Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

AFFORDABILITY

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and speak to the statement on affordability in British Columbia. It’s a great honour to be the Parliamentary Secretary for Poverty Reduction.

[R Chouhan in the chair.]

We know that across our province British Columbians have been experiencing crises of affordability, and that is why our government has made it a priority to address affordability, to make life more affordable for British Columbians, to improve services that people count on and to build a strong and sustainable economy that benefits everyone.

We know that B.C. is the only province or territory that does not have a poverty reduction plan in the country. Certainly, we are the last to join those ranks. Despite British Columbia being one of Canada’s wealthiest provinces, B.C. has among the highest poverty rates in the country.

When we think about what the experience of poverty is and what that means to British Columbians, I think one of the common misconceptions is that the poor are mostly on social assistance. We know that is not the case. Nearly half of those living below the poverty line are either the working poor or the children of the working poor, and they are employed in the low-wage labour market. So folks can be working hard at one, two or three jobs and still be below the poverty line.

So when we see the face of poverty in our province, it’s complex. It has many faces, and it cuts right across the continuum. We see individuals and families and children living in poverty in all our communities across the province. When we look at….

Poverty is a serious problem in British Columbia. Especially troubling are the high number of children living in poverty due to…. They often experience long-term health and social impacts that severely restrict their opportunity and their success later in life. We know that 1 in 5 of B.C.’s poor are under the age of 18 years old.

Poverty disproportionately impacts marginalized groups, including Indigenous people, people with disabilities and mental illness, recent immigrants, refugees, single mothers, single senior women and, also, queer and transgender people. We have nearly half a million British Columbians — so that’s a quarter of paid employees — that earn less than $15 an hour. Most are working full-time, and most support an additional household.

Poverty affects all of us, and we all pay for poverty. Not investing in poverty has an impact on our economy. It’s estimated that poverty costs British Columbia $8 billion to $9 billion a year in health care and justice system costs and, particularly, in diminished opportunities.

We’ve seen that the crisis of affordability squeezing individuals and families in British Columbia — with the sky-high housing affordability, the lack of access and expensive child care, the increasing costs of MSP, B.C. Hydro and other services — has really outstripped wage growth in our province. This is a situation 16 years in the making, under the previous B.C. Liberal government.

That is why I’m very proud to work with my colleague Minister Simpson to make a commitment and implement a poverty reduction strategy and to have the support of government to undertake that. Our government is moving quickly to put people first and to begin making life more affordable for individuals and families.

[10:10 a.m.]

We’ve brought forward a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy to lift children and families out of poverty. We have, in our province, the unacceptable number of 700,000 British Columbians, and 120,000 children, in poverty, the highest poverty rate of any province. So we need to fix that, and we’ve made the commitment.

Of course, it’s a complex issue, and there are many broad, contributing factors to poverty — lack of affordable housing, high child care costs, low wages, social programs that aren’t working for people. So we need a number of initiatives and commitments to reduce poverty in our communities.

It isn’t something that the Ministry of Social Development and myself, as the Parliamentary Secretary for Poverty Reduction, can achieve on our own. We’ll be working with other ministries across all levels of government and in partnership with organizations in the community to address this issue. It is an issue that impacts all of us and is a concern. We will also be consulting and working in partnership to solve this issue.

To date, we’ve made the commitment to move forward, and one of our first acts of government was to increase income and disability assistance by $100 a month. That takes effect shortly. That’s the first increase in ten years, so a single person on income assistance will receive $710 a month, and someone on disability assistance will receive $1,133 a month. We’ve said that we will also, in the budget update, make a commitment to increase earning exemptions by $200 a month for people on assistance so people can keep more of the money that they earn and remain connected to the workforce and better support themselves and their families.

This is a first step — it’s a start — to reduce inequality and poverty that is a scourge in our province and that really tears apart the fabric of our society. We’ve made the commitment, as well, to restore transit passes for people with disabilities, to restore access for adult basic education and English language learning. We’re moving forward for plans to address affordable housing, to work towards increasing the minimum wage towards $15 an hour, implementing affordable child care and a commitment to lower MSP premiums.

We know that these steps will make a real difference in the lives of struggling families and kids throughout British Columbia, and we will continue to work to end poverty in our province.

Deputy Speaker: I want to caution all members. When you speak, do not name any members. Only address them by their constituency names, please.

J. Thornthwaite: On behalf of my constituents in North Vancouver–Seymour, it is with great pleasure that I rise in the House today to respond to the member for Vancouver-Kensington. As I’ve said before, my riding of North Vancouver–Seymour is one of the most beautiful places in the province, yet it is becoming one of the least affordable, and people are finding it difficult to live on the North Shore. A lack of affordable housing options, coupled with a lack of transit options available to people getting in and out of the North Shore, is creating serious concerns for our community, something that I talked about last week in my response to the budget.

Throughout the North Shore, employers are already struggling to find workers to staff their businesses. We see it in our coffee shops, our hospitals, our schools, our universities and our ports. This is becoming an issue for small and big businesses alike.

At Capilano University, debt-saddled students who struggle to find student housing are set to be further burdened after the NDP failed to follow through on their election promise to eliminate student loan interest.

My constituents want child care close to home or work. There aren’t many options available. During the election, this government made a lot of noise about their commitment to bring $10-a-day child care, and I know that people voted because of this issue. But apparently, we found out that it’s not even in the mandate letter of the minister responsible.

We need to have a long-term, comprehensive plan in place, and so far, we’ve seen a complete lack of leadership from this new government on this issue. What I do know is what the economy looked like when this government inherited it. The NDP inherited the best-performing economy in the country. Our province boasted five consecutive balanced budgets, a $2.7 billion budget surplus and a triple-A credit rating. More importantly, we had a solid plan to keep taxes low, attract investment, create jobs and further grow the economy. Now we face an NDP government that is set to turn back time on this province’s years of historic economic growth.

[10:15 a.m.]

We now have a government that has decided to cancel the Massey Tunnel replacement, with thousands of jobs and contracts cancelled, let alone 80,000 commuters stranded; a government that threatens Site C and the thousands of jobs, let alone its commitment to clean energy sources.

We have a government whose decision to scrap bridge tolls is likely to cause a downgrade in the triple-A credit rating, debt that will now be put on the government’s book, debt that will be passed on to hard-working British Columbians.

But who is going to pay for all of these spending promises and no job growth? The answer is: all of us, through the only approach the NDP seems to know: by increasing our taxes.

First, the NDP will raise the personal income tax rate for individuals earning $150,000, from 14.7 to 16.8. Next, the NDP is going to raise the corporate tax rate from 11 to 12 percent. This will only serve to penalize entrepreneurs and businesses and will force them to pass their increased expenses on to consumers, just like the increase in the minimum wage does. We know that it increased cost to consumers. It will also make British Columbia less competitive regionally and a less attractive place to invest.

But that’s not all when it comes to taxing hard-working British Columbians. Shockingly, the NDP plans to increase the carbon tax and abandon the revenue-neutral requirement that has been in place since its inception.

Under our previous Liberal government, we were the first jurisdiction in North America to introduce a broad-based, revenue-neutral carbon tax. That meant that every penny raised through the carbon tax was returned through tax cuts to directly support British Columbians and B.C. businesses. But now, the government is set to excessively raise the price at the pumps and the cost to heat our homes across the board. People are now going to have to pay seven cents more per litre of fuel.

This government has an ambitious spending plan, but it lacks a plan to grow the economy and produce revenues so it can afford to pay for it. After 16 years of strong fiscal management, we left B.C. leading the country in economic performance. Where is the NDP’s plan to grow the economy and continue our strong record on jobs?

We now have a government whose governing philosophy can be reduced to spending and taxes. While it’s true that the issue of affordability is a serious challenge with no solution, I fear that under this government, life for British Columbians is set to become even more unaffordable.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and conclude my remarks.

I’d like to thank the member for North Vancouver–Seymour for her remarks. She mentioned the challenge and the squeeze of affordability for folks on the North Shore in terms of the lack of affordable housing and the need for improved transit and, indeed, the high cost of tuition. I would just like to note that 16 years of B.C. Liberal government priorities and choices have led to that crisis of affordability in her community.

It’s a clear commitment of our government to address poverty. We didn’t hear much, beyond a few opening remarks, about recognizing the impact and scourge of poverty in our province. Our government has made a clear planning commitment to implement a poverty reduction plan, finally, so we’re not laggards in our country. We can join the rest of Canada to bring an end to poverty across our province.

It’s been eight weeks, and I think that in terms of our announcements that we’ve made, it’s been a good start in terms of a very clear commitment around addressing how families and individuals are impacted, with a $100-a-month increase to income assistance as well as eliminating a cost for adult basic education and English language learning. We are also going to address the high cost…. Tuition fees have doubled. They doubled under 16 years of the B.C. Liberals, so we have taken clear steps and made commitments to move forward.

We are also going to implement a basic income pilot project, which was an initiative brought forward by the Greens, to look at really piloting that — look at an innovative way to address poverty — and look at that as an opportunity and an effective way to reduce poverty, improve health, housing and employment, particularly for vulnerable individuals and families throughout the province. So that will come out. We will lay that out in the coming months.

[10:20 a.m.]

We are committed to implementing a poverty reduction strategy. We have taken clear steps. We will address these issues, going forward every day, and we will ensure that we take steps to address the crisis of affordability, that we build and strengthen public services for British Columbians and that we ensure that there, fundamentally, is an economy that benefits all British Columbians so that it’s not a low-wage economy where nearly half a million British Columbians work but are still below the poverty line. We are committed to that, and we will take steps to work on behalf of British Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: A caution to all members: these statements are supposed to be very non-partisan. Please be careful when we talk about, make our comments. So keep that in mind.

POWERING THE FUTURE WITH SITE C

D. Davies: The other day in the House my colleague the member for Skeena drew attention to the fact that the May 9 election results were far more revealing than just the number of seats won by any political party. If you stand back and take a bird’s-eye view of the geographic results of the election, it reveals a stark divide between rural and urban British Columbia. With only a few seats scattered in the Interior and the north, the seats won by the NDP were predominantly in the Lower Mainland and on the Island. The same with the Green Party — they won their seats on the southern tip of Vancouver Island.

On the other hand, the B.C. Liberals are the only party with representation on the Island, the Lower Mainland, with the lion’s share of seats in the Interior and north.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member, please keep your comments non-partisan.

D. Davies: One of the reasons is because our party doesn’t view the environment and the economy as mutually exclusive. As a matter of fact, we believe that the environment is best protected and preserved by the economy that places a premium on reliable, renewable and clean sources of energy. That pretty much defines hydroelectricity in this province. Jurisdictions around the world envy British Columbia because we have an abundance of hydroelectricity, especially since it doesn’t contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. Yet for some reason, other people in the province are adamantly opposed to Site C. Site C is a generational opportunity. By building Site C, we will be passing a legacy on to our future generations, a source of power that will reduce our carbon footprint over the coming decades.

Hon. Speaker, 2017 marks the 50th anniversary of the W.A.C. Bennett dam, and I encourage members of this House to tour up north, and make sure that you put the Bennett dam on as part of your itinerary. Today we are the benefactors of an abundant, reliable and renewable source of power provided by the Bennett dam because a previous government had the vision to look to the future, a vision to build a legacy for the province of British Columbia.

Site C represents that same opportunity. While people talk about Site C as our largest hydroelectric project, that simply isn’t true. It’s actually the fourth largest in our system. The Bennett dam is the largest, and it was a massive undertaking at the time. The Bennett dam was built 50 years ago when the population of B.C. was only 1.8 million people, compared to 4.7 million today. There was no talk, back in the 1960s, about how the dam would provide more electricity than what is needed for the current demand. The Bennett dam was built for the future generations and, importantly, to expand our economy.

Now it’s our turn to plan for the future. Site C opponents say that the demand for electricity is not there right now. That’s like saying — a farmer: “We have enough food on the table today. We’re not going to plant crops for next year.” If you don’t believe me, let’s look at what some of the independent people are saying. Dr. Mark Jaccard at the School of Resource and Environmental Management at Simon Fraser recently published a piece in the Vancouver Sun. This is what Dr. Jaccard had to say. “Studies by us and others show that B.C. electricity demand will be almost double today’s levels if we are to reduce our emissions by 55 to 70 percent in just over three decades while our population, economy, buildings and equipment grow significantly.”

[10:25 a.m.]

Dr. Jaccard goes on to say: “In the case of our 2030 and 2050 greenhouse gas reduction targets, such evidence shows that we must substantially increase our generation of dependable electricity. If the Site C dam is built and if we are true to our climate goals, all of its electricity will be used in B.C. soon after its completion.”

I was born and raised in Fort St. John, the largest city in my riding. We’re home to a variety of industries — oil, gas, forestry, agriculture, mining, tourism and hydroelectricity. These industries provide well-paying, family-supporting jobs to hard-working British Columbians and are integral to our northern way of life. We are the first ones to know that if you fail to adapt or plan for your future, you will quickly lose your economy.

Today 2,600 people are employed at the Site C project, many in my community, whom I represent. It’s 2,600 people who face unemployment if members opposite have their way and this project is cancelled. This project is extremely vital to our communities in the Peace region and throughout the province. Thousands of families and businesses are relying on the work and the opportunities that this project is providing.

We need to mend the gap between rural and urban British Columbia. We need to build a future and a green economy for our future generations and our children, and that future depends on Site C.

J. Rice: I appreciate the opportunity to rise to respond to the statement here by the member for Peace River North. I’d actually prefer to pass this on to my colleague to my right here, but I can’t do such a thing today, so I will respond much less succinctly as could be, possibly.

One of our first acts as government was to ask the British Columbia Utilities Commission to review the Site C project to ensure that this project is in the public interest and to keep hydro rates affordable. This is something that should have been done from the get-go. A responsible government with the best interests of British Columbians in mind would have sent this project to the BCUC before spending a penny of taxpayers’ money.

In fact, that is what is always supposed to happen. That is the job of the independent commission. Instead, the former B.C. Liberal government exempted this project from independent oversight for their own political purposes. In fact, the former B.C. Liberal Premier, Christy Clark, stated that no matter what the cost to the people of B.C., it was her goal to get it past the point of no return. Is that the vision the member opposite is speaking about? That was wrong. The B.C. Liberal government was looking out for their own best interests, not the people of British Columbia. That’s why we’ve sent this project to the BCUC…

Deputy Speaker: Member.

J. Rice: …to ensure that we make the right decision for British Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: Member, be careful in your comments, please.

J. Rice: Ratepayers could be on the hook for billions of dollars for power we might not actually need and paying for it in jacked-up electricity prices for years to come. That is what the Utilities Commission will look at. This was a political project of the former Premier, and our government has done the responsible thing by sending it to the BCUC for independent review.

No matter what, energy policy needs to be in the best interests of the people of British Columbia. That’s why our government will drive innovation, expand energy efficiency and conservation programs, generate new energy responsibly and sustainably and create lasting jobs across the province, not just in the northeast corner of the province.

B.C.’s public buildings need upgrading. We will create thousands of jobs across the province retrofitting public buildings, such as schools and hospitals, as well as industrial and commercial buildings and private homes. Retrofits will save the taxpayer millions of dollars by reducing the energy needs of our schools and hospitals, as well as reducing the amount of carbon offsets they need to purchase. Retrofits will also save businesses and individuals money on their energy bills and increase property values.

Conserving energy is the most efficient way to meet B.C.’s energy needs. Energy-efficient retrofits create twice as many jobs as building a new dam, and the jobs are long-lasting, good-paying and close to home in every community across B.C.

[10:30 a.m.]

B.C. can become a world leader in clean energy by investing in wind, solar and other renewable energy sources. These technologies are becoming cheaper and more efficient every year, and wind and solar projects are providing an ever-increasing amount of power in jurisdictions around the world. The previous Liberal government made B.C. so unfriendly for investment in these kinds of green energy projects that the Renewable Energy Association of B.C. left B.C.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member, be cautioned, please.

J. Rice: We need to think big, look to the future and allow B.C. Hydro the flexibility to pursue these projects to meet our energy needs in partnership with First Nations and clean energy providers. We will position British Columbia as a clean energy champion and a world leader in new and emerging technologies by boosting investments in groundbreaking new energy technologies and climate change solutions.

This is the kind of forward-thinking leadership that has been missing in this province, and that’s what the people of British Columbia voted for last May.

D. Davies: I’d like to thank the member for her contributions to this debate.

I talked about the environmental and economic benefits earlier in the debate, but what is often overlooked are the social benefits of Site C. The construction and operation of the Site C clean energy project will provide lasting benefits for communities and residents in the Peace region and throughout the province. Within the Peace region, some of these include regional legacy benefits, community agreements, infrastructure improvements, agriculture funding, support for community services, recreation and tourism opportunities, and affordable housing.

For example, in June 2013, B.C. Hydro and the Peace River regional district reached an agreement for regional legacy benefits associated with the operation of Site C. B.C. Hydro will provide an annual payment of $2.4 million to the regional districts and its member communities for a period of 70 years once Site C is operational — an index to inflation.

In April 2016, B.C. Hydro and the city of Fort St. John concluded a community measures agreement for Site C. These measures include $1 million per year to the city of Fort St. John during construction, increased by 3.5 percent each year. This is in recognition of the city’s unique position as a regional service centre for the North Peace Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities and the proximity of the dam to our community, which is only seven kilometres.

Working with B.C. Housing to build a total of 50 new rental housing units in Fort St. John, with ten offered as affordable housing during Site C and all 50 offered once the project is completed. Providing 37 new daycare spaces in Fort St. John and area to support families. Providing more than $1 million to support regional non-profit organizations during the construction.

By delaying the construction or cancelling Site C outright, the NDP and the Green Party are saying no to the people of Peace River North…

Deputy Speaker: Member.

D. Davies: …and no to the thousands of others…. The member across mentioned that this is only jobs in the northeast, but it is the entire province — thousands of other workers that are working on this project throughout the province of British Columbia.

I therefore hope that this House takes into consideration and plans for the future of British Columbia. And that future includes Site C.

HUMAN RIGHTS

R. Kahlon: It is my honour to speak today about human rights in B.C. Before I do that, I would like to acknowledge that we are gathering on unceded Coast Salish territory, represented today by the Esquimalt and Songhees Nations. They’ve been custodians of this land for thousands of years, and I would like to pay my respects to both the elders past and present.

I want to thank all of the members for their statements today. It’s my first opportunity to hear statements. I think it’s an important part of debate and will help move issues along in this province.

The Attorney General and the Premier have tasked me with the responsibility to lead a consultation on human rights in B.C. They requested that I write a report, with recommendations, on the B.C. Human Rights Commission in B.C. and what it would look like. When I was tasked with the responsibility, I decided to start my research by going back to the origins of human rights. Hon. Speaker, you’re a champion of human rights, so you’ll appreciate this.

[10:35 a.m.]

My initial research led me to the story of a man named King Ashoka. Throughout the history of India and in Buddhist folklore was repeated a story about a cruel king that discovered Buddhism and changed his ways — King Ashoka, who led a crusade in which thousands of innocent people were killed. It was violent and bloody. The story goes that he saw the horrors of war, and he committed to create a more humane society.

For the longest time, it was assumed that these stories of the merciful king were just fables — until the early 1800s, when scholars discovered large stone pillars with etchings. For many years, archaeologists tried to decipher the script in order to place this history. In 1837, James Prinsep succeeded in deciphering the inscription, and years later, it was traced back to King Ashoka. After 700 years, scholars had found the teachings of one of the world’s greatest leaders.

Known today as Ashoka’s Edicts, these scriptures spoke of rules, orders to achieve state, private and individual morality. King Ashoka’s administration wanted to create a society that was more just and more spiritually inclined, a society that promoted peaceful coexistence. These early forms of human rights were etched into giant rocks throughout the country.

Ashoka envisioned a society that promoted the welfare of its people and wildlife. Its Edicts protected all religions and promoted harmony between religions. Its Edicts encouraged respect towards parents, elders, teachers, friends, servants and so on. It’s really fascinating history. It struck me that this leader used education as a tool to create this just and equitable society. It’s a great history that should guide us today as we make progress on creating a new body that will be tasked with promoting similar shared values.

B.C. is the only province in Canada that does not have a commission that proactively works to address discrimination in our society. Human rights legislation was first introduced in Canada during the 1960s and ’70s. It recognized that discrimination is an offence against shared public values of equality and fairness to all individuals and groups. The B.C. human rights code protects persons from discrimination on the basis of personal characteristics including sex, race, religion, family status, disability, place of origin, sexual orientation and, most recently, gender identity or expression in the areas such as tenancy, services available to the public and employment.

The Human Rights Commission had been the stewards of human rights with a responsibility to the public interest by working to eliminate all forms of discrimination. In 2002, the government scrapped the Human Rights Commission for a Human Rights Tribunal. The tribunal was seen as a more efficient model to hear cases in which people have their rights infringed. Although the direct model has some benefits, it does not work proactively to address discrimination before it happens.

Our economy and our society are changing faster and faster. Human rights play an important role in that change. For example, rapid progress is being made by researchers and scientists, and it’s having huge impacts on human rights. A term called “bioethics” has been coined to capture this predicament as it relates to the study of genes. In particular, the advancements in DNA research and cloning possess new challenges. Questions that once seemed academic and futuristic are now part of the public debate. The need to balance advancement and protect individuals from discrimination is becoming more challenging.

Drug researchers are creating drugs that target specific gene makeups. This will lead to dramatic improvements in health outcomes. But when it happens — when insurance wants to cover only people’s specific gene makeups — that leads to new challenges. Thanks to advancements in technology and research, we are heading into uncharted territory when it comes to human rights.

It’s not limited to genes. In 2015, a study was conducted by a Carnegie Mellon group, in which they discovered popular search engines were more likely to advertise executive-level salaried positions only to men. It wasn’t the company’s intention to do so, I’m sure. The algorithms re-enacted the societal trend. Artificial intelligence comes with significant challenges. How do we prevent these programs from amplifying the inequalities of our past and affecting the most vulnerable people in our society?

[10:40 a.m.]

Human rights have come a long way since King Ashoka, but the general concepts remain the same. We all want to live in an inclusive and equal society. Human rights are a key to that society.

I want to thank the members for giving me their time today, and I look forward to hearing from the member opposite regarding human rights.

J. Yap: I’d like to thank the member for Delta North for his opening remarks and say that I’m very proud to rise in the House today to speak on this important matter of human rights in our most diverse province of British Columbia. In fact, we can call our province the most ethnically diverse province in all of Canada. We know that every year 40,000 new immigrants are welcomed into B.C., and when they move here, we proudly tell them that they can continue to practise their religious beliefs and their cultural traditions without fear.

I’m proud to say that my home community of Richmond-Steveston — in fact, all of Richmond — is an incredibly diverse area. It’s something that our local residents and businesses take a great deal of pride in. With this in mind, it’s important that we nurture concepts of understanding, inclusiveness and respect for one another.

B.C.’s Multiculturalism Act enshrines these values. Its purpose is to recognize that all our lives are greatly enriched by the diversity found in our province. It encourages respect for the multicultural heritage of British Columbia and promotes racial harmony, cross-cultural understanding and respect, and the development of a community that is united and at peace with itself.

Furthermore, British Columbians are protected under the human rights code if they are subject to discrimination. In B.C., it’s against the law to discriminate against or harass others because of their race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, political belief, religion, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, age over 19, unrelated criminal conviction and lawful source of income.

The code applies to all businesses, agencies and services in B.C. except those regulated by the federal government. It protects British Columbians from discrimination at work, in a store or restaurant or between a landlord and tenant. And it works to ensure everyone can participate equally in the economic, social, political and cultural life of British Columbia. I know that’s something we all hold dear, because when we see all members of our diverse cultures engaged in our community, it builds a strong and vibrant social and economic future for British Columbia.

But while we never wish it to happen, there may be times when some members of our diverse communities feel that their personal human rights are being threatened. That’s where the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal comes in. It’s an independent, quasi-judicial body created by the B.C. human rights code. The tribunal is responsible for accepting, screening, mediating and adjudicating human rights complaints. The tribunal offers the parties the opportunity to try to resolve the complaint through mediation. If the parties do not resolve a complaint and the complaint is not dismissed, the tribunal holds a hearing.

The Human Rights Tribunal is recognized as a leader in the protection of human rights. The tribunal provides British Columbians with an accessible, speedy and cost-effective alternative to the Supreme Court of B.C. More than 1,100 British Columbians receive dispute resolution services, including mediation and adjudications, from the tribunal each year.

B.C. is a diverse province built on a spirit of openness, and we can take a lot of pride in that, but we always need to be vigilant and look out for one another. The human rights code makes clear that there’s no tolerance for discrimination for any reason. I think that all of us in this House and the diverse peoples in our communities can agree on the tremendous importance of protecting human rights.

By working together and by sharing our stories, we can ensure B.C. continues to be a welcoming place for years to come. It’s up to all of us to ensure that our multicultural society is supported today and for future generations.

[10:45 a.m.]

R. Kahlon: As I stated earlier, B.C. is the only province in Canada that does not have a human rights commission, and it is seen as the weakest province when it comes to fostering human rights awareness. Without the capacity to review legislation, conduct research, educate the public or investigate systematic discrimination, B.C. is failing to address the needs of residents and, at the same time, to live up to the international standards established by the United Nations. We have some serious issues and attentions for a human rights commission.

B.C. was given a D grade recently by the Conference Board of Canada for its gender wage gap. The report found that B.C. has the highest gap between men and women in this country. The report stated: “Eliminating the wage gap between men and women is critical to achieving inclusive, cohesive society and to sustaining economies. Women’s work should not be undervalued; nor should women’s skills be underutilized.”

It’s not about just being vigilant. These issues need to be proactively dealt with by a commission. Yes, it’s 2017, and these gaps are larger than ever. We need a commission to look at these gaps, suggest policies to governments and to the private sector.

A few years ago there was a study done, and it was titled: Why Do Some Employers Prefer to Interview Matthew but Not Samir? The researcher sent out 7,000 hypothetical resumés to hiring managers. He gave applicants English-sounding names and identical resumés with Chinese, Indian and Greek-sounding names. The English-sounding names were 40 percent more likely to get a callback, despite having the exact same resumés.

These biases do exist. They are affecting people and they’re affecting the economy throughout the province. Stories like these happen to people with disabilities, the LGBQT community, Indigenous communities especially.

I would just like to close by saying that the need to address human rights proactively is critical for the success of our province. I’m sure all members of this House would agree with that. So when a human rights consultation is launched, I encourage all MLAs to participate, to help shape the work of a commission, because it will end up benefiting all of our constituents and the province as a whole.

So with that, I’ll end. Thank you, hon. Speaker, and thank you to the member for Richmond-Steveston.

ELIMINATING BOTTLENECKS

I. Paton: Thank you to my fellow member for Delta North for his statement this morning.

I rise in the House today to speak on the subject of eliminating bottlenecks, a subject I’m well-versed in as a long-time resident of Delta South.

Back when I was a kid, it was called the Deas Island Tunnel, but we now know it as the George Massey Tunnel. It was a frightening experience in 1960 for me to go through that tunnel, and it’s a frightening experience even today to go through the tunnel. It opened in 1959, and unfortunately, its age is showing. We also know that it is B.C.’s worst bottleneck, the largest parking lot in the province. The level of traffic congestion that we see on a day-to-day basis has a huge impact on people’s lives and on our provincial economy.

Most of us are familiar with how the counterflow lanes work at the George Massey Tunnel. This system allows operators to change the direction of traffic in one or more lanes to create more efficient traffic flow, especially during peak periods. Well, I can you that the way it works in the Massey Tunnel is far from efficient. Five lanes of traffic try to jam into one lane to go north in the George Massey Tunnel in the late afternoon. It is particularly bad in the morning as well.

You’ve got massive commercial trucks heading south to the U.S. border in the morning or over to Tilbury Industrial Park or to the south Surrey industrial parks, to the B.C. ferries or to Deltaport container terminal —18-wheel trucks spewing diesel into the air every morning, lined up all the way back to Westminster Highway to get through one lane of the George Massey Tunnel heading south. They’re idling in the traffic, putting diesel fumes into the air and not getting their goods to market as fast as they would like.

Can you imagine our U.S. friends coming up from Washington state, from California, from Oregon to the gateway to Vancouver? It’s the gateway to the most beautiful tourist area in the province, perhaps — Whistler. They come through the Blaine border crossing.

[10:50 a.m.]

This is the gateway highway to the tourist industry in British Columbia. They get to the George Massey Tunnel, and they sit there for an hour and a half at times, going: “Is this your answer to getting to the tourist industry — to Vancouver, to Whistler?” It’s actually embarrassing.

I’ve been stuck in it myself. I could tell countless stories of people trapped in the traffic gridlock and missing medical appointments, ferry trips — even something as simple as enjoying dinner with their family after a long day’s work. These are all inconveniences, and when it happens once or twice, it’s probably manageable. But it’s not manageable when you are stuck in that traffic every day, a situation 80,000 people find themselves in. It becomes absolutely unacceptable when you are seriously ill or clinging to life in an ambulance. If there’s a fender-bender in the tunnel and those emergency vehicles hit gridlock and they have a patient that needs to get to Vancouver General Hospital or to St. Paul’s, they just can’t get through in an ambulance.

The folks I’ve talked to at our local fire department…. They’re also very concerned about things like fires in the tunnel. If there’s a big accident involving multiple vehicles in the tunnel, fire departments can’t get their trucks in there. And that means they have to go in on foot, which means oftentimes they’re walking into a toxic situation with fumes from burning vehicles. Meanwhile everyone driving through the tunnel is on edge because of another threat: earthquakes. If a major earthquake strikes — and we keep hearing the warnings that the big one is coming — we know that anything over a magnitude of 7.0 would likely make the crossing unusable and cut off its lifeline during an emergency and for months or years after.

So with all this in mind — the traffic congestion, the delays in moving goods, the concern of emergency services, safety, risk to the public — the previous government made a commitment to construct a new bridge on the existing Highway 99 corridor. This project saw a multi-stage planning and consultation process, incorporating technical analysis and broad-based public input from First Nations; local businesses, including farmers; and individuals from our community. Over five years there were more than 250 meetings held within the municipalities of Richmond and Delta, and more than 50 meetings with Metro Vancouver to discuss topics like traffic, land use, transit and air quality.

What’s more, there were more than 14,000 pages of information on the Transportation Ministry’s own website. But that wasn’t good enough. The new NDP government decided that more study was needed and pulled the funds for this project, effectively cancelling it.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

I. Paton: The publicized costs associated with the decision — $66 million for advanced construction work, $25 million for B.C. Hydro work, and millions of dollars in cancellation costs to proponents. And who knows how much hasn’t yet been publicized?

That choice to cancel the projects was reflected in last week’s budget, with no funds allocated to help relieve the traffic bottleneck and protect public safety. If that wasn’t bad enough, we find an internal document that shows they have zero intention of helping these commuters. The document is clear. It says: “Platform prep, 2017. This is what bold looks like. We will build the Vancouver and Surrey rapid transit projects.”

Deputy Speaker: Member.

I. Paton: “Rapid buses across the North Shore from Port Coquitlam to Maple Ridge…”

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member for Delta South.

I. Paton: “…and through Vancouver along Hastings Street, and 41st and 49th avenues.”

Deputy Speaker: Member.

I. Paton: That is: “We will implement the Mayors Council vision. We’ll pay for these instead of replacing the Massey Tunnel.”

Deputy Speaker: Member.

I. Paton: Yes?

Deputy Speaker: When the Chair calls, please listen. Be careful.

I. Paton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

The hidden agenda has been revealed, and they had always planned to kill the project. It means folks in Delta, south Langley, South Surrey, White Rock, Richmond and those regularly crossing the border were misled into believing that a solution was coming. The people in these communities are profoundly disappointed, and they want answers. More importantly, they want a solution to B.C.’s worst bottleneck.

J. Brar: What I would like to say, before I start reading from my script, is that after 16 years of neglect, the solution is coming.

Deputy Speaker: Member, let’s stick with your script.

J. Brar: Okay. Thank you, hon. Speaker.

I’m very pleased to respond to the private member’s statement made by the member for Delta South. I would like to start by saying that after 16 years of neglect by the previous outgoing government, the solutions are coming.

[10:55 a.m.]

There’s no doubt that eliminating the bottleneck in B.C. is an issue. The member in his statement made a strong case for addressing the bottleneck, saying that it’s a very urgent issue and also demanding solutions without offering any comprehensive plan that will work for the people of British Columbia.

All members of this House agree that we need to take action to address bottlenecks, but I would like to point out that the bottleneck the member is referring to is, of course, the outcome of the actions taken by the previous government, or the neglect during the last 16 years. I agree that there’s a lot of work that needs to be done. The previous government has repeatedly refused to fund, as we know, to increase the provincial share of funding from 33 percent to 40 percent to support the Mayors Council’s ten-year plan for the Metro Vancouver transportation system.

We all know that in 2013, the then Premier Clark demanded a referendum to fix the problem but did not herself endorse or campaign for it, which wasted almost two years. That referendum was a huge blow to the project timeline of the Surrey LRT, and the people of Surrey are still paying the price in big lineups, as the member indicated, because of the delay that took place because of the referendum. On the other hand, our new government is now fully committed to finding the best solution to address the bottleneck and take action. In the short few weeks after taking power, our government has taken critical steps to build a better transportation system for the people of British Columbia.

First, as of September 1, our government has eliminated tolls on the Port Mann and Golden Ears bridges. This is fantastic news for commuters and commercial drivers who will benefit from this change. The member sitting to the left of me, the member for Delta North, is telling me the community in his riding is already very excited, and they see the impact of those elimination of tolls. The elimination of tolls will also clear congestion on other routes.

Second, replacing the Pattullo Bridge also remains a major priority for our government. Third, our government fully supports the Mayors Council’s ten-year plan for Metro Vancouver transportation. We are committed to fund 40 percent — I’m saying 40 percent — of the capital costs of every phase of the plan, including the Pattullo Bridge replacement, which the previous government refused to fund during 16 long years.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

On the Lower Mainland, the member is talking about the issue with safety and congestion of Highway 99 at the George Massey Tunnel and the roadblocks to the efficient movement of people and goods in the region. We can all agree that the congestion at the tunnel needs to be taken care of, but finding the best solution is a serious point of debate.

There have been concerns raised by the Metro Vancouver mayors and many residents about the idea of building a ten-lane bridge, as well as over the cost of such a project. We have heard those concerns and think it’s important to explore all options available for the crossing and to make sure that we are making a decision that is best for the region, a decision that is best for the people of British Columbia and a decision that’s best for future generations.

That’s why our government is proceeding with an independent technical review of the George Massey Tunnel crossing. Generally speaking, the review will focus on what level of improvement is needed, as well as on what options would be best for the crossing — be it the proposed ten-lane bridge, a smaller bridge or a tunnel.

I would like to conclude by saying we are looking forward to the recommendations brought forward through this independent technical review, and our Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure is working with Metro Vancouver mayors, including the mayor of Delta, to find the right solution. The solution we find must work for the entire region and for the people of British Columbia.

[11:00 a.m.]

I. Paton: What I’m hearing on the issue of the Massey Tunnel is nothing more than excuses to hide a hidden agenda to kill this replacement project. The fact of the matter is they have no plan and no money to fix it. Their internal document clearly states that they have no intention of easing traffic congestion for 80,000 commuters a day.

They don’t seem to be fazed by the public safety risk posed by this aging tunnel or the fact that emergency services struggle to get in and out of it or worry about the fires inside the tunnel. By cancelling this project and reiterating the lack of support in their budget, they are telling people in my riding and throughout Delta, Richmond, Surrey and Langley that their safety and quality of life aren’t really a high priority.

What’s more, they’re telling commercial truckers that they don’t see a problem with them idling in traffic instead of getting their goods to market. Maybe that’s not a huge surprise, because we know that a plan to grow the economy and grow jobs is sorely lacking in this budget. In fact, the move to kill the George Massey Tunnel replacement project is going to kill thousands of jobs. Not only saying no to congestion and seismic safety issues, they are saying no to 9,000 construction jobs and to 4,500 to 5,000 additional permanent jobs created by 2045.

We could have a solution to this problem: a bridge that, we just learned, could have been built for $2.6 billion — a full $900 million less than they originally estimated, if only we had gone ahead with the procurement process. But instead, taxpayers were told that more study was needed and more consultation was needed after five years and 14,000 pages of information on the subject.

Yet one little page produced internally shows it was just an excuse to cover the fact that they have no real intention of solving the problem.

Interjections.

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

I. Paton: Hon. Speaker, the people that use the tunnel deserve better than that. They deserve quicker access to their destinations and more time spent with the ones they love, instead of idling in B.C.’s worst bottleneck.

Deputy Speaker: Government House Leader.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thank you, Hon. Speaker.

Interjection.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Member.

Before I call the motion up for debate, I think I’d like to remind both sides of the House that two-minute statements are non-partisan. Member statements are non-partisan, not as much as two-minute statements, and I think we demonstrated here today why that is.

Motions, which we are going to call next, can be partisan and will be partisan. With that, I call the motion on the order paper in the name of the member for Nanaimo.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 2 — HEALTH AND
EDUCATION SERVICES

L. Krog: Goodness gracious, I’m glad we got to this stage in proceedings this morning. The partisan political pots are bubbling over on both sides of the House this morning, members anxious to express their opinions on various matters. That’s why I’m so delighted that I get first kick at the cat with my motion which reads:

[Be it resolved that this House call on the Government to improve key services, such as health and education.]

Now, that’s a broad topic, and I’m going to speak somewhat broadly, but I want to start very specifically. This morning I had occasion, setting out early from Nanaimo, to stop at my constituency office, which is right downtown across from the Salvation Army, which has a shelter. There to greet me were three fellows sitting on the steps of my office, several others huddled under blankets and an old sleeping bag just in the sheltered area where they’d obviously spent the night.

Hon. Speaker, what does that tell you? What does that tell you about the need to improve key services? What it tells you and what the members opposite really don’t wish to acknowledge is that they made choices for 16 years, and now, hopefully, this side of the House will get to make some different choices for British Columbia.

I appreciate the frustration. Having spent as long a time as I did in opposition, I assure the members opposite that the frustration they may be feeling this morning, reflected in their remarks, is felt over here as well. But the difference is that the people of British Columbia have spoken, and now it’s our turn to play with the trains.

[11:05 a.m.]

In fairness to the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Langley East, I used to thank him publicly for any money that came into my constituency to support housing. But I have to tell you, hon. Speaker, I’m informed…. And I have every reason to believe it’s accurate. Our city social planner, the RCMP bike cops downtown and others in our community who care about social issues and housing tell me that, essentially, we are back to where we were in 2004-2005 in terms of the crisis on the streets of Nanaimo.

I could go on about the opioid crisis, but I’m not going to talk about that this morning. I will talk a little bit more about housing. By every standard in the world, in a wealthy society, after 16 years…. It is repugnant to me as a member of this assembly that when I go to my office at quarter to seven in the morning, there are people sleeping outside my very office.

Now, I’m not going to blame it all on the previous government. The reality is that people make choices in their lives. People suffer from mental illness. People have addiction issues. There are all kinds of reasons that put people on the streets. But surely, it is our collective responsibility to ensure that they have an opportunity to be housed and fed and cared for in a reasonable way. Sleeping in the doorway of your local MLA’s office is not reasonable care. It is not acceptable.

Government, as it formerly existed, has to take some responsibility for those circumstances. They devoted themselves to bragging about tax increases, to eliminating the surtax on the wealthiest British Columbians, to ensuring corporate profits were high. There is a price to be paid, and the price was not paid by the members of this assembly. It was not paid by the wealthiest 2 percent of British Columbians. The need to improve key services such as health and education, as I say in the motion, exists because this government chose to benefit the few at the expense of the many.

The greatest burden has been borne by the most vulnerable in our society — the very people I spoke to this morning. It is those people that will see the benefits of a new government that is going to give priority to caring for its vulnerable citizens, whether it be with a new Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions, whether it be in addressing social assistance rates or the need for public housing. Those are the kinds of improvements that are needed in British Columbia. That is what this government should have been doing for the last 16 years, but that government chose not to make that their priority.

The times, as they said in the ’60s, are a-changing. The times are a-changing, and I’m proud to be on this side of the House, not that side of the House.

S. Gibson: It’s a pleasure to be here again today, dealing with the motion regarding improvements to our health and education systems.

Health care and education are probably the two most important services for our citizens. We all agree with that, and as the speaker noted, they’re priorities for all governments. Ensuring these services are top quality and affordable is a priority for everyone in this room.

British Columbia was rated No. 1 in Canada for health care, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. That’s an A. Our province spends more on health care than any other service in the budget. And rightfully so. It’s that critical to the well-being of our residents. The cost of providing world-class health care rises every year, and I am proud that our former government committed to keeping those expenses as affordable as possible.

I was glad to see this new government keep our commitment to reduce MSP premiums by 50 percent, eventually eliminating them completely. Our health care system is among the best in Canada. Here in British Columbia, our residents have the highest life expectancy, a testament to the quality of our health care system and the medical professionals — and, of course, not to mention, the healthy lifestyle.

[11:10 a.m.]

Our citizens have some of the lowest rates of smoking in Canada and many other key indicators. This ensures the sustainability that our system is paramount…. However, government needs to manage these expenditures very carefully so that other essential services like education can continue to receive the necessary funding to remain successful.

Education is something that is very personal for me. I was an instructor at the University of the Fraser Valley for many years and a professor at Trinity Western University. I’m a grad of both SFU and UVic, so I value education very much. I was so fortunate to see the success of many of my young students — bright, motivated and talented — as they pursued their career aspirations. I might add that my wife Joy was an elementary school teacher for her entire working career, teaching primary kids in the Abbotsford school district.

I’ve recently heard government members criticizing our education system, suggesting our students are falling behind and failing. The fact is: our province has some of the best-performing students not only in Canada but in the entire world. Our previous government’s budget commitment to $2 billion over the next three years to maintain and replace schools, with a focus on growing communities such as Surrey, which we know has a significant growth rate, and seismically upgrading schools….

I want to see British Columbia continue to be in the top of the economy in our country so we can keep investing in those very best services for our residents. I don’t want to see our credit rating downgraded so we can’t keep building schools and hospitals at the same pace. I don’t want to see our British Columbians becoming so heavily taxed that it’s impossible to attract the best teachers, doctors, nurses and other health professionals.

The good thing is we don’t have that problem in British Columbia right now. The recent release of public accounts shows that our finances are in exceptional shape, so we can keep prioritizing spending on key services like health and education. Our former government’s budget invested $4.2 billion in health care spending over the next three years, and the total education budget for 2017-18 was planned to be $5.9 billion. We were able to spend that much because of five consecutive balanced budgets and disciplined money management.

I believe British Columbians will continue to expect their government to properly manage their tax dollars. It’s our duty as the official opposition of this province to hold the government responsible for every decision they make, especially when it comes to investing in our children, young people and families. I look forward to ensuring this government’s decisions are in the very best interests of British Columbians.

M. Dean: I am very proud to rise in the House today to talk in support of this motion. In fact, I have wanted to have this message heard at the highest level for many, many years. In my constituency of Esquimalt-Metchosin, there has been a chronic and now urgent need to improve key services, especially in the area of mental health. My constituency is one of the fastest-growing communities in the province. The community is full of families, many the working poor. They’ve experienced ever-increasing hardship over the last 16 years, and those with mental health concerns have struggled even more.

In spite of the growing population, the community did not experience an increase in services to match the growing need. Indeed, the community experienced cutbacks to community social services. In West Shore, child and youth mental health services has a wait-list of over 12 months. Would that be acceptable if these youth had a physical injury? Indeed, the wait-list is such a barrier that local professionals and families no longer bother to refer to the service.

[11:15 a.m.]

So then, they’re referred to the only local community social service organization, which ends up with 50 youth waiting for service, which is overwhelming for a small non-profit. In the end, these youth fall through the cracks.

Further, the West Shore adult mental health community service, which for years had offered community-based clinical individual service to over 100 individuals a year, was eliminated. In the three years that followed, the West Shore RCMP reported an increase of incidents related to mental health by 50 percent — effectively resulting in the near criminalization of these people in the community because the service was cut, and people who needed and wanted help could not get it.

A young woman in my constituency suffered through her childhood, and as an early teen, her mom was murdered by her dad, who then killed himself. In spite of being a victim of such tragedy, she built her life with resilience. She stood up against domestic violence, she resisted drugs, and eventually, she took her daughter to live with her alone.

As a young adult and single mom, she recognized that her trauma continued to have an impact on her life. She needed support. She needed help to recover, and she approached a local counselling agency. She was entitled to fully paid counselling. She was ready to attend counselling sessions. She would organize her life to fit this in, and she was ready for the journey of healing from her trauma. Yet she could not find resources.

Our community had experienced such cutbacks that local counselling services had not been able to survive. Those who had were under such demand, their wait-list was so long, it was not even ethical to be taking personal details.

This young woman sought counselling in that moment, and nothing was available. She is now hopeful. She’s hopeful that there will be more investment with our new government in services that promote the health and well-being of people like herself, that will enable her to achieve her potential as an individual, keep her job and be the best mom that she wants to be.

She needs improved services — services that are locally accessible, services that are convenient for her, services that meet her need when she’s ready, when she actually can take the initiative herself and organize her life to take advantage of services and to recover and to improve her own health and well-being. She needs services that fulfil the pledge of “ask once; get help fast.” She needs to know from her government that help is on the way.

That is the promise of this new government. That is why I totally support this motion.

D. Barnett: I want to thank the government side for the opportunity to join this debate about improved key services like health care and education. I want to bring a rural and northern perspective to this debate, because the delivery of services in my part of the province is much different than in urban British Columbia, where most of the population resides.

In the context of the worst wildfire season in the province’s history, people who have been forced to flee these fires quickly learned what it is like to have your normal life turned upside down. Evacuees no longer had access to health care services, as they normally would. For those with pre-existing medical conditions, seniors and people with disabilities, they were especially hit hard. This includes those who had difficulty obtaining medication because they were cut off. Some schools are not yet fully opened because of the delays caused by wildfires.

The point being that we often take services, like health care and education, for granted until you are cut off from them. Then we realize just how important these services really are.

It is no secret that we have difficulty attracting doctors and nurses to rural British Columbia. There are a number of factors which contribute to the shortage, which is a reason why it is necessary, in a province like British Columbia, that we have specialized rural programs.

[11:20 a.m.]

In the field of health care, the rural practice program works with health authorities and other partners to address issues specific to rural regions like the Cariboo. This includes a rural retention program that pays retention benefits to physicians to help keep them in our communities. It also supports the rural education plan that supports and facilitates the training of physicians in rural practice. All three of these programs are vital to communities like mine.

The same applies to the education sector. Our last Minister of Education, the hon. member for Peace River South, comes from rural B.C., and he understood the challenges we face in rural B.C. to provide the same opportunities that students in urban parts of the province have access to. It is one of the reasons why we made it a priority to keep rural schools open through the rural enhancement fund.

As a government, we took it upon ourselves to conduct a full study of rural education funding because we recognized the economic impact that single schools have in small communities. In fact, I was hoping to see something on rural education and rural health care services in last week’s budget. But the only thing I did see was a very expensive wish list of new social programming that will probably compete for funding with existing programs.

As a matter of fact, I was especially disappointed that nothing was mentioned about what was happening with the rural advisory council and the B.C. rural dividend. Both the council and the $100 million rural dividend program are vital to helping with the delivery of health care and education services in places like the Cariboo.

Since there were so many government MLAs elected in the Interior and the north of this province, I am deeply concerned that we are going to find ourselves in a widening gap between rural and urban British Columbia. I, therefore, call on this government to pay close attention to the rural communities of this province and make sure we are not forgotten.

B. D’Eith: “Education is not a filling of a pail but the lighting of a fire.” That’s from one of our great literary figures, the Irish poet William Butler Yeats. Education is the great equalizer. From education comes hope and opportunity, not only to contribute to society but a chance to build a life for yourself and your family.

For 14 years, the B.C. Liberals fought the B.C. school system in the courts. The former Premier ripped up the collective bargaining agreement and proceeded to fight with teachers, whose only desire was to make life better for our young people. All they wanted was smaller classroom sizes and more help for special needs kids. Only after the Supreme Court ruled that the B.C. government had erred — and it only took 15 minutes — did the former government honour the original agreement and start to reinvest in our school system.

For 16 years, my children and their friends went to underfunded schools in Maple Ridge. In fact, they’ve never known a properly funded school system. They’ve never known what it looks like. Children have suffered due to overcrowded classrooms and inadequate support for all children needing that extra attention, including children with special needs and gifted children.

Our B.C. NDP government will provide $681 million over three years to help our kids get the education they deserve, with smaller classroom sizes, more resources and the supports they need to succeed, including hiring more than 3,000 teachers.

The children in Maple Ridge and Mission have been educated in an ever-growing number of portables. In fact, in one year at Albion Elementary, there were so many portables that they put one over the track field, so they couldn’t have sports at all. While the B.C. Liberals did announce, finally, an elementary school in east Maple Ridge, in the year of the election, it came ten years too late for my community.

Our NDP government will provide $50 million to ensure that space requirements for kids go back into schools and that these issues are addressed. We will invest in public schools and school infrastructure, not because the Supreme Court of Canada ordered us to but because it’s the right thing to do for our children and the future of this province.

As Yeats said, education is lighting a fire. Now, I experienced that in the 1980s at Carson Graham in North Vancouver. They had the most incredible public school music program. It lit a fire in me that continued throughout my post-secondary years and throughout my career in the arts.

[11:25 a.m.]

It’s a shame that so much of my time as an advocate for music in British Columbia was fighting the B.C. Liberal cuts to arts and to music in our schools in British Columbia, that so many young people over the past decade have not had the same experience, that same life-changing enrichment, as I did, in schools is simply tragic.

Now, I’ve had the opportunity to continue my education as far as I wanted, but so many students are unable to due to tuition costs, housing and other hurdles in their life. In fact, in my opinion, no group of young people have been left behind more by the B.C. Liberals than the youth aging out of foster care. They’re often a subject of difficult lives, and they lead to a disproportionate number of them on the streets. Education is one possible way to give them hope — a trade, a profession, a passion. The NDP government has announced that young adults leaving foster care will now have access to free tuition to all 25 of British Columbia’s post-secondary institutions. This will, quite simply, save lives.

For those people who didn’t make it through public school or arrived in Canada without a working language, English, the B.C. Liberals decided to make their lives harder by imposing tuition fees for adult basic education and English-language-learning programs. Enrolment dropped 35 percent. Our NDP government has eliminated tuition fees for adult basic education and English-language-learning programs across the province. As our Premier said: “We can’t afford to leave these people behind.” As a new government, we want to make sure that people participate in our economy. This is only the beginning.

As our new government moves forward, we will work with schools, with teachers, with students, with private schools, with public schools, with post-secondary institutions to put students first and ensure that our students obtain the best education that they can so they can succeed in life, contribute to our economy and become more powerful citizens.

We have to remember what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said about education: “Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choices are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education.”

T. Wat: On behalf of my constituents in Richmond North Centre, I’m pleased to rise in the House today to respond to the private member’s motion calling on the government to improve key services, such as education and health. I agree with the member for Nanaimo that these are issues of huge concern, especially to my community of Richmond North Centre.

Richmond has been growing and changing rapidly for some time, and in some ways that’s not a surprise. It’s a wonderful city to call home. It is a culturally diverse, welcoming and vibrant community that I’m proud to be a part of. It is an important economic centre, given that it’s home to Vancouver International Airport, Canada’s second-busiest airport. We are close to the U.S. border. Our Canada Line quickly connects people in Richmond to Vancouver for employment opportunities, attractions and other activities. With all this in mind, it is no wonder that many people are choosing to move into our community.

But with growth and success come challenges as well. On the education front, families in our community were looking to see a commitment in the NDP budget to seismically upgrade 25 Richmond schools. After all, the NDP platform did commit to accelerating the seismic upgrade program, but sadly, there was no mention of this in the NDP budget. This is our first disappointment.

Our second disappointment is in the area of health care. Richmond Hospital has been offering high-quality care to local residents for just over 50 years. But this facility is aging and seismically unsafe. Upgrades and improvements are needed to ensure the level of care can continue.

The doctors, nurses, administrators and other staff have been doing a tremendous job with the tools and equipment they have. They have been vocal in advocating for a new acute care tower for some time now. Noting this need, the previous government supported the development of a business plan for the new tower. But things are in a state of uncertainty now, because there is no mention of the project in the NDP’s recent budget.

It’s odd, because back in February the member from Juan de Fuca and current Premier was publicly supporting the new tower with some of his candidates. They even put out a news release to proclaim their support. But now the folks at Richmond Hospital and the Richmond Hospital Foundation, as well as local residents, are left wondering what has happened to that commitment.

[11:30 a.m.]

Speaking of the foundation, I want to applaud them for the hard work they are doing as we speak. Throughout the month of September, during Community Cares Month, they are actively reaching out to the community to raise funds for the new acute care tower. I think we should be supporting their efforts, instead of ignoring them. I also think we should be supporting our local emergency services personnel, whose job it is to respond to health care emergencies and transport injured patients to hospital.

The NDP’s cancellation of the George Massey Tunnel replacement project does nothing to help them. If there’s a big traffic accident in the tunnel, those emergency vehicles cannot get through, and the frequent traffic congestion causes delays in getting patients to hospital in Richmond and Vancouver. So the cancellation of this transportation project becomes a health and safety concern for my constituents. It’s just another promise made by the NDP that seems to have gone up into thin air.

When it comes to education and health care in Richmond, I — and my constituents that I represent — will indeed be pressing this government for more attention and more resources.

R. Leonard: In support of the motion from the member for Nanaimo, I would like to highlight the opioid crisis, with the growing number of British Columbians who are suffering and dying and their families who are drawn into this nightmare.

There’s a prevailing notion amongst British Columbians that the opioid crisis is centred on the streets of the Downtown Eastside. In actual fact, we heard this past week that Kelowna has had the most overdose deaths in the province. The problem has been growing long enough that it can be categorically stated that this crisis can and does come to any door.

Our new government has recognized this. We are reshaping how we approach this crisis by establishing a dedicated ministry that will provide strategic leadership in developing a seamless, coordinated mental health and addictions system. Public education needs to focus on breaking down the stigma that surrounds mental health and substance use so that doors are opened for people to unashamedly recognize trouble and seek help earlier. It’s time to cast aside cultural attitudes of shame and blame.

My heart goes out to two families in my community of Courtenay-Comox. They’ve stepped forward to seek improved services for those living the nightmare of the opioid crisis. One is a single mother, a successful businesswoman with a fast-paced, demanding job, who cares for an elderly parent and now lives every minute of every day with a threat of her young adult son dying from a drug overdose.

This young fellow suffers from a mental health issue and chronic pain, both from an ongoing and curable condition as well as from injuries. He has turned to street drugs after the public health system has failed him. This mother has been told to check his pulse before dialing 911, and she lives in dread of every parent’s worst nightmare.

There are too many mothers and fathers across British Columbia who feel just as helpless, just as terrified, not knowing where to turn for help. This family’s lived experience is a health system that suffers from not enough supports, with too few treatment beds in our region and certainly too few affordable treatment centres anywhere.

Another family in my community is living that nightmare, after their 27-year-old son died from an overdose in April of this year. He had a bright future. He was healthy and athletic, and he was learning a trade, but his life took a bitter turn. After years of struggle with his addiction, and even a time of time of hope after he spent many months in supportive recovery, he overdosed alone at his new worksite.

[11:35 a.m.]

This family’s lived experience is a health system that lacks local detox beds, with long waits for an appointment with a detox nurse and nowhere to go. This young man had no safe place to turn when he needed help the most.

This one is a hard one for me to talk about because he was the same age as my son, and he shared the same first name. And he came from my community. I want to acknowledge the bravery that this family has shown in reaching out to the broader community. They’ve taken action already, working through the pain of their loss to reduce the stigma I spoke of earlier. They did this by organizing the first International Overdose Awareness Day event in Courtenay at the end of August.

People are anxious to get on with making change. I’m sure I’m not alone in hearing such stories. They’re everywhere.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

The history of adult mental health and addictions services is varied. My husband spent his career as an outpatient addictions counsellor, being shuffled between ministries — including the years when it was inexplicably under the Ministry of Labour. I admire the dedication of those who work in the field, especially those who are saving lives today with naloxone kits.

It is beyond time to support these workers and tackle mental health and addictions with all the force we can muster. This is what our new government will do. Sixteen years of neglect by the former B.C. Liberal government of the growing mental health and addictions crisis in B.C. cannot be reversed overnight. We will put in much-needed services. We will put people first and make life better for people and families everywhere in British Columbia.

S. Bond: I always appreciate the member for Nanaimo and his energetic approach to his comments in the House. It was good to hear him begin the debate this morning.

I want to start by perhaps disagreeing, just for a minute, with the Minister of Public Safety, especially on this particular motion, because he said that this part of the work we do in the Legislature is more partisan. I can tell you that I think that when you have a motion that talks about calling on government to improve key services such as health and education, that’s hardly a partisan issue.

We’ve heard a lot of really poignant stories, and I appreciate the member previous to me speaking about the families who are deeply impacted. I was with her right to the part about 16 years of neglect. Every single government — at least ones that are successful — makes education and health care spending and investment and attention a priority. As the member for Nanaimo said earlier, it is about choices.

No person in this Legislature — no MLA, no government member, no opposition member — has a monopoly on caring. All of us have people in our communities that have been facing the situations that have been reflected on here today. But to suggest, for example, that poverty and homelessness didn’t exist before the previous government…. And the member for Nanaimo is smiling. He knows that would simply be ridiculous.

Poverty and homelessness have existed for decades, for generations, in both British Columbia and Canada. And it is incumbent on members in this House to work together to find ways to solve those problems.

If we were to bring a room full of British Columbians together and ask them what services they value most, probably health care and education would rank, certainly, amongst their highest priorities — perhaps right at the top of the list. Both of them are important, and in fact, they’re vital. But maybe from a financial perspective — because it does matter how we balance the needs that we have in British Columbia — every jurisdiction is grappling with spending, with choices, what models to use for the opioid crisis.

If British Columbia alone was facing those circumstances, then I think it would be a little more fair to be pointing fingers at a particular government. Health care represents the single largest program expenditure in the provincial budget of British Columbia, and it continues to grow, as we all know.

[11:40 a.m.]

Let’s look back for just a moment. In 2000-2001, the budget for health care in British Columbia was $8.3 billion. In 2001, when the budget was tabled by then member Paul Ramsey, someone who comes from where I live in British Columbia, his budget document noted that 52 percent of new program spending would be for health care. His budget was $9.2 billion. When we look at the budget update for 2017-2018, we’re spending over $18 billion on health care services in British Columbia. So no one needs to question whether or not there’s been investment. It’s how we invest in those programs.

As the member for Nanaimo so rightly said, it is about how you make the choices in the days ahead. As we look at the issues that have been reflected on here today — things like class size, when we’re talking about education; things like the opioid crisis; and all of the other issues that have been raised — it will be essential that we look at balance. The demands will be enormous. People will be looking to the government, as will the opposition members, for the kinds of choices that today they’ve stood in this House and talked about in a very passionate and very moving way, in many cases.

We should be clear. There have been significant investments in both education and health care over the last 16 years. We look forward, on this side of the House, to seeing those investments continue. I can assure the members opposite that we’re going to do the job that our constituents sent us here to do: to ask the tough questions about the how.

So to the member for Nanaimo: we agree. Government should continue to invest in important services, key programs in both health care and education, and we look forward to seeing the kinds of choices that they will now make as members of the new government.

R. Singh: It is my honour to stand in favour of this motion. While door-knocking, I heard a number of stories from the residents of Surrey. The stories resonated: the worry, anxiety and frustration with overcrowded classrooms, lack of resources for special needs children and long wait times at the Surrey Memorial Hospital emergency room.

Surrey is the fastest-growing city in British Columbia. More than 1,000 people move to Surrey every month. Unfortunately, services like education and health care have not kept pace with the growing population of Surrey.

Parents are frustrated with the overcrowded classrooms and lack of resources for their children. The special needs kids suffer even more. I remember talking to a mother whose child requires speech therapy and was on the waiting list for more than six months. A speech-language pathologist from the Surrey school district told me that it takes her at least six months to a year to see a student with speech issues. Many of her students won’t ever get direct service from her, only consultative service. A full-time language pathologist in the district is assigned to a school population of 2,400 students.

For 16 years, B.C. Liberals were busy fighting with the teachers. As a result, a whole generation of students have gone through the underfunded education system. I’m glad that our government is making education a priority and putting $681 million into the system, which will improve the services. As well, we will be hiring more than 3,000 new teachers.

[11:45 a.m.]

There have been so many stories about overcrowding at Surrey Memorial Hospital emergency room. Almost every household I talked to had a story about long waits in the emergency department. One such story was of Karen Sidhu. Earlier this year, Ms. Sidhu went to the Surrey Memorial Hospital emergency. She had to wait for six and a half hours before she was admitted. After admission, she was shocked that she was going to be stationed in a hallway with about 35 other patients. With strangers walking back and forth constantly, she never felt safe, and she felt that performing medical care in the hallway exposed her private, personal information to anyone within earshot.

The Surrey Memorial Hospital emergency department is one of the busiest in British Columbia. When in need of health care after hours, Surrey residents don’t have any option but to go to the emergency department. I’m very glad that our government is making health care in British Columbia, and especially in Surrey, a priority. They will be putting more investment in services like urgent care centres.

M. Bernier: Thanks to the member for Nanaimo for putting this motion forward. As was mentioned by my colleague from Prince George–Valemount, this is an important issue. It’s an important topic. One of the things I just want to say is that families expect us to be having this discussion. They expect us to be talking about how we make health care better, how we make education better, in the province of British Columbia, for them and for their families.

One of the things I was hoping to hear from government, though, today, when they put the motion forward, was about government making more investments and government working on education and health care. I haven’t heard one member from government actually stand up and say that that’s what they’re going to do. All the accusations have been on what hasn’t been done. In fact, some of the things I really want to talk about are what’s happened over the time while we were in government.

It’s quite appalling when I hear the member for Maple Ridge–Mission stand up and basically say that he received a better education than the students that we have right now. That is absolutely crazy, and it’s actually insulting to the teachers that we have in our system. In fact, he also stood up just a moment ago, when the member for Prince George–Valemount was speaking. Totally contradictory to his speech, he turned around and said it’s not about the money. Yet his whole speech was on underfunding, underfunding.

What we should be talking about are outcomes and results. We have the best health outcomes in Canada. We have some of the best educational outcomes across every sector globally. Our teachers are doing an amazing job in our schools. That’s why I’m proud of the time that I spent as Minister of Education, travelling around the province, seeing those investments, seeing the money that’s being spent on the students, which is resulting in great educational outcomes right across all our sectors.

When you look at our Aboriginal students, their completion rates have almost doubled in the last 16 years. Students with special needs have gone up 180 percent over the last 16 years. In fact, we invest almost $1 billion in helping students with special needs.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. The Chair will hear the standing member’s statement.

M. Bernier: You know, this is actually where it’s a fun time, where we get to actually talk to the members opposite. You should read the budget that they put forward. The budget that they’ve tabled around health care and around education almost mirrors….

Interjections.

M. Bernier: Oh, the members opposite say: “Wait for another day.”

Today is about what the people of British Columbia expect. They expect what this government is going to put forward. When you look at the fact that the Education budget has gone up almost double, and 60 percent…. Guess what. You’re right. It’s not about the money. It’s about what we do with those funds.

I think the members opposite also have to remember…. When they stand up and say, “We need to be investing more,” one thing they don’t talk about is where that money is going to be coming from. That is something that they have to put forward, because right now, there’s been no plan from the members opposite. In fact, they talk about all this investment they’re putting forward in health care and in education. I challenge the members opposite — any of them, just one of them — to stand up and say how much they’re investing that’s different than we already announced in February. They’re not doing that. Every announcement and every discussion they’re putting forward right now is just reiterating and echoing what we already put forward in February.

I’m hoping that maybe the last speaker will stand up and say that all these billions of dollars that are in the budget that they’re talking about as going into education, all these billions of dollars that are going into health care…. In fact, those were already announced by the B.C. Liberal government in February. If they’d like to stand up and contradict that, I’d look forward to hearing that, because I haven’t heard or seen one thing. Other than them talking about it, I haven’t seen them doing anything about it.

[11:50 a.m.]

The families of British Columbia expect it. That’s why we’d been making those investments, and more investments need to be made. They do need to be made. People expect that as well.

What we need to make sure, though, is that the members opposite…. If they’re going to be putting forward a motion saying that they have to increase operations in health care and funding in education, they should be standing in the House and actually saying what they’re going to do.

Name one hospital that was built when the NDP were in government. Name one school that was seismically upgraded when the NDP were in government. In fact, it was the B.C. Liberal government that seismically upgraded schools. We are the ones that put forward a plan. We are the ones that actually made sure that there were billions of dollars put forward. The NDP actually cut the seismic program. Why? In the 1990s, they said they did not have enough money in government to do it.

It wasn’t until we built a strong economy in the province of British Columbia that we actually had the funds to make those investments.

Again, I hope the members opposite can stand up and actually contradict anything I said.

N. Simons: Revisionist history written eight weeks after this government finally relinquished — their fingernails were white from clinging to power as long as they could — 16 years of neglect. It takes a while to reinvest in the programs and services that have seen a steady decline in their funding proportionate to the need of this province.

We know that we have work to do. We have a lot of work to do, and we have a plan to do it. We start by investing in education to make up for the years of fighting with teachers. We have $681 million that is going to go into schools to help the K-to-12 system, help the kids, help the teachers, help the families that have been in an underfunded system that the Supreme Court has reiterated to the government of the day.

Now it’s our responsibility, and it’s our desire to invest in education because it’s the right thing to do — not because the courts have ordered us to do so. I think that the investments that we’re going to be making in education and health are going to be the appropriate investments — investments that are needed. We’ve been waiting a long time for them.

It’s kind of interesting to hear members of the former government stand up and talk about: “Name this. Name one school, one building.” Sixteen years ago. There were a lot of things that happened before the previous government came into being. And 16 years later we still have to make up for the deficits they’ve created.

We have a social deficit in this province. We talk about the opioid crisis. The opioid crisis was not sudden, and it’s not new. It came out of a long list of government decisions that were made in the early 2000s. First of all, the getting rid of our ability to pay for the programs that we needed to pay for. What treatment beds have opened since the opioid crisis began? What access to treatment was available? What supports to families? What preventative services? We need to invest in this — because we need to protect families in this province from the scourge of addiction — and mental health and all the areas that have been neglected.

This government was part of an all-party committee. The previous government was a member of that all-party committee that called for a poverty reduction strategy, that called for a comprehensive plan to address poverty. They didn’t do it. It took us coming in to this side of the House to finally act on recommendations that were made by people in this province.

We have no lessons to learn from the previous government. We’re on a strong path to fill the gaps that have been created over the last 16 years. I’m proud to do that from this side of the House.

N. Simons moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: The House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:54 a.m.