The committee met at 3:03 p.m.

[B. D’Eith in the chair.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): Good afternoon, everyone.

My name is Bob D’Eith. I’m the MLA for Maple Ridge–​Mission and the Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services.

We’re very thankful to be here in Castlegar on the traditional territory of the Ktunaxa, Syilx, Okanagan and Sinixt people.

We are a committee of the Legislative Assembly that includes MLAs from the government and opposition parties. Normally, every fall, we hold a public consultation and visit different regions of the province to hear directly from British Columbians about their priorities and ideas for the next provincial budget. This year, we have moved our consultation up to June to enable the committee to deliver a final report to the Legislative Assembly earlier in the budget process. We’ll be reviewing this new timeline and welcome feedback on the changes from anyone at the end of the consultation.

Our consultation is based on the budget consultation paper prepared by the Minister of Finance, who actually presented yesterday. There are copies of the paper available here today for anyone who’s interested in reading it.

We’ve just come from Kimberley, where we held a public hearing this morning, and we will be visiting a number of communities over the next two weeks. There are still some spots available to anyone if you’d like to share your ideas with us in person or over the phone. You can also share your ideas in writing or by filling out the on-line survey. Details are available on our website at www.leg.bc.ca/cmt/finance. The deadline for input is 5 p.m. on Friday, June 28, 2019.

[3:05 p.m.]

Now, all of the input we receive is considered carefully and is used to make recommendations to the Legislative Assembly on what should be in the next provincial budget. Our report will be available in late July or early August. Thank you to everyone participating today for taking the time to share your suggestions and perspectives.

As far as the meeting format, to ensure that we can hear from everyone who took the time to come here to speak today, I’d kindly ask everyone to respect the following time limits. Each presenter has five minutes to share their input, followed by five minutes for questions from the committee. We welcome you to provide in writing any further information that you’re not able to share in this time period.

If there’s anyone who hasn’t registered in advance but would like to speak to the committee today, please see Stephanie over there at the information table, and we will do our best to accommodate you.

Today’s meeting is being recorded and transcribed. All audio from our meetings is broadcast live via our website, and a complete transcript will also be posted.

First, I’d like to introduce our members. I will turn it over to MLA Rich Coleman to start off.

R. Coleman: I’m Rich Coleman. I’m from the riding of Langley East.

D. Clovechok: I’m Doug Clovechok, and I’m the MLA for Columbia River–Revelstoke out in the Kootenays.

R. Leonard: I’m Ronna-Rae Leonard. I’m the MLA for Courtenay-Comox.

N. Simons: I’m Nicholas Simons. I represent the Sunshine Coast.

D. Ashton (Deputy Chair): Good afternoon. My name is Dan Ashton. I’m the MLA for Penticton to Peachland.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Once again, I’m Bob D’Eith, the MLA for Maple Ridge–Mission.

Assisting us today is the Parliamentary Committees Office. I have Susan Sourial on my left and, of course, Stephanie Raymond. Also, we have Simon DeLaat and Amanda Heffelfinger from Hansard Services, who are over there, who come and set up all of this fancy equipment every time. We’re very, very pleased to have them along.

First up we have Selkirk College Faculty Association — Dr. Lui Marinelli.

If you wouldn’t mind coming up, that would be great.

Budget Consultation Presentations

SELKIRK COLLEGE FACULTY ASSOCIATION

L. Marinelli: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you all today. I’m a wildlife instructor, but I’m also the president of the Selkirk College Faculty Association and have been a part of the executive for some 14, 15 years.

Secondary scales is an issue that is provincewide in our sector. It’s something I know that you’ve heard about already and will be hearing more of at some of your other meetings from our other presidents. It’s basically, though, similar work being paid at a different, lesser rate.

From place to place, from institution to institution, how they got to that situation differs. We all have different collective agreements. We have different histories. But ultimately, we’ve got to this place where instructors that are doing similar work are getting paid substantially less. In some places, the difference is very dramatic.

Also, the number of instructors that are in that category is increasing. For the most part, it has to do with, at most locations, a difference between regular versus contract work. Quite honestly, from a fiscal point of view, as an employer, if those were the options available, then it makes sense to take advantage of getting the same amount of work, same quality of work, but paying less for it. But in many cases, it becomes a real challenge for some of those instructors to even earn a living wage.

At Selkirk, it’s a different issue — our secondary scale. Ours has nothing to do with regular versus contract or short term. We have both of those, but ours is for on-line instruction. For on-line instruction, different instructors use it differently.

I do a little bit on line. I don’t teach fully on line. I use on line just for resources. But others teach a full course on line, and those courses that have less than six students enrolled are paid per student.

[3:10 p.m.]

Basically, when you have a maximum of five students, it’s about one-third of the wage than if you taught that same course face to face. If it’s less than 17, you get paid two-thirds of what it would be like to do face-to-face courses.

Again, all of that work for those on-line instructors is the same, if not more work. It’s quite a challenge to teach a full course on line. They do that amount of work, the same amount of work, but they get substantially less pay for that.

Again, in our case, where we do have regular instructors and short-term or contract instructors, they both do on-line courses. So it affects both sides of that. We don’t have the same issues as some of the other institutions have.

In addition to that, the employer has, over the last number of years, put caps on some of those on-line courses. For example, a course that may have seven, eight or nine students enrolled…. They’ll put a cap on it at five so that they don’t have to pay the higher rate.

Now, it makes sense in a financial sense to, for a couple of extra students and a couple of extra tuitions, bump up the pay for the instructor quite a bit more, another third more, for that instruction. It makes some sense to do that. Again, I think they’re just taking advantage of what’s available to them.

There’s no question in our minds that the work that’s being done is the same or greater for the on line. In fact, in a number of rounds of bargaining that I’ve been a part of, the employer has acknowledged that it’s unfair and that the work is similar or greater. However, they’ve argued: “We don’t have the money to pay for it.”

As instructors, I think it’s our duty to our students to model, ultimately, what we preach to them. We talk about equity, and we talk about fairness. But we have issues where we’re treating our on-line instructors differently and unfairly.

Ultimately, what we’re asking for and looking for is the base funding that comes to the college to be increased. Over the years, it has decreased. There has been more of a reliance on international students and other sources of funding. But it’s come at a cost for the instructors teaching, for us, those on-line courses. Thank you.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great. Well, thank you very much. You are correct. We have heard this a couple of times, but we hadn’t heard the on-line angle and piece of this. That’s new information for us. So we really appreciate you bringing that up.

Are there any questions?

R. Leonard: Thanks for your presentation. The last thing that you said, actually, sort of made me pause. As international students have increased, has that had a direct impact on the wages for the contract faculty?

L. Marinelli: No. It’s always been the same. For the on-line instructors?

R. Leonard: You made the point that because of the formula for funding, with the increase in international students, it’s affected the bottom line. My understanding was that it’s forcing the colleges to find the funding where they can, which is by reducing the wages for the contract….

L. Marinelli: I think I understand what you’re saying. There is no correlation between those two things.

My point that I was trying to make is that whether…. The government, a number of years ago, that started this, the move to push for more international students, was using that as their justification for providing less and less. The base funding has been dropping over the last number of years. Some of the statistics I’ve seen…. Now we’re getting maybe 40 percent from the government and are expected to get the other 60 percent elsewhere.

There’s not a correlation necessarily between those two, for us, for the on-line instruction. That’s always been the case for us.

The on-line instruction evolved from what used to be called distance education, where there was a package. If you’re a physics teacher teaching physics 100, you could send a package by mail to someone at a different location. They work through it, it comes back to you, and then you spend a couple of hours marking assignments. Give a test. Do the same thing. There was a small amount of work associated with that distance education. That’s been morphed into on line, and they then just converted that same formula to what we do for on line.

[3:15 p.m.]

On line is nothing like distance education. The on-line teaching is, in every way, done differently — the full course — and takes a substantial amount of effort from the instruc­tors.

N. Simons: I appreciate your presentation, Dr. Marinelli. I wonder what you see as the impact on students of this unfairness to the profs.

L. Marinelli: The instructors do their darndest not to allow this to affect the students. The students are getting the same education. There are probably more instructors that are choosing not to do that — that are being challenged and suffering through this, hoping that they can get more face-to-face stuff. But they almost never take it to the students and give less.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Can I just follow up on one thing? The on-line teaching…. There are two camps. There are the faculty that have full-time work, that are recognized, that aren’t on contract, that are staff and all that. Then there are the contractors. Are you talking about only the contractors doing on line, or are you talking about all faculty doing on line?

L. Marinelli: At Selkirk, both the regular and contract ones can have on-line work.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Now, in the collective agreement, then, on the…. I’m not talking about the contracted side. Does that not take into account the on line? Or is it a different scale, based on whether you’re faculty or whether you’re contract? The point being…. Are the regular faculty getting paid properly for on line or not?

L. Marinelli: No.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. So this affects everybody, not just….

L. Marinelli: It affects everybody doing on line — regular and contract workers.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. So that’s something that could be subject to collective bargaining in the future. Is that not correct?

L. Marinelli: Yes. That is a big issue for our sector. We’re coming into bargaining. Our contract expired in March, but nobody has really started bargaining yet. There’s been a major push at the…. It’s called the common table, where all of the colleges and universities come together to argue for similar issues. We’re looking to have a side table just to deal with secondary scales.

It’s been brought up in the past, many times, but we’ve never had any traction with that. The NDP, now, has been talking a very different tune and has been somewhat sympathetic to some of these issues. So we’re trying to get it. So far we’ve had difficulty, at that level, gaining any real traction.

With this committee happening, with the budget happening earlier and our bargaining likely not happening until after the budget — we’re probably going to go into fall, September and October, before we do that — there’s been a push to make this issue even more aware to the government.

B. D’Eith (Chair): This committee only makes recommendations. We’re trying to get it in a little bit earlier in the budget process, but the actual budget isn’t presented until February of 2020, just in terms of timelines. It’s certainly informing what will be happening during the fall. But just in terms of your own timelines, if you can keep that in mind.

We’re over time. Are there any other questions?

Well, thank you very much for the presentation. We appreciate the different angle on this. We really appreciate it.

Okay. Next up we have the regional district of Central Kootenay — Paris Marshall Smith and Nelson Wight.

Just a reminder. If we can try and keep the initial comments to about five minutes, then we have time for questions. That would be great. Thank you.

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF
CENTRAL KOOTENAY

P. Marshall Smith: Thank you for this time. We look forward to sharing with you the work of the regional district of Central Kootenay, specifically related to what we have called the regional watershed governance initiative.

I’d like to introduce my colleague, Nelson Wight. He’ll be speaking for a few moments, I will be speaking for a few moments, and then we’ll be available for questions.

N. Wight: Thank you, everyone.

The regional district of Central Kootenay seeks to investigate its role in watershed governance and the primary intent and goal to protect watersheds where consumptive water sources are at risk. The regional watershed governance initiative is an opportunity to reflect on how to work collaboratively to increase, leverage and influence multi levels of decision-making, to expand on-the-ground effectiveness and to influence existing provincial structures that guide resource development.

[3:20 p.m.]

Our current situation is that the RDCK engages with watersheds and water system protection in a wide range of ways, including monitoring the delivery of services and planning and engagement with other governments, stakeholders and rights holders.

While it is beyond the political jurisdiction of the RDCK to facilitate watershed governance on Crown land, the current lack of oversight, conflicting interests and increasing pressures and challenges faced by residents, communities and municipalities is prompting the RDCK to take action. What are some of the challenges we’re facing? We’ve identified six.

First of all is geohazards. Recent events within the regional district, such as Johnsons Landing, Kuskonook and Destiny Bay landslides, have highlighted the risks associated with forestry, mining and geohazards, wildfire and drought, to watersheds.

Number 2 is climate change. The risks are compounded to the above by increased climate change weather–related events, increased levels of uncertainty. It is difficult to predict what the effects will be, but preparing for increased resilience and adaptability is critical.

The third challenge we’re facing relates to governance. We have fragmented and limited capacity for effective governance at all levels. At the community level, the challenges include limited funds, lack of regulatory understanding or interest in becoming compliant with legislation. Disintegration and internal conflicts impair communities from making good decisions at the local level. The lack of jurisdiction and mandate restrict effective involvement.

At the provincial level, the designation of community watershed, as defined by the Forest and Range Practices Act, is limiting and discriminatory. The lack of coordination related to resource allocation decisions and ongoing local level capacity limits good governance.

The fourth challenge we’re facing is related to development. Vulnerable and sensitive areas of watersheds continue to be placed under pressure for growth and increase the risk not only of geohazard but also for maintaining the integrity of water sources.

The fifth is forestry pressures. The local government, of course, does not have jurisdiction on Crown land, and the forest industry operates under the professional reliance model, which is not effective at supporting conservation and community interests. It is anticipated that a watershed governance entity would support increased and improved negotiation between logging industry and community.

The sixth challenge I would identify is the cumulative effects of all of the above, recognizing that they are compounded in those unknown impacts that come to combine years of industrial activity, extreme weather–related events and increased development pressure and the lack of or limited oversight.

P. Marshall Smith: When encountering such realities, RDCK communities, staff and elected officials have ex­pressed their frustration and fear over being unable to influence upstream activities and, therefore, watersheds as a whole.

The challenges of not being able to adequately engage all parties involved to play a formal role in the provincial decision-making process, to change behaviours or mitigate damage underscore the importance of having an effective, collaborative entity that can convene cross-sectoral oversight.

We have examples, from across the province, leading us with their specific responses based on their community needs: Cowichan Valley regional district, the regional district of Nanaimo, Nicola watershed and, most recently, the regional district of Kootenay-Boundary.

Now the RDCK is also trying to find its way through this complex situation. In May 2018, the RDCK board worked with Polis water sustainability project for a full-day workshop to understand what is the potential of their role in watershed governance. Following the workshop, the RDCK board directed staff to develop a regional watershed governance initiative plan. The first step in this plan is a scoping study, which we’ve put out for RFP, received proposals for and plan to award contract on June 21, with the final report coming in, in the fall of 2019.

The scoping study will produce two significant outcomes. One is guidance — guidance to RDCK staff and elected officials on how best to proceed with the watershed governance initiative, building that guidance based on lessons learned and best management practices from other jurisdictions.

The second will be immediate engagements in six diverse watersheds that are currently facing challenges to protecting their consumptive water sources. The study will work with community whose water sources are threatened by community-level conflict, logging activities, development encroachment, impacts from wildfire and landslides and the impacts of climate change — all those threats that were previously mentioned by Nelson.

[3:25 p.m.]

The studies will inform the recommendations produced through the study and inform the next steps for the RDCK. While the purpose of this study is to understand the role and responsibilities of the RDCK, it is, in a sense, an internal piece of work. We also know that what’s required is a space for collaborative dialogue, meaningful engagement and informed planning to produce long-term strategies and short-term responses. Consideration must be given to how to best serve the needs of communities, agencies and the overarching interests involved.

N. Wight: To close, I want to summarize our main points and what we are asking for.

We are advocating for ecosystem-based planning, which recognizes that economic, social and environmental resilience starts from a foundation of conservation and protection. We’re advocating transparency and engagement of those involved and impacted, including rights holders and stakeholders. We’re advocating for provincial participation for decision-making. Lastly, we’re advocating for sustainable financing and capacity, recognizing that long-term engagement and adaptation requires ongoing funding and capacity.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much. That went about two minutes and a bit over, which is fine. You had a lot to say, and I didn’t want to interrupt you because it was very important. But it just leaves us a little bit less time for questions.

Any questions?

N. Simons: Thank you very much for your presentation. I think you reflect many people’s concerns about the lack of real planning around watersheds, especially drinking watersheds.

I’m wondering if any of the local government associations have passed resolutions, like at the UBCM, around this issue.

P. Marshall Smith: Yes. Actually, I am able to quote it. UBCM did pass a resolution last year. It is included in your handout. It just emphasizes the role of the provincial government in taking action on watershed-based issues. So we’re working with that direction.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great. Thanks.

Any other questions?

Well, thank you very much. We really appreciate it.

All right. Next up we have B.C. Fruit Growers Association — Glen Lucas.

Just a reminder. If we can keep the initial comments, Glen, to about five minutes, then we have time for questions.

B.C. FRUIT GROWERS ASSOCIATION

G. Lucas: Great. Thanks.

It’s a pleasure to be here to contribute to and comment on the 2020 budget. My name is Glen Lucas. I manage the B.C. Fruit Growers Association.

It’s a real benefit — moving the meeting earlier in the year. It gives a bit more time before the budget. It seems like when you’re holding it in October and that period of time, you kind of run into the budget preparation. So a bit more time is a good thing. Unfortunately, moving it earlier makes a problem for our growers to attend, because they’re quite busy in the field right now.

We represent 440 commercial tree fruit growers in the Okanagan, Similkameen, Shuswap and Creston valleys. Our mission is a prosperous, sustainable, innovative tree fruit sector.

Based on our most recent ag census, and this would be about right for today, we have an income of $118 million at the farm level. When we pack cherries and apples, there’s a lot of investment and cost there, so that adds about another $100 million worth of value. Then, all the spinoff activity — the posts and wires, selling nursery trees, tractors — adds up to $776 million. So it’s a sizable industry.

We really appreciate the budget review. It’s very important to our association and members. I’d like to skip to our top three priorities.

The first is financial programs. In agriculture, we have farm financial programs. One of them is called the AgriStability program, which helps level out farm incomes. There was an enhancement last year, mainly due to the Cariboo fires, but it benefited the tree fruit growers. We’d like to see a continuation of that enhancement.

[3:30 p.m.]

Moving forward, we’d like to see the provincial Ministry of Agriculture budget move to the national average. There’s a second page I’d like to point out. Lots of numbers, but on the back is a handy-dandy graph. If you look at the graph….

B. D’Eith (Chair): I don’t know if we got that.

G. Lucas: Okay. I have spares, fortunately. So I’ll just pass these around.

On this graph, which contains…. The nice thing about graphs is you get the whole tableful of information onto one graph, and it’s easier to understand.

Each pair of columns is a province. The pair of columns is just two years. So if you average those two years, you can see they’re similar in each case. The yellow is the provincial contribution, and the kind of teal is the federal contribution. The four left-hand provinces are, of course, the Maritimes. You see Quebec there. It’s moderately high.

If you look at the top of the yellow columns, you can see it’s averaging about 20 to 25 percent. New Brunswick’s a bit low, but across the country, it’s no lower than 20 percent and as high as, in Alberta, 40 percent. In B.C., we’re struggling to get to 15 percent. That’s a contribution as a percentage of agriculture GDP. So we fund, in B.C., our agriculture at the lowest level in Canada.

If we were to look at Canada as part of the OECD, Canada is the lowest of the OECD countries. So we’re not only lagging in Canada, but Canada is lagging in the world. We’d really like to see more interest in developing our agriculture sector, in supporting it, in parallel with the preservation of agriculture land.

The second item is labour — mainly a federal issue, about getting workers to Canada. We get a lot of backpackers and so on. If they don’t apply for the visa before they come, they can’t legally work on farms. In New Zealand, they allow the backpackers to apply after they arrive. We’d like to see a change like that. That’s a federal role.

Regarding our foreign workers that we get in…. We do, in B.C., get in about 5,500 Mexican workers and about 1,000 Caribbean workers. Almost half of those come to the Oka­nagan.

The payroll tax for very large…. We have a few very large farms. There’s a lot of consolidation. They get the payroll tax. Those farmworkers are not eligible for MSP. So the grower’s getting taxed to pay for the MSP, but his workers aren’t eligible for the MSP. So it’s this kind of weird thing happening there.

Crop protection is our third priority. We’ve got a lot of invasive pests happening and a lot of research to be done on that.

Dan, from the Okanagan, you’ve probably heard of spotted wing drosophila and apple maggot and brown marmorated stink bug. These are all pests that we’re very concerned about. Apple clearwing moth is a big one in Summerland right now.

Those are our three priorities. I’d kind of like to leave it there and open it up to questions, if I could.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Sure.

R. Coleman: I just want to understand your numbers a bit better.

When you talk about the numbers on the agrifood sector, do you add in the contribution or direct contribution of direct delivery for B.C. spirits, wine and craft beer? In other words, there’s about $100 million in the wine industry alone, direct delivery without tax, that basically has built the wine industry. Do you add that in as a contribution from the provincial government when you make coming together those numbers?

[3:35 p.m.]

G. Lucas: The numbers that I was looking at, at the top, are just agriculture. That’s farm gate, basically. It includes things like dairy and nursery and floriculture, but it does not include value-added. The one on the bottom is value-added. So that’s agrifood GDP.

I’d have to look into…. I know it would include on-farm wineries. I’m not sure if it would include Labatt’s….

R. Coleman: Wineries in B.C. can direct-delivery to any private liquor store, pub or restaurant without paying the tax if it’s VQA wine, for instance, or 100 percent agriculture…. Even in a fruit winery, same thing: they can add that direct delivery in. We’ve moved to beer and moved to ciders and to spirits. In the reflection of what contribution there is, it’s a pretty substantial contribution on allowing them to have some market access.

G. Lucas: That’s correct, and that would be included in the agrifood GDP, and we are seeing a huge growth in cideries. We have two new organic cideries in the Okanagan. I was over in the Kootenays, driving up in the Kootenays once, and there was a cidery there as well.

So a huge value-added there. That would be included in the bottom graph. You can see that B.C. is better off in supporting its processing sectors but is not so good at the farm-gate side of it.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Glen, it would be really helpful if you did send your presentation electronically. It’d be really helpful if you wouldn’t mind sending these graphs, as well, electronically.

G. Lucas: I’ll make sure to do that.

B. D’Eith (Chair): That’d be fantastic.

Any other questions?

R. Leonard: Talking about conflict, I just wanted to say in a proud parental moment that my daughter was one of the first…. She did her master’s on the apple clearwing moth, so she was in the beginning stages of trying to attack that pest. I recognize the impact of pests in our whole food chain and appreciate that you’ve taken note of that in the whole picture.

The question that I have is around the differences between all of these provinces. Is there perhaps a relation to crops or to what is being farmed? I notice that it’s federal contributions as much as provincial contributions that changed significantly between each province. I was wondering if you could comment on that.

G. Lucas: I think you can see there are a few things to look at in this graph. One is the ratio of the yellow to the teal for a particular province. So looking at Quebec, much more yellow — much more provincial contribution than federal, compared to any other province; whereas the prairie provinces are, I would say, generally more federal than provincial contributions. They are better at maximizing bringing the federal dollars home.

B.C. is probably the most extreme in terms of provincial to federal. We’ve done very well in bringing those federal dollars home. But I think we’re maybe shortchanging our growers a little bit in terms of programs like research on invasive pests, enhancing our AgriStability program, and so on — things that would benefit all growers, not just tree fruit growers.

I’m sorry. Your daughter’s name, daughter-in-law…?

R. Leonard: My daughter, Chelsea Eby. It was a few years ago. I think it was 2013.

G. Lucas: I’ll look that up.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much, Glen. We appreciate your presentation. I appreciate your comments in regards to the time change. Of course, we’re very lucky to have you to be able to represent the growers. Please tell your members we appreciated having you here and we know they’re hard at work right now. You’ve made a great presentation. So I’m sure their interests are being well served.

G. Lucas: Thanks very much for your time and efforts on the budget. I’ll make sure to send that attachment as well.

B. D’Eith (Chair): A short recess.

The committee recessed from 3:39 p.m. to 3:50 p.m.

[B. D’Eith in the chair.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): Next up we have Living Lakes Canada — Avery Deboer-Smith.

Just as a reminder. If you could try and keep the initial comments to about five minutes, then we have time for questions. It’s all yours.

LIVING LAKES CANADA

A. Deboer-Smith: Hello, everyone. My name is Avery Deboer-Smith. I’m a program manager with Living Lakes Canada. We’re a national charity, a registered charity, that does water stewardship work across Canada. We are affiliated with Living Lakes International, which is the international version of our organization that we partner with regularly. That was developed under the umbrella of the Global Nature Fund. So we have quite a wide network around the world, which allows me to have lots of resources to draw from.

I’m here today to present on the proposed need for a water sustainability fund for the province of British Columbia. I currently, within my capacity at Living Lakes Canada, work on a program called the Columbia Basin water monitoring collaborative, where we are working to implement a guidance document to help us develop a framework for a data hub. That includes a criteria matrix, which was provided to us by the provincial government. We work quite collaboratively with many different government departments as well as Indigenous government, academia, other non-profits, local government and industry.

Our biggest struggle, as with most non-profits, is finding sustainable funding, which I prefer to refer to as durable funding, because I don’t think sustainable funding can exist for non-profits without endowments, which are quite difficult to come by.

I’m going to read off my notes here, because I want to make sure I follow my script and don’t get in trouble from my boss. I’m just going to quickly go over some of the reasons we believe that there’s a need for a water sustainability fund in British Columbia.

Obviously, the biggest concern is climate change, and as this worsens with things like droughts, floods and wildfires, it poses greater threats to our water. So a big reason would be to create some more climate resiliency and support organizations to come up with strategies around that. That includes protecting iconic species like salmon as they struggle with the changing temperatures and water.

Threats to water quality and quantity across British Columbia, which is what I focus on, are impacting the beautiful, treasured ecosystems that we have, and the increasing competition and conflicts over water are becoming much more common.

All of these challenges point to the need for long-term watershed-level planning and partnerships between local Indigenous governments and communities, as well as adequate resources for local leadership on these efforts. A lot of the work we do at Living Lakes is advancing reconciliation around freshwater planning and decision-making, and I think that would be another huge benefit to a water sustainability fund.

Currently the Water Sustainability Act is in effect, as you all know. But I used to work in government, so I know every department is always under capacity and underfunded as well. I just wanted to make note of that, especially in terms of the water management, both in regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to water. I believe that to place water at the centre of a modernized strategic land use planning regime, this sustainability fund would be really beneficial.

[3:55 p.m.]

What does investing in protecting freshwater resources look like? I believe that a water sustainability fund could be a permanent fund to invest in initiatives and efforts that deliver long-term water and watershed sustainability across British Columbia. This could include — or should include, I believe — collaborative partnerships at a watershed scale, modernized watershed-based land use plans, community-driven restoration initiatives and innovation supporting prov­incewide advancements in watershed protection.

Healthy forest and wetland systems provide a host of watershed services, as I’m sure most of you know — I’m assuming — including really important things for a society, like water purification, groundwater, surface-flow regulation, erosion control, stream bank stabilization, benefits to wildlife. The list goes on and on. The importance of these watershed services will only increase as water quality becomes a critical issue, especially as it becomes more expensive to deal with in the face of climate change.

A water sustainability fund endowment could be established through a one-time endowment. A trust fund structure, we believe, should provide the framework for collaboration between provincial and federal governments as well as private sectors and improve and enhance the ability to invest in water sustainability.

Ongoing sources of revenue should be diversified over time to maintain and grow the project funding for the long term. Non-governmental organizations dedicated to protecting B.C.’s freshwater supplies could be more permanently held in a trust such as this.

Not only do I work on this, or have chosen to work on this, in a non-profit capacity, but I’m also volunteering my time to be here because we couldn’t find the funds to cover my time to come. So we’re hoping things like that — supporting groups, even local government and Indigenous governments who are working on this and don’t necessarily have the financial capacity…. This fund could support people — investing more time and energy and resources into something like that.

I believe so strongly in this that I’ve decided to also do my master’s research on water governance from a transboundary perspective. That’s definitely been interesting, but let’s focus on B.C. first.

That’s the main part of what I have to say for now.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great. Thank you, Avery. Appreciate it.

R. Leonard: Thanks for your presentation, and thanks for your volunteerism.

When you talk about an endowment fund, how do you see that as being sustained? It would eventually be used up.

A. Deboer-Smith: The way that we’re looking at…. The model we’re using for an endowment fund, which we are proposing or looking at, is based on the academic structure. So it would be annual investments, and the interest from those investments would be redistributed on an annual basis to groups doing the water work.

R. Leonard: Do you have a position on what kinds of investments?

A. Deboer-Smith: In terms of government, private…?

R. Leonard: Well, it’s one thing to annually give funds to organizations to do their work. It’s another thing to invest a capital amount and only use the interest. I know there are a lot of different initiatives out there about how funds are being invested. I’m just curious about….

A. Deboer-Smith: Well, one example that I have here is a surcharge directed to the water sustainability fund. For example, based on research, British Columbia currently charges $2.25 per million litres for water rentals, the lowest rate of all the provinces that charge a water rental or royalty. Ontario charges $3.71 per million. In Quebec, it’s $70 per million. In Nova Scotia, $140 per million. So a modest surcharge to major industrial and high-volume water users that could be potentially directed….

R. Leonard: If I may ask one more question. In terms of community water use, communities don’t pay for the water. Then when they get a licence to provide to a community…. Would they be exempt from that, or would it be…?

A. Deboer-Smith: Sorry. I’m not too sure what you’re referring to. In terms of water meters or communities getting water from…?

R. Leonard: Communities getting water from Crown land, from lakes.

A. Deboer-Smith: Yeah, communities don’t pay directly to get the water, but they pay to maintain the infrastructure that provides the water to communities. More and more communities across British Columbia are installing water meters, which I think is something that is quite beneficial to reducing water usage and the impact on systems.

Sorry. I’m not too sure if I directly follow the question.

R. Leonard: Those costs are for the infrastructure, not for the water itself.

A. Deboer-Smith: You’re talking more of a taxation.

R. Leonard: Well, if you were talking about the water rentals to major users, you’re talking about commercial enterprises.

[4:00 p.m.]

A. Deboer-Smith: Yeah, industrial and commercial. We do have an example — a few in this region — where the community members have chosen to pay a parcel tax that goes towards a land securement, which works towards water stewardship, just as one example. That was something that community members voted on, and that exists in the regional district of Central Kootenay as well as in the regional district of East Kootenay.

D. Ashton (Deputy Chair): Just really quickly, this morning we had the Elk River Alliance, Lake Windermere Ambassadors — I think it’s very admirable, what you’re doing — and then yourself. I’m quite sure we’ll hear more, but I hope there’s a coordinated effort amongst others. It tends to get so siloed, and everybody seems to want to do their own. Again, it’s very admirable, but I think there needs to be some real coordination, especially when the ask is for funds for all these independent organizations.

A. Deboer-Smith: Sure. Yeah, I think that’s a really good point, Dan. Most of my master’s research is on collaboration around water governance. I strongly believe that that is the answer to a more sustainable future. We are coordinating this effort under the umbrella of Polis, which is out of the University of Victoria. They are the ones leading this ask for a water sustainability fund. We have been working with academics there, as well as with other non-profits and local government, to come up with a collaborative and cohesive ask on what a water sustainability fund could look like for the province of British Columbia.

D. Ashton (Deputy Chair): Just talk to your peers. That’s all I ask.

A. Deboer-Smith: Yeah, for sure, definitely. I appreciate that, and I agree with that sentiment.

D. Clovechok: Just a quick question for you. Are you receiving funding from CBT?

A. Deboer-Smith: Yes.

D. Clovechok: Is that on a yearly basis, or do you have to reapply?

A. Deboer-Smith: Living Lakes Canada currently receives a small amount of grant funding from Columbia Basin Trust, which we have to reapply for on an annual basis.

D. Clovechok: On an annual basis. What about the RBC blue water fund?

A. Deboer-Smith: Yeah, we also receive a small amount of money from them, which we also have to reapply for on an annual basis.

D. Clovechok: Okay. Thanks.

A. Deboer-Smith: Yeah. Both are amazing supporters in the region.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Do I hear a push for multi-year funding? Is that in your voice?

A. Deboer-Smith: Yeah. That’s the dream for every non-profit, right? But you guys probably know.

B. D’Eith (Chair): I used to run a non-profit, so I know all about finishing one application and then starting on the next one — instead of doing your work.

I would concur with Dan. We are hearing…. There seems to be a bit of a theme, especially around the water licensing piece. What seems to be differing is what should be done in different…. This is the first time, I think, we’ve heard about the endowment idea. I would echo what Dan is saying: in terms of dealing with water sustainability, make sure that all of the stakeholders, when they come to government, have one plan and really come as a group. It would be very, very helpful, I think. It’s just something to keep in mind.

A. Deboer-Smith: For sure, definitely. I apologize if there were any inconsistencies, but on our last group conference call, the endowment fund was something we talked about as a group, based on some research that Polis had done.

B. D’Eith (Chair): I don’t know if it’s other groups involved with different parts of environmental protection that are also coming up, but we’ve just heard the idea of the water licence being used, water licensing fees being increased, from a number of groups.

Any other questions?

Well, thank you very much. I do appreciate your time and your passion on this.

A. Deboer-Smith: Yeah. I really appreciate all your time and passion as well. Thank you so much.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Good luck with your master’s.

Next up we have the B.C. Dental Association — Jocelyn Johnston and Dr. James Singer.

Before we start, just a reminder. If we could keep the initial comments to about five minutes, then we’ll have time for questions.

B.C. DENTAL ASSOCIATION

J. Singer: Good afternoon. My name is Dr. James Singer. I’m the president of the British Columbia Dental Association. With me is our executive director, Ms. Jocelyn Johnston. I’ve been practising dentistry in Castlegar for 22 years since my wife, Lisa, and I moved here from Ontario. She is here supporting me this afternoon, along with our two Kootenay-born and -raised daughters, Jordan and Taylor.

As the voice of dentistry in B.C., the BCDA represents over 3,600 dentists committed to the oral health of British Columbians. The dental profession contributes over $2 billion a year to the provincial economy. It employs roughly 17,000 dental professionals.

[4:05 p.m.]

I want to thank the government for its significant investments towards improving the oral health of British Columbians, these being Minister Shane Simpson’s $3.6 million grant to existing and upcoming not-for-profit dental clinics to support the B.C. poverty reduction strategy and Minister Adrian Dix’s initiative to add 900 hospital-based dental surgeries in 2018. This has resulted in reduced wait times for children and for persons with disability. Yet we would all agree that more is required to improve oral health for all British Columbians. Supporting government in achieving this goal is the focus of our recommendations.

Similar to labour shortages in other industries across B.C., dentistry is experiencing a growing shortage of certified dental assistants. Our patients are being adversely affected by delayed or cancelled treatments due to this shortage. When surveyed, half of B.C. practice owners are seeking a CDA, of which 59 percent are trying to fill an existing position. Compared to other provinces, B.C. is facing the greatest challenge in this area, based on national data. The BCDA recommends that the Ministries of Advanced Education and of Health add certified dental assistants to the high-demand occupation category in the upcoming labour market outlook.

Access to dental care remains a significant problem for low-income British Columbians. As cited in the poverty reduction report, even people receiving income or disability assistance with supplemental health coverage were being forced to go without because of gaps in their coverage. The BCDA appreciates and supports the $3.6 million funding for the not-for-profit clinics, but these clinics are only in 14 cities. Most ministry clients are treated by their local dentists, such as me, in our own offices.

I recognize the financial impact, as I’ve cared for adult ministry patients at ministry fees for the past 22 years. The Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction dental fees have not increased in 13 years. Inflation, though, has increased by 20 percent. Today these fees are about 55 percent of the suggested BCDA fee guide.

Dental offices have attempted to absorb the cost, but increasingly, they are charging patients additional fees and/or limiting their patient load. The situation is not sustainable. Patients are not able to access the timely care they deserve.

Without a fee increase, the situation will only worsen. Dental disease is progressive. It does not self-resolve. Untreated problems tax operating and emergency rooms and strain the already limited resources of public health.

The Ministry of Health’s focus to reduce wait times for hospital dental surgeries has been very successful. However, the Ministry of Social Development’s dental program should be reviewed to reflect patient needs, as the objective is to reduce and, ultimately, eliminate the need for operating room time. Coordination between these ministries would improve the situation.

Twenty years ago 12 percent of ministry clients were persons with disability. Now it is 71 percent, yet the dental program has not kept up to reflect this shift towards patients with significant medical issues. If their needs exceed the limit of $1,000 for every two years, patients rely on antibiotics and painkillers to manage infection and pain if they wish to retain their teeth. This contradicts the B.C. Centre for Disease Control’s efforts to reduce such prescriptions.

An increase in the fees would also provide a long-term solution to the not-for-profit clinics’ operational sustainability. The BCDA recommends that the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction restructure its dental program to meet the needs of its clients. This includes the level of dental fees.

I wish to also draw your attention to seniors; 65 percent of seniors lack extended health benefits, including dental, according to the provincial seniors advocate. Repeatedly, the lack of funding for dental care has been identified as a systemic issue for low-income seniors. Age-related impairments put seniors at increased risk for severe infection and tooth loss. The BCDA continues to recommend that the government create a dental plan for low-income seniors. A first step could be to provide coverage for seniors in long-term care facilities.

Lastly, the BCDA again recommends that the PharmaNet program be expanded to include dentists and dental specialists. Dentists are the second-largest prescribing group in the province. It is critical that we have access to PharmaNet to provide the care our patients deserve and require for their safety.

The BCDA looks forward to partnering with government in all efforts towards enhancing oral health for vulnerable British Columbians. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to appear before you this afternoon, and I thank you for your kind attention.

[4:10 p.m.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much, Dr. Singer. I appreciate your comments and your thoughts.

One of the things, before I start…. I met a homeless gentleman who was recently put in supportive housing. He told me the one thing that was holding him back from getting work was his teeth. He’d lost half his teeth, and he said: “Who’s going to hire me?” So one of the first things they started working on in the support was getting him the dental help that he needed, obviously, for health but also just for employment and many other things. So it goes beyond that.

Thank you very much for that. I appreciate it.

R. Leonard: Thanks very much for that presentation. A question around seniors. Do you know what percentage of seniors wear dentures versus are working to maintain their teeth? I’ve had a lot of folks in my office who have issues around dentistry, and I’m just curious what the split is, if you know.

J. Singer: I’m not aware of those precise numbers, specifically B.C. numbers.

J. Johnston: Yeah. I’m trying to think. But that number has been declining. In fact, you’d probably find now full dentures tends to be the minority, and partial dentures increasingly so. Some folks are moving on to implants to replace teeth. But I would probably go well under 20 percent that are using partial or full dentures.

J. Singer: I definitely would say that there’s a correlation with socioeconomic class related to that, unfortunately.

R. Coleman: I just have a comment. I’ve had a long working relationship with the Dental Association of B.C. I just want to thank you, because you do some philanthropy. You do some pretty special cases where I’ve had the luxury of, or the relationship with, the Dental Association where people that were really, really sick — you’ve stepped up.

I know you do that on a regular basis quietly when needed, and I just want to thank you for that, because it’s meant a lot to the people I’ve served for the last 23 years.

D. Clovechok: Just a quick question. Are there any identifiable barriers that are preventing dentists from moving to British Columbia or working in British Columbia?

J. Singer: No.

J. Johnston: That is not a problem. We probably have the most dentists per capita in Canada, in a broader sense. The federal government and the national dental board, the NDEB, have worked to facilitate having internationally trained dentists come to Canada. Right now in B.C., every year there are about 200 dentists that enter the province. Half of those are trained outside of Canada. We have reciprocity with Australia, Ireland, the U.S. and New Zealand.

As well, if you come from a non-accredited school, there’s the ability to write the national boards. In that regard, I think, probably, dentistry is a leader in terms of welcoming new dentists to Canada.

D. Clovechok: Good to know.

N. Simons: Thank you very much for your presentation. My question is about the eligibility for $1,000 every two years. Can you give us an idea of what that could cover — or not cover? Well, don’t make it….

J. Johnston: I can answer. If you’re an adult, that $1,000 entitles you to basic dentistry — one exam, some cleanings or, actually, about an hour’s worth of cleanings — partial dentures and full dentures. If you exceed the $1,000, then you can have emergency-only coverage. Those folks who are entitled to this are persons with a disability.

If you’re on income assistance, you’re only entitled to emergency care. So the chances are that when it comes…. It’s intended for pain relief. There are restorations, but you wouldn’t get a crown, for example. So if you’re on income assistance, it’s primarily pain relief. Generally, you would probably lose a tooth if they couldn’t save it with a filling. In the case of persons with disability, there is more preventive care.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you. You make a very good case.

R. Leonard: Do we have time for one more question?

B. D’Eith (Chair): One short question.

R. Leonard: Quickly, you’ve touched on dental assistants and a shortage there. You’ve talked about the reciprocity and where dentists are coming from. What’s the issue with the dental assistants, and what’s the solution that you’re looking for?

[4:15 p.m.]

J. Johnston: What’s happening is, as in every other profession or other industries, there’s a real demand for young workers. In B.C., the issue is not…. There is no wait-list to get into these programs. It’s attracting them into the programs.

We’re competing with other industries. We are doing a lot of promotion to attract people in. We are also encouraging our members to look at alternatives in attracting young folk into this, because it’s generally a younger profession.

Also, as we noted in here, the Ministry of Advanced Education has this high-demand occupation category in their labour market outlook. That would also help to attract, especially, high school students.

The CDA program is ten months. They’re paid anywhere from $25 to $30 an hour. They’re good jobs. They’re reliable jobs. They tend to be nine-to-five jobs or eight to ten, and there’s flexibility as well as weekend work. It could be a potential for a lot of folks. I think it’s, in part, reflected…. We are now looking at the lowest unemployment rate in B.C., so I don’t think we’re alone. But we have to now compete with other industries.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great. Well, thank you very much for your presentation. To echo what Rich says, thank you for all the work you do, especially on the charitable side. Quiet heroes. We appreciate it.

Next up we have Jones Boys Boats — Casey McKinnon.

Hi, Casey. How are you?

C. McKinnon: Good. How are you?

B. D’Eith (Chair): Good. So just a reminder. If we could keep the initial comments to about five minutes, then we have time for questions for another five minutes. All yours.

JONES BOYS BOATS

C. McKinnon: I’m representing Jones Boys Boats, a family-owned and -operated small business, located on Kootenay Lake. I’m here on behalf of the company to bring to your attention the impact of the provincial sales tax on out-of-province sales of, mainly, boats.

Boat dealers in B.C. are mainly small or medium-sized businesses, and some are also family owned and operated like our company. As a multigenerational family business, our dealership has allowed us to provide skilled labour positions and many other job opportunities.

As you are likely already aware, tourism is an important industry in B.C., and even more so in smaller communities in the Kootenay region. Due to the seasonality of our area, small businesses thrive on tourism. The customers we attract from other provinces help support this tourism industry and local communities.

Unlike car dealerships, boat dealers have territories, limiting the customer base to a certain geographical area. For example, our dealership covers the Kootenay region and into southern Alberta. Due to the proximity of Alberta to Kootenay Lake, approximately 60 to 70 percent of our customers are from Alberta.

The current provincial tax bulletin for boats says, “If you purchase a boat in B.C. through a private sale or from a boat dealer, you’re exempt from paying PST if the boat is shipped by the seller for delivery outside B.C. and no use is made of the boat while the boat is in B.C.,” except you’re allowed to store it with the seller. The exemption does not apply if you personally haul the boat out of B.C. or if you have family members or friends or have another third party haul the boat to the border.

We’re finding that this is causing more people to purchase in Alberta to avoid paying PST or the out-of-province delivery fee. In certain cases, our dealership has covered the expense of the delivery in order to make the deal, cutting into already tight margins.

Tourists that spend their holiday time on Kootenay Lake and other Interior lakes in B.C. should not be penalized for choosing to spend their money in B.C. We’d like to be more competitive to attract out-of-province purchases. Also, the people that come to B.C. to go boating will spend a lot of money locally, including groceries, fuel, accommodation, tourism activities, restaurants and shopping at small boutiques — so just basically supporting these local, small communities that might not usually be discovered.

Our economy relies on this seasonal activity to allow for small businesses to provide jobs. The provincial sales tax has been a negative impact on our local economy, as it has driven boaters to keep their money in Alberta and not spend their vacation time in B.C., to avoid having to pay the PST.

[4:20 p.m.]

Also, when we deliver the boat out of B.C. to Alberta, it’s less likely the boaters will return to B.C. to go boating. We want to encourage boaters to spend their time in B.C. and promote everything B.C. has to offer, which will be a huge benefit to our local communities and also our province. People who purchase a boat in B.C. and who have a primary out-of-province residence should be PST-exempt — same as the automobile and RV industry — and be able to use their boat while they’re visiting when they make their purchase.

We are a member of Boating B.C., and they recommended that this is one step towards getting this discussed. We’re aware that this may not be in your direct control, but we’d like to make a recommendation to the minister to review this PST policy and reconsider it.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thanks, Casey. Appreciate that.

N. Simons: One of the things I like about this committee is that we get, as MLAs for different areas with different needs…. I’m on the coast, and it’s sort of a different issue.

I really appreciate you taking the time to let us know about this issue. Has this provincial sales tax been in place for a long time?

C. McKinnon: It has, yes. It’s my father’s company right now. He couldn’t be here today because he’s busy. It’s one of the things he’s brought up multiple times, so I brought it to Boating B.C.’s attention. They actually had a few other dealers with the same issue. We’re just trying to figure out ways to approach it. It might not be really recognized as a large deal because, for small businesses, there are a lot of other expenses that aren’t necessarily made aware of….

N. Simons: Just as a follow up, if I may, hon. Chair. I usually start, and then he decides not to let me.

B. D’Eith (Chair): No, it’s okay.

N. Simons: I threw myself off track here. It’s not unusual. It serves me right, he said, for the record.

Thank you for your presentation. I was going to ask about your advocacy and if you’ve approached the Minister of Finance at this point.

C. McKinnon: No. But knowing that it’s kind of our next step.

N. Simons: Okay. What we’ll do is…. We make recommendations to government. So thank you. We have more to deliberate on because of your presentation.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Casey, just to follow up on that so you understand the nature of this. This is an all-party committee. We make recommendations, but we don’t actually make the decisions. We’re not the Treasury Board. We’re not the Minister of Finance. We’re not the ministers. So it’s really important to also follow up. For example, the Minister of Finance would be the right minister to follow up with on this.

The other thing, too, is…. I’m just curious. Is this something that would also affect boat sellers outside of this area? Have you talked to other retailers, let’s say, on the coast, in Kelowna or other areas? Is this affecting them as well, or is this primarily businesses that are closer to the border?

C. McKinnon: I think it’s affecting all boat dealers in B.C. We have talked to…. We have a few close relationships with about three or four other dealerships, and I know this is a major problem for them.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. So it’s probably exacerbated here because of the proximity to the border, but it’s something that’s happening, in your opinion, right around the province.

C. McKinnon: Yeah. Dealers in Vancouver or the Okanagan are going to have a wider customer base. For us, we just see it more because we have such a big clientele in Alberta.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Right. Okay.

R. Leonard: Thanks for your presentation. Thanks for representing your father’s business today.

It’s a multigenerational family business, and the PST has been in place for a while. You say 60 to 70 percent of your customers are from Alberta. Has your customer base gone down?

C. McKinnon: It hasn’t gone down, but it is shifting. Before the price of everything started going up, we actually had, probably, 80 percent of customers from Alberta. It’s starting to flip to more customers from B.C. just because…. We’ve really noticed in the past while that a lot of people from Alberta are purchasing in Alberta and then coming to B.C. with their purchase.

B. D’Eith (Chair): So they’re basically using the…. They’re buying a boat there, but they’re still coming here. We could have had the sale here, is what you’re saying.

C. McKinnon: Yes.

B. D’Eith (Chair): All right. Any other questions?

Thank you very much, Casey. Appreciate it. Please say hi to your family for us. Fantastic.

Okay. Next up we have Canadian Society for Medical Laboratory Science — Maria Klement.

[4:25 p.m.]

CANADIAN SOCIETY FOR
MEDICAL LABORATORY SCIENCE

M. Klement: Thank you, Chair and hon. members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. My name is Maria Klement, and I am the national president for the Canadian Society for Medical Laboratory Science, or CSMLS. I’m also the director of quality, safety and innovation here at Interior Health.

Founded in 1937, CSMLS is the national certifying body and professional association for medical laboratory technologists and medical laboratory assistants. CSMLS has a long history of leading the medical laboratory profession by setting the standards of practice in the industry. We have continued to grow and develop in order to represent the professional interests of approximately 14,000 of our members in Canada, over 2,000 of which practise in B.C., like myself.

British Columbia’s medical laboratory technologists, or MLTs, are highly trained professionals in our health care sector. Every day in B.C., MLTs provide tens of thousands of potentially life-changing laboratory results which guide the diagnosis and treatment of patients. Simply put: without the timely, accurate and professional work of our members, the rest of the health care system cannot function effectively. Lab professionals practise in hospital laboratories, private medical laboratories, public health laboratories, government laboratories and research and educational institutions. Our members are proud and passionate about their valuable contribution to patient care.

I would like to point out two important considerations for this committee and the government. First, it is imperative that the government work to address the growing shortage of MLTs in the province. About half of all MLTs will be eligible to retire in the next ten years. These shortages are already being felt in our rural and remote communities, and the impending retirements will exacerbate this issue.

Here in Interior Health, we have had shortages across the region. I’m going to list all the communities so far. We have New Denver, Barriere, Ashcroft, Sparwood, Elkford, Lytton, Princeton, Grand Forks and Salmon Arm. I only represent the Interior Health here. In Northern, it’s not any better — and even on the islands.

The current supply of new MLT graduates is not sufficient to offset the projected retirement numbers. A shortage of MLTs has a cascading effect throughout the medical system, as delayed diagnosis means delayed treatment.

At the same time, research indicates that the number and complexity of laboratory tests are increasing. Advances in testing capabilities and precision medicine will continue to increase orderable tests in the future. For example, the number of genetic tests available has doubled over the past two years. The situation will be further compounded by B.C.’s aging population.

To address these challenges, we recommend the government increase the supply of new laboratory professionals by increasing the capacity of local training programs in B.C. Next, we recommend the creation of bridging programs for internationally educated MLTs who would like to come live and work in B.C. Further, we should incentivize MLTs to relocate to rural and remote areas, where the ongoing shortages are much more of a challenge.

The second major consideration is regarding the regulation of medical laboratory technologists here in B.C. The MLT profession is currently at the tail end of completing the process of self-regulation but is facing suspension in light of the Cayton report. The lack of regulation means that entry-to-practice standards are left for employers to set, the scope of practice is not defined, there are no mechanisms in place to ensure maintenance of competency over the career of a professional, and there are no defined processes in place for patient complaints and discipline.

Suspending the process of self-regulation leaves the public without the safety and reporting mechanism provided to other health occupations. This is absolutely critical, and our members across the province would like to see this implemented forthwith.

Thank you for your time today. I would be happy to answer any questions.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Just before I turn it over to the other members, could you give me a little bit more background on the regulatory piece? You mentioned in your discussion here that the MLT profession is currently at the tail end of completing the process of self-regulation. Could you just elaborate a little bit more on that and where it’s going and what the problem is, just so I can understand it?

M. Klement: It actually got passed. The act got passed. It’s down to its 90 days of public input. It never did get to that point because of the Cayton report. He suggested that all health regulatory bodies should be reviewed. Our fear is that’s going to be another three- to five-year review, when we are so close.

[4:30 p.m.]

One of the recommendations from Cayton was an um­brella regulatory college, and we actually have four groups in our…. It would be, actually, a regulatory body.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. I just wanted to get my head around that.

Any questions from the members?

Great. So one of the things you’re asking for is definitely more seats in post-secondary. I mean, it’s a challenge, generally, not just in these sectors but also in the trades. We’re hearing this from all sorts of places: that the demand for skilled, trained people is growing and growing.

M. Klement: We’ve worked with BCIT and CNC, and they do have the capacity to actually increase. It’s just coming down to Advanced Education giving the extra funding towards it. They currently do 80 in BCIT. They can go up to 96. CNC, I believe, has 20. I think they’re willing to go up to about 30.

B. D’Eith (Chair): So there is capacity but not funding?

M. Klement: Yes, there’s capacity. It’s the funding.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. That’s a good point. I mean, that would be another challenge — if the colleges or universities or technical institutes didn’t have the capacity.

M. Klement: Our society has worked with lots of MPs. We’ve been doing a lot of lobbying. We’ve worked with educators. We’ve kind of done the whole gamut, and we’re just down to: what’s holding it up? It usually comes down to financing.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. Great. Well, thank you very much for your presentation. We appreciate it.

Okay. I’m just going to take a short recess, if that’s all right.

The committee recessed from 4:31 p.m. to 4:33 p.m.

[B. D’Eith in the chair.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. Next up we have viaSport — Trisha Davison.

Hi. How are you?

T. Davison: I’m great. How are you? Long day, I’m sure.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Very well. Beautiful day. Well, it’s the job, and we love it.

Just to give you a heads-up. If you can keep the initial comments to about five minutes, then we have time for questions. That’d be wonderful.

T. Davison: Not a problem. I can do that.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. All yours.

VIASPORT

T. Davison: Thank you to the committee for the opportunity to present today, and thank you to the provincial government for its recognition of the important role sport plays in building connected, safe, healthy and inspired commun­ities across B.C. by investing in sport, and specifically via­Sport.

With the support of the province, viaSport oversees more than 70 B.C. sport organizations and manages approximately $16 million of government’s investment in sport for provincial leadership development, community initiatives and cross-sectoral activations. Our purpose is to transform and scale the impact of sport and to create more equitable, safe, inclusive and meaningful experiences.

Canada received a D-plus in overall physical activity in ParticipACTION’s 2018 report card. Perhaps surprisingly, this is Canada’s highest grade achieved in the past decade. In British Columbia, more than 26 percent of youth aged 12 to 17 are overweight or obese, and at least 80 percent of this group will become obese adults — largely attributable to inactivity.

[4:35 p.m.]

Overweight and obese children are vulnerable to chronic diseases and conditions, and unhealthy weight increases the risks to an individual’s overall health and mental well-being. There are many benefits to individuals and families who are active, as well as collective benefit to the communities and to the social, economic and environmental conditions in the province.

While the majority of children and youth in British Columbia are active, only 40 percent of students across all grades are meeting the daily physical activity requirements.

Similarly, sport participation numbers have decreased. In 2010, only 26 percent of Canadians over the age of 15 participated in sport, compared to 45 percent in 1992.

Part of this trend can be attributed to children who are quit­ting sport at an alarming rate. By age 13, 70 percent of children quit sport. Girls and women face increased bar­riers to participation. Over half of girls in British Columbia, 58 percent, do not participate in sport, and 96 percent of girls are not meeting minimum physical activity standards for optimal health. Despite concerted effort, participation rates for girls in sport in British Columbia have been stagnant since 2011. Because of their inactivity, today’s children now have a shorter life expectancy compared to their parents.

To positively change this story for our children, government and its partners have a shared responsibility to invest in and implement immediate interventions and actions. By working with and across ministries, we can collectively and collaboratively reverse this alarming trend.

Through community capacity-building, our approach is to go beyond awareness and education and to embed physical activity and sport development best practices across multiple sectors that align with priorities of multiple ministries, including the Ministry of Health — the investment in pre­ven­tative health care measures of physical activity will reduce the cost to the health care system; the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture — families who are physically literate will increase their participation in sport and physical activity; the Ministry of Education — increased movement in the everyday learning environment will increase children’s physical and mental well-being and their ability to self-regulate, focus and learn; the Ministry of Children and Family Development — physical activity is an essential component of early childhood development, as it is a foundation for being active for life; the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction — physical activity and sport are developmental tools with proven benefits for gender equity, Indigenous communities, persons with a disability and newcomers, to name a few; and the provincial recreation and community development, where happy and healthy families contribute to vibrant communities by participating in recreation and sport.

To lead this intervention in action, viaSport and the via­Sport Regional Alliance are facilitating this system change by further developing and implementing MOVE, a provincially standardized physical activity and sport development capacity-building program, for the recreation sector, which is called MOVE to Play; education, which is called MOVE to Learn; early childhood education, called MOVE to Discover; and sport, called MOVE to Train.

The viaSport Regional Alliance is uniquely positioned to help build capacity for organizations and their leaders who work in these sectors. The alliance partnership is a collective of nine provincial sport delivery organizations passionate about enriching lives and energizing communities via sport. As experts in sport and physical activity with relationships and reach in communities in all regions of the province, each organization delivers exceptional programming, ensuring all British Columbians receive quality options to lead healthy and active lifestyles.

Capacity-building is a broad term to encapsulate work directed towards structural, organizational or programmatic change to advance a vision — in this case, quality physical activity and sport opportunities for all British Columbians. Capacity-building interventions, when strategically deve­loped and implemented with a long-term lens, result in system change.

To date, we have leveraged a modest investment of $200,000 over the past 18 months to develop and successfully pilot the MOVE program in 11 communities across the province, working in four regions and engaging approximately 1,000 educators, recreation leaders and coaches. MOVE pilot projects have directly impacted approximately 4,500 and indirectly impacted 20,000 participants so far. These programs are ready to be scaled to all communities across B.C. to maximize impact and enable the immediate intervention that is needed to change the trajectory of childhood health.

[4:40 p.m.]

Today we are asking for an investment in children’s health. A $500,000 investment through viaSport would enable the successful MOVE programming to reach all regions of the province by 2021. Namely, it would bring resources to small and large B.C. communities and impact an estimated 100,000 participants, including engaging 10,000 educational leaders, recreation leaders and coaches.

I will now happily entertain any questions that you may have.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thanks, Trisha. Wonderful.

Before we start with the other members, I just had a follow-up. You had said that there’s been some investment already. Could you maybe just elaborate a little bit more on that before we jump in to the half-a-million-dollar ask.

T. Davison: Sure. Basically, the $200,000 that I referenced as being money that’s been put into that program so far has largely come from resources that already exist. It’s staff that are already there, leveraging partnerships and collectively putting all those resources together to try to pilot these programs through our alliances and our partners throughout the province.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. Great.

R. Coleman: Thank you for that. You were going very fast, so I may have missed the stats.

T. Davison: Oh, I’m sorry.

R. Coleman: No. You only have so much time. So that’s our fault.

On the activity…. So viaSport versus the distinction of activity is the question I have. I have grandchildren that might do taekwondo. They’re very active in hiking, biking and what have you, but it’s not organized sports. I have grandchildren that are dancers. Where does dance come into the physical activity side? I know they sweat a lot more there than they do when they’re doing track and field.

For viaSport, your statistics were: “So many percent were not involved in sports.” But how many are actually involved in physical activity that could be equivalent to a sport or an activity that isn’t necessarily organized? Not everybody wants to play an organized sport. Certainly, my son didn’t. He’s active, but he never really got into team sports.

Where does viaSport’s distinction step over to the general activity of the rest of society, and where are we with trying to enhance that, too, as far as not just measuring who’s involved in organized sport but who’s involved in physical activity?

T. Davison: I think that’s a great question. My daily hat, just so you’re aware of my perspective, is that I’m a director of parks and recreation with the city of Trail. So it is very near and dear to me — the participation and things that are unorganized. I understand that.

The MOVE program aims to deliver on that by targeting recreation leaders as well as educational leaders so that the impact goes greater than just the sport leaders, for lack of a better way to describe them. The whole concept of MOVE is to have this broad reach across those four pillars, if you will, to ensure that the people that are learning about what the MOVE program is and what it delivers understand the impact that they have on children in all of these different capacities.

You may hit a child in the education world that may never see organized sport. You may see people in the recreation world that may never see organized sport. The idea behind it is to have some commonality and understanding of the degree of impact that this type of training and leadership opportunity can have for anybody that will fit into those categories and to have some foundational principles that are delivered to everyone.

Did I answer your question?

R. Coleman: I think so. Sort of.

B. D’Eith (Chair): You didn’t answer the one about dance, though.

T. Davison: Oh, yes. Fair enough. In my world, that falls into recreation, because there isn’t a provincial sport body affiliated with dance. So you’re correct. It would fit into the recreation pillar. It may fit into the touchpoints with education. But generally speaking, I would say that would fall to the recreation piece.

When they deliver the MOVE program, the idea would be that they would be calling all those individuals from all these different non-traditional sport activities to come and learn how to be a facilitator of good quality sport or activity.

R. Leonard: Taking the other end of the spectrum, I actually very recently had someone come into my office asking about how to support more teachers getting involved in coaching, because there is a decline in interest for teachers to get involved in coaching. If I look at whatever it is that my kids ever got involved with, you need a leader that is inspirational to activate those kids.

I’m just wondering. You mentioned the MOVE sport was a MOVE to Train. If you could explain a little bit about what you might be doing or wanting to do that will help to….

[4:45 p.m.]

T. Davison: Help with the teacher?

R. Leonard: Yeah. Training the trainers or motivating people to be trainers and to be coaches.

T. Davison: If I understand your question correctly…. Tell me if I do when I answer what I think is your question. It’s in the educational world where…. You’re absolutely correct. There are a lot of teachers, and certainly…. Just the way schools operate now, there’s not a lot of physical activity built into a child’s typical day-to-day experience. Certainly, the coaching environment doesn’t exist in some schools at all.

What this does is help facilitate. One of the pillars is MOVE to Discover, which is directly related to the educational system. The idea behind that would be that this program would be delivered to teachers to help them understand how they could incorporate movement and physical literacy into their day-to-day program without feeling that uneasiness or, possibly, stress around the delivery of true sport programming, which they may not feel trained to do.

Physical literacy is a very broad term that has very clear deliverables. Does everybody know how to skip? Does everybody know how to throw? Does everybody know how to jump? Some basic fundamentals that you could incorporate into a day-to-day program, which doesn’t have to feel like your traditional phys ed class. It’s helping the teachers understand how they can go about incorporating physical activity to get kids moving and inspire them to want to be more active through an educational day.

Did I answer that question?

R. Leonard: It’s a good answer. I guess I’m looking for ways to motivate people to become coaches. My sense is that…. What was described is that it’s moving from the teaching environment into the community, when you’re looking for coaches. I immediately was introduced to two coaches — grandpas and retired teachers — but not in the education system.

T. Davison: In a similar vein, MOVE to Train would be around the development of coaches. That would be a targeted activity where people could come and get some skills and learn how to deliver a program that was safe and inclusive, where they felt that they were well-equipped to deliver a quality program — in particular, to children. The goal of this program was to create that foundation so that any coach that wanted to become or say, “I’m kind of interested in this,” could come and take this to build that foundation for them. So similar. It’s just on all four pillars.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great. We’re out of time. Thank you very much, Trisha. We appreciate that. I learned the term “physical literacy” last year, and now I’m learning more.

T. Davison: Hearing about it a lot, I’m sure.

B. D’Eith (Chair): No, no. It’s good. Thank you. Wonderful.

Next up we have Mika Ishikawa.

Just to give you a bit of the ground rules that we have, if you could take no more than five minutes for your initial comments, then we have some time for questions.

MIKA ISHIKAWA

M. Ishikawa: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for being here tonight, and thank you for letting me speak.

I am here today to ask you to please consider giving support to youth aging out of foster care — specifically, to make the agreements with young adults program more accessible and more effective.

I sit here before you today, not as an official foster child but as someone who lived with legal guardians between the ages of 12 and 17. At 17, the situation with my legal guardians became quite unbearable, and I was unofficially fostered by a friend and her family. As that family went through their own struggles, they eventually became unable to support me. So by the time I graduated from high school, I was essentially on my own.

Due to these experiences, kids in the foster system really hold a special place in my heart. I can reflect on myself, a 19-year-old without support, asking myself questions that perhaps parallel questions that youth aging out of foster care might ask themselves, questions such as: what will I do if this fails? Where will I sleep if I can’t pay rent?

[4:50 p.m.]

Even when I do have a job that does pay rent, there’s always this haunting what-if. What if something happens, and I suddenly need a large amount of money? What if that happens, and I can’t work? What if this happens, and I need to ask someone for help? Who could I ask for help?

Amidst this, as a 19-year-old without support, I’m asking myself more day-to-day life questions, questions such as: after class and before work, do I have time to walk that extra 25 minutes to buy those eggs that are on sale? If I slept four hours last night, and I won’t go to bed until three tonight, do I have the ability to splurge on some caffeine in the form of a Tim Hortons tea? If I’m eating Mr. Noodles for dinner every night, will that multivitamin from the dollar store keep me healthy enough? Could I convince my roommates to keep the thermostat at 17 so that the heating bill becomes more affordable? This is only the surface.

Youth aging out of care often face a whole other category of questions that come when you have parents that had substance abuse issues, parents that screamed and threw things, parents that came in and out of your life when it was convenient for them, parents that committed suicide, parents that you found lying on the living room floor one Saturday morning.

Youth aging out of foster care are not only trying to deal with the complicated traumas of their childhood. They are trying to juggle the sometimes very difficult responsibilities of adult life. B.C. has made great steps to support these youth. The tuition waiver program and modifications to their agreements with young adults program are comforting, but too many of B.C.’s youth are still slipping through the cracks.

In 2017, the Ministry of Children and Family Development reported that a maximum of 30 percent of youth from foster care are accessing the agreements with young adults program. That’s not even necessarily for the full year. So one of the challenges youth face accessing the support is the requirement that you must be attending full-time school or an accredited life skills program. That sounds reasonable, but on average, only 30 percent of foster kids gain a high school diploma by 19. When we remember their complicated childhoods, we can begin to understand why.

The effect of this requirement is that if you are in foster care, you basically need to sort through all of your traumas, get yourself together enough and be functioning to be accepted into post-secondary education by 19, or else you will be completely without support. Furthermore, if you are eligible for the support, you are eligible for $1,250 a month. Now, because your post-secondary institution will be in an urban area, we can estimate rent to be at about $750 a month. That gives us a maximum of $500 a month to buy things like groceries, personal hygiene products, to pay our utilities; water; heat; Internet; and, heaven forbid, to have some money for something like leisure, something like a gym pass, something like gym shoes.

To get to this point, where not only more kids can access this support but the support could be effective, how much would it cost? Well, the total incremental investment needed by the government for this is estimated at about $57 million. But right now, the costs of our current inadequate support of youth aging out of care is between $220 million and $268 million annually — things like health care costs, criminal activity costs, loss of earnings, premature life costs.

This doesn’t even necessarily need to be considered as an investment but as a saving, particularly as the years go on — a saving not only of finances but also of the lives of very vulnerable British Columbian youth.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much for that. I really appreciate it. We have heard from a few people in regards to youth aging out and appreciate your life experience as well. It’s always important to us to hear people’s stories. It takes a lot of courage to come up and tell your life story and also to stand up for those people who are struggling or having a hard time. Those are the sorts of things that we need, those tools we need, to be able to make the recommendations that we can make.

N. Simons: Thank you very much for making such an eloquent presentation to our committee. You really did capture my imagination, anyway. I was picturing what you were saying. I worked in the sector for a long time.

Obviously, we hear about the AYAs and how they can be improved. I’m questioning: if you are not an official child in care, what access to AYAs would you have in circumstances now?

[4:55 p.m.]

I know that there are some unofficial fostering-type situations. There are a lot of children who may go to relatives, back and forth, and who maybe have some similar experiences as children who are unable to live at home for other reasons. Maybe if you could comment on that.

M. Ishikawa: As far as I know, as an unofficial foster child, I have no access to that. I did not access that support, as far as I know, at that time. When I was 19, I could not have, and I was never a part of the government care system. I had legal guardians, so it wasn’t government care.

Some of those anecdotes were a bit real, the Mr. Noodles one. I think that’s part of the thing where…. I do want to appreciate the steps that…. B.C. does have these programs in place. It’s not a totally dire situation, but there are a lot of vulnerable youth still slipping through the cracks.

N. Simons: Absolutely. Really well said.

D. Ashton (Deputy Chair): I should also say very well said. Personal experiences do make a difference when we can hear them directly. So thank you again.

M. Ishikawa: Thank you so much.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Any other comments?

Great. Well, thank you very much. We really appreciate your thoughts.

Next up we have Selkirk College — Angus Graeme.

Hi, Angus. If we could try and keep the initial comments to about five minutes, that would be great. Then we have time for questions.

A. Graeme: Absolutely.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Okay. The floor is yours.

SELKIRK COLLEGE

A. Graeme: Thank you very much to the committee. It’s good to see everyone back here and wonderful to be able to participate in this annual event.

I’ve put together a briefing note for the committee. Maybe what I’ll do in the interest of time is I’ll just go through a couple of key points for folks. What’s included in the package is a bit of an economic impact analysis that we have, including with a briefing note, our most current strategic plan, which we just launched yesterday, and then a one-page supplementary from B.C. colleges, of which we’re a member — of the ten publicly funded B.C. community colleges.

On the briefing note, I just tried to put a couple of points together, and it’s packed with information. I did want to just start by saying how appreciative we are, in the public post-secondary sector, to work with government on an annual basis to identify the priorities. A lot of those priorities currently we’ve really benefited from. We’re just about to finish our Silver King trades campus. This is a third of the way down page 2.

We’ve also received some funding and support from the Ministry of Advanced Education, Skills and Training for redoing our enterprise resource platform — and, of course, all the investments that the province has made in our infrastructure and facilities in new programming and access for students as well. Tuition-free adult basic ed has gone a long way to help us create accessibility for our students and bring them into the college, meet them where they’re at and then get them started on other credit programming.

We’ve received targeted funding, under point 3 there, for a number of areas that are really, really helping us. We’re going to be launching some new programs in the fall to help with the B.C. tech strategy to respond to TRC calls to action and to fill other labour market needs in early childhood care, health care and the education fields.

It’s been wonderful, actually, to work with government and feel the results of this process of hearing from the regions and from rural B.C. Some of the challenges we have…. Physical space. Our campus, our college, is the oldest outside the Lower Mainland. Our buildings…. The new Silver King trades campus in Nelson is absolutely fantastic. Our Castlegar campus was built 52 years ago, and were it not for our skilled maintenance crew, we would be in even more trouble. But we do have an aging main campus at our college. We’re now running out of space to be able to provide our programs.

Student housing, as everybody is aware, is an issue across the province, and it’s great to see on-campus student housing included in the B.C. housing strategy.

[5:00 p.m.]

One of our biggest challenges is just the rising operating costs not necessarily being matched all of the time by operating grants. You’ll see a relationship there, graphically, around what gaps we’ve been trying to fill with other revenue streams in the past four or five years.

We’re trying our best to meet those challenges from the province on the TRC and UNDRIP requirements under a mandate letter, but some ongoing and secure funding for that would be very helpful. Then there are some other challenges that we’re facing listed there as well.

Opportunities. You’ll see from page 1 of the briefing note that it was 12,000 learners coming across our doors every year in a region of about 85,000 citizens. About one in eight citizens accesses our services. That’s great for us. We want to see that number continue to improve. Working with all of those sectors, the challenge, of course, is the capacity to do it.

With new broadband coming on with Columbia Basin Broadband, we’re seeing way more opportunities now to connect to our campuses and learning centres across the region, produce some distance ed programming — more of that — as well as continue to partner with other colleges and institutions across the province.

On the very last page — just for some consideration, and then I’ll leave it for questions — continuing to look at these publicly funded campuses as part of the public commons. So the upkeep is really important, particularly for our Castlegar campus.

On-campus student housing as a partnership is something we’re really excited about, for the possibilities there — a modest lift to our operating grant to just cover some of those increasing operating costs.

We’re a bigger college than we were, and we’ve been trying to meet the challenges and goals of government to expand our offerings, expand our impact in the region, but we really are now increasingly finding it financially challenging.

Then just a few other ideas there around some maybe more flexible approaches to how we might work with retained earnings or surpluses. Currently, under finance policy, those are difficult for us to access once we’ve earned them.

Then just some equitable annual funding. There are some institutions in the province that receive regular, ongoing funding to support Indigenous learners and their families and communities. We do that currently out of our main operating grant, so some consideration there would be great.

That’s a real quick overview.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Thank you very much. Thanks for the additional materials as well. It’s nice to get an update like this. You just put this out? It’s like the ink is still fresh on it.

A. Graeme: Yeah. The strategic plan was launched yesterday. On Facebook. No, on the….

B. D’Eith (Chair): That’s fantastic. We’ll look forward to reading that. It’s wonderful.

Would you say that there’s any one area that’s the highest priority to you right now? There are a number of recommendations here. Is there something that really stands out as something that you need right away?

A. Graeme: I think the top two are really important for us. Those are really about student life. We’re now at a place where we know that enrolments are being affected by the availability of affordable housing in the region, so we’ve been working as best we can to put some ideas in front of our ministry in terms of a partnership investment in expanding our on-campus housing in Nelson and Castlegar.

Then, also, state-of-the-art facilities. Again, over the last six or seven years, the province has been wonderful at supporting capital infrastructure and capital upgrades to equipment. Physical plant, as well. Some energy upgrades. The new trades campus. But as buildings get older, those become more and more poignant in terms of challenges.

So ours are really more infrastructure related. We’ve been very successful at increasing our operating budget through other revenue streams, but that has some limitations as well in terms of risk and exposure of a publicly funded institution to too much reliance on other revenue sources.

[5:05 p.m.]

B. D’Eith (Chair): I don’t mean to put you on the spot, but we have been approached by a number of faculty organizations in regards to the regular faculty and contracted faculty and disparity between the rates that contracted faculty are getting, often for the same work. Are you willing at all to comment on that? Is that something that you could comment on?

A. Graeme: It’s a collective bargaining year.

B. D’Eith (Chair): That’s only why…. That’s fair, and I understand.

A. Graeme: What I can say is we don’t have…. Our collective agreements are some of the older ones in the province, because we’ve been in business for over 50 years. We don’t share some of those challenges, I guess is how I would put it. If you come and teach a class — English 100 or nursing 300 or what have you — you’re paid at the same rate as regularized faculty.

B. D’Eith (Chair): So Selkirk doesn’t have that issue?

A. Graeme: The challenge, I think…. What you might hear locally is that what constitutes part-time, full-time, regularized versus a term is slightly different, but we don’t have anything in our agreement around sessional, for example.

B. D’Eith (Chair): There was something else about on-line courses and needing an update, upgrade or some sort of revisioning of that as well, just in terms of how it has changed and evolved over time.

A. Graeme: Absolutely. That, I would expect, would be something that would come to the table.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Again, this is….

A. Graeme: It’s timely, yeah.

R. Leonard: Thanks for your presentation. It’s nice to have all of this stuff hot off the press.

A. Graeme: Sorry about that.

R. Leonard: No, that’s great.

Now, in terms of what you…. Under the heading “Appreciation for the support of the province,” regarding reconciliation and Indigenous initiatives to respond to the TRC calls to action and relevant articles in UNDRIP, there was targeted funding. But then you ask for equitable annual funding to increase and improve programs and services. Can you speak to that a little bit?

A. Graeme: So there are some institutions, the minister will also be able to fill in a few blanks, in the province that benefited from something called Aboriginal service plan funds in about 2007 or 2008, I think. We were not one of those. We weren’t in a place where we could effectively take those funds and use them to the benefit of students, but now we are.

What the province has been very helpful with has been one-time funding, year-end approaches to helping with some projects and getting at least some traction and mo­men­tum around student supports, cultural training and faculty development and indigenization efforts. We will actually be launching a plan this summer for some curriculum development and those kinds of things.

Right now it’s on kind of a hopeful basis of: will we receive year-end moneys again next year to continue the effort forward? So this idea of sustained annual funding as part of our grant, that’s targeted and earmarked for that work, would be welcome news.

R. Leonard: Okay, thanks.

D. Clovechok: Just a quick question around targeted fund­ing. One of the programs that I thought was very well done is the targeted initiative for older workers. I’m wondering if you could give us an update of where that sits and if it’s still going on. What’s happening with that?

A. Graeme: For older workers?

D. Clovechok: Yes.

A. Graeme: Again, we’ve been very appreciative of the…. It’s primarily through year-end funding for workforce development and helping to develop learning plans for students coming back into college or school to retrain. That’s been very successful. Because of the sometimes variable nature, it’s less of a need in terms of ongoing regular. We can usually find those sorts of resources with a combination of our current operating grant and then targeted funding and then also leveraging that with federal moneys or seeking federal moneys.

I had a question recently about why our domestic enrolments have dropped a little bit this year. One of the reasons, we think, is that our unemployment rate here in this region is historically low, which is excellent. But what it means is an extra challenge for us to bring students in and retrain and continue that learning journey. It’s been very successful.

B. D’Eith (Chair): Great. Well, thank you very much, Angus. We really appreciate the presentation and the update. That’s wonderful.

Seeing as there’s no further business, can I have a motion to adjourn?

Motion approved.

The committee adjourned at 5:10 p.m.