2014 Legislative Session: Second Session, 40th Parliament
HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 8, Number 1

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print)
ISSN 1499-2175 (Online)

TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2014

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

[1005]

Introductions by Members

N. Letnick: Joining us in the members' gallery this morning is the consul general of France, Mr. Jean-Christophe Tallard-Fleury. He will be meeting with several members of this House today to discuss social, economic and trade relations between our governments — relations that we'll be reminded of on Thursday, when we celebrate the international day of la francophonie.

I am pleased that the consul general will be here on Thursday to celebrate with all of us. J'espère qu'il aura un séjour agréable et productif à Victoria. I hope he has an enjoyable and productive time in Victoria. Would this House please extend a warm welcome to Mr. Tallard-Fleury.

Tributes

ALEX MACDONALD

A. Dix: I rise today to pay tribute to Alex Macdonald, a legendary figure in B.C. life, a former member of the Legislature and, of course, a former Attorney General, who passed away last Wednesday.

Politics and the law were in Alex's blood. His father, Malcolm Macdonald, was a member of the Legislature and an Attorney General of British Columbia before being appointed to the Court of Appeal and appointed chief justice. When Alex became Attorney General in 1972 he said the office had been out of the family far too long. He occupied, in fact, the same office his father had 50 years earlier.

He was first elected a Member of Parliament in 1957, lost his seat in the Diefenbaker sweep and was elected here to this Legislature in 1960 and then seven times subsequent to that. He was, of course, the Attorney General of British Columbia from 1972 to 1975. I think there were only 12 members of the initial cabinet, which means he was also minister for many other things, including energy.

Interestingly, he was very proud of starting the B.C. Petroleum Corporation, whose intent was to increase the revenues that government gets from natural gas. He also, of course, was famous in government and everywhere else for his sense of humour. Most of the stories I know, knowing Alex quite well, I can't repeat here.

There was a famous occasion after the government had raised the minimum wage, when the president of Canadian Pacific Railway came out to British Columbia in a dudgeon to meet with the Premier and Alex Macdonald, who was the minister responsible, to complain about the situation. They arrived in the office. Dave Barrett tore a strip off of him for about 30 minutes. There was a long, difficult silence, and then Alex added simply: "What the Premier means to say is that the increase will stand."

After leaving politics, Alex taught political science at Simon Fraser University. Both my colleague the member for Port Coquitlam and the Premier were students in his class. He was an avid tennis player and squash player. He once played Bobby Riggs on the lawns of the Empress hotel.

Of course, he wrote several books, many of which members of the Legislature would have read. His final one was Why I Am Still a Socialist…and It's Not Because I Don't Know Any Better. That book title sums up Alex's strongly held views and always disarming and sometimes raucous sense of humour.

I'd ask all members of the Legislature to acknowledge the passing of Alex Macdonald, a great British Columbian, and to extend our heartfelt sympathies to his daughter Christina, son-in-law Luca, and grandsons Andrew and Michael.

Hon. M. de Jong: I think the word "legendary" is appropriately used here. I did not know Alex Macdonald in the same way as the hon. member who continues his legacy in Kingsway, in the riding that he represented for 26 years, but he was, by any measure, an extraordinary man. Very few serve in both the federal and provincial parliaments, and he did so for so many, many years.

[1010]

There are a few people whose presence in this place permeates beyond their departure. I think it's fair to say that Alex Macdonald is one of those individuals. The opposition leader has talked about his wry sense of humour, his affection for people, which ultimately propelled and allowed him to prosper and enjoy more than a quarter century in office — and, candidly, the bulk of that time serving in an opposition capacity, which can be challenging at times.

Yet in addition to the contributions he made as an Attorney General…. I don't know if the opposition leader mentioned this, but Mr. Macdonald did, on one of the occasions that we met. He did reclaim the mantle of attorney generalship for his family from his father, who had served as a B.C. Liberal Attorney General in this place. So he took great delight in mentioning that.

The hon. opposition leader mentioned one anecdote. It's funny how the more things change, the more they are the same. Attorney General Alex Macdonald also had responsibility for liquor reform in this place, and if you visit a pub you will still, on occasion, see the legacy of one of
[ Page 2066 ]
his contributions.

That line on the beer glass is the Alex Macdonald line, because to that point there was great suspicion in what were then called beer parlours across the land about whether or not someone was getting a fair dispensation of beer. The description: "B.C. beer drinkers, who had literally foamed at the mouth for years over being served brews with too much head and too little liquid, gurgled with delight when Attorney General Alex Macdonald brought in a Plimsoll line on all beer glasses in the province."

Alex Macdonald's legacy, of course, extends far beyond that. I think in many ways the legacy he might be proudest of is the legion of young people that he taught and provoked to think about issues of public policy and the kind of society that they want to live in.

We all want to join with the leader of the opposition and all his colleagues and all members of the House in conveying and asking you to convey to his family our condolences and our thanks for sharing their father and grandfather with a grateful province and a grateful nation.

Introductions by Members

C. Trevena: In the precinct today are several hundred of my constituents who are coming to express their displeasure with the government's approach to the handling of what they see as their marine highway, B.C. Ferries. They're very concerned about cuts and increasing fares. There will be several hundred of my constituents in the precinct today, and I hope the House will make them very welcome.

Hon. M. Polak: Today in the House we are joined by some folks who have worked very hard on the bill that will be introduced moments from now, the Water Sustainability Act. In particular, I want to welcome Lynn Kriwoken and Ted White. We have others who will be joining us, and I believe some are in the gallery in support of the longtime work of these folks to bring this important piece of legislation to the House. Would the House please make them very welcome.

M. Mungall: Today in the House we have Martin Ouellette, who is a member of the Nelson fire department. The Nelson fire department does truly phenomenal work in the community, whether it's the holiday hamper program at the Nelson Food Cupboard, the amazing amount of work they do with fire prevention in our heritage community and, of course, fire suppression.

Everybody in Nelson remembers the summer in July 2010, when the Nelson fire department spent eight long hours through the night controlling a fire in our downtown core and preserving our heritage city. So may the House please welcome Martin and give a raucous thank you to Martin, for all the great work that they do in Nelson.

[1015]

Hon. R. Coleman: Good morning, everybody. I have sources all over British Columbia, of course, and one of my sources is a guy named Bill Bond, who is the rock that stands behind the Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour. Today is their 35th wedding anniversary. Would the House please congratulate them.

D. Routley: I'd like to welcome several guests to the House today — first, Rob Helenius and his son. He's joining us from Gabriola. He has been an activist in many different areas in the community. He's a communications specialist and produces film and all sorts of different interesting things. He's here to join people outside and hear question period.

Also joining us is Sheila Malcolmson. Sheila Malcolmson is a longtime member of the Islands Trust and currently the chair of the Islands Trust. Sheila is a Gabriolan as well and is here to hear question period and join the people outside expressing concern over B.C. Ferries issues.

From Nanaimo, Rick Meyers. Rick Meyers is also known as Vicki Smudge in his other life. He's also an actor, and I will be co-starring with Rick Meyers soon in La Cage aux Folles, for all the members. I'll be sending out robocalls to tell you it's in a different theatre and on a different night than it actually is.

Then, joining us from Penelakut is Chief Earl Jack. Chief Earl Jack represents the Penelakut First Nation, and he is also here to experience the demonstration outside and hear question period.

Please make them welcome.

Hon. M. de Jong: One of the great junior hockey organizations in the country is the Vancouver Giants, and we're really pleased to have in the audience today representatives from the Giants. Now, one of them is no stranger to the rough-and-tumble of the arena. It may be the closest he has gotten to arena politics, but everyone in Canada knows Pat Quinn, the longtime player and coach in the NHL, someone who is greatly respected in the community not just for his exploits on the ice and on the bench but, most certainly, in the community.

Ron Toigo, president and majority owner of the Vancouver Giants and, of course, the man we all genuflect to when we get our Triple-O sauce at the White Spot is here. I should add, as well, that he is acting presently as the chair of the CKNW Orphans Fund. Of course, we all know the great work that organization does. They're joined by Dale Saip, who is the vice-president of business development for the Vancouver Giants.

I know all members are appreciative of the work that
[ Page 2067 ]
the Giants do on the ice and in the community and will want to welcome our guests today.

R. Fleming: Well, for the second time in as many days we are joined here for question period by a group of firefighters from Victoria, and I want to introduce them — members of the IAFF, Local 730. With us today is Greg Batters, the president; Neil Pierson, the vice-president; Gary Birtwistle, the secretary-treasurer; and John Mokosak, a trustee of the union.

I think we all appreciate that professional firefighters in Victoria provide fire protection for some of the oldest building stock in Victoria, including all of us and our staff who work in this building. I know from firsthand experience as a previous Victoria councillor how hard they train daily to hone their skills and provide emergency preparedness in Victoria.

It's a real pleasure to have them here in the House this morning, and it will be a real pleasure to meet with them later today. I want to thank them and, of course, the provincial association for providing such wonderful hospitality last night as well.

Hon. P. Fassbender: In the precinct and joining us in the House in a few minutes will be 29 grade 5 students and their teacher Kori Langston, who are from my riding, from Walnut Road Elementary School in Surrey. I know they are going to be around the precinct, so if members see them in the hallways, I'd like you to give them a very welcome arrival to Victoria. This is part of their education on local government and provincial government.

[1020]

J. Rice: In the House today I have a friend and constituent, Sarah Nickerson. Sarah is a mother of three beautiful children — Haley, Kira and Eric. She has also been helping me out in my community office. I would like the House to make her feel welcome.

R. Lee: In the gallery today we have a delegation from the Chinese Federation of Commerce of Canada. They're sitting over there. They chose a sunny day to visit Victoria. They are Joseph Hui, Sheila Hui, Pius Chan, Cindy Chan, Hans Wong, Eliza Wong, Kim Chau, Becky Lu, Mingson Chui, May Ho and Ricky Wu. Would the House please join me and the member for Richmond-Steveston to give our visitors a very warm welcome.

K. Conroy: I have a number of introductions I'd like to make today. First of all is Gudrun Langolf. She is the first vice-president of COSCO. That's the Council of Senior Citizens Organizations. She's here to join hundreds of other people — other seniors, actually — who will be out on the lawn to express their concerns about B.C. Ferry cuts.

I'd also like to introduce a couple of my firefighters from Trail Local 941. Lee De Pellegrin is the president, and Greg Ferraby is the vice-president. I want to thank them for the wonderful event they threw last night, which all of us partook in. I'm also looking forward to hearing what their issues are later on today.

Would you please join me in making them all very welcome.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL 18 — WATER SUSTAINABILITY ACT

Hon. M. Polak presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Water Sustainability Act.

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

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Polak: Today I am pleased to introduce the Water Sustainability Act. This legislation delivers on government's commitments to modernize B.C.'s water laws, regulate groundwater use and strengthen provincial water management in light of growing demands for water and changing climate. Water is our most precious resource, and this legislation will help ensure that our supply of fresh, clean water is sustainable to meet our needs today and for generations to come.

Over the past four years we have engaged widely with British Columbians and have received thousands of ideas and recommendations for improvements to our system of water management. We have used this input to create legislation that provides certainty for water users, improves environmental protection and is able to respond to local and regional needs.

The Water Sustainability Act recognizes that groundwater and surface water are interconnected and addresses the need to manage them under the same regulatory regime. The act will bring groundwater into the water licensing system so that groundwater users, for the first time in British Columbia, will be able to obtain a water right.

Through this bill we also aim to improve the efficiency of water use in British Columbia, recognizing that expanding economic and societal needs will have to be met with supplies that are being affected by climate change. Expanded planning provisions and the ability to strengthen or change requirements for specific areas will also help us to meet this challenge.

The Water Sustainability Act will repeal most of the Water Act, which has served as our primary water law since 1909. A new water users community act will be created to ensure that efficiencies can continue to be gained
[ Page 2068 ]
through shared use of infrastructure.

Many important provisions of the Fish Protection Act will also be brought into the Water Sustainability Act so that protection of fish habitat and aquatic ecosystems are under the same system.

A new riparian areas protection act will be created to ensure continued protection of riparian areas by protecting the land adjacent to water bodies.

Once again, it's my privilege to introduce this bill to the House, and I acknowledge the efforts of everyone who has contributed to it. I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 18, Water Sustainability Act, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

[1025]

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

ALEX MACDONALD

B. Ralston: Alex Macdonald, a former member of this Legislature, died on March 5 this year. Born in Vancouver, after UBC and Osgoode Hall Law School he worked in Ottawa for M.J. Coldwell, the national leader of the CCF.

Alex accompanied Coldwell as part of the Canadian delegation to the momentous 1945 San Francisco conference where the charter of the United Nations was signed. The mood of determination of the conference to build a lasting peace coming after a world war of such devastation and suffering reinforced Alex in his will to never abandon his hope for a better and more just world.

Established in Vancouver as a lawyer, Alex was first elected in 1960 to represent Vancouver East in the provincial election and continued for seven more elections over 26 years. In 1972 Premier Dave Barrett appointed him Attorney General. As Minister Responsible for Energy, one of his proudest accomplishments was the creation of the B.C. Petroleum Corporation, a step that dramatically increased government revenue from the sale of natural gas.

Upon retirement from the Legislature in 1986 he turned to teaching and writing, producing three books. I remember him sitting in a chair outside the doors to a recent NDP federal convention, selling his final publication entitled, as the Leader of the Opposition has said, Why I Am Still a Socialist…and It's Not Because I Don't Know Any Better.

He was predeceased by all his siblings: his brother Jim, a Court of Appeal judge; his brother Malcolm, a Provincial Court judge; and his sister Elena, to whom he was very close. His wife, Dorothy, whom he married in 1944, died before him in 2008. He dedicated his first book to her in this way: "To my wife, Dorothy, whom I married at an early urge and who has brought me up through rough passages into my peaceful years of indiscretion."

He leaves his daughter, Christina, his son-in-law, Luca, and his two grandsons, Andrew and Michael.

A public celebration of his life will be held in the near future.

OKANAGAN CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
AND BUSINESS ACTIVITIES

D. Ashton: Chambers of commerce across British Columbia stimulate our economies and provide a voice for business. We know that small businesses are the heart and soul of our communities, and we support small businesses that mean jobs and economic growth.

This year our community of Penticton was honoured with the 2013 Open for Business Award, recognizing the mayor's, council's and, especially, staff's hard work on measures like reducing building permit fees, which are now the most competitive in the South Okanagan, improving business licence programs and an ongoing commitment to small business and entrepreneurs through an economic incentive zoning.

Penticton and Wine Country Chamber of Commerce recently held their 27th annual business awards celebrating leaders in business. I would ask the House to join me in congratulating Campbell Watt, the Business Leader of the Year, and Colin and staff at MarketPlace IGA for the Business of the Year.

Summerland Chamber of Commerce also recently held their 76th annual business and community awards on February 22. Congratulations to Crush Pad for Business of the Year and Deborah Silk of Critteraid for receiving the Mayor's Award of Excellence.

This past Saturday the Peachland Chamber of Commerce held their Business Excellence Awards, which included Bliss Bakery for winning the Business of the Year Award and Chris Rollins and Chrissy Chernoff of Edgewater Bar and Grill for winning the Business Persons of the Year.

Let's also thank the presidents of the chambers of commerce and their volunteers for ongoing work and their commitment to their communities: Andre Martin, the president of the Penticton district chamber of commerce; Patrick Van Minsel, the interim president for Peachland Chamber of Commerce; and Arlene Fenrich, for the president of the Summerland Chamber of Commerce.

I would like to applaud the work of all chambers of commerce and all the businesses that have been recognized in each and every one of our ridings. It is their hard work and commitment that keeps each of our regions open for business and keeps all those in our communities working.
[ Page 2069 ]

GREATER VICTORIA
CITIZENS COUNSELLING CENTRE

R. Fleming: I'd like to say a few words this morning about an incredibly valuable voluntary organization in my community that's been helping ordinary citizens better manage their lives since 1969. The Greater Victoria Citizens Counselling Centre has as its mission the assistance of adult community members to provide quality, accessible counselling services for those experiencing difficult times in their lives.

Serving about 1,200 community members annually with the assistance of 100 trained volunteer counsellors, the centre is able to provide thousands of hours of counselling services to help people who are experiencing stress, anxiety, depression, relationship breakdowns or coping with abuse or addictions.

[1030]

The longevity of this organization speaks to its importance and its effectiveness, as do the exit surveys of former clients, who in 2013 reported an 83 percent significant-to-moderate improvement to their wellness and happiness. More than a third of the centre's clients are young people between the ages of 18 and 29.

The centre could not function without the generous support of community funders like the United Way and the Victoria Foundation as well as the corporate support of Thrifty Foods and others.

But they also rely on an annual fundraising event called Tip a Fool, which is a gala fundraiser that usually happens around April Fools' Day. The sixth annual is coming up on Saturday, April 5. It's an evening of fine food and drink, silent and live auctions, and an opportunity for politicians and local media personalities to make fools of themselves, more than usual.

Past years of this sort of annual self-deprecation or charitable humiliation have raised over $100,000 for the centre. The challenge that the centre continually faces is financial stability, and through this event, they hope to provide the centre with more ongoing stability.

I want to applaud all of the Tip a Fool sponsors and the staff — including the executive director, Brenda Wilson — and the volunteers for putting this fundraiser together and for all the work they do year-round to make this a valuable service in our community.

SOCIETY OF ORGANIZED SERVICES

Michelle Stilwell: Parksville-Qualicum is blessed to be the home of the Society of Organized Services, better known by its acronym SOS. The SOS is a volunteer-based, non-profit organization that recently won the Prime Minister's Volunteer Award in the category of social innovator. Now the whole country knows about this unique organization.

The awards highlight best practices in community leadership and encourage partnerships across sectors. The SOS has truly been a leader in both of these areas. They care for people by filling the gaps in the services available in the community. I am honoured to recognize this organization, just as I'm honoured to live in a part of the world where we can recognize real need and act upon it.

This is something the people of the SOS are exceptionally good at. In Oceanside if you need to find good-quality secondhand housewares and clothing, you go to the SOS. If you're a low-income teen who needs a grad dress or a tux for $5, you go to the SOS. If you're a family in need of extra support at Christmas or if you need guidance with taxes or parenting advice, you go to the SOS.

Children in my community can attend preschool and can get help with homework after school at the SOS. If you're a senior in need of a ride to a doctor's appointment or if you need Meals on Wheels, you go to the SOS. No matter what your circumstances or age, if you live in Parksville and Qualicum Beach and you need help, you go to the SOS.

The organization is supported by an incredibly busy thrift shop as well as donations and fundraisers. A dedicated team — including thrift shop manager Kevin Newton, executive director Renate Sutherland, assistant director Susanna Newton and family centre manager Paulette Harcourt — ensures the SOS makes the most of its resources.

The hard-working board of directors — including Candy Ashbridge, Carol Plaisier, Cory McIntosh, Deborah Bromley, Don Dempson, Janet Smukowich, Kay Burgoyne, Mark Stuart, Wendy Hill and Will MacEwen — help ensure the SOS offers services not provided elsewhere.

Volunteers are the key to the success of the SOS. Since it launched in 1968, literally thousands of Oceanside residents have given their time and effort to support this incredible organization.

RESPONSE TO 2011 EARTHQUAKE
AND TSUNAMI IN JAPAN

S. Fraser: Today marks the third anniversary of the devastating earthquake and tsunami that struck Japan with such ferocity. Similar to last year, the district of Ucluelet plans to host a memorial event at Big Beach from 1:15 to 2:30 this afternoon.

In some instances disaster brings communities and cultures closer together. That is certainly the case in Ucluelet. That is where the Japan Love Project comes in. The Japan Love Project, along with 73 students from the International Volunteer University Student Association in Japan, is assisting with the removal of debris near Ucluelet, the Pacific Rim National Park Reserve and along the shoreline in the Ucluelet territory.

Over the last two years the district of Ucluelet has con-
[ Page 2070 ]
ducted several cleanup projects. Two of these projects were affiliated with the Japan Love Project, which is an international disaster relief association established to assist with cleanup and fundraising for the great east Japan earthquake and tsunami event.

[1035]

The International Volunteer University Association of Japan is a Japanese student organization focused on disaster relief and volunteer work around the world — young people doing the right thing for the right reasons with no fanfare.

Along with the memorial, Mayor Bill Irving and the district of Ucluelet are planning a tsunami debris and emergency preparedness information session at the Ucluelet Community Centre tonight from seven till nine, if anyone can make it. The international students will provide a presentation about their program and experiences. Local artist Peter Clarkson will discuss his recent experiences in Japan, and Ucluelet's manager of environmental and emergency services, Karla Robison, will provide a presentation on Ucluelet's marine debris and emergency preparedness program.

Out of disaster, communities and nations pulling together with respect. Thanks to Ucluelet for helping to show us all how to do it right.

THE SHARING FARM SOCIETY

J. Yap: I rise today to recognize the Sharing Farm, a creative and thriving community farm in Richmond that builds community and provides food for Richmond families. The Sharing Farm grows and donates thousands of pounds of fresh, healthy produce every year to community meals throughout the city of Richmond and the food bank.

The history of the Sharing Farm goes back to 2001, when a small group of volunteers began the Richmond Fruit Tree Sharing Project, an initiative that gathered surplus fruit from residential gardens and lawns to donate to the Richmond Food Bank. In 2002 the Sharing Farm became a registered non-profit society and began to grow vegetables on donated land. Now the Sharing Farm is an award-winning program with more than 1,000 volunteers annually and two sites, an apple and pear tree orchard and three acres in the Terra Nova Rural Park.

In ten years the Sharing Farm has donated more than 200,000 pounds of fruit, vegetables and produce to Richmond families that need it most. In addition to distributing fresh produce, the Sharing Farm promotes community development, through collaboration with Richmond organizations, by hosting educational programs both for youth and for community members of all ages.

Please join me in commending the Sharing Farm Society and their executive director, James Gates, for their commitment to keeping Richmond healthy by growing food, promoting farming and building community.

Oral Questions

IMPACT OF
FERRY SERVICES REDUCTIONS ON
ECONOMY AND TOURISM INDUSTRY

A. Dix: My question is for the Minister of Transportation. Before announcing its reckless cuts to ferry services, the government failed utterly to look at the economic impact of its decisions. Not one economic impact study was done.

But even if the government didn't bother to do one, the city of Prince Rupert did. They commissioned a report on the economic impact of these decisions on the north. The findings were clear. Liberal ferry cuts will damage the local, coastal and provincial economy.

Will the minister please tell us why his government chose to ignore reality and go ahead with cuts without understanding or even looking at their economic impact?

Hon. T. Stone: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. As I have consistently stated for the past eight months, going on nine months now, this government is absolutely resolutely committed to doing everything that it can — working with coastal communities, working with B.C. Ferries, working with the B.C. Ferry Commissioner — to get B.C. Ferries to a place of affordability and sustainability. We have said consistently, as well, that this is going to require tough decisions. This is going to require change.

That is why, back on November 18, I stood in the press gallery here in the buildings and announced a new vision for B.C. Ferries — one that involves, yes, some changes to service levels but also a wide array of other initiatives, all intended to get Ferries to a place of sustainability and affordability.

We're going to continue to work as hard as we can with coastal communities, with the ferry corporation and, indeed, with the Ferry Commissioner to ensure that Ferries is there for generations to come.

[1040]

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

A. Dix: It's not an excuse. Tough doesn't mean poorly thought out. The minister seems to have — what? His entire analysis is: "Page 1, say it's tough; page 2, repeat page 1." I mean, it's not good enough. The report from Prince Rupert notes: "The announcement of service cuts to the B.C. Ferries northern routes has created a ripple effect through the investment community, calling into question a wide range of issues, from access for goods and services
[ Page 2071 ]
to quality-of-living issues for workforce recruitment."

The decisions the minister has made are hurting the B.C. economy. No less an economic thinker than the Premier has said this in the past: "And I'm betting that fares have finally gotten so high that for every dollar they raise, it will actually garner less in revenue. Higher fares mean fewer passengers, so the accountants will have to subtract paying customers from every new dollar" they add to the ticket price.

That was the Premier some time ago. I know it's unfair to use quotes that are older than a week from the Premier, but nonetheless.

Can the minister explain why he didn't bother to do what the city of Prince Rupert did and do an economic impact study so that he can understand the impact of his decisions on ferry-dependent communities?

Hon. T. Stone: Consistent with announcing our plan, I have said — I said then and I have said at every opportunity since — that there were going to need to be tough decisions and that those decisions indeed were going to have an impact on communities.

I actually met with Jack Mussallem, the mayor of Prince Rupert, only a couple of weeks ago. We had a very frank discussion about that. I met with folks from Saltspring Island yesterday. I met with tourism organizations last week. I've been meeting consistently with a variety of different individuals and organizations from coastal communities across British Columbia.

I have acknowledged that there will be impacts, but let's be clear. While we're prepared to make some changes for the long-term sustainability of B.C. Ferries, let it be clear that the NDP, the opposition, is not prepared to embrace any of these changes.

A classic example. One of the sailings that is being eliminated is Buckley Bay to Denman Island, the Monday 11 p.m. sailing. This sailing has a utilization of 3 percent. That's one or two cars, eight or nine passengers and a crew of six. This is on a vessel that carries 50 cars and 294 passengers. The opposition may believe that that's sustainable. We certainly do not in government.

Madame Speaker: Recognizing the Leader of the Opposition on a supplemental.

A. Dix: Well, the Premier has a good response to that, in fact, from her past statements. I'll quote that.

"Well, and that's the thing I don't get about the subsidy argument. I mean, all right. If there's a subsidy going in — and I guess, Tony, you would argue it's not much of a subsidy anyway — to support people who live on the smaller routes, why don't they say they're subsidizing people who live in Whistler by the massive expansion of the Sea to Sky Highway?

"I mean, occasionally I go up to Whistler. I suppose I benefit from the expansion of the highway. But the math they do suggests the only people who live at the end of one of these transportation routes are the people who are being subsidized. Why don't they apply the same math to the highways that they build and they maintain that they do to the ferry routes?"

Very, very eloquent words from the Premier. Very reasonable and eloquent words. Words that I think people in Prince Rupert would agree with, their report concludes. The minister just said there will be impacts — doesn't know what they are, but there will be impacts.

Okay. Well, there has never been an economic impact assessment to measure the benefits of B.C. Ferries to the provincial and especially northern economy. We need to postpone any cuts to service until we fully understand the benefit of the service.

[1045]

Will the minister listen to the mayor and council of Prince Rupert and to the people in ferry-dependent communities, including the people on the lawn of the Legislature, and put these cuts on hold until their full economic impact is understood, at least by him?

Hon. T. Stone: Well, only the NDP opposition would suggest that $180 million of taxpayer contribution, an all-time high, is insufficient support from the taxpayers of British Columbia for B.C. Ferries. Taxpayers have actually increased their contribution to B.C. Ferries, through this current performance term, by $86.6 million. That's at a record level.

Again, I come back to the challenges with respect to utilization. The opposition can float all the rhetoric they want. The Leader of the Opposition can throw all the rhetoric out there. The opposition is not proposing any alternatives. There are no alternatives being proposed from the opposition.

How about the Wednesday 10:10 p.m. sailing from Texada Island to Powell River? This is a route that has a vessel that carries 49 cars and 150 people — 5.5 percent utilization. That works out to three cars, eight people and seven crew. Now, surely, the members opposite aren't looking the taxpayers of British Columbia in the eyes and suggesting that three cars, eight people and seven crew on a vessel that carries 49 cars and 150 people is sustainable.

J. Rice: Prince Rupert businesses know B.C. Liberal ferry cuts will undermine the local economy. Pineridge Bed and Breakfast in my constituency says: "We expect an immediate 40 to 60 percent loss of income if these cuts go through." Even businesses outside of the tourism sector are concerned, like Advantage Print and Design, which says: "Our business has multiple tourism industry partnerships. If ferry traffic is down, these businesses will suffer, so in a trickle-down effect, our business will also suffer."

Again, to the minister, why is he trying to shutter the hospitality industry instead of trying to grow it?

Hon. T. Stone: Again, I think British Columbians are waiting with bated breath for the NDP opposition to actually suggest an alternative, to actually suggest some
[ Page 2072 ]
changes, that would help deal with the challenges at B.C. Ferries, yet we hear nothing.

I would be happy to give the member for North Coast one good suggestion, one initiative, that she and her colleagues would be wise to support, that would go a long ways to supporting ferries. I think the member opposite might want to take another look at LNG and the opportunities that LNG provides her region.

I might be going out on a limb here, but I think the LNG opportunities might actually be pretty good for Prince Rupert and the entire northwest. The hon. member that represents those folks might want to get on board with LNG.

Madame Speaker: Recognizing the member for North Coast on a supplemental.

J. Rice: As this report notes, there is "no business case for these cuts. There has been no review of economic or social impacts" of the cuts. B.C. Liberals are ignoring businesses and communities across B.C. who are saying that these ferry cuts could cause "serious and widespread damage to the northern B.C. economy."

Moresby Explorers in Sandspit says: "We estimate the impact on our revenue to be over $100,000. Because we are a small business and because many of our costs are fixed, the loss of revenue may be enough to shut down our business."

[1050]

Again, why is the minister trying to sink the coastal tourism industry instead of trying to grow it?

Hon. T. Stone: The changes that we're making to the Discovery coast circle tour, as one example…. While they will result in a different service, there will still be service on the Discovery coast circle tour. On behalf of government, I want to reaffirm our commitment to the tourism industry. We certainly, through the creation of Destination B.C. and a number of other initiatives, have demonstrated our continued support for that industry.

While we welcome tourists from around the world, including Germany and other parts of Europe, I'm not so sure that British Columbians think it's a good idea to subsidize those tourists to the tune of $2,500 per vehicle on the current route 40 service. That is simply not sustainable, and that is why it is important that we move forward with the changes to that service.

C. Trevena: I take it that the minister follows the instructions of his Premier closely, so I'd like to quote what his Premier said in that interregnum between when she was Deputy Premier and she was Premier. She said: "You know, people live in Horsefly. People live in all kinds of spots around the province where they probably cost us, as taxpayers, more than they contribute to the larger economy. I mean, that's just the way it works."

We live in a complicated province, and I hope the minister accepts that the impact of these cuts is going to have a devastating effect on tourism, no matter what the minister says. We know that the leisure travel industry accounts for about 80 percent of travellers. That's not just people coming to the north. It's people coming across the province, using B.C. Ferries. Take away the transportation link and you take away the visitors to the north, visitors to the Okanagan, visits to Vancouver and visits to Victoria.

This report done by Prince Rupert — the economic impact assessment done by Prince Rupert, not by this government — concludes: "The implications of service cuts must be seen as a threat to all of B.C.'s $13 billion tourism industry."

To the minister, why does he feel it's appropriate to sink this economic sector?

Hon. T. Stone: Again, we are proposing a wide array of changes, in an effort to get B.C. Ferries to a place of sustainability and affordability. Many of these changes represent difficult decisions. There's no question about that. But British Columbians are wondering: what is the NDP's alternative here?

What is the NDP's alternative? They made no commitments in the recent election campaign to pumping a whole bunch more money into B.C. Ferries. They didn't make any commitments in the last election to reducing ferry fares. What is it that the NDP opposition stand for? I think British Columbians would like to know.

Back to tourism. We are going to continue to do everything we can to work with our partners in tourism, with respect to the changes coming at B.C. Ferries. The Minister of State for Tourism, in fact, will be in the Cariboo Chilcotin coast region of the province within a matter of weeks, sitting down with tourism operators, small businesses and others impacted by these decisions.

C. Trevena: I've just got to say that the minister is wrong. We did actually have a number of things about coastal transportation infrastructure in our platform, and we are committed to our coastal transportation infrastructure.

Prince Rupert isn't the only local government to come out opposed to these cuts. I hope the minister comes out to the lawns to talk to a number of people from local government who will be there. But I doubt that people from Fernie will make it over to the Legislature, and the city of Fernie is speaking out against these cuts.

[1055]

I'd like to quote Coun. Randal McNair, who said: "Ferries are a part of highways." If some other corner of government would tell us that our highways were to be cut back by 20 percent of the time, I'd hope that folks in the Queen Charlottes and that part of the world would come to our aid. You don't have to live on the coast to
[ Page 2073 ]
know that this doesn't make sense.

To the minister, why is he getting in the way of business by trying to cut our marine highway?

Hon. T. Stone: I'll tell you what doesn't make sense. What doesn't make sense is sticking your head in the sand and pretending that there aren't significant challenges facing B.C. Ferries.

Let it be clear again, for British Columbians to hear today, that the NDP opposition believes it's a good idea and that it's sustainable to subsidize $2,500 per vehicle — $2,500 per vehicle — for a route that moves 500 vehicles in one direction, 600 vehicles in the other direction and operates for 13 weeks of the year. That is typical NDP math. That is why we're making tough decisions across the entire ferry system.

IMPACT OF
FERRY SERVICES REDUCTIONS ON
POWELL RIVER KINGS HOCKEY TEAM

N. Simons: As was already mentioned in this House, we know and recognize the importance that hockey plays culturally and economically to our communities. The ferry service cuts mean that Powell River could lose its hockey team. The Kings won the Coastal Conference four out of the last five years. By the way, they won their first playoff round last night against the Clippers.

Along with 100 percent fare increases, these cuts could mean the Kings will be forced to schedule more weekend games on Sunday afternoon, and we know what that means to the gate revenue. Club President Rob Villani writes: "Because of the service cuts, we will in all likelihood be forced to cease operations." How does the minister respond to fans of the Powell River Kings, who could lose their hockey team along with the economic benefits that go with it?

Hon. T. Stone: As I have said consistently, and I'll say it again for the member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast, these are tough decisions, and they're going to have some impacts.

The entire point of the last round of engagement, which took place in November and December of 2013, was to go out to coastal communities and to talk to them about the proposed schedule changes and to seek their feedback and input on that.

I'm pleased to say that a tremendous amount of feedback has been received from coastal communities, and the schedules are being refined accordingly.

Again, I come back to the simple fact of the stark contrast that there is here between the NDP opposition and this government. The members opposite are saying clearly to British Columbians that the Sunday 6:30 a.m. sailing from Comox to Powell River, which currently has a utilization of 5 percent, which is ten cars, 45 people, a crew of 25…. This is on a vessel with the capacity of 192 cars and 897 people — 5 percent utilization.

These are the kinds of changes that we're making to ensure the ferry system is there long term.

N. Simons: The Powell River Kings have been part of the community for 26 years. It's a team that's produced Stanley Cup champion Brad Bombardir in a league that has nurtured many NHLers.

[1100]

They spend a lot of their $800,000 budget in the community, and the economic impact should at least be measured by this government. They're the ones sticking their heads in the sand.

It's the Liberal cuts to ferry services that are hurting the economic fabric of our communities. Will the minister explain to people in Powell River why his government is willing to strip their community of their hockey team because of their lack of investigation of the impact of their cuts?

Hon. T. Stone: Again, I point out an example of the types of reductions that we're talking about here. I've mentioned it already today — Texada Island to Powell River. This is a Wednesday, 10:10 p.m. sailing, with a 5.5 percent utilization — three cars, eight people, seven crew. Eight people. Last time I checked, there were more than eight people on a hockey team, right?

B.C. Ferries is finalizing the route refinements to the schedule, and we're going to do everything we can to make sure that those schedules work as best as they possibly can for coastal communities.

ACCESS TO FERRY SERVICES FOR
PENELAKUT FIRST NATION

D. Routley: The Penelakut First Nation in my constituency are asking for help. They live on a small island off of Chemainus served by B.C. Ferries. The Penelakut were forced to move to the island reservation when they were relocated by settlers. Now they are held hostage by soaring ferry fares and a government that ignores their plight.

When I spoke to an elder, she told me the story of how she collected pop bottles and cans to get enough money to return home. When she came up short, she tried to board the ferry. She was told she couldn't get on. She refused to leave, and eventually the RCMP were called. That elder was escorted off the ferry slip by her elbows.

Someone in the lineup gave her enough money, the money she needed to make it home. She made it home, but she left a good portion of her dignity on that ferry slip. This is the real effect on some of my most vulnerable constituents.

Will this minister promise to the Penelakut, whose chief is here, that he will take immediate steps to relieve the Penelakut and other coastal communities of the bur-
[ Page 2074 ]
den his ferry fares and his increases have imposed upon them?

Hon. T. Stone: Thanks to the member opposite for his question.

I certainly want to restate again — and certainly for the benefit of the chief and the others that are in the chamber here today — that these were very difficult decisions. These were tough decisions.

I also want to point out, hon. Member…. I hope the member opposite, when he met with the chief and the elders from Penelakut, looked them in the eyes and shared with them a few facts.

A large part of the problem, the challenges faced today by B.C. Ferries, is because when the NDP were in power, they actually took the debt of B.C. Ferries from $60 million to $1.1 billion in nine years — nine years. They did that all while they increased fares by 70 percent. I certainly understand, as the government does, that these are difficult decisions. But let's make sure we've put all the facts on the table.

D. Routley: Madame Speaker, through you to the minister: yes, Minister, I was there looking them in the eye. I was at all the ferry consultation meetings. You weren't. For years this government has paid consultants to come and talk to the Penelakut. The government hasn't been there.

[1105]

They've heard from the Penelakut, and the Penelakut have been ignored, along with every coastal community, by this government. The Penelakut are closely related with nearby Vancouver Island bands in Cowichan — Halalt and others.

Children can't compete in community sports. Families can't attend cultural events such as weddings, funerals and other ceremonies. Elders are cut off from their extended families, all by punitive ferry fares brought by the policies of this government. Few can afford to take advantage of the discount cards offered, as they require a minimum $105 investment prepurchase.

Something must be done to relieve this burden. That something must be done now, and it must be done by that minister.

Madame Speaker: Hon. Member, through the Chair.

D. Routley: To the minister, will he act now to restore affordability to the lives of my constituents, to the lives of the Penelakut?

Hon. T. Stone: This government is acting now. This government is acting on a wide number of fronts. In addition to the service adjustments that we're making to the various routes around the system, B.C. Ferries is also working on an LNG fuel propulsion strategy. We're also looking at alternative technologies. Just the other day Seaspan in North Vancouver was awarded a contract to build a $15 million cable ferry, which is going to save the system $2 million per year.

I would point out again that the contribution from the taxpayers of British Columbia to B.C. Ferries is at an all-time record high of $180 million this year.

INVASIVE SHELLFISH
PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT

S. Fraser: The B.C. Liberals know that "if zebra or quagga mussels become established in B.C., they could decimate sockeye salmon and kokanee runs." We know that they know that because that's a quote from the government's own documents. The documents also note that these invasive shellfish can wreak havoc on water systems and may even interfere with B.C. Hydro's electricity generation.

My question is to the Minister of Environment. After acknowledging these risks and their staff stating the dire situation and the complete "grossly inadequate preparation" for this, why are the B.C. Liberals failing to properly fund prevention and management programs for zebra and quagga mussels and putting Okanagan communities' economies at great risk?

Hon. M. Polak: I think, firstly, the most important thing to acknowledge is that to date there have been no viable quagga mussels detected in Shuswap Lake, and that is something we can thank very many people working very hard, not only in the Ministry of Environment but in the local community and in the local campaigns that they've established and the Don't Move a Mussel campaign that has been publicized widely by many, many volunteers. We have them to thank for those efforts.

We're certainly combining our efforts with local communities and also with the federal government to ensure that all the protocols in place can keep our lakes and our waterways safe and can inform the boating public of the responsibilities that they have. I am confident that with all of that working together, we can ensure that we keep our waterways and boaters and others safe from the potential for zebra and quagga mussels to move into British Columbia.

[End of question period.]

J. Yap: I seek leave to table a petition.

Leave granted.

Petitions

J. Yap: On behalf of my constituent Sue Burford and her colleagues with the Canadian Federation of
[ Page 2075 ]
University Women, I present a petition with 316 signatures in regards to poverty.

[1110]

Ministerial Statements

UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE
RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

Hon. D. McRae: I rise in the House today to recognize the fourth anniversary of Canada's ratification of the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. This is the first international treaty that comprehensively recognizes the rights of people with disabilities, a convention that is working to guarantee human rights for an estimated 650 million individuals with disabilities around the world. Canada was one of the first countries to sign the convention, and we are proud to recognize today's anniversary.

Today also marks the conclusion of the first public consultation phase of B.C.'s disability white paper project. But for this side of the House, it is just a beginning. Now comes the data compilation, writing and reporting out of what has been heard — what the people of this province have had to say. The UN convention's idea of "Nothing about us without us" was employed as a foundational piece for the consultation, which is unique in the sense that there are no predetermined outcomes for this process.

The goal of this consultation is to take a look at what we, as a society, can do to reduce barriers and increase accessibility for people with disabilities living in our province. We that know when barriers are removed and people with disabilities are able to participate fully in their communities, everyone benefits. And it doesn't end there. This is a conversation that needs to keep going.

Today we must also acknowledge the leadership of the disability community as well as the work of the family members, advocates, businesses, employees and volunteers in building an inclusive and accessible British Columbia. March 11 is an important date for society, an anniversary that commands reflection on how we can raise awareness and promote the abilities of our community members and generally better support individuals with disabilities in British Columbia.

Please join me in recognizing this day and in recognizing the many contributions and achievements of people with disabilities in British Columbia.

J. Kwan: I thank the minister for his statement. In response to the statement on behalf of the official opposition, we, too, like to commit ourselves to the UN convention on the rights of people with disabilities. As the minister stated, this in fact was the fastest-negotiated human rights convention in the UN's history and has the highest number of signatories, and of course, it was also the first time in history where civil society actively participated in the framing of the negotiations and the text for the convention.

Canada, as well, in terms of firsts…. It was also the first UN convention where Canada actually signed on its opening day. So it is significant in many realms, and I think it speaks to Canadian values as we recognize this day. Canada played a leading role, there's no question, with the development of the principles of the convention, consistent with Canadian values and the Canadian Charter.

What are some of those principles? They include, of course, the principles of equality and non-discrimination, equal recognition before the law and the right to inclusive education — in other words, many of the elements that are needed to ensure that we're all recognized as equal citizens in our communities. Going forward to the convention, the key questions, in my view and in the opposition's view, are, of course, the implementation actions that are required on the key principles.

What are the five key principles that were recognized nationally? Disability-related supports, poverty alleviation, labour market participation, access and inclusion and, of course, Canada's international disability leadership. Because the delivery of these programs rests with the provincial governments and territorial governments for the most part, it does mean that B.C. has to examine our own approach to ensure that we not only meet the standards and the principles that are set out but also strive to be a global leader in this regard.

There is no question that disability-related support has long been of utmost priority for the disability community. Members of this House will recall that the outcry of families and advocacy groups around the province, from the developmental disability community, actually caused the government to bring forward a review back in September 2011.

The issues that they raised were the lack of service supports integration for delivery; the lack of planning, to even non-existent planning, for youth with developmental disability transitioning into adulthood; the closure of group homes, which we have heard is a major issue; and the flawed assessment tools; among others. This led, of course, to the review, although not an independent inquiry. That said, there was a review, and many recommendations flow from that.

[1115]

The government, of course, is saying that they're moving forward with this. We, in the opposition, want to work with the government, along with the community, to realize all of that.

There's no question that people with developmental disabilities are under-represented in the labour market. To date, poverty remains a constant for many with disabilities. That is something that we need to continue to strive to address — the poverty question.
[ Page 2076 ]

People in the community are calling for…. For example, the Federation of Labour is calling for an increase in minimum wages. Others are calling for a living wage. People in the community have for a very long time been calling for an increase in their rates. So there's much work that should be done and that needs to be done.

In the words of the people from the disability community, access and inclusion means what? As the minister has cited in the disability white paper consultation…. I, too, have taken the opportunity to attend some of these events. Let me just put on the record what some of those call for — from the community for the government to act.

Access and inclusion means support for activities needed for daily life, help with personal care and housework assistance to be in the community, to be at work, to access education, recreation — in other words, to be full participants in our community. They are also calling for these principles to be materialized and for support for full participation.

Everyone, of course, lives in fear. They say that the cuts will take place in terms of funding, which, of course, will severely minimize their ability to access the services.

Madame Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Kwan: Let me just close with this, Madame Speaker. The community calls for this, that we need to provide….

Madame Speaker: The member will take her seat, thank you.

K. Conroy: I seek leave to present a petition.

J. Horgan: Madame Chair, I'm wondering. The member still had a brief response to the minister's statement. Is there a time limit that we're not aware of on comments with respect to ministerial statements?

Madame Speaker: Thank you for the point raised. On balance, the response should not exceed the length of the time taken for the initial ministerial statement. That was the advice.

J. Horgan: Thank you, hon. Chair, for advising members of these requirements.

There also are requirements, traditionally, that statements are shared with the opposition. That hasn't happened for some considerable period of time. So it's difficult to gauge, when preparing to make remarks in this place….

Interjections.

J. Horgan: So absent any sense of how long to go, the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant prepared a response that she thought would be comprehensive to meet the needs of this chamber. If that's been overshot, then perhaps if we were sharing these documents, we would be in a better position to gauge how we prepare in the future.

Madame Speaker: Fair comment.

Member, please continue.

J. Kwan: On that note, let me close with this. The participants from the government's own white paper consultation stated, and I thought this was a poignant point that they made: "Government needs to provide enough for people to make do but not enough for them to strive." That I thought was a poignant comment that came from the people in the community.

If we are to meet the principles and standards set out in the UN convention on the rights of people with disabilities, I would argue that we must do better. The opposition is committed to that, and we'll certainly work with the community, and all members in the community, along with the government to realize just that.

K. Conroy: I seek leave to present a petition.

Leave granted.

Petitions

K. Conroy: I have a petition signed by over 4,300 seniors who are unable to be here today, out on the lawn of the Legislature. The petition is calling on the provincial government to reconsider and reverse its plans to reduce service while slashing the fare discounts for seniors. It is inappropriate to guarantee exorbitant salaries for B.C. Ferries executives while shifting the burden to seniors.

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: In Committee A it's Committee of Supply, the ongoing estimates of the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations; and in this chamber, continued committee stage debate on Bill 3, Missing Persons Act.

[1120]

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 3 — MISSING PERSONS ACT

(continued)

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section B) on Bill 3; R. Chouhan in the chair.

The committee met at 11:22 a.m.

The Chair: Last night at adjournment we were, I be-
[ Page 2077 ]
lieve, at section 7, so we continue on section 7 of Bill 3.

On section 7 (continued).

K. Corrigan: I have some more questions — although we did deal with a proposed amendment yesterday that the opposition brought forward about disclosure to third parties. I'm sorry that that amendment…. It would have required, in the case of records being gathered with regard to either third parties or the missing person if they were to show up, that there should be disclosure to those individuals that their cell phone records or text messaging records or so on had been gathered.

Unfortunately, the government side decided to vote against that. But I do have other questions with regard to section 7. I'm going to be going back to the phrase in section 7, similar to section 6, when you're talking about "in respect of a third party."

We spent a long time yesterday, and I don't want to spend a long time today on it. But I'm wondering if the minister has more clarity on what "in respect of a third party" means — whether or not, for example, if there is a third party, the missing person would have to be either in the company of that third party or last seen in the company of the third party.

I'm going to ask again: with respect to the records of that third party that are being gathered, could that be records that are not actually records of the third party but somebody associated that could give information about the whereabouts of the third party?

[1125]

Hon. S. Anton: The words "in respect of" are a drafting convention which is used frequently in legislation. In this case they mean that the records need to be relevant. The process, I'll remind the member opposite, is that the officer must request the records, to a justice, and the justice will need to determine in the usual way of a justice that the records are relevant to the investigation.

K. Corrigan: I think we're making progress in understanding what "in respect of" means.

Could, if they were relevant…? I go to cell phone records because they're just an easy and understandable example. Could the cell phone records of another person who is not the third party and not the missing person, if they are relevant to finding where the third party is, be subject to a demand and an order?

I'll give a really concrete example. If the third party is suspected to be with this missing person and there is a belief that the judge would perhaps support that there are cell phone records that indicate conversations that go back and forth between two other parties — not the third party and not the missing person — that could indicate where the third party is and therefore lead to the missing person, could those types of records — I think I've been clear in this scenario — be records that could be demanded for the purpose of finding that missing person?

[1130]

Hon. S. Anton: The answer is the same as the previous answer, which is that the officer will request records the officer believes to be appropriate. The officer will attend in front of or by telephone to a justice. The justice will determine the relevance of the officer's request, the relevance of the records, and will make the order that the justice believes to be the proper order — including, by the way, imposing restrictions on access in terms and conditions on the order.

K. Corrigan: It seems like a really simple yes or no. If they are determined to be relevant by the police officer making the request, if the judge or justice believes they're relevant, could they conceivably…? I'm not asking for every case. I'm just asking whether they could conceivably be those types of documents. Yes or no?

Hon. S. Anton: I believe I've answered the question.

K. Corrigan: I'm not sure why the minister is refusing — I think it's an important question — to confirm or deny that it is possible that third-party or other-party records could in fact be accessed. It is the minister's bill, so surely the minister has thought about this.

If the minister is now saying that there is no answer to that, I guess we'll find out in the courts. But I think it would be helpful for us to be able to debate this properly, to know exactly how far these increased police powers go. I think it is an important question.

I'm going to assume, I think — because the answer was given about hotel records, and those would be hotel records that don't belong to either the missing person or the party that might be with them, the third party, but another party — that the answer is…. I don't know what the answer is. Once the minister said no, and then a couple of times the minister said yes. We'll find out, I guess, in the courts what the answer to that is.

I wanted to go on to another question with regard to subsection 7(2), which says: "Before applying for an order requiring a person to give access to a record in respect of a third party referred to in subsection (1) (a) (ii), a member of a police force must make reasonable efforts to obtain the consent of the third party."

The reason I want to raise that is that yesterday when we submitted an amendment asking for disclosure to third parties, one of the reasons that the minister responded to say that government would not be supporting the amendment was — I'll read from the record yesterday: "There may be other reasons why you need to keep the records. For example, if it turns into a criminal investigation, you don't want to notify the third party that you are in fact in possession of his records and that you're
[ Page 2078 ]
now in the middle of a criminal investigation." That was from the minister yesterday.

That was the reason given, one of the reasons given but a major reason given, about why the government did not want to agree with us about disclosing to third parties and to missing persons, if they are in fact found, that information about them had been gathered. That was the reason given by the minister.

[1135]

I'm wondering how that squares with subsection (2). When you're applying for an order with respect to a missing person who's a minor or a vulnerable person, you need to give notice and make reasonable grounds to obtain the consent of the third party. How is that a consistent position?

Hon. S. Anton: We should not lose sight of the fact that this act deals with civil abilities for police to look for people who are missing. In the case of obtaining the consent of the third party, in this case, it's still a civil investigation. It's not a criminal investigation; it's a civil investigation. It is looking for this missing person.

The example I gave yesterday was where a criminal investigation might have ensued. But in fact, in the civil remedies, under this act, the goal is to achieve a balance between notifying people, which here is to "make reasonable efforts to obtain the consent of the third party," but also allowing the police to continue with their investigation, because their goal — of course, always — in this is to find the missing person.

K. Corrigan: Yesterday the minister was saying if it turns into a criminal investigation…. The assumption was, as it always is and as the minister has said many times, that this is a civil remedy. This is a civil process, not a criminal process. What the minister was talking about was it starts out as a civil process and then it turns into a criminal investigation.

Exactly the same comments can apply with respect to subsection (2). It is a civil process when you're talking about "make reasonable efforts to obtain the consent of the third party." When this is in play, it is, as the minister has said many times, a civil process. If it becomes a criminal process, things change.

I just really don't understand. If there were small wording changes that would be needed, like "reasonable disclosure" or something, we would have been happy to entertain anything the minister would have suggested that would have allowed for disclosure to third parties and to missing persons.

[1140]

But it doesn't seem consistent to me that the minister is now saying we have to make reasonable efforts to obtain the consent of the third party and that there is suddenly no concern. What if it does turn into a criminal investigation in that case? What would happen then? Would there need to be consent obtained of the third party?

Hon. S. Anton: If it's a criminal investigation, police will use their authority under the Criminal Code of Canada, not this act, which is a civil remedy for missing persons.

K. Corrigan: Except the minister herself said it could turn into a criminal investigation. So you are required to get the consent of the third party, and then it turns into a criminal investigation.

Under the proposed amendments we had yesterday, we were talking about disclosure to third parties and missing persons, which of course would change if it turned into a criminal investigation. I fail to see the difference.

The Chair: Member, was there a question?

K. Corrigan: No.

D. Eby: For the minister, on section 7(3)(a). Under this section, it discusses a member making "reasonable efforts to obtain the third party's consent, if applicable." My question relates to the parenthetical "if applicable." The question, I hope — although we haven't seen that today — is relatively straightforward.

When would it not be applicable to obtain a third party's consent? Clearly, this section relates exclusively to third parties, so there's always going to be a third party. If the third party is deceased — which is the only scenario I can think of — obviously, no justice is ever going to require reasonable efforts and may reasonably ask that the estate be notified.

What is the point of adding "if applicable"? It seems to import an uncertainty around the obligation of police to make reasonable efforts to obtain third-party consent. It seems to me that that is a critically important notice provision.

Hon. S. Anton: If the third party cannot be found and the member makes reasonable efforts to find the person, they will then appear in front of the justice and say that the third party's consent is not available.

D. Eby: Well, of course. One would assume that the member would be presenting to the justice evidence of their reasonable efforts to track down the third party and that they weren't able to do that. Then the justice would say: "Okay, you've made reasonable efforts. Here's your order."

I don't understand why "if applicable" is included in the clause, and the minister didn't answer the question.

The Chair: Member, would you repeat the question, please?
[ Page 2079 ]

D. Eby: To clarify: why is "if applicable" there? The minister's answer did not address that. She said the member may make reasonable efforts to track someone and not be able to find them. It seems to me that that satisfies the section, so why has she included "if applicable"? It imports a level of uncertainty that is not required. The section already addresses the minister's scenario as she presented it, without "if applicable."

[1145]

Hon. S. Anton: It is expected that the police will make reasonable efforts to obtain the third party's consent. If they can't reach the third party, that will be part of their application to the justice, and the justice will determine whether or not to make the order that is sought by the police officer.

G. Heyman: I'm mindful of the minister's clarification about the words "in respect of." Section 7 says that it allows "access to a record set out in section 9 in respect of a third party if the member has reasonable grounds to believe," etc. There's a long list in section 9 of the types of records that could be accessed.

It could be contact information, identification information, "telephone and other electronic communication records including, without limitation, (i) records related to signals from a wireless device that may indicate the location…(ii) cellular telephone records, and (iii) text messaging records; (d) internet browsing history records; (e) global positioning system tracking records," photos, videos — basically all kinds of records and, at the end, "any prescribed records."

That's very broad. There may be records within Internet browsing history or cellular records or text records that pertain or could pertain to a missing person, but there would obviously be a broad array of other records that would normally be considered a person's private information.

My question to the minister is: how does the minister envision some form of containment or limitation being put around the specificity of the records, within any of these categories being released, to contain them to the purpose at hand — the location of a missing person — and not simply be a broad-brush order granted by a judge? The bill itself doesn't seem to specify much more than a pretty general limitation.

For instance, perhaps the minister believes that the limitations are implicit in the words "in respect of," or perhaps the minister foresees some form of guidance or regulation or policy to guide the decisions of a justice in being more focused and honed in on the nature of the records, rather than simply saying: "Hand over this person's entire Internet browsing history. Hand over this person's entire travel history through their GPS records. Hand over this person's entire cell phone inventory of text messages to everybody. Hand over this person's entire history of telephone calls to everybody."

Hon. S. Anton: I'll read subsection (4) to the member opposite. "A justice may impose any of the following that the justice considers appropriate: (a) restrictions or limits on access to a record specified in an order under this section; (b) terms and conditions on an order under this section."

Justices do this every day, and they know the territory that they are operating in. They put the limits on things that they need to put limits on, and they're quite used to that.

[1150]

That's their ordinary role in criminal investigations up till now and in civil investigations under this.

G. Heyman: I appreciate the minister pointing me to a section, but justices generally interpret the law based on what the law states.

Again, my question to the Justice Minister is: does she think it is appropriate to leave entire discretion over this to a justice to interpret what appears to me to be some vagueness in the act, or is there any plan to be more specific in direction, even through, perhaps, a reference to principles of privacy as contained in other statutes?

Hon. S. Anton: I have confidence in the justices of British Columbia.

G. Heyman: With respect, to the minister, does that mean her answer to my question is that she thinks the legislation is sufficiently specific and there is no intention whatsoever to provide guidance either in the legislation, in regulation or in policy to clarify, even with respect to references to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and when that act should apply and how it should be read in conjunction with this act if they may appear to be in conflict?

Hon. S. Anton: There is sufficient guidance in the act for the police officer to make their application, for the justice to hear the application and for the justice to make his or her ruling. It is a question of judgment by the justice. That's what they are trained to do, and it's what they do every day in British Columbia.

G. Heyman: I'll confess to you that I find the answer troubling. I, too, generally have faith in the justice system, but we also have a situation here where we have the potential of conflict between two pieces of legislation, conflict that the minister states she does not believe needs clarification.

She has by her answers provided what could be termed extrinsic evidence in some future case — where a justice or anyone, a police officer, is seeking a certain scope of information beyond which might be considered rea-
[ Page 2080 ]
sonable by people who are mindful of the Protection of Privacy Act — that, in fact, the Minister of Justice has said in this chamber that it is entirely up to the discretion of the justice. No guidance will be provided. The Minister of Justice has no opinion on how this bill should be read vis-à-vis the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

Frankly, I find that troubling. It's important that when legislation is introduced, discussed and voted on in this House it contain a certain level of guidance, particularly if there may be conflict with other pieces of legislation. I would hope that the Justice Minister can do the people of British Columbia as well as the judiciary a service by providing a bit more guidance than: "It's out of my hands. I trust you."

[1155]

Hon. S. Anton: As I said a few moments ago, the act itself contains guidance for the justice. I'll point out to the member opposite section 7(3)(c), that there are reasonable grounds to believe that "the record may assist the police force in locating the missing person," and (d), that there are reasonable grounds to believe that "the record is in the possession or under the control of the person."

That is very significant guidance, and rather than attempting to define every situation here, which it would be impossible to do, I am confident that there is sufficient guidance in the act, and I'm confident that there is sufficient guidance in the justices of British Columbia.

K. Corrigan: The member for Vancouver–Point Grey was asking questions previously about section 7(3)(a), and I'm wondering if the minister could give an example of when the third party's consent would not be applicable.

The Chair: Minister, noting the hour.

Hon. S. Anton: Chair, shall I answer that question very quickly?

The answer is one example, as was given earlier, which is if the third party themself is not able to be found, that section applies.

Given the time, with that, I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:58 a.m.

The House resumed; Madame Speaker in the chair.

Committee of the Whole (Section B), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. M. Polak moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Madame Speaker: This House, at its rising, stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:58 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE
DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
FORESTS, LANDS AND
NATURAL RESOURCE OPERATIONS

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); M. Dalton in the chair.

The committee met at 11:17 a.m.

[1120]

N. Macdonald: There are a number of questions, following on where we left off, about the particularities of the issue we were dealing with around Morice. We'll include those in a letter. I think we're getting to a place where time will become more and more of an issue — and again, the patience of the minister is experienced.

Following on what we did yesterday, where a fairly technical piece was read into the record and the minister undertook to, in writing, offer a technical reply to what was asserted, which is a fairly major assertion…. I'm sure the ministry would be either accepting what was asserted or pushing back fairly strongly, because the basis of what we asserted yesterday was that the AAC, which is, of course, incredibly important at all sorts of levels, is overestimated, potentially — so a fairly major assertion and one that has implications in a number of areas.

The ministry has undertaken to, in detail, respond to that assertion. It's there in Hansard, of course, for reference by the ministry.

I want to follow along the same lines and look at another element. Like I say, it's along the same lines, and it's around carbon and estimation of forest carbon. Again, the assertion here will be that we are overestimating carbon. Again, to make sure that, technically, it is going to be accurate, I'll try to make sure that I move carefully through what is being said.

If we accept that there are issues around confidence in the ministry's estimation of site index or site productivity for the forested land base, then that lack of confidence in site index translates into uncertainty, as I said,
[ Page 2081 ]
with allowable annual cuts, which, in turn, undermines public confidence in the minister's ability to manage the timber- and carbon-based economies.

Site index is a key variable in models that determine and project tree growth over time and estimate timber volumes available for harvesting, which holds true for the estimation of timber volume. What holds true for the estimation of timber volume also holds true for the estimation of forest biomass and carbon offset projects.

In 2007 the CFS released stand-level volume-to-biomass conversion equations for use in its carbon budget model for the Canadian Forest Service. That's CBM-CFS3, which is one of the models preapproved for use under the B.C. forest carbon offset protocol.

The Chair: Member, I'm going to have to interrupt you right here. We actually needed to wait for the orders of the day from the government House order. We had to go forward with the motion first. We're going to go forward with this motion and then go back.

Minister.

Hon. S. Thomson: Vote 26, resolve that a sum not exceeding $372,345,000 be granted to Her Majesty to defray expenses of the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, ministry operations, to March 31, 2015.

On Vote 26: ministry operations, $372,345,000 (continued).

N. Macdonald: Just a question for Hansard. What was already said is in Hansard, presumably? Or do you want that paraphrased? How do you want to do that?

The Chair: One moment.

N. Macdonald: While they're talking, I can continue, and if we need to come back….

Basically, the assertion is the issues that we talked about — if they affect volume, then they're also going to affect carbon. I can come back if I need to. Where I left off, we were talking about CBM-CFS3, which is one of the models preapproved for use under the B.C. forest carbon offset protocol. The equations were fit by ecozone and province, using sample plot data provided by the ministry.

Since the 2008 individual tree biomass equations with B.C. data had yet to be derived, individual tree biomass equations from the mid-1980s were used to add biomass to the sample plot data.

Although CFS used gross merchantable volume as the predictor variable in all other provinces, they used net merchantable volume for B.C. While this may have been necessary to link the ministry's VDYP 6 model, which does not output gross merchantable volume, it is not necessary for VDYP 7, the latest version of the model.

[1125]

Apparently, the CFS had not been informed of the changes made in VDYP 7.

In addition, the CFS applied the wrong loss factors — reductions for decay, waste and breakage — and also applied them at the incorrect stage of data compilation, making their net merchantable volume incompatible with the province's VDYP7 net merchantable volumes. Users informed the CFS of the problem, and in 2008 they issued a warning about — I can quote the term that was used — the "problematic stand-level volume-to-biomass conversion equation for British Columbia."

At a meeting to discuss the biomass conversion problems in 2009 the minister agreed to fit new stand-level volume-to-biomass conversion equations for B.C. The ministry's equations were released in 2011.

Although the ministry correctly used gross merchantable volume to predict biomass, problems with these equations include, I'm told, first, incompatibility with the federal CBM-CFS3 because the ministry fit a much simpler model that could not be used in the CBM-CFS3 model.

Secondly, although the CFS has changed to the 2008 individual tree biomass equations for adding biomass to sample plot data, the ministry used the equations from the mid-1980s — instead of the 2008 equations — to assign biomass to the sample plot data. Apparently, the ministry cannot provide a valid reason for using the mid-1980s individual tree biomass equations.

Third, in about 20 percent of the sample plot data, the individual tree biomass equations predicted a biomass that led to invalid green, which is wood densities. This is a problem with applying the equations to trees outside of the range of data used to derive the equations. The ministry made adjustments but inadvertently used oven-dried wood densities, instead of greenwood densities, for the adjustment — thereby inflating the stemwood biomass.

Now, when users did inform both the ministry and the CFS about the problems in 2011, the ministry reacted and direct-awarded a contract to fit stand-level volume-to-biomass conversion equations, using the model used in CBM-CFS3, using the sample plot data compiled with the 2008 individual tree biomass equations and using gross merchantable volumes as a predictor variable.

These equations were to be released in 2012, but they never were. Instead, the ministry released a report in 2012 that compared the ministry equations released in 2011 with the ministry equations that were to have been released in 2012. The report documented significant differences in biomass predictions between the two sets of ministry equations. As examples, differences for lodgepole pine were 40 percent and differences for interior spruce were 20 percent.

Although the ministry attempted to justify the differ-
[ Page 2082 ]
ences by saying that one set was for use in the bioenergy sector and the other for use in the carbon accounting sector, the CFS rejected the equations that the ministry had fit for the federal CBM-CFS3 model. The CFS is currently fitting new equations, and the latest information is that they will be released in March of this year, 2014, but no date has been set for the implementation in the CBM-CFS3 model.

In 2009 the task modellers added biomass to the TASS-TIPSY output using the 2008 individual tree biomass equations. The problem with this is that due to the decreased density of managed stands, the TASS predicts trees with more taper. As a result, a TASS tree will have less volume than a natural tree with the same DBH and height but will be assigned the same biomass.

Although the B.C. forest carbon offset protocol is the responsibility of the Minister of Environment, it has had significant input from this minister's staff. With that, the B.C. forest carbon offset protocol then has preapproved the use of the federal CBM-CFS3 model, even though the CFS has identified the CBM-CFS3 biomass conversion as problematic.

[1130]

The Ministry of Environment has defined preapproval: "'Preapproved' means that as long as the model is being used properly in the appropriate region land base with appropriate inputs and assumptions, then the government believes the output is similar quality to data used to make other decisions of similar value or risk and is acceptable for appropriate use and calculations related to the protocol."

By preapproving the CBM-CFS3 model, the Ministry of Environment has implicitly accepted the CBM-CFS3 biomass conversion, and by doing so has rejected the biomass conversion associated with the ministry's TASS-TIPSY and the VRI, VDYP7 models.

Unfortunately, the Environment Ministry cannot give a rationale for preapproving the CBM-CFS3 model. A problem can arise under the B.C. emission offsets regulation, depending on whether the difference between the biomass modelled with the federal CBM-CFS3 model and the biomass assigned to the inventory or growth models by the ministry is considered to be a material error or uncertainty.

If a material error, omission or misrepresentation results in an overestimation of greenhouse gas reductions by more than 5 percent, then by regulation, the verifier is precluded from issuing a reasonable assurance statement from the carbon offset project. If the difference is considered uncertainty, the project proponent must account for uncertainty by ensuring that the greenhouse gas quantification result in greenhouse gas assertion is conservative, by employing a discount.

I just thank you for your patience and forbearance. Hopefully, that's clear for Hansard.

I have three questions, and for the three questions I think we're able to move to a less technical language. In plain English, the first question is this: why can't the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, the Canadian Forest Service and the Ministry of Environment agree on a standard biomass conversion for use in British Columbia, as has been done in other jurisdictions?

[1135]

Hon. S. Thomson: Just to advise the members opposite, we are collaborating with the entities mentioned — the Pacific Forestry Centre, the Canadian Forest Service. We keep MOE informed on the development of new equations.

To confirm what the member indicated, by next month new equations will be in place. We work with partners regularly on updating the science and the information to keep it as accurate as possible as the science improves. We are addressing all of those issues in terms of new equations being in place that will be agreed. As I said, we keep MOE informed in the development of those equations.

There was a very technical preamble to the member opposite's question. I'd like to advise, as we did yesterday, that we can provide a technical written response to the preamble or a briefing on it. I expect the member opposite will again say that a technical written response is what he would prefer. This is very scientific, very technical information, so we can undertake to do that. Just to confirm, we are working with the entities to ensure that we have the equations up to date, and new equations will be in place by next month.

N. Macdonald: I appreciate the written response, of course. I'll give a series of questions here on this topic, and then we'll move off it. Are the differences in biomass conversion between the province's TASS, TIPSY, VDYP7/VRI models and the federal CBM-CFS3 model to be interpreted as uncertainty or a material error? That would be one question.

The second is: given the problems associated around biomass estimation, have the forest carbon offsets purchased by the B.C. provincial government with taxpayers' money to achieve carbon neutrality been properly validated and verified? Basically, they're the two questions. Then we'll move on to the next topic.

[1140]

Hon. S. Thomson: In response to the first question, as the member opposite will know, there are a lot of varying opinions in the science. It's not unusual to find differences in the modelling and the conversion formulas. We continue to work to get the most recent, best available science. It's always changing. It's a model of continuous improvements. As we've indicated previously, in terms of our technical response, we'll provide a full response to the question.
[ Page 2083 ]

[1145]

In terms of the validation, the member opposite will be aware that the validation is undertaken by third parties — the validation and the verification. So this question would be more appropriately canvassed with the Pacific Carbon Trust or MOE, who has the responsibility there. That should be canvassed there. It's managed under the offset reg, which is the responsibility of the MOE.

B. Routley: I would like to turn to a question about the projected revenues for water usage. When the present ministry was constituted as the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, the ministry assumed the responsibility for reviewing applications for water licences and temporary water permits. With the exception of the provincial Oil and Gas Commission, which has the authority for issuing temporary rights of access to provincial water resources to energy companies, all water applications are now reviewed and approved by the ministry.

Could the minister please provide us with last year's figure, for 2013-14, for water revenues collected by the province?

Hon. S. Thomson: Just to advise and make the point that I think the member opposite asked for '13-14. We're still in '13-14. The estimated forecast revenue is $414 million.

Noting the time, I move that the committee rise and report progress on the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:48 a.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Hansard Services publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.

TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule

Copyright © 2014: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada