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, November 2, 2015

Morning Sitting

Volume 30, Number 8

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

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2015

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

RESPECTING WORKERS

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to be here and speak to the principle of respecting workers in British Columbia.

Since 2001, we’ve seen the record in the Liberal government to move towards more flexible labour. We’ve seen that characterized as a restructuring of employment standards, undermining the regulations around worker safety. I want to address, particularly, the context and reality of the increasing numbers of temporary foreign workers that we have in our province.

Certainly, in B.C., our economy is in a national and international globalized market. When we look at the pool of 230 million migrant workers circulating around the world, we see that one impact of migrant workers on national and provincial economies is to keep wages down.

[1005]

[R. Lee in the chair.]

They are more prone to accept paying conditions that local British Columbians can refuse. They’re often ineligible for the same level of benefits and protections enjoyed by British Columbians, and they remain in the shadow of our society.

The story in British Columbia: 70,000 individuals on a temporary status and increasing numbers. More are coming in on a temporary status than permanent status. We see that there’s an increasing role for migrant workers — temporary foreign workers being used for seasonal and also permanent jobs.

Their rights and legal protections, however, are highly compromised. Their employment is insecure, and abuse of temporary foreign workers by employers is widespread. Further, their rights to a healthy, safe workplace are nonexistent or greatly inferior to the rights that are available to British Columbians because of their precarious status.

They are a pool of highly vulnerable workers who work in an exploitative secondary labour market. What we’re seeing…. Certainly, the rising reality in British Columbia is that our B.C. economy — actually, in reality now — is experiencing a dual labour market, where temporary foreign workers make up a large, permanent pool of workers, with a number of difficulties and challenges taking place in our midst in communities across our province that are unacceptable to British Columbians, unacceptable to those workers and really don’t play a positive role in terms of moving forward for a sustainable economy.

Their experience, particularly with their temporary visas and being employed to a single-employer work permit, an employer-specific work permit, with workers under the threat of repatriation if they raise concerns, puts temporary foreign workers in an exploitative and precarious situation. As well, the cuts and the lack of proactive enforcement of labour standards also contribute to their precarious nature, and the lack of access to appropriate legal services is a barrier that limits access for these individuals to seek and protect their rights.

There’s also difficulty in terms of if there are concerns or injuries on the worksite. There’s under-reporting of over 90 percent in terms of workplace injuries for migrant workers, temporary foreign workers, because they are reluctant to come forward. This is a situation in British Columbia that undermines not only the rights of these individual workers, but it also has an impact in terms of bringing wages down and denying opportunities to British Columbians seeking jobs.

One of the areas that I want to highlight, as well, which is a big gap and just is a terrible situation, is the reality of recruitment fees that migrant workers are being subjected to in our province. With the explosion — really, the expansion and the increasing numbers — of temporary foreign workers coming into British Columbia, we’ve seen an industry of third-party-for-profit labour recruiters emerge to match employers with workers in Canada to help these workers navigate the complex process of moving across national borders for authorized work.

There’s widespread abuse of low-wage migrant workers at the hands of disreputable recruiters. This has been going on for years. A significant number of migrant workers are brought to Canada by recruiters who charge oppressive recruitment fees, which are illegal but are, in fact, going on under our noses because there’s a lack of enforcement.

As well, there is routine and systemic charging of thousands of dollars in recruitment fees to be placed in low-wage jobs. And the fees, to the extent that they can equal as much as two years’ wages from these workers’ home countries, effectively place workers in debt bondage to their employers and recruiters. The failure to guard against these exploitative recruitment practices sets the stage for recruiters and employers to subject workers to even deeper erosion of their legal rights here in British Columbia and also raise insurmountable barriers for workers to enforce their rights to decent work.

[1010]

We’re seeing that this is a situation that is just continuing to expand in British Columbia. It’s unacceptable
[ Page 9938 ]
in terms of labour rights for all workers. This is a reality, and there needs to be protection against this ongoing exploitation.

There is a need for action to be taken to ensure that exploitative recruitment practices are not condoned, and we need to ensure that low-wage migrant workers and all workers who are subject to private recruitment are not charged these, really, illegal fees, amounting to thousands of dollars. There needs to be, to ensure that workers are empowered so that they do not remain in this exploitive relationship…. It’s fundamentally underlined by their precarious temporary work status.

Fundamentally, it’s steps British Columbia can take to ensure that this exploitation doesn’t happen and, fundamentally, to ensure that our immigration system returns to a model of permanent migration.

D. Ashton: Good morning. It’s my pleasure to respond to the statement from the member for Vancouver-Kensington with respect to workers in our province, and I would also like to thank her for her comments. It’s a topic I take a great deal of interest in, as a long-time business owner in the retail sector in many cities in the southern part of British Columbia.

B.C. has in place an employment standards branch which serves as a neutral party and ensures due process in all cases. Anyone who has complaints against their employer under the Employment Standards Act can contact the branch for information and assistance. This help is available in person, on line or through a toll-free number.

Our government’s priority is clear: getting British Columbians the skills they need to be first line for job opportunities in our diverse and growing economy. That’s why we’re redirecting nearly $3 billion in funding over the next ten years to train British Columbians for in-demand jobs.

But we all know that in our growing economy, we could train every eligible British Columbian and we still would not have enough workers to fill those job openings. Responsible use of the federal government’s temporary foreign worker program helps move our economy forward by filling short-term labour gaps. It is also one pathway for those workers to become new Canadians.

In fact, 90 percent of the current workers here under the B.C. nominee program came to our province as temporary foreign workers. To give credit where credit is due, as I always do, the provincial nominee program originated in 1998 underneath the NDP government.

The provincial nominee program is a means where eligible employers can support foreign employees in certain occupations, and their dependant family members, to apply for permanent residency in Canada. B.C. welcomes an average of 36,000 new Canadians to our province each year, and nearly one-third of all immigrants to British Columbia started off as temporary residents.

The vast majority of the temporary foreign workers — and that’s about 75 percent — are here under the federal international mobility program. This federal program includes highly paid occupations, such as professors and researchers, or foreign students on working vacations or young people here under international work agreements.

As of December 31, 2013, the total number of workers under the temporary foreign worker program represented only about 9/10 of 1 percent of British Columbia’s total labour force of almost 2.5 million people, so the number of temporary foreign workers in British Columbia is small in relation to the overall workplace numbers. In fact, B.C. ranks third in the number of temporary foreign workers in Canada, after Alberta and Ontario.

All workers in British Columbia, regardless of their immigration status, have the same rights and same protections. This includes protection under B.C.’s labour laws, employment standards, minimum wage and workplace safety standards. The province provides $4 million to immigrant settlement services across British Columbia to help temporary foreign workers garner information about their rights under B.C.’s employment standards, legal rights and their advice of services otherwise offered in British Columbia — i.e., housing.

Under B.C.’s immigration agreement, our province can obtain new work permits from the federal government for temporary foreign workers if they might be at risk. This means that temporary foreign workers will be able to report to employment standards violations against their employers without the fear of losing their jobs.

[1015]

I’d like to speak very quickly about the mandatory penalties, complaints and fines under the employment act. British Columbia is the only jurisdiction in Canada with mandatory penalties for violations in the Employment Standards Act. We continue to have the toughest mandatory administrative penalties in Canada for employment standards violations, with escalating penalties — from $500 for the first offence, $2,500 for the second and $10,000 for the third offence.

Over the past five years, the employment standards branch has received an average of more than 6,100 complaints per year, and about $6.5 million in wages owing are recovered in an average year on behalf of members — i.e., employees — under the branch. The employment standards branch puts education outreach programs to inform workers and employers about employment standards….

Just last month we introduced the Provincial Immigration Programs Act. This act will help B.C. meet its economic development priorities by providing a framework to the selected newcomers, under which existing provincial nominee programs as well as any future immigration agreements with the federal government…. We have redesigned the provincial nominee program to make sure we are aligning our nominations for permanent residents with our labour priorities.
[ Page 9939 ]

The Provincial Immigration Programs Act is the next step in putting the province forward in a position to carry on attracting high-demand, skilled workers and investment-ready entrepreneurs to grow our economy.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to recognize the remarks of my colleague from Penticton. Just to close, one of the gaps in British Columbia, with respect to the issue of temporary foreign workers…. We know that under the provincial nominee program, opportunity for employers to sponsor workers to become permanent residents…. That’s only a fraction of the actual number of temporary foreign workers — so less than 10 percent eligibility. Certainly, we have nearly a nine-times number in terms of a greater number of workers who remain in that permanent temporary status, if you will.

With regards to the high numbers, B.C. utilizes a high number and ratio. We’re the second highest, in terms of ratio, with respect to the numbers of temporary foreign workers in British Columbia.

The issue of same rights, same protections. That exists in law, but indeed, in reality, there’s a big gap. These individual workers have a very precarious nature in their status, so there’s a real reluctance to come forward.

What we need is for the government to take leadership and actually ensure that employers are regulated. Right now we have an open door policy. Really, it’s carte blanche. There’s no oversight and monitoring.

We do not know which employers utilize temporary foreign workers. We need to ensure that they are licensed. We need to take steps to ensure that recruitment agencies do not charge illegal, exploitative and exorbitant recruitment fees. We need to ensure that the B.C. government takes action. It really is a disgrace in terms of the lack of oversight, the lack of legislation and the lack of accountability of this program in British Columbia. I know that seems to be a recurring theme — lack of accountability.

We also have a lack of data, in terms of understanding what the conditions are. Certainly, there’s need for action, need for leadership and need for the government to put in place mechanisms to monitor employers to ensure that they are registered — that companies that utilize temporary foreign workers are registered — to ensure that recruitment agencies are licensed and also ensure that employers and agencies put a bond so that if they’re found in violation, their workers are able to be reimbursed.

Fundamentally, we need to see the government take leadership to ensure that British Columbians have opportunities for jobs that exist and also that all workers are protected and not exploited in British Columbia.

Certainly, much needs to be done to ensure that migrant workers and all workers are not exploited in British Columbia and that we go forward with a sustainable economy that respects workers.

INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORTING
THE ECONOMY

J. Martin: It is my pleasure to rise and deliver a private member’s statement on infrastructure supporting the economy.

Infrastructure projects provide thousands of jobs for British Columbians throughout our province, while supporting the economy. I would like to take the time to examine some of the specific infrastructure projects that have taken place in this beautiful province.

[1020]

Every time I stand before a lectern, when I have the opportunity to rise in this House, it momentarily takes me back to my many years of lecturing at the podium at the University of the Fraser Valley. I used to preface all of my lectures with the caution: “Pay attention. There will be a quiz at the end of this.” Yes, there will be a quiz at the end of this today.

Let’s begin with a few projects that have especially benefited my constituents. The new Port Mann Bridge opened in 2012 and has made it so much quicker and easier to travel to Vancouver. People had been waiting for years to get rid of one of the worst traffic bottlenecks in B.C. to be fixed. Thanks to this project, 8,000 jobs were created, and some drivers have been able to cut their commutes in half, some shaving a whole hour off their commute. Now families can enjoy faster, more efficient commutes and spend less time idling in traffic and more time with their families.

We also have the South Fraser Perimeter Road that opened in 2012. The expansion of this road led to 4,000 construction jobs and will lead to 7,000 long-term jobs in Delta and Surrey. Additionally, this new four-lane route on the south side of the Fraser has transformed the Lower Mainland by saving time for commuters, the trucking industry and visitors. This strengthens our economy, while also facilitating increased exports from Canada to the fast-growing Asian markets. These partnerships are creating jobs and economic growth in local communities.

Continuing on the theme of transportation infrastructure, we have the Sea to Sky Highway improvement project. Finished in 2009, this project created 3,000 jobs and has made a safer, more efficient and reliable transportation corridor to and from one of the world’s most popular and desired resort destinations.

When it comes to other infrastructure projects around B.C., we have the northwest transmission line, completed in 2014. This project has created 840 person-years of employment during construction. The line will deliver affordable, reliable and clean energy that will stimulate the economy and provide renewable power to remote northern communities. Local communities will benefit with increased access to clean hydroelectric power. This line extends B.C. Hydro’s power grid north from Terrace into an area rich in mining and clean energy potential.
[ Page 9940 ]

There are already four mines that will be able to open, thanks to this new power source. Red Chris gold and copper mine is the first to take advantage of the northwest transmission line. This mine will employ 250 — permanent jobs on site — while 750 construction jobs will be created. We also have the KSM mine, not quite yet open. It is estimated that it will create 1,800 construction jobs and 1,040 permanent jobs on site.

As well, there will be the Kitsault mine, with estimates of 300 permanent jobs on site, and Brucejack will have an estimated 900 construction jobs and 500 permanent jobs on site. That’s a lot of jobs in the north that would not be possible were it not for the northwest transmission line. I am proud to say I support these jobs. I support these projects.

Well, the B.C. Place revitalization project was completed in 2011. This project created approximately 3,500 person-years of employment, with a total of 450 people working on site.

The revitalized B.C. Place facility has led to hosting world-class events such as the 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup this past summer. The event broke records for both live attendance figures and worldwide television audiences.

The event was another opportunity to showcase British Columbia to the world, as nearly 50 million people saw the beauty of Vancouver and B.C. Preliminary estimates suggest that the World Cup would generate $52 million in economic impact for B.C., and it is expected that we will exceed these calculations.

Even going back to the 1980s, we see the same trend of government support creating jobs and economic growth. Going back almost 30 years, Vancouver hosted Expo 86. This was a pivotal event in the city’s history and one that showcased Vancouver to the world. It brought global recognition and praise and a major boost to tourism. Expo 86 brought 9,700 construction jobs.

Do you know what else opened in 1986? The Coquihalla Highway. The infrastructure project generated economic opportunities and fostered tremendous growth for the Interior. Over 10,000 jobs were created during the project, not to mention the significant tourism, investment and economic opportunities created for the communities along the route. That, by the way, includes my community of Chilliwack, where travellers must pass through on their way to and from the Interior.

[1025]

So 1986 was a big year for completing infrastructure projects in the province. We have the Alex Fraser Bridge, which opened in September of ’86 — an essential part of Vancouver’s infrastructure. For commuter traffic, this project created 1,800 direct jobs and 2,700 spinoff jobs. This is another project that was completed ahead of schedule and on budget.

We also have Site C. More than 10,000 jobs will be created, thanks to this clean energy project.

I mentioned there was going to be a quiz at the end of this. What do all of the aforementioned projects have in common? Well, they were supported by this government and previous free-enterprise coalition governments, and each and every one of them was opposed by an opposition NDP party.

K. Conroy: I want to thank the member for Chilliwack for bringing up this important topic. There are many different areas one could speak on when it comes to infrastructure in our province and how it supports our economy. I just want to remind the member that he forgot a whole decade of projects that were done in the ’90s. The Burrard thermal generating station is in Port Moody — $176 million. The Keenleyside dam. Arrow Lakes generating station, 195 megawatts of power — $270 million.

Yeah, we did build some ferries in this province, unlike the B.C. Liberals, who had their ferries built in Poland, or was it Germany? Some in Poland; some in Germany. They took away job creation for people of this province, took away the economic viability.

Let’s get back to infrastructure. The member also spoke about a number of projects on the Lower Mainland. I have the opportunity….

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member, order.

K. Conroy: I’ve had the opportunity in my new critic area to travel through the Interior. I’ve always been somewhat surprised by the condition of the road system in our Interior. I want to talk about Highway 1. Now, there has been some significant investment, as the member referred to, in the Lower Mainland to create traffic that can move seamlessly from Hope to the ports and to the Lower Mainland — other destinations in the Vancouver area. And there has been significant investment. But we need to ensure that there is significant investment in the rest of the province so that we can all benefit from a better highway system.

In fact, the Premier mentioned in 2012 that she was going to be doing that. She made a commitment to turn the remaining 280 kilometres of the Trans-Canada into a four-lane highway. Basically, the stretch is between Kamloops and the Alberta border. She even said she’d accelerate that. Only, one has to travel some of those roads between Revelstoke and Golden, with those huge trucks whipping by and their urgency to get their loads to the Lower Mainland.

Here are some stats that people in the Lower Mainland don’t have to put up with. The crashes that happened between 2007 and 2011 resulted in 76 fatalities, over 1,000 injuries and over 1,400 vehicles that were damaged. Just from 2004 to 2013 alone, there were 38 fatal crashes between Revelstoke and Golden — just that section of the highway.
[ Page 9941 ]

That’s more than any other highway in B.C. in that period. When you put it in perspective, with the average daily traffic from Abbotsford to Hope, there were 17,000 vehicles in 2013, and they only had 17 fatal accidents. Whereas the average daily traffic from Revelstoke to Golden had only 5,400 vehicles in 2013 and 38 fatal crashes in that little, tiny section of the highway.

Between 2005 and 2012, there were 456 road closures of 30 minutes or more. You have to think: how does that affect the economy of the province, especially when you think of the billions of exports moving along that highway? And $1.9 billion comes directly along the Trans-Canada.

Even though the minister of highways and the Premier have made a commitment to this highway, they haven’t budgeted to make sure that the four-laning of this highway can be completed. They’re under budget in every sector of this every year. They’ve been under budget with the work that they’ve done on this highway. They haven’t come close to ensuring that we have a four-lane highway between Revelstoke and the border, between Kamloops and the border. This is a major access.

I’d like to say that when you look at it, their budget…. If you look at the projections, where they’re about 60 percent of the way into a ten-year plan for this section of the highway, they’ve only spent 40 percent of the budget. Why?

[1030]

I mean, we have significant people in this province, who are more than capable, with the expertise to build safe roads. I think it’s a lack of political will. We need to ensure that we have a first-class highway in this province, across the province, to ensure that we have an infrastructure that truly supports our economy. We need to make sure that, while we have a first-class system down in the Lower Mainland, we also need to maintain that across the rest of the province. I say it’s like you’ve got a goat trail through the mountains to get to the Lower Mainland, where you have this expanded highway.

I’ll give the last word on this to Revelstoke mayor Mark McKee. He said: “The highway — I think it has been recognized by everybody in the province — is not up to a proper and safe standard.” We need that to ensure that the economic development can continue in the Lower Mainland, as well as in the Interior.

J. Martin: I would like to thank the member for, well, whatever that was. I’d like to, if I may, carry on for a moment or two.

In my unbridled enthusiasm a couple of minutes ago, I forgot all about the Pacific NorthWest LNG. We must speak about Pacific NorthWest LNG. Here’s a project creating 330 direct operational long-term jobs, 300 local spinoff jobs and up to 4,500 jobs at peak construction. We support those jobs. We know not everyone does.

Not only that, but this project is expected to generate an estimated $8.6 billion in additional provincial revenue by 2030 through taxes and royalties. This is a generational opportunity, and it is already creating jobs and training opportunities for British Columbians.

We work very, very hard to make sure we are creating a better future and a better British Columbia for our children and our grandchildren. It is thanks to these many projects we support that we are able to do this. The number of jobs all these projects have created and the economic benefits they have produced for our province is absolutely astounding.

I’m proud to say that this government supports infrastructure. It supports job creation. It supports growing the economy. It is such a tragedy that the opposition does not.

SHAWNIGAN LAKE AND REGION
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

B. Routley: We have a number of environmental issues in the Cowichan Valley. However, the contaminated soil dump, which is operating in an area just above our beautiful Shawnigan Lake, is clearly the major community concern at this time.

The contaminated soil dump is located directly by a stream that leads to the lake, a drinking-water lake that is one of our community’s most special places, a treasured place. It is particularly troubling to our Shawnigan Lake community, and really the entire Cowichan Valley region, that there are so many ongoing legal and environmental issues.

The Cowichan Valley regional district has concerns regarding the Shawnigan region. Specifically, they have sent a letter that talks about lot 21, South Island Aggregates, Cobble Hill Holdings. The residents call this area the contaminated soil dump, as I’ve said. The CVRD says there have been long-standing concerns about the nature of materials being deposited on both lot 21 and lot 23 of the South Island Aggregates, Cobble Hill Holdings, property on Stebbings Road.

Staff from the Ministry of Environment — at the request of the director representing electoral area B, Shawnigan Lake — tested only the top 15 centimetres of 80 meters of fill that has been deposited on that lot. At a subsequent open house, the public meeting of July 16, 2015, at the Kerry Park Recreation Centre, the Ministry of Environment staff reported that while there were some occurrences of contamination being found, the levels did not warrant any further investigation.

[1035]

At the same meeting, the MLA from Oak Bay presented findings from his independent testing of water samples taken from the creek above the location where runoff from the dump site enters Shawnigan Creek at the bottom of lot 21. These tests found elevated levels of a number of heavy metals, including lead, iron and thorium.
[ Page 9942 ]

Ministry staff present at the July 16 open house advised the Shawnigan Lake residents at this public meeting that they would follow up on these results. However, the community is now aware that the Minister of Environment recently announced, in a Times Colonist article published October 4 of this year, that there’s nothing of immediate concern coming off the site and that the ministry plans to reach out to the Cowichan Valley regional district to discuss the possibility of regular monitoring in and around lot 21.

The community is still concerned that contaminated water is still flowing from lot 21 into Shawnigan Creek and into the lake and that more rigorous sampling and testing are required to ensure the quality and the safety of water entering the Shawnigan watershed from adjacent industrial lands. Also, the community, through the CVRD board, is requesting that the Ministry of Environment complete further testing of the soil deposited on lot 21 to determine if there are sources of contamination in the soil below the top 15 centimetres that was tested.

Again, I’ll add that there was only the top 15 centimetres of this potentially contaminated soil that was tested. Given the original conditions that the government put in place prior to the permit — which was that there was going to be sampling to protect the community — these public requests seem reasonable. As the MLA, I request help from the government to achieve these community requests.

Now turning to another of the Shawnigan community’s environmental impact concerns, regarding the Estates at Shawnigan Station. Again, we have concerns and issues re the government signing off on a land development plan. We, the public of B.C., are supposed to be able to trust the professionals. That’s what this government tells us — that under the government’s professional reliance model, their red-tape-cutting model, the professionals are going to protect the public interest. They’re going to protect the environment. They’re going to protect our land and water to protect the citizens of British Columbia.

In this case, the Ministry of Transportation and the developer and the CVRD were all involved. However, I’m told it was ultimately the MOT government representatives that signed off on a plan for a subdivision. Shawnigan residents bought these homes, trusting that the regulators, the professionals, would require it to be done properly to protect the public safety. Yet now the homeowners are told by engineers, who they had to hire, that there is a significant risk of potential loss of life and/or property damage in the event of a future soil, rock and/or tree-falls hazard event.

The report concludes that time is of the essence and immediate action is warranted. If you’ve been down there and have seen this…. This is a sheer bank that was allowed. In my opinion — and I’m no hydrologist or geologist — it should have been stepped back. You don’t have a sheer cliff with trees up there right next to homes in a subdivision.

My Shawnigan constituents are living under a potential environmental- and government-approved plan that could lead to disaster. These are the residents of a bare land strata south of Shawnigan Lake, B.C. During construction of the subdivision, excavation was permitted to follow a plan that created a man-made, unstable rock face. Several substantial rockfalls have already occurred since the occupancy by families, causing damage to the catchment wall. Fear of future landslides has already caused at least one resident to leave.

Two geotechnical reports describe the hazards as risking life and property and recommends substantial and immediate remediation. The scope of this work is well beyond the financial and managerial capacity of the Shawnigan residents. In fact, the current families living in this region had no hand in creating the hazard that they have inherited, but they have inherited this problem.

It is evident that the design, construction and particularly the approval phases failed to protect the community.

[1040]

J. Sturdy: Again, I have to say it’s a challenge sometimes to generate some responses to some of these statements. Recognizing that “Shawnigan Lake and region environmental concerns” is the title of this discussion, and anticipating or having a look at what kinds of concerns there are that have been identified, I guess I expected to see some discussion on the issue of the contaminated soils around Shawnigan Lake. I’m not familiar with the estates issue, so I won’t speak to that.

I had to look back at the Environmental Appeal Board decisions and some of the documentation there. It’s very interesting and complex, a challenging problem that the ministry, the CVRD and the residents have faced. It is fascinating reading. I understand that petitions have been submitted to B.C. Supreme Court, which limits some of the comments.

But what I can say is…. I can cover some of the background on this issue.

Cobble Hill Holdings, formerly — or South Island Aggregates — has, as the member mentions, two separate permitted areas. One is permitted under the Ministry of Environment and can receive contaminated soil, and that is lot 23. The other is permitted under the Ministry of Energy and Mines, lot 21, and that site cannot. Each parcel is permitted to receive soil at contaminated concentrations that are deemed safe for the specific land use and based on the permits that they have.

Government staff carried out sampling on May 13 for groundwater, surface water and soil. Sediment and surface water were also tested in Shawnigan Creek. The results found no major exceedance of concern for provincial drinking water guidelines and aquatic life guidelines.
[ Page 9943 ]

The results of the samplings were presented to the Shawnigan Lake residents and available on the Ministry of Environment website. The company was found to have some minor noncompliance issues with the permits, and, as of today, ministry staff have stated that all noncompliance issues have been fixed or are in the process of being resolved.

On the 1st of May, Energy and Mines issued a stop-work order to ensure that the company did not bring soils onto the Ministry of Mines–permitted site, or lot 21, so that further testing would not be compromised. The CVRD was consulted on the sampling plan, and their staff was in attendance while sampling was taken. There was actually quite a group of people. I saw some photos on that site, and there must have been 20 or 30 people there witnessing the sampling.

Cobble Hill Holdings and South Island Aggregates can continue to receive contaminated soil on the MOE-permitted site as long as they remain in compliance with their permit — clearly a logical step. Ministry of Environment is monitoring the CHH and SIA activities to ensure that the company remains in compliance.

Ministry staff have previously visited the site on April 8 and collected downstream samples, and the results were below the provincial water guidelines for all parameters tested. It is important to remember that the company is required, under the permit, to implement a comprehensive sampling program of soil, groundwater and surface water.

With regard to the Environmental Appeal Board decision, the Ministry of Environment staff has amended the permits in accordance with the Environmental Appeal Board’s direction as outlined in the final decision. The EAB is an independent tribunal, and our government respects its decisions. The original decision to grant the permit was made by a statutory decision-maker, independent of any political process, and the ministry is legally obligated to consider all applications, including those to treat and discharge contaminated soils.

As part of the permit, the company must treat discharge water to meet the most stringent water quality standards in B.C. and are required to post monitoring information and reports. The ministry is aware that the CVRD and Shawnigan Lake residents have filed petitions with the B.C. Supreme Court, alleging the company engaged in fraudulent behavior during permitting and subsequent environmental appeals process.

[1045]

At this time, the permit amended in accordance with the Environmental Appeal Board decision remains valid.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Sturdy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We clearly can’t comment further on it.

B. Routley: I thank the member for his response. I know, because I’m close to it, that I have had access to the Shawnigan Residents Association website. I would urge the members — any members — to go and look at the Shawnigan Residents Association website, because they posted the latest legal challenges that are going forward to the court. If they’re true, significant jiggery-pokery has taken place, in the sense that this government, without question, has been involved in signing off on a plan.

I think that in this case, the government was lied to. The reason I say that is…. I said that I think that’s possible. You read the material, and you decide for yourselves. I think that when you read the submissions, you’ll see that the evidence is now coming forward that suggests that the professionals, on which the public is supposed to be able to expect some public interest to be protected, have instead been joining hands with the proponent, and it’s a 50-50 business deal. So it’s very shady and, as I say, jiggery-pokery in my mind.

I’ll let the courts decide that at the end of the day, but I would urge you to take a look at what the Shawnigan Residents Association has to say.

I want to finish up on the Estates at Shawnigan issue. Again, this is a sheer bank, probably as high as this roof is. It’s very significantly straight up and down. And then imagine trees up there as well — trees, if they were up by the ceiling. Then you’ve got your house right next to it and a little retaining wall to protect you from these environmental issues and concerns.

It’s evident that the design, construction and, particularly, the approval phase of this project failed to adequately assess and mitigate the significant hazards to these communities and the families. It is unclear how the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, as the approving agency, I might add, moved from a preliminary approval — it did have six conditions back in April of 2008 — to a final approval document in October 2008.

My constituents wonder: will anyone be held accountable or deal with this problem before disaster strikes, or must it be forced to be held accountable through more legal action? Really, is this how the professional reliance model designed by this government works? Unbelievable.

In early October 2015, my constituents were advised by their geotechnical consultant that this is an unstable rock face, that it exposes them to considerable danger and that immediate remediation is necessary.

I hope the government is listening. We’re looking forward to your help.

JUNIOR CAPITAL MARKETS

R. Sultan: In August of this year, the Venture Capital Markets Association fired a broadside, telling us that the junior mining sector was in a death spiral because of our Securities Commission, which they described as “a well-meaning but destructive force,” and also because robots
[ Page 9944 ]
had taken over stock trading, and also because banks controlled the stock exchange.

Well, it would take seven hours, not seven minutes, to fully discuss all of these points. But I would concede that yes, the junior mining sector is currently suffering. Gavin Dirom of AME said: “Times are tough for almost all AME BC members.” That’s the Association for Mineral Exploration. “Although British Columbia continues to host 58 percent of the mineral exploration and mineral companies listed on the various exchanges, the ranks are thinning.” Mining share prices, if there’s any bid at all, on our venture exchange are down by at least a third or a half or even 90 percent.

We can all agree it’s a serious situation. However, as the broadside also said: “B.C. has a well-earned reputation for raising venture capital. Many of the major mines in the world were discovered by Vancouver-based junior exploration companies raising risk money from speculators.”

[1050]

However, “the exploration financing mechanism,” the broadside concluded, “is in full retreat.” Let’s remind ourselves of some of the famous risk-takers we have seen in this sector in Vancouver — Murray Pezim; Robert Friedland, Steve Jobs’s buddy; Frank Giustra; Ian Telfer; Ira Thomas; and let’s add Bob Quartermain — and some of the huge wealth-generating resources which such persons’ risk-taking helped create: Diavik, Sullivan, Bralorne, Hemlo, Eskay Creek, Oyu Tolgoi in Mongolia, Brucejack, Stornoway, Cerro Negro and Snap Creek.

To be sure, not all of these players were choirboys. Murray Pezim, described by one writer as “living somewhere beyond outrageous,” would not be found in any bank’s wealth-management comfort zone. But we should celebrate what our little corner of the world accomplished. While in the 1980s Vancouver was described by Barron’s magazine as the “scam capital of the world” — and Calgary’s $9 billion Bre-X fraud certainly didn’t help — we stepped back and learned, and the TSX and TSX Venture share exchanges have today become the gold standard of the world when it comes to dollars raised by mining companies.

Canada now raises 75 percent of the world’s mining capital, and Vancouver dominates the junior mining slice of that pie. We can attribute this success to experience and confidence — confidence in our capital market system and the trading associated with it.

Our vast cordillera opened to exploration our geology, the largest concentration of mine engineering expertise in the world and access to large quantities of smart money, which understands the risks and rewards of mine exploration development. And as Quartermain recently observed, B.C. has the highest concentration of quality geoscientists in the world.

In sum, as a country, we know more about finding, financing, building, operating and responsibly closing down mining than anybody else in the world. The sector knows how to bounce back. In 2001, before this government came into office, mine exploration expenditure in B.C. was only $29 million. Now B.C. dominates, peaking at $680 million in 2012 and, even in today’s truly crummy commodities market, $338 million last year.

It may surprise you that in 2014, the TSX Venture Exchange in this town raised about $5 billion of equity capital, much of it for the mining industry. Working together, Vancouver and Toronto have eclipsed London, New York City and Johannesburg as centres of mining finance.

Our government encourages the mining industry to sell flow-through shares. We give them mine exploration tax credits. We invest $5 million annually in Geoscience B.C. We waive mine exploration permit fees. We’ve learned it makes no sense to ignore First Nations, as others do in Canada. Better to bring them in as full-fledged partners so they, too, can benefit from the royalties, jobs and community strengthening which accrues.

Having bragged about all of that, we must also recognize the serious issues dumped on our table — tales of heavy-handed financial regulation, impressions that computers have in fact taken over the market, and how in heck does the average retail investor get investment advice from some black box with an algorithm plugged into a stock exchange server operating 24 hours a day in a dark room in Kamloops or somewhere? That is how trades actually get executed today, believe it or not. Finally, as alleged, are the big, risk-averse and highly regulated banks spoiling the game?

I will try to answer these questions after hearing from my friends on the other side.

G. Heyman: Thank you to my friend and colleague from West Vancouver–Capilano for giving us a colourful and detailed history of the whole nature of developing the mining sector in British Columbia, as well as some of the very colourful characters involved in stock trading in that sector.

[1055]

Certainly, the mining sector, with all of its colourful ups and downs, all of its colourful characters, all of its booms and busts and all of its, as the member himself pointed out, shady dealing, has contributed much to the development not only of British Columbia’s economy but the economy of the world in general and the development of the world in general.

Certainly, the nature and history of the Vancouver Stock Exchange and the trading of penny stocks and more highly valued stocks could, as the member for West Vancouver–Capilano has said, be food for many, many hours of discussion.

The member for West Vancouver–Capilano talked about some of the tools that this government and other governments have introduced in tax policy to support investment in the mining sector — the flow-through tax
[ Page 9945 ]
credit. But I’m going to pivot a little bit and talk about a new — perhaps not so new but an emerging and continuing-to-develop — sector in British Columbia that is very important. That’s the technology sector, which provides as many or more jobs than all of the resource industries — mining, forestry, oil and gas — put together.

It has grown phenomenally over the last number of years, whether it’s early-stage venture capital, whether it’s angel investors, whether it’s the tremendous ingenuity and entrepreneurship of people who have built a significant tech hub in Vancouver.

There are, however, some significant challenges facing this sector. While the resource sector is, of course, very important to British Columbia, I think we also need to talk about what we can do today to address some of the barriers faced by this very important emerging tech sector in British Columbia.

I’m going to read some references from a very recent article, August 2015, in the Globe and Mail that talked about some of the hurdles facing Vancouver and British Columbia’s high-tech companies. There are now only nine venture capital firms in B.C., according to the Technology Industry Association. That’s “down from 43 in 2002.” The current level of approximately $300 million of angel and venture capital investments per year represents only about 0.03 percent of provincial GDP, which is only about a third of that that is invested in the United States.

The Technology Industry Association has repeatedly said that one of the key things that is holding back even more rapid expansion and development in terms of GDP and jobs of this sector is the lack of early-stage venture capital. They have said that British Columbia should find a way to take advantage of the federal government’s $400 million venture capital action plan.

Ontario has done that. Other provinces have done that. Yet this government in British Columbia has yet to step up to the plate and put some money into a pot to access federal funds and create, as many have called for, a fund of funds, a regional fund of funds to invest in the technology sector in British Columbia.

In estimates, I’ve questioned the Finance Minister about that. He says he wasn’t convinced that the submissions put us on the right track, could guarantee that the money remained in B.C. Yet the Finance Minister, to date, has not come up with the kind of plan that would actually access these federal funds and create the kind of venture capital pool that would invest in early-stage companies in British Columbia, keep talent in British Columbia and, most importantly, keep companies in British Columbia who too often today sell out to American-owned companies and move south, taking jobs with them.

The economic impact analysis in the paper entitled Revitalizing Venture Capital in B.C. that was put forward a year ago to the Select Standing Committee on Finance by the Technology Industry Association pointed out two scenarios. One was a baseline scenario of slowly declining venture capital in British Columbia, and the other was assuming that venture capital in B.C. declines even further, which is the track it’s on. The different is huge, both in terms of jobs and GDP.

R. Sultan: Thank you to the member for Vancouver-Fairview for those constructive comments.

[1100]

An old miner recently reminded me that good prices make good miners, which is to say that if China had continued its 7 percent growth path, portfolio managers would be regarded as geniuses. Well, it did not, and they are not. Macro always wins. But in terms of those things actually under our own control, what could we do better?

I happen to believe that the B.C. Securities Commission, for example, should continue to protect us diligently from outright fraud. In that regard, the so-called perp walk that we see on television occasionally, where some Manhattan executive is frogmarched to a waiting police car, perhaps in manacles, should not be foreign to our justice system, because the fines aren’t ever collected, as the Ontario Securities Commission itself conceded only last week.

Maybe we also try too hard to shelter our citizens. They happily invest $3 billion a year, each year, on lotteries, despite government taking a full one-quarter off the top. If some of them are also lured into what they hope and dream might be the next Hemlo, perhaps that’s their business.

Rules and regulations, in my opinion, certainly tend to be overdone. Who could have foreseen that Barney Frank, in my experience, when I lived there, a yappy political aide I read about in the Boston papers in another century, would, to everyone’s astonishment, become a congressman, and then ultimately co-author the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, several hundred pages of opaque and frequently contradictory rules to live your life by if you are a financial institution or a regulator.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

The waste engendered has been phenomenal. I chatted recently with my classmate Tom, former vice-chair of Citibank, and he told me that 10 percent of Citibank’s operating costs are now compliance-related — lawyers, paperwork, clerks and accountants, filing and reports. It’s 10 percent. He said that banking had, in fact, become an unattractive business, in his somewhat expert opinion.

We find ourselves dealing with ever-expanding rules spawned by the usual Wall Street malfeasers, and they are never in short supply, born in some back room of Congress, adopted by the Washington financial regulators and shipped to New York. It’s only a hop, skip and a jump to Toronto, where they wiggle their way into the TSX, are transferred out west and land on the desks, with a thump,
[ Page 9946 ]
of the B.C. Securities Commission and the TSX Venture Exchange, who must explain it all to their customers.

If the end product amazes our Minister of Red Tape Reduction, we should blame Barney Frank. Yes, indeed. It’s not kind to junior mining, and we have work to do.

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

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

K. Corrigan: It gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce two guests that we have in the gallery today. Terri Van Steinburg has recently been elected as the secretary-treasurer of the Federation of Post-Secondary Educators. Joining her today is Bob Davis, the newly elected president of the Kwantlen Faculty Association. They are here to listen to debate on the motion that is about to come before us. I hope that the House will make them both very welcome.

Hon. M. Polak: I call Motion 28.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 28 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 28 — ADULT BASIC EDUCATION
AND ENGLISH-LANGUAGE LEARNING
FOR REFUGEES

K. Corrigan: It gives me great pleasure to move the motion.

[Be it resolved that this House recognize the high value of adult basic education and English-language learning programs for refugees.]

For the past eight years, adults in British Columbia have been able to finish or upgrade their high school education, either through their local school board or at colleges, free of charge. It was widely agreed and, in fact, stated in a B.C. Liberal government report that “The public interest in eliminating barriers to participation in post-secondary education requires that no tuition be charged to any adult learners seeking to upgrade their education.”

[1105]

A year ago, the B.C. Liberals announced an end to universal tuition-free upgrading or completion and that colleges will now be “allowed to charge” for courses. Many students are now being charged up to $550 per course or $1,600 per term. At the K-to-12 level, the funding has been cut entirely for students who are upgrading their education.

We don’t know the final impact because colleges are receiving some transition funding. Some institutions are charging fees now; others are not. However, we do know that the impact at the K-to-12 level has been devastating. In Burnaby school district, where I’m from, 16 teaching positions have been cut, reflecting a drop of enrolment of hundreds of students. So in Burnaby and around the province, adult learners are paying the educational price of the Liberal government’s cut to education funding.

I know that speakers from the other side of the floor on this motion will say that nothing has changed because there is a grant program that is in place. However, the grant application process is complicated. Maybe we should say there’s red tape involved. It’s necessitating the hiring of additional personnel at colleges, money that would be better spent in the classrooms, and it has several eligibility limitations.

At a time when we are short of skilled workers and knowing that a well-educated population is the surest way to economic prosperity, why would a government make the short-sighted and ill-advised decision to make it harder for people to become better educated?

In a province with some of the highest inequality and highest poverty rates in the country, we shouldn’t be slamming the door on education. In fact, we know that jobs now and increasingly in the future will require a higher level of education. To make it more difficult contributes to the level of inequality and poverty.

The recent cuts to adult education are in addition to funding cuts to English-language learning programs, which has already resulted in the decline of thousands of students in programs across this province. The cuts to the English language programs were, again, short-sighted.

We rely on immigrants to bring their education, their training and their experience, in addition to their hopes and dreams for a new and better life in British Columbia. Our immigrants come with a desire and determination to work and want nothing more than to contribute to the social and economic fabric of this country. The vast majority of the students who take English-language courses have done so with the intention of taking further education.

The cuts to both English-language and adult basic education programs disproportionately affect women, immigrants, refugees and lower-income adults — all who are working hard to better their own lives and that of their families. Ensuring access to our colleges and universities is good for them and good for our province.

I have a particular concern about smaller rural institutions. Already, with funding cuts in advanced education in this province, program offerings have declined.

I’d like to finish with the words of Suzy Annala-Macdonald, who took adult basic education courses at Northwest Community College. She said:
[ Page 9947 ]

“When I recently learned about the cuts to programming at Northwest Community College, I was very concerned. I enrolled three years ago as a mature student in the social service worker program, graduating with my diploma this June.

“Cuts to university credit courses will impact the educational journeys of many students in programs such as social work, nursing and the environmental sciences, all of which are paramount to the well-being and sustainability of our community in the northwest as a whole. Cuts will also propel many students to leave the community to pursue education elsewhere.”

These cuts to adult education and English-language programs are short-sighted. They create barriers to success and to improvement. We should be investing in people who are doing their best to do better, not slamming the doors to education in their faces.

D. Plecas: It is a pleasure to lead off the government’s response to the following private member’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the high value of adult basic education and English-language learning programs for refugees.”

Last September, the world was aghast at the lifeless image of three-year-old Alan Kurdi, a Syrian refugee who drowned and washed up on a beach in Turkey while his family was making a desperate attempt to land on the Greek island of Kos.

[1110]

That photograph seized the world’s attention on the crisis that has befallen Syria through four long years of civil war. This conflict generated an enormous humanitarian crisis — 3.8 million Syrians fleeing their homes, trying to escape the fighting. Imagine, if you will, British Columbia’s entire population of 4½ million people suddenly uprooted and sent packing in all directions. How would our neighbouring provinces and the United States respond to such sudden migrations of millions of people?

Well, that is essentially what is happening right now to the Syrian people, and the world is still struggling with how best to respond. But I can tell you one thing. British Columbians are more than willing to help. People all across this province have opened their wallets and are willing to open their homes and sponsor a refugee family. We know that the newly elected federal government wants to accelerate the process of bringing 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada. Many of them will arrive in British Columbia, and when they do, we will be ready.

On September 8, just a few days after seeing that horrific picture of a lifeless Alan Kurdi lying on the beach, the Premier of British Columbia led all of the provinces in Canada by announcing a $1 million readiness fund for Syrian refugees settling in Canada. Yes, Syrian refugees will need things like adult education and English language training, and my colleagues will be addressing those issues in greater detail later this morning. But we must look to the immediate needs of refugees as they first arrive in British Columbia.

The province will work with settlement agencies, community groups and private sponsors to make sure these funds are used to achieve the best outcomes for these refugees. Specifically, these funds will be used for counselling; trauma counselling, through a range of psychosocial supports; groups-of-five private sponsorship supports made up of private citizens who come together to sponsor refugees. Community-level supports. Help for local governments that will be settling Syrians refugees so there’ll be a welcoming community for these newcomers.

Foreign credential recognition. Many Syrians will arrive in Canada with work experience and credentials from their home country. Funds will be available for B.C.-based professional associations to quickly and fairly review and approve their foreign credentials so that they can start working in British Columbia. Employer supports — that is, funds to help businesses and existing immigrant settlement organizations employ, train and mentor Syrian refugees. These funds will also provide matching funds to employers who train and commit to hire a Syrian refugee.

In conclusion, I’m immensely proud of the response British Columbia is taking to help those less fortunate in this world. These are people who, through no fault of their own, have been forced from their homes to the face of a bleak future. This government is going to do its part in the most sincere and welcoming ways to turn that around, giving these Syrian people a new foundation for the most promising of futures.

R. Fleming: I’m pleased to speak in favour of this motion that was submitted by my colleague, the member for Burnaby–Deer Lake.

There are a number of points I wish to raise this morning about why governments in advanced economies like ours should take adult education, lifelong learning and workforce skills investment by government and employers much more seriously if they wish to remain prosperous. The consequences of failing to invest in the skills of people are real, and the opportunity costs of missing out on capital investment in the global knowledge economy in which we live are also real.

Many industries of the 21st century simply cannot take root where the skills and innovation of their domestic workforce does not support such investment. That’s the risk that we have here in British Columbia. The research is clear. At the OECD level and at individual levels of industrial countries, higher rates of literacy and numeracy, improved language proficiency, are what enables individuals to access post-secondary education, acquire specialized skills and earn more and contribute more to their countries and their economies and raise their families and lift them out of poverty. This is what is critical, also, to creating a more socially just and socially cohesive society where there are opportunities to get ahead and move out of poverty.

[1115]

In light of such undeniable conclusions from economic and social research, the question is: why is this province, why is this B.C. Liberal government, reducing
[ Page 9948 ]
access for low-income workers, immigrants and refugees to adult education and to ESL learning, especially when the case is so strong to do more?

Why did the B.C. Liberals, for example, cancel the education guarantee program that removed tuition fee barriers for adults wishing to upgrade their high school and then become eligible to get into college or a trade?

Was the program failing? No, it wasn’t. In 2008, the year in which it was introduced, upon the recommendations, I might add, by our former Attorney General, Geoff Plant, there were 18,000 adults involved in adult education in B.C. of which only 3,200, or 18 percent, were considered graduated adults. They had a high school diploma, but they lacked the ability to be eligible to get into college and higher education.

By 2013, the fifth anniversary of this program, there were 24,000 adult students in the province of British Columbia, of which 12,300, 51 percent, were graduated adults. In other words, removing the tuition fee barrier for graduated learners needing to upgrade to get into post-secondary education…. It being accessed by the people who needed access to get opportunities to have a better life for themselves. That’s what was happening.

What’s been the impact of cancelling the education guarantee? Well, enrolment gains that saw tens of thousands of British Columbians, rather than merely thousands, get into graduated learning programs and get out of poverty are set to retreat. There are now diminished opportunities to upgrade high school coursework in urban and rural communities across B.C.

The province’s $9 million cut…. This is the scale of the cutback that we’re talking about. The impact is much, much larger. It has seen large school districts like Surrey cancel offerings for course upgrades. The Vancouver school board has shuttered adult learning centres like the Roberts Centre. Salmon Arm trustees have closed adult ed centres in Salmon Arm, Enderby, Armstrong and Sicamous. That’s what’s happening out there on the first-year anniversary of this misguided program cut that the Liberals rammed through the Legislature.

This is a perilous development. Curiously, it’s completely at odds with the government’s own skills blueprint. Let me quote from that document.

“About 530,000 young people will enter the job market over the next ten years. Our goal” — i.e. the government’s — “is to make sure that British Columbians have a seamless plan from elementary to high school through post-secondary education and right into the workforce. We also need to provide more support to those…who face unique challenges, such as youth at risk, aboriginal youth and persons with disabilities.”

More support is called for by the jobs plan. The Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Advanced Education provide less support. This is a government that can’t get its story straight and can’t get its act together and is closing the doors of opportunities for those who need them most in our province. That’s why it’s so disappointing that they’ve cancelled this program.

Adult education should be seen as a safety net in this province. You know, 80 percent of kids finish high school in a timely completion by the time they’re 18. One in five does not, for a variety of reasons. But by age 20 to 24, that graduation rate changes to 92 percent. That shows how essential adult education is. We still leave one in 12 out, but adult education is critical for those people to get back into the workforce. This government is closing the doors on them, and it’s going to cost the society and the economy of British Columbia much, much more than the value of that cutback.

M. Dalton: I’m happy to add my voice to the private member’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the high value of adult basic education and English-language learning programs for refugees.”

I’d just like to begin by saying that adult education is free and continues to be free for those who are non-graduated. As a teacher by profession, I understand the importance of literacy and English-language skills for people in B.C. Gaining competency in English is vital for immigrants and refugees to benefit personally, becoming independent and employed.

When I was a teenager, I lived in the mountains of central Mexico for several months. I brought a dictionary with me and a grammar book and learned elementary Spanish. The world opened up, with conversations I was able to begin.

[1120]

I was in the marketplace. I was able, as I learned the language, to go to the post office, conduct business, go shopping. I saw the value of learning a language, especially in an area you don’t know the language. It provides freedom and opportunities. That’s even much more so for immigrants and refugees that come here, for them to learn English, because they’re not here just for a few months. They’re here for the rest of their lives.

I gained a heart for people from other nations during this time. When I lived on the North Shore, I wanted to help new immigrants and started a free ESL class for new immigrants. It was a very enjoyable experience.

The responsibility for refugees lies primarily with the federal government. But we can do a lot to support refugees and newcomers when they arrive to B.C.

I was talking last night with the member for Surrey-Panorama, on the ferry. He had just met with Chaldean Christians that were from Iraq but, because of persecution, went to Syria. They were in the refugee camps but again were persecuted. So they’re in limbo between the two countries. They want to connect, and the government is wanting to connect with the federal government in order to help them, to provide a way for refugees. This is important for them, and obviously, English language programs are essential.
[ Page 9949 ]

From April 1, 2012, until January 1, 2015, English language programs at public post-secondary institutions had been tuition-free, as has been mentioned. This was made possible through funding from the Canada-B.C. immigration agreement. However, the former federal government announced that they would no longer support the tuition-free policy at B.C. public post-secondary institutions. Instead, the decision was made to move to a new model for delivery of the English language learning and training.

Since the federal funding change, we have been working with public post-secondary institutions to develop a long-term strategy. The federal funding shift did mean that the $22 million in federal funding that flowed to us from the Canada-B.C. immigration agreement…. As well, due to the federal changes, B.C. public post-secondary institutions were informed that their base operating grants would be reduced significantly.

Through Citizenship and Immigration Canada, this new delivery of training was effective April 1, 2014. Citizenship and Immigration Canada continues to fund English language programming through agreements with service delivery organizations such as not-for-profit organizations and public post-secondary institutions.

During the transition from one style of program to another, the Ministry of Advanced Education provided transition funding of $17.2 million for the 2014-15 fiscal year, as public post-secondary institutions transitioned to the new model. As part of the new model, convention refugees, as determined by the Immigration and Refugee Board, persons applying to become permanent residents and permanent residents are eligible for tuition-free ESL through the federal government. The tuition-free ESL programs are available through the language instruction for newcomers to Canada program.

As well, students with protected-person status from the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada are also eligible for non-repayable grants that cover the cost of tuition for English language training at public post-secondary institutions — the first priority in settlement — and then higher-level ESL programs.

The federal government offers basic English language training programs in B.C. through 35 not-for-profit agencies in 80 locations. This includes the Burnaby English Language Centre, which provides language training in Surrey, New Westminster and Burnaby, as well as the Inter-Cultural Association of Greater Victoria.

J. Shin: As always, it’s my privilege to rise this morning on behalf of Burnaby-Lougheed in support of the motion on the floor recognizing the value of adult basic education and English-language learning programs for refugees.

Now, like the member who spoke before me, I, too, served in the education sector, both as an instructor at VCC and also as an administrator, as the head of a department at BCIT. I refute the notion that this government’s stripping of the tuition-free ABE and ELL have no impact. That’s absolutely not true. He knows as well as I do that the waiver gets clawed back at minimum wage, and a good bulk of those needing ABE training are those who already have high school credentials but need to make that career transition that most of us face when we hit middle age or if life circumstances turn on us.

[1125]

On that note, I will go back to my notes here. The Immigrant Services Society of B.C.’s website opens the topic of refugee settlement and integration as follows: “Imagine arriving at the airport with nothing but the shirt on your back after fleeing your homeland due to persecution, violence or war. You may be alone or with your surviving family, unable to communicate in English and feeling lost.” Such would be the reality for over 50 million refugees worldwide in 2008, according to the UN.

Canada has a long-standing tradition of providing protection and residency to refugees from around the globe. In the four-year period between 2004 and 2008, over 150,000 convention refugees and protected persons were embraced by our country. That made up over 12 percent of our total immigration. Ontario received the biggest share of refugees, at 57.2 percent; Quebec, second at 21.3 percent; Alberta, third at 7.2 percent; and British Columbia, fourth at 6.5 percent, which is a significantly smaller portion compared to the other jurisdictions and also considering that we attract 2.5 times as many immigrants from other classifications, at 16.7 percent of total immigration to Canada.

It’s worthwhile noting certain demographics of the refugees, who were, on average, younger than other classes of immigrants, with nearly half of them under the age of 25 on arrival. It is also the case that almost half of them spoke neither English nor French, with close to two-thirds of them having less than primary or secondary education, if any at all. And 95 percent of refugees to B.C. settled initially in the greater Vancouver region — in Surrey, in particular.

Not surprisingly, considering the census, the settlement outcome for refugees would be contingent largely on their education and skills, which tend to be minimal, as well as their physical and mental condition, which are often at their worst, not only at the time of their arrival, but really, it’s how we cultivate and develop them after they have arrived in our country. It turns out that two-thirds of our refugees will likely need trauma counseling. Children make up a third of the refugee population and will need schooling.

Regardless of the background or age or gender profile, they all need empowerment to gain a practical command of English in a Canadian context and basic educational prerequisites recognized in Canada for further vocational training and job prospects. It is the English language training and adult basic education that constitute the kind of settlement process for successful integration
[ Page 9950 ]
beyond just landing on our soil, to form the foundation to finding permanent housing, securing sustainable income, managing finances and putting roots down in their new community.

If the new federal Liberal government makes good on their promise to increase the refugee intake, our province will need to be ready with a coordinated response for that potential mass arrival. Our community service providers and private sponsors, like ISSBC, health authorities, Vancity, etc., have been hard at work to look for housing, food, transportation, health care, education and training solutions for the refugees, as the existing government support is limited and lacking.

For example, B.C.’s Welcome House, where government-assisted refugees spend their first few weeks, can only sleep 75 people. On top of that, just this year alone, this government began charging hefty tuition for ABE and ELL programs.

Opening our doors to those seeking asylum is just the first step to a long-term commitment for us as a society but, also, what we should consider a very worthy investment. Studies do show that refugees and immigrants contribute positively to the Canadian economy, with many starting small businesses that employee both themselves as well as native Canadians. In addition, they also help us offset the effects of our aging population and declining birth rate. No different than many immigrants of other classifications, our refugee group is grateful and eager.

I join my colleagues on this side of the House, calling on the government to recognize the value of accessible and affordable ABE and ELL programs.

J. Yap: I’m pleased to rise in the House today to speak to this motion and provide some detail on the ways in which newcomers to British Columbia are being supported.

[1130]

My community, Richmond, is an airport city and a gateway to many B.C. communities. Our world-class Vancouver International Airport welcomes people from around the world, some travelling on a temporary basis and others who come here with dreams of a better life in a province that is safe, welcoming and abundant in opportunities.

It’s important that we work together with the federal government, with community groups and settlement agencies, to ensure newcomers can access the services they need to put down roots and contribute to their new communities. While responsibility for such settlement services in B.C. was repatriated to the federal Department of Citizenship and Immigration Canada in April 2014, B.C. is proud of the many outstanding achievements that have been made during the 16 years that B.C. was responsible for administering immigrant settlement services in our province.

I should note that provincial funding of $4 million has been dedicated to continuing support to service providers across B.C. to ensure there are no gaps in services for clients. With the recent announcement of a new one-time, $1 million refugee readiness fund, we continue our work with the federal government to support additional refugees coming to British Columbia and to discuss a number of immigration and labour market issues.

But going back to those service providers in our communities, I’d like to highlight a few in my community, Richmond, who do great work reaching out to families and individuals who have chosen B.C. as their new home.

I can think of no better example than SUCCESS. What started out, in 1973, as an effort to assist new Canadians of Chinese descent to overcome language and cultural barriers has evolved into a multicultural, multiservice agency, assisting people at all stages of their Canadian experience. Its Richmond service centre has been serving residents of Richmond since 1989. It offers programs and services in English, Cantonese, Mandarin, Punjabi and Hindi, aimed at helping new and established Canadians to adapt and integrate into the community and make their own positive contributions.

I also want to highlight the Immigrant Services Society of B.C. It has been operating since the early 1970s and officially opened its location in Richmond in 2013, expanding services for immigrant and refugee children, youth and young adults. What’s more, in nearby East Vancouver, we’ve worked with the society on the Welcome House initiative, a one-of-a-kind refugee and newcomer centre, where the province has provided project development funding of $630,000, interim construction financing of $8.6 million and a $1 million capital grant to that project.

These types of organizations, be they in Richmond or elsewhere in the province, are important partners in our efforts to get new Canadians settled, happy and productive in our communities.

Finally, I want to highlight an important local investment in literacy for newcomers. Our government granted nearly $28,000 to the Richmond school district for the Richmond community adult literacy program. The grant comes from the $2.4 million our government has invested in community adult literacy programs in 75 B.C. communities in 2015-16. Community organizations collaborate with a public post-secondary institution in their region. In this case, the Richmond school district is collaborating with Kwantlen Polytechnic University.

These partnerships help adult learners transition from literacy programs to post-secondary studies or employment training. They provide new residents of Richmond with the literacy skills they need to participate in B.C.’s growing economy.

I’m proud of Richmond’s multicultural heritage and the benefit this brings to the community. All of these partnerships are helping to connect newcomers to services and give them the best possible start in their new country.
[ Page 9951 ]

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to stand and speak to the motion from my colleague from Burnaby–Deer Lake: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the high value of adult basic education and English-language learning programs for refugees.”

We’ve heard from many colleagues recognizing the importance and the value of adult basic education. Certainly, our education system and literacy are a foundation for a strong and vibrant economy and a cohesive society.

[1135]

The recent cuts to adult basic education and English-language-learning programs fly in the face of providing those opportunities. We heard recently from my colleague for Richmond-Steveston, with the goal of ensuring all newcomers to British Columbia have abundant opportunities to participate in a growing economy and the opportunity to connect to established services to ensure their success. The reality is that these cuts to adult basic education and English language learning undermine and undercut those opportunities for the very individuals that need this support.

Adult basic education is the provision of equivalent courses to ensure that adults have a higher rate of success to seek further education, often to either complement individuals who have graduated from grade 12 but need upgrading or individuals who have gone through the high school system but need additional courses to complete their basic high school education.

The provision of adult basic education is invaluable. I have the South Hill adult basic education centre just down the street in Vancouver-Kensington and have had the opportunity to meet with many individuals who take those courses there. We know that it’s a socioeconomic equalizer and that the individuals impacted by the cuts will disproportionately be aboriginal youth, as well as women, single parents and families and individuals from low-income backgrounds.

We even have the recognition from the Vancouver Sun editorial that the value of adult basic education is…. “The provincial funding program known as the education guarantee functioned as a poverty reduction strategy, since studies have demonstratively proven that high school completion improves employment outcomes and post-secondary training reduces the risk of unemployment.”

That is certainly the reality of the provision and the access to opportunities for British Columbians and of the importance of ensuring that, collectively, we ensure that individuals are successful — through no fault of their own and having great initiative.

We know that jobs and opportunities of the future require an increasing percentage of individuals having to access post-secondary education. Certainly, ensuring that individuals have the opportunity to upgrade their skills and the necessary requirements to be eligible to upgrade to enter those programs is important.

The barriers of tuition fees…. In some of them, institutions charge as much as $1,600 per semester in tuition fees — just really an insurmountable barrier for individuals. It provides a disincentive. We know that registration rates have dropped dramatically since these fees have come in and that that undermines the opportunity not only for the future of our economy but the need for workers to be skilled. That is a great undermining of a strong economy.

Really, we’re moving in the wrong direction around adult literacy. Adult literacy is the foundation not only for a strong economy but ensuring that individuals have opportunities.

Also, in terms of refugees, I want to reference that Surrey, Coquitlam and Burnaby get more refugees — the highest proportion. The top six countries of origin for government-assisted refugees were Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Bhutan and Myanmar. The bet is that English or French is not necessarily their first language. The provision of English language courses is important for their successful integration and, also, for opportunities and social cohesion. We need to reverse the cuts and provide opportunities for British Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: The member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head seeking leave for an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

A. Weaver: In the precinct earlier today was an amazing and inspiring group of students from Strawberry Vale Elementary School, accompanied by their equally amazing and inspiring grades 4 and 5 teacher, Kirsten Brookes.

[1140]

I recently visited the school, and these remarkable students toured me around their school’s Garry oak meadow. They pointed out a resident hawk’s nest and showed me the vast area where they had removed invasive species. They even provided me with a sample of class-made environmentally sensitive products. These students fill me with hope, and I ask that the House please, in their absence, thank them for being here.

Debate Continued

M. Morris: All of us in this House and all of us across British Columbia have seen the news showing the constant stream of refugees from Syria and all the other places over the years in the world where people have fled from their own country to find refuge in other countries. Though provincial governments have limited immigration authority, we know that we can do a lot to support Syrians and all newcomers when they arrive.

B.C. continues to invest $4 million each year for settlement services for federally ineligible clients so they can
[ Page 9952 ]
get trauma counselling, language classes and help finding work, as well as help integrating into our communities. Recognizing the severity of this global humanitarian crisis, in September our Premier, with the Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training, announced that B.C. is creating a $1 million readiness fund for Syrian refugees settling in British Columbia.

The fund is a one-time investment intended to complement existing provincial and federal support services for refugees. It will enhance existing provincial refugee programs and provide additional resources for private sponsors who are working to bring these refugees into British Columbia.

Our province is ready to welcome these newcomers, and this readiness fund will allow to us respond quickly when the need arises, by working through the support groups that are already connected with refugees. Our government is working with settlement agencies, community groups and private sponsors to make sure these funds are used to achieve the best outcomes for these refugees. We expect to have a plan in place this fall.

Helping refugees is a collaborative effort. Many immigrants choose to start their new lives in Prince George, my home community. The Immigrant and Multicultural Services Society of Prince George is a non-profit community-group-serving organization that provides settlement and integration services to immigrants and refugees throughout Prince George and the northern region of British Columbia. Our government has continued to support this organization over the years and will continue to do so in the future.

In addition to the Syrian refugee fund, our government is also investing in adult literacy. This past Friday I was pleased to join the member for Prince George–Valemount in honouring a woman from my community of Prince George as the recipient of the 2015 Council of the Federation Literacy Award for B.C.

Helen Domshy worked as Prince George’s literacy outreach coordinator for many years. She offered plain and clear language workshops, coordinating training for volunteer tutors, and created locally relevant programs to help learners improve their well-being. By helping people develop strong literacy skills, Helen has helped open the doors for people in our community.

Our government invests in adult literacy programs. This year our government has invested $2.4 million in community adult literacy programs in 75 B.C. communities. Funding is distributed to non-profit community groups to offer free literacy training that is easily accessible in local places such as schools, aboriginal friendship centres and community centres. The program is tailored to suit the need of any adult with low literacy ability and is delivered by trained volunteers offering one-to-one tutoring or small group classes.

Community organizations collaborate with the public post-secondary institutions in their region. These partnerships encourage the transition of adult learners from literacy programs to post-secondary studies and/or employment training. The programs are tailored to suit the needs of any adult with low literacy ability and are delivered by trained volunteers offering one-to-one tutoring or small group classes.

In conclusion, our government is working to do everything that we can to provide adult basic education and English language programs for refugees. We look forward to meeting with the new federal government to discuss all areas of immigration and working with them to assist all refugees who want to start a new life in our great province of British Columbia.

[1145]

H. Bains: It is always a pleasure to stand and speak on issues that are very near and dear to my constituents. I’m here to speak in favour of the resolution that is a motion proposed by my colleague from Burnaby–Deer Lake: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the high value of adult basic education and English-language learning programs for refugees.”

Probably you will see the need for this service, probably have more evidence, in the area that I represent, Surrey-Newton, or the Surrey south of the Fraser area perhaps than anywhere else. When you look at the fastest-growing community anywhere in B.C. — or in Canada, you might say — and then you look at the….

It is the most diverse, and we’re looking at adding another million people in the Lower Mainland by 2040. Most of them are to settle in the northeast sector and south of the Fraser. We don’t have the educational services as we speak today to serve the population that we have. How are we going to serve the extra — all those additional — people that will be coming in?

When you look at our demographics in B.C. — 25 percent of the people have functional literacy — then you know that we have a serious issue here. We have two groups: new immigrants, refugees, and then we have people that graduate from our own schools. They both need this service.

Adult basic education is needed by those students coming out of our school system who need to upgrade their skills and education so that they could continue on to graduate in their chosen fields, because we know — the government will not argue with this; it’s their statistics, their numbers — that over 80 percent of all future jobs will require some sort of post-secondary education or skill.

If that is the case, then why are we cutting back in an area where we actually need extra resources? It does not make sense. It does not make economic sense. It does not make social sense either.

My colleagues in Kwantlen. Two of them are here: Terri Van Steinburg and Bob Davis. These are the champions who are promoting the need for adult basic education at
[ Page 9953 ]
Kwantlen and, generally speaking, in that region. If we had more people like the people we have at Kwantlen, then I think we would do much, much better.

They’ve done really good work, and I think it’s appropriate if I could mention some of the things that they have said. They said: “If ABE was a good idea in 2007, it is an even better idea now when we have an even higher need for skilled labour.”

Two: “ABE programs are an investment in the future,” and it makes a lot of sense when they make that argument. “The government’s own research states that ‘ABE course completion lays the needed groundwork for success in post-secondary education and labour market attachment.’”

Three: “The working poor will be severely affected. With the government’s new maximum rate of $1,600 per full-time semester, tuition fees for ABE are on par with the tuition for a master’s degree in local universities.”

This clearly shows this government is missing the mark here. Charging a tuition fee to ABE learners creates another barrier to those struggling to improve their already challenging life circumstances.

These are really good fact-based arguments. I think we should support them. I think that is the only way that we can start to build a foundation for a society that takes care of itself. Also, they can utilize their full potential when they are in the job market.

We cannot do that when we are asking those people, especially refugees, especially the new immigrants, even the newest graduates, to pay a $1,600 tuition fee. That is a major, major hurdle for them to achieve that goal. It just does not make sense. So I think it is high time that we pay serious attention to this.

On top of that, the area that I represent is riddled with crime. Study after study shows that the higher the education, the lower the crime, so it makes sense to support this.

A. Weaver: I seek leave to make another announcement.

Leave granted.

[1150]

Introductions by Members

A. Weaver: In the gallery above me are 26 remarkable young students from the grades 7 and 8 classes at Monterey Middle School. They’re accompanied here by their teacher, Mai Amei, and two adult helpers. Would the House please make them feel very welcome.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Debate Continued

J. Martin: Our government recognizes the severity of the humanitarian crisis in Syria. That’s why, in September, we created a $1 million readiness fund for Syrian refugees who’d be settling in B.C. This $1 million fund is a one-time investment intended to complement existing provincial and federal support services for refugees. It will enhance existing provincial refugee programs and provide additional resources for private sponsors who are working to bring those refugees to B.C.

The province will work with settlement agencies, community groups and private sponsors to make sure these funds are used to achieve the best outcomes for these refugees.

Specifically, the funds will be used for trauma counselling through a range of psychosocial supports; groups-of-five private sponsorship — a group of five is made up of private citizens who come together to sponsor a refugee, and these funds will assist these private sponsors to help navigate the refugee sponsorship process; community-level supports, help for local governments that will be settling Syrian refugees, so there will be a welcoming community for newcomers; and foreign credential recognition.

Many Syrians will arrive in Canada with work experience and credentials from their home country. Funds will be made available for B.C.-based professional associations to quickly and fairly review and approve foreign work credentials so they can start work in B.C.

Employer supports are funds to help businesses and existing immigrant settlement organizations to employ, train and mentor Syrian refugees. These funds will also provide matching funds to employers who train and commit to hire a Syrian refugee.

Our work on the issue of refugees started long before this year’s Syrian crisis. For example, B.C. Housing began working with the Immigrant Services Society of B.C. on the Welcome House initiative in 2007. Welcome House will be a one-of-a-kind refugee and newcomer centre in the heart of East Vancouver for refugees escaping war, famine and prosecution. The B.C. government has helped this one-stop housing and support centre project to the tune of $630,000 in project development funding, interim construction financing of $8.6 million and a $1 million capital grant. We’re continuing to work with the Immigrant Services Society to see the Welcome House project through to completion and to get newcomers the help they need to come and settle in B.C. The society expects Welcome House to open in late 2016.

We also continue to invest $4 million a year for settlement services for federally ineligible clients so they can get trauma counselling, language classes and help finding a job and help integrating into their community. We want to ensure that we’re finding the very best way to support each and every newcomer when they arrive. That’s why we are currently working with settlement agencies, community groups and private sponsors to make sure that these funds are used to achieve the very best outcomes for the refugees, and we expect to have this plan in place this fall.
[ Page 9954 ]

We also look forward to meeting with the new federal government to discuss all areas of immigration and working with them to assist all refugees who want to start a new life in beautiful British Columbia.

R. Austin: It’s my privilege to stand up in support of the motion: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the high value of adult basic education and English-language learning programs for refugees.”

I think what I’ve learned from this debate here this morning is that before we are able to provide the kinds of services that all of us want to see for refugees and for those who are fortunate enough to arrive on our shores, we also need to recognize that we haven’t done a great job in the last few years of even providing these services for the citizens that live here right now.

We need to improve adult basic education and English language learning for everybody. As somebody who went back to school at the age of 39, I was one of the lucky ones. I could tell you incredible stories of how adult basic education changes the lives of people.

What do they need? They need to have no barriers. People should not have to pay for adult basic education.

[1155]

It should be a right to be able to go back to school and change your life. That’s what we all talk about in here. We all talk about improving each other and being able to support one another. Adult basic education should be a fundamental right. Even the former Attorney General of this province, in his report, stated very clearly that we should remove all barriers and allow people who dropped out of school as young people to have that opportunity to go back to school.

In my own case, I witnessed people who had gone through ABE before they came into the college programs to be in class with myself. I could tell you incredible stories of people whose lives were very, very harsh in their early years and did not succeed in school and who learned very quickly that without an essential education at the post-secondary level, life is very, very tough.

But in those days, we gave them opportunities. There was free tuition. There was a free bus pass. There were supports for single mothers to have their kids at Northwest Community College to attend the daycare. These are the kinds of programs that we need to have in place for every citizen as well as all newcomers that are coming to this country.

Imagine if you are a new refugee. You have a cultural change. You’ve probably been traumatized. You don’t speak the language, and you arrive in a province where we have been making cuts to English language learning. That just creates an even greater barrier for people to be able to get on with their lives.

I think it’s very important that we look at this and recognize that we need to be supporting all of these programs. It is an investment that brings countless benefits back to British Columbian citizens because ultimately, if somebody cannot succeed, their family cannot succeed. What does that mean? That means they’re going to be struggling. That means there are going to be those of us now looking for extra dollars to try and support families that are struggling.

ABE is the ultimate great investment. It helps people to turn their lives around, and it helps people to fulfil their lives and their potential and to help their children.

Lastly, I’d like to make this point. Where I come from, in northwest B.C., we see a huge amount of economic potential and probably the largest amount of capital investment that could take place if some of these big projects take place. And what do we have in northwest B.C.? We have a high aboriginal failure rate at school. It says here in the statistics that 18 percent of all people who are going back to school are aboriginal. But if you go and look at the map of British Columbia, those are highlighted in certain portions of British Columbia.

In the northwest, we have a very high aboriginal dropout rate yet the most potential capital investment. You have First Nations bands making impact-benefit agreements with these companies. Yet when those young people go to try and benefit from this, they have such low literacy levels that they can’t even take benefit of it.

There are so many reasons why we need to support this motion and ensure that the government — I hope — in their upcoming budget next year understands that to make an investment at the K-12 system, to help people to access adult basic education and ELL classes, as well as in the community college system, enables people to better their lives.

Madame Speaker: Member for Skeena, if you could note the hour and move adjournment of the debate.

R. Austin moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Polak moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:58 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