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, May 9, 2016

Morning Sitting

Volume 39, Number 3

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

MONDAY, MAY 9, 2016

The House met at 10:03 a.m.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers.

Introductions by Members

J. Rice: Today in the precinct is my partner, Andrea Wilmot, visiting from Prince Rupert. I’d like the House to make her feel welcome today.

Speaker’s Statement

PARLIAMENTARY LANGUAGE
AND RESPECTFUL DEBATE

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, on Monday, May 2, the Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation rose on a point of order seeking clarification regarding the rules applicable to private members’ statements and private members’ motions.

The opportunity for members to discuss matters of interest to them and to their constituents is well recognized and supported by the rules of this House. There are opportunities to raise such issues daily in statements by members, Standing Order 25B, and on Monday morning under private members’ statements, Standing Order 25A, and private members’ motions.

I would like to address the tone of remarks during recent private members’ statements and private members’ motions. While these proceedings often generate healthy debate and allow members to discuss important policy ideas, I must remind members that statements should not reflect negatively on individual members or groups in the House. During private members’ motions, as is the case during other proceedings, it is never appropriate to make allegations of improper conduct against members or impute improper motives to members.

[1005]

As I have stated previously, it is possible to disagree without resorting to personal attack against other members. Inevitably, these attacks diminish the institution and reflect poorly on the Legislative Assembly as a whole. I would urge all hon. members to treat colleagues with respect and dignity.

Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

ADOPTIONS IN B.C.

E. Foster: I rise today to speak on behalf of my constituents and, certainly, people throughout the province of British Columbia. Adoption is something that involves every emotion imaginable. There are tears of joy, tears of sorrow. There is heartache. As we can well imagine, giving up a child for adoption is never a decision that is taken lightly.

[R. Lee in the chair.]

As in the case of any other long-term relationship, there are bumps along the way. But the good news: there is much happiness, for children and parents alike. Adoption is about love and a lasting commitment to make a difference in a child’s life.

Adoptive parents come from diverse backgrounds. You don’t need to be a perfect parent to adopt, and I am certainly a shining example of that. His mother and I adopted our son 38 years ago. Though I’ve never claimed to be a perfect parent, we have raised an amazing young man who, along with his partner, has blessed us with two outstanding granddaughters. In fact, any B.C. resident, regardless of marital status or sexual orientation, who is over 19 years of age and can provide a loving, nurturing home is eligible to adopt.

The Ministry of Children and Family Development set a goal, which seemed ambitious, to place 600 children and youth in adoptive homes over the two-year period ending March 31, 2016. Well, with the help of partners, such as the Adoptive Families Association of B.C., licensed adoption agencies, indigenous protective societies, the Representative for Children and Youth and contractors — and through the efforts of the adoptions social workers throughout British Columbia — that goal has not only been met, but it has been surpassed.

A total of 644 young people who were in permanent government care found the love and security of safe, nurturing forever homes over that past two years. The 2014-15 fiscal year marked the highest annual adoption count since the Adoption Act came into effect in 1997, with 276 placements. This was a 20 percent increase in adoption placements over the previous year. This was followed by a further 368 places in ’15-16, which marks the highest single-year total in the past two decades. British Columbia averages 270 adoptions of children and youth in care each year, and about 42 percent of adopted children are adopted by their foster families.

While we did set a record last year, with 368 placements, there are still a lot of children waiting for permanent homes. At any given time, B.C. has about
[ Page 12820 ]
1,000 children and teens in the permanent care of the Ministry of Children and Family Development who are waiting to be adopted. In partnership with the representative and the Adoptive Families Association of B.C., the ministry launched the 1000FamiliesBC campaign to encourage adoption of the more than 1,000 waiting children and teens.

Many of the children and youth still waiting for adoption are of school age. They may be siblings who need to stay together, or they may have special placement needs due to difficult early childhood experiences, learning delays or other developmental challenges.

In B.C., we have a disproportionate number of children waiting to be adopted who are aboriginal. This is why MCFD is working closely with aboriginal communities on a permanency planning project to ensure aboriginal children and youth continue to have strong connections to their culture, traditions, communities and language after placement.

Our government has made investments in each of the last three years to increase the number of children and teens finding forever homes through adoption, guardianship and other means, including $4 million in 2014-15 to support adoptions, guardianship and permanency for waiting children and youth in care. As part of the emphasis on responding to the needs of vulnerable children and families, Budget 2016 included an additional $3 million over three years to facilitate the adoption of children in care.

[1010]

With this $3 million in new funding, we are increasing access to the adoption education program, helping to support aboriginal agencies focused on permanency planning or providing more support for children going through the transition from living in foster care to an adoptive home.

As I said earlier, at any given time, there are about 1,000 children and teens waiting to be adopted. We are committed to finding a permanent, loving home for each of these children and teens. That is why our government has set a target of 600 permanent placements in 2016-17. Now 644 children and teens have found permanent, forever homes in the past two years.

It is worth celebrating the courage of these children and parents. Being an adoptive child or parent is both rewarding and a lot of hard work, but our government and our partners, like the Adoptive Families Association of B.C., are committed to ensuring that they have supports, programs and caring community whenever or wherever they need it.

J. Rice: Thank you for allowing me to rise here to discuss adoptions in British Columbia. It’s a rare occasion, on this side of the House, that I’d actually say something quite positive and supportive — congratulating the government on achieving its goal of 600 adoptions this year.

I do commend the other side of the House for that goal. However, we do have much more work to do. We have many more adoptions to make. As the member mentioned, we have over 1,000 kids waiting to be adopted, generally, every year — 1,000 or more.

We know that aboriginal children are vastly over-represented in government care in B.C., and we have much more work to do to find permanency for aboriginal children in British Columbia. We know that over 60 percent of the kids in care are aboriginal, and yet First Nations or aboriginal people make up less than 5 to 6 percent of our entire population.

I think there is an area of focus that we need to address, and to spend more resources and energy and effort into looking at adopting or finding permanency or other higher levels of care for First Nations teens and children.

The member talked about the $3 million in new funding. I just wanted to outline that that is front-loaded, essentially. That is one-time funding for a short period of time. While I do commend the government for achieving its goals of over 600 adoptions this year, there’s no sustained funding for that. Therefore, I can’t help but wonder if we are setting ourselves on a path to have plummeting adoption rates going forward in the future.

We know that this is an area of the ministry historically that has been…. I don’t necessarily want to use the word “neglected.” It’s a harsh word. But essentially, it’s the lowest priority. We deal with all the fires and the imminent issues of kids in danger and getting them out of danger. We put them in foster homes, and the trend is that kids sit in foster homes. They often spend their entire childhood and youth in foster homes until they age out of care at 19.

We somehow feel that putting kids in foster care is acceptable because now they are safe and now they are out of danger, and the attention towards finding permanency is not put there. With a $1 million to $3 million lift for a short period of time, I don’t see how that’s actually going to sustain higher levels of adoption in our province. I can’t help but wonder if that will just plummet once the funding plummets.

The $3 million the member speaks about is actually a $1 million lift. The $2 million was found in efficiencies. I’m not sure where those efficiencies were found, but again, it’s not really a substantial lift. It’s not a substantial amount of money to actually focus on adoptions.

[1015]

In 2014, the Representative for Children and Youth issued a report entitled Finding Forever Families: A Review of the Provincial Adoption System. The report showed that at any given time, more than 1,000 British Columbian children and youth in care of the Ministry of Children and Family Development were waiting to be adopted.

Subsequent to that, the Representative for Children and Youth has issued two adoption updates. Of course, the numbers are increasing. However, she does identify
[ Page 12821 ]
much more work to do, and she identifies the issue of sustainability.

One of her recommendations that I wanted to just speak about today was recommendation No. 3. That was “that MCFD make legislative changes to require and support external oversight and public reporting of adoption or alternative permanency plans on an annual basis.”

What this would mean is that the CFCS Act would have to be amended. It would include adoption planning in the definition of a “plan of care” and require written justification for any plan of care that does not include this. It would require MCFD to present an annual review in the Provincial Court of British Columbia of all actions taken by the ministry to realize adoption or other permanency measures for each child under a continuing custody order.

The reason I would like to speak about….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Rice: Could I just finish the one line, sir?

Recommendation No. 3 would ensure the accountability and the sustainability that I speak of today that is much needed.

E. Foster: Thank you to the member for North Coast. I was heartened to hear her opening statements about supporting the government’s initiative on this, as it should be a non-partisan issue. It’s an issue that people throughout the province all feel the same way about. But then, unfortunately, she slipped into the rhetoric.

The issue with the…. The member is quite correct that the First Nations are disproportionately represented in this group of children who are in permanent care of the ministry awaiting adoption. The government and the Committee on Children and Youth have realized this, as well, as part of their deliberations. We need to do more with regard to the over-representation of First Nations in this group, and we are, with partnerships with the First Nations organizations, with the extra money.

The $3 million that we spoke of and the member for North Coast spoke of is an infusion of money to catch up on the 1,000 children on the list. But MCFD has also hired a great number of new social workers. Those social workers are being directed into the adoption department so that we can use this infusion of money to lower that number. Then the additional staff that have been hired to work on adoption and permanency for these children will be there into the future.

To the concern about it just being a one-time shot in the arm, it’s a one-time shot to get that number down. The people that are there and have been hired by MCFD — to keep that down.

Again, I want to just add a little personal note to the end of this presentation. I can say, without question, one of the happiest days of my life was the day that we went and picked up my son. There’s nothing like it. Then watching him grow and be part of our family and giving us two great granddaughters, he and his partner.

I’m reaching out to people in British Columbia who have a home and the opportunity to adopt. There’s no substitute for it. It’s great. It’s a family thing. It’s fun. We’ve had just a tremendous time with our son, watching him grow, going to hockey games and doing all the things that parents do. He’s our son. He’s not somebody we picked up down the road; he’s our son.

So, folks, please look at all the information that’s out there. If you have a loving home and you have the opportunity, think very seriously about adopting.

[1020]

PROTECTING B.C.’S MINING JOBS,
COMMUNITIES AND ENVIRONMENT

N. Macdonald: That was very nicely said, I have to say. That was very moving, actually.

The topic that I have for my statement is protecting mining jobs, communities and the environment. As I’ve said many times in this House, I represent a community that was built by workers who mined for almost a century in the Sullivan mine. Kimberley benefited immensely, and the community members in that area fought hard to make sure that the operation was safe and that it returned a fair value to the community.

Now, Sullivan led to vast sums of money coming into B.C. It led to developments throughout southeastern B.C. The deposit eventually became uneconomical. The billions of dollars’ worth of ore removed is of self-evident value. The generations who were gainfully employed and who built a vibrant community like Kimberley — that is clearly valuable.

The downside is evident as well. For decades, workers had to fight to get safe working conditions. That’s part of the history of Kimberley. Dozens lost their lives over that time. So that is also part of our history here in British Columbia.

As well, to this day, there are vast areas around Kimberley that are left unusable, and water from these lands will need to be treated for the considerable future. I think most would agree that overall, on balance, the benefits outweighed the negatives, but the negatives are there as well.

Mining can be a tremendous benefit, but it has to be done properly. Done poorly, it can be destructive, and it can create long-term liabilities. That is why workers, communities and the environment need mining done properly.

MLAs here today…. Last week we were reminded by our Auditor General that it’s this Legislature, through the minister responsible, that is the only entity that can ensure that mines are built properly and that they are operated properly. That is our job solely. We are the ones that
[ Page 12822 ]
are responsible to the public for that happening, and it’s collectively. Even though we often point to one person as the minister responsible, it is our collective responsibility to make sure it’s done properly.

Mining continues to be very important. There are over 7,500 direct jobs in mining in B.C. That is 2,500 jobs less than when the jobs plan began, but we cannot control commodity prices. We can’t. None of us can do that. But what we can control, and we must control, is how mining is done here in British Columbia. When it doesn’t go well, we see the pain. You only have to go up to Tumbler Ridge to see the hardship that comes when a community that’s dependent upon mining finds that industry struggling.

The Auditor General lays out in considerable detail the failings of this Legislature to properly oversee mining in B.C. Now, if the member who is going to respond wants to contest those facts, he’s free to do so. But the fact is that anyone who has read the expert panel’s report, the chief mine inspector’s report or this report from our Auditor General will be struck by the magnitude of the failure of this Legislature’s oversight of mining and an unacceptable failure to protect miners, the communities that depend on mining and to protect our environment.

Mount Polley happened after the Auditor General actually had begun some of the work. That dam should never have collapsed. Never. It wasn’t an earthquake. There wasn’t a massive flooding. It was sloppiness in its construction and in its operation that is at the base of what took place at Mount Polley.

This Legislature makes the rules for building these structures. This Legislature approves those structures and is solely responsible for making sure that the builder follows the rules and operates them properly. This Legislature — let’s be clear — failed. We failed. We can either learn, or we can pretend it didn’t happen. I’m afraid that we’re going to pretend it didn’t happen, and that’s a huge mistake.

I was a critic with the Babine mill explosion. We had a fatal explosion from a well-known cause, wood dust buildup. In my opinion, the response, especially initially, was weak. Mere months later, we had a second fatal dust explosion that tragically occurred. We have to look at that as a complete failure. We can’t repeat that mistake.

[1025]

Two consequences to a weak response to the AG’s response and Mount Polley. Legislators need to know this. First, it is likely going to happen again, and this Legislature will be complicit if it does. Second, we lose credibility as a jurisdiction.

Externally, we already see it. Alaska has been clear they don’t trust us, and it complicates the development of a number of, potentially, extremely lucrative deposits that are along the Alaskan boundary. We lose credibility within B.C. You look at the public response to Ajax and, earlier, to Prosperity mine and other mining proposals. A predictable, sensible system of compliance and enforcement in B.C. is fundamentally important to B.C. miners, mine-dependent communities and the environment.

As MLAs, we all know — or should know — that what is in place is not acceptable. It needs to change. As MLAs, we need to be the agents of that change, pushing internally within our caucuses to make that point and making sure that we get to a place where mining is once again seen in this jurisdiction as being the best in the world — not just rhetorically but, in fact, actually the best.

We have a lot of work to do. With that, I turn it over to my colleague for his comments.

J. Martin: I’m very happy to rise today and respond to the member’s statement on protecting B.C.’s mining jobs, communities and environment, and I do thank the hon. member for bringing this forward. He spoke very forcefully about protecting mining jobs in B.C., and I’d like to elaborate on that. One of the ways in doing so is to contrast this government’s record of protecting mining in B.C. and the way that was approached by a previous administration.

Under a different government back in the ’90s, B.C. lost over 5,000 mining industry jobs, wiping out over 36 percent of all of the positions in the province. During that time period, two mines closed for every one that opened, and by the end of that era, B.C. had fallen to last place in the Fraser Institute survey of mining executives. They ranked B.C.’s mining laws as the most antagonistic of any jurisdiction in the world.

One does not attract investment to B.C. by creating an antagonistic environment. By 2000, mining exploration and development expenditures in B.C. were down to just $30 million, down from an average of $200 million annually, during the ’80s, after adjustment for inflation. Not only that, but in a 2001 report, PricewaterhouseCoopers found that mineral exploration and development was at an all-time low.

What is significant about this is best put by Gary Livingstone of the Mining Association of B.C. He says: “As a result of an unstable and uncertain investment climate, B.C. lost an estimated $750 million in exploration spending from 1992 to 2001. Statistically, that lost exploration spending would have found eight new mines, resulted in over $2 billion in additional capital spending and provided more than 7,000 new jobs.”

Now, one can just ponder all of the programs and infrastructure that $2 billion invested into B.C.’s economy at the time would have funded. One doesn’t grow the economy by continuing to resist investment. By saying yes to economic development in B.C., we’re able to invest in social programs and improve health care, education and other social services. We have today approximately 30,000 jobs in mineral exploration, mining and related sectors. In 2001, there was less than half of that — 14,700 jobs.

It’s not just the jobs. Also, the average salary and the benefit package are way, way up. They’re currently at
[ Page 12823 ]
about $120,000, which is way up from the $81,000 it was in 2001. When one looks at mineral exploration spending in 2015, it was $272 million. Sadly, in 2001, exploration spending was just $29 million, about 10 percent of that.

We’ve made it a priority to open eight new mines. Since 2011, six new mines have opened and two more are currently under construction. These include Copper Mountain, New Afton, Mount Milligan, Red Chris, Barkerville Gold and Yellow Giant. The two mines currently under construction are Brucejack and Silvertip.

[1030]

Both the Red Chris mine and the Brucejack mine would not be possible without the northwest transmission line. One cannot support mining in B.C. if one does not support the infrastructure to get power to the mine.

It’s clear that there’s a stark difference between how the mining industry has been growing under this government and the case of the previous administration, when the industry was almost wiped out.

Even today the opposition continues to call for policies that would make B.C.’s mining industry less competitive, such as increased taxes and resource rents on job-creating industries such as mining.

It’s very unfortunate that members in the opposition fight against every mine in every community in this province. These are high-paying jobs. These are critical jobs in a sector in communities across our beautiful province. We’re proud to offer our support to this important, this vital sector, and we’ll continue to do so.

I thank you so much for the opportunity. And again, I do thank the member for bringing this forward. It’s important to have this dialogue.

N. Macdonald: Well, leading up to an election, of course, you have to put things like this on Hansard. I totally get it. But what I would say to members is we need to recognize that this is not an issue that is taken anywhere forward if all it is, is just a series of slogans or bumper stickers.

Some of the mines that the member listed there have opened and closed. The reality is that right now two mines are closing for every one that’s opening, and it has nothing to do with government policy. It is the price of commodities. By the way, the price of copper was half of what it is now in the 1990s; metallurgical coal, a third. These are things we don’t control.

What we do control are the rules that mining operates under here in British Columbia. They have to improve, and that’s what I want to push forward with government MLAs. They need internally to have that discussion to push for improvements.

This whole “forces of no” thing — it’s one thing to say it rhetorically, but I sure hope nobody buys into it really. It is surely more nuanced than that. I mean, if you look at who said no to Morrison mine, it was the member for Kamloops–North Thompson, who is now the Health Minister. When he was Environment Minister, he said no to Morrison mine, to the investment there — I have to think probably for a very good reason, right? It’s more nuanced than just you say yes to everything.

What about this Minister of Mines? I will remind people that were here in the House at the time, 2010, that he said no to any mining or mining exploration in 1,800 square kilometres near Cranbrook. Forestry allowed, but no mining. That’s the member for Kootenay East.

Now, I’m not accusing him for a second of being anti-mining. He’s not. It’s just there’s more to it than simply a slogan: “We say yes to everything.” How insipid would it be if that’s all we did? We just mindlessly said yes to everything?

I can give at least two occasions. Who said no to the Prosperity mine? It was Stephen Harper. This isn’t some wild ecoterrorist or something like this. This is the most right-wing, pro–resource development person in the world. Stephen Harper said: “No, you can’t do this.”

Who’s saying no to Ajax right now? It’s a conversation within Kamloops community — right wing, left wing. We have to have a more sophisticated discussion here in the Legislature about issues like this. There is a clear, clear shortcoming in terms of how we do mining in this province. It is incumbent upon us to fix that up.

Now, I don’t expect anyone in the House on the government side to stand up and agree with me, but, internally, I hope government caucus is having that discussion.

Thank you, as always, for the opportunity to have a say. I thank you for your attention.

PROMOTING AQUACULTURE IN B.C.

D. McRae: I know members of this chamber are always keen to talk about the economy. I know that they often want to bring up that we have the fastest-growing economy in Canada. We also have the lowest unemployment rate in Canada — actually, the lowest unemployment rate in the history of British Columbia since it was measured — and we’re leading the nation in job growth.

I know these are really important things to talk about. But some things we don’t often talk enough about, in my opinion, are some of the other advantages we have. We have a relatively small population — 4.7 million people — but we are blessed with an abundance of natural resources.

[1035]

I know the member opposite was just talking about one of those natural resources. But today I wish to talk about our ocean resources. Today my motion is on promoting aquaculture in British Columbia. But before I speak on just how important the aquaculture industry is to our province, I want to spend a minute talking about the wild fishery and its importance to our province and our nation. I firmly believe that when we talk about both the wild fishery and aquaculture, one does not have to be at the expense of the other.
[ Page 12824 ]

Now, many people in this chamber are aware of Vancouver Aquarium’s OceanWise program. It is a conservation program that provides buyers of B.C. seafood the confidence that the product they eat comes from a species that is abundant and harvested in a sustainable manner. They certify species like the Dungeness crab, like the geoduck, the halibut, ling cod, spot prawn, salmon, tuna and, of course, the sea urchin.

Our commercial fishery has 2,500 vessels plying the coast with crews ranging from sometimes just one person to sometimes a dozen or more. It is worth over a quarter of a billion dollars when landed and worth much more when processed. It is absolutely iconic in British Columbia.

I don’t want to talk about just wild seafood production. Let’s talk about aquaculture. From Prince Rupert to southern Vancouver Island, aquaculture is present. There are over 5,000 direct and indirect jobs associated with aquaculture. And while every job is important to British Columbians, I will argue that in coastal rural British Columbia, every job means one more person gets to keep their family in their community, makes sure they live a lifestyle that is able to support their family and makes sure those small communities are vibrant.

B.C. aquaculture raises basically three areas: finfish, which would include things like salmon and, of course, sablefish; shellfish, which could be oysters and mussels; and marine plants — and in case you’re not sure, that’s kelp. In fact, B.C. shellfish…. The Comox Valley, as many people in this chamber know, is home for many of our shellfish aquaculture companies.

In fact, British Columbia produces about 60 percent of the oysters grown in Canada. We export our shellfish to 14 nations. The United States, obviously, buys the vast majority — about 85 percent. Asia brings up about the last 15 percent. Farm-gate sales, when it comes to shellfish, are around $33 million. By many measures, there are about 1,000 direct and indirect jobs.

Some iconic companies are companies like Fanny Bay Oysters, Mac’s Oysters, Baynes Sound shellfish and Stellar Bay Shellfish. For many of you, you might have heard of the famous Kusshi oyster. That’s what they produce.

Of course, in the Comox Valley, we’re very proud of the Pentlatch Seafoods company, which is owned by the K’ómoks First Nation. I think their trademark oyster is the Komo Gway. Incredibly important and something that we celebrate in British Columbia in communities large and small.

Farmed salmon is worth over $1.1 billion to the B.C. economy, another important part of aquaculture. B.C. raises 75 percent of the salmon raised in Canada. We export 70 percent of this product. Again, the Americans buy the vast majority of it. In fact, they buy so much of it that B.C. farm-raised salmon is our number one agricultural export and our second-largest agriculture commodity after dairy.

Now, while most of it is sold to the United States, the Asian market has basically become more aware of what we have. We’ve been able to sell more product there. They are buying more than ever before. In fact, they often want to buy product that people in North America aren’t looking for. Believe it or not, the North American market often wants a smaller salmon, where in Asia, a large salmon — say, over ten kilograms — is often prized at a banquet.

There’s an opportunity to sell the smaller salmon in British Columbia and the United States, but also the larger salmon have a very, very growing market in places like China, Taiwan and Korea — in fact, so much so that in 2015, British Columbia set a record for exports of farm-raised salmon. It’s just one of those things that is constantly growing. It’s sustainable. It provides community jobs, large and small.

Now, another important thing I think we need to talk about as well when we talk about the salmon industry and the farmed salmon industry is that it wouldn’t exist the way it does today without First Nations partnership. In fact, 78 percent of all salmon raised in British Columbia is done with direct partnerships with the British Columbia First Nations. It’s really important that people understand that.

It’s also important to realize that the industry has come a long way since its infancy, say, in the 1980s. In the last 30 years, they have been able to increase their yields by ten to 15 times what they did when they first started out, and yet at the same time, their environmental impact is just a fraction of what it once was. They continually refine and innovate to make sure they are meeting high environmental standards.

In fact, I want to pay special note to a researcher who lives and works in the Comox Valley, Dr. Stephen Cross. Off the west coast of Vancouver Island, he is working on an innovative polyculture aquaculture industry setup. In fact, he’s been featured in magazines like National Geographic. What he does is he only feeds one species. He feeds the sablefish at the very top — the sablefish sometimes known as the black cod. But then that’s the last species that is fed.

[1040]

Below it and beyond it, cockles, oysters, scallops and mussels — and, for example, the sugar kelp, which is often a sushi ingredient. Sea cucumbers, at the very bottom, make up the rest of the aquaculture innovation. Feeding one species has the ability to actually raise seven more after that.

It’s an opportunity to see some of the thoughts and processes that we should celebrate in British Columbia. Not only are we doing great aquaculture today; we’re also leading the world in some of the innovative research and practices that the world will look at and want to adopt. It’s one of those elements that I think that residents should be rightly proud of.
[ Page 12825 ]

In fact, I’m very pleased to say, when I’ve talked to some of the salmon farmers…. They were in Victoria, I think, just last week, and members of both sides of the House were talking to them. It was, basically, well spoken that the industry is actually in a reasonable place right now. Their market is doing very well. The Canadian dollar, at about 80 cents, or down to 75 cents if it fluctuates, is benefiting them dramatically.

It’s an opportunity, again, to share an incredibly high-value, great product, not just with our own residents but with the world. I think it’s an opportunity that we should continue to work on and celebrate. In fact, I will say it’s a commodity that needs to be treasured. When I come back in a couple of minutes, I’m going to talk about one way we can celebrate in British Columbia that makes a rather unique premise for all of Canada. I look forward to hearing the members opposite.

R. Austin: Thanks to the member for the Comox Valley for bringing up this topic.

It’s interesting. Prior to the member coming to the Legislature, some things happened in the years just before he came here, which actually took a lot of the jurisdiction around salmon-farming aquaculture away from the province. When I first got elected first in 2005, it was at the heat of the battles, and it was very, very controversial.

In fact, the then Premier Gordon Campbell decided to set up a committee to look into sustainable aquaculture. This just tells you how controversial it was. He made the decision to actually give the opposition a majority of the seats on that. Now that just tells you, when a government…. It was the first time ever in a democracy anywhere in the parliamentary system that an opposition was given the majority of seats. That just tells you how complicated it was for the government of the time, because they didn’t have any solutions for this either.

As a result of that, some recommendations were made and the Liberal government really only took on one major recommendation, which was to not continue to have the fish farm industry go further north of Cape Caution. That’s something that was supported by the Liberals, and it’s still in place today.

What we have now, actually, is the federal government is in charge of promoting aquaculture as well as regulating it. The provincial government’s role now is in tenuring it and then to make sure that they do the inspections on the fish farm — just so we’re all sure what is happening.

The member spoke a lot about the different types of aquaculture here. He mentioned, of course, shellfish, which is from his neck of the woods. Here’s something which, even though we did not want to have open-net fish farms promoted north of Cape Caution, we wanted to encourage aquaculture in the form of shellfish aquaculture to move further north. I hope that that will continue to happen.

One of the great things about our industry here in British Columbia is that we have access to a huge market and can provide this product fresh. That’s the huge difference with Chile and Norway, where the product is sold and exported around the world as a frozen product. Anyone who knows anything about fish — once it’s frozen, it simply doesn’t taste the same as it does when fresh. I think that is the real advantage that British Columbia has — the fact that we have millions of Americans just south of here who can get the product to them in a fresh state. That is hugely important.

I want to just speak for a second here about the locations of fish farms, because that really, still to this day, is the root of any concerns. The important thing, when we have new fish farms that are suggested, is to have them located in places that do not affect the wild.

I’m glad that the member spoke a lot during his seven minutes about the importance of the wild fishery. If we can ensure that we can have salmon farms located in locations where we know that we are not having massive runs of juvenile salmon going out into the ocean to do their thing, then that takes away a lot of the “oh, we can’t do this” or “we can only do one or the other.”

I think that if we can agree on that, then we will see, maybe, an expansion of fish farms. Right now what you’ve got is a very limited number of tenures or licences, and the only way they’ve been able to expand production is by expanding production in the sites that already existed.

[1045]

The Liberal government has had several years, but they haven’t themselves approved a whole bunch of new fish farms in the last several years. Now we have the federal government coming forward with some new ones.

I’m glad to see that the last ones to be actually accepted all have First Nations influence, because of two things. First of all, the First Nations have been living in these locations, so they know the best place to locate them so it’s not going to affect fisheries that they have been working on for hundreds of years. And the second thing is, of course, is it gives jobs to folks who don’t traditionally have access to the modern economy.

I remember when I was on the committee, visiting Klemtu. Klemtu is as remote as you can possibly imagine. Unfortunately, in Klemtu, the wild salmon runs have been fairly decimated by overfishing in the ’60s and ’70s. In our committee, we grandfathered that situation in Klemtu. It was wonderful to see people having access not just to working on the fish farms but also having their own processing plant right in the community of Klemtu.

I think that if we can do that, if we can bring jobs to remote communities where the local people have insight into the locations of those fish farms, it makes it much safer.

I’m going to say this quickly. I was talking to people, the same people that came last week, and was asked whether I would eat farmed salmon. The truth is I live
[ Page 12826 ]
on the Skeena River, so obviously my choice is to eat wild salmon, because it’s just fantastic. The taste and the texture is, frankly, better than, I think, farmed salmon.

However, let me say this. I don’t believe in the vilification by those who go around saying that it is a bad product. If you look in the grocery store, it is one of the better products to eat.

D. McRae: I applaud much of what the member opposite said. Earlier I talked about celebrating our seafood sector. Nowhere does it better in British Columbia than the Comox Valley.

I want to remind members in this chamber that from June 9 to 19 of this year, for 11 days, the Comox Valley in British Columbia will celebrate wild and farmed seafood with events like B.C. Seafood Expo, bringing buyers from around the world; oyster farm and salmon farm tours; an opportunity to visit hatcheries; an opportunity for restaurants and chefs to teach consumers about not only how to prepare seafood but also, perhaps, how to pair it with a great B.C. wine. As well, we’re going to celebrate B.C. seafood with a number of gala dinners and events.

While that is an important thing — we need to remind ourselves in British Columbia we should celebrate some of the great things we do — seafood is not just important to British Columbia. It’s important to the world.

I remind all members of this chamber that the world is changing dramatically. In 1980, when I was ten years old, there were 4.4 billion people on the planet. Today there are 7.4 billion. When my children reach old age, it is very likely there’ll be 15 billion people on the planet. How are we going to feed them?

Well, world seafood consumption is increasing by 10 percent every three years. In fact, for some people, it’s surprising to know that in 1960, per capita the world population consumed about ten kilograms of fish a year. This year, 56 years later, it is actually at 19 kilograms.

It’s so essential that aquaculture can play a role to preserve the wild species. It’s a chance. Thirty percent of our wild fisheries around the world are overfished. They’re at risk of extinction. I would argue that in British Columbia and in Canada, we do a far better job than the vast majority of world fisheries.

Of the 30 percent that are near extinction, there are 70 percent that are maintaining. But of those 70 percent, almost every single one is at maximum capacity for fisheries, and any more fishing will put them in peril.

So how do we feed and provide this protein for the planet? I will argue that good-quality, well-measured and well-controlled aquaculture techniques will ensure the world will have the protein it needs.

In fact, for some people, it surprises them to know that to grow a pound of chicken, the chicken has to consume about two pounds of food. To grow a pound of pork, about three pounds. Now, I love a good steak, but it takes about seven pounds of food to make a pound of beef. To make a pound of fish, about 1.1 pounds. It’s an incredibly efficient way to grow a great-quality product.

Like the member says, when we make sure that they are used with good science and located in good areas, B.C. can lead the world — in fact, does lead the world — in making sure our aquaculture industry is doing a phenomenal job. And we can still do more.

Like I said earlier, it is literally…. We’ve increased production by ten or 15 times in the last 30-plus years. But at the same time, the environmental footprint is substantially less than it’s ever been in the past.

That being said, I just want to leave the members of this chamber with two thoughts. The uglier it is — seafood, that is — the better it tastes. And when in doubt, garlic butter makes all seafood 10 percent better.

[1050]

EVERYONE DESERVES HEALTH CARE

J. Wickens: I’m happy to stand in the House today to talk about access to health care for all British Columbians. It’s something that is important to me, as a mom, for my family and my community.

Access to timely, quality health care is vital for strong and healthy communities. Government has the challenge of ensuring that we have an accessible and reliable health care system.

I know firsthand how important it is to have access to family doctors, specialists and hospitals. I have sat in many emergency rooms with my children when they’ve broken an arm or my son has had a seizure or even myself, when I have been very ill. I have visited many walk-in clinics over the years, and I have relied on our family doctor to diagnose and treat my family members when necessary.

There is a growing concern in our communities over the state of our health care. In my community of Coquitlam, we have a growing population of families and aging seniors. We are dealing with a physician shortage in Coquitlam. Our region continues to struggle as one of the fastest-aging. At the same time, we are seeing more and more doctors retire. I believe that this problem affects many aspects of our community. We have not seen promises and commitments fulfilled by our government — particularly when it comes to the GP for Me program.

Last week our Minister of Health stood in the House and said: “When we make a promise on this side of the House, we keep it.” In 2010, the government made a promise to have every British Columbian attached to a family doctor by 2015. The GP for Me program has cost hundreds of millions of dollars. The deadline has come and gone, and the shortage of family doctors has persisted. Not only is there not a family doctor for everyone, but we have seen the closing of many community health clinics.

The government openly admitted that in the new service plan, they’ve completely changed the metric in meas-
[ Page 12827 ]
uring the full-service family practice initiative. When families struggle to access family doctors, it has a trickle effect into so many other aspects of our community. People are waiting for assessments that then will give them access to therapies, services and support.

I can’t help but think about my time before I was here in the Legislature, when a new parent came to me worried about the development of their child. Many times, the first hurdle was just accessing a reliable family physician. I saw precious months go by trying to access health care so that those families could then wait for other assessments and therapies. We know that early identification, early treatment, for so many diagnoses can change the trajectory of people’s lives and their health.

The estimated number of British Columbians that do not have a family doctor actually continues to rise. Furthermore, the 2014 report from the Auditor General Oversight of Physician Services called into question whether this government was making evidence-based funding decisions in regards to our health care system.

As a mom, a community advocate and a citizen, like so many other British Columbians, I have to ask whether or not this government sees the GP for Me program as yet another broken promise to British Columbians.

Not having access to primary health, like I said, has an effect on all other areas of our health care system, and we are seeing incredible challenges at our hospitals and emergency rooms. When people cannot access health care in their community, they end up in emergency rooms contributing to those wait times.

[1055]

There are two main hospitals that service my community — Eagle Ridge Hospital and Royal Columbian Hospital. Just this past weekend, we saw 11 ambulances parked at Royal Columbian Hospital, waiting with patients for beds to become available. At both of these hospitals, we are failing, right now, to meet the targeted wait time of ten hours in the emergency room — ten hours. At Eagle Ridge Hospital, we are only reaching that target 32 percent of the time. This is a problem that continues to affect all of our communities.

I recently had a chance to sit down with our firefighters. They invited me for dinner, sat with me and talked to me about some of the challenges that they face. Our firefighters are incredibly frustrated with the challenges that the Ambulance Service has. That then affects them and keeps them for prolonged periods of time at calls because they are waiting for an ambulance to arrive before they can leave. One problem affects another problem and affects another problem.

Our health care system is complex, and many challenges affect other aspects of the system. There are no simple solutions to complex problems, but the lack of access to primary health in the community has a devastating trickling effect into other areas.

In the Tri-Cities, each doctor is responsible for serving approximately 1,400 residents on average. This is not possible or sustainable. Although we have heard of some promising initiatives, public confidence that this government will follow through on promises and make sustained, long-term, cost-effective public policy is rapidly declining.

We need to ensure that we are investing wisely and appropriately in the social services that will drastically affect our children, our grandchildren, our parents and our seniors. If we do not re-evaluate how primary care is being delivered, if we do not listen to the recommendations of the Auditor General’s report on the oversight of physicians, we will be in trouble.

D. Plecas: Thank you to the member opposite for her comments. But perhaps we could look at the health care system in British Columbia in its totality. What do we know about that?

Well, B.C. ranks amongst the best in the entire world in terms of health care outcomes. Looking at Canada’s performance in health care, the Conference Board of Canada ranks British Columbia as the top-placing province in Canada, giving it a score of A. On top of that, B.C. ranks third overall in the world, right behind Switzerland and Sweden.

B.C. has the longest life expectancy of anywhere in North America at 82 years, and that’s almost the highest in the entire world. B.C. also has the best health care outcomes in Canada. We have the best survival rates for heart disease, the lowest incidence of cancer and the best survival rates for those who do get cancer in Canada. We have the lowest heart attack rate and the lowest smoking rates in Canada.

B.C. has an extremely efficient health care system. We spend the third-lowest per capita on health care in Canada, yet we continue to have the best outcomes. While we have the best outcomes in Canada, we continue to work towards a more innovative and sustainable health care system.

I’m reminded that we have made some pretty significant investments in health care. Since 2001, we’ve invested over $10 billion, building new hospitals, replacing hospitals — new towers and major additions to hospitals. This list is extensive, and I don’t have time to go into all of our accomplishments. But I know one thing. It’s a far cry from what we saw in the ’90s, when we spent virtually nothing and our health care system was basically on life support.

Health care has the largest part of government’s budget. Even though we’re working hard to improve efficiencies and the effectiveness of health care, we continue to see record investments in health care each year. Rather than raising taxes, though, we believe the way to bring more money into government is by growing and diversifying our economy.
[ Page 12828 ]

There’s a reason why B.C. is leading the country in economic growth and in job creation. It’s because we’ve been focusing on diversifying and growing our economy.

[1100]

Part of that strong economic foundation is continually balancing our budget and paying off operating debt. People may not realize just how important it is to balance our budget each and every year. We get lower interest rates because we have a triple-A credit rating. That means we have more money to spend on such things as heath care and access to health care.

For example, $500 million of the health care budget is funded by lower interest costs and thanks to our retiring the operating debt. If B.C. had the debt levels of places like Ontario, we would be paying another $2.45 billion more for services in British Columbia.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

We can always do more, as our Health Minister is fond of saying, to improve our health care system, and we want to do more. If the members opposite want to do more, one of the things that they’re going to have to start doing is saying yes to economic development in this province.

J. Wickens: I will respond to the member opposite’s comments, talking a little bit about economy and the past versus the future and our health care system. I guess I would have to say that it always surprises me when members opposite make comments that this side of the House is not concerned about our economy or doesn’t want a bright future for our children. As a mom, it is my number one concern to look to the future to see what we are creating for our children.

The difference, the fundamental difference, is that we want a strong economy that’s not built on the backs of our children, on the backs of our education system and our health care system.

Investing in our social services. We have a social service–driven economy in this province. Making quality investments in that economy benefits us and our future.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members, can we have one discussion at a time, please?

The member will continue.

J. Wickens: It shouldn’t surprise me that the member opposite brought up the ’90s once again. What I know, from talking to many people in my community…. Many people in British Columbia want a government that will start looking forward. What are we doing to make sure that our children have strong health care, strong education, strong services so that they are able to reach their full potential?

There is a disconnect, a complete disconnect, with this government and what people on the ground say that they are receiving and need. Critical thinking and critical analysis is an important, important part of being a leader and being a part of government. When we have people on the ground saying that they can’t access health care, saying that they can’t find a family doctor, those are things that we need to listen to.

We need to understand that the experiences on the ground are different than what our elected officials are standing up and professing, and we need to honour the people that we were elected to serve.

There are a number of complexities around our health care system, and I understand that. But what I originally talked about was the GP for Me and the fact that people cannot access a general practitioner in their community. We have hundreds of people in Coquitlam, in the Tri-Cities that need to have access to a primary care physician so they can access health care.

In 2010, the GP for Me program was announced.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

Hon. T. Lake: I call Motion 14.

Deputy Speaker: Before, Member, let me ask the House.

Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 14 without disturbing the priorities of the motion preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

[1105]

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 14 — B.C.’s Skills
for Jobs Blueprint

G. Kyllo: It is my pleasure today, on behalf of the people of the Shuswap, to introduce today’s motion.

[Be it resolved that this House recognize the accomplishments and success of B.C.’s Skills for Jobs Blueprint.]

In my role as Parliamentary Secretary for the B.C. Jobs Plan, I take immense pride in what the skills-for-jobs blueprint has accomplished in B.C. for our economy, for our families, all over our province. The skills-for-jobs blueprint is now two years old, and I think this is an ideal time to look back on what has been achieved under the blueprint since its introduction in April of 2014.

A few of my government colleagues will join me in speaking to some of the key successes under the blueprint. The member for Fraser-Nicola will tell the House about aboriginal trades training and how the Nicola Valley Institute of Technology, which is a success story in itself, is equipping aboriginal students with the skills needed to compete in a changing job market.
[ Page 12829 ]

My colleague from North Vancouver–Seymour will speak about the strides being made for women in the skilled trades. The member for Maple Ridge–Mission will speak about the Industry Training Authority, the provincial government agency that is responsible for apprenticeships and industry training programs in B.C.

My colleague from Delta North will tell the House about the interactive program Find Your Fit, in which people of all ages can find out about in-demand careers and even try their hand at some of the skills they will need in various careers. Finally, the member for Port Moody–Coquitlam will speak about the single-parent initiative, which is expected to help 16,000 single parents on income or disability assistance by covering post-secondary training for some of the most in-demand jobs in B.C.

The latest employment numbers in our province are a vindication of our government’s disciplined approach and speak to the success of the skills-for-jobs blueprint. At Statistics Canada, as they announced just last week, 13,000 new jobs were created in British Columbia last month alone. That total is greater than the number of jobs created in all other provinces combined and is more than double the number of jobs created in the second-place province, Newfoundland and Labrador.

These 13,000 new jobs bring B.C.’s total job creation since the B.C. jobs plan was introduced five years ago to 156,000, which is second in Canada only to Ontario, a much larger province. When the B.C. jobs plan was launched in 2011, B.C.’s unemployment rate was 7.3 percent. As announced on Friday, our jobless rate is now 5.8 percent, the lowest in all of Canada, and our momentum is not expected to lag any time soon.

Looking ahead, B.C. is expected to lead the country in economic growth over the next two years. This economic expansion, in addition to retirements from the workforce, means that B.C. will have nearly one million new job openings by 2024. Our goal is to make the next waves of entrants to our workforce job-ready.

A key commitment under the skills-for-jobs blueprint is helping to build and expand a skilled workforce to meet our future labour demand. Over the past two years, we have seen great progress in helping British Columbians get the skills they need to be hired for the in-demand jobs of the future.

We expect that almost 80 percent of the job openings in the coming years will require some form of post-secondary education and training. That is why we’re restructuring our education and training programs towards a system that focuses on jobs and skills that are in demand. Our goal is to put women and men from every corner of British Columbia in a position that makes them the first choice of employers looking to fill those family-supporting jobs.

Our government is proud of the work we’ve accomplished in the first two years of the blueprint, and I look forward to the remainder of this morning’s debate.

S. Simpson: I’m pleased to join this debate around the blueprint for skills training. When we talk about this, I think it’s really important that we go back and look at how we got to the place we are today.

The member across the way and the government will know — you will know, hon. Speaker — that after the 2001 election, shortly after that, the government took it upon itself to dismantle the ITAC, which was the training structure in place at that time, creating the ITA.

When this was done, though, one of the things that happened there…. Clearly, this was an ideologically driven decision, and it was driven in a way that undermined the future of training in this province. It excluded the labour movement from those discussions. It excluded the educational institutions from those discussions. It became a business-driven model.

[1110]

What we know from that is that the system stumbled badly. We know that the completion rates were dismal. We know that there were serious issues around training. That was the reality of the system put in place by the government.

That only started to turn when the interest in LNG led some of those potential proponent companies to be very clear that they expected a workforce, if they were going to proceed, that could build their structures, and they weren’t confident that they had one. That led to the McDonald report, and that led to a significant restructuring of the ITA, including bringing in labour — the building trades particularly, who have a highly successful training and apprenticeship model — and bringing educational institutions to the table.

Even with those changes, and they have led to some improvement, we still have significant issues. We know that the completion rate of apprenticeships right now is running under 40 percent. That’s the completion rate today. That’s not a positive number by any standard. It’s a number that suggests that there’s a lot of work to be done.

We know that the challenge there is that there just isn’t…. We’re not having the corporate sector step up in the way that they need to, to create the placements for apprenticeships. The government, the minister, introduced legislation, back a year or so ago, that created some opportunity in capital spending for some expectation around apprenticeships on publicly funded projects. The challenge with that is there are no quotas of any sort to this. So we don’t know whether 5 percent is success or 20 percent is success. It’s a model without any quotas.

We also know that the public service itself — whether it be federal, provincial or local — does a dismal job, quite frankly, in terms of apprenticeships and that there needs to be work done there. There has not been any action taken in that area.

When this member talks about the blueprint for training, we have to understand it is a model that is modest at best in the work that it’s doing. It has a great amount of
[ Page 12830 ]
work to do. We’re not seeing that progress in ways that we need to see. We know that it’s challenged around the support in educational institutions, because there have been no resources. I know a few million dollars into K to 12 was announced recently, but there has been no additional support around advanced education. Instead, there’s a reallocation of 25 percent of the grant around advanced education.

So we have to ask ourselves: “If we’re serious about creating opportunities for our kids, if we’re serious about really growing the economy with skilled trades and skilled tradespeople, are we investing in this model in a way that we should?” I would say that we’re not. I would say that it’s time for a real hard look at what the blueprint should be.

This is a government that, I believe, is saying: “We had created a mess out of this in the early 2000s. In 2002 and 2003, we created a mess. It’s not quite as big a mess today as it was then, so we should be cheering that on.” I would hope for something better. I would hope that we would be looking at this as: how do we make progress, and how do we look forward and not back? There’s no indication that that, in fact, is the motivation of government at this point. I wish that that would be the case. We would all be much better off.

J. Tegart: Thank you to my colleague from the Shuswap for this motion to recognize the achievements of the skills-for-jobs blueprint. As the representative for Fraser-Nicola, I can attest wholeheartedly to this success of the blueprint.

Like much of B.C., the riding I represent is mostly rural. It’s no secret that unemployment rates in rural B.C. consistently lag behind those of the cities. We also have a large aboriginal population, which also suffers from chronically high unemployment. But under the skills-for-jobs blueprint, our government is addressing these shortfalls for our rural and aboriginal residents.

Seven months ago our Premier cut the ribbon to officially open the new trades-training building at the Nicola Valley Institute of Technology, a primarily aboriginal post-secondary school in Merritt. This facility was funded through the skills-for-jobs blueprint and included capital funding for new trades-training infrastructure and equipment.

[1115]

NVIT is a full, independent member of B.C.’s public post-secondary education system with legislated authority to grant its own course credits and transcripts. NVIT offers innovative, relevant credentials for future First Nations leaders in the fields of wellness, governance, land and economic development. The new trades-training facility will allow NVIT to accommodate 40 trades students each year. The facility builds on the strong trades programs provided by NVIT already, reduces transportation issues for students and positions trades students to participates in campus life activities.

NVIT is training the next generation of Nicola Valley students to graduate with the skills they need to join our province’s workforce. But NVIT’s influence reaches far beyond the Nicola Valley. Training is being delivered by NVIT in Fort Nelson, in northeastern British Columbia, in a series of community-based, skills-training courses, to help First Nations members become job-ready in the natural resource and LNG sectors.

In Buick Creek, north of Fort St. John, NVIT will deliver a program called Pathways to Success to members of Blueberry River First Nations through a $324,000 investment from our government. Pathways to Success will give skills training to 30 participants to qualify them for jobs in the service and industry sectors. A modified Pathways to Success program will also be delivered by NVIT to members of the Halfway River First Nation through a six-month program.

We’re also investing $323,000 to the Tsay Keh Dene Nation’s workforce development initiative in northern B.C. With academic upgrading, literacy skills, driver training, career exploration and industry-related certifications, these participants will be ready for transition to further education, training and employment.

Also near Fort St. John, members of the Doig River First Nation will receive training needed to obtain a class 1 driver’s licence, which will allow holders to drive semi-trailer trucks. Funding will also enable community members to receive class 4 driver’s training to allow operators to drive school buses and special activity buses with a maximum seating capacity of 25.

All four programs are underway and are being funded through B.C.’s LNG-focused aboriginal skills-training development fund. The fund supports strategies outlined in B.C.’s skills-for-jobs blueprint and the goal of increasing the numbers of aboriginal people in the provincial workforce by 15,000 people over the next ten years.

Increasing the success of aboriginal students is a key component of the skills-for-jobs blueprint, the B.C. jobs plan and the B.C. aboriginal post-secondary education and training policy framework and action plan. The Ministry of Advanced Education supports aboriginal students through numerous programs, and I am very, very proud that NVIT is very much a part of that training.

K. Corrigan: Well, when we are talking about jobs, the best investment that we can make in this province is in education. It provides the clearest, surest path to economic success. In the long term, what we need to do in this province is to create a diversified, knowledge-based economy, and in that regard, this government has a 15-year record of failure.

The B.C. Liberal government, just a couple of months ago, with its most recent budget, made the choice yet again, year after year, not to prioritize our post-secondary institutions. For the past two years, before this budget, the budget for post-secondary education has actual-
[ Page 12831 ]
ly fallen. For the next two years, this year and the next, there will again be cuts to services and programs, since the increases of 1 percent a year do not cover even inflationary costs.

[1120]

That’s four years of cuts — and previous years of cuts, in addition — to the post-secondary system, a system which, as I said, is our path and our route to economic prosperity in a diverse, knowledge-based economy.

Not only have the B.C. Liberals cut funding to advanced education, tuition fees have doubled. B.C. charges the highest student loan interest rates in Canada, at 2.5 percent above prime. BMO says the student survey shows that student debt averages $35,000 — and that was from a couple years ago — the highest in Canada.

When you talk about the future economy and innovation and technology, which is where we should be going, there is no better site for that than one of my local institutions, BCIT. Yet there, like institutions all over the province, walls are crumbling as the budgets are cut. Superimposed on this is the blueprint for education, which is going to move 25 percent of college and university funding to courses in preparation for in-demand jobs.

But there is absolutely no new program funding for the 25 percent. So what it is doing is taking money away from one part of the post-secondary system and placing it in another. It’s limiting choice for students. I’m hearing from institutions that it anticipates growth in the resource sector, but it doesn’t place enough emphasis on the knowledge economy, and that is the root of our future growth in this province. Programs that develop critical thinking are in danger.

When this skills-for-jobs blueprint came out a couple of years ago, it was, essentially, about re-engineering our post-secondary system for the LNG — what was going to be the saviour of our province, which is the LNG industry. So we have this huge system of post-secondary education in our province. The decision was made in order to satisfy, I assume, those that it was hoped would be investing in LNG. We’re channeling 25 percent of it towards jobs in demand, and the assumptions that were made was that that was going to be LNG.

We’re asking our colleges and universities to close programs and increase others for an industry that, so far, doesn’t exist. Remember, there was going to be a plant open by 2015 and five more. Those are the assumptions that the blueprint for education is based upon. So we’re retooling our post-secondary system for an industry that doesn’t exist.

I’ll give you an example. The first blueprint said that we are going to have an extra 10,500 to 12,000 jobs for helpers and labourers specifically with the LNG industry. We had an action item: $21.6 million to go towards training helpers and labourers for the LNG industry. So we are retooling this huge and complex system partially on the basis of an industry that does not exist.

J. Thornthwaite: It’s a pleasure to rise in the House today to take my place in this debate and speak about the success of B.C.’s skills-for-jobs blueprint. As we’ve already heard, there will be more than 1 million job openings in B.C. by the year 2024. The majority of these positions will require some form of post-secondary education and training.

Preparing for this increased labour demand means building the capacity of our province’s skilled tradespeople and apprentices right away and putting British Columbians — including First Nations, immigrants and women — first in line for training and apprenticeship opportunities. The skilled trades are vital to our economic growth and provide lucrative employment, yet just 5 percent of our skilled tradespeople are women. There still remains a stigma surrounding women in the trades, but we now have an opportunity to balance the labour shortage and tap into the full potential of our workforce. That means encouraging women to pursue a career in the trades and helping them access training to get the skills they need to succeed.

[1125]

In March of this year, our government announced a $1.8 million investment in the women-in-trades-training initiative to support the delivery of four programs that are specifically designed to help women kick-start their careers in the trades.

These programs provide introductory jobs training, technical training and job placement support and are contracted out by the Industry Training Authority and delivered through Camosun College, Okanagan College, Thompson Rivers University and the Tradeworks Training Society. These four programs will help more than 230 female participants who will be well on their way to a successful career in the trades when training finishes in September.

Since our government partnered with the Industry Training Authority to support programs like women in trades, we’ve been able to help more than 3,000 women access training and financial assistance and become apprentices in a variety of jobs in the skilled trades sector, from carpentry and plumbing to aerospace and horticulture.

Thanks to this partnership, there are now more than 3,900 registered women apprentices in the province in 72 different trades. That’s a notable increase in the number of registered women apprentices over the past few years, and we are committed to continuing that trend.

To further support the skills-for-jobs blueprint, in April of this year we announced a new partnership that will enhance mentorship and apprenticeship programs for women. Mentorship is one of the best ways to help women achieve success in the skills trades. To help them get the support they need, we are investing $400,000 through a partnership with SkillPlan, Canada’s Building Trades Unions, Build Together Women of the Building Trades and the International Brotherhood of Electrical
[ Page 12832 ]
Workers to create a made-in-B.C. mentorship program for women in trades.

This is a direct response to the needs highlighted by the building trades to provide broader services to support women. Through this partnership, we aim to identify barriers to employment, find out where supports are needed and provide mentorship solutions that will facilitate the advancement of women in the construction industry.

As Lisa Langevin, policy director for B.C. Build Together, said: “When you are on a jobsite and there are hundreds of guys but you are the only woman, it can be overwhelming.” This program will level that playing field by providing women with the network and resources they need to be successful in these great-paying careers.

Trades workers are integral to growing our economy and furthering the development of communities across our province. By encouraging more women to look at careers in the trades, we can harness the full potential of our workforce and meet the future demands of the job market. We’ve had great success helping more women take advantage of the opportunities in this growing sector, and we remain committed to making the trades more attractive and more accessible for women.

G. Heyman: It’s fascinating to sit in my place and listen to a litany of initiatives that B.C. Liberal MLAs are taking great credit for as if they haven’t been in office for 15 years and had gutted most of the apprenticeship opportunities, training and mentorship programs, capacity and K-to-12 and post-secondary education over that time. It’s almost like the last 15 years never happened. So here we go again.

It’s also fascinating to stand here and listen to government MLAs once again talk about the great opportunity in industries that simply don’t exist yet in British Columbia. They may in the future. They may provide employment in the future. That’s no reason not to plan for that future, but along with that, we have a history of this government simply ignoring successful sectors of B.C.’s economy and the opportunity to make those sectors more successful — to grow larger, to grow stronger — by providing the tools that those sectors need.

Let me talk for a moment about the technology sector in British Columbia. The B.C. government has recently discovered the tech sector and trotted out a tech strategy that has a lot of words, but we have yet to see significant follow-up and action on those words.

The tech sector has grown significantly in the last 20 years. It now employs over 85,000 people. Wages are 66 percent higher than the industrial average, and yet our per-capita employment in tech is lower than provinces with significant tech sectors in Canada.

[1130]

The reason for that is the sector has been asking for a number of things to help them grow and deal with the need for skilled workers, to deal with investment. They’ve been asking for this for a long time.

B.C. continues to lag other provinces in engineering, science and most other tech-related undergraduate and graduate degree programs. To address this, we need to do a number of things. We need to create capacity in K to 12 as well as post-secondary. We also need to ensure, through a number of instruments, that young people can actually afford to attend post-secondary educational institutions and get the skills and education that they need. The approach of this government is: if you put something in one place to fill a gap and a need, then you have to take something from something else.

We also have a lack of venture capital investment. The government recently announced a $100 million fund — an overdue commitment, I would say — without any detail yet, months after the fact, about how this fund will be distributed, except we’ve recently learned that the fund manager who was chosen is not even in British Columbia.

The B.C. Technology Industry Association two years ago said that if we took educational steps and investment steps, we could increase the number of jobs created in this sector in British Columbia by an additional 31,000. We have yet to see the steps taken.

We see both photo ops and announcements, like the Premier’s announcement that we would make coding mandatory in K-to-12 educational institutions within a couple of years. But there is no funding in the budget to support that, and we have an Education Minister who ludicrously claimed that you do not need computers to learn how to code. When I learned how to drive, I took theory, but I certainly didn’t get my licence until I’d had some time behind the wheel.

Finally, we have tremendous opportunity in energy in British Columbia — but not the big megaproject photo op. We have an opportunity, which was destroyed by this government, to create thousands of jobs in every community in British Columbia with an aggressive demand-side management energy retrofit program, which will create twice as many jobs as new construction. Yet this government scaled back B.C. Hydro’s commitment from option 3 to option 2, which was far less ambitious. A New Democrat government will commit to an energy retrofit program that builds jobs in every community in British Columbia.

M. Dalton: I’m happy to speak on this motion.

I wonder, in listening to the remarks here from the member for Vancouver-Fairview, if we’re speaking about the same province. I don’t think he heard the comments from the member for Shuswap, who said that last month we had 13,000 new jobs added to our economy, and we have the lowest unemployment in all of Canada.

Speaking about technology, we have over 80,000 jobs in the field. They’re high-paying jobs, and it’s expanding. The aerospace industry is expanding. I was at an opening, along with other members here, with Conair. They have a new bomber they developed for fighting forest fires,
[ Page 12833 ]
which is a very appropriate industry right now. They’re using their aircraft all over the world.

We’re a diversified economy, and we’re seeing great steps forward. The B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint is an important component of this.

The member mentioned photo ops. We’re not talking about photo ops. We’re talking about industries that are going forward, whether it be Site C, whether it be…. Here on the Lower Mainland and all throughout the province we are seeing our industries…. We are seeing jobs increasing.

I was actually, yesterday, driving through the interior of British Columbia. I was reflecting on how travelling the same area when the NDP was in power…. I realize it’s over 15 years ago. It’s been some time, and hopefully, it will be much longer still. I remember at that time — I wasn’t in government, obviously — thinking how…. There were for-sale signs absolutely everywhere. It was a depressed economy.

[1135]

I was there. And just how things have turned around…. It has turned around from north to south, east to west, throughout this entire province. That’s great news for British Columbians. It’s great news for our young people.

By providing funding to in-demand education and job training, our government is ensuring that young people of B.C. get the skills and knowledge they need to fill the in-demand jobs. We want them to take advantage of the almost one million job openings that will need to be filled across this province by 2024. Eight out of ten of these job openings will require post-secondary education and training. This is why we are committing to making sure that young people in British Columbia today are being given the skills and experience they need to succeed for tomorrow.

A growing economy, shifting demographics and changing technology in the workplace will mean that B.C. needs a large, diverse workforce to keep up with the demands of the future job market. That’s exactly what the skills-for-jobs blueprint is doing. Since 2014, we have invested over $130 million for 11,300 new full-time-equivalent spaces for targeted, in-demand training and education through the skills-for-jobs blueprint. That’s on top of the $7.5 billion we invest every year in education and training for British Columbia’s children and youth.

One thing that this government has done is invested in educational institutions throughout the province, and that, actually, really helps with affordability for young people getting training. One of the most expensive aspects of getting education, especially in the past, was to have to relocate and to provide for room and board. Now they can stay at home and have the training close to home. That’s good news.

This includes everything from early childhood education to apprenticeship training for young adults entering the skill force. The Industry Training Authority is a vital organization that is responsible for leading and coordinating skilled trades training and a credentialing system for the province. All across the province, these investments are yielding great results and paying dividends.

We will continue to evaluate our educational investments to determine whether they are doing enough to prepare B.C. students to take advantage of the job opportunities in the future. By 2024, this government will have redirected $3 billion in training resources. That’s a good thing.

We want students to go into university or college or institutions and have a job when they come out. That is part of the whole objective — to allocate funds for the jobs that are available for today’s workplace and tomorrow’s workplace. In fact, students in my riding of Maple Ridge–Mission have already benefited from local investments geared toward the blueprint.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and speak to the motion on the floor, blueprint for skills training. The premise is that British Columbia provide opportunities for British Columbians to access jobs today in British Columbia.

I want to start my remarks by replying to some of the comments from the previous speaker, the MLA for Maple Ridge–Mission. He was speaking with regards to the challenges around affordability for students, in particular in pursuing advanced education to gain skills necessary for today’s jobs.

I think it’s really an indictment of the record of this government that we have a crisis of affordability now. Certainly, headlines in the papers today about inaction by this government allowing skyrocketing prices in the housing market…. On top of that, besides basic needs and increases to ICBC, MSP and all those costs, we are seeing the record of tuition fees having doubled under this government and, really, near-record student debts being shouldered by students. That’s the reality today of students who are seeking to fulfil opportunities to get a good-paying job. That’s the record.

When we look at what the record is over the last 15 years in terms of our training opportunities, when we look at skills training, it can be summarized and really summed up by the record now.

[1140]

We have not even a 40 percent completion rate of students going into skills training and coming out and completing their apprenticeships. That is very low and not an acceptable rate. There needs to be adequate support and focus to ensure that individuals who go in to upgrade skills and to gain a trade certificate come out with a successful completion. That is a very low mark.

In addition, we do not have a quota system. The current model is a model without quotas. This is, I think, one of the biggest contrasts that we can see in terms of what has happened with the dismantling of the ITA and the
[ Page 12834 ]
creation of ITAC. One of the major failings is that there is not a quota system in place so that there are enough opportunities for students who want to pursue apprenticeships and complete their training. I think that is the biggest failing of our current model.

In addition to that, I’m very disappointed at the underfunding of post-secondary education and, in particular, the cuts to adult basic education, which provides an opportunity for individuals to pursue and really further their studies.

I want to address what I think has developed, really, in parallel to the lack of focus and lack of commitment of this government to providing opportunities for British Columbians. This is the record of this government around temporary foreign workers into British Columbia. We know that those numbers are increasing: from 2012, 74,000 on a temporary status, to now in 2014, the most recent numbers — 84,000.

This is a program where this government has failed to take any action. The B.C. Liberals have basically opened the door. It’s a hands-off approach. The minister has said: “Well, it’s up to the federal government,” while many jurisdictions require employers to register so that we know what employers, what companies are utilizing temporary foreign workers. Where are they? What are their conditions? What are the jobs that they’re doing? That is a failing by this government.

It’s not included when we hear about any of the programs that are announced across the regions. Yet, we have companies in British Columbia utilizing hard-working temporary foreign workers and no accountability from employers. No registry. This government cannot tell British Columbians what companies are utilizing temporary foreign workers, where they’re employed, what their conditions are, because they don’t have that information. It is a real disgrace.

When we talk about opportunities for British Columbians, they fall short. This government falls short on providing opportunities, on the one hand. And on the other hand, they leave it open, there is no oversight, there is no accountability for employers utilizing workers, and these rights are not upheld for these workers.

S. Hamilton: I’m grateful for the opportunity to rise on behalf of my constituents in Delta North and speak in support of this motion.

The B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint is a cross-government, multiministry initiative that allows British Columbians to be first in line to benefit from the almost one million job openings that are projected in our province by 2024. These job openings are anticipated due to B.C.’s continued economic growth, as well as retirements from the workforce.

To meet this future labour demand, we need to build and expand a skilled workforce right here in British Columbia. That’s exactly what we have with this blueprint. The blueprint allows us to plan, execute and re-engineer our education and training programs toward a system that focuses our investment on jobs that are going to be in demand.

On April 25, we celebrated the second anniversary of the B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint. This anniversary provides us with the opportunity to reflect on the accomplishments and success of the blueprint. Government has dedicated almost $8 million in new youth trades funding to ensure that our young people have the training they need to succeed in a skills-based economy.

We provided $650,000 to 27 school districts across B.C. to increase recruitment capacity and skills training. To direct more youth towards in-demand education and job training, our government has also introduced the Find Your Fit program.

[1145]

Find Your Fit is an interactive event where individuals of all ages can find out about careers that are in demand throughout British Columbia, connect with necessary labour market information resources and even try out the skills they’ll need for some of these in-demand careers.

Parents, teachers and career councillors also benefit from Find Your Fit as they look for ways to educate and support youth in their career exploration. These events are part of the blueprint’s commitment to re-engineer education and deliver the skilled workforce that’s needed to meet the demands of B.C.’s growing economy.

A little earlier today, during statements, the member for Coquitlam–Burke Mountain talked about everyone deserving good health care in this province. There’s not a member in this entire House, and especially on this side, that will argue with that statement. Everyone deserves good health care. We continue to advance initiatives on behalf of health care in this province, but we know health care isn’t free. We have to pay for it somehow, and we do that through growing our economy and creating jobs — good-paying jobs that create taxes that go into paying for services that people in this province deserve.

So far, 86,000 students have taken part in Find Your Fit events across B.C. Students in my constituency recently had the opportunity to participate in Find Your Fit at the Delta Trades and Technical Career Fair. Over 3,500 students, teachers, parents and other members of the community participated in this free event, which included interactive displays and demonstrations from local businesses and industry professionals.

One of the local businesses at the career fair was Ocean Trailer, a one-stop shop for anyone in the transportation industry who wants to buy, rent or repair transport trailers. Ocean Trailer was founded in Delta in 1981 and now has expanded across western Canada with four additional branches. This truly speaks to the heart of Find Your Fit. This program connects successful British Columbians, trades and technology businesses like Ocean Trailer with students who are still trying to figure out their path in life.
[ Page 12835 ]

Our government is proud of the positive impact that the Find Your Fit program and the B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint has had on students in our province after only two years. We look forward to expanding on this success, and we will continue to build the workforce B.C. needs to support our diverse, strong and growing economy.

R. Fleming: It’s interesting to hear the member for Maple Ridge–Mission. In his statistics that he threw out there, he didn’t talk about falling wages in British Columbia, down 1.8 percent, the only province in Canada to see purchasing power for workers and middle-class families in B.C. on the decline. He didn’t mention that three of the five industries where there has been employment growth in the province are the worst-paid industries in B.C., where employment is insecure, often part-time and unable to support families. He didn’t mention that.

He didn’t mention what Central 1 Credit Union observed the other month, describing the economic outlook in British Columbia. They said that when you go outside of the Lower Mainland, where all the job creation has been, we have regions in British Columbia that are technically in recession. Those are the facts on the employment landscape in British Columbia.

He didn’t mention that since the Premier has become a member from Kelowna, the benefit to her constituents is that they have an unemployment rate that’s tracking almost 9 percent in the city of Kelowna. Let’s give credit where credit’s due. Well done, Premier, for your constituents.

Let’s look at the genesis of the B.C. skills-for-jobs blueprint. It’s effectively an attempt to create a remedy for this government’s absolute failure in terms of ramping up certified trades apprenticeship completion rates. This government’s once shiny-new entity, the Industry Training Authority, presided over a chaotic decade with the net result that our province saw the completion rate of apprentices plunge massively.

Our province, with one million more citizens than our neighbours in Alberta, produces half the number of certified apprenticeships annually than our neighbours do. It’s not the NDP saying this. It’s the skills-training review that was done by Jessica McDonald, the former head of the Public Service Alliance and, I believe, the chair of B.C. Hydro right now — somebody the government apparently has a lot of confidence in who absolutely trashed this government’s reckless experiment in trades training in B.C.

The blueprint also comes from the Liberals’ discredited election promises, doesn’t it? Let me quote the document directly. Up to 100,000 in LNG jobs upstream, midstream, downstream; $175 billion in direct investment — five plants — generating “up to $1 trillion in economic activity.” That was all going to be by 2020, right? How’s that going?

[1150]

The document was created after the election promises were made to British Columbians. This is more of a skills fig leaf than a skills blueprint, and that’s what people in this province know.

Now, when the government talks about a million job openings on the horizon, here’s the interesting thing they never mention. I looked at the assumptions in that figure. Where is that labour market forecast coming from? Well, more than two-thirds of the jobs, 670,000 of them, are related to death and retirement. Death is the great job creator in British Columbia under the skills blueprint plan. Can you believe it? Do you think you’d see that in the advertisements on TV? Never. You have to FOI it to find out the truth behind the labour market assumptions that they put out there, which are ridiculous.

Now, let’s look at the skills blueprint as it relates to K-to-12 education. High school trades education by the Industry Training Authority is $5 million per year. That’s the new funding that was put in place under the skills blueprint plan. Let’s put that into perspective. We have a $5 billion Education Ministry budget per year, so 0.1 percent is targeted ITA funding to increase trades training.

Let’s look at the goals of this plan. There aren’t many of them, because performance indicators and accountability are not really this government’s thing. But here are the recycled goals of the skills blueprint as it relates to K-to-12 education. Expand dual-credit programs. Well, that’s a bit vague, isn’t it? Double the number of ACE IT accelerated spaces from 2,500 to 5,000 over the next year. They’ve been promising this for ten years, and they haven’t moved the dial at all.

The number of students in ACE IT programs in 2005 and 2006 was 2,652. The number of ACE IT students in 2012 was 2,065. They dropped by 600. They’re not going to double it. They can’t even get back to where they were ten years ago.

Here’s the thing. Expanding trades training in high schools is actually difficult unless you have a real plan that works closely with school districts. The funding shortfalls, which we’ve canvassed in this House, make it almost impossible to ramp up trades-training spaces. You have to find new trades instructors, who have teaching licences, to be recruited. Districts need more shop space, and capital dollars are scarce to be able to do that. Districts have no funds for heavy equipment, so it falls to creative teachers who beg and borrow with industry. And, you guessed it, parents are the ones who have to fundraise for trades-training equipment, another burden.

That’s why the skills blueprint is failing, and that’s why we need a real plan to create real jobs in this province.

L. Reimer: Today’s debate relates to the second anniversary of British Columbia’s skills-for-jobs blueprint. The blueprint recognizes that almost eight out of ten of all job openings will require some form of post-secondary education and training. That is why we are
[ Page 12836 ]
re-engineering our education and training programs towards a data-driven system that focuses our investment on jobs that are in demand.

We have accomplished a considerable amount since the blueprint strategy was launched. Currently, B.C. is projected to lead the country in economic growth. As many of us heard the news last week, British Columbia created 13,000 jobs just this past month of April alone. While these numbers do tend to fluctuate from month to month, it does confirm that we have the lowest unemployment rate in the country, at 5.8 percent.

[Madame Speaker in the chair.]

The blueprint’s success is due primarily to finely tuned cross-government coordination. The blueprint brings together the Ministries of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training; Education; Advanced Education; Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation; and Social Development and Social Innovation. This collaborative approach is helping to re-engineer B.C.’s education programs towards jobs that are in demand.

For my part in this debate, I would like to highlight the highly innovative single-parent employment initiative. Thanks to a balanced budget, we are now in a position to provide more help to British Columbians most in need. We recognize that single parents receiving income assistance face tremendous hurdles that must be overcome. This initiative helps single parents on income and disability assistance get the supports they need to overcome barriers to employment and build a better future for their families.

Under this initiative, participants are able to remain on income assistance while enrolled in a training program. Participants also receive up to 12 months of funded training for in-demand jobs or on-the-job training through a paid work experience placement.

[1155]

What makes this program so effective is the fact that single parents enrolled in the program can also receive child care costs during training or job placement. By removing this barrier, single parents wishing to make a better life for both themselves and their family have the opportunity to enter or to re-enter the workforce.

To further ensure the pathway towards success, the program also covers child care costs for the first year of employment. In addition, the single-parent employment initiative also covers transportation costs and exemptions for bursaries, scholarships and grants.

The program has the potential to change the lives of 16,000 single parents throughout British Columbia. So far, 1,335 single parents are participating in the single-parent employment initiative. More than 100 are already enrolled in training programs or work placement; 50 are already in the workplace in the construction, retail, health and community service sectors.

Over 1,000 participants are currently receiving employment support services or workshops, such as resumé-building and interview skills, through Work B.C. offices. These participants are working with case managers who are helping them develop their plans towards sustainable employment.

We also know that over 90 percent of participants are single mothers.

Of those participants currently pursuing skills training, their aim is to pursue the following jobs: 17 in management, technical and paraprofessional; 19 in administration and administrative support; 36 in sales, personal and customer information services; ten in industrial construction and equipment operation trades; as well as workers and labourers in transport and construction.

In conclusion, the single-parent employment initiative is an important part of B.C.’s skills-for-jobs blueprint. It is making a difference in the lives of British Columbians most in need and helping single-parent families along the way.

L. Reimer moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. N. Letnick 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 11:57 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