2016 Legislative Session: Fifth Session, 40th Parliament
HANSARD

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.

The printed version remains the official version.

official report of

Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Tuesday, April 5, 2016

Morning Sitting

Volume 36, Number 3

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

TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 2016

The House met at 10:06 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Speaker’s Statement

WOMEN’S RIGHT TO VOTE
AND WOMEN IN POLITICS

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, today — April 5, 2016 — marks the 99th anniversary of the adoption of legislation by this Legislature providing women the right to vote in British Columbia and to seek provincial office.

We are also approaching the 100th anniversary of the by-election victory of Mary Ellen Smith, the first woman elected to the Legislative Assembly in 1918. Today we can celebrate how far we have come since 1917 — proud to be a member of a Legislative Assembly which leads the country with 38 percent of our members being women, the highest level in Canada’s history.

The member for Westside-Kelowna is the Premier of our province, and the member for Victoria–Beacon Hill has served as a Leader of the Official Opposition. In 1949, Nancy Hodges became the first woman elected to the position of Speaker of a Legislative Assembly and also the first in the Commonwealth. It is an honour to follow in her footsteps today.

I would like to invite all women members to be part of a commemorative photo marking this 99th anniversary, which will be taken this chamber at noon today. Following the photo, there will be a special luncheon event in the Legislative Library gathering room. I invite all women members to attend.

Tributes

DEATH OF RCMP OFFICER

Hon. M. Morris: I’d like to let this House know that in the early hours of this morning, we lost a member of the RCMP on duty in Langford. The member was on duty at a traffic stop and was unfortunately struck and killed on duty.

She’s the mother of two young children, and my condolences go out to her family, her workmates in the RCMP and the police in general. They provide such a great service to us, and this is a tragic loss.

M. Karagianis: I’d like to join with the Solicitor General. It was terrible news today of the accident that claimed the life of a member of the RCMP detachment that both the member for Juan de Fuca and I share.

Our thoughts are with her family and with the other officers at the scene and the detachment during this very difficult time.

I think we all know and appreciate the dangerous nature of this work and the dedication and courage of the men and women who provide protective services in our communities. I know that all members will join me in offering our sincere condolences to the family of this officer.

Introductions by Members

Hon. P. Fassbender: This morning, many of us on both sides of the House had a chance to attend the tenth annual prayer breakfast that was held. I know the people who organize that. Their heart was to assure all of us in this House that they pray for us and pray for the leadership. It was a great event, and when we hear incidents like this, I know they pray for safety for all of those that serve our communities in so many ways.

[1010]

I am delighted to welcome five people who came over from the Lower Mainland to show their support for this House and this community — Ernie and Violet Nesdoly, Wayne and Diane Nelson, and Joyce Jungclaus, who are with us in the House. I’d ask all members to make them feel welcome and thank them for their prayer of support.

Statements

TLA’AMIN TREATY

Hon. J. Rustad: Today is a very proud day for the Tla’amin people and, really, for all of British Columbia. Today at 12:01 a.m., the Tla’amin final agreement came into effect, ushering in a new era for the Tla’amin community as a self-governing First Nation.

The Tla’amin treaty is now the fourth modern treaty to come into effect in British Columbia, and I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Hegus Clint Williams and the Tla’amin people on this historic and generational achievement. I also want to take the chance to thank our dedicated staff within the province, the negotiators, as well as the federal negotiators and the Tla’amin negotiators in helping to bring this into effect.

The Tla’amin Nation now owns its treaty land and the resources on that land and has authority over a range of jurisdictions. I know that the Tla’amin people are very excited about their future and the new economic opportunities to come.

British Columbia is a proud partner with the Tla’amin people, and I’d ask all of the people in this House to join me in celebrating the Tla’amin people in getting out from underneath the Indian Act and for being able to now build a prosperous and proud future for their people.
[ Page 11756 ]

Introductions by Members

S. Chandra Herbert: I would like to welcome and ask everyone else to welcome Theresa Mackay, who is the executive director of the B.C. Museums Association. She joins us in this House today, bringing over 25 years of experience in culture, heritage, marketing and much more. I look forward to meeting with her later today.

Statements

TLA’AMIN TREATY

N. Simons: I would like to join the Minister of Aboriginal Relations in congratulating the Tla’amin First Nation. Last night they had the ceremonial burning of the Indian Act. I think it represents for them an end to, obviously, some negative public policy and signifies, I think, to everyone the desire of the Tla’amin people to move forward with prosperity and hope for all.

I personally hope that this treaty represents to them all of the best hopes for the future, and may it be even more successful than they hope.

Tributes

WOMEN’S WORLD HOCKEY VOLUNTEERS

Hon. T. Lake: Following up from my comments yesterday, I want to, together with the Minister of Transportation, thank the volunteer committee of the IIHF Women’s World Hockey Championship in Canada’s tournament capital.

Unfortunately, last night our Canadian women’s hockey team put up a tremendous fight against their arch nemesis, the United States, and lost, one goal to nothing, in overtime. Both goalies were amazing. The crowd was electrified all night, and the whole community was engaged, as was the province.

I just want to thank Norm Daley, who is a tremendously giving individual who leads so many volunteer committees. These events don’t happen without volunteers. I wanted to say a big shout-out to Norm Daley and his committee, the city of Kamloops and the IIHF Women’s World Hockey committee, as well as the United States — deserving champions — and really thank the Canadian team for an exciting performance all week.

Introductions by Members

G. Kyllo: I’m joined today in the gallery by two guests, very dear friends, Ellie Kenori and Jane Guy, who are visiting us from Vancouver. I’d like the House to please make them feel very welcome.

Tributes

100 MILE HOUSE WRANGLERS

D. Barnett: Well, it’s my turn to brag. Everybody is bragging about the Rockets and the Blazers and this and that. Well, a three-year Junior B hockey team by the name of the 100 Mile House Wranglers won the Kootenay International Junior Hockey League against the Kimberly Dynamiters, four games to one.

They are in Victoria, playing for the next two or three nights. So if you’ve got a chance, get out and say: “Go, Wranglers, go.”

[1015]

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

AUTISM AWARENESS AND TREATMENT

J. Wickens: April is Autism Awareness Month, but I have to be honest. Every year this month comes and goes, and I have mixed feelings. You see, it’s 2016, and I believe that it’s time to move beyond awareness, and it’s time to see action. Autism action is what I know that families and individuals need.

When my son was two years old, out of the blue one day he fell limp in my arms, his face went blue, and he had his very first grand mal seizure. That event triggered years of hospital and specialist visits. Eventually, after an 18-month wait-list, he received an autism diagnosis at the age of five.

It has been five years since that diagnosis, and my beautiful, precious little boy has worked incredibly hard every day. My husband and I have spent any and all savings that we have, we have forgone family vacations, and we have put everything that we can into applied behaviour analysis for our son. Today he is an independent, funny little boy that has made gains in all cognitive areas, bringing him close to the same level of functioning as his peers.

I know firsthand the meaning of: “You pay now, or you pay later.” Children and individuals with autism deserve access to the interventions necessary that will allow them to reach their own personal potential. That access should not be restricted and dependent upon whether or not parents can somehow find a way to scramble and pay for it.

What I ask all of my colleagues in the House today is, in addition to lighting it up blue — and I thank the Speaker for doing that in the House — and wearing our puzzle pieces, let’s think about what families really need and collectively act to make that closer to a possibility.

BOWEN ISLAND

J. Sturdy: While Bowen Island is just three kilometres from the Mainland, like many islands it is a world apart,
[ Page 11757 ]
with a unique and storied past. Bowen is within the traditional territory of the Skwxwú7mesh Nation. The Snug Cove area, along with other parts of the island, were used from time immemorial as seasonal campsites for hunting and gathering.

The island was first charted in 1791 by the Spanish and was subsequently named by the British to honour Rear-Adm. James Bowen. In 1871, homesteaders built houses and started brickworks, supplied by a rare blue clay deposit found in Mannion Bay. Early settlers planted orchards, started farms. The island was selectively logged towards the end of the 19th century, while the Western Explosives Co. set up a dynamite plant on Tunstall Bay.

Coastal steamers carried goods to and from Bowen, and it was aboard these early coastal packers that the first tourists arrived. As early as 1900, the tourism potential of Bowen was recognized by Capt. John Cates, who built the Terminal Hotel, picnic grounds, the farms, a store, a bakery and cabins, all of which was bought out and then operated by the Terminal Steamship Co. and later the Union Steamship Co.

In the 1940s and the 1950s, an artist colony became a retreat for many famous Canadian authors and artists, including Earle Birney; Alice Munro; Margaret Laurence; Jack Shadbolt; and Malcolm Lowry — who, I understand, finished his last book, ironically enough called October Ferry to Gabriola, while on Bowen.

Today 3,500 people live on Bowen year-round, with an additional 1,500 people coming as summer residents. Bowen is an island with a complicated set of local government jurisdictions. It is currently the only municipality within the Islands Trust, but is also subject to the jurisdiction of Metro Vancouver, including being part of TransLink, although with the real access provided by B.C. Ferries.

All in all, Bowen continues as a perfect place for a restorative retreat, a day trip, an overnight stay — a stone’s throw away and a world apart.

[1020]

JIM WAKEFORD

N. Simons: I’d like to speak about a constituent of mine who has an incredibly strong track record in fighting for social justice. Jim Wakeford, in 1967, started Oolagen Youth Mental Health, a not-for-profit children’s mental health agency and U of T teaching facility, long before the issue of child and youth mental health, or mental health in general, ever hit anyone’s radar.

After 20 years serving as its executive director, he saw another need for his advocacy with the emergence of HIV and AIDS. Along with a large group of volunteers, he was with June Callwood and Margaret McBurney, who were appalled at the way that society was “shunning beautiful young men dying of AIDS” when they founded Casey House, the first stand-alone treatment facility and first hospice for people with HIV/AIDS, where Jim Wakeford would serve as executive director.

In 1998, he found himself living with AIDS and was concerned about the nutrition afforded to people suffering from the disease. He created the first program called Food for Life that was informally known as Wakeford’s Wagons, which brought food with good nutritional value to those living with AIDS.

Living in Toronto he saw young men dying early and ending their lives with little assistance or dignity. He knew it should be a human right to be able to choose when to die with dignity, with medical assistance, and challenged the law, being represented by a now Ontario Superior Court judge. While it was unsuccessful, it certainly paved the way for the discussion.

In 1999, he was the first person to successfully challenge laws around medical marijuana. However, he won that right without remedy and consequently found himself in the crosshairs of the criminal justice system, which threw him off track and made him find his way to the west coast, where he lives now.

He hopes, with the assistance of me and with the Member of Parliament, to exonerate him from the charges that he was charged with. He’s certainly a wonderful man that deserves a lot of credit. Thank you for the opportunity to speak about him.

FINANCIAL LITERACY INITIATIVE

J. Yap: Here in British Columbia we know the value of a balanced budget. In fact, we just celebrated our fourth consecutive one. But we know that it’s not only important for government to keep its financial house in order; it’s just as important for families and individuals to do the same. That’s why it’s so important that financial literacy is taught at an early age, because those habits can last a lifetime.

On April 20, the Canadian Foundation for Economic Education is hosting the annual Talk with Our Kids about Money Day. It’s held on the third Wednesday each April in partnership with BMO Financial Group. It’s a day for families and teachers to make a point of talking with kids about money, whether at the dinner table or in the classroom.

The home program features an informative website that provides parents and guardians with ideas, activities, tools and resources that help them engage in age-appropriate conversations and interactions about money. Meanwhile, the school program specifically targets grade 7 students and helps teachers plan lessons and projects that focus on a money topic.

Some examples include the common costs of running a home, how to create a budget, and the cost of owning and caring for a pet. Some schools even organize money fairs in which students in grades 6, 7 and 8 undertake research on money topics and then prepare creative displays that showcase what they’ve learned.
[ Page 11758 ]

Kudos to the Canadian Foundation for Economic Education’s B.C. coordinator, Kumi Abercrombie; to BMO Financial Group; and my constituent, board member Tung Chan, for their work in helping kids to learn the value of money at an early age.

THE PEAK RADIO STATION
IN PORT ALBERNI

S. Fraser: CJAV radio started broadcasting April 1, 1946. On Friday, we celebrated their 70th birthday at beautiful Char’s Landing in Port Alberni. Let me give you a brief history of this great radio station that actually was a positive impact on radio all over the province.

Back in 1946, the original owner was Harold Warren. He was a part owner and operator of the Capitol Theatre. Jack Cullen started as a news reader at CJAV in November 1946 before going on to his very famous Owl Prowl radio show on CKNW. Jim Robson started his broadcast career at CJAV on July 1, 1952, at the tender age of 17. He later went, of course, to CKNW to become the voice of the Vancouver Canucks.

[1025]

Other people who got their start in broadcasting at CJAV in the ’50s include George Cowie at CFUN, Vancouver; Lyle Feltham at CHUB, Nanaimo; and Bob Switzer, CBC, Vancouver. Also in the 1950s, CJAV had the only male Chinese-Canadian disc jockey in Canada. As a teenager, Robbie Mar hosted a weekend jazz show that was very popular with Port Alberni teens.

CJAV studios were surrounded by water during the Good Friday tsunami of 1964 that hit Port Alberni. They broadcast throughout that weekend — and the water — helping with the emergency efforts in the valley.

In 2005, CJAV switched to the FM dial and became 93.3 The Peak radio and was purchased by the Jim Pattison Broadcast Group. Today 93.3 The Peak employs six full-time and four casual employees and is known as the “Sound of the valley.” What a station. What a history.

Would this House please join me in offering a hearty applause of congratulations and a happy birthday to 93.3 The Peak on their 70th birthday.

COLDEST NIGHT OF THE YEAR
FUNDRAISING WALK IN COMOX VALLEY

D. McRae: I’m certain that all members of this chamber have heard of and quite possibly participated in the national awareness and fundraising campaign, the Coldest Night of the Year. For 25 years, people have been gathering in communities large and small across Canada to walk two, five or ten kilometres.

It’s a chance to help raise money for local charities that serve those in need and, in a small way, for individuals to feel the challenge faced by those experiencing homelessness, especially in the cold winter months.

This past February the Comox Valley held its first Coldest Night of the Year event. It was amazing to see 500 individuals from 52 teams come together and raise almost $70,000 for two great organizations. The first organization, Dawn to Dawn, has been servicing vulnerable Comox Valley residents for almost ten years. They provide transitional housing to get individuals and families off the streets and into safe living environments. They also provide a range of services to help people gain and keep their independence, with the goal of moving into long-term housing.

The second organization, the Comox Valley Transition Society, is approaching its 30th year of providing supports to the Comox Valley residents. They provide a wide range of support services, but their focus is to assist women, often with children, who are in abusive relationships and feel they have nowhere to go. They operate a safe house with 14 beds, and they also run a substance abuse recovery house where women can stay for up to three months as they work to recover from substance abuse.

On the Coldest Night of the Year, I joined my daughter Gracie, who walked with a group of teachers, students, parents and custodians from Puntledge Park Elementary. The Comox Valley, as a total, led the province in fundraising and came 13th overall across the nation. It’s a great feat, considering many of the communities are five or six times larger in population.

I want to thank the organizers of the Comox Valley who brought the Coldest Night of the Year to our community, the great organizations who benefitted from the community’s generosity and the 500 walkers, young and old, who raised money and awareness for an important issue in all our communities.

Oral Questions

GUN VIOLENCE IN SURREY

S. Hammell: Yesterday I asked the Solicitor General what he was doing to protect the citizens of Surrey. I asked him why my constituents and my neighbours should have any confidence in this minister after they’ve seen the 29th and the 30th shootings of the year, barely a week into April.

The minister repeated the same “blame the families” he and his colleagues have given time and time again. And I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that at the very moment the minister was telling Surrey residents that he had things under control, there was another shooting in Surrey.

My question is to the minister. How many more shootings have to happen in Surrey before he gets serious about stopping this out-of-control violence?

Hon. M. Morris: We’re not satisfied with the regularity of these type of offences, these occurrences, by any stretch of the imagination.
[ Page 11759 ]

For well over a year now, the RCMP and all police agencies in B.C. have been focused on eliminating or reducing these types of events. We have surveillance teams that follow these individuals around day and night. We have covert, we have overt operations.

[1030]

These individuals — if they look over one shoulder, they’re going to see a police officer. If they look over the other shoulder, they’re going to see one of their adversaries. What we’re saying is: “Leave gang life now.” We’ve got all kinds of programs in place, as well, for them to get out of their gang life.

We’re using state-of-the-art technical surveillance techniques to try and track these individuals and gain evidence so that we can successfully prosecute them at the end of the day. We’ve been liaising and meeting with experts from across North America involved in gang activity and all the different techniques that we use internationally to try and quell these disturbances.

So we are working. There are hundreds and hundreds of police officers that are solely focused on reducing these events.

Madame Speaker: Surrey–Green Timbers on a supplemental.

S. Hammell: Saturday, Sunday and yesterday. First the gangsters had gun battles on streets at night, then they started shooting around schoolyards in the dark, but yesterday, in broad daylight at two in the afternoon, as this minister was standing in this House, someone fired multiple shots at a car on 140th Street across from Bear Creek Park.

My constituents are scared; they are worried. They want answers, and they want action. My question to the minister, to the Minister of Public Safety: what is he going to do to put a stop to the out-of-control violence on the streets of Surrey?

Hon. M. Morris: To date, these highly trained police teams throughout the Lower Mainland, throughout the province, have checked thousands of individuals involved in these crimes. They’ve arrested hundreds. They’ve laid all kinds of criminal charges against these individuals. They’ve seized hundreds of weapons. They’ve seized hundreds of thousands of dollars. They seized, just recently, $4½ million worth of drugs involved, in addition to the drugs that they’ve seized throughout the past year.

There are all kinds of activities going on, and we won’t rest until we put these individuals behind bars. We’re going to work with families in Surrey. The families in Surrey are just as dedicated to seeing an end to this as the police are, and I think, working hand in hand with the families throughout Surrey, that we will put an end to this violence.

B. Ralston: The Minister of Public Safety talks about addressing gun violence in Surrey, but despite everything that he’s said, including here this morning, the problem is getting worse, not better. We’re now averaging a shooting every three days, so perhaps the minister can give us some more substantive answers.

I know the minister speaks with the RCMP detachment regularly. Is he confident that the steps taken by the Surrey RCMP meet the highest operational standards of policing in Canada?

Hon. M. Morris: Today, yesterday, for weeks, for months, we have had hundreds of dedicated experts within all the policing universe within the Lower Mainland and within British Columbia working on this file, checking thousands of people, charging hundreds of people, seizing millions of dollars worth of drugs. They are effective, and we’re going to continue to do this until such time as these incidents are reduced.

Madame Speaker: The member for Surrey-Whalley on a supplemental.

B. Ralston: The minister has expressed some concern that there are additional police resources deployed in Surrey. Can he explain what additional specialized resources that need to be deployed are not currently contained in the Surrey RCMP budget and the Solicitor General budget as well? In other words, what specific steps is he going to take to stop the violence because the steps taken so far aren’t working?

[1035]

Hon. M. Morris: The police in British Columbia, the RCMP in Surrey, have expertise. They are very capable of doing the work. There are hundreds of them on the road. They’re checking thousands of people. They’re charging hundreds of people. They’re going to continue to do that until these shootings are diminished.

H. Bains: What we have heard so far, yesterday and before, from this minister and this government…. They continue to read the same script, but no actions. No results.

My constituents and all Surrey residents are looking for answers. They deserve answers. The minister yesterday said that it’s up to the families to come forward and it’s up to the community to come forward. Of course, parents and the community are working together with the little help they have from this government.

Then he went on to say that they have made arrests. They seized more weapons. They seized more vehicles. It proves that the RCMP is also doing everything they can with the little resources they’re given.

We have a minister who is the chief law enforcement officer of this province, and the safety of residents rests with him. So my question is to the minister again. If the
[ Page 11760 ]
gang violence continues to escalate, why does he feel that the action that he is repeating here regularly is working?

Hon. M. Morris: The hundreds of officers, dedicated officers, that are working in Surrey and on this file have charged hundreds of people, checked thousands of people, seized hundreds of vehicles, and seized millions and millions of dollars worth of drugs. That shows their effectiveness.

They’re also working hand in hand with families, with community groups, in trying to end gang violence. There are programs in place to identify youth who are at risk that we can hopefully keep from going into gang violence. There are people that are addressing gang violence with the individuals who have been arrested and are incarcerated, trying to show them a better way of life.

The communities are involved, and the communities are just as dedicated to ending this as the police are. They’re going to be working hand in hand with the police to mitigate the situation.

Madame Speaker: The member for Surrey-Newton on a supplemental.

H. Bains: So what do you hear from the minister again? There’s nothing more he can do. He’s throwing his hands in the air. There’s nothing more he can do.

We are asking questions — what specifically can he do to deal with this issue? — and he has no more answers. The more he says that they’re acting on crime, things get worse. He goes back to his talking points, repeats the same thing time and again, but our constituents are looking for answers. They deserve answers.

Results are clear. Whatever strategy this minister is repeating isn’t working, so my question is this. If lack of police resources, help from parents and communities, isn’t enough, then is it a lack of leadership coming from this minister and from this government?

Hon. M. Morris: There’s great leadership out there amongst the police resources. We have dedicated hundreds and hundreds of hours to resolving this issue. I’m regularly briefed and updated on what is transpiring out there. I’ve been very satisfied with the action they’re taking, and I believe it’s moving in the right direction. I’m meeting with the mayor of Surrey and the RCMP E division…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. M. Morris: …to discuss what other strategies may be available that we can employ. But at this particular point, there are all kinds of resources on the ground focused on this issue.

[1040]

STAFFING LEVELS IN
SENIORS CARE FACILITIES

J. Darcy: Yesterday I asked the Minister of Health about his plans to force seniors in Nanaimo to endure the second major disruption in their care in the last two years, and the minister replied that the quality of care for residents was his number one concern.

Well, last month the seniors advocate released a detailed report that indicated nearly 80 percent — 80 percent — of government-funded seniors facilities in this province do not even meet the government’s own staffing guidelines. In fact, the seniors advocate…. The minister said yesterday that she does amazing work, and I agree with that absolutely. The seniors advocate was surprised to discover how badly this government is shortchanging seniors.

Can the Minister of Health tell us why 80 percent of the care homes that this government funds do not meet the staffing guidelines established by this government?

Hon. T. Lake: The seniors advocate — the first seniors advocate in Canada — does some great work, and we appreciate the information that she provides to government, the recommendations that she provides to government. That’s why this House has a bill before it to increase the flexibility around assisted living. That was a recommendation of the seniors advocate, one that we are acting upon. So we will continue to have discussions.

It’s important to note that hours of care are a guideline for planning purposes. Seniors are not widgets. They need individual plans of care. We make sure that health authorities look at each individual resident as a person, and we want to assure them and their families that each of those residents, as an individual, has an individual care plan. And it’s important that we shift resources into home and community.

This is what we are doing. We have recognized that in our plan. The members opposite should support us when we do that instead of standing up every time we do that and criticizing those actions.

Madame Speaker: To remind members, the Chair will hear the answer and the question.

J. Darcy: The minister is right that our seniors are not widgets, and the impact of not having proper staffing levels in residential care is human and is profound. We’re talking about whether there are enough staff to ensure that our seniors are toileted in time. We’re talking about whether there are enough staff to ensure that our seniors get even one bath a week, much less two. These are the seniors who built our province — our loved ones, our parents and our grandparents — and they deserve better from this government.

According to the study that the seniors advocate reported, fully one-third of seniors in care are being given
[ Page 11761 ]
antipsychotic medication when they don’t even have a diagnosis of a psychosis. What do the facility operators say? Well, they take their cues from the government. They say: “We can only do what we’re funded to do.” In other words, if the government wanted facilities that were properly staffed, they would properly fund them.

My question to the minister is this. If quality of care for our seniors is really a priority, why are you shortchanging 80 percent of our most vulnerable seniors?

Hon. T. Lake: As usual, the answer to every problem from the NDP is more money. We’ve heard that time and time again. So if they would like to listen….

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members will come to order. The members will come to order.

Please continue.

Hon. T. Lake: We know that we have seniors awaiting placement in residential care in what we call alternative level of care beds throughout the province of British Columbia. We know that we need to shift resources into home and community, because we know we can provide higher quality care at a lower cost in community. Every time that we do that, the members opposite get up and say: “You can’t do that. You can’t do that.” Heaven help anyone who shifts funding into home and community to allow seniors to be looked after properly.

[1045]

We are committed to creating a sustainable, long-lasting health care system for the province of British Columbia, despite the opposition and their comments.

B.C. HYDRO PAYMENTS
TO BIOMASS FACILITIES

A. Dix: Can the Minister of Energy confirm that B.C. Hydro has been paying costs and penalties rather than take power from pulp industry biomass facilities in Prince George, Nanaimo and other communities? Has B.C. Hydro been paying not to get power while raising rates on customers?

Hon. B. Bennett: Rather than not be certain about the answer, I’ll take it on notice and get back to the member.

WATER QUALITY IN SPALLUMCHEEN AREA

G. Heyman: Last month the Ministry of Environment senior contaminated sites officer emailed the chair of the Steele Springs waterworks board, Brian Upper, stating he was reversing his commitment to require a site-risk classification report be submitted under the contaminated sites regulation. He then asked Dr. Upper to delete the earlier email he had sent. Apparently, it’s now government’s policy to require private citizens to delete their own records of government communications.

My question for the Environment Minister is: who ordered a senior ministry official to suspend his plan of action so that the ministry could wash its hands of responsibility to protect clean, safe drinking water for Spallumcheen Hullcar residents and the Splatsin First Nation?

Hon. M. Polak: I have the expectation that all who work within the ministry will conduct themselves with the highest level of integrity, especially with respect to information surrounding people’s health. I’m not familiar with the specifics that the member mentions, but I’m certainly happy to look into that.

With respect to decisions made around the notification of community, the assessment as to actions that should be taken on the ground, the member well knows that those decisions are taken by statutory decision–makers. They have technical expertise that allow them to make decisions to protect human health and the environment — and in this case, human health in particular.

The Ministry of Environment has been working very closely with the Interior Health, as well as the Ministry of Agriculture, and holding community meetings as well as working together with those in the farming community to ensure that we can improve the health of this aquifer while, at the same time, not endangering the activities of those in a community that has seen farming for hundreds of years.

Madame Speaker: Vancouver-Fairview on a supplemental.

G. Heyman: I was in Spallumcheen two weeks ago, and I met with people who attended the community meeting. They had gone there with hope, and they left the meeting feeling it was going to be business as usual — more conversation, more study and increasing nitrate contamination levels.

There is no legal or other reason for the contaminated sites regulation to be swept aside in a matter as serious as drinking water contamination. A Splatsin First Nation councillor told me that tests from her 285-foot-deep well revealed nitrate levels more than double the Canada drinking water quality guideline.

The 2016 crop season is upon us. Chief Christian of the Splatsin First Nation, along with residents who depend on the Hullcar aquifer for clean water, are calling for a moratorium on further manure spraying while the Ministry of Environment continues its two-years-and-counting studies.

Will the Minister of Environment end her excuses and commit today that she will put a stop to manure spraying on the Hullcar aquifer to protect clean, safe drinking water for those who depend on it?

[1050]

Hon. M. Polak: The member well knows that in areas around the province where there has been intensive agriculture for generations, there are, from time to time, challenges with aquifers. This is not the only location.

The answer that the member seems to be suggesting is that the only solution is to shut down farming in those areas. Perhaps that’s what he wants to get up and announce here.

The actions that the ministry has taken, together with Interior Health, are intended to get to a place where the health of this aquifer is improved. They individually assess each application to apply effluent to the fields. They have approved some. They have denied others. All of those are based on testing that is conducted. Results are supplied to Interior Health.

These ministries are working together, working with the farms and will continue to inform the community to ensure that we have a long-term solution for the health of this aquifer while, at the same time, being able to maintain what has been for generations an agricultural area of British Columbia.

L. Popham: The Minister of Environment has not released soil and manure test results to the Steele Springs water board and the mayor of Spallumcheen because she claims the information does not belong to the government and is protected by privacy legislation, yet these tests were a requirement of the ministry’s own 2014 inspector’s order. Residents can’t understand why information required by the ministry’s own order is now hidden by the minister simply because she chose to allow the farm in question to test itself.

Why is the Environment Minister withholding critical information from those directly at risk from dangerously contaminated drinking water?

Hon. M. Polak: First, let me be clear. Every single piece of information that is related to decisions around the health of residents in the area has been provided to Interior Health. They make decisions as to water quality advisories. To the members of the public — and it’s on our website — every single piece of information that we can legally publish has been released.

There is one document in question. We are seeking advice with respect to whether or not we may release it. If we are legally able to, we will. It’s our intent to release every single piece of information we have.

The member will also know that the Privacy Commissioner is also reviewing this, and if the Privacy Commissioner’s office has any recommendations, we will follow those.

Madame Speaker: Saanich South on a supplemental.

L. Popham: The minister’s explanation sounds like a cross between Monty Python and Catch-22. She can’t contract out her obligations to protect environment and public health. The Freedom of Information Act…

Interjections.

Madame Speaker: Members, this House will come to order.

Please continue.

L. Popham: …requires public disclosure of information “without delay” about a risk of significant harm to the environment or to the health and safety of the public. FOI Commissioner Denham has repeatedly called on this government to comply with this requirement.

Can the Environment Minister agree that the residents of Hullcar valley and Splatsin First Nation are legally entitled to test information and hand it over?

Hon. M. Polak: I will repeat for the member that every single piece of testing information that we are legally allowed to provide has been published. There is one document that has not been provided because it is believed not to be legal to provide it. With respect to the member’s prewritten question, I would rather take the advice of Commissioner Denham, which will come in due time, and we will release information that we can.

[1055]

S. Fraser: When I visited Spallumcheen with my colleagues, we had the privilege of meeting with Chief Wayne Christian of the Splatsin First Nation and his council. He explained to us why he is so concerned for his community and the water quality. Two of the three private wells they use draw water from the Hullcar aquifer. Tests from one show nitrate levels that are double what Canada’s guidelines say are acceptable. Their water is contaminated.

Chief Christian has formally requested that this government halt the spraying of the liquid manure on the aquifer that is contaminating the water supply and that the Splatsin First Nation and Chief Christian be fully involved in any review process that follows. Chief Christian is still waiting for an answer.

My question is for the Minister of Environment. Will she confirm those answers for Chief Christian today?

Hon. M. Polak: Certainly, as I’ve outlined, our staff are engaged in working with the community. They want to ensure that the First Nations are involved as well.

There has not been application of effluent in the area since August of 2015. If there are any requests — and at this stage, I am not aware of any — for further application, those are reviewed by statutory decision–makers with the technical expertise to make that determination as to whether or not it’s appropriate.

At this stage, the best work is being done between all agencies — Interior Health, Ministry of Environment,
[ Page 11763 ]
Ministry of Agriculture — to ensure that we can improve the health of this aquifer and, at the same time, allow for the traditional agriculture that has taken place in that area for generations.

Madame Speaker: Alberni–Pacific Rim on a supplemental.

S. Fraser: Chief Christian has a role to play in protecting his community. I would suggest the minister should play the same role in protecting his community and the people in the region.

Chief Christian has put a simple and reasonable set of questions to the minister, to the government, and they have not responded. That’s the issue here. That’s unacceptable, and it’s no way to work with First Nations in dealing with reconciliation in this province. The Splatsin First Nation deserve to be treated on a government-to-government basis and not with silence — not when the health of their community is at stake.

I will ask the minister again. Will she contact Chief Christian today and finally give him the answers to the questions he has asked?

Hon. M. Polak: We certainly endeavour to answer any and all questions, especially with respect to people’s health and safety, as quickly as we can. Very often those involve questions of a technical nature, and it takes some time for staff, who are also engaged in working directly on the issue, to provide that information. But I will certainly ensure that that information is provided to the chief with all due speed.

PERMIT FOR SOIL DUMPING IN
SHAWNIGAN LAKE WATERSHED

B. Routley: The community of Shawnigan Lake has been vindicated. For years, the community has expressed concerns that the contaminated soil dump could harm their drinking water, and this is a site permitted by this government. For years, this government ignored the community, local governments, experts and the mounting evidence. Well, Shawnigan Lake celebrated a great victory on World Water Day two weeks ago.

It took the B.C. Supreme Court, however. The B.C. Supreme Court ruled that the contaminated soil site is not a permitted use under the regional zoning bylaws, and the court decision included an injunction against further contaminated soil being dumped at the site.

My question to the Minister of Environment is: will this government finally admit that they were wrong, stop this nonsense and cancel this permit for good?

Hon. M. Polak: First, let me reiterate for this House and for the people of the Shawnigan area: despite what the member says about mounting evidence, there is no evidence of contamination of the drinking water coming from this site — not any.

Interjections.

[1100]

Madame Speaker: Members will come to order.

Hon. M. Polak: The member will also know that in addition to the Supreme Court of British Columbia decision, there is also an appeal that has been filed. I’m not going to comment on matters that are before the courts.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. M. de Jong: In Committee A, Committee of Supply, for the information of members, the estimates of the Ministry of Advanced Education; and in this chamber, second reading debate on Bill 12.

[R. Lee in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 12 — FORESTS, LANDS AND
NATURAL RESOURCE OPERATIONS
STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2016

Hon. S. Thomson: I move that Bill 12, the Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Statutes Amendment Act, 2016, be read a second time.

The proposed amendments are to the Wildfire Act, the Forest Act and the Wildlife Act. These will help reduce human interference with wildfire suppression activities, provide more certainty regarding the province’s timber and wood fibre supply and enable streamlining of wildlife permits and licences.

Proposed amendments to the Wildfire Act will help enhance wildfire prevention efforts and discourage human activities that could interfere with firefighting activities. Proposed amendments clarify the definition of interference to include actions that could hinder firefighting activities — for example, blocking access to a wildfire control area. The proposed changes would also clarify that interference does not have to be intentional to constitute a contravention.

The proposed amendments to the Wildfire Act would also strengthen compliance and enforcement provisions by establishing an offence and penalties of up to $100,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year for failing to comply with a stop-work order. An example would be a failure to stop using equipment that could generate sparks and potentially create a hazard.
[ Page 11764 ]

Proposed amendments to the Forest Act support economic opportunities for communities by increasing fibre supply and allowing the expansion of some existing community forest agreements, enhancing our ongoing efforts to build community forest opportunities in the province, which we have seen grow to over 53 community forest agreements in place in British Columbia currently.

[1105]

This will help us deal with many of those current community forest agreements that are looking for expanded opportunities and new opportunities in existing community forests, along with continuing to build the opportunities for new community forest agreements in British Columbia.

We’ll support the management and sustainability of timber supplies by providing the chief forester and the minister with approved tools to set, change and enforce allowable annual cut partitions.

Lastly, these changes would improve residual fibre use through increased certainty of fibre supply for primary and secondary harvesters to assist with their operational planning.

We’re also proposing amendments to the Wildlife Act that would remove legislated barriers and facilitate an e-licensing system. Initially these amendments will support a new e-licensing system for hunters, allowing them to apply for licences, complete compulsory reporting requirements and make payments on line. Over time, other permits related to fish and wildlife would also move on line.

Amendments to the Wildlife Act will also streamline administrative requirements for guide-outfitters by allowing an agent of a guide-outfitter to submit a guide report. These changes would also strengthen compliance and enforcement tools by allowing fines and tickets for first-time offenders that would be more in line with the nature of the offence, instead of requiring court conviction for the fines.

Together, all of these amendments will support the B.C. Wildfire Service in protecting our communities from wildfire, promote business certainty for the forest sector and continue streamlining permit and licence application processes for the fish and game industry in British Columbia.

I look forward to the comments from the members in the Legislature and, again, will also look forward to taking these important amendments forward in the committee stage of the bill following second reading.

H. Bains: It is an honour to speak on Bill 12. I’m happy to do that. The minister outlined a number of changes that are listed in Bill 12. Those are some of the good ones.

I think we need to look at that in detail when we are in committee stage, especially when you are talking about the efforts to crack down on people disrupting fire-line suppression efforts, as we’ve seen in the past. You’ve seen — it was in the media — that the firefighting crews were working hard to suppress the fires, and the water bombers had to be grounded because some drones were observed in the area. That makes that exercise very, very dangerous, so it was grounded.

As a result of that, you can imagine the impact on those people on the ground and on the fires that are supposed to be put under control and how that leaves it in a questionable situation. So there are some good things.

I think the bill talks about — I believe it is through regulations; we’ll ask those questions — increasing the fines when someone is seen to be or is caught disrupting firefighting exercises. Also, if someone ignores fire bans, the fines will go up, my understanding is, from $345 currently to $1,150. Also, if you fail to report a wildfire, that fine also goes up from $115 to $383.

There are some other areas in the bill. We’ll talk about it in detail in committee stage. There are definition changes to AACs, giving the chief forester some additional leeway to specify portions of the AAC.

[1110]

Also, the bill gives authority to the minister, who is required to make some payments to non-BCTS timber holders under certain circumstances.

I think there are some technical and complex items of the bill, and we will deal with them as we speak and go clause by clause in our committee stage.

I’m seeing some good things in it. It’s not too often that we stand up on this side of the House and say there are some good things in the bill, and we acknowledge that. I want to thank the minister for taking the lead and putting some of those issues in there, especially getting tough on firefighting and fire suppression exercises when different people try to intervene or disrupt that exercise.

Before I say too much on this, you need to get into the details of the fibre utilization, which is called the residual fibre utilization. There are some good things that I see on the surface, but we will be looking at some details — how we will be able to utilize the residual, as it is called.

When I was on the biparty committee to go around and talk to different community members and stakeholders to find fibre supply in the Interior…. It was no surprise to me, actually, coming from the forest industry. I worked as a sawmill worker, having to deal with the forest industry issues all my life. I wasn’t terribly surprised, but still, when you see, with your own eyes, stacks of good lumber sitting there only to get burned and not being able to utilize that timber for those who could put that to good use….

If this is handled right, I think that is a good approach. When you look at that portion alone…. You go to the Interior. You go along the logging roadsides. The timber licence holders will harvest a certain area and take the wood they need, that they think is good for them, and they leave the rest along the roadside in big piles. Then that pile gets burned.

Sometimes there are some reports. You will see it in the bill — not my words but the ministry’s. This gov-
[ Page 11765 ]
ernment is saying that sometimes they will damage that wood so that no one could use it. They could actually make a case to the ministry that that was damaged goods and cannot be used. But there are some provisions in here, I understand, to deal with that issue as well.

That is in the Interior. But I don’t think there’s much in the bill about dealing with the issues on the coast. There is just as much waste left behind on the coast as well. The situation is different, the problem is different, but overall, the issue is the same. It’s the waste.

For example, on the coast, we see the escalation of raw log exports. Almost 50 percent of the coastal harvesting volume is exported these days — well, the last few years, at least.

I think they went down slightly last year, only because the buyer didn’t want as much wood from us, not because of any policies of this government to make that wood utilized here in British Columbia, to create jobs in British Columbia, to have them processed in British Columbia mills so that those mills could work and run at full capacity. The reason log exports went down last year was because the customers didn’t want as much wood, especially China. Their economy started to slide, so they don’t want as much wood from us. So that’s the reason.

As a result of that, what’s happening on the coast — and I’m told by very reliable sources — is that the log exports that used to be…. They used to utilize ships as a bulk. You throw all the raw logs in a ship, and they’re sitting in there. But now, more and more, I think almost all of the log exports are by containers.

[1115]

Now, you can see the problem of having bulk load versus containers. When you’re talking about big, huge logs from the coast, the bottom of the log is much more flared than the top. In order to make it uniform to fit in the container, they cut the bottom portion of the log the number of feet that they need so that the uniformity of the log is desired and maintained and so that more logs can fit in the container. That piece — three, four, five feet, which is really good wood at the bottom of the tree — is left behind in the forest to be burned.

What a waste of our resources and a resource that is not in an abundance of availability right now. There’s less and less fibre available these days. So you allow, in the Interior, good logs to be burned, and on the coast, you allow the bottom part, the flared part of the log to be cut off so that the logs can fit in a container better. More logs can fit in the container.

As a result, that portion is left behind and burned. It’s a waste. It burns me to no end, because this is wood that we could use, especially in the value-added industry. That portion of the bottom is really good wood. So that part, I think, is missing.

There are issues about firefighting in here, as I said before — fire suppression, you call it. But I think, also, what hasn’t been done…. We went through the estimates for forestry. We raised those issues there. Again, for those who missed that, I want to repeat what the real concern there is.

If you recall in Kelowna, early 2000s, we had a huge fire. A number of houses were burned, and it was a record amount of forest that burned at that time. I think it cost almost $370 million to suppress that fire.

As a result of that, a commission headed by Gary Filmon was commissioned and asked to look at the reasons behind and, going forward, how we can actually prevent those types of fires from recurring. They came down with a very good report. The report came down in 2004, I believe it was, and they made a number of recommendations.

If you look at the real recommendations they came out with, they identified 1.7 million hectares that required cleaning of the debris at the floor level. Out of that, they identified 685,000 hectares that they called a critical area to be cleaned — critical. They recommended that that be done.

What we have seen…. If you look at the estimate reports and what the government reports are, less than…. I’m so disappointed, and I think people from those communities who suffered through those fires and those days would be really upset and disappointed to hear that only about 8 percent of the critical area that was identified has been cleaned since 2004. You’re talking about 11 years, and only about 8 percent has been cleaned.

If that’s the rate that we are going to go, it will take over 100 years to do the job that Gary Filmon recommended that we should be doing to put those communities at ease and help prevent fires of that nature in the future. Then there is the remainder, over one million hectares, that needs to be cleaned, and they haven’t even touched on that, if you really look at it.

What does that say? The lack of leadership and lack of direction from this government is clearly not paying attention to the real needs of the forest industry, and no wonder. The forest industry right now….

[1120]

People who are growing up in British Columbia don’t see any future in the forest industry and forest industry jobs. When I started at Eburne sawmills back in 1973 — 1973, can you believe this? By the way, I started on the jubilee chain. We used to call it the jubilee chain. That was one of the four greenchains that we had, and that’s where they started the new people. All day long about three to four feet of lumber was there on that chain. It kept on coming. You tried your best, and it never was ending. When I started there, I had….

There are some people…. I know Brother Garcia was there. His father was working there, and his son was working there. Three generations of people worked at Eburne sawmill, and he was not the only one. There were a number of others for generations.

When I started at Eburne, it was owned by Canadian Forest Products. All my friends and everyone who
[ Page 11766 ]
worked in the forest industry said: “You’ve got a job for life.” They said: “You’ve got a job for life.” At that time….

Interjection.

H. Bains: A very good question from the member from Kingsway. Who was the government in 1973? I believe the guy that actually followed, followed very, very keenly…. As a result of that, I think I became a member of the NDP. The work that he had done…. A guy named Dave Barrett was the Premier of the province at that time.

When you look at the leadership here in Victoria and you look at the leadership of the working people…. Jack Munro was the president of the International Woodworkers of America at the time. So I had the luxury, I think you call it, of watching and following the leadership on display, real leadership on display.

Dave Barrett, here in government, had a vision, and he brought in policy that still exists today. The agricultural land reserve….

Interjection.

H. Bains: I think if the Minister of Technology was paying attention at that time, he would have become a much better minister. Obviously, he failed. He wasn’t paying much attention.

Here we had leadership at the provincial level, and we had leadership in the industry and on the workers’ side.

Interjection.

H. Bains: I’m being heckled by the Minister of Technology. I will be patiently waiting to see if he will stand up and speak about the forest industry and about this bill and see what is needed here — I will be waiting patiently — rather than tattering away there, not actually coming up with any substantial and substance-based speech. I think it’s just that. It’s tattering.

I had the opportunity to follow leadership at the provincial level, with the industry through FIR and with the workers under the leadership of Jack Munro, Bob Blanchard, Terry Smith and Gerry Stoney. In my own local union, Syd Thompson, a member from Kingsway — what a member; Doug Evans; Don Jantzen; Erich Ewert; and Marvin Rasmussen are the people that I followed. Then, at the worksite, I had people like Garth Brown, who is no longer with us, and a guy like Ray Agnew. He’s no longer with us. Gary Kobayashi is still there.

Those are the people that I followed. I think it is a luxury to have those types of people around you to start to establish yourself in Canada. I came to Canada in 1971, and 1973 was the time when I started at the Eburne sawmills. So that is the very early stages of my life in Canada, and I think I’m fortunate that those were the people around me.

I would say they played a large part and a real role in shaping me as a person and also directing me to the direction that I needed to go in order, myself, to work within the Canadian system, understand the Canadian system and eventually turn me into an activist. So I’m really thankful to all of those.

[1125]

Coming back to this bill, there are a number of issues here. I talked about the firefighting. It is a real concern. Then if you look at the firefighting…. I just talked about fire prevention — that was recommended by Gary Filmon — which the government has failed to implement. Only 7 or 8 percent of the area that he identified as critical is clean so far. There’s a major failure in that.

Then you look at how they are going around with numbers. They brag about a balanced budget. They brag about everything else. But when you really look at it….

I have a chart here that goes back to 2003. You look at every year how much money, actually, the government spent on fighting fires, fighting wildfires. When you look at it, it ranges from a low of about $82 million to the high of $382 million in 2009. Last year it was just as much. When you average it out, it averages out close to $200 million each year. That’s how much money is spent fighting fires in British Columbia. That’s the average.

What do you see in the budget year after year after year? What do you see? It’s $63 million — sometimes $63.5 million. It’s about that — $63 million. The reason they’ll give you? “Well, we’ll get into the contingencies if we need it.”

Well, if every ministry and every program were to depend on contingencies, what’s the purpose of putting a budget together, then? Everything could be left to the contingencies. Why allocate a certain amount to every program, then? You could make the argument with everything else. “Let’s have a large contingency, and we’ll dip into it whenever we need it.” Clearly, there’s a problem that the government hasn’t paid much attention to.

Here’s what Robert Gray had to say, who, by the way, was also co-author of that report that came down with Gary Filmon. He’s the guy who helped write the Filmon report. This is what he had to say in 2011. He said:

“To date, governments’ solution to the fuel and wildlife threat issue has been to subsidize partially the on-site treatment or removal of material. But,” as we have seen, “there isn’t enough federal, provincial or municipal funding for a subsidized approach to hazard abatement.

“A more economically promising solution to the problem is the aggressive use of this biomass to produce energy. However, to make this solution a reality, the provincial government will need to move away from its passive approach to biomass feedstock availability and create opportunities for local governments to use the material through a reapportionment of the resource. It will also need to encourage the use of the burgeoning biomass-to-energy industry to solve landscape-scale wildfire and forest health issues.”

That’s what he said.

It is a serious failure on the government side when you look at what they were required to do. There was
[ Page 11767 ]
a reason that they commissioned that report, but they failed to follow up. What’s the point of spending so much money on commissions if you have no intention of following them up?

It is a serious issue. A serious issue also was reported in 2014 in a Vancouver Sun article entitled “Report Warns of Rising Mega-Fire Risks in B.C.” Now, this is 2014, again.

They revealed a draft of the ministry, FLNRO, Climate Change Adaption Action Plan for Wildfire Management, 2014-2024. They had a final copy of the plan. You could read it. It’s there.

This is something that the Sun reported:

“As the planet heats up and the risk of mega-fires rises, B.C. will no longer be able to lean on its world-class wildfire-fighting teams to keep people and property safe, according to a draft provincial document.

[1130]

“The Forests Ministry paper, called Climate Change Adaption Action Plan for Wildfire Management 2014-2024, suggests fire prevention should become the province’s top priority.”

They went on to say:

“It is not an option to continue to increase fire suppression response and associated costs, because even the most aggressive action would neither be safe nor effective for the extreme wildfire events such as those seen in Kelowna in 2003 and Slave Lake in 2010.”

They went on to say:

“During these events, suppression response cannot be relied upon to protect communities or natural resource values. The only protection provided will be protection established before the fire, provided through wildland-urban interface, fuel reduction and landscape fire management.”

That’s the one that I talked about earlier. That’s the one, when they talk about wildland-urban interface, that is the area most people will not understand. It’s a technical term. It’s the area around the communities, where communities live. It’s how to manage that area to prevent fires in the future.

That’s where 685,000 hectares were identified by Filmon and Gray, saying that that is a critical area that needs to be cleaned to prevent mega-fires like that in Kelowna in the future. What have we seen? Only about 8 percent is clean. It’s a critical area, but only 8 percent is clean. So how do you say that the government actually is doing what needs to be done to prevent those types of mega-fires? I’ll leave that one at that.

There are a lot of other things that we could talk about. Let’s talk about the rules and the regulations and the acts that are being changed here. But if there’s no enforcement, what’s the point? What we’ve seen in the past in the compliance and enforcement side is that more forestry enforcement officers have been cut. So self-reliance is the model. You know what? When you do that….

It’s been a terrible failure on the part of the government to enforce some of the basics that are needed in order to make sure that the industry and the people who are utilizing our natural resources in the forest industry are actually doing it the way they should be, doing their jobs and managing the forests the way they should be managed, based on the goals and objectives that are left with them by this government, by the professionals. I think that is a problem there, as well.

Let’s talk about that a little bit. In 2012…. The C-and-E action report states that from April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012, 8,000 inspections were recorded, 248 enforcement actions were taken, one stop-work order was issued, five seizure orders were issued and 1,800 compliance actions were taken. But when you look at that — and look at the enormity of the file at hand, the forest industry itself — there’s been an enormous reduction in field inspections over that time. As the forest service has shrunk, there have been corresponding declines in field inspections by its compliance and enforcement staff.

In 2000-2001, compliance and enforcement staff completed 31,000 field inspections, compared to 8,000 later. So 31,000 field inspections. Four years later, the number of inspections have been nearly halved to 16,600. The most recent loss of a further 22 compliance and enforcement positions will undoubtedly lower the number of future inspections and require change in the way the compliance and enforcement staff work. That was a report by Ben Parfitt.

[1135]

It’s a problem. First, you don’t even put policies together. You don’t put resources behind to make sure that what’s told by experts to this government is followed through.

Then, whatever is there, there’s no enforcement because the staff continue to get cut and cut and cut. Then you look at the other issues here — that is, inventory. Also, during the time when I was on that committee, on the fibre supply committee, it was revealed to us by the ministry briefing that we are really lacking inventory. In many of the forest districts, their inventory was outdated, and they didn’t have the numbers. So they are basically making decisions in the dark.

That will leave dire consequences because we have a huge forest industry. If you just leave your town, you’ll see you’re in the forest — anywhere in British Columbia. What you have is, if you make a small mistake in calculating AACs….

If you overestimate it, that’s a problem. Then you overcut, and then we will see a problem going forward in future generations. Then you will have less forest left. You make a mistake on the low side — again, the current mills that require our fibre will not get the fibre that they need, so there will be layoffs and mill curtailments. That will cause a problem as well. So either way, that’s a problem.

It was identified as a major problem. I think it’s just common sense. If you don’t even know what you’re working with, then how are you going to make the right decisions? This government doesn’t get it. They just don’t get it.

The forest industry told them: “We will run the forest industry. You just watch.” So truly the previous, I believe, Minister of Forests, who is the minister of gas today,
[ Page 11768 ]
said…. You know what he said to the most important industry in the province — the industry that built this province for the last 150 years, paid for our health care, paid for our education, paid for our roads, paid for the well-being and the good living that we all enjoyed, generations before us and ourselves? Guess what he had to say. He said: “We’re spectators. We’re only spectators as a government.”

So they are the spectators. They have no leadership. They have no say in how our forest industry is managed. That’s what the minister said. If the minister says that, guess what kind of message he’s sending down to the industry, those people who rely on the forest industry, the forestry-dependent communities. Spectators.

Guess what. In 2003, they allowed the industry to write the Forest Act. They allowed them. They allowed them to disregard the social contract that existed for 100 years.

Appurtenancy clause. For those who don’t understand what an appurtenancy clause is, it was, back decades ago, when the government, who owns 95 percent of the forest on our behalf …. They were told: “You come in. We’ll give you a tract of land, and you can utilize the forest, the fibre, from that area to process them in your own mills so that you create jobs in B.C. for British Columbians on the manufacturing side.” That was cut.

Then you look at the cut controls that were part of the social contract. There are so many smaller communities who depend on activities in the forest industry in order to survive. Guess what. That was relaxed to a point….

[1140]

There’s always a five-year cycle that the timber holders are required to fulfil their AAC. There was a provision that every year they must harvest a minimum of 50 percent of their AAC so that there is some activity in the area to support the community during the bad times. When the times were good, they were allowed to go 150 percent in that year so that they could catch up. But over a five-year period, they were allowed to cut their AAC, I think, give or take, 5 or 10 percent over or under without them losing any portion of their AAC.

Now, what this government, in their wisdom, has allowed the industry to do…. They can cut the entire AAC in one year and put their equipment back in their garages for the remaining four years, so nothing is going to happen to the AAC. That’s not the way to manage the forest industry. All of that was done with the promise that the industry would be investing billions of dollars. At that time, that was the argument — that the industry needed to make investments in our local manufacturing plants in order to stay competitive with the rest of the world.

Makes sense. But guess what. Let’s take a look. At that time, how many mills — I think the member for Vancouver-Kingsway would know that — were owned by B.C. companies in the United States in 2003? Probably one, maybe two — just across the line here, strategically located. Mostly, they were remanufacturing plants.

Move forward to 2016. Today we have B.C. companies leaving British Columbia, investing in the United States. Over 40 mills were purchased by B.C. companies in the United States. They’re investing, but they’re investing in the United States, not in B.C.

What does that say to the leadership of this government about the industry that built this province, as I have said before? When you say that we are only spectators, then that’s exactly what’s going to happen — industries leaving British Columbia. As a result, we have 30,000 fewer workers working in the forest industry today than the day when they took over in 2001. And 200 mills have been shut down in British Columbia, and they are purchasing mills in the United States. So it’s not that they’re not making money. It’s not that they’re hit economically so hard. They’re investing elsewhere, not here.

Also, on the coast, when our licence holders are shutting the mills down — permanently, I might add — in the meantime, they continue to export logs from B.C. So the truckloads and truckloads….

Deputy Speaker: Member, please take your seat.

I recognize the member for Nanaimo.

Leave granted.

L. Krog: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Introductions by Members

L. Krog: Thank you to the member for Surrey-Newton, who was waxing so eloquent on what is one of the major industries in British Columbia, forestry.

Joining us in the gallery today are 33 folks from my constituency, 28 grade 5 students and five adults, and their teacher, Nadia Elzinga, from Pauline Haarer. It’s a French immersion school, so those young people up there in the gallery could put many of us to shame, being able to speak in both official languages.

I believe this is their first time at the Legislature, and I’d ask the House to make all of our guests welcome.

Debate Continued

H. Bains: I will continue on.

When you have no leadership shown by this government, year after year after year, and minister after minister after minister, those are the results, which I’ve just mentioned: 200 fewer mills than when they took power and over 30,000 fewer workers working.

In the meantime, investments of B.C. companies are growing in other jurisdictions, other countries. At the same time, like I said, the logs…. I talked about the appurtenancy clause. That was taken out by this government, and the result is many major forest industry companies have become log brokers. They cut our logs
[ Page 11769 ]
and just sell them. There’s no requirement for them to process them here in B.C. anymore.

[1145]

If there was leadership, wouldn’t you think that you would sit down with the industry and say: “Look, we have logs now. There’s an excess of logs on the coast. We need people who want to work in the forest industry. How do we help you? How do we work together to have those logs processed here in B.C.? How do we work together to create jobs here in British Columbia for British Columbians, as was the foresight of people that came before us?”

But no. They are saying they’re spectators. I remember — the member from Kingsway mentioned — there was another minister who said it is a sunset industry. When you have that kind of leadership, then the industry will dwindle and it will be on its knees — as it is, we have seen, in the last number of years.

We can do better. I know this minister tries. He tries his best. I know he’s genuine, when he stands up, that we need to turn this industry around. I know he does that, because I have dealt with him since I became the critic, and I think he tries his best. But again, leadership doesn’t come from his office, as is the case with this government. It comes from the west wing.

It is a west wing, isn’t it? That’s a west wing — the Premier’s office. Whatever is decided in the west wing is what you see here and what you see outside. When you ignore the talent that is brought to the table by the ministers, sometimes people question that too. You would think that they would stand up to the Premier and say: “Look, Premier, it doesn’t make sense.”

I know their tenure as a minister may be limited if they do that, but they would be doing the right thing. When they leave these walls and this hall and when they are on their retirement, watching their kids and their kids, on a rocking chair, they would be able to say to themselves: “I did the right thing, although the Premier took me out of my ministry. But I did the right thing for British Columbians, and as a result of that, my children’s — their children’s — future is a little better.”

They should be able to say that. Each one of those ministers should be able to say that. Each one of us should be able to say that, because we’re paid well by the taxpayers to do the right job. Not all politics all the time, as we have seen from this Premier.

Chances after chances are ignored by this government and the ministers here, when they have the opportunity to fix the problem but it doesn’t get fixed. They are squandering away the opportunities to fix the things so that they can say to themselves and to the people and their children and their children: “You know, I did my best, and as a result, there are some good things.”

I haven’t seen much of that from the ministers here so far. It is a problem, especially when you look at…. The forest industry was so important, which it can be again — an engine that would drive our economy. If the Premier had spent even a quarter of the time that she spent on LNG, even 10 percent of the time that she spent on LNG, on the forest industry, the forest industry would be in much better shape.

There would be more people working, there would be more resources coming to the government coffers, and our communities would be much more prosperous. And there would be again…. It would rekindle the hope of our children who are coming out of high school to say that there is a future in the forest industry once again, as I’ve said there was.

[1150]

That takes leadership. You can’t say that we are spectators and it is a sunset industry, then expect that something is going to happen on its own. It doesn’t work that way. There is a serious problem in the forest industry that we need to fix. I’m really, really disappointed that minister after minister stands up…. They have an opportunity. They do tweak a little here, tweak a little there, as is the case in this bill, Bill 12.

You know, there are some good things in here, and I want to support them. I say thanks to the minister. But the big picture is being ignored in the forest industry: to turn the forest industry around. That takes leadership. That requires leadership which we have not seen in the Premier’s office.

Let’s take a look at some of the other things that need to be done which aren’t being done. Let’s take a look.

I talked about log exports a little bit. The member from Kingsway will know exactly. In 1998, what was the amount of logs exported out of B.C.? It was less than one million cubic metres of logs exported in 1998, and we had over 30,000 more workers working in B.C. There is a direct relationship — a direct relationship.

Let’s go on. In 2005, 4.8 million. Just five or six years down, after this government took over — 4.8 million cubic metres. Who wants to guess for 2013? Mr. Speaker, 6.7 million cubic metres of logs were exported — 6.7 million. That represented over almost half of the harvest level in British Columbia.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

How do you say that there is a vision and there is a strategy to have the forest industry work in a direction that would create more jobs? From 0.9 million cubic metres to 6.7 million. In 2014, 6.3 million, just slightly less, and for 2015, I’m told the numbers are a little under six million.

Again, that wasn’t because we, through some leadership of this government, said that we should actually start to process those logs here more so that our mills, which are starved of fibre, can start to get the fibre and they can start working at full capacity. No, it’s because our customers said: “We don’t want your logs anymore because our economy is sliding.”
[ Page 11770 ]

Madame Speaker, welcome. I know that you are pointing me to the clock, and I’ve got the hint.

I’d also like to say this on log exports. There is the excess test, right? If the logs that are…. The log holders and timber holders — if they apply to export certain logs, there is the excess test they must meet. There is a committee appointed by the minister himself to oversee each application. When the most logs were being exported, he overruled his own committee over 100 times.

The committee said: “These applications do not meet the excess test, so they should not be allowed to be exported.” Guess what happened. They ran to the minister’s office. I think they came to the minister after they went to the west wing. The message came: “No, you’re not going to stop these logs.” So they overruled his own committee over 100 times in that year.

Madame Speaker, you are indicating that I should be wrapping up. I will adjourn the debate, noting the hour, and I will continue after, I believe, the lunch break.

H. Bains moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

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

Hon. T. Lake 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 11:54 a.m.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE
DOUGLAS FIR ROOM

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
ADVANCED EDUCATION

The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); D. Plecas in the chair.

The committee met at 11:08 a.m.

On Vote 13: ministry operations, $1,947,632,000.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I’ll indulge the members opposite by giving a bit of introduction to today’s estimates. It’s a pleasure to be here for this 2016-17 estimates debate. Of course, this particular ministry includes the estimates debates around the board resourcing and development office and the government communications and public engagement office, and those staff members are here for the first stage of the estimates.

Now, to introduce the staff present, we have the deputy minister, Mr. John Paul Fraser, and we have the assistant deputy ministers Denise Champion and Kelly Gleeson and the inimitable Mary Dila. Other staff will join us later in the day as their issues arise.

[1110]

We’ve had a successful year to date in the Ministry of Advanced Education. I’ve been able to visit all 25 of our public post-secondary institutions as weather and schedule permitted, and it’s also been an opportunity to visit many of the private institutions that we regulate. We, of course, don’t fund them, but we do regulate them, and it’s important to maintain that relationship so that we maintain the standards that, in many parts of the world, are absent.

It reflects well on our system, both public and private, that we have a highly accessible, affordable and high-quality education system in the public sector, which we provide almost $2 billion of funding to every year. Also, we maintain those standards in the private systems so that we don’t face the kind of unfortunate events that have happened in other countries — dealing with their private post-secondary systems.

We have increased the funding to post-secondary education since 2001, since this government came into power, by 43½ percent, from $1.25 billion to more than $1.8 billion in actual operations to the institutions. Over the next three years, we’ll be directly investing more than $906 million in capital projects in these institutions. The capital projects have also received a recent influx of anticipated funding from the federal government, so we expect to be able to do even more in terms of building out our post-secondary system and replacing some of the more aged structures at our post-secondary institutions so that they will be available for top-of-the-line student education.

Some of the capital projects we’re engaged in are the complete rebuilding of the Emily Carr University of Art and Design in Vancouver. There are numerous upgrades underway, including, for example, one at UBC to their Biological Sciences Building, and new trades facilities are underway at the Silver King campus of Selkirk College in Nelson. We recently opened a new trades facility here at Camosun College, and one is about to be opened at Okanagan College, each of those costing in the range of $30 million for brand-new trades-training facilities.

On the capital side, we’re doing very well. On the affordability side, we’re very pleased to be able to say that we have 430,000 students now enrolled in our public post-secondary institutions. On average, our British Columbia students pay less than one-third of the cost of their higher education in the form of their tuition. The
[ Page 11771 ]
rest, of course, comes from public sector grants to the institutions and from various revenue sources, such as federal research funds and whatever revenue sources they have on their own.

Government introduced a policy 11 years ago now that caps tuition increases to 2 percent per year. This has been greeted with warmth by students and less warmth by faculty and administration, but it is a reasonable balance in the range of the consumer price index, and we intend to keep it that way. This is the balance that we seek between the cost of higher education and the quality of higher education, of course, that requires some reconciliation on the financial side.

Now, that policy has also been extended to mandatory fees since 2007. Undergraduate students in British Columbia are now paying the fourth-lowest tuition in Canada, at an average of $5,118 a year, and of course, it’s about half of that for college programs. We provide a mix of grants and loans that encourage students to access their post-secondary education, regardless of their personal financial circumstances. That has, indeed, been very successful, in that a lot of students who come into our post-secondary system would not be able to without the financial support from the province and the federal government student loan programs. Those have been resoundingly successful for decades now.

I think we all know that a post-secondary education offers the individual to make the best of their life, to be the best they can be and to advance their credentials, whether it’s in a diploma or a trade program or a degree program. In fact, most people in this room have benefited from substantial post-secondary education that took them to a better place in their personal life and allowed them to grow their family and to be prosperous in the world and to seek the opportunities they desired as they grew up into their working years.

The significant difference is that an undergraduate post-secondary degree leads to an additional $827,000 in income over the students who do not seek post-secondary education. This is a remarkable difference, and we all know what a difference that makes over a lifetime to the accomplishments of an individual and a family.

We’re also very cognizant of the need to provide the skill set for our educated population to move into the numerous job openings that are coming up in British Columbia in the next decade. We’re looking at roughly one million job openings in British Columbia over the next ten years. About 70 percent of those are due to retirements and replacements in the existing workforce. The other third are due to economic growth that we anticipate and the changing nature of the economy, which requires more and more skills from each and every person in the workforce.

[1115]

About eight out of ten of these tasks will require post-secondary education, so we are poised to provide that education to those hundreds of thousands of students in the next decade.

We also have an opportunity with the British Columbia tech strategy, which was launched this January. We’ll be providing the training and engagement for students in the talent pool pillar of that strategy so that we can have the necessary skills out there in the workforce to provide employees to budding industries and to the established technology industries that have been so successful in British Columbia.

Of course, those individuals tend to work for a few years for the large company and then eventually decide to set up their own shop. Their overwhelming desire is to stay in British Columbia and to build up their own company and become an employer here.

We’ll also be supporting graduate students through the Mitacs program, which aligns student financial aid around the graduate students who seek to find employment other than in the academy. They are then paired with industry partners to explore work opportunities, utilizing their graduate training, so they can (a) solve problems for companies and (b) look forward to employment with those same companies. The employment and the retention rates are, in fact, very high.

We’re also aligning our student financial aid funding to support a first round of coding academies at our public post-secondary institutions, in keeping with the tech strategy and with a bit of a worldwide movement which encourages students to think beyond basic literacy in computer skills and numeracy to actual advanced system skills dealing with coding.

We’ve funded more than 32,000 new student seats over the past 15 years and established seven new university campuses in the public post-secondary system.

Credentials were awarded to aboriginal learners in 2013-14 that amounted to 3,241 credentials. That’s an increase of 23 percent over the five years earlier. This is part of our first nations engagement strategy in higher education, which is leading to substantial success with our First Nations learners. They, of course, are expanding their opportunities and contributing to their own communities and to British Columbia at large.

We’ve also taken an open textbook initiative, which has led to British Columbia being a leader in this space. We now have 130 open textbooks available to students throughout British Columbia at no charge. If they elect to, they can order up a print copy for about $20. This compares with the university bookstore cost of roughly $200 for a comparable textbook. It also encourages curriculum to be developed right here in British Columbia from our very able educators and allows us to use licences that we provide to our students for on-line versions. This provides for more rapid updates, and the quality is certainly there.

Students benefited to the tune of saving more than $1 million in the past year, in the hands of about 11,000
[ Page 11772 ]
students, and we are encouraging faculty to move more and more into this space. One course at UBC, UBC physics 100, used an open textbook and in that single course saved $93,000 in textbook costs for students.

More particularly, we’ve doubled the number of nursing spaces, with more than 7,500 full-time-equivalents now in nursing. We’ve more than doubled the number of medical school spaces since 2002, to 288, after they were dramatically cut back in the 1990s from 160 to 128. We’ve added more than 2,900 additional critical trade seats since the launch of our skills-for-jobs blueprint in 2014.

We’ve also come to the realization that international students are a huge asset. They broaden the horizons of our institutions, they enrich the classroom, and they pay market tuition comparable to world costs and thereby subsidize the tuition for students locally. We’ve increased the number of students from 94,000 in 2009 to roughly 115,000 in 2013-14. We’ll continue to increase the number of international students so that they can enrich our campuses, subsidize our domestic students and create spaces for more domestic students.

We’ve also redesigned our StudentAid program so that it can be much more accessible to students and to allow them to get into student support more readily so that they can get on with their education and worry less about their finances and more about their studies.

In summary, we have a highly diverse, growing and strong economy that is supported by a diverse and comprehensive and affordable educational system. We know that the economies are changing around the world, and we are training our students to be ready to take on any task and to take on any challenge anywhere in the world due to the quality of the education they receive here in British Columbia.

[1120]

K. Corrigan: I want to take just a minute to thank three people as well.

I would like to, first of all, thank Chardaye Bueckert. Chardaye is one of the wonderful legislative interns that we have here in the Legislature, and she has been working very hard to assist me with the research that is necessary for asking questions in estimates. Chardaye has been working with — and, I suppose, with the support of — researcher James Harada-Down and another researcher, Derrick Harder, as well. I want to thank all three of them for their assistance.

For the information and the convenience of the minister and ministry staff, I think we’ve already let them know that we were going to ask some questions about government communications, GCPE, first of all this morning. If we have time this morning, we’ll go on to some questions about board appointments.

This afternoon we will likely start with some questions about the jobs plan as it relates to post-secondary education — in other words, the blueprint for education. Then we’re going to go on to a number of other categories, including many of the subjects that the minister spoke about already.

I’m going to start with government communications and public engagement questions. I just wanted to confirm that the budget for advertising — and that’s in STOB 67 — for the coming year is going to be $8.48 million. Is that correct?

Hon. A. Wilkinson: Because the budget books tend to be stated by the thousands, we are actually looking at $8.482 million for advertising.

K. Corrigan: Thank you to the minister. I believe that’s what I said. I said $8.48 million, so yes, that would be the same thing.

I just wanted to say that I appreciate the minister’s comments at the beginning that having a post-secondary education — completing a post-secondary education — is a very important thing. It certainly moves people forward in life, but it isn’t always necessary, as the Premier of the province would well know.

I wanted to ask a question about the STOB 67 funds. There’s also STOB 68, which is statutory advertising in publications. The budget for that for this year is $2.533 million. I’m wondering if the minister could just explain what is included in that, as opposed to informational advertising and publications, which is STOB 67.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: Examples that I have gathered from the staff include things that are in many ways intuitive to us, because we have seen the newspaper ads, but unless it’s pointed out to us we readily forget. Some examples of statutory advertising are bridge closures, fire bans, public consultations and civil forfeiture.

K. Corrigan: My understanding…. To be clear, the minister is giving examples of STOB 68? That was STOB 68? I see staff…. That’s all right, you don’t need to answer that.

[1125]

I thought it was more like statutory publications, or maybe it also includes statutory publications? Like, Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner printing a report would come under STOB 68. Is that correct?

Hon. A. Wilkinson: It has now been clarified for me that where there are statutory officers who may be engaged in things like recruitment or engaging with the public on the web or perhaps in a newspaper ad, that is actually managed through their own budget. For instance, if the Privacy Commissioner were soliciting public interest on a topic, that does not come through STOB 67 or STOB 68. That comes through the budget of the statutory officer of the Legislature.
[ Page 11773 ]

K. Corrigan: I thought this was going to be easy, but I’m getting new information. I read something recently, in the last several days, where…. I think it was the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, but it might have been the Ombudsperson’s office. One of those offices talked about their reports being an example and were classified under STOB 68.

Now, I don’t want to get bogged down in this, but I do want to ask some questions about the plans of government for advertising over the next while. I think it’s important to understand where those advertising dollars are. Maybe for now, all I need is to know is that if the government was going to have some kind of advertising campaign, such as is running right now, they would fall under STOB 67. Is that correct?

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I’ve now learned from staff that the member opposite is correct that STOB 67 advertising would incorporate things such as the recent campaign for the training and education savings grant.

STOB 68 would be for things such as bridge closures and fire bans. There are also STOB 68 budgets available to ministries for things like road closures that wouldn’t, in normal circumstances, come through the government communications and public engagement office because they would be of a very routine nature and would be within STOB 68 of the Ministry of Transportation, for example.

Then, of course, we have the advertising that the member alluded to earlier for, perhaps, the Ombudsperson’s office advertising for a new staff member or for soliciting public input on a particular issue.

So there are three distinct categories within STOB 68. Generically, there are ministry sub-budgets that may be called upon for routine matters, as I’ve said, such as road closures.

K. Corrigan: We make progress — thank you.

So in STOB 67 — that would be campaigns. I just want to clarify, as well, that STOB 67 includes budgets for advertising campaigns in the coming year. Also, could the minister confirm that over the course of the year, there can be internal reallocations by ministries? That would mean there would be no more money added, but there can be a reallocation, with approval, for money to be reallocated to an advertising campaign.

In addition to that — I guess I might as well ask it all at once — there can be draws from contingencies that can be put into advertising campaigns as well. Is that correct?

[1130]

Hon. A. Wilkinson: The member touches an interesting point in public administration that the budget as laid out in the fat blue books about a month ago does provide the rigid envelope for a balanced-budget regime.

The budget allocated under STOB 67 for government communications and public engagement, as the member has noted, is $8.482 million. If there was some exigency that led to demand for further public presentation of an issue or communication of an issue, then the routine approach would be for the government communications and public engagement staff to approach me.

I would then be asked to go before Treasury Board and justify the need to call upon contingency funding to be transferred from government contingencies in the central forum, managed by the Ministry of Finance, to government communications and public engagement so that they could address the exigency of the day leading to the need for further communications.

However, the Ministry of Finance may decide, in their discretion, that the issue that has arisen should properly be drawn from a ministry budget. For instance, if the matter were to do with vaccination, they could turn to the Ministry of Health and say: “Well, there is a need for this; it’s justified. Government communications and public engagement needs to spend a certain amount of money to alert the public to this matter, and it should properly be drawn from Health, as a reallocation from Health, rather than turning to government contingencies.”

The first stop would be for me to go to Treasury Board and ask for a transfer for contingencies, and it would be up to Treasury Board staff to determine whether that would be straight from the government contingencies budget in the central pool or whether there should be an attempt to reallocate it amongst other ministries, which would not be something that would be part of the submission from government communications and public engagement, nor would it come from me.

K. Corrigan: It’s an interesting word, “exigency.” There was a biggie in 2012-13. In 2012-13, the draw on the contingency was $21 million, which was substantially more. I’m just wondering if the minister can confirm that that was the number. That was the number that was provided by Ms. Champion in our Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts on Thursday, February 5, 2015. I just want to confirm that that’s on the record and is correct.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: The precise number which has been provided to me for fiscal 2012-13 that the member alluded to in terms of reallocations and contingency draws is $21,035,913. More specifically, that was spent on campaigns related to the B.C. jobs plan, the Columbia River treaty, some health prevention improvement strategies, the B.C. CareCard program, a seniors action plan, Work B.C. and a variety of other useful purposes.

[1135]

K. Corrigan: I would note that that was, of course, the year before the election, and the contingency spending was in fact around $21 million. But the next year, apparently, there was not useful work that the government needed to speak about nearly so much, because there
[ Page 11774 ]
was only a contingency spending of $3.7 million. And last year the contingency spending was about $312,000.

I guess that leads me into the questions that I have now. What campaigns are planned for the next fiscal year — what advertising campaigns? That would be the STOB 67.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: Some of these advertising and engagement programs are underway already. The member may well recognize them. There’s the B.C. training and education savings grant program which is already underway.

This, of course, is the $1,200 grant provided to the RESPs of eligible children born in 2006 or later. That was changed this year from 2007, to create another year of eligibility. The students or learners or children come into the program for eligibility between ages six and nine. At that age, the parents have to be reminded to sign their children up for this program in order to receive the $1,200 direct deposit into their RESP.

This has been very successful with credit unions, and I was actually fortunate enough to bump into a sign outside the Bank of Montreal at Oakridge, which had chalked onto it: “Don’t miss your chance to sign up for the RESP under the training education savings grant program.”

As a result of that change to the earlier year, we now have tens of thousands more children eligible, because each calendar year of eligibility generates about 40,000 eligible children. Of course, our job is to mobilize their parents to get them in the habit of contributing to an RESP so that they can invest in the future of their children.

A further example would be the property transfer tax changes. This is a full new exemption for newly built homes up to $750,000 which will save buyers up to $13,000 on the purchase of a new home, with a partial exemption of up to $800,000 of purchase price. This, of course, means that buyers of new homes of any sort, whether single-family dwellings, condos or otherwise, can then put into their heads the calculation. They’re actually going to pay $13,000 less in PPTA.

As the member opposite well knows from her legal practice days, it’s the lawyers’ fees and the PPTA and the other add-ons at the end of the transaction which come as the rude surprise to the purchaser. They’ve figured out what’s in their interim agreement, but they have not figured out, generally, what’s coming afterwards when they actually go to do the transfer. So this comes as very welcome news to purchasers, and we have to get that information out so that they know that they have that much more money to work with.

Another good example would be the B.C. seniors home-renovation tax credit. This is a tax credit of up to $1,000 which assists individuals 65 and over with the cost of certain permanent home renovations to improve their accessibility.

[1140]

Of course, this is very important in the modern era, because more and more of the population, as it ages — perhaps including some people in this room — will be interested in staying in their own home as long as possible. That means accessibility is terribly important, because so many of our homes are built with bedrooms upstairs and no bathing facilities on the main floor. This provides an incentive for seniors to act in the earlier retirement years to make their home their long-term home rather than leaving it till it’s perhaps too late to do that kind of thing, once they’ve perhaps injured their hip or have lost their mobility.

It’s important for us to get information out so that seniors feel the opportunity to mobilize their assets and get on with adjusting their living space for long-term arrangements.

K. Corrigan: I’m wondering if it would be possible for the minister to provide me, not perhaps at this point but in the near future, with an estimated cost of what those various ad campaigns are going to be, the ad campaigns that are planned for the next fiscal year, at least at this point. For example, the MSP for seniors — that was one that has been advertised — the RESP grants for students, for children, which is one that the minister mentioned, as well as the property tax changes and the tax credits.

I’m wondering if the minister can either now or will commit to letting me know what the present and planned advertising campaigns are and what the budget for them is.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: Of course, we’ll be glad to provide a written synopsis to the member. This being a projection for 2016-17, we’ll do our best to provide the current projections, which would be subject to some revision. For instance, if the training education savings grant recruitment was extremely strong, we would wind down the campaign early. If it were not as strong as might be the goal, then the goal would obviously be to continue the campaign. So it’s subject to revision, but we will provide those currently best-available estimates.

K. Corrigan: I guess what I’d like is a commitment from the minister, as well — since this is the minister responsible — that we won’t have a repeat of what happened in 2012-13, where we had a contingency of some $21 million being spent on advertising, much of which was, certainly arguably, partisan in nature.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: Of course, our commitment in this government is to provide information to British Columbians about the circumstances which they will benefit from. One can never tell what the future holds. We’re now about a week into the new fiscal year with 51 weeks to go, so it’s impossible to predict the future in terms of what might be needed.
[ Page 11775 ]

Certainly, the member can be assured that advertising will not be partisan. It will, in fact, be meritorious and entirely based on factual need and to serve the interests of British Columbians.

K. Corrigan: I hear the minister saying that it’s impossible to know, but isn’t that exactly what a budget is about? Isn’t that supposed to be the plan? Can the minister not commit that the plan is the plan and that the money that’s in the budget now for advertising of about $8.5 million is sufficient for the coming year?

Hon. A. Wilkinson: Budgets are, by their very definition, projections. Projections are made with the best available information at the time. The goal is to perform within the budget, and as I said, all kinds of odd things happen. In this province, we have the regular occurrence of forest fire containment budgets being either underspent or vastly overspent according to the snowpack and the fire risk and the temperature in August, so these things are in some cases clearly impossible to predict.

I don’t think anyone in our Legislature would disagree with the extraordinary difficulty of making solid projections about forest fire containment budgets, but on the other hand, this is applicable in many other circumstances as well. We simply cannot predict the future.

K. Corrigan: I appreciate that. I think in this case the unpredictability and the changes certainly have to do with whether or not it is a coming election year.

[1145]

The minister said that these are non-partisan ads. I just want to get a confirmation on the record that the minister believes that something that has the tag line “Our opportunity is here….” It says “B.C.’s plan to protect Canada’s strongest economy is working. Balanced budget 2016 means we can keep taxes low.” Is the minister saying that this is a non-partisan ad?

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I wouldn’t want to go through our entire family history, but certainly, we found that our opportunity was here when we got off the train in Kamloops in 1962 from Australia and found that the world unfolded as our oyster right here in British Columbia. Our entire family prospered from the opportunity to get off that train in British Columbia.

I don’t see that as being partisan in any fashion at all. It’s persuading British Columbians that their future is here. They can prosper here, and they should invest themselves and their lives here in order to lead to the kind of prosperity and life satisfaction that we all seek.

K. Corrigan: These are not tourism commercials. These are commercials for people that are already living here. To try to persuade them that they should live here and invest here seems rather odd. I would disagree. I know that there have certainly been others that have disagreed.

I do appreciate the commitment from the minister that the minister is going to provide the information as to what the planned advertising campaigns are — the cost now — and also will continue to provide that information over the next while. That is inconsistent with what the minister previously said in an interview, which was that the information would be provided at the end of the year, essentially, through public accounts. I do appreciate that. I appreciate that that’s going to happen.

I want to ask also about whether or not there is a federal component to the advertising campaigns, just to clarify if there is federal money that is coming in that will be coming through the federal government to the provincial government and that is going to be used for advertising. If that is the case, what campaigns is that money going to be used for? How much is it? Is it included or not in the STOB 67 allocation?

Hon. A. Wilkinson: I think what I’ll do is provide a synopsis of the federal transfers to support communications in the past two years and then move, too, that the committee rise, and we’ll come back after lunch.

In 2014-15, the federal government provided $1.672 million to support communications around the Canada job fund and Work B.C., and a further $525,000 around the WelcomeBC labour market development agreement process. In 2015-16, the federal government provided $3.025 million for the Work B.C. labour market development agreement and a further $1 million related to the Canada job grant.

On top of that, they’ve put in $40,000 toward the #SaySomething program, which is, of course, designed to remove the scourge of sexual violence from our communities.

The amount that the federal government will provide in the current fiscal year is unknown at this point. The federal budget, as we all know, came out about two weeks ago, and their anticipated spending is substantive, but we haven’t been able to get the granular level of detail for this kind of determination at this point.

However, in general terms, we do expect some federal support for communications in British Columbia, particularly around employment. It may well be more extensive than that. We simply don’t know until the federal government makes their position clear.

With that, I’d move the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:49 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 © 2016: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada