welcome to the trial lawyers group here this afternoon. Of course, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that the distinguished current president is a former colleague of mine in this chamber and the former Premier of the province of British Columbia. It only goes to prove that sometimes your kids do really well in spite of your political career. Welcome to the trial lawyers.

Hon. P. Fassbender: I’m delighted to introduce a group of students from Kwantlen Park Secondary School in the great city of Surrey. They’re here today to see what happens here in Victoria. And I need to tell you that as I had lunch with them, I’m absolutely thrilled to see the involvement and the perspective they have.

They’ve been brought over by the Rotary Club of Surrey to participate today. I know that the Rotarians do this because they believe in democracy and want to expose these students to that.

The students that are with us today are Grace Mattson, Achini Udaratayalage, Kimberlyn Gacusan, Faisia Ahmadi, and the Rotarian is Lakhjit Sarang. The teachers that are with them are Stephen Mackie and student teacher Thomas Tesan.

Would the House please make them all feel welcome.

M. Mark: I’d like to introduce my Auntie Doreen Sinclair, who’s here from Winnipeg. She is one of the few family members on my dad’s side, my Cree, Ojibwa, French and Scottish side. She’s an elder-in-residence at the Stony Mountain federal penitentiary.

Will the House please join me in making her feel most welcome.

G. Kyllo: I’m very proud to share with the House today that a pattern appears to be emerging in my family in the Shuswap. You see, being blessed with four daughters and four granddaughters, Georgina and I are very proud to announce the birth of yet another granddaughter.

Miss Hannah Lorraine Plock arrived just after 5 p.m. at six pounds, ten ounces and 21 inches long. Parents Angie and Aaron couldn’t be happier, and her big sister Kylie, who just last week told me that she’s going to call her “kid,” couldn’t be more excited.

Would the House please join me in welcoming my newest constituent, Miss Hannah Lorraine Plock.

J. Shin: While I’m happy to introduce my guests from the Turkish-Canadian community visiting us in the capital city, I regret to inform the House that they didn’t make their 11 o’clock ferry and will be missing question period. The good news is that there are two members of the delegation who are from Vancouver Island, so they are here in the gallery joining us.

This group is here not just to meet their MLAs but also to share with us their work in our communities through the Intercultural Dialogue Institute. IDI is a non-profit organization founded by Turkish Canadians in 2010. They already have 11 chapters and regional offices across Canada, including British Columbia. It aims to serve Canadians with open dialogue across culture for democracy, human rights and equality.

Would the House please join me in making the executive director, Ahmet Karaaslan, and the members of the Intercultural Dialogue Institute, both in the gallery and many of them on the ferry watching us live on Hansard as they cross the Georgia Strait, feel very welcome.

[1345]

D. McRae: I have a cornucopia of guests to announce today, if I may — maybe a veritable plethora. I’ve got to practise my words.

Today I have the Nasralla family joining from the Comox Valley. I’m joined by dad, Phil; mom, Jolie; daughter, Cassia, who’s in grade 11; and son, Spencer, who’s in grade 8. We had an opportunity to tour the Legislature. We had a chance to sample the fries in the dining room. Would the Legislature please make the Nasralla family most welcome.

And another part of my cornucopia, if I may. I’d like to introduce some individuals from the B.C. Salmon Farmers who are here joining us. I have Jeremy Dunn from the B.C. Salmon Farmers Association, joined by Vincent Erenst from the Marine Harvest company. Stewart Hawthorn from Grieg Seafood is joined by his lovely wife, Carrie; Fernando Villarroel from Cermaq Canada; and Tim Rundle from Creative Salmon.

They are joined by their First Nation partners. We have Bruce Frank, who is from the Tla-o-qui-aht First Nation. He is also joined by his ten-year-old daughter, Hannah, who is here joining us today. We have Chief John Smith from the Tlowitsis First Nation, who are partners with Grieg Seafood. We have James Walkus from the Gwa’sala-Nakwaxda’xw First Nation. We also have Keith Atleo and Trevor Jones from the Ahousaht First Nation, who are partners with Cermaq. We also have Richard Harry from the Aboriginal Aquaculture Association.

Would the House make all my cornucopia of guests most very welcome to this Legislature.

J. Horgan: Following on the introduction from the member for Burnaby-Lougheed, I think the minister responsible for ferries is going to want to make sure that we’ve got Hansard television rolling on every available TV on B.C. Ferries from this point on.

Joining us in the gallery are two Vancouver Islanders from my constituency of Juan de Fuca. Jemgerbuz Unar

[ Page 12565 ]

and Nazeem Akar are up here, are part of the Turkish-Canadian delegation visiting the Legislature to get an understanding of what government is all about and how the two sides of the Legislature go back and forth in a positive and, I would hope, cordial way today.

Would the House please make them very, very welcome.

C. Trevena: I’d like to join the member for Comox Valley to welcome the salmon farmers who are in the House today. They’ve made their headquarters in Campbell River and have added to the economy of Campbell River and the north Island.

I’ll be meeting with Jeremy Dunn myself tomorrow, from the Salmon Farmers Association. We’d like to extend a warm welcome to Vince Erenst from Marine Harvest; Stewart Hawthorn from Grieg, whose operations are over on the west side of the Island. Marine Harvest are up in the Broughton area. To Fernando Villarroel from Cermaq and their First Nations partners as well.

The Walkus family have a very active engagement with Marine Harvest. They have a boat that works closely with the factory. The Tlowitsis, John Smith, also has a very close connection with Grieg. Obviously, Richard Harry has a long history in aboriginal aquaculture.

I hope the House will make them all welcome and recognize the importance of their industry for my community.

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL 25 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES

(GENERAL) AMENDMENT ACT, 2016

Hon. S. Anton presented a message from His Honour the Administrator: a bill intituled Miscellaneous Statutes (General) Amendment Act, 2016.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Anton: I’m pleased to introduce Bill 25, the Miscellaneous Statutes (General) Amendment Act, 2016. This bill amends the following statutes: the Agricultural Land Commission Act; the Assessment Act; the Local Government Act; the Environmental Management Act; the Protected Areas of British Columbia Act; the Income Tax Act; the Insurance Act; the Mutual Fire Insurance Companies Act; the Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing Act; and the Liquor Control and Licensing Act.

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

Bill 25, Miscellaneous Statutes (General) Amendment Act, 2016, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. M. de Jong: To, as I customarily do, advise the House that the tabling of Bill 25 represents the completion of the government’s intended legislative package for the spring session, in the days ahead, the hon. Opposition House Leader and I will endeavour to settle on a

schedule that will ensure timely consideration of the measures that sit on the order paper.

[1350]

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

SCHOOL COUNSELLORS

Moira Stilwell: It’s with great pleasure that I rise today to recognize British Columbia’s school counsellors and the exemplary work they do to help students manage crucial turning points in their lives, cope with a variety of social concerns and plan for a life after high school.

High school can be very challenging. There are a number of issues that often can challenge a student’s self-esteem and academic achievement. Things like family troubles, social pressure and discrimination are just a few of the challenges that present barriers to learning and success. Counsellors mitigate these barriers, providing much-needed guidance in an array of personal and career matters.

They are often the first point of contact for students dealing with issues such as anxiety, depression and bullying. In situations like this, they provide front-line support by resolving threats and offering tools to help students strengthen their resiliency and build confidence.

Recently I heard from parents whose child was suffering from bullying and homophobia, and the harassment had led to self-harm. These parents are crediting their school counsellor with saving their child’s life. I’ve also heard from other parents who are thanking their school counsellor for helping to steer their child away from the gang lifestyle and onto a safer, happier and more productive path.

Counsellors do more than assist with schedules and post-secondary applications. They help students and parents handle a multitude of problems that fall outside regular academic issues. They enhance the school experience, help build inclusive learning environments and ultimately societies and provide guidance for emotional development.

I ask the House to join me in thanking them for everything they do to empower youth to strive for their best and take control of their futures.

[ Page 12566 ]

BURNABY FESTIVAL OF LEARNING

K. Corrigan: The Burnaby Festival of Learning is a week-long celebration from May 1 to May 7, co-presented by Simon Fraser University and the city of Burnaby, with participation from school district 41 and support from Vancity and Burnaby Now . More than 50 free events will inform, engage and spark creative conversations between diverse audiences.

Capping SFU’s 50th anniversary celebrations, the festival will showcase performances, lectures, discussions, debates and book launches, joining the university’s strong history of research and dialogue with the city’s diversity and community programming. Events will engage many audiences, including children, families, young adults and seniors. Activities will happen across many civic spaces and institutions, including libraries, museums, galleries, parks and community centres in Burnaby and SFU.

Activities will include Burnaby high school students attending classes at SFU; a discussion of the elders digital storytelling project; and a talk by Ray Villard, who was public relations director of the Hubble telescope for 25 years. There are walking tours about the development of the city; talks about the archaeology of the Franklin expedition; an environmental scavenger hunt; a talk by SFU president Dr. Andrew Petter, entitled “Why Universities Matter”; and “Bugs and Bodies: An Introduction to Forensic Entomology.”

The festival is an exciting mix of facts and fun, activities and reflection, and there are still many days left for those who want to attend.

Congratulations to the city, Simon Fraser University, the Burnaby school district, the sponsors and all the presenters for this wonderful celebration of learning.

ABBOTSFORD CHRISTIAN SCHOOL

S. Gibson: It’s a great pleasure for me to rise on behalf of my constituents in Abbotsford-Mission to recognize an outstanding educational institution within my community. Since 1953, Abbotsford Christian School has been a centre of learning and development for Abbotsford’s youth.

Its entrepreneurial forefathers sought to establish an institution dedicated to educating their children and first opened their doors as an elementary school in 1953. In the decades since, Abbotsford Christian School has grown into a wonderful community of students from preschool right through to grade 12, with a simple but clear mission: “Engaging minds, nurturing hearts and shaping the world.”

The school fosters an environment where students are encouraged to become naturally curious and engaged with their teaching through project-based learning, group work and community service, which is well-known throughout the area.

[1355]

Beyond intellectual development, the school also focuses on developing the emotional intelligence of students. It instils with them the traits of responsibility, empathy, integrity, courage and respect, so that one day they will become leaders who shape our world. It is more than simply a place of learning. It’s a community built upon partnerships between students and educators that nurtures the spirit and grows the mind.

I wish all the best to Abbotsford Christian School in the decades to come. I’m very proud to acknowledge that today and continue the excellent work of preparing its graduates to seize life’s challenges and inspiring them to be the next generation of Christian leaders.

CYSTIC FIBROSIS AWARENESS

AND FUNDRAISING WALK

S. Simpson: Along with the start of great weather that May brings, this is also the month to highlight awareness around cystic fibrosis. I’ve spoken over the past few years about this issue a number of times in the House. It is a personal matter for me, as my nephew Liam has CF. More importantly, for Liam and the other 4,000 young Canadians who face the reality of CF, it is a compelling life challenge.

Cystic fibrosis causes mucus buildup that damages the lining of the lungs as well as blocking an enzyme required for the intestinal digestive system. There is no cure for CF, and too often the disease is fatal, cutting short too many young lives. While there is no cure for cystic fibrosis, the progress being made on the research and science is significant. There are new treatment regimens and strategies that are showing real promise in battling CF.

Since 1960, Cystic Fibrosis Canada has invested over $140 million in research, care and support for those suffering with CF and their families. This is critical support in so many ways for these families.

The major fundraising event for cystic fibrosis is coming up on May 29. Across Canada, people will be participating in the Great Strides walks. In British Columbia, walks will take place in ten locations around the province. I will be participating in the Vancouver event at VanDusen Botanical Garden. I want to encourage all members of this House to support walkers in your community or to participate yourselves.

For those who may be watching today, commit to walk or pledge to give our young people the best chance we can in life. Go to cysticfibrosis.ca for more information.

Reiterating what I said last year, I am more confident than ever that we are making real progress on this disease. We can find a cure or turn this into a manageable chronic condition rather than a life-threatening disease with all too often fatal results. Together we can beat cystic fibrosis. Support the Great Strides walks, and let’s make that happen.

[ Page 12567 ]

OLD HASTINGS MILL STORE MUSEUM

EVENT ON CHINOOK WAWA LANGUAGE

S. Sullivan: On June 24 and 25 at the Old Hastings Mill Store Museum, a group of people will gather for the weekend to learn from Jay Powell, a retired UBC professor who has dedicated his life to documenting and reviving traditional First Nations languages. He’s the only remaining speaker in British Columbia of Chinook Wawa, or Chinook Jargon.

It is fitting the gathering will take place at the Hastings Mill museum. The Hastings Mill was the largest employer in early Vancouver, and it operated in Chinook Wawa. This means that Chinook Wawa was at one time the working language of Vancouver. It was spoken in logging camps, mills and canneries along the coast. It was also the first language used by Japanese and Chinese people when they came. We know that because their eyewitness testimony was written in Chinook by the judges.

Many of us still speak Chinook Wawa when we use words like skookum or salt chuck, meaning the ocean, mucky-muck, bigwigs, potlatch, cultus. I’m sorry to the member in front that cultus means a “not very nice” lake. The surest way that I know to tell if someone is really from British Columbia is how many Chinook Wawa words they know.

People from many different cultures contributed to the development of Chinook Wawa. It is an example of how people work together. It is an inspiration for our future. The language is so intimately connected with our history that some people call it speaking British Columbian.

Would you like to learn to speak British Columbian? Come join us at the Hastings Mill store museum.

[1400]

B.C. CENTRE FOR

AQUATIC HEALTH SCIENCES

C. Trevena: I rise today to speak about a unique operation located in Campbell River, the B.C. Centre for Aquatic Health Sciences. Eight years old and going from strength to strength, this high-tech laboratory is providing new opportunities for the community. It’s the only aquatic research facility of its kind in the province and adds a new dimension to Campbell River. Long known as the salmon capital of the world, it’s also still a hub for fishing and, of course, for aquaculture. Having a research centre dedicated to aquatic health is truly value-added.

The not-for-profit, fee-for-service lab works with many organizations, from the Tula Foundation, which runs the Hakai institute on Calvert Island, to shellfish farmers; from the federal department of fisheries to fish farmers. Its mission statement, perhaps, says it all. The centre “exists to improve the health of aquatic animals and ecosystems by developing applied scientific knowledge.”

The work it does includes fish health and welfare, looking at wild and farmed animal interactions, epidemiology, stress physiology and environmental monitoring. From checking for lice on tiny, tiny fish — which was what was happening when I last visited — to monitoring plankton in Discovery passage, from virology to molecular tests, the ten-strong team is engaged and enthusiastic about their work.

Jim Powell, the executive director, was a founding board member. A number of the staff have been on the board since its inception, and the diversity of the backgrounds in the board are emblematic of the diversity of the work done by the laboratory.

Education and training are core to the operation, both for its own staff and those who work in the industry. But the organization also wants to increase the value of marine-based industries. The investment in the centre is huge, as would be expected, with state-of-the-art equipment for tests. But its location is discreet, although a new, vivid mural on one of its walls might give the game away. It’s in a building that houses a dentist, a restaurant and a union office. It has already outgrown its initial space in the Maritime Heritage Centre and now is bursting at the seams at this, its second home.

What is clear for those who have come to rely on it, as well as for Campbell River itself, is if the B.C. Centre for Aquatic Health Sciences didn’t exist, it would need to be invented.

Oral Questions

ROADSIDE PROHIBITION PROGRAM

ADJUDICATION SYSTEM AND

ROLE OF LEGAL SERVICES BRANCH

J. Horgan: Over the past five years, the government has had serious challenges to its roadside prohibition program. While keeping impaired drivers off the road was unanimously supported by this Legislature, we still also must, of course, keep in mind the legal rights of British Columbians. In 2012, the government was forced to amend the legislation, and now we have serious allegations of direct interference in the adjudication process.

My question is to the Attorney General. Can she tell this House if her staff has interfered in the independence of the adjudicators?

Hon. S. Anton: It is indeed the goal of the immediate roadside prohibition program to take people who have been drinking and driving off the road and to make our roads safe. There’s an adjudication system, and

[ Page 12568 ]

RoadSafetyBC and the adjudicators enjoy advice from our legal services branch lawyers. This is common for tribunals. This is common throughout the justice system — that those making decisions can receive advice.

Our legal services branch lawyers are there to ensure that the system operates fairly and with integrity, and when they give advice to tribunal members, when they give advice to different branches of government, that is exactly what we are doing — what those lawyers are doing. And everyone in this House — indeed, everyone in the province — should have confidence in the work that they do and in the advice that they give.

Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a supplemental.

J. Horgan: Paul Doroshenko, a Vancouver lawyer, received a freedom-of-information package from the B.C. Liberal government that painted quite a different picture from that which was just described by the Attorney General. In fact, according to those documents, emails suggest that the superintendent of motor vehicles, as well as ministry staff in the Attorney General’s ministry, directly tried to influence the outcome of an adjudication.

Again, I appreciate the minister’s talking points, but when I think of the reasons for judgment…. Chief Justice Hinkson said the following: “While a part of this exchange was certainly legal advice to the responsible adjudicator, another part of the exchange went beyond the lawyer’s role as legal adviser by purporting to influence the reasonable adjudicator’s decision-making or adjudicating role.” And that’s the end of the reason for judgment.

[1405]

So to the Attorney General, can she determine for us in this House: which is it — legal advice or interference?

Hon. S. Anton: As I mentioned a moment ago, it is the job of the legal services branch lawyers to provide advice to government ministries and to government programs and to assist in tribunals, and of course, there are tribunals throughout government.

That kind of advice is common throughout the judicial system. It’s common in courts, and it’s common in tribunals. That’s exactly what our lawyers do. The advice is provided to ensure that the system operates fairly and with integrity. At the end of the day, it is the adjudicator who makes the decision, but they can get advice, they do get advice, and as I said, that happens across the justice system.

Once again, I will say that the province and this House should have confidence in the advice given by legal services branch lawyers. They act with integrity, and they serve us well every single day.

Madame Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a further supplemental.

J. Horgan: I appreciate the Attorney’s sentiment, but it’s difficult to have the confidence that she suggests that British Columbians have — in fact, that suggests at the confidence this House should have — when no one less than the chief justice, in reasons for judgment, calls into question that very independence. In fact, it says that the legal action went beyond advice towards interference.

So I am hopeful, hon. Speaker, through you to the Attorney General, that perhaps the….

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

J. Horgan: Perhaps the Attorney General can put our minds at ease by releasing, through freedom of information, the emails that are now being sealed until such time as the government determines whether or not they are going to appeal. I think we could clear the air. Support the intention of the Attorney General to give confidence to this independent adjudication process by allowing us to see the emails, and we’ll judge for ourselves.

Hon. S. Anton: As I said a moment ago, the legal services branch lawyers provide advice, in this case to RoadSafetyBC and to the adjudicators in that system.

This is common throughout the justice system. They do it with integrity, they do it fairly, they do it properly, and they do it so that our province, our justice system and, in this case, the immediate roadside prohibition system are operating properly and operating with integrity. So all of us in British Columbia should have confidence in the work that they do.

M. Farnworth: I know that the Attorney General wants to take a nothing-to-see-here approach in her answers. Given the government’s record on so many other issues, please don’t be surprised if we’re skeptical on her answers to date.

I’d like to draw the Attorney’s attention to the quote of the chief justice, of Justice Hinkson, and what he said. He said: “Another part of the exchange went beyond the lawyer’s role as legal advisor by purporting to influence the responsible adjudicator’s decision-making or adjudicating role.”

That’s completely different than the answer the Attorney General has given us. Mr. Doroshenko alleges that the Ministry of Attorney General released documents under FOI that prove “the government is committing an offence and breaking the law.”

We’ve had a statement from the justice. We have the comments from the lawyer. So if the Attorney General is so confident that there is nothing to see here, will she release those documents and table them in the House today? What’s she afraid of?

[ Page 12569 ]

Hon. S. Anton: As I have said a couple of times already, it is the job of legal services branch lawyers to assist with advice, both to government ministries and, indeed, to government tribunals. The immediate roadside prohibition program — the reviewers being part of that overall system of justice in the province of British Columbia…. They provide that advice properly. They provide it fairly. We are well-served in British Columbia by the advice that they provide.

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

[1410]

M. Farnworth: It is the Attorney General’s job to ensure that justice is delivered fairly in the province of British Columbia. It’s the Attorney General’s job to ensure that administrative tribunals are not interfered with. And what we’re hearing are serious allegations and questions that that is in fact exactly what has been taking place — that these tribunals are being interfered with.

The Attorney General has one way today to resolve this issue, and that is to table those documents so that the public can judge for themselves that justice is being delivered fairly. Will she do that?

Hon. S. Anton: Indeed, the member opposite asks that justice be delivered fairly, and it is. Advice is given properly and fairly and with integrity. The advice is given by legal services branch lawyers, in this case, and the adjudicator makes their decisions. The adjudicator…. It is their job to maintain their independence and make their decisions independently.

It is a bit rich, coming from members opposite, who like to advise political interference often. They want political interference on the health firings. They want political interference…. They want political interference on the issues around indemnity. They want political interference in the issues around judging on real estate transactions.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. S. Anton: They love to have political interference, but I can assure you, I do not, and nor do our lawyers. Our lawyers operate fairly and properly to ensure that justice is properly and fairly delivered in the province of British Columbia.

OVERSIGHT OF BANKS ISLAND

GOLD MINE OPERATIONS

J. Rice: I received a copy of a letter, sent by the Gitxaala First Nation to government, raising serious concerns about the now closed Banks Island gold mine.

In March and June of 2015, Banks Island Gold did not report that it had two separate tailings spills and numerous serious health and safety infractions. Alarmingly, the minister’s staff never set foot on Banks Island until after it had been in operation for 15 months and only after the ministry received a tip from the opposition that there had been a spill and safety infractions.

What is the end result of the minister’s negligence? Ninety people are out of work, and the Gitxaala traditional and seafood harvesting territories are a mess. To the minister: why were there no inspections for 15 months — while, at the exact same time, the minister was promising increased rigour for mine oversight?

Hon. B. Bennett: The member is partly correct — which is a change. The mine on Banks Island was determined to be not following best practices in terms of protecting the environment. Immediately upon the ministry getting a tip — not from the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke, actually, but from somebody in the north — they went up, they looked at what needed to be looked at, and the mine was closed.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. B. Bennett: The opposition likes to say that the Ministry of Energy and Mines never takes action in the mining industry. Well, that mine was closed. It was closed, it’s still closed, and it will never reopen, unless they can show that they will operate in a way that protects the natural environment.

Madame Speaker: The member for North Coast on a supplemental.

J. Rice: Hon. Speaker….

Interjection.

Madame Speaker: Member, the Chair will hear the answer and the question.

Please continue.

J. Rice: In the 15 months from the time the mine was permitted until the visit by compliance officers on July 9, not one inspection took place. When the minister finally sent staff to Banks Island, they discovered no fewer than ten violations of the mines permit.

[1415]

So the ministry told the company to shut down. Banks Island Gold ignored that order. The ministry also ordered Banks Island Gold to submit an action plan to clean up their operations by August 31, 2015. Again to the minister: why did the ministry not enforce the order?

[ Page 12570 ]

Hon. B. Bennett: The member has the chronology wrong; she has the facts wrong. When the Ministry of Energy and Mines found out that the mine was not in compliance, the mine was closed. It is still closed.

The right action was taken by the Ministry of Energy and Mines. It is unfortunate that people lost their jobs in the member’s constituency, but the choice for the regulator is not whether there ought to be jobs in the mining industry or whether there ought to be proper compliance and enforcement. There has to be proper compliance and enforcement. The ministry has to shut a mine down that is not behaving in a responsible way, and that’s what we did.

N. Macdonald: The mine opens. It’s not inspected from when it opens, for 15 months, until there is a complaint. The ministry orders it closed. They refuse to close. They simply don’t, and the ministry becomes aware of that in a media story.

That is compliance and enforcement here in British Columbia, and it’s pretty appalling. There was an action plan. Action was supposed to be taken August 31. In fact, the company only got around to submitting their action plan on October 9. Even then, the Gitxaala described that plan as haphazard, and no action followed.

The minister promised British Columbia after the Mount Polley spill that he was going to ensure that mines were operating safely, that he was on the case. Can the minister tell the House what steps he took between July 2015 and December 2015 to force Banks Island Gold to fix the damage that they had caused?

Hon. B. Bennett: We received a tip — we don’t know who from for sure but probably somebody working at the minesite — that there were practices at the minesite that were not meeting standards. It’s true. We don’t have inspectors on the site every single day.

Immediately upon having received that tip, the staff from MEM and, I believe, the Ministry of Environment as well…. I will take some advice on that later. I believe the two ministries both went up and determined that the mine had to be closed.

The member for Columbia River–Revelstoke also got a tip, apparently, from somebody up north that this mine was doing something that they shouldn’t be doing. The member, quite rightly…. I think I would commend the member for letting my office know that he, too, had heard that there was a problem at this minesite. We had already had the tip.

In any case, our ministry looked into it and very quickly decided that the only right thing to do here was to close the mine down. The mine was closed. Corrective action has been and continues to be taken. We do have a bond in place. Frankly, I think what we have done is exactly what the people of British Columbia would expect us to do.

N. Macdonald: It’s what does happen, but it’s not what should happen. The Gitxaala are there. They’ve had people on the ground. They have been clear in the letter that was sent to this minister that if government had listened to their concerns, had caught violations and required Banks Island Gold to fix problems earlier, the spills would not have happened and 90 miners would still be working.

It’s what this minister chooses…. It’s because he chooses not to understand the reality that most British Columbians understand clearly — that if you regulate the industry properly, you will not have people losing their jobs and the environment will not be damaged. That is the reality that we understand, that the minister seems to not understand repeatedly.

[1420]

The fact is that with no inspections, this minister chose to let Banks Island Gold operate with impunity until a worker became fed up, put his job on the line, sent the ministry and me a tip and pictures and documented what was going on there. The ministry didn’t have the people on the ground to do that.

Even after Banks Island Gold was ordered to shut down and clean up its operations, this ministry did little to enforce that order. The company ignored this ministry because they knew they could.

The question I have for the minister is: what will it take to have this minister, this government, take seriously the onus of responsibility for compliance and enforcement on B.C.’s public lands?

Hon. B. Bennett: I think what I just heard the member say was that if you have the right regulatory and compliance and enforcement regime in place, you’ll never, ever have a bad actor. You’ll never, ever have to close a mine down. I think that’s what he just said. But actually….

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

Hon. B. Bennett: He’s wrong. Unfortunately, he’s wrong. I think we all know that, human nature being what it is, occasionally you do encounter situations where they will not do the right thing. And that is, in fact, what happened in the case of the mine on Banks Island. Unfortunately, it has happened in at least one other case since I was sworn in, in 2013, where we had to close the mine down because the operator simply would not do the right thing.

I think the public of the province supports government in that. I think they want us to take that kind of rather direct and severe action in cases where you do have an actor, an operator, who fails to deliver on the standards that we have set out.

I’ll say, in conclusion, that my ministry and, I think, government in general are always looking for ways that we can do things better. There are always improvements

[ Page 12571 ]

that can be made. We will continue to strive to deliver the most effective permitting and compliance and enforcement that exist in this country today.

WEST FRASER AND CANFOR ACTIVITIES

AND DONATIONS TO B.C. LIBERAL PARTY

H. Bains: In 2014, the forestry companies West Fraser and Canfor were found to have illegally overharvested healthy trees in northwest B.C. Under B.C. laws, they could have been fined well over $6 million. But they weren’t fined $6 million. In fact, they weren’t fined at all. The fines were waived by the Premier and her minister. West Fraser and Canfor are two of the biggest political donors to the B.C. Liberal Party. They have donated over $1.6 million since 2005.

To the Minister of Forests: was this decision to excuse them from any fine related to the massive donations that they have made to the B.C. Liberal Party?

Hon. S. Thomson: Firstly, if there’s any assertion by the member opposite that any of my decisions in operating this ministry at any time are influenced by support for this government in any way, I take great offence to that assertion. I have managed this ministry with integrity, with informed decision-making, and I make the decisions in the best public interest that I can.

With respect to the situation referenced by the member opposite, we reviewed the situation and looked at whether to put hard partitions in place with respect to the harvesting. We did not do that because what we did was we put the companies under watch and have them file plans around their harvesting plans.

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members.

[1425]

Hon. S. Thomson: The ministry continues to monitor the harvest activities of companies to ensure that they comply with the partition directions that are set by the chief forester and set by the apportionment decisions that are in place.

D. Eby: This minister is offended, but it’s British Columbians who are offended that this government will not take the big money out of politics.

Now, let’s go through the chronology. In the year before the last election, West Fraser and Canfor donated more than a quarter-million dollars to the B.C. Liberal Party. That same year the Premier and her minister made the decision not to fine them a penny for illegally cutting almost a million cubic metres of wood in our public forests. The Premier’s decision, the minister’s decision, cabinet’s decision was a $6 million gift to these two companies.

To the minister: was this decision made at a dinner party?

Madame Speaker: Member, do you recall the caution I provided you this morning?

D. Eby: Thank you, hon. Speaker.

Madame Speaker: Next question. Esquimalt–Royal Roads.

CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT

MINISTRY RESPONSE TO PLECAS REPORT

M. Karagianis: Last summer the Ministry of Children and Families hired Bob Plecas to distract from the failure to protect children from harm, a failure that was exposed by the Judge Walker decision in the J.P. case. When Mr. Plecas was hired, the public was originally told that he would be reviewing “matters arising from Judge Walker’s recent B.C. Supreme Court ruling.”

Months later Mr. Plecas delivered a report that had nothing to do with the J.P. case, a report that the independent Representative for Children and Youth has called a train wreck.

My question is to the Minister of Children and Families. Mr. Plecas has failed to deliver on the work that he was paid to do. Why is he still on the payroll?

Hon. S. Cadieux: Mr. Plecas indeed embarked on some work that I asked him to do — to look at some issues within the Ministry of Children and Families and to advise on how we could do our work better. Mr. Plecas provided that report in December. We have accepted in principle many of the recommendations and have, indeed, started to work on an implementation plan.

I think it’s important that the ministry and I hear from people with vast experience, like Mr. Plecas, on what they think the ministry could do differently and better. We take the advice and recommendations made from time to time by the Representatives for Children and Youth as she carries out her duties of oversight of the ministry. We are taking the advice of Grand Chief Ed John as he helps us to chart a new path in relation to the work that we do specifically with aboriginal and First Nations people. We take the advice of others.

We take all of that. We combine it. We look at how best we can serve the children of this province. All of that will be considered as we move forward to develop a three-year plan for changes to the ministry.

Madame Speaker: Esquimalt–Royal Roads on a supplemental.

M. Karagianis: Again, the minister has failed to address the fact that J.P. and her family have not been served

[ Page 12572 ]

well by this government. Mr. Plecas was to have looked into that case. But Mr. Plecas didn’t see fit to consult with First Nations peoples before recommending changes to the ministry, despite the fact that we know that aboriginal children are over-represented in that ministry.

Responding to this failure, First Nations leaders have said: “It harkens to another era when our children were forcibly removed from their homes and put into the residential school system and where our land was taken and our culture was outlawed.”

Given this kind of condemnation, does the minister think it’s appropriate to charge ahead with this train wreck of a report, a report that will disproportionately impact aboriginal people, without any consultation whatsoever with them?

[1430]

Hon. S. Cadieux: Firstly, I think we see the opposition again leaping to conclusions that have not been made. The conclusion that has been made to date is that we will work on developing an implementation plan for changes to improve the ministry, to improve the oversight of the ministry, to improve the policy and practice within the ministry.

As I have stated publicly, that work will include the consultation with all of our necessary partners, including First Nations people. The first will be through the report I will receive from Grand Chief Ed John, but not exclusively, as the oversight of the development of an implementation plan. The development of what will be involved and changes made to over the coming years will involve an independent advisory on which there will be representation from First Nations and the Representative for Children and Youth.

N. Simons: Several inaccuracies in the report were pointed out to the minister prior to the report being made public. So not only is the report actually off-topic, not only does it fail to include any voice of those who are overrepresented in the system — 60 percent of children in care are from First Nations communities — but now we realize it’s also riddled with errors.

Now, the minister might want to quote some folks who she is asking to work with who’ve actually said that the review is “utterly unfair,” “represents a wasted opportunity to effect positive change,” is a “biased survey of child welfare and politics,” and is “deeply offensive and inappropriate.” Oh, and that’s from the special adviser, Grand Chief Ed John.

If the minister is so sure that she wants to follow through with the recommendations of this report, I would ask her to take a second look. And would she, at this point, allow the representative, who has asked on repeated occasions, to at least provide her with the information used by Mr. Plecas to come up with his so-called recommendations?

Hon. S. Cadieux: While the members opposite may see that there is only one individual in the province for whom they would prescribe to take recommendations, I take recommendations from many sources, not the least of which is Grand Chief Ed John. However, I will also be taking the advice of other First Nations leaders. We have a Children and Family gathering coming up shortly, at the end of May, where we have two days of discussions lined up.

I will also take advice from experts with vast experience in the field and in bureaucracy like Mr. Plecas. And we have, over many, many years, taken the advice and recommendations of the Representative for Children and Youth. I will take all of that into consideration.

But in this circumstance, the Representative for Children and Youth had the opportunity to speak with Mr. Plecas. She chose not to take him up on that opportunity. And she has asked to be provided with information that falls outside of her scope.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, I have the honour to present a report of the Ombudsperson, special report 37, Strategic Plan, 2016-2021 .

Hon. R. Coleman: I have the honour to present the revised Oil and Gas Commission service plan for the fiscal year ending 2016-2017. This updates cash and letters of credit held by the organization against potential liabilities from permit holders, as discussed on page 13 of the report.

[1435]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: In both

Section A and

Section B, Committee of Supply — for the information of members, in Committee A, the estimates of the Ministry of Transportation and, in this chamber, the estimates of the Ministry of Health.

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF HEALTH

The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); R. Lee in the chair.

The committee met at 2:39 p.m.

On Vote 29: ministry operations, $17,820,706,000.

Hon. T. Lake: I am proud to stand in the House today to present the estimates of the Ministry of Health.

[1440]

[ Page 12573 ]

We have some of my ministry officials here assisting me in the House. We have a cast of thousands in the Cedar Room here in the building, as well, to support us, as well as many people around the province that are watching on television and helping us answer questions from members on the operations of the Ministry of Health. I want to, first of all, thank all the members of the ministry and health authorities and related organizations for supporting us and for the work that they do each and every day. It is remarkable.

Today in the House I have my Deputy Minister of Health, Mr. Stephen Brown, on my right. I have our associate deputy minister of corporate services, Sabine Feulgen, to my left. Behind me is our assistant deputy minister, finance and corporate, Manjit Sidhu.

J. Darcy: Thank you to the minister and his staff, including all the staff who are watching — the army of thousands, as the minister said. I know that we’re going to have a very intense five days asking questions about every conceivable aspect of the health care budget and driven very much by the issues that British Columbians raise with me.

I wish I could say that I had a cast of thousands assisting me on this, but I certainly do want to thank the staff in caucus services who have been assisting and will continue to assist through this estimate process — Tim Renneberg, in particular, and our legislative intern Michael McDonald.

If I could just begin by confirming the figure, the total operating expenses for the Health Ministry for the 2016-2017 budget year.

[1445]

Hon. T. Lake: I apologize for the length of time. As one can imagine, the ministry is a very large and complex one.

The voted appropriation, as I mentioned here, is $17,820,706,000. When it shows up in our blue book, in terms of operating expenses, it’s actually $17,967,956,000 because we have a health special account, which is a statutory appropriation which is on top of the voted appropriation that is in vote 29. That is money that flows, actually, from gaming revenue into the ministry.

J. Darcy: I didn’t think I had asked a difficult question off the top. Perhaps what I’ll do is ask a few together so that we can move things along and get to the heart of the matter.

Just to confirm, that is an increase, I understand, of $522 million from the restated estimates of last year, and that represents an annual increase of approximately 2.9 percent year over year. Is that correct?

Hon. T. Lake: The increase is approaching 3 percent at $522.494 million.

J. Darcy: Going forward, the three-year plan sets out budgets of $18,504,795,000, then $19.064 billion the next two years, respectively. Those represent increases of roughly 3 percent annually. Is that correct?

Hon. T. Lake: That is correct.

J. Darcy: In terms of percentages, how do those compare to the past ten years? Does the minister have that figure available, or can he provide it to us?

[1450]

Hon. T. Lake: I don’t know if we have it going back ten years. I can tell you that in the three years I’ve been minister, that’s been the norm — anywhere from 2.7 percent to 3.1 percent. In the previous years, there certainly was a higher increase annually. Going back to about 2007, we were seeing probably on the order of 6 to 7 percent into about 2011. I will confirm all this, and if we don’t have it here today, we can certainly provide that to the member.

I think the member’s point is that the annual rate of increase in health budgets has decreased over the last three years, which is very in line with what is occurring across the country. In fact, you will see that budgets for health care organizations across North America have decreased in the rate of increase.

There are some provinces that are operating on a zero percent increase at the moment, but across the country, it is not unusual anymore — instead of 5, 6 or 7 percent increases in annual budget lifts for the Ministry of Health — to be anywhere in the zero- to 3-percent range.

J. Darcy: So the minister will provide those figures for the last ten years?

Hon. T. Lake: Now that I’ve ragged the puck long enough, forget the numbers. They’re right here.

They bear up with the essential part of the answer I gave earlier. If you look at going back to ’07-08, in that year there was a 6.4 percent increase in the budget. In ’08-09 — that was a bit of an anomaly — it was only a 3 percent increase. The member may remember that all government revenues were down, and there was considerable effort at restraint across the board after the recession.

In ’09-10 it was a 5.7 percent increase; in ’10-11, a 4.9 percent increase; in ’11-12, a 6.3 percent increase; in ’12-13, a 2.8 percent increase. In ’13-14, it was 2.3 percent; in ’14-15, 2.3 percent; in ’15-16, 3 percent; in ’16-17, 3 percent. Projected in ’17-18 and ’18-19 are also 3 percent increases.

J. Darcy: So health spending is anticipated to rise by about 3 percent a year for the next three years. How does that compare to the rate of inflation?

Hon. T. Lake: The current rate of inflation is approximately 1 percent per annum. So it is three times the rate

[ Page 12574 ]

of inflation. Having said that, the typical CPI is based on a basket of goods that a typical household family would use. It probably doesn’t apply directly to the inflation we see in health care. When you look at the pressure on pharmaceuticals, for instance, as one example, certainly they tend to increase — particularly the newer pharmaceuticals — at a much higher rate than the rate of inflation.

Having said that, we’ve been managing, in terms of our largest expenditure, which is human resources, to manage that similarly to the rate of inflation. It’s our largest cost driver, actually. Thanks to our partnership with health professionals, in terms of physicians and nurses — although we are awaiting anxiously the outcome of a tentative agreement with our 42,000 nurses — which is about 70 percent of costs in health care, we’ve been able to hold those increases at close to the rate of inflation.

J. Darcy: What is the anticipated increase in population in B.C., as a percentage year over year?

[1455]

Hon. T. Lake: When we’re looking at budgeting, particularly as we look at the population needs–based funding formula we use for health authorities, we generally look at inflation. Even though it’s running at about 1 percent, we sort of have a conservative estimate that could be up to 2 percent in the health care field. And population…. We estimate that the pressure due to population growth is 1.2 percent. The other pressure, related to aging, is 0.7 percent.

We do try to take those factors into account — not just the growth of the population but the demographics of the population. As we have talked about many times with our federal counterparts, British Columbia has an older population. As that baby boomer generation moves through the system, it does put added pressure on the system.

J. Darcy: I wonder if the minister could clarify. He referred to the change in demographics, as far as the aging population, as 0.7 percent. But surely the cost, the impact on the health budget, is more significant than that. I wonder if the minister could talk about the budgeted increase in health spending and how much of it, as a percentage, is expected to be taken up by the demographic changes — in particular, in the aging population.

Hon. T. Lake: Apologies if it wasn’t clear. That is the pressure that we expect. The aging population is 0.7. If you take population growth, if you take inflation and then add 0.7 for the effect of the changing demographics, that’s how we arrive at that figure.

J. Darcy: The minister touched on the federal government. I know that there was recently a meeting of Health ministers. I’m sure that there’s ongoing dialogue. Can the minister please share with us what assurances he has received from the federal government, if any, about increases in federal transfers?

Hon. T. Lake: At the meeting of provincial and territorial ministers in January of this year in Vancouver, the provincial and territorial ministers were quite clear in terms of the expectation that federal investments in health care would increase. Currently for British Columbia, it’s about 21 to 22 percent of health care costs that are borne by the federal government through the Canada health transfer. Now, it’s a complicated formula, and there are tax points that are given up. So there are other factors to consider.

But if you look back in time, there was an era where the federal government paid for about 50 percent of health care costs. Again, the tax points make up some of that. But the point we made as ministers was that we expected the federal government to increase their investment in the costs of health care to the level of 25 percent.

We did not have agreement among the provincial and territorial ministers about how that allocation would take place — in other words, on a pure per-capita basis as it is now, as it became under the former federal government and is currently utilized by the current federal government, or to have a demographic lens on the transfers so that provinces with a higher age group in the population, an older population, would receive more funding. Obviously, it takes a higher level of health care and health care costs to deliver services to an older population than it does a younger population.

[1500]

It’s no secret that provinces like Alberta, with a younger population, did not want us to look at a change in the formula,

whereas provinces like Quebec, the Maritimes and British Columbia were very much in favour of that.

There has not been a new agreement on the Canada health transfers or health accord. The federal government has expressed a desire to work towards that, and it’s a combination of Health ministers and Finance ministers and first ministers working together, but we have had no assurances from the federal government that, in fact, what type of changes would come. We’ve been given signals that there may be changes, but we have not had any solid assurance of what those changes would be.

J. Darcy: The service plan envisions an additional cost of about $72 million to the provincial PharmaCare program in the first year of a three-year plan, and then the expected budget flatlines for the next two years.

Can the minister expand on that commitment and, in particular, the flatlining, after this year, for the next two years? How does he expect to spend the same amount of money for the next two years?

Hon. T. Lake: PharmaCare is a budget that we have concerns about, there’s no question. As I mentioned ear-

[ Page 12575 ]

lier, when you have new pharmaceuticals coming on the market, some of these are coming on at a much higher cost than the armamentarium that we have been used to. Now, on the other hand, some of these pharmaceuticals are life-savers. The drugs that treat hepatitis C, for example, have the ability in 95 percent of cases to cure the most common type of hepatitis C, but they come at a steep cost.

Our goal is to look for savings elsewhere in the PharmaCare budget, and we do this a number of different ways. We work together with our provincial, territorial and, now, our federal counterparts in the Pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance, so that we can extract a lower cost from pharmaceutical companies on 18 — soon to be 24 — different drugs, commonly used generic drugs, across Canada at 18 percent of the cost of the name-brand drug. That has the potential to save, for each province, tens of millions of dollars.

We also have things like the low-cost alternative program and the reference drug-pricing program, where we will only pay for certain types of drugs in a particular category and if the outcomes are considered clinically the same as a higher price drug. This is a program that has been advocated by PharmaCare advocacy groups as well as those in research in terms of looking at lowering the cost of pharmaceuticals.

We look for those opportunities knowing that there will be pressures, and there always are pressures, to cover more and more different kinds of pharmaceuticals that come on the market.

I will add this. The addition to the budget was because we knew that these hep C drugs were going to be approved, and there was a latent demand among patients for these drugs to come on the market and be covered. People that were diagnosed with hep C were waiting for these drugs to be covered. That’s why we had an increase of 6.5 percent in ’16-17 so that we could accommodate that latent demand among patients. It has actually occurred. We’ve seen, I think, $100 million that has been spent on hep C drugs.

Now, the good news is that we expect to see that demand taper off and decrease as we’re able to treat more and more people with hepatitis, because this is a drug that, under the right circumstances, will provide a cure.

G. Heyman: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

[1505]

Introductions by Members

G. Heyman: Joining us in the gallery is the president of the B.C. Teachers Federation, Jim Iker, and one of the vice-presidents, Teri Mooring. I ask members to make them both very, very welcome.

Debate Continued

J. Darcy: I have a number of questions now about a recent announcement that the government has made in the area of health as to where those appear in the budget. The first has to do with MRIs.

This fall, in this House, on a number of occasions I raised, as did other members of the official opposition, the exceedingly long wait times for MRIs in the province of B.C. Some people are waiting as long as a couple of years for MRIs. People are being told to come back for their MRIs, told to check the year of the appointment because they think they would show up at literally the wrong year. People, even for the most urgent MRIs, are having to wait twice as long, sometimes three times as long, as was the standard set by the society of radiologists, the national standards in this regard.

The minister announced an increase to the number of MRIs — 65,000 new MRI scans — over the next four years. He announced that, I believe, the day after the last session completed. It’s certainly welcome news for those folks out there who have been waiting exceedingly long times, some of the longest times in the country.

We’ll return to the issue of MRIs later, but I would ask if the minister could give us the estimated annual cost of that commitment and where it can be found in the budget.

Hon. T. Lake: The regional health authorities receive their budgets. The larger health authorities, like Fraser Health, would receive about $2 billion a year. The estimated cost of increasing MRI volumes as planned is about $20 million per year by 2018-19. So if you were to take a health authority like Fraser Health, that would probably be in the order of about $4 million a year on a $2 billion budget.

J. Darcy: My question is more specific. This was a commitment made by the minister. I understand it’s delivered through the health authorities. Has there been additional funding, therefore, given to the health authorities in order to pay for those additional scans? Or are they required to take that out of existing budgets?

Hon. T. Lake: Yes, they are expected to take that out of existing budgets, which is why I made the point about $4 million on a $2 billion budget. This is always the challenge within a health authority or any ministry: looking at the priorities from a patient-centred approach and being able to find efficiencies within the system to be able to provide those patient-oriented services — in this case, ensuring that we’re completing more MRIs within a certain period of time.

[1510]

J. Darcy: I think I know the answer to my next question, which also relates to MRIs, but I’ll try it in any case.

[ Page 12576 ]

With respect to those MRI scans, are there currently enough radiologists and MRI technologists in B.C. in order to keep the commitment that the minister has made? Is there enough MRI equipment? Is there anything in the budget that sets aside funds for the health care professionals and the equipment that will be required in order to meet the commitment of 65,000 new MRIs over four years?

Hon. T. Lake: A couple of things. The question is: how are we going to accommodate the additional scans? We’ve canvassed the health authorities to determine if they have the capacity to do that.

Now, first of all, there are publicly owned MRI scanners. There are 16 MRI scanners at HA facilities. They’re not being utilized at maximum, so there is time available on the public facilities. We’ve canvassed the health authorities to see if they have an adequate supply of radiology technicians to assist with this. I should say we’ve had no indication from the specialist groups that the radiologists are not able to manage that extra capacity.

[1515]

Of course, the other avenue is private MRI clinics. There are 17 accredited private MRI clinics across British Columbia. Where a health authority does not have the capacity in the public system, they would look for opportunities to contract with the private sector to provide those MRIs — of course, in a publicly paid and publicly administered way.

Now, the other limiting factor always is: do you have enough machines? We are developing a longer-term MRI strategy in terms of looking at the number of machines that we will require. In process already is an additional mobile MRI for the north, and we have also set aside, in a restricted capital account, an amount of money with Interior Health for the needs of the Interior.

As is always the tradition in health care in Canada and, in fact, around the world, the philanthropic community often will step up. We saw, I think, $3.5 million in Penticton recently by a private individual towards the purchase of an MRI machine for the new hospital being developed in Penticton.

We think we have the capacity in terms of equipment, in terms of the people who will operate and the people who will interpret the MRIs at this additional capacity.

J. Darcy: On another issue, B.C. Hydro rate increases are an issue that has been canvassed considerably in this House as far as the impact on affordability of daily life for families and households in British Columbia. It also, clearly, has an impact on businesses and on public bodies like health authorities, school districts and so on. The increase in B.C. Hydro rates for 2015-2016 is 6 percent. For 2016-17, it’s 4 percent.

Can the minister please tell us how much these increases will cost health authorities? I assume, from the trend in the previous questions, that the additional costs to health authorities would need to be absorbed within health authority budgets. If the minister could confirm, yes or no, whether that’s the case.

Hon. T. Lake: Yes, the health authorities are expected to manage those increases. As I said, they get an increase of, on average, 3 percent each year. That’s to cover all manner of costs associated with providing health services. Some of it is to do with inflation. Obviously, energy use would be one part of their costs that is subject to inflation.

However, I would say that our aggressive capital plan helps health authorities in many ways, because the newer buildings are more energy-efficient. For an example, the North Island project, which is building hospitals in Comox and in Campbell River, has won multiple international awards for energy efficiency. They will be using far less energy than the legacy buildings that they replace. We can go and point to Surrey Memorial Hospital. We can point to the Interior Heart and Surgical Centre in Kelowna.

[1520]

The addition at Royal Inland Hospital, the redevelopment at Penticton, the redevelopment occurring at Children’s and Women’s, the redevelopment at Royal Columbian, the new hospital that is nearing completion in Haida Gwaii, and the new hospital we opened about 18 months ago in the Lakes District, in Burns Lake — all of these facilities are far, far, far more energy-efficient than the legacy buildings that they replace.

While there will be cost pressures as a result of inflationary pressures for some components, with the considerable investment that we’re making in capital, there will be savings on those energy uses — which will accrue to health authorities — that can be used for front-line health care.

J. Darcy: Yes, I’d like to turn to some other recent commitments by this government and the impact on the budget.

The minister will be aware, and we will certainly return in some more detail later in the week, of issues related to the Ambulance Service. After hearing considerable feedback and concerns from firefighters, ambulance paramedics, municipal governments and the official opposition, the government made a commitment to eight new ambulances and hiring of 34 new ambulance paramedics. Again, we’ll return to this issue of whether that addresses the need.

If the minister could please indicate: what is the estimated annual cost of that commitment? Can the minister point to where that commitment is costed in the budget?

[1525]

Hon. T. Lake: A two-part answer. First of all, in terms of B.C. emergency health services — which, of course,

[ Page 12577 ]

includes the Ambulance Service — there is currently a business case being developed, based on the ORH study that was done over the demand in the Lower Mainland and the response times that we currently see.

This study pointed to the need to make investments. In the short term, the immediate action was to place the additional resources on the road. That would come from the existing B.C. emergency health services budget. The B.C. emergency health services in the last year received $401.226 million. Again, in a budget exceeding $400 million, they were able to take action immediately to fill the immediate needs of the Lower Mainland, based on the results of that ORH study.

That is leading into a business case to look at how, over the long term, some of the issues identified in the ORH study can be addressed. There will be a business case developed that will outline new funding requirements, should that be the case, based on actions taken.

Some of the actions contemplated may be additional resources in terms of ambulances but other methods, as well, that may not in fact require more dollars to support — for instance, the idea of treat and release. An ambulance team will show up to a call and, supported by a physician, make a decision that the person for whom they were called does not in fact need to go to the hospital. That will free up resources.

Also, the transfer of patients at the hospital, we know, in some cases is taking far too long. So strategies to reduce the handover of the patient to the hospital staff will also free up resources. The use of what are called PRUs, response units…. Instead of sending a full ambulance, you send a primary care paramedic in, alone, to assess and essentially determine whether or not the patient needs additional resources. Again, that frees up a number of people to respond to other calls.

[1530]

There are different strategies that are all being developed within this business case. The business case will include the potential new funding requirements, in addition to the $401 million that they received in the past year.

J. Darcy: On another area of funding commitment, I think we’re all aware that the health care system has suffered over the last number of years from a shortage of nurses. In the previous round of public sector bargaining, there was a commitment made to hire an additional 2,125 nurses. The minister made a commitment earlier this year, January 19, that after years of delay, it would appear that the last of that commitment, an additional 643 regular nursing positions, would be created by March 31, 2016. What is the estimated annual cost of that commitment? Can the minister point to where that commitment is costed in the budget?

Hon. T. Lake: I believe that the member said 643. It was 1,643. I know that was just a….

Interjection.

Hon. T. Lake: Yeah, 1,643.

If I might just report out on that, that obviously was a very aggressive target. The B.C. Nurses Union has been extremely collaborative in our efforts to recruit nurses into the system, along with Health Match B.C. and the health authorities. I just would like to today report out on the results of that. We are still in process, but as of a couple of weeks ago, we were at 1,563, very close to meeting our goal there.

Now, the member’s question is: where does that appear in a line item? Well, it would appear, again, under the regional health authorities. We are of the belief that the hiring of additional nurses will, essentially, pay for itself, because we were in a situation where we were using a very expensive form of filling the gaps using overtime.

What was happening was clear, after we worked with the BCNU and the health authorities, that we were seeing very high overtime bills in some health authorities. We were finding, also, a high level of burnout on the part of nurses. We were seeing nurses that were on leave due to either physical injury or from burnout because of the number of hours that they were working to fill this gap. And, of course, you’ve got a churn that happens in the system, a very inefficient way of managing human resources.

[1535]

Working with health authorities, we are confident that having these additional nurses in place will reduce the cost of overtime, reduce the cost of sick leave and reduce the churn in the system that, essentially, will pay for those positions. As mentioned, all the health authorities are getting increases that are to pay for increased human resources and other cost pressures that they face.

We are, again, very thankful for the working relationship with the union and the health authorities to make this commitment. By and large, we are almost there in completing our goal.

J. Darcy: I certainly appreciate that overtime costs and burnout and sick leave will be reduced. But could the minister please still answer the question about what the actual cost is for 1,643 nursing positions.

[1540]

Hon. T. Lake: First of all, I just want to give you an idea, hon. Member, about the number of nursing hours that are overtime. I don’t have a number that I can attach to the costs of overtime. I’m endeavouring to find that out and certainly can provide the member that number at a later date, as to how much each health authority was spending on nurse overtime hours.

I think the point the member is making is: where are you going to get the money to pay for these 1,643 nurses? My contention is that this will come from the regional

[ Page 12578 ]

health authorities’ base budgets. It doesn’t appear as a new item in the budget. It’s part of the increases they get.

It will, through the conversion of casual nurses to full-time nurses…. That would be considered one position. New nurses coming into the system and, often, new graduates would be at a lower level of cost than someone that’s got more experience. Agency nurses — in other words, contracted services — now would become hired nurses within the system. The combination of that versus the decrease in overtime and the decrease in sick time due to burnout will, essentially, equal the amount of money that is needed to fund these additional positions.

We can provide more details in terms of the costs of overtime currently, but as I mentioned, the regional health authorities…. This is one of their human resource pressures that they face. We have about 42,000 nurses around the province. Looking at the order of magnitude, 42,000. Not all of them will work for health authorities but 42,000 versus 1,600 new positions. Many of those will be converting a part-time nurse, a casual nurse, into a full-time position. It is a relatively small number, given the number of nurses that work within the system.

By modifying the way nurses are hired and the number of hours that they are working, we feel that health authorities will be able to manage this within the budget, under regional health services, that is in the budget of the Ministry of Health.

J. Darcy: Well, I would certainly appreciate the minister being able to get back about how the savings would be realized in other areas. But I would still like the minister to answer the question about what the cost of 1,643 new nurses is. I know that the ministry staff has that kind of information at its fingertips. It has been provided many times in the past.

Can the minister please share: what is the cost of creating 1,600 nursing positions?

[1545]

Hon. T. Lake: No, it’s not something that is at our fingertips. It depends on all of the factors that I mentioned. If you’re taking a casual nurse and turning that casual position into a full-time position, obviously, it’s not…. On average, let’s say an experienced nurse with benefits is probably in the order of $100,000 a year. It’s not a full $100,000 to take a casual nurse and that casual nurse becomes a full-time-equivalent. Then, if you subtract the overtime, if you subtract the costs in terms of injuries and burnout…. It depends what that mix is, and it will vary depending on the health authority.

Some health authorities experience shortages in specialty nurses, so there will be…. Obviously, training is ongoing to increase the number of specialty nurses, and our tentative agreement with the nurses union has set aside money for specialty training. Again, if their needs are more in the specialty nursing area, that would be a higher figure than it would be on the general wards.

I don’t have that exact figure. If you were to take a simple calculation and multiply 1,600 nurses by an average of $100,000, that’s $160 million. But that is a vast oversimplification of what we’re talking about here. It is our contention that if the health authorities manage this well, there should be no net cost. It should come at…. The benefit will be that we have full-time nurses, we have fewer overtime hours, and we have fewer hours of short-term or long-term disability.

J. Darcy: If I just can summarize the minister’s answers to some of the questions that I’ve asked so far. We’re talking about health care. The minister has confirmed that the increase in the Health budget is 2.9 percent, 3 percent — roughly, a $522 million increase — and that health care inflation the minister estimated to be approximately 2 percent. He said — and, of course, he’s right — that inflation in health care is not the same as a basket of goods, as calculated under the CPI.

The minister has indicated that the aging population accounts for 0.7 percent. CIHI actually says 0.9 percent. But even if we take the minister’s figure of 0.7 percent, the aging population…. Sorry, the population increase, the minister referred to as 1.2 percent. That means, even without getting into…. The minister says $160 million for the new nursing positions, from which you would have to deduct various things — I understand — but deducting figures that are not yet known and not yet proven.

We also have an additional $72 million budgeted for PharmaCare. Even without getting into the increased ambulance service and MRIs, it seems to me that the commitments that have been made and the expected increases — because of aging population, because of population increase, because of health inflation — already have eaten up more than the entire budget increase that the minister has projected.

It is very difficult to understand — with those announcements, with those additions and with those costs that the minister has agreed with — how the minister could not be planning to make some significant cuts in various health care programs in order to pay for those expected increases and those new programs. What is the minister planning to cut in order to meet the budget?

Hon. T. Lake: Well, again, the member, I think, is oversimplifying the situation. The member’s contention is that nothing will change, that we’ll just continue doing what we are doing, just at a higher level in terms of the percentage increases. The reality is: we understand that to have a sustainable health care system, you do have to change things.

[1550]

When Fraser Health, for instance, says, “We’ve got too many people sitting in what we call alternative level of

[ Page 12579 ]

care beds in our health authority; we are going to create 400 new beds in community for complex care patients in residential care, but we’re going to close 78 or 80 beds in the acute care system, those alternative level of care beds,” that will result in (

a) better care, because they’re in the appropriate environment, and (

b) savings, because each of those acute beds — the alternative level of care beds in an acute facility — will cost, on average, four times more than a bed in a residential care facility.

The member’s contention is that we just keep doing the same thing rather than changing. I know the member has read all of our strategic priorities for the health care system. This team worked extremely hard for over a year when we came into the ministry in June of 2013 to develop the strategic priorities.

Those priorities address the need in an aging population to do things differently, to look after people in their homes longer, to provide help in community — that would be assisted living in residential care — so that we’re not as reliant on the high-priced acute care facilities that were really built for a younger population and a style of medicine that was more suited to the 1970s than it is to 2016.

I would contend that by having a 2.95 percent increase in our budget and making the changes in the direction outlined in the strategic priorities for the health care system in British Columbia, we actually will be able to improve care within the budget that we have been allocated.

J. Darcy: Thank you to the minister. I want to turn to commitments that the minister has made in the past and that were set out in mandate letters for the minister in the past and compare some of those past mandate letters with present mandate letters. I think that will….

In addition to the issues that I’ve raised already today — about programs and funding that the minister has committed to but that it’s not clear to me that money exists in the budget to fund — there are a number of other commitments that I would like to understand the status of. This is based on looking at the 2015-2016 mandate letter and going back and examining the mandate letters for the last couple of years preceding it.

For hospice spaces, in 2013, there was a commitment to double the hospice spaces in British Columbia by 2020. In 2014, the commitment changed to “work with Treasury Board and Finance to develop a plan and begin the process of doubling hospice spaces by 2020.” Then by 2015, it was simply “provide an update to cabinet” on the plan to double by 2020.

Can the minister please explain what the status is of doubling hospice spaces by 2020, which was the commitment in 2013?

[1555]

Hon. T. Lake: I just want to make the point that the commitment hasn’t changed. The mandate letter changes in terms of: “Okay, this is what we said we wanted you to do. Now how are you doing? Report back. Go to Treasury Board to make sure you’ve got the resources necessary.”

The commitment is the same — to double the number of hospice spaces by 2020. These are a combination of health authority beds that would be either in hospitals or in other forms of tertiary care and then community hospice beds. The number of beds, as a baseline, is 375. We need to get to 750 to meet the commitment by 2020.

Planning is ongoing. At this point, we have 104 beds planned in phase 2. That would be in 2015-16, ’16-17 and ’17-18. Those have been planned. Another 52 beds in phase 3, and that would take us to ’19-20. That’s not the end of 2020, obviously. So there are 219 beds that still need to be filled in that process, and those beds are still being planned.

We’ve got three phases of the plan in place. They’ve been identified — where those will go in terms of which health authority will receive additional beds. But there are still 219 in the planning process to get us to the 750 number that is in the commitment.

J. Darcy: If the minister can please indicate…. The commitment was in 2013 — double the number of hospice beds by 2013. How many of those beds have already been created?

Hon. T. Lake: New beds completed to date total 29. As I mentioned, in phase 2, there are 104. In phase 3, 52. That would bring us up to the 531 mark. So there are 219 beds that are still being planned.

[1600]

J. Darcy: Looking at addiction spaces, in 2013, there was a commitment to significantly increase the number of addiction spaces by 2017. It was reiterated in 2014: deliver by 2017 and, in 2015, provide an update on the status by December 31, 2015.

Can the minister please clarify what was the starting point from which he’s measuring progress? In his update on December 31, 2015, how many addiction spaces had been created? How many will be created in the coming year? Because 2017 is next year.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Hon. T. Lake: The baseline of substance-use beds in the province that the commitment is measured against is 1,104 beds. With the additional 500 beds, then the expected number by the end of 2017 would be 1,604.

To date…. Well, first of all, I should explain that the plan was broken down into three phases, and it was informed by a planning process conducted by the Centre for Addictions Research of B.C. and community consultations. It provided health authorities with estimates of

[ Page 12580 ]

demand for various types of substance-use services and a description of need by geographic area among subpopulations.

So a three-phased approach, and to date, in planning and implementation, we have 220 beds open in phases 1 and 2. There is still a gap there of 280 beds that need to be planned and implemented by the end of 2017.

[1605]

There’s been considerable discussion with the health authorities about what constitutes a bed. Again, the goal was to increase the resources available for substance-use recovery and treatment, and there are different schools of thought on how best to provide that. There has been discussion about mobile withdrawal management spaces and home-based withdrawal management spaces, because not everyone would need an institution-based kind of program.

That is an ongoing discussion with health authorities, and there may be some discussion around the best approach to meet those 280 bed equivalents, if you like, as we approach the phase 3 part of this target.

Again, because I know the member will ask, this is part of the commitment that we have made, that we expect health authorities to be able to manage within their budget. The estimated operating cost for the 500 beds is expected to be in the range of $20 million to $40 million.

So again, in the context of budgets to regional health authorities, which — I don’t have the line in front of me — is about $12 billion, we’re looking at a relatively small incremental cost for this particular service to patients that would result from savings that accrue to this shift, outlined by the strategic priorities, to have less of a reliance on the higher-cost acute care system.

J. Darcy: So I just want to be clear. The commitment was for 500 new addiction spaces to be delivered by 2017, which is a year away.

The 220 that the minister referred to in planning or implementation — how many of those already exist? How many have actually been created? Not planned for, not implemented — created.

Hon. T. Lake: To date, 144.

J. Darcy: That means that by the end of next fiscal year, the remainder, to take us up to…. That’s 356, if I’m doing a quick math — in the next year.

The minister gave a range of cost — $20 million to $40 million. Did I hear that correctly? That’s a big range, $20 million to $40 million, especially if we’re talking about an additional 356 addiction spaces in order to meet the commitment.

How does the minister expect health authorities to absorb that big of a number in the remaining year of that commitment?

Hon. T. Lake: I stand corrected, hon. Member. There were 76 opened in phase 1; 144 in phase 2; so there’s a total of 220 that have been opened. The gap is 280 between now and the end of 2017.

Is it a challenge? Yes. In terms of the cost, I mentioned that the annual operating cost for the extra 500 — so, again, 220 are in place already — is in the range of $20 million to $40 million, on a total budget for health authorities of about $12 billion.

J. Darcy: I neglected, when I asked about hospice spaces…. Can the minister please give the cost of doubling the number of hospice spaces that we talked about previously?

[1610-1615]

Hon. T. Lake: The cost of a hospice bed will vary on a number of things — number one, the type of hospice bed. A stand-alone hospice, for instance, is more expensive than a hospice space that is part of an acute care hospital or part of a residential care hospital. On average, it’s estimated that the cost of a hospice space, on a year-to-year basis, is about $300 to $400 per day.

Not all of those beds would be operated every single day of the year, because they wouldn’t all be full all year. But within that estimate, the 375 spaces, order of magnitude of costs, our estimated costs…. Again, without the plans in place and seeing what kinds of beds are needed in what community, it’s hard to be exact. Again, the estimate would be $20 million to $25 million a year.

J. Darcy: I hesitate to ask some of my remaining questions, because these were the easy ones. Perhaps what I’ll do is…. For the times when I’m asking for numbers and it would appear that it will take some considerable time for the answer, the minister could indicate that he would be happy to get back to me and provide the information tomorrow, just so that we can move things along. Would that be acceptable?

[1620]

Interjection.

J. Darcy: Perhaps.

The Chair: Member, continue.

J. Darcy: Well, you know, it would make better viewing for those hundreds of thousands of people who are tuned in to Health estimates and are following this, with rapt attention, from one corner of British Columbia to the other.

How about I put some questions on the record, and the minister could perhaps undertake to provide the information for tomorrow? These are some issues we would like to pursue further. The mental health plan….

[ Page 12581 ]

Hon. T. Lake: To the member: I’m not going to commit to a certain style of answering questions. If you ask the question, I will do my best to answer. If I don’t think I can get you the answers within a reasonable period of time, we will provide them to you. But I won’t be held to a standard of questions that I don’t feel is appropriate. We’re here to debate the estimates of the Ministry of Health, and I’m prepared to do that.

J. Darcy: With respect to the minister, we’re also here to canvass as many possible issues as we can. If we can expedite this by getting answers and the minister getting back to me, as he often has in the past…. But I guess that’s the minister’s decision.

Again, in the mandate letters, 2013 refers to “full implementation of the provincial mental health plan”; 2014 refers to the same, “full implementation of the mental health plan Healthy Minds, Healthy People ”; and 2015 says: “Ensure renewal of the balance of the provincial mental health plan.”

Can the minister please provide the figures, either at this time or for tomorrow, about the cost of fully implementing the mental health plan? What of that cost has already been expended, and what is expected over the next budget year?

Hon. T. Lake: The mental health plan — Healthy Minds, Healthy People — is a ten-year plan, and the commitment is to renew the last half of that mental health plan. There also is work ongoing with the cabinet working group on mental health. There is no specific dollar attached to the mental health plan. It is embedded in the increases that we see on a year-to-year basis. We currently spend, I believe, $1.42 billion on mental health and substance use per year in the ministry.

Again to the member: this isn’t about doing the same things that we’ve always done. It’s about doing things in a different way to achieve better outcomes. A good example of that is the child and youth collaborative, which was to work with health authorities, with primary care physicians. It was a good partnership between the government and the Doctors of B.C. to increase the connectivity of services in child and youth mental health. That is doing something different that doesn’t require, necessarily, additional operating dollars on a year-to-year basis.

To the member’s contention that each commitment needs to have a line item, my contention is that that would be true if we were doing the same things, but we’re not. We’re doing things differently. We are making sure that the priorities of the B.C. health care system, as identified in the strategic papers that we have presented, are being met, both by the ministry and by regional health authorities. It’s a matter of doing things differently to get different outcomes within the 3 percent budget increases that are in the three-year budget for the Ministry of Health.

J. Darcy: The minister has spoken on many occasions…. The discussion papers of the ministry certainly speak to the importance of taking pressure off our acute care hospitals so that patients are cared for appropriately in the appropriate place, whether that’s residential care, assisted living or in their own homes.

[1625]

Can the minister please set out what the government’s commitment is to creating new residential care spaces, new assisted-living spaces and expanded home support, and what are the dollars? How many spaces — residential care — and how many assisted-living? What’s the increase in home support that the minister envisions? What’s the cost of that over the next year and over the next three years?

Interjection.

J. Darcy: That would be fine. If he has the answer now, that would be great too.

Hon. T. Lake: Just a little bit of context, if I may. The spending on community and residential care currently is $2.92 billion, which, compared to 2001, is a 79 percent increase. That’s a reflection of needing to catch up, which we did in the early 2000s, and 6,500 beds have been added in that time.

Now, I don’t have in front of me the plans of every health authority in terms of number of beds. We did mention earlier that Fraser Health is looking at 400 additional beds.

Some of that planning will be developed in the consultation process that will take place over the next year with the passage of the Community Care and Assisted Living Act. As the member well knows, this act has been changed so that there’s more flexibility to keep people in assisted living rather than having to move on to residential care. That will shift the demand for assisted living and the subsequent demand for residential care.

During that consultation period over the next year, we’ll have a better sense of how many new beds in residential care will be required versus assisted living. Currently, health authorities plan using demographics. So if I may…. The majority of people in residential care, for instance, would be older British Columbians. So if we look at the 85-plus age group, that is 2 percent of our population now and will grow to 3 percent of our population by 2025.

We’re going from 110,890 British Columbians over 85 to 162,000 in 2025. That’s the figure that health authorities use to decide the demand moving forward, but it will now change because of the changes that we’ve made to the Community Care and Assisted Living Act.

Hon. Chair, with that, if I might request a health break for a few minutes.

[ Page 12582 ]

The Chair: The committee will be in recess for ten minutes.

The committee recessed from 4:30 p.m. to 4:42 p.m.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

J. Darcy: I just want to revisit the last question that I asked before the break. I certainly appreciate that the changes to the Community Care and Assisted Living Act will mean that there are a certain number of frail seniors who will be cared for in assisted living, but we’re talking about a change from two services to more than two services. We’re still not talking about the majority of the frail elderly population in residential care.

I think what the minister essentially said when…. I asked the question about what the plans of the ministry are as far as new residential care beds, new assisted-living beds and increased funding for home support. His answer was that, essentially, it depends. It seems to me that only part of it depends. That

part is: what’s the potential shift of a certain number of seniors — not the majority, I would estimate — being able to be cared for in assisted living, rather than residential care?

Can the minister please answer the question, which is: what projections does the ministry make about increased numbers of residential care beds, assisted-living beds and increased support for home support?

Hon. T. Lake: Well, I thought I explained extensively how health authorities plan. They base their planning on growth of the population, on the aging of the population. That varies within each health authority. The consultation over the Community Care and Assisted Living Act changes will help to inform and refine those plans. Health authorities know what’s coming at them in terms of the aging of the population. They make their plans based on those changes.

Now, however, with the changes that we’ve made…. They were identified by the seniors advocate in a report that showed that up to 15 percent of people in British Columbia in long-term residential care could still reasonably live in assisted living. That prompted changes to the Community Care and Assisted Living Act to allow that to happen. So that will change the balance.

[1645]

Over the next year, health authorities will be engaged, along with the care providers in that space, to determine what the new demand will be in assisted living versus residential care. It may affect the number of residential care spaces.

I guess I need to make the point that with a regional health authority, we don’t have micromanagement from the ministry. We have oversight by the ministry.

The ministry created priority papers, which I mentioned, in February of 2014. There were five major areas: access to primary care; primary and community care, particularly with frail seniors; primary and community care with mental health and substance use; rural health; and access to surgical treatments and procedures. Each health authority has a different way of meeting those major areas of priority that have been identified by the ministry.

The ministry didn’t do this in isolation. We did this with extensive consultation with health authorities, with experts in health policy, and using extensive informatics of the B.C. population today and into the future.

Each of those health authorities develop their own plans. We have a leadership council that is comprised of senior ministry officials and the CEOs of each of the regional health authorities. They do an update to the ministry on how those plans are coming. I also meet with the CEOs and chairs of the health authorities on a regular basis.

We did extensive bilateral sessions, one-on-one with the ministry and the chair and the CEO of each health authority, in October of 2015. We set aside the better part of a day to go through, with each health authority, how they were going to meet — and do a check-in on the development of their plans — those five priority areas.

If the member had the opportunity to question the CEO of each regional health authority and the Provincial Health Services Authority in this forum, she would receive more detailed answers in terms of what each of those health authorities are doing to meet those five priority areas.

They have an understanding of what the priorities are. They know what their budget is. It is up to the health authorities, which answer to a board — a publicly appointed board of directors — how they’re meeting those priorities. They also need to develop detailed plans and check in with the ministry. We are going through that process with them.

In terms of the individual plans for each health authority, that will vary depending on the health authority. They each have different needs, different challenges. Northern Health is a lot different than Fraser Health in terms of demographics, distances and the types of services that they need to provide.

K. Corrigan: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

K. Corrigan: It gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce a group, by name, who were introduced as a group earlier today by the member for Burnaby-Lougheed. I’d like to introduce some members of the Intercultural Dialogue Institute, B.C. chapter, which is a group of Turkish residents.

[ Page 12583 ]

Up in the gallery today, we have Gurdal Telli, Muzaffer Ahmet Karaaslan, Enes Satir, Hayri Ardal, Emrah Tutumlu, Sultan Murat Atay, Erkan Kara and Madi Satayev. I hope the House will make all of our guests very welcome.

Debate Continued

J. Darcy: Just one last question before we move on to capital projects. The minister’s mandate letter — the last item, No. 14 — says: “Work with the parliamentary secretary and the seniors advocate to provide an update to cabinet on seniors care improvements in the province by December 31, 2015.” Could the minister please share a copy of that report?

[1650]

Hon. T. Lake: The member knows that cabinet reports are under confidentiality. So no, I cannot.

J. Darcy: Well, let me ask the question a different way. Could the minister please share the substance of the report that he produced for cabinet on improvements in seniors care based on the seniors advocate’s recommendations?

Hon. T. Lake: I do not see the distinction in the question. Reports to cabinet are covered by an oath of confidentiality. I can tell the member that we are working with the seniors advocate. Our parliamentary secretary is working hard on improvements to services to seniors, in the field of health care particularly. We’ve seen the results of some of that in legislation presented here in the House, with the changes to the Community Care and Assisted Living Act.

We currently have the parliamentary secretary working with the seniors advocate and with the ministry over the issue of dedicated hours per resident in residential care facilities. That work is ongoing. Again, we’ve seen some of the results of that work in legislation passed this session.

J. Darcy: If we could turn to capital projects. Just to be clear.... Does the minister need a shift change?

Interjection.

J. Darcy: Yes, capital questions. Just to be clear, the expected expenditure of capital in 2016-17 is $505.855 million. Is that correct?

Hon. T. Lake: The capital is broken into two different areas: restricted capital grants and P3 debt, which is, in many cases, a part of capital projects. In ’15-16, that total was $560.9 million, and in ’16-17, it is $678.8 million.

J. Darcy: Could the minister please set out those two groups? The minister said restricted funds and P3 debt. Can the minister give the amount for each?

Hon. T. Lake: The restricted capital grants for ’15-16 were $378.9 million, and for ’15-16 they’re $505.9 million. P3 debt in 2015-16 was $182.1 million and is $173 million in 2016-17.

J. Darcy: The service plan lists eight major projects: Queen Charlotte–Haida Gwaii hospital; Royal Inland; North Island hospitals; Interior Heart and Surgical Centre; Vancouver General Hospital, the Joseph and Rosalie Segal family health centre; Children’s and Women’s Hospital redevelopment; Penticton Regional Hospital patient care tower; and Royal Columbian Hospital.

Could the minister please provide a brief update on the status of each? I know from reading the service plan what the total cost is that’s anticipated for each. Can the minister please indicate how much of the $505 million is being allocated to each project in this fiscal year?

[1655]

Hon. T. Lake: I can go through and I will provide a breakdown in writing in terms of the restricted capital grant versus P3 debt for the various projects. But I’ll quickly go through the projects and let the member know where we are in terms of project cost to date, as of December 31, 2015.

Queen Charlotte–Haida Gwaii hospital. The target date is completion later this year. Anticipated total cost is $50 million. The cost to the end of 2015 was $28 million.

Royal Inland Hospital clinical services building, again, will be open by August of this year. The anticipated cost is around $80 million. The project cost till the end of 2015 was $25 million.

North Island hospitals, again, will be opened in the spring of 2017, and the anticipated cost of these two hospitals at Comox and Campbell River is $606 million. The cost to December 13, 2015, is $288 million.

Interior Heart and Surgical Centre. The targeted completion date is 2017, and approved cost was $381 million. The cost to December 31, 2015, was $254 million.

Joseph and Rosalie Segal family health centre at Vancouver General Hospital: 2017 completion date; anticipated cost, $82 million; project cost to the end of 2015, $25 million.

Children and Women’s redevelopment anticipated date is…. Well, the full development is in phases. Full development is 2019; the total cost, $678 million; the cost to date, at the end of 2015, $228 million.

Penticton care tower. The anticipated cost is $325 million. That’s in the early stages — only $3 million by the end of 2015.

Royal Columbian Hospital, again, very early stages, but that total, at phase 1, is $259 million.

J. Darcy: I believe the member for Burnaby–Deer Lake has some questions.

[ Page 12584 ]

K. Corrigan: Prior to the 2013 election, a document was leaked, which was a little plan, signed by Pamela Gardner, Brian Bonney and Mark Robinson, with the title, “A New Burnaby Hospital: the issue we can win Burnaby Deer Lake on, re-win Burnaby North and Lougheed — will also help in Fairview and Fraserview.”

The plan in that document was that they could announce a hospital and wouldn’t have to commit any dollars to it — it’s all in the document; I’m sure I’ve mentioned it before — but then could do some polling later to see whether it was a winning issue.

[1700]

Since that time, you would understand that those of us that live in Burnaby are always concerned when there’s talk about Burnaby Hospital. We do need a new hospital, and we’ve needed a new hospital for a long time. In fact, there was a capital plan in 2001, a master plan, that said that there needed to be a new hospital and that the hospital is very seismically fragile. We also know that in 2011-12, there were a number of C. difficile deaths, I think 84 deaths, that the doctors in the hospital said were related to the aging infrastructure.

In the 2013 Liberal election platform, Burnaby Hospital was listed as underway or in progress and then separately as “underway or in planning.” But last year when I asked the minister — same minister, the present minister — about the plans for Burnaby Hospital, the comment I got was: “I just wanted to say, though, I have no record of any promise being made about building a new hospital in Burnaby. The master site plan was developed, and that is absolutely correct. But as far as I can tell, there was no commitment made by this government to build a new Burnaby hospital.”

My question to the minister is from the people of Burnaby. No promise is being made, despite the election platform, despite the fact that we’ve had about 15 years that there’s been a plan that says we need a new hospital. What are the commitments to the people of Burnaby to build a new hospital?

Hon. T. Lake: Well, I would just want to reiterate that the government has not made commitments in the past in terms of a new Burnaby hospital. The member is quoting from a document. I haven’t seen the document. Presumably, it was like a lot of process, whereby political parties think about what could form part of a platform. But to my knowledge, there has never been a commitment to rebuild Burnaby Hospital, to date.

[1705]

Now, the member does know…. She was in a meeting with me and with the other Burnaby MLAs, I believe in about June of last year. We sat down and discussed extensively Burnaby Hospital. At that time, we acknowledged that there had been a master site plan that had been developed and that we were committed to discussing with Fraser Health the needs of Burnaby Hospital in context with the redevelopment of Royal Columbian Hospital and St. Paul’s Hospital, as part of looking at the acute care facilities and the future needs of the Lower Mainland. To plan in isolation would not, obviously, be the best way to address the needs in the Lower Mainland.

That work is ongoing. Fraser Health is looking at the acute care needs in the Lower Mainland and how the redevelopment of Royal Columbian Hospital and the building of new St. Paul’s will impact the needs at Burnaby Hospital.

I can tell the member that there has been some work done on Burnaby Hospital over the years. I’ve been to Burnaby Hospital, and I can tell you that the changes that have been implemented there — for instance, over containing C. difficile , which is an infection that can occur in hospitals — the remarkable difference that they’ve made, is actually leading across Canada.

The care provided at Burnaby Hospital is first class. We understand that the facility needs to be looked at, in terms of a renovation, replacement. That work is ongoing, but it can’t be done in isolation of what else is going on in the Lower Mainland, particularly as it relates to St. Paul’s and to Royal Columbian.

K. Corrigan: I think it’s interesting that the minister talks about information that was in the 2013 Liberal platform, essentially saying: “Well, that’s what political parties do.”

Interjection.

K. Corrigan: Well, I’ll pull the documents out — that it was mentioned in the platform. That’s my understanding, so I will confirm that. Nevertheless, reference to that as being something that has to do with elections and somehow intimating that that’s not relevant to what government actually plans to do…. But I’ll certainly pull it out and provide it to the minister.

It does concern me, because Burnaby Hospital is very old. I appreciate that the hospital and the hospital staff, who are fantastic…. I’ve gone there, had my children there, both my parents died in the hospital with great care, and it’s served us very well. But to have to put resources — focus hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of dollars of resources — to try to prop up a hospital that needs to be rebuilt….

When you talk about the infection control — yes, that was done. But my understanding from talking to people who have worked at the hospital is it took a huge amount of resources that were then taken away from somewhere else.

It’s a concern. It is the third-largest city in this province, and we have a hospital that is essentially falling apart, despite the great work of the people that actually work in that hospital — the doctors, the nurses, the support staff and other professionals, and the volunteers.

[ Page 12585 ]

I want to ask a specific question about bed closures. Earlier this year, there were several stories in the news about Fraser Valley’s plan to close 80 — well, one story says 80; I think another said 95 — beds in Fraser Health Authority.

The report that we had, that the member for New Westminster raised in this House, said over 100 acute care hospital beds were going to be closed. The number that was attributed to Burnaby was 11 — that 11 beds were going to close.

[1710]

The response from the minister on that date, in question period, was essentially that these beds were going to be replaced and then some with community beds. That would include, I’m assuming, long-term-care-facility beds and so on.

My questions are twofold to the minister. Have there been 11 acute care beds closed in Burnaby, or is there a plan to close 11 beds? If it’s not 11 beds, how many is it? What beds are being replaced in the city of Burnaby with these other types of resources, like long-term-care-facility beds and so on? What’s being added to Burnaby very specifically to address the closure of the 11 beds, if that’s the correct number?

Hon. T. Lake: The number is not 95; it’s 80. But the member is right in terms of Burnaby General looking at the closure of 11 of what we call alternative level of care beds. These are people that should be in complex care and residential care rather than in an acute care situation.

There will be 403 new residential care beds in Fraser Health by the end of 2016-17. I don’t have the number precisely for Burnaby. I will endeavour to get that number for her and provide it tomorrow.

J. Darcy: I know that the member for Vancouver–West End has some questions about the St. Paul’s redevelopment, but he’s not here just now. He will be returning shortly.

I would like to move on to the clinical and systems transformation project. Do we need a shift change?

Hon. T. Lake: We will endeavour to…. This is a very large project. Obviously, had we known that this topic was coming up today, we would have had other people here that are not present today, so I’m not sure we can answer all the member’s questions on that project.

J. Darcy: We did indicate that we were dealing with capital projects and CST. When we’ve discussed it in estimates the last couple of years, it has certainly been part of capital projects.

As the minister knows, we have been talking about the clinical and systems transformation project for a few years. Two years ago the minister said the project was 29 percent complete and was on time and on budget. In last year’s estimates, the minister admitted that the project was no longer on time and was projecting it to be eight to 12 months behind.

Can the minister expand on where we are with this project now? Is there a percentage completion number the minister can give today?

[1715]

Hon. T. Lake: This is one of the largest capital projects we have, and it’s not a typical capital project. We think of capital projects as buildings — bricks and mortar. This is…. Some people would call it an IT project, but it really is much more than that and better described as a quality improvement project.

The clinical and systems transformation will knit together three health authorities — Vancouver Coastal, Provincial Health Services Authority and Providence Health — and establish common clinical and process standards, including work flows; order sets, which are the computerized provider order entries; clinical guidelines; integrated care plans; and a common clinical information system, which will replace a myriad of legacy systems that are in place now.

One of the attributes of this type of system is patient safety, which is why I like to describe it as a quality improvement project rather than an IT project. It allows for consistency in terms of the way the care plan is provided for patients, based on these computerized provider order entries. It will prevent medication errors. I can give examples from Island Health. I think there are over 300 medication errors that have been averted due to their institution of a similar but smaller-scale project in Island Health.

In terms of where we are with the clinical and