2015 Legislative Session: Fourth 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, April 27, 2015

Morning Sitting

Volume 24, Number 4

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

MONDAY, APRIL 27, 2015

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

SUPPORTING FARMERS MARKETS

D. Plecas: On behalf of my constituents of Abbotsford South I am pleased to put forward the following private member’s statement entitled “Supporting Farmers Markets.”

[1005]

[D. Horne in the chair.]

In the process of updating British Columbia liquor laws, some of which belong to a bygone era, we are working to implement 73 recommendations from the B.C. liquor policy review. Prior to the last election we promised British Columbians and the industry that we would change liquor laws to reflect current lifestyles, encourage the growth of small businesses in our economy, address calls for consumer convenience and continue to safeguard health and public safety. So far, these changes have included the introduction of happy hours, the removal of beer garden and festival barriers, and support for local liquor manufacturers.

The goal is to grow the wine industry, the craft brewing industry and the craft distillery industries by allowing the sale of products at locations like farmers markets and secondary tasting rooms. Our intention is to provide new opportunities for B.C. businesses and the hospitality industry, by simplifying and making it more flexible.

All of these changes and recommendations were arrived at through an extensive consultation process that was led by my colleague, the MLA for Richmond-Steveston, whose hard work saw him travel across the province and hold 65 meetings with stakeholders. By all accounts, the consultation process was a resounding success. It allowed British Columbians the opportunity to share their views and shape the future of liquor policy in British Columbia.

I can assure you that the changes have been welcomed by a broad range of people in the province. When changes came into effect last year, the manager of Abbotsford Farm and Country Market was quoted as saying: “This is awesome. This is great news.” He went on to say: “This is a little piece of agriculture that hasn’t been included before. It will add a really interesting component to the market itself.” Mt. Lehman Winery owner Vern Siemens also supported the change. He was quoted as saying. “That’s fantastic. This will be so good for small wineries.”

At the end of the day, the government has kept its promise to get out of the way and let B.C. businesses do what they do best, and that’s create jobs and grow the economy. But it’s also about giving consumers the choice and convenience that they have asked for.

What better way to enjoy a summer in British Columbia than to take a drive in the country and go visit your local farmers market? Farmers markets are everywhere in British Columbia. In the Fraser Valley where I’m from, there’s the Abbotsford Farm and Country Market, the Chilliwack Farmers Market, the Agassiz Farm Fresh Market and the Mission City Farmers Market.

Farmers markets also stretch as far north as Dawson Creek, the Dawson Creek Farmers Market, and as far east as Fernie, the Fernie Mountain Market. They can be found tucked away on the Gulf Islands, including Salt Spring Tuesday Market. People love farmers markets because today’s consumers want to have access to the freshest agricultural products that are available locally.

Instead of heading into a supermarket, as good as they are, and having a very limited knowledge of where their food comes from, people in British Columbia want to support local growers. They want knowledge about the food they eat. With the introduction of liquor sales, consumers in British Columbia now have the option of buying locally produced wines, beer and spirits.

These consumers also want to support local producers of alcohol products. They know that by purchasing local wines, beer and spirits, they are supporting the local economy. They also know they’re supporting people who work in these industries — local people, which may include their own friends, neighbours and members of their family.

The fact is that growing the local market for B.C. agriculture is a key component of the government’s agrifoods strategy. It is a key component of the B.C. jobs strategy. It supports 61,000 jobs in the province, and it generates close to $10.5 billion a year in provincial revenues.

Moreover, farmers are at the heart of B.C. food production. In fact, it should be noted that nine out of ten farms in the province are family-owned and -operated. It is not surprising, then, that almost 50 percent of the food consumed in British Columbia is produced right here in the province.

[1010]

That is why the government is going to great lengths to support the agricultural industry and farmers markets by modernizing our liquor laws and giving vendors the opportunity to showcase the best that B.C. has to offer.

L. Popham: It’s a pleasure to rise and respond to the member for Abbotsford South. I think that when he is
[ Page 7642 ]
conveying his commitment and inspiration about farmers markets, it comes from his heart. I think he’s being very authentic, but I’m afraid that some of the statements that he’s making about the support for agriculture, in my view, are a little bit off, and I’m going to explain why.

I think we all like farmers markets. I, in fact, was a farmer for years and depended on the farmers markets as part of my income source. Nothing was a better part of my day than arriving with my pickup truck filled with produce that I had picked and prepared over a couple days to sell to the people that would meet me every Saturday morning. But it’s a lot of work.

When consumers arrive at farmers markets they see what’s there in front of them, but they don’t see the time, the effort, the expense and the toil that goes into the job before arriving there. What we see often is farmers showing up at farmers markets, and then they disappear.

You can look to examples in Quesnel. Somebody spoke to me a couple weeks ago about producing chickens that they were able to sell at a farmers market, but the barriers that they came across just made it impossible to continue that. So you don’t see poultry being sold at the farmers market in Quesnel anymore, simply because of policies that haven’t been worked out properly.

Now, when we support farmers markets, it’s incredibly important for our sustainable farming sector. But if you have a fancy house that you’re moving into and you forgot to build the foundation, it’s going to be a big problem. To support farmers markets, you have to have a sustainable food policy in this province. You have to have a long-term plan. Eventually, although it’s fabulous to see a lot of the crafts that are involved in farmers markets, if we don’t support agriculture, we’ll be having B.C. craft fairs only.

I think that the job of the government, with support of the opposition, would be to come out with a local food act. We’ve talked about this before, but I think the government needs to take it seriously. The purpose of the act, of course, would be to ensure a resilient, sustainable and strong local food economy and an agriculture land base that we can depend on in the future. We need to improve and maximize economic returns in our food security, from maintaining agricultural land for the purpose of farming and nothing else….

We need to improve the population health outcomes through increasing the production and consumption of local food. We need to provide an increased and stable demand for local food through government and public sector organization purchasing. This is something, again, that I don’t see any action on. In order to create a stable agriculture demand, I think that if we’re purchasing, through our health dollars, local food, we can make some progress there.

We need to promote sustainable farming practices. We need to attract new generations into farming, which you can’t do just by supporting a farmers market. They have to have the land to grow on. We also need to support indigenous food sources and systems.

If you don’t have a long-term food policy in place and a long-term food plan in place, eventually we are going to be caught out, depending on all the places that are having trouble producing food right now due to drought. You can read it in the paper today, actually. When we look at climate change and the ways it’s going to change our world and the possibility that more people will be moving to our province in order to survive the perils of climate change, one of the things you have to do is you have to have an emergency preparedness plan in place. Part of that is making sure that we’re growing a lot more food.

The support that the government gives to farmers markets is incredibly important. The funding that they get for marketing is incredibly important. Of course, that, in conjunction with the consumers supporting these ventures, is making farmers markets very successful, but my worry is, again, that we’re building a very fancy house without the proper foundation.

[1015]

D. Plecas: Thank you to the member opposite, who I know is a great champion of farmers markets, for her comments.

The B.C. Association of Farmers Markets published the top ten reasons to buy local. Let me give you those ten reasons:

(10) It protects the natural beauty and green spaces in B.C. by preserving farmland.

(9) It keeps good agricultural jobs in our community.

(8) It supports the future of family farms and food security in British Columbia.

(7) People will discover new specialty products that will impress your dinner guests.

(6) You support farmers who are committed to the humane treatment of animals.

(5) Buying local products protects your health and the environment with food that is produced sustainably.

(4) You get the chance to meet the farmers who grow your food.

(3) Buying local strengthens the local economy and keeps the dollars close to home.

(2) You can enjoy delicious foods that are only available in season.

(1) The reason you should always buy local is because it’s always fresher and tastier than anything that’s imported.

For all of these reasons, Budget 2015 set aside $2 million this year and invested it in the B.C. Buy Local program. The Buy Local program aims to increase consumer demand and sales of B.C. agrifoods. Businesses and organizations can apply for matching funds from the B.C. government for projects that promote local foods. Projects can include in-store promotions, social media, web campaigns or traditional advertising.
[ Page 7643 ]

In conclusion, I encourage all members of this House to show their support for farmers markets in the House by supporting this statement.

FIGHTING CRIME WITH
THE SURREY ACCORD

B. Ralston: I rise to address the private member’s statement Fighting Crime with the Surrey Accord. That’s a policy proposal that was brought forward by the Surrey MLAs — myself, the member for Surrey-Newton and the member for Surrey–Green Timbers — 15 months ago, in January 2014. Clearly, this discussion today takes place against the backdrop of recent events in Surrey — 22 shootings in six weeks and, most recently, the violent, fatal death of Arun Bains in the early morning hours of Sunday, April 19.

A community meeting attended by over 700 people took place last Tuesday, April 21, at Tamanawis High School. The Leader of the Opposition was there, as were many members of the Legislature — the member for Surrey–Green Timbers, the member for Surrey-Panorama, the member for Surrey-Tynehead, myself — and a number of members of the Surrey council, including the mayor; Chief Superintendent Bill Fordy; and other representative senior police officers from what’s called IHIT.

What the superintendent said at this meeting was that the root causes of these shootings are drug use and drug trafficking. It was to address those very issues that the Surrey accord was brought forward last January, 2014, by me, the member for Surrey-Newton and the member for Surrey–Green Timbers. We wanted…. We thought it important that these important issues, these significant issues in our community, be addressed by a non-partisan approach, directing a meeting of the federal authorities, the provincial government and the municipal government to get together and begin to tackle those important issues.

When the chief superintendent says that those are the root causes of the shooting…. The conditions that result in people entering the drug trade, becoming addicted to drugs, are complex, but there are some identifiable policy options that could and should be taken. These are what we proposed in the Surrey accord.

The first was increased policing. As a percentage of police officers per capita, Surrey, despite its crime rate, had a relatively low ranking of number of police officers per capita — 31 — in the province.

[1020]

Its position in the indices of crime, unfortunately, is a bit higher than that. So not only are more police resources required…. That includes community policing and transit police in the fastest-growing city of British Columbia.

Now there has been a proposal to bring forward 100 new officers. I think that’s part of the result of the debate that the Surrey accord has engendered in the community. When those officers will arrive is not entirely clear. They’re requested from Regina and the depot — new training, new officers that are trained. There’s a fairly long process to bring those officers forward, but I know from our discussions with the Chief Superintendent there, Bill Fordy, that those officers will be welcome in Surrey.

We have also called a second proposal for the creation of a community court. There is a community court in Vancouver, although Surrey and the Surrey city council have advocated for a community court for some time — in fact, prior to the creation of the community court in Vancouver.

Community court offers the judiciary, the arresting officers and the court system the opportunity to connect relatively low-level offenders, typically addicts, with services. So it’s an effective prevention and rehabilitation mechanism that operates…. Rather than simply the courts operating as a revolving door, it offers some solutions. It has had some effect in Vancouver to the degree that those support services have been funded.

A further issue that is really important in Surrey and that we have raised repeatedly is the regulation of so-called recovery houses. Unfortunately, unscrupulous operators will establish, essentially, flop houses where people pay their welfare cheque directly to the landlord. No therapy, no treatment is offered. Simply, they continue in the cycle of addiction and fuel the demand for drugs within the community.

Despite the regulations for that being abolished in 2002, we have repeatedly called for that, yet the problem still continues. As recently as last week, when I was back in my constituency office, a constituent was complaining of three houses that are operated in precisely this uncontrolled, unregulated neighbourhood nuisance and criminogenic manner in my constituency.

Fourthly, we called for a mental health action plan. Many of the people on the streets who are addicted and, again, fuelling the demand for drugs have profound mental illnesses. Vancouver, through the intervention of their mayor and their police chief, made an agreement with the Minister of Health, a very strong and effective agreement, where there was additional funding provided to mental health support teams on the street. We called, in this accord, for a similar arrangement with the provincial Ministry of Health for a focus on Surrey.

Finally, the fifth plank of the Surrey accord was to create more non-profit and supportive housing, particularly supportive housing, which is non-profit housing but with the additional ingredient of staff who are there to monitor, support and direct to treatment those who are in later stages of recovery who are subject, potentially, to the problem of relapse and a return to drug addiction and fuelling the drug trade.

This proposal was brought forward at that time, and we have endeavoured to place it before the public and
[ Page 7644 ]
have talked about it. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to have been the takeup that there should have been for this initiative.

M. Hunt: I rise to respond to this resolution of fighting crime through the Surrey accord. I want to thank the member for raising the issue. As the member for Surrey-Whalley said in his introduction, this is being brought up in the background of what has currently been happening in Surrey.

Let’s be very honest and clear with ourselves. These incidents that have been happening are simply and absolutely unacceptable, and they are a great concern to our government as well as to the people of Surrey and Delta. These shootings have now led to a death, and no matter what the circumstances, this is always a tragedy.

[1025]

The province has been actively involved with the anti-crime agency and is fully engaged in working with coordinating the Surrey RCMP, the Delta police and, of course, the Integrated Homicide Investigation Team.

Last year Surrey added 34 new members to the RCMP. This year, after the municipal election and the debate during the municipal election concerning this, they’re requesting 100 more RCMP officers. The Attorney General has signed the letter to the federal government, and now we are waiting for those to be coming forward from the depot in Regina.

Let’s be very clear about this. We have the resources necessary. We have the leadership. We have the determination. We have the resolve. As was said at the meeting Tuesday night of last week, the missing element is what we need — those who are involved in these incidents, whether they’re the families, whether they’re the friends or associates, to come forward and to work with the police.

There’s an African proverb that says it takes a village to raise a child. Well, that is the reality. It takes a village. It takes all of us working together to be able to deal with these things, and there are people who know these offenders. There are people who know these people who are involved, whether they be friends, whether they be family members. If these people have guns, you know something is wrong with this situation. If these people are out at 3 o’clock in the morning, we know something is wrong with this situation. If we have these different indicators and….

The different crime prevention groups within Surrey have been working with the community to be able to get the information out to say: “These are the signs. These are the indicators that give you the understanding of the type of behaviour of those who are involved.” We need to recognize the danger that these people are putting themselves in as well as their family.

As the police have said, it is no longer gun play. We’re now dealing with murder, and that’s why they have created the information line. Whether you wish to call 911 or the 24-hour tip line of 604-915-6566, we need the information. As we heard at the Tuesday meeting, there are those that are concerned: “Oh, I’m ratting out my friend.” Well, no, you’re actually saving that person’s life.

Gang prevention is a public safety priority throughout the province of British Columbia. Over $60 million a year is being spent with the RCMP on creating this combined force to work on the anti-gang initiatives. We have spent, from the forfeiture of crime…. Over $4 million has been worked in the local youth crime prevention initiatives throughout Surrey and the province since 2015.

We established the Surrey criminal justice task force, which was struck a year ago, to find homegrown solutions to deal with these persistent issues of crime within the city of Surrey. The task force has been comprised of a dozen representatives from the ministries, from police, from fire, from local government sectors. The task force is working together, and their solution and what they have brought forward is an integrated service network of the social, health, justice services — all in a single location to provide the coordination and the collaborative report to reducing crime in Surrey.

In the school system, which is a major part of these solutions, we’ve established an anti-gang program through partnerships with the city, the RCMP, government and community organizations called Surrey Wraparound. This project was launched in 2009 with the Surrey school district and in partnership with the city and the RCMP. The whole issue is to find those young people who are at risk and to be able to get around them the various helps and supports that they need in order to see productive lives.

We’ve seen the federal government come up with over $800,000 in 2008. In 2011 they came up with another half a million dollars. The Ministry of Justice has come up with around $300,000 — all working together to deal with this problem.

B. Ralston: I thank the member for Surrey-Panorama for his comments. Clearly, he is of the view that this is a law enforcement problem that requires people to come forward and speak with the police. I think that’s part of what’s going on.

[1030]

Clearly, he seems to think that there are sufficient resources in place, and that is really the only concern that needs to be addressed. I disagree, frankly, and that’s why we brought forward the Surrey accord. That’s why we continue to speak of it, and that’s why it’s important to look into the community and not just blame parents or students for their failure to come forward and report to the police but look at what is really taking place on the ground in Surrey.

Now, at the meeting on Tuesday night a young man named Jessy Sahota, who said he had graduated, him-
[ Page 7645 ]
self, from Tamanawis School in 2010, remembered being called a “gangster wannabe” when he was only 12 or 13 years old. I’m quoting him directly.

Fortunately, his parents reached out. He got involved in a program in Surrey and went on to become a SFU graduate, a two-time national wrestling champion and is now employed by the Surrey school board in talking and acting as a mentor to kids who are in the same position as him.

That program is a good program, and it’s been evaluated by Public Safety Canada, which describes it as “an effective school-RCMP response to youth who are at risk of joining gangs or are gang-involved.” There are 60 kids in it. It has a waiting list of 40 students right now and could well be expanded. That’s certainly the view of the police. That’s certainly the view of the superintendent of the Surrey school district. That is only one avenue into preventing the causes of crime and beginning to tackle them, in addition to solving the crimes that have already taken place.

I think that’s why joint action by the federal, provincial and municipal governments that involves not only the government talking to staff at the provincial level but involves community leaders and political leaders…. We all get together and set out to solve this problem in the way that we’ve described, whether it’s more police officers coming on, whether it’s more police officers specifically….

School liaison officers. There are only ten in the biggest school district in the province, where there are 70,000 students. In the public system in Surrey there are only ten school liaison officers. Chief Superintendent Fordy has conceded that there could be more done there.

The Surrey accord is important, and I urge other members to advance it as we move forward in the days to come.

CELEBRATING THE ADVANCED
TECHNOLOGY SECTOR

R. Lee: I’m pleased to talk about advanced technology this morning. Advanced technology, broadly speaking, is the collection of advanced techniques, methods or processes used in the production of goods and services or in scientific research. Advanced technology is closely related to science and engineering and may be considered as an advanced application of scientific knowledge.

In British Columbia we have a vibrant advanced technology sector, and we should celebrate the success of this important sector of our economy. We are the key. But what are the key advanced technology industries in British Columbia?

The advanced technology sector includes multiple segments. For example, information and communication technology includes telecommunications software, computer services, computer-related manufacturing, website design and maintenance. Also included are digital media and wireless. That sector includes video gaming, animation and social media. We use that every day.

Also, we have life sciences and biopharmaceutical products, clean-technology companies. Also, the sector includes other high-end engineering and technology services.

You may have known that B.C.’s technology sector is one of the top contributors to the provincial economy and represents an extraordinary opportunity for industry investors and also job seekers. B.C. has been among the top provincial performers in terms of growth in high-technology revenues over the last decade.

[1035]

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 national product, at 7.6 percent.

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 industries in B.C. Wages in the high-tech sector are more than 65 percent higher than the average wage in B.C.

B.C. is among the top provincial performers in terms of growth in technology revenues, outpacing overall Canadian technology revenue growth. I mentioned that already. For example, in 2012, among the number of technology companies in B.C., the growth was 2.9 percent. This sector provides over 84,000 jobs for British Columbians and revenues of $33.2 billion a year and has been the third-fastest creator of new paying jobs over the last decade.

B.C.’s advanced technology sector continues to employ more people than the mining, oil and gas, and forestry sectors combined. B.C. is now recognized as a leader in the world for developing and growing innovative technology companies, and it’s a destination for technology investment.

How does our government support innovation? Let’s take a look at one of the institutes we support, the B.C. Innovation Council, BCIC. Established in October 2004, the B.C. Innovation Council’s mandate is to support new start-ups and entrepreneurs. In 2013 to 2014 the ministry provided $6.09 million to the BCIC to support these vital programs.

The B.C. Innovation Council is responsible for B.C.’s venture acceleration program, a structured program that helps early-stage technology entrepreneurs in B.C. commercialize their product, their innovation. The program is delivered by 13 regional partners around the province. Since the program started in July 2011, it has supported numerous companies. And 331 companies have been accepted into the program, and 922 new jobs have been created while in the program.

The BCIC is also responsible for the New Ventures Competition that helps early-stage tech start-ups through
[ Page 7646 ]
mentoring, networking, education, exposure and seed funding. Since the award started in 2011, over 1,700 entrepreneurs have participated, and the top 25 companies have raised over $200 million in financing and created more than 3,300 jobs in B.C.

Research and development are essential to the development of new technologies. Since 2001 we have committed over $2 billion to research and innovation in B.C., leveraging an additional $1 billion in research funding from other sources. Specifically, our government has provided $400 million to the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research. This has helped them support over 1,800 medical trainee positions over the last decade.

In addition, we have also provided Genome B.C. with $187.5 million in funding since 2001, and the province’s B.C. knowledge development fund has provided over half a billion dollars — in fact, $550 million — to support research and innovation work.

We all want to improve the quality of life and provide enduring value to the people of British Columbia. B.C.’s technology sector is doing just that. Our advanced technology sector is a crucial job generator for some of the most educated, creative and skilled people. Technology is vital to B.C.’s overall economic growth, and that really supports innovation across all key sectors.

[1040]

G. Heyman: Indeed, as the member for Burnaby North points out, the technology sector in British Columbia is vibrant. It employs over 84,000 people at wages that are 66 percent above the industrial average. That’s more jobs, high-paying jobs, than mining, forestry and oil and gas put together.

I’ve been pleased, as I’m sure people in the sector have been in recent months, to hear a number of members from the opposite side of the House stand up and speak about the importance of the technology sector. But it’s important to note that they are saying this after a couple of years where many people in the tech sector as well as other parts of the economy in British Columbia said that it was very difficult to get attention from this government on anything that did not have the letters L-N-G placed in front of them, notwithstanding the current very important contributions to the provincial economy from this sector.

That’s why we have the B.C. Technology Industry Association once again, in its most recent report card, saying that the tech sector in B.C. gets a good mark, an A, compared to the rest of the economy and other sectors in British Columbia. But compared to other provinces that have been paying more attention to their tech sectors, we only rate a C-plus.

There are a number of reasons for this that I will go into in a moment, but it is important to note that people in the tech sector say that the frontier ahead of them is to use technology to gain more value from our resources, to improve how we extract resources in environmental ways, to develop clean technology and also to use technological advances to help us in our fight against climate change. That’s a win-win. They are good-paying jobs. They help us with our resource sector. They help us to make more money and create more jobs as well as deal with the environmental challenges ahead of us.

A little over a month ago I was in Kelowna meeting with Accelerate Okanagan and talking to them about the vibrant technology sector in Kelowna. As well, this past weekend I was up meeting with a number of animation and gaming studios. I met with Yeti Farm, which works with Atomic Cartoons here in Vancouver, and people at Club Penguin, which grew from a basement operation to employ close to 300 people, as well as a start-up in interactive digital gaming.

The message remains the same. There are the same challenges that the BCTIA pointed to. One of those significant challenges is graduating enough people in British Columbia to fill the skills that are needed in jobs. That’s critically important. The BCTIA survey shows that specialty technicians and technologists were the single most important position for B.C. tech companies to fill.

That’s why the Applied Science Technologists and Technicians of British Columbia issued reports in 2007 and 2012, the most recent report, on a strategic direction for technology education in B.C. saying that there has been limited growth in the absolute number of graduates in the last ten years and that it’s important to take programs like the ones that exist at BCIT and develop additional tech programming around B.C. in post-secondary institutions. We also need to increase the number of high school tech career program graduates in science, technology, engineering and math.

The other issue facing us is not enough support for early-stage companies. We need more venture capital for that. That’s been clearly enunciated by the B.C. Technology Industry Association. They asked for increases in the small business venture capital tax credit, and all we saw in this year’s budget was $3 million in new money, not the significant increase in this investment pool that was called for by the industry or the other measures that were called for by the industry — raising the cap for individuals as well as companies to be capitalized.

The industry association has said that if we take some of these measures, we can grow an additional 31,000 jobs in a six-year period. That is worth the attention of the government. It’s worth the attention of every member in this House.

[1045]

Our tech sector is vibrant. It holds great promise to help us not just create jobs in technology but enhance the ability to create jobs in resource extraction as well as deal with our environmental challenges. It’s time we took that challenge up.
[ Page 7647 ]

R. Lee: I thank the member for Vancouver-Fairview for his response, but our sector, actually, is doing quite well in terms of some of the…. In the business sector they are really keen to say that we actually have a very good environment for the high-tech sector. For example, I’ll give you a quote from Jock Finlayson. He’s the chief policy officer of the Business Council of B.C. Recently, just a week ago, he said: “B.C. has really created a pretty attractive environment here for technological innovation and for companies that are in that space.”

He also said: “We have got good universities and colleges and technical training institutions in B.C., so they churn out lots of graduates every year who can fill the sorts of entry-level jobs that assist in most of our local technology companies.” He also continued: “Not only do we have good institutions that are graduating people, but we attract people from other countries and other parts of Canada as well. But this is something that we want to keep investing in. The government of B.C., for its part, seems to be moving in the right direction, and that’s good news.”

We are doing well in terms of training, but of course, there is more to be done. In BCIT, in my riding, they are doing a good job. A new laboratory on plant-based medicines such as ginseng, hawthorn and elderberries is being established, awarded provincial funding of $368,000. Since 2001 the province also provided $939,000 to research projects at BCIT through the B.C. knowledge development fund. The government also has provided B.C. with $1.1 million for new equipment — for example, aerospace, avionics, electrical, carpentry, welding and power engineering.

There are many good companies in Burnaby as well. Electronic Arts is one of them. Electronic Arts Canada’s headquarters is located in Burnaby. Their 450,000-square-foot headquarters is a major economic contributor to the community, housing a workforce of 1,300 people. They’re doing quite well.

IBM Pacific Development Centre….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

EQUITY FOR MEDICAL TRAVEL

J. Rice: I rise today in the House to talk about equity for medical travel. There is a need for a more equitable approach to medical travel assistance in this province. B.C. residents living in rural and remote communities such as Bella Coola, Sandspit and Oweekeno deserve no less than the B.C. residents living in Vancouver, Victoria or other urban parts of our province. Yet the hard-working, resourceful and no less worthy people of rural B.C. face enormous challenges in getting basic primary medical care.

These challenges are obstacles that most people, including this government, are oblivious to. They don’t know the challenges a remote community resident faces in accessing basic health care that someone in the Lower Mainland takes for granted. There are no walk-in clinics, midwives or doctors in Oweekeno, for example. I bet most people don’t even know where Oweekeno territory is. It’s in Rivers Inlet on the central coast. The only way in and the only way out is by seaplane operated by Pacific Coastal Airlines out of Port Hardy.

[1050]

Now, Pacific Coastal Airlines is a partner with the Ministry of Health, providing medical flights under the provincial TAP program, the travel assistance program, providing medical flights at around a 30 percent discount. The challenge is that seaplanes aren’t covered under the Pacific Coastal Airlines travel assistant partnership.

A constituent of mine who was working and living in this remote community is forking out hundreds and thousands of dollars for basic prenatal care, while neighbouring communities, who have regular airplane and ferry access, can benefit from the travel assistance program.

When my constituent asked the Ministry of Health for assistance, they referred her to travel programs offered in Bella Coola and Bella Bella, clearly demonstrating that the Ministry of Health doesn’t even know where this resident lives. As she lives in a community in between these two Bellas, she doesn’t qualify for travel assistance, and yet she lives in an even more isolated community than both of these communities.

Is the purpose of the tax program to not assist rural and remote British Columbians’ access to basic medical care that the rest of the province so readily has access to? Let’s look at the TAP program. The TAP program, the travel assistance program, helps to alleviate some of the transportation costs for eligible residents who must travel within the province for non-emergency medical specialist services not available in their own community.

TAP, administered by the Ministry of Health, partners with private transportation carriers — some offering discounts ranging from 30 percent to 100 percent off regular fares to eligible B.C. residents. TAP does not provide direct financial assistance to patients for travel costs or make travel arrangements for patients. Meals, accommodations, mileage, fuel and local transportation expenses are not included in TAP and are the responsibility of the patient.

B.C. Ferries offers a full discount for patients and escort if approved by a referring physician and regular passenger carfare, but other modes of transportation are not 100 percent covered. And in my research it appears that B.C. Ferries is the only travel provider that provides 100 percent coverage.

Anyone who does not live on the Lower Mainland must often travel to it for specialized services. Residents in rural and remote areas often have to travel even for primary care and, as the constituent I just spoke of, basic
[ Page 7648 ]
prenatal care as well as their specialized care. Given ferry schedules have been cut in the north, travelling for medical services from rural to urban areas is even more expensive.

I’ll share with you a phone call I received from a physician in Prince Rupert. He pleaded with me because his patients that live in Haida Gwaii were neglecting their medical appointments in Prince Rupert due to the cuts to the ferry schedule that meant they would now have to take a whole week off work, spend a whole week in a hotel and find the money for a week of meals and local transportation costs and child care.

So many of them were no longer going to their physician in Prince Rupert because it was a huge financial burden to make that appointment. Now, the ferry fare was covered, but none of the other expenses were covered. Because the schedule is so reduced, it’s not feasible for them to actually go to a medical appointment where normally they could return in a day or two.

It takes more than a week each way to travel from Haida Gwaii to Vancouver. Ferry fares are free, but fare discounts at most are at about 30 percent. It is my opinion that it is not the role of charities to ensure health care for residents. Often, on the other side of the House, the mention of Hope Air is provided as a solution for travel barriers for medical appointments.

[1055]

The recent cuts to B.C. Ferries have flooded my inbox with various stories around medical care and medical travel. For example, a constituent was not able to get a reservation to leave Haida Gwaii to get to the mainland for her medical appointment, but she was able to get a confirmed reservation for the return to the island. So she was wait-listed. She lives on the north part of Haida Gwaii and has an hour and a half drive to the south part of Haida Gwaii to get on the ferry.

M. Bernier: I’m pleased to rise in the House and respond to the statement brought forward by the member for North Coast. It gives me a few opportunities and moments here to clarify a few issues. I hear the member opposite trying to say that our government is not implementing the services that people need for rural and remote British Columbia, but let me be clear about some of the points that are actually taking place right now in British Columbia.

In fact, we have one of the best overall health care systems in Canada. British Columbia was ranked No. 1 in 2014 by the OECD for the health care, the data that we have collected for British Columbia and the services that we provide.

In fact, more than $9.1 billion has been invested in health care capital since 2001. This includes new hospitals, emergency rooms, departments and seniors facilities throughout the province, including in Cranbrook, Fort St. John, Burns Lake, Terrace. In the member’s own riding there have been huge capital investments in Prince Rupert and Haida Gwaii as well.

That said, B.C. does face similar challenges as those found around the rest of the country when it comes to providing health care services to rural and remote communities. Our government’s commitment in all of the rural areas is to build safe and stable community-based health care. When it’s not safe to provide that service locally, we want to provide access to B.C.’s health care network regardless of where British Columbians live.

How are we doing that as a government? Well, we are developing a rural health strategy that will include providing effective community services for patients in rural communities, with timely access to specialist care, diagnostic imaging and elective surgeries. Since 2001 we’ve invested more than $200 million to promote education, recruitment and retention of nurses in rural communities.

Also, in 2014 we had 1,582 doctors practising in rural British Columbia, which is up 7 percent from 2010.

To improve access to health care in rural and other communities here in B.C., one of the other things we’ve done is we’ve been leveraging technology. We have telehealth, which uses video conferencing to put patients in touch with health professionals, which actually saves travel time and also saves costs.

But sometimes travel is needed, and when travel is needed…. I know the member mentioned a few things, but I’ll enlighten everybody a bit more on what we’re doing and how it actually has been successful.

The member mentioned the travel assistance program. That’s a partnership between our government and a number of private transportation carriers which offer discounts. It was mentioned 30 percent. But there are opportunities, depending on the income level of people, for up to 100 percent off regular fares for eligible B.C. residents who need to travel for non-emergency care.

In 2013-2014 our government also provided $10.8 million in funding for travel assistance programs for people in rural and remote British Columbia. We actually funded 119,000 trips around British Columbia.

Another program that we have is Health Connections, which the member is very well aware of. This program funds numerous transportation options for patients who must travel from their home community to obtain necessary non-emergency medical services. Collectively since 2004-05 Northern Health, Vancouver Coastal, Interior Health and Island Health authorities have received $6 million a year to help to support Health Connections.

We have another program. We have the B.C. family residence program. That enables families with children needing medical care at B.C. Children’s Hospital or Sunny Hill Health Centre for Children — helps access subsidized accommodations and ground transportation thanks to the help and the support from the Shriners charity.
[ Page 7649 ]

We also have Hope Air, as was mentioned. Hope Air has been a very successful program thanks to donations with that group. It arranges free flights for patients of all ages who can’t afford to get to health care services.

[1100]

Another thing that we’ve been successful at is our relationships with other provinces here in Canada, especially for border communities like mine in northeastern B.C., where we can work with Alberta to make sure that we have access to surgical and diagnostic services. Patients are often referred to Alberta for care because the hospitals are closer to the communities in British Columbia on the border of Alberta there.

We’ve been successful in having B.C.’s billing agreements with other provinces ensure that health care costs are covered. While it’s not feasible sometimes to cover all medical-related travel costs for all travel needs, these programs that I’ve mentioned offer support to patients who need to travel to access health care.

In closing, overall, I think, as our government, our goal is to provide culturally respectful health services. I’m sure the member for North Coast is well aware of all of these travel assistance options. But in case she wasn’t aware of some of these, now she’ll be able to go back, talk to her constituents and give them the much-needed information so that they can get out to the health care services that they require.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

I know we’ll be able to achieve the great work that we’re doing by the great physicians, the nurses and other health professionals, the health authorities and the relationships that we have here, and the great work that they’ve been doing here in British Columbia for the citizens.

J. Rice: Thank you to the member for his comments. The member listed off some of the investments that the government has made in rural health or in recruiting physicians and nurses, but clearly, the strategy for recruiting and retaining these specialists needs a revision, because we have a chronic shortage of physicians and rural health care practitioners in the north.

He lists off the fact that I may be more informed now of some of the programs. I think the issue is not that we in the north or in the remote and rural parts of the north coast aren’t informed of the program and the options. What we need to see is a re-evaluation of the program. Where policies aren’t practical, they should be changed and made to work for the people in the north coast.

For example, the B.C. government here pays 100 percent of ferry costs for a resident on Haida Gwaii to attend a medical appointment in Vancouver. They will pay over $2,000 for two people — an escort, a patient and a car — to take two ferries from Haida Gwaii to Prince Rupert, Prince Rupert down to Vancouver Island and onwards to Vancouver. They will pay for that. Yet a round-trip flight from Haida Gwaii is less than $600, and only 30 percent of that is covered.

How does that make sense financially? How does that make sense for the patient who would have to take two weeks or more off work or find child care and/or have all those incidental costs? It doesn’t make sense. It’s not a good policy, and it should be re-evaluated.

The ferry schedule is so impractical for medical appointments, as I just mentioned, that a constituent that couldn’t get her car on the ferry had to take a taxi multiple times because she couldn’t get her car on. She had to take a taxi from the ferry to the hotel, another taxi from the hotel to the hospital, a taxi from the hospital back to the hotel and one from the hotel onto the ferry.

Obviously, transportation is a huge issue in the north coast, in the remote and rural parts of British Columbia, and we’re not looking at the cost to the health care system by not re-evaluating the tax program.

My request to the government is to re-evaluate the travel assistance program to serve rural and remote British Columbia better.

Deputy Speaker: That concludes the private members’ statements debate. Government House Leader to introduce Motion 13.

Hon. T. Stone: Yes, I call private members’ Motion 13.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 13 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper. Do we have the consent of the House?

Leave granted.

[1105]

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 13 — SUPPORT
FOR SINGLE PARENTS

D. McRae: I move the following motion:

[Be it resolved that this House supports single parents as they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget.]

British Columbia is truly an amazing place to live, but it’s essential to realize that government must be there to support our vulnerable citizens.

I could talk about many ministries, but in my limited time I’m going to focus on the Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation. I want to thank and acknowledge the hard work of the minister, the dedicated and hard-working staff, the individuals who volunteer to sit on key advisory boards — like the Minister’s Council on Employment and Accessibility, the presidents group
[ Page 7650 ]
or the RDSP action group — and, of course, the feedback government receives from families, individuals and stakeholder groups.

The evolution of programs and supports has been continual and ongoing, and I’d like to highlight a couple, if I may. In 2012 we talked about monthly earning exemptions. People on PWD earning assistance saw their earnings exemption increase from $500 to $800. We also piloted an annual earnings exemption that went provincewide this past January.

Earlier this year the minister was able to announce that government increased monthly earnings exemptions from $200 to $400 a month and from $300 to $500 a month if families have a child with a disability. Why? Because those supports need to continually evolve.

In Budget 2015 it was pleasing to hear the Finance Minister announce that the family maintenance exemption program was ending this September. Then there is what I will argue is the most significant new social program to be announced by this government since my time in this chamber. It is the single-parent initiative.

There are 16,000 single parents in British Columbia and 26,000 children. Families want to provide the greatest amount of opportunity for their children. There’s no doubt. As a parent, I know that raising children can be rewarding. It is incredibly rewarding, but it can also be stressful at times. Stress can come in terms of employment, finances and child care. The single-parent initiative looks to looking at some of those stresses and seeing what government can do to help remove some of the barriers to allow individuals and families to be self-supporting.

The program allows parents to have their tuition covered for 12 months. Areas of employment would be those key job markets where there is actual employment when they finish the program. Parents will have the opportunity to have their school transportation costs covered. While the parents are in school, the full child care costs are covered during the training, while they’re there.

It doesn’t end there. After their schooling is completed, the parents will leave school, enter the workforce, and child care will be covered for a year after that. Parents and children will also have their health supplement coverage, both while pursuing their training and for a year after, while they leave income assistance.

The single-parent initiative has a chance to radically change the lives of so many families. It’s an opportunity to find long-term and meaningful employment for individuals and their children. It’s an opportunity to provide a better life for parents. It’s an opportunity for individuals to go from needing government support to supporting the government.

We constantly know we can do better in this society. We want to look to see where areas of need are and address them. I want to applaud the work of this government as we respond to the needs of society’s most vulnerable. The work is not done, but programs like the single-parent initiative are how we are evolving government supports to reflect the needs of a changing society.

I just want, again, to say thank you to the minister, the hard-working staff in the ministry and the individuals who put forward those ideas. It’s not the work of just one individual. It’s the work of many, many people, and I look forward to seeing the changes that we continue to evolve in our society to help the vulnerable British Columbians of today.

M. Mungall: I rise to respond to the member’s comments and to his motion and add my thoughts to the debate today on the motion.

I think that what’s important to note in all of this is that the changes that this government made to policies that impacts families, particularly single-parent families, living in poverty are welcomed by all members of the House and, I would say, by all British Columbians.

I want to take this opportunity to offer warm, felt thanks to the ministry staff who made these initiatives possible. But what allowed them to move these initiatives forward, for government to actually take them seriously, was because families who were experiencing poverty…. It was single parents watching their children not have enough good food, not because they didn’t care about their kids and not because they weren’t stretching every single penny that they had but because this government had active policies that increased their poverty levels.

[1110]

If it wasn’t for them coming forward to this place, to this building, 12 years of bad policy that created poverty rather than reduced poverty would have continued. I have no doubt about that.

This isn’t about a benevolent government. This is about a government that has prioritized massive expenditures, instead of looking at ways that they can reduce poverty for literally pennies on the dollar, to what they are spending on things like the integrated case management, with $182 million wasted on a computer system that to date does not work properly and has only replaced one-third of the old programs that it was supposed to replace at that price tag.

This is not the only mismanagement and failure and waste of taxpayers’ dollars by this government — $72 million on a health computer boondoggle. Let’s not even get started on the cost overruns that run from B.C. Place right over to the northwest transmission line. We see this government waste billions and billions of dollars every year.

When families came forward and asked to keep their child support — for many families, $150 a month — this government resisted at first. They were taking that money away for 12 years. These policies — nor did they result because this government has done such an incredible job at job creation. Let’s look at the facts from StatsCan. In the 1990s job creation was, on average, 3,300 jobs per
[ Page 7651 ]
month. Under the Premier, since the jobs plan, 79 jobs per month. What a massive difference.

When we look at these policy changes, we need to thank the families who came forward, the non-profit advocacy organizations who worked with them in coming forward to share their story, to overcome the social stigma that can come with poverty, to say: “Yeah, I can’t feed my kids. They’re going to school hungry. They don’t have the basics that they need to learn and do their best in school, and it’s not my fault. I’m supposed to be getting $150, $300 a month. My child is supposed to be getting that.”

That’s what the parents came forward to say. “I want that money to go to my children,” said the parents. They came to this place. They pled their case. They didn’t stop. They did it once. They did it twice. They did it multiple times. They didn’t stop. They were a powerful force. At the end of the day, they proved that a small group of people really can change the world. They changed the world for their children. They made a difference, every little bit of difference that those children need so that they can get the start that they need in life.

That’s how these policies came to be. It wasn’t benevolence from a government. It was public pressure, intense public pressure. We know that that is the case, because if it was benevolence, these types of policies would never, ever have been created 12 years ago. These types of policies were never a good idea, yet they were instituted by this government in 2002 and continued on for far too long.

S. Hamilton: I’ll begin by addressing some of the comments, or at least one of the comments, from the member for Nelson-Creston. Once again we hear in this House how rosy and wonderful things were in this province in the 1990s, and I’m having difficulty squaring that with the fact there was a mass exodus of people and jobs. They were flooding out of this province to look for work elsewhere.

I can’t quite understand where the member is getting her figures from. I don’t know where she was living at the time, but I was living here in British Columbia, and I saw it happen in front of my eyes.

[1115]

I’m very proud to stand up and speak about this important topic. Our government is dedicated to helping British Columbians in need by supporting our most vulnerable citizens, giving families the tools to participate more fully in their communities and helping people become more independent. This is why in balanced budget 2015 we worked hard to produce new ideas to leave British Columbia better for not only ourselves but also for our children and their children.

We believe that the future of British Columbia is about investing in people and doing the best we can possibly do as a government for those around the province. That’s why we are continuing to introduce changes to our income assistance policies and our single-parent employment initiative. Through initiatives like these, our government is making the transition to employment easier for families who receive income assistance. We started the single-parent employment initiative for those 16,000 single parents who are struggling, because we want these parents to live the fulfilling life they deserve and set the example they want to set for their children.

With more than one million jobs expected in this province over the next decade, we firmly believe that all British Columbians should have the opportunity to take advantage of this economic growth.

We’re also increasing the monthly earning exemption for families on income assistance with children to pursue employment, which will help them move towards independence and fully participate in B.C.’s diverse economy. Our goal is to help people and families become self-sufficient so they can contribute to an expanding economy and growing communities.

Through our single-parent employment initiative, we’ve said: “Parents, we’ll help you. We’ll give you the extra help you require to get off social assistance. We’ll pay for transportation and child care so you can get the training you need to get the job you want.” The single-parent employment initiative, which will launch in September 2015, supports B.C.’s skills-for-jobs blueprint, which is re-engineering the province’s education and training systems to ensure students have a full range of training options.

There are currently 16,000 single-parent families, with 26,000 children, that are on income and disability assistance in British Columbia. Our government is investing $24.5 million over five years to help ensure all British Columbians have an opportunity to benefit from B.C.’s strong and growing economy and transition into the workforce with skills and training that align with today’s labour market demand.

Our government announced significant changes to the income and disability assistance program that will help single parents secure a meaningful job by allowing them to stay on income assistance for up to 12 months while they train for their new job. This major program change recognizes how challenging it can be as a single parent, especially when transitioning to the workforce.

Tuition and education costs for approved training programs that last up to 12 months for in-demand jobs. Transportation costs to and from school. Full child care costs during training. Upon completion of their training, single parents who are eligible for a subsidy will continue to have full child care costs covered for one year after they leave school and enter the workforce.

They will also retain their health supplement coverage for a year after they leave income assistance. This includes dental, optical, premium-free Ministry of Health MSP and PharmaCare programs.
[ Page 7652 ]

Single parents on income assistance who are ready to find employment often face obstacles that most of us do not experience: paying for daycare before your first paycheque arrives, buying supplies or a bus pass, even registration costs for school.

By 2022 there will be one million new job openings in British Columbia, of which more than 78 percent will require some form of post-secondary education, and 44 percent of jobs will be in skilled trades and technical occupations.

These are just a few ways that our government is dedicated to supporting British Columbians. I am proud of our government’s initiatives to make sure that our children will have the opportunities for a better and more prosperous future.

D. Donaldson: I rise to take my spot today in response to the private member’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House supports single parents as they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget.” I would thank the member for Comox Valley for introducing it.

I judge, from his comments and the previous speaker’s comments, that they are saying: “Look at us. The glass is half-full.” Well, in the last 14 years, this government has emptied the glass when it comes to single parents and their children. We’re looking at…. Now we’re putting a few drops back in that glass, mainly due to the work of families, and then they say: “Look at us. Look at how good we are.”

Here’s the reality check. Reality check No. 1. Between 2008 and 2012-13 — over those five years — the Representative for Children and Youth pointed out that $100 million in real dollars was cut to the Ministry of Children and Family Development. Children, families, development — services cut.

[1120]

Meanwhile, in those five years, this government clawed back tens of millions of dollars in child support payments for families on income assistance and disability assistance. It wasn’t even the government’s money to claw back. Most single parents pursuing new opportunities in fulfilling careers are doing it to support their children. So $100 million in cuts to MCFD, tens of millions of dollars in clawbacks — that’s their idea of support.

Reality check 2. Rushed land sales. A fire sale in land sales and assets that we heard in this Legislature in the last couple of weeks — $43 million in lost revenue. What could those moneys have supported?

Well, a fraction could have gone to Northwest Community College in Smithers. Their board of directors, due to government cutbacks, have had to cut 14 university credit courses for in-class delivery. So single parents looking for access to training in the north…. Those are lost opportunities. How can those single parents pursue fulfilling careers when that kind of service has been cut by this government?

Reality check 3. Some $5.6 million spent, wasted, on the Auditor General for Local Government for one audit. The office wasn’t even requested by communities. What could have been done with those dollars?

A fraction of that money could have gone to the Bulkley Valley Child Development Centre. Due to government cuts, they’ve had to withdraw a service for families with children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, an intake process to help those parents get the services they needed and to gain access to those services. It’s called streamlining by this government, and $11,000 was all that cost. They’ve lost that access. That’s the support this government provides to single parents.

Reality check 4. Some $208 million and climbing, wasted on an integrated case management computer system at the Ministry of Children and Family Development and the Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation. Only one-third of the antiquated, inefficient, archaic computer systems were replaced, and the government has the audacity to say that’s complete. So two-thirds of the systems still remain — $208 million and counting. What could that money have supported?

A fraction could have gone to single parents who are struggling, facing a 28 percent hydro rate increase under this government over the next five years, including a 6 percent increase in this coming year. The heating costs in the north are incredible, and single parents have to deal with that.

All of this money wasted, while we’re facing one in five children in the province living in poverty, one in five single parents or families, at least, with poverty issues. So 170,000 kids living in poverty. It reminds me of when the Representative for Children and Youth was looking at the lack of a poverty reduction plan in this province. Every other province in Canada has a poverty reduction plan and strategy. This province doesn’t. She called the progress on the issue very dim and slow.

Well, I think very dim and slow is an apt description when it comes to support by this government for single parents in the province. This motion would be a bad joke if it wasn’t such an important subject matter. It’s an insult to single parents. I’m really not happy with the member for Comox Valley saying he supports some kind of motion like this.

S. Gibson: On behalf of my constituents in Abbotsford-Mission, I am proud to support the following motion: “Be it resolved that this House supports single parents as they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget.”

I want to acknowledge the mover of the motion this morning, over there at the back, the hon. member for Comox Valley, who was the former Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation. I know this is a former minister with a big heart, a caring person, so it’s very
[ Page 7653 ]
appropriate we speak to this today. He worked very hard on winning support for making single parents a priority. With a balanced budget, he succeeded in making people most in need a big priority for our government.

By balancing the budget, the government frees up surplus revenue that can now be spent on new initiatives. The hallmark of this government is that the moment the budget was balanced, our first priority, an important priority, was helping families most in need — especially single-parent families. We started the single-parent employment initiative for those 16,000 single parents who are still struggling. We want these parents to live the fulfilling life they deserve and set the example they want to set for their children.

[1125]

There are currently 16,000 single-parent families, as I mentioned, with 26,000 children that are on income and disability assistance in B.C. Through our single-parent employment initiative, we have said to parents: “We will help you get the training you deserve to get off social assistance. We’ll pay for transportation and child care so that you can live a life that is fulfilled and filled with the dignity that you deserve.”

We’re also increasing the monthly earnings exemptions for families on income assistance, with children, to pursue employment, even part-time employment, which will help them move towards independence and fully participate in B.C.’s exciting and diverse economy.

Our government is making the transition to employment easier for families with children who receive income assistance by doubling the monthly income exemption from $200 to $400 a month and increasing it from $300 to $500 for those families who have a child with a disability.

Earnings exemptions allow eligible income assistance and disability assistance clients to earn income, up to a monthly limit, in addition to shelter and support assistance. By increasing earnings exemptions, parents on income assistance are encouraged to pursue employment, part-time work, as an option which will help them move towards independence and fully participate in the economy.

I want to just share a bit of a personal experience. In my family my youngest daughter is a child with a disability. Some of you here maybe know that. So I can relate to all the struggles that people have to go through. Now, in my own experience, I had my wife by my side to support me in a two-parent family with our oldest daughter needing assistance. But I can imagine how much larger a challenge it is to raise a child with a disability as a single parent on income assistance. For those receiving income assistance, having an extra $200 a month can mean all the difference in the world.

The cost of these earnings exemptions will be approximately $1.4 million per year. Our goal is to help people and families become self-sufficient so they can contribute to an expanding economy.

We are making changes to income assistance policies that help people transition to employment. We’ve said we’d do more when we could afford it, and now we are. Both the single-parent initiative and changes to earnings exemptions for those receiving income assistance would not have been possible without a balanced budget. I will continue to support a balanced budget, because it affords more opportunities to help British Columbians who are most in need, and that’s the record of our government.

K. Corrigan: Well, I’m thrilled that after 14 years of policies that have intentionally punished and pummelled single-parent families in this province, suddenly there’s a recognition that providing some small piece of help will make their lives better. Those are piddling pieces of help, but it’s been 14 years.

I would like to speak on this resolution, on this motion, that says this House “supports single parents if they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget.” So according to this rather nonsensically worded motion, the single parents of the province should be thankful that the B.C. Liberal government sold property on Burke Mountain worth $128 million for $85 million.

Children are only young once, and their development will not wait for some nebulous claim that things will get better in the future. This ongoing mantra of many years, “Things may be terrible for you and your children, but just wait; things will be better,” is not a promise. It’s an excuse, and not a very comforting one, for struggling single-parent families.

Children in single-mother families have a 50 percent chance of growing up in poverty — 50-50, like a random flip of the coin. Children don’t get to choose their situation. They don’t get to choose whether their family is poor. Yet we almost act as if they do.

If anyone in this House were to walk by a child standing in the middle of a busy street, not one of us would walk by. We would go to help and protect that child. Yet this government, in its failure to support these kids and their families, is walking by those kids in the middle of the street, in the middle of traffic, every single day.

It is their policy choice. It is this government’s policy choice that children in single-mother families are just as likely to grow up in poverty as not, that one in five children under the age of six lives in poverty in the province, one of the worst rates in the country. We’ve been at the bottom of the heap for over a decade.

[1130]

It is the choice of this government to give $230 million in tax breaks to individuals making $150,000 or more while hitting middle-income earners and those struggling to meet ends with MSP premium increases, hydro increases and, in the case of students, with the highest interest rate on student loans in Canada.
[ Page 7654 ]

I’d like to talk about education for a moment. When we talk about offering opportunities for careers, we know that the best way to get there is through education — whether by completing high school, upgrading high school courses or taking English language courses at college or university. Yet the B.C. Liberal government has made those options harder to access.

This year the B.C. Liberals ended a long-standing policy of offering high school completion or upgrading at colleges and universities free of charge. It also stopped funding English-as-a-second-language programs that used to be offered free of charge. These courses were ladders of opportunity. But now, with charges of $400 or so per course, there will simply be less British Columbians, particularly lower-income British Columbians, that complete high school or go on to college.

We know that the vast majority of students that take English language courses or complete high school as an adult in a college setting go on to take further post-secondary education. We also know that it is generally more difficult for lower-income students to attend college or university. B.C. students have the highest debt in Canada and pay the highest interest rates in Canada on their student loans, from 2.5 percent to 5 percent above prime on their student loans. And single parents, particularly women, are most affected by these negative policies.

Finally, not only has the B.C. Liberal government not kept up with inflation in the funding of post-secondary education; it has actually cut funding two years in a row. This has resulted in significant costs to programming that would benefit those that take it, including single parents.

One such cut is the cut that was finalized just in the past few days — the cut of the dental program at the College of New Caledonia. The dental hygienist and assistant programs have provided good jobs. For who? Largely women. And they have allowed those students to remain in the north to take their education and have attracted many to come to the north, where they often stay.

If we’re serious about providing opportunities to single parents, one of the most effective ways to do that is to make post-secondary education more, not less, accessible. But under the B.C. Liberals, that has simply not been the case.

J. Tegart: It gives me great pleasure to rise today and speak to my colleague’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House supports single parents as they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget.”

My riding of Fraser-Nicola is home to a number of small rural communities working hard to create an economy that supports young families. We have large numbers of unemployed workers and single parents who rely on government assistance. However, I can speak with direct knowledge to the fact that our government’s balanced budget means people in my riding are now able to gain a foothold on their career aspirations.

The Nicola Valley Institute of Technology, in Merritt, is a secondary institution serving mostly aboriginal students. Recently I visited the NVIT campus with the Minister of Advanced Education. During our visit we met a young woman. She was 21 years old, aboriginal and a single mother. She was on social assistance and had enrolled in a ten-week, full-time, non-credit employment-skills-building program at NVIT, where she was doing very well, according to the staff.

She was, however, advised that she would be cut off of social assistance if she continued to attend the program and that she would have to pay back any money she received during that period. She had no other source of income at that time and so was going to have to withdraw from the program — a program that may actually have given her much-needed employment skills.

[1135]

NVIT staff also told us that there were two other students in the same situation. I was concerned that this type of situation could arise, and I advocated on their behalf and on behalf of others like them. I’m proud to say that these young students will now be eligible for supports while they take courses.

The single-parent employment initiative launches this September, to help single parents get the training they deserve to help them move off of social assistance. Under this initiative, more than 16,000 single parents on income and disability assistance will have access to a range of supports, including tuition and education costs for approved training programs that last up to 12 months for in-demand jobs.

Upon completion of their training, single parents who are eligible for subsidy will continue to have full child care costs covered for one year after they leave school and enter the workforce. They will also retain their health supplement coverage for a year after they leave income assistance, which includes dental, optical and MSP and PharmaCare programs.

The single-parent employment initiative supports B.C.’s skills-for-jobs blueprint, which is re-engineering B.C.’s education and training systems to ensure that students have a full range of training options to enable them to qualify for any of the one million job vacancies expected in B.C. over the next several years.

Furthermore, our government is contributing $1.5 million to a new trades-training facility at the Nicola Valley Institute of Technology, which is scheduled to open next year. We recently announced that we’re also adding 36 new electrical and plumbing seats at NVIT to reduce wait times for students entering into these in-demand professions.

A balanced budget enables our government to address the needs of every British Columbian and spend in areas that other provinces just aren’t able to.
[ Page 7655 ]

Single parents on income assistance who are ready to find employment often face obstacles that many of us don’t experience — paying for daycare before your first paycheque arrives, buying supplies or bus passes, even tuition for school. The supports we are making available will help parents on income assistance overcome many of the barriers that can hold them back as they move towards independence and allow them to dare to dream of a better life for themselves and their children.

R. Austin: I rise to make some comments with regards to the motion, “Be it resolved that this House supports single parents as they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget,” brought forward by the member for Comox Valley.

It’s interesting listening to the comments here from several MLAs who have arrived in this chamber in more recent times. The important thing to point out here is that while we certainly support all of these efforts that have been made to support single parents, I think particularly the new MLAs need to understand some of the history here that took place.

I was fortunate enough to go back to college and then university in the 1999-2000 year. Actually, in my class I had several single moms who were studying, initially to do a diploma and then eventually, hopefully, to go on and do a degree. There were fantastic supports for those single moms at that time. There was a daycare on site. They had free daycare. Their transportation was taken care of. Their tuition was taken care of. Their books were taken care of. It was called the TAPS program.

In 2001 something happened. Something changed. A gentleman — who sat in a chair over there, reserved for the Premier of the province — by the name of Gordon Campbell came in and took all those supports and programs away. That’s the reality. What it did was it created a ten- or 12-year gap when child poverty went up, when single mothers found themselves no longer able to give the opportunities to their children that the member for Fraser-Nicola just so ably spoke about — the same things that we all want for our children. They were removed.

It was an ideological war. Why do I say it was ideological? Well, think about this. Even the Fraser Institute and even the Vancouver Board the Trade said this was dumb, stupid public policy. Now, those two institutions are not known as bastions of socialist thought. So when you have institutions like that criticizing the government of the day, saying this makes no sense….

[1140]

You want to help families to get better, and those who are struggling the most are single parents. We all recognize that in this chamber. That’s not a debate, yet this is the kind of stuff that went on.

Now yes, I have to give credit to the member for Comox Valley. He was a minister for a short time. Knowing him as I do, I bet that he was fighting and advocating for the kinds of changes that have taken place now. Good for him. I applaud that. But let’s not forget, he has brought back things that were removed by this very government.

When we talk about the glass half-full and half-empty, there’s a lot of revisionist history here that needs to be brought up so that people realize that it’s not good enough to come back ten years later and say “look what we’re doing for single parents” when you’ve done so much destruction, so much damage.

You know, children’s lives are like all of our lives. You get one chance. It’s not a dress rehearsal. It’s life. Think of the pain and suffering and damage done to those kids during those ten or 12 years when all these programs were cut.

While I am obviously in support of the changes that are being made, I just want to point out that I think when governments change, we need to recognize what governments have done well and build on it, not destroy for ideological purposes — to take money from the most vulnerable to give it to other programs, very often to people who didn’t need it.

That’s what I would say. I would hope that we continue, as this government moves forward, to see pressure from families and parents, pressure from the opposition, to make this government understand that every opportunity that they have in budgets, in policy, in changes, they need to be moving society in a more progressive way to help the most disadvantaged.

We have seen since 2008, with the financial meltdown that occurred — firstly in North America and spread around the world — that income inequality has become a huge topic — not just a debate here in Canada, not just a debate here in British Columbia, but around the world, because governments are struggling financially. People are struggling financially. Yet we consistently see policies that help those who don’t need it at the expense of those who do.

Income inequality is rising everywhere in the western world. Here in British Columbia the statistics are clear. We have the worst income inequality of any province in British Columbia.

While I applaud the changes that the government is making, there is tons of work, much more work, to be done. I hope that they recognize their past inadequacies and bring in more and more measures, as we’re seeing here today, to try and support those families that need it most.

D. Bing: On behalf of my constituents of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, I am pleased to support the following member’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House supports single parents as they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget.”

I thank the member opposite for his comments. I would like to correct one inaccurate comment. I would
[ Page 7656 ]
like to point out that child poverty rates have actually fallen dramatically, approximately 41 percent, since 2003.

We are really talking about two main elements that are contained in this motion. The first relates to additional supports that the government is extending to British Columbians most in need. These supports include the single-parent initiative.

Through this new initiative, single parents on income and disability assistance will be able to continue to receive their income or disability assistance benefits during their training for up to 12 months, providing the training is approved to fill a labour market niche.

They have their tuition and education costs covered, along with child care and transportation expenses where needed and, if needed, have help with child care costs for the first year of employment after training. There are currently 16,000 single-parent families, with 26,000 children, that are on income and disability assistance in B.C. All of them can benefit.

In addition to the single-parent initiative, the B.C. government is making the transition to employment easier for families with children who receive income assistance by doubling their monthly income exemption from $200 to $400 a month. They are also increasing it from $300 to $500 a month for families who have a child with a disability.

For those single-parent families receiving social assistance, having the ability to earn an additional $200 a month without having benefits reduced can make all the difference in the world. More than 10,600 families on income assistance are expected to benefit from the new earnings exemptions. That is the first element of the motion.

[1145]

The second element is making all of this possible by balancing the budget. These are new initiatives that are paid for by having surplus revenues available to government. It is the hallmark of this government that once the budget was balanced, our first priority was to focus on British Columbians in need. In this case, we’re talking about single parents relying on income assistance in British Columbia. Without a balanced budget, we would not be in a position to launch new social initiatives.

To be sure, none of these programs come without a cost. The cost of the earning exemption will be approximately $1.4 million a year.

Through the single-parent initiative, we intend to spend $25.5 million to ensure that all British Columbians have the opportunity to get off social assistance and to participate in the workforce. Single parents want to set a good example for their children, and they want to build a better life for them too. That is why this government remains committed to a balanced budget.

Moody’s bond-rating service once again affirmed B.C.’s triple-A bond rating. With lower borrowing costs, we can afford to spend more money on social priorities rather than using it to finance interest costs. We now have the fiscal freedom to chart our own path and make British Columbia a better place to live and raise a family. That is why I urge all members of this House to support this morning’s motion to help support British Columbians most in need.

S. Fraser: I rise with some confusion, actually. I read the motion from the member for Comox Valley. I have no doubt he has the best intentions. “Be it resolved that this House supports single parents as they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget.”

The realities of single parents…. The challenges they face, engineered by this government, are massive. Relating them somehow to a budget being balanced, to say: “It’s a luxury thing. If we do….” The member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows just spoke about how the first priority with a balanced budget is to help single mothers.

Well, first of all, it shouldn’t be related to a balanced budget — 14 years’ worth of single mothers and children being raised in this province without the supports that they need, stripped away by this government. We’re seeing a few reinstatements of those, but not the first priority, as stated by not just the member for Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows but many Liberal members.

It’s no first priority. A $230 million tax break for the top 2 percent wealthiest British Columbians in this province, that didn’t even ask for it — the millionaires are getting the resources, and the single mothers are getting, to replay the quote, a piddling amount in comparison.

This government has made an art form out of reinstating little bits of things they’ve stripped away from the people of this province. The B.C. Liberals took away $200 million from ministries that are supposed to be supporting families and spent it on other things, other priorities — not the priorities.

As a matter of fact, in 2001, when this government came in — to a balanced budget, to a surplus budget — they stripped away the resources to single mothers and their families. They stripped them away. They created a huge tax break, again, inordinately benefiting the wealthy at the expense of the rest of the province, no one hurting more than single mothers and their families.

[1150]

The government eliminated the exemptions on family maintenance, eliminated earning exemptions for income assistance clients with children and closed the doors to post-secondary studies in many cases. They stripped away needs-based grants that would often be a huge benefit to allow the children of single mothers to move on with their education. They stripped that away and replaced it with nothing, relegating many to the continued cycle of poverty.

As far as programs that are even in place, like the supported child development programs, funding for children
[ Page 7657 ]
with developmental disabilities…. Well, five or six years ago I became a champion because members of my constituency — single mothers and married mothers, couples — with children with developmental disabilities were not getting the supported child development programs that they were supposed to be getting, and it’s happening again.

I’ve taken on two new cases and got their funding back, but only by pounding on the minister’s door, and I think it’s fear of embarrassment that they’re not even doing the job they’re supposed to with the programs that are in place for the people that are supposed to get them. They’re not getting them.

Linking supporting single mothers and their families to the budget — you can’t tell that to a single mother and her child or children. It’s the role of government to provide those services. This government had seven…. They took a surplus budget and turned it into a deficit.

D. Ashton: I would like to thank my peer across the way for his comments. I would just like to say that for the last five-plus years this government has borrowed $5 billion just to keep everybody’s lifestyle up to where it is. Now we’re having to pay it back, just like a mortgage.

On behalf of the citizens from Penticton to Peachland, I’m very pleased to speak to the motion brought forward today by my colleague from the Comox Valley: “Be it resolved that this House supports single parents as they pursue new opportunities and fulfilling careers, as made possible by a balanced budget.” As Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, I’m extremely proud of our government’s third consecutive balanced budget — a record that puts British Columbia in a very exclusive group of one in Canada.

Balancing the budget is no easy task. A balanced budget is more than just making the numbers add up. It takes an enormous amount of discipline and commitment.

Needless to say, achieving a balanced budget is about controlling spending, but our balanced budget also takes into consideration the demands for more social services. The values of generosity and a strong social conscience were instilled in me at a very early age by my parents. Enabling as many British Columbians as possible to achieve fulfilling and rewarding careers is one of my personal goals and, indeed, one of our government’s overriding goals.

One of the pathways towards that goal is by providing the means and the tools necessary for struggling single parents to become full participants in British Columbia’s growing economy. That is why I’m very pleased that our government is introducing a significant change for parents receiving both income assistance and support payments from non-custodial parents.

As announced in Budget 2015, starting September 1 child support payments will be fully exempted from income assistance calculations. It means parents will be able to keep every dollar they receive in child support over and above what they receive in assistance. It means an additional $32 million over three years for some of the neediest children and families in this province.

This announcement complements another new initiative that supports all parents on income assistance and those who are looking for work. Our government doubled earnings exemptions, to $400 from $200 a month, for families with children and increased them to $500 per month from $300 for families who have a child with a disability.

Also launching in September is the new single-parent employment initiative, which will help single parents secure a meaningful job by allowing them to stay on social assistance for up to 12 months while they train for a new job.

We recognize how difficult it can be for a single parent, especially when transitioning into the workforce. Under the new single-parent employment initiative, more than 16,000 single parents on income and disability assistance will also have access to a range of supports that will help them find a full-time job, including tuition and education costs for approved training programs that last up to 12 months for in-demand jobs, transportation costs to and from school and full child care costs during training.

[1155]

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Upon completion of their training, single parents who are eligible for a child care subsidy will continue to have their full child care costs covered for one year after they leave school and enter the workforce. They will also retain their health supplement coverage for a year after they leave income assistance. This includes dental, optical and premium-free Ministry of Health Medical Services Plan and PharmaCare programs.

For many of the single parents, finding that family-supporting job requires the ability to access training. Our government is making changes that will enable this to happen. With so many financial demands, a responsible government must address the well-being of all British Columbians but especially those most in need — a priority not only for this government but for myself. A balanced budget gives us the freedom to do just that.

D. Ashton moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. J. Rustad 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 11:56 a.m.

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

Copyright © 2015: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada