Fourth Session, 41st Parliament

(2019) OFFICIAL REPORT

OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Wednesday, May 29, 2019

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 265

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Statements

Message to MLAs

B. Routley

Introductions by Members

Introduction and First Reading of Bills

Bill M224 — Gasoline Awareness of Standard Surcharges and

Excises Disclosure Act

P. Milobar

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

Role of bees and bee garden project at Moscrop Secondary School

J. Routledge

Olympic qualifier softball tournament in Surrey–White Rock

T. Redies

Taekwondo tournament and festival in Langley

A. Kang

Honey bees and MLA’s experience with beekeeping

M. Morris

Oceans and coastal protection

S. Malcolmson

Mauro Ranallo and advocacy for mental health awareness

J. Martin

Oral Questions

Government response to allegations regarding Citizens’ Services Minister

M. Polak

Hon. J. Horgan

P. Milobar

Road conditions on southern Gulf Islands

A. Olsen

Hon. C. Trevena

Government response to allegations regarding Citizens’ Services Minister

S. Bond

Hon. J. Sims

J. Thornthwaite

M. de Jong

Hon. J. Horgan

Petitions

C. Oakes

Hon. D. Eby

Reports from Committees

Human Rights Commissioner Appointment Committee, May

S. Malcolmson

S. Cadieux

R. Chouhan

Motions Without Notice

Appointment of Human Rights Commissioner

S. Malcolmson

Standing Order 81.1

Schedule for debate on Bill 15

Hon. M. Farnworth

M. de Jong

Orders of the Day

Third Reading of Bills

Bill 8 — Employment Standards Amendment Act, 2019

Bill 30 — Labour Relations Code Amendment Act, 2019

Bill 28 — Zero-Emission Vehicles Act

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Office of the Premier

Hon. J. Horgan

A. Wilkinson

Reporting of Bills

Bill M206 — Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2019

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Office of the Premier (continued)

Hon. J. Horgan

A. Wilkinson

A. Weaver

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of the Whole House

Bill M206 — Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2019

A. Weaver

J. Rustad

Hon. S. Robinson

Bill 22 — Forest Amendment Act, 2019 (continued)

J. Rustad

Hon. D. Donaldson

Proceedings in the Birch Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General

Hon. M. Farnworth

M. Morris

E. Foster

D. Clovechok

L. Throness

M. Stilwell

P. Milobar

WEDNESDAY, MAY 29, 2019

The House met at 1:35 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

T. Redies: I have the pleasure of introducing a number of people today. First,

I’d like to note that we have ten people — eight grade 11s and two adults,

including their teacher, James Johnson — attending from the South

Surrey–White Rock Learning Centre. I’d hope the House would make them

welcome.

We also have a number of representatives from the credit union

industry here in the gallery with us today. I know that on this side of the

House, we were delighted to have some excellent meetings with the credit

union folks yesterday. Many of us were able to attend an event later in the

evening so that we were able to continue the conversations. Of course, for

me, it was a bit like old home week. It’s always great to catch up with my

old friends and colleagues from the industry.

This is a very important industry, contributing $3 billion annually to

our GDP and providing loans to individuals and businesses totalling more

than $70 billion. Perhaps even more importantly, the credit unions are the

quintessential good corporate citizens, donating millions of dollars

annually to support their local communities. If the House will bear with me,

I’d like to acknowledge and welcome the following individuals.

From CCEC Credit Union, we have Ross Gentleman. From NPSCU, we have

Michael Chilcott. From First West Credit Union, we have Ron Dau, Alicia

Peters, Ken Voth and Renee Wasylyk. From Greater Vancouver Community Credit

Union, we have Richard Thomas and Balbir Bains. From Westminster Savings, we

have Sonia Mior. From Coast Capital Savings, we have Sara Goldvine and Dave

Cunningham. From BlueShore Financial, we have Anna Hardy. From Interior

Savings, we have Gene Creelman. From Vancity, we have Jonathan Fowlie. From

Stabilization Central, we have Doug Evenshen. From Central 1, we have Karen

Macdonald and Catherine Wall. And finally, from CCUA, we have Henry Han,

Anna Morena and Morgan Paulgaard.

Would the House please join me in welcoming all of these individuals

to our House today.

M. Morris: I’m delighted today to have a very valuable member of our

constituencies, Shirley’s and mine, down here, representing the Prince

George chamber. Todd Corrigall is the CEO. He’s been with us for about the

past year and a half — extensive work, right across the country, with

various governments and at government levels. Would the House please make

him welcome.

Hon. M. Mungall: Zavier is joining me today for two reasons. One, he’d like to

introduce the House to his Gumby, which is what we call his grandfather,

Roman Matieschyn.

The second reason is that Zavier and I want to thank everybody in this

precinct — all of the members here, all of the staff and all of the security

throughout the entire building — for being so welcoming for this little guy

and for accommodating all of our unique needs that we’ve had over the last

two sessions.

[1:40 p.m.]

When people back home ask me how things are going and how it is to

bring the baby into the Legislature, I tell them that it wouldn’t be

possible for women, no matter where we are and which House in the

Commonwealth, if we didn’t have the support of the House and all the people

in the buildings where we work. Making workplaces more family friendly makes

our workplaces more inclusive. It makes our democracy better, and I’m so

glad that I get to go home and tell everybody what a wonderful place this

place has been for the last two sessions, and no doubt into the

future.

Thank you all very much.

Hon. L. Beare: I had the great fortune this afternoon to run into students from R.C.

Garnett Elementary School in Langley. I ran into them in the halls, and they

were asking me some wonderfully inquisitive questions. So I brought them

into my office this afternoon, and they were able to tour the ministry

office and sit in the minister’s chair and take some selfies. I want to wish

all the students at R.C. Garnett a very happy tour, and I hope the House,

please, makes them feel very welcome today.

L. Throness: We have a special guest on the floor with us today. When the member

for Chilliwack-Hope retired in 2011 after almost 16 illustrious years in

this place, I had the good fortune to take his place, but I’m not sure that

I’ve ever filled his shoes. I’ve found him to be…. In addition to being a

friend, he’s an intelligent, capable, principled, knowledgable and, I’m

told, well-dressed member. He’s promised not to ask any questions today.

Would the House please welcome Barry Penner.

D. Routley: I would like to introduce two guests. One is Joe Yablonski. He moved

to Vancouver Island in 1993. He was a CBC TV worker in Winnipeg. He is a

veteran of the Royal Canadian Air Force, where he was an electronic firing

systems operator.

He is joined by his partner, Joy Dickie. She worked for the federal

government in Victoria. She’s from England. She served in the British

military as a dental hygienist. She met her husband in Germany and moved to

Canada. They both have lost spouses, but they’ve found each other, and

they’re here to join us today. Can the House please welcome them.

The next introduction is someone who might…. We just heard young

Zavier had something to say here. It’s another voice in the Legislature that

was commonly heard echoing through the hallways — and from in here, by the

way. I happened to sit in front of that voice. He’s responsible for my

hearing loss, not all the crazy punk rock.

This guy is a real hero of mine. We share a last name. We didn’t know

we were related until recent years, when one of our relatives found a

connection seven generations back. So when people used to ask me in Cowichan

Valley, “Are you related to Bill?” I would say: “Well, how do you feel about

Bill?” Now, actually, we can proudly say that we are related. I’m proud to

be related to my distant cousin Bill Routley, who joins us, former MLA for

Cowichan Valley.

Mr. Speaker: I’m not sure it would be appropriate if we allowed you to sit there

without you at least talking for one half a minute in your voice. Could you

do that for us? Can you say something, in your voice?

Statements

MESSAGE TO MLA s

B. Routley: Well, this is an unexpected opportunity. I’ll take full advantage.

I get to say brothers and sisters, and brother to the Speaker, one more

time.

I want to say that it was a most enjoyable time working here in

the Legislature with many of you. Those of you that are new, I want to

congratulate all of you that work on behalf of our constituents

throughout British Columbia.

[1:45 p.m.]

I know what you’re doing is honourable work from both sides of the

House. So I want you to know that at least one British Columbian

actually really appreciates what you do, because I know now what it’s

like to sit on both sides of the House. This is a weird experience, but

I’m happy to say there’s still jiggery-pokery going on.

[Applause.]

Thank you very much. I’m sure I’m out of time.

Mr. Speaker: That was by unanimous leave.

Introductions by Members

T. Wat: June 5 to 11 is B.C. Seniors Week. In the public gallery today, there

are over 50 seniors directly from Richmond Chinese Community Society, RCCS,

from my beautiful riding of Richmond North Centre. One of the seniors is 95,

and one is 90, so you see how senior they are.

RCCS was established in 1989 as a charitable organization. They

promote the spirit of community involvement and encourage the Chinese

community to participate in various community activities and to also

volunteer their time for other Richmond community organizations.

RCCS provides a variety of services and programs to the community and

the seniors in Richmond. In 2005, RCCS was awarded the first City of

Richmond Community Spirit Award for their outstanding contribution to

intercultural diversity in our community.

I would like to take this moment to thank RCCS for your very valuable

community services. Particularly, my heartfelt gratitude to the president

Linda Li and directors Karen Chow, Thomas Yu, Wendy Yu, Frankie Chan, Mimi

Chan, Fasina Low, and others. I’ll also send sincere thanks to all the

seniors who have built our province and provided our families the many great

opportunities and stability that we enjoy today.

spoken.]

Please join me in welcoming all the seniors and the RCCS president and

directors to our House.

J. Rice: Many members here may remember two weeks ago when we enjoyed a

beautiful spread put on by the B.C. Seafood Alliance. It was there that many

of us met a young, hip, pretty cool fisherman, fisherwoman, fisher. Side

note: fisherwomen prefer to be called fishermen. That is politically

correct, just so you know. I have been instructed.

Tiare Boyes is an albacore tuna fisher, which is deemed one of the

cleanest fisheries on the planet. Here our North Pacific stocks are in good

shape and certified by the Marine Stewardship Council and listed as a best

choice by both SeaChoice and the Vancouver Aquarium’s Ocean Wise seafood

rating programs. Would the House please make Tiare feel welcome.

P. Milobar: I’d like to introduce two people here today who have been down for the

last few days, meeting with our caucus and several other local Indigenous

leaders to talk about their project, which is Project Reconciliation. It’s a

project that would see Indigenous communities have an equity stake in the

Trans Mountain pipeline project. They’re down trying to make sure people are

well informed, and I know they hope to have some face-to-face ministerial

time before they leave town as well.

Would the House please make welcome D’Arcy Levesque as well as Shane

Gottfriedson, who is no stranger to people in this chamber.

J. Yap: First of all, I would like to add my welcome to the 50-plus visitors

in the gallery who are members of the Richmond Chinese Community Society

here for a special visit to the Legislature.

I would like to welcome to the Legislature three visitors from China

from the high-tech sector. With us today are three senior executives: Mr.

Yuxie Tian, who has worked as a consultant to Alibaba new retail intelligent

building and smart city and is also the CEO of a number of high-tech

companies; also Mr. Rongde Lu, CEO of Hash Tech and founder of Contract

Venture.

[1:50 p.m.]

Lastly is Ms. Qi Pan, who is the chief operating officer of U-bicycle.

Now, if that name sounds familiar, U-bicycle of China is the parent company

of the U-bicycle operation that has arrived in British Columbia. All of us

who spend time here in Victoria will know the presence of the U-bicycles,

which are bicycles for sharing. They’re in good use around the greater

Victoria area.

Would the House please join me in offering a great welcome to our

visitors from China.

R. Glumac: I would like to introduce two of my constituents, Guy Black and Sonny

Son. They’re going to be travelling to Korea on June 17 to pay tribute to

British Columbians that died in the Korean War — in particular, three

veterans that have no known grave: Donald Hastings, Vince Liska and John

Burak. They’re supported in their journey by many people. Many of them are

here today. I believe they’re in the House. Maybe they’re above me; I can’t

see. I ask the House to make them feel welcome.

Hon. K. Chen: I’m very happy to have the opportunity today to welcome a group of

guests from the Canadian Chinese Betterment Association of Canada, including

their executive members Julie Chen and Mr. Alan Den, who are here joining us

for question period today. They are also here with a group of outstanding

young professionals, including four award winners of a scholarship award

from their organization. That’s Peggy Hua, Elody Yen, Margaret Zhe and Shan

Zhang, who are outstanding young individuals — and all women — who are

joining us for question period today and also meeting with members from this

House, including the members for Burnaby–Deer Lake and North

Vancouver–Lonsdale. I would like to ask the House to make them feel very

welcome.

I also want to give a big shout-out to Ms. Julie Chen, who is also

passionate about early childhood education.

C. Oakes: Last week I had the privilege of attending two different

organizations’ conferences — the British Columbia Chamber Execs is a

conference of managers from across the province and then the B.C. Chamber of

Commerce, which represents small businesses in every part of the province.

They do a fantastic job.

Today in the House we have Val Litwin and Dan Baxter from the B.C.

Chamber of Commerce — hot off the press of their policy session. They have

fantastic policies. I encourage everyone to please review the manual,

because it represents the voices of businesses from across the

province.

Hon. A. Dix: I’d like to introduce students from Ms. Lindsay Causey’s class at

Stratford Hall school, which is located near Trout Lake in my constituency.

The students’ names are Levi Schmitts, Jaden Ahamed, Ania Kasaam, Ming

Treblecock and Obie Caldoway. They’re also joined by parents Ana Lin, Chris

Caldoway and Hazel Lu. The students have been very involved in something

called the 6,000 red poppies event that occurred at Mountain View Cemetery

last year, honouring Canadian veterans of World War I.

They will be going with Mr. Guy Black, who the member for Port

Moody–Coquitlam introduced. They’ve been working on making 400 handmade

Canadian flags and 22 dogwood flowers. Mr. Black will be taking them with

him on his trip to Korea at the end of June to place at the graves of

Canadian casualties of the Korean War.

I ask everyone to make these amazing students welcome.

M. Hunt: This afternoon there’ll be two classes of young students with us from

Surrey Centre School. Ms. Sandhu and 32 of her students will be here. I

would like the House to please make them welcome.

J. Tegart: I’m pleased to introduce a constituent of mine from the village of

Cache Creek visiting the precinct today. David Dubois has served on

municipal council, and he will be enjoying the experience of question

period. I ask the House to please make him welcome.

R. Leonard: We come into this House every day, and it’s always an amazing place to

come into. For some of the folks that work in this building, it’s not a

place they get to come to every day, but they support us to be able to be

here.

[1:55 p.m.]

Today, for the first time, my legislative assistant and others’

assistant, Kaylee Szakacs, is here, and she’s really excited. I’m sure we’ll

give her a great welcome.

Hon. S. Fraser: I rise on a point of order. I think it’s important that we follow

proper procedure here. The member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan recognized our

former colleague at an inappropriate time. He should have waited for

introduction of Bills. [Laughter.]

Mr. Speaker: Oh, you’re withdrawing?

B. Ma: We have some guests from and with the Korean War Veterans Association

of Western Canada. They are joining us today to commemorate the Canadian

veterans of the Korean War as well. They are Ms. Yun Ik Schallert Im, Mr.

Michael Chang, Ms. Jieun Lee and Ms. Celinda Williams. Would the House

please join me in welcoming them to the Legislature.

M. de Jong: Last Monday the Bradner Elementary School hosted the 100th Annual

Bradner May Day Parade. Today in the Legislative Assembly we’re joined by 16

grade 5 students from Bradner Elementary. They have their teacher, Mrs.

Sandhu, and four adult chaperones joining them. Amongst the student numbers

are the world champion maypole dancers of Bradner. I hope the House will

make them welcome.

Hon. M. Farnworth: As both sides of the House well know, we are assisted during a session

by an amazing internship program that has been a part of this Legislature

for many, many years. In fact, some interns have gone on to become members

of this House. The government caucus has been well served by a number of

interns whom we would like to thank for their exemplary, incredible service

this past session.

They are Kenya Rogers, who majored in political science and a minor in

Spanish from the University of Victoria; Jess Neilson, who majored in a

political science honours and a minor in public administration from the

University of Victoria; Kim Chhina, who majored in health sciences from

Simon Fraser University; Gagan Lidhran, major in political science with

honours, minor in communications from Simon Fraser University; and Ella

Champion, who majored in international relations from the University of

British Columbia. I would also add that Ella will be fighting forest fires

with the B.C. Wildfire Service this summer with the Blackwater unit crew out

of Quesnel.

I would like to, on behalf of all members and especially our caucus,

thank each and every one of them for the amazing job that they’ve done. I’d

ask the House to join me in that welcome.

M. Polak: I know I’m late in adding my voice to this chorus. I had hoped to

attend the Korean War veterans event at 11:30. I wasn’t able to just because

of some other meetings, but I do need to stand and thank all those who keep

the memory of the service and sacrifice of those veterans alive.

My father just turned 90 in March. He’s a veteran of the Korean War.

He’s been to this place a number of times to join us. For those veterans of

what was the forgotten war, it is so meaningful to them to now, so many

years later, have people remembering the efforts that they put to that. I

just want them to know how very meaningful it is for those veterans and for

their families.

J. Martin: While we’re recognizing and welcoming representatives from the B.C.

Chamber of Commerce and some local chambers of commerce, I’d just like to

remind everyone in the House that last week the Chilliwack Chamber of

Commerce was recognized as the Chamber of the Year. Please give it up for

Chilliwack.

[2:00 p.m.]

Introduction and

First Reading of Bills

BILL M224 — GASOLINE AWARENESS

OF STANDARD SURCHARGES

AND

EXCISES DISCLOSURE ACT

P. Milobar presented a bill intituled Gasoline Awareness of Standard

Surcharges and Excises Disclosure Act.

P. Milobar: As everyone in this room and across the province is aware, gas

prices have hit, and could potentially surpass, record highs this

summer. Within that increase is a myriad of taxes levied by all three

levels of government reaching up to 54 cents per litre in the Lower

Mainland. But to many British Columbians, just what those taxes are is

not very clear.

This legislation would increase tax awareness to the level of

taxation on each litre of gasoline. With the Gasoline Awareness of

Standard Surcharges and Excises Disclosure Act, gas stations would be

required to post, on each pump, a breakdown of all federal, provincial,

municipal and regional taxes applied to each litre of gasoline. This

would be similar to a restaurant bill that shows liquor tax, GST and any

other fees, or a property tax bill that shows the various levels of

taxation within your bill.

This will provide British Columbians with a clear,

easy-to-understand breakdown of just what each of their hard-earned

dollars goes into when filling their tank. I’m confident, given that all

the members of this House are committed to advocating for the consumers

of B.C., that all parties in the Legislature will support this measure

to increase British Columbians’ awareness and understanding of how they

are taxed at the pump.

Mr. Speaker: The question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

P. Milobar: 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 M224, Gasoline Awareness of Standard Surcharges and Excises

Disclosure Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on

orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after

today.

Statements

(Standing Order 25B)

ROLE OF BEES AND BEE GARDEN PROJECT

AT MOSCROP

SECONDARY SCHOOL

J. Routledge: Today is B.C. Bee Day. Bees are a symbol of activity, diligence

and constant effort. We revere them, and so we should. Where we see

beautiful flowers, bees see pollen, food for their entire community. And

bees don’t eat the pollen; they collect it for their hives. They carry

it from flower to flower, spreading the pollen that fertilizes the

plant, and the plants grow fruit that we eat. In fact, Mr. Speaker, one

out of three bites of food we put into our mouths is made possible by

bees.

Bees don’t just support their own communities. They support ours,

and that’s why we need to support them. Bee health is at serious risk.

Their habitat is being destroyed. They’re being killed off by

pesticides, parasites and pathogens. They suffer from climate change,

monoculture and industrial agriculture. So on B.C. Bee Day, we also

celebrate the partnership between the province and B.C. beekeepers to

improve agricultural production and monitor and maintain bee

health.

Moscrop Secondary school in Burnaby became a bee school last year.

They are the first school in greater Vancouver to receive that

designation and only the second in the province. To become a bee school,

Moscrop created a working group to put together a pollinator action plan

and develop a plan for pollinator education and awareness.

Students in the environmental and gardening clubs took steps to

make the school more livable for bees. They replaced lawns with gardens

of native plants. They planted diverse species so there would be

continuous blooms. Ten percent of the garden is arid, because those

conditions are best for native bees, and the gardens are pesticide-free.

They installed a bee bath station and two mason bee condos.

In conclusion, on B.C. Bee Day, we celebrate bees and our

relationship to them because bees matter to everyone.

OLYMPIC QUALIFIER SOFTBALL

TOURNAMENT IN SURREY–WHITE

ROCK

T. Redies: This summer my riding of Surrey–White Rock will be hosting the

Americas Olympic qualifier for women’s softball. This competition, which

will be held at Softball City, will determine two of six berths for the

women’s softball tournament at the 2020 Summer Olympics in

Tokyo.

Softball is a sport that is well loved in our community. We have

hosted many international tournaments, and the community comes out in

full force to see the games and support the teams. But this year will be

even more exciting as we welcome athletes from all over the Americas who

are vying to realize their dream of going to the Olympics.

[2:05 p.m.]

From August 25 to September 1, 16 countries will compete for the

two spots. If members are in the South Surrey area during this time, I

hope they’ll join me to support these talented women as they compete in

our beautiful province.

Of course, we’ll be supporting the home team in their bid to

qualify for the 2020 Summer Games in Tokyo. Canada is ranked third in

the world for women’s softball behind the U.S. and Japan, so we have a

very good chance of seeing young women like White Rock’s own Danielle

Lawrie-Locke compete in Tokyo.

It takes a lot of time and passion to make these events happen,

and I’d like to recognize Greg Timm, the Canada Cup chair who helped

drive Softball City’s successful bid to host the Olympic qualifier. I’d

also like to thank general manager Cari Henry, administrator Carla Reid,

the staff at Softball City and all the sponsors and volunteers who put

extraordinary effort into making sure the events at Softball City go off

without a hitch. No doubt they will ensure this year’s event is a

complete success.

Finally, I’d like to recognize all the athletes for their

dedication and hard work in getting to this important qualifier. Like

our Canadian team, each and every one of the players will no doubt

represent their countries proudly. We’re looking forward to welcoming

you all to our community this summer.

TAEKWONDO TOURNAMENT

AND FESTIVAL IN

LANGLEY

A. Kang: Kam-sa-ham-ni-da, hon. Speaker. An-yong

has-se-yo.

I had the pleasure of attending the third Korean Consul General’s

Cup and Taekwondo Tournament this weekend at the Langley Event Centre.

This festival has become one of the largest Taekwondo Tournament events

with approximately 2,000 people attending, including 500

participants.

Taekwondo is a sport that was once solely practised in Korea —

Seoul-ly — but has since grown to become a world-recognized Olympic

sport. Approximately 50 years ago, the Korean government sent taekwondo

masters to come to teach taekwondo in Canada. Taekwondo is especially

popular in B.C., where there are more than 70 taekwondo clubs and 15,000

people practising the sport.

Taekwondo is one of my favourite martial arts. It has positive

effects on the psychological and social development of youth and

athletes of all ages. It is so popular that it even has worldwide appeal

on many big-screen TVs, starring actors like Jean-Claude Van Damme,

Chuck Norris and Jackie Chan.

This event not only promoted taekwondo but also the beauty of the

Korean culture. It was an opportunity for the Korean and local

communities to come together to not only enjoy watching taekwondo but

have fun exploring the various cultural booths. I especially enjoyed

watching the story-themed taekwondo demonstration by Chang’s Taekwondo,

trying out the various foods such as fried chicken and Korean shaved

ice, and watching a K-pop performance by KPK.

I also had the opportunity to try on a hanbok , which is a

traditional Korean costume, write their names in Korean calligraphy, try

K-beauty and many more activities. This festival was fascinating and

impressive because one can experience every aspect of Korea in just one

place. I want to specially thank Consul General of the Republic of Korea

of Vancouver Byung-won Chung for hosting this event.

Thank you. Kam-sa-ham-ni-da.

HONEY BEES AND MLA’S

EXPERIENCE WITH

BEEKEEPING

M. Morris: May 20 was the second annual United Nations World Bee Day,

recognizing bees as being key to conserving biodiversity around the

world. Today, of course, in B.C. is the Day of the Honeybee. The humble

honeybee has been producing honey for at least 150 million years and is

one of the most common agricultural pollinators worldwide.

My interest in honeybees began because of pollination concerns

around my own garden at home. Little did I know of the magic these

amazing insects perform each and every year. My garden has flourished.

Fruits and berries are bigger and yes, Mr. Speaker, even Prince George

apples seem a little riper — almost Okanagan-like.

My wife, Chris, together with our neighbours, took over the tasks

of beekeeping when I entered politics and has embraced all of the

aspects of this rewarding activity. Unwrapping the hives in April after

a cold and snowy winter, feeding the bees until the first pollen appears

in May and watching the colonies explode into action is a wonder of

nature.

The queen bee goes into overtime, laying eggs over the summer.

Eggs hatch in the larvae within three or four days and are then fed by

worker bees for days before emerging as newbies. Worker bees spend their

entire few weeks of life gathering pollen and nectar to produce natural

honey. They can detect nectar up to two kilometres away.

[2:10 p.m.]

As the colonies expand during early summer, additional boxes — or

supers, as we refer to them — are added to the hives to accommodate the

honey production. By late August, approximately 100 pounds or more of

honey are harvested from each colony.

Because of our extended winters in the central Interior, we also

like to leave each colony with at least 100 pounds of honey to help them

survive the winter. The bees will cluster together inside the hives,

consuming honey and vibrating to generate the heat that will keep them

warm throughout the winter. And then, once again, the cycle

commences.

OCEANS AND COASTAL PROTECTION

S. Malcolmson: We celebrate oceans and coastal defenders on Ocean Day. Clean

coastal waters keep us healthy, generate tens of thousands of B.C. jobs

and billions in economic activity, from tourism to film to

fisheries.

However, the ocean is taking the brunt of climate change, and oil

tanker spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion risk

everything. B.C. people are taking action. Coastal restoration and

Clayoquot cleanup re­moved over 1.5 million pounds of marine debris from

the ocean just last year alone.

Veins of Life and the Dead Boat Society have pulled hundreds of

abandoned vessels out onto dry land — just a thousand more to go. Ocean

Legacy is turning marine plastics into fuel. And our government is

taking action, moving open-net salmon fish farms out of wild salmon

migration routes and fighting in court to tighten oil spill

response.

This summer I’m travelling the coast to find recycling solutions

for abandoned vessels and stop marine plastic pollution. Our first stop

will be Nanaimo, June 8. The shoreline cleanup starts at 9:30 at the

Lions Pavilion. The Snuneymuxw First Nation, the city of Nanaimo, the

Pacific Biological Station and the Port Authority host Ocean Day at

Maffeo Sutton Park, at Saysutshun Island and also along Nanaimo’s

beautiful waterfront walkway. There will be touch tanks and whale

skeletons to see.

Oceans give us life. So do the grassroots coastal

defenders.

MAURO RANALLO AND ADVOCACY FOR

MENTAL HEALTH

AWARENESS

J. Martin: It is with great pleasure I rise today to recognize an exceptional

British Columbian born and raised in the Fraser Valley — in fact, just a

couple of kilometres down the road from you, Mr. Speaker.

Mauro Ranallo knew at a very young age what he wanted to do with

his life, and that was be behind a microphone entertaining sports fans.

As a teenager, he did play-by-play for local hockey and football teams.

He also called the in-ring action for wrestling promotions in Calgary

and Vancouver. Mauro caught his big break when he became the voice of

the Japanese mixed martial arts promotion, PRIDE. Today he is the most

recognizable voice in combat sports, providing commentary for the

biggest boxing, kick boxing, MMA and professional wrestling events

around the world, including the recent Floyd Mayweather–Conor McGregor

pay-per-view.

But none of this was supposed to happen. At the age of 19, Mauro

was diagnosed with bipolar affective disorder. He has been hospitalized

on multiple occasions. Ranallo once said: “I’ve looked at the

chandeliers in the hospital and the light fixtures, wondering if it

could hold my weight. I know the feeling.”

He was recently the subject of the critically acclaimed Showtime

documentary, Bipolar Rock ‘n’ Roller , in which he literally

bares his soul. The film chronicles Ranallo’s personal daily struggle

and has served to educate countless viewers about the reality of living

with bipolar affective disorder. The movie has been described as a tough

but necessary look at mental illness.

Mauro is a role model and an inspiration to his huge fan base. He

has channelled his fame and name recognition to encourage others to

pursue their dreams despite living a with a mental health

condition.

May is Mental Health Month, and I’d like to ask the House to join

me in recognizing Mauro Ranallo. But rather than the usual, where we all

clap for him, Mauro Ranallo has a catch phrase that he always uses at a

high point or a knockout in one of his fights. He says: “Mamma mia.” On

the count of three, can the House please join me in a tribute to Mauro

Ranallo with a “Mamma mia.” One, two, three.

Some Hon. Members: Mamma mia.

J. Martin: Thank you.

[2:15 p.m.]

Oral Questions

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS

REGARDING CITIZENS’

SERVICES MINISTER

M. Polak: For two weeks now, the Premier has avoided answering questions

about the alleged misconduct of his Minister of Citizens’ Services, and

it’s time he addressed them. On March 4, his office was notified of

allegations against a member of his cabinet who had previously admitted

to similar misconduct.

I’m sure everyone in this House would like to know: what steps did

the Premier take to ensure that these serious allegations were

investigated?

Hon. J. Horgan: Before we begin question period, I’ll just apologize to members. I

know that you’re as crestfallen as I am that my voice is being lost. Not

being able to speak is a great, great tragedy for an Irish guy. But I’ll

do my level best to carry through the afternoon.

I am well aware of the allegations that the member raises. My

chief of staff received a letter from the secretary to cabinet in March.

He reviewed the allegations to the extent that he could. We discovered

that the person making the allegations was not a government employee but

was an employee of the Legislative Assembly.

He then transferred the information to the executive director of

the NDP caucus. An appropriate investigation was done at that time. It’s

also now known by all members, or should be, that the individual making

the allegations was a very short-term employee, was terminated for

reasons that can’t be discussed in this House and has been releasing

information that may well not be hers to release.

I’m confident, based on the work that my chief of staff did, that

any of the substantive allegations that have been made are not founded,

and I’m comfortable with where we are on that.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader for the official opposition on a

supplemental.

M. Polak: Well, the fact of the matter is that while the person making the

allegations is not a government employee, the allegations are about the

behaviour of a cabinet minister and the behaviour, the conduct, of

government employees who work for her — her government staff.

According to the Minister of Citizens’ Services, the Premier’s

chief of staff, Geoff Meggs, reviewed the matter.

Would the Premier tell us what instructions he gave to Mr. Meggs

in terms of conducting that investigation, and would he table

those?

Hon. J. Horgan: There were allegations made that money-for-access or

cash-for-access events were being organized. That turned out to be

unfounded.

There were allegations that political contributions had been made

to the NDP. My chief of staff checked with the provincial office of the

NDP and found that the individuals that were allegedly contributors to

the NDP were not. At that point, the issue was a human resource issue.

It was between the caucus and the individual, and we left it at that and

carried on with the business of government.

Mr. Speaker: The House Leader for the official opposition on a second

supplemental.

M. Polak: But in fact, the allegations are much broader than that. We’ve had

acknowledgment in this House — from the Attorney General, no less — that

the appropriate place for these things to be investigated is at the

Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

Subsequent to that, the Information and Privacy Commissioner wrote

a rather explicit letter outlining his concerns that he was not able to

investigate. Certainly, this lands at the Premier’s doorstep. It’s all

well and good for the Premier to say: “Trust me. My folks have looked at

it. It’s all good.” We don’t have any of that information.

If the Premier was privy to what kind of investigation took place,

surely he can provide to us not only the terms of reference for that

investigation and any instructions but also what came from that

investigation. Where is the report out at the end of it?

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, the reference that the Opposition House Leader makes to the

Attorney General’s response was the day that the official opposition

made allegations without context about issues that were not at that time

known. The Attorney General gave the answer that would have been

appropriate. If you have allegations, they can go to this place or that

place.

The opposition did none of that. Instead, they continue to come

into this House with some trumped-up charges about a human resource

matter between a former employee and a Member of the Legislative

Assembly.

My chief of staff did what I directed him to do — ensure that

there were no cash transfers taking place. There were not. To make sure

that this so-called fundraiser that was not about politics

whatsoever….

Interjection.

Hon. J. Horgan: The member wants me to answer the question, but she wants to

continue to ask questions while I’m endeavouring to do that. I

believe….

Interjection.

[2:20 p.m.]

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Hon. J. Horgan: What I said was that a letter came to government, to the assistant

cabinet secretary. The assistant cabinet secretary looked at the

material and said, “This is clearly not part of cabinet’s operations,”

and handed it to the chief of staff. The chief of staff reviewed it. We

discussed it. He looked into the allegations of impropriety between a

political party and an individual. There were no grounds for

that.

The member will also know that legal counsel for the caucus has

asked the individual to cease and desist distributing information that

she ought not to have in her possession. The allegations have been

offered up. They’ve been proven to be unfounded. That’s not good enough

for the Opposition House Leader, but apparently she has more questions,

so I’ll wait for her to spit them out.

P. Milobar: The changing answers are getting a little hard to keep track of.

When we first started down these lines of questions, the Premier said

there was no investigation. Today he’s saying that he and his chief of

staff discussed the allegations back three months ago. So it was almost

exactly….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, we shall hear the question. Thank

you.

P. Milobar: It’s understandable they’re having a hard time keeping their

stories straight on this one.

It was almost exactly a year ago, May 31, 2018, that the Premier

said: “We missed the mark, Member. I acknowledge that. And I’m going to

do everything I can to make sure it doesn’t happen again.” But a year

later, the same minister continues to break FOI rules by actively using

iMessage and WhatsApp to communicate with Mindy Bansal and Shannon

Russell, her government staff — not her constituency staff, her

government staff.

To the Premier, did Geoff Meggs investigate all sent texts and

WhatsApp messages of the minister and her government staff?

Hon. J. Horgan: When the letter was received by government, we reviewed the

information. We found the allegations to be unfounded, and we carried

on.

Now, I appreciate that the official opposition has had a bad patch

for at least two years. It may go back a little bit further than that. I

can well imagine that if they don’t have anything substantive to say

about the economy in British Columbia, which appears to be red hot, and

if they have nothing to say about the most ambitious climate action plan

in Canada, that’s fine. If they don’t want to talk about the lowest

unemployment rate for 18 consecutive months, that’s fine. But to come

into this House, day after day, conflating stories by a disgruntled

employee that have been unfounded, proven to be unfounded, that, I

guess, is their right.

You’ve got about 20 minutes left. Have at it, Member.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Kamloops–North Thompson on a supplemental.

P. Milobar: The sad reality is we have screen grabs of the WhatsApp

conversations with government staff and the minister. Yet when you FOI,

nothing comes back. So for the last year that we’ve been FOI’ing from

the same minister that had troubles with her record management a year

ago…. That means either the minister has done zero work in the last year

or is continuing to skirt the rules around FOI.

The Premier doesn’t seem to want to look into this, yet a year ago

the Premier promised: “We are going to do better. That’s as simple as

that.” Yet it still appears he did nothing when he was told three months

ago of allegations against the very member of his cabinet who admitted

to misconduct a year ago and has continued on over the last

year.

The Information and Privacy Commissioner says he can’t

investigate. In fact, he said it’s absurd that the ministers would have

to investigate themselves. It’s up to the Premier.

Will the Premier show leadership for once and order a proper

investigation into these serious allegations?

Hon. J. Horgan: Again, I appreciate that the Leader of the Opposition and his team

don’t have any material to bring to question period beyond the

allegations of a disgruntled employee. That’s fine. I appreciate

it.

[2:25 p.m.]

We have now some images that were captured by, again, a

disgruntled employee, distributed, potentially, illegally. And they

bring them to the House today with an expectation that somehow there has

been malfeasance. I would remind the members…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Horgan: …that the number of freedom-of-information requests between 2010

and 2018 has gone up 7,000 — 7,000 more requests today than there were

then. Government is diligently working on this. We have had…. After the

incident that the member made reference to, we’ve done more training.

We’ve ensured that all members of cabinet, all staff understand the

rules. I believe we’re back on track.

Again, I remember members on the opposite side deleting documents

on their desks and saying: “There, now we don’t have to do any FOI.”

That’s the record of the people on the other side. I’ll stand by what

we’re doing nine times out of ten.

ROAD CONDITIONS ON

SOUTHERN GULF

ISLANDS

A. Olsen: For more than 16 months, I’ve enjoyed….

Interjections.

A. Olsen: It was a dare.

Anyway, I’ve appreciated working with the Minister of

Transportation. In many respects, I recognize that she inherited a

ministry, a portfolio that was in some serious decay. I

know….

Interjections.

A. Olsen: Equal opportunity.

I know the minister prioritizes safety. The residents of the

Saanich Peninsula and millions of tourists each year have experienced

the Keating overpass. But today I’m going to switch gears a little

bit.

I have to ask the minister questions about the roads on the

southern Gulf Islands. The conditions of the roads there are steadily

deteriorating — hundreds of kilometres of roads, which are little more

than paved wagon trails from decades ago and have a lack of road

markings. They’re dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists. My

constituents have been raising these issues, through my office, with the

ministry, going back to previous governments.

My question is to the Minister of Transportation. When will the

roads on the southern Gulf Islands be a priority for the provincial

government?

Hon. C. Trevena: In light of what the member said, I have appreciated working with

him too. He’s been very helpful and a very good advocate for his

constituents, who have, like the rest of Vancouver Island, suffered

after 16 years of neglect by the previous government. Because of that,

there has been a lot of catch-up to do. We are working hard to try and

catch up. We are working hard…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. C. Trevena: …investing in projects for safety. Right across the region, we’re

investing. Whether it is working on bus lines, whether it is working on

bridges, seismically improving bridges — the Koksilah Bridge, the bridge

in Campbell River, resurfacing in Nanaimo — we are checking them off one

by one. We’re investing in the area that has been neglected for 16

years, and we’ll continue to so. I look forward to continuing to work

with my colleague in the Third Party on the needs of his

constituents.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Saanich North and the Islands on a

supplemental.

A. Olsen: Unfortunately, through that answer, I still don’t have any

indication of when the roads on the southern Gulf Islands are going to

be a priority.

We have a situation in my riding where, actually, year-over-year

neglect, where work that should be done to improve the conditions of

those roads that would actually increase longevity of those roads….

They’re now deteriorating to the point where safety has become an

issue.

It’s been raised by constituents to me…. Last summer there were

reports that surfaced that substantial investments in road improvements

were being made on Gulf Islands — Quadra Island.

My question to the Minister of Transportation: can the minister

tell us if those road improvements on Quadra Island are going ahead, and

if so, why are they being prioritized over the well-known needs of

bigger island populations like the one I represent on

Saltspring?

[2:30 p.m.]

Hon. C. Trevena: I’m happy to say that there has been work, widening the shoulder

along Heriot Bay Road on Quadra Island. That was done directly after

community consultation and will increase safety for all road users. It’s

due to be completed in a couple of weeks. I’m happy to sit down with the

member to talk about the specific needs in his constituency, and we can

make sure that we find the time to do so.

I’m extraordinarily proud of the investment we’ve been making in

transportation on the Island and around the province — particularly on

the Island — after 16 years of neglect. Not only are we investing in

transportation; we’re investing in a transportation strategy to deal

with the growing needs of one of the fastest-growing areas of the

province. We’re working on a pedestrian traffic study at Cathedral

Grove, a popular tourist area. We’re investing more than $40 million in

transit in southern Vancouver Island.

I know that the member is also very happy to know that we kept

fares on B.C. Ferries frozen for another year, after rolling them back

by 15 percent. We brought in the free seniors rates, and we reinstated

2,700 sailings that were cut by that government, when the opposition was

in government. I’m very pleased with what we’ve been doing.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO ALLEGATIONS

REGARDING CITIZENS’

SERVICES MINISTER

S. Bond: The Premier and his office received serious allegations about the

conduct of a minister of the Crown. Now, the Premier may want to stand

in the Legislature today and have a discussion about the employee who

had the courage to stand up and bring those allegations forward about

where that employee, what jurisdiction…. But of this I am positive: the

conduct of a minister of the Crown and how that is managed rests solely

with one person, and that is with the Premier of British

Columbia.

While the Premier has been hiding and not answering questions,

we’ve been treated to an absolutely embarrassing and nonsensical

performance by the minister who is facing those allegations every single

day. The Premier is well aware of this. We’ve heard a different story,

different details and different answers every single day. Frankly, no

one on that side has been prepared to describe exactly what happened

during a so-called investigation.

It is time for the Premier to stand up today, to do the right

thing and order an impartial investigation into the conduct of his

minister.

Hon. J. Sims: The opposition has spent two weeks spinning unfounded claims and

being reckless and irresponsible. Private, personal information from a

constituency office and correspondence has wound up in the media and all

over the Internet.

The member for Richmond-Queensborough was forced to apologize for

playing into Islamophobic stereotypes for cheap political

shots.

The MLA from Langley talked about a terrorist watch list, which is

inflammatory. It’s irresponsible, and it also harms private

citizens.

While the opposition….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, we shall hear the response from the Minister of

Citizens’ Services.

Hon. J. Sims: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While the opposition focuses on irresponsible gotcha politics,

we’re focused on people. I want to remind everyone that we are dealing

with a human resources issue out of a constituency office — allegations,

unfounded allegations by an employee who was in that office for six

weeks.

Mr. Speaker: The member for Prince George–​Valemount on a

supplemental.

[2:35 p.m.]

S. Bond: Well, if this Premier has so much confidence that this minister

has followed the rules, then he should have absolutely not one moment of

hesitation in calling an independent investigation and making sure

that’s accurate. There is absolutely no one in British

Columbia….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, we shall hear the question. Thank

you.

S. Bond: There is absolutely no one in British Columbia, including the

Privacy Commissioner, who thinks it is appropriate for this minister to

investigate herself and stand up and say: “I’m beyond reproach.” Not

acceptable. In fact, let’s look at what the Attorney General said. That

was the day that we learned that he knew absolutely nothing about what

he was talking about when it came to the role of the Privacy

Commissioner.

Here’s what the Privacy Commissioner said. He called it “patently

absurd” that he could not investigate this minister.

It’s time for the Premier to stand up in this House, do the right

thing and allow the Privacy Commissioner — who, apparently, the Attorney

General thinks is exactly the right person to do the

investigation….

It is time for the Premier to stand up, do the right thing and ask

the Privacy Commissioner to investigate the Minister of Citizens’

Services.

Hon. J. Sims: While the opposition continues to spend their time spreading

unfounded claims, doing irreparable damage to private citizens, we’re

focused on making life better for British Columbians. The opposition has

spent two weeks…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Sims: …talking up unfounded claims, allegations made by an employee in

my constituency office who was there for six weeks. We have outlined the

false allegations, and the opposition keeps repeating them. There is no

credibility to them.

Their claim that visa applicants were on a watch list turns out to

be fabricated. There was never any information to suggest that. Their

so-called cash-for-access….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, we shall hear the response. Thank

you.

Hon. J. Sims: Their so-called cash-for-access turned out to be a charity event

for a children’s hospital. They made false claims about invoices — once

again, no foundation. The registrar of lobbyists said the claims were

not true, and — wait for it, Mr. Speaker; wait for it — even the

Information…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Sims: …and Privacy Commissioner said: “No evidence has been provided of

an issue on freedom-of-information rules.”

Mr. Speaker, the other side continues to spin the allegations made

by a disgruntled employee.

J. Thornthwaite: This issue is about FOIs. We have FOI’d and got absolutely nothing

back from this minister. The fact is that, according to the Information

and Privacy Commissioner, “the person responsible is the minister

herself, which means she is investigating herself, and I think that the

members of the public would agree this is absolutely absurd.”

Will the Premier, then, end this absolutely absurd situation and

order an independent investigation into that minister’s

conduct?

Hon. J. Sims: I’ve been very clear. I do not use WhatsApp for government

business. There is a distinction between government and non-government

work. These claims are unfounded. The facts are being presented — that

there is no credibility to them.

On this side of the House….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

[2:40 p.m.]

Hon. J. Sims: On this side of the House, we’re very proud of the work we’ve done

on record management. We have implemented Bill 6. Last month B.C. became

the first province in Canada to legislate government’s obligation to

create adequate records of key decisions under the IMA. These changes

respond directly to recommendations made….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. J. Sims: They ask, and then they don’t want to listen.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, if we may hear the response.

Hon. J. Sims: These changes respond directly to the recommendations that came

from the former B.C. Information and Privacy Commissioners David

Loukidelis and Elizabeth Denham. Loukidelis said B.C.’s new approach

will meet or exceed requirements to document government decisions in

other jurisdictions around the world.

Mr. Loukidelis stated: “The directive and guidelines are

consistent with best practices internationally and domestically…the

directive and guidelines will result in a leading-edge framework for the

documentation of government decisions that meets or exceeds requirements

in other jurisdictions around the world.”

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. de Jong: You know, listening to the minister’s nonsense and ever-changing

story, I can’t say that I blame the Premier for not wanting to get up

and defend her. It is difficult to defend the indefensible.

The Premier’s office gets notice of serious allegations of

misconduct by a minister in his cabinet, allegations that include

misconduct for behaviour that the minister herself confessed to one year

ago, along with some other very serious allegations.

Well, the Premier apparently thinks this is all insignificant. He

also apparently thinks that, confronted by those allegations, it is

appropriate and sufficient to go to his political chief of staff at some

point and say: “Geoff, anything here? No? That’s good enough for

me.”

That’s an interesting standard in investigative excellence that I

don’t recall the now Premier deploying when he was the Leader of the

Opposition.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

M. de Jong: We have received additional information from the former employee

that directly contradicts virtually everything the Minister of Citizens’

Services has said.

Will the Premier do the right, responsible thing, exercise the

leadership that he should and initiate a truly independent, impartial

investigation? Or, and I suppose we’ll do this in any event, we’ll

simply forward along this material to the head of criminal justice

branch and to the RCMP, and they can conduct their

investigation.

Hon. J. Horgan: I just want to correct the record. I said there were 7,000 more

FOIs in the seven years between 2011 and 2017. It’s only been 5,000, so

I stand corrected on that.

With respect to the allegations made by the hon. former Attorney

General, a QC, if he believes that there’s something inappropriate here,

he knows what to do about that. I did what I was obliged to do. I looked

at the information. I….

Interjections.

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, do you want to hear it?

I looked at the information. The questions with respect to

political parties receiving funds for access were

investigated.

Interjection.

[2:45 p.m.]

Hon. J. Horgan: You can do that by googling it, hon. Member, but I know you don’t use

computers, so maybe one of your friends could help you google it. Just go to

Elections B.C. You plug in the name, and you’ll find that no one can give

more than $1,200, not the $12,000 or $100,000 they used to give to the B.C.

Liberals. You can do that if you want.

The so-called cash-for-access was a charity fundraiser.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the Premier has the floor.

Hon. J. Horgan: A charity fundraiser. Only the B.C. Liberals could say: “What a

scandal. The Minister of Citizens’ Services is helping raise money for

Children’s Hospital.” I’m outraged.

[End of question period.]

Petitions

C. Oakes: I rise to present a petition signed by 37 residents of Cariboo North.

The undersigned formally request a reappraisal of the AR-1 interconnector

route plan in Quesnel and ask for further consideration of an alternate

bypass option.

Hon. D. Eby: I rise to present a petition: 18,417 names signing the Howe Sound

declaration opposing the Woodfibre LNG project.

Reports from Committees

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONER

APPOINTMENT

COMMITTEE

S. Malcolmson: I have the honour to present the report of the Special Committee

to Appoint a Human Rights Commissioner.

I move that the report be taken as read and received.

Motion approved.

S. Malcolmson: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the

report.

Leave granted.

Mr. Speaker: Please proceed.

S. Malcolmson: I move that the report be adopted, and in doing so, I will outline

how we got here.

Last fall the Legislative Assembly adopted amendments to the human

rights code, which established the Human Rights Commissioner as a new

independent officer of this Legislature. This committee was then

appointed to select and unanimously recommended a Human Rights

Commissioner.

The committee advertised widely and received 50 applications. This

report describes the committee’s process and constitutes our unanimous

recommendation to appoint Kasari Govender as B.C.’s Human Rights

Commissioner. [Applause.]

Ms. Govender has an extensive background defending human rights.

Committee members were impressed by her work with diverse communities,

her commitment to Indigenous reconciliation and defending women’s

rights. Combined with her collaborative leadership style and her

strengths as an administrative manager, Ms. Govender has the skills,

experience and qualities required to establish and carry out the mandate

of this new independent office.

Finally, I extend my sincere appreciation to the committee members

for their diligent work on this appointment process: the Deputy Chair,

the member for Surrey South; the member for Shuswap; and the member for

Burnaby-Edmonds, who has worked over a decade to get us to this day.

Thank you all.

S. Cadieux: I, too, would like to make just a few comments as the Deputy Chair

of the committee.

Ms. Govender is an exceptional candidate who brings a wealth of

experience to this independent office. She exemplifies leadership,

collaboration and openness, qualities that I believe will serve her very

well in the role. She has in-depth experience in human rights,

constitutional and administrative law. Personally, I will say that I’ve

admired her work over many years with West Coast LEAF, where she has

earned recognition, I believe, as a leading voice for gender

equity.

I would extend the opposition’s thanks to the staff of the

committee, who, as always, provided excellent service to the committee

in support of the process.

On behalf of the Official Opposition, I welcome Ms. Govender to

this new and very important role.

[2:50 p.m.]

R. Chouhan: I am so proud and honoured to participate in this historic moment

announcing the appointment of a human rights commissioner after many

years. B.C. was the only province that did not have a human rights

commissioner for 16 years, but last year, as the committee Chair has

said, the committee was appointed. We looked at more than 50

applications, and we were so impressed with Kasari Govender’s

credentials. I’m so proud, so honoured to say that she will do a

wonderful job.

I also want to say thank you to the committee members, the member

for Shuswap and the member for Surrey South, for their friendship and

their understanding to work on such a wonderful project to make sure

that we have the right person.

We were all very impressed with the experience, the credentials

Ms. Govender had. We are looking forward to working with her to make

sure that British Columbia becomes a wonderful place, an inclusive place

for everybody here in British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is the adoption of the report.

Motion approved.

S. Malcolmson: I ask leave of the House to move a motion appointing Kasari

Govender as Human Rights Commissioner for the province of British

Columbia.

Leave granted.

Motions Without Notice

APPOINTMENT OF

HUMAN RIGHTS

COMMISSIONER

S. Malcolmson: I move:

[That Kasari Govender be appointed as an Officer of the Legislature,

to exercise the powers and duties assigned to the Human Rights

Commissioner, pursuant to s. 47.01 of the Human Rights

Code (RSBC 1996,

Chapter 210), for a term of five years

commencing on September 3, 2019.]

Motion approved.

[Applause.]

Standing Order 81.1

SCHEDULE FOR DEBATE

ON BILL 15

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move:

[Pursuant to Standing Order 81.1 (2), all remaining proceedings

related to Bill (No. 15) intituled Agricultural Land Commission

Amendment Act, 2019 , including any proposed amendments on

notice standing in the Ministers’ names on the Order Paper, shall be

completed and disposed of on or before Thursday, May 30, 2019 at 5:00

p.m. At 4:45 p.m. on the date mentioned, the Speaker and the Chair of

the Committee of the Whole will forthwith put all necessary questions

for the disposal of all remaining stages of the said bill without

amendment or debate.

Any divisions called on sections of the said Bill shall be taken in

accordance with Practice Recommendation No. 1. Any division called on

third reading of the said bill may be taken in accordance with Standing

Order 16. Proceedings under this motion shall not be subject to the

provisions of Standing Order 81, or the Standing or Sessional Orders

relating to times and days of the sittings of the House.]

M. de Jong: I simply want to make this observation. I know the House is going

to vote on this. I think this is a misuse of the particular standing

order.

Mr. Speaker: Member, it’s not debatable.

M. de Jong: If Mr. Speaker consults the authorities, he will note that there

is a procedure associated with the use of this particular standing

order, and I don’t believe that procedure has been deployed. If the

Speaker is prepared to entertain my submission in that regard, I’m happy

to give it. If the Speaker is not prepared to entertain a submission on

that procedural point, then I will be obliged to take my

seat.

Mr. Speaker: Member, under the standing order, there is no debate. Thank

you.

[2:55 p.m. - 3:00 p.m.]

Members, the question is the time allocation on Bill 15, moved by

the Government House Leader under standing order 81.1(2).

Motion approved on the following division:

YEAS — 44

Chouhan

Kahlon

Begg

Brar

Heyman

Donaldson

Mungall

Bains

Beare

Chen

Popham

Trevena

Sims

Chow

Kang

Simons

D’Eith

Routley

Elmore

Dean

Routledge

Singh

Leonard

Darcy

Simpson

Robinson

Farnworth

Horgan

James

Eby

Dix

Ralston

Mark

Fleming

Conroy

Fraser

Chandra Herbert

Rice

Malcolmson

Furstenau

Weaver

Olsen

Glumac

NAYS — 41

Cadieux

de Jong

Bond

Polak

Wilkinson

Lee

Stone

Coleman

Wat

Bernier

Thornthwaite

Paton

Ashton

Barnett

Yap

Martin

Davies

Kyllo

Sullivan

Reid

Morris

Stilwell

Ross

Oakes

Johal

Redies

Rustad

Milobar

Sturdy

Clovechok

Shypitka

Hunt

Throness

Tegart

Stewart

Sultan

Gibson

Isaacs

Thomson

Larson

Foster

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I’d be remiss, before members get too far out of the hall…. I’m not

wanting to preclude things. I suspect that there will be some votes coming very

quickly in this chamber. I’ll do the committees first, so everybody knows what’s

going on, and then I’ll come and do the main chamber.

In Committee A, the Douglas Fir Room, it will be committee stage on Bill

M206, Residential Tenancy Amendment Act. In Committee C, the Birch Room, it will

be the estimates of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General. In this

chamber, it will be third reading on Bill 8, Employment Standards Amendment Act,

and then there will be a couple of third readings after that which I will call,

as well, just so everybody knows.

So right now in this chamber, it will be Bill 8, third reading, Employment

Standards Amendment Act.

[3:05 p.m. - 3:10 p.m.]

Third Reading of Bills

BILL 8 — EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS

AMENDMENT ACT,

Bill 8, Employment Standards Amendment Act, 2019, read a third time

and passed unanimously on a division. [See Votes and

Proceedings ].

Hon. H. Bains: I call third reading of Bill 30.

[3:15 p.m.]

BILL 30 — LABOUR RELATIONS CODE

AMENDMENT ACT,

Bill 30, Labour Relations Code Amendment Act, 2019, read a third time

and passed unanimously on a division. [See Votes and

Proceedings .]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call third reading on Bill 28, Zero-Emission Vehicles

Act.

BILL 28 — ZERO-EMISSION

VEHICLES

ACT

Bill 28, Zero-Emission Vehicles Act, read a third time and passed on

division.

Hon. M. Farnworth: In this chamber, I call estimates for the Premier’s

office.

[3:20 p.m.]

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: OFFICE OF THE PREMIER

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

chair.

The committee met at 3:22 p.m.

On Vote 11: Office of the Premier, $11,349,000.

Hon. J. Horgan: Joining me for this year’s estimates is my deputy minister, Don

Wright; chief of staff, Geoff Meggs; Deputy Minister of

Intergovernmental Relations, Bobbi Plecas; and Vanessa Geary, the

executive director of operations of strategic initiatives in the Office

of the Premier.

This week marks the end of the fourth session of our government

sworn in just two years ago. From the first day, we endeavoured to do

our level best to make life better for British Columbians. We resolved

to ensure that we were working every day to make people’s lives better

by reducing costs, providing more services and meeting the objectives

that we laid out in the election campaign of 2017.

I believe we’ve been making different choices. I know those

contrasts will be made apparent over the next number of hours as the

opposition members, the Leader of the Opposition and his team, ask

questions not just about the budget that we’ve requested to be approved

but a whole host of other issues.

I expect that we’ll talk, for example, about medical services

premiums. Medical service premiums — the last province in the country to

have them. By January 1 next year, we will be the last province to do

away with medical service premiums. I’m very proud of that, putting

money directly back into people’s pockets.

We’ve moved on affordable child care, putting money back into

families’ pockets, making life, again, more affordable for families

struggling in one of the most unaffordable markets in the country — not

just in the Lower Mainland and our urban centres but right across the

board. We’ve worked to address some inefficiencies in our Crowns. We’ve

worked to ensure that our economy continues to prosper.

[3:25 p.m.]

We’ve kept balanced budgets year after year and going forward for

the next three years. We’ve put money back into B.C. Ferries to reduce

fees for the travelling public and coastal communities and on minor

routes. We’ve added 20,000 new affordable housing units since we were

sworn in with an objective of getting to 114,000 over the next ten

years.

We’ve also been focusing on the economy, making sure that as the

economy grows, people benefit from that good fortune we have here in

British Columbia. I was very proud to work with my cabinet and the

government staff to land the largest private sector investment in

Canadian history. In October of last year, LNG Canada made a decision to

invest $40 billion in an LNG facility on the north coast, putting people

to work, putting dollars in our coffers to go towards the good society

that I know that all members in every corner of the House want to

see.

The challenges of our British parliamentary system will be laid

bare for those who are able to watch today and those who are in the

gallery and those who will be reading the transcripts in the future. It

is appropriate that we have a back-and-forth about policies and views

and perspectives and choices that the different people in this House

would want to make.

I am very proud of the work that we’ve done in not yet two years,

and I look forward to continued success for the people of British

Columbia who all of us serve, regardless of what party we ran with,

regardless of what part of the province we live in. All of us want the

same thing. We want a better outcome for families, for communities and

for our province.

A. Wilkinson: The Premier has outlined his program, and as part of that, he is

spending in the range of $60 billion of taxpayers’ money this year. So a

few questions arise from that.

The first will be, I hope, a very simple and straightforward

question and a straightforward answer. The Premier has announced that

projects in this province will be built under community benefits

agreements, and there’s been a great deal of advertising in the last 15

months on that very topic.

Can the Premier tell us how much was spent on advertising and

communications related to community benefits agreements in the last

fiscal year? How much has been spent to date this year? How much is

budgeted this year for advertising and communications of the community

benefit agreements, the community benefits standards — all the things we

hear on the radio and see on line?

Hon. J. Horgan: As the Leader of the Opposition knows, government advertising is

the purview of the Minister of Finance. The government policy and

communications office is within her administrative responsibility. She’s

here with us today and has advised that there were no questions of her

at that time on advertising specifically for CBAs, but we’re going to

endeavour to get that information for the member as quickly as we

can.

A. Wilkinson: We have until tomorrow afternoon to complete this, so one would

hope that you’ll be able to collect that information overnight, since

it’s a very simple matter and should be available with a single phone

call.

Now, yesterday there was a fairly clear exposition in the

newspaper about community benefits agreements and their apparent lack of

benefits. The quotes that come forward…. I’ll just give the Premier a

series of them, and he can confirm or refute them and tell me whether or

not they’re correct.

“The New Democrats claimed these community benefits agreements

would add only 7 percent to the cost of construction.” True or

false?

[3:30 p.m.]

Hon. J. Horgan: I don’t know if this is going to be multiple choice, true or

false, all the way through the next number of hours. I will say that if

the member wants to explore the benefits of community benefits

agreements, I’m happy to do that. He’ll also know, from his time in

government, not just as a minister but as a deputy minister, that when

you’re trying to build capital projects — whether they be hospitals,

highways, schools or bridges — you’re competing, with other players in

the marketplace, for skilled workers.

What we have seen over the past 18 months is an extraordinary

record of employment. I believe the unemployment rate last month was

just a bit above 4 percent. We’ve seen an escalation in costs for all

capital projects, not just those that are governed by CBAs. One example

I can think of is a project in Terrace. That was not a CBA project, but

when bids came in, it was 50 percent over estimates, and we choose not

to proceed with the project.

If the member wants to talk about specific projects, I’m happy to

do that. If he wants to talk about how overheated the economy is because

of the desire of people to come to British Columbia, to put down roots

and to make a life for themselves, I think those are some of the

challenges we’re seeing when we see escalation in capital costs — again,

not just on CBA projects, but on projects in the private sector as well

as in the public sector.

A. Wilkinson: Given that that is a complete evasion of the question and the

statement that we understand was in the media — that the New Democrats’

plan, the community benefits agreements, would add 7 percent to the cost

of construction — we’ll take that answer as either “don’t know” or

“that’s wrong.”

The next quote from the

article is referring to the Illecillewaet

improvements on the Trans-Canada Highway east of Revelstoke. The quote

from the

article — which is readily available on line; I suspect the

Premier has it readily accessible to him: “In calling tenders for the

main construction contract on February 11, the B.C. Transportation

Ministry estimated the total project cost at $62.9 million, but in

announcing the award on May 16, the ministry issued a revised estimate

of $85.2 million, an increase of $22.3 million in three

months.”

That is a 35 percent increase over the anticipated cost. This is a

community benefits agreement project. The learned commentator in the

newspaper goes on to point out that all of the factors were predictable

in this bid, except for labour costs. It appears that there’s a 35

percent boost in labour costs for this particular project. Is that an

accurate statement from Mr. Palmer and the Vancouver

Sun?

[3:35 p.m.]

Hon. J. Horgan: The member’s numbers are indeed correct. We were anticipating a

lower bid when the tender was issued. Again, I think I’ve given the

member, in my earlier answer, a sense of how we got here. It’s a result

of higher costs for gravel, higher costs for asphalt. We know that steel

tariffs have had a significant impact on our ability to meet costs, and

it’s not just on this one CBA project.

I think we’ve seen escalating costs on a whole host of projects,

one of which was started by the member for Kamloops–South Thompson at

the McKenzie interchange. We’ve seen escalation in capital costs as a

result of the hot labour market, an inability to secure labour, and

increased costs for inputs that are so critical to roadworks, such as

steel, gravel and asphalt.

A. Wilkinson: Well, that answer doesn’t address the issue, because there is no

steel in this project. The idea of steel tariffs, which have now been

abandoned by the U.S. government, is utterly irrelevant. Perhaps the

Premier should take note of that before he answers the next

question.

The project, I understand, has been reduced from 2.4 kilometres to

two kilometres. At that rate, we’re looking now at $42.6 million per

kilometre, or $42,000 per metre. This is a rather costly project, with a

35 percent cost overrun — apparently because it’s under the community

benefits agreement.

The Premier is now faced with a choice of saying either that Mr.

Palmer has got it right or that he’s got it wrong. Is this cost overrun

related substantially to the community benefits agreement or

not?

Hon. J. Horgan: I’m saying there are a number of inputs that have seen an

escalation in cost, not just for this project, which is a community

benefits agreement, but other projects across the province — capital

projects of a public nature and capital projects of a private nature.

These are challenging times with the hot markets.

Labour is difficult to come by because there has been a decline in

skilled workers available to do these projects. That’s the whole point

of a community benefits agreement — to make sure that the next

generation of skilled workers is getting on-the-job training, practical

training, so that we can continue to build this spectacular province.

The majority of British Columbians support these initiatives because

they know that their neighbours’ children are going to get the skills

they need to compete in a very, very tough market.

A. Wilkinson: Given that this is a contract that apparently has been won by Emil

Anderson Construction of Kelowna, which is a deeply and widely

experienced contractor around the province of British Columbia…. There’s

no change in the price of gravel, Premier. There’s no steel involved.

Asphalt prices haven’t changed. The only variable is the community

benefits agreement.

I’ll ask the Premier once more: is Mr. Palmer wrong that this 35

percent cost overrun is related to community benefits

agreements?

Hon. J. Horgan: I disagree with the member’s premise. There has been increased

cost in inputs. He knows that. We can have a disagreement on the

efficacy of community benefits agreements. The opposition has made it

abundantly clear that they prefer to not have people learning how to be

better, going forward, by getting the skills they need to compete in a

modern economy. That’s fine; acknowledge that. But I believe the member

should understand — I’m sure he does — that we are at almost zero

unemployment in British Columbia because of the hot market. The private

sector is having difficulty — and the public sector is having difficulty

— finding skilled workers. We need to focus on that.

That’s why we’ve been investing in advanced education in an

unprecedented way. That’s why we believe the community benefits

agreements will get people from classrooms to practical applications on

worksites. We’re going to continue down that road.

A. Wilkinson: Well, given the cost overrun of $22.3 million on this project,

which is 2,000 metres long, that’s about $10,000 a metre in cost

overruns. Can the Premier refer to any other project in British Columbia

which has had 35 percent cost overruns?

Hon. J. Horgan: I know the member has been to Kamloops. I think he knows this

stretch of highway. He knows that it’s a very, very difficult piece of

work. I’m advised that there are some 1,300 tonnes of steel on this

project. So maybe you could get your facts straight and come back to me

with another question.

A. Wilkinson: Well, rather than being combative, we look forward to answers from

the Premier. Given that he’s apparently ignored the fact that we’re

looking at a $10,000-a-metre overrun on this project, it’s a rather

exorbitant number to explain to the voters of British Columbia. Is there

any other project that has had this kind of overrun in British Columbia

since this government was elected — or, for that matter, ever — a 35

percent cost overrun?

[3:40 p.m.]

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, again, the member two seats down from the Leader of the

Opposition knows this community and knows this road and knows this file,

and he understands the challenges of this piece of roadwork.

I will say, though, looking for other examples of cost overruns,

I’ve come to one in 2009: the roof on B.C. Place, 40 percent over

budget; the convention centre, 60 percent over budget; and then I guess

one of the best all-time overruns — B.C. Hydro’s northwest transmission

line, 82 percent over budget. Those were not community benefits

agreements. Those were agreements that were signed by the people on that

side of the House.

A. Wilkinson: Perhaps the Premier can explain how this dramatic cost overrun of

$10,000 a metre was allowed to happen?

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, certainly we set out to do our level best to keep these

costs contained. All governments do that, but as I have said — not yet

acknowledged by the opposition leader — we have a very tight labour

market. We have input costs that are escalating.

The member’s colleague, the constituency where this work is being

done…. Those citizens deserve to have access to safety in their

roadways. I know the member would agree with that, and perhaps he might

want to pass a note down to the Leader of the Opposition.

We’re setting out to do our level best to make the roadways safe

for the travelling public. We’re setting out to make sure that when we

do that, we’re training the next generation of workers, often focusing

on those that have often been left out of apprenticeship programs —

women, visible minorities, Indigenous people. This is a program that’s

designed to not just get a better outcome for the travelling public but

also to get a better outcome for the people of British

Columbia.

A. Wilkinson: At $11,000 a metre, the question obviously arises: how many people

will be trained in this program, which is to cover only two kilometres

of road with an extra cost of $11,000 per metre? I mean, the distance

between me and the Premier is about four metres. That’s about $50,000

just to get from me to you.

Hon. J. Horgan: The member will know that the project has not yet begun. I don’t

have apprenticeship numbers at this time. I will certainly endeavour to

get them to him over the course of the project.

I want to just reinforce that this is a safety initiative. You’ve

got two members from Kamloops sitting right there. They know full well

how important this work is. I would expect they would want to get at it

as quickly as possible, making sure that we’re putting local people to

work and training the children of their neighbours to make sure that

they’re ready for the next jobs that come forward.

[3:45 p.m.]

A. Wilkinson: Can the Premier confirm that he’s just told me that he has no idea

how many apprentices will be trained for an extra $22 million of

provincial money to put together two kilometres of road? No

idea?

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, I reject the member’s premise. I did say to him that I would

get the job numbers, I would get the apprenticeship number to him. The

project was just let. It has not yet begun. That information will become

available, and I’ll make it available to him as soon as I have

it.

A. Wilkinson: Given the Premier has no idea how many apprentices will be trained

for the extra $22 million, we’ll perhaps move on to the “sobering news”

as put by the Vancouver Sun :

“The New Democrats are in the design and development phase to

four-lane another half-dozen sections of the Trans-Canada

Highway.”

The same highway, the same neighbourhood, the same labour

pressures.

“Contracts for each would also be subject to community benefits

agreements. There’s a budgeted $450 million twinning of a 4.8-kilometre

section through Kicking Horse Canyon and $121.4 million for four

kilometres of four-laning and a new bridge at Quartz Creek west of

Golden. A five-lane replacement for the Rolf Bruhn Bridge near Sicamous

is priced at $224.5 million. A further $162.7 million is budgeted for

six kilometres of four-lane highway and another new bridge at Salmon

Arm.”

There’s also a phase between Salmon Arm and Kamloops at just under

$200 million.

To quote the article: “Even without the missing estimate, the

total budgeted cost of those six projects approaches $1.2 billion.” Is

that correct?

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

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Hon. G. Heyman: I want the members present in the House to recognize 24 grade 5 and 6

students and their teacher, Jessie Claudio, from Vancouver’s Talmud Torah

school. They’re joining us in the gallery to observe the Premier’s

estimates. Please make them very, very welcome.

Debate Continued

Hon. J. Horgan: I wasn’t clear what the actual question was from the member. I

guess we’re going to be chasing our tail for a couple of days here. I do

know that the total capital budget approved for the twinning of Highway

1 is $468 million, and we have an overrun on the first component. Again,

I think that the public needs to understand that this isn’t the prairie

we’re building highway on here. This is the Rocky Mountains. This is

difficult terrain. So 20 percent….

Interjection.

[3:50 p.m.]

Hon. J. Horgan: I understand that, so I would think you’d have a more holistic

approach to how we’re going to address a challenging piece of

roadway.

What we do know is that the Minister of Transportation and the

Minister of Finance have put in place a capital budget. We’re doing our

level best to meet the needs of the travelling public, improve safety.

Those in the area where this project is going to go ahead are looking

optimistically at women and Indigenous people getting access to

apprenticeships, and I’ll bring that information back to the member when

we have it.

A. Wilkinson: Well, given that British Columbia has been paving its roads for

over 100 years, that contractors like Emil Anderson are experts in their

field — respected around the world — and that the Ministry of

Transportation has a very long record of good estimations and good

management, the only variable here is the community benefits

agreement.

Perhaps I’ll give the Premier the list again: Kicking Horse Canyon

improvements, the new bridge at Quartz Creek, the Rolf Bruhn Bridge at

Sicamous, the improvements between Salmon Arm and Kamloops — all

familiar to anybody who has driven across the Trans-Canada Highway

between Kamloops and Golden. The newspaper

article by Mr. Palmer says

that the estimated cost of those six projects approaches

$1.2 billion. I’m hoping that the Premier would tell us that he’s

wrong, because the Premier has all the expertise on his side of the

table.

Let’s just get this in focus: a $1.2 billion project set, and Mr.

Palmer suggests, with a 35 percent cost overrun. We’re looking at $420

million of excess costs with no increase in the federal contribution.

This is $420 million of excess costs introduced by this government to

keep a few union bosses happy. So can the Premier explain? Is the $1.2

billion number wrong? It came from his ministry. His ministers are

sitting right behind him.

Hon. J. Horgan: I appreciate that the member has got more time on his hands,

perhaps, than I do, and he can look at Vaughn Palmer, noted engineer and

roadbuilder, and extrapolate all he wants. I can tell you what I know.

We need to do this roadwork for the safety and the interests of the

people — not in a New Democrat constituency, because that’s not what

this is about — of Kamloops, the people that travel back and forth

between Alberta and British Columbia. It’s important work. We’re going

to get to it.

If the member wants to make allegations and extrapolate overruns

based on one contract, he’s welcome to do that. If he wants to use a

noted columnist as his expert on these matters, he’s welcome to do that.

I’ll remind him that this is the Premier’s office estimates, not the

Ministry of Highways. The Ministry of Highways, as he has already

acknowledged, is filled with outstanding individuals that work every day

to make life better for people, make roadways safer for people, and they

do it in the most cost-effective way possible.

What we have added, in the interests of the people of B.C., is a

program that will train the next generation of workers that were ignored

by that government when they had the opportunity, and we are going to

stick with it.

A. Wilkinson: Well, the

article goes on and quotes the ministry. The Minister of

Transportation has staff who provide information to the media. The quote

is: “The ministry is revisiting its estimates in light of the $22.3

million surprise on the Illecillewaet contract.” It goes on to point out

that the federal contribution is capped. As the

article says, “That

leaves the province with commitments of about $700 million, not

including any overruns,” which, on the same

percentage basis would amount to a further $420 million, which would

wipe out a hospital contract.

Is it true, Premier, that the people of British Columbia are

getting shorter roads for higher cost with extreme cost overruns that

will prevent other capital spending because of community benefits

agreements?

Hon. J. Horgan: Again, I just reject the extrapolations the member is making. He

raised one contract that has recently been let that is a CBA and that is

over budget. We’re going to take a look at that. The minister is going

to take a look at that and find out why.

[3:55 p.m.]

I’ve raised a couple of ideas that the member has rejected. He

believes that there’s no steel in construction. That’s fine, if he wants

to carry on that road. What we’re trying to accomplish here — the policy

that he objects to — is making sure we can hire people in the

communities where they live to do the work that will make their roads

safer, their schools better, their hospitals better and, most

importantly, make sure that the next generation of workers are red-seal

trained to create the B.C. that we all want to see in the

future.

I acknowledge that the B.C. Liberal Party does not agree with

that, but to sit here and read a columnist’s

article back to me…. I’ll

get the newspaper in here. I have before me the deputy of the government

of British Columbia. If you want to ask about my office and what we’re

doing, I’m happy to answer the questions. If you wanted to know about

highway construction, the minister for highways’ estimates are over

now.

A. Wilkinson: Well that, with all due respect, amounts to just a flagrant

evasion of the issue in front of the Premier, when he has the highways

minister sitting behind him.

Just a little context. He talks about training. Well, the

Hoffman’s Bluff project was done near Chase with 30 percent Aboriginal

workforce from the Neskonlith and Adams Lake Bands. That workforce is

immediately available for the Illecillewaet project and the bridge at

Sicamous.

So the question remains. Apparently, there is no answer as to

whether the 35 percent cost overrun is solely because of community

benefits agreements, because there is no explanation that is credible,

as the newspaper

article points out.

We turn then to the next projects: the Pattullo Bridge, currently

estimated at $1.377 billion, and the budgeted $2.83 billion expansion of

SkyTrain. Together, that’s over $4.2 billion. Perhaps the Premier can

comment: is there any limit that he will tolerate on cost overruns

because of community benefits agreements? Because 35 percent of that

would be $1.4 billion in overruns. Goodbye, Surrey SkyTrain. Goodbye,

Richmond Hospital. Goodbye Terrace hospital.

Can the Premier comment: does he have any willingness to cap the

costs of community benefits agreements in these projects?

Hon. J. Horgan: Again, I’ve given the member answers with respect to material

costs; labour shortages; companies that are running flat-out bidding on

projects, but they’re already fully subscribed; risk premiums…. Again,

the member will know full well the challenges in a hot economy when

you’ve got difficult work to be done. There are going to be challenges

meeting budgets. We’re going to do our level best to make sure that we

achieve that, but the objectives that we’re setting out to

achieve….

I would maybe flip this around. I don’t understand why it is that

the B.C. Liberal Party doesn’t want to see more training on our publicly

funded projects so we have the skilled workers we need to continue to

have the best economy in the country.

A. Wilkinson: Well, thank you, but that ignores the premise of the question I

asked last time about the 30 percent Aboriginal workforce on the

Hoffman’s Bluff improvement under the B.C. Liberals. The Premier has

selectively just ignored that.

Let’s just summarize this article. It talks about a total of

estimates that came from the Ministry of Transportation: $5.6 billion of

spending, all subject to community benefits agreements. The obvious

question for you, Mr. Premier, is: what is your tolerance limit for cost

overruns due to community benefits agreements, and will you ever

consider abandoning them if we get into the 35 percent of $5.4 billion,

which is over $1.8 billion in cost overruns due to CBAs? Will you

tolerate that, or do you have a cap?

[4:00 p.m.]

Hon. J. Horgan: Certainly, tolerance for overruns wasn’t an issue with the

previous government. I already articulated three projects. Northwest

transmission line, 82 percent over budget. We carried on from there to

see 60 percent overruns at the convention centre and 40 percent overruns

on B.C. Place. So again, pots calling kettles black are oftentimes

circuitous arguments.

We are going to do our level best to meet the budgets that we’ve

set rigorously through Treasury Board, through the Minister of Finance.

And the minister for highways is doing everything she can to ensure that

we’re getting bids in, in a way that will allow us to take the best way

forward. That is what governments are supposed to do.

I appreciate that in down times, members can extrapolate a total

budget and say: “Well, if it’s all 35 percent over budget, this is going

to be the final number.” We have one project — one project — that is

over budget on the community benefits side. I mentioned one. I could

mention others that are not community benefits agreements that are also

over budget. In fact, one was cancelled, in Terrace, because it was 50

percent over. That would be my tolerance on projects, broadly

speaking.

The CBA target that the independent contractors, the backers of

the B.C. Liberals, want to focus on is the issue here. Cost overruns are

certainly commonplace to B.C. Liberals. We want to make sure we see as

few of those as possible, but what we do want to see is as many local

people hired and as many young people getting access to skills training

so they can realize their full potential and benefit not just

themselves, their families and their communities but all British

Columbians.

That’s the policy objective. I don’t know why the B.C. Liberals

and their backers don’t embrace that, because they certainly let costs

get out of control when they were in power.

A. Wilkinson: Well, the obvious question that arises from that circuitous answer

is: is there a cap on this policy? Will the Premier stop any project

that hits the 50 percent cost overrun? Is that his tolerance? We’ve got

a 35 percent cost overrun that he seems to think is just fine because of

the CBAs. If it hits 50 percent on any project, will he kill the

project?

Hon. J. Horgan: I reject that the 35 percent overrun at Illecillewaet is

exclusively a result of the CBA. I’ve said that from the beginning. The

member has not wanted to hear that, so I reject your premise.

What I will say is that although the former government had no

problem with massive cost overruns, I do, and we’re going to do our

level best to keep these contracts under control. But we need to be

mindful. This is not a big problem for other provinces, because they

have serious unemployment issues and challenges with their economy. We

are going at full speed in this economy. We are having difficulty

finding skilled workers. That’s the whole point of a community benefits

agreement. Train more people; build B.C.

A. Wilkinson: Is there any cap the Premier is prepared to impose on cost

overruns, regardless of the cause? We’ve heard 50 percent was

intolerable; 35 percent is okay. Is that the range — somewhere between

35 percent and 50 percent cost overruns — in which the Premier says he’s

prepared to say: “No, the people of British Columbia can’t afford this,

because we’re going to get fewer projects for more money.” Is that an

accurate suggestion?

Hon. J. Horgan: Our commitment is to provide services to British Columbians in a

cost-effective manner, and we’ll continue do that. I appreciate that the

member didn’t have an opportunity to ask the Minister of Transportation

these questions, and I’m delighted to spend some time with him here

today. But the difference between the two of us isn’t about the size of

our overruns, because yours were massive. The issue is: we believe in

investing in people. We believe in making sure that everyone has an

opportunity to succeed in British Columbia, and we’re committed to

making that happen.

Community benefits agreements are a way for that to go forward.

The other side disagrees with that. That is the argument right now.

That’s the whole point of this line of questioning. I don’t think the

members care a whit about cost overruns, based on their own record. So

if he wants to continue down this road, I’m happy to do it, but perhaps

there’s some other part of government you want to talk about

today.

A. Wilkinson: Well, we’re happy to talk about another project, and that’s, of

course, the subject of today’s newspaper column — yet another blunder in

the Ministry of Transportation, where the Premier seems to have decided

unilaterally to blow apart his Transportation Ministry’s expertise, to

ignore his minister and to just unilaterally decide he’s a civil

engineer. He has decided the best way to get across the Fraser

River.

[4:05 p.m.]

Perhaps the Premier can explain where this impulse came from to

decide there should be a parallel tunnel under the Fraser River at the

George Massey Tunnel.

Hon. J. Horgan: Again, referring to the venerable engineer from the Vancouver

Sun . That impulse, as the member called it, was at an

announcement at the Jimmy Pattison centre in Surrey, announcing a new 3T

MRI machine, the most high-tech MRI machine in British Columbia, which

will reduce wait times for diagnostic procedures and will make sure that

our hip-and-knee replacement program, which has reduced wait times as

well, will be even better.

In the course of that press conference, a camera person — because

networks rarely send reporters these days because they’re so busy —

asked me what my views were on the new view of the Mayor’s Council,

which was unanimous support for a tunnel. What I said at that time was

that this was good news because we had unanimity on a mode of getting to

the biggest congestion problem in that part of the Lower

Mainland.

I thought that was good news. I celebrated that — that the mayors

had come together. I met later in the day with the new mayor of Delta.

I’m very excited about his desire to work with his neighbours in

Richmond and other parts of the Lower Mainland to get a positive outcome

for the travelling public.

I have every confidence in the Minister of Transportation that she

will be able to work through all the issues that were left behind by the

previous government, which said: “We’re going to build a ten-lane

bridge. I don’t care if no one else wants to do that.” We disagreed with

that. Now we have consensus. We have near unanimity in the area about

building a tunnel.

I celebrated the fact of unanimity. I was not doing engineering

decisions. If you want to blow that out of proportion or the

Vancouver Sun wants to blow it out of proportion, fill your

boots.

A. Wilkinson: Well, we also observed that there’s a $2 million contract out

there to study the options. Is that now a nullity, or is the Premier

saying he misspoke and should have referred to the engineering study and

held his fire and been deferential to the experts in the field so they

could come up with some options? Or are they just engaged in a pointless

exercise at public expense?

Hon. J. Horgan: I guess the member didn’t hear what I said. I was at a health

announcement, and I was asked about the Massey Tunnel and unanimity that

now exists about a particular mode to address that congestion. I said

that was very good news. I also have every confidence that the Minister

of Transportation and her team are going to methodically go through this

to get the best outcome for the people of British Columbia.

It’s difficult to understand why the member on the other side

would not rejoice in the fact that Delta and Richmond and other mayors

and other communities have a common focus. They wrote to us, publicly.

They probably sent a copy to you. If you don’t have it, I can send a

copy over to you. They’re excited about getting going, so are we, and so

is the minister.

A. Wilkinson: The obvious question, Premier, is get going on what? Is the

Premier still open to a total replacement tunnel, a deep tunnel, a

bridge? Or is this a foregone conclusion now because he’s been

influenced by half a dozen mayors?

Hon. J. Horgan: There is no foregone conclusion. The only foregone conclusion is

that we’re sitting over here, and they’re sitting over there.

A. Wilkinson: Well, given that vacuous and arrogant answer, perhaps we’ll move

to the next question. Is the Premier open to a bridge to replace the

Massey Tunnel?

Hon. J. Horgan: The Minister of Transportation is discharging her responsibilities

to make sure she canvasses a range of options. The point of my comment

was that there was unanimity, and they wanted to talk about tunnels.

That was the point.

If I can’t make comments when someone asks me a question, then I’m

in the wrong line of business. If the member on the other side is going

to take a comment and extrapolate it to me overturning engineering

decisions, well, that’s ridiculous. It’s patently ridiculous, and he

knows that.

A. Wilkinson: Same question, no answer. Is the Premier still open to having a

bridge replace the Massey Tunnel?

[4:10 p.m.]

Hon. J. Horgan: An expert review rejected the ten-lane plan of the B.C. Liberal

Party. The member now has the member for Delta South beside him. The

mayor of Delta wants to make progress. He wants to see a tunnel proceed,

and I said: “That’s great news.” That’s great news because there’s

unanimity around the community. If there’s a better idea than that and

it will receive unanimity, I’ll accept that as well.

A. Wilkinson: Third time, we’ll try for an answer. Is the Premier open to having

a bridge replace the Massey Tunnel or not, given that he has a $2

million study underway to decide that question?

Hon. J. Horgan: I think I just said that I’ll embrace the best idea that’s

supported by the people in the community. If they come forward with an

idea that is not a ten-lane bridge that would be tolled, which was the

plan on the other side, then I’m absolutely prepared to look at

that.

The Minister of Highways is responsible for discharging this file,

and I have full confidence in her. I made a comment with enthusiasm

about diverse people coming together with common purpose. I think that’s

a good thing, and I celebrate that.

A. Wilkinson: The most recent remarks from the Premier have been that he’s

thought the idea of a twin tunnel was a good one, and now the mayors are

saying they want a deep bored tunnel, which is a totally different

proposition. Has the Premier come to any conclusions about this before

his $2 million engineering study is brought forward, or is that just a

complete waste of time?

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, again, if the member on the other side is saying that his

solution is a bridge, then he can tell that to the people in the region.

What I’m excited about, and I’ve said this a couple of times, is that

people are coming together.

The work that the Ministry of Transportation is doing is going to

be valuable in getting us to a resolution. But the thing that we need to

celebrate, and what I celebrated in a brief, brief comment to a

television camera, is that it’s good news that Delta and Richmond

leadership want to see something work for everybody. I would’ve thought

that the Leader of the Opposition would want everybody on the same page.

Apparently not.

A. Wilkinson: I suppose it’s fair to say it’s nice to be on the same page about

an answer to the question for the fourth time. Is the Premier open to a

bridge to replace the Massey Tunnel? Or is this $2 million engineering

study a complete waste of time, because he’s already come to the

conclusion that it should be a bored tunnel?

Hon. J. Horgan: Well, I did say that I’m open to the best outcome for the people

in the region. If that’s difficult for the member to understand, I don’t

know how many different ways I can answer that. I believe there’s a way

forward where there’s consensus in the region that will address this

difficult congestion point. The minister is working on it. We’re seized

of this.

The plan that the Liberals had, which involved no consultation

whatsoever, was being dictated to the people of Richmond. There was one

area that thought this was a great idea and a whole bunch that said:

“Wait a minute. Why are we doing that?”

Now we’re getting consensus. We’re getting people coming together.

If the Leader of the Opposition wants to get on board, there’s plenty of

room, man. Come on, join us. Let’s all work together on this.

A. Wilkinson: Well, I’m always enthused by offers from the Premier to join him,

because it’s in this charade about how to manage construction in this

province. I’m sad to say that I won’t be joining him in that.

[4:15 p.m.]

The further part of the charade is this suggestion that there was

no consultation on the bridge proposal. The Premier seems to have

forgotten that there were 7,000 pages of consultations made available at

an office in the Ironwood mall in south Richmond, which outlined the

plan for a bridge where the engineering work had all been done, and the

tenders were let at $3.5 billion, and the offer came in at $2.6 billion,

as noted in the Vancouver Sun this morning and many times over

the last three years.

So perhaps the Premier can let us know: is he still open to the

idea of this apparently economical bridge proposal rather than the

tunnel, or has he closed his mind to the idea of a bridge because of

something he blurted out on television yesterday?

Hon. J. Horgan: My mind is always open, and that’s probably why I’m having so much

fun. I just want to read a couple of quotes from people that might be

familiar to the member. One is a former Liberal candidate. One is also a

member, I believe, of the Liberal Party. It doesn’t matter.

Malcolm Brodie said: “The thing is, a new Massey replacement

bridge exacerbates the problems. It’s shortsighted. It’s absurd. It goes

against 40 years of regional planning focused on confining suburban

sprawl and getting people out of cars and onto transit.” He also went on

to say: “Under the previous group,” being those on that side of the

House, “they made the announcement that there would be a ten-lane

bridge, and that was all. That was the end of it.” We tried for — what?

— five years to discuss and to have them rethink the options that were

available but absolutely to no avail.

Greg Moore: “A ten-lane, auto-oriented bridge is too big in

scope.”

So if anyone needs to open their mind, it would be the people on

the other side of the House. I want to find resolution to the congestion

at Massey. I think all of us want to do that. But the other guys, when

they had the opportunity, disregarded 40 years of urban planning,

according to the mayor of Richmond, who was re-elected overwhelmingly

just last year.

The Chair: Member, just a second.

Users who are using their electronic devices may not be

allowed, but we are double-checking that, Premier. In the meantime,

just be careful.

A. Wilkinson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ll do my very best to use paper and my

brain rather than electronic devices to address the issues.

So, Premier, we still haven’t had an answer. Greg Moore was the

mayor of Port Coquitlam, 50 kilometres away from 87,000 people waiting

to get through the tunnel every morning. The people of south Delta and

Richmond are begging for an answer, and we’ve had no progress whatsoever

after a bridge was cancelled, which would have shown a $900 million

discount over the quoted sum in the budget.

So having discarded all that work, having blown off 7,000 pages of

consultation, having rejected a bid which would have saved the taxpayers

almost $1 billion, having wasted four years of traffic relief for the

people south of the Fraser, perhaps the Premier can just answer the

simple question: has he ruled out a bridge or not?

Hon. J. Horgan: I don’t have access to an electronic device, but I have a quote

that is just waiting to be read into the record. It’s the member for

Kamloops–South Thompson, who at the time had just been defeated. He had

been, previous to that, the Minister of Transportation. It goes as

follows — check me if I misspeak here: “A lesson for me that I really

want to apply moving forward is I think we had our elbows up a bit too

much with the mayors. I think the tone of the conversation was not

always one of partnership and working together.” Imagine that. “There

was too much tension, too much political calculation. We need to stop

telling local communities and regions what is best for them.” We need to

start engaging with them to improve places where they live, work and

play.

I could not agree more with the good words of the member for

Kamloops–South Thompson. That’s exactly what we’re trying to do, Member:

to listen to people, to open our minds to possibilities, to bring people

together. And positive outcomes will follow for all British Columbians.

That’s what we’re doing on this side of the House. You might be sitting

in the wrong place, Member. You should come on over.

A. Wilkinson: Well, these glib sporting analogies still don’t answer the

question of whether there should be a bridge, a tunnel or otherwise at

the Massey Tunnel crossing, and of course, we’d all like to think the

Premier would keep his mind open to the possibilities and look for the

best deal for taxpayers, rather than dissipating our income on cost

overruns on these Rocky Mountain projects.

[4:20 p.m.]

We have a huge number of bridges in the Lower Mainland, across

British Columbia, and very few tunnels. The obvious question is: what’s

the enthusiasm for the tunnel apart from the politics of appeasing the

mayors?

Hon. J. Horgan: I know we could check the Blues later. I have said my

mind is open to the best outcome several times. “Asked and answered” is

often, I think, what we say at this point in the deliberations. But I’ll

carry on, because it gives me an opportunity to talk a little bit more

about what we’re doing now to assist the congestion in the

region.

We’re looking to see what the best way forward is. We invite

members from all sides of the House to work with us on that. In the

meantime, we’re pursuing congestion relief by putting in place traffic

networks on both sides of the river. We’re also implementing safety

improvements to the tunnel: new lighting, improved drainage, surfacing

and other measures.

We’ll continue to work with local communities, listening to what

they have to say to improve their communities. They don’t belong to the

member for Quilchena. They belong to the people who live there. Why

wouldn’t you listen to them? Malcolm Brodie, respected member of the

community, longtime mayor of Richmond, is happy that finally someone is

listening to the community, not telling the community what they need.

That’s what we’re doing on this side of the House.

A. Wilkinson: I’m going to get nowhere on the eighth attempt to ask whether the

Premier has ruled out a bridge because he’s simply unwilling to answer

the question.

A $2 million engineering study that’s apparently just a complete

waste of time. Continuing the pattern of the Ministry of Transportation

to politicize every decision at the cost to the taxpayer of massive cost

overruns. If the Premier is not prepared to answer the most basic

question, perhaps we’ll go back to this issue of apprenticeship

training.

New documents came out today, obtained by freedom of information

from the Industry Training Authority, showing that 23,172 of the

province’s 28,432 registered construction apprentices — that is 81½

percent of B.C.’s construction apprentices — are sponsored by open-shop

companies, not unions.

Given that profile, perhaps the Premier can take us back to the

Illecillewaet and tell us how these apprentices are all going to be

trained on two kilometres of road when actually more than 80 percent of

apprentices are trained by non-union work contractors, and the Premier

has excluded them entirely from the Illecillewaet project.

Hon. J. Horgan: Again, I don’t want to leave the Leader of the Opposition with the

view that my mind’s not open to whatever solution comes forward from the

work that’s being done. I don’t know how more simple I can say

that.

With respect to the so-called political calculations, I just refer

him again to the very able comments of the member for Kamloops–South

Thompson, where he said: “We need to stop telling communities and

regions what’s best for them. We need to start engaging with them to

improve the places where they live.” That’s exactly what we’re

doing.

With respect to community benefits agreement projects, anyone can

bid on those — union, non-union. It doesn’t matter.

[4:25 p.m.]

The B.C. Infrastructure Benefits is the group that will be the

employer. They will be the employer. It takes away the labour risk, to a

certain degree, from those who bid on the projects. That’s why we’re so

concerned about the Illecillewaet contract, because there are other

inputs that have seen that escalation, and I don’t know why the member

won’t get his head around that.

The Chair: Before the Chair recognizes the Leader of the Official

Opposition, I would like to make it clear that according to Standing

Order 17A, electronic devices are allowed to be used here in the

House, except for the Speech from the Throne, royal assent, prayers,

oral question period, Speaker’s rulings, divisions and at any

designated time pursuant to instruction by the Speaker.

For example, they cannot rely on a hand-held device or laptop

to access textual information once they have been recognized by the

Chair. So prior to being recognized by the Chair, if they have an

electronic device in their hand, they can use it.

A. Wilkinson: Well, I’m sure the Premier will accept that reprimand in the best

spirit of the House.

But the answer to the previous question is still unknown. Given

that 81½ percent of apprentices in British Columbia are trained by

non-union contractors, why is there this insistence on having them for

two kilometres of road in the middle of the Rogers Pass, when the cost

overruns suggest that perhaps the cost of doing that business is too

high?

A $22 million cost overrun, $11,000 a metre — perhaps that’s

getting a bit too steep for a community benefits agreement. Will the

Premier consider opening that tender again for a non-CBA

project?

[J. Isaacs in the chair.]

Hon. J. Horgan: I believe the member’s question was whether or not we were going

to throw the bids back into the hat, and the answer to that is no. We’ve

got an outcome. We’re going to proceed. We’re going to get the work

done. I know that the community wants to see that happen, and we’re

committed to doing that.

We’re going to make sure, as we go forward, that we address the

challenges of other inputs: the cost of construction, the risk factors

and the fact that most of the companies in British Columbia are going

into overdrive to meet their existing obligations as we increase public

funding for other projects — hospitals, schools, roadways, bridges and

transit. That’s going to be increasingly challenging, but we’re up to

the task.

[4:30 p.m.]

A. Wilkinson: Well, I think that answer invites the obvious question: are we

going to be able to afford these hospitals, schools, bridges, when the

Premier has decided that there is no apparent limit to cost overruns

because of community benefits agreements? That’s the question, Premier.

Are you prepared to say that there’s a reasonable limit in the billions

where CBAs and the associated costs become intolerable to the taxpayer,

and we need to build other projects?

We need to provide those schools in Surrey to replace 300-plus

portables. We need to build the hospitals in Richmond and Terrace. Or

are those going to be simply discarded because of the need to pay CBA

premiums on Rocky Mountain highway projects?

Hon. J. Horgan: Again, the key issue here is that Rocky Mountain highway project

was just extremely challenging. Again, the member has acknowledged that,

but he doesn’t want to continue that thought forward.

So 80 percent overruns on the northwest transmission line, 60

percent overruns on the convention centre, 40 percent on the roof at

B.C. Place — I’m not going to take advice on cost overruns from the

Leader of the Opposition.

A. Wilkinson: Well, I’m going to take the Premier back to last year’s estimates.

There was a question asked. I’ll ask a very simple question. What level

of disclosure is required in the railways, which are federal

undertakings under the constitution and not regulated by the province,

in terms of disclosure of their cargoes, whether they’re hazardous or

crude oil or diluted bitumen or otherwise?

After a lengthy pause and a consultation with his staff, the

Premier came back and said: “We just had confirmed by both the Ministers

of Environment and Transportation that that information is held by the

federal government, and it is not currently shared with the province.”

I’m sure the Premier remembers that little encounter, and perhaps he can

answer the question. Has he endeavoured to get any more information

about oil shipments in British Columbia from the federal government when

they occur by rail, and if so, what has he learned?

N. Simons: I just want to introduce the young folks who are leaving the House

right now. I think they’re from Surrey Centre, grade 5.

The Chair: Shall leave be granted?

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

N. Simons: Oh, yeah, apparently I have to have leave.

Welcome to the House. Thanks for coming. Sorry you’re leaving so soon,

but the