First Session, 43rd Parliament

Official Report

of Debates

( Hansard )

Tuesday, May 6, 2025

Afternoon Sitting

Issue No. 57

The Honourable Raj Chouhan , Speaker

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.

The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.

Contents

Orders of the Day

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General (continued)

Elenore Sturko

Hon. Garry Begg

Bryan Tepper

Rob Botterell

Brent Chapman

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 5 — Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2025 (continued)

On the amendment (continued)

Sharon Hartwell

Brent Chapman

On the main motion

Hon. Brenda Bailey

Bill 11 — Employment Standards Amendment Act, 2025

Hon. Jennifer Whiteside

Kiel Giddens

Jeremy Valeriote

Darlene Rotchford

Brennan Day

Standing Order 81.1

Adoption of Government Business

Schedule

Hon. Mike Farnworth

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction (continued)

Tara Armstrong

Hon. Sheila Malcolmson

Kristina Loewen

Estimates: Ministry of Jobs, Economic Development and Innovation

Hon. Diana Gibson

Gavin Dew

Teresa Wat

Estimates: Ministry of Transportation and Transit

Hon. Mike Farnworth

Harman Bhangu

Sheldon Clare

Lynne Block

Ward Stamer

Proceedings in the Birch Room

Committee of the Whole

Bill 7 — Economic Stabilization (Tariff Response) Act (continued)

Kiel Giddens

Hon. Niki Sharma

Tony Luck

Steve Kooner

Rob Botterell

Gavin Dew

Tuesday, May 6, 2025

The House met at 1:32 p.m.

[Mable Elmore in the chair.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. Mike Farnworth : In this chamber, I call continued Committee of Supply for the Ministry of Public

Safety and Solicitor General.

In the Douglas Fir Room, I call continued supply debates on the estimates of the Ministry

of Social Development and Poverty Reduction, to be followed by the Ministry of Jobs,

Economic Development and Innovation, and if that is completed, the Ministry of Transportation

and Transit.

In the Birch Room, I call continued committee on Bill 7, Economic Stabilization.

The House in Committee,

Section B.

The committee met at 1:34 p.m.

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of

Public Safety and Solicitor General

(continued)

The Chair : Good afternoon, Members. We’ll call this House back to order.

On Vote 42: ministry operations, $1,121,960,000 (continued) .

[1:35 p.m.]

The Chair : As you’ve heard, we’re going to be considering the budget estimates of Public Safety

and Solicitor General this afternoon.

Elenore Sturko : In a bid to protect its workers and to reduce what Loblaws calls violent incidents,

the number of stores in British Columbia that have employees wearing body-worn cameras

is increasing. Loblaws, which owns properties like Superstore and Shoppers Drug Mart,

confirmed to media on March 25 of this year that the number of stores now participating

in this program is going up to 11, where only two stores were previously taking part.

First, can the minister share some thoughts on retail employees having to wear body

cameras to work in a shop? What provincial programs and funding are being allocated

to reduce the risk that retail employees in British Columbia are increasingly facing

because of this government’s inability to manage public safety?

[1:40 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : Importantly, I think it is for us to consider, first of all, that we are committed

with businesses, with business groups, to doing what can be done to ensure that those

on the front line and facing customers each day, whether they be stocking shelves

or working in the aisles, are safe and have the tools that are available for them

to do their job. It’s important that they feel safe, that they surround themselves

with other workers and devices that allow that to happen.

We’ve met with business groups. They’ve voiced their concern directly to us. On an

ongoing basis, we have cooperated with our policing partners, with the federal government,

so that businesses directly, on SITE, can take advantage of the opportunities that

are allowed to them to protect themselves when they’re doing their job.

We, of course, fund police throughout the province. We have SITE-funded operations

which have directly impacted the outcomes of their group by targeting a high volume

of repeat offenders and holding them accountable, reducing public exposure to violent

crime and disrupting cycles of violence.

For example, since May 2023, the program SITE has supported 113 operations across

33 communities with approved funding of over $10 million and facilitated investigations

of over 2,900 individuals, with 1,900 recommended charges for 965 individuals with

substantial seizures of illegal weapons, drugs and criminal assets.

Elenore Sturko : In August of 2024, the Wildlife Thrift Store on Granville said it spent $300,000

over the last three years in costs related to crime in the neighbourhood. They reported

the money had gone to repairs and security.

Does the minister believe that retailers should pay, in some cases, as I mentioned,

$100,000 a year for extra security and repairs because of the government’s failure

to manage public safety? What is the ministry doing to address the rising cost to

businesses as a result of the government’s failure to manage public safety?

[1:45 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : We, the government of British Columbia, have been actively supporting businesses

when they encounter problems. It’s important that they look to us, and they do, as

partners in their fight, fighting retail crime. We funded them to the tune of $10½

million for money that they use to protect their business.

CSTEP, for example, has been a valued program. It’s very supportive. It’s been a success

from a criminal point of view. We’re continuing, as we move forward, to ensure that

businesses know that they should come to us to seek support as they continue to fight

retail crime.

Elenore Sturko : Again at the Wildlife Thrift Store in Vancouver, the security guard there, Japinder

Pal Singh, told Global News last summer that he’s been spat on at least 20 times in the eight months that he’s

worked at the store and has frequently had things thrown at him.

He said, “To be honest, all the time I’m afraid doing my job here,” adding that he

frequently finds weapons on people. “Knives are normal. Bear spray, pepper spray,

batons, all sorts of weapons.” He ends up, he said, having to handcuff someone at

least twice a day.

Yesterday the minister agreed that security officers who are licensed by the province

are not trained to intervene with weapons. If that is the case and there is active

violence inside retail settings, what does he believe security officers are supposed

to do?

[1:50 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : It’s important that we not confuse the work of a paid security guard hired by a corporation

with that of a police officer. There is no expectation that they act like a police

officer. We always caution, and they are trained, that they cannot act beyond the

scope of their duties. They are an important part of deterrence, and in many cases,

that’s the sole job that they have to do.

There are cases where there are incidents, regrettable incidents that force a security

guard to involve himself, perhaps. But I think it’s important that in the context

of all of this violence, we are continuing to underfund CSTEP, for example, which

is an important program, and the barrage program in Vancouver, which had fully and

highly trained policemen on the street doing their job every day.

My key points I’d say are that security guards, acting within the scope of their duty,

have a limited range of operations, and they must think first about their own personal

safety. They liaise on a daily basis with the police in their neighbourhood, and there

is an ability to continue to curb that kind of violence by the presence of police.

Hon. Christine Boyle : I’d like to seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Hon. Christine Boyle : I just want to welcome the students from St. Mary’s School who are visiting us here

and are up in the gallery.

It’s so nice to have you here.

I understand that they had a tour with Minister Dix or got to meet with Minister Dix

earlier.

I’m glad to have you here for estimates, which is an important part of our budget

process, where we have these sorts of questions and answers and discussions.

Will the House join me in welcoming students from St. Mary’s School and their teacher,

Mirna Lewis.

The Chair : Thank you very much.

Kids, that minister is generally referred to as the Minister of Energy and Climate

Solutions, in this room.

Debate Continued

Elenore Sturko : In his response, the minister said that security guards need to act within the scope

of their training and their duties. We’re talking about people who are licensed, for

example, by this ministry to be advanced security guards, which allows them to put

handcuffs on people.

As the minister will remember from his more-than-three-decades-long policing career

and I remember from my much shorter policing career, if you put handcuffs on people,

you go hands-on. When you go hands-on with people, the chance of encountering a weapon

or even strikes from a person goes up.

The minister also said, in his previous answer, that sometimes there are situations

where people may be forced to intervene. Could the minister please explain what he

means by forced to intervene?

Hon. Garry Begg : When I say that the security guard may be forced to intervene, I don’t mean that

there was physical force attached to him. Under the circumstances, he or she decided

that the most appropriate course of action would be to intervene.

[1:55 p.m.]

Elenore Sturko : Thank you to the minister.

I’ll give you a couple of examples here of some rising concern that, as critic for

Public Safety, I have with the scope of what’s happening and the reliance upon, increasingly,

security services to be brought into retail, to be brought into…. Almost every place

you go now, they’re hiring security guards.

I think it’s heartwarming to see how many people want to step up to be deterrence,

as the minister says, to try in their own way to protect their fellow community members.

We’re talking about a scope of work that is increasingly high risk in situations.

We’ve already heard from Mr. Pal Singh that they get assaulted and they’re being exposed

multiple times a day to things like weapons.

On April 10, outside of Granville Square, and this is in 2025, near Granville and

West Cordova Street, a 62-year-old security guard had his fingertip bitten off. The

victim was on shift when he encountered a suspect in an outdoor plaza, police said.

Going back in time in March of 2022, Harmandeep Kaur, 24, died after she was attacked

during her shift as a security guard at the Kelowna campus of UBC Okanagan.

Lots of security guards are newcomers. Many of them are elderly. Many are adapting

businesses are relying on security guards, we have the potential for more injuries

and even deaths.

Does the minister believe that security guards that his ministry is licensing are

qualified to deal with the level of danger that they are being exposed to?

Hon. Garry Begg : I think we’re veering into hypothetical situations. The situation itself is not hypothetical,

but we’re being hyperbolic about occurrences that do happen.

I know through my own personal training, I know through the Justice Institute of B.C.

that there are a variety of options that security guards face. Of course, one of the

options is that they can withdraw from a situation they judge could be dangerous.

It’s excessively hyperbolic to use examples of the rare occasions when something does

happen that could perhaps have involved another method by the security guard so that

they withdraw from that dangerous situation, which is not to say that there cannot

be unexpected results of contact with a person. But to concentrate on that alone,

I think, presents the perception that there is always danger there.

I believe that the Justice Institute provides a level of training that if the member

works within the scope of their duties, they should be in a better situation. And

it’s always an option to withdraw from a situation.

Elenore Sturko : I find it really disturbing to hear the minister categorize talking about…. These

are just three, within the last half an hour, of multiple incidents happening across

the province where we have…. Even from my own community, the minister’s own community

in Surrey, we see multiple incidents where it doesn’t have to necessarily be having

your thumb bitten off like this poor 62-year-old, but getting spit on, shoved.

I mean, this isn’t hyperbole. This isn’t me exaggerating. These are real risks. In

fact, we had the Minister of Health standing in here. We discussed this. We canvassed

it yesterday in response to rising stabbings, uttering threats with weapons, things

like machetes, crossbows, these types of risks being in places like hospitals.

[2:00 p.m.]

Now we have people…. And from my own experience dealing with people in the security

services while I was taking files as a police officer, many are newcomers — many.

Many have language challenges. We’re expecting a lot, and people are getting hurt.

To stand up in this place and say that it’s an exaggeration, that it’s hyperbolic,

that I’m making a mountain out of a molehill…. We had a security guard, a young woman

who was actually working that job to save money for tuition to go to UBC Okanagan

She was killed trying to protect people on her campus. I don’t think it’s unreasonable

that we engage in a discussion, perhaps, on the circumstances that we currently have

going on in the province.

With an increase in people with brain injuries, severe substance use disorders, untreated

mental illness to the extent where we’re putting designated beds into pretrial and

other places so that we can try and get a handle on the rampant violence that we have,

random repeat attacks that we would be expecting that…. Businesses and people are

fearing for their safety. They’re bringing these individuals into their space.

There is an expectation there. When the public sees a security guard, there is an

unspoken expectation that comes with wearing a uniform, even if that uniform only

has a flashlight on it. I think that some thought needs to go into looking at what

expectation is being placed on security guards in this province, as a result of an

epidemic of retail crime that’s absolutely gotten out of control.

Some headway has been made with things like ReVOII, but it hasn’t solved the problem.

We see increasingly even retail employees wearing things like stab vests and cameras.

We need to understand and collect data on what type of risk that poses, then, on people

who are now wearing security equipment. What is the expectation being placed on them?

What type of risk may they then place themselves in inadvertently?

Retailers are also closing. A vintage consignment store in Vancouver’s downtown core

packed up and moved, after nearly a decade in the area, because of rising crime rates

in the neighbourhood. “The downtown neighbourhood has unfortunately declined over

time. Factors like injection sites across the street from the store and an overarching

unsafe feel has become the norm. Numerous shop owners have experienced an increased

rate of crime and break-ins in the area as well.”

It’s not only retailers who are feeling less safe. At a public forum in Victoria,

area residents discussed a new housing project that included drug consumption services.

“When SOLID started at North Park, we saw a notable uptake in the amount of drug paraphernalia

that children were bringing into the school at recess. What are you going to do for

the children in this community to keep them safe?”

A teacher at George Jay Elementary, located less than one kilometre away from the

proposed housing project, voiced worries for her students’ safety. “When I look at

the other places in town, it doesn’t matter where they are, whether it’s North Park

or Ellice or the 900 block of Pandora, they are disaster zones. I believe that we’re

on a road that is going to get worse and worse and worse.”

The reality is that people can see it with their own eyes. They can see what’s happened

in areas where there is a concentration of services that enable drug use. The disorder

is obvious.

Can the minister please provide information on how the ministry is managing public

safety risks and crime associated to drug use, mental health street disorder that

often accompany these services? What risk assessments are being done to protect and

keep the communities safe?

[2:05 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : None of these places act in isolation. It is part of a community that has been built

up over a number of years. Sometimes the best recorders of that information are the

policing community themselves, policemen who are on the street, who identify for us

areas of particular concern to them.

When you talk of incidents where someone has been spat upon or threatened with a knife

or seen some other type of force applied upon them, that is not unique to that community

in the sense that the policing that goes on there every day becomes aware of it.

In the provincial government, what we’ve done is concentrated our scarce policing

resources on a particular area, so that the issues that are there present can be changed.

The barrage program I referred to earlier, from October 1 to January 31, saw a successive

drop in the rate of crime in that area, which was, no doubt, because of the police

presence and their concentration on crime in that area. Violent crime was down in

that area 27 percent; break and enters, down 33 percent; assault with weapons, down

45 percent; and shoplifting itself, down 36 percent.

[2:10 p.m.]

So while you, perhaps, choose to look at other areas, I choose to look at the stats

that have been established by the police, the arrests that have been made. It’s also

important to understand that violent crime now is down in that area as well.

Are the police impacting the rate and the incidence of crime? I would say absolutely.

Now we’re going to add CSTEP to that program as well. So we will see, I predict, a

decline in overall crime as we continue to impact it by a program like CSTEP.

The Chair : Just a reminder to have all responses through the Chair.

Elenore Sturko : I’m happy to hear that the minister believes public safety resources are scarce;

I agree. It’s interesting that the minister chooses to concentrate on VPD’s success.

The question wasn’t about whether or not VPD was successful or whether intensive policing

projects can be successful — because they can.

This question, really, was speaking about both the case of a retailer that shut down

because of factors like a safe injection site, an overarching unsafe feeling that

resulted from that and break-ins in the area of the injection site in Vancouver.

Then here in Victoria, SOLID was opening housing that included drug use, and teachers

and other community members were coming forward to say that the kids at recess were

bringing in needles and drug paraphernalia from open drug use in the school grounds

and in the area where the kids play.

The question wasn’t about whether VPD is being successful with project barrage, which

they are. It was what risk assessments are done by the ministry, or what will be done,

to protect the community.

This is a government that continues to place resources for people with addiction in

areas located close to schools, housing, neighbourhoods and retail, and the results

are not good. We still have six people a day dying of drug use, and in addition, we

have businesses closing, community members feeling unsafe and, apparently, kids playing

with drug paraphernalia.

The question was…. Maybe I’ll word it differently. What budget measures are allocated

to mitigate the risks to public safety because of increased public drug use?

[2:15 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : This is becoming a circular discussion. We, as a funding agency, have created programs

that I’ve outlined, like SITE and STEP, which have been amazingly successful. The

police continue to work that area. They collaborate. They cooperate. They receive

information. They receive intelligence. They identify risks. They shift their resources

to meet the risk that is there.

It’s dangerous to connect criminal behaviour with drug behaviour sometimes. There

is sometimes a connection, but there is not always a connection. To assume that someone

who is abusing drugs is a different kind of criminal is dangerous. We have invested,

the police have invested money to counteract criminal activity at a much higher level.

For example, the CFSEU goes after much higher risk. We’re not now talking about street

crimes. We’re talking about crimes at a higher level.

The discussion becomes circular when you say that we did or did not do this or that

we should or should not do this. You don’t get the complete picture until you look

at all of it. There is as much regard for prevention, reformation and redirection

of criminal activity through policing as we move forward.

My expectation is that the police will continue to concentrate on the highest or higher

risks. It’s much more effective to combat criminal activity, particularly drug activity,

the higher up the chain you go. The police are looking after the street-level crimes

and also the large crimes that may involve international and extraprovincial criminal

activity.

Elenore Sturko : I’ll just remind the minister that even during decriminalization it remained illegal

to possess drugs in a schoolyard. So if kids are finding used paraphernalia in a schoolyard,

that’s evidence of a crime. It’s criminal activity. While I understand the minister

might be after the cartels, as he should be, it’s also important to remember that

there are people who live in these neighbourhoods.

Even something as simple to the minister, perhaps, as possession of drugs in a schoolyard,

maybe that doesn’t seem like a big crime. But if you’re the parent of a kid who comes

home with a hypodermic needle in their backpack or that little kid that picked up

some fentanyl at a Nanaimo playground, I mean, it’s your whole world.

During VPD’s project barrage, Vancouver police dealt with a room takeover. A room

takeover is a situation where a resident is forced out from their single occupancy

suite by individuals who use them as bases for criminal activity. Room takeovers have

been reported in the past, of course.

In 2022, the Tyee did a news story on it when a support worker reported that multiple tenants of the

London Hotel SRO were threatened with violence by the people who had taken over their

rooms, and if they would return, they would be threatened with violence, and some

became homeless again.

[2:20 p.m.]

Based on conversations that this gentleman had with clients, he said that tenants

who had been bullied out of the London continued to pay rent for their rooms, that

money was deducted from their income or disability assistance cheque and that that

was transferred to Atira Property Management, which is a common arrangement for people

on government assistance.

The worker said: “Even though they’re still paying for the room, they’re told they’ll

get beaten up or really hurt, hurt badly if they tell anyone or if they go back.”

There have been multiple reports of supportive housing in hotels and other locations

becoming hubs for drug trafficking and prostitution.

Can the minister please explain and provide details on any interministry work with

the Ministry of Housing or Health or Poverty Reduction or funding of initiatives that

go towards reducing crime at B.C. Housing projects or any policies or initiatives

related to supportive housing?

Hon. Garry Begg : It’s important here that we recognize from the outset that there is tremendous cooperation

across various ministries in this province. We collaborate and cooperate with each

other. Most ministries do not work in isolation, one from the other.

We have situation tables across the province, 33 to be specific. Those are one-stop

shops, as it were. You may be familiar with situation tables where people from the

Ministry of Housing, people from the Ministry of Health, people with drug addictions,

parole, probation, police all get together and map out a plan that allows for the

relocation or dislocation of these people from their criminal activity.

[2:25 p.m.]

That is something that has been going on in this province for quite some time, and

my expectation is that it will continue and expand. These problems and problem people

do not work in isolation of each other. They have built a community around them, to

their detriment. A situation table with the resources that are available all across

the various ministries makes it much easier for those people to make a decision to

change their lifestyle.

The direct answer to your question is that there is, on an ongoing basis every day

of the week, a situation table somewhere in this province that is dealing with the

problems that are peculiar to their community. That’s by design. It is working.

Information, of course, is shared back with the police. Targeting is done as a result

of information that is obtained during the situation tables. That’s how we get to

helping people in community, whether it’s in Campbell River or Surrey or wherever,

to solve their problems.

Elenore Sturko : The decriminalization experiment in British Columbia, which began on January 31,

2023, allowed adults to possess up to 2.5 grams of certain illicit drugs — heroin,

fentanyl, cocaine, methamphetamine and MDMA — for personal use without criminal penalties.

The three-year pilot, intended to reduce stigma, decrease criminal justice interactions

and address the province’s drug crisis, was scaled back in 2024 due to public outcry

related to rampant public drug use and the inability of police to respond to that

problematic drug use.

From February to June 2023, B.C. saw a 76 percent drop in possession offences, as

police had stopped arresting people for possession and were, during the pilot, discouraged

from interactions with people using drugs. The 15 months of the pilot also coincided

with the deadliest year for overdose deaths in the history of our province.

Has the ministry evaluated the impact of the decriminalization experiment on overall

drug investigations?

[2:30 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : The question is perhaps better answered by the Ministry of Health. They are doing

an ongoing evaluation, and they have included in their evaluation, on an ongoing basis,

the policing agencies as well. But they’re better equipped to, perhaps, speak more

about the program than I am.

Elenore Sturko : It’s unfortunate. I’m still going to ask a series of questions related to public

safety. I think that it would be actually surprising, given that this was an experiment

undertaken, yes, for health reasons but that had significant impacts on the public

safety landscape, especially at the street level. It had an impact on how police could

conduct investigations, often that start at the street level by talking to people.

I think it’s unfortunate, if this is what the minister is confirming, that they are

not doing their own Public Safety Ministry evaluation separate from Health, which

would have a bias. I’m going to say it. When the evaluations were going on, while

decriminalization was still in full swing, even in terms of monitoring, there was

no monitoring of negative unintended consequences.

There was no monitoring of the impacts of not enforcing the law but only trying to

bolster arguments to keep going — even in the face of significant harms that were

happening at the street level, in hospitals, in places like transit and in restaurants,

where people were using drugs — and police were powerless to take action.

Is there information, though, about how decriminalization impacted street level enforcement

and investigations? How, in the 2025 budget, are they working through some of these

impacts?

[2:35 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : This, as I’ve mentioned, is an ongoing evaluation. The information obtained through

the Health Ministry is gained by the benefit of having police input there as well.

In spring 2024, we requested a change to the

section 56 CDSA exemptions from Health

Canada in response to public concern about public drug use. The new exemption bans

open drug use in nearly all public places. People can now only possess drugs in private

residences or designated health care sites such as overdose prevention, drug-checking

or addiction treatment service locations. An exception has also been made for unhoused

people in legal overnight sheltering options.

The evaluation is ongoing with the cooperation and with advice from the police on

an ongoing basis.

Elenore Sturko : I understand that, and I understand why, from a health care perspective, a review

would be done of the decriminalization experiment. Also, there would be a need for

a Ministry of Public Safety review, because from a health lens, there will be different

things that they’re looking for.

For example, when they had their dashboard, the things that they were looking for

about police…. They were only looking at whether or not the number of arrests for

people for possession went down, which, of course, they did because they weren’t arresting

people, because that part of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act was gone.

But what about the increase to drug use in hospitals? What about the number of incidents

that they were called to where there was drug use on beaches? Fiona Wilson went to

the parliamentary committee, HESA, in Ottawa and talked about a scenario where if

someone was smoking crystal meth next to your family at the beach, the police couldn’t

respond because it wasn’t illegal.

What about a full evaluation of how this experiment impacted safety, through a safety

lens, through the minister’s lens of looking…? Yes, we wanted to do an experiment

to try and see if we could deal with this issue solely looking through the health

lens, and it was disastrous. What impact did that actually have?

Did we have an increase in gangs and cartels? Survey says yes, we did. We saw a doubling,

actually, almost. We talked about that yesterday. The number of cartels and gangs

identified operating in the province of British Columbia happened to coincide around

the time that we had 15 months of not enforcing possession laws in British Columbia.

I don’t know if that’s a direct result or if it happens to be a really wild coincidence,

but a review of the decriminalization experiment from the lens of public safety would

be appropriate to make sure that if someone gets the wild idea that we should stop

enforcing B.C. and Canada’s laws ever again, we know what the impact is going to be,

because it is a matter of safety.

In May ’24, the minister is correct that the government recriminalized drug use in

public. It allowed the police to arrest, seize drugs, compel individuals to leave.

When the Premier went on television and did a news conference about rolling back the

decrim experiment, he still stipulated that police would be encouraged to simply move

people on and that, in fact, the previous Sol. Gen had said that that’s basically

the last option.

[2:40 p.m.]

They didn’t want to still arrest people. They wanted to not charge people, unless

it was an extenuating circumstance. I’m wondering if the minister can please explain:

has the number of charges for possession of drugs increased since the rollback of

the pilot?

Hon. Garry Begg : There has been an increase in the number of charges subsequent to the change in the

act. I would say, as well, that it’s important that police are given a wide use of

discretion in these types of charges.

Elenore Sturko : Thank you to the minister for the response.

During project Barrage, in just over a month, VPD executed 153 warrants. Those were

arrest warrants. They made 204 Criminal Code arrests. As well, 200 weapons were seized

in four weeks. That’s a 258 percent increase, which, as the minister earlier stated,

did result in a 30 percent reduction in assaults with a weapon.

During decriminalization — police were not able to conduct the same type of street-level

enforcement due to the removal of possession charges from the CDSA. How did that impact

safety, and what kind of data related to warrants and weapons seizures during the

decriminalization experiment exists?

Will there be a thorough review to see what impact decriminalization had on the execution

of warrants and seizure of weapons at the street level during that time?

[2:45 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : I’ll take the question under notice and get back to you with that information.

Elenore Sturko : I think this is important. I think that understanding the full scope of how we were

impacted during that time…. If we make a decision to make some other kind of change

to help stop the six people a day from dying, we need to not only look at the reduction

of harm for people with substance use issues but what those overarching impacts to

public safety as a province it will have.

I can remember, and I’m guessing the minister remembers, too, street-level enforcement,

where there was, for example, the possession of drugs, often leading to the seizure

of a weapon — not necessarily resulting in a charge even, but incidental to arrest

or detention for investigation — and seizing things like machetes, chains, all kinds

of things that do have an impact on our ability to manage the types of violence at

the street level.

One of the stats that the VPD had talked about is that it’s not just that the amount

of assaults overall had gone down but the assaults with weapons went down. While there

may still in the Downtown Eastside during project barrage be assaults that take place,

the severity of the injuries to the victims could be substantially less because they’ve

had an opportunity to remove weapons, which is, of course, really a positive thing.

My last question here on the decriminalization pilot is: will the ministry commit

to compiling data on decriminalization, not only to see if there were fewer arrests

and then subsequently more arrests but looking at all the other aspects that these

changes had on street-level enforcement, on the ability of police to conduct investigations

and on the drug-trafficking landscape as it evolved over that period of time in British

Columbia?

Hon. Garry Begg : Interesting proposition. We will do, as part of an integrated process with other

partners, a review, as you suggested.

Elenore Sturko : Thank you. That’s good news, and I’d be happy to help in any capacity that the opposition

can lend a hand.

I only have a few minutes left before I’m going to turn this over to the member for

Surrey-Panorama. I just want to follow up quickly on a couple of things from yesterday,

related to illicit vapes, tobacco and cannabis.

We are in a financial situation in the province where we actually need to collect

as much revenue as we can from all those sources. We know that the revenues from cannabis

and tobacco products and nicotine products go back into our system to fund the very

projects that we badly need.

Unfortunately, we know that at least for cigarettes alone, it’s a 34 percent illegal

market share that is estimated by industry research. This would translate into 534

million cigarettes, which costs about $174 million annually. Over time, that’s quite

a bit of money that could be injected into other programs, including law enforcement.

A 1 percent, 5 percent or 10 percent reduction in illegal tobacco is worth $5 million,

$25 million or even up to $50 million, respectively.

[2:50 p.m.]

For the sake of time, I’m going to ask a few of the questions so I don’t fall behind.

When it comes to vapes, vapes in particular don’t just have these financial implications.

They have health and safety implications as well.

The industry, along with other authorities, conducts reviews of retailers in the Lower

Mainland and across the province. They did a retail sweep in the Lower Mainland in

June of 2024, and they inspected 60 vape product retailers. Of those, 56 out of 60

stores — that’s 93 percent — were selling non-compliant products. That’s a lot.

Those products are fraudulently packaged disposable devices that had more than the

allowable amount of fluid, more than the concentration that they were allowed to have

of the product inside. Because it has more vapes inside, it actually is stealing provincial

sales tax and, of course, the excise tax.

There were also illegal nicotine patches in approximately 50 percent of the retailers,

including Zyn. They’re not allowed here, but they’re still available, apparently,

in 50 percent of the retailers that were inspected.

Let me read a few of these, for the sake of my own time here, and I would love to

hear just generally what the thought here would be.

There are actually some changes to regulations that are being suggested by industry

to help to take away the market share from the illicit sources. Really, looking for

a commitment from the minister in terms of vaping products, they’re looking for removing

the volume restrictions so that the legal retailers are able to compete and remove

that market share from the illicit sources; also, removing the regulation that says

that refill containers can’t have more than 30 millilitres.

They note that some of the reasons why we had these restrictions here in British Columbia

were because of safety for kids, but a new federal regulation had come in and increased

the amount of safety on those devices, making these redundant pieces of legislation.

They feel that in removing those restrictions, it allows them to basically compete

with the illicit sources and, hopefully, remove the market share from those other

guys.

Likewise, the cannabis industry is struggling. Costs and fees are placing burdens

on our B.C. cannabis growers with pressure, and licensed growers have come here and

said that they’re leaving the industry because of rising costs. Again, once we lose

our legal market, they can be easily displaced by illicit sources, which still make

up a fairly big chunk of the market here. Illicit sources continue to take a large

market share here in British Columbia.

Again, they’re asking for regulatory changes to allow, for example, cannabis tourism,

kind of like winery tourism. They’re looking for regulatory change permitting responsible

consumption within production retail settings. Like visiting a winery and having a

glass of wine, they want you to be able to go to their cannabis production and be

able to sample products.

That would generate jobs, also revenue in terms of the taxation for the government,

and help reduce that market share for illicit sources, fighting organized crime. It’s

a win-win. Get your money here to pay the bills and fight organized crime.

Looking for a commitment from the minister to please review, both in the cannabis

act and then for the tobacco and vapes, regulations that will help reduce the market

share for illicit sources and help boost tax revenues back to the province.

[2:55 p.m.]

Hon. Christine Boyle : I’d like to seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Hon. Christine Boyle : I would like to welcome students, staff and parents from St. Mary’s School in Vancouver

who are here visiting and having a tour of the Legislature today.

We’re so glad to have you here. We’re in the midst of estimates, which is when the

opposition asks questions of the government on the budget.

So glad that you could join us and that I get to welcome you on behalf of the Minister

of Energy and Climate Solutions, who is the MLA in your school area, though I know

you’re from across Vancouver, and I know some of you are also constituents of mine.

I’m glad to see familiar faces and friends.

Will the House please join me in making them feel welcome.

Debate Continued

Elenore Sturko : Can I just add one thing? In terms of the vapes, one of the issues with non-compliance

is that they were looking to see if there would be a greater appetite for enforcement.

Their inspections in those are finding a high percentage of non-compliance — looking

to see if there would be a further commitment for the enforcement of those regulations.

Hon. Garry Begg : I would say at the outset that, particularly, the legal cannabis industry has been

and continues to be very forward-thinking in adapting and changing regulations so

that it better meets the needs of the market.

In B.C., they enacted a legal and regulatory framework to govern retail sales and

distribution as well as dedicated enforcement to support the transition from illicit

to legal and regulated.

My ministry leads the ongoing implementation of the provincial regulatory framework

as well as policy coordination across ministries and in alignment with the federal

government. We’re working across ministries, with cannabis industries, Indigenous

partners and local governments to identify where adjustments to the provincial framework

can be made to support the legal sector, including increasing access to industry support

programs and gradually enabling cannabis hospitality and tourism experiences.

Since legalization, we’ve made several adjustments to the provincial framework to

support the legal sector. Examples include authorizing licensed retailers to offer

online sales and delivery, developing programs for farm-gate sales and direct delivery

distribution and adjusting rules around promotion of places to consume cannabis. The

ministry is now looking towards enabling cannabis sales at events like craft fairs

and this kind of thing.

[3:00 p.m.]

It’s also important…. As far as the vape goes, in this province, it is regulated not

provincially but municipally. The enforcement mechanism there is usually on a bylaw

basis. I’m aware that there are problems with the industry and the sale of product

that is not suitable for human consumption, but the enforcement of the regulations

is a municipal responsibility.

Elenore Sturko : Sorry, just one follow-up before I turn it over. In terms of the regulation provincially

that stipulates how much strength or how many vapes…. I don’t know. I’m not a vape

person. How many servings that are inside the vape that are allowed to have…. This

is where the discrepancy is.

Even though Health Canada has also tested these samples, they’re finding that your

provincial sales tax, our tax, is being stolen. I don’t know the real number, but

some of them are supposed to have 50 servings, and they end up having like 250.

That’s 150 stolen servings that we could have received revenue for, and we’re allowing

that, according to these industry groups. Many of these people or organizations who

are selling these counterfeit and illegal vapes in British Columbia with such a huge

market share are actually tied to criminal organizations.

I think that regardless of whether it is a bylaw enforcement issue municipally or

whether there are ways that we can take back the market share and support enforcement,

at least if the minister could commit to meeting with this industry to look at those

solutions…. They also point to other provinces where they don’t have the same regulations

that we do, and they actually have a lesser problem than we do with the illicit market

share.

Hon. Garry Begg : I have met with members of the vaping industry. This, essentially, is a child, as

it were, of the Ministry of Finance — the application of the fees attached to it.

It’s something, certainly, that I can discuss with the Minister of Finance.

Bryan Tepper : I would like to get into a little bit of BCLC and online gaming and iGaming. Interestingly

enough, I got an email with a letter actually from the British Columbia Gaming Industry

Association just while we were sitting here. They have their concerns about how their

business has been going since the pandemic and how they can keep revenue moving as

they are losing to the online gaming that we have in this province.

I will bring up the PlayNow website, which the government does operate through BCLC.

It hasn’t really been an ideal site. I’ve used it myself, and my wife sometimes, while

we watch the Canucks and place a $5 or $10 bet on it. It is not as good as other websites

that I’ve seen — not that I’ve used other websites. They have been out there. I’m

not much of a gambler. That $5 or $10 usually lasts me for a while.

Anyway, the casino, community gaming and bingo operations generated revenues of $1.87

billion to BCLC in ’23-24. I’m to understand that they’re losing share in that now.

I’m not sure how much we’ve gone down or anything else, but that’s not into the question.

That’s just an idea of how much the gaming industry means to our province.

With the online gaming that we have, I believe and the BCGIA also believes that we’re

losing money, basically, to foreign markets with these websites that we’re not controlling.

[3:05 p.m.]

I would like to know if there’s an appetite to work, as a province, to maintain regulation

over iGaming and allow operation to go over to an industry group like that. They have

some ideas as well. Mine would be slightly different: operated as one group, one website,

to control what is allowed in this province.

Has there been any thought into us just taking over regulation?

Hon. Garry Begg : The PlayNow site is the only gaming site in British Columbia that is legal. There

are queries being made about the liability, feasibility, acceptability through the

gaming branch for other kinds of gaming as well.

Bryan Tepper :

Section 63 of the Gaming Control Act states that the Lottery Corp. must take reasonable

steps to prevent an individual from continuing to participate in an online gaming

scheme if the Lottery Corp. has reason to believe that the individual is either unlawfully

participating in the online gaming scheme, participating in the online gaming scheme

for the purposes of carrying out an unlawful activity or engaging in unlawful conduct

or an unlawful activity while participating online gaming scheme.

However, as I was saying, we have that multitude of sites: Bet365, Stake, Betway.

There’s a multitude of them. I believe in Ontario they’re up to 70 that they allow,

and most of those are actually not operated from Canada. That’s my understanding.

How is the minister going to ensure that gaming is regulated across B.C.?

Hon. Garry Begg : To the member: the gambling to which you refer is illegal. It’s treated as illegal.

When the Gaming Commission becomes aware of it, that it’s prevalent and active here,

they conduct an investigation, part of which may be that they send a letter to the

persons involved, the company involved and ask that they cease and desist from operations

in this province. The application of the law in regard to that is a federal matter.

Bryan Tepper : I will just quickly ask: is enforcement provincial?

[3:10 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : The application of the law is provincial. There is a federal component if the site

is housed outside of the province, but there is cooperation between the provincial

authority here and the federal authorities, generally.

Bryan Tepper : I will follow up on that one more time with the regulation then. Can the minister

tell us if the regulation of…. What occurs within the geographical boundaries of British

Columbia on the iGaming, are we regulating that at all right now provincially?

Hon. Garry Begg : The answer is that yes, we do enforce that inside the province. The provincial gaming

commission does that.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

The service plan for ’25-26 estimates spending on gaming policy and enforcement around

$22.2 million. How much of that is going to go directly to online gaming enforcement?

Hon. Garry Begg : Only $3.4 million of that $22.2 million is spent on enforcement.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

I don’t know if we have the answer, but if we do, how much money is iGaming bringing

into BCLC right now? If I could add, and estimate how much is total, including the

illegal sites, if we have an estimate on that as well, just to total it all up in

one go.

Hon. Garry Begg : That question is better directed to the Ministry of Finance.

Bryan Tepper : Has the gaming policy and enforcement branch been updated since 2010 to include online

gaming? Do they currently conduct and oversee the enforcement of unlicensed gaming

platforms in B.C.?

Hon. Garry Begg : Yes, we will investigate if the sites you’re talking about operate within British

Columbia.

[3:15 p.m.]

Bryan Tepper : Just to get the answer on the…. Has the gaming policy and enforcement branch been

updated since 2010 to include all of that?

Hon. Garry Begg : A new act was brought into force in 2022 and will be actually brought into force

later this year.

Bryan Tepper : Okay, so I will confirm, then, that the Gaming Control Act does update that then.

Given the growth in online gaming, what protections, if any, does the ministry have

in place to protect British Columbians who use online gaming platforms, particularly

in relation to data privacy, fraud and addiction safeguards?

Hon. Garry Begg : Again, your question is better answered by the Ministry of Finance.

Bryan Tepper : Sorry. I’m just trying to figure out how that does relate to Ministry of Finance

— data privacy, fraud and addiction safeguards. If we have the fraud in there and

data privacy, would that…? Maybe I’ll just confirm one more time. That will be Finance

and not…?

Hon. Garry Begg : There is a separation between the business side of BCLC and the regulator.

Bryan Tepper : If there was fraud being committed through the iGaming platform, would it not fall

under Solicitor General and Public Safety? Say we throw in underage gambling that

goes in on that as well. Would that fall into something that the ministry would take

care of?

Hon. Garry Begg : That is something that would be investigated by the ministry — the underage, the

fraud, that kind of thing.

Bryan Tepper : Okay. If I rephrase the question a little bit, what protections does the ministry

have in place or plan to put in place for fraud, underage gambling?

[3:20 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : When the new regulations come into effect later this year, there are provisions for

the prevention of some of the things that can be prevalent, including underage illegal

activities, etc.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

Do we have any independent oversight that exists for BCLC’s online gaming platform,

PlayNow.com? What steps does the minister take to ensure there’s no conflict of interest,

given that the Crown acts as a regulator and revenue generator?

Hon. Garry Begg : This might get confusing for you, but BCLC reports to the Ministry of Finance, and

the gaming enforcement branch reports to the Ministry of Solicitor General, so there

is a deliberate separation of the two sides.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer. Actually, it wasn’t that confusing. That was a good one.

What I will finish up on this is…. Given that there’s a lot to be gained, a lot to

be lost with the criminal aspect of this, the illegal sites, can we get a commitment

to move forward with the independent bodies that might be able to put this forward

to be regulated by the province and operated by somebody else as an oversight group,

however they want…? Sorry, the regulation would be the oversight. They would be the

operating group.

If we can move towards that direction to make sure we have no conflicts, and we are

assisting, bringing money in for things like the community gaming grants that…. I

know I’ve applied for many of them. They’re very valuable and have been drying up,

apparently, in the last little while. There have been no increases in those, so this

is incredibly important to all our community groups.

I’ll let you go.

Hon. Garry Begg : There is an ongoing commitment to look at some of the issues that you have raised.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer. Thanks for that section. I’d like to move into the future

of contract policing.

[3:25 p.m.]

Currently contract policing is overseen by the provincial police service agreement

from, I believe, 2012. It should be extended through March 31, 2032. At this point,

we do have…. Either side can terminate the agreement with 24 months’ notice. Those

are the important parts that I want to cover on that right now.

How much of the $577 million the ministry estimates spending on policing and security

’25-26 is spent on contract policing?

The Chair : Members, it’s been requested to have a quick recess, so we will sit in recess for

the next seven minutes, precisely seven minutes. Thank you, Members.

The committee recessed from 3:26 p.m. to 3:39 p.m.

[Mable Elmore in the chair.]

The Chair : I’ll call the committee back to order. We are considering estimates for the Ministry

of Public Safety and Solicitor General.

Hon. Garry Begg : The final ’24-25 delegation to the RCMP was $623 million for the B.C. RCMP as the

provincial police service. That represents the 70-30 percent cost-sharing with Canada

under the provincial police service agreement.

[3:40 p.m.]

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

Maybe I should ask if I have the number wrong. The $577 million for spending on that

— is that number wrong? It’s $623 million as the amount?

I will just continue with the question then.

According to the provincial police service agreement, the RCMP aids the province in

the administration of justice by implementing the provincial policing objectives,

priorities and goals as determined by the minister.

To the minister: what policing objectives and policy goals have been developed by

the ministry, and can you please table them?

Hon. Garry Begg : I’ll read directly from the note to the RCMP commissioner. In accordance with

article

6.1 of the PPSA, the provincial minister sets the objectives, priorities and goals

of the provincial police service. The policing priorities for B.C. are sent to the

commanding officer of E division, all chiefs of municipal police departments and self-administered

policing services in the province.

In the latest year, which is 2023, the commanding officer of E division was issued

the following policing priorities for B.C.

Staff existing vacancies within the provincial police service.

Address systemic racism throughout various initiatives.

Implement the B.C. First Nations justice strategy, the city of Surrey’s police model

transition.

Address repeat and violent offending.

Increase use of restorative justice.

Collaborate with community partners on safety issues, including mental health and

addictions.

Target proceeds of crime for high-level organized criminals in line with the Cullen

commission recommendations.

Combat gangs and criminal organizations that fuel the toxic drug supply.

Lastly, support service delivery recommendations identified in the Special Committee

on Reforming the Police Act.

Bryan Tepper : Given that British Columbia has the largest number of contract RCMP officers in Canada,

and with the uncertainty that’s been created in the past couple of years by the federal

government in moving that, has there been a look at what a transition would be, given

that level of uncertainty?

[3:45 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : In May 2024, the former federal Minister of Public Safety wrote to provincial and

territorial ministers regarding the need for a stronger RCMP federal program, including

a separate, distinct mandate for contract policing. This correspondence also provided

a commitment that Canada and the RCMP will continue its contract policing program

beyond 2032.

The province is engaged with partners from other provinces, territories, local governments

in B.C. and the federal government through various committees at the staff and DM

levels on work considering the future of contract policing.

Bryan Tepper : I guess that sort of answers it, but I’ll get a comment on this. Is the ministry

and the government considering the creation of a provincial-wide police force at all,

which was recommended by the all-party B.C. legislative committee in 2022?

[3:50 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : The work that was done by the special committee on policing in British Columbia will

continue. We, as a government, are committed to looking at all of the options that

are available.

Bryan Tepper : I’m going to jumble my question around because of that. Going from the estimates

notes from ’24-25…. They have a quote: “Exploring this option would require extensive

research, including legal, operational, financial, communications and consultation.”

Does this minister support the creation of a provincial police service that moves

away from the RCMP?

Hon. Garry Begg : The dynamics of policing in Canada are changing dramatically. It is something that

we have to be cognizant of. As the minister responsible for Public Safety, it is an

opportunity for me to look at all the options.

I would say that it is a response of ours that we will examine closely all the possibilities,

in consultation with the general public, to see what meets best the needs of British

Columbians.

Bryan Tepper : My question to the minister is then: how much do we project that exploring these

other options would cost?

Hon. Garry Begg : We will use the existing resources within the ministry, as we move forward, so that

no additional funding will be required at this point.

Bryan Tepper : So perhaps I could ask then: what is the progress thus far looking into the special

committee’s recommendations? Really, what are they that we’re looking into? If we

could table them.

[3:55 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : I’ll read directly so that, perhaps, makes logical sense to you.

Work continues on the policing and public safety modernization initiative, which was

established to respond to the recommendations of the Special Committee on Reforming

the Police Act. This initiative is taking a phased approach.

Phase 1 introduced legislative amendments in April 2024 that address topics related

to municipal police governance, police oversight and tiered law enforcement within

the current Police Act. These amendments directly respond to recommendations of the

special committee and changes requested by the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner.

Government is now building on these initial amendments, based on a significant consultation

process that has been ongoing since 2023, to determine our next priorities for modernizing

policing and updating the Police Act.

For all this, to do this right, we need to consider future changes carefully and in

close partnership with all impacted groups. We are also continuing to work on developing

regulations that will bring all the changes made to the Police Act in 2024 into force.

Bryan Tepper : Given the critical role the RCMP does play in rural and small communities, with the

cost-sharing with the federal government and the under 15,000 population with the

70-30 split, how will the minister ensure that the new model does not abandon the

rural small towns for large, urban policing in communities?

Hon. Garry Begg : The RCMP has been the provincial police agency here in British Columbia for a great

number of years and has provided tremendous service day in and day out all across

the province, in big cities and in small cities. The challenge facing us today is

to replicate a model that does the same thing.

[4:00 p.m.]

You’re right in the sense that small communities deserve the same quality and level

of policing as do large cities. That’s one of the recommendations noted in the police

reform act — that there has to be, across the province, whether it be in the largest

city or in the smallest community, a quality and level of policing that best suits

the needs of British Columbia.

That was the intent of the special committee. That’s my intent, to ensure that the

quality and level of policing in British Columbia is the highest attainable in the

country.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

Given that we know the crime rate in a lot of our northern communities…. I policed

Williams Lake, and I think we were top three in the country for several of those years.

I don’t think it was my fault, but it probably dropped because I did such a good job

afterwards.

Have we had any of those communities that have raised concerns, any of the municipalities

brought it to the ministry about the future of the RCMP contract policing in their

communities?

Hon. Garry Begg : We meet, of course, with the Union of B.C. Municipalities regularly, the Union of

B.C. Indian Chiefs and solicit advice and opinion from all across the province.

You will not be surprised to know that everyone has a different perception of their

problem which is peculiar to where they live.

What we have received runs the gamut of geographic locations. Smaller communities

have perhaps more intense needs than some larger communities. But the dividing line

or the commitment about policing, our commitment to that is that it will be the same

wherever you are in the province.

There are, of course, logistical problems. There are staffing problems with the RCMP

and other policing agencies, and difficulties, in some cases, in fulfilling their

obligations. That’s not unique to the RCMP but is unique to policing in the most recent

years. But our commitment, again, is to ensure that the quality and level of policing

in British Columbia is the best possible.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

I will just ask, maybe a yes or a no: have any municipalities actually just raised

concerns purely about the RCMP leaving and being replaced with something else?

Hon. Garry Begg : In our most recent report on our municipal round table, the indication is that the

majority of members of that municipal round table are supportive of the RCMP.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

Perhaps I’m going to end up switching gears here. For this one, I might as well just

ask right now: how many provincial police officers, contract police officers, not

municipality but the ones that the province is paying for, do we have in the province

right now?

[4:05 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : It’s 2,431 members, including the members at Surrey detachment.

Bryan Tepper : I would assume the ones at Surrey detachment will not be continuing on. What would

we have if they aren’t a part…?

Maybe you could just confirm. Are they part of the regular provincial force, and if

they’re not, how many without them?

Hon. Garry Begg : The number of positions, without Surrey, is 1,991.

[4:10 p.m.]

Bryan Tepper : If we’re continuing forward with 1,991 in moving to a different model, do we have

a cost difference, without the 30 percent from the federal government, from what we

would end up with if we continued with the same number of provincial police?

Hon. Garry Begg : We do not have that information.

Bryan Tepper : If it’s possible to get that in the future, that would be terrific.

I will move on. I’m trying to fit in as much as I can in my time, so I might jump

around a little bit.

How would the minister be advocating for stronger bail laws? During question period,

the Attorney General said the minister is making sure there are the resources on the

ground to make sure the system is ready to respond. If the minister could explain

the system and what resources that the Attorney General would be referring to?

Hon. Garry Begg : I will defer entirely to the Attorney General, who is our lead when it comes to the

bail reform program. But I do know that the program that she was referring to is the

repeat violent offending intervention initiative — we call it ReVOII — which brings

together police, dedicated prosecutors and probation officers to address repeat violent

offending through enhanced investigation, enforcement and monitoring of individuals

in communities throughout B.C.

It’s important to understand that the position that B.C. has taken has become a subject

of great discussion in Ottawa. The Premier and the Attorney General are actually amongst

those who are leading these changes.

Bryan Tepper : Yes, I do appreciate that program. I think it has been fairly successful.

I’ll move on. In the fall 2024 budget — I’m going to get into some numbers here, I

apologize — table 1.8 lists actual spending for ’23-24 as $1.089 billion. The forecast

to finish the year was $1.084 billion.

I’m actually skipping a little bit there, because…. At one point the minister has

said that we have had the largest increase in spending on policing. I don’t know if

it was ever or something along those lines.

[4:15 p.m.]

The final forecast was there, but this year’s budget, we’re up to $1.137 billion and

then going up, forecasted for next year at $1.139 billion. At this point, it doesn’t

seem like a large increase. Perhaps you could comment on that and where the increase

is.

Hon. Garry Begg : The overall budget for the ministry is $1,137,182,000, which represents a $54.054

million increase, or 5 percent, from ’24-25. Reconciliation of the budget changes

is detailed elsewhere.

The overall increase since ’24-25 includes the following: $27.9 million for RCMP wage

increase; $6.596 million for wage-related increases; $5.01 million for crime assistance

program modernization; $5 million for body-worn cameras; $1.798 million for First

Nations and Inuit policing; $1.69 million for electronic supervision to support the

increased costs to monitor offenders; and $1.484 million for coroners’ operational

pressures.

There’s $1.096 million for the Fire Safety Act; $606,000 for police modernization;

$175,000 for minister’s office adjustments, which include the creation of the Ministry

of State for Community Safety; $2.669 million primarily for the Nanaimo Correctional

Centre, public safety programs, corrections food services, contracts from Budget 2024

and minor incremental budgets in the 2023 decisions.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

So we have the number of provincial police officers. Do we have the total number of

active police officers in B.C.? Would we have a breakdown, even provincially, for

five years ago until now?

[4:20 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : We’re attempting to get the answer that you require and, perhaps, are able to get

it in the next short while. In the interim, you should feel free to ask another question,

if you wish.

Bryan Tepper : I don’t know if it’s a program or an organizational group, but it was called “future

directions,” involved in this. First Nations submitted suggestions on how to improve

policing. Do we have a report on what came of those?

[4:25 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : I’ll give you now two answers, because there’s one that we’ve held in abeyance until

we could get what we needed to know.

The Police Resources in B.C., 2023 , published by the ministry…. The authorized strength of police agencies in B.C. was

10,843. That’s a report published in 2023, which is the latest report.

To answer about First Nations policing, ministry staff have directly connected with

87 First Nations and modern treaty Nations and several Indigenous leadership organizations

to guide their work. Compiling and receiving the feedback, including recent submissions,

is ongoing now from additional First Nations leaders.

Bryan Tepper : Thank you for the answer.

Perhaps I could just put this for a later answer, if we can get how many police officers

there were. I’m going to say in 2018 as well — just the difference between the two,

if that was the latest report.

I’ll move on. I think I have enough time for one more question and answer before it

is the Third Party’s time.

I will say I happened to be listening to a radio interview, because the minister is

very engaging. He did say some things I had questions about during the interview,

one being talking about the RCMP and saying he wanted to make changes. I would ask

what changes he would like to make. The minister did go on to say the RCMP could not

make those changes. I’m curious why they wouldn’t be.

I will throw in the last here, if you can separate that into this one. The minister

also said the Premier made overtures with the federal government, making success on

bail reform. Can we get an update on what kind of success he did have?

Thank you, Minister.

[4:30 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : We’ve come up with the math that you suggested. The total authorized strength, in

all of the police agencies in B.C. in 2018, was 10,312. You’ll know that that’s not

a significant difference.

For your question about the Bail Reform Act, I obviously can’t speak for the Premier

or the Attorney General, but they advised that they did make progress. One of the

important things they were able to stress is that people living in British Columbia

are concerned about repeat and violent offending in our communities and the threat

to public safety that these offenders pose.

The current situation in British Columbia requires that we take urgent action to address

elements of the bail system that make it difficult to hold people who commit repeat

violent offences in custody and to ensure the bail system is functioning as intended.

That, I think, adequately states the position of both the Premier and the Attorney

General in their dealings with Ottawa.

Rob Botterell : I have a series of questions that I’ll raise over the next hour.

Before I begin, I just wanted to express my appreciation to the minister and the minister’s

staff for your efforts and work. This is a very important ministry, and I really appreciate

your taking the time to answer these questions and continue the important work of

this ministry. I just want to thank you for all of that.

I’d like to start with a question related to the B.C. conservation officer service.

I recognize that in some cases, these questions may have been canvassed. If that’s

the case, I’m hoping you could summarize your answers to others for the benefit of

those constituents and others watching today.

Multiple organizations in this province have raised concerns about a lack of oversight

for the B.C. conservation officer service, from their police-like arming to the increasingly

high number of black bears unnecessarily killed by officers to wolf culls.

How is your ministry ensuring that the conservation officer service has proper oversight

mechanisms or independent bodies to improve transparency, accountability and public

trust?

[4:35 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : First of all, I was on the Committee on Reforming the Police Act. This is one of

the questions that came up there and caused us significant concern, so much so that

we recommended it in the special committee.

Bringing the conservation officer service under the jurisdiction of a policing oversight

agency is a significant policy change. However, the Ministry of Public Safety and

Solicitor General has worked with the Ministry of Environment to develop a proposal

to apply independent oversight of the conservation officer service.

Direction on this proposal to be implemented is pending. In the interim, in the absence

of a new policy, complaints can be made about the conduct of conservation officers.

If a conservation officer commits some sort of misconduct as part of their general

employment duties, this proceeds to the conservation officer service professional

standards unit and to the Public Service Agency.

Complaints that relate to the improper exercise or performance of a constabulary duty

or the neglect to exercise their constabulary duties can be made under the Special

Provincial Constable Complaints and Discipline Regulation under the Police Act.

Rob Botterell : Could the minister give us a timeline for the independent oversight proposal being

implemented?

Hon. Garry Begg : This is a very active file by the ministry, but I cannot give you a specific date

upon which it will come into effect.

Rob Botterell : Thank you, Minister.

The lack of oversight and regulation concerning the conservation officer service has

not only resulted in poor ecological management but has also raised ethical and financial

concerns.

The wolf cull is one example of this. Since 2015, 2,192 wolves have been killed, often

inhumanely, costing B.C. taxpayers over $10 million.

Will this government commit to ending the wolf cull and improving transparency and

oversight in its upcoming proposal to prevent similar issues in the future?

[4:40 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : Oversight regarding policy decisions with respect to wildlife management issues is

under the Ministry of Environment.

Rob Botterell : I’d like to shift gears to police accountability and trust. While this budget saw

a notable increase in funding towards policing, public confidence in the police remains

low. The service plan forecasts for 2024 find that only 45 percent of British Columbians

have a lot of confidence in the RCMP.

What is this government’s plan to promote public trust in the RCMP and local municipal

police, and what funding exists in this year’s budget to do so?

Hon. Garry Begg : We’re doing a number of things to bolster the reputation of the policing community

here in British Columbia.

One of the things that comes to mind, for example, is police boards. The police b oards have conduct over the performance of police in their jurisdiction, and it’s

important that they receive the training so that they can be a reflection of what

the community wants in their police department.

[4:45 p.m.]

We always talk about the visible presence of the police in the community. In order

for police work to be done, it must be seen to be done, which means, in policing,

that the police must be out there and be seen to be doing their job. The best ambassadors

for the police are the police. Their conduct, their deportment, the way they treat

the community is a reflection of their values. That’s something that has been instilled

in policing since it began, historically.

We recognize, for example, in this province, a large number of Indigenous people who

have come into contact with police and are unhappy with the result. We have undergone

and are continuing to encourage the policing community to ensure that the Indigenous

community, the BIPOC community, those who are disenfranchised or less enfranchised

because of their position in society are treated equally. That’s something that we’re

committed to, and we will continue to do.

Rob Botterell : Thank you, Minister.

The ministry’s service plan includes a target this year of 46 percent of British Columbians

who have complete confidence or a lot of confidence in the RCMP. This is only one

percentage point higher than the forecasts from last year.

The minister has outlined the importance of training of police boards, the importance

of a visible presence and the approach to that in the community, the importance of

tailoring, if you will, the approach to policing to better reflect the needs and interests

of Indigenous people.

I guess there are really two questions. Can the minister identify any other barriers

to improving public trust in police and describe the ministry’s approach to addressing

those barriers, or are those the main three?

Secondly, why are the targets for public trust so low? This is only one percentage

point higher than last year. What it conveys is that there is really one in two British

Columbians who doesn’t have confidence in our approach to policing. Certainly the

ministry is very committed to the work it does and increasing the degree of confidence,

but why are we only shooting for a 1 percent increase this year?

[4:50 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : The numbers that you picked are numbers from the Angus Reid Institute. That was conducted

nationally. It is an indicator, certainly, of the confidence that some Canadians have

in policing, but I think it’s important, as well, that we consider what has actually

been done to help boost public confidence here in British Columbia in policing.

The police in British Columbia have chosen to involve the community in their policing.

They’ve done that by setting up situation tables which involve community members,

leaders in the community, leaders in business, leaders in commerce, leaders in thought

in the community. They’ve set up CSTEP as a program to better integrate people. We’ve

spent, in this province, more than $233 million in new policing.

What we’re trying to do to improve the image of police is to improve the quality of

involvement of the community with the police. We find that if the community is involved

with policing, they become more dedicated to policing; the policing members become

more familiar with their groups. So enhancing the image of policing, from our point

of view, is best done by the police themselves in the community doing the work that

has to be done.

Now, we recognize that much of the work may not be police work, the per se police

work. It may be more social work in the sense that it is responding to the needs of

community members, but I think that is what is required. Policemen must be reminded

that they are servants of the public. They are not free to do what they will. They

are free to respond to the needs of the community.

We’re encouraging them, through police boards and internal training, to ensure that

the work they do is focused on making the changes in the community that are required

by the community.

[4:55 p.m.]

Rob Botterell : Each community will face its own challenges in terms of policing. Certainly, what

we see are some communities where the challenge of policing is very high, very intense,

is very difficult for the police. And it involves a much higher degree of workplace

stress and impact than other communities.

A comparison that I can draw, just to illustrate the point, is…. I grew up in Oak

Bay here in Victoria. Not to take anything away from the hard-working Oak Bay police,

I will say that it was a pretty quiet community. It was rare there was much in the

way of an exciting or dangerous event to deal with. Compare that to Victoria. Victoria

police face significant work stress and challenges on an almost daily basis.

Has consideration been given by the ministry to amalgamation of police forces in the

capital region to create a working environment that includes some of the quieter areas

within the region and some of the more intense, in order to enable the police force

to manage that degree of stress for its individual officers, on an ongoing basis,

to a lower level?

Hon. Garry Begg : Harkening back to my own days as a policeman, it was fairly evident to me as a young

policeman in Burnaby that not all the criminals were in Burnaby. They were elsewhere.

They didn’t restrict to the boundaries that I was confined to. There is an anomaly

in police work that delegates police authority to a particular area that only applies

to them. It doesn’t apply to the criminal element.

In areas like Victoria, this is something that we considered on the Special Committee

on Reforming the Police Act. There was a consistent feeling that this was a perfect

place to amalgamate the police agencies. You will know that by and large, many of

the police departments here in Victoria have joint squads that operate interjurisdictionally.

Recently there has been an effort here in Victoria to make that happen. It makes sense.

It makes sense geographically. Even from a fiscal point of view, the economies of

scale that can be applied are at work here. So my direct answer to your question is

that it’s certainly something that is being considered.

[5:00 p.m.]

It’s not something that will be led by the province. It will be led by the municipalities

here in Victoria — perhaps in Kelowna and that area, too, which has a large expanded

population and duplication of many police agencies.

Rob Botterell : Thank you, Minister.

Earlier we discussed and you touched on, Minister, the Indigenous policing and the

nature of police services provided to Indigenous communities. The service plan includes

a commitment to include DRIPA in the promotion of public safety.

My question to the minister is: how does your government intend to implement DRIPA

with respect to its efforts to promote police accountability and public trust?

Hon. Garry Begg : This government is committed to the principles of DRIPA.

I am sure you will be pleased to know that we have worked hand in hand consistently

with our First Nations to ensure that we work in lockstep with them so that the principles

of DRIPA are upheld. There is constant consultation between the groups involved so

that happens.

Rob Botterell : Thank you, Minister.

Minister, you’ve indicated that all changes to policing have been in consultation

with First Nations communities. Yet our understanding is that board members of the

B.C. First Nations Justice Council say they were not consulted on any of the changes

brought in Bill 17 last year.

How is this ministry, your ministry, ensuring that any reforms to policing the Police

Act are done in consultation and with the participation of organizations like the

B.C. First Nations Justice Council?

[5:05 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : Phase 1 amendments were introduced in April 2024 and covered 21 topics over 170 clauses:

amendments to 84 sections of the Police Act; 41 sections added to the Police Act;

consequential amendments to 74 sections of 22 other acts; and the focus on municipal

police governance and oversight, the law enforcement continuum and miscellaneous topics.

Coordination and consultation have occurred and continue with the B.C. First Nations

Justice Council, First Nations Leadership Council, Métis Nations B.C., the Alliance

of B.C. Modern Treaty Nations, B.C. First Nations and modern treaty Nations — all

invited; and the Local Government Policing Modernization Roundtable; and the Union

of B.C. Municipalities.

[5:10 p.m.]

We continue to meet with the Indigenous groups I am advised weekly, as this process

is continuing.

Rob Botterell : It’s helpful to have that information on the record and certainly draw that to the

attention of the board members of the B.C. First Nations Justice Council.

Much has been said over the course of estimates and, certainly, in other forums about

the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act and the implementation of transformative

change. It’s been three years, and it would be helpful to have a fairly detailed picture

of the minister’s timeline and approach to full implementation of the Police Act reforms.

Where are we at? Which ones are left? How will the funding be set to complete this

work? And what is the timeline for completion, 100 percent implementation?

Hon. Garry Begg : As I noted earlier, phase 1 of the policing and public safety modernization initiative

introduced the Police Amendment Act, 2024, which received royal assent on April 25,

2024, as an initial legislative reform step. To date, we’ve implemented three recommendations

from the special committee’s report.

For example, municipal councils now have the authority to determine who their representative

will be on the police board and will allow members of the police board to elect their

chair and vice-chair. Before the mayor was automatically the representative on the

board.

As well, we’ve implemented seven recommendations from the 2019 Special Committee to

Review the Police Complaint Process. For example, the Police Complaint Commissioner

can now call a public hearing earlier in misconduct investigations.

That’s now in its second phase, including regulation development from phase 1, focusing

on additional policing and public safety reforms through broad consultation and cooperation

with stakeholders and partners.

We’re also focused on co-development of policies and legislation with Indigenous partners

and local governments, as recommended by the special committee. This work takes time

to ensure meaningful in-depth consultation and engagement on proposed policies is

completed, and we look forward to providing an update as appropriate.

[5:15 p.m.]

Rob Botterell : As a follow-up to the question, are there any recommendations that the government

does not intend to implement?

Hon. Garry Begg : We’re committed to reviewing all of the recommendations.

Rob Botterell : The minister recently said that this government would be open to implementing a fourth

option for 911, specifically for mental-health-related emergencies, as this is another

example that’s consistent with the recommendations from the Special Committee on Reforming

the Police Act.

Can the minister describe what this plan would look like and how soon we can expect

this vital change? Mental health issues are a top priority.

Hon. Garry Begg : As I committed earlier, we are reviewing the fourth line as an option.

Currently, if someone is in distress, our 911 call-takers and dispatchers will assign

mental health and police teams in communities where they are available and on duty.

Rob Botterell : This government has committed itself to implementing the calls for justice developed

from the national inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls.

Can the minister speak in some detail to this government’s progress on the calls for

justice and the funding in this year’s budget that exists for this important work?

[5:20 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : My ministry supports a number of initiatives to help prevent and address the violence

faced by Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people, including $10 million for

70 new sexual assault services programs, which commenced in 2023, which are Indigenous-focused

programs; and continued operation of FILU, the family information liaison unit, which

provides front-line support to families of missing and murdered Indigenous women and

girls.

Also, the establishment of path forward community fund in 2022, developed and administered

by the B.C. Association of Aboriginal Friendship Centres, to meet the needs for Indigenous-led

capacity building and safety planning and help Indigenous communities and organizations

create and implement their own culturally safe solutions.

Over 750 projects funded since 2014-2015 through the civil forfeiture office grants

program that focuses entirely on Indigenous women and girls.

Rob Botterell : Does the minister plan to create an independent unit or task force with oversight

from Indigenous communities to ensure there is a proper and culturally sensitive review

of unresolved files of missing and murdered Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit

people?

Hon. Garry Begg : There has not been an independent unit formed because of our ability within the RCMP

provincial police service, with specialized squads, to tackle issues like this. They’re

at work, they’re existent in the RCMP as we speak, and there is no special group formed

to do that work.

[5:25 p.m.]

It is work that is inclusive already in our budget, in the $233 million that we’ve

expended on this project, and it is inclusive and included in that.

Rob Botterell : Thank you, Minister.

We’ve canvassed this in this session. I’d like to canvass it again. Many have raised

concerns about the pattern of misconduct and violence committed by the critical response

units, or CRU, including from the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission, municipal

officials, human rights organizations like Amnesty International, independent police

watchdogs and First Nations groups.

So this is not an isolated complaint. These are not isolated concerns. There are a

range of individuals, entities, oversight organizations that have raised these concerns.

During question period earlier this session, the minister said the CRU will “do things

as they’ve always done things, with fairness to all involved.”

Can the minister explain what he means by this and, given the range of concerns raised,

whether, in his opinion, the CRU has always acted fairly, especially considering the

range of concerns that have been raised?

[5:30 p.m.]

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Hon. Garry Begg : I want to reaffirm that I expect in all cases that the critical response unit will

act fairly at all times. We have taken steps to set targets to support them in their

training and their outreach. This promotes within them the ability to provide direction

to crew and to achieve its goals.

A principle that I work on, that we work on, is fairness. Again, the expectation is

that with the training provided to them, with their targets set out, they will, in

all things, act fairly.

Rob Botterell : Thank you, Minister.

I just want to express my appreciation to the minister and the staff once again for

the helpful answers to the questions. That’ll be the conclusion of my questioning.

Brent Chapman : We haven’t got a lot of time, so I’ll keep it pretty simple and straightforward with

about three subjects.

ICBC’s no-fault insurance. Overview of ICBC’s no-fault insurance model.

In May 2021, ICBC transitioned to a no-fault insurance system known as enhanced care.

This model was introduced to reduce insurance premiums and streamline the claims process

by eliminating the need to establish fault in most motor vehicle accidents under the

system. Individuals involved in accidents receive predetermined benefits for medical

care and income replacement, but their ability to sue for damages is significantly

limited.

This is from the Victoria Times Colonist:

“‘The beneficiaries of the old litigation-based ICBC system were lawyers, not victims,’

says B.C.’s Premier. No-fault insurance, or the enhanced care model, introduced in

May 2021 to provide set amounts of compensation by injury type to victims regardless

of fault, without a referral, eliminated most victims’ right to sue.

“The goal of the no-fault system was to ensure billions of dollars that were going

to legal fees and pain and suffering and injury claims instead went to improve benefits,

immediate treatment and compensation, as well as generating low basic rates and rebates

for policyholders.” We’ve seen a bit of that.

“This month the Premier announced” — this was when this

article came out — “a fourth

rebate, to be delivered May through July to about 3.6 million policyholders, at a

cost of $400 million, due to the corporation’s projected revenue of about $1.3 billion.”

But it’s a different story in practice.

“Last July Victoria lawyer Tim Schober, who was left a quadriplegic after he was hit

by a vehicle while cycling August ’21” — that’s 2021 — “launched a civil claim in

B.C.’s Supreme Court against the province, with the Trial Lawyers Association of B.C.

as the second plaintiff, arguing that no-fault insurance legislation discriminated

against individuals based on the cause of their disability.

“Schober has argued that ICBC’s revenue gains come at the expense of catastrophic

injury victims like himself, who are compensated their full working wage and can’t

sue for higher compensation for pain and suffering.

“The Premier said one of the commitments that the government made when they brought

in the new system was a review at the five-year mark of the implementation.”

A lot of innocent people can fall through the cracks over five years. There are more

stories in the news.

In late 2024, Maria Espedido, a caregiver and a hit-and-run accident victim, cannot

receive fair compensation for her severe injuries. Last Christmas she had a GoFundMe

page. That’s what she had to do to try to make ends meet at Christmas. In fact, I

donated and challenged the members opposite to chip in, but I didn’t witness anyone

taking up the challenge.

Then there’s retired firefighter John Wakefield. In May 2023, the Vernon man was hit

while riding his bike. He had multiple broken ribs, broken scapula, broken collarbone,

concussion and began to struggle mentally. In December 2023, ICBC cut him off and

said his PTSD was from another incident when he was an RCMP officer. The ICBC assessor

had never actually met with Mr. Wakefield.

[5:35 p.m.]

As we ponder these stories, it’s important to know that ICBC currently sits on a $19.5

billion investment fund.

Prior to implementing no-fault, ICBC used premiums paid by ratepayers to cover future

contingent losses. With the implementation of no-fault, there are no future tort losses.

Thus, the following question arises.

One, here’s my question to the minister. When is ICBC going to reimburse ICBC ratepayers

the premiums paid in advance for future contingent losses that will never occur because

of no-fault?

Hon. Garry Begg : Enhanced care, the current system that we’re under, pays for needed care when it’s

needed. It does not need to pay for future costs. When the need arises for the victim

of the accident, it is paid then. So that need for future losses is not required.

Under the old system, of course, there would be litigation involved, and the lawyer

would take 30 percent of the payments. Under our system now, 96 percent of all payments

go to the policyholder.

Brent Chapman : The NDP government took $1 billion from the ICBC coffers and put it into general

revenue. There was legislation for this. However, it is really an unfair additional

tax on vehicle owners.

Question 2: when are they going to pay that money back?

[5:40 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : This is the government that passed legislation to make it impossible for the government

to take capital from ICBC. In fact, it was the prior government that did that. We’ve

never done that.

[The bells were rung.]

The Chair : Member, just take a quick pause while the bells ring.

Brent Chapman : We are going to widen the scope of the impact of a no-fault insurance, putting people’s

injuries into columns and deciding what they get.

The Lapu-Lapu festival incident, where a driver intentionally drove into a crowd,

has highlighted concerns regarding the adequacy of the no-fault system in addressing

victims’ needs and severe cases. Personal injury lawyers have pointed out that under

the current model, families of deceased victims may receive a limited compensation,

often significantly less than what could have been pursued under the previous tort

system.

For instance, children who lost parents might only receive benefits in the tens of

thousands of dollars compared to potentially higher settlements through litigation

in the past, of money that they could very well need.

While there are exceptions in the no-fault system for certain criminal code violations,

the practical application of these exceptions remains uncertain, and they may not

provide the level of compensation that these families require.

The question for the minister.

Minister, can you provide the committee with the maximum potential compensation available

under the current no-fault model to a family who has lost a primary income earner

in the Lapu-Lapu incident and compare that to what might have been possible under

the previous tort-based system?

[5:45 p.m. - 5:50 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : The child who lost both parents and his sister would be eligible for everyone’s death

benefits. Death benefit in this case could be as much as $581,000, in addition to

other benefits that he is eligible for, which includes all kinds of care and treatment

that he requires — grief counselling, income loss, physio, massage, etc. And that

starts on the day of the incident.

I should say that ICBC, in this particular case that you refer to, has set up a dedicated

line that does nothing but deal with the victims of Lapu-Lapu.

For your interest, if we were in the old tort system, it would take years to resolve

this claim. Compensation was dependent, in the old system, on how much insurance was

bought by the driver, and the lawyers would take one-third of whatever they got. ICBC,

in this case, expects that the amount to Lapu-Lapu will far exceed what was paid under

the old system. Under the old system, lawyers were better off, but the victims got

less.

Brent Chapman : That’s the best of one situation and the worst of another, but I’ll accept that as

an answer.

I don’t have a lot of time, and I’d like to touch on a couple of subjects, but I hope

the minister wouldn’t mind if I could…. I might come back to things if I get through

what I’m going through here.

While the Premier says there could be a criminal conviction exception and that enhanced

care gives coverage without waiting, the question is: will this government apologize

for the fact that even in cases of criminal convictions, the government, the NDP,

took away the right to sue for past and future income losses and the ability to get

legal counsel to represent injured victims — that they have no alternative? Can we

expect some sort of recognition of what is missing now from what is normally a legal

case?

[5:55 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : For the record, it’s important to understand that everyone still has the right to

a lawyer. Wage loss is paid in the enhanced model. This happens without the need for

a lawyer.

Brent Chapman : B.C. has introduced legislation to remove the need for drivers with a novice licence

to take a test to obtain their full licence. Also, new drivers over the age of 25

have a reduced N probation period. It’s gone from one year to nine months.

Can the minister see any safety issues arising with this new policy, and what is being

done to mitigate them?

[6:00 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : The province has introduced legislation to improve the graduated licensing program

to create a simpler, more accessible process for new drivers while improving safety

standards for motorcycle drivers.

As this is a matter that is before the House, it cannot be discussed in this venue,

but it will be coming up in the fall, and you can discuss it then.

The Chair : Thank you, Minister. I was about to say the exact same thing.

We would welcome questions at committee stage once that bill is before the House.

Brent Chapman : Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I apologize for bringing that up.

Many accredited collision repair shops report that electronic payments that used to

land within ten to 20 business days now are taking 45 to 90 days or more. The slowdown

began to bite in February, but industry media first flagged it publicly on 10 March,

2025, tying the delays to an internal work-to-rule campaign, while ICBC and unionized

claim-processing staff negotiated a new contract.

Shops say that they are carrying tens of thousands of dollars in unreimbursed parts

and labour, forcing some to tap bank credit lines, postpone equipment purchases or

refuse lower-margin ICBC work altogether.

In northern and rural B.C., where only one or two facilities serve vast areas, there

is a risk of facility closure. Prince Rupert has had no in-network shop since late

2023, leaving customers to pay up front or haul vehicles to Terrace.

Question 1: what was the total value of unpaid collision repair invoices at the month

end 31 January, 2025, and the most recent month end?

[6:05 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : Regrettably, the number that you seek is not available, but I will commit to getting

it to you.

Brent Chapman : What is Treasury Board’s estimate of the aggregate interest in carrying cost that

collision repair facilities have absorbed, financing ICBC receivables since February

1, 2025? Does the minister recognize that this is an unfair imposition on important

small businesses in B.C.?

Hon. Garry Begg : The same thing — the information about it is not available now, but we will get back

to you.

Brent Chapman : I would ask, though, just is there a recognition that there is quite a load that’s

being carried by these small businesses? I would ask that to the minister. Can he

recognize how difficult this is for autobody shops, really, across the province, that

are footing this bill? Is there any kind of acceptance as that being a situation that

should be dealt with?

Hon. Garry Begg : The members of ICBC who are here indicate to me that they’re not aware that the problem

exists as you describe.

Brent Chapman : It seems it’s quite common. I have heard from all parts of the province. We have….

I’m just surprised.

Will the government compensate those firms, yes or no? And if not, why should small

businesses continue to bankroll a Crown corporation’s cash flow failure?

[6:10 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : ICBC will take under advisement the questions that you asked. In the interim, you

should be assured that ICBC is fully compensating their vendors and their workers.

They pay fair rates. They’re also embarking on an extensive program to fund new apprentices

into the body industry.

If, in any event, it is found that there are vendors who have not been paid, ICBC,

of course, will pay them quickly.

Brent Chapman : If they’re being compensated but compensated on time — I think that’s what we’re

saying. It’s not that the compensation is not coming; it’s taking too long to get

there.

Given that every additional day of rental expense ultimately feeds basic rate pressure,

how does the minister justify this bureaucratic logjam to British Columbians, who

are already paying some of the highest auto insurance premiums in Canada?

Hon. Garry Begg : The move to the enhanced-care model decreased the basic rate by 15 percent in 2021,

and it has been held steady since then with no increases. The basic rate will remain

the same until March 31, 2026, making it six years in a row with no increase to the

basic rate — which is, contrary to what the member indicated, amongst the lowest rates

in the entire country.

Brent Chapman : Just to clarify something here. The minister said that ICBC is unaware of any delay

in getting payments to auto body shops and that they’re not aware that there is a

concern of this, but I am aware of directly speaking with auto body shops that they

have doubts. They’ve spoken to ICBC. Now, maybe they’ve spoken to another level of

ICBC, but somehow the left hand isn’t talking to the right.

[6:15 p.m.]

Can we clarify that there really is no knowledge of any auto body shops in British

Columbia having any struggles getting their payments on time? Is the minister saying

that the people here have no idea of this occurring?

Hon. Garry Begg : The members of ICBC who are here are unaware of the situation that you described,

which is not to say, I suppose, that there may be in the system some late payments.

It’s not something of which they are aware.

I repeat that they will take it back, and I will get back to you with what they find

in their report.

Brent Chapman : I’ll take the minister at his word.

Why did the government permit bargaining to drift past ICBC’s March 31, 2025 service

plan deadline without even an interim deal when the union had already signalled that

overtime bans and work to rule would begin if no progress was made?

Hon. Garry Begg : The union contract that is currently in place does not expire until the 30th of June,

so it’s coming up. It’s not expired, and the corporation is in dialogue with the union

at this point.

Brent Chapman : I’m going to jump back to the no-fault question.

Has your ministry conducted any assessments or studies since the implementation of

the no-fault system specifically examining the adequacy of compensation provided in

incidents involving deliberate criminal actions, such as vehicle ramming attacks?

If so, will you table those findings with this committee?

[6:20 p.m. - 6:25 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : There has been no review of compensation related to criminal convictions. The government

and ICBC are reviewing benefits on an ongoing basis and recently changed care benefits,

for example, to counselling, physio and that kind of thing.

By legislation, a special committee of the Legislature is going to review the enhanced

care within five years of its introduction, starting in May of 2026.

Brent Chapman : I don’t have much time left here, but can the minister tell us about the steps they’ve

taken with the physiotherapy and some of the other care that has been given, and the

access to the records of patients and the access to the records of victims, being

that it is no longer a selective access to records? In fact, it’s pretty much whatever

ICBC wants to look at. Is there any recognition in that — that it’s quite an invasion

of people’s privacy?

Why is there such a need for such an autocratic and tyrannical process to take place

from something as simple as a physiotherapy regimen? I would like to know that.

Hon. Garry Begg : There is an agreement for direct billing. An agreement is meant to ensure it can

access records related to billing, and there’s ongoing communication to clarify the

limited scope. I myself met with these professional members and ICBC together, and

our commitment is that we will continue to consult on an ongoing basis as this moves

forward.

Brent Chapman : We spoke earlier about Mr. Schober and Mr. Wakefield and Ms. Espedido and the challenges

they’re facing after car crashes and car accidents that were no fault of their own,

being victims.

[6:30 p.m.]

Is ICBC or the minister aware of these people, of these cases? Are there any steps…?

When these cases come through the cracks and reveal themselves, is there any motion

or any initiative to help these people? How hard do they have to fight — I guess that’s my question — to get compensation?

[6:35 p.m.]

Hon. Garry Begg : We’re working closely with Mr. Schober and all of these individuals to ensure their

needs are taken care of. We’ve recently been to Mr. Schober’s home. His entitlement

would have been limited and unresolved. The current system has paid him $1.65 million

to date, and it’s still ongoing.

Brent Chapman : That’s very good news.

I’ve run out of time, the time that I’m allowed to have. So I would ask that if I

could provide the minister with a series of questions, I could get answers back in

writing. I’d appreciate that.

Thank you for your time, Mr. Minister, and to the people at ICBC.

The Chair : Minister, would you have closing remarks for us?

Hon. Garry Begg : I wish only to thank everyone for their appearance here. It’s a tedious process to

be on this side, and all of the people who have represented me have done a very good

task.

I respect, as well, the way the opposition has treated this. It’s been a very congenial

and cooperative process, and I appreciate it very much.

Thank you all.

Vote 42: ministry operations, $1,121,960,000 — approved.

Hon. Garry Begg : I move that the committee rise, report resolution and completion of the estimates

of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 6:38 p.m.

The House resumed at 6:39 p.m.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

Lorne Doerkson : Committee of Supply,

Section B, reports resolution and completion of the estimates

of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General and asks leave to sit again.

Leave granted.

Hon. Brenda Bailey : I request a ten-minute recess, if we may, and then we’ll be calling Bill 5, continued

debate.

The Speaker : This House will be in recess for ten minutes.

The House recessed from 6:39 p.m. to 6:48 p.m.

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 5 — Budget Measures

Implementation Act, 2025

(continued)

Deputy Speaker : Members, we’ll call this House back to order. We will enjoy comments on Bill 5 —

the amendment, of course — this afternoon.

On the amendment (continued) .

Sharon Hartwell : I rise today to speak in favour of the Budget Measures Implementation Act.

The NDP government championed a $1,000 grocery rebate for the people in British Columbia.

My riding of Bulkley Valley–Stikine is one of the most beautiful, resilient and hard-working

regions in this province. Year after year, budget after budget, we are getting farther

behind.

Promises are made, photo ops staged, and press releases are issued, but when the rubber

hits the road, there’s nothing. So here’s an opportunity for this government to commit

to actually doing something that they promised the taxpayers of British Columbia.

The NDP government has gone back on their word again. They are casting the blame on

the U.S. President and tariffs, but last I saw, in this House, President Trump was

not present.

The people in Bulkley Valley–Stikine are struggling. Our forest sector is all but

shut down. Mines are waiting for permits. People are struggling with rent, mortgages,

groceries and daily life. The promises of speeding up permitting for mine development….

But that’s not helping people in Bulkley Valley–Stikine. They need relief now.

[6:50 p.m.]

This amendment to Bill 5 rectifies a broken promise. It brings back the grocery rebate

through reduced income taxes and makes it permanent. By delaying the reading of Bill

5 and adding this amendment, this House and, indeed, this government can bring much-needed

relief to the people of British Columbia.

The northern ridings are continually left out. To reach a doctor, a dentist, an optometrist,

people have to drive. This is an expense all too familiar in the North. Parents in

some areas drive their children to school, as many days there are no bus drivers,

and other activities if they’re fortunate enough to be able to afford them.

The minister can pontificate all he wants about the billion-dollar projects in the

Lower Mainland, but he obviously forgets that the money that funds these projects

comes from the hard-working people of the North. These are the people that are being

asked to do more with less.

Well, the Premier has nine new staff in his office, $1 million for the staff of the

Premier, yet in Smithers, a daycare has been denied a small grant. Please explain

to me how this government expects people to go to work and then will not fund daycare

spots for these people, while they continually tell us in the House that they are

supporting programs in all corners of the province. Well, no evidence of that in my

area. Again the North has been left out.

By discussing this amendment and hopefully passing it, this House can reflect on the

importance of amending the personal income tax credit provided in

section 4.3(1.1)

of the Income Tax Act to $22,462, which would provide $500 tax relief for a single

individual. In a two-income household, that would allow both income earners to claim

this deduction, thus honouring the commitment by government.

I’ve heard it said that budgets are moral documents, that they reflect not just numbers

but values. If that’s true, then this amendment is a moral test. In not passing the

amendment to Bill 5, this government is telling the people of Bulkley Valley–Stikine

that they do not matter. They are saying that the North doesn’t matter. Let’s be honest.

Many in the North believe this already.

I will stand in this House every day and defend the people that get up and go to work

in very difficult and extreme situations. This government wants and expects that the

revenue from the North will flow freely to the province and that they can spend it

with no forethought of how that revenue is generated and the sacrifices the families

make while parents are away for extended periods to achieve these results.

Here are some quotes by the Premier: “People need help now so that they can get ahead.

John Rustad would make ordinary people wait 18 months to receive any support. That’s

if you believe him at all. Our tax cut for the middle class supports people now who

are struggling with the high cost of groceries.”

Deputy Speaker : Member, I don’t want you to get too far down that road. We don’t use each other’s

names in this House. Thank you.

Sharon Hartwell : I forgot. Sorry.

The Premier promised “a $1,000 tax cut year after year after year.” He promised: “Under

our plan, families will get more support, and you’ll get it right away. Now they won’t

have to wait — no red tape, no wait-lists, nothing but relief.” If the Premier wants

to honour these promises, he can support this amendment for the hard-working people

of British Columbia.

My colleagues and I in the official opposition are on the side of everyday people

and families. They work hard and want to get home at the end of the day, safe in the

knowledge that they are a little further ahead than when they started. If the Premier

agrees, as his previous statements prove he does, it should be very easy for him to

vote in favour of this amendment.

By not supporting this amendment, this government is showing that they continue to

not stand up for the people of British Columbia that they claim to support and work

for. The people of the North, the true North, who are strong and proud, are repeatedly

let down by urbanized government who dismiss the value of hard-working people in the

North.

What is so hard to take is the hypocrisy. This government stands in this House talking

about working families, but when they have an opportunity to help, they posture and

blame. Let’s not forget the Premier’s words after his slight win in the election,

when asked about working with the opposition. His words were: “I will work with opposition

MLAs if they meet the green-line criteria.”

People are losing faith, not in themselves, not in their neighbours, but in this institution,

in this government. This amendment is not going to solve the entire affordability

crisis created by the NDP, but it will help. Unlike any temporary relief programs

or inflated promises, it provides consistent, long-term tax relief to every British

Columbian, especially those who need it most.

[6:55 p.m.]

Residents of our province, especially in the North, can’t afford to wait. They’ve

already been waiting. They don’t need red tape. They don’t need more delays. They

need this government to act and to act now.

The rising cost of living isn’t just a statistic. It’s a lived reality that affects

every decision we make, from the groceries we buy to the extracurricular activities

families want to participate in.

The proposed amendment to Bill 5, offering $500 back annually for individuals and

$1,000 for two-income families, isn’t merely a fiscal adjustment; it’s a lifeline

for countless residents of our province, especially here in the North. Families across

the province are grappling with skyrocketing expenses. Basic necessities like food,

housing and child care have become increasingly unaffordable.

Consider the story of a single mother in Smithers, who works two jobs to support her

children. Despite her relentless efforts, she struggles to cover rent, utilities and

groceries. The rising costs have forced her to make difficult choices, often sacrificing

her own needs to ensure her children are cared for. This isn’t a rare or uncommon

occurrence. It’s a reality for countless residents of our province, especially in

the North.

The working population isn’t immune to these challenges. Many individuals, despite

being employed full-time, find themselves living paycheque to paycheque. The MNP consumer

debt index reports that nearly half of the residents of our province, especially in

the North, are $200 or less away from financial insolvency. This precarious financial

situation means that unexpected expenses, be it a medical emergency or a car repair,

can plunge families into debt.

Seniors, many of whom lived on fixed incomes, are particularly vulnerable. With the

cost of essentials rising, their purchasing power diminishes. According to Food Banks

B.C., 11 percent of food bank users are seniors, one of the highest proportions across

the country.

Food insecurity is a growing concern. Food Banks B.C. reports that over 100,000 people

access their member food banks every month, with one in three clients being a child.

The rising cost of groceries exacerbates this issue. Food prices in B.C. have risen

by 27 percent from January 2019 to July 2024. For families already stretched thin,

these increases make it challenging to put nutritious food on the table.

Child poverty remains a pressing issue. The 2024 B.C. child poverty report card indicates

that one in six children in the province lives in poverty. Children in lone-parent

families are particularly affected, with a poverty rate of 45.5 percent.

Individuals with disabilities face compounded challenges. Many rely on food banks,

with some reports indicating that the highest recorded numbers in certain areas are

among this demographic. The lack of adequate support systems means that people with

disabilities often must choose between essential needs such as medication and food.

The proposed amendment to Bill 5 offers a straightforward solution: provide immediate

financial relief to those who need it most. By allowing individuals to retain more

of their earnings, we empower them to make choices that best suit their needs, be

it purchasing groceries, paying rent or covering child care expenses.

This amendment isn’t just about numbers; it’s about restoring dignity and providing

hope. It’s about acknowledging the struggles of families, workers, seniors and others

and taking concrete steps to alleviate their burdens.

The affordability crisis in British Columbia is multifaceted, affecting various demographics

in different ways. However, the common thread is the urgent need for relief. The proposed

amendment to Bill 5 addresses this need head-on, offering a practical, immediate solution.

It’s time for the government to act, to fulfil its promises and to support the people

of British Columbia in these challenging times.

This amendment we’ve introduced isn’t some brand-new concept pulled out of the blue.

It’s the government’s own promise. It’s a policy the Premier himself campaigned on

in 2024, not whispered in passing, not a footnote but a centrepiece of the NDP platform.

Residents of our province, especially in the North, were told to expect a $500 rebate

for individuals and $1,000 for families. And they believed it, because in times of

financial uncertainty, people cling to hope, especially when it’s delivered with such

certainty from the highest office in the province.

[7:00 p.m.]

This was supposed to be the government’s answer to rising food costs. The Premier

posts that help was coming. The government acknowledged the affordability crisis,

pointed to its grocery rebate as a major solution, and then as soon as the votes were

counted, that promise was dropped.

The reason given? Tariffs. The Premier said reckless and destabilizing U.S. tariffs

were to blame, even as he has since admitted that British Columbia was largely unscathed

with the exception of the lumber sector. That is not a justification; that’s a contradiction.

If the tariffs weren’t as damaging as feared, why cancel the very support people were

promised? Let’s be hon