2014 Legislative Session: Third 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, November 17, 2014

Morning Sitting

Volume 17, Number 8

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

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2014

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

SUCCESS FOR SMALL BUSINESS

N. Simons: Good morning, Madame Speaker, and good morning to my friends and colleagues.

It’s my pleasure to stand here and speak about success for small business. This is one of those areas where I think, for the most part, both government and opposition members understand and recognize the importance of small businesses in our communities and of the important things we can do as government or as decision-makers to ensure that small businesses in our province continue to thrive — that they’re given the necessary information and supports, that their tax and regulatory issues are appropriate to their needs. That is what I’d like to speak about today.

[D. Horne in the chair.]

When we’re talking about small business, and in my new role as opposition spokesperson for Small Business and for coastal economic development….

Interjection.

N. Simons: I see the critic for Agriculture appreciates that, and I appreciate the fact that she’s working hard in the spokesperson role for Agriculture.

[1005]

When we’re talking about small business, of course, we’re talking about how essentially 98 percent of businesses in this province are small businesses, and of those, about 80 percent are of smaller than five employees. So when we’re talking about small and microsized businesses in the province, what we’re really talking about is our neighbours, our friends, spouses, partners. We’re very closely related to people who run small businesses.

Over one million people in this province work for small businesses, so the things that impact them are things that impact us as individuals, as families and as communities. When I talk about the importance of success for small business, what I really am talking about is the importance of success for everyone in our communities. If we see appropriate regulatory systems for small businesses, we see businesses that thrive, and when small businesses thrive in our community, we as communities also thrive.

I just want to establish as the starting ground that I don’t think there are a lot of places where we disagree.

When we’re talking about the importance of taxation levels, we’re also talking about competitiveness within Canada, and we need to consider that when we make decisions about small businesses.

I have to say that I appreciate some of the steps that government has taken in terms of making sure that small businesses have the supports they need. Small Business B.C. is one of those organizations. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting with them. I’m doing my homework and meeting as many people in the sector as possible, as is my responsibility as an elected official — I have to say that I thank everyone who I’ve met with for their generosity, for their contribution to my increased knowledge — to make sure that they’re speaking on behalf of businesses that they represent, which run the gamut in terms of affiliation, perspective and purpose.

Small businesses are our communities. Small businesses are a part of our communities, and because of that we need to do what we can to ensure that they are supported.

Now, this isn’t an attempt to criticize anyone. I think many times we talk about what we did for small business and what they did or what worked and what didn’t. We have to recognize that a lot of success or failure has to do with factors beyond the control of any one of us in this House.

When we talk about the fact that the number of people employed in small business is down or that the earnings are down and the gap between people who work for larger businesses versus people who work for small businesses has actually grown significantly in the past five years, it’s not necessarily a criticism of government policy. Government policy doesn’t always have that immediate and direct impact on immediate success or failure. I grant them that.

There are some worrying trends, but there are also very positive trends. I think that if we have a government that is actually paying attention to the needs of small business, then we can ensure that we continue to have healthy and vibrant and thriving communities.

Now, small businesses overall — the number has fallen, but no more significantly has it fallen than in our rural communities. Small business success in our rural communities perhaps is tied closer to the immediate impacts of policies that don’t necessarily take into account rural considerations. Just as an example of that is small businesses in ferry-reliant communities. Clearly, they are businesses that are suffering directly because of government policies — government policies that can be changed, that have been proposed to be changed.

I would even say that even my right of right-wing friends on the Sunshine Coast — I do count them as my friends — absolutely….
[ Page 5308 ]

Interjection.

N. Simons: The member from somewhere east of Vancouver and I agree that, in fact, we have friends. But even they shake their heads and decry some of the policies affecting our rural communities, especially the small businesses in our rural communities.

Recommendations have been made to government based on factual information and statistical evidence, and I’m hoping that government will take heed of those concerns as expressed by rural communities.

[1010]

A 29 percent drop in the number of small businesses in the Cariboo. It demands the attention of government. It demands more than just stating all of the successes. As much as it’s nice to talk about success only, we, as members of this elected body, should be always striving to try and improve things, to try to strengthen what we have. If, in fact, there’s nothing we can do, we’d never be sitting here. But we do sit here, and we do sit here because we have reason to sit here, and that is to improve the policies that impact our small businesses.

Some of the things that were talked about a lot are regulation and taxes. I think when you think of the fact that most small business people also pay their hydro, also pay their ICBC, also pay their MSP, also pay their ferry costs…. When you see every single one of those I’ve just mentioned go up in a fairly significant way since 2001, we have to recognize the impact those policies are having on small and micro-sized businesses.

It’s one thing to say all the good things about reducing burdens. I don’t think it’s a burden when our children are educated. I don’t think it’s a burden when the homeless are housed. I don’t think it’s a burden when our streets are safe.

I’ll leave it at that and look forward to the comments from my friend opposite.

M. Hunt: I certainly rise to respond to my colleague from Powell River–Sunshine Coast. I have to admit that I am absolutely delighted in what I hear my colleague saying.

My family is most likely no different than many of the others here, except my family is a little larger. My youngest daughter does work for a bank, so that disqualifies her from working for small business. I have one son that works for an NGO, which is also a small business, so it can qualify under that, even though it is an NGO. But the rest of my children all work for small businesses.

As a matter of fact, my oldest son is constantly coming up with new and creative ideas on starting businesses. The only challenge is how to capitalize the ideas that he has. That certainly is something that they are working on.

It’s certainly a unique group of people who are these entrepreneurs that are able to see opportunities and have creative ideas and solutions to address those ideas, to address those challenges and to work with them. I’m so pleased with the member opposite in raising this issue, because it does touch all of our families. It does touch all of us exactly where we live.

I love to use one simple illustration from my community of Surrey, where we have Endurance Wind Power. You would think…. Endurance Wind Power. I mean, they build turbines for the alternate energy industry. Why are they in Surrey? We don’t have any wind turbines in Surrey. We don’t actually have a lot of consistent wind in Surrey. Well, other than politicians. Okay, I have to give that one.

We don’t have that kind of consistency for the alternate energy industry. However, we do have an atmosphere. We have created an atmosphere within our cities, within our provinces, to be able to see the opportunities, to see that reduction of red tape, the reduction of obstacles to it.

That’s why I’m really pleased with many of the initiatives that this province has brought forward, such as BizPaL, where, in fact, an entrepreneur can go on line giving their location and what kind of industry they are wanting to work in and be able to get the resources that they need so they can get the appropriate permits. They can get the appropriate licences, and they can get the things that they need to be able to get on with life in the business of their choice.

I think that’s why one thing that’s very important that we need in this province is to continue to have incubators where we have the opportunities particularly for young people who have creative ideas to be able to actually see those ideas commercialized and working in the real world.

I thought it was interesting that the member opposite raised the issue of rural B.C. I think he’s completely, totally, absolutely right in the issues of rural B.C. and the growth of small businesses in B.C.

I think that’s where a piece of legislation…. I don’t want to be partisan in this, and I want to be very careful how I walk through this piece. But we create rules and restrictions that limit people’s abilities to respond to opportunities.

[1015]

That’s why in my community…. I’ll talk of Surrey rather than in the rural side because of the delicate area that I’m about to go into, and that is the rules and restrictions we have in the agricultural land reserve.

I wish that we could look at the home plate, the actual place where we allow the houses to be built, the barns to be built, the actual sort of urbanized part of a farm. We recognize that, hey, what they do on that…. They should be able to do entrepreneurial things on that portion. I’m not talking about the agricultural part that’s used for the production of food but those areas where they can actually see creative businesses working with the opportunities in their communities. That’s why….

I think there’s some legislation that’s working towards that goal, but these are the things that we need to do. We
[ Page 5309 ]
need to look at ways that we can help and foster what is going on in our communities so that we can work with that entrepreneurial side of life and see that grow, see that develop, because ultimately, yes, it’s all about us working with businesses and promoting them.

Certainly, we have a set of awards that go to communities that are creating those types of atmospheres. I think that’s absolutely critical to the growth of small business in this province, and I’m excited to be able to respond to the member’s comments.

N. Simons: Thank you, hon. Speaker, and Surrey-Panorama, if I’m not mistaken. I did have research check that out.

Interjection.

N. Simons: Thank you very much to the member. Where are you from?

S. Fraser: Alberni–Pacific Rim.

N. Simons: Alberni–Pacific Rim. That was easier.

The comments from my colleague across the floor I take with interest. I think that he did try to make an allusion to the issue of agricultural land. Having experienced the role of opposition critic for Agriculture, I know what he’s trying to say.

I would suggest that farms and people who operate agricultural businesses have had, and continue to have, every opportunity to pursue their economic interests, their business plans. I congratulate everybody who is involved in that sector.

The one thing that I think we need to recognize, though, is that every decision we make about where things go and how things are done is a balance and a trade-off. When we talk about the importance of ensuring that small businesses can do what they need to do with as limited regulatory restrictions as possible, let’s understand that in the context of ensuring that the men and women who work for those businesses need to be safe, need to work in safe conditions, need to have their dignity respected.

When we’re talking about industry or small businesses that will have an impact on our environment, we need to know that we have a responsibility for future generations and that the regulations we talk about, sometimes in a negative fashion, in this chamber are, in fact, protections. So red tape and protections and regulations shouldn’t all be lumped into the same category.

Let’s make sure that the regulations that exist for small businesses are not overly onerous. Let’s make sure that we are doing what we need to do to protect the workers who work for them and for the environment around them. This isn’t just for now. This isn’t just for our economic success today. It’s to ensure that something is available for our future generations. I know we love to talk about future generations here. Let’s make sure we’re doing something for future generations.

I think sometimes that means postponing some of the benefits that we could accrue now if we went whole out completely. We need to be responsible in the way we manage not just the economy but also our environment and the rights of workers who ensure that our economy continues.

We need to have protections for our environment because when we see disasters like, for example, Mount Polley…. I know we don’t have exact causes, but we know that the impact on the small businesses in those communities is immense. When we see regulations like MMBC come in with very little preparation, we know that the impact of those on small business is immense.

Let’s make sure that when we talk about small businesses, we do so from the perspective that it’s for all our benefit. So thank you to small business, and thank you to my colleague across the floor.

[1020]

PARTNERING WITH FIRST NATIONS
TO BUILD LOCAL ECONOMIES

L. Larson: I rise today to speak in support of partnering with First Nations to grow local economies. First Nations support economic development projects that are socially, environmentally and culturally sustainable.

One of the best examples anywhere in Canada of this are my communities in the South Okanagan. The Osoyoos Indian Band, under Chief Clarence Louie, has received many nationwide awards for their focus on economic development. Chief Clarence Louie’s quote “Preserving our past by strengthening our future” is the foundational belief behind the many economic partnerships that the Osoyoos Indian Band has forged with the neighbouring communities in the South Okanagan. Specifically, the town of Oliver and the town of Osoyoos have been benefiting from this focus for many years.

Chief Louie has received many honours and acknowledgment for his work in economic development, including being inducted into the national Aboriginal Business Hall of Fame and recognition with the B.C. aboriginal award for individual achievement.

The Osoyoos Indian Band is a good neighbour and shares in the costs of parks and recreation services and purchases fire protection, irrigation, water and sewer services delivered by the town of Oliver and the regional district. They have representation on mutual committees and boards and are active participants at local events. Their story is one of inspiration to other First Nations who, throughout the province and Canada, are only now emerging as economic participants in their local economies.

The Osoyoos Indian Band land covers 32,000 acres of some of the most desirable urban, industrial and commercial land
[ Page 5310 ]
in the South Okanagan, with businesses involved in agriculture, ecotourism, commercial, industrial and residential development. Their agricultural leases represent upwards of 20 percent of B.C.’s grape production, including Vincor International, Mission Hill winery and Burrowing Owl vineyards.

The Osoyoos Indian Band, under the Osoyoos Indian Band Development Corp., owns and, in partnership with other businesses, operates Spirit Ridge Resort and spa; Nk’Mip Cellars, the first aboriginal winery in Canada; desert canyon golf course, where my grandson works; two gas and convenience stores; Oliver Ready-Mix; OIB Holdings; Nk’Mip Desert Cultural Centre; the Senkulmen Business Park; and many more.

As the Osoyoos Indian Band has just over 500 members, the majority of the jobs created by their enterprises are filled by non–First Nations peoples. Jobs in construction, forestry, viticulture and tourism provide hundreds of local residents an income that allows them to live and play in the South Okanagan.

This year, with the return of the salmon to Osoyoos Lake, band members and locals were able to fish during the month of August and enjoy this salmon at local restaurants. The protection of the sensitive Okanagan River system and the return of the salmon in much greater numbers are the direct result of the work of the Okanagan Nation Alliance and the Osoyoos Indian Band.

Teaching the history and culture of the First Nations peoples is a priority for Chief Louie, and our local public schools instruction in native languages and history is part of the curriculum. In addition to operating their own school, SenPokChin School, a local daycare and a health care facility focus on the needs of the very young and the elders of the band.

However, it is the Osoyoos Indian Band’s newest partnership with the corrections branch of the province of B.C. that is currently contributing to the economy of my community. During construction of the facility and after completion, the permanent jobs created will have a long-lasting economic benefit to an even broader area of the South Okanagan. The construction phase will continue till the fall of 2016, when the facility will be completed.

The construction itself is unique in its efforts to be environmentally sensitive, not only to the First Nations lands it is on but to the surrounding area also. All the soil and gravel needed for construction are being processed on site, so trucks are not out on our local roads. Seventy percent of the energy needs will be supplied by on-site geothermal sources. Subcontracts have been awarded throughout the Okanagan Valley and the Lower Mainland for a variety of construction services and products.

Workers on site now are approximately 50, several of them members of the Osoyoos Indian Band, and will ramp up to more than 100 as construction continues. The correction officer information sessions have drawn hundreds of people from the Okanagan and include many of the Osoyoos band members who have expressed an interest in the jobs that are being created.

[1025]

The Osoyoos Indian Band, under the leadership of Chief Louie and in partnership with the province of B.C., has given the South Okanagan economy an incredible boost that will benefit generations to come. The legacy of this project will be 240 permanent, full-time jobs and the currently immeasurable secondary jobs in maintenance, food services, etc., that are part of the daily running of a corrections facility.

None of this would be happening if it wasn’t for the vision of Chief Louie to become more actively involved in finding solutions for the revolving door of First Nations people in our justice system. First Nations people represent 4½ percent of the population of B.C. but represent 27 percent of the daily inmate population of the nine correctional centres in British Columbia.

The corrections branch contracts with the aboriginal liaison service providers to develop and manage programs for each centre. Services provided at each centre are different and can include sweat lodge ceremonies and talking circles. This corrections facility is the first and only one on First Nation land in North America.

Chief Louie is also involved with B.C. Corrections on the development of the programs and cultural spaces inside the facility to better meet the needs of First Nations people for rehabilitation and to raise awareness of their cultural heritage, including a program involving horses.

This project is just one of the many economic partnerships with First Nations currently underway in the province of British Columbia.

S. Fraser: I’m always pleased to take part in the debate here in this House. The member for Boundary-Similkameen made a good case for partnerships with the Osoyoos Indian Band and Chief Clarence Louie and his award-winning work in developing the economy in the southern Okanagan. No one can argue that.

The topic today is partnering with First Nations to build local economies. I would note that those are plural, so I’m going to go to a few instances here where I think that the government needs some help in addressing those partnerships, because they’re simply not happening.

I’ll go right to a court decision that just came out recently. It’s around the OCP that was quashed by the courts — Whistler’s OCP. In this case this government simply failed to consult with the Squamish First Nation before signing off on Whistler’s official community plan, which actually was of a divisive nature.

It’s unfortunate that that happened, but Justice Greyell ruled that despite the government’s onus to consult with First Nations, in this case the minister responsible, now the Minister for Energy and Mines and the Core Review…. He said that the province “made little attempt
[ Page 5311 ]
to engage in its own consultation. It held no face-to-face meetings with the representatives of the nations. It made no attempt to involve any other ministry with whom the nation dealt in ongoing negotiations, and it denied requests for further consultation.”

We see that that’s a problem, actually, and the court also levied the fees to be paid by government for the court costs for the Squamish First Nation. We have yet, through FOI, been able to figure out how much that was. Again, setback relationships…. One-offs are not the way to go when developing relationships with First Nations. All First Nations in British Columbia deserve that great respect.

I would like to touch on the fact that this government has been much lauding the potential benefits of LNG. The Acho Dene Koe First Nation — their traditional territories are in the Northwest Territories, southeast Yukon and northern British Columbia. I’m reading now from a letter that was addressed to the Premier from the Acho Dene Koe. That’s from Chief Harry Deneron.

I have been up to their territory. ADK is not just a transboundary claim. Its traditional territories are found where B.C.’s prime natural gas fields are located. This is addressed to the Premier, again:

“Your dream of an economically secure B.C. rests with settling Acho Dene Koe’s claims on these lands. Failure to do so may cause the closure of LNG activities on our lands. B.C. has a legal and political duty to negotiate in good faith with Acho Dene Koe, but B.C. is totally derelict in its fiduciary duty to Acho Dene Koe by its continual taking of Acho Dene Koe lands for its many LNG projects without consultation.”

Another case where we’re simply not seeing partnering between the government and First Nations.

I’d also like to mention that the member for North Coast and I were able to travel up to Namu, B.C., in Heiltsuk territory. We met with Harvey Humchitt — he’s a hereditary chief, a wonderful person — and Chief Councillor Marilyn Slett — both very capable, very caring people.

[1030]

They have an ecological disaster right on a site of what is the oldest continuous settlement — not on the coast — in the province, probably in North America. Over 10,000 years old, and there’s a rotting old fish plant on piers. It’s actually a whole community that is falling into the sea, and this government has so far refused to meet and consult with the Heiltsuk on that matter despite repeated requests to do so.

I’m asking again for government members to address the issues and meet as a true partner with First Nations throughout the province.

Meet with the Acho Dene Koe in the northwest of this province. Meet with the Heiltsuk First Nation and their leadership to deal with a looming environmental disaster in one of the most significant archaeological and historical and cultural sites on the coast. Address First Nations’ issues with respect and recognition, which is the basis for partnerships that will allow this province to thrive and unleash all of the potential for economic development and true justice for past injustices in this province.

That is what we need to see from the government. Examples in the Osoyoos are important, but rest of the province is just as important.

L. Larson: There are many other examples of First Nation and government partnerships throughout British Columbia, with economic development and jobs for First Nations as a priority.

The Upper and Lower Similkameen bands have a revenue-sharing agreement with Copper Mountain mine in Princeton.

An agreement-in-principle with the Ktunaxa Nation Council will support economic development and job creation in the West Kootenay region. In the Elk Valley four Ktunaxa communities will share in the revenues from new coal mine projects. The Ktunaxa also have a 25-year community forest agreement supporting continued success in job creation, local manufacturing and silviculture.

An economic development agreement with the Red Bluff Indian band enables the Red Bluff to develop meaningful employment, as well as help B.C. salvage beetle-killed timber.

Another example of economic development being driven by First Nations is in Tsawwassen. The Tsawwassen First Nation has started construction of the new Tsawwassen mills and Tsawwassen commons retail development. This is another example of the positive economic benefits that can come from the treaty process. The project anticipates approximately 4,500 construction jobs and approximately 1,000 permanent jobs.

A partnership between Steelhead LNG Corporation and the local First Nations in Port Alberni to build an LNG export facility on treaty lands near Bamfield, at the southern end of the Alberni Inlet, could represent an investment of $30 billion.

Another 30 First Nation communities throughout B.C. with proposed LNG-related projects in their traditional territories are currently engaged in discussing benefits and concerns related to proposed pipelines. Fifteen First Nations along the Pacific Trail pipeline route have reached an agreement that will see $32 million in benefits to their communities once construction begins.

The Haisla and the province signed the Haisla framework agreement that led to the Haisla obtaining a lease — over 800 hectares of Crown land adjacent to their reserve, intended for LNG development. Talks continue with respect to the Haisla exercising their option to purchase the land in future to hold as private land.

For the First Nations people to take advantage of these and many other economic initiatives, an aggressive skills-training program is also being implemented. We’ve increased delivery of the aboriginal business and entrepreneurship skills-training program to ten to 12 communities annually to bolster aboriginal business development, provide increased
[ Page 5312 ]
economic opportunities and encourage the retention of skills and experience.

These economic and training initiatives are only a few examples of the engagement with First Nations currently taking place that will benefit all British Columbians for many years to come. Chief Louie has many famous quotes but none more fitting than this one: “It takes an economic engine to pull a social cart.”

[1035]

BUS FOR THE HIGHWAY OF TEARS

J. Rice: British Columbia has more than twice as many unsolved cases of murdered and missing aboriginal women than any other province in Canada, yet the investigation unit dedicated to looking at the murdered and missing women along Highway 16, otherwise known as the Highway of Tears, has been cut by 84 percent in the last two years by this government.

The Highway of Tears is the section of Highway 16 that transects numerous rural, remote and aboriginal communities across northern B.C. between Prince George and Prince Rupert. Transportation options are limited, and creative ways of getting around are needed. Some of these creative methods of getting to appointments or to school or for purchasing groceries mean resorting to hitchhiking. This is risky, but many feel that they have no other choice but to hitchhike.

Police report 18 murdered or missing women along this stretch of highway. Others report closer to 40 cases. Nationally, hundreds of women, the majority of which are aboriginal, have gone missing.

I met an aboriginal woman in Prince Rupert recently who had lost a friend on the Highway of Tears. She spoke about the years she herself had spent hitchhiking along Highway 16 in order to get herself through school. She counted herself lucky, as she did not disappear or succumb to violence — as many women, including her friend, have along this highway.

She explained that in order for her to get an education she needed to hitchhike to get to school, as there was no public transportation in her community. There were no buses or taxis where she lived, and owning a car was simply not feasible.

The Minister of Transportation has suggested a shuttle bus for the Highway of Tears is a simplistic solution to transportation challenges in the north. But until this government is prepared to take leadership and make some major social investments, so-called simple solutions, such as a shuttle bus service, should be implemented. There are many factors that need addressing to make the Highway of Tears safer. This includes examining economic, health and social factors, including the history of residential schools and systemic inequality that impacts the area.

It includes creating and implementing a poverty reduction plan, which this government is simply not interested in doing. Until such time as the prevailing factor of poverty is addressed, a shuttle bus or a series of buses serving rural and remote communities along the Highway of Tears is not a bad idea. As the mayor of Smithers recently said, it’s inexpensive, and it’s doable. I stand here today to argue that knowing this, we should do it.

Safe transportation options were proposed in 2006 by the Highway of Tears Symposium, but the government failed to follow up on these recommendations. Recommendation 1 from the symposium report states: “That a shuttle bus transportation system be established between each town and city located along the entire length of Highway 16, defined as the ‘Highway of Tears.’”

The report explains that except for the Greyhound bus line that services the Highway 16 corridor from Prince George to Prince Rupert, no other public transportation system exists. “A shuttle bus transportation system would focus on the pickup and drop-off of young female passengers at all First Nation communities, towns and cities located along the entire length of the highway between Prince George and Prince Rupert.”

In December 2012 Missing Women Commissioner Wally Oppal called on the government to immediately commit to establish safe transportation options along Highway 16. This government said it was developing a targeted consultation plan that would be complete by the summer of 2013. But the government never followed through on this commitment, even though the Minister of Justice’s own briefing notes remind her of the need for this urgent measure.

February’s throne speech made the empty promise to “move towards a violence-free B.C. and ensure women, including aboriginal and vulnerable women, have the supports they need to help prevent violence, to escape from violent situations.” The government spent the whole session doing little to make women safer. In fact, I personally have asked 11 times about safer transportation options along Highway 16 and have received non-answers and responses that have little to do with the question.

The Minister of Justice continues to claim that there are transportation options in the north, then lists off wholly inadequate options such as the Northern Health bus, which is only for people with health issues and with a signed appointment verification form. It’s not available to women needing to get groceries or to get to court or to an appointment with a social worker, nor is it available to students studying in other communities or needing to travel for employment.

The Greyhound bus service, which was dramatically cut along Highway 16 by this government’s approval in early 2013, is worse now — down to 14 from 22 trips a week.

[1040]

The Minister of Justice has mentioned the option of the train, which is laughable. The train — which no longer serves the needs of the passengers along Highway 16
[ Page 5313 ]
corridor, let alone reaches any outlying First Nations communities — is impossible to use. Increased freight through the Port of Prince Rupert has essentially made passenger service secondary and completely unreliable with major delays, meaning the passenger train spends hours sitting on sidings as container ship traffic takes priority and passes by. Freight trumps people in the rail industry, and hence, the train is losing its appeal to tourists and locals alike. Like Greyhound, no doubt we will also hear announcements of passenger rail service reductions in the future.

In her budget speech the Justice Minister said that the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry recommendations were “the highest priority in justice.” However, contrary to her saying this, the B.C. Liberal government has failed to implement the majority of the recommendations from the inquiry.

The investigation unit dedicated to looking at the murdered and missing women along Highway 16 has been cut by 84 percent since 2012. The Justice Minister excused these massive cuts by saying there is less investigative work to be done. Yet not a single one of the outstanding Highway of Tears cases has been solved.

B.C. has the highest number of unsolved cases of missing and murdered aboriginal women in the country. It’s shameful to be cutting the resources needed to solve these cases and to bring closure to grieving families who have never learned what happened to their loved ones.

In June the Premier stood up with First Nations leaders and pledged to end violence against aboriginal women and girls. I ask: what is the Premier doing to end this violence?

D. Plecas: On behalf of my constituents in Abbotsford South, I’d like to take this opportunity to address this morning’s private member’s statement entitled “Bus for the Highway of Tears.” I’d also like to thank the hon. member for North Coast for her passion in raising the issue for safety of travellers along Highway 16, especially women and First Nations people, and bringing it to the attention of this House.

It might interest you to know, hon. Speaker, that when I saw this statement placed on the order paper, I specifically requested to respond. I did so, in part, because of my background as a criminologist and because I know that this issue and the concern for the safety of women along Highway 16 — aboriginal women and, in fact, people everywhere — and women everywhere in the province are of deep concern to all members of this House.

The sheer length of Highway 16, the corridor between Prince George and Prince Rupert, represents hundreds and hundreds of kilometres of highway and many communities separated by great distance. This distance represents a huge challenge to offer safe, reliable and frequent ground transportation for residents. I want to assure the member for North Coast that the government is committed to the recommendations contained in the missing-women report to identify safe transportation options along the Highway 16 corridor.

I’m therefore certain the member will welcome the news that in June and July of this year, staff at the Transportation Ministry travelled along Highway 16 corridor and held face-to-face discussions with over 80 communities. They met with the leaders of 12 First Nations. They spoke with 13 different municipalities and regional districts.

Out of those discussions, it became apparent that different communities have distinctly different needs, so we are now in the process of developing a number of practical solutions to safely connect residents with services and amenities in the major centres along this corridor. The member will also be interested to know that we will be announcing those initiatives in the not too distant future.

Deputy Speaker: Members, the member for Esquimalt–Royal Roads wishes to reply in place of the member for North Coast. Is consent granted?

Leave granted.

[1045]

M. Karagianis: Thank you to the House for allowing me respond. It’s very heartening to hear the response from the member for Abbotsford South, because I’m sure that government, in any consultations along Highway 16, has heard what members on this side of the House, and most specifically the representative, our MLA in that area…. Last Easter a number of us from this side of the House took it upon ourselves to travel the Highway of Tears from Prince Rupert to Prince George and talk with communities along the way. What we heard was profound and disturbing and, I think, speaks to government’s need for immediate and effective action on this.

Between 18 and 40 missing and murdered women. Those are mothers and sisters and daughters who have gone missing, and families have no idea, in many cases, what has happened to those individuals. If that was happening in our local communities, we would be outraged. We would do everything possible within our means to ensure that that kind of situation did not occur into the future.

The solutions for this are often very small, very simple. As the Minister of Transportation has said, it seems like a simplistic response to put a shuttle bus service in place. But in fact, simple is very effective in this case.

I want to, in my remarks, pay homage to some of the people we spoke to along the highway. I want to talk particularly about a woman named Brenda Wilson, who spoke about her sister Ramona who at the age of 16 hitchhiked 15 minutes away to see a friend. There was no bus service for her to go a few minutes down the road to see
[ Page 5314 ]
her friend in the area that she lived along the Highway of Tears. Ramona went missing. Her body was found several years later. Brenda says that in her case, her family has closure. But many, many families do not because these women have not been found.

We’ve had a symposium on the Highway of Tears that talked about a shuttle bus service. We’ve had the very effective Wally Oppal Inquiry and recommendations that urgently called for a shuttle bus service. These kinds of transportation solutions are commonplace in every urban area and in many towns and cities across British Columbia. Why this is not available along the Highway of Tears is a mystery that needs to be solved.

I’m here to talk about the need for the government to take action — not just to talk about consultations, not to promise something in the future, but to talk about real and concrete bus service so people can get around their communities and do the things that we all commonly take for granted: to walk out your door and go get a loaf of bread, take your child to the dentist, go see your social worker, go to work. Those are things we all take for granted in most communities, but you don’t along the Highway of Tears. Instead, you risk yourself.

Mary Teegee from the Carrier-Sekani in Prince George said, I think very wisely, that millions and billions of dollars of revenue are taken from this area every year, and the small amount of money that could be put back for solutions for a shuttle bus service is well deserved in this community.

SUCCESS IN THE TECHNOLOGY SECTOR

S. Sullivan: I want to speak about the success of the technology sector in British Columbia.

Just upstairs from my constituency office is a company called PayByPhone. It started in the early 2000s by a small group of young people. It’s quite remarkable for me to think that people currently parking their cars in London, England, or Chicago and hundreds of cities and universities and agencies all over the world…. When they want to park their car, they will pay by phone. That signal comes to Vancouver. When they want to get their parking renewed or there’s a message going back, that message comes from Vancouver to the bloke in London, England, getting his car. I think it’s quite remarkable to see that kind of success.

Just down on the waterfront there is a company called Saltworks founded in 2008 by a couple of young gentlemen. They actually did the initial work in their apartment kitchen, and they’ve come up with a program for advanced water treatment solutions. They design, manufacture and assemble systems for desalination, brine management and chemical recovery applications. Their technology is used in the oil and gas, mining and water management fields.

[1050]

They have been so successful that recently they were awarded a contract to deliver a unit to NASA. This unit will be used for testing water recovery systems and processes at NASA Ames Research Centre with the intent for future use onboard the International Space Station.

I wanted to get a few more notes to share. I asked the very capable David Wasyluk in research and also Derek Robertson, who is known around the Legislature as the best in the biz. I asked them to help me get some more information that I could share. These are the kinds of things that I think it’s important for us all to know.

B.C.’s technology sector is one of the top contributors to the provincial economy. It represents an extraordinary opportunity for industry, investors and job seekers. The sector provides 84,000 jobs for British Columbians and revenues of $23.2 billion a year. It’s been the third-fastest creator of new, well-paying jobs over the last decade.

B.C. is a recognized leader for developing and growing innovative technology companies. It’s a destination for technology investment, and B.C.’s high-tech sector continues to employ more people than the mining, oil and gas, and forestry sectors combined.

Although many of these companies are based in Vancouver, there are many companies around the province. As a representative of Vancouver–False Creek, I do like to refer to downtown Vancouver as downtown British Columbia.

Industry GDP and revenues. B.C. has been among the top provincial performers in terms of growth in high-technology revenues over the last decade. Since 2002 high-tech revenues in B.C. have significantly outpaced overall Canadian high-tech revenue growth.

The high-tech sector is the third-largest economic contributor to B.C.’s gross domestic product. Technology wages and salaries rose 7.7 percent in 2012, to almost $6.3 billion. This is almost double the 4.1 percent growth in total wages and salaries across all industries in B.C. Wages in the tech sector are more than 65 percent higher than the average wage in B.C.

To refer to a couple of local success stories…. Although it’s not a local company, we know that Amazon.com has recently expanded its operations in Vancouver. In late October the industry giant posted up to 90 job postings for its Vancouver operations, including postings for managers, software engineers and research scientists. They also announced they would be leasing 91,000 square feet of office space in the new Telus Garden building in downtown Vancouver. Depending on the configuration, this one space could house up to 1,000 employees.

Starting on November 5, Amazon also started same-day delivery for on-line purchases in Vancouver. Vancouver joins Toronto as the only two cities in Canada where Amazon offers same-day delivery.

Sony Pictures Imageworks announced in May that they would be relocating their headquarters to Vancouver from Los Angeles. The company initially opened a Vancouver production office in 2010. The move by April
[ Page 5315 ]
2015 into a 6,800-square-foot, state-of-the-art facility at Pacific Centre will accommodate up to 700 employees.

Hootsuite. Founded in 2008, Hootsuite operates a platform for the integration and management of social networks like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. Founded and headquartered in Vancouver, Hootsuite has over 600 employees worldwide. Currently they have over ten million users worldwide who take advantage of their products, and I’m told that the White House uses Hootsuite.

Hootsuite has seen massive success and popularity. In 2013 they secured $165 million in capital, one of the biggest venture capital investments in Canadian history.

[1055]

Over the past five years Hootsuite’s revenue has grown by an astounding 556,000 percent, making it the tech company with the second-highest rate of growth in Vancouver. I might let you know that Ryan Holmes, the founder of Hootsuite, was born in Kelowna and did a lot of his work there.

G. Heyman: It gives me pleasure to stand up and respond to the statement by the member for Vancouver–False Creek about the tremendous contributions of the high-tech industry to B.C.’s economy. It also gives me some pleasure to note that…. Even if it’s the member from False Creek and not a cabinet minister standing up to note that there are, in fact, other industries in British Columbia that are contributing tremendously to B.C.’s economy, it’s important to see that noted.

B.C. is home to eight of Deloitte’s Technology Fast 50 winners, as was announced very recently. These include companies like Hootsuite, Global Relay, Zafin, Avigilon, Appnovation, Richmond’s Clevest, Burnaby’s Photon Control and Burnaby’s Clio.

Yes, the tech industry now employs over 84,000 people, according to the most recent statistics. These companies, these start-ups, are as likely to start up in northern B.C. and in the Interior as they are on Vancouver Island or the Lower Mainland.

This is a good-news story. But I was somewhat taken aback to not hear the member for Vancouver–False Creek note some of the cautions that have recently been raised by the B.C. Technology Industry Association in their report card. I like to think of myself as a glass-half-full person. But in order to see the glass full to the brim, I think we need to take heed of some of the comments that were made by people in the sector.

While the tech sector has been given an A by this report card in comparison with other B.C. industries, it only received a C-plus versus the activities of other provinces and a poor C-minus on industry input indicators. B.C.’s per-capita employment is lower than other provinces in Canada with significant tech sectors and 30 percent behind the U.S. in terms of the share of GDP.

That shows that there is significant potential to be realized. In order to realize that potential, I believe that we need to take heed of some of the recommendations of the Technology Industry Association as contained in the report card.

We are not, as a result of this government’s policies in post-secondary, developing the needed skills and knowledge here in B.C. We rank near the bottom, on a per-capita basis, for the number of tech-related graduate degrees granted in B.C., producing only half the number of engineers as the Canadian average. And we are significantly below the Canadian and OECD average in granting technology-related doctoral degrees.

We have a lack of venture capital investment. Early-stage venture capital is largely lacking or insufficient, and that’s exactly what start-ups need.

We lack in research and development investment. I’ll come to this a little later, but our percentage of GDP has been constant since 2007 but remains 40 percent lower than Ontario and Quebec. We lag Ontario and Quebec in technology goods and manufacturing. We are a net importer.

That’s why the recommendations of the industry association are so important. A government that focuses exclusively on one yet-to-be-established industry is doing our economy and the tech sector no favours.

The BCTIA called for government support in the following three critical areas.

Revitalizing access to early-stage venture capital. There is a recommendation in the recently released Finance Committee report that the government review the small business venture capital program budget to promote greater venture capital investment in early-stage tech companies and do this through a partnership with the federal government.

We need to expand talent availability. We have fewer students enrolling in key areas — including engineering, math, sciences and marketing — compared to other provinces in Canada.

[1100]

We need to help the tech sector grow the size of firms so we have large-sized anchor firms that will draw investment and more start-ups to British Columbia. As the Technology Industry Association said at the end of their report card, if we “continue to improve in the key areas identified in this report, we can keep building the momentum B.C. tech needs to realize its provincial successes and gains on the national and global scales.” If we do that, if the government can do that, the glass will indeed be full.

S. Sullivan: I’m grateful for the comments from the member, but I would like to stress that it is completely inaccurate to say that this government is focusing on one industry at the expense of all the others.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

The fact is this B.C. technology report card reaffirms how critical the technology sector is to B.C.’s economy.
[ Page 5316 ]
We’ve seen huge successes in this sector, as the report acknowledges — global leaders such as Microsoft, Amazon, Sony Imageworks and Disney coming to B.C. Since the last report card the B.C. technology industry has outperformed other industry sectors in the province, particularly in terms of revenues and GDP growth.

The report shows that the industry is reaping the benefits of deliberate, long-term investments made by all levels of government and is performing strongly compared to other B.C. sectors. By incenting private investment in the sector, programs such as the small business venture capital tax credit, the angel tax credit, the scientific research and experimental development — we call it the SR&ED tax credit — and the interactive digital media tax credit have all played significant roles in driving the successes we have today.

The report also notes that B.C. growth has been supported by rich talent pools available at a lower cost relative to U.S. clusters such as Silicon Valley. B.C. tech companies have also demonstrated stronger employee retention rates when compared to other jurisdictions in the U.S. and globally.

In the fields of math, computer science and information science there has been a positive trend since 2009, with B.C. now second only to Ontario in granting both undergraduate and graduate degrees in these disciplines.

I wanted to make a note of an important B.C. government initiative. The BCIC launched the B.C. Acceleration Network, a network of 12 regional partners who facilitate the ongoing development of regional innovation networks and deliver the B.C. venture acceleration program provincewide. The network has engaged 202 companies across the province, assisting them to add 523 new full-time jobs and attract $39.6 million in new investments to British Columbia.

The venture acceleration program is available in all regions of B.C. through its program delivery partners who are members of the B.C. Acceleration Network.

R. Fleming: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

R. Fleming: With us this morning are a large group of ESL students and instructors from Camosun College, here to observe the debate on the motion that is just coming to our attention. I want the House to make them most welcome this morning because many of these are new Canadians in our country and in our province. This will be for many of them the first time they’ve been in this democratic chamber. I would like, for that reason and all of the other ones, members of this House to make them feel most welcome here this morning.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 10 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

[1105]

K. Corrigan: I also seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

K. Corrigan: It also gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce, in addition to all the wonderful students and faculty from Camosun, the members of the Federation of Post-Secondary Educators of British Columbia — Cindy Oliver, the president of FPSE; Jason Brown, the first vice-president of FPSE; Frank Cosco, second vice-president of FPSE; Erin Rozman, the president of the Douglas College Faculty Association; Terri Van Steinburg, the president of the Kwantlen Faculty Association; and Karen Shortt, president of the Vancouver Community College Faculty Association.

In addition, we have Phil Legg, who is a staff person with the Federation of Post-Secondary Educators.

They’re all over here as well because they want to impress upon all of us in the Legislature how important it is that we continue to support English-language-learning programs in British Columbia. They have brought senior people from across British Columbia and from their association here to see the debate today. I hope you will also make all of them feel very, very welcome.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 10 — ENGLISH-LANGUAGE-
LEARNING PROGRAMS
AND SKILLED WORKFORCE

K. Corrigan: On the motion.

[Be it resolved that this House recognizes the importance of public, post-secondary English language learning programs to a skilled labour force in B.C. and to the health of the provincial economy as a whole.]

In essence, we are talking about the critical importance to Canadian immigrants of continuing to provide a variety of higher level English language programs at the college and university level. These are programs serving 9,000 students a year, programs that integrate with or lead to other post-secondary programs and that allow students to utilize all the skills and experiences that we as a country recognize when we encourage people to make the often difficult decision to make Canada their home, often believing that they would make a better life for themselves and for their children.
[ Page 5317 ]

These are people who want to work hard, want to contribute and who have the skills to do so but who face one major hurdle to maximizing that potential. That is the ability to communicate effectively, particularly in the workplace and in their professional lives.

English language proficiency is fundamental to success for the vast majority of ELL students in our post-secondary institutions, who intend, usually, to take further college and university training or who already have foreign degrees and credentials that they want to put to work in British Columbia.

What we have heard over and over is that these courses are like steps on a ladder, and if you take away the first rungs, there is no way to climb that ladder. For decades colleges in British Columbia — for 40 years at Vancouver Community College, at Camosun College, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Douglas College, Thompson Rivers and others — have been providing accessible, high-quality, professionally delivered, attested, refined English-language-learning courses to thousands of students every year.

Two and a half years ago the federal government announced that its funding of these programs would cease. Interim funding by provincial government has been provided, but there has been no lasting solution for these critical programs, and now they face closure.

It raises the question now about why, when the provincial government has had this amount of time to solve this problem, it has not. The result is that 9,000 students are about to lose these critical programs. That includes 2,200 students at the largest provider of college English-language-learning programs. That’s VCC.

Those students and their teachers were so concerned that last month hundreds of them came to the Legislature to talk to government. Today we have students from Camosun and their teachers as well, as we’ve noticed, and FPSE, whose teachers teach thousands of students around this province. If you listen to the hundreds of stories from the students, they are stories of hope, they are stories of gratitude, and they are stories of success. Now they have turned to pleas.

[1110]

I want to read just one from Philipe Muriel of Camosun.

“I am from Colombia. I studied ESL for 12 months at Camosun. I am now enrolled in the baccalaureate of science and nursing program at Camosun and UVic. My goal is to finish my degree in nursing and work my way to med school in order to become a family doctor. If I did not have the opportunity to study ESL at a high level, I would not be able to materialize my dreams and be useful to this beautiful country.”

It is a story that is repeated in different ways over and over.

It is the eleventh hour. Shortsighted decisions to axe these programs…. Once they are lost, it will be difficult or impossible to reinstate. Students, instructors, leaders of the colleges, community leaders and the opposition have all said that this is a huge mistake.

The provincial government response has been, instead of finding a solution, to point students to not-for-profit community programs. Those programs are not a solution. They do not provide the level of sophistication. They do not provide the integration and the entry to college programs. They do not provide that ladder.

These are programs that have been developed and refined over decades within the very accountable, professional and stringent academic confines of universities and colleges. Upper-level reading, writing, college prep courses, grammar courses, pronunciation programs, professional advancement programs….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

R. Lee: I thank the member for Burnaby–Deer Lake for the motion to recognize the importance of public post-secondary English-language-learning programs to a skilled labour force in B.C. and to the health of the provincial economy as a whole.

I believe our government has long recognized that a skilled labour force is extremely important to the health of this provincial economy as a whole. That’s why, three years ago when the Premier launched Canada Starts Here, the B.C. jobs plan on September 2011, she identified a skilled workforce as the foundation of a strong economy and a key driver for B.C.’s economic growth.

That’s why in 2012 the government launched the skills and training plan to fundamentally change how we prepare British Columbians for the jobs of tomorrow. As our economy is growing stronger and stronger, 43 percent of the job openings in our province were in trades and technical training. That’s why we have the Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training with the minister tirelessly working to promote skills training.

That’s why I’m so pleased that we see the government has launched B.C.’s skills-for-jobs blueprint to re-engineer education and training so that B.C. students and workers have the skills to be first in line for jobs in a growing economy.

Many members of this House recognize that because of so many job openings, the challenge to fill those jobs is a huge challenge. That would be a need to attract workers from the rest of Canada and, when necessary, immigrants and temporary workers from other parts of the world. Some immigrants, students and workers will need to increase their communication skills in order to be successful in getting further training, filling the right jobs and helping to meet the labour demands in our growing economy.

It is our government’s priority to ensure that those who have those needs are able to access the proper English language training. Unfortunately, there has been some interruption in the English training for newcomers to Canada. The federal government has cancelled the Canada-B.C. immigration agreement affecting immigrant settlement services, including English as a second language.
[ Page 5318 ]

The province now has a more limited role in settlement services for newcomers. The federal government has taken back the money from the province and, instead, distributed the money by themselves to the providers of ESL training directly since April 1 this year after 16 years of provincial administration. My understanding is that our provincial government has worked with public post-secondary students since learning in April 2012 of the federal government’s plan.

[1115]

Citizenship and Immigration Canada actually conducted a call for proposals to ask service providers to come forward in the fall of 2013 and finalized agreements with service providers in March this year.

The fact is that the majority of service providers previously funded by B.C. received contribution agreements from CIC, and small numbers of service providers were not successful in getting the fund. Our government expressed disappointment with the federal government’s decision, and the ministers repeatedly make it clear that we preferred the previous funding model to remain in place.

Former minister Pat Bell, in a letter to the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, Jason Kenney, on July 10, 2012, stated:

“I am writing in response to your letter of April 12, 2012, in which you communicated that Citizenship and Immigration Canada will resume responsibilities for the design, delivery and administration of immigrant settlement services in British Columbia in April 2014. I am disappointed with this decision, as British Columbia has successfully delivered groundbreaking and internationally recognized programming for over ten years, recognizing the need for local, responsive settlement services.”

To help with this transition, our government has since provided $17.2 million in one-time funding to public post-secondary institutions, including Camosun, $2.42 million.

H. Bains: I, too, would like to welcome the representatives of the Federation of Post-Secondary Educators and all the students that are here. In particular, I want to welcome Terri Van Steinburg, the president of Kwantlen Faculty Association. Thank you very much for bringing those issues here to this House.

When we are talking about any policy or legislation in this House, you try to understand the logic behind the shift or the change or the new policy that is coming in. On this particular area that we are talking about today, it fails me. It fails everyone that I’ve spoken to. The students, the faculty associations and everyone else who’s concerned about this issue fail to understand why a shift of this nature is taking place.

What we are talking about is helping and enabling our new immigrants, especially, to utilize the skills that they bring with them to the highest of their potential. Not only would that enable them to be successful in their new country, but also the skills that they bring with them…. The contribution they will be making in our economy is huge.

When we cut these kinds of programs, not only are we telling them they’re on your own; many of them will fail in their destiny to become the most productive citizens of this province. We also are failing our economy as a province, because we’re not able to utilize their skills.

This is a program that they need, many of them, to upgrade their English language so that their credentials can be recognized later, and then they are working in their own fields. Many of them also need to upgrade their English language so that they can move on to new careers here in this province.

At Kwantlen we have 300,000 immigrants who live in the South Fraser region, including 30 percent of B.C.’s recent immigrants. For almost all recent immigrants, English is not their mother language. This is a huge issue for our area — south of the Fraser.

Economist after economist, never mind just the people or the legislators that are talking about…. Toronto-Dominion Bank — their report clearly shows the economic well-being of recently arrived immigrants has declined over the past quarter century. One of the problems is Canada’s poor recognition of foreign education and credentials, but the other is a poor literacy rate among immigrants in either of Canada’s two national languages.

[1120]

The report found that 60 percent of both the new and established immigrants had literacy rates below a desired level as defined by the OECD. “Canada depends on immigrants,” it goes on to say, “to buoy its increasingly aging workforce.” It’s almost a necessity for us. I don’t know why this government doesn’t get that. That’s why Geoff Dean, the co-chair of economic and career preparation at Kwantlen Polytechnic University and college-level math instructor at the institution, said it’s baffling why Kwantlen and this government would cut English academic literacy classes for immigrants.

There’s a very good write-up by Katie Hyslop in the Tyee, and I recommend members of that side of the House read that — the effect that this policy is leaving on new immigrants and the faculty association members. Up to 17 of them will be laid off, I’m advised.

Also, in the Kwantlen region we have a higher than average population of people who have no knowledge of English — a total of 6 percent of all residents compared with the provincewide average of 3.4 percent and a GVRD average of 5.7 percent.

You would listen to this side. The minister will stand up and say: “Well, we don’t agree with the federal government. It was the federal government who cut this program.” There are two different versions of that coming up. The minister will stand up here that they don’t agree with the federal government’s decision. The federal government, Mr. Chris Alexander, has said clearly on CBC: “I
[ Page 5319 ]
worked with the Minister of Jobs very closely on this. She agrees with this.” He went on to say: “The Premier agrees with this.” He said the B.C. government endorses this.

I think we are left to judge who is telling the truth here. The minister is saying that it’s not them. But the federal government is saying: “We have done it in conjunction and endorsement of this government.”

S. Gibson: On behalf of my constituents of Abbotsford-Mission, I’m pleased to offer a response to the following private member’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House recognizes the importance of public, post-secondary English language learning programs to a skilled labour force in B.C. and to the health of the provincial economy as a whole.”

It was Ray Bradbury, the renowned science fiction writer, who said: “You don’t have to burn books to destroy a culture; you just have to have people stop reading them.” Or to put it another way, not being able to read is surprisingly similar to not choosing to read.

As an instructor for many years at three universities, I long ago discovered that the secret behind being a good teacher is being a good learner. This certainly applies to our debate today.

For those who come to Canada with dreams of providing a better life for themselves and for their children in our province, a good command of the English language is essential. To succeed in today’s economy, which is so heavily weighed on the use of technology, English literacy is indeed the key. Therefore, the public must have access to English-language-learning programs.

It was with much disappointment that we learned in April 2012 that the federal government planned to cancel a section of the Canadian-B.C. immigration agreement which included ESL. Consequently, the province has a more limited role in settlement services after the federal government assumed responsibility for most newcomers in B.C. as of April 1, 2014.

In order to help prevent people from falling through the cracks, the provincial government responded by committing nearly $4 million in funding to ensure that newcomers who are not eligible for federal immigration services have access.

The University of the Fraser Valley, for example, where I taught for 13 years, received $844,000 in one-time funding to ensure that students could continue their ESL programs after April 1, 2014. Furthermore, the government is committed to developing a long-term strategy for the delivery of ESL to mitigate the impact on students.

[1125]

The government also recognizes the ongoing importance of ESL. According to the 2013 B.C. developmental student outcomes survey of former ESL students at post-secondary institutions, the statistics are very good. Ninety-six percent said that their ESL courses helped them achieve their most important goal, which could have been English language in daily life, improving their employment situation and many others; 94 percent said they were satisfied with their ESL courses; and 92 percent of those who took further studies said they were very well or somewhat prepared by these courses.

In my own riding of Abbotsford-Mission, in October I announced that Mission Literacy in Motion, a great organization, would be receiving a grant of $22,000 for their community adult literacy program, which was well received. The community adult literacy program is an initiative that distributes funding to not-for-profit community groups to offer free literacy training that is easily accessible to local schools, native friendship centres and, also, community centres.

This grass-roots organization works miracles with their limited amount of funding and offers literacy programs to all levels of learners. This year approximately $2.4 million is being distributed towards 83 projects in 90 communities throughout B.C. and is expected to help 9,000 adult learners.

J. Shin: I’m happy to rise on behalf of Burnaby-Lougheed to speak on the motion today calling the House to recognize the importance of public, post-secondary English-language-learning programs.

Now, not many of us have this quantified, but B.C. is home to 1.2 million immigrants. That’s a quarter, 27 percent, of our provincial population with English not being our mother tongue. In fact, in Burnaby and in Metro Vancouver we are looking at nearly half of our residents speaking over 100 different languages.

It is our educators at public post-secondary institutions that deliver multiple levels of quality English language training, from basic conversational to TOEFL and IELTS, for 9,000-some students each year. The largest provider of ESL in B.C. is Vancouver Community College, where I used to teach. But unfortunately, this iconic institution, as you know, along with others like Camosun and Douglas, lost their block funding this year.

What does all this mean? VCC alone had 2,200 registrations last fall, and there will be zero in the new year. Why is that? Because despite its plans to increase immigration levels, the federal Conservative government announced two years ago that it was going to axe the agreement with the B.C. government, which meant colleges and universities will be losing $22 million in federal money to continue providing ESL training for our immigrants and domestic students.

We can clearly tell by the discussion today that members opposite, all sides of the House, agree that this is not a smart move and this is something that we have to pay attention to. This government, unfortunately…. The ministry has known for two years, at this point, that the federal Conservative government was vacating the field of English language training. To date, unfortunately, I don’t hear any conclusive solutions or a plan, which is disappointing.
[ Page 5320 ]

Karen Shortt, my former colleague and the current president of the VCC Faculty Association, who is in the House today, said that she was finally granted a meeting with the minister only after showing up on the front lawn of the Legislative Assembly last month with over 300 students and faculty. That was after almost a year of trying to get that meeting.

She said she left the meeting even more frustrated, unfortunately. She says: “There’s no plan…for the 2,300 students who will have nowhere to go on January 2.” She further went on to address the crowd on the Legislature lawn, saying: “I hear the ministry saying we can’t afford to fund ESL, and I say, ‘You can’t afford not to.’”

I agree with Karen. This government’s inaction, unfortunately, is effectively abandoning our struggling citizens this winter over just $22 million. Now, I know that sounds like a hefty sum for an average working family, but let’s put that in perspective here. I have seen this government spend that kind of money on advertising. There seems to be money for some British Columbians like Mr. Ben Stewart, who is getting a $2,400 allowance for his Chinese lessons. Yet 9,000 English learners in this province, who are eager to fill the jobs in B.C., are told that there’s apparently not enough money. I can’t buy that.

[1130]

The minister states that ESL students can still take these courses through non-profit organizations. I don’t understand how the minister seems unaware that the community and settlement agency programs…. As excellent as they are, for one, they’re not available to Canadian citizens as per CIC guidelines. Two, they already have long wait-lists. Three, they cannot provide the access to academic services and facilities, as in the case with the colleges. Lastly, they’re not set up to provide the same academic pathways for students to transition from language courses to academic and career-oriented programs.

Investing in our immigrants is not a one-sided contribution. New and settling immigrants — including many of my former students at BCIT and VCC and like my own mom and dad — depended on the accessibility to these language courses in their bid to make a better life for themselves and for those around them. These are valuable members of our province who have the right to be empowered, not further challenged by the inaction of this government.

I say that this is not a matter of affordability; this is a matter of priority. By investing in English language learning, we will be providing the professionals that we attract from around the globe — like my parents, who made B.C. their home — the opportunity they deserve to settle and thrive in our province. They have so much to offer and contribute to our economy and society. B.C. is a province that is built by the immigrants.

If this government indeed says that it believes in jobs and training, it is time for the government to recommit to its mandate for the 1.2 million immigrants in B.C. by fully restoring the funding for ELL training.

J. Martin: On behalf of my constituents of Chilliwack, I’m pleased to respond to the following private member’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House recognizes the importance of public, post-secondary English language learning programs to a skilled labour force in B.C. and to the health of the provincial economy as a whole.”

As a lifelong educator and one with experience teaching English in northern Japan, I can certainly appreciate the value of ESL from both an economic and a social perspective. From an economic perspective, newcomers to Canada will not succeed in our economy without a good command of one of the official languages. From a social perspective, we must ensure that members of society do not become marginalized, do not become isolated simply by a lack of English language skills.

Everyone has a right to participate in the economy and contribute to the health of this beautiful province. In my own experience, virtually all who do come to British Columbia want to do just that. They want to make a better life for themselves, and they want to succeed in the job market.

Naturally, we in the provincial government expressed disappointment when Citizenship and Immigration Canada resumed responsibility for the administration of federally funded immigrant settlement services after 16 years of provincial administration. This decision has significantly affected ESL programs in British Columbia, and we have made it clear that we prefer the previous funding model to remain in place.

However, the provincial government has responded by committing nearly $4 million in funding to ensure that newcomers not eligible for federal immigration services can continue to access services in this province. We want to ensure that clients not served by the federal government will still have service options in B.C.

In fact, the government has gone one step further by negotiating a transition settlement agreement with CIC. This enables the Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training to continue to administer the Skills Connect for Immigrants program in 2014-15. Skills Connect is an employment and skills-training program serving approximately 3,000 skilled immigrants per year with combined federal and provincial funding. The agreement will enable JTST to extend the Skills Connect program for an additional year, in 2015-16.

In my own riding of Chilliwack I recently announced a $72,000 funding source from the provincial government to help learners improve their reading, writing and technology skills. Chilliwack Community Services will be receiving a grant of $32,000, while the Chilliwack Learning Community Society will be receiving $40,000 to deliver programs to adult students. This funding is being delivered through the community adult literacy program.

Projects are tailored to suit the needs of young parents, aboriginal learners and newcomers throughout the community. This year approximately $2.4 million is being distributed toward 83 projects in 90 communities throughout
[ Page 5321 ]
the province, and it is expected that 9,000 adult learners will be helped through these projects.

[1135]

In closing, this government remains committed to supporting newcomers to British Columbia, and we are committed to helping them succeed in today’s job market.

R. Fleming: I appreciate the motion this morning because it is something that deals with something in people’s lives that is current and real and could negatively impact the lives of new Canadians who are trying to make a contribution to British Columbia. It’s an issue that not only impacts the lives of students who are engaged in ESL but all of us, including our region’s employers, and our province’s well-being going into the future.

Make no mistake: the elimination of high-quality ESL language instruction also risks reducing the social cohesion and our well-being as a multicultural society where opportunities are shared, where citizenship has power and meaning, and where we do well by those who take a chance on Canada as immigrants in a highly complex and interdependent economy.

Times change, but the one constant in a knowledge-based economy is that the needs for education grow ever more steadily. That is why this debate is so critical. It really is, as one as one of my colleagues said, about government kicking out a couple of rungs of the opportunity ladder that has made British Columbia a great province for over a century.

We risk wasting precious human capital, for individual human beings to reach their full potential as highly skilled, contributing members of our society over a lifetime of work. That is not good for these immigrants, it is not good for families, and it is not good for our province. The motion before us presents a debate that is not philosophical or abstract or speculative. It is a real issue, and it is entirely within the power of this government to resolve.

There’s no good reason, that we have heard, why the province of British Columbia is abandoning high-quality, college-provided English language learning programs. So let’s hear it from the members opposite, because to date there has only been a series of feeble evasions and excuses from the Minister of Advanced Education, and that’s not good enough.

This is the triumph of bad politics over good public policy that has proven its worth over decades. The performance reviews of these ESL programs are excellent. The role they play in developing our labour force is proven, as is the connection to employment and a return to the province’s treasury through higher incomes and taxes over the lifetime of these immigrants.

This $22 million cut to B.C.’s ESL programs arrives at a time when we already know that the province and the federal government are failing recently arrived immigrants. We had a TD Bank study recently that concluded that 60 percent of new and established immigrants had literacy rates below the desired level established by the OECD.

We know the problem is large, but here, when we have a bright spot in the province to celebrate an ESL system that actually works and is the best model for raising immigrant literacy rates and connecting them to higher education, this government seeks and oversees its dismantling.

Let me speak about Camosun College in my region, which is a school with a long experience in ESL instruction. In 2013-2014 ESL registrations totalled almost 1,200. There was huge demand. But soon these students will have, potentially, nowhere to go. What Camosun offers is unique in this region. It is the only institution that offers intermediate-or-better language fluency that allows people to pursue higher education and skilled professions.

I have met and heard from students in my region. I think of the electrician from China, an engineer from Libya, a nurse from El Salvador — all of these people working and contributing to our region here in greater Victoria, paying taxes — who are grateful for what Camosun provided to them. And I think of those who come after them who will not have those opportunities because what this government is doing is so shortsighted and so wrong.

The value, the expertise contained in this institution that has been built up over time, could all be eliminated because right now we’re in a transition, according to the Minister of Advanced Education. A transition to what? A transition to the elimination of high-quality ESL programs in our community is not a transition at all. It’s a massive hole being opened up for immigrant families who seek to do better in their lives in Canada, and it’s unacceptable.

[1140]

So I say to the government of British Columbia: why do they continue to act like a passive spectator, watching the federal government dismantle the transfer funding system to British Columbia? It’s time for the government to stop the evasions, the finger pointing and blaming. No one else can save ESL at our colleges but this government. It’s time for them to do so.

L. Reimer: It’s a pleasure for me to rise in the House today to respond to the concerns of the members opposite. Our government’s priority is to ensure immigrants and students continue to access English language training, to succeed, find jobs and help the province meet labour market demands in a growing economy.

We’ve worked with public post-secondary institutions since learning in April 2012 of the federal government’s plans to cancel part of the Canada-B.C. immigration agreement affecting immigrant settlement services, including ESL. While our province now has a more limited role in settlement services after the federal government assumed responsibility for it, for most newcomers in B.C. as of April 1, 2014, we are disappointed with the federal government’s decision. We have repeatedly made it clear that we preferred the previous funding model to remain in place.
[ Page 5322 ]

On July 10 of 2012 the hon. former minister Pat Bell sent a letter to Jason Kenney outlining his concerns. Since that time the Minister of Advanced Education continues to strongly advocate for the government of British Columbia’s displeasure with the new model. He has done this in several different press releases in December of 2013.

We remain hopeful as our government continues to work with institutions on how they can keep ESL sustainable beyond 2014-15, and we will communicate any decisions once they are made. I also note that last week, when the recommendations of the Select Standing Committee on Finance were released, there is one recommendation there — recommendation No. 32 — that says: “Provide adequate funding to support provincially funded ESL programs delivered by B.C. post-secondary institutions and work with those institutions to develop a long-term and sustainable strategy for the delivery of ESL.”

Currently under the Canada-B.C. immigration agreement, the federal government provided funding which the Ministry of Advanced Education distributed directly to public post-secondary institutions to deliver English language training. Under the agreement, public post-secondary institutions in B.C. delivered English language training, tuition-free, to 9,000 students in 2013-14.

The province has committed nearly $4 million in funding to ensure that newcomers not eligible for federal immigration services can contribute to access services. This funding ensures that B.C.’s newcomers not eligible for the program continue to receive high quality settlement services as they integrate into workplaces and communities.

Four public post-secondary institutions have contracts with Citizenship and Immigration Canada to deliver English language training. They are Vancouver Community College, $9.4 million over two years; Douglas College — which is just next to my riding of Port Moody–Coquitlam — $3.9 million over two years; North Island College, $400,000 over two years; and a minor contract to Northwest Community College.

I’ve been in repeated contact with an instructor from one of these institutions in regards to this issue. CIC also has contracts with community-based service providers and school districts to deliver English language training — now known as language instruction for new Canadians, or LINC — in about 80 communities throughout the province. The B.C. government continues to work with public post-secondary institutions to develop a long-term strategy for the delivery of ESL and mitigate the impacts on students.

In total, the Ministry of Advanced Education, working with the Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and CIC, provided $17.2 million in one-time funding to public post-secondary institutions for ESL, April 1, 2014 to April 1, 2015. The one-time transition funding has ensured students could continue in their ESL programs past April 1, 2014. ESL training is also available for immigrants through not-for-profit and community organizations and some post-secondary institutions that have negotiated contracts directly with the federal government.

[1145]

While certainty in regards to funding is always a preference, we know that our community and not-for-profits do a fabulous job delivering services such as these. In my role as a former Coquitlam city councillor, I’ve had the pleasure of working with some of these organizations, such as ISS and SUCCESS. Thus, the federal government continues to fund English language classes for immigrants through non-profit agencies and public post-secondary institutions.

According to the 2013 B.C. developmental student outcomes survey of former ESL students at public post-secondary institutions, 96 percent said their ESL courses helped them achieve their most important goal.

J. Kwan: As I listen to the members, what am I hearing? I’m hearing excuses after excuses to say: “Not me. Look to the federal government.” Then, all at the same time, they are saying: “But look. We do support ELL programs. We do support ESL programs.” If that is true, then why doesn’t the government step up right now and fund the $22 million shortfall for the post-secondary institutions that are providing intermediate, advanced and career-specific English learning programs in their institutions?

If you don’t do that…. The truth of the matter is that these students that are sitting here today — some 50 of them, I believe, from Camosun — and the others, 8,950 across the province of British Columbia, will not get access to the programs that they need to be successful, independently, in British Columbia.

Immigrants come to this community — why? — because they want a better alternative. They want to do better for themselves and for their families, and they need language training. I know that because I am an ESL student in the elementary school system. I know that because my family, my dad, went through VCC, Vancouver Community College, to get access to English to get a job in his profession. I know that because I have friends who are in that system, and I know people who are in that system today.

How can we make a difference as legislators? We have a choice before us. Stand up and, yes, not just say to the federal government: “We’re disappointed that you’re going to do away with the funding.” We’d kick their door down and say: “Not good enough.” And in the meantime, we say the province will step up. Alberta has done it. Ontario has done it. Other provinces have done it. Why can’t we? We’re talking about $22 million to make it happen.

Next year, Members, lest you think otherwise, students will not have access to this program. That’s 2,200 people from Vancouver Community College. They will be left out in the cold without access to the programs that they need to get the jobs to support themselves and their families.
[ Page 5323 ]

I heard the member for Burnaby North and the members from government say that we have a skilled labour shortage. Yes, we do. In fact, statistics actually tell us that the top 60 occupations that require training are the very training that is provided by the post-secondary institutions, some of which are going to lose this funding, and they will not be able to train their students to access those programs and to access those jobs.

We’re talking about construction managers, welders, related machine operators, construction millwrights, industrial mechanics, senior managers — in transportation, in production, in construction, in utilities — heavy-duty-equipment mechanics and so on. They could fill the labour skills shortage if they can access these programs. And we’re not doing it. We’re just saying: “Oh, gee. But we’re just so disappointed.” Well, as my good colleague the member from Swan Lake has said: “Don’t be a passive spectator on this. Step up and do something. Challenge your government.”

The Committee on Finance travelled the province and heard from people across British Columbia. In fact, they put forward a recommendation to say that ESL should be funded. Now, when we say ESL should be funded, let us be clear about what that means.

[1150]

We’re not just talking about the entry-level programming into ESL. We’re not talking just about the LINC program, which I know some member referred to and the Minister of Advanced Education has referred to as what they are providing. Those are programs that should be provided as the first step. But the ladders of opportunities go beyond the first steps. It has to go to the post-secondary institutions, where people can get intermediate and advanced training, career-specific training and profession-specific training to move beyond this level.

We have all seen it in our communities. We see people who are talented that should not be working in the fields they are today. We know engineers who are working as cab drivers. We know people who are doctors and who are working in the agriculture industry. We should do better and fund the $22 million to end this disgrace right now.

J. Thornthwaite: Our government’s priority is to ensure immigrants and students continue to access English language training to succeed, find jobs and help the province meet the labour market demands in a growing economy.

Our government has instituted the B.C. jobs plan and a complete re-engineering of our secondary and post-secondary institutions in order to provide training to match all the high-tech skilled jobs that will be available in our near future. In addition, we’ve worked with public post-secondary institutions since learning in April 2012 of the federal government’s plans to cancel part of the Canada-B.C. immigration agreement, affecting immigrant settlement services including ESL. The province now has a more limited role, as we’ve heard, in settlement services after the federal government resumed responsibility for settlement services for most newcomers in B.C. as of April 1, 2014.

As has been mentioned before, this morning in the debate, our government expresses disappointment with the federal government’s decision, and we’ve repeatedly made it clear that we preferred the previous funding model to remain in place. However, in contrast to the members opposite, we will not be “kicking their door down.” We prefer to work with other levels of government. We prefer to work with NGOs. We prefer to work with non-profits to make these things happen.

Even in the member for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant’s own riding…

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

J. Thornthwaite: …there’s Vancouver’s Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood House. In my own riding North Shore Multicultural Society and SUCCESS are other non-profits that help to provide these services.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada assumed responsibility….

Interjections.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Madame Speaker: Members.

Please continue.

J. Thornthwaite: Citizenship and Immigration Canada assumed responsibility for the administration of federally funded immigration settlement services on April 1, 2014, after 16 years of provincial administration. Under the Canada-B.C. immigration agreement, the federal government had provided funding, which the Ministry of Advanced Education distributed directly to post-secondary institutions to deliver English language training.

Now, effective September 1, 2014, Citizenship and Immigration Canada continues to fund English language programming through agreements with service delivery organizations, such as not-for-profit organizations and post-secondary institutions. The province has committed nearly $4 million in funding to ensure that newcomers not eligible for federal immigration services get access to services in order to help them integrate into workplaces and communities.

Four public post-secondary institutions have contracts with CIC to deliver English language training: Vancouver Community College, Douglas College, North Island College and Northwest Community College. CIC also has contracts with community-based service providers
[ Page 5324 ]
and school districts to deliver English language training — now known as language instruction for new Canadians, or LINC — in about 80 communities.

The B.C. government continues to work with public post-secondary institutions to develop a long-term strategy for the delivery of ESL and mitigate the impact on students. In total, the Ministry of Advanced Education, working with the Ministry of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and CIC, provided $17.2 million in one-time funding to public post-secondary institutions for ESL in 2014 and ’15. These include Vancouver Community College; Douglas College; Kwantlen Polytech; Capilano University, in my riding; and BCIT — a total of 17 institutions.

[1155]

Our government continues to work with institutions on how they can develop and keep ESL sustainable beyond 2014 and 2015. I’m confident that any decisions will be announced in due time.

S. Robinson: I am pleased to take my place in the debate to recognize the importance of public post-secondary English-language-learning programs to a skilled labour force in B.C. and to the health of the provincial economy as a whole. I wanted to speak to this motion this morning because my great-grandparents came from Russia and Poland in 1920 speaking their respective languages and Yiddish, the language of Eastern European Jews.

When they arrived in Montreal, they were in their early 20s. They were welcomed by the Montreal Jewish community and continued to speak Yiddish in their daily activities. My great-grandfather eventually learned a tiny little bit of English, and my great-grandmother learned even less, making it difficult to get work outside of their own community. As a result, they were poor immigrants and lived life as poor immigrants. Getting ahead was impossible.

Over the years, governments have realized that they can do better. There’s been recognition that when a country is dependent on immigration, it’s worthwhile to invest in the English-language skill development of its new immigrants. It’s understood that in order for new immigrants to participate fully in our communities, they need to be able to speak English — or French, if you’re in Quebec. When new immigrants are conversant in the language of the land, they can engage with their child’s school, talk with their neighbours and volunteer their skills and their talent in the community.

More importantly, they can fully participate in the economy. When new immigrants can fully participate in the economy, they have better health outcomes, their children have better educational outcomes, and the entire family has better social outcomes. In other words, English language training makes good economic sense. Not only can new immigrants with good English language skills get better jobs and pay more taxes, but they cost less to the social structures we have in place — all in all, a good investment.

Here we are almost 100 years after my great-grandparents came to Canada, and what are new immigrants facing? Where we once had a robust system of English language training — where a new immigrant in 2001 could attend a college ESL program that included lower-level community-based language programs as well as higher-level academic English, English for special purposes and skill-based training — we now have a system that has been decimated.

Where British Columbia through the late ’90s into the early 2000s received anywhere from $37 million to $47 million a year from the federal government to deliver and manage language training and job programs for newcomers, we now have a federal government that decided it would prefer to deliver its own programs in its own way, effectively eliminating funding for English language learning in our colleges and universities — well-established places of learning.

Where has the B.C. Liberal government been on this issue? This is the part that is perhaps the most disappointing. They’ve really been nowhere. We see what I would call a wimpy response.

There’s a letter from the previous Minister of Jobs, Pat Bell, from July 2012. What does he do? He expresses disappointment and then goes on to say that the province “is committed to working with CIC to ensure a smooth transition.” He also notes: “Maximizing the social and economic benefits of immigration is critical to British Columbians’ social and economic development and the continuation of locally responsive innovative programming that’s essential to achieving successful settlement and integration outcomes for immigrants across British Columbia.”

Madame Speaker: Hon. Member, noting the hour.

S. Robinson: Hon. Speaker, I thank you, but if I can just take one more brief second.

The B.C. Liberals say they support jobs for everyone and they recognize the social and economic importance of ELL. They’ve done nothing to advocate for our citizens.

On that note, I will note the hour and move adjournment of debate.

S. Robinson 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 11:59 a.m.

[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]

Access to on-line versions of the official report of debates (Hansard),
webcasts of proceedings and podcasts of Question Period is available on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television.

TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule

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