The committee met at 8:37 a.m.

[M. Starchuk in the chair.]

M. Starchuk (Chair): Good morning, everyone. My name is Mike Starchuk. I’m the MLA for Surrey-Cloverdale and the Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services.

I would like to acknowledge that today we are meeting in Richmond, which is located on the traditional territories of the Musqueam, Tsawwassen and Kwantlen Nations.

I ask everyone to reflect on the lands that they come from and where they work, live and play.

I’d like to welcome everyone who is listening and participating in today’s meetings.

Our committee is currently seeking input on the next provincial budget.

British Columbians can share their views by making their written comments. Details are available on our website at bcleg.ca/fgsbudget. The deadline for input is two o’clock on Friday, June 16. We’re also holding a number of public meetings to hear from British Columbians about their priorities.

All audio from our meetings is broadcast live on our website, and a complete transcript will also be posted.

We will carefully consider all input to make recommen­dations to the Legislative Assembly on what should be included in Budget 2024. The committee intends to release its report in August.

I will now ask members of the committee to introduce themselves.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Tom Shypitka. I’m Deputy Chair and MLA for Kootenay East.

G. Chow: I’m the MLA for Vancouver-Fraserview, just across the river here, George Chow.

B. Banman: I’m Bruce Banman. I would be the MLA for Abbotsford South.

A. Walker: Adam Walker, MLA for Parksville-Qual­icum.

H. Yao: Henry Yao, MLA for Richmond South Centre.

B. Stewart: Ben Stewart, MLA for Kelowna West.

R. Leonard: Ronna-Rae Leonard, MLA for Courtenay-Comox.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Today assisting the committee are Karan Riarh and Emma Curtis from the Parliamentary Committees Office; and Dwight Schmidt, David Smith and Danielle Suter from Hansard Services.

For today, each participant will have five minutes to speak, followed up with five minutes of questions and/or comments from the committee members. Of note, for the questions-and-answers period, the committee members are to make their questions as brief as possible and the presenters to make their answers as brief as possible so that we can get as many through.

On that note, James Lota from the city of Burnaby, you have five minutes to speak and then five minutes for follow-up questions.

Budget Consultation Presentations

CITY OF BURNABY

J. Lota: Good morning, everyone. Thank you for having me here. My name is James Lota. I’m an engineer with the city of Burnaby and the general manager of lands and facilities with the city.

This morning, I’d like to recommend that the committee commit $30 million in the next budget to collaborate with the city of Burnaby in building the Burnaby district energy system. As far as clean energy systems go, this one is quite rare. It’s forecast to provide clean energy to the residents and businesses of Burnaby at a cost lower than conventional electricity and gas.

[8:40 a.m.]

Clean energy systems typically come at a premium, but because we have such a high-quality energy source so close to a dense urban centre, the infrastructure to get the energy to where it needs to go isn’t expensive. That’s why this is a rare opportunity to provide clean energy at a more affordable cost than conventional energy.

The project also aligns with CleanBC goals. It’s a significant investment in B.C.’s circular economy. The project is a collaboration between Metro Vancouver and the city of Burnaby. Metro Vancouver has already committed $90 million to the project. The city of Burnaby has committed $120 million in its five-year capital plan, and we’re hoping the province will also participate as a partner in the project.

The project recovers energy from waste generated in the region. Currently the incinerator in Burnaby produces 100 megawatts of energy every hour, which is an insane amount of energy. That’s enough energy to heat all of Burnaby. What we’re proposing to do is to capture that energy and use it to create clean and affordable energy to bolster the resiliency of the energy grid and provide another diversified, reliable source of energy for B.C. residents.

We’ve been working hard, over the last two years, to try and garner other grant funding from the federal and provincial governments. We’ve looked at the Canadian low carbon economy fund, UBCM, Canada community-building fund, the B.C. local government climate action program, the Canada clean fuels fund, NRCan, the Canadian strategic innovation fund.

We haven’t been successful in getting any other grant funding through any of these other programs, which brings me here this morning, to ask the committee if they would consider committing $30 million, in the next budget, to this project.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you, James.

B. Banman: Thank you very much. I’ve got a couple of questions.

Coming from my end of the world, which is upstream from where the pollutants are from, this is going to happen. What consultation have you done with the Fraser Valley regional district? Do you have their gold seal of approval, or are they against it, or have you consulted with them, period?

J. Lota: To date, we haven’t consulted with the Fraser Valley regional district, but we will. Again, the incinerator is run by Metro Vancouver, so it already has all those stringent air quality provisions and standards in it now. We will absolutely meet or exceed those. We’re not proposing any changes to the operation of the existing facility now.

There are no additional emissions of pollutants from this project. It’s as it runs now. We’re just extracting the resources that are, frankly, getting wasted now. We’re just going to use what’s being generated, in a more holistic way.

G. Chow: You’re asking $30 million. How much is your total budget for your district energy project?

J. Lota: Right now it’s about $200 million, over the next five to seven years. But in the district, as I mentioned before, there’s enough energy to just keep going with this. This project, if it’s successful, will keep rolling and expanding, again, to use the resources that are available.

G. Chow: Yeah, because you said…. Okay, you’re asking for 30 mil, and then you’ve got commitment for 120 and 90 as well. That makes 240. But you only need $200 million for the next five to seven years?

J. Lota: It’s true. That’s if we stay in the scope that we…. So we will build the system to as much funding as we have. Like I said, we could keep going with this, but we can only get as much funding as we can get. We’ll limit the scope to the funding that we have available.

G. Chow: This is burning garbage and then generating electrical power, right?

J. Lota: Well, right now it’s burning garbage from the waste generated in the region, and not all of it is used to generate electricity. What we’re doing is to take that energy and use it in a more efficient way to use hot water. We’re going to convert it to hot water to heat homes and business, so we won’t be generating electricity.

G. Chow: So you have to pipe the…?

J. Lota: That’s correct.

G. Chow: Okay. So if you have a generation facility, how many megawatts. You’ve got the 100-megawatt incinerator right now, right?

J. Lota: Correct.

G. Chow: So it’s about the same. What’s the electrical power output?

J. Lota: There are 100 megawatts of heat available, and right now the project isn’t proposing to convert that heat to electricity. We’re just going to keep it as heat, which is a much more efficient way to use the energy.

G. Chow: Okay, thank you. That’s a district heating system.

J. Lota: It’s a district heating system. That’s correct.

[8:45 a.m.]

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Perfect. George has had all my questions answered.

H. Yao: I really appreciate your bringing this idea to our table. I’m wondering. Obviously, this is being asked for Burnaby — I’m not an engineer, so I apologize for this — but is the energy serving the district area or serving mostly Metrotown and, based on your report, Edmonds Town Centre?

J. Lota: Correct. It will be serving South Burnaby, but it’s also projected to serve Vancouver. Right now phase 1 of the project will be going to Vancouver. The energy source is in Burnaby. That’s why it’s a collaboration with Metro Vancouver. We want to serve as many of the municipalities in Metro Vancouver as we can — Vancouver and New Westminster, potentially, but Burnaby as well.

H. Yao: If you don’t mind, I have a follow-up question. Is there consideration of collaboration or a coordinated effort, using a similar vision to what you guys have for Burnaby right now, to work with the rest of the Metro Vancouver area? Is there a need for that, utilizing what you’re proposing here but expanded to the rest of the Metro Vancouver area?

J. Lota: I’d say that there probably isn’t a need for it so much as it’s the right thing to do. Because there’s so much energy available, we should be using the resources. It’s that concept of the circular economy. It’s our waste. We have to deal with it, and we should deal with it in the most responsible way possible.

The way to do it is to share it amongst the region, with our other regional partners. Since we have the resource available, we should use as much of the clean resource as we can. The most economic way to do that is to share it with Vancouver and New West as well.

R. Leonard: Oh, there are so many questions. Thank you for presenting. The notion of waste energy has been around for quite a while, and the opportunity to capture that through our waste stream is appealing.

The question is: how does it come into conflict with the goals around reducing waste? Then I have a question around whether or not it has been adopted in other places. Is that one of the reasons…? Why are you not getting grants from Canada or elsewhere, from the federal government?

J. Lota: That’s a good question. I’ll address the first question. Absolutely, the region is still committed to reducing waste wherever possible. There will always be solid waste, however. Right now the incinerator processes about 25 percent of the region’s waste, and it’s not going anywhere any time soon, which makes the energy source such a reliable and resilient source, because we’re going to have to deal with solid waste. We still have the goals of reducing.

Many of the reasons why we haven’t been successful in getting the grant funding is mostly on technicalities. For example, some of the funding agencies I’ve talked to have said that if it’s not related to electrification, then it doesn’t apply to that funding source. Or we’ve missed a timing window, where it has to be shovel-ready by a certain date. It’s all these small, technical details to qualify for the funding, and we just seem to fall through the cracks. That’s why I’m here this morning.

A. Walker: Just really quick, what efforts are being made to capture the carbon emissions from this project?

J. Lota: Oh, thank you for raising that. What this will do: this project will generate about 22,000 tonnes of GHG credits every year. This is offsetting natural gas, primarily — burning fossil fuels by using the heat. Thank you for flagging that.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation this morning, James.

Next up is Alan Low, Clinical Pharmacists Academy.

Alan, you have five minutes to make your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

CLINICAL PHARMACISTS ACADEMY

A. Low: Thank you for inviting me. My name is Dr. Alan Low. I’m a pharmacist, and I’m from the Clinical Pharmacists Academy.

I want to say that as of June 1, which is today, pharmacists have received the authority to assess and prescribe therapies for 21 minor ailments. Some categories include multiple differential diagnoses. Pharmacists are the most accessible health care practitioner and are in rural and urban communities.

Community pharmacists will be the ones, generally, who are going to be taking on these additional duties and adding them to their existing work of what they already do. We continue to be in the midst of a human resource shortage in many health disciplines. This includes nurses, physicians and pharmacists.

[8:50 a.m.]

It’s going to be extremely challenging to implement such a significant program — and a paradigm shift, especially with public expectation not sure — during a human re­source shortage, but B.C. pharmacists have demonstrated their ability to take on new responsibilities. As you have seen, in October of 2022, they added on adaptations for prescription renewals and injection of drugs at the busiest time for pharmacies, in the fall, with injections, vaccines, flu season and COVID boosters.

Despite the shortages and only a reimbursement of $11.41 for injecting drugs, pharmacists have stepped up and have come through to help the B.C. public, sometimes to their own detriment, taking on overtime, over-extending themselves, leading to stress, mental health issues and illness. Pharmacists are passionate, sensitive and caring people who rise to the call for help to preserve life, extend life and improve quality of life.

Pharmacist training ranges from a bachelor’s degree to recent graduates who now possess a doctorate of pharmacy, a pharmD degree, as their entry to practice. There are ten of us out there in community practice who possess postgraduate pharmD degrees and accredited hospital pharmacy residency training and who represent probably the most formally trained.

It’s the administrative aspects of this new practice — the implementation, the work flow and establishing new expectations and relationships with patients, physicians and nurses — that require significant attention. Funding in a few related areas is required to ensure successful uptake and implementation of pharmacists working in this integral area, as well as promoting interprofessional health care teams. So I’d like to recommend that we need to put more attention on a few specific areas.

One is specifically supporting clinical pharmacists with workshops and hands-on postgraduate training to those who are already in practice. Some of the training needed is in the clinical area, as well as the operational. This is not just about training those who are going to school still; this is about those who are in practice.

Among the greatest need are those that are in independent pharmacy practice who don’t have corporate head offices to support them. These practitioners are likely to be the ones that are most engaged in developing relationships with patients. They’re the ones that work in rural and urban centres and are willing to take on more patients, provide minor ailments and add on these additional responsibilities. These same pharmacists have the least access to support, training, educational opportunities. This is because they work in small, independent pharmacies with limited staff, and seldom do they have the resources to participate in extensive continuing education programs.

A second recommendation is to focus on the fostering of development of interprofessional teams, incorporating pharmacists, leveraging these new tools and documentation systems that are available. We believe the Ministry of Health needs to facilitate and catalyze the interprofessional discussion and teamwork as scopes of practice expand to solve this health care crisis. The tools are available. They include things like point-of-care testing, which can be operated by pharmacists, and the pharmacists can interpret these results as well. This can facilitate the contribution of pharmacists to early disease detection and treatment.

Physicians have received funding for implementation of key initiatives in the past to improve patient care, as well as continuing professional development. This is something that’s greatly needed by pharmacists, but funding is not currently available. As pharmacists embrace new opportunities to assess patients, it can lead to early identification of diseases as they work through the minor ailment differentials and assist patients in navigating the system. People can be diagnosed earlier with less invasive testing and less costly investigations, all leading to earlier detection, treatment and a higher likelihood of cure and continued productivity.

It’s because of the accessibility of pharmacists that identification can occur rapidly, because you can see your pharmacists frequently, with short durations between visits and things like that. To be efficient, we can provide interprofessional care without needing to establish new brick-and-mortar facilities. Point-of-care testing can be implemented very quickly at the pharmacy and reduce the pressure on the ERs as well as the labs.

My third recommendation is about improving the reimbursement structure, ensuring that pharmacists’ provision of care is sustainable and fair. The province currently sets a maximum dispensing fee at $10. It has been that way for 12 years. What professional fee has remained the same for 12 years? The new fee for minor ailments is $20, which is a fraction of the service fee that physicians receive.

Rather than suggesting an increase in the fee-for-service, I’m recommending a need for a new structure of funding that doesn’t force or promote episodic care — something that is going to be aimed at longitudinal care and incenting it to be a fair and sustainable payment structure that will attract practitioners to the profession and allow them to deliver care and services in a sustainable manner and not necessitate retail sales and subsidized expenses.

We’re seeing many pharmacists having shorter operational hours. There are pharmacist staffing shortages, and activating pharmacists with an appropriate support and reimbursement plan is a realistic long-term solution to the health care crisis, shortage of ER beds, physician shortages and the paradigm shift to preventative health care and early detection.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, Alan.

First up is Tom.

[8:55 a.m.]

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks, Alan, for the presentation.

Well, if there’s one thing the pandemic told us, it’s that we need all hands on deck, and those pharmacists were those boots on the ground. First responders, essentially, is what they were, and desperately needed. Thank you for all the pharmacists that chipped in there.

A couple of things here. Where are we, in the labour shortage, with pharmacists in the province? How many more seats, how many more pharmacists are we looking for?

The second one would be on your fee, approving a reimbursed dispensing fee, to increase that. Would you consider a tiered structure, so for more vulnerable, maybe senior citizens or low-income? Maybe you could expand on that.

A. Low: It’s really difficult to predict what the necessary seats are because the demand is going to be high, especially with today’s starting of the minor ailments. So if tons of patients come, it’s going to be huge.

Right now there is a clear shortage. Stores have to lessen hours, and there are lots of openings that are currently out there. There are probably hundreds, if we go across the entire province, because in rural settings, it’s very hard to get people there.

Many people are leaving the profession, as we’ve seen. I’m a clinical professor at UBC. I see many of the gradu­ates aren’t staying in pharmacy practice. So I don’t have the exact number, but there are many, and the demand is going to go higher as our baby boomers enter the elderly years and are living longer as well.

With regards to the payment system, there are a couple of ways to go. A fee-for-service — we have always said that it’s not really the best way to go. A payment system that recognizes complex care is going to be much better, but an even better one would be something that is going to be focused on longitudinal care.

I’ll make a suggestion that it could be like a subscription service. This way it’s up to the practitioner to gain efficiencies by keeping the patient healthy and not seeing them a lot. Let’s say you pay $100 a month for a patient being looked after for anticoagulation management. That is done and taken care of. The more you control them and keep them safe, healthy and lesser visits, this practitioner is going to do a better job, and so will the patient. You’re incentivized that way.

The fee is kept, because it’s $100 for that fee. But it should be a fair fee, and that’s the thing — that it’s got to be fair. Some of these fees like the dispensing fee at $10 for 12 years, a $20 minor ailments fee that’s less than half of the physician’s fee…. It’s not necessarily fair when it’s really the same work.

G. Chow: Thank you, Dr. Low. Thank you to the pharmacists for stepping up to help in our health care system.

Yeah. I’m all for what you mentioned — the first one, the workshops and postgraduate training for practising professionals in pharmacy. Are you suggesting that the government should fund some of this training and not your college, for example?

A. Low: Yeah. The college is not one that funds these kinds of training. They’re purely a regulatory body. So we are needing that training because it’s not coming from anywhere.

Education is very expensive. If you look at the tuition fees for pharmacy right now, going to school, that four-year program is $20,000 per year. It’s among the highest for training. It is very sophisticated training.

Now we’ve got graduates who are out there already practising, and you’re flicking a switch, turning them on and saying: “Now you’re going to start to assess people and prescribe for them.” Now, I’ve been a prescriber, because I work in hospital as well, but those community practitioners have not prescribed a drug that’s a prescription drug ever and have not been on a practicum where they’ve seen somebody do it in the community practice. Now you flick the switch and tell them to do it.

They have the theoretical training. We’ve got a really good training program, and we’re graduating doctorates of pharmacy. But you’re now asking a lot of them without giving them the support and expecting the system to somehow absorb and provide the support and training.

We’re already short-staffed. I’m one of the most educated out there, and how am I going to squeeze in extra time to train people without additional funding, time or resources? We’re just kind of almost set up for failure.

Pharmacists are really good. They stepped up for the pandemic, added on additional opportunities and re­sponsibilities when they really didn’t have the time or resources to do it. But they did it. They stayed over time. They opened up weekends, gave shots, gave boosters, did all of these things that were additionally thrown at them without, really, additional resources given to them. The fees for those injections and things are generally relatively low compared to the inflation and everything that the costs are going. So yes, they do need support.

H. Yao: I’m a bit confused, and I do apologize for that. Definitely, I’m seeking clarity on this.

I was under the impression that for the last few years, the pharmacists were actually the ones who were asking for having the permission to provide minor ailment ap­pointment support. Are you saying now, with this approval, we’re actually setting up the industry for failure because there’s a lack of unified training and practice, or competence, in regards to providing services? Would you recommend us to delay it for six months or a year or something, and provide the proper training?

A. Low: It’s not a lack of competency. It’s lack of, I guess, an implementation plan that includes all the supports needed to allow something to happen successfully. You can do it so that you can help ten people, but if you want to help tens of thousands, it’s going to require greater support.

[9:00 a.m.]

Like I said, there are some folks out there, like myself, with a lot of formal training. I’ve got a doctor of pharmacy. That’s a postgraduate. I’ve worked in a hospital. I’ve got a hospital pharmacy residency. That group is going to be doing lots and helping lots of people, but they’re few and far between. Then you’ve got some who also need the training to pick up and step up to that level. Some will look after one of the 21 minor ailments, some may look after ten, and some will look after all 21.

It’s not that we can’t implement it on a step-by-step, tiered basis. Helping some patients is better than none, but if we want to activate all the pharmacists to take care of all the patients and look after all 21 minor ailments, yes, they need support. There has to be a bigger support implementation and, I guess, a backing so that they can do this in an interprofessional way, working with the doctor.

Right now there’s nothing set up and in place for doctor, physician, nurse and pharmacist communication and platforms to be able to be effective and efficient. We’re all going to be working in another silo, where pharmacists are going to document, in their own system, separately from everything else. Now we’ve just added on minor ailments, where pharmacists are going to be documenting about those in another separate system. We’ve already got a problem with physician, hospital and community labs in separate systems.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you, Alan, for your presentation this morning. Thank you, again, for your community that takes care of us as well.

Next we have Randall Heidt, from Kwantlen Polytechnic University.

Randall, you have five minutes to present. We have five minutes to ask questions and/or provide comments.

You have the floor.

KWANTLEN POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY

R. Heidt: Good morning, Chair, vice-Chair and committee members. It’s great to see so many familiar faces from current and past careers.

Nice to see you, Ronna.

I’m privileged to be speaking to you in a region that overlaps with the unceded, traditional and ancestral First Nations territories of the Musqueam, Katzie, Semiahmoo, Tsawwassen, Qayqayt and Kwikwetlem peoples — and, of course, the Kwantlen First Nation, who graciously gifted their name to our university.

I would like to start by recognizing the hard work of the committee members, along with all of their government colleagues who serve their constituents across B.C. on a daily basis.

Kwantlen Polytechnic University is Canada’s only polytechnic university. We offer 140 credentials and serve approximately 20,000 students per year at our campuses in Surrey, Richmond and Langley. KPU’s credentials meet regional and global employment needs. KPU is well positioned to support B.C.’s inclusive approach to economic sustainability through applied research and innovation and by providing graduates who are equipped with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed.

There are three priorities I would like to address with you today from KPU. The first priority I would like to address is student mental health.

Today’s students are faced with many challenges. Emerging evidence points to growing disengagement by today’s students, who are experiencing low motivation, lack of focus, enduring feelings of isolation and an increased expression of heightened anxiety as we emerge from the pandemic. They are also experiencing financial uncertainty due to the housing crisis and inflation, and they are grappling with the climate emergency, along with the unstable geopolitical environment that we are witnessing around the world.

In addition to these external factors, an increasing number of students identify as neurodivergent, where special expertise is required to deliver non-stigmatizing supports for these students.

KPU also recognizes higher rates of mental health needs by underrepresented and marginalized student populations. In particular, Indigenous, 2SLGBTQIA+, international students, former youth in care and students with accessibility needs are at risk of higher rates of depression, anxiety and self-harm. Some are more likely to experience poverty, interpersonal trauma and substance abuse challenges.

KPU applauds the government’s committee for supporting those who experience mental health challenges. How­ever, with the growth in student mental health needs, there is a corresponding need to support the health and well-being of employees in student-facing roles. Accordingly, KPU ask this committee to recommend that Budget 2024 include an investment that enhances the ability of post-secondary education institutions to continue supporting student mental health.

Our next item is investing in applied research. The 19 public teaching universities, polytechnics and colleges across B.C. have an applied post-secondary education mandate. These institutions partner extensively with industry and community organizations in their regions to train thousands of students across B.C. with knowledge and skills for career success.

Unfortunately, these institutions do not receive sustained provincial funding for this research and innovation, which has impeded both student experiences and the positive impact we could have had in our communities. Provincial seed funding attracts investments from other levels of government and the private sector, so B.C.’s share of federal research and innovation funding for these institutions is weak relative to its share of the population and when compared to other provinces in Canada, who invest more in applied research.

[9:05 a.m.]

KPU recommends to the committee that Budget 2024 include long-term investment into applied research and innovation at teaching academic institutions. These investments will provide many rich learning opportunities for students while helping local businesses and industry to innovate and expand, thereby creating new jobs and bolstering the economy in our communities.

Last but not least is expanding prior learning assessment and recognition for immigration and mature students. KPU stands with the B.C. government to help deliver on StrongerBC’s future-ready skills plan by expanding access to affordable, accessible and relevant training by supporting career paths for skilled immigrants and by providing services that give immigrants and refugees a strong start in Canada. KPU will do this by expanding the capacity through expanding prior learning assessment and recognition to precisely assess foreign credentials and to award credit where credit is due through recognition of prior learning of all types.

Further, an expansion to PLAR will also help domestic mature students receive credit and recognition for the skills they have acquired while working, thereby allowing them to more quickly receive provisional professional cre­dentials that allow them to upskill and reskill quickly. As well, Indigenous knowledge, cultural teachings and language skills are an important component of assessing Indigenous students’ relevant prior learning for post-secondary credit, leading to educational success and job readiness.

KPU recommends to this committee that Budget 2024 include continued investment in expanding the ability for post-secondary education institutions to assess foreign credentials and prior learning.

In conclusion, I truly believe that not only for KPU but for all of us, by thinking and acting together, we transform lives and empower positive change. Thank you so much.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, Randall.

H. Yao: Thank you so much, Randall. I really appreciate that. You did hit the one area that I’m very deeply passionate for — really helping us do the full potential in helping newcomers and immigrants.

First question. Obviously, can you put a dollar figure to what you are looking at financially as being supported in that aspect and the number of support staff in that regard?

I guess my second question is that we do have a lot of concern that many of the immigrants and newcomers might have a language barrier and might not even be aware that KPU has such an incredible system ready to go. What is your strategy of outreach so that we ensure that our non-English speaking population is able to access the exceptional services that you are providing?

R. Heidt: I think one of the easiest things that they can do is go on our website if they’re not sure — kpu.ca. There’s lots of information on there in terms of the services that we have for people who are looking to improve their English language skills. I think that’s certainly one of the things.

In terms of the prior learning assessment, I think it would really make sense if we had a coordinated system in B.C. Right now a lot of our institutions are all just trying to look at prior learning assessment. If you look at Ontario, for example, what they’re doing is prior learning assessment for military. Many people in military receive lots of training, but they don’t necessarily get ticketed in carpentry, welding, electrical, things that they’ve done.

Ontario, as a system, is looking at how they can do prior learning assessment. Once you do that for one institution, you can roll that out for all of the other ones. It would depend on, I guess, if the government would look at…. It would definitely make sense if you would invest in all post-secondaries. Then we could share that information and ensure that once one institution has looked at the prior learning assessment, it can be something that could be used for other institutions as well, so we’re not reinventing the wheel each time.

G. Chow: I think the suggestion of this prior learning credential recognition assessment is great. We don’t have any institution involved, and you’re suggesting KPU will take part in this kind of system. You mentioned Ontario. What do they have in terms of trying to quickly assess foreign-trained professionals?

R. Heidt: They are actually doing it together, in collaboration. They’re doing it through, I believe…. Ontario was in, and colleges, Canada…. The Colleges and Institutes of Canada is also working on that from the federal level, and I think that there could be some there. We’re looking at what we can do there and which ones they’ve already actually assessed, which learning.

At Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Dr. David Burns — our associate vice-president, academic and provost — is leading that for us. He’s very intelligent, very brilliant, and he actually has some history in military background as well. I think that will be useful.

We need to look at foreign credentials, for example, with our nursing program. We have a very rare international nursing program where we take foreign nurses — a lot of them are from the Philippines currently — from all over the world, and they can actually come to KPU and receive Canadian credentials to be able to practice not only in B.C. but across Canada. I think we could create more programs like that. I think that’s the way that we need to go. We could be doing that for other nursing programs.

[9:10 a.m.]

We could be doing that for carpentry, electrical, welding, other programs like that, where we can recognize foreign credentials and, basically, give them the skills that they need to be successful in B.C. and Canada. I think that would really help with the labour shortage here.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Randall, you mentioned upskill and re-skill mature students. Can you expand on what skills we’re actually talking about?

R. Heidt: It could be anything, really. There are many people that don’t finish their credentials. Maybe do three years. A lot of people are offered jobs after three years. That is great — right? — until they try to get promotions maybe five or ten years into their career, and then they don’t actually have that education that got them that job.

By using a prior learning assessment, we can not only take that education that they had, those three years, but then we can say: “Well, what have you learned in the last ten years? How close is…? Which classes could we give you credit for? You know what? You only have to take this one or these two classes, and now you can have your degree. That will allow you to move on and not have that ceiling where a lack of education is stopping you.”

M. Starchuk (Chair): Henry.

H. Yao: Thank you so much for allowing me to have one more question for Randall. I want to just piggyback on a previous question.

You offered the idea of people going to kpu.ca to look for information if they have foreign credentials. I’m looking on your website. I don’t see any translated services or support. So I’m not too sure….

Is there anything else you guys can offer? So if people reach out to you guys, you can provide support. That way, people who struggle with the English language skill set can still navigate through your website or your services.

R. Heidt: I would suggest going to our student services part. You could talk to a counsellor or an adviser there, and they could help you get into the proper programs and courses that you need.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Randall, thank you very much for your program.

Full disclosure. Yesterday we had somebody from Genome B.C., and I felt wow. I finally understood what the word meant.

R. Heidt: That’s great. Thank you so much.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much.

Next up we have Jeremy Dunn, the B.C. Dairy Association.

Jeremy, you have five minutes for your presentation, followed by five minutes for comments and/or questions.

The floor is yours.

B.C. DAIRY ASSOCIATION

J. Dunn: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for having me here today on what happens to be World Milk Day.

Happy World Milk Day to everyone here in British Columbia, in Canada and, in fact, in the world.

I’m here proudly representing the 460 dairy-farming families in British Columbia. Likely you have at least one dairy farm in your riding. I know many of you and thank all of you for visiting dairy farms in your ridings and in other ridings through our association. Our farmers absolutely love having you come to their farms to see what modern dairy farming looks like and what it means for our farming families to have such a heartful place in what they believe to be feeding British Columbians.

Supply management focuses our farmers on feeding local communities. They feed their community. They ensure that milk and dairy products, in conjunction with our dairy-processing partners, are on the shelves of stores throughout British Columbia, in the largest and smallest communities, every day for British Columbians to eat and drink and help nourish their families.

At last year’s budget consultation, we spoke about water prioritization from both a flooding and a drought perspec­tive. I’m going to address that again today. Some investments were made this year. It’s certainly not enough.

I also want to talk about the cost of farming in British Columbia. This relates a little bit to the cost of life and the affordability of living in British Columbia. Our farmers are certainly feeling that.

We’ve just completed a business cost study analyzing the cost of owning and operating a dairy farm in British Columbia from a provincial perspective but also from a regional perspective. The bottom line is actually quite shocking, and for me, it’s a little bit frightening for our farmers.

Today, on average, dairy farmers are losing money by operating dairy farms and feeding British Columbians. Currently they’re losing about 0.5 percent on a kilogram of butterfat produced, which is how we measure. It essentially means that if a farmer receives $10,000 for the milk that they sell from their farm, it costs them $10,050 to produce it.

[9:15 a.m.]

B.C. is a uniquely high-cost jurisdiction in which to operate a dairy farm. From a supply management perspec­tive, we are one of the higher-cost jurisdictions for farming in Canada.

Dairy farmers typically grow most of their own forage, mostly grass and corn. However, the extreme weather over the last number of years, the heat dome, wildfires and, of course, flooding in many parts of the province, including the Fraser Valley, have taken a toll. Crop yields have been impacted, and in some cases, farmers have experienced outright crop loss. This means they’ve been forced to buy replacement feed on a market that has been inflated by a war, a lack of fertilizer and other issues, including a drought on the Prairies.

As a result…. I want to share some numbers. I’ll read from my notes. A dairy farmer in the Fraser Valley is now paying one-third of their gross monthly revenue towards feed they cannot grow themselves. One year ago an average-sized dairy farm with about 135 milking cows paid roughly $40,000 a month to purchase feed. Today that same farm is paying at least $52,000 a month at a minimum. That’s an increase of $12,000 a month, or $144,000, on the feed alone due to rising grain costs, reduced forage crop yields and associated transportation costs.

On top of this, interest rates have, obviously, gone up for all of us. An average dairy farm in the Fraser Valley, because of heightened land costs for decades in the Fraser Valley, is carrying a $5 million debt load. Every 1 percent of interest adds an additional $50,000 that they have to pay to carry their debt load.

From a water perspective…. I shared this the last couple of times I have met with this committee. I see we’re at 30 seconds.

The flooding in the Fraser Valley showed us how vulnerable we are. Critical investments absolutely must be made to protect those farmers.

On the other hand, we’re dealing with farmers in many parts of the province, including Vancouver Island, who regularly don’t have enough water to be able to water their crops, which again puts them back into the inflated market to purchase feed and create sustainability for business.

These investments are needed now. They are needed in the long term. British Columbia absolutely must have a strategy for both managing water and ensuring it’s there when you need it.

Thank you very much for having me here today. Happy World Milk Day. It is a good time in the dairy business. It is just a very challenging time to make ends meet at the moment.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Jeremy, thank you very much for your presentation. To echo what you had said….

If you haven’t visited one, go ahead and visit one. Donia Farms with Stan Van Keulen and sons. You’ll get a great tour and a bigger opinion.

I’ve said it for you, Stan.

You’ve been forewarned, everyone.

B. Banman: Well, first, thank you very much.

It was my riding that was under water. The decisions that some of those farmers had to make were heartbreaking. It was, I have to say, the province that actually let them down. The repairs to the dikes, which cities cannot afford to do, have been put off. It’s not just the dikes that prevent the Sumas…. It’s also now the Fraser as well. The dikes along there need some infrastructure.

When you consider that 80 percent, probably, of dairy comes out of the Fraser Valley, which is susceptible to floods, again…. I agree with you fully that something needs to be done. I know the heartbreak that farmers have firsthand. I hear it all the time. They do feed us, and I want to thank them for continuing to do that.

My question to you is: if you were to pick one item out of those things that you’ve given…? What would be your single-biggest ask from this committee to supply money for?

J. Dunn: The long-term needs of flood and drought are apparent. I’m very worried about the next couple of years in a higher interest rate environment than we’ve lived in.

In your report, urge that no additional costs be put on industry from any level of regulation or administrative or tax. Try to find a creative way, whether it’s through the PST, the employer health tax or other taxes and fees that are being applied to business owners and farmers across the province, to reduce them even for a short period of time. They may not be reduced forever but even for a short period of time to give these business owners a break so they can actually make it to the other side. It’s that other side that I’m concerned about for our farmers.

[9:20 a.m.]

B. Stewart: Thanks, Jeremy. Good to see you again. You cited cost of production, and you’re in the supply management system. I don’t exactly know how dairy, which is one of the — what? — five supply-managed boards in Canada….

J. Dunn: Yes.

B. Stewart: I always thought that supply management meant that when you did cost of production, those costs would be passed on to consumers — those higher costs for fuel…. Well, anyways, feed, fertilizer — those types of things. So why is that not happening? What’s the disconnect here?

J. Dunn: It’s a national system, and the pricing is set nationally. We’re about 10 percent of dairy in Canada. We are in a high-cost jurisdiction. In other parts of Canada where they have more dairy, the cost of production is lower. They can grow much more of their feed, including grain. So when you average out the national formula, the national formula does not produce a price on milk that is covering our costs at the moment.

H. Yao: Thank you very much. I really appreciate you spending time with us. I’m looking forward to a dairy farm tour somewhere in Richmond, if I can find one. I know we’ve been doing a lot for watershed management. We’ve tried out different strategies to do different kinds of water retention and water protection, obviously due to a dramatic increase or reduction of water flowing in the Fraser River. However, obviously, it’s not….

Is there any other recommendation you’d like to put on the table for our government to consider when it comes to our water security, both protecting from flood and also protecting from drought?

J. Dunn: Thank you for the question. I’m not a hydrologist. I know many who are in this business would say we probably have enough water in B.C. It just doesn’t happen at the time we’re used to having it happen. We have forest fires in April, and we have floods in November when the river is supposed to be low.

The water is there. We just haven’t really, as a province, needed to have the management infrastructure that many other jurisdictions in the world do, because B.C. was blessed. It rained at the right time. It kind of rained enough in July. It worked for so long, and climate change has altered it just enough that now, in many areas, it’s just not working.

I know the watershed strategy that’s being led has been helpful. The water…. Going community by community and having a community-based approach we would think is the right approach. The conversations happening on floods, particularly in the Fraser Valley, including First Nations, are important.

Farmers, year after year…. I have been in this business now for four years, and one of the first things I encoun­tered was drought on Vancouver Island in the Koksilah watershed. Farmers, for the four years I’ve been sitting here…. We’ve been saying: “Government is having really important discussions, and strategies are being made.” Farmers are wondering when the serious action is going to come that will give them the water that they need and protect their farms when floods are rising.

It’s not to discredit the engagement, the conversation, the involvement of First Nations, which are all critical. It’s the action point that farmers are waiting to see. And many are afraid for their crops or afraid for their property and their businesses because of the flood risk.

M. Starchuk (Chair): All right. We have two last questions, if we can expedite the question and expedite the answer.

G. Chow: Thank you, Jeremy. I visited a dairy farm last year just outside of Vernon, and I think the owners have to work really hard. They’re a husband-and-wife team, and that’s really all they have. They rely on technology and everything else, but it’s still very hard work.

You said 10 percent is dairy in B.C. So what’s the other 90 percent?

J. Dunn: It’s that 10 percent of Canada’s dairy production is in B.C.

G. Chow: Okay. In B.C.

J. Dunn: Ontario and Quebec are by far the largest provinces producing dairy in Canada.

G. Chow: So before the pandemic and before the war, did we get all our feed in B.C. from B.C., or is it just within Canada?

J. Dunn: We grow our forage, our corn and our grass, and the grain is imported. So the grain price is inflated globally, primarily through war and lack of fertilizer, which is also related to war. But then the cost of moving that grain from the prairies into B.C. has gone up for a whole host of reasons. Obviously, the carbon tax is higher, but also labour, trucking costs are just higher.

Getting that grain, even at an inflated price, to your farm in B.C. that the farmer in the prairies doesn’t have to pay because they happen to live where the grain is, is creating an imbalance in the cost structure.

[9:25 a.m.]

R. Leonard: Just quickly, the impact of the international trade agreement really affected B.C. dairy farmers. I’m curious about that impact and how it’s playing out with some of the costs that you’re talking about.

J. Dunn: Yeah. It has had impacts, because our markets have had to readjust. The amount that farmers are receiving per hectolitre of milk has not kept up with the pace of their costs, and they have not seen a quota increase in four years because the market is now being filled by imports. Their equity, their business, what they work for….

Many of them work for that increased equity. It hasn’t grown in four years. So it’s help…. The immediate cost and the prognosis, going forward, reduces the hope a bit. Farmers are incredibly resilient, but after four years of no business growth, that becomes challenging.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Jeremy, thank you for your presentation this morning. It couldn’t have happened on a better day. Good luck to you. Thank you.

J. Dunn: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, committee.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Next up we have Linda Blankstein, the Dance Foundation.

Linda, you have five minutes for your presentation, and then we will have five minutes for our questions and/or comments.

Linda, the floor is yours.

THE DANCE FOUNDATION

L. Blankstein: Thank you so much for the opportunity to present today. It’s a little bit hard to follow the gentleman that was just here, because I agree with everything he had to say, and I know you have a lot of very important issues on your plate to consider. But I would also ask that you consider arts and culture today.

If you think back to the start of the Ukrainian war or the pandemic, people have been turning to entertainment to get through the day, and it is becoming increasingly important in our society. It’s also a major contributor to our economy. So please don’t forget that.

I am Linda Blankstein. I’m here on behalf of the Scotiabank Dance Centre in my role as chair of the Dance Foundation and as a major donor to the Scotiabank Dance Centre.

First, I would like to acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional territories of the Musqueam people, and we are very happy to be here.

We were formed in 1995 as a non-profit society tasked to fund, build, endow and operate the Scotiabank Dance Centre in downtown Vancouver at the corner of Granville and Davie. While we are located in Vancouver, we serve as a cultural community hub for all of British Columbia, providing dance-related programming and support across the province, connecting us with the rest of Canada and the international dance stage.

Our facility, designed by Arthur Erickson, opened in 2001, incorporating the facade of a former bank branch. It is a purpose-built facility for diverse dance forms, de­signed to support the creative process, teaching and the performance of dance in a supportive and affordable envi­ronment. The programming inside the building focuses on youth, seniors, underserved communities, community outreach and professional development for dance artists.

Every type of dance representing the cultures of the world and British Columbia takes place at our centre, in­cluding ballet, contemporary, ballroom, tap, classical Indian, Highland, flamenco, belly dance, hip hop, Hawaiian, salsa, K-pop, Japanese, Filipino and many other culturally specific forms of dance. We were the first centre of our kind to have Indigenous artists in residence and have continued with a strong focus on Indigenous programming and partnerships.

Affordability for artists, audiences and renters is im­portant in order to create meaningful partnerships with school groups, seniors, low-income populations, including outreach to youth, immigrant and refugee communities, seniors, those with mobility issues and underserved communities.

[9:30 a.m.]

Approximately 87,000 people walk through our doors every year. Our facility is a critical community asset. The tenants include 12 arts organizations using the centre as their base, and our affordable and high quality rental space is heavily used by the professional arts community — dance, music, theatre and digital arts — recreational dance enthusiasts and non-dance community, including fitness schools. Daycares use our space in the downtown area as gym space. We get all these little kids running through the building but, unfortunately, all of this is at risk.

We built and own our facility. We are debt-free and operationally sustainable. We receive no operational funding from any level of government, but we don’t own the land the building is on. We only lease the land from Scotiabank. They have confirmed they want to sell the property and made us an offer to purchase the land for $8.4 million. It is a generous offer, and one that expires in September 2024; a date that is fast approaching.

That is why our recommendation today is that you support the province providing us with $5 million of funding to help secure the future of the centre and the benefit we provide to the greater community. We are actively seeking the rest of the funds from donors and other levels of government. If you help us, you also help the 87,000 individuals who walk through our doors every year by keeping our studios and theatre open and affordable.

Help us continue to develop B.C.’s arts and culture scene so that it is second to none in the world. Provincial support can secure this unique, high quality and affordable space for decades to come.

Thank you. That’s amazing timing.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Linda, thank you very much for your presentation.

As a father of a daughter who spent a number of years in dance and various organizations, I appreciate the work that you do. Karan was next to me, and you were listing all the dances that we’re going through, and I think we didn’t hear square dancing.

L. Blankstein: Well, you know, we don’t have a square dance group actually, so if you know of one that would like to come, let me know.

M. Starchuk (Chair): All right.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Well, you’re talking to an MLA that’s from rural B.C., so square dancing….

L. Blankstein: Okay.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): But thanks, Linda, for the presentation. You know, when we think about dance, the Chair even indicated…. He talked about his daughter. We think about the young and the vibrant, but I would argue that for the aged and the experienced, it might be just as relative to encourage this.

I know for mental health — like senior fitness, senior wellness, mental capacity — it really does assist in that end of your golden years or whatever you want to call it. Do you have a demographic breakdown on who those 80,000 individuals are? Is it weighted more heavily to the youth, or is there a certain amount of people in the…?

L. Blankstein: I don’t have a demographic breakdown. That’s a great project to send me home with.

I would say it’s really quite varied. We always ran a seniors dance program, but when COVID hit, our executive director took advantage of all of the grants that were out there, and all of a sudden we had TV screens and WiFi and the ability to Zoom out of every studio as well as air purifiers. We don’t receive funding for operations, and we had to keep the doors open, and they were closed and they were open and they were partially open.

So the seniors program went online, and we had seniors from across the province, even outside of the province, and they all said what a connector it was for this time when they couldn’t get out of their apartment. We do noon-hour shows where the ticket price is about $12 per senior. It’s at noon, so it’s very affordable. It’s cultural dance, so they get to learn about different cultures.

We have young people. We have little, little young people, but I would say that our main audience or user is between about 20 and 50ish. That’s the active time of a professional artist’s career.

[9:35 a.m.]

Also when you think about it, there have been cutbacks to arts and culture over the years, and more and more, the grants that we write are related to EDI. They’re related to what kind of work you can do in the community to benefit the community. All of our programming benefits needy community members and offers entertainment to get us through the dark days. We reach out to so many people.

A very important aspect of the work we do is younger artists that have graduated from Simon Fraser or another dance program. They’re like: now how do I act in the real world? How do I survive as an artist? It’s extremely difficult. The average salary of a professional artist is about $22,000 a year. So they’re all working other jobs, whether they’re in the arts or they’re in the restaurant industry.

We feel that having an affordable space and a high-quality space…. You see pictures of the facility. If you would ever like to come and tour the facility…. It is unique. It’s absolutely unique, with an Arthur Erickson vision behind it. This is a B.C. building.

It’s something everybody can use. It trains that new generation. The new, the younger, the more experienced, the mentors and the mentees all meet in the lounge. They watch each other in the studio. So the connections and the overlap are beautiful.

We have artists doing…. I just attended, last night, a really special dance program at the Sun Yat-Sen Garden. There’s lots of cultural work and developmental work within the community going on through the arts which we don’t always see. There’s a lot of activism involved in the arts.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Linda, we have a list of other people that have questions.

L. Blankstein: Sorry, I’m going on.

B. Stewart: Linda, it’s very exciting. To be honest, I’m surprised I don’t know more about this.

However, what I wanted to say was…. If the $5 million…. Let’s say the government can’t find the means to do that. Is there any option for the foundation to pay some sort of a repayment system, if it was available, like a loan of a different sort? Is that something…?

L. Blankstein: That is something that could work in part. I don’t think the building generates enough income. We’ve already…. I mean, we’ve looked at all of our options. We don’t generate enough income to repay an $8 million loan.

We are looking at the city. We are looking at private donors. We’re looking at all avenues, if it doesn’t all come from the province. If the province saw fit to donate a certain amount and then maybe a loan at very low interest rates…. With the interest rates today, it’s just not feasible for us.

H. Yao: Actually, Ben just asked my question.

I do want to comment. I’m a square-dancing supporter. I appreciate Latin dancing, like bachata, salsa, merengue. Anything you’re saying I appreciate. Thank you.

G. Chow: I also really miss your building. I’m trying to picture that corner, Granville and Davie. There used to be a Royal Bank there. Is that the…?

L. Blankstein: There used to be a Bank of Nova Scotia.

G. Chow: Oh, okay. All right. So this is not a purpose-built but a converted….

L. Blankstein: Well, we have maintained the facade of the old bank because it had heritage status. The rest is all new build.

G. Chow: Okay. Sure. So you’re looking for $8.4 million to buy the land. You’re, obviously, raising funds for the other portion. You’re asking the government for $5 million.

L. Blankstein: Yes. We’re hoping….

G. Chow: How much is your budget? I saw your financial report here. Just to get an idea of how much your budget is for your organization.

L. Blankstein: We operate in tandem with the dance centre society, another non-profit. We own the building and maintain it, and the society operates the building and does the programming, as well, for us through an agency agreement. Each of our budgets is around $1 million.

G. Chow: Well it’s very good of this bank to give you this good price.

L. Blankstein: Yeah. It has been 29 years that we have not had to pay for the land, which is probably the only reason the building got built in the first place. It was built in a time where there was much less support for this kind of activity.

Yes, we are very lucky. If we can raise the money for the land, then we have this incredible asset for decades to come without any financial encumbrance. I think it leaves arts and culture in a great space.

[9:40 a.m.]

M. Starchuk (Chair): Linda, thank you very much for your presentation and what you do.

Of all the things that happen in life, when you see those small kids when they hit the stage for the very first time and you’re looking at the costumes…. I know how much they cost and where they have to get built. In anticipation of the one that decides that they want to go to the edge of the stage and wave to mom and dad, or somebody has got a feather that falls off their head, and now everybody is trying to….

L. Blankstein: And they’re looking for it.

M. Starchuk (Chair): And they’re looking for it; where did it go.

I mean, the entertainment value that’s there is priceless at any given time. So thank you very much for everything that you do.

L. Blankstein: Just to say, if you are interested in seeing the building in person and meeting some of the artists, I can arrange that. All my contact information is in your kits.

Thank you so much for the opportunity.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay, we are going to take a brief recess.

Our next presenter is in the parking lot, apparently.

B. Stewart: There she is.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Andrea, would it help if we just take a two-minute recess and just give you a little time to…?

A. Curtis: I’m caffeinated. I’m good, as much as I want another coffee.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay. All right, then, Andrea. You will have five minutes to make your presentation. Then there will be five minutes of questions and answers. When we get down to the questions and answers, if you could make your answer relatively brief, just in case there’s a list of questions that come out of it, all right?

A. Curtis: Sounds great.

M. Starchuk (Chair): The floor is yours.

ANDREA CURTIS

A. Curtis: I think I’ll be pretty brief today anyways. I’ve only prepared a short statement.

Good morning. First and foremost, I’d really like to express my sincere gratitude to all of you for your commitment in supporting the cultural and arts sector in this deeply creative province. I’ve even seen some of you at some of my events. So thank you.

It’s with great appreciation that I’m here to acknowledge the tremendous impact of the B.C. fairs, festivals and events fund, the BCFFE. My name is Andrea Curtis. I’m the co-founder of the Vancouver Mural Festival and the VMF Winter Arts event.

H. Yao: Right.

A. Curtis: That’s right, Henry. You were at one of our events.

I have been producing festivals in B.C. since 2005, and I’ve witnessed firsthand how these kinds of events…. They transform urban spaces. They foster understanding and collaboration among strangers, invite tourism, create jobs and economic activity in every place that we operate.

For the 2003-2004 calendar years, 1,172 events across B.C. were being powered by just over $30 million in BCFFE funding. Again, a huge thank-you. That was tremendous. This is explicitly why I’m here. This is a thank-you. This is amazing.

The 2021 and 2022 calendar year supported 680 events, with just below $30 million in funding. These are technically one-time BCFFE grants allowing up to 20 percent of an event’s budget. They were available to non-profit, for-profit, municipalities and First Nations. Events supported ranged from arts and music festivals to food and wine festivals, sports, more.

[9:45 a.m.]

From mural festivals, dragon boat festivals, powwows, Victoria’s World Accordion and Tango Festival and — this one I want to go to, after doing some research — the South Cariboo Garlic Festival. It was really a tremendous list. When I scanned through all 1,172 of them, it really blew my mind just what that fund can do for this sector. It’s hard to wrap it up into one tax ministry because it really does support so many other sectors.

The BCFFE fund has been a beacon of support and a lifeline for B.C. jobs and general economic activity. As many of you are likely aware, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the events sector globally. Of course, here at home in B.C., we’re still struggling to find our footing while our colleagues struggle to maintain operations.

Recently, in March, the CBC reported on a growing list of festivals that have cancelled this year — FVDED in the Park in Surrey; Rockin River Festival in Merritt; the Constellation Festival in Squamish; and, very nearly, the Vancouver Folk Music Festival; and possibly more.

It’s critical to note that the BCFFE investments reach far beyond the event itself. It stimulates local economies directly through cultural sector employment, employing small businesses that service the events and that surround the events. For example, fencing, staging, food trucks, performers, security, ticketing systems, tenting. It really is that funds become circular in the local economy while attracting enormous amounts of tourism.

VMF, the Vancouver Mural Festival — we pull attendees year after year. We find regularly that 15 percent of the attendees are out-of-province, so a 15 percent return on that investment, at least in our case, was quite significant.

I’m speaking not only to express my gratitude but to emphasize the importance of sustaining something like this. Many of you will know that this fund is very closely related to the TEP, the tourism events program. The tourism events program is tremendous as well, but it’s a little bit more limited. It’s less funding. It’s marketing-focused only, and you can receive it for two years and then take a break. The BCFFE is a much more tremendous, all-encompassing support system. And in this post-COVID era, I think it’s actually more responsive.

In continuation of bolstering the world-class talent we have here at home, and supporting activity that beacons tourism, this also becomes a springboard where people see what we have here, and it gets to travel across the globe.

I don’t have access to the statistics that accompany the return on investment for BCFFE, but I certainly hope the tracking is in place. I would really love to be part of receiving some of that, and share it out more widely. The fund really does ensure the success of our events in this moment in time. I certainly hope that it continues.

Another note I wanted to make is that while some of us come from such disparate backgrounds, the opportunities to celebrate and create different types of events that invite people in, especially in this moment in time of reconciliation, really help us to build a shared identity while driving local economy. I see it as win-win.

I don’t have much more than that. I just want to say, in closing, thank you again for your continued support for the cultural sector. I want to help find a way to make this an annual fund.

B. Banman: First off, thank you very much. I have to say my colleague here pulled up the Garlic Festival. Any festival that says it’s “A stinkin good time for the entire family” — I love that kind of stuff. It doesn’t get much better than that, really. I just love it.

I think sometimes we have to lose something in order to truly appreciate what we had, and the pandemic has done that. The one thing that has been clear is people’s need to get together. We lost that. It was heartbreaking for many of us, especially if you’re an extrovert like me. The pandemic was like a jail sentence to me.

What I want to ask you, though, is (a) do you think the fund is big enough, and (b) how difficult is it to go through the grant process? Do we have enough lead time in that grant process for you actually to be able to organize an event in a timely manner?

[9:50 a.m.]

Should it be a longer lead time so you’ve guaranteed that you have it? “Great, now we can start to plan.” So your thoughts on the grant process and that in particular.

A. Curtis: In response to “Is the fund big enough,” I mean, if we’re showing a return on investment — i.e., 15 percent of the people who are coming to our event are from out of town — that’s a pretty significant ROE. We also know that every person who attends is usually spending $50. So every time we increase that fund, we increase the power of what we’re bringing into the province, we’re increasing the capacity of the locals who are producing it, we’re increasing jobs.

So no, the fund’s never big enough if we want to see more impact, especially if we want to raise the bar on how we see ourselves. If we believe that we are of international talent and standards, then yeah, let’s increase that fund. I don’t think it’s difficult, and I’d love to provide some ideas.

The lead time for the grant — this one was excellent. In terms of the lead time, no, it was way too short, but this was like an emergency grant. Yeah, we can do better there. But the reporting on this one, and the access to the application, was much better than anything like the B.C. Gaming.

R. Leonard: Sorry to laugh. I know how difficult the gaming application process is.

First of all, I want to say congratulations. I think that the whole mural festival was one of the best coping mechanisms to get through the pandemic — visiting family and friends and being able to be outside. So first of all, thank you in return.

Second of all, I wanted to ask about…. We keep hearing about, you know, we’re still in recovery post-pandemic. I’m curious about what kind of shift and changes you have to make to be feeling less like you’re healing and more like you’re progressing.

A. Curtis: I think something like this fund supports that feeling of progressing because while…. I’ve polled a number of not-for-profit organizations that operate in the cultural space and festivals, and not many of them receive more than 20 percent public funding, okay, so it’s not a lot. When we have these opportunities, it bolsters it.

Right now the big thing that’s down, and the reason we’re seeing these festivals cancelled, is because private funding is down. That will come back. It will come back, but in this moment, we need a little bit more support while that’s returning because of this challenging economic climate.

A. Walker: It’s great that the festivals that take place in our communities really define where we are. I’m thinking of Parksville with the sandcastle competition. I mean, it’s…. They are who we are.

I’m wondering if you can expand a bit on how it has changed. You know, the mural festival started in 2016. My experience is volunteers were easier, logistics were often easier, security was easier. I’m just wondering if you can expand on some of the challenges that you’re facing, not just with COVID but running events now, that maybe ten years ago wouldn’t have existed.

A. Curtis: Yeah. Again, the BCFFE was wonderful because it was not restrictive. This answer is going to be different for a lot of different festivals.

Overall…. You mentioned volunteers. Rebuilding vol­unteer programs has been quite difficult because everybody has a different comfort level on coming back in. For our work at the mural festival, we haven’t been able to recover our volunteer program yet because it’s been too expensive.

In order to rebuild, it’s been quite difficult. A lot of those funds don’t support us in operations costs, to pay for the volunteer coordinator and to pay volunteer costs. This one does. When people have that flexibility, they know what they need to do, and everybody is going to have a different challenge.

H. Yao: Thank you so much. Unlike my colleague who is actually an introvert…. But like I said, even though he was talking about how COVID-19 reminded us what we missed, as a person who attended the Vancouver Mural Festival, I think actually attending the event was incredible, especially seeing innovation around AI technology associated with the mural display.

Can you explain a bit more how the BCFFE supports innovation development when it comes to tourism, proper engagement, so that we can actually increase incorporation of technology in special events?

A. Curtis: It’s interesting. A lot of people are spending their time just trying to stay operating, right? We’re not the most innovative when we’re just trying to stay operating, unless, you know, sometimes, like you said, we have to lose something in order to feel like we’re in an innovative space again, but that can actually be a little bit PTSD.

In terms of something like the BCFFE supporting inno­vation, I think the more that we fund these things, the more resources are available.

Myself, I know that I’ve set up my team with the Vancouver Mural Festival to operate without having my oversight. I’m moving into a space of consultation so that I can support more people in figuring out how to be innovative and use their funds more wisely and to be able to be responsive to this really interesting moment in time, whether it’s AI or whatever.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Andrea, thank you very much for your presentation this morning. If that’s what a presentation comes from being rushed, I can only hope that the rest of the presenters today are rushed as you were. Thank you very much for your time.

We are going to take a brief recess until 10 after.

The committee recessed from 9:55 a.m. to 10:13 a.m.

[M. Starchuk in the chair.]

M. Starchuk (Chair): We’ll call the meeting back to order. We have Bill Barrable from Praxis Spinal Cord Institute.

Bill, you have five minutes to make your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

The floor is yours, Bill.

PRAXIS SPINAL CORD INSTITUTE

B. Barrable: Thank you, Mike. Unless one of my lenses falls out, we should fall within five minutes. If we don’t, lunch is on me.

Thanks so much for having me today. I’m Bill Barrable, CEO of the Praxis Spinal Cord Institute.

I want to acknowledge that we’re here today on the traditional territories of the Musqueam people.

Praxis is part of the life-changing work being done by the people who work in British Columbia’s life sciences sector. We play a key role in the development of new technologies and treatments for those living with spinal cord injury, the acronym being SCI, both here at home and around the world.

SCIs have an outsized impact in the lives of the 6,000 British Columbians affected. SCIs drive reduced life ex­pectancy, social isolation, unemployment, forced relocation to urban centres and frequent hospital readmissions.

[10:15 a.m.]

Newly sustained traumatic spinal cord injuries cost the B.C. economy $370 million per year. Obviously, the hu­man impact is massive, and the financial impact as well. Chronic SCI-related health complications cost our health system $70 million every year.

There are almost three dozen secondary complications that come from spinal cord injury, not all of them unique. None of them are truly unique to spinal cord injury, but if you’ve had a spinal cord injury, your chances of getting one of those secondary complications, like bladder infections, neuropathic pain or pressure injury is extremely high.

Pressure injuries are the number one most expensive medical error in the health system. It’s hundreds of millions of dollars a year across Canada just for that one…. Let me call it a misadventure. It’s much worse than that.

Our vision is a world without paralysis after spinal cord injury, which will, in turn, drastically improve the quality of lives while reducing provincial costs. We are moving towards that, thanks to the province of B.C. and the Ministry of Health, who provide us ongoing support for our work and have since 2010.

Thanks to this provincial funding, we are able to advance SCI research and innovation here in B.C. and worldwide through networks of international researchers, health care professionals, clinical trials, entrepreneurs, investors and people with lived experience of spinal cord injury.

We use the short-form acronym PLEX, people with lived experience, to represent those with lived experience. We needed a short form, because they are at the foundation of everything that we do. The work we do is driven by their priorities, and we monitor our work to ensure that we’re driving results that improve their lives.

We tackle those priorities by focusing on four areas: pioneering PLEX leadership and engagement with those living with spinal cord injury, catalyzing networks of peo­ple and data, ensuring that the latest research and knowledge is used in the health system and speeding up the delivery of new SCI technology to those who need it.

From across the river in Vancouver, we facilitate an international network of people with SCI and world-class experts. This network is working together to identify, prioritize and solve the most urgent challenges. We work to get the most promising ideas out of the lab into standards of care for people with SCI and into new technologies ultimately available to those living with SCI, to improve their lives.

Some of our examples of real impact here in B.C. in­clude improving SCI patient outcomes in Interior Health by helping clinical practitioners adopt best practices. This has been a very successful program. We would like to scale it across the province and also in other provinces.

Addressing SCI issues facing Indigenous communities through the creation of Indigenous-led SCI networks and Indigenous-led research projects.

Opening a path to improved grasp, autonomic function and bladder and sexual health through research on spinal cord stimulation therapy.

Showing the effect of spinal cord perfusion pressure — that’s in the cerebrospinal fluid — and the potential that has for neurological recovery. We’ve got some outstanding researchers here in B.C. who are leading the world in this area and looking at biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid and their impact on therapy and recovery.

We’re only able to do this work thanks to the generous support of the province over the past decade. I’d like to say again, thank you.

Our recommendation today is simple and, I believe, easily supportable. We would like the province to continue to make strategic investments in support of B.C.’s life sciences sector and organizations like ours so that we can all continue to advance B.C. as a global life sciences hub.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation. We were seven seconds away from lunch.

H. Yao: Bear with me if I didn’t hear clearly. When you were talking about addressing the Indigenous community, you didn’t go into a lot of detail. At least, I didn’t hear much. Can you educate us a bit more? Why do you feel there’s a need in the area? Is it because there is overrepresentation of a certain aspect of spinal cord injury in Indigenous communities that we should also pay attention to?

B. Barrable: Yes, a very good question. We developed a relationship a number of years ago, first of all, with Margo Greenwood, who’s at UNBC. Margo was on the advisory board of Waakebiness-Bryce Institute for Indigenous Health, which operates nationally as well. I think Margo has actually been appointed a senator in the last year, but played a key role, inviting us into a community about seven or eight years ago.

[10:20 a.m.]

With that group, we’ve supported some research post-docs in that area and done some research in the commun­ity, led by people within the community, and we’re starting to see some of the results of that research tumbling out.

The key component is it’s led by people who are from those communities. We’re not the ones to be doing the research, necessarily, on reserve. We’re the ones that are there to support that. You can’t have a good strategy unless you have good data and good understanding of what all the challenges are.

There is lots of anecdotal evidence that the burden of injury among Indigenous peoples is higher than the general population, particularly in areas like neurotrauma, which includes both spinal cord injury and traumatic brain injury. This is an area of obvious importance, not only in SCI, but traumatic brain injury, which is a public health challenge — concussions. You can’t pick up a newspaper or go online anymore without reading a story about concussion.

We also have a gentleman who has joined our team with lived experience, Paralympian Richard Peter, who is our Indigenous liaison. He has been working with the communities within the province — one of our key partners is the B.C. aboriginal network for disabilities, which is headquartered on Vancouver Island and led by Neil Belanger — to develop strategy, to do outreach, to develop networks so that we’re in a position to understand the unique challenges that Indigenous peoples experience, particularly on reserve, which is quite different than an urban area. The challenges are quite unique in that respect.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Tom.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): No, I’m good, thanks. That actually was pretty close to what I was going to ask.

B. Stewart: Sorry, could you just…? You mentioned Interior Health. I missed what it is that you’re doing with Interior Health or what their area of specialization is.

B. Barrable: Our persons-with-lived-experience team and some of our clinical experts have been providing in-service training and education to clinical people within Interior Health in the care areas so that they can understand some of the conditions that people with spinal cord injury are faced with and how that affects them on a day-to-day basis.

These secondary complications, in addition to the paralysis, really affect someone’s quality of health and their life. We’re providing them with best practice knowledge on how to support people in those situations, how to help them to prevent the secondary complications from arising and to mitigate against them.

The chair of Interior Health is Doug Cochrane, who’s a former head of pediatric neurosurgery at Children’s and understands the challenges faced by people with neurological cognitive impairment, spinal cord injury being one of those. They’ve been really great support there, great feedback. It’s something that has gone very well, and we would hope to share it in other health authorities as well.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation this morning, Bill, and for the work that your organization does.

Next up, we have Lee-Ann Lalli, CUPE Metro Vancouver district council.

Lee-Ann, you will have five minutes to make your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

L. Lalli: I’m just a bit nervous. This is my first time doing this.

M. Starchuk (Chair): We’re a friendly bunch, Lee-Ann. All right. The floor is yours.

CUPE METRO VANCOUVER
DISTRICT COUNCIL

L. Lalli: Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak here.

I would like to acknowledge the traditional unceded territories of the Squamish and Musqueam people, whose land we are gathered on today.

My name is Lee-Ann Lalli. My pronouns are she and her. I’m a proud vice-president of CUPE Local 1936, the Canadian Union of Public Employees, and a member at large for CUPE district council. CUPE Metro district council serves CUPE locals in all sectors in the Lower Mainland through advocacy, information-sharing and coordination.

CUPE 1936 represents workers who deliver community services. We work in housing, support vulnerable individuals, deliver inclusive programs and child care. Local 1936 members are essential to the community, and I’m proud to represent them today. Because of that, the first thing I would like to talk about is the cost of living.

The shocking increases of costs of living are hitting working people hard. At this moment, there are people forced to choose between paying rent or buying food. Re­cently, a CUPE 1936 member came to us for help, not able to pay for prescription medication because she needed the money to pay for rent to put a roof over her and her children’s heads.

[10:25 a.m.]

The idea that in a wealthy country like Canada, she has to choose between health or staying housed is unacceptable. As we all know, the shocking cost of buying housing in B.C. has increased. Rent increases are draining our bank accounts and having negative impacts on the workforce.

People can’t afford to live here anymore on middle-class incomes. Our workplaces are seeing huge turnovers be­cause wages aren’t enough to pay for rent, and the rent continues to rise faster than we can address wages.

Something needs to be done quickly. Controls on rent increases at turnovers between tenants are an immediate way that the government can act on huge gaps of rents. Without vacancy controls, landlords can essentially raise rent at will between tenants, which keeps pushing out rent, rental housing and our jobs in the Lower Mainland.

But as much as workers need vacancy controls, that does not fully address the housing crisis. Private development has been B.C.’s answer to a shortage of affordable housing, but it is creating more inequalities. Because of the uncontrolled housing market, workers can no longer enter the housing market without generational wealth. Even working class that are owners are in financial risk, in risky positions.

The answer is non-market housing. Non-market housing for all who need it is an important piece of reconciliation, because it is unjust for an Indigenous person, who are owners and stewards of this land, to experience discrimination or difficulty in accessing housing. If we are going to address inequalities in every aspect of our society, we need to examine the colonial structures and implement the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and United Nation rights of Indigenous people.

We need Indigenous voices and lived experiences at all levels in addressing issues that affect Indigenous communities. Non-market and social housing, a focus on homes and not homeowners…. With adequate numbers of non-market and social housing units, including identity-specific units for people who experience marginalized…. B.C. can affirm the rights of all people to be housed.

Finally, the closest to my heart, I want to talk about child care. My career in CUPE 1936 started as an ECE, early childhood educator, at Treehouse Early Learning Centre in Richmond run by Aspire Richmond. I am very proud of the work this government is doing in recognizing ECE work and increasing child care spaces.

In closing, I want to talk about the importance of having a public option for child care. Before- and after-school care as a part of the public education system would mean easy access to affordable child care, parents not having to juggle drop-offs of kids at multiple locations, and having high quality and fewer transitions in their day.

Schools in every district already have the space and structure to do this. The return of over 4,000 housekeeping and food services jobs to the health care sector showed that this government cares about working people. It also shows that this government cares about conditions of a workforce that is feminized and racialized, like the child care sector. It is largely private right now. That means low wages, few or no benefits and precarious work.

Public sector jobs have huge advantages for workers. Stability, living wage, pensions and benefits are some of the few. What B.C. needs right now is a public option for school-age children, one that provides child care in every community and ensures that people like me, who do this essential work, are valued and respected.

Sorry if it was too fast. I was rehearsing this, and I was like….

M. Starchuk (Chair): Lee-Ann, we got there. We got there, didn’t we?

H. Yao: Thank you so much for the great work you are doing.

I do have a question about ECE, and I’ve been asking this question to almost every representative of ECE. People who do shift work. I think that’s one thing I’m struggling with, because I’ve had multiple conversations with different service providers. They cannot see how they can make it work. Yet there’s a huge…. There is a demand for it, but it’s so scattered across the province. It’s really hard to concentrate.

Do you have any recommendation in that area?

L. Lalli: I think the Nurses Union actually has an in-house daycare that’s provided. I think UBC already has a program that they provide for their students in-house. I think that’s one way to do it, because we know that there are spaces in those places. So I think that’s the way to go.

I think shift work is always going to be different, because it’s going to be 24-hour work. We’re already doing it in community social services. There are residential homes that are run 24-7, but they’re staffed 24-7. So I think that’s something that licensing also needs to talk about, because there are strict regulations of opening a daycare or even a non-profit that has to abide by licensing rules.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Any other questions and/or comments?

H. Yao: Thank you so much. My apologies to keep on taking up your time.

L. Lalli: No, that’s okay.

[10:30 a.m.]

H. Yao: You probably know the reason why I have such a passion for shift workers. A lot of people of colour, immi­grants, women, unfortunately tend to start in shift work. That’s where a lot of the shift work is coming through.

You talked about licensing requirements. Can you may­be go into a bit more detail? What kind of licensing requirement challenges are actually blocking service providers or making it harder for them to provide shift work support?

L. Lalli: This province has been working really hard on making universal child care — I think this government has put a lot of money towards that — but through that, we are also leaving out people. Shift work is one of those things that always comes up. We also know that school-aged child care did not get the wage enhancements that they needed.

I think there is a lot of work that needs to be done at the provincial level in order for that awareness to come. If we don’t have the awareness and the people that are in power are not dealing with those issues, those issues are not being brought up.

I think right now the focus is more on providing ECEs and trying to get a universal child care system in. It’s not talking about child care workers or talking about shift work. We have to tackle one thing at a time. I think focusing on ECEs and trying to bring child care in-house right now is the best way to do it — if we lift one person up, we can lift everybody else up — bringing awareness to that.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Well, Lee-Ann, thank you very much for your time this morning, and thank you very much for your presentation.

Next up, we have Eduardo Azmitia Pardo, Capilano Faculty Association.

Eduardo, you have five minutes for your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

CAPILANO UNIVERSITY
FACULTY ASSOCIATION

E. Azmitia: Good morning. I am honoured and pleased to have the opportunity to provide input for the 2024 budget. I am here in my capacity as the president of the Capilano Faculty Association. My pronouns are he, him and his.

I want to start by acknowledging that the Capilano University campuses are located in the territories of the Líl̓­wat, Musqueam, shíshálh, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations.

Capilano University has approximately 9,000 students enrolled in for-credit programs. Of those students, 2,900 are international students, from 86 countries, and we have classes averaging 23 to 25 students. We are a regional university that makes an impact by responding to the needs of the region through collaboration with local communities or university boards to support the full cycle of students so that they become good and responsible citizens. Also, we help to address labour market needs and shortages.

I will speak a little bit about myself. I’m a settler and occupier in these lands. I was born in Guatemala, and I am a graduate of Capilano, as well as of SFU and UBC. I have been teaching in the post-secondary education system now for over 25 years, so I have quite a bit of experience as a student and as an instructor.

The three areas that I would like to talk about are B.C. post-secondary funding, the support for international students and support for indigenization, decolonization, re­conciliation and anti-racism in the post-secondary sector.

With the first topic, the academic literature supports that higher education is a main contributor to the well-being of communities and the individual, and is one of the essential factors for robust economic growth. I urge you to make decisions that will have the effects of making higher education as accessible as possible, be that lowering intuition fees, especially to international students; increased financial aid; scholarships; access to grants; or any other means that will make it more affordable.

The current situation is forcing administrations to over-rely on lower-paid, short-term contract faculty. Overreliance on international students, who are close to full-time workers, puts a huge burden on the faculty — who are overworked, exhausted and stretched to the limit — and also on the students, who have no time to engage in a proper educational experience.

I have countless students who fall asleep or barely have time to do homework and assigned readings. The education for them has been minimized to the point that it’s really just skills training. It’s very difficult and very different from what education was for us or what it’s meant to be.

[10:35 a.m.]

A numerical example that I will provide gives you a sense of the underfunding. For issues of Indigenous education, our budget totals $3.6 million, but only $322,000 is provided by the government.

With respect to the second issue, support for the students, most of the students are international students in my classes, sometimes close to 90 percent of them, and they are isolated. They have few networks of support. They have little access to mental health and physical health services and to legal services. I urge you to increase the funding that supports access to those as well as to the programs that provide that help to our students.

With respect to the third issue, I have witnessed the debilitating effects that discrimination, anti-Indigenous racism, anti-Asian racism, gender discrimination and other forms of discrimination have on our students, staff and faculty members, both in our communities and in our institutions. Unfortunately, very few resources are devoted to counter-educate on, and provide understanding of, these problems for all of the students.

As an example, I’ll tell you that we have managed to organize Asian Heritage Month, Women’s History Month, and Indigenous History Month. We get close to $3,000 for each, for the entire month — very little when we could have full discussions that could support our students.

In summary — I see I have 25 seconds — I can tell you that we have the staff, the students, the faculty and the administrators that are committing to make a better, more just and equitable society through higher education, but we are not being adequately funded to make this vision a reality. For this, I encourage that more resources be devoted to international students and higher education.

That’s one second. Thank you so much.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Eduardo, thank you very much for your presentation.

H. Yao: Thank you so much. I would like to go to No. 2, talking about international students not having mental health or physical health support. Does Capilano College not provide any kind of service to international students, through their student fees?

E. Azmitia: They provide it, but it’s very minimal. Very often what we find is it would be more helpful if they could have access through networks in their own communities, but they have very little understanding of how to access it. Or very often, at the same time, they are overworked, so they are in a very vulnerable position that is almost a cycle. I hope I answered your question. Apparently, I didn’t do it satisfactorily.

M. Starchuk (Chair): On that subject, you had talked about the number of international students. What was the proportion of the number of international students that you were speaking of?

E. Azmitia: In one of my classes, it is close to 90 percent. I have classes where there are only two local students. It depends.

Let’s say, in social sciences or the arts, it’s very, very high, and it’s very hard to teach them because we are really not equipped, nor have been provided the resources, to teach a diverse community that is facing specific challenges. Especially, one of the problems is that they are working, so they have very little energy. Essentially, if they are going to do any homework, it has to happen during class time.

B. Stewart: I thought the threshold for international students in an institution was around 20 percent, and I’m a bit surprised when you say you have classrooms that are full without that. I can understand completely what you’re talking about, because there’s a significant cost. I know that I had one of my children go internationally to school and having to pay a substantial differential.

One of the things we’ve heard has been the issue about the uncertainty, the increases, the costs and things like that. But I do think it’s the system. Capilano wasn’t set up to be an international education school, was it? I mean, it’s one of the community colleges, so it’s meant to be diverse and have a mixture and stuff like that.

It’s a comment. I don’t know if there’s…. Is Capilano at a higher level than 20 percent international?

[10:40 a.m.]

E. Azmitia: I do believe so. As I say, probably what’s happening is it’s by schools and classes. Maybe the proportion gets lower when they are students that are going into film, and so on, but in many classes — let’s say the university transfer classes, especially during the summer — they’re mainly international students.

A. Walker: Thank you for sharing this with us. I’m wondering about the funding for decolonization. What would that look like? Is that per-student provincial support, or is it a grant program? What would you like to see that look like?

E. Azmitia: I think a grant program or even per student, but that this is specifically set for decolonization.

To let you know, I am very keen on it. Two years ago, I had one Indigenous educator who was helping me in the university. She got overwhelmed. She left. Right now I have to do it on my own. That’s very hard.

We are very often worried we are creating more damage. I am trained in economics. I am not really…. And I am foreign-born, so it’s…. Even that Indigenous educator would tell me: “No, you’re doing it wrong. You’re just putting a canoe and, let’s say, something in your examples is not Indigenization. You really have to weave in….”

Essentially, most of our faculty are doing it on our own. That creates a burden to students and almost a defeat of the purpose.

Thank you for that question. As educators, we feel very conscious that we don’t recreate the damage of the past and that we might be doing it in a new form by not creating specific resources that help us to do it in a proper and genuine manner.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay. Thank you very much, Eduardo, for your presentation this morning.

E. Azmitia: Thank you. It was my first time. Next time I will be more organized, but thank you so much.

The last comment. I really benefited from the educational system here, and that’s why I’m working on it. I hope you provide more resources.

Thank you so much.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you.

Next up is Lief Garrett, Justice Institute Students Union Society.

Lief, you have five minutes for your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

The floor is yours.

JUSTICE INSTITUTE
STUDENTS UNION SOCIETY

L. Garrett: First and foremost, thank you for inviting us to be here today. My name is Lief Garrett. I am the director of external relations for the Justice Institute Students Union. We have five campuses across the province on the Island, down here in the Lower Mainland and in the Interior.

The three recommendations to put forward to you guys today are: more funding towards JIBC’s operating budget, investment in affordable and sustainable housing for students and investment in international student support.

For the first one, currently there is little to no support for students on campus. That means we only really have a library. We have a library and a half-working student writing centre for students to get support at. That’s really about it. We have no counselling services, nowhere for students to go and talk about career, nothing like that. That’s due to the low budget of JIBC. As well, there is no consistency in learning outcomes for students, also due to the inadequate funding of JIBC.

The second point is for investment in affordable housing. To assist students in focusing on their studies to reach their fullest potential, instead of having to focus on working, they should be focusing on studying. Many of my classmates and other fellow students are working between 20 and 40 hours a week while going to school full-time. This means they have to sacrifice studies for working.

The last one is the investment in international student support. Right now we’re asking for increased funding to help new students, when they come to Canada, to help them integrate into Canadian culture.

A lot of the international students I have spoken to say there isn’t much support for students when they come here, when they come from their country. They come here, and they’re kind of left to their own devices. There isn’t much support here for them.

I have two minutes left. I rehearsed this.

M. Starchuk (Chair): All right. Well, thank you, Lief.

[10:45 a.m.]

B. Stewart: Thanks very much, Leif. It’s just interesting that I was talking to some of the emergency service personnel in West Kelowna, which is the riding I’m from, and they were talking about the Justice Institute in terms of the training that they’re providing.

But it’s interesting, because the government sees that because of the fact that it trains police, firefighters, things like that, local government is the one that should be funding this or doing more. Anyways, obviously we have a disconnect here.

It’s good to hear about the fact that…. I mean, I know the campus that’s in Kelowna and the Interior, and it’s relatively modest. I do think that looking towards that…. I don’t know how much you know about the individual campuses, but I don’t know whether they were thought to be what they have turned out to be. Any comments about the campus situation and the outcomes for students?

L. Garrett: We recently — myself and our staff organizer, Thach Thao — went to all of our regional campuses, and we had a chance to speak with our students there. The students are happy, but the same things that keep coming up are two things.

One is there are not enough hours in a day for training in the facilities, and housing. The story from Kelowna is that a lot of students have to end up bringing their RVs to campus or sleeping in their cars overnight for six months, five months, for the entire program. That was really concerning for us. We’ve heard it from Victoria as well, from our Victoria campus, as well as some students from our Chilliwack campus.

Other than those two things, other than not enough hours in the day for practising, and housing, students have been pretty excited and pretty happy.

H. Yao: Thank you so much. I really appreciate what you’re doing here.

I know our government is trying to target about 12,000 student homes right now, but I’m actually looking at JI Institute’s New West campus physically. It doesn’t seem like there’s a lot of school campus space for student housing. Do you guys have any kind of maybe creative solutions or suggestions that the government can work with JIBC if the opportunity comes that they can actually build student housing that matches the unique design compared to UBC and SFU, where they have their property and land?

L. Garrett: We actually had this conversation internally on our board and with a few instructors, on maps. If you look kind of right across from our campus, there’s a little green space.

I don’t know how familiar you are with the way JI is laid out. It’s like a half C, and right across from there is a big green with a bunch of trees and whatnot. They’ve been rumoured that they’re planning to have some sort of accommodations there. It could be big enough for housing to go up there, but that’s really the only location at the New West campus that would make the most sense for accommodations.

G. Chow: Pardon my ignorance about the Justice Institute. I always thought it’s an institution to train our law enforcement officers. What I got from you is that you actually have five campuses in B.C., and you also have international students. So that’s certainly an education for me. I just wanted to let you know that I have to learn more about your institute.

L. Garrett: I’m in the law enforcement studies diploma. I actually walk the stage next month. I’ve done my two-year diploma. There’s a law enforcement studies diploma, and there’s also the bachelor of law enforcement studies as well as a post-baccalaureate diploma for international students to take. We call it PBDLES.

There’s that. We also have disaster management, and then the regional campuses — Kelowna, Victoria, Maple Ridge and Chilliwack campuses — are more for paramedics, so PCP, EMR. I’m forgetting one of those in there, but they’re primarily for paramedics. New West campus is the main hub for everything else.

G. Chow: The only facility I visited is actually in Surrey. That’s a different…. Maybe that’s justice….

L. Garrett: I don’t believe that’s us.

G. Chow: It’s a different one, okay. I’m confused on that.

R. Leonard: Thanks for your presentation.

Many decades ago I got to go to the Justice Institute on a conflict resolution program, which was pretty short-lived, which is what the basis of my question is. What’s the range of length of programs? You were talking about student housing. Is there a need for short-term housing? What percentage of the student population would be looking to find housing for the longer term?

[10:50 a.m.]

L. Garrett: The programs that the JI runs are anywhere between three days to four years, and that’s including the diploma and the bachelor of law enforcement. The longest-running would be my program, the law enforcement studies. With the diploma and the bachelor’s, it’s four years.

For the paramedics, theirs ranges quite a bit, from be­tween a couple of months to about to three to six months long. That’s part of the issue, because a lot of places will not have students come in for a couple of months, and that’s kind of the major concern that we’ve had.

My understanding, from the tabling sessions we’ve had with students and from my own personal experience, is all the students would be able to benefit from some sort of housing or accommodations, especially the paramedics, especially the EMR paramedics, the ones who are only around in Kelowna or in Maple Ridge, Chilliwack and Victoria — somewhere to have for six months while they’re doing their studies. That way, they don’t have to worry about living out of their RVs or living out of their cars and trying to find shelter.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Well, Lief, as a person who spent…. I don’t even know how much time I spent at the JI as a firefighter, through my training officer program, through my fire officer program, through my ICS and all the other training that came with it. I completely understand what the campus in New West and Maple Ridge is all about.

It’s good to see that the students are here advocating for what the services need. I think the other part of the equation should be here as well, personally. Thank you for your time, and thank you for your presentation this morning, Lief, and good luck.

Next up is Dominic Lai, Canadian International Dragon Boat Festival Society.

Dominic, you have five minutes for your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

The floor is yours.

CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL
DRAGON BOAT FESTIVAL SOCIETY

D. Lai: Excellent. Well, thank you for having me here today.

I want to start by acknowledging that the Canadian International Dragon Boat Festival Society’s work operates primarily on the territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, Tsleil-Waututh, Sts’ailes; and the lək̓ʷəŋən-speaking peo­ples, including the Esquimalt and Songhees Nations; as well as a couple of other spots. We get around the province a fair bit.

My name is Dominic. I’m the senior development marketing operations director for the Canadian International Dragon Boat Festival Society. We operate primarily as Dragon Boat B.C. We run the continent’s flagship dragon boat festival, the Concord Pacific Dragon Boat Festival in Vancouver, as well as the Steveston Dragon Boat Festival and a host of other events. Through our community partnerships, we support the Harrison Dragon Boat Festival, the Canada Dry Victoria Dragon Boat Festival, as well as the Comox Dragon Boat Festival.

I’m here today to talk about a couple of things to highlight some of the successes we’ve had thanks to provincial funding and to advocate for continuation of some of these strategic investments. Primarily these revolve around the gaming grant programs on both the community and capital gaming grant side, on the BCFFE fund, as well as the BCTEP fund.

In the past couple of years, we have been able to turn the organization around quite substantially, just because of some of the impacts of COVID, with the support of the provincial government. With the capital gaming program, we were able to make the largest-ever capital purchase so far in our history, with 18 new dragon boats. That purchase cemented our position globally as a global flagship dragon boat festival, and that actually has started delivering results instantly.

At the moment, from what I can tell, we are the largest dragon boat festival in the world outside of Asia, and we expect to continue that trajectory moving forward. Our colleagues in other parts of Canada, across the continent, are seeing declines, which is somewhat expected because of ongoing impacts of the pandemic. That strategic capital investment at a time when there wasn’t any good news in the market allowed us to ensure we could continue delivering quality services to British Columbians and also deliver local economic impact and continue our growth trajectory.

With the community gaming grant, I think that speaks to something that’s much larger across the entire province. It doesn’t impact just events; it impacts a range of people. We’re really excited to see that for the first time in many years, there was an adjustment made to the funding formulas there, and the local and regional buckets have been put together. As a local organization, you can now apply for more than $100,000, and you can apply for $225,000.

At the same time, those numbers have been static for a very long time, and while we understand there are multiple different funding pressures that the province faces, those numbers are critical for community organizations. With the community gaming grant, that is one of the only sources that is stable from year to year, within reason of course, and that’s how we can actually plan and look forward.

[10:55 a.m.]

That doesn’t just impact events or sport groups. That funds things like community service groups. That funds things like educational programs. It impacts us in ways I’m not even completely 100 percent certain about, even though I’m in the industry, and I deal with this all the time. Finding a way to expand that program or provide more flexibility to that program is such a critical part of the puzzle, moving forward.

As my colleague Andrea Curtis was saying earlier, the BCFFE fund has been an amazing boon to the entire community. It has created opportunity for unique festivals to pop up and really showcase our community. On the other side, what it has also done is it has taken on some of the heavy lifting of delivering economic benefit as well. By revitalizing the events industry, we’re trying to get more people back into our community from all over, and this fund is something that is critically needed.

This is the first time, to my knowledge, that B.C. will have implemented something like this. Other provinces have similar funds, and if we look at what’s happening in Quebec and Ontario, those funds deliver benefit. With BCFFE, it was not announced until a little bit later on this year. I think that with the community, with all the different events that were there, you saw the impact of that, because there was a lot of concern about whether events would be able to continue at the same scale.

When BCFFE was announced, I was on the phone with my multiple colleagues across the province in different event industries and in different event categories, and there was a collective sigh of relief. What BCFFE does is it gives us the flexibility to really showcase the best of B.C. to the world. With BCFFE’s focus on local community, we’re able to present B.C. to people coming from elsewhere.

What we want to be able to do is to say to people, “Come to B.C.; experience our communities,” and we also want to say to our community: “This is what we are.” What it really does is that it uplifts and celebrates who we are as community.

On the economic benefit, I can speak to that as well, but seeing that I’m running a little bit low on time, perhaps we’ll leave that for another time.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay. What we’ll do is that we’ll wrap up here. Thank you very much for your presentation.

I’ll start off with the first question.

Dominic, what is the economic benefit?

D. Lai: For the economic benefit of one of our festivals…. Let’s take the Concord Pacific Dragon Boat Festival. Right now we have about 5,500 athletes — from Can­ada, from the U.S.A., from the United Arab Emirates, from the Philippines and also from Australia — coming in.

This is somewhat of an off year for us because we aren’t getting the overseas contingent, but let’s take the teams that are coming from the U.S. We have approximately 2,000 people coming in. They’re going to be coming in for about four days. They’re coming in, and they’re paying for hotels. They’re paying for airfare. They’re spending locally. They’re going to be delivering all of these results in our local community.

Also, on top of that, by pairing that with our local culture and saying, “This is what you’re experiencing,” we are building a strong business case for them to come back in the future. What that does is it delivers incremental growth, year after year. Because of our previous record of delivering quality, we’re able to ensure that, moving forward. That keeps these people coming back and celebrating our community — which, in turn, delivers local economic impact to artists, to workers, to all these different community groups that we support.

It’s the same with a lot of festivals out there. Whether it’s the Vancouver Mural Festival, whether it’s us or whether it’s parades, all these events really do contribute a fair bit, and it’s not necessarily seen.

G. Chow: Do you have a permanent organization location in Vancouver?

D. Lai: We do. We have our docks in False Creek, which is where our paddling operations operate out of. Over the next few years, what we actually are doing is we’re going to be renovating a heritage building in Chinatown to turn it into a 20,000-square-foot community sport and cultural hub.

What we do is we really do focus on our roots in traditional Chinese culture but reflect that in a way that actually makes sense now. That hub will deliver probably about 100,000 additional visits to Chinatown every year and really support that local community as it kind of evolves and grows.

G. Chow: You mentioned Vancouver, Victoria and Co­mox. Any other cities in B.C. where you have a dragon boat festival?

D. Lai: Richmond and Harrison.

G. Chow: Richmond, yeah. I did see the dragon boats outside of the Olympic oval on Saturday.

D. Lai: That’s just our organization, to be clear. There also are additional, multiple organizations across the prov­ince. We just happen to be the largest, and we provide support through all of our branches to other smaller organizations as well.

G. Chow: For the festival component, you have artists and people who participate. Do they pay you a fee, or do you actually have to pay them in order to…?

[11:00 a.m.]

D. Lai: We pay them a fee. There are costs to being an artist, a musician.

We’re unique in that we platform exclusively local art­ists, so when you come to Vancouver, you’re experiencing Vancouver. When you go to Victoria, you’re experiencing Victoria. The logic is that if we’re inviting people from all over the world to a specific community, why would we fly people in from elsewhere? If you’re going somewhere, you want to see that community, so we should uplift that community, increase that spend and keep that money local.

G. Chow: Final question. You mentioned your 20,000-​square-foot space in Chinatown. Is that firmed up? Where is that?

D. Lai: We are going through the preliminary feasibility and engineering studies, and we hope to be able to hit that towards the end of Q3 this year. With all the other pieces of the puzzle coming into place, hopefully, we’re aiming for early 2026, mid-2026 open.

G. Chow: Good. Thank you.

H. Yao: I really appreciate…. I really enjoyed attending the Dragon Boat Festival last year too.

Do you mind helping us appreciate the number of audience participants. I remember that False Creek was surrounded and was crowded, and we had a hard time finding parking.

D. Lai: Yeah. Our events really do range in scale. We run small-scale community events, because we want every community to have access to it, and then also we run our biggest event, which is the Concord Pacific Dragon Boat Festival. So numbers will range anything from about 150 to 200 people for a community up to 150,000 for our biggest events.

When we add it all up annually, we’re looking at about three quarters of a million visits through all of our programs and events a year. To my understanding, that’s approximately similar to some other large venues and large sport teams in the province.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Not seeing any other questions or comments.

Dominic, thank you very much for the presentation and thanks for sharing that little piece of information about being the largest outside of Asia. I find that very amazing, and I’m very happy to see that it’s here.

D. Lai: Perfect. Thank you.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Next we have Zach Segal, Building Owners and Managers Association of British Columbia.

Zach, you have five minutes to make your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

You have the floor.

BUILDING OWNERS AND MANAGERS
ASSOCIATION OF B.C.

Z. Segal: Great, thank you.

I would like to begin by acknowledging that we’re on the traditional territory of the Katzie, Tsawwassen, Kwantlen and Musqueam people.

My name is Zach Segal, director of government relations of the Building Owners and Managers Association of British Columbia. BOMA B.C. has over 300 members that own or manage most of the commercial space in B.C., ranging from offices in downtown Kelowna to warehouses on Vancouver Island. Our industry contributes over $4.5 billion annually to the provincial economy and employs over 40,000 British Columbians.

My presentation today will highlight how we can work together to accomplish our shared goals in three important areas: climate change, labour and revitalizing our downtowns.

One, incentivize existing buildings’ decarbonization by exploring new programs. The commercial real estate in­dustry in British Columbia is taking great strides to proactively reduce emissions. Any emission reductions that can be done have already been achieved. However, we need collaboration with the province to take our decarbonization journey to the next stage.

Deep energy retrofits like building envelope replacements are expensive, complex and have longer payback periods. Upfront capital costs and financing can be a significant barrier. While the province introduced a clean buildings tax credit, much more needs to be done to incentivize change.

After surveying our association, the new tax credit is not a large enough of an incentive for retrofits that were not already planned. B.C. should look to other jurisdictions for inspiration, like Washington State, which has a $75 million pool for retrofits, and Manitoba, which offers up to $600,000 for energy savings for commercial buildings.

All buildings have unique circumstances, different levels of capital and debt, various degrees of retrofit needs and different building profiles. As such, there needs to be a wide variety of incentive programs available to achieve all the important work that needs to be done. Commercial property assessed clean energy, C-PACE, for example, is a financing structure that allows a loan to be paid back on a property tax bill, allowing for lower monthly payments and longer term financing.

The province can lead by example by certifying provincial buildings with BOMA BESt, a whole building environmental certification program for existing buildings.

Two, expanding the labour market. B.C.’s commercial real estate sector is facing an acute labour shortage, particularly amongst property managers and building operators. Despite important efforts by the province to improve the labour shortage, we are not seeing sufficient recruitment in these two roles.

[11:05 a.m.]

The province must continue to encourage newcomers, students and new entrants to the job market to enter the trades. The recent decision in Ontario to remove Canadian experience for foreign-trained engineers in Ontario is a great example. Commercial real estate employees are critical to the economic growth of the province. Infrastructure, office construction, decarbonization and deep energy retrofits can’t occur without well-trained property managers and building operators.

Three, revitalizing our city centres across the province. The crime, vandalism and street disorder we have seen since the pandemic threaten the vibrancy of our major cities and towns. We are now seeing record high office and retail vacancy rates as a symptom in some cities.

Remote work, a depressed tech sector and a changing business climate are adding fuel to the fire. Fewer office workers means less money spent on surrounding businesses, and less brick-and-mortar stores negatively im­pacts our neighbourhoods. For example, several businesses even recently closed in Nanaimo citing surrounding social disorder.

The province must take these three steps to improve the vibrancy of our city centres and, in turn, improve our local economies.

One, the province needs to address the cost of doing business. Support for small business was noticeably absent in last year’s budget, and costs have only increased. Cutting costs within provincial jurisdiction for small and medium-sized businesses will encourage businesses to keep a brick-and-mortar presence in our city centres. You could look at, for example, another time-limited freeze of the school tax.

Secondly, a robust return to work will improve the state of our city centres. When streets are busy, there’s less street disorder. However, public safety concerns are inhibiting people from returning to the office. Forty-seven percent of Metro Vancouver residents say they visit the downtown core closest to where they live less often due to increased social disorder. As such, the province could look at supporting business owners with property crime and vandalism costs and other security measures through grants and subsidies.

Improving public spaces and transit options could also help incentivize a return to work through revitalization funds or some form of transit subsidization.

Finally, the province should consider targeted subsidies for properties that can be transitioned to a more efficient use of the space, including converting office space to hotels or residences. Converting building use is a costly endeavour, but neighbouring provinces have seen success with this initiative.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation, Zach.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks a lot for your presentation.

I want to expand on your third point there, on revitalization of downtown and social disorder. Do you have any statistics on those buildings that have either sold or are forgoing leases due to social disorder?

Also, what impact is it, on the retail side, for customers not to engage and go down into some of these sectors?

Z. Segal: The Downtown Vancouver Business Improvement Association released some statistics on how social disorder is impacting it. They said, for example…. One of the statistics I cited…. Nearly 50 percent of people in the Lower Mainland are saying that they go downtown less often, and they cite crime as one of the top reasons.

There was another statistic that measured mobile phone data downtown. Downtown Vancouver’s recovery ranked near the bottom range for North American cities in terms of the number of people that are coming back. A lot of people are citing crime and are just uncomfortable.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Sorry, just a quick….

Could we get links to some of those reports? If you have them, send them to the….

Z. Segal: Sure, absolutely.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): That would be great.

A. Walker: I appreciate you raising the concerns in Na­naimo. I just want to give some accolades to the city council in Nanaimo. They’ve got a great grant program for those small businesses who have been impacted by street disorder. I think they earn credit for that.

The question I want to ask is about the property assessed clean energy. That’s something that we’ve heard discussed for some time now. What does it mean for a commercial building owner? Explain the program and what the values of that would be.

Z. Segal: It’s a program that would require provincial legislation to allow municipalities to loan money, which they would get from the private sector, to a building owner, and a building owner would pay back the loan on their property tax bill. By being able to pay it back on a property tax bill, you can have a much longer amortization. There are lower monthly payments.

The way our taxes work here, with triple net, where the costs are passed down…. It’s the tenant who benefits from a retrofit, because they have lower energy costs and that sort of thing, so it balances it out when it’s then on the property tax bill.

[11:10 a.m.]

In a high-interest environment, where loans are more challenging and interest rates are going up, it’s a great way to keep costs down and to incentivize important retrofits.

G. Chow: You mentioned converting commercial buildings — residences and hotels. What are the barriers right now? Zoning?

Z. Segal: Yeah. In the media, it’s been public that Vancouver has said they do not feel that they need to start pushing for this the way other cities do. In Calgary, they have a $75-per-square-foot incentive to encourage office-to-residential conversion because they have such a high office vacancy rate from things that have happened in Calgary. They need to revitalize their downtown.

The main challenges are, like you said, zoning…. Offices are built differently than residences with the size of the floor plan, a load of plumbing that’s required, electricity requirements. So it’s quite an expensive endeavour, and the concern is that if it’s not incentivized or subsidized somehow, the building might just be knocked down or left vacant like it was in Calgary. There really needs to be some form of subsidization to help because there are so many barriers.

M. Starchuk (Chair): I have a question. At the beginning, you talked about the labour shortage with regards to property managers and building managers. What is there to be done to invigorate that labour pool?

Z. Segal: What the province has done has been great. We love that there’s been a focus on it. Because there’s such a labour shortage across every industry, we find there’s just sort of a recruitment and awareness issue. When all these great initiatives are done, there’s such a smaller pool that people are attracted into other industries. We just don’t have enough awareness, we find, of our industry to really capture the small pool that’s out there.

As people keep retiring, we’re really in a tight position now. Property managers manage multiple buildings, and building operators are stretched quite thin. With all the important work that I was talking about that needs to be done, it’s a really challenging situation right now.

M. Starchuk (Chair): On top of all of that, what is the solution to the awareness? Where does that fall within government? As far as this committee is concerned, if this is something for us to consider, how do we move that forward?

Z. Segal: If there’s any way you could partner with more associations like ours in terms of funding or grants, so we could spend money to get the word out about our association, because it just seems like, with such a small pool right now, when there’s a focus, people go just to certain trades, and it’s not trickling out across the board. If there’s any way you could partner individually with associations to help us, I think that would go a long way.

M. Starchuk (Chair): All right. Thank you very much for your time and your presentation this morning, Zach.

Z. Segal: Thank you. I appreciate it.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Next up is Jane Adams, Surrey Hospitals Foundation.

Good morning.

J. Adams: Good morning, Mr. Starchuk and committee members.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Jane, you will have five minutes for your presentation, followed by five minutes worth of comments and/or questions.

The floor is yours.

SURREY HOSPITALS FOUNDATION

J. Adams: Thank you. Well, I’m Jane Adams. I’m the CEO of the Surrey Hospitals Foundation.

I am a settler. I’m here to speak to you about the health care needs of people living on the traditional and unceded territories of the Semiahmoo, Tsawwassen, Kwantlen, Katzie and Kwikwetlem nations.

Our three funding requests are funding for an evidence-based health care master plan for Surrey, immediate funding for maternity, pediatric and cardiac specialty services and consideration for a second tower at Surrey Memorial Hospital.

Why are we asking? By any health care standards, Surrey is the most poorly serviced large city in Canada. Surrey is the second-largest city in B.C., and within two decades, it will be the largest. Between the 2016 and 2021 census, it had the largest growth in absolute terms in B.C. — over 50,000 new residents. That’s the equivalent of every citizen of the city of North Vancouver. It is the second-fastest growing city in Canada. Surrey absorbed 28 percent of the region’s total population growth. Surrey has B.C.’s largest urban Indigenous population and is anticipated to absorb much of B.C.’s new immigrant population.

Despite this unabated growth, Surrey has not had a health master plan since 2007. Why do we need investment in space for specialized services? Because B.C.’s burden of heart disease, the second-largest killer, is in Surrey.

[11:15 a.m.]

About 30 percent of our population are of South Asian descent, a diaspora that has high predisposition to cardiac disease. Cardiac catheterization is a standard treatment for heart attacks. Despite having the highest number of absolute heart attacks in its general population, Surrey and the one million residents south of the Fraser that depend upon Surrey Memorial Hospital for specialized care do not have a cath lab within their boundaries. All cardiac catheterization labs in the Lower Mainland are located north of the river.

In 2021, 1,376 patients were transferred from Surrey Memorial Hospital’s emergency code 3, lights and sirens. The top reason was heart attacks. Successful transfers are subject to bridge conditions, traffic and weather.

Additionally, 2,411 Surrey residents needed emergent catheterization. So 33 percent of those occurred in Vancouver and 67 percent in New West. Surrey residents waited longer than the B.C. average and recommended clinical benchmarks for those emergent caths. There is no plan to add catheterization capacity in Surrey.

Why do we need maternity care? Surrey women deliver more babies in B.C. than anywhere else. Last year that number totalled 6,040. Rising birth rates in Surrey have been a demographic trend for two decades. Surrey Memorial Hospital’s maternity unit is the busiest in B.C. It was constructed 22 years ago, with 28 beds for 4,000 deliveries. Last year we delivered 5,000 by operating over capacity.

In a typical month, 98 women in active labour will arrive at our hospital, and we will attempt to divert them to a maternity centre outside of our city. We’re successful in about 25 percent of those. When we can’t divert them because the women are too far dilated, we deliver them in hallways, makeshift conference rooms, modified rooms. The maternity unit has added four new beds in 22 years. By comparison, last year the Surrey school district added over 1,000 new seats in elementary schools.

There is no new maternity capacity planned in Surrey.

Why pediatrics? Surrey is B.C.’s youngest city. We have 77,303 school-aged children. That’s equivalent to the New Westminster population in 2016. Surrey, therefore, experiences the greatest burden of childhood disease in B.C. Surrey’s hospital-based pediatric services are limited to a 5,000-square-foot pediatric ER. We see 200 children a day. B.C. has 443 hospital-based pediatricians. We have 12. We have only 16 in-patient beds, down from 24 in 2001. We have no pediatric subspecialist. Nor do we have an ICU.

Last year 192 children had to be transferred from our emergency code 3 to Vancouver for emergency care. An estimated 50,000 children and teens also go to Vancouver for specialized clinics we don’t have in Surrey. Travel of this scale impacts school attendance, family income and the environment. There is no planned pediatric expansion in Surrey or south of the river.

Why a tower? In addition to the hospital in Cloverdale that we’re very grateful for, a second tower was planned for in 2007 to allow for the growth of specialized service, expansion of the medical school — now schools, thank you — and population growth.

Surrey has one bed per 1,000 residents, far below the 2.5 average in Canada and the five in Vancouver, even after our new hospital — again, thank you. By the time it’s built out, we’ll have fewer than one bed per 1,000 residents. The people of Surrey and south of the Fraser need a permanent solution to our lack of specialized service, which has arisen over decades and decades.

Thank you very much.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you, Jane. I feel like I’ve done this.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks for the presentation. A lot in there.

J. Adams: Yeah, sorry. I tried. I hit my five minutes.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Congratulations to the foundation for successfully raising $200 million over the last 30 years. This is quite something.

First question. The health master plan — I imagine that would be fairly comprehensive. Do you know what the price is for a master plan of that size?

J. Adams: No, I do not. The last one was done in 2007.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): The second one was: what was the average on beds? You said one for every 1,000.

J. Adams: Yes. Residents.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): What was the average you said?

J. Adams: In Canada, the average is 2.5, which is low for the western world. In Surrey we currently have one.

B. Banman: First off, thank you for advocating on behalf of the citizens of Surrey and the Fraser Valley.

[11:20 a.m.]

If you were to surmise…. You have listed off a ton of things. What I hear is that we need maternity, we need pediatrics, but it’s got to be more than that. If you were to say something to this committee, other than what you just did, what would be the single greatest ask that you would ask for?

J. Adams: We need a master plan…

B. Banman: … because it’s been since 2007.

R. Leonard: I want to thank you for coming. As Tom said, congratulations on the work that you’ve done to raise funds to support health care in your community. I know that, particularly coming through this pandemic, there has been a sense of urgency and acceleration and recognition of new challenges. It’s like the challenges of old have become a distinct entity unto themselves, now, in terms of the speed with which we need to…. Surrey seems to be the epicentre of it, or really just at the very point of all of that that’s going on.

Do you see a place, when you talk about master planning, to really model the way to respond to these new challenges that we’re facing since 2022, say?

J. Adams: Absolutely. I think Fraser Health is incredibly innovative. Because of entrenched long-term funding patterns, the health authority in Surrey, in particular, because of our growth, relative to the rest of the province, has done creative things with a scarcity mentality.

Do I think that the leadership of Fraser Health, the physicians in particular, and the whole medical team are capable, properly resourced, of putting together a model that could be brought to scale in B.C. and other places? Absolutely. They have already proven, through COVID and through other crises, that they can do that.

A. Walker: I always appreciate hearing from the hospital foundation’s leadership in that role. It’s always been one of the strongest voices in our province, and it’s something we all benefit from.

I’m just wondering what the difference would be from this evidence-based health master plan versus a long-term capital plan that the health authorities tend to do.

J. Adams: My understanding, because I’ve been peripherally involved with both of those, is that a master plan tends to be far more inclusive and very dependent on demo­graphy. Looks, not so much. It’s just short- and mid-term, but typically plans out about 20 years. In particular, when done properly, it’s very inclusive of front-line workers, physicians, the medical or academic partners. It’s very inclusive.

Capital planning tends to be focused on particular assets, whether they be buildings or equipment, and it’s a far narrower group of people who are involved in the consultation decision-making.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay, not seeing any other questions or comments, Jane, thank you very much for your presentation, and thanks for what you do for the hospitals foundation.

J. Adams: Thank you. It’s the community, not the foun­dation, that gives money, but we’re privileged to participate.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Next up we have Richard Griffin.

Richard, you have roughly five minutes to make your presentation, followed by five minutes with questions and/or comments that are there.

The floor is yours.

RICHARD GRIFFIN

R. Griffin: I’d just like to say thanks for the opportunity to speak to you today.

As a recovered addict, I have certainly benefited from B.C.’s health care system, so I want to start by acknowledging the efforts of a great many people to help me get clean.

Nonetheless, as with everything else, there are some ways things could possibly be improved. With all the deaths out there stemming from drugs, I can get quite emotional, because I know so many people who have passed away. Thinking of them shakes me to the core, so please forgive me if I choke up a bit.

[11:25 a.m.]

First, I’d like to see all the B.C. health agencies become one, instead of having many different entities — Fraser Health, Coastal Health, and so on. The reason for this is because, with one central agency, we could eliminate redundant bureaucracies, become financially more efficient and be able to fund more workers on the ground.

Next, given that we do have separate agencies, I would like each agency to follow the same procedures, whereas now it appears each agency has its own way of doing things. For instance, right now, Surrey addiction services admirably offers drop-in counselling for clients who need help, but other agencies do not follow drop-ins.

There used to be a self-referral to drug treatment centres in Vancouver, but now you have to be referred by a counsellor, which leads to missed opportunities for someone who is homeless and addicted and ready to try to turn their life around.

Right now if you’re addicted and homeless in Vancouver, you’re not allowed to go to different health agencies. You must go to Coastal Health in Vancouver. If I was in Vancouver and used in Surrey, and if I needed to go to a Surrey addiction service to see a counsellor, I would not be allowed to see anyone, because I live in Vancouver.

With one central health agency, people wouldn’t have that experience. I was an addict for many years. I know, if I was ready to seek help and was asked to call another agency, I would simply have given up, and the golden opportunity to agree to treatment would have been missed. I would have just given up.

I appreciate the chance to speak to you and share my thoughts. Thank you.

Wow, I got through it.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Wow.

R. Griffin: I’m still here too, eh?

M. Starchuk (Chair): See, there’s nothing to it.

R. Griffin: Yeah, but I have this history of stuff going on.

B. Banman: Richard, I want to thank you, and I want to congratulate you. Good on you for finding your path and having a companion there to help you through the tough part.

We hear an awful lot, but for me personally, nothing beats hearing from someone that’s gone through the experiences that you have. So I want to thank you for the courage that you have shown and demonstrated here. I wish you many, many more years of sobriety and recovery.

What I do want to ask you, though, is when, currently, if someone who was in the midst of their…? When they’re an addict and they’re reaching out for help, how long, in your experience, do we have to get someone into a recovery bed? Is it minutes? Is it hours? Is it days? How long?

R. Griffin: A long time, for sure.

B. Banman: How fast should it happen? You were there. When you reached out and asked for help, how fast should it happen?

R. Griffin: I believe as soon as possible. Having had the experience of living in bushes and sleeping in trees, doing all this weird stuff that…. I had an opportunity. Well, actually, I’d gotten through that.

I went through the Phoenix Centre. I don’t know if you’ve heard of it. But I went through there, and I was there for ten years. Since then, I was having some issues. I live in Richmond here, and I phoned up the addiction services. They suggested I go somewhere else or phone some other agency.

And Surrey…. Like I say, they don’t follow the same mandate. Surrey has a great one. You can drop in, and you can go from 8:30 to 4:30. You can fill out your application form. You get to see a counsellor for half an hour.

Here, they don’t do that. It’s Coastal and Fraser. That’s what I mean by…. If it was all under one umbrella, and they followed the same mandate, it would…. That one’s a really good one, from what I’ve found. I called here, and they said to call other agencies, or: “You have to call back later.” I said to the lady: “You know what? Look, I’ve been there. If I was homeless and lived where I was living, and you expected me to get up in the morning and phone for help….” It’s missed. It’s a missed opportunity.

[11:30 a.m.]

Why couldn’t they have the same as over there? Why doesn’t Vancouver have it?

I have a granddaughter down there, and I got a daughter who is wired up really badly. I could be there for her, because I’ve gone through the system. I keep an eye on it, and I try to advocate for the people that are out there, because I’ve been there and I understand it. There are lots of overdoses. It’s in the news and everything, right?

I think if it was one agency, then you could go…. Be­cause there’s this…. I call it cross-border shopping or something. So you’re in Vancouver; you go to Richmond. “Well, you’re not in my catchment area.” You go over to wherever the other agencies are. “Well, you’re not in the catchment area.” So what? I got to go somewhere else now? Why can’t I just go to this one? They’re all following, like I say, the same mandate. I don’t even know if they’re on the same page or not. People need it now. They don’t need it, you know….

And the self-referral to treatment centres. When I was at Phoenix…. The man who founded it, a wonderful man. If you were on the streets, you could walk into their office, and they’d have an application form. You could fill it out. Even if you didn’t come back, at least there’s that opportunity. Who knows? Maybe there would be a chance that there’s an opening, and they can get you in right away.

Whereas now you’ve got to go see a counsellor. You’ve got to sit with her and do an interview. She’s got to write this thing out. She’s going to send it to the treatment facility. Well that golden opportunity is missed, because I couldn’t go in and do it physically myself. That would be a sign that I’m ready, and if I didn’t get in, well, at least I tried and I was there. But going through all those other mazes, I guess you’d call them, it’s just very difficult.

I’ve had lots of help from counsellors. I mean they’re all wonderful, the ones I’ve met.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Richard, we have a couple of other questions.

H. Yao: Thank you, Richard, for being so brave and sharing your story with us. We appreciate you, and we’re honoured by your presence. I wanted to say that.

I heard your story talking about Richmond. I assume you contacted Richmond Addiction Services Society, and they told you to go to Surrey. If you don’t mind me, I almost want to bring it back. I think, piggybacking off my colleague’s comment, when we have women who have experienced domestic violence and escaping, it takes a lot of courage — same as an individual experience addiction, and they’re looking for a way to seek support. We want them to be available there.

I think you probably know this far better than I do. It’s that sometimes Richmond…. There does seem to be a certain amount of barriers or stigmatization that makes it difficult for people reaching out for help or for support. I’m not too sure.

Maybe you can enlighten me how we can actually strengthen our services across the boundary, as you mentioned earlier, in a way to allow people like you, when you’re ready to reach out for support, that we can combat the stigmatization, combat against the fear and make the process less bureaucratic and more streamlined to support people just like you.

R. Griffin: More agencies, because I found out here in Richmond…. It took me a while to find out where people frequent the area that are in homeless, addiction…. There are not really any resources out here even to help them people.

What was the beginning of that question? There’s so much I want to say, but I got little time.

H. Yao: My apologies. I’m really more….

R. Griffin: Oh, to get…. Yeah. If they had more services open to people, like I say, when you’re ready….

There was something else. I had a really good idea, but I can’t remember it because I’m a bit anxious here. I wish I could remember it all.

M. Starchuk (Chair): We’ll get Tom….

You ask your question, then if it pops in…. That’s how, sometimes, it works for me. As I start hearing something else, it’s like: “Oh, now I remember.”

R. Griffin: Okay. Thank you.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): All summed it up beautifully. Thanks for being here. It means a lot.

I’ll try to go the reverse of what Henry asked. He was asking about what kind of supports, where are we missing the mark, but I’ll go the other way. What was your greatest support? What helped you the most? Was it friends you had? Your peer groups? Was it counselling? What helped you?

R. Griffin: I will get emotional with this one.

Well, I was on the streets in Surrey, and I was using everything. I met a young lady, and we sat down and we talked. I sort of…. We talked about our lives. We shared where we were and where…. You know, like, really connected well. I did that a lot with people. Then we went our separate ways.

[11:35 a.m.]

Then about six months later, I’m walking down the street. It’s pouring rain and snowy and cold, and I pass this girl. I look and I went: “She looks familiar to me.” It was like six months later. I used to carry a big backpack, and I’d help clothe. I did all this stuff for people. I said: “Do you need a place to stay?” I said, “There are no strings attached,” because women are preyed upon out there, and I don’t do that. I’m proud of myself, because I help them because I know they’re….

Anyway, I said, “No strings attached, no sexual favours, none of that stuff. I have a trailer, a camper, and you can stay there if you want,” and she said: “Well no.” Then about a couple of days later, she says: “Is it open?” I said: “Sure.” So I doubled her to this camper where I was staying at a friend’s place. That night she was sick, throwing up and shaking and sweating, and I thought maybe she needed some substance. I went out and got her some, and I got some for myself. That didn’t work. It was winter, so to stay warm…. We cuddled to stay warm, and she said: “I think I’m going to die.”

I’m like: really? It scared me. So the next morning, I piggybacked her to a payphone and called an ambulance. They came, they picked her up, and they took her away. Then I went into the emergency, and when I went to see her, she was fine. Then I went and had something to eat at the soup kitchen. I came back, and there was a trach­eotomy and IVs and all this stuff going on. I visited her for the six weeks that she was in this coma. She finally came out of it, and she was in a recovery house.

I stayed in touch with her, and she said: “Okay, are you coming in?” I said: “No, I’m not going to. Why bother?” About four or five months later I went in, and I was in the house. By then she’d moved to an old woman’s house. I was in a co-ed house. They had this bus. This church would pick everybody up, and they’d take us to the church. We went to the woman’s house, and she got on, and I saw her. There was this beautiful person. It was her, right? You know, we hung out together and stuff.

Then she met a guy, and she went out. It turns out that she had a lot of health issues — HIV, all that stuff. That’s why she was so sick. Then when I was at Phoenix — it’s right across the street from the hospital — she was in there. It turns out that she had to go on kidney dialysis. I visited her every day. I’d give her a big hug, and I thanked her for saving my life.

Then I went over there a day later, and I said: “Well, where’s my friend?”

“We had to ask her to leave because she was using.” I said: “What is your point? She’s an addict.”

Then they found her, because she didn’t come back. She’d passed away. But she saved my life. That’s how I got in. Then I started…. You know, I moved into Phoenix, and that place is marvellous. It had all the support in the world.

I miss her. That’s how I got in. My daughters are addicted. I have other members that were, but I’ve sort of steered them in different directions and helped them. My grandson was into it, and my oldest daughter is using that poison out there. I see her occasionally, and the stuff they’re doing is…. The other day she wasn’t moving. I went to see her, and she was slumped over, and she was….

I thought: “Yeah.” I checked to see if she’s breathing. I yelled her name, and she wouldn’t answer. She ended up wetting herself because of that stuff. I don’t know what they’re putting in it, but I have to deal with that one, too. I’ve tried to convince her, but I can’t, because she’s an adult. She’s 50, and she’s not listening. I’d like to get her help, but she’s not listening.

Anyway, I know I’m all over the map. That’s what happens when I get onto subjects. I’m so passionate about helping people.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Richard, it’s a good map. It’s a good map to be all over. Your lived experience will be the thing, I am positive, that this committee will remember at the end of our deliberations.

When I say this, I think you were talking about Michael Wilson.

R. Griffin: Yes, exactly.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Michael is an amazing human being.

R. Griffin: He sure is. He’s a beautiful….

M. Starchuk (Chair): He loves all kinds that are on this planet. You are the living proof that his work goes a long way.

I’m looking at the clock, and you’re just under the five minutes. So we’re all good that way. Thank you very much for the courage to sit in front of us to explain your life story and what it means to be in recovery.

R. Griffin: Okay, thank you. I appreciate your time. Thank you very much.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much.

We’re going to take a three-minute recess.

The committee recessed from 11:40 a.m. to 11:48 a.m.

[M. Starchuk in the chair.]

M. Starchuk (Chair): Our next presenter is Ajit Johal, Immunize.io Health Association.

You have five minutes to give us your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

The floor is yours.

IMMUNIZE.IO HEALTH ASSOCIATION

A. Johal: Perfect. Well, first and foremost, thank you so much, hon. ladies and gentlemen of the standing committee, for having me today. My name is Ajit Johal. I am a community member as well as a health care professional.

As mentioned, the organization I work for is a not-for-profit organization called Immunize.io Health Association. Our mission statement is a lofty one. It’s taking our best shot at immunizing the world, starting locally.

Personally, I have ties to Richmond. I’m a graduate of Richmond Secondary School. Happy to say that, and there you go. Professionally, born and raised in B.C., I’ve had the pleasure of working here as a practising pharmacist for almost 12 years now.

As a practising professional, as well as a vaccine educator with the UBC faculty of pharmaceutical sciences, I have witnessed, personally and professionally, the burden of shingles disease in patients — absolutely debilitating. It strikes at the worst possible time — stress, age. It leads to painful reactivation of a primary chickenpox infection, which manifests as a nasty, nasty rash.

[11:50 a.m.]

It shouldn’t be called a rash. It looks more like second-degree burns which can go up into the ocular area, leading to time off work; doctors visits; painful post-herpetic neuralgia — nerve pain that lasts months, years, requiring specialist visits, multiple medications; decreased quality of life.

Perhaps the most devastating thing I see in every single case, from a professional or personal level, is as people are made aware there’s a vaccine that can prevent it, so it’s preventable: “Why didn’t I get it, and why did this happen to me?” The three recommendations I’d like to put forth to the committee basically lead to one common goal, and that’s to prevent the burden of shingles on our community patients and the strain on our health care system.

The first recommendation is that the vaccine should be covered by the Ministry of Health, at no cost, as part of a routine immunization program. Different provincial jurisdictions have covered this vaccine. Ontario has had a program for those aged 60 to 69. Prince Edward Island has one for 60 plus. Quebec has one for 80 plus and for those who are immunocompromised.

The decision on the age demographic, of course, is variable. But at the end of the day, if it’s covered, that decreases a huge barrier to accessing this vaccine. Cost is often seen as a barrier. But also, if something is part of a public program, it benefits from all the luxury and the resources of allowing people to be aware of it and to access it.

This brings me to recommendations 2 and 3, because as we know, we can purchase this vaccine as a province, but it does no use sitting in our fridge; it needs to go into people’s arms. The two-dose shingles vaccine is a two-dose vaccine, so it’s very important they get both doses for up to ten years’ protection from shingles.

The economic impact is very clear. For patients who have shingles, the average cost is between $250 and $300 per patient. If they do have postherpetic neuralgia, that can go up to $1,000. And if they do need to see a doctor — or now, fortunately, a pharmacist as of today — it can range between $20 and $29. Those add up.

Look at the demographics and the incidence rate of shingles in B.C., and you look at savings of about $13 million, $11 million and $3 million, respectively, if we look at cases, postherpetic neuralgia and physician visits.

That brings me to points 2 and 3. The second one is implementation. Having it delivered by community pharmacists leverages an existing fantastic infrastructure that has shown excellent results with COVID-19, as well as influenza, where the community pharmacists deliver the majority of those vaccinations to our communities.

The third recommendation is that we need to promote the program. We need to, as Winston Churchill said, not let a good crisis go to waste. All of the investment, leverage and infrastructure we’ve seen with the Get Vaccinated program in B.C. — 95 percent first doses, 85 percent second doses…. All of that infrastructure has been paid for, so let’s leverage it and pivot it to making a successful shingles program where we can limit the strain on our already strained primary care system.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation, Ajit.

We have a list of people, starting with Tom.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks for the presentation.

I was one of the ones that got the one-dose vaccine. Maybe you can explain to me: do I need another one, or what led to the second dose? You said a ten-year protection, so am I protected or not?

A. Johal: That’s a great question. I’m more than happy to give you medical advice. So first of all, the original live attenuated Zostavax vaccine was fantastic. It came out in 2009. It was what we had available. Unfortunately, its protection doesn’t last. With the newer vaccine available in 2018, the two doses are showing, again, 90-percent-plus protection initially, which is staying pretty solid for at least ten years, and there’s ongoing surveillance.

The current guidelines, if you were to cite the NACI guidelines for your case specifically — it would be with grade A evidence that you should be revaccinated with the two-dose vaccine.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Well, I’ll wait until we fund the free program here.

H. Yao: Thank you so much for the presentation. You’ll be surprised that probably I’m a little bit not happy with your recommendation No. 1. It almost felt like it should be younger than that — 65. The reason why I brought it up is because I personally had shingles. Earlier, when I was in my career, I almost went blind. Thankfully, it was captured early.

I had quite a few people around my age group that had shingles as well. It’s maybe due to the lifestyle we’re having or due to the stress level we’re having. Is there any consideration to maybe do research? Or maybe we should actually lower the age? That way, one, professionally, people are not taken away from their work; and, two, actually helping increase your preventive measure.

[11:55 a.m.]

I think one of the most important things is actually having chicken pox vaccinations to prevent shingles in the first place. I would love to hear your feedback on that part.

A. Johal: Yeah, there’s a lot in that as well.

First of all, I absolutely agree with you. Again, the guide­lines say 50 plus. Globally, at the age of 50, we see an uptake in shingles rates, so it is recommended at age 50. Sixty-five was thrown out there as an estimate.

Different programs…. Again, the more age cohorts you cover, the more money that needs to be spent. That is a consideration that needs to be taken. I think there’s also…. I mean, cost is only one barrier. Those between 50 and 60 are typically working. There are extended benefits.

As employers…. We do a lot of work with that as well. I think there’s much more that needs to be done. Any sort of strategy that gets people protected and reduces the impact…. The employer sees that impact. We ran a very successful program, which was featured a few years ago, with the Richmond school district. The incidence of shingles in teachers was…. As you mentioned, it’s increasing due to stress and due to the aging demographic.

We have to look at these solutions. That’s certainly a way. I think the key thing is promoting access to and awareness of the program. Covering the vaccine is only one small sliver of it. That’s why it was only one of my three recommendations.

H. Yao: Do you mind speaking a bit about the chicken pox vaccine as well?

A. Johal: Chicken pox vaccination prevents primary infection. The interesting thing is…. We started the chicken pox vaccine in the early 2000s. Those kids aren’t 50 yet, so we don’t know if they don’t need the shingles vaccine.

B. Banman: Thank you for the presentation.

Let’s see if I can remember my science. I believe that chicken pox is a herpes zoster which lies dormant in you if you get chicken pox, in the dorsal root ganglia. Or is it the dorsal root horn? Is it the ganglia?

A. Johal: That is correct. It’s the ganglia, yeah.

B. Banman: I remembered. I would still pass the board exam.

A lot of people are not aware that they actually have it. It’s lying there dormant, waiting to just erupt. Henry, actually, spoke on it a little bit. So we won’t know for a few more years whether or not the chicken pox vaccine actually will prevent shingles. I guess there’s no way of knowing whether that’s alive in your dorsal root ganglia.

For those listening at home, that’s a skin dermatone, basically. It can go anywhere. It can go in your eye. Anywhere where those nerves go out to the periphery of your skin is where it goes. It’s basically like having your skin on fire or having acid dripped on it. That’s what it would be described as.

How much longer until we know whether or not the chicken pox one will actually prevent shingles?

A. Johal: If you were to do the math…. I mean, it’s typically done…. It also depends on when kids get the vaccine. If they get it in their first year of life, then there is less chance that they may have been exposed before they get vaccinated. But if they get it when they’re in grade 6, then there’s a chance they might have been exposed to it already, and it’s already dormant.

It’s complicated. I think the key takeaway, though, is…. The first iteration of the shingles vaccine — its effectiveness waned. Really, we were getting about a year out of it. If we’re getting ten and we’re looking at cohorts, that’s a very good investment. The data I cited is each year of cases that could be avoided with a vaccinated cohort.

G. Chow: Thank you for your presentation.

I wasn’t too sure when you mentioned that the vaccine is already paid for and that we already have them in our health care system. You’re advocating — well, this is not the only thing — to have the vaccine covered by the health care system, right?

Who makes this vaccine right now? It’s not in B.C., right? We don’t make it, despite our biosciences.

A. Johal: No. Basically, I’m advocating for…. There’s a cost to…. When you have a vaccine program, you cover the vaccine so people don’t have to pay for it. The province purchases the doses.

The two-dose vaccine is currently made by Glaxo­SmithKline. They have manufacturing in Quebec. What would happen, then, is…. You would have to look at supporting the administration. You would reimburse pharmacists for administering the vaccine, similar to what they’re doing for COVID and flu.

Then the third investment would be to add an additional antigen or vaccine into the get vaccinated program and to do some promotion on the Immunize B.C. website. Similar to COVID 19, we all got emails when we were eligible. We also got emails when we were due for another dose. That’s really key. You really need two doses.

[12:00 p.m.]

To get the true savings, you need a high uptake in your at-risk population, whatever you decide that may be, and then you’ve got to make sure they get two doses. You look at data on the retail side. Only 70 percent of people show up again. That’s 30 percent of people who got one dose, but they didn’t get the second one.

With COVID, we saw a very good uptake with the first and second dose because people…. I mean, I’ve looked at the data. Being in vaccine research…. There’s no real innovative trick. You’ve got to remind people and just keep bugging them. That’s the only way. That app does that.

M. Starchuk (Chair): That’s a good phrase. Just keep bugging them.

A. Johal: That’s it.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Just keep bugging them.

Ronna-Rae, final question.

R. Leonard: Okay. Thank you.

You’ve told us how much shingles costs in terms of accessing the medical health system. What is the cost to actually provide the shingles vaccine to our population? If you’ve got a sense of that.

A. Johal: That’s a really good question.

That would depend on a couple of things that, unfortunately, I’m not important enough to know the answer to. The first would be…. What is the actual cost the ministry is going to buy the vaccine at? It’s going to be less than the retail cost of what pharmacies buy. Each province that signed a deal is not disclosing it.

I think there was an economic analysis done by Ontario where each dose would be about $120. So $240 per person to get them fully vaccinated. Depending on which age cohort you look at…. If you’re going to go as low as 50, that’s more people. If you are going to go as high as 80, like Quebec, that’s less people. That will be the multiplier of interest. With demographic statistics in B.C., you can calculate that out.

Then the cost of administration. B.C. PharmaCare reimburses pharmacists $12.10 for the administration of publicly funded vaccines. So about $24.20 per patient.

If the cost estimate, which we don’t know, is $240, plus the $24.20…. That would be the cost to vaccinate somebody against shingles with both doses. That includes the cost of the dose and the reimbursement.

Don’t quote me on the cost of the vaccine, though. I don’t know what that would be. That’s for the higher-up people to….

R. Leonard: There has been a suggestion earlier, too, that we raise the price of providing shots.

Thank you very much.

M. Starchuk (Chair): All right. Thank you, Ajit, for your presentation and for the time this morning.

To the committee, we will recess for lunch. If we can be back here, ready, at around one o’clock, for 1:05. The afternoon is crammed. That’s it.

The committee recessed from 12:02 p.m. to 1:04 p.m.

[M. Starchuk in the chair.]

M. Starchuk (Chair): Welcome back from our break.

First up we have Yvonne Jeffreys, Prosthetics and Orth­otics Association of British Columbia.

Five minutes for your presentation, and five minutes from the committee for questions and/or comments.

The floor is yours.

PROSTHETICS AND ORTHOTICS
ASSOCIATION OF B.C.

Y. Jeffreys: My name is Yvonne. I work as a certified orthotist. Today I’m presenting as a member of POABC, advocating for patients living with amputations or physical disabilities and needing prosthetic and orthotic care to live each day.

[1:05 p.m.]

A prosthesis is worn by someone who is missing a limb. That might be because of absence from birth, trauma, cancer, or something like that. A prosthesis is an orthotic device or a brace that isn’t just for your feet. It actually is an external support that overcomes physical impairment or pain.

Most of us take walking for granted, but for someone with limb loss or who can’t control their muscles, this is not the case. When treated with a proper and well-maintained prosthetic and orthotic device, people can work and participate in a fuller life, with improved mobility.

Last year this committee made recommendations to modernize the funding strategy for how prosthetic and orthotic care is provided. I’m here again to highlight the need for a seamless funding plan rather than the hodgepodge of band-aid solutions that exists right now. B.C. does not have an adult funded orthotic program. If your mother or father survive a stroke, there’s no provincial funding program to help them get a brace.

I have a patient, Sally, who works on a film crew. She was left, after her stroke, with a paralyzed leg, and this brace allows her to safely return to work on the film set. She thought she was really lucky, but then she had to find $2,000 because this brace wasn’t covered by PharmaCare.

I have another patient, Tim. He’s a 17-year-old grade 11 boy who lives with cerebral palsy. He has worn braces his entire life, always funded through PharmaCare. So why does the government think that his braces are not a worthwhile benefit when he turns 19? He’s not sure how he’s going to be able to afford them in the future. An adult orthotic program could solve that problem.

People wear these devices every day, so over time, they wear out or need some maintenance. Unfortunately, the funding policies to keep these devices in working order are outdated. Patients are in a holding pattern when they need to get permission for funding for urgent and necessary repairs. For example, if you wore two artificial legs and needed an adjustment, you would have to wait until these costs are approved through a cumbersome application process before getting the work done.

Today’s inadequate funding policies create barriers for emergency repairs, sometimes leading to catastrophic falls or ulcers while waiting, all because the system is difficult to navigate. Can you imagine this prosthetic suspension sleeve…? It wears out. While you’re waiting for a replacement, every step you take, you’re worried that your leg is going to fall off. That’s terrible. Wearing a worn-out liner next to your skin can produce skin rashes and can cause infected wounds. This is bad news, potentially forcing people to stop wearing their artificial leg while the skin heals, often missing work or school.

Another example of a brace is this one worn by Barbara, who’s got polio, so she has a paralyzed leg. These knee joints lock so that she can walk with a straight leg. Over time, these braces wear out, and I’ve seen duct tape, plastic zippy clips or face cloths used because they can’t afford to get them fixed. This puts them at risk of bone-breaking falls.

For those on disability assistance, some orthotic services are frozen at 2010 rates. People on disability incomes are having to cover these outstanding balances not funded. These reimbursement rates are 14 years behind the true cost. Even some recent increases on select devices have reimbursement still lagging by several years. Funding should reflect the cost of current services, and these need to be indexed to inflation so the financial burden on patients does not get worse over time.

I see the struggle every day when patients are trying to afford new devices or repair, sometimes even trying homemade solutions because they can’t afford proper care. These challenges lead to increased health complications and more incidents of amputation.

As prosthetists and orthotists, we can help people stay mobile, but if they can’t afford it, this care remains unattainable. Creating an all-ages inclusive and indexed funding strategy under the Ministry of Health will go a long way to improving accessibility of prosthetic and orthotic care. Modernizing strategies to support, maintain and repair devices is just good health care.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, Yvonne.

We have a list of people that are here, so if we can have our questions brief and our answers brief as well, we’ll get through the list.

B. Banman: Thank you very much. It’s not often we get a display like this. I hope staff takes a picture of this. I think it’s worthwhile.

[1:10 p.m.]

My question, actually, is…. Yes, I agree that it is a huge financial burden to some that cannot afford to do that.

I want to zero in on the ulcers and skin rashes and actually anatomical changes that happen if you’re wearing a prosthetic device. Do you have any idea as to how much extra it costs the health care system by someone being forced to wear a prosthetic device that no longer fits and now creates an ulcer?

For those back home that are listening online, an ulcer is basically an open wound.

Do you have any idea how much extra that costs our health care system to have that wound now dealt with?

Y. Jeffreys: Well, Diabetes Canada has a lot of data on millions of dollars in our health care system when…. The other thing is that people may end up losing their limb or having a revision to that limb because of an infection, because of that wound. So big.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks for the presentation. You hinted at it a couple of times here — perhaps the young man that has cerebral palsy, those that are on disability income that can’t afford prosthetics. Would it be acceptable to have an income-tested model for your strategy to be implemented, meaning those that are most vulnerable would be covered? And for those that aren’t, that are working, able to work and create high income for themselves, it wouldn’t be available.

Y. Jeffreys: As long as that income testing is affordable. I think, right now, what happens under PharmaCare….

Now, orthotics is not covered under PharmaCare. Under prosthetics, they actually do cover all ages, but sometimes that deductible…. Someone still has to pay $5,000 before they can actually get assistance because of that income. That could be a large hit at the beginning of the year if someone has to pay that in order to fix something. They just do without for quite a while, and the trade-off is the health conditions.

H. Yao: Thank you so much, Yvonne, for coming back to the Finance Committee and presenting again, and thank you so much for championing the importance of this work.

I think I will ask the same question I asked last year. Do you have any data to demonstrate that due to the lack of access to prosthetics, the number of hours of work is compromised and, I guess, also the number of hospital visitations increase — how that can actually become an investment that will have a certain amount of return to our society?

Y. Jeffreys: We don’t actually track that information, so I don’t actually have any of that information, but I think it’s really…. It’s the quality of life and missing work, and those hours would be very valuable to know.

A. Walker: I might have missed it. Do you know roughly how many British Columbians require orthotics and prosthetics to live a regular life?

Y. Jeffreys: In orthotics, we would never know because there’s no program, so no idea. Yeah, I’m not sure.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Yvonne, I have a question regarding the part about urgent repairs and the ask for a funding strategy that was there. Is there truly a funding strategy that would get it to the point where when it’s broken, they could get it done immediately, like that 24/7 kind of a model that would be out there for somebody, especially if it’s a lower limb and it becomes an issue around mobility?

Y. Jeffreys: Yeah. For prosthetics, there is a $400 maximum. You can go in, and you can get $400 that can be covered, but anything over that…. As I say, if you have two limbs and you need something, you can get the first one fixed, but you can’t get the other one fixed. We would like to see, as a strategy, that that daily limit is increased and not limited to just one limb. Some people are missing an arm and their leg, so they have different needs that are going on. We would like to see that increased.

Under prosthetics, there is a bit of a strategy, but it’s very outdated in that price. The $400 buys one liner, that kind of thing. You can’t make a big change on that. But for orthotics, there’s nothing.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Yvonne, thank you very much for your presentation today. Obviously, your presentation becomes more memorable every time. Thank you very much.

Our next presenter is Evan Kellett, Home Medical Equipment Providers Association of British Columbia.

[1:15 p.m.]

Evan, you have five minutes to make your presentation, and the committee has five minutes to ask questions or make comments.

You have the floor.

HOME MEDICAL EQUIPMENT PROVIDERS
ASSOCIATION OF B.C.

E. Kellett: Fantastic. That previous discussion and the talk around ulcers might actually save a little bit of time here. We’ve got some similar problems.

Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to address the committee today.

My name is Evan Kellett. I’m here on behalf of the Home Medical Equipment Providers Association of B.C. to hopefully shed some light on mounting challenges faced by equipment providers like us, as well as the end-users of equipment living in our B.C. communities.

Rapidly rising costs and disrupted supply chains have created a situation that poses significant risk to B.C. residents, as it hampers the provision of appropriate medical equipment.

Thirteen years ago, amended regulations brought in funding caps. These funding caps obviously no longer re­flect current market conditions. Inflation in B.C. during that time has risen 22½ percent. The consumer price index has risen over 25 points. A suggested retail price of a mobility scooter during that time has increased by 46 percent.

Currently our capped funding covers about 55 percent of those costs. These funding caps have become unsustainable and have led to a reduced and soon non-existent availability of safe and reliable products for individuals requiring medical equipment.

Imagine living in a B.C. community with difficult terrain and limited services. You commute 30 minutes each way to daily dialysis treatments over rough terrain and hilly streets. An appropriate scooter for your needs was out of reach, with the coverage that was available. You didn’t have access to any specialty or alternate funding, so you got what you got. And the scooter that you got isn’t able to handle the terrain. It breaks down frequently. This leads to missed appointments and increased health complications.

Another really common story is that of an end-user stuck in bed for days because of a lift failure. An overhead lift, for many, is their only way out of bed. Without it, not only can they not conduct their day, go through their daily activities, but they’re also missing medical appointments. Their risk of a pressure injury, the ulcer we talked about last time — I had dumbed it down to bedsore, but we’ve gotten past that here — skyrockets.

This story often presents itself as a quadriplegic at home in bed for days with already compromised skin and now a pressure injury. This pressure injury costs the health care system significantly more than an adequate lift would have, in the first place. Ultimately, both of these users have ended up in hospital, at great cost to the province.

We recommend immediate amendments to B.C.’s em­ployment and assistance regulations to align with current market pricing for scooters and lifts, or we will continue to see deteriorating health outcomes and increased costs for the province.

While the Ministry of Children and Family Development recently improved funding for children’s medical equipment, it is essential to acknowledge that adults also face funding shortfalls. My next recommendation is that swift re-evaluation of equipment funding for B.C.’s adult population is necessary to ensure comprehensive support for all residents.

In April of 2022, MCFD increased funding for medical equipment benefits for children by $10 million, recognizing the need to better assist them. However, the province refuses to acknowledge the persistent funding shortfalls for adults. Approximately 30,000 children and youth re­ceive support needs through MCFD while over 100,000 B.C. residents receive PWD benefits through SDPR. So that’s more than triple the user base with no increase to funding.

Increasing funding for adults in B.C. who require medical equipment is imperative to ensure they receive the necessary support to stay healthy and, where possible, to enhance their independence.

Our last recommendation is that urgent modernization of our funding system or funding process in B.C. is im­portant to optimize outcomes and effectively manage overall spend. The current system in B.C. is plagued by funding silos and inadequate coordination, which leads to higher costs, likely for the Ministry of Health, and missed opportunities for cost savings and improved services. The left pocket doesn’t know what’s happening in the right pocket, and small SDPR savings are leading to considerable additional repair and future health care costs.

[1:20 p.m.]

Additionally, frequent reviews of funding are needed to keep pace with evolving needs as well as B.C.’s booming population, which has grown by over 1 million residents since those funding caps were implemented.

I know I’m at time. Thank you for your attention and consideration of these pressing issues. Home Medical Equipment Providers Association of B.C. urges you to join us in this fight and make recommendations that address the funding shortfalls and rectify the disparities in medical equipment support for all residents. We’d welcome the opportunity to work with any of you to modernize these long-standing problems.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you, Evan, for your presentation.

B. Banman: You mentioned that you had some data with regard to how much money it could actually save our health care system. In some cases, now, are you talking about persons with disabilities that are on income assistance only? Or are you also talking about…? There are other individuals out there where parents may have extended health care that would cover portions of this. Are you bringing those into the fold as well?

E. Kellett: For sure. I’ve learned a lot about navigating politics and B.C. Stats in the last few months, trying to do this. It’s difficult. To be fair, not everyone receiving PWD benefits requires equipment supports, nor does every child or youth accessing MCFD supports require equipment — assuming those populations are similar. My point is that we’re dealing with triple the user base.

In putting a cost to the savings, I’ve tried to round up a lot of numbers. I can’t put a dollar cost to that. Similar to the last presentation, I can tell you that the cost for healing a simple wound is easily $20,000 and up. We’re dealing with a ceiling track lift that would have cost $8,000 to begin with, and we only get paid 4,200 bucks for it. Nobody in here works for half of their going rate, except for us.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Evan, I have a question. You can’t nail down the savings, so if we were to open this up to the numbers that you’re talking about, what would be the added cost to the system, by going into the numbers that you were showing, where everything was back at that point here and moving itself, moving the dial forward?

E. Kellett: By “added cost,” do you mean of funding the equipment in the first place?

M. Starchuk (Chair): Yes.

E. Kellett: Per piece of equipment, right now, ceiling track lifts are capped at $4,200. The going rate is about $8,400 or $8,500 for something like that. Mobility scooters are capped at $3,500. I can find something exact if I dig a little bit, but the going rate is about $6,300 or $6,400. Roughly 54 percent of the cost is covered for a ceiling track lift, and about 56 or 57 for a mobility scooter.

M. Starchuk (Chair): I guess the other part of the question would be: do you have data to show how many of those units are out there, and what the expectation would be for additional people as the population ages?

E. Kellett: As an individual contractor — my company is one contractor that’s authorized under a master standing arrangement — we only have access to our numbers, and overall numbers aren’t provided. I can tell you that the contract we operate on spends about $25 million a year on medical equipment. SDPR is said to be the largest user of that budget. The other stakeholders in that contract are MCFD, WorkSafe and ICBC. Again, I only have access to my numbers.

If I can learn some of the information requests, I can find some of those numbers, but it has proven challenging.

R. Leonard: Thanks for your presentation. It’s obviously a pretty significant impact on people’s lives.

One of the things that I’ve had experience with in my office is where people have something that’s a little better-quality. Then it breaks down, and they have had some coverage, through whatever stream, but it’s for a lesser quality, and they haven’t had a good experience with that. Do you see a way of navigating that so that people do end up with an end result that actually improves their quality of life without causing further injury?

[1:25 p.m.]

E. Kellett: I think quality of equipment certainly plays into things. It’s like owning a car, and total cost of ownership. A better product is going to break down less and result in a better quality of life for the user. There’s no guarantee that a more expensive piece of equipment won’t break, but numbers are on our side, for sure.

One of the recommendations I made — outside of the presentation but in the submission — was increased collaboration. I think if the procurement services that manage our contract would facilitate two-way conversations between providers…. We’re hands-on with these people every day. Don’t take our word for it. Contact the end users as well, and take feedback from them, about the quality of product that’s being provided and the impact that it has on their lives.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Evan, thank you very much for your presentation and for the time you took out this afternoon.

Next up is Line Porfon, OpenCircle.

Line, you have five minutes to make your presentation and then five minutes for comments and questions from the committee.

OPENCIRCLE

L. Porfon: Thank you for having me here to represent our organization. If I stumble over a word or two, I had some jaw work done, so I apologize in advance.

We are an organization that represents construction and related industries all across the country. We have 1,700 members and 50,000 people that we serve through our benefits and other services, including in B.C. We are here to represent today to talk about three key recommendations that we made as part of our submission, two of which relate to the industry and one that relates specifically to our member organizations.

Our first recommendation is coordinating an industrywide consultation to engage partners to focus on the competencies that address the current and projected labour gap, which would be valuable and set a stage for meaningful and informed education, training and refinements.

We know that in the B.C. construction industry, the percentage of newcomers is actually 23 percent and is higher than Canada’s 18 percent. We are looking at a recommendation that says to allocate the supportive placement and initial training of newcomers in trades.

We are very supportive of the B.C. government’s initiative to support skilled-trades training through the future-ready action plan, which is for 400 opportunities starting in September 2023. We are looking forward to witnessing the outcomes of government investment in skilled-trades training through the future skills grant.

Our second recommendation is related specifically to promoting skilled-trades professions as a prestigious ca­reer. This has been lacking overall in Canada, where there is a sense that being in the trades is lesser than that of being a professional.

Our recommendation is that we are willing to work with governments right across the country, including B.C., to engage students, parents, educational institutions and the industry to break the stigma around skilled-trades careers. We believe government should recognize and support in­dustry-led initiatives to increase participation of women, Indigenous people and racialized individuals in skilled trades.

Many of our member companies are leading in this space by ensuring that their organizations are inclusive and welcoming environments. They are achieving this by implementing robust training, beyond tool skills, and engaging their teams through enhanced mental health training.

Finally, the last recommendation is around employer-led mental health initiatives. In 2019 and 2020, we recognized a trend through our benefit plan: there was increased utilization for mental health services, and it continued throughout the pandemic. The increase in those services that were being provided became even more so after the pandemic. We recognize that there is definitely an industry issue.

We encourage government to promote and support em­ployer-led programs that enable companies to work with their employees to seek and connect with meaningful mental health resources for psychologically safe workplaces. The construction industry represents some of the highest numbers of workers presenting with mental health crises, including substance abuse and addictions.

In November 2020, the mental health index for LifeWorks — which is our provider for EFAP — indicated that construction workers had the third-lowest mental health score in all benefit programs that they were providing across Canada.

Overall, our organization, in 2019 and 2020, rebranded. We used to be called the Merit Contractors Association. We were originating in Alberta 37 years ago. In 2020, we went national, and there was a deliberate reason why we changed our brand to OpenCircle.

[1:30 p.m.]

We recognize that the industry is changing and that it is so important for employers to do those supports and be there for their employees. That is what you see in terms of part of the rebrand that we did and the reason that we became national.

As an organization, it is our intent and purpose to serve those employers and serve the employees in order that they’re able to have meaningful work and safe spaces, and that this is a good industry for people to work in. Thank you for your time.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, Line.

H. Yao: Thank you so much for your presentation. I really appreciate the stuff you’re doing, especially to help us promote the trades sector. For Richmond specifically, if you don’t mind me saying, we often see a lot of families or parents who do seem to come with a bias against the trades industry sector.

Do you have any recommendations, suggestions or re­sources that would actually help parents to have a deeper appreciation for what our trades sector has to offer? Maybe you have some kind of data that can actually compare trades income with every other sector, including the benefit of flexibility, or all kinds of work opportunities, so we can create a comparison and contrast to share with different families in our community.

L. Porfon: Absolutely. We actually have data around that, which I would be able to share with the committee, related to what a good career it could be in the trades and what that looks like over a lifetime.

Anecdotally, I can tell you that our board of directors, which is composed of very senior folks right across the country in construction, does extremely well. In terms of tools, I would say that it has to start right from the get go — kindergarten all the way up. It’s a shift in attitude within the school systems, and it’s just a culture shift.

It’s not because the parents or schools are bad-intentioned. They’re all well-intentioned around how they do that. If you look to Europe and some of the ways that they do their progressive education around identifying kids early on and promoting particular trades, professions etc., it really is about changing the attitude and the culture around the fact that it is a profession.

Another example I’ll give you is math. It’s absolutely amazing. We had a program where we had math teachers coming in, going on a job site for a day and walking out of there complete believers — shocked at how much math was used on a job site, etc. There are, absolutely, tools that I can make a submission for around how that works and how that looks.

G. Chow: Thank you for your presentation. You mentioned that workers have the lowest mental health well-being in the construction industry.

L. Porfon: Third lowest, according to LifeWorks, who is a national provider for EFAP.

G. Chow: Third lowest. Okay. Who are the other two industries? Do you know?

L. Porfon: No, I don’t. I’m sorry.

H. Yao: We had actually heard a fellow presenter talking about, unfortunately to say, harassment of people with different genders in the trades sector. I would love to hear….

Maybe, of course, to piggyback on my colleague who talked about mental health, you can enlighten us on what kind of steps have been taken by OpenCircle within the sector itself. What can we do to further protect and strengthen the sense of confidence and security of women, or individuals who self-identify as women, in the trades sector?

L. Porfon: That’s a great question. As we serve our membership, which is our end-users of the company, and through that, the employees, we certainly promote best practices, etc. We support any policies, legislation, regulations, etc., that would support that.

We were in Ontario not that long ago, talking about a recent piece of legislation where it was about safe spaces for bathrooms for ladies who were on job sites. We presented to the standing committee there to support that piece of legislation.

Everywhere that we can, we definitely promote that. As a member association, we have no enforcement that we can do with our members specifically. We certainly support the work with the organizations, the companies etc., and we look at partnering with companies that want to make a difference, that want to be progressive, that want to do things for their employees, etc.

We’re pretty cautious about that as well. Where we can, we support and, certainly, bring those practices forward. In terms of ourselves, we are also one of the companies that supported women in trades with the Canadian Apprenticeship Forum. Where we can lend our voice and lend information on behalf of our members, we do.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Bruce, in 60 ticks or less.

B. Banman: Thank you very much. I think that there needs to be more emphasis on trades in particular. I came back from the Site C dam, and they will hire a female driver over a male driver for those big trucks, because they don’t break them. They’re better operators, is what we were told. What can we do to promote trades, not just for women, but for young men and women that are going in there? What’s the one thing you think we can do?

[1:35 p.m.]

L. Porfon: It’s education around what a great career it is.

Specifically, our plan is portable, so you can port our plan between companies. You can help with the highs and lows of folks, because that’s one of the restrictions that people have. They look and say: “Well, I don’t want to be laid off for winter, etc.” So if there are ways to address those gaps for people, it will make it a better, attractive space for people to go into.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Line, thank you very much for your presentation.

As you pack up, I will simply say I was at a commencement a few weeks ago. I watched the graduating class walk across, and I cannot tell you the number of people that were very proudly telling what trades they were entering into. There were more people talking about the trades they were entering into than what their career would be in as an engineer. Not that there’s anything wrong with engineers. It was in your face, what trade they were actually going into.

While we may need to do more, I can tell you that from what I saw a few weeks ago, there is a lot being done right now.

L. Porfon: That’s very exciting. Thank you for that.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Next we have Richmond school district. I have written down Debbie Tablotney as the speaker.

D. Tablotney: Yes, and I’m joined today by our staff, our stakeholders and trustees.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Your complete entourage.

D. Tablotney: We do things together.

M. Starchuk (Chair): You have five minutes for your presentation and five minutes remaining for questions and/or comments.

The floor is yours.

SCHOOL DISTRICT 38, RICHMOND,
BOARD OF EDUCATION

D. Tablotney: Thank you, hon. committee members, for the opportunity to present the priorities of the Richmond board of education for the upcoming provincial budget.

We’ll share three critical priorities: capital funding for our City Centre school spaces, capital funding for seismically safe schools and sustainable funding for ministry initiatives in K-to-12 education.

First and foremost, we urgently request capital funding to address mounting enrolment pressures in Richmond City Centre. The need for a new elementary school and essential additions to existing schools is paramount. Recent enrolment trends have shown a staggering 15.2 percent growth in total enrolment across the four elementary schools in the City Centre. This has led to the deployment of eight portable classrooms to accommodate a 215-seat shortfall.

Committee members, we ask that we work together and invest in the City Centre to address the changes of population growth while also providing an opportunity to alleviate pressure on our educational infrastructure, reduce reliance on portable classrooms and deliver high-quality education in every neighbourhood school.

Secondly, we implore the province to allocate appropriate capital funding for our seismic mitigation program. Currently, 20 schools in our district carry a high seismic risk rating, demanding immediate attention. Regrettably, 16 elementary schools and four secondary schools remain unsupported for mitigation, placing over 10,000 student seats at risk.

When it comes to safety and well-being of our students and staff, can we afford to wait for a seismic event to occur before we take action? Again, let us work together by investing in the safety of our schools and, in doing so, we’ll not only fulfil our moral obligation but also make a prudent economic decision that secures a brighter and safer future for our families in our province.

Lastly, we request sustainable funding for ministry initiatives, including the Indigenous-focused graduation re­quirement, the K-to-12 anti-racism action plan and child care and early learning initiatives. The implementation of the Indigenous-focused graduation requirement signifies a significant commitment to truth and reconciliation. To ensure its successful integration, we appeal to the ministry for additional funding to support classroom resources, release time for professional development and staffing support to effectively incorporate Indigenous-focused content and curriculum into our schools.

The K-to-12 anti-racism action plan aligns strongly with our ongoing work to create safe and inclusive learning environments. We request additional funding from the ministry to effectively implement the action plan, including the addition of staff positions that build the necessary professional capacity for an understanding of anti-racism.

[1:40 p.m.]

The ministry has also emphasized the importance of child care and early learning initiatives, and our district has made significant strides in this regard. Additional funding is needed to support students with disabilities and diversabilities, offer professional development opportunities for staff, enhance administrative assistance, allocate additional custodial time and address costs associated with staff absences, and finally, recognizing the impact of financial hardship on student performance and well-being.

The student and family affordability fund has played a crucial role in our district. We urgently request ongoing funding to support families experiencing financial hardship, ensuring equitable access to education by alleviating the burden of school-related expenses.

Committee members, help us commit to truly achieving educational equity and inclusion by allocating the necessary funding for initiatives like Indigenous-focused graduation requirements and the K-to-12 anti-racism action plan.

In conclusion, we want to extend our sincere apprecia­tion to the ministry for ongoing commitment to supporting K-to-12 public education. We are grateful for the investments made thus far, and we recognize the positive impact they have made on our students and schools. We are committed to working collaboratively with the ministry to ensure the best possible education opportunities for all students in our district.

Together, let us continue to build a brighter future and a more prosperous future for our province through sustained investment in K-to-12 public education.

Thank you for your attention and ongoing support.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, Debbie.

First up, Tom.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks for the presentation. A question I asked, I think, a couple of days ago now — I’m losing track — to another school district…. When you talked about portables, when it’s funded, is it a capital cost expense, or is it an operating expense?

D. Tablotney: It is, I believe, an operating expense for our district. I know that it is not funded by the province, but I’ll let our secretary-treasurer, Cindy Wang, answer.

C. Wang: Thank you for the question. Yes, the nature of the expenditure, in accounting terms, is a capital expenditure. However, we have to move operating funding to pay for the capital because the portables are not funded by the provincial government.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): That is a concern, obviously, because that comes out of your operating cost for capital projects.

C. Wang: Purposes. Yeah, for sure.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Okay. Thank you.

H. Yao: Thank you so much. First of all, I do want to say kudos to the SD 38 school board trustees. You guys have been advocating for it. I do want to reassure you that MLA Kelly Greene and I already have a meeting with the ministry at the end of June in regard to bringing your conversation. So thank you so much.

I do want to have a conversation about your first recommendation, talking about 23 new classrooms and the two new elementary schools in the city centre area. Do you have an approximate location you’re preferring? Are you thinking that will be suitable and work for the students for two elementary schools?

D. Tablotney: There are a couple of approximate locations, but we are still trying to secure a property for that. It has been difficult. We’ve been working with the city on that. I’m not sure if our secretary-treasurer wants to add to that, but we have not yet secured a site for that.

C. Wang: Thank you. I do want to add a couple of points. Number one, we do have a piece of property. It’s called Dover Park. The location of Dover Park is actually a little bit away from the city centre, away from where most of our student population growth happens.

Location is an issue for the Dover Park site. The other thing is that the Dover Park site is small. It’s just a little over two acres. It’s not a desirable site for a proper school site. A proper school site should be anywhere between five to six acres. So Dover Park…. Yes, we do own the property. However, it’s not desirable for a new school site.

We are looking for support from different levels of government. Number one is the city of Richmond to see if there’s any opportunity that we can engage with the city to do a land swap, land exchange, to move that site, because it is a green space for the city, for the entire community — to see if we can have the opportunity to exchange it into the inner city to be closer to the neighbourhoods. That’s one.

[1:45 p.m.]

The second opportunity is that we are looking for support from the provincial government or Crown corporations, because within the city centre area, there are a number of provincial Crown corporation organizations, and we can see there is some spare capacity. We are looking for support, obviously.

B. Stewart: Under your second recommendation, on the seismic risk, you have 20 schools. Do you have a number as to the magnitude of that seismic mitigation?

D. Tablotney: Sixteen remain unsupported, and a good number of them are, I believe, H1, or H1 is the highest. I didn’t bring that actual figure, but quite a few of them are H1 or H2. And we have unique soil conditions in Richmond, so it is crucial that we get these seismic upgrades to ensure that our students are safe.

G. Chow: A number of presenters came to us to talk about child care and the great need for child care before and after school. In your school district, at the staff level, are you kind of moving in that direction? Is there anything in place right now that actually has before- and after-school care that’s being run right now?

D. Tablotney: Yes, we do have before- and after-school care in several large schools, and we are expanding as we obtain spaces and funding to do so.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay. Thank you very much for your time this afternoon and for your presentation.

D. Tablotney: Our secretary treasurer does have….

C. Wang: I have a little bit of quick information for your….

M. Starchuk (Chair): If we could just…. If there’s something specific for…. We are really back to back.

C. Wang: Okay. We can give you that information on the question that you asked.

M. Starchuk (Chair): If you want to submit it to us, then we can get something that’s there added to your submission.

Brian Leonard, B.C. Principals and Vice-Principals Association.

Brian, you have five minutes for your presentation and five minutes for questions and answers and/or comments.

You have the floor.

B.C. PRINCIPALS AND
VICE-PRINCIPALS ASSOCIATION

B. Leonard: Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I’m glad you’ve got a clock here so I can keep pace myself. Thank you.

Yes, my name is Brian Leonard. I just want to say for the record that I’m not related to Ronna-Rae. So thank you.

I’m the president of the B.C. Principals and Vice-Principals Association.

I’d like to say I’m grateful to be here speaking to you on the traditional and ancestral territories of the Musqueam, Tsleil-Waututh and Squamish Coast Salish peoples.

Our association office is also situated in these territories, and as educators, we are reminded every day of the continuing and important legacy of teaching and learning on these lands.

Ours is a voluntary professional association, but more than 95 percent of our public school principals and vice-principals from every community in B.C. choose to be part of our organization. Sixty-two percent of our members identify as women — a number that has increased steadily over the years that we have surveyed our 2,700-plus members.

Research tells us that the quality of a school’s leadership is a primary factor in the success of its students. Currently, 44 percent of principals and nearly 70 percent of vice-principals in B.C. are within the first five years of their leadership role. The majority take on their roles with between six and 15 years of teaching experience, and I offer this context because leadership matters.

Our first request is that government provide additional long-term funding for leadership development. B.C. is a high-performing jurisdiction with respect to public education worldwide, but this can only be maintained when the system and those who work in it are provided with appropriate professional learning opportunities.

The current labour shortages, which have arisen in so many other sectors, have also seriously affected our education system. Unlike some sectors facing these issues, schools don’t have an option of reducing service or closing early. To bolster the ranks of school leadership and ensure that B.C. students are given every chance of success, educators are being placed in their role with little or no training.

[1:50 p.m.]

In our 2022 member census, we found that 32 percent of responding principals and 37 percent of vice-principals had never taken a principal or vice-principal training course. The BCPVPA, along with a consortium of key education sector experts, has been working with the Ministry of Education and Child Care and the B.C. School Superintendents Association to develop a foundational training program for vice-principals two to three years into their roles. But more focused funding to support professional learning for school leaders is needed.

Our second request is for full funding of all PSEC-approved exempt staff compensation improvements, in­cluding benefits, with funding that is on par with or in excess of that which is provided to support teacher and support staff contracts.

The actions of principals and vice-principals determine the overall success of a school and its students. We feel that school and district principals and vice-principals deserve equity and fairness in their compensation. It may surprise you to learn that in some districts in this province, there are teachers and support staff who are at a higher level of benefits and compensation than those that lead. We don’t feel that equates to a fair recognition of the experience and responsibilities of those school leaders.

Lastly, I will share that our members are truly excited about the recognition that education begins long before a child enters kindergarten and the importance that is being placed on the integration of daycare and child care programs into our schools. The natural progression of young children learning and socializing within the public school environment introduces them to a school as a safe place of learning and helps families with a spectrum of support for their child’s education.

The introduction of child care into the school setting does require resources. We know that with the impact of labour shortages in education, the existing human re­sources in schools have been strained beyond capacity.

Our third and final request is for government funding of the true associated costs for school-based daycare and child care programs. That includes factoring in the administrative time required of school leaders who are supporting those facilities in their schools.

Introducing further growth in our schools without the leadership time to effectively manage that growth will not yield the positive outcomes sought by government. Districts need to be provided with the financial resources to augment administrative time and ensure that there are staff positions to effectively manage the new programs and responsibilities. In that way, the children in these programs will have the best level of care and the best learning experience.

I would like to thank you sincerely for your time today. It has been a pleasure to present to you on behalf of the BCPVPA members.

One second to spare.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Well, I was going to say, Brian, that you win the 300-second award for the day.

I have a question to start off with. You had talked about the equity in the varying regions or the various school districts that are out there and the disparity that could be there from one to the other. Can you tell me what that is and how it happened?

B. Leonard: First and foremost, the employment structure of principals and vice-principals is an individual services contract with each district. It is also constructed on a regional model around the province. However, it is left to each and every district to negotiate those salaries with each individual principal and vice-principal.

Talking about the inequities, we could have people working in the same role within the same district getting different salaries. Then that can be also different across the sector, meaning a particular region. Some districts in a similar region and a similar root unit could be paid significantly different salaries and compensation.

Does that address your question?

M. Starchuk (Chair): Yeah. I’m still stuck on how we got there. That’s all. It’s fine. It’s just me.

B. Leonard: How we got there would be a little bit longer to answer.

M. Starchuk (Chair): All right, then.

Any other comments or questions?

B. Banman: You mentioned that there are times when support staff and/or custodial or others are actually making more money, their compensation, than principals or vice-principals. Keeping in mind that most principals or vice-principals come up teaching, generally, to begin with, not always….

How much of a disincentive is that now? We’re saying: “I’m going to go through all this hassle, and I’m making the same amount of money here. Why should I?” How much of a disincentive is it?

[1:55 p.m.]

B. Leonard: If I could say one thing. It’s not so much the salary that’s different. Generally speaking, principals and vice-principals do make more than the support staff. Where the big difference is, actually, is in benefits.

Some districts have significantly inferior benefits for principals and vice-principals to those that they lead. For example, there’s a number of districts that actually don’t have maternity language in their contracts. That’s kind of an alarming thought in the 21st century. It is also on medical and extended health benefits.

In many cases, educational leaders have a partner who is in, probably, one of the support unions. It could be a teacher — quite frequently, it’s a teacher — but it could be an educational assistant. In many cases, they actually are better to go through their spouse’s benefit plan than the plan that’s offered to them as a school leader. So that’s something that an individual has to decide when they take on the role.

To answer your question in a long way or, maybe, to try to shorten it…. It is a significant impediment, sometimes, in cases where people are moving into that role.

If I could build on Mike’s point, briefly. Many years ago, before principals and vice-principals were moved out of the union, there used to be sort of a percentage between the highest-paid teacher and an administrator. What has happened over the ensuing 30-odd years is…. That gap has fluctuated widely across the province. It’s not to say that every district is suffering that challenge, but it is very widely across the province.

B. Stewart: First point. This training that you said is lacking, etc…. I don’t know how we got to this point, how we would have a lack of leadership training or what it’s like to be in that role of leadership.

What I want to know is…. What do you estimate the cost would be for implementing that?

B. Leonard: To answer that question…. Currently British Columbia is the only province in the country that doesn’t have a formal leadership development program for principals and vice-principals.

As I said in my notes, one of the things that the government had committed to is establishing the management framework standard, which is in development at the moment and is being piloted next year with 30 principals or vice-principals around the province. Our request is that the funding continue for that model so that it can be ramped up, if you like, broadly speaking, towards all principals and vice-principals.

It’s hard for me to say, at this point, how much it would cost. What we had asked for a number of years ago was about $1 million over a series of years, incrementally over the years, to be able to sustain a program.

For example, in Ontario, before you can become a principal or a vice-principal, you have to go through a principal course, if you like, and get your certificate. So the people that are moving into those ranks are fully prepared.

In British Columbia, it’s left, in large part, to districts to do that leadership development piece. Districts like Surrey or my own district, Coquitlam, are large enough where they can sustain programs like that. Where it becomes a challenge, and what I’m finding out as I move around the province to visit schools and districts, is…. Smaller districts just don’t have the capacity. They don’t have the funding or the personnel to lead that.

Our association has been providing that for a number of years. That’s another area…. We would like to see that on a coordinated basis across the province. That would help with recruitment and retention and address the issue that Bruce was talking about, the disincentive.

What happened is…. Retention is also an issue in terms of…. It’s not just the salary and benefits and compensation. It’s also the workload and understanding what’s involved before you become a school leader, not afterwards.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay. Thank you very much, Brian, for your presentation and for your time this afternoon.

Next we have Tammy Murphy, CUPE Local 728.

Tammy, you have five minutes to make your presentation and, afterwards, five minutes for questions and answers.

You have the floor.

CUPE LOCAL 728, SURREY SCHOOLS
SUPPORT WORKERS

T. Murphy: Awesome. Thank you.

Good afternoon, committee members. My name is Tammy Murphy. I’m the president of CUPE Local 728, the union representing the Surrey school district’s support staff. Our membership includes community support workers, bus drivers, clerical, caretakers, maintenance, education assistants, student support workers and StrongStart. Our membership is B.C.’s largest and fastest-growing school district.

[2:00 p.m.]

We work on the unceded territories of the Coast Salish peoples, specifically the Katzie, Semiahmoo and Kwantlen First Nations.

We need a new approach to public education funding. The existing funding model is based on student numbers and fails to properly account for the fixed costs, unique challenges and unstable inflationary environment. It also fails to account for the additional funding needed by districts like ours for students with unique and complex needs.

Lack of adequate funding stresses all aspects of the system, including staffing structures. Increased workloads cause unfilled vacancies and absences and add new vol­ume to already challenging work. Funding shortfalls lead districts to expanding precarious work rather than creating full-time, family-sustainable jobs. For school districts, this leads to recruitment and retention challenges and constitutes a positive-feedback loop of increasing precarity and growing staffing shortages.

Our first recommendation is to provide block funding components to help school districts address structural shortfalls: additional funding under current formulas to better address inflationary and other cost pressures.

As I noted, recruitment and retention is a growing problem in the K-to-12 sector. One such is the wage gap for skilled tradesworkers. Data shows the trade wages in K to 12 are commonly 9 to 12 percent lower than in the adjacent municipal sectors. These lower wages in public education place the school district employers at a significant disadvantage in retaining and recruiting qualified trades staff, especially in larger centres like Metro Vancouver.

Another structural problem affecting recruitment and retention is the lack of hours for education assistants. EAs in our district work with the most vulnerable learners, and do so on limited resources and on far from full-time hours. Lower incomes, higher workloads and less-than-full-time work, along with the seasonal nature of an EA’s job, create tremendous pressures on workers, both at work and at home. Without significant reform, EAs will leave the profession faster than they can be replaced, and a district will fall short of meeting students’ most required needs.

Our second recommendation is to address the shortfalls and retention challenges in public education by funding solutions for the structural issues forcing workers out of K-to-12 sectors.

Despite historic investments by B.C.’s government, families continue to face challenges in finding reliable child care spaces. These challenges persist because in B.C.’s model for child care, nearly all child care, including for those on school grounds, is provided by for-profit or not-for-profit providers. There are no public options alongside with these private systems.

Negative effects of relying on the market-based model prevent parents from finding affordable, reliable care in their communities. The result of this system is a lack of spaces that meet the demand, and insignificant compensation to recruit and retain staff.

What B.C. needs is a public option for school-age care, one that provides reliable, stable and accessible child care in every community. An integrated before- and after-school care program in the public education system is the public option. Public child care in schools means fewer transitions, better care for kids, better jobs for workers and better access to reliable and affordable spaces that parents need. A public option in school delivers these benefits.

This model, which includes seamless days for younger years and which is among the highest-valued systems for early learning and care around the world, could be implemented across the province using existing spaces and, in many cases, using existing, underemployed staff already working in the school system.

Our final recommendation is to invest in the creation and expansion of seamless days in integrated child care, operated in-house by school districts and creating thousands of new child care spaces in the public schools across the province.

Thank you so much for listening.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation, Tammy.

A. Walker: Thank you for this. The seamless child care — we’ve got one in our community — is amazing as a resource for parents. To have one pickup, one drop-off and the continuity of care is great.

I’m just wondering if you can expand on what block funding would look like. What does that actually mean? What’s the dollar amount? How would you operationalize that at a school board?

T. Murphy: For us, because we’re Surrey school district — we are the fastest-growing one — what ended up happening is that we are funded right now per student. We have all these new schools opening, all these portables in all these places opening.

To give you a cash amount — I couldn’t tell you. But I can tell you right now that by funding for students, with a growing population like we have in Surrey and with the number of buildings that we have, we no longer have the same amount of ability to support the schools, the buildings and the facilities.

[2:05 p.m.]

We have overworked maintenance staff. We’re having to contract out work because we just don’t have the money in-house to sustain all of the people that are required.

Now we’re also having less care going into the student part of it. I am an education assistant by trade as well. We have less money now going in to support our students that have diverse needs because we’re needing to also support the buildings that we have added and don’t get funded for, and the facilities that are taking place and the members that we need to be able to fill these jobs.

To have a block funding where we have something for structure as well as for students would be beneficial, especially in such a growing area.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Tammy, I have a quick question. With regards to your membership, have you surveyed your EAs as to the before- and after-school care and what percentage of uptake there would be for those members?

T. Murphy: In our district, we have 2,500. We just joined our EAs and our ABAs together, so we’ll have over 3,000 EA/ABA positions. Out of 140 schools, I believe 120 are elementary schools. They’re now talking about having 70 percent of the elementary schools with these positions.

The way that it would be set up, it would be a posted position, so you would post into the position, and we have so many EAs that are looking for more hours. That is the biggest thing that we find right now: that we have members who have gone into these positions, either with young kids and it started out as something, and now we have people that need them as careers.

These are career jobs now. They’re not the same as when I started doing this 25 years ago where it was just easy to pick up my kids. Now we have people that actually need to support their families, and they’re really looking for the extra hours. You’ll always have the few that won’t, and they’ll post into high schools. But then you have these elementary school people who need the hours and are looking for that work.

We have done surveys in our district, and we have over 50 percent of 3,000 people who want this stuff. That’s out of the people that answer. You never have all the surveys answered.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks, Tammy.

For your organization, for the people that you represent, the 5,000 plus…. They’re essentially the glue, I guess, for the school district — all the support workers, the maintenance, the bus drivers, the EAs, the student support, all that kind of stuff. What of those occupations are we really dire on? Is it all across the board? I would imagine. But is it maintenance workers? Is it bus drivers?

T. Murphy: Right now we have a real need. Our bus drivers we’re doing pretty good on. Where our real need is, is in our skilled trades and our EAs. Our education assistants — we can never fill the jobs because they end up going and looking for more money, going to districts…. I mean, New West has now got the before- and after-school. They’re looking at going to places like that where they can get more hours.

Our tradespeople are leaving and going to municipalities. We’ve had quite a few leave to go to Chilliwack, to go to the city of Surrey. They just pay better, right? The pay is just not enough to sustain. And then in school districts, you also have afternoon shifts. A lot of the maintenance workers are afternoon. They can go to the city and be paid better and have a day shift. So it’s just….

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Just a quick follow-up. With the daycare program, would that be EAs that would look after that, or would you bring in ECEs.

T. Murphy: In most districts now, there is StrongStart. We have StrongStart facilitators, so we already have ECEs. For us, it’s an easy transition because we have ECE workers as well as the EAs, so we would be able to run the programs quite sufficiently with what we have going. I mean, we’d need to hire a few more ECEs, which would be fabulous, but we do have the people to sustain the process.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Awesome, cool. Thanks.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay. Well, Tammy, thank you for your presentation this afternoon, and thank you for what you do at our schools.

T. Murphy: Thank you so much. Have a great day.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Next up Susan Sanderson, the Realistic Success Recovery Society.

Susan, you will have five minutes to make your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments from the committee.

Susan, you have the floor.

REALISTIC SUCCESS RECOVERY SOCIETY

S. Sanderson: I love the way you’ve changed where the clock is. It used to be up there. Now it’s down here.

Thank you for the opportunity to present and appear to you. Today I applaud the current government for the many and very significant investments made for the people and communities of B.C.

I have lived experience as a family member of an addict. I am co-founder and executive director of the Realistic Success Recovery Society, operators of the Trilogy Houses on the unceded territories of the Coast Salish peoples, the Tsawwassen, the Semiahmoo, the Katzie and the Kwantlen folks, which we are grateful for.

[2:10 p.m.]

We operate four ten-bed houses in Surrey. Three of those are first stage, and one is second stage. Treatment in the first stage includes ten program components.

The Realistic Success Recovery Society serves the homeless population with substance abuse issues, those who do not have the financial resources for a private treatment centre or to pay added user fees. Most of our clientele have burned bridges with employers, family and friends. The majority of our clients are eligible for social assistance benefits through the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction while in recovery. To date, we do not charge user fees.

The diseases of alcoholism and drug addiction destroy individuals and families, ripping at the very fabric of our society. Their effects are apparent in our health and welfare systems, on our streets, in our schools, jails and in our homes. Our purpose is to provide a respectful environment for alcoholics and drug addicts who seek to recover from this debilitating disease.

Our first recommendation is to immediately, through supplemental estimates, increase the per diem to $60 per day, per person. We cannot wait for a data system to be created and implemented before we get an increase in our per diem. I have given you an explanation in my 300 words, but in 2022, there were 1,707 ALR beds in the province; 629 of those beds were in Surrey. In 2019, there were 1,572 beds in the province, and 667 of those were in Surrey. We’ve increased, overall, in the province, the number of beds and lowered the number in Surrey.

One of the interesting things about this whole thing is that it’s actually the Ministry of Health that provides the funding for the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction for the per diem. Increasing the per diem is an economic investment in the people of B.C. in the same way that investments in schools, affordable housing, bridges and roads pay dividends for years to come.

Compared with other services frequented by this population, $60 a day is still a real bargain. The daily rate comparisons are shelter beds, which are at least about $64.40 a day, and they don’t provide any programming and rarely any food. Jails are $144 or $145 per day, and hospitals are about $363 a day.

The B.C. coroner, a couple of weeks ago on CBC radio, estimated that there are 100,000 people in B.C. who need addiction services — 100,000 — and we have 1,700 sort of public beds.

Support recovery facilities change the trajectory of peo­ple’s lives and help to create safer communities. We merit adequate funding and to be recognized for the positive contribution we make in our communities.

My second recommendation is that there be a built-into-the-budget inflationary increase. If we were paid at the 2019 rate today, we’d receive $41.93.

I’ve given you all the detail in my 300 pages, but I don’t have time in five minutes. I’ve got 30 seconds.

Okay. Recommendation 3 is a data system provided by the government, paid for by the government, so that we will have reliable data on the populations accessing addiction services in order to inform operations, strategic planning and to ensure that treatment services are available and accessible.

The Canadian Mental Health Association has been collecting data on the 14-bed-based organizations that got the grants in 2021. If you don’t know about that, it’s quite exciting. So we provide data on wait-lists, unplanned and planned discharges, where they go, sources of referral, First Nations status and bed usage. Then I give you some stats for our little, tiny organization. So a big topic.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Yup. Susan, thank you very much for your presentation.

I just want to say that earlier on today — I wish you were here — there was a presentation by Richard Griffin, and it was astounding, his story in recovery. I think what would make it more astounding for yourself is that it was Michael Wilson that was the person that…

S. Sanderson: Brought him in.

M. Starchuk (Chair): …brought him in, or had the door open for him.

[2:15 p.m.]

My question to you is…. You said you have no user fees for anybody that wants to walk in the door. Is there a wait time for your organization? I’ll leave it at that.

S. Sanderson: Today we have about seven guys, mostly in jail, who are waiting. If anybody phones and they’re on the street, we’ll take them. We’ll put them on the — we call it the bed of willingness, which might be a couch, until a bed becomes available.

Today we’re full. In the next five minutes, we might not be. It changes all the time. The guys in jail are safer. They can stay there until we actually have a bed, but if there’s somebody on the street, we’ll do whatever we can to take them. The money is not…. I mean, nearly all of them will qualify for social assistance.

R. Leonard: Nice to see you again.

S. Sanderson: Yes. It is nice to see you, Ronna Rae.

R. Leonard: Thank you for coming out once again. I really appreciate it.

S. Sanderson: I hope to be a bullet line in your report one of these years. I’ve been doing this since 2007. I don’t know. When Rich Coleman was Chair, like a long time ago. Anyway.

R. Leonard: And still, you’re here.

S. Sanderson: I am still here. Yes.

R. Leonard: Dedicated. We’re talking about recovery houses, right?

S. Sanderson: Yes.

R. Leonard: You mentioned that only 1,700 beds were available publicly. I just was checking, because I thought that’s wrong. That’s not the number, because it’s almost 3,300 as of March. So what’s the difference?

S. Sanderson: I’m talking about per-diem-paid beds. When I call the Deputy Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction and say, “How many beds are you paying for this year or right now?” that’s the number, so that could be licensed and/or registered. There may be other beds that are paid for by grants that aren’t per-diem beds that are paid through not grants but contracts through health authorities, and every health authority is different and deals with addiction differently.

In Fraser Health, they will not refer anybody to any fa­cility that doesn’t have a contract with them. We’ve never received a call from Fraser Health, ever, to get somebody in our beds, ever, because we don’t have a contract with them. Then there’s also the 14-bed grant. Some of those were…. That’s all they had. They got enough grant to do just…. That grant, really, is about $51 a day. So that’s the difference.

R. Leonard: Okay — so how people are getting help, how beds are being paid….

S. Sanderson: How people are getting paid. There are a variety of ways, before I even go to the private sector, but it’s still sort of within the public field. But I’m talking just about the per diem. The per diem is the only thing I can count on, and the only thing I can count on for salaries.

R. Leonard: If I can just follow up with that, because of that per-diem issue, it’s based on somebody coming in and occupying the bed.

S. Sanderson: Yes.

R. Leonard: Can you speak to the impact of that model, as opposed to block funding, to keep the doors open regardless of whether the beds get filled, and staffing particular challenges?

S. Sanderson: Oh, well, I mean, it would be night and day, as long as the block funding is enough. That’s a dream. I don’t even go there. I don’t waste my time. Does that say it? I mean, I’ve been banging my head on this wall for a very long time, and it was only because John Horgan was so proud of his budget in 2019, and I said, “You haven’t done it, John,” and he got us an increase through supplemental estimates.

If it hadn’t been for that personal connection, we’d still be at $30.90 today, which is horrifying — that it took that kind of personal connection to move the dial on this. That’s not what this is about.

G. Chow: Thank you, Susan. If you hang in there to 2027, that would be the 20th anniversary.

Where would these people go? Do they go on their own after? Or do they go to other housing?

S. Sanderson: Many of them, if they have a planned discharge, they’ll have somewhere to go back to. They’ll have a job to go back to, fortunately.

[2:20 p.m.]

Some will move into our second stage, and they can stay there for as long as they can. We have a First Nations guy who’s now in Kwantlen University, who is just a little miracle guy. I would have brought him, but he has gone back to see his grandmother, who’s ill.

They can stay in the second stage for as long as they need to. Then they’ll get…. Most of them are trades workers. Most of them work in construction, building trades. We’ll work with them and get them apprenticed so that they can do that, and then they’ll move on, on their own after they’ve been through our second stage.

We will not allow them to work or go to school for at least 120 days. Our program is considered 120 days. We need four months. At least four months. They come in, and they don’t have a toothbrush. They don’t have ID. They don’t have anything. They’ve got the clothes on their back. Half of them come with the runners that the jail gives them. That’s what they arrive in.

That’s it. That’s all I’ve got.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Susan, thank you for your presentation.

I think it was last year you made a comment that is stuck in my head, and it’ll never go away. As a former dog owner, the amount of money that we are spending for you, for that per-diem rate, is actually less than what some people will pay to kennel their pets when they take a vacation. When I had it put in that kind of perspective, and the work that you do…. You provide those spaces at no charge to those people. So thank you for what you do, and thank you for your presentation today.

Next we have Bailey Cove, Douglas Students Union.

Bailey, you have five minutes to make your presentation and five minutes of questions and answers to follow.

You have the floor.

DOUGLAS STUDENTS UNION

B. Cove: Amazing. Well, good afternoon. My name is Bailey Cove, and I’m the director of external relations at Douglas Students Union at Douglas College. We represent a membership of approximately 13,000 post-secondary students in the Lower Mainland, of which 4,200 are international students.

The recommendations I will be speaking on today are based off the voices of our members collected through surveys, tabling, conversations and working groups. In addition, our recommendations are supported by research of the B.C. Federation of Students.

Over the past two decades, the proportion of provincial funding has decreased drastically. For example, in 2016, the percentage of institutional revenue provided by government funding in relation to total budgets decreased by 24 percent. As a result, tuition has skyrocketed to more than double for students since 2001, when the average cost of tuition was $2,500 a year. Costs are now well over $6,000.

As a solution to help students, interest was removed from student loans, and the weekly student loan allowance was increased from $110 to $220. This is not a long-term solution. Eliminating interest on student loans helps students once they graduate but does not remove existing barriers to accessing education now.

In addition, that allowance increase only sets students back further financially postgraduation. Students need more non-repayable grants to be able to access post-secondary education. Due to government underfunding education, post-secondary institutions have needed to enforce a fail-safe to fund the budgets of their institutions. The 20 percent population of international students makes up 50 or more percent of revenue generated for institutions.

These publicly-funded institutions are seemingly no longer publicly funded, as they rely on the pockets of students and families of both domestic and international students.

The Douglas Students Union recommends a funding model that makes sense for each region, school and economy the institution feeds into and that does not rely on international student tuition to balance the budget.

The workforce desperately needs skilled and trained em­ployees, and our economy is declining because of it. Statistically, a large population of B.C. will be retiring. Between now and 2030, 10,000 of the baby boomer generation will hit retirement age, and our economy will have more significant need for students to complete degree programs and enter the workforce. The answer lies in refunding post-secondary institutions with a model that works for everyone.

The B.C. government needs to reinvest in post-secondary institutions to ensure the future of B.C.’s economy. In addition, the Douglas Students Union strongly recommends that the provincial government include international student tuition in the tuition fee limit policy, in which all student tuition increases should be capped at 2 percent. Due to the lack of public funding, post-secondary institutions heavily recruit international students and use their tuition fees to balance institutional budgets. Since 2019, the international enrolment rate has increased by 13.7 percent yearly.

[2:25 p.m.]

While post-secondary institutions rely on international students to balance their budgets, the provincial and federal governments rely heavily on international students as a crucial component to boost their respective economies. The value of international students to the Canadian economy is measurable. The students significantly contribute to the economy, pay taxes and participate in the workforce.

However, the current model risks the economy’s stability if international students are mistreated and subsequently leave. Simply put, when education is no longer affordable due to these increases, B.C. will no longer be a destination for international students, and they will go elsewhere.

International students look to Canada as an opportunity to access a globally recognized education. Instead they face unstable and unpredictable tuition increases that set them up for failure due to financial unpredictability. They arrive with clearly set budgets that are forced to be manipulated due to unpredictable tuition increases.

A recent example happened this fall when Emily Carr University proposed and passed a 30 percent increase in tuition fees for incoming international students. This equates to students needing to pay an extra $5,000 in tuition costs, giving $1.8 million in added institutional revenue. International students should not be the financers that fund university budget deficits.

Tuition fees continue to rise. Since 2006, fees have in­creased by 64 percent. As a result, students work under the table and live in unsafe and illegal conditions with many roommates in order to pay these high tuition costs.

With these added stresses weighing on their mental health and with minimal access to support services, many international students are forced to leave before they complete their studies, causing a direct impact on our economy. In 2017, international students in B.C. added $4.15 billion in spending, created 31,000 jobs and contributed 2.37 to the provincial GDP. What would we do if they could not afford to study here anymore?

Douglas College has announced that they will cap international student increases at par with domestic increases at 2 percent. They’ve listened to the collective voices of students. Through collaborative work with the students union, they’ve committed to upholding fairness for international students.

We urge the government to add international students to the tuition fee policy so that their fees are regulated and students can predict their costs. We urge the provincial government to counsel B.C. post-secondary institutions to follow the lead set by Douglas College in making the international student experience fair in Canada.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, Bailey.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks for your presentation.

I’ve said it a million times before. I would love to see 100 percent retention with international students staying here. We absolutely need them. It’s essential.

You mentioned something about…. International students are mistreated and leave. I would imagine that’s primarily based on the raise in tuition costs. Are there any other factors? The second part of that is: do international students not get a discounted rate to domestic students right now? Is it the same across the board, or do they pay a premium?

B. Cove: In terms of tuition?

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Yeah.

B. Cove: In terms of tuition, international students are paying almost double what domestic students are paying. It’s a ridiculous increase strictly because the post-secondary institutions don’t have the wiggle room in their funding. They’re not going to take it from domestic students. They’re expecting international students to, then, supply that funding.

Institutions have taken a…. They have stressed the importance, for their institution, of physically going out and recruiting international students in whatever the country is that they’re doing and creating those bonds.

A lot of international students, when they’re back home…. They will be in touch with a recruiter and come to Canada. “Just kidding. That recruiter lied about everything.” The institution that they were wanting to go to doesn’t exist. They come here, their visa gets revoked, and then they have to get sent home. That’s after their family has put an enormous amount of funds into even just getting their child to Canada to have a chance.

Those that are lucky enough to be able to come to the institutions and actually study are paying enormous rates. They’re not able to work as much. As much as we don’t want it to exist, racism does exist. If people are renting out basement suites…. They will see international student on the application and immediately disregard their application.

[2:30 p.m.]

For me personally, I live in a house right now. Underneath me, there are eight international students living in two bedrooms. That’s strictly because they can’t find anything, and because our economy is so much fun right now.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): So they’re very marginalized — really, a lot of barriers for them to make it.

B. Cove: Totally. They’re taken advantage of in almost every single aspect. As someone that has lived here my entire life, I wouldn’t have even thought that going into work…. I might not know about what my rights are as a worker.

Not only am I trying to pay my tuition, possibly then supporting family back home, but then, also, I’m being forced to work in illegal conditions, being paid minimum wage and told that that’s normal, and not knowing any different.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Any other comments or questions?

B. Banman: I want to thank you, actually, for speaking up on behalf of international students. As a Canadian that was born here…. I hear of much of what you do.

I, myself, was actually foreign-educated. I went to the United States to get my education, and I was not allowed to work at all, as a matter of fact. The United States has very, very different rules. But I hear what you’re saying, loud and clear.

Also, one of the things is that they have to pay MSP on top of it all. Then when they go to work, it’s actually a double-tag thing, which makes it even worse.

If you were to try and fix this, however, keeping in mind that most universities are subsidized by Canadian taxpayers, what would you say would be a fair level that foreign students should pay above and beyond Canadian students, for instance?

B. Cove: As someone that is a taxpayer…. I pay for my tuition at all different ends. I think that although studying abroad is considered a luxury, we kind of need to think about what the whole picture looks like. Whatever our end goal is for having these international students coming into our spaces, ultimately, we’re wanting immigration. We’re wanting them to come in, live in the space, ultimately become Canadian citizens and be able to support their families, possibly bring them over, adding into the economy.

It’s a challenging question to answer, because I have a couple of different thought processes when I go to answer this question. I think of myself as a student. I love being able to go and spend time with the international students. I’ve learned more from spending time with our international students than I did with the students that I have lived with, grown up with and that have similar experiences to me.

They have opened up my mind to so much more. And going into education, that is then going to help me teach our future generations of the things that we need to be thinking about, understanding how to break down racism and provide opportunities to everyone in these spaces.

I think there needs to be a balance that’s found. I don’t know what that balance is. But a balance needs to be found where they are being treated in a way that is respectful and beneficial, not just to them but also to us in B.C. and in Canada. We want to make sure that that Canada is still remaining a space that is desired by international students.

You were so lucky to have gone to the States. I looked at it. I couldn’t afford it. There’s no way. But that’s why Canada is a really great option. We have these ideals.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Bailey, I hate to do this, but I’m going to have to…. The light has been flashing. Make sure that your submission, when it comes in, reflects that anecdotal thing of where your house is and how that resides and what’s there.

I applaud you, like everybody else, for being the voice for our international students. Then your comments about Emily Carr, the faces that were behind you….

We’re going to adjust our agenda. We’re going to have Emily Carr, and then we will take our recess.

Kamila Bashir, you have five minutes to make your presentation and five minutes for questions and answers.

You have the floor.

[2:35 p.m.]

EMILY CARR STUDENTS UNION

K. Bashir: Good afternoon, everyone. I’m Kamila Ba­shir. I’ll be representing the students union at Emily Carr as the current chairperson.

I’m an international student from India, currently in my fourth year of industrial design. I also work in the areas of health design research and climate justice.

I have three key recommendations today for the 2024 B.C. budget.

First, adjust the base funding to Emily Carr University to solve the structural deficit. Second, cap international student tuition fee increases to 2 percent, equal to domestic tuition fee increases. Third, increase funding for the post-secondary sector by $200 million annually.

Reiterating my first point, adjust the base funding to Emily Carr University to solve the chronic structural deficit. We believe that the successes of Emily Carr University graduates are B.C. successes. It is quite exceptional to be the only specialized art, design and media university in the province. It’s pretty unbelievable to be surrounded by such talented colleagues. I see a direct link to the work that my colleagues are doing and the priorities of the B.C. government as outlined in the future-ready skills plan. However, Emily Carr University suffers from a chronic deficit that threatens our operations into the future.

One of the first things that I learned when I joined the students union was about the university’s $7 million annual operating budget shortfall. The result of this deficit on campus is a sense of missed opportunity. The additional result is that the university is put in a position to find revenue to balance the budget. Unfortunately, the only possible source of revenue is from international students.

This year the university approved a historic 30 percent fee increase for incoming international students, an increase of $5,491.35, and an increase of 10 percent for current international students, an extra $1,830.45. Yet, still this additional revenue does not solve the ongoing chronic deficit.

Targeted funding to our art and design university in­vests in the new ideas needed to solve the province’s most challenging problems. I ask: what other ideas and solutions are still in their early ages, taking shape through the brilliant minds of B.C.’s only public specialized art and design school? What else can we provide to the province if well supported? Without this needed support, I think we are watching the potential slip away. Our institution, if adequately funded, can continue to bring incredible value to B.C.’s economic recovery.

My second recommendation: cap international student fee increases to 2 percent, equal to domestic tuition fee increases. International students contribute significantly to British Columbia’s post-secondary institutions by en­riching cultural diversity, driving economic growth and enhancing academic excellence. However, unregulated tuition fee increases pose a challenge that adversely affects their well-being. As a student representative, I witnessed firsthand the profound consequences of these issues, particularly the risk of homelessness faced by international students.

Many of our international peers grapple with homelessness, juggling academic responsibilities without stable housing. This situation jeopardizes their education and threatens their physical and mental well-being. Addressing this disparity and providing adequate support for vulnerable international students at our university and through­out the province are crucial.

Additionally, international students often face financial burdens due to ineligibility for income assistance, for grants, exacerbating food insecurity, limiting access to essential resources and heightening job insecurity. Their non-citizen status further limits opportunities for internships and field-related employment, hindering professional development and their ability to fully contribute to the province.

To foster an inclusive environment that recognizes their valuable contributions, we must cap the international student fee increase at 2 percent, aligning it with domestic rates. This measure alleviates financial burdens and positions them for success as future British Columbians.

[2:40 p.m.]

My third recommendation is to recognize the critical role of post-secondary education in rebuilding the B.C. economy and to invest an additional $200 million annually in the post-secondary sector. We echo the British Columbia Federation of Students as we identify that the post-secondary sector is in urgent need of an annual funding increase of $200 million.

We are well aware that we have experienced a massive tuition fee increase this year. We do not have an isolated problem. Our colleagues at other universities in the prov­ince experienced a similar fee increase, just nowhere as high as ours. I believe that with these adjustments, we will be building for a stronger British Columbia.

That’s my time. Thank you for listening.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, Kamila.

B. Stewart: I wanted to go back to…. Do you have any information on the percentage of international students, after graduating, that stay behind or stay in Canada or British Columbia?

K. Bashir: I do. According to the CBIE international student survey conducted in 2021, 43.3 percent of re­spondents intended to stay and get PR after three years of working, 28.4 percent of respondents intend to work for a short period and then go back to their studies and 11.6 percent return home. So 72.6 percent of international students intend to work after graduation and, in totality, 86.4 percent wish to remain in B.C. Only 1 percent moved to Ontario.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): I wanted to ask: can we get those statistics? Can you send that to the committee, the statistics on retention of international students? It’s something I’ve been asking a bit about.

Just a basic question here. The $200 million to inject in the post-secondary sector — where did that number come from? How is that derived?

K. Bashir: The British Columbia Federation of Students went through the data they have, and it says that this is the requirement to fulfil all the shortfall that’s currently there in the institutions in British Columbia.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Okay. I was hoping for more of a metrics involvement.

K. Bashir: We can definitely follow up with an email with more….

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Yeah, because it’s an interesting number. I mean, somebody can throw any number out there and say, “This is going to do it,” but it would be great to get it kind of a little bit more dialled in to see how those metrics came up with that number so that we can identify the shortfalls here and there in different parts of the sector. It would kind of neat.

Any information on that and the statistics that Ben talked about would be great. I’d love to get that.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Any other comments or questions? Okay.

Not seeing any, thank you for your presentation, and thank you for being prepared for the question from Ben. That answer superseded anything I had in mind, in any way, shape or form. So thank you very much for your presentation and for the work that you do. I wish you great success on graduation.

We will take a recess to 2:55.

The committee recessed from 2:43 p.m. to 2:55 p.m.

[M. Starchuk in the chair.]

M. Starchuk (Chair): On deck is our next presenter, Stephanie Rudnisky of PacificSport Fraser Valley.

You have five minutes for a presentation, followed by five minutes for questions and/or comments.

PACIFICSPORT FRASER VALLEY

S. Rudnisky: Hello, everyone. My name is Stephanie Rudnisky. My pronouns are she and her, and I’m the executive director of PacificSport Fraser Valley.

Before I begin, I’d like to acknowledge that I am grateful to be sitting here on the traditional and unceded lands of the Coast Salish people.

I want to thank you all for being here and for giving me the opportunity to speak about sport.

PacificSport Fraser Valley is a non-profit multisport organization that services the Fraser Valley from Surrey to Hope. We value partnerships and work with various organizations — such as schools, recreation departments, Fraser Health Authority, the Indigenous Sport, Physical Activity and Recreation Council, disability organizations, settlement agencies — as we provide sport and physical activity programs for youth — and, more recently, for the 55-plus age group, as we are running a series of try-it sport programs in partnership with the city of Abbotsford and the 55+ Games.

An endorsement of the strength of our programming is that we recently won the province of B.C.’s Delivering on Diversity Award, which recognizes special commitments towards diversity, equity and inclusion in sport programs and services. We are also a member of the Regional Sport Alliance, which includes all the PacificSports throughout the province, including the new PacificSport Columbia Basin in the Kootenays, as well as a couple of other key organizations. We’re working collectively to increase physical activity and physical literacy for everyone in B.C.

I’ve worked in the sport sector for my entire career, for a number of different national, provincial, local and disability sport organizations. I have a master’s degree in sports administration and technology, and I’ve been a member of Team B.C.’s mission staff for three Canada Games. I am currently on the board of directors for the Canadian Blind Sports Association. I am also currently finishing my master’s in social justice and community action — although it feels like I may never finish.

You will, hopefully, be able to tell, as I go through my presentation, that I’m very passionate about finding a space for social justice in our world of sport. I’m currently starting my thesis and working on research around blind and visually impaired youth and participation rates, with the goal to develop recommendations for all organizations to be able to include these youth in their programs in a safe and inclusive way.

I’m the first to go from the sport sector, so I get to start with the ask. The amateur sport sector needs an increase in core funding. Collectively, sport is requesting an increase of $15 million, over three years, to ensure sport is available for all British Columbians. As a sector, we believe more British Columbians should be able to derive the social and economic benefits of sport, particularly underrepresented populations, including Indigenous people, girls and women, British Columbians with a disability, LGBTQI2S+ and new Canadians.

We need to invest more in sport. We believe an investment in sport is an investment in physical and mental health, in better-connected communities and in community economic development. While we appreciate a formal recommendation from this committee that our ask happens, we look forward to the increase making it into the budget this cycle.

I’d like to talk about a couple of different priorities in which this additional investment could be used: accessibility and inclusion. Additional funding will enable us to invest more in training our staff, coaches and volunteers, so that they are equipped to design, develop and run programs for all abilities.

Additional funding can help remove barriers to sport, including cost, transportation and even mandatory line items on our budgets for one-on-one support, so that we have funding set aside for those who may need it in our programs. An example of this could be an ASL interpreter.

Additional funding will enable us to have time to collaborate and work on creating meaningful partnerships to co-construct meaningful programs. I spoke about the strength of our partnerships earlier, and I was presenting on the topic last month at the International Physical Literacy Conference with B.C. Wheelchair Basketball.

I want to highlight one particular partnership that is outside of sport and that we have created. It’s our relationship with Inclusion Langley. They provide a range of services to children and youth with developmental disabilities.

[3:00 p.m.]

One of the services they currently didn’t offer was sport. We saw a unique opportunity. We worked with Inclusion Langley, trained our staff and have now run, on Monday nights for almost a year, introducing new sports and fundamental movement skills to these youth, many of whom have never participated in sport before.

Sport and social justice. We have a unique opportunity at this time to become more involved and proactive in the relationship between sport and social justice. Sport is full of inequalities, but we can use it as a vehicle for change. We can work to empower our communities, our athletes and our coaches to stand up to social inequalities they may see in their teams, clubs and communities.

This can lead to establishing equitable policy creation, hiring practices and educational opportunities such as anti-racism training, cultural training and safe sport training. Through sport, we can re-evaluate the economic inequalities that exist in our communities.

There are many challenges in our sector, and we continue to do the work because we love it. Sport is a connector, a vehicle for change and something that I care so much about. Thank you for this time to speak on these important topics, and I wish I had five more hours to go through everything that I had to cut out.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Well, based on what you told us that you were doing, I don’t know where you would find five more hours.

S. Rudnisky: Ten more hours.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Stephanie, thank you very much for your presentation.

I don’t have anybody on my list right now, but one of the things that I wanted to talk…. You talked about the training of staff, coaches and volunteers. Currently, what happens with them?

S. Rudnisky: It really depends on different sport organizations. We put our staff through various different trainings — inclusion training, safe sport training, fundamental movement skill training. But there are so many opportunities out there. With more funding and time and energy, we can really create quality program leaders, coaches and staff that have the knowledge for all the different opportunities.

H. Yao: Thank you so much for your presentation. I’m repeating a quote from Robert Butler, from the National Institute on Aging: “If exercise could be packaged into a pill, it would be the single most widely prescribed and beneficial medicine in the nation.” Thank you so much for the great work you are doing. I do want to express my appreciation.

I specifically want to look at the $15 million for three years, and I’m wondering…. I know for a lot of individuals in my constituency, when they think about sport, it’s really about people who are physically fit, who are active, who are able to participate. I really appreciate the inclusive talk you mentioned earlier.

What about the general population? Is there a strategy to get people actively engaged in sport, in more of a recreation, social manner, that actually can make people feel comfortable and not being pushed into a sense of competitiveness?

S. Rudnisky: Yeah, I think there are a lot of opportunities there. A lot of that work comes from recreation centres. There’s a program called physical literacy for communities, with Sport for Life, where we can go into communities and create a plan for the communities as a whole on how to get them more active.

I was actually just at a park in Richmond. They have an outdoor free seniors’ workout circuit. So there are opportunities, so many opportunities, for different ways to create activity and physical recreation for the whole community.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks, Stephanie. I think you said 15 million, not 50.

S. Rudnisky: I mean, I’ll take 50, but I said one-five.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): I wasn’t quite sure, but I thought it was 15. It divides by three a lot easier than 50 does.

Inequalities, for sure. Physical inequalities, accessibility issues, those kind of things, mental inequalities in children, neurodivergent issues, but financial barriers as well. I’m just wondering, of that $15 million…. Not all sports are created equal. I was a curler. Very easy to throw a piece of duct tape on your tennis shoe and then go and use a handmade broom or something like that. It’s pretty cheap. But my son is in hockey, and that’s really super expensive.

So that $15 million — is there any way to incorporate more children, and parents, that aren’t as financially ready to…? Like, they can’t possibly do that. Is there anything in that $15 million that could address that?

S. Rudnisky: In my organization, all of our programs since COVID have been free. We run multisport…. We call it explore sports. The kids, the youth, participate once a week, eight to ten weeks. We’ve applied for a lot of one-time grants that get us through one cycle. They can come and try a different sport every week and learn a different fundamental movement skill for those sports.

We’re one small organization giving those opportunities to the youth. But, say, if a youth comes and they’ve tried all the sports and they want to go to hockey, we would then connect them to the local hockey organization, connect them to KidSport, which can help fund some of those programs.

[3:05 p.m.]

I think if we do get this additional funding, some of that money definitely would be to help reduce those barriers of cost. As we know, that’s probably the number one barrier.

B. Stewart: Thanks very much, Steph. I wanted to ask you. That $15 million: what increase…? I know last year we heard from you, and I believe we supported you. I’m just trying to find out how much money, actually, PacificSport got last year. Did you get an increase last year?

S. Rudnisky: No, we haven’t had an increase in our core funding for, I think, ten years. The sport support sector hasn’t. There were some one-time grants that were offered. I think there was $4 million that went to viaSport that we could then apply to, but it’s a one-time grant. I mean, I did get it.

B. Stewart: What’s that $15 million on top that you currently get, and where do you get it?

S. Rudnisky: We get our core funding from viaSport. The government, the Ministry of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport to viaSport, gives the funding. All of the sports organizations — I think there are maybe 52 of us — get a chunk of core funding from viaSport. A lot of us also get gaming funds, but every sport and organization gets a different amount of funding from viaSport as our core funding. I don’t know what everyone gets.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much, Stephanie, for your presentation today.

Up next is Brian Gisel from the B.C. Ultimate Society.

Brian, you have five minutes for your presentation and five minutes for questions and/or comments.

You have the floor.

B.C. ULTIMATE SOCIETY

B. Gisel: Thank you to all the members of the standing committee for coming, some of you again. It was great to hear so much talk about activity. It’s a core part of sports.

I’d like to first acknowledge the traditional lands of the Tsleil-Waututh, Musqueam and Squamish First Nations on which this meeting is taking place today.

My name is Brian Gisel. My pronouns are he and him, and I’m the general manager of B.C. Ultimate. As a provincial sport organization, we work with local leagues, clubs and disc organizations to bring disc sports to over 8,000 members each year.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. I think that’s a saying that we’ve all heard before, and it continues to this day, in spite of the metric system. It’s generally accepted that activity is a great benefit to a person’s physical and mental health. Having a healthy and active population benefits the entire province, and at the heart of any sporting program, activity or opportunity are provincial, local and club organizations that are dependent on core funding from the government to deliver our ounce of prevention.

Unfortunately, in sports, it’s not always obvious or im­mediate what the impact can be from this funding in the short term. There are no bridges or tunnels or hospitals or schools to point to at the end of it. But the connection is understood over the long term, and long-term participation growth is at the heart of every PSO in British Columbia. We understand that more sport funding equals more activity, more activity equals a healthier population, and a healthier population equals lower costs to government in terms of mental and physical health care. That’s how we deliver our pound of cure.

Even if we don’t have any of these immediate, flashy capital projects which would be created by increased funding, if granted, those funds will be put to quick and immediate use at all levels of sport in B.C. The province already has the infrastructure in place in the form of PSOs and local organizations that make up the backbone of sport delivery in every community around the province. If you ask any PSO if they have a blue-sky project on the drawing board that they would like to implement right now, you would get a resounding and enthusiastic yes from them.

BCU’s blue-sky program is Ultimate Spirit. It’s our Indigenous-focused youth program. This program has long-term goals that we measure in decades rather than seasons. We work with communities to build a program that has a vision to create a culture of team and sport, giving participants the opportunity to not only play but also connect with other communities, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, and create a network of youth throughout the province connected by both sport and culture.

Recently we had an incredible connection event when we brought together athletes from Líl̓wat, Stz’uminus and W̱SÁNEĆ Nations for a day of connection and competition. The community of Líl̓wat, north of Pemberton, has joined the W̱SÁNEĆ Wolfpack by creating the second Indigenous-led ultimate team in the province. The Eagles have travelled to Bowen Island to connect with kids from the Island Pacific School, played games in Squamish against the team from the Coast Mountain Academy and this past weekend participated in the B.C. High School Ultimate Championships, which were held in Surrey and included 64 teams from schools across the province.

[3:10 p.m.]

Our focus in the next 12 months is to expand our program to the B.C. interior north. Our first multi-commun­ity trips are planned for later this month to the northeast and the northwest. Thanks to our partnership with ISPARC, we’ve had many requests, really more than we can actually handle right now, from communities in these areas to have our program introduced to their youth.

Some of our longer-term goals are to increase the number of teams going to the B.C. high school championships but also to create an Indigenous high school or youth championship in B.C. Further along that path is increasing the number of Indigenous athletes being considered and selected to participate in provincial and national teams.

To date, we’ve been successful in finding support outside core government funding for this program, but this type of funding is variable and doesn’t give the same stable support which comes from annual contributions. Ultimate Spirit is just one program run by one PSO. There are countless others being delivered or often living in the dreams of PSO staff which can positively impact the province.

There can be no doubt that our request, the increase of $15 million over the course of three years, would be put to immediate use creating programs which increase participation activity across the province. This funding is our ounce of prevention, and B.C. Ultimate and the PSOs of B.C. will be sure to deliver more than a pound of care with it.

Thank you very much for your time.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Brian, for the sake of making the wrong pun, as a person that’s been a tournament director, to have 64 teams would be the ultimate number to have.

B. Gisel: Yes.

M. Starchuk (Chair): I failed on that, didn’t I?

H. Yao: On a positive note, Brian, on behalf of my staff in media, I want to say hi.

B. Gisel: Hello, again. Yes.

H. Yao: Of course, I also want to talk about…. You mentioned different community groups actually asking to participate as well. Do you have a funding cost that will be able to help you reach out to them? Do you actually have a number figure?

B. Gisel: It varies so much. A big part of our program is based, right now, on Vancouver Island and the coast. As we reach out to other organizations around the province, obviously, travel is a big component of that. So it’s hard for us to kind of say a cookie-cutter situation.

One of the very important parts of our program is we’re very much against the idea of the one-and-done engagement. We come into communities for the long haul. So when we start talking about northern communities, being able to develop both coaches in that area that can help us out in being able to go back there on multiple occasions is a critical factor. So there isn’t an easy answer about cost.

Also, because there isn’t…. As we say, our time frame is kind of looked at as the very long term. It’s not how many times can we get up in the next three months for $50,000. It’s about how we can engage this community and create a team and a culture over the course of the next five or ten years so that they can be self-sustaining. So there we go.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Any other comments or questions?

I have one. I’d like to know, and I would have asked this of Stephanie: have you reached the levels of participation with the lapse of COVID?

B. Gisel: In ultimate we have. This year we’ll basically bounce back and just have slightly more members than we did in 2019. Obviously that’s a bit of a bounce-back from the last two years. But the sport, our sport in particular, ultimate is a low-barrier-to-entry sport, in terms of financial.

In 2018 we became connected with B.C. School Sports, and that has really driven a lot of growth, particularly outside of Metro Vancouver. The greater Metro Vancouver area has always had quite a lot of teams. We’ve kind of been working in that area for the last 20 years. But the number of teams coming from the Okanagan, the Kootenays, the Island and up north is starting to grow quite a bit.

You made the joke about 64 teams. I’ve been doing ultimate tournaments around the world for the last 30 years and, obviously, I agree with the number, but the reason we can have that number is because we have so many schools that want to get in. We had schools on our wait-list for our senior invite, schools on our wait-list for our junior.

We accept schools always, traditionally, from outside of Metro Vancouver. We kind of jump them to the front of the line, because they have fewer opportunities to play, but now we have so many more schools that want to come, we’re having to turn them away, unfortunately, which is one of the reasons we love B.C. School Sports to increase the number of tiers — we’re a double-tier sport right now — so they can do more senior team, so we can do more junior teams.

[3:15 p.m.]

We want to kind of work in connection with them so we can get to 64, and we know we’re going to have it every time because there are 70, 80, 90 that want to come.

So good for round numbers. Bad for leaving people behind. We don’t ever like to do that.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Yeah, you need 128, I guess.

Any other…?

H. Yao: Thank you so much. You mentioned earlier, talking about how there’s no big infrastructure that you get to showcase. But obviously, we also understand we just went through a COVID 19…. What COVID-19 taught us is that we saw physical activity. We saw outdoor engagement, social recreation. It definitely demonstrates the detriment for both youth, young adults, and, of course, our older population when it comes to mental health.

Is there any data or any information you can share that really strengthens the argument? And say, “You know what?” because ultimate, which is a low-barrier sport…. As I mentioned earlier from a previous presentation, people see some sports as highly competitive sports, where ultimate is more of an inclusive sport. Do you have any data to show how an inclusive sport like yours can then strengthen our communities’ mental health and mental wellness?

B. Gisel: Well, I’d certainly say that the more inclusive the sport is, the more people participate in it, and the more people that participate in it, the more benefit there will be.

It’s actually interesting. Yesterday, as I was kind of writing this speech and putting the last touches on it, I got an email through Sport B.C. that talked about the fact that the Canadian Institute for Health Information statistics just showed that girls…. In their statistics from an April 2023 report, girls who participate in sport indicate a higher level of positive self-worth than girls who are not participating, and that’s certainly, from our point of view, why we want to be as inclusive as possible.

Of course, ultimate…. The most popular form of it is mixed gender, co-ed. The high school tournament was that…. I get many ADs and other teachers coming in saying: “We love Ultimate, and our kids….” When they figure out it’s co-ed, it becomes even more popular. That’s what we want to do.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Well, Brian, thank you for your presentation this afternoon and what you do for the communities.

We’re just going to jump around. The next person is from Sport Medicine Council of British Columbia. I flipped a coin, and Robert Joncas….

Robert, you have five minutes for your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions or comments.

The floor is yours.

SPORT MEDICINE COUNCIL OF B.C.

R. Joncas: Bonjour. Good afternoon. My name is Robert Joncas. I’m the executive director of the Sport Medicine Council of British Columbia, better known as SportMedBC, which is in its 40th year of operation.

Our mission is to support health and performance through sport and exercise with the best people, best practice and best program in sport medicine and exercise science for British Columbia.

I would like to acknowledge that while the work of SportMedBC and our members takes place throughout the province, our office is on the unceded traditional territory of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh nations.

Over 750 medical and paramedical British Columbian practitioners are members of SportMedBC, and they are supported by over 225 volunteer leaders in different programs offered by our organization in communities across the province. On this, I’d like to acknowledge the 25 years of Ms. Chant as a run-walk leader for our organization. Thank you very much for your support.

In addition, SportMedBC works closely with other sectors and organizations that run sport events, such as the well-known Vancouver Sun Run, with an average of 40,000 runner participants each year, and the Whistler GranFondo, with an average of 5,000 cyclist participants annually, just to name these two, who keep a lot of British Columbians active and healthy.

A key learning over the last three years of the pandemic has been an emphasis on the critical role the sector played for B.C. citizens to live active and healthy lives and stay connected to their communities.

SportMedBC greatly appreciates the direct funding support it receives from the province of British Columbia. However, our ability to implement the Pathways to Sport strategic framework has been adversely impacted by the fact that the province of B.C. funding for the sector has not seen an increase since 2010. The Pathways to Sport document presents critical goals for affordability, reconciliation, inclusion, diversity and safe sport.

[3:20 p.m.]

To make strides in this area, SportMedBC and other sport organizations need to be able to plan with sustainable funding to implement strategies to achieve these goals.

Additionally, this funding pressure creates significant challenges for our organization to implement the Pathways to Sport strategic framework for sport in British Columbia 2020-2025 and to ensure that sport is affordable for families. SportMedBC supports the goal of an objective of Pathways to Sport, and a renewed government investment in sport will help advance sport participation, athlete development and event hosting.

Our role as an organization is to support sporting events and provide safety expertise. We have concerns about capacity, and additional core funding is required to recruit, train, implement and sustain medical expertise for the B.C. sport system. Safe sport is also about injury prevention for those new to sport.

Sport attracts all ranges, in particular the 55-plus population. Older adults are expected to represent 25 percent of the B.C. population by 2041, according to B.C. Stats. Over one-third of men and almost 50 percent of women between 64 and 74 are considered inactive.

Perception of safety in sport can be a barrier for parents enrolling their children. Those barriers are even more pronounced for Indigenous people, new Canadians, girls and women, and individuals with disabilities. These groups often face multiple barriers to participate.

SportMedBC staff went from nine employees in 2010 to five in 2023. The cut in the funding had a big impact on our operation and on the support that we could give to a bigger group of partners than in 2010, as the number of PSOs, LSOs and MSOs went up. More people to support with less funding.

Significantly, with additional resources, SportMedBC would like to be able to help to keep sports safe, keep the athletes healthy and in good physical condition, and get more people trained on how to keep sports safe. SportMedBC will be able to run more courses and workshops, such as concussion management, athletic taping, first aid in sports.

SportMedBC fully supports the amateur sport request for an additional $15 million to core funding over three years from the province of British Columbia. Thank you very much.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation.

B. Banman: My colleague was just pointing out that as a chiropractor, we probably have more in common than we think. Many chiropractors, actually, I believe, are members of…

R. Joncas: Specific to sport.

B. Banman: Specific to sport. There are a couple in my home town that I know are. They absolutely love working with sports.

You were saying that it has not increased since 2010. Do you have any idea as to reason, as to why that may be?

R. Joncas: I believe that after 2010, we got all that money as the legacy from the Olympics. Then, as the years went up, it just decreased and decreased. As an example, for us, in 2015, our viaSport core funding went from $200,000 to $188,000, which is what we got two weeks ago. We never know what we’re going to get. We expect more, but we know that the funding has been the same, like I said, since 2010.

B. Banman: What I hear is that, like with other organizations, it’s this feast or famine. It’s like winning the lotto, if you’re going to get it. What you really are asking for is a stabilized…. Stable would be better than what you’ve got right now.

R. Joncas: Yeah, and then, as I expressed, there are more organizations. There are more PSOs. There are new sports. The pie remains the same, with more people trying to get a piece of the pie.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): I will take a stab at it. Thanks. All the practitioners that you have within the society, I guess kinesiologists, strength and conditioning people, physio.…

R. Joncas: Doctors.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Is there mental training as well?

R. Joncas: Yes.

[3:25 p.m.]

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Out of all those practitioners, is there one that’s a little bit more at risk of not getting more people, qualified people, into the sector? Is there something we need more than the other?

R. Joncas: No, I don’t think so. Most of the time, don’t forget, it’s a circle. More money to the PSO, and more work for us. When the PSOs are affected by the budget, if they run a tournament, or they have an event, and then they can’t afford to get our service, we don’t get revenues and they don’t get the service. So most of the time, we get requests for physio, athletic therapists and doctors on site.

H. Yao: A bit of a difference between SportMedBC first and, I guess, St. John Ambulance, when they provide first aid. How are you different? I know that in Richmond, sometimes when you see a community group hosting events or hosting sport activity, it’s actually…. I see St. John Ambulance or Red Cross first aid attendants there instead of SportMedBC.

R. Joncas: You’ve heard all those acronyms. PSO is provincial sport organizations. We are officially an MSO, a multi-sport organization. But our vision and mission, like I said, is to support the PSO and the LSO in their venture. We don’t come with an ambulance or something. We just reach out to our practitioners according to the requests we get. It could be a mental trainer. It could be a chiro. It could be a kinesiologist on site. That’s how we do our work.

H. Yao: If you don’t mind me following up, I have another question. I guess your work is actually more focused on getting participants back into activity sooner, rather than providing immediate medical services.

R. Joncas: Yeah. Then another thing that we do as well, which…. Part of our mandate is to support Team B.C. when they go to the Canada Games. Last year was very busy because of the pandemic. Both summer games and winter games were in the same year, so we’ve been very busy with that.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Robert, thank you very much for your presentation this afternoon and thank you for the work that you do for those athletes that are in need of your services.

Next up we have Will Davis, B.C. Adaptive Snowsports.

Will, you have five minutes for your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

You have the floor.

B.C. ADAPTIVE SNOWSPORTS

W. Davis: Appreciate it. Thank you for allowing us this time.

In 2024, B.C. Adaptive Snowsports will be celebrating a very significant milestone. BCAS was founded in 1973-74, and ever since then, our organization has worked tirelessly to improve the quality of life of countless British Columbians who are living with either a physical or cognitive disability. We’ve done this by funding unique programs and activities which provide direct access for British Columbians to ski resorts for those individuals who would otherwise be unable to enjoy our slopes.

We do this in collaboration with an amazing group of adaptive snow sports clubs in B.C. and in the Yukon who provide a wide range of lessons and programs to adapt to each participant’s abilities. These lessons and programs are delivered by a dedicated army of volunteer instructors trained by BCAS — B.C. Adaptive Snowsports — technical experts. Together, we are providers of adaptive snow sport equipment, advocates for accessibility and supporters of B.C. para-athlete development. Under the B.C. Adaptive Snowsports portfolio, we serve as the PSO for Alpine Canada’s para-alpine ski team.

Every day in British Columbia, hundreds of youth wake up with the knowledge that due to a variety of reasons, they will be unable to join their friends and family in our back country and on our ski hills. These individuals come from various backgrounds and ethnicities and are located around the province. In addition to the identified youth who are living with physical disabilities or cognitive differences, a growing number of British Columbians living with autism or who have other cognitive impairment are also cut off from accessing the sport of skiing and snowboarding.

Our wait-lists to access camps and lessons for those living with autism or cognitive impairment has been growing over the last few years. Meanwhile, BCAS has fewer resources to meet these growing demands. For example, BCAS offers all-mountain camps, which are multi-day camps offered in partnership with Rocky Mountain Adap­tive. They are geared to the intermediate to advanced skier or snowboarder who can confidently ski a blue run with linking turns with control.

[3:30 p.m.]

Endorsed by Alpine Canada as part of their development stream and Carving the Future initiatives, our All Mountain Camp offers a mix of race and all mountain skill development led by top para coaches in Canada. AMC provides adaptive alpine and snowboard participants the opportunity to build confidence, work on technique and socialize with peers.

After the struggles of the past two years of the COVID pandemic, BCAS is pleased to report that membership levels are back to pre-pandemic levels. In the 2021-22 season, we had 2,117 members registered with BCAS across 16 club members. Last year our initial numbers were about 150 more, just shy of 2,300.

The three areas that we’d like to highlight for the standing committee…. Pardon my lack of knowledge. I don’t know if we are able to ask for one-off celebration money or funds, but we are looking to celebrate properly our 50th anniversary. We’d like to do so, in collaboration with the government of British Columbia, across all our clubs throughout the province.

We have a champion and have created a program called snowbility, which not only works with the participant and the volunteer instructors but also works holistically with the clubs to ensure that they get the support required to be able to function. For example, if someone shows up at Mount Washington…. They could be a great skier. They could be a veteran. They could be supporting our club. The next day they will have to become a fundraiser or be the chair of the board or the bottle washer, etc.

Snowbility is built to help support clubs so that they can be vibrant, so that there’s a succession plan, so that we constantly have new people coming through.

That’s the one big piece that we’re asking for. The other piece is that we work in collaboration with government to recognize that building codes are not up to standard and that building codes can sneak through cracks regionally, at different levels of government, in different places. That becomes problematic for our skiers.

Big White is a perfect example. They had a new building built, two storeys. The building code didn’t require them to put an elevator inside that building, so the second floor is not accessible. That was a recent build.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Well, thank you for your presentation.

R. Leonard: Nice to actually meet you face to face. I’m glad to see you. I’m glad to see you here at this committee.

How I know you is from a request around an elevator in a privately owned resort. What you’ve just said about building codes and the need to find ways to fund access…. It’s a really important thing. So I’m really glad that you brought that up.

One thing you…. A couple of things that I heard from local folks were the impacts not only on individuals, particularly around mental health, when they have physical disabilities, but on the teaching staff and the support staff and how it can lift others out of bad places. We have some veterans in our community.

If you wouldn’t mind speaking to that a little bit. Also, just highlight a little bit more about that celebration and what opportunities come from having tournaments and things where people gather.

W. Davis: Excellent. Uniquely, our PSO does support and find pathways for athletes and coaches and officials to develop. We also are as much athletic as we are social. We are a place for the development of individuals beyond their ability on the snow.

An example at Mount Washington is…. One of our key volunteers, who is a veteran, came to us through True Patriot Love. He was identified as an individual with PTSD who they wanted to reintegrate into something, into the community, and they sent him to us. This individual has become an instructor, a leader. He is on boards of directors and is completely immersed and engaged in the community.

[3:35 p.m.]

That is one story amongst many. In fact, that same individual will be a coach for the Invictus Games, which we are heavily involved in and supporting.

R. Leonard: Thanks for sharing that.

H. Yao: Thank you so much for the opportunity.

I know you mentioned, when you do an ask…. One of your asks is a 50th anniversary across the province with various clubs. I hate to do this to you, but do you have a dollar figure to your ask?

W. Davis: Well, we have been working around a document that we did ask for that included several points for our ask. It was $600,000, which covered our 50 champions for 50 years celebration, bringing 50 champions from across the province together.

It was a development of guidelines for resorts for accessibility. It included tools for schools, the education campaign, EDIA specific, and growth around understanding of what we do. Awareness and exposure is something that is lacking.

Our first annual conference and exhibition, which we are in current negotiation on and hope to continue to develop, is called ramp it up. Ramp it up will be a celebration and youth forum where we bring our clubs, and not only our clubs, but all those that live with adaptive needs. We don’t want to start at the slope. We want to start in people’s lives and bring them along for the journey.

We want to also purchase equipment. We already purchase equipment. We have great partnerships with B.C. Rehab, for example, where we provide grants and support. Sit skis, and headsets for vision-impaired skiers, are not inexpensive. So we have a need for redevelopment of that.

Development of accessibility base camps at all our clubs. Some clubs, like Grouse…. Grouse is world-class. I would argue it’s one of the best setups in the world. Mount Washington, save the lack of that access elevator, is an incredible facility with all kinds of opportunity. So we want to see our base camps at all our clubs get that kind of attention.

Finally, a community van, which would go around the province and be able to service our clubs, both in the club and also the individual’s equipment.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Will, thank you very much for your presentation and the work that you do that allows those people to enjoy the snow the same way that we do.

W. Davis: I very much appreciate it. Have a good day.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Next up we have David Crawford from the Pacific National Exhibition.

David, you have five minutes to make your presentation and five minutes for the committee to have questions and/or comments.

The floor is yours.

PACIFIC NATIONAL EXHIBITION

D. Crawford: Thank you very much for your time today. I’m the vice-president of finance and corporate services at the PNE.

I’m here to talk about the PNE very briefly today, in the context of a capital project that we’re undertaking, and also to give you some context as you go through your deliberations around not only the PNE but other tourism investments that you may make as well.

The PNE is a non-profit. We’re owned by the city of Vancouver. We generate an annual surplus of $2 million to $4 million. All of the surplus is invested back in the site.

We employ approximately 4,000 people per year, pri­marily youth and new Canadians, because we have lots of low-barrier-to-entry jobs as you look at it. Obviously, that peaks during the summer, during the fair. We have an independent board of directors, and as a management team, that’s who we report to.

The site itself is 110 acres. We have seven large venues, and we generate about 180,000 tourism visits a year across the activities that we undertake. There are five things that happen at the PNE. Three generate revenue: the fair, which most of us are familiar with; Playland, our amusement park, which operates from May to October; and then we operate about 1,000 different events on our site a year — trade, consumer shows, concerts, things like that.

We use the surplus on that to fund park care and maintenance of the site, because it is a public park and accessible to the residents of, primarily, Burnaby and Vancouver. We have a community and social mandate as well, about accessibility, which we engage in, in the community.

For those of you who may have seen, we made an announcement about the construction of a brand-new amphitheatre on our site. That takes us from today, where what’s there is a parking lot and some wooden bleachers that hold 7,000 people, to a 10,000-guest, three-season, permanent facility. Part of that, as we look right now….

The building is in final design. The PNE has to service the mortgage on that facility, just as anybody else would. It is guaranteed by the city of Vancouver, the debt, but we as the PNE have to service the ongoing operating costs of that.

[3:40 p.m.]

The benefits of this building are going to be quite impactful, because we’ll go from currently, this summer, where we’ve got about 26 events scheduled, to approximately 75. Those will be commercial events, but also, we’re well aware that community access is going to be a critical part for all of Metro Vancouver to this new facility.

It really does fill a gap. We go from civic theatres at about 2,600 seats to the next-smallest venue — it’s actually on our site — at 15,000. There’s a missing middle there, and that’s what this venue addresses. That comes to us from consultation with community groups and promoters. What’s the right size of facility? What makes their business work? Also, what’s the right size for arts, culture and other groups to have access to at an affordable cost?

It’s also going to be a world-class venue. I’ll leave copies of the images that I brought with me from our architects. This building is going to be built of mass timber. That’s intentional. What it allows us to do is actually design the roof to mitigate the sound so we can be a good neighbour.

It’s going to be absolutely stunning, and it’s going to be a showcase. The building is designed in British Columbia. It’s engineered here. It’s going to be constructed using materials…. Obviously, when we look at timber…. It’s going to be operated by British Columbians. It really is going to be a showcase, when we look at the accessibility aspects of it but also the environmental aspects of it.

Right now the building is scheduled to come into service in the spring of 2026, to give you an idea. What our ask is today…. We believe that the capital cost for this will be about $75 million. We’re just going through the costing of that now. Our ask is for $25 million, and part of that is to invest in the things that make the building work, the audio and the visual.

Part of our mandate with operating the building is to have community access. When we look at the struggles…. I’m sure you’re aware that some of the festivals that have been supported by the province of British Columbia access venues that are effectively bare ground. Renting all temporary infrastructure is very expensive. We experience it right now, and we see that with others.

As we go forward, a mandate from our board is…. Obviously, there’s commercial activity. The promoters will come. Also, how do we engage the arts, culture, tourism community and make the building accessible to them in an affordable way? That’s part of our ask.

When community groups want to use the building, they can do so at an affordable cost. Also, it’s turnkey. They don’t have to rent anything. They can simply use the building. The art and the design of this is to spend enough money that it’s useful for community groups. They don’t have a facility rental and then have to rent a bunch of equipment. We can help with the business case of other festivals that are operating in the Lower Mainland. They’ll have an opportunity to have a permanent home as well.

With all the other services and high accessibility standards and things that just sometimes don’t happen when you’re using, effectively, a civic park to stand up a facility or, like us…. We’re using a parking lot, in many cases.

With that, I will conclude with…. The other thing that we’re also well aware of is…. Yes, we are speaking to the federal government. The federal tourism strategy is going to be rolled out this summer. It’s going to focus on seasonality, and the seasonality is between September and May. We fit there. I just thought I’d share that with you.

We certainly see…. In communication with the federal government, its support is going to be focused on events and activities that enhance tourism experiences between September and May.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, David.

B. Banman: Thank you very much.

The one thing I think you failed to mention was the struggles that the PNE went through with regards to all of the grants during COVID that, because of the city’s ownership, you kind of got excluded from. We almost lost you.

D. Crawford: Well….

B. Banman: Almost.

D. Crawford: There’s a lot of truth there.

B. Banman: I would say that perhaps we might owe you one.

I’m a big fan of the PNE. I think it is one of those $100 weekends that you can take a family to.

What I’m interested in is…. When you say you’re looking at…? Did you say $75 million? Was that the number? How close are you with regards to your estimates on that?

D. Crawford: Yeah. We’ve gone from class D to class C, to use the vernacular of construction. So we’ve obviously had to increase it. The original budget was pre-COVID. Obviously, we’ve seen an escalation of services and construction materials as well.

We’re fairly comfortable with that number at this point. The design is sort of 50 percent. Then it’s, really, what else…. How much do the seats cost? There are other things that are obviously variables. How much audiovisual equipment and things do you put in the building?

The images are here. I’ll leave them for you, if you want to review them. The building design is largely set physically. It’s what’s inside the building.

That’s why our ask today is to make an investment to make it completely usable, not only for commercial purposes, which, obviously, helps to pay the bills, but to make it accessible to community-based arts and culture organizations as well.

H. Yao: Actually, I’m going to piggyback on my colleague Bruce’s question too.

[3:45 p.m.]

Can you help us appreciate your $75 million? How does it break down? Which levels of government are you asking? What kinds of private corporations are you hoping to achieve?

D. Crawford: Yeah, absolutely. To be clear, the PNE is on the hook for the construction costs. Obviously, the ask of both the provincial government and the federal government is to help support that. It would lower the operating costs and lower the cost of access to the building.

It doesn’t mean we’ll change the commercial terms for promoters and for-profit activities. Our balance is: “Okay. How do we get community groups in the building at an affordable rate that still makes the business model work for us?”

Obviously, we also have to pay competitive wages. We have four unions on site. We have to make the business operate. What we don’t want to do is have a building that’s so expensive community groups can’t afford to use it.

G. Chow: So 2,600 spectators, right? Is that the capacity?

D. Crawford: Sorry. The civic theatres today…. The largest one in Metro Vancouver is 2,600 seats. If you’re a promoter, your options are 2,600 seats or 15,000. We’re going to be in the middle.

The venue will also be scalable. We can operate sections of it for events that don’t have 10,000 spectators. The other thing…. Obviously, this is going to have a roof. It’s going to be rainproof. So it allows us…. This is the seasonality that it opens up for us as well. It will be scalable, between the sections inside the building, from about 2,800 to 10,000, depending on the needs of the promoter or of the community group.

G. Chow: Oh, to 10,000.

D. Crawford: Up to 10,000.

G. Chow: Okay. So how big is, really, your building compared to, say, the Olympic oval or the dome right now at the PNE?

D. Crawford: To answer your question directly…. The building is triangular in shape. It has fantastic views of the North Shore Mountains. It’s going to be about the same size as the Richmond Oval. The roof span will be larger than the Richmond Oval.

To the best of our knowledge, once completed, it will be the largest mass timber roof in Canada. So it’s big. You’ll notice it when you drive up.

M. Starchuk (Chair): That will make the engineers happy.

Any other comments or questions? I’m not seeing any.

David, thank you for your time today. We were sitting here thinking that in 2026, if the price is right, maybe we can host our committee meetings there, in the great outdoors, instead of just kind of looking outside. That’s facetious at best. I look forward to the landmark that will be there.

D. Crawford: Yeah. Just to reiterate the commentary about the federal government. As you go forward and look at other tourism investments…. We’re pretty confident that the federal government is going to really, really focus on seasonality — where it focuses its financial resources as well. I thought I’d leave you with that.

Thank you for your time. I’ll leave the photos here for you.

M. Starchuk (Chair): We’re doing a little bit of a jiggle, if you’re looking down at your agenda that’s here. Next up we have TC Carling, from the Canadian Men’s Health Foundation.

TC, you have five minutes for your presentation, followed by five minutes of questions and/or comments.

The floor is yours.

CANADIAN MEN’S HEALTH FOUNDATION

T. Carling: Excellent. Thank you. Good afternoon.

I’d like to acknowledge that we’re on the traditional territories of the Musqueam people here.

I’m really grateful for the opportunity to discuss, with some of you, for the first time, and for some of you, actually, for a second or a third time, the work that our organization does, with our shared goals to improve the health of men and families here in British Columbia.

With the partnership with and the ongoing generosity of the province of B.C., we’ve been able to continue to help men who are reluctant to seek help, oftentimes because it’s seen as a sign of weakness. We’re trying to normalize these kinds of conversations and to break down stigma as it relates to both mental and physical health awareness for men and their families.

That’s why, for the last nine years, we have found effective ways to communicate with men in a non-traditional style that helps them make small changes that we’re certain are making big impacts in their lives.

Our data show that 68 percent of men in B.C. are living unhealthy lives. This is through lifestyle choice. We remain committed to finding ways to proactively address these concerns around men’s health, not only here in B.C. but all across Canada.

We have three main areas of focus. They are mental health, early intervention and hard-to-reach populations. I’ll start with mental health.

With quality advice and accessible tools, we believe every man can change and make changes to be healthier. Mental health is part of this. We know that, and that’s why we’ve expanded our service to address the stress, anxiety and depression that many men and families are feeling as we evolve from the pandemic and move forward in our lives.

We are providing men and their families that are struggling with these mild-to-moderate symptoms in their mental health with tools to live healthier lives each and every day. We’ve launched signature programs just in the last 18 months, with resources such as our MindFit toolkit, which is offering barrier-free counselling. We’ve already put hundreds of men through counselling this year at no cost to them, just since January 19.

[3:50 p.m.]

Our Don’t Change Much podcast is engaging a totally different audience, and our “Move for your mental health” month, which is in its third annual edition, started today. That is a 30-day campaign that started today.

Our mental health programming supports our chronic illness prevention — which was the backbone of this organization from its inception — to support both the mind and the body.

Our second core focus is on the early intervention programs that I said have been the focal point of our organization since inception. We proactively engage men in lifestyle and behavioural change, including seeking treatment for early-stage medical conditions before the onset of chronic illness begins. We’ve been at the forefront, we believe, of improving men’s health by using years of systematic research and testing to engage these unhealthy men and encourage better self-care. We believe that self-care is not selfish, and I think educating people on that is important.

Our digital programs are cost-effective. From the user’s perspective, they’re free, and they’re tailored for men who prefer the flexibility, convenience and, of course, privacy of online male-centric health information. With so much news and information out there, we believe we are a trusted source of important information.

From validated studies, we know men who are highly engaged with our Don’t Change Much programming have seen significant positive outcomes. Some 75 percent have changed their diet or improved their eating habits, 70 percent have increased their physical activity, 46 percent went on to lose weight, 45 percent drink less alcohol, and 35 percent reduced their overall stress level.

Finally, the third core area focuses on these hard-to-reach populations, because we know that the challenges that we have in our general society are only more difficult in the hard-to-reach populations. That’s why this partnership with the government of B.C. has allowed the foundation to have this positive impact on men and families all across our province.

With the health outcomes even more challenging in the underserved and hard-to-reach populations, that is one of the reasons why CMHF was an original fan of the DUDES Club society. They are now operating 50 DUDES Clubs across British Columbia. If you’re not as familiar with them, they’re supporting the mental and physical health of Indigenous men here in B.C. This partnership is something that we remain committed to and that I would like to continue to grow.

We continue to work with subject-matter experts both in the South Asian and rural communities and try to make breakthroughs in their tailored health outcomes.

Finally, our conclusion is that with men’s changing health needs, we need to emerge from this pandemic, continue to help underserved populations to proactively improve their health and lifestyle through expanded and deepened outreach here in B.C.

Our online platforms are especially useful. They were even more useful than we could have ever imagined, as people consume more information virtually. The province of B.C. has inspired many like-minded companies across B.C. to partner with us. That is why our growth continues. These partnerships provide us this opportunity to continue to develop new, engaging and, most importantly, scientifically backed resources and expand our reach across B.C.

That is why our recommendation is to continue supporting the delivery of evidence-based digital tools that we’re creating — such as the MindFit toolkit, the Don’t Change Much Podcast and Move For Your Mental Health — so that we can increase the health of B.C. men and their families. We’re certain that healthy men make healthier families and healthier communities.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Thank you, TC, for your presentation and your Don’t Change Much Podcast. To me, that just goes a million miles. It goes a million miles.

H. Yao: Thank you so much. I really appreciate your presentation. I think I asked this question last time. I will ask the same question again.

You mentioned South Asians, and you mentioned the Indigenous outreach, and I really appreciate your reaching out to them. From my community, among the Chinese-Canadian men…. They are actually fairly isolated. Unfortunately, in my opinion, this allows toxic masculinity to flow through the community from time to time. Do you have a strategy to reach out to Chinese Canadians? How can we support them in that ethnic culture?

T. Carling: We do. In fact, it’s a conversation I had recently with somebody in the local Vancouver market, in the Chinese community, for this exact same reason we talked about — and not just Chinese but the overall Asian community.

A friend of mine who is of Korean descent recently shared a very powerful story about losing a family member through suicide, talking about the stoic nature within various Asian populations and families. That’s something that I would like to see our organization continue to build. We know how big the community is here in the Lower Mainland, in particular.

So I would look, MLA Yao, to yourself, even just for somebody that could help us continue to make inroads into that community. I’d much appreciate that.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Any other comments there?

B. Banman: Well, thank you very much. I share this every now and again. I was in the health care field myself. You’re dealing with a pretty stubborn lot.

T. Carling: We are.

[3:55 p.m.]

B. Banman: We have a tendency not to ask for help, because traditionally…. You know: “Just walk it off. You’re okay.” But we’re now learning that it’s okay not to be okay.

T. Carling: It is.

B. Banman: Anything you can do to help spread that message is much appreciated, and I think you sum it up. Healthy men make for a healthy family and a healthy community. If you were to point out your single greatest concern or shortcoming, what is it that keeps you awake at night that you’re missing?

T. Carling: Well, that’s an excellent question. One thing is…. I have a gentleman, Dr. Kuhl, sitting behind me, I believe, who’s going to speak to you in a minute. He’s going to appear on one of our podcasts in a couple of weeks with Trevor Linden. It’s been pre-recorded. It will run the week of Father’s Day.

Trevor speaks in detail about the environment that he grew up in, in Medicine Hat, Alberta in the ’70s versus the environment that he’s raising his child in right now, about how he and his two brothers, the three boys, were taught to suppress their feelings and the impact that that’s had on his life up until now, when he’s 53 years old, versus the life that he and his wife, Cristina, are trying to provide for his young son.

Taking from that, I think the more long-time narratives or stoic behaviours or stigmas, if you will…. I actually prefer the term “normalize.” What we’re trying to do as an organization is normalize these conversations. That starts right here. I have a first-person story on our website right now about my lived experience with anxiety and my desire to help other people.

I think anything we can do to just make these conversations normal for people so that they know that asking for help…. Whether they want to do it in the privacy of their own home, or they want to be like me and write a first-person story, or they want to be like Trevor and be on a podcast, that’s okay. But either way, it’s important you look for help, because there are too many examples around us.

I recently became a Big Brother for an 11-year-old son of a friend of mine, because his dad died last March from colon cancer, after 15 months of living a very unhealthy life for many years before that. It’s created a crater in their life. That’s one family, and we know there are many, many families like that all across B.C. and across Canada.

M. Starchuk (Chair): TC, if you don’t mind, I would like you, if you could, just to expand upon the podcast and the numbers that come out of that service that’s there.

T. Carling: Yeah, for sure. We have published 15 episodes, and between YouTube views and downloads, we’re sitting at about 115,000 total, cumulative. The great thing is we have focused our attention…. It’s been a bit of a learning experience for us. We never had a podcast before June 1 of last year. And the thing that we are highly focused on is our subscriber base, because the subscribers are the most loyal listeners.

It’s interesting. Kevin Bieksa was a guest of ours in November — he would have been guest No. 9 — and he almost immediately outpaced every other previous episode, even though he was starting six months behind some of the episodes. That’s because of his social presence and his online presence and his storytelling. Dan O’Toole was a guest of ours in May, and he’s already the No. 2 leading podcast because we’ve grown our subscriber base, and we’re dealing with people that are willing to tell — in Dan’s case, his journey back to sobriety.

We’re at about 120,000 downloads and YouTube views, based on the first 15 episodes, and we’re publishing four episodes this month.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Okay. TC, thank you very much for your presentation. More importantly, thank you for what you do for the community that’s out there.

T. Carling: I appreciate it. Thank you for your time.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Our next presenter is Gord Ditchburn from the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters. I don’t know whether this is the first time it gets recorded in public, but the former president of the B.C. Fire Fighters Association.

G. Ditchburn: As of noon today.

M. Starchuk (Chair): As of noon today. Welcome to what you might want to call “retirement.”

Gord, you have five minutes for your presentation, five minutes for questions and answers.

The floor is yours, Gord.

B.C. PROFESSIONAL
FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION

G. Ditchburn: Very good. Well, firstly, good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity to address this body in support of the funding opportunity, the work of Blueprint.

Our work goes way back, but we’re here today to talk about providing improvements for the health and well-being of women, children and families by creating and scaling programs focused on men and fathers, and you’ve just heard from TC, further strengthening community health by enhancing the health and well-being of police officers and firefighters, again, with scaling evidence based on clinical programs.

We came together with Blueprint in 2016. The impetus for that were two firefighter suicides in 2015, Kevin Hegarty and Ernie Dombrowski. Two weeks ago, Surrey firefighters suffered the loss of another firefighter, and before that, another one. That’s four for Surrey in seven years.

[4:00 p.m.]

I was just in Campbell River at our convention, and we honoured a firefighter who took his life at Christmas. We have far too many suicides, far too many of our members suffering, going through this. The work that we have partnered with, with Blueprint, is changing lives. It’s saving people. It’s saving families.

I can tell you firsthand what I’ve experienced in my 27 years as a firefighter in the city of Vancouver, working a lot on the Downtown Eastside — my own instances. The backpack is full; I’ve seen a lot. I’ve seen too much, and this program literally saves lives. I work with individuals who have gone through the program. I’ve been through it myself. The evidence that is being compiled is truly, truly making a difference in the lives of firefighters and, equally as important, their families.

The 3½-day, 34-hour intensive program that we go through in this program — supported by Dr. Kuhl, Dr. Duncan Shields and others — as I say, truly makes a difference. The resources that you are given, the ability to change your mindset and assist you as you move forward, I don’t think can properly be quantified in stats. Sitting side by side with people you trust, going to battle every day, you need to know that they’re safe in their own mind and that they’re safe to work with you.

Traditionally, people in the public will see one or two tragic events in their lifetime. I go to work, and I will see one to two in a four-day period, sometimes one to two in a single day. That wears on you. Dr. Shields put it as: “The military goes to war in a tour every six months to two years; firefighters and police officers go to war every four days.”

The difference that this program makes in saving lives — again, the research is there; the data is there. Sitting side by side, some of you know firefighters extremely well. I think you will see that from the day they start to the day they end their career, they change. The same goes for police.

What we see, what we’re exposed to, the environments that we’re part of, changes a person. It also affects how you react within your own family. My wife still thinks I’m an asshole, but I’m less of an asshole because I’ve gone through this. I’ve accepted the help. If she were here, she would tell you that. I’ve gone, and I’ve got the help. To this day, I see a psychiatrist to help me offload what I’ve seen in my career.

The very first day on the job, I had five overdoses. They didn’t all make it. That was day one. I got tagged with “Dr. Death” on my first day on the job. It has been like that for a long, long time. That may sound dramatic and graphic, but that’s the blunt reality of what we do in a community. Whether it’s Vancouver, it’s Cranbrook, or wherever you want to put it, firefighters, police officers, first responders are there first.

If you’re in a smaller community, you’re not only dealing with the individual at the incident. Quite often you either know the family or you’re part of the family. It’s intimate, and that never leaves you, right? I could be anywhere in the world, and a sight, sound or smell triggers me back.

It used to be that they would say that if you drove into a certain part, you would see an address and you could remember the call. Well, for me, every corner I take in the city of Vancouver has a meaning. But I wouldn’t be where I am today without the work that this program has helped me with, quite honestly. I’ll share it because of what I went through. I’m watching it, what I went through.

I witnessed my own daughter die in the street — her last breath. I never grieved. I went into work mode to help my family get through. I went into work mode; it got me through. I went to our resiliency program. I was able to unpack that. That’s where my wife says I’m less of an asshole. I was able to unpack that and come out of that with a far better understanding of who I am. That’s what drives me to do the work that I do every day in supporting other firefighters.

[4:05 p.m.]

I know I’ve gone over my time. But that’s the value of this program. That’s why we’re here to support the ask: to make sure that other firefighters, police officers and first responders get the assistance they need and take the stress off the health care system, because it’s making a hell of a difference for people. That’s the blunt reality.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Gord, I’m not sure if Hansard’s ready for this and the gallows humour that comes from our occupations, but I can confirm that you are that a-hole. It takes one to know one.

B. Banman: Thank you very much, Gord. As you know, my son is a firefighter, and he would probably share Mike’s opinion. I said I wouldn’t give you a hard time, and if you were to phone his wife, she would have the same opinion.

G. Ditchburn: All our wives do.

B. Banman: Absolutely. As his dad, well, he’d probably think I’m one as well, and vice versa, but he has given me a glimpse of the window of the horrors that he has had to go through in his career. I’m proud of him, but there are times when I’m not, and this kind of help is exactly what those in…. I would say let’s bring medical professionals and paramedics in as well. There is that attitude where, as I said to the last speaker, it’s now finally okay to say: “I’m not okay.”

If we can get it through to firefighters — I know how stubborn my kid is — we can help a lot of people. I want to thank you for sharing your story, and I look forward to any of the questions that others have. I don’t have a question; I just have a statement. Thank you for being here.

G. Ditchburn: Thank you, and knowing your son, he’s a great firefighter. I don’t say that flippantly. He’s a tremendous individual. If you’ve got a glimpse into his life, then you know what we’ve all gone through.

This has made a difference, and many of you have seen me advocate on behalf of firefighters and first responders. It’s a belief that we have to change, and by accepting that we are all not normal and that what we do isn’t normal, we shouldn’t have to carry that burden for the rest of our lives because of the work we do. If there’s an avenue to get the assistance, then we need to delve into that avenue. That’s what this is.

I say it over and over: this will literally save lives. We talk to spouses and families that have had their loved one go through this. There’s a marked change in that individual, to the benefit. There truly is.

B. Stewart: Thanks very much, Gord, for sharing that information and stories.

I want to ask you about the issues that you’ve been dealing with in the last seven or so years since the opioid crisis was declared. I think it was declared in 2016. Anyway, the bottom line: as first responders, seeing some of this, what you’ve been seeing, has that noticeably changed the challenges that firefighters have had, because of what they’ve been confronted with? I ask that because you mentioned at the start about the four suicides in Surrey.

G. Ditchburn: Absolutely. When I started, we would go to one, maybe two, overdoses in a four-day stretch — a four-day tour. Today, we will often see, depending on the time of month, upwards of 30 to 40 overdoses in a day — in a day. Not in four days, but in a day, when you’re going to see the same people over and over again.

I’m going to say it’s not just the Downtown Eastside. I will tell you that in my work in the city of Vancouver, it is often behind the gates in Shaughnessy. The drugs know no class, no culture. It affects every single person. Quite frankly, every community in this province has a Downtown Eastside. It just depends as to the percentage of the community. You also have a lot of “average citizens” who are using drugs, whether recreationally or by addiction. They’re the ones that we’re responding to.

Does it affect you? Absolutely. That’s because you go and often see, again, the same person. In our communities, it’s a twisted way of looking at it, but they become part of you. When you see, repetitively, the people, and when I hear the address, I know exactly where I’m going. I can picture the furniture and the pictures on the wall in the house I’m going to. And when you lose somebody, that affects you.

[4:10 p.m.]

Again, we try not to get tied into the work that we do, but I take that home. When I’m in my own community going down the street and I see somebody that looks similar, it brings that back. It affects you all the time — all the time. Quite often if you’re dealing with a family outside of the Downtown Eastside scenario in a community, there’s family involved. There may be kids. There are parents.

When I got on the job, nobody taught me how to deal with death. Nobody taught me how to deal with a family in crisis. Now when I go, as a captain, as an officer, I have a crew that’s dealing with the incident at hand, and I’m the one talking to family.

I don’t know how many of you have ever had to go and tell somebody that their loved one was dying or dead, but that literally kicks the shit out of you, and if you do it multiple times in a day…. Yeah. Try that. These guys make a difference.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Gord, thank you for your presentation.

G. Ditchburn: I had a whole bunch of notes.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Yeah. Thank you for getting yourself here from Campbell River. I know there was a little bit of a challenge to get here in time. Thank you for telling part of the Surrey story and about that service that we will be attending tomorrow in Chilliwack.

G. Ditchburn: Yeah. Ben Albisser. He was an important part of our culture and a valued member.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Next up is Ralph Kaisers, B.C. Police Association.

Yeah, tough act to follow.

R. Kaisers: Wow. Things get personal. I’m going to try to keep mine a little more upbeat.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Go ahead and try.

You’ve got five minutes to be as upbeat as you can and then five minutes of our questions.

B.C. POLICE ASSOCIATION

R. Kaisers: Perfect. My name is Ralph Kaisers. I’m a sergeant with the Vancouver police department. I’m the union president for Vancouver, also the president for the B.C. Police Association, and I sit on the Canadian Police Association board, respectively representing about 1,500 members, 3,500 members and 60,000 across Canada.

As a police officer, for a third of my career I worked in operations. I worked on patrol. I worked as a beat officer in the Downtown Eastside. A third of my career was doing undercover work, and a third of my career was doing major crime–type investigations. During that time, I also then started dabbling in helping members in connection with our union, first as a union agent and then as a union director, the vice-president for a number of years, and now formally as the president.

In that work with the union, government had spoken to WorkSafe back in 2015, if I remember right, and put together the first responders steering committee and brought police, fire, ambulance, unions and employers together to look at what was going on with first responders in and around occupational stress injuries. We met a lot of good people there, through that.

The work started, and through the work, and some tragedy in Surrey, by way of suicides, the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association, in collaboration with Dr. Dun­can Shields and David Kuhl, started doing some work, because they’d worked with veterans before, and it morphed into assisting some of these firefighters. The program was working. I say that because from my perspective, we were looking for something that we could do for our members around the province that was going to work.

It was something that we wanted to build: first responders building a program for other first responders. We had lots of doctors, lots of clinicians, lots of organizations approaching us and wanting to help. A lot of it sounded anecdotally like it was going to work, but we wanted to test something. We wanted to build something that was going to work for us.

So between the Professional Fire Fighters, ourselves, the doctors that are now at Blueprint, we started and built the program for our members. Part of it was that we needed research-based testing: “Is this working?” It’s great that people might come out of a program thinking and feeling better, but is it, and can it be, quantified by way of research, data and matrixes that it is working?

That’s where, once we started, I was drawn to the program and thought: “Okay, this is something that we do have to push forward with.” There are interviews that are done with scales and matrixes in and around occupational stress injuries. It was demonstrated, by way of a number of the cohorts that we had started, that it was having an effect. It was having a positive effect on our members.

[4:15 p.m.]

I also want to thank government, because it was back in 2018 that the presumptive legislation around OSIs was implemented. That was something that collectively, as a group, we were working on for years, and it was good. It’s one step in the journey of all of us working together, trying to make the lives of our first responders better. If we have healthy first responders, we have healthy communities, and that’s important.

First responder statistics out of CIPSRT…. I think the latest research that they have, which is nationally looking at the public safety profession: 44 percent of public safety personnel are suffering or can be diagnosed with some form of occupational stress injury. That’s about four times more than the general population, so we do need help.

This program has been running a couple of years, and it’s tough. I say that because there’s no stable funding. We’re doing what we can to get money, from wherever we can, to ensure this very productive and effective work continues for our members. Year after year we literally have to hunt different organizations, our employers, to get the funding that we need to make this work.

It would be a great opportunity for us along with government in some form of partnership — because we have a partnership already, the three of us together for this program — for government to get involved in this. It works, and we need some help with the funding piece of it and look forward to having government join us.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Ralph, thank you very much for your presentation. Bang on, time-wise.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks, Ralph, for the presentation. I just wanted to commend both you and Gord for working in tandem for the general good of the Blueprint.

I just wanted to recognize Gord. Regards from the Locals 1253 and 2827 and all those other volunteers in the Elk Valley. What Gord has been a big advocate for has been a mandatory prevention program for occupational disease and medical surveillance, as well as the psychological safety in the workplace. He didn’t seem to mention that, but he went on what’s good for all first responders, so I wanted to commend Gord for that.

With the B.C. Police Association, do they have a program that is what Gord is trying to advocate for? I’m just trying to see if we can get something that’s so consistent throughout all first responders.

R. Kaisers: The program we’re talking about is the program. It’s the B.C. first responders resiliency program. It’s a collaboration between B.C. fire, B.C. police and Blueprint. Maybe I didn’t come across clear enough at the start. This is a coordinated collaborative program that the three of us have put together.

Obviously, it started with fire and was the impetus for it to start. Fire, police, we have a great relationship and obviously work together in a lot of different things that we need to deal with.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Well, to follow up, I think that’s brilliant. I think it really shows where the focus needs to be for first response and mental health right across the board.

R. Kaisers: What’s good about this program, too, is that, again, as we build this program, we hope that by way of teaching — train the trainer; we’ll call it that — we’ll be able to expand this program to our brothers and sisters that work in B.C. Ambulance, Corrections, Coast Guard.

The program works. There’s almost more demand — well, there is more demand — than capacity right now. I know that when the time comes, if it were to be expanded to EHS and others, it would be great, just in the sense that they need the help as much as we do as well.

R. Leonard: Thank you, all, for coming as a group to present.

I feel like I’m a little bit ignorant here because I don’t know what Blueprint is. I haven’t heard exactly what it is. Is it mandatory? Is it something that is introduced early on?

I have a retired fire chief who had to take leave for PTSD, and he was very vocal about it. He was a great advo­cate for seeking help.

R. Kaisers: Dr. David Kuhl will speak to Blueprint. It is a Canadian non-profit that obviously is building mental health initiatives for first…. Well, it is helping us with first responders.

Is this mandatory? No, it isn’t. That’s part of the thing, by way of our committee work that we do with WorkSafe.

[4:20 p.m.]

One of the biggest campaigns we had there was trying to break down the stigma of mental health in first response. “Share it; don’t wear it” was the slogan that we’ve created and have been pushing for a number of years.

H. Yao: I’m going to piggyback off my colleague Ronna-Rae’s question, because during this whole presentation, I’ve been googling and googling, and I cannot find it.

R. Kaisers: Googling what — Blueprint?

H. Yao: Blueprint, Blueprint Canada, Blueprint Foundation, Blueprint B.C. I’m not seeing it.

A Voice: It’s blueprint.ngo.

H. Yao: Thank you.

R. Kaisers: You know what? I realize, too, that I didn’t answer the question about it being mandatory. That’s the thing. No, a lot of this stuff is not mandatory. It’s voluntary as to whether members want it.

Now, one thing I can say, too, is that recently we had an inquest. We had a suicide in the Vancouver police department. One of the things that came out of that, one of the recommendations, is that our members actually do and should be part of some form of mandatory psychological screening test checkup on a yearly basis, which is actually something I’ve been advocating already within the organization for a number of years.

It likely…. I would suggest it’s going to happen. It’s just that now they’ve got to figure out the logistics as to how they’re going to do that, because that’ll be 1,500 appointments with psychologists to have that one-hour check-in every year to make sure that they’re okay.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Well, Ralph, thank you very much for your presentation and your time today and for being part of this team effort for the program that we’re going to hear about.

R. Kaisers: Excellent. Okay. Thank you. Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to come and speak to you today.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Our next speaker has the best doctor’s name of all time, Dr. Kuhl — “Going to see Dr. Kuhl; oh, wish I could come” — from Blueprint.

As a side note, I cannot believe the karma that is around us. As the two other gentlemen presenters will know, we were all issued badges, and we all have numbers that are associated with that badge number. Dr. Kuhl, you are the 137th presenter we’ve had, and that is my badge number.

Interjection.

M. Starchuk (Chair): There we go.

On that note, you have five minutes for your presentation, and five minutes for questions and answers.

You have the floor, Dr. Kuhl.

BLUEPRINT

D. Kuhl: I left my sunglasses at home.

Thank you for the invitation to meet with you today.

I do want to start by acknowledging that I work and live on the traditional, ancestral and unceded territory of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations.

I’m David Kuhl. I’m a professor in the Faculty of Medicine at UBC. I’m here as co-founder on behalf of Blueprint, a university-based non-profit organization, to request your partnership to improve the well-being of men and thereby also have a positive impact on the well-being of women, children, families and communities.

Men are statistically more likely to suffer addictions, enjoy fewer friendships, have a shorter expectation of life and die by suicide and other illnesses pertaining to the lives they live and the risks they take. When their model of masculinity demands stoicism, toughness and independence, men too often end up isolated, lonely and in pain. It’s time for this to change. By reshaping the way men relate to masculinity, we help them heal and show them a healthier way forward.

Today our focus is on Blueprint’s groundbreaking work with first responders and fathers. You’ve heard about the positive impact from the two gentlemen that spoke before me. Our programs help first responders strengthen their resilience in the face of life-or-death environments.

Where masculine work culture can be a source of strength, it can also be a source of suffering. Stoicism in the face of danger shouldn’t mean silence in the face of trauma. They are exposed to the impact of violence, crime, catastrophic accidents, disasters and widespread public health crises such as the pandemic, effects of the heat dome and the opioid epidemic. While the rest of us are insulated from all of that, their work exposes them to the risk of death, illness or major injury on a daily basis.

Over time, repeat exposure to these conditions wears down their abilities to cope and to care for others that work at home and in the community. It affects their mental health. As was stated previously, 44 percent meet the criteria for a mental health disorder, four times the normal Canadian average.

[4:25 p.m.]

Despite the burden and cost of service, we have charged first responders with the responsibility to provide first contact, protection and compassionate care for the community, the injured, those with mental illness and for society’s most vulnerable and most impoverished people.

We have a duty of care towards those from whom we ask so much. We may delegate care and protection of the vulnerable to first responders. We must not abdicate our responsibility to care for them, the majority of whom are men. Their work has an impact on them, their families and our communities.

By using clinical research and practice, our first-responder resiliency program gives police and firefighters an avenue for recovery and growth that many of them desperately need. This is a made-in-B.C. program created by first responders for first responders.

As I mentioned earlier, along with the B.C. first-responder program, Blueprint is also working to create a unique, innovative and world-class research program designed to enhance the positive impact of men as fathers. The most frequent question I get asked by firefighters, police and the military is: can you help me be a good dad?

Whether absent or present, a father’s impact on his children lasts a lifetime. Despite the significance of this formative relationship in a child’s life, fatherhood continues to be understudied and underfunded in health, in education and in our communities. Our goal is to change this and to develop programs for fathers and father figures that will have as positive an impact on families and communities as the first-responder resiliency program.

Through these two innovative measures, we are creating healthy, compassionate workplace cultures that in turn create more inclusive, compassionate and healthier families and communities. Our work has been developed, evaluated and proven using resources and funding from a unique collaboration of unions, universities and, primarily, private donors. It has also attracted international attention from researchers and first-responder groups in Australia, Ireland and, most recently, NATO.

Today we are asking that you, our government, enter into this partnership and support the productive community partnerships that already exist and are already making a positive difference.

First, we ask for stable funding to maintain and increase our capacity to deliver the first-responder program. As has been stated, the program is saving lives and restoring families. Second, we ask for operating funds to expand our fatherhood research program. And thirdly, we ask the government to fund a building that can house these innovations and program deliveries so that we can better support our provincial community.

Thank you for your attention to, and consideration of, our submission today.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Dr. Kuhl, thank you very much for your presentation. Not sure if we had it in the right order, but we now know what Blueprint really, really is.

H. Yao: Thank you so much for your presentation. Bear with me a bit, but do you have a dollar figure in regard to your ask?

D. Kuhl: Our dollar figure. Yes, it was submitted earlier. It’s $14.5 million. It includes an amount for a building. It’s divided into a period of three years, with the first year of $1.26 million, the second of $1.625 and the third of $1.625, for the programs — for program development, for scaling the program, for developing a train-the-trainer program and to continue to do research and evaluation to make sure we’re actually delivering what we intend to deliver.

It’s the geeky part of who we are. It’s the academic part: to make sure that it’s always evidence-based and, if it’s not, let’s correct it so it becomes that.

Then also to develop a program for research on fathers. We’ve already started that. There’s another important area which has to do with researching father figures, because coaches and other people in our children’s lives have a tremendous effect on children. Coaches can often affect more people than fathers in terms of the number of people that they work with. It’s virtually an unexplored, unresearched area.

We would also want to develop a research team with the intent of creating programs for fathers — young fathers, and also fathers at the end of their careers, because often they’re estranged from their children because they have devoted their life to their work. So it includes all of those components.

G. Chow: Thank you, Dr. Kuhl.

Right now the program is just you and the two associations, kind of like volunteers. You do it out of the fact that you’re a professor at UBC, so you still need an organization to get going.

D. Kuhl: That would be under the auspices of Blueprint. Yes.

[4:30 p.m.]

G. Chow: Then when you get going with the money for three years, how many…? Well, I would say, are those counsellors that you would actually work with?

D. Kuhl: That’s right. Right now the program is being evaluated by Movember, because it’s their goal, their intent, to scale it internationally. So right now we can’t bring new people on board because we have to make sure that the program is run very consistently.

There are four of us that are running the program right now. The evaluation of that will be done in spring of next year, and that’s why we’re wanting to look at how we create a program to train the trainers. So yes, it would be people that have training in psychology and training in group process, while my training is in medicine and psychology. It doesn’t have to have the medical part of it, although there’s an advantage to that in terms of the lens by which I see the world.

It would be primarily through master’s and doctoral programs of therapists that are very skilled in group process but also have an understanding of trauma-based therapy. It’s essential that they understand that and that they also understand what it means to be in community with firefighters and police. When we do the four-day retreats, we eat with them, we sleep in the same place, we give them access to who we are for four days. That has to be people that are very willing to make a commitment to this work and to these particular populations.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Thanks, Doctor. A couple things here, I guess.

First on the…. Well, I will make a statement first. I really believe in this program. I really believe what Gord and Ralph had to say as well, of supporting this initiative and mental health.

First response — we all know how critical that is. It’s who we call first in our greatest times of need. And if we don’t have those proper guardrails in place, we’re going to lose more to recruitment and retention. And we know the police right now, with their retention and trying to recruit, it’s getting more and more difficult. If we don’t have these guardrails in place to show that we do care for their mental health, we all lose big-time.

With the funding, you said $14.5 million, I think. And is that for capital build?

D. Kuhl: That’s right.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): And then….

D. Kuhl: So $10 million for the capital building, and the rest would be for program and program development over three years.

T. Shypitka (Deputy Chair): Okay, great. Thanks.

M. Starchuk (Chair): Well, Dr. Kuhl, thank you very much for your presentation. This is a really, really good way for us to end our sessions here in the Metro Vancouver area before we tour. Thank you for the work that you’ve done, and thank you for the work that you’ll be doing, I hope, in the near future.

D. Kuhl: Thank you kindly.

M. Starchuk (Chair): That concludes our meeting.

For the listener that might be out there, this is just a note that beginning Monday to Thursday, we will be in Campbell River, Kitimat, Prince George, Dawson Creek, Cranbrook, Revelstoke, Penticton and Abbotsford. We look forward to meeting those people that are there.

A motion to adjourn.

Motion approved.

The committee adjourned at 4:33 p.m.