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)

Monday, April 25, 2016

Morning Sitting

Volume 37, Number 6

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

MONDAY, APRIL 25, 2016

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

ELECTRIC VEHICLES

J. Sturdy: It is a pleasure to rise today in the House to talk about our provincial climate success story. British Columbia has been at the forefront of climate action in Canada and beyond.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

From the introduction of the revenue-neutral carbon tax to the establishment of the innovative clean energy fund, we’ve made positive strides to combat greenhouse gas emissions. One very effective strategy for achieving these reductions has been through the introduction of electric vehicles to our roads.

[1005]

To promote the adoption of electric vehicles and encourage British Columbians to make greener choices, in 2014, our government introduced incentives of up to $5,000 toward the purchase or lease of a new battery-electric or plug-in electric vehicle.

Clean energy vehicles are an important part of British Columbia’s future, and last year the province became the 14th member of the Zero-Emission Vehicle Alliance, joining countries and jurisdictions like Germany, the Netherlands and the U.K. Through this partnership, we have committed to doing our part in accelerating the global transition to zero-emission vehicles.

The increase in the number of electric vehicles on B.C. roads is already having a positive environmental impact. Each electric vehicle displaces approximately four tonnes of CO₂ annually, and over the next 15 years, the 3,300 electric vehicles currently in use today on B.C. roads will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 200,000 tonnes.

In addition to emission reduction, electric vehicles offer a number of other benefits to users. Electric vehicle owners save about 75 percent on fuel costs, which for the average driver translates into almost $1,600 a year in fuel savings. Because electric vehicles have fewer moving parts, they often require less maintenance, offering owners future or further potential savings. What’s not to like?

Our government anticipated these benefits from early on, so we introduced the clean energy vehicle program in 2011 and have committed more than $31 million to encourage British Columbians to choose cleaner, greener vehicles. Since 2011, our incentives, along with investments in infrastructure, outreach, research and training, have helped put 2,400 electric vehicles on the road and made us the province with the highest per-capita adoption of electric vehicles in the country.

Encouraging the purchase of electric vehicles requires further investments in supporting infrastructure, like electric charging stations. British Columbia has invested significantly in this infrastructure and boasts the largest charging network in Canada, with more than 1,000 charging stations throughout the province. We’re preparing for the growing number of electric vehicles on the road.

Many of these charging stations, which, incidentally, are present throughout the Sea-to-Sky…. We were early adopters in Pemberton, but also there’s a great charging infrastructure in Whistler and Squamish — including some which feature DC fast chargers, which can charge a vehicle in about 30 minutes. I thought I better get my Sea-to-Sky plug in there for electric vehicles.

Last month the Premier announced an additional $6.89 million for the clean energy vehicle program to ensure that purchase incentives continue to be made available to British Columbians who choose a qualifying electric or hydrogen cell vehicle. This additional funding can also be used to expand and upgrade British Columbia’s residential and public charging infrastructure, including more than $688,000 in incentives for level 2 charging stations in apartments and strata complexes.

This funding also includes a partnership between the province, B.C. Hydro and BMW Canada to upgrade ten public single-standard DC fast-charging stations to dual-standard chargers. These upgraded stations will enable the chargers to offer both styles of common charging standards, allowing them to serve all models of electric vehicles.

We also announced that starting in March, 2016, all electric vehicles displaying an official decal will be allowed to travel in high-occupancy vehicle lanes throughout the province without having to meet the occupancy requirements, making these vehicles a great option for commuters and rewarding their commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and saving time and saving money.

Increasing demand for electric vehicles will also create more demand for sources of reliable and affordable electricity. I hope you all know by now that electricity we currently generate here in British Columbia is 98 percent clean and renewable energy — energy we need to power electric vehicles in our increasingly electrified world.

Because we have the third-lowest residential hydro rates in North America, electricity is a viable as well as
[ Page 12286 ]
economic and responsible source of vehicle power. Using coal, for example, to generate power for a clean energy vehicle is more than a little bit ironic. Fortunately, here in B.C. that is not and will not be a problem.

[1010]

Over the next two decades, our province is expected to welcome more than 1.1 million new residents, and with an expanding population, the construction of thousands of new homes and increasing demand for electric vehicles, we need to ensure that our electrical infrastructure is prepared to meet British Columbia’s future needs.

B.C. Hydro is preparing for tomorrow’s power demands by continuing to make investments in our transportation and generation infrastructure. Over the next five years, B.C. Hydro will have completed more than 560 capital projects, totalling nearly $4 billion, all of which goes towards supporting reliable and affordable power in British Columbia.

These investments, announcements and incentives are all about planning for the future, meeting future energy needs and ensuring the necessary infrastructure is in place to support and reduce emissions across the sectors. British Columbia can rightly be pleased with our climate action record, and through investments like the clean energy vehicle program, we are continuing our commitment to maintaining British Columbia’s position at the forefront of climate action.

G. Heyman: I concur with the member for West Vancouver–Sea to Sky that the adoption of electric vehicles is a positive initiative for British Columbians, a positive initiative for the world in addressing one of the greatest sources of greenhouse gas emissions, but there are many aspects of his comments with which I do not concur.

Let’s just look at B.C.’s initiatives with electric vehicles for a start. It’s true that B.C. has recently introduced its maximum rebate of $5,000, but when you compare that with initiatives in other provinces, like Ontario, it pales a bit in quantum. In Ontario, they are up to $10,000, and in addition, there are other rebates that are available.

The Netherlands may ban the sale of non-electric cars entirely by 2025. I think in British Columbia — in Canada, in fact — we’re a long way from being able to actually consider something like that because we have much further to go than European nations in terms of adoption. Last year in the Netherlands, 43,000 new electric vehicles were purchased, which gives them already a 10 percent share of the market. In Norway, the figure is 22 percent. In Canada, notwithstanding the fact that the member said that B.C. leads on a per-capita basis in Canada, the adoption rate is a mere 0.35 of 1 percent.

Let me go back to the premise of the member’s statement, using electric vehicles as an example of the significant strides that he claims this government has taken on climate action and that they’re emblematic of this government’s commitment to fighting climate change.

It’s typical of this government’s modus operandi that instead of having a provincewide climate action plan with clear targets and mechanisms to meet those targets sector by sector, it rolls out flagship initiatives and claims this will demonstrate their commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, taking something like electric vehicles or a carbon tax, which has been frozen now for several years and shows no sign of being reintroduced, as mechanisms for British Columbia to use to continue its so-called climate leadership simply won’t cut it.

This government has been forced to admit, because the climate leadership team appointed by the Premier called their bluff, that they cannot meet the targets they themselves legislated for greenhouse gas reductions by 2020. The leadership team proposed new targets for 2030 and 2050 and a suite of recommendations to meet those. The government has been studying those recommendations for quite some time now. But what British Columbians need, what industry needs, what Canada needs is a provincewide plan to cut emissions that deals sector by sector.

[1015]

Here we have the member talking about the role of electric vehicles, but six years ago this government signed a memorandum of understanding with Metro Vancouver mayors committing to find a funding solution for much-needed public transit in Metro Vancouver, which would have the most significant impact on transportation emissions in B.C.’s most populous region.

It has done nothing but put roadblocks in the way of building transit. Despite the fact that the federal government now has money on the table, the minister responsible continues to make no moves to solve this problem so we can get on with the job of reducing transportation-based emissions.

With respect to energy conservation, it was this government that forced B.C. Hydro to move back from a more ambitious option 3 in demand-side management to a less ambitious option 2 so they could sell the surplus of power that we currently have to British Columbians. That would make a significant dent in emissions.

Finally, B.C.’s emissions aren’t falling. They’re not going down; they’re rising. According to recent reports, they are going up significantly. They will go up by 32 percent by 2030 with this government’s current plan.

J. Sturdy: I’d like to thank the member opposite for his comments. I recognize that electric vehicles are but a part of the solution. We have to recognize our transportation sector does produce somewhat around 40 percent of our emissions, so it is a part of the solution that we need to get to. A new plan will be rolled out this June that will deal with provincewide emissions on a sector-by-sector basis.

I’d like to talk a little bit, to finish up, on what I see as the clean energy problem of our time — and that is, in fact, storage. This is the great challenge that we face in the adoption of a clean energy grid.
[ Page 12287 ]

There are many ideas out there and potentially disruptive technologies that will have an impact on our storage challenge: various types of battery innovations — which do, incidentally, come with an environmental footprint — or technologies that store heat from concentrating, for example, solar power that use molten salt to save the heat and release it at night to boil water to spin a turbine; or balloons installed at depth in an ocean or a lake, using renewable energy to fill with air that can then be released to spin a turbine.

I mean, many of these ideas have tremendous potential, but for the foreseeable future none can compete on a level playing field with hydro storage. B.C. Hydro is making, on behalf of all British Columbians, a capital investment that will help us meet our clean energy future.

The Site C clean energy project will be the third dam and hydroelectric generating station on the Peace River. Site C will have a lighter footprint relative to its big upstream neighbour, in that it will generate 30 percent of the electricity produced at the W.A.C. Bennett dam with only 5 percent of the reservoir area.

In planning for the future, Site C will be that publicly owned heritage asset that will be the backbone necessary to firm the grid and allow for more renewable generation projects, be they wind, wave or solar, which are by their very nature, intermittent. This is a huge strength of our system, and I have little doubt — little doubt at all — that Site C will be eventually be seen as the benefit to all that it is, for all British Columbians for many generations to come.

Construction started in the summer of 2015 and is expected to be completed by 2024. Through all stages of development and construction, the project is expected to create about 33,000 person-years of employment in our province for skilled-trades workers and, once completed, will provide clean, reliable, affordable energy for more than a hundred years.

Site C will provide 1,100 megawatts of capacity and produce about 5,100 gigawatt hours of electricity each year, enough to power nearly 450,000 homes. In addition to the significant economic and environmental benefits for British Columbia, the project will deliver lower, more reliable rates for customers than other energy options.

RECONCILIATION

M. Mark: Simgigat, Sigidimhaanak, K’uba Wilksihlkw, distinguished guests, it’s an honour to rise in this House to speak about an important issue near and dear to my heart — that of truth and reconciliation and the recovery process to heal from the devastating impacts of residential school.

[1020]

Last year the Truth and Reconciliation Commission identified 94 calls to action. The report presented heartbreaking evidence of how generations of First Nations families were torn apart through state-sanctioned policies that the Chief Justice of Canada has called cultural genocide.

This verdict is echoed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which outlined how, over more than a century, Canada tried to eliminate aboriginal governments, ignore aboriginal rights, terminate the treaties and, through a process of assimilation, cause aboriginal peoples to cease to exist as distinct, legal, social, cultural, religious and racial entities in Canada. According to Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs:

“We agree with many of the findings in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission final report and unquestionably agree that we must all recognize our collective history.

“In order to reconcile for the future, let us truly honour the truth: the state of Canada and the church committed acts of genocide as defined by the United Nations convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide. On this day as an indigenous people, we have endured, survived, and we are now honoured to carry out our inherent rights, title and treaty rights on behalf of our children and grandchildren.

“The Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 recommendations are calls for actions by all levels of government and must be implemented, as the bare minimum, to respect, recognize and reconcile for the sake of our future generations.”

Further, Chief Chapman added:

“The Truth and Reconciliation Commission has spurred a national dialogue, and there is an important opportunity for Canada and the province, in partnership with First Nations, to jointly commit to change. Bold action is required. Reconciliation must be supported by a legislative framework that not only encompasses the Truth and Reconciliation recommendations but supports mechanisms for ongoing reconciliation between First Nations and the Crown. This is the important work ahead of us all.”

When I looked up the definition of “truth,” it states: “that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.” The fact is that I’m a descendant of a loving grandmother who was torn from her village of Laxgalts’ap in the Nass Valley, who took a grave journey down to the school in Alert Bay and attended St. Michael’s when she was ten years old. My late grandfather from the village of Gitsegukla in the Gitxsan territory was hidden in the bushes, in the forests, from Indian agents to escape the residential school experience.

From my lens, the truth is very clear: many of us have been denied our culture. We have been denied our right to be proud of our history and our identity. There is a strong lineage in the Nisga’a and Gitxsan community, and many of us were torn from that rich reality of growing up with strong families and strong culture. It was the darkest days in our history, and the devastation is real, when we think about our lack of culture, our lack of language and our lack of access to our traditional territories.

When I think about reconciliation, it is about the restoration of friendly relationships. It’s about making amends. It’s also an invitation to transform the current social trademark by moving from a culture that has been branded by its poverty to moving and transforming communities to prosperity.
[ Page 12288 ]

We need to reduce the number of kids in care. We need to reduce the number of kids that are growing up without their families. For those who may not know, there are more kids in foster care now than there was at the height of residential school. We need to do something to foster a stronger sense of belonging for indigenous children.

We need to reclaim and revitalize First Nations culture and language. We need to foster a culture that aims to bridge divides, not by fear and not out of pity. This isn’t about feeling sorry about native children that attended residential schools. It’s about reconciliation in action.

On that note, I’d like to quote the member for Juan de Fuca who stated last summer: “The Truth and Reconciliation report should be required reading for all Canadian political leaders. It must also inform school curricula so that the true and unsanitized history of the Indian residential school system can be told and understood by all British Columbians and by all Canadians.” He added: “If we wish to right those wrongs, we must do more than say sorry. We have to take action.”

[1025]

Reconciliation in action is about our social debt we are all paying to indigenous people in Canada. It’s about restoring public confidence that such horrors will never happen again. It’s about having the fortitude to mitigate the disproportionate numbers of kids in care.

I quote B.C.’s Representative for Children and Youth and her response to the Truth and Reconciliation report: “Such work will not be easy. It will require an unflinching lens as well as the ability to have difficult conversations about the harm children face and to command real resources to ensure that all aboriginal children have a fighting chance in life.”

Reconciliation in action is about restoring a relationship with indigenous people based on love and respect and founded within a human rights framework as identified within the United Nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. Reconciliation in action is about fostering relations with indigenous peoples based on the Supreme Court’s Tsilhqot’in decision, which urged government to ensure there’s free, prior and informed consent when business is carried out on the traditional territories of the First Nations and indigenous peoples of B.C.

It’s about making up for lost time. When I think about reconciliation, I think about how much time was lost. I think about how much I went without. I am not able to speak my traditional language as a result of the Indian residential school experience. I grew up with devastating shame.

J. Tegart: Thank you to the member opposite for your thoughtful remarks about this important issue.

Years ago, when I was a new school trustee, I wondered why we didn’t see First Nations teachers in our schools. Certainly, we were surrounded by First Nations communities, and that was a question I had. Over time I came to realize why this was. As I began to understand and go into the deeper details of the horrors imposed on aboriginal children in Canada’s residential schools, I was able to answer my own question.

Why would bright, young aboriginal men and women join an education system that so thoroughly failed generations of their people — their parents, their aunties, their uncles, their grandparents? How would each of us react if, in our community, every child aged six to 16 was taken away? No children in our community. Imagine learning of the suffering of those children and what they were subjected to in residential school. Who could trust a society that treats children in such a way?

The damage inflicted on those children was only the beginning of the story of residential schools, which operated in our country for 125 years and covered more than five generations of aboriginal people. The impact was unimaginable — on aboriginal culture, heritage and language and on the lives of innocent children.

More than 150,000 children, some as young as four years of age, attended government-funded, church-run residential schools. Today’s survivors and those before them became known as the stolen generation. Taken from their families as children, they were captives in a world that was foreign to them, far from their families, culture and communities. Stolen from them was their youth, their innocence, their sense of identity and their cultural origins and traditions.

The path towards making amends for these wrongs is long and arduous, but we are making progress on reconciliation with our First Nations neighbours. Supporting greater economic prosperity in First Nations communities is a major part of reconciliation: creating partnerships based on mutual respect. Our government supports reconciliation in important areas such as economic development, revenue-and benefit-sharing, health, education and skills training. We have reached more than 100 economic and reconciliation agreements with First Nations in the past year and are working to improve the treaty process.

[1030]

Treaties are the most far-reaching agreement because they clearly settle aboriginal rights and title and provide legal and economic certainty on Crown land. Treaties, which are cost-shared with the federal government, also remove First Nations from the federal Indian Act and provide the authority to deliver self-governance to their citizens. B.C. currently has four treaties in effect with eight First Nations bands.

Unique to B.C. are incremental treaty agreements, which provide treaty benefits prior to a final agreement by transferring provincial Crown land to a First Nations community early to support economic and community development opportunities. B.C. currently has 22 of these agreements with 26 First Nations.

In the past ten years, the Ministry of Children and Family Development has more than tripled funding
[ Page 12289 ]
to delegated aboriginal agencies, to $96 million a year. Grand Chief Edward John has been appointed as a senior adviser on aboriginal child welfare to the Ministry of Children and Families.

A top priority for the ministry is ensuring that aboriginal children and youth have access to culturally sensitive mental health and substance use supports, as well as access to early intervention and prevention programs which help to ensure that the cycle of intergenerational trauma and abuse does not continue.

Near and dear to me is the issue of aboriginal education. I’m encouraged that the six-year high school completion rate for aboriginal students has increased from 39 percent in the year 2000 to 63 percent in 2015.

There is lots of work to be done, but this government is committed to reconciliation with First Nations.

M. Mark: I appreciate the remarks from the member opposite, the focus on treaty and economic development, economic prosperity and education and the child welfare system. There is no question that we have lots of aspirations, that we have high goals and high hopes that things are going to change for aboriginal children throughout the province. But in my term — I’m 40 years old — I see reports after reports after reports. I see recommendation after recommendation after recommendation. I see a lot of talk. I hear a lot of talk about economic development and prosperity.

When you are a First Nations person in this province, you are almost born into poverty. It is almost your social licence to be born into poverty. When I think of the number of children in foster care…. We have 8,000 children in foster care in this province. The numbers aren’t going down, regardless of whether budgets are increasing for delegated agencies or not. The numbers aren’t going down.

We have to adjust the lens. We have to bring the focus back to reconciliation. What does reconciliation mean to the members of this House? I think of reconciliation in action as paddling together. I want to see action where we are in unity, when there is unison, and that we are beating to the same drum. It wasn’t till a few months ago that the first First Nations woman entered this House. It wasn’t till a few months ago that, for the first time in history, we’ve had a First Nations drum in this House.

We can have all of the art that we want in our offices that talks about reconciliation. We can show by symbols of feathers and art and ribbon cutting. But when I look to the people in my riding, when I look to the people in my villages, throughout all of this province, people are not living in prosperity. People are not living with privilege. People are not living with, I think, reconciliation in action in their backyards.

I’m going to go back to thinking of my grandmother’s experience through residential school and reconciliation. In many ways, it’s a miracle that we’re still standing. It is a miracle that we are the fastest-growing population in Canada. It is a miracle that some of us can even speak our language. It is a miracle that we are graduating at the numbers that we are from college and university and high school, but I don’t think it’s by virtue of just public policy. I think it is by virtue of our desire, our strong determination, our will and our spirit as an indigenous people. We have a right, like every other Canadian and every other British Columbian, to prosper.

Thank you, hon. Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to this matter close to my heart.

[1035]

SAFER COMMUNITIES

M. Hunt: Surrey is a beautiful place. It’s the fastest-growing city in British Columbia, if not the rest of Canada. It also boasts the youngest population of virtually any community. Almost one-third of our population is under the age of 19. That means young families are eager to move to Surrey.

Unfortunately, there is a very small number of people involved in gang activity who are making the community feel unsafe. Since last January, there have been no less than 34 reported incidents of gunfire. This is unacceptable.

While the perception is that most of this activity occurs in Surrey, the sad truth of the matter is that gangs have no boundaries. They don’t respect borders or city limits. In fact, gang activity is a very serious problem throughout our province. From Surrey to Williams Lake, from Kelowna to Ladysmith, and all points in between, gangsters and organized criminals are at work.

Every British Columbian deserves to know that their family, their friends and especially their kids should feel safe in their own community. The frequency and public nature of recent gang shootings demand that we step up our efforts. British Columbians have had enough. On April 15, the Premier announced a dozen new initiatives as part of a $23 million boost to B.C.’s guns and gangs strategy.

We intend to do everything through law enforcement to go after criminals who are making life untenable for ordinary British Columbians. As part of that strategy, we’re also taking a proactive, preventative approach to stop youth from getting involved in gangs in the first place.

As the minister of public safety — himself a former law enforcement officer with 32 years of service with the RCMP — pointed out during the announcement, there are only two outcomes for gang members. It is either jail or a coffin. Neither is a particularly attractive outcome.

The $23 million will be applied in a three-pillar approach that will focus on supporting effective enforcement and prosecution; furthering community safety and public engagement; and expanding laws and sanctions targeting illegal guns and gang violence, profits and property.
[ Page 12290 ]

The first pillar will support the investigation, apprehension and prosecution of gangsters and organized criminals by adding two teams to the Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit, B.C.’s integrated anti-gang organization, to support police in communities around the province dealing head-on with the violent criminals, to suppress and disrupt their activities.

We’re also enhancing funding to the provincial tactical enforcement priority, a comprehensive approach that has integrated municipal, provincial and federal intelligence systems to maximize police efforts to pinpoint the disruptive gang and criminal networks.

We’re putting dedicated Crown counsel on priority tactical enforcement files in Surrey that involve offenders with low-level ties to guns and gangs. This will enhance continuity as these cases proceed to trial. We’re expanding the capacity for electronic monitoring of high-risk offenders and ensuring that the courts, which have the sole discretion over assigning electronic monitoring as a condition of reconnaissance or sentence, are fully aware of the options that are at their disposal.

The second pillar will further community safety and public engagement by establishing a new office of crime reduction and gang outreach. This office will work in support of its End Gang Life program and provide overarching coordination of provincial anti-gang outreach programs.

We’re creating an illegal firearms task force to study and strengthen provincial and federal programs related to illegal firearms. In consultation with the Attorney General, we’re also providing people with a safe, secure way to permanently surrender unwanted and unauthorized firearms and ammunition without fear of legal repercussions through a firearms amnesty program, the first here in B.C. since 2013. We’re also investing $450,000 to support Crime Stoppers’ proven cash for tips on illegal firearms line.

[1040]

Finally, the third pillar will focus on exploring a range of legislative solutions, informed by the office of criminal reduction and gang outreach and the firearms task force and through consultation with law enforcement, local government and agencies, to support potential outreach programs to disrupt and prevent gang violence; explore potential changes to provincial and federal laws related to the purchase, movement and storage of firearms; and examine ways to further restrict gangsters and their drug trafficking access to vehicles and other tools of their trade.

In short, we’re going to use every available resource, including the best technology, to end gang violence in this province.

H. Bains: I thank the member from Surrey for standing up and raising an issue that is very, very important and is on the mind of, I would say, almost everyone — not only in Surrey but everywhere around the Lower Mainland.

I think it’s almost a déjà vu. If you go back even ten, 15 years in this House, the people of Surrey and people in this House have been listening to exactly the same speech with the same contents for the last 15 years. Whatever strategy the member has described has not worked. In fact, the gang violence and the gun violence has escalated in recent years in Surrey, the reason being that there’s no fear of getting arrested, no fear of intervention by law enforcement. That encourages them to continue on with the work they’re doing, making the lives of Surrey citizens almost unbearable — to live in their neighbourhoods.

Surrey, in fact, is a beautiful city, the most diverse, I would say, in almost all of Canada, the fastest-growing, the youngest community. There’s huge potential, but if you don’t feel safe in your own home, don’t feel safe walking your kids in your neighbourhood or to the neighbourhood park or don’t feel safe utilizing your public facilities, nothing else matters.

That message has been brought by my colleagues from Surrey, all of my NDP MLA colleagues, the member for Surrey-Whalley, the member from Green Timbers. We’ve been raising this issue here for almost the last 15 years — but no action from the government. Even look at today. Finally, after ignoring all of those years, going back to the previous Premier who said that we would end gang violence in Surrey and the Lower Mainland…. Gordon Campbell said that, and almost the same words are being repeated by the current Premier. But the actions are lacking. There are no actions, real actions.

I think the time has come that we move from sloganeering to real action, and that is the only time and only way that the people of Surrey will actually start to believe in the system, believe in their law enforcement, believe in their government. They are losing trust in this government and in their law enforcement authorities very, very rapidly.

Even if the announcement…. After ignoring it for five, ten years, if you look at the announcement that the Premier made, again, it’s all reactionary. There are no proactive or preventative or education parts included in the $23 million that was announced a week ago.

Bill 40…. The RCMP chief for Surrey said that we cannot arrest our way out of this gang violence. We need prevention, and we need education. There’s nothing for the parents. There’s nothing for the teachers. Those are the areas where we need to provide resources so that the parents and the teachers can work together in the early stages when they see that the child is moving in the wrong direction.

Again, when you move on to a Wrap program, which is a very, very successful program, there’s no sustainable continuous funding for that program. There’s a waiting list for that. There was no additional funding announced on that day for that program. There’s no announcement for those children, those youth, who have moved from high school and are moving into the universities.
[ Page 12291 ]

Those people who were helped through the Wrap program are now falling back, because there’s no follow-up. There’s nothing for them to go to and get help from anybody. Those are the areas where we need support and resources.

Again, the Premier came in and announced two teams of ten. One of those was cancelled two years ago, the result being 60 shootings last year and 33 shootings this year. Finally, now she’s reacting again and implementing two teams of ten.

[1045]

It’s a welcome announcement. But again, people are questioning why it is that she’s coming only just before the election, when she continued to ignore it for the last five, ten years.

People were demanding. People were asking. People were standing on the rooftops and asking anybody who would listen: “Hey, we need help in this area. We need more police. We need to regulate our recovery homes. We need to have a specialized court to deal with all of those prolific offenders. We need more police so that we have more foot and bike patrol.” That’s all missing in that announcement.

M. Hunt: Thank you to the member opposite for his comments, particularly around prevention and education.

One of the things that gang members value more than anything is the money and the proceeds that flow from their criminal activity. One of the most effective means of combating gangster activity is to take all of their money away from them.

As a matter of fact, just last month I was pleased to announce, on behalf of the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General, $375,000 worth of civil forfeiture grants to local organizations. This included $100,000 to the Surrey school district for its Surrey gang prevention program.

This is a part of nearly $7.2 million of provincewide investment that the largest-ever one-time grant has invested in community crime prevention in B.C., combining $5.5 million in provincial civil forfeiture proceeds with $1.7 million from criminal forfeiture proceeds. In all, more than 250 projects and programs throughout the province will receive these one-time grants.

Nearly $2 million is dedicated to gang and youth crime prevention and more than $3.5 million will go to community services that address violence against women and girls. The remainder will support training and education for front-line victim services workers, police training, special equipment and restorative justice.

I should also point out that this year a new stream of civil forfeiture grants is dedicated to programs focused on sexual assault, including responses to sexual assault on post-secondary campuses. This builds on our vision of a violence-free B.C. and the province’s long-term strategy to end all forms of violence against women as well.

SAFEGUARDING B.C.’S BLOOD

J. Darcy: Over 30,000 Canadians, among them thousands of British Columbians, were infected with hepatitis C and HIV from tainted blood and plasma in the 1980s. Many of them have since died. It was Canada’s worst public health disaster.

The four-year royal commission that followed, the Krever inquiry, made critical recommendations for safeguarding our blood supply and set out five key principles — among them, blood is a public resource and donors should not be paid. Tainted-blood survivors today would never have imagined that a day might come when private companies set up shop in B.C. and pay donors for their blood plasma. But that’s exactly what could happen soon in this province.

In a statement last month that safe-blood advocates found very troubling, B.C.’s Minister of Health said that he “didn’t see any problem with pay-for-plasma clinics in British Columbia.” A very disturbing statement, because introducing pay-for-plasma clinics threatens our safe, stable supply of blood and blood products for British Columbia patients in more ways than one.

First of all, having private pay-for-plasma clinics directly contradicts a key recommendation of Justice Krever, who said that offering incentives makes it more likely that infected blood would get into the system. When private blood clinics first opened up shop in Ontario, they followed a pattern that has been repeated in cities across the United States, setting up in neighbourhoods with marginalized populations.

According to Saskatchewan’s Dr. Ryan Meili, they’re doing the same thing in Saskatoon, setting up a few blocks from payday loan shops and pawnshops. They are preying on people who are down on their luck to sell their plasma because they have no other options.

[1050]

Dr. Michele Brill-Edwards, a former senior Health Canada regulator, has stated that “the risk of transmission and infection via blood, including plasma, is well known to increase when donors of blood and plasma are paid for their donations.” That’s a view echoed by none other than the WHO, the World Health Organization, and the International Federation of Red Cross Societies, whose global framework for action states very clearly:

“Paid donors are vulnerable to exploitation and commercialization of the human body, as they become paid blood donors due to economic difficulty. The need to protect the income they receive compromises issues of honesty in the donor interview, and they are unlikely to reveal reasons why they may be unsuitable to donate blood.”

The World Health Organization goes on to say:

“The highest prevalence of transfusion transmissible infections is generally found among paid or commercial donors. They are often undernourished and in poor health and may give blood more frequently than is recommended, resulting in harmful effects to their own health.”
[ Page 12292 ]

That’s why the WHO and the International Red Cross have called on all countries, including Canada, to have 100 percent voluntary blood and plasma donations by 2020 to keep our blood and our blood donors safe.

Shockingly, the B.C. government is considering allowing private pay-for-plasma clinics to set up shop here in B.C. The Minister of Health has stated that the province hasn’t taken an “ideological position” on the issue. But by not taking a clear position against pay for plasma, the government is potentially putting the safety of blood products and people’s health at risk.

The second major reason to be concerned about private pay-for-plasma clinics is about supply. Evidence shows that allowing pay-for-plasma clinics can serve to undermine our present voluntary blood donation system. With a limited pool of potential donors, there is a very real risk that pay-for-plasma clinics will end up competing for donors with existing clinics and reduce the number of voluntary blood donors. That’s exactly what happened in Europe not so long ago.

The European Blood Alliance has documented that competition between voluntary blood donor agencies and private companies that paid for plasma led to a shortage of blood supply in Austria and Germany in 2006 and 2007. So there is very good reason to be concerned that our voluntary donor base will be jeopardized by the existence of paid plasma clinics.

There is no guarantee whatsoever that plasma collected from these private clinics will stay here in Canada, much less in B.C.

For all of these reasons, it is imperative that the B.C. government act quickly to prohibit pay-for-plasma clinics from setting up business in this province. The province of Quebec already prohibits pay for plasma. Two years ago Ontario unanimously passed a law prohibiting paying donors for blood and plasma. The B.C. government should do the same.

We don’t allow payment for organs or human tissue or other body parts. We shouldn’t pay for blood or plasma either. New Democrats believe that the government should legislate a ban on pay-for-plasma clinics without delay.

J. Yap: I’m pleased to rise in the House to respond to the member’s statement on safeguarding B.C.’s blood.

There’s been much discussion recently across Canada and here in B.C. about pay-for-plasma clinics. We know British Columbians need a safe, adequate supply of this essential medical product, which saves lives every day. I know this all too well, having been through my own serious medical challenge just over a year ago.

Patients and their families want to be assured, to be reassured, that in the event that a blood transfusion is needed or in the event of some other type of major medical procedure, the products and tools needed to restore them to good health are there for them. When it comes to this particular issue our primary concern is for patients. We want to reassure British Columbians that safety is always our number one consideration in collecting and supplying any medical products.

We have heard concerns from some British Columbians about a possible repeat of the 1980s tainted blood crisis if donors were paid in B.C. To give a bit of background on this issue, British Columbians already receive plasma products from paid donors and have since the 1990s.

[1055]

Canadian Blood Services only collects enough plasma within Canada to meet about 20 percent of the demand for these products used to treat patients with illnesses like immune deficiency and blood disorders. As much as 80 percent of the plasma protein products that Canadian Blood Services distributes are derived from paid-plasma donations collected in the United States. In fact, the majority of the world supply of plasma products comes from paid donors. Without this system, there would be severe shortages of products for patients who need them.

In the meantime, we have been assured by Canadian Blood Services that the technology and systems now in place, whether for products derived from public or private plasma donations, safeguard the supplies of these products. That technology has advanced dramatically in the last 30 years, and Canadian Blood Services has strict policies to ensure the safety of blood products for those who donate and those who receive. This includes screening for infectious disease threats.

Health Canada is responsible for regulating the safety of Canada’s blood system. Manufacturers of plasma-based products must be licensed by Health Canada and meet its stringent quality and safety standards. Today these products have a remarkable safety profile, resulting from multi-layered production processes and procedures.

Data shows that products derived from plasma donated by paid donors are as safe as those from unpaid donors. The medical community makes no differentiation between products derived from the plasma of paid or unpaid donors.

Meanwhile, I should mention that in 2015-16, the Ministry of Health provided $174.8 million in funding to Canadian Blood Services. The organization is refocusing its plasma sufficiency strategy and plans to present this strategy to provincial and territorial governments this summer.

While the ministry has not invited Canadian Plasma Resources or any other company to set up a for-profit plasma collection clinic in B.C., if a company wants to come to British Columbia and employ British Columbians and collect plasma products from British Columbia residents, we don’t see anything inherently wrong with that as long as the quality and safety provisions are in place. Such a clinic would also potentially provide Canadian Blood Services with another choice — a potential Canadian supplier.

In the meantime, we encourage all British Columbians to continue to voluntarily donate blood and plasma, as
[ Page 12293 ]
we know these donations are critical to the health and well-being of British Columbians.

J. Darcy: Well, it is worrying, indeed, to hear a member opposite essentially tell British Columbians not to worry. It is none other than the World Health Organization and the international society of Red Cross that says the highest prevalence of transfusion-transmissible infections is generally found among paid or commercial donors. There is a reason that the WHO has set a goal of 2020 to have all countries, including Canada, have 100 percent voluntary donations. That’s because the evidence shows that the risk is lower when we’re talking about people who voluntarily donate.

Instead of telling British Columbians not to worry, the government should be aggressively working with the federal government to increase our blood supply through voluntary donations. There is absolutely no guarantee that private blood donations in B.C. would be used in Canada, much less in British Columbia, and I really believe that that argument from the government side is false.

Unfortunately, voluntarily blood donation programs have been scaled back at a time when we, in fact, should be expanding them. The government should be listening to the multitude of groups and individuals who have been raising their voices on this issue: survivors of the tainted blood crisis, the B.C. Hemophilia Society, Kat Lanteigne and Bloodwatch, the B.C. Health Coalition, front-line health care workers — doctors, nurses and others. They are all saying no to pay-for-plasma.

Instead of telling British Columbians not to worry, the government should be following the lead of other provinces, like Quebec and Ontario, which have shut the door tight on these private blood clinics setting up shop in their communities.

If the government won’t listen to safe-blood advocates or to other provincial governments or the official opposition, surely they will start listening to the World Health Organization and the International Red Cross and realize that they are moving in the wrong direction — in fact, the opposite direction from that that is being taken by countries across the globe.

[1100]

Let’s not go down that slippery slope. We banned payment for organs and human tissue and body parts. We should protect the safety and security of our blood supply by banning pay-for-plasma too.

Hon. M. Polak: I call debate on Motion 12.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 12 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 12 — DIVERSE ECONOMY

D. Plecas: I’d like to move the following motion:

[Be it resolved that this House recognize the benefits that derive from a strong, diverse economy.]

[R. Lee in the chair.]

A strong, diverse economy does not rely on only one sector. Right now this is more evident than ever before. With the decline in oil prices and low commodity prices, we see economies that are dependent on one or two sectors and are struggling now. By having a diverse economy, this means we can rely on other sectors that are booming. Growing the economy means getting to yes on responsible economic development projects right across this province.

This motion is about recognizing the benefits that derive from a strong, diverse economy. The best evidence of this is that our province is leading the country in job creation, with 72,000 jobs created last year. We are leading the country in economic growth, and we are projected to continue leading the country. Since we introduced the B.C. jobs plan, we are first in reducing unemployment and we are first in youth job creation in Canada.

We are focusing on growing the economy, creating jobs and powering the future using clean energy and conservation. The Site C clean energy project will help B.C. meet our long-term energy needs. It will be a source of clean, reliable and affordable electricity for more than 100 years. Not only that; it will provide thousands of jobs — 10,000 during the construction period alone and approximately 33,000 jobs throughout all stages of development and construction. This project will benefit the surrounding communities and aboriginal groups during the construction phase.

Of course, our natural gas industry is also a key economic driver. B.C. is the second-largest producer of natural gas in this country, and we are responsible for 26 percent of Canadian production. We also have the largest remaining gas reserves in Canada. Major global companies are showing a strong commitment to B.C.’s natural gas sector and its future. We’ve already had over $20 billion invested by industry to further B.C.’s LNG opportunity, and as the LNG industry in B.C. gets going, we’ll see more and more investment in the province and more and more jobs for British Columbians.

Tourism plays an important role in our diverse economy. We are continuing to grow the tourism sector through our integrated marketing approach. A variety of factors contribute to the boost in tourism numbers, including increased direct flights from B.C. from key U.S. markets and international markets. Roughly one out of every 15 people employed in B.C. works
[ Page 12294 ]
in the tourism industry. As our tourism sector continues to grow, we’ll see more and more jobs for British Columbians.

Forestry continues to be an important part of our strong and diverse economy. In 2015, wood products represented 36 percent of B.C.’s total exports. That’s $12.9 billion in forest products. Wood products from our sustainably managed forests will tackle climate change by being a renewable building material and a means to store carbon. Building international markets for B.C.’s natural resources is a component of the B.C. jobs plan. B.C.’s forest sector employs more than 6,000 British Columbians and supports over 7,000 businesses.

[1105]

These are just a few aspects of our diverse economy that are helping B.C. thrive. This government has worked hard to diversify and grow our economy. We have more British Columbians working than ever before. We see proof of our hard work. We have a strong and diverse economy that supports and provides benefits to all British Columbians across the province.

C. James: I’m pleased to rise to speak to the motion that talks about the House recognizing the benefits that derive from a strong, diverse economy. I want to just start off with the interesting wording of mentioning “diverse,” given this Premier’s laser focus, as she has described it, on simply LNG post-election.

LNG was supposed to solve all the challenges British Columbia had ever faced. I think it’s interesting that all of a sudden, we see that the government has discovered the word “diversification,” when industries have been ignored for the last four years. In fact, you would talk to industries that would jokingly say that they thought they should put the word “LNG” in the name of their business, whether it had anything to do with LNG or not, because it seemed to be the only way they could get any attention from this government.

So I’m pleased to see that we have, as the member mentioned, tourism. He didn’t mention high tech, film. I’m pleased to see those industries doing well despite this government — not because of the support of this government but, in fact, despite this government.

The member mentioned forestry. Well, I can’t leave that one alone without mentioning that the majority of the forest industry work that has gone on under this government has been the export of raw logs and of jobs that don’t stay in British Columbia. Sustainable forestry? I don’t know where the member has been, because, in fact, we haven’t seen investments in silviculture, in reforestation, in research — all the kinds of things you need to have a sustainable industry.

Now, I find it interesting that the member said that we really want to talk about the benefits that come from a strong economy. That’s where I want to spend my couple of minutes that I have left.

I believe that there are benefits from a strong economy. I also believe that all British Columbians should benefit from that strong economy. That’s the big difference between this side and that side.

Let’s look at the reality that the government doesn’t talk about — the reality for individuals and hard-working British Columbians and families in this province. While the Premier and the Finance Minister have been telling families that they have to wait and that they have to tighten their belts and that times are tough, government did actually happen to find money lying around — not to benefit those hard-working families, not to make life easier for those individuals.

In fact, the government found $230 million that went towards a tax break for the top 2 percent of income earners. I guess, under this government, certain people benefit. The top 2 percent of income earners benefit but certainly not the rest of British Columbians.

The Premier and the Finance Minister also found $100 million to put into the Premier’s fantasy fund that was supposed to be there from all the wealth from LNG that was going to come to our province. Instead, she found that money to put in there, but again, how did that benefit the people of British Columbia? That’s what a budget is there for.

The reality is that families have faced more and more costs — increases in everything from hydro rates to tuition, ferry fares to ICBC and MSP. All have increased under this government. And they’re huge increases. We’re talking about everything from 108 percent to 74 percent when it comes to increases to families. We have the highest debt load here in British Columbia that families are facing because of government making things more difficult. We’ve seen a 58 percent increase in growth in the number of payday loans that are being used, not for extras but for the basics: housing and the cost of living here in British Columbia.

Even on opportunity, when people are looking to better themselves…. When they’re looking for opportunities to take upgrading, for example, the government starts charging for it. Even when they want to better themselves, the government makes it more difficult.

Education is squeezed. Child care costs are skyrocketing. We are number one. We’re number one when it comes to child poverty in this province — a shameful statistic that all of us in this Legislature should be working to fix. I haven’t even mentioned the bus pass and disabilities. Even when the government tries to put in some extra, they still don’t manage it, and they take away a bus pass from people with disabilities.

[1110]

Benefits from a strong economy? Yes. Yes, there are benefits from a strong economy. The sad reality, under this government, is that British Columbians are not the ones benefiting. The people who should benefit from a strong economy, the people who should be benefiting
[ Page 12295 ]
and doing well, are not. They’re finding their life more difficult. They’re finding it tougher. They’re finding a government that doesn’t put them first.

D. Barnett: It is my pleasure to rise and add my remarks to my colleague’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the benefits that derive from a strong, diverse economy.”

Our government’s record on fiscal discipline is unmatched in Canada. Because of this self-control, we are able to make investments that encourage and strengthen growth in our key economic sectors. In addition, we are sustaining core public services and making life a little easier for families and people in need. We are growing our economy, creating jobs and powering the future by using clean technology, clean energy and conservation.

Construction on the Site C dam is underway and will be the third dam and hydroelectric generating station on the Peace River in northeastern B.C. We are building Site C to meet our province’s long-term electricity needs. It will provide 1,100 megawatts of capacity and produce about 5,100 gigawatt hours of electricity each year, enough energy to power the equivalent of about 450,000 homes per year.

Construction on the Site C project started in the summer of 2015, and completion is scheduled for 2024. When completed, Site C will be a source of clean, reliable and affordable electricity for more than 100 years.

During construction, the project will provide significant economic, community and environmental benefits for British Columbia. It will bring significant increases to GDP during construction — $3.2 billion to provincial GDP, including $130 million regionally. There will be approximately 10,000 person-years of direct employment during construction and about 33,000 person-years of employment through all stages of development and construction.

Site C also helps meet our future electricity demand — firm energy that can be relied upon to meet electrical needs throughout the year and much-needed, dependable capacity to meet peak sudden demand.

Working on the Site C project is more than just a job. It is an opportunity to be part of a legacy project for our province that will provide clean, reliable and cost-effective electricity for more than a century. The numbers of workers on site peaked at more than 600 workers during site preparation activities last fall, approximately three-quarters of whom are from B.C.

Earlier this month, the Premier announced a $470 million contract for Site C’s six turbine generators. With nearly 150 workers slated to be on site during the peak of the installation in 2022, the contract is expected to create about 400 person-years of employment, resulting in job opportunities for millwrights, electricians, pipefitters, boilermakers and other trades.

Our priority is to ensure that British Columbians are given first look to work on the Site C project. It is one of the reasons that Site C is being billed with the managed open-site model so that the project and its contractors have access to the broadest possible pool of workers from across the province.

We are also promoting local hiring by working with regional economic development agencies funding skills-training programs in the regions, and B.C. is holding local and regional job fairs. In fact, they have already taken place in Tumbler Ridge, Fort St. John, Dawson Creek, Chetwynd, Mackenzie, Prince George, Quesnel and Fort Nelson. They have been attended by about 5,000 people looking for Site C jobs.

[1115]

One of B.C. Hydro’s project objectives for Site C is to provide lasting economic and social benefits for northern communities and aboriginal groups. B.C.’s aboriginal contracting and procurement policy is designed to increase the involvement of aboriginal groups in economic opportunities connected to B.C. Hydro’s activities.

Site C is a model of responsible economic development that is building lasting benefits for all British Columbians, and it is the centrepiece of our vision for a strong, diverse economy.

L. Popham: “Be it resolved that this House recognizes the benefits that derive from a strong and diverse economy.” This is the motion that we’re debating this morning.

Well, I ask the government this. Imagine a government that believed that sustainable agriculture could unlock prosperity in communities throughout our province. That’s something that we believe in on this side of the House. That’s an opportunity that we’re missing, and unfortunately, the members on the opposite side, the government that we’ve seen, have dismissed this idea of agricultural economic development for the last 15 years.

Although this could be seen as something that is just a difference of political beliefs and should be up for debate, we’re past that point. At this point, even the United Nations recognizes that if you’re not embracing your local sustainable agriculture system within your own province, then you’re missing out on an opportunity to become resilient in the face of climate change. And while doing that, if you actually could embrace that, it would offer so many economic benefits around the province.

We’re lucky in our province because we have different agricultural bioregions that offer different growing opportunities, but we’ve dismissed this. We’ve seen this government over the last few years try and destroy the agricultural land reserve, which is really a bank for food security. We’re giving that away. We’re giving away opportunities. We see farmers trying to take advantage in places like Cranbrook, for example. The growing opportunities in Cranbrook are enormous, but unfortunately, we don’t have government representation that believes in that. In fact, it has been trying to take that away.

It’s not lost on anyone that we are becoming more and more dependent on imports into British Columbia,
[ Page 12296 ]
where in fact we could become a lot more self-sufficient. So 67 percent of vegetables and 44 percent of fruit are imported from the United States into this province, and half of that is coming from California. This is not a recipe for success when you look at food security and also at economic opportunities.

If you looked at how we could split our province up and rely on what we’re growing in different areas of the province, and make sure that we’re incenting value-added and food opportunities, we could see that we would have a stable domestic agrarian economy working in rural communities which are struggling because of the neglect of some of our other resource economies.

Now, when you look up at the Peace, we’ve heard from the other side how great the Site C project is. When you look at what that actually means in relation to economic opportunities within the Peace River area, we see the oil and gas industry up there taking quite a hit.

We see young people that have gone into that as a promise of great economic opportunity for themselves. They are now losing their jobs. They’re returning to areas on the Peace River that…. For example, there’s a 100-year-old grain farm on the Peace River. Young people are coming to that farm asking for employment there. At the same time, we are flooding over 4,000 hectares of prime agricultural land in that same region.

We do not have a diverse economy in British Columbia. This government is heading into an election. They love to say it, because they believe anything they say is the truth to the voters. But we are going to be presenting a plan that looks at an actual diverse province, an actual diverse economy that offers real jobs for British Columbians, not just the ones that show up in photo ops from the other side of the House.

D. McRae: On behalf of the people of the Comox Valley — I also want to say a special shout-out to the people of Shuswap because they’re important as well, and my colleague who really wanted to speak was not able to be here — it is my pleasure to add my voice to my colleague’s motion. The motion is: “Be it resolved that this House recognize the benefits that derive from a strong, diverse economy.”

[1120]

I’m going to also call this speech the theme of the glass half-full. I’m going to talk about the benefits that happen on Vancouver Island and in my area.

For example, I know the members opposite are very keen to talk about the investment in health care we do across the province of British Columbia. I know, because I’ve spoken about it in this House. My colleagues probably say: “MLA, don’t keep talking. We don’t want to hear about the $300 million hospital investment in the Comox Valley.”

Then I remind them, and I say: “We’re not just doing the Comox Valley. We’re going 45 minutes to the north to Campbell River, and we’re also building a secondary hospital up there — a smaller hospital, a little bit. Nonetheless, we are going to make sure that we are investing in ridings across British Columbia to make sure that there are health care investments for all British Columbians. Those two investments — $600 million. And that’s just one of many.

We don’t stop at health care. I know last Wednesday I had the opportunity to go up to the John Hart dam site. I’ve never seen $1.1 billion being spent, but the reality is that for $1.1 billion, we are not getting a brand-new dam. We’re building spillways and generating stations to make sure…. Because the investment hadn’t happened for 50 years, 60 years, we want to make sure that the spillway and that hydro electricity–generating area is able to produce power for years and years to come.

We’re making a new generating station. We’re making sure that the spillways are going be there, in case there is a seismic event. On top of that, we’re going to add one more piece. Working with the city of Campbell River, we’re going to make sure their drinking water is even more secure because of a partnership between B.C. Hydro and the city of Campbell River — another great investment in the north Island, because we have a growing and a diverse economy.

My colleague minutes ago was talking about agriculture. I’m sure she forgot, but I wanted to add a couple little pieces of growth in diverse economy. I was out with some farmers in the Comox Valley during our constituency week. It surprises many that there are 800 more cattle being grown in the Comox Valley than there were five years ago. You know what? Of those 800 cattle that are then processed in the Comox Valley and then shipped outside of the Comox Valley for consumption, they don’t actually get a chance to even leave Vancouver Island.

Every single one of those animals is actually sold on Vancouver Island. If we’re talking five years ago, we’re talking 15 years ago, that industry did not exist. Why? Because the consumers of this province want to make sure they have local. They want to make sure they have high quality, good-value product, and they’re making sure that they have the dollars in their pocket to spend it.

It’s not just about agriculture. I know, as all of my community…. We’re were really excited right now. School district 71 — I know we talk, in this district, and there are some challenges. One thing they really championed in the last six years in our district was the seismic upgrade program of the high school, G.P. Vanier — very important to our school, to the north Island, to our district.

They were able secure, from the province for the seismic upgrade program, over $30 million to make sure that G.P. Vanier is rebuilt to a level that will ensure generations of students in the Comox Valley continue to get high-quality education from great teachers, support staff and administrators. You only get to make those kinds of investments when you have a diverse economy, a grow-
[ Page 12297 ]
ing economy and a chance to make sure you make those investments where people need it most.

North Island College. It just happened the other day as well. You might have seen it as well, hon. Speaker. They announced more spots for health care training in the Comox Valley. But you know what? I’d feel bad if it was just for the Comox Valley, but I saw there are opportunities to invest in new slots, whether it’s trades in Nanaimo or Victoria or across British Columbia.

Again, we’re continuing to invest in training spots where there are jobs for Canadians and British Columbians across British Columbia. What does it take to invest in these areas? Well, you need to have some resources. How do we get those resources? We grow a diverse economy. Once again, it’s an example where we share those opportunities with all British Columbians.

The forest industry on northern Vancouver Island is doing really well right now. Still some challenges, but those are the individuals who generate income for British Columbians.

We talk about agriculture on Vancouver Island. The abattoir in the Comox Valley, Gunter Brothers, couldn’t actually be any busier, as we would like.

Interjection.

D. McRae: I know the member opposite from Nanaimo is talking aside from me, and I know that even your area, member for Nanaimo, is doing pretty darn well because of investments. That port in Nanaimo — unbelievable. That’s an opportunity to make those kinds of investments.

We can also talk Helijet. Why is Helijet coming to Nanaimo? Helijet comes to Nanaimo because there are individuals who can spend the money. They’re working, they have the opportunity, and they want to visit Vancouver.

Even Nanaimo is in the news, where people are saying: “Let’s leave Vancouver. Let’s go to Nanaimo.” Why? It’s a great place to live. I agree. It’s just another example of how we continually grow a diverse economy in British Columbia for the benefit of all British Columbians.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and speak to the motion before us “that this House recognize the benefits that derive from a strong, diverse economy.”

[1125]

I’m very pleased to speak to this motion and to hear that the government has discovered the word “diverse” economy. I guess that that was a revelation coming upon the government that we have a variety of sectors very active in our economy that are important and contribute.

It’s certainly in contrast to what we were hearing from the government with the lead-up to our last election and for the first few years after that, where it was all LNG all the time. That is a contrast in terms of what we heard as the priority not only of the Premier and this government but also as a slogan that we can characterize, and we have seen that this the government has not delivered on that. I guess we are looking at the reality of our province. We do have a good number of diverse industries that contribute to our economic well-being.

I want to talk a little bit about…. We’ve heard some comments I want to remark on, from one of the members across the way, that from B.C.’s diverse economy…. We are seeing, through these actions, that they are “making lives easier for families in need.” That was a quote that we heard from the member speaking on the other side.

Let’s look at the reality again. That is the claim, but what’s the reality in terms of what families in British Columbia are facing under this government? We are seeing, in particular, increasing fees that have gone up — increases in Medical Service Plan, increases to ICBC, increases to tuition and really rocketing housing costs in Metro Vancouver.

We are seeing, on the one hand, the claim from the government that British Columbian families in need are finding it easier. But in reality on the ground, as a result of the priorities and directions and decisions of this government, we are seeing British Columbian families facing increasing hardships and facing difficulties to make ends meet. We are not seeing the picture of British Columbian families being able to take advantage of our economy. So on the one hand, we have the claim that British Columbian families are benefiting, but the reality is that increasing fees are creating more pressures on families.

In addition, British Columbian families are paying more and getting less. We are seeing cuts to social services, cuts to education, a shortfall in terms of staffing levels at seniors homes, a shortfall in terms of adequate staffing in our court systems, a shortfall of sheriffs. This is the reality under this government. They have delivered the reality that British Columbians pay more for less and have less opportunities.

When we look at the record, we see that job growth has predominantly been in part-time jobs, that those part-time jobs are overrepresented here in British Columbia. In addition and hand-in-hand with that, wages have stagnated, are falling behind, so we are seeing increasing difficulties of families finding good-paying, family-supporting jobs and, at the same time, having to pay more fees and getting less.

The clear priority of this government has not been on the side of the British Columbian families. British Columbian families are facing increasing struggles, increasing difficulties. While we’re seeing who is benefiting, on the other hand…. With increasing fees we see that there are some British Columbians that are benefiting. We see under this previous budget going back — not only this budget but last year — tax breaks to whom: the wealthiest 2 percent in British Columbia, millionaires — a half a billion dollars. These are the British Columbians who are benefiting, and over the next two years, $1 billion.
[ Page 12298 ]

We need to see that British Columbia’s economy works for all families — that opportunities are provided and that it is not rhetoric, that it is not slogans. We need to see a change.

[1130]

D. Bing: On behalf of my constituents of Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows, I am pleased to rise today to take my place in the debate on this motion about the benefits of a strong, diverse economy.

Through strong fiscal discipline, we are able to find room for modest investments that strengthen and encourage growth in key economic sectors. This means we are able to sustain core public services and make life a little easier for families and those in need.

Growing the economy means getting to yes on responsible economic development projects across the province. We believe that technology enables growth in all sectors of the economy, and growth means jobs for families. Clean technology is a quickly developing subsector that crosses over into many traditional industries. Clean tech is also part of our recently released #BCTECH strategy. It creates more efficient, effective and sustainable practices. In fact, the global market for clean technology and services is expected to grow to $3 trillion by 2020.

Clean-tech companies vary from such segments as hydrogen and fuel cells, clean transportation, energy management and efficiency technologies, renewable energy technology and water and waste resource management technologies. In 2014, the B.C. Technology Industry Association released a report that indicated B.C. is on the leading edge of clean technology solutions. B.C. has over 200 clean technology firms, many of which are gaining global recognition for their leadership. B.C. is at the forefront of Canada’s growing clean-tech industry. This means that as our companies grow, we will see more and more jobs for B.C. families.

Another huge sector that plays an important role in our diverse and growing economy is the tourism sector. In my riding, I’m lucky to say that I have B.C.’s busiest provincial park, Golden Ears Park. Visitors come from across the province, from the United States and from around the world to camp and hike and enjoy British Columbia’s beautiful scenery.

Tourism provides a job for roughly one out of every 15 people employed in B.C. The number of British Columbians working in tourism-related activities is the highest it has been since 2009; $4.3 billion in paid wages went to tourism workers in 2014, and the tourism industry keeps growing. Industry projects that the number of positions will continue to increase. By 2020, it is projected that more than 44,000 new jobs will be added to B.C.’s economy. In 2014, tourism generated $14.6 billion in revenue in B.C. This is a 5.1 percent increase over 2013.

There are more direct flights to B.C. from the U.S. and other key international markets that are drawing people here. On a personal note, there are now direct flights from Vancouver to Reykjavik, Iceland. I took this flight two years ago. Iceland is just a beautiful place and is the gateway to Europe.

We have more than 19,200 tourism-related businesses here in B.C., and 93 percent of those are in small business. People are eager to visit British Columbia and see what we have to offer. More people are travelling to B.C., and British Columbians are benefiting from welcoming these visitors into our province.

As part of our diverse economy, our natural resources play an important role. Our forest industry continues to play an important role in our diverse economy. In 2015, wood exports represented 36 percent of B.C.’s total exports. This month, our government announced that it is investing $8 million to promote the use of B.C. wood, to help advance wood-building systems and products and to expand global markets for B.C. wood products. As part of this investment, $6.2 million will target activities that will expand markets for B.C.’s wood products that reflect evolving market opportunities in Asia and North America. Building international markets for B.C.’s natural resources is a component of the B.C. jobs plan. Our forest sector employs more than 60,000 British Columbians and supports over 7,000 businesses.

These are just a few highlights of the key sectors that keep our province growing and thriving. There are many more benefits of having a diverse and strong economy.

B. Ralston: I listened carefully to the lead speaker for the government, proposing this motion. He mentioned a couple of sectors — a fairly selective list; I was a bit surprised — LNG, of course, the laser-like focus of the Premier since 2013; tourism; and forest products.

[1135]

These are, of course, important sectors, particularly tourism. I’ll have a little bit more to say about how the actual, the real, tourism sector in one part of the province has been treated by the government and forest products as well.

I didn’t hear anything in the government-speak from the government speakers so far…. These are sectors that have struggled to get the government’s attention over the last three or four years. The manufacturing sector, the third-largest employer of people in British Columbia — 400,000 jobs, 12,000 companies, a third of the taxes paid to the government. Jobs that pay, on average, 15 percent more. They can’t get time with the government to talk about their issues.

The B.C. technology industry — $15 billion in GDP, 84,000 jobs. The government belatedly and reluctantly recognized the importance of this sector by directing that a conference be scheduled last fall, given that the LNG strategy is falling apart.

The life sciences sector. I was at the awards ceremony there. There were some ministers there to take the plau-
[ Page 12299 ]
dits of the crowd. It’s a huge sector — 180,000 jobs, $14.4 billion to the GDP, significant public investment through Genome B.C. and through the Michael Smith Foundation started by the NDP in the year 2000.

The economy is diverse, but the political list that’s selected by the proposer of the motion is very political for purposes best known to the B.C. Liberal Party and their strategists. They don’t really want to talk about the diversified economy. They want to find wedge issues in the economy to attack their opponents and to rally people in what they regard as key political seats.

Let’s have a look at what they did. We talk about tourism. Members opposite have talked about tourism. Let’s talk about Osoyoos. Osoyoos is designated as a resort community in accordance with the province’s resort municipality revenue-sharing program. In other words, there is a government program to enhance the ability of Osoyoos to function as a…. Their goal is, if you look at their site, to be a year-round, four season destination resort. Their economic plan talks about agritourism and wine, retail, value-added wood, warehousing and logistics.

What did the government decide to do? They’ll deny this. They’ll say it’s a local decision. Everyone knows that that’s not true. Their decision was to force the school board to close the high school in Osoyoos — to rip the guts out of that community. How can you attract workers? When you close a school, you change the entire dynamic of the community. You reduce the potential of the community to attract business. You can’t attract young families when you don’t have a high school.

The mayor and the council of Osoyoos have properly described this as tragic. Hundreds of people showed up at community meetings. This is the economic strategy of the government, apparently. Creating a diverse economy in Osoyoos? I don’t think so, and they certainly don’t think so there. They are very troubled. No leadership is shown by the local Liberal MLA at these community meetings, and that speaks to the reality of the diverse economy that the members opposite are talking about. A resort community is trying to establish itself, taking key economic initiatives, and having the guts ripped out by having their high school closed, which will be damaging economically to that community.

That’s the reality of the diverse economy on that side of the House. That’s what we, on this side of the House, strongly oppose.

S. Hamilton: It’s an undeniable fact that British Columbia has the strongest economy in Canada. While other provinces are struggling with high unemployment and record deficits, people are looking to British Columbia. They’re looking to British Columbia and they’re moving to British Columbia in droves because this is where all the vast economic opportunities exist.

We have a balanced budget — one of the few provinces, if any, in Canada to make that claim. We have a government that’s able to find room to make investments to strengthen and encourage growth in economic sectors. We’re also using our modest surplus to make life easier for families in need.

[1140]

To the casual observer, one might ask why B.C. is so different. The difference lies in the fact that our provincial economy has evolved rapidly since the days when our main exports were just fish and minerals and, by far, the largest commodity was wood. We were also confined to only one export market, the United States.

That made the job of being economic forecasters in those days pretty tough. If there was a significant slump in housing starts south of the border, a recession was sure to follow in British Columbia. But those days are gone. As I mentioned earlier, we’re no longer a single-resource economy. If we were, we’d be suffering the same economic pain that our neighbours in Alberta are suffering right now. That’s precisely what happened to them. They put all their eggs in one basket.

The member opposite for Surrey-Whalley mentioned early in his dissertation that we have a laser focus on LNG. Darn right we’ve got a laser focus on LNG. But we’re capable of beading in on more than one target at a time, and we do just that. We don’t put all our eggs in one basket. We’ve invested in many different areas of this province, and the members opposite know that. The difference that sets B.C. apart is the fact that we have a much more diverse economy that makes our province more resilient to fickle markets.

While we’ve been growing different parts of our economy, we’re also getting out there and seeking out new customers for our products. While the United States remains a very important trading partner, the Premier, members of this government and, indeed, representatives of companies from around this province and other parts of the country have been travelling to parts of Asia to secure new markets, especially in China and India.

One example in my community of Delta is Zodiac Hurricane Technologies. Since 1978, Zodiac Hurricane Technologies has designed commercial rigid-hull inflatable boats for worldwide distribution through its parent organization, Zodiac International. These are the types of boats that search and rescue organizations, police, the military and even whale-watching companies use all over the world. Many people think that B.C. is not a big player in the manufacturing industry, but companies like Zodiac Hurricane Technologies are proving them wrong.

Another industrial sector that is close to my heart is high tech. As I’ve mentioned before in this House, my own daughter works in B.C.’s high-tech industry and is enjoying a career that never even existed until this government made concerted efforts to grow the high-tech industry as it is today.

As a matter of fact, the number of high-tech jobs has increased in the past three years, and employment in
[ Page 12300 ]
British Columbia’s technology sector continues to climb. Today the high-tech sector employs approximately 4.4 percent of B.C.’s workforce. It employs over 80,000 employees with wages and salaries that, on average, pay more than other sectors. This is important to younger generations of British Columbians that, if given the proper skills and training, will carve out an even larger niche in global markets.

This government has come a long way, and this government plans on continuing to promote our products and people. This government plans on going a lot further, so stay tuned,

S. Simpson: I’m pleased to join this debate about the benefits of a strong, diverse economy for British Columbia. I find it interesting that the member who spoke previously talked the about the diversity of our economy and the relationship to LNG. Of course, what we know is that every promise — failed promise after failed promise — about LNG made in 2013….

You’ll all remember the 100,000 jobs. You’ll remember the hundreds of billions of dollars in prosperity accounts, getting rid of our debt, getting rid of the sales tax, trillions of dollars of economic opportunity — none of that realized. You’ll all remember that we were going to have that first LNG plant up in 2015 and operating in 2015. But we know what a failure all of those promises have been. They were unfounded when they were made, and of course, they’ve failed.

In the last year, we have seen the government pivot and scramble to cobble together this political argument around a diverse economy. Let’s talk about that diverse, strong economy. The problem with the government’s position around a strong, diverse economy is that it is all precipitated on the argument of the balance sheet and the number at the bottom of the balance sheet. That’s not what our economy is about. The economy has to be about the people of British Columbia. The economy has to be about what works for people in British Columbia.

[1145]

What do we know? We know that costs are continuing to climb and jam people, whether it’s increases in MSP, whether it’s Hydro, whether it’s ICBC — all part of that strong economy that the government talks about. But there is little or no help there for British Columbians. We know, as my colleague talked about, the challenge that we’re seeing reverberate across this province around education funding and around concerns that British Columbians have about how their kids will learn and what those opportunities will be.

When schools are closing in Osoyoos, when they’re scrambling in Surrey because they can’t get enough seats in, when Vancouver is being told that the answer to the problems, the challenges, in Vancouver is to close 20, 21 schools…. Is that what a diverse, strong economy in British Columbia means? How many schools can you close?

That’s part of the challenge here that this government’s approach to a strong economy does not address in any way, shape or form. When we talk about a strong economy, we have to talk about affordability issues. People talk about jobs over there and the strength of the job market. In the Lower Mainland, in Metro Vancouver and on the south Island, we have an economy that’s pretty strong. But we have two economies in this province — quite clearly. You get into the rest of the province, and people are challenged for that economy.

When the government wants to talk about a strong, diverse economy, it’s time to start talking about what the real priorities are, because it’s always about priorities. For this government, is the priority, the $236 million tax cut for the top 2 percent? Apparently, because it’s not minimum wage — that’s clear — and it’s not flat wage growth across the province, where people are struggling to deal with cost pressures. That’s not part of the strong, diverse economy, apparently, for the folks on the other side.

We need to have a debate about that economy. But the debate needs to be about how well people are doing in British Columbia. After 16, 15, however many years of a tired government on that side, people are struggling, and they are being offered nothing except a political opportunity when it’s seen — to try to maximize whatever that opportunity is. In this case, it’s about a balance-sheet number at the end of the page. That’s not a strong economy.

A strong economy is when people are doing well and feeling confident. British Columbians are not doing well today, and they’re not feeling confident today and not feeling confident that that government has their interests or much cares about what happens to them.

If we’re going to build a strong economy, build it on what’s good for British Columbians, not what’s good for B.C. Liberal political opportunity.

D. Ashton: It’s my pleasure today to speak on behalf of the citizens of Penticton, Summerland, Peachland and Naramata on the benefits that derive from a strong economy. I would like to thank my colleague from Abbotsford South who introduced this motion and also all the members on both sides of the House for their remarks.

Our province enjoys a robust economy in part because our government pursues diversity in our industries so that the downturns in one or two industries are at least partially compensated by upticks in others.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

One industry that’s enjoying consistent growth in our province is tourism. Through the B.C. jobs plan, we are growing our tourism industry by building an integrated marketing approach and by partnering with tourism marketing organizations throughout the province.
[ Page 12301 ]

Tourism generated $14.6 billion in revenue in British Columbia in 2014, a 5.1 percent increase over 2013. Strong growth in the tourism sector can be linked to a number of factors, including more direct flights to British Columbia from key U.S. and international markets as well as Destination British Columbia’s new international marketing strategy.

Tourism is indeed a big business in our province, as there are more than 19,200 tourism-related businesses in British Columbia. Almost 93 percent of those are small businesses. Tourism provided a job for roughly one out of every 15 people employed in British Columbia.

Our government is investing more than $90 million annually in the tourism sector across the region to grow and market the sector. Employment within tourism is at 132,000, up 3 percent since 2012. In 2014, wages and salaries were $14.3 billion to tourism workers, and that’s up 4½ percent from 2013.

[1150]

The tourism industry projects the number of positions in the tourism and hospitality sector will have increased by more than 255,000 by 2020, meaning more than 44,000 new jobs will be added to British Columbia’s economy.

We also have, in Vancouver, the top North American city for international meetings, according to a report by the International Congress and Convention Association, which said that Vancouver hosted 60 of these big international meetings in 2014.

This year is already shaping up as another banner year for international visits. International overnight entries to British Columbia for the month of February topped up to a 16.2 percent increase from February of 2015. There were some big increases in overnight entries from our key markets in February, compared to February 2015: France, up 61 percent; South Korea, up 27 percent; Mexico, up 26 percent; Japan, up 25 percent; and the United States, up 20 percent.

It’s worth noting that the tremendous growth in the number of visits from France is due largely, in part, to a direct flight to Vancouver. I have my own opinion. I think many of them are coming over to experience the incredible wines and wineries that the Okanagan has to offer.

Additionally, overnight visitors from the United States — vehicle traffic was up 15.4 percent in February over last year. And United States overnight visitors arriving by plane increased 39 percent. The dollar makes a big difference. They’re coming up here and spending their money.

But we know there’s a lot of global competition in the tourism industry. Through Destination B.C., we are aggressively marketing ourselves around the province and the world. Destination British Columbia’s corporate strategy is centred on finding better ways to market the province. Destination B.C. is looking to enhance our competitiveness by focusing on visitors’ improvements to their experiences while being in British Columbia.

Our government is in close communication with Destination B.C. to ensure that the consultations with all our regions are a priority. We want our visitors to know that there is much more to see and do in British Columbia other than what they find in Vancouver and Victoria.

We make no secret of the fact that tourism is a cornerstone of the economy for now and into the future. In 2011, we set an ambitious target of 5 percent annual growth in tourism revenue. We believe that that target is achievable if the world economy conditions remain favourable and, also again, with that strong American dollar bringing so many more Americans across the way.

Our attention to expanding our tourism sector promises to be a great buffer of the downturn for other key industries. It will keep this province strong and resilient and give that experience to so many people around the world that love this province and continue to come back.

Noting the hour, I think it is my duty to move an adjournment of the debate at this point in time.

D. Ashton moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. A. Wilkinson: Under the circumstances, I suggest we adjourn to the next sitting.

Hon. A. Wilkinson 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 11:53 a.m.

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

Copyright © 2016: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada