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)

Monday, May 5, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 11, Number 8

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

MONDAY, MAY 5, 2014

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Statements

SUPPORTING OUR YOUTH

C. James: I'm very pleased to rise today to speak to supporting our youth in British Columbia.

[1005]

There are a wide range of supports that I could speak to this morning — everything from the challenges in youth mental health and the lack of specialized supports to the lack of resources and beds for youth and their families.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

I could speak to the challenges of children in care, the caseloads for social workers, the real difficulties that, again, specialized services and children who need those specialized services are facing. I could speak to youth justice and the real lack of planning and attention that's being given to youth justice when we see the closure of the youth custody centre right here on Vancouver Island.

But in the few minutes that I have this morning I want to focus in on youth leaving foster care and the challenges that our youth are facing as they move from being in the care of the government to being on their own. I think it's important to remember that youth who are in the care of government are there by no fault of their own, because of their family circumstances or otherwise. Government is then their legal guardian and, therefore, has a responsibility to take care of those children.

I think anyone who's a parent knows that every child is unique and that one size does not fit all. There isn't a parent I know who decides, when their child turns 19, that they should all of a sudden move out and be on their own, that they have no supports and that they're expected to manage. Yet in our province that's exactly what happens for approximately 700 youth a year on their 19th birthday. They turn 19, and then there are no supports. They're expected to move out on their own.

I think about how life has changed for that age group since the 1950s, for example, when many of us on our 19th birthday were on our own, were working, were going to school. The kind of expectation that is here for children when they turn 19 now is completely different. Life is completely different than it was during that time period.

Back then, I think, young people expected one job, perhaps with one company — that that would be their lifetime employment — and that they would have one family, live in one place and be close to their extended family.

Well, that doesn't happen anymore. The cost of living is much higher than it ever was then. Think about a youth who's transitioning. Think about full-time employment right out of high school if you haven't had university or college or additional course work. Think about how a 19-year-old could manage in the kind of environment we have today with, as I said, the cost of living and the employment situation.

Then I want everyone in this House to think about a 19-year-old managing in that situation, who's just come out of government care, who doesn't have the kind of supports that I think all of us have either given to our children or have seen as individuals, received from our parents — the kind of support when you're short rent for a month because you haven't been working full-time. You know you've got a difficulty, and your parents help you out, to cover you off for that month. Or the secondhand furniture that's been in the basement of the house, which comes over to your place when you get a place, your first apartment. You've got that furniture, and you've got that support from a family.

Think about the phone calls home, either from your own kids or when you were a child. You'd phone home, and your parents would help steer you in the right direction. They'd remind you about things that you needed to do that perhaps you hadn't remembered to do. Well, just imagine a 19-year-old trying to navigate that without all that family support.

Think of a 19-year-old trying to navigate that, who may have mental health issues, who may have had eight, nine, ten placements and has no one stable in their lives. They're then steered towards income assistance — told to go and get income assistance — no different than anyone else out there. Think about that challenge.

The kind of transition that is needed for our youth who are aging out of care is transition that will be less expensive than not putting the transition support in place. It's actually going to cost the system more to not help those young people get on their feet as they come out of care.

Now, I'm sure we'll hear, as we go through this discussion, some discussion about programs and supports that are limited but in place and that there isn't an opportunity to be able to expand that. But I believe the government has an obligation — an obligation both moral and financial to these young people — to do more. Other jurisdictions do. Saskatchewan and Ontario consider 21 as the age for children before they age out of care.

[1010]

Ontario, for example, provides medical, dental and ex-
[ Page 3432 ]
tended health benefits up to age 24 for youth who have been in care because they recognize the real challenges that youth are facing. We could look at expanding the kinds of supports for up to age 24 for our youth who need them. There are some young people who will be able to transition, but again, I come back to the fact that every child is different and unique, and every circumstance is unique. I believe we have an obligation to put those kinds of supports in place.

Youth who are in youth agreements are able to get some support after 19. So there has been some recognition of that. But those contracts are only in place for six months. Again, if you're a youth coming out and you know you've got the six-month clock ticking, that makes it really tough for you to settle in and try and get the kind of support that you need.

Many youth aren't able to get into university and college. While I'm pleased that we're seeing some private sector partners come forward and put supports in place for youth who have been in care to be able to access university and college, providing that stability is critical, because for youth to even access those dollars they need to have a stable home.

Think about a youth going out and trying to find some place that's affordable when you're on income assistance because that's your only income. Then if you decide to go to school…. "By the way, your income assistance is cut off." You then have to find another opportunity for your income.

When I look at supporting our youth and when I'm speaking specifically about youth transitioning, I want to emphasize how important it is for us to take a look at this from, as I said, both a financial and a moral obligation that we have as government. These children are in the care of government. Government is their legal guardian, and certainly all of us as parents would understand that.

J. Tegart: Thank you very much to the member opposite. On behalf of the constituents of Fraser-Nicola, it gives me great pleasure to respond to the private member statement entitled "Supporting our youth." This is a motion that is of particular significance to me and all of us on both sides of the House.

Like many of you, I have devoted a great deal of my life to promoting education and the well-being of young people in British Columbia. May I begin by saying that any youth transitioning out of care at age 19 will certainly face challenges. But the government is doing more to make sure that young people are aware of and are able to access many supports that are already available.

As a recent Representative for Children and Youth report points out, the Ministry of Children and Family Development is already engaged in initiatives to improve planning, coordinate supports and use existing services for current and former youth in care more effectively. In fact, the latest report from the Representative for Children and Youth is a good foundation document, not only for the ministry but for our key partners as we work together to improve our system and facilitate better outcomes for young people.

We know that there is always more we can do. The Ministry of Children and Families works to link youth with other services such as medical and financial supports, skills training, employment services and therapeutic and addiction programs through other ministries. It is of vital importance that youth transitioning to adulthood don't slip through the cracks.

Young adulthood can be a difficult time of change and adjustment, especially with the added stress of no family or support system. Our government wants to ensure that young people have the appropriate supports in place to transition into adulthood and lead healthy and productive lives.

B.C. already matches or exceeds many types of supports or services other jurisdictions offer to post-majority youth who have been in care. Of course, there is always more we can do, and that's why our focus now is to ensure young people are aware of and able to access the many supports that are available to them. We also offer youth agreements, as the member opposite indicated, independent living arrangements and agreements with young adults which can extend the transition age to 24.

[1015]

Our government recently announced the Strive program, a new $250,000, 18-month pilot program, created and delivered in partnership between MCFD and YWCA Metro Vancouver. Our experience is that not all youth who age out of foster care want continued contact with a social worker, but many do want support in accessing programs that allow them to move into adulthood. This innovative program will help youth transitioning from care gain the life and work skills necessary to become independent.

Yes, we can always do more, but the government remains committed to promoting better outcomes for youth in transition. Most importantly, we need to concentrate on ensuring that young people are aware of cross-ministry services that are already available and help them to access those services when youth are making the transition. Our task is to support them along the way, to provide as much stability as possible and to help youth gain the life and work skills they need to become independent.

It has been a pleasure to speak to this subject this morning. It is one of great importance and one that both sides of this House have a great deal of concern about.

C. James: Thank you to the member for her comments. I certainly know her commitment to youth and to education. We worked together many years ago on the area of school boards, and I thank her for her comments.

I think it's important, though, to look at specifics in
[ Page 3433 ]
the programs that are in place because I think part of the difficulty that youth face as they age out is that many programs and services are only available in certain areas. The member mentioned the Strive program. The Strive program is great if you're in the Lower Mainland and you're able to access it and you know about the program, but if you're a youth in another part of British Columbia or Vancouver Island or the north or the Interior, the Kootenays, you don't have access to that program. You're then stuck with the kind of difficulties that I talked about in navigating the system.

I think the other challenge youth face is just being able to even know about the programs and services. I just want to honour the voice of a youth I met in Prince George, a young woman who came to talk to me about her excitement at getting into a child care program at the college. She was really keen on being an early childhood educator and discovered she couldn't get a student loan because she hadn't paid her medical service premiums for a year. Well, nobody had told her. Nobody had told her she needed to pay her medical service premiums. Nobody had told her there was a program even to look at it. So she was then denied the opportunity to be able to go in because that transition support hadn't been there.

I think there is much more to be done, and I don't think it's a matter of working towards it. I think it's a matter of getting on with it — early support, early planning in place, lower caseloads for social workers, because with the kind of caseloads they have, they aren't able to provide that kind of support to youth who are aging out who sometimes don't need the same kind of supports as other kids in care. Moving on that is critical.

Basic supports for youth transitioning. As I said, there are other provinces like Saskatchewan, like Ontario, where they've extended the age for children to be in care. I think that's another area that this province could certainly look at that I think would make a big difference.

Services across the province. They're never going to be the same. People in rural communities understand they don't get exactly the same services as in an urban setting, but they expect basic service. Right now, for many youth in care, there aren't basic services — mental health, additional supports — once they age out. So looking at services and supports across our communities.

I think the last piece that I just want to touch on is the issue of making children and youth a priority. I think we hear a lot about the resources of our province in this Legislature, and I think we all understand the importance of resources in our Legislature, but I think we often forget that children and youth are one of our greatest resources. If we're really going to focus on resources in British Columbia, I think we need to recognize that. I think we need to recognize what a precious resource our children are and that they're more deserving of the care and attention and resources and supports than they're able to get right now.

If I think of children in care and the challenges that they face, many of them who have been in placements, they need and deserve our attention.

B.C.'s SKILLS-FOR-JOBS BLUEPRINT

G. Kyllo: It is a pleasure to rise in the House this morning as Parliamentary Secretary for the B.C. jobs plan to the Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training to speak on the B.C.'s skills-for-jobs blueprint — re-engineering education and training, a plan that our government announced just last week. This plan is key to our government's goal of building a strong economy and a secure tomorrow for all British Columbians.

[1020]

The blueprint calls for a more targeted focus on training for high-demand jobs, encouraging innovation on how we provide education and training to better meet the needs of British Columbians and aligning funding for skills and training programs for high-demand occupations and jobs in the workforce.

With over one million job openings projected in B.C. by the year 2022, the need and timing for the skills-for-jobs blueprint could not be better. This remarkable figure is exciting news for our province, and that is why our government is taking the leadership to seize this opportunity to develop a coordinated approach between the Ministries of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training; Education; and Advanced Education.

The goal of the blueprint is to maximize the potential of an estimated 537,000 young people as they exit the education system, making fundamental changes to ensure that as they enter the workforce they'll have the necessary skills for the jobs and the economy of tomorrow. More than 78 percent of the one million job openings require some form of post-secondary education, and 43 percent of these jobs will be in the trades and technical occupations.

There is a very bright future for young British Columbians in the years ahead, with new career opportunities in new industries such as liquefied natural gas and in rapidly growing sectors such as high-tech, along with more traditional job openings coming available as our older workers retire.

I'm proud of our government's proactive and thoughtful efforts to take action and create the skills-for-jobs blueprint, helping to ensure that British Columbians will have the skills and training required to fill these jobs. By making sure that British Columbians are first in line for the jobs of tomorrow, we will help to keep our economy moving forward and provide the opportunity for our children to enjoy an even higher standard of living in British Columbia.

This plan recognizes that in order to achieve these goals, we have to start with the fundamentals — education and skills training. The blueprint starts with recognizing that
[ Page 3434 ]
the current funding model for post-secondary education institutions needs to be significantly overhauled and re-engineered to ensure that there are both openings and the capacity to train young British Columbians so they are first in line for new career opportunities.

With this realignment and increased capacity, we'll also do our part to encourage young people to consider training and programs that lead to high-demand occupations and jobs in the workforce and help to ensure a robust utilization of these training spaces, providing taxpayers the best possible return on investment.

The release of the skills-for-jobs blueprint could not be more timely. With one million job openings projected by 2022, the necessity and urgency for re-engineering our skills and training programs across the province to meet the needs of industry and the economy of tomorrow is before us. Providing the right workers with the right skills in the right place at the right time is an enormous undertaking, but we are up to the challenge.

By realigning 25 percent of provincial operating grants to public post-secondary institutions, we'll be better able to focus funding and training towards high-demand occupations and jobs, such as those projected by 2017-2018 for the LNG sector — projected job openings for operating engineers, pipefitters, welders and civil and mechanical engineers to name a few. Our government will be investing over $185 million in infrastructure and equipment over the next three years to modernize training facilities to better support these new trades-related programs across the province.

Re-engineering our system doesn't necessarily mean spending more. It means we demand better outcomes and results from our training programs, training, again, the right workers with the right skills in the right locations at the right time. Our government currently invests more than $7½ billion each year in education and training in British Columbia, and we'll continue to measure our successes, monitor our progress and continue to adjust program funding as the economy evolves.

That being said, starting this fiscal year we'll be targeting over $160 million in funding to meet labour market priorities, and in four years that figure will reach $400 million. Over the span of the ten-year plan this funding will represent $3 billion directed towards training for high-demand occupations and skills-training programs.

What is very revolutionary of this plan is the aspect of changing the culture and attitude of people towards the trades, starting at a very young age. For students in the K-to-12 school system, we want them to have a head start on hands-on learning so they're better prepared for the workforce and more advanced training once they graduate.

For example, we are going to double the number of accelerated credit enrolment in industry training — or the ACE IT spaces — to 5,000 over the next two years. This program lets high school students take their first level of technical training in specific trades, which will help to prepare or qualify students for apprenticeship or industry training programs.

[1025]

We will be expanding dual-credit programs to offer students courses and programs that will help them move into post-secondary studies or the workplace faster and with the skills for jobs that are in demand.

We are going to reform grade 10-to-12 graduation requirements to allow personalized graduation plans and have education sector leaders more involved in skills outreach programs to help assist young students in planning for their future careers.

For students in college, university or trades training, we're matching training with jobs in demand and maximizing the spaces available to provide the programs they need to compete successfully in the workforce of tomorrow.

As parliamentary secretary to the jobs plan, I've had the opportunity to meet with business owners from across our great province. One of the most common concerns expressed by business owners and industry leaders is the need they have for a constant stream of skilled tradespeople to allow them both to keep their operations running at full capacity over the long term but also to fill new projected job openings.

The large majority of companies that I have met with are extremely optimistic for the growth potential in British Columbia over the coming years and are expecting to increase their workforce. The skills-for-jobs blueprint goes a long way to address this issue, and as a business owner myself, I could not agree more. Thanks to the leadership of our government, we will ensure that any British Columbian interested in working in high-demand jobs will have access to and the opportunity of these new education and skills-training spaces.

To summarize, our blueprint is about seizing the momentum of our growing economy by making it easier for British Columbians to get working and finding their best fit. I'm looking forward to the remarks from my opposition colleague.

D. Routley: Thank you to the member for bringing this important issue again to the floor of the Legislature. Having heard such glowing remarks on the government's record, I'm sure the Speaker will entertain some more critical evaluation of their performance.

It is a most important issue to our economy — how we broaden and make our economy more productive and competitive through enhancing the skills and the training opportunities for the people of British Columbia. But we need to remember how we got here. This reminds me of a GPS verbal warning: "Take the next exit. Take the next exit. Recalculating the route." The further you go ignoring the warnings that you're off track, the further the path back to being on track becomes.
[ Page 3435 ]

That is, in fact, where we find ourselves in British Columbia, where we have endured ten lost years in the skills-training sector. Our completion rates in this province have dwindled to an abysmal 35 percent. In Alberta, our neighbouring province and economy, we see completion rates that are double the completion rates in B.C.

Indeed, we do have a problem. Indeed, it needs to be addressed. But I can't resist the thought of an arsonist arriving at their own fire with a pail of water, wanting to be appointed fire chief and patted on the back and given a medal for having recognized that there's a fire burning.

In fact, in 2002 the government dismantled the trades-training programs of this province. For a year there was no program whatsoever in place. When it was reinstated, it was effectively disassembled. So 120 staff worked in the sector in government before the dismantling; only 12 afterwards. Forty regional offices were closed, and 40 counsellors were fired.

For years the government has heard "please" from the sector, from this opposition, to reinstate trades and apprentices counsellors to help students and help employers reach higher levels of completion. So we do welcome a reinvestment, as small as it is, in the role of counsellors in the trades-training sector.

It should also be mentioned that this government has made many promises. Before the Olympics we were promised that there would be tens of thousands of jobs flowing from that. Now, with an approaching LNG industry, we're promised more than a million jobs.

Let's take a look at how that's calculated. The Toronto-Dominion Bank recently called that projection as being "founded on shaky ground," to quote their report. The assumptions on economic growth have not turned out.

[1030]

We need to recognize that this report and the response to it are essentially an acknowledgement of the failure of the past ten years. It is important that we recognize that. It is important also that we recognize that this report continues a longstanding pattern of behaviour from the government of offering grandiose schemes that are well promoted and have slick advertising but no substantial support. There's no substance.

There is no additional funding being added to skills training in this province. In fact, there's not even a retrofit of high school shops, which are abysmally obsolete in their equipment. If we double the number of ACE IT opportunities for high school students, they will go into shops that do not and will not meet the need.

The Vancouver Symphony Orchestra, Bramwell Tovey, today on Canada music day is coordinating a countrywide performance of band students performing Commander Hadfield's music that was composed in the space station. The Vancouver school board has just given their band programs a one-year reprieve.

Now the government is asking these stressed institutions, post-secondary and K to 12, to re-engineer themselves, to redefine what they are. They can barely provide foundational skills now. What we need is real support. What we need is a real commitment, reflected in resources, that this government can add.

Who will pay for this refocusing of resources? It will be the students in all of the other programs that will have their funds diverted in order to fulfil the government's promise to fix up their own mess. I welcome this subject coming to the floor, but I would also welcome responsibility taken from the government for this mess.

G. Kyllo: I thank the member opposite for his comments. The reality is that British Columbia has done a fantastic job with our skills training. Can we do more? Can we do it better? Certainly.

I'm really honoured and privileged to actually speak on behalf of the Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training in laying out the foundation for that ten-year skills training plan. I think we're going in the right direction, and I'm really encouraged by the remarks that we're hearing from industry.

As a business owner myself and from discussion with entrepreneurs and business owners across the province, the B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint addresses the fundamental need of having a comprehensive plan to ensure that we have skilled workers needed in new resources, manufacturing and technology-related roles throughout our great province. By making the necessary changes now to the post-secondary system, we will meet our province's future demands and be well able to fill these new job openings.

Before announcing our plan to re-engineer education and training, we listened to the needs and ideas of young British Columbians, educators and labour and industrial leaders. After the release of the government's skills-for-jobs blueprint, we're hearing some extremely positive accounts. Here's what some of these British Columbia leaders have to say.

Terry Sullivan, of the Kamloops-Thompson school district, said this about training for jobs demanded by the economy and education of youth in trades at NorKam trades centre of excellence on CHNL. "A very positive type of initiative on the part of the province."

John Winter, of the B.C. Chamber of Commerce, praised our government's efforts in a news release on April 29, saying the following. "It's great to see B.C. leading the country in moving to a data-driven strategy on education spending. By using labour market information to drive B.C.'s education and training spending priorities, we can ensure that we're providing the educational opportunities that our students need to land B.C. jobs."

Irene Lanzinger, secretary-treasurer of the B.C. Federation of Labour, said this on CBC radio on April 30. "We need more young people going into the trades. They're very good jobs. They're extremely well paid."

Phil Hochstein of the Independent Contractors and
[ Page 3436 ]
Businesses Association of B.C. said this on meeting the needs of industry to promote trades for opportunities in LNG for youth. "What this announcement does to help that is it shows the investors who want to come here that the government is going to have the skilled workforce to build their projects so it's all tied together."

This reaffirms our blueprint is the right plan for building the economy of tomorrow, a collaborative focus to create a data-driven educational and training system in B.C. and will help to increase our ability to provide the right workers with the right skills in the right places in order to maximize the career opportunities for all British Columbians.

[1035]

Deputy Speaker: I thank the member.

I feel like I need to get a recording that plays, "This is private members' time," and the rules for private members. I'd like all members to maybe, perhaps over the next week, spend some time looking at the standing orders and familiarizing themselves with the rules for private members' times on Monday morning.

With that, I'll recognize the member for Vancouver-Fairview.

PUBLIC INTEREST

G. Heyman: In this time when British Columbians and people across Canada are becoming more cynical about politics, more alienated from government, I think one of the tools we have at our disposal to reverse that unfortunate trend, to give people back some sense that we in this chamber and people in government are acting on their behalf, is to respect their right to information.

The freedom-of-information and protection-of-privacy commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, has expressed the strong view that the creation of records is a fundamental part of our access-to-information rights. The public has a right, and it's been enshrined in legislation since the early 1990s, to the free release of information about the processes and discussions through which government makes decisions on all of our behalf. It's subject to only very explicit and narrow limitations.

However, the commissioner has repeatedly, including recently, noted that government is simply not keeping and releasing appropriate documentation. She said: "We're seeing the creation of an era of oral government that leaves little trace as it erases its tracks."

Ms. Denham reported out recently the increase in "no record" responses in March 2013. This is following many years of slow response to freedom-of-information requests. In fact, this government received an F, or a failing grade, from the Association of Journalists in Canada. "No record" is the frequent claim made by government that it just has absolutely no documents that are relevant to the request that's been made.

The commissioner's key conclusion is that in the past four years the number of "no record" responses has increased from 13 percent in '08 and '09 to 25 percent in '11 and '12. The dramatic increase was helped along by a Premier's office record where the percentage went from 30 to 45 percent, ending in 2012. This includes speaking notes, agendas, travel expenses, briefing materials and far more information that's quite critical for people who are reviewing how government reaches its decision.

That's why the commissioner has called for a legislated duty to document — that the public's right to know deserves to be supported by proactive information.

Recently the Freedom of Information and Privacy Association reported that the U.S. Trade Representative had complained about B.C.'s privacy laws that require information be housed in Canada. We could find, and no one could find, any records in B.C. of these discussions, yet an FOI request to the American government turned up this information. When asked about it, the minister responsible brushed off this news by saying that it was a non-issue.

How can this be, hon. Speaker? Well, let's look at a directive from the current assistant deputy minister of International Trade and then–special projects executive director Christine Little telling staff to make e-mail info transitory only and telling them to be sure to delete it. Transitory e-mails are not FOI-able. They're only meant to cover very time-limited discussions around the logistics of meeting schedules. They are not meant to throw a blanket over information to which the public has a right to access.

Similarly, recently the commissioner pointed out that there was very little knowledge of the requirement in section 25 by public bodies. Section 25 requires the release of information proactively when there's a threat to public health, safety or the environment.

[1040]

Not only did she point out that public bodies were essentially ignorant of their requirement to release this information, as demonstrated in the failure to release information about the Testalinden dam failure, but she thought that there was a history in B.C. of people simply not responding to the other part of section 25 — which contemplates releasing information proactively if it's clearly in the public interest — because people are interpreting this to mean that it must be of a temporary, urgent nature.

She called that the act be strengthened so that the public interest disclosure provision should not require urgent circumstances, and she recommended that legislation be amended so that there's a mandatory obligation for the release of information proactively that is in the public interest. As the head of the University of Victoria's Environmental Law Centre pointed out, the most shocking thing about the commissioner's report was that ministries don't even understand their current
[ Page 3437 ]
legal requirements.

Finally, the Privacy Commissioner just last month pointed out that there is a habit in British Columbia of releasing police information checks on request by employers or volunteer groups. She says that her investigation shows that mental health and other non-conviction information — including completely unsubstantiated allegations and charges that have not resulted in criminal charges — is routinely released and that we are on "the extreme end of the disclosure spectrum compared to other jurisdictions."

She called for immediate action to cease the release of information on mental health records, on suicide attempts and unsubstantiated allegations. With the exception, she said — and I agree — of those understandable checks dealing with people who work with children or vulnerable adults, there is no evidence that the release of non-conviction information helps the hiring practice or that it increases public safety.

People don't know what's in their job file. This is an inhibitor to job and volunteer applications. The commissioner said that there is a history, with the people she interviewed, of significant negative impact on their self-esteem, on their dignity and even on their willingness to volunteer for volunteer organizations. "Record checks that prevent citizens," she says, "from obtaining work may actually result in a burden on society as a whole."

Far from being the most transparent government in B.C.'s history, as this government claimed to want to be, its actions are shrouded in secrecy. It's disrespectful of British Columbians' right to privacy. This government needs to heed the recommendations made by the independent Privacy Commissioner and strengthen the act.

J. Martin: It gives me, indeed, great pleasure to rise on behalf of my constituents in Chilliwack to address this morning's private member's statement, "Public Interest." In that respect, we are committed to ensuring that this government is open and transparent for British Columbians.

Our Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act is widely recognized as having the broadest coverage in the country. B.C.'s freedom-of-information legislation is a cornerstone of our democratic process, and it's crucial to providing accountable, accessible government. Responses to general freedom-of-information requests are posted to B.C.'s Open Information website 72 hours after being released.

While exercising sound fiscal management, the Ministry of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services and other ministries have maintained resources dedicated to freedom-of-information requests. To follow through on our commitments, this government is keeping funding for freedom of information stable.

This year a budget of $7.9 million will remain the same as the budget for '12-13. In fiscal 2013-14, government responded to 9,832 freedom-of-information requests. This represents a 3 percent increase over the previous year. It may interest members to know that government receives approximately six requests every single hour. In fact, in the past year government responded to 5,234 general requests, the most ever.

It is interesting to note this was also the first year in which general requests have outpaced personal requests. It should be of interest to several members in this House to know that the number of political party requests government responded to increased by 52 percent this year. At the same time, the number of media requests responded to was precisely the same number as the previous year. This is evidence that the freedom-of-information process is serving British Columbians well.

[1045]

It's important to recognize that complex freedom-of-information requests can result in many, many hours of search time. The current fee structure in place under the legislation ensures that taxpayers do not have to bear the full cost of extensive FOI requests.

A member of the public can ask for records relating to their personal information at no charge at all. Free estimates are provided and issued by professional public servants whose actions are guided by the legislation. Staff work with applicants to narrow the scope of their requests in order to help reduce fee estimates.

In total, for freedom-of-information requests that result in fees being charged to the applicant, the average fee was $440. The total value of fees collected in the fiscal year 2013-14 was $78,000. Despite criticisms from the opposition that our government uses fees to discourage FOI requests, we have not raised the cost of fees since 1993. That's because the government is committed and continues to be committed to being open and transparent.

In conclusion, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act is designed to make public bodies more accountable to the public and to protect personal privacy through a number of measures, including providing for an independent review of decisions made under this act.

I would like to take a moment to thank the member opposite for this opportunity to demonstrate the commitment of this government to being open and transparent. Thank you so much for this opportunity.

G. Heyman: Thank you to the member for Chilliwack for his comments. I appreciate that the member sincerely believes that this government is doing well, or at least better, but if that was the case, there simply wouldn't be constant commentary from the independent commissioner responsible for privacy and freedom of information, from the freedom-of-information and protection-of-privacy advocacy organization.

It's one thing to say that British Columbia has the broadest possible coverage for freedom of information.
[ Page 3438 ]
Yet the commissioner has just recently pointed out that we're on the extreme end of releasing far too much information that impinges seriously on the privacy rights of British Columbians with no good reason whatsoever, either from a hiring-practice perspective or from a public safety perspective.

The member has said that British Columbia has a higher response. Yet the commissioner has pointed out on more than one occasion that the rate of speed of response, frankly, has been terrible, and that there was a dramatic increase in the rate of "no responses," which has gotten marginally better this year but nowhere near the baseline of 2008 and nowhere near the benchmark that is expected.

The reason for this is simple. We know about private e-mails being used for communication within government. We now know that there were directives explicitly from senior members of the bureaucracy to simply arbitrarily label information as transitory and to delete it. That is why there is such a high record of "no records" responses — no response on record. If there's no response, there's nothing to post. If nothing is kept, there's no information for the public, the media and the opposition to peruse.

The kinds of records that have not been available were critical briefing notes on B.C. Hydro rate increases and information passed on to the Premier prior to her meeting with the Premier of Alberta. These are not transitory issues. They go to the very heart of the policy decisions being made.

The member talked about fees being kept at a low level. The commissioner has called for the elimination of fees because they are an inhibitor to seeking information. She's also pointed out that the centralization of recordkeeping has resulted in records not being properly archived and kept, so when people ask for them, there's nothing that can be handed over because it has not been properly catalogued.

I could go on, and the litany goes on, but the answer to this issue is to strengthen the act on the recommendations of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, which she has made on numerous occasions, both to allow greater access to information and to ensure documents are kept. We on this side of the House would, in fact, do that.

[1050]

BEING LEADERS, NOT FOLLOWERS,
ON SOCIAL MEDIA LITERACY

J. Thornthwaite: I rise in the House to talk about two critical subjects that play a large role in the work I do as an MLA: bullying and on-line safety.

Bullying is not a new phenomenon, but it's become more prevalent thanks to technology and the innovative tools it provides to bullies. Because of new technology, bullying is no longer restricted to the halls of a school or the hours of a school day. It happens 24-7 and often under the illusion of anonymity that the on-line world provides.

Youth are the biggest concern when it comes to cyberbullying. One study estimates that more than half of teens and adolescents have been bullied on line and that one in three has been the target of a cyberthreat.

Most youth, whether they're a bully or a victim, believe that bullying on line is easier to get away with than bullying in person. The problem has worsened because of the increased access that young people have to on-line gadgets, particularly to smartphones and various apps like Snapchat, Instagram or Twitter. A smartphone is now the number one tool for cyberbullying because it's portable, easy to use and always connected to the realm of social media — a world that, to a large extent, is rarely supervised or policed.

The best way to fight cyberbullying is to raise awareness and to get parents and educators involved. To that end, our government introduced the ERASE Bullying strategy in June 2012. ERASE Bullying is a ten-point, comprehensive prevention and intervention plan designed to promote positive mental health and to address student safety in schools. The strategy includes a five-year, multilevel training program for 15,000 educators and community partners. To date more than 8,000 people have already been trained across the province.

Part of the training is specifically targeting cyberbullying by helping educators understand three key points: the importance of developing a response plan to cyberbullying, the importance of teaching students to use social media ethically and responsibly, and how to work with companies like Facebook and Twitter to remove harmful content.

This last point is particularly important because many students have a misconception that on-line profiles are a safe place to share personal information. A New York school recently started a day of action called Delete Day, during which students are aided by trained peers to delete personal information, unknown friends and inappropriate content on their social media profiles.

The ERASE strategy is largely web-based to make use of the tools, the technology, that the kids are actually using. For example, the ERASE Bullying Twitter feed interacts directly with students on line and provides updates and tips on bullying prevention. The ERASE Bullying website provides a wealth of information for students and parents on conflict, bullying, early warning signs, youth suicide and background on cyberbullying and Internet slang.

ERASE also offers supports on the website reportbullying.ca, which provides an anonymous, confidential on-line reporting tool where students can report bullying and harmful behaviour. The website is available in French and English and is one more way for students to reach out and ask for help via computer or mobile device. We were told a couple of weeks ago that out of 350 bullying
[ Page 3439 ]
reports, 319 have been resolved so far.

The ERASE student advisory is a team comprised of 19 students from across B.C. They had their first meeting on April 7 and have been tasked with creating social media guidelines for the province and providing advice on student safety to the Minister of Education and the Premier. Maya Treuheit, who is a school district trustee and is interested in working with her fellow students to help prevent bullying, said: "A person is a person, no matter how small."

The strategy has now entered its third year, and great progress has been made. All 60 B.C. school districts have completed the first phase of the five-year, multilevel training program, and training continues to develop community partnerships and protocols to support threat assessment and violence prevention.

The ERASE website is getting thousands of visits each month and has provided substantial knowledge to students and their families about preventing bullying, the importance of a positive school climate and sharing information on line.

Moving forward, the recommendations of the ERASE student advisory and the provincial advisory committees will be incorporated into the strategy to ensure we can continue to provide our province's children with learning environments that are safe, caring and accepting. We will also be making all bullying prevention materials and training available to university education programs so that they can be used in teacher training curriculum.

[1055]

One of my key priorities as Parliamentary Secretary for Student Support and Parent Engagement is to promote awareness of the ERASE Bullying strategy among students, parents and educators. I'm doing this through video, social media, school outreach and, of course, in person with the BCCPAC, DPACs and parent groups.

How do we keep children safe on line? How do we have difficult conversations about inappropriate on-line behaviour? These are just a few of the obstacles facing parents and teachers today. The ERASE strategy provides a way to educate them on how to recognize problems and develop action plans to stop harmful behaviour. It also shows students how to take accountability for their actions at school and on line and how we can end cyberbullying by becoming responsible, mindful on-line citizens.

M. Karagianis: I'm happy to rise today in response to the member's private member's statement. I would say that, first of all, I'm in agreement that the issue around bullying and cyberbullying and issues around on-line safety are, I think, a concern to everybody in our communities.

I'm a huge fan of social media, and I think that it's a fantastic communication tool, but certainly, we can see the pitfalls of that. It's laudable — the efforts that the government is making in trying to change some of the safety factors around this.

I do want to talk about something that I think is a clear motivator behind some of this, and that is, actually, social attitudes to bullying. I think there is a move, a move socially, that is very disappointing. We're seeing more and more of an attitude that downplays and is slightly indifferent to violence, to violence against women. I think that these attitudes have begun to penetrate the kinds of behaviours we see from young people on and in social media.

If society treats violence against each other, violence against women as something that is not of significant importance, if we objectify violence, if objectify violence against women, then in fact, what is the lesson that we're saying to young people? How are we teaching them that, in fact, our social behaviours and our social attitudes will set the stage for their behaviour, whether it's in schools or whether it's on line or whether it's in their texting and chatting with one another?

We've seen an increased number of violent incidents that have taken place, against young women in particular. I've got to say that a very vivid example of something that's going on right now today in real time is that international governments are spending a fortune looking for a missing Malaysian plane, and as great and laudable as that is, there doesn't seem to be any kind of serious effort to look for over 250 missing young women in Nigeria.

I guess if we turned those kinds of resources on to looking after finding these young women — the same that we're looking at finding a missing plane — then perhaps we'd send a very clear message that we in fact value young people in our society, that we value young women in our society. If we're not prepared to expend all kinds of resources and concern in international efforts to try to find and rescue these young women who have gone missing in Nigeria, then what does it say about us as a society?

What does it say to young women in our society? And what does it say to young men or those who are targeting each other and bullying on line? In fact, this attitude sets the stage for what we're teaching our young people. It's great to have educational programs in schools that talk about "cyberbullying is bad" and "these kinds of behaviours are bad," but we've actually set the stage socially for these kinds of attitudes.

Missing and murdered women — in the headlines all the time here in Canada. We have just recently discovered something like almost 1,200 missing and murdered women across this country — no interest in a national inquiry into that. We're sending a message again. There's a group of women, girls, primarily aboriginal, who have gone missing and been murdered. We're not prepared to inquire or show a deeper interest in that, so what are we saying about the value of our young women in our society?

Well, we're actually clearly saying that we don't put as
[ Page 3440 ]
high a value on that as we should. As a consequence, we are by our own actions teaching attitudes towards young people that are beginning to play out in the way they treat each other.

[1100]

The prevalence and the sort of indifference and objectification of violence generally. We see it in music videos. We see it in all kinds of on-line games. Those send a very clear message of kind of indifference. We are indifferent to the message that we're sending to young people on a much deeper level. So when you come along and say: "Well, now, we don't like your behaviour, the way you're texting. We don't like the behaviours that we're seeing in cyberbullying…." We've got to set a much bigger and better precedent in the way we treat each other in society, but certainly the way we treat violence against young women and the value we put on those young women, wherever they've gone missing, wherever they've been treated violently.

I think that we need a shift in our thinking here. You can't just narrow it down and say: "Well, cyberbullying is bad, and we've just got to narrow that down and stop it." It's about treating each other better. It's about valuing each other better and certainly sending a clear message to young people that we value them. We value young women, no matter where they live, no matter what the conditions and no matter what their background.

J. Thornthwaite: Thank you to the member for Esquimalt–Royal Roads for your support in our government's efforts on this in the schools.

I've been working on a video series about cyberbullying that features social media safety and awareness expert Jesse Miller, as well as Theresa Campbell, president of Safer Schools Together. These videos will support parents by addressing topics such as how to keep children safe on line, how to recognize dangers and how to approach difficult conversations with youth. It will be provided to all parents, all school districts and, actually, all interested stakeholders in British Columbia.

The videos will showcase the dangers of sharing personal information on line and how on-line posts can be viewed by anyone who knows how. Snapchat photos do not disappear in seven seconds. Treat people with respect, just like they were right in front of you. Internet safety and media literacy are inseparable.

I talked to a student at Windsor Secondary School the other day — Chris Bolton. He's a grade 11 student at Windsor, and he is the national youth ambassador for HootSuite's young entrepreneur program, The Next Big Thing. He is using this technology for good, to help his fellow students sort out their class rotations with an app. He is also mentoring young students to learn how the technology works.

He says: "The more we teach kids how this technology works, how the code is being processed, the more they will understand about how their information is being used and stored on a database."

Education is the key to protect our children and teach them to be good digital citizens. My work and the ERASE Bullying strategy are doing just that, to guide students on the path from victimization to empowerment through technology.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Hon. M. Polak: I call private member's Motion 17.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, we need unanimous consent of the House to move Motion 17.

Leave granted.

Private Members' Motions

MOTION 17 — RIGHTS AND WELFARE OF
CANADIAN AND TEMPORARY FOREIGN
WORKERS IN B.C.

M. Elmore: I'm very pleased to move the motion:

[Be it resolved that this House urge the Government to protect and promote the rights and welfare of Canadian workers and temporary foreign workers in B.C.]

We have heard recent stories of temporary foreign workers speaking out, Canadian workers speaking out. The issue of the temporary foreign worker program is in the news in British Columbia. It's a conversation across Canada.

We have seen rapid expansion of the program, over 500,000 temporary foreign workers in B.C., really eclipsing our traditional pattern of bringing in workers to immigrate as permanent residents. It has given rise to a huge number of challenges.

I'm very pleased to welcome here members of the community and also temporary workers here today for this motion. They brought forward to me their concerns, the problems that need to be addressed and the actions that the government needs to take to ensure that all workers are protected.

[1105]

I have heard stories about the problems of workers coming in illegally and being charged high recruitment fees, which are illegal, but there is no monitoring, enforcement or repercussions for recruitment agencies who charge these fees.

As well, there's a difficulty of limited labour mobility because work permits are employer-specific. Workers coming in are not advised of labour rights. They have limited services and are threatened with deportation if complaints arise — and today, this morning, even death, in the case of a temporary foreign worker from Israel who reported, here in British Columbia, that that was
[ Page 3441 ]
his experience.

This is unacceptable. We have no oversight of this program in British Columbia, and there is a need to address these problems. Part of the vulnerability is that these workers are in a very precarious situation — vulnerable workers because they do not enjoy the same legal status. We're seeing a two-tiered system where workers are scared to speak out. They don't enjoy the same protections as workers with permanent residency, and they are at a higher risk. This is unacceptable.

We have, basically, no monitoring of the overall program here in British Columbia. We are seeing workers being exploited and not being able to assert their rights. When they come forward and speak of their rights they often face a lot of difficulty and threats from employers. I want to really applaud those workers who have the courage to step forward and let those concerns be known here.

There are steps that we can take in British Columbia. In Alberta there was an audit that the government conducted that found in 2010 that in three-quarters, 74 percent, of workplaces that were audited there were violations against temporary foreign workers. We also know that there is a better…. We should also look at: what is our experience here in British Columbia? We do not have that information coming forward.

As well, we have the example of Manitoba, which has the Worker Recruitment and Protection Act that has brought forward protection for the first time in Canada to ensure that foreign workers are protected from unscrupulous recruiters and employers, that employment agencies should be licensed and that there are repercussions if there are violations. It also ensures that workers under the low-skilled category have an opportunity to apply for permanent residency under the Manitoba provincial nominee program.

We need oversight. We need to ensure that employers are monitored. We need to ensure that there's a process in place to ensure that labour market opinions are, in fact, valid and also to ensure that rights are upheld.

There is, I would say, a crisis here in British Columbia. People are being left in limbo, and there are steps that we need to take, that should be taken, to ensure that all British Columbians and all workers here are protected. The fundamental issue, certainly, is the precarious nature and a need to return to the values that built Canada — an immigration system that was driven by citizenship and not a guest worker program. That's the fundamental value that we need to uphold. Ensure that employers are monitored; that employment recruiters are not able to exploit people, basically, at will; and that a whole host of other difficulties and violations do not occur which are going on throughout all communities across British Columbia.

We need action. We need action from this government now.

M. Bernier: I just want to thank the member as well for her comments and her concern with this. The issue of the temporary foreign worker program has been a point of discussion now for Canadians from coast to coast lately. That being said, there's been a lot of rhetoric and a lot of commentary that's clouding the entire debate of this program.

While the program is managed by the federal government, we're working closely with our counterparts to ensure that whenever possible, we know that British Columbians are always first in line for the job openings. Also, we want to say that if a case arises with employers and their disregard for the process of utilizing the program in their businesses, we do admit and say that there have to be consequences. Our government is saying that we're not going to be just bystanders on this issue.

[1110]

Fundamentally, the temporary foreign workers cannot and should never be abused by the system or by employers here in British Columbia.

It's not fair. They deserve more, and they deserve the same rights and dignity as any other worker in Canada, as stated in the Employment Standards Act. Our federal counterparts are looking at creating a black list and the means to impose serious sanctions, including losing the ability to use this program or fines and jail time for employers who exclude efforts to use Canadians for jobs.

Bringing it closer to home, in the South Peace it's incredibly difficult to fill every single job opening that we have in my riding and in my communities. With a very fast growing economy and single-digit unemployment, there's a genuine need in the South Peace to use temporary foreign workers to help fill our job vacancies in our region. Particularly right now in the food services and hospitality establishments, it's difficult to fill these roles. Frankly, right now there are just many more options for residents in my riding to choose from.

From an entrepreneurial standpoint, if they cannot find employees to work in the food outlets or the other service-oriented positions, they will have no choice but to close down. They'll be losing the opportunities to run successful businesses, and that will hinder the growth of our communities. This should not happen, and that is exactly why this program is available to employers.

Frankly, I say it's working quite well in my riding. Many businesses in rural British Columbia look to the temporary foreign worker program as a real solution to be able to stay in business and to fill critical job vacancies.

Going forward, our economy is going to create and continue to grow a lot of jobs. We will be needing to fill job vacancies in my riding as LNG projects continue to become a reality. The temporary foreign worker program will be playing a role in the Premier's Liquefied Natural Gas Working Group in that final report. With all recommendations accepted, our government is committed to making sure that every single British Columbian has the
[ Page 3442 ]
skilled labour force it needs to seize the opportunities of this liquefied natural gas program.

One of the working group's recommendations explicitly recognizes the important role temporary foreign workers are going to play and has harnessed the opportunity British Columbians have to develop the natural gas industry. To summarize this recommendation in the report, the temporary foreign worker program will be utilized in the context of the overall strategy that identifies the workforce needs of the LNG opportunities and immediately will be beginning the skills-training plan to develop as many British Columbians as possible working in this sector.

I do come from a region of the province where temporary foreign workers are much needed and, I would say, much respected. I will mention that many workers, who have come from all over the world, are really active in my community. They're volunteering in cultural and service clubs. They're helping build a diverse and better community in the South Peace. They are proud to be working in Canada, and as Canadians and British Columbians, we welcome them, respect them and recognize their contribution to growing our economy.

I know many of them personally, and I would like to end by thanking them for being part of my community. On that, I look forward to the rest of the debate.

H. Bains: It is, actually, a privilege to stand up and speak on an issue that is very, very close to my heart. I know, Mr. Speaker, it's close to your heart — and many members in this House.

The issue we have before us, the temporary foreign worker program — let's go back to the origin of it. What was the real reason when the temporary foreign worker program was started? It was started to have the foreign workers come in when there are no Canadian workers available or they don't have skills to do the job. That was the whole purpose behind this.

It started along those lines, but now take a look at what is happening. We have gone way away from the original intent of this program.

Now the main reason why this government and their cousins in Ottawa support this program is to suppress the local wages. There's no doubt about that fact. That's exactly what's happening.

[1115]

How do they do that? Canadian workers are being squeezed out of the jobs. We have evidence of that. When they apply for the job they are willing and able to do and are ready to go to, their applications and resumés are thrown into the trash bin. We have evidence of that.

That's not the purpose of the temporary foreign worker program. That wasn't the program. If it is to be used to suppress wages in Canada and to help pad the bottom line of multinationals, then we are on the wrong track. That's not what the government should be all about.

Canadian workers should be first in the lineup for jobs they are willing to do, able to do and have the skills to do. That's not happening. We have evidence at HD Mining. We have evidence at Canada Line. When South Americans were brought in, they were used and they were charged fees when they were not supposed to be charged, under the law. They were not given the rights they were entitled under the law.

It took unions to take those companies and the government to court, to go through the system. They were able to secure about $15 million to $20 million in lost wages for those workers. They took the money, at their own expense, over to their home country and hand-delivered the cheques. That's what Canada is: our passion for each other.

But the government is lacking that — on both levels of governments. The employers are not brought to the table to make sure that they follow the law that is behind the temporary foreign worker program. The program today pits worker against worker, and that's not what Canada is all about.

It's not the fault of the temporary foreign workers. They are here to make their lives better for themselves. It's not their fault, and I welcome them. They should be allowed to do that. It's not the fault of the local workers. They are also raising some concerns. Those are legitimate.

The fault lies squarely at the feet of this government and the federal government — the federal government for not monitoring it properly and local government for not enforcing the laws that they should be. We squeeze local workers out of jobs, and we allow the system to exploit temporary foreign workers. We have evidence of that.

You know, just recently we had cases where we were asking…. The previous governments' wrongdoings…. We ask them to apologize. We're asking the current government to apologize for the wrongs of past, which is the right thing to do. We are creating a similar situation now, and that's not what Canada is all about.

The temporary foreign worker…. If you say that in the Lower Mainland we cannot find workers to go to McDonald's, to work at Tim Hortons, I think there's something wrong here with that system. We have our students. The only way that they can pay for their fees — the escalating fees, which are otherwise totally unaffordable for local students today…. They get the opportunity on the weekends and on their time off during the summertime to take these jobs and pay for some of their education. They are denied that right now. That's not the purpose of temporary foreign workers.

I say, right now, that it needs to be revamped. I think we need to have a real, independent investigation into this to see who is not following the rules.

L. Larson: In responding to the motion, it's important to acknowledge that the temporary foreign worker
[ Page 3443 ]
program is managed by the federal government and that British Columbia has been a leader in working directly with the federal government to ensure that our residents come first. If employers disregard the rules or do not follow the process to hire temporary foreign workers, there should be consequences.

While it is clear this is a federally regulated program, that does not mean our government is a bystander. All workers in British Columbia — citizens, residents and temporary foreign workers — have equal rights and protections under the Employment Standards Act. Temporary foreign workers who find themselves in a vulnerable position have the same rights and are eligible for support and services like any other worker in B.C.

[1120]

Locally, even in my community, there are services to help untangle the complexities of legal human rights and language issues that can happen, however infrequently, between employers and temporary foreign workers. When workers in our province are in a vulnerable situation, we are committed to providing them with necessary information and support to help them understand their rights and responsibilities under the Employment Standards Act here in the province.

Workers' rights do need to be protected in British Columbia. Whether you're a temporary foreign worker or not, if you make a complaint, this government follows up and makes sure that the case is investigated carefully. The province has recently allocated $2.6 million to service providers across the province so that temporary foreign workers can access one-on-one consultation services, group workshops and support groups.

The employment standards branch conducts education and outreach programs to inform workers and employers about employment standards, including education, seminars, presentations to schools and presentations to groups of workers and to employer associations. There is also networking through community groups and appearances on ethnic media.

There are fact sheets and ideas available on line. Many of those are translated into multiple languages. Fact sheets are available in English, French, Chinese, Punjabi, Hindi, Filipino, Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese and Spanish. Videos are also available in Mandarin, Cantonese, Spanish, Punjabi and Filipino.

Closer to home, my riding has had a long and very positive experience with temporary foreign workers. Agriculture in my area has been dependent on the influx of these workers for many years. It is these temporary foreign workers who came to help local farmers that have created the multicultural mosaic of people who currently make the South Okanagan their permanent home.

Beginning in the '60s with people from Portugal, then India and now Mexico, our communities are populated with people who came to work the land and eventually became the landowners and the farmers of today. Those who were temporary soon became permanent citizens and have added many layers of culture and made great contributions as Canadians.

Locally we have the South Okanagan Community Services, which works with all new people to Canada, temporary or permanent, to help them learn about Canada and transition smoothly to citizenship. Our government also invests in Welcome B.C., a comprehensive suite of digital services and information offered in multiple languages to support all newcomers to B.C.

It is these kinds of help from the provincial government and through federal programs that have enabled temporary foreign workers, particularly in agriculture, to become farmers in many areas of our province and keep farming a traditional way of life. The federal government's message is clear: no abuse of temporary foreign workers will be tolerated. And our government supports this. Many of these workers will become Canadian citizens. It is extremely important that abuses do not occur.

The federal government is exploring serious criminal sanctions, including fines and jail time, if employers lie about their efforts to hire Canadians first. If employers have broken the rules, they will face serious consequences. We join the federal government in encouraging all people with concerns or information on abuses of this program to call the employment and social development tip line.

Putting B.C. residents first is a priority of this government. But we also need to attract workers to B.C., and we are competing with countries all over the world. We should continue to be a welcoming place for all.

D. Eby: I wanted to thank, with my colleagues, all of the workers who have come here today to hear and witness this debate. I think it's incredibly important that those folks are here. They have lived the experience in British Columbia, and they know the realities versus what the government is saying in their speeches today. Let me tell you about a very important project that illustrates the difference between this government's words and their actions.

My colleague mentioned the Canada Line. Now, on the Canada Line, which was a provincial government program to build a rapid transit line to the airport, this government's project had two groups of workers. They had workers from Europe who were paid at a certain level, and they had workers from South America who were paid at a different level. They were doing the same work, side by side, building that train to the airport.

[1125]

The workers from South America were paid at a lower wage. They were discriminated against based on where they were from. And that was a government of B.C. project.

If on the government's own projects, there is racism and there is discrimination against foreign workers, then,
[ Page 3444 ]
how can they stand in this House and say: "Oh, well, certainly, it is unacceptable to discriminate against workers"? On their very own projects, their very own Human Rights Tribunal said: "You are discriminating against workers." This was racist conduct and unacceptable, and those awards were made to those workers against this government's project.

I think it's important to talk about that story. If you listen to the speeches today, you would never know that this was the same government that was acting that way in the tunnels underneath Vancouver and yet standing in this House and saying they're standing up for workers.

Again, let me point out that the only reason that that discrimination was captured and enforced and that those workers received awards was not enforcement by this government, not oversight by this government. It was as a result of litigation brought against this government, fought against this government in the courts to enforce those workers' rights.

That's what this whole program is all about. These workers are incredibly vulnerable. They are here at the whim of a single employer. That's where these abuses come from. They can't go to another employer.

I heard a member say: "Oh, this is part of the mosaic of our community." Well, that is not true. These workers are not equal. They are not equal members of your community. They are treated as a disposable sub–working class. If they speak out against an employer, they are shipped home.

These workers need not the same protection as everyone else in your community. They need more protection than everybody else in the community.

I think it's really important to note that the temporary foreign worker program has two key elements to it. We have been focused very much on the abuses and the neglect and the racism that come from the elements of the program where very vulnerable workers are brought in to work at the whim of a particular employer. The fees, the living conditions that they are put into, the working conditions that they have to endure — we talked about those.

But there is another element to this program, and it is also directly linked to this government's neglect. That is the higher-skilled temporary foreign worker program. We currently have employers leaving Prince George to go to Ireland to hire skilled employees and bring them back to Prince George, in an area where there is very high unemployment, especially among First Nations.

We have employers who, on a federal shipbuilding contract — after asking this government to please, please ramp up shipbuilding training — are going to Sheffield, England, to hire shipbuilding workers to come back here to work on a government project. It is the failure of this government to train up British Columbians to have the skills necessary for these employers, for their projects here in British Columbia.

I hear over and over again that British Columbia residents are first in line. It's very clear that they're not even in the lineup at all, because they can't get the training they need to take these jobs and to be working these jobs in British Columbia. That's why B.C. has double the national average — not just a little bit more than the national average but double the national average — of temporary foreign workers in new jobs in this province. It's because British Columbians can't get the skills that they need to take these jobs.

Let me tell you about the haul truck operator program. If you want to drive a truck in a mine in British Columbia, if you want to get those skills, you need to come up with $7,500 to pay for the program.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

D. Eby: Thank you. I'm just getting started, Mr. Chair. [Laughter.] Thank you very much.

S. Hamilton: I welcome the opportunity to speak on the subject of foreign workers. Let's be clear. Our government has been very clear that British Columbians come first. That's the best outcome. British Columbian businesses employ British Columbians with everyone benefiting. But we can't, obviously, be Pollyannas — not when we have to govern and when there are real world issues at stake here. One of those issues that is very real is that there just aren't enough workers in British Columbia to fill our labour shortages.

[1130]

Contrary to what the member for Vancouver–Point Grey said a moment ago, I quite clearly remember the Minister of Jobs, Skills Training and for Labour distinctly say that at one time, say, some 15 or 20 years ago, the unemployment rate in Prince George was hovering around the 14, 15 percent level. Now it is about the 4 percent level. So I don't know where this rampant unemployment is coming from, in terms of his figures.

Anyhow, employment forecasts tell us that even if we train every single high school graduate in B.C., we won't be able to fill the number of jobs that we've created over the next decade. The same is true for workers across the country, who are second choice to fill available jobs in British Columbia. When we do look to workers from outside Canada — and let me once again point out that temporary foreign workers are part of a federal program, managed by the federal government — it's because there's a recognized need.

Let's take the words of the president of the B.C. Federation of Labour. Jim Sinclair was talking about the Rio Tinto smelter last month when he said: "We're building a new smelter in Kitimat — a huge job. There's 7 percent or 8 percent temporary foreign workers on that job, from the United States. 'Let's come through the union, and let's go up there and work.' They want to go up there and work and then go back home when the job is done.
[ Page 3445 ]
That's not new. We've been doing it for a long time."

Organized labour recognizes that this program is not new. It's been around for a long time. This program is needed in order for us to have these types of businesses that we all want. Let's be clear. The moment that a temporary foreign worker steps foot on our soil they are protected under the rules of the B.C. Employment Standards Act. They have the same rights and privileges as any other worker in this province.

In my community there's a critical shortage of workers willing to do the kinds of jobs needed in agricultural operations. British Columbia farmers have been clear that the federal government's temporary foreign worker program offers an option they need. Working on a farm is hard work. At one time in British Columbia and in Canada working on a farm was a common experience, but times change. Our economy has grown and diversified, and British Columbians have many more choices for how they want to make a living. It's been this way for a long time.

I don't know how many members of this House have had much experience working in fields, but I've spent time with many farmers in Delta, and I've seen how they've struggled to find labour during some of the most critical times of the year. The DeBoers, the Newells and the Houwelings would not be in business today if it were not for the temporary foreign workers program. It works.

Here's a quote from Rhonda Driediger, the former chair of the labour committee of B.C. She said: "I'm not sure I want to think about that — about not being able to hire temporary foreign workers. We would just go back to struggling like we did before."

Temporary foreign workers have played an important role in making sure crops are harvested in British Columbia's farming regions, including Delta and elsewhere in the Fraser Valley as well as the Okanagan. Of course, our government would prefer that local people — British Columbians — who live in an agricultural community be the ones to fill available jobs. We believe in the value of working, and we're always focused on increasing employment opportunity for the people of B.C. But we can't go back in time, nor would British Columbians want to.

The temporary foreign worker program helps our province have a viable agrifood industry. Let's not forget: this is an industry valued at $11.7 billion. More importantly, this is an industry that ensures British Columbians have fresh and local foods in our supermarkets and on our tables.

Let me turn once more to the former chair of the labour committee for the B.C. Agriculture Council. She summed it up when she said: "The temporary foreign worker program provides a lot of stability. We know that these people are going to be showing up for work every day. We know that these people that we've trained are going to be here for us every day until the end of that contract."

British Columbians value our province's agriculture industry, and we need to continue to help our farmers thrive by ensuring that there are workers to bring in the harvest.

K. Conroy: I'm pleased to take my place in this debate, responding to my colleague from Vancouver-Kensington's motion. Even though the temporary foreign workers program has been around since 1973, it has only really become an issue, a program with much more negative connotations than positive ones, in the last recent years.

Our country and our province were built with immigrants. My parents came to Canada as immigrants from Denmark in the early '50s, knowing that they wanted to live and work here, and they had the opportunity to do just that. Even though he had a trade, Dad took odd jobs until he could get a position in a mine on Texada Island and be earning enough money for mom to join him. Both eventually became Canadian citizens and raised their family here.

[1135]

During the '50s so many people came to Canada just in that way. In the '70s the government recognized that employers in Canada needed skilled workers like scientists and engineers on a temporary basis and introduced the temporary foreign workers policy. But in 2002 the scope changed, making it easier for businesses to access temporary foreign workers on a much more temporary basis.

What's the difference between then and now? The program has grown from a temporary solution to worker shortages to, in many cases, an all-out abuse of people's rights. We have the stories that are being told from the workers at the Tim Hortons in Fernie, the McDonald's in Victoria and the young man from Israel living in Nanaimo who actually had the courage to come forward and tell his story of how he and his colleagues worked hundreds of hours for no pay while forced to live under constant threat of deportation.

He was told to come to Canada. He would have a job. He had to pay his own airfare, even though under the law, employers are supposed to cover the airfare. Then he had to work 12 hours a day but with no pay. He lived with four other workers in a home under constant monitoring of a supervisor. If they complained, they would be deported, even though they had come to Canada with the dream of earning a decent living here.

Several government agencies had known about this B.C. company's practices for months. Despite that, Employment Minister Jason Kenney's department didn't revoke the B.C. company's foreign worker permits when the latest allegations surfaced, and the company continued advertising for workers overseas.

This young man had death threats against him after he blew the whistle and can't understand why the gov-
[ Page 3446 ]
ernment didn't take it seriously and take action against this employer. The company had a written labour market opinion which allowed it to hire foreign workers and said that they must be paid $13 an hour, and $21 an hour for any overtime. He was never paid even close to that. In fact, the payroll records show that he and other employees earned zero dollars — zero dollars for a salary. During a two-week period this employee put in 116 hours and received no pay.

They were told they were working on a commission, that if they didn't like it, they'd get deported. The supervisor would cancel their work permit. They were told they'd get 25 percent from each sale. The shock came on pay days, when they received next to nothing. The employer deducted money every two weeks for rent plus other fines for little infractions that they didn't even know they were going to be getting.

To quote this young man: "If you look at it, it's modern slavery, because some people were not actually paid at all." He said: "I got 50 bucks or 100 bucks in the three months I worked, and that's bad exploitation, but some people were actually slaves and ended up owing him money."

The question here is: why are people being treated like this, and how many more are there? The other question: are there really no Canadians who would like to take those jobs?

It's obvious that the employers are abusing the situation by having the threat of deportation hanging over the employees' heads. For Canadians, there is no such threat, as no young Canadian would work for two weeks for nothing except minimal room and board, and they also have the ability to leave and find other employment.

The case in point is the workers in the Victoria McDonald's and the courage of the whistle-blower who came forward there, a young British Columbian who couldn't understand why local people weren't getting jobs, how the employer was bringing in foreign workers when he knew locals were looking for the jobs. Since the story broke, McDonald's Canada has brought in new management, and there is a moratorium on the use of the program for the entire Canadian restaurant industry.

For those companies who are treating their employees well, this is a problem, and there are employers in this province who are treating the employees well. But for many, there is not.

Even though the federal government is responsible for immigration and regulates the entry and stay of workers under this program, there are steps the provincial government could be taking to ensure workers are properly treated and protected. There is no reason the province of B.C. couldn't be implementing better standards and policy for these workers. Both Quebec and Manitoba have brought in legislation to do just that.

Manitoba passed the Worker Recruitment and Protection Act, which protects foreign workers from unscrupulous recruiters and employers. Manitoba exercises control over which jobs can be filled by temporary foreign workers, has improved the rights and enforcement and has given low-skilled workers a path to permanent residency by allowing them to become provincial nominee program…. That's something that the provincial government here in B.C. should also be doing.

J. Thornthwaite: One of my responsibilities as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Education is to educate parents and students about the valuable high-paying, family-supporting jobs lying ahead for our youth in the very near future.

[1140]

By 2020 there will be one million job openings in British Columbia, and our government has made it clear that we expect British Columbians to be first in line, followed by Canadians, and then, as a last resort, we look for skills abroad.

More than 78 percent of those jobs will require some form of post-secondary education, and 43 percent of these jobs will be in the trades or technical operations. But even if we were to train up every single high school graduate in B.C., we still wouldn't have enough people for the number of jobs we expect.

Our plan, mentioned earlier by the parliamentary secretary for jobs, B.C. Skills for Jobs Blueprint: Re-engineering Education and Training, charts a seamless path for young people from elementary to high school to post-secondary education and right into the workforce, to ensure they're first in line for the jobs of tomorrow. It lays out a major shift to a data-driven system where training dollars and programs are targeted to jobs in demand. This system will also be outcome focused. We will measure our success and adjust funding and programs as the economy evolves.

Government currently invests more than $7.5 billion each year in education and training. Re-engineering our system doesn't mean spending more. It means targeting more of the substantial resources already available to meet labour market priorities. That's why, starting this year, we're targeting over $160 million to do just that. In four years it'll be $400 million annually. Over the span of the ten-year plan this represents about $3 billion redirected towards training for high-demand occupations.

Our focus is on changing the culture and the attitudes toward the trades. That includes getting more young people involved and excited about trades and technical training. In fact, I attended an event a couple of months ago at the North Vancouver school district called Ticket to Your Future. You think in North Vancouver that most people think their kids are going to university to be doctors and lawyers, but 600 parents and students showed up that evening to learn about all of the exciting opportunities in the trades.

This Thursday I'm involved in a very exciting project in the North Vancouver school district called Innovative
[ Page 3447 ]
Career Pathways for Young Women, an interactive evening for parents and students, grades nine and 12.

For kids in the K-to-12 system, we want them to have a head start to hands-on learning so they're better prepared for the workforce or for more advanced training when they graduate. We're going to double the number of ACE IT spaces to 5,000 over the next two years. ACE IT is the accelerated credit for enrolment in industry training program. It lets high school students take their first level of technical training in certain trades, which could qualify them for apprenticeships or industry training programs. And we'll be expanding the dual-credit programs, reforming the grades ten-to-12 graduation requirement, qualifying more teachers and totally revamping the ITA. We will encourage school districts and industry to partner to create new programs.

We recognize that in some cases the temporary foreign worker system is abused, and we are working with our federal counterparts to shut this down. In the meantime, we are getting our students, our aboriginal people and those with disabilities the first chance to find their fit in the jobs market.

B. Ralston: Well, we've heard from members opposite about the jurisdictional difference between the federal role in this program and the provincial role. Certainly, immigration is a split jurisdiction. It's one of the two in the BNA Act, the other one being agriculture, but there is a real role for the province in enforcing employment standards.

I heard the member for Peace River South say that there should be fines and jail time for employers who violate the conditions of the temporary foreign worker permissions that they're given. Yet there is a provincial role, under employment standards.

It's interesting to note what the federal minister responsible for the federal side of the program said about British Columbia's response to violations of the Employment Standards Act. In December 2012, Minister Kenney said: "'The sanction appears to be quite modest in British Columbia. I would encourage them to consider in the future increasing the fine to send a strong message' to anyone who might be considering exploiting people seeking to come to Canada."

In January 2013 the then minister responsible — and no longer here in the Legislature — Minister Bell, indicated he would consider increasing fines, but there had been no changes announced. He said: "As a first offence, $500 seems...modest. If we need to step that up, I'm fine with that."

[1145]

Nothing's happened, of course. That's the rhetoric that we hear from the other side: "Yes, there should be fines and jail time. Yes, there should be important…." I think the talking point is, "We're working with our federal counterparts," but nothing has happened. The real legislative powers that this Legislature has over employment standards to protect and investigate the work conditions of temporary foreign workers who are being exploited — not every case, but in many cases — have not been taken up.

In fact, the gutting of the employment standards legislation and the requirement at the first stage for the aggrieved worker to self-negotiate with their employer…. Can anyone think of more of an imbalance of power than a temporary foreign worker who is beholden to the company that they work for, because their work permit is employer-specific, saying: "I, under the employment standards, have a grievance, and I'm going to negotiate with you."

What do you think would happen, and what is happening? What was the example in Nanaimo? The person was threatened with being deported, and in this particular case there's an allegation that he was threatened with being killed. So the idea…. All the rhetoric on that side is fine — typical rhetoric — but the real powers of enforcement that could be used are not being used despite what we've heard here from members opposite in the debate.

In fact, there is a role for the provincial government. In other jurisdictions in Canada — in Manitoba, for example — they have a special investigations unit that responds to complaints as well as conducting proactive investigations. It's not simply complaint-driven or referrals from the media.

It seems to be that most of the investigations, given the absolute dearth of any investigations on the part of the province or any enforcement on the part of the province, are initiated by the media — CBC in Victoria and the McDonald's, and CBC and the issue in Nanaimo. They are bringing these cases forward to the public. They're doing the job that one would think a government that rhetorically is committed to worker protection would be undertaking themselves — not just responding to complaints and the unsatisfactory complaint process that's in the Employment Standards Act but actually conducting proactive investigations.

Manitoba requires employers to register, so there is a list. It's known what employers have temporary foreign workers and, therefore, who might be subject to random spot checks in order to enforce the rights that those workers have. The members opposite claim that they support their right to exercise those rights. It's very difficult here to know where to turn in terms of the rhetoric that's been put forward.

The other thing that I would note as well is that the temporary foreign worker is not something that…. It looks like I'm out of time. Sorry.

M. Morris: I did have some prepared notes here, but I'd probably like to respond more to some of the comments that members opposite have made during this debate.
[ Page 3448 ]

British Columbia has a rigorous employment standards program, looking after the rights of every single worker. We don't make any distinction between whether or not they're foreign workers, whether they're from British Columbia or whether they're from elsewhere in Canada. They are all taken care of very appropriately.

Some of the comments from across the floor focused on issues that were criminal in nature. I'm wondering whether the members opposite have information that is probably useful to the police or useful to other organizations that do these criminal investigations. Like death threats. I'm astounded to hear that members opposite have information on death threats, and hopefully, they have provided that same information to some of the agencies that are in the province here to look after that.

[1150]

I also want to talk about some of the comments that the member for Surrey-Newton made in relation to worker availability.

The urban area of the province of British Columbia has close to 80 percent of the people of British Columbia. The rural area, which is the northern 80 percent of the province, has 320,000 people living in that area, roughly, but that's where most of the resource development is in British Columbia. The employment rate in Prince George is in the low 4 percent range. In other areas of the province it's even lower than that. Up in the Peace River region where my colleagues are, the rate is even lower than that.

It's very difficult for not only employers to attract the skilled help that they need, but it's also very difficult for the people in the service industry to find people that are interested in working in restaurants, in hotels, in those kinds of functions. They rely on foreign employment, people from foreign countries, to fill those jobs so that they provide that level of service in the communities. They can maintain their hotels. They can maintain the motels, restaurants and those other services that other workers rely so heavily on.

If somebody is interested in working from down in the urban area of British Columbia in rural B.C. in some of those jobs, I think all they have to do is move up there. They would probably get one of those jobs.

Comments, as well, in relation to some of the trips overseas that employers have taken to try and find workers overseas. The member for Vancouver–Point Grey was talking about going over to Ireland to find workers over there when we have all kinds of people available in Prince George and Fort St. James.

We don't have people available in Fort St. James and Prince George to fill some of these very high-tech positions that we have — pressure welding, for an example. We're in competition with Alberta. We're in competition with Saskatchewan and other areas in Canada that rely heavily on those kinds of workers. So they went over there specifically looking for that.

The member also commented on opportunities for First Nations. We are exploring every opportunity for First Nations in British Columbia. Sixty percent of B.C.'s First Nations population live in the northern rural areas of British Columbia here, and we're providing them with opportunities for increasing their skills in welding, in operating heavy equipment and other areas up there, and employment in areas where we're going to need them in LNG development, in oil and gas development, in mining and, of course, in our forest industry that is still so predominant up there.

We are doing as much as we can in rural B.C. to attract all the workers that we can, but at the end of the day, if we can't find somebody from British Columbia to work, if we can't find somebody from Canada to fill those jobs, then we will be looking at foreign workers to fill those jobs so that we can keep the economy of British Columbia going and we can keep everything prosperous, keeping our hospitals, our highways, our schools and everything else that relies on those tax dollars from the resource sector in British Columbia.

S. Hammell: I am pleased to rise to join this debate. There are other examples of provincial protection around temporary foreign workers that are more robust than our B.C. government has provided. As was mentioned by a previous speaker, Manitoba has passed the Worker Recruitment and Protection Act, which protects foreign workers from unscrupulous recruiters and employers. Manitoba exercises control over which jobs can be filled by temporary foreign workers, has improved rights and enforcement and has given low-skilled immigrant workers a path to permanent residency by allowing them to apply to the provincial nominee program.

B.C., on the other hand, gives all control to the federal government, has weaker legal protections and enforcement for migrant workers and restricts access to the provincial nominee program by imposing income requirements that are too high for low-skilled workers.

Migrant workers in low-skilled occupations in Manitoba have a path to residency because they can apply to the Manitoba provincial nominee program if they have a job offer or support from a family member in the province.

[1155]

In B.C. migrant workers in certain low-skilled occupations have access to the B.C. provincial nominee program, but applicants must have a level of income that is higher than the pay expected for these low-skilled-work jobs.

In Manitoba a special investigative unit responds to complaints as well as conducting proactive inspections. In B.C. insufficient resources are allocated to enforcement, so enforcement remains largely complaint-based. Manitoba prohibits the charging of any recruitment fees to workers, with stiff penalties for violations. In B.C. fees are prohibited, but recruitment agencies are permitted to
[ Page 3449 ]
charge immigrant workers for a variety of services, opening the door to recruitment fees disguised as other immigration services.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

In Manitoba repeat violators of TFW's rights face stiff penalties. In B.C. penalties for infractions are minimal, and employers found guilty of breaking the rules are required to reimburse the worker for the lost wages, meaning there is no financial incentive for employers to follow the law. Manitoba has successfully negotiated with the federal government so that employers of temporary foreign workers must have their labour market opinions approved by the province. B.C. relies only on the federal government.

There are many improvements that can be made, many improvements that we can, hopefully, see coming from a province that is committed to the rights of the workers, whether they are from our country or from abroad.

S. Hammell moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

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 11:57 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