Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

AGING WITH DIGNITY

A. Kang: Today I rise, with humility, to pay respect to all the seniors of our province. They play so many different but crucial roles that touch every aspect of our daily lives. They are our parents, our grandparents, our great-grandparents, our friends, our neighbours, our teachers and our mentors. Seniors have dedicated their whole lives, building our province and strengthening our province. There is no better way to show our gratitude than to help them age with dignity.

[10:05 a.m.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

I care deeply about the seniors in our community because while I was growing up, they taught me valuable life lessons, provided me with guidance and encouraged me to reach for the stars. They treated me as one of their own — their daughter, their family. Of course, they were not considered seniors 20, 30 or 40 years ago. Time is our most merciless and our most inevitable enemy. It is also the enemy that our society has to face together, as it slowly strips us of our health, both physical and mental.

Most of us here will become seniors. Well, some of us already are but definitely still young at heart and strong enough to help build a better B.C. But when the day comes when we can no longer be our own voice for our own concerns or stand up for ourselves, we all need someone to be our voice, to advocate on our behalf and to be the support that we can lean on. I want to be that support and that voice now.

When I served on Burnaby city council, I worked closely with senior citizens in our community. With many of our former colleagues, I was deeply involved in planning and creating accessible environments and community centres for people of all ages. I’m especially proud of our 55+ seniors centre at Bonsor, and the new seniors lounge in Edmonds Recreation Centre. Now I’m honoured to have the opportunity to work with my former colleagues, as well as my new colleagues here in this chamber, to serve the seniors across all of British Columbia.

Our province is at a crossroads. Not only are we facing tremendous population growth, but our population is also aging at an accelerated rate. According to Statistics Canada, the population growth in British Columbia between 2011 and 2016 — that means the five past years — is approximately 250,000, or 5.6 percent, higher than the national average of 5 percent.

Out of the four million people in British Columbia, approximately 700,000 people are above the age of 65, and the number continues to be on the rise. The Business Council of B.C. has released a report with a projection that the senior population will double by 2030. This will create immense pressure on our health care system and social programs, and we must ensure that our seniors will continue to receive good, quality services that support healthy aging.

I am proud of B.C.’s health care system, and I am confident that the Minister of Health will continue to improve our health care system. We also have incredible health care workers that we can count on. But we cannot take everything that we have for granted. Caring for our older citizens involves more than providing the best medical care. In a province such as ours and very diverse, our seniors have diverse needs. It is important to learn and understand what those needs are. This means providing our seniors with services that are culturally sensitive and making information accessible in different languages.

Providing culturally sensitive care to our seniors has become an important and emerging issue in our culturally diverse province. We recognize that many of our seniors may not be proficient in English, or many are unable to communicate on their own behalf.

This is also an issue that is dear to my heart. For example, we all know the importance that food plays in our daily lives. We all have our personal cravings of comfort food, especially when we are stressed out or emotionally stretched. To some, comfort food may mean clam chowder, ketchup-flavoured chips or dark chocolates, or they could just be my own. But to others, they may be kimchi, curry, rice, piri piri chicken or bannock.

Seniors have been telling me that they hope to be able to retire and live in a place where they can enjoy the food that they love. They also hope to live and celebrate each day with the food, music and social activities that they are familiar with. Bringing more awareness to culturally sensitive retirement life is an important aspect of retiring with dignity.

I’m committed to caring about all aspects of our seniors’ lives — economic situation, mental and physical well-being, as well as housing and transportation. That is why I have been speaking to the seniors advocate, senior ambassadors, families with seniors and community groups and visiting senior homes — communicating with and treating our seniors like my own family.

[10:10 a.m.]

I have senior-aged parents, and my grandfather is 93 years young. I want to make sure our parents, grandparents and great-grandparents receive high-quality health care services and retire with dignity. The seniors have done their part for the province, and now it’s time for the province to take care of them. I hope that you will tell your parents, your grandparents, seniors and mature adults around you that they can count on me to be their voice in this House.

R. Sultan: Aging with dignity. I don’t know why they pick on me for this topic, but I’ll do my best.

When my father was born, the average age at death in America was only 34 years. Almost 140 years later, in B.C., the average age at death has doubled, to 75. The question is: will it double again over the next 140 years?

Well, I wouldn’t rule it out. Thanks to our clean environment; healthier living; technology from the likes of Genome B.C., which visited us a few days ago; and as the member for Burnaby–Deer Lake points out, a superb health system; and yes, more emphasis on walking, simply walking, B.C. newborns today will routinely live to 85.

In international comparisons, only Switzerland and Japan have a higher longevity than babies born in British Columbia today. Longevity is galloping forward, but the question is: can we gallop with dignity? To do so, I believe the world of work must play a larger role, both healthwise and money-wise.

Money-wise, the Globe and Mail a couple of days ago had a story on household finances headlined that the new retirement age is 70 and that, frankly, we should dismiss those mutual fund ads touting “Freedom 55.” Well, folks, having been in the business myself, lots of luck with that one.

Healthwise, idleness is the curse of old age. As Minister of State for Seniors a number of years ago, I toured about 100 seniors care facilities, mostly paid for by the government. Today we look after about 4 percent of B.C. seniors in publicly subsidized facilities. These are seniors no longer able to look after themselves — and even some who are not seniors. Staring at the same four walls day after day after day is not healthy.

The client base has evolved. Government-supported care homes are no longer places where seniors can park their cars in the garage underground and flit down to the mall from time to time for a shopping spree. The facilities today are increasingly difficult to distinguish from hospitals for the extremely frail and the demented.

If this represents the future for 4 percent of us, what about the rest? Another 1 percent or so will receive high-end care at strictly private-pay institutions, such as Amica and Revera. Well, that still leaves 95 percent of us.

For them, the seniors strategy, which I was briefly involved with in implementing years ago comes into play: “Better at home”. As the slogan implies, most seniors as they age will in fact be looked after where they live, often living alone and often helped by families and friends, supplemented by respite centres from time to time, such as those created by my friend Inge Schamborzki, who heads the Health and Home Care Society.

If government has a role, and it must — and it’s a big one — it is to help organize and subsidize home care. These are the avenues by which we shall age with dignity. Retirement policies must adjust accordingly. Employment contracts forcing retirement at age 65 are, as I understand it, already essentially illegal in B.C.

Tax measures which encourage retirement savings must be expanded. Costly defined-benefit pension plans will be forced to face up to their actuarial and investment return realities.

[10:15 a.m.]

It will be harder and harder to accept the injustice in a society embracing two worlds simultaneously: one of taxpayer-assured, fully funded financial security and another one of seniors living on food banks and cat food. British Columbia, get ready for the super seniors demanding full and fair dignity of treatment, for they are visible in large numbers on the not-distant horizon.

A. Kang: Thank you to the member for West Vancouver–Capilano for your response. I can see that we both have similar passions for this topic.

I do not take my responsibility lightly. I have been researching and learning from community partners and seniors about their concerns and how we can do better. I have been visiting senior homes and speaking to families and care providers about what we can do for our seniors here in British Columbia.

We all play an important role in making sure that our seniors age with dignity. There are some things that we can learn from other countries around the world and some things that we can learn from each other. Our civic gathering places are a great place of cultural exchanges, and so are our senior centres. Our lives are further enriched because of our beautiful multicultural diversity here in B.C.

We can challenge the negative stereotypes about aging. We must remind ourselves that many of today’s seniors have played a key role in shaping our province and have fought for many of our rights that we enjoy today. Many remain active in the community and politically, regardless of physical abilities. Our seniors continue to make a difference.

There are also small things we can do to prepare ourselves for aging. We can make plans for ourselves about where and how we want to live as we grow older. We can also think about what we might need in our life in case we need daily support, and identify people who we trust, who will honour our health care wishes if we cannot make decisions for ourselves. It is also helpful to keep a list of important contacts, including professionals, family members, friends and loved ones, in an accessible place.

Our doctors, health care professionals and our loved ones are here for us to discuss the kind of care we want for ourselves. We can also reach out to our local senior and community centres to learn about the services they offer. Public libraries are also great places to visit for local community resources.

Share the information with friends, neighbours and family members so they know that they are not alone. If you have older neighbours who live alone, check in on them from time to time and ask them if they are getting the support and services that they need to live well in the community.

Small, kind gestures like this can make a big, meaningful impact. It is also a reflection of our values, because in British Columbia, we believe in taking care of each other. We believe in the unity of our community. Together we can make a difference, and together we can make sure that our seniors age with dignity.

REGISTERED DISABILITY SAVINGS PLAN

S. Cadieux: On December 1, 2008, the late Jim Flaherty, the then Minister of Finance for the federal government, did a remarkable thing — a forward-thinking, first-in-the-world thing. He responded to the advocacy originating from South Surrey by Al Etmanski and the Planned Lifetime Advocacy Network folks, and he introduced the registered disability savings plan, or RDSP. The first of its kind in the world, this new tax-deferred savings vehicle was designed specifically to assist people with disabilities and their families for planning for the long term for financial security.

I won’t need to tell members of this House about the reality that people with disabilities have higher rates of poverty and unemployment than their temporarily able-bodied counterparts. I hope I don’t also need to educate this House on the reality that living with a disability can add significant costs and expenses not faced by those who don’t have a disability.

While there are many social programs designed and provided by governments to assist, some of those programs are only available to individuals whose sole source of income is government benefits. Another less-known reality is that there are far more people with disabilities that are not dependent on — or even eligible for — government benefits than those who are.

That’s why the RDSP vehicle is so important. An RDSP allows you to save money for the future without paying tax on the earnings. The federal government will contribute as much as $90,000 to an individual’s account. It’s estimated that 500,000 people across Canada are eligible for the benefit.

[10:20 a.m.]

The future impacts of the RDSP go well beyond a simple planning tool. They provide a path for security, for choice — for individual choice. So far, since first becoming available in 2008, over 100,000 RDSPs have been opened. I’d like to read for you the Plan Institute’s top-ten list, the top ten reasons why people with disabilities or their carers should open an RDSP.

(1) You choose where to invest your money. All of the major Canadian banks are offering RDSPs.

(2) The government contributes generously. For every dollar saved, they will match up to $3.

(3) If you have a low income and can’t invest yourself, the government will still save for you.

(4) An RDSP will not affect your disability benefits.

(5) It’s an easy way to save for big items like mortgage down payments, home renovations or cars.

(6) There are no restrictions. You can spend the money on anything you choose.

(7) When you close an RDSP, your contributions and investments gained are yours.

(8) With savings tucked away, the future becomes yours to imagine.

(9) You become more powerful economically. Decision-makers need to take you more seriously.

(10) The whole world is watching. What happens here in Canada may determine the future of people with disabilities in other countries.

As of December 2015, the total value of RDSPs in B.C. is over $460 million. British Columbians have personally contributed $163 million to their RSDPs, leveraging an additional $297 million in federal grants and bonds. I know, with talking with financial advisers and having financial planning education myself, there’s no better deal out there. People have nothing to lose and so very, very much to gain.

In 2015, British Columbians held 18 percent of all RDSPs in Canada, yet made up only 14 percent of eligible Canadians. Currently 12 percent of all people with disabilities under 50, or 22,500 people, in B.C. have an RDSP, higher than in any other province, which is great. But another 60,000 people in this age group could benefit, and they should.

Like most financial products, the rules are complicated, but there are plenty of experts available to help. It doesn’t need to be overwhelming. People should not be afraid to ask for help. There is too much to gain, especially if you have a low or modest income.

As an example, also from the Plan RDSP website, if an individual with an annual net income of $26,000 contributes $900 per year, they will earn $2,300 in federal RDSP grants and another $1,000 in a bond every year. So over your lifetime, you could receive $250,966 from your RDSP by contributing $18,000 in contributions, garnering $20,000 in federal bonds, $46,000 in federal grants and $166,000 in earned interest at 3 percent a year.

Understanding that even coming up with an initial contribution could be a challenge for some people, there are grants available through the endowment 150, which offers eligible people with disabilities a one-time savings grant of $150 to help get their RDSP, or registered disability savings plan, started and growing.

There’s no better time than now. October is RDSP Awareness Month. The government of British Columbia has been a leader across the country in supporting the efforts of the advocates and the federal government in ensuring that British Columbians were first and most apt to take up this challenge. B.C. was first to exempt the income and earnings from an RDSP from affecting disability benefits, and on so many fronts, B.C. has been leading the country when it comes to providing supports to people with disabilities and looking to find ways to ensure that people with disabilities can claim their economic position, as well, in our society.

I think it’s tremendous. There’s a tremendous amount of work that has gone on. The RDSP action group, made up of advocates and groups that support people with disabilities, is doing a tremendous job making sure that British Columbians with disabilities stay at the forefront of this program so that B.C. continues to have the biggest uptake of RDSPs in the country. But there are so many people that still haven’t taken advantage of this vehicle and should, because they only have everything to gain.

[10:25 a.m.]

A. Weaver: Thank you to the member opposite for her compelling narrative about the importance of the registered disability savings plan.

Unlike some other provinces, the province of British Columbia does not actually protect RDSPs from creditors. It’s something that I think we could expand upon — the leadership that British Columbia has shown. Twice over the last couple of years, I brought in a bill to ensure that RDSPs, like RESPs and RRSPs and RIFs, are protected from creditors. It’s the case where, through no fault of their own, somebody who is relying upon an RDSP, perhaps once their parents pass away, can have that taken from them because it can be accessed by creditors.

Now, the reason why that occurs is nothing more than for historical reasons. The RDSP is a relatively new tool. It was predated before that by the RESP and the RRSP. While we have no problem in British Columbia and Canada, that’s why protecting RRSPs and RESPs in some provinces — certainly RRSPs and RIFs…. The RSDP is not protected. There’s a national organization, whose name slips me at this moment, who has been pushing for this provincewide. Some jurisdictions, like Alberta, are taking a proactive response here.

I completely agree with the member opposite about the importance of RDSPs, allowing people to put aside some resources in case they need to be accessed sometime in the future. Fundamentally, those resources should be used for the purposes that they’re used, and they should not be used in terms of creditors potentially having access to them.

The analogy with RESPs is direct. A child may have an RESP. Through no fault of their own, they might get into financial difficulty. In B.C., RESPs are not protected either. What can happen, then, is creditors can go after those designed specifically for the education of a child down the road. In the case of the disability plan, it’s analogous.

As we move forward, in light of the presence of the new government here, I hope that we can actually work across party lines to build the support for RDSPs that we’ve just heard, in terms of why they’re so important, to build support from all parties to bring credit protection for those in British Columbia blessed to have an RDSP so that they are protected not only for today but also for tomorrow. They’re there for a specific reason.

With that, I thank the member opposite for her comments. I agree wholeheartedly with her comments, and I hope that we can take that to the next level and protect RDSPs for present and future and generations.

S. Cadieux: Thank you to the member for Oak Bay–Gordon Head for his comments. There are probably, I would say, few things that we have been in agreement on in recent days. Yet, like the member’s desire to see us work towards basic income pilots, which I agree with him on, I certainly agree with him on the need to look to expand creditor protection for RDSPs. These are, in my mind, no-brainers as we look to modernize and ensure that all of our citizens engage fully in their economic citizenship as well as their social citizenship.

The reality is that the RDSP is such a significant tool for long-term financial security. Someone saving $1,500 a year over 30 years could find their RDSP worth nearly half a million dollars. An RDSP allows you to save money for the future without paying tax on the earnings, and I can think of no other program where the federal government will contribute as much as $90,000 to an individual’s account.

It’s true for many people with disabilities who rely on government benefits that saving even a small amount can be too challenging, but it doesn’t mean that you can’t have an RDSP and benefit from the tax-free savings vehicle and the government’s contributions and the compounding interest. And compounding interest is just a beautiful thing.

[10:30 a.m.]

In fact, the reality is that this vehicle is extra beneficial, in that anyone can contribute to an individual’s RDSP. Family, friends, neighbours, charities, foundations and organizations can all contribute dollars to an individual’s RDSP. The federal government encourages these contributions by matching each dollar contributed with up to $3, depending on the RDSP owner’s annual income.

This is an opportunity for us, as elected members, to use the platforms provided to us to amplify the message, to use our voices and our collective non-partisan voices to do our best to ensure that people with disabilities in our communities are aware of the RDSP and, for those who need it, that they’re aware of the grants available through endowment 150.

In case there’s any doubt from members in this House on who is eligible for an RDSP, it’s people who are eligible for the disability tax credit federally, who are under the age of 60 and who are Canadian residents with a social insurance number. So it’s relatively easy for a person with a disability to qualify.

If people have any questions at all, in October 2014, the provincial government created the RDSP action group. Their goal is to maintain B.C.’s position as the province with the highest per-capita uptake of RDSPs. They have a toll-free hotline and step-by-step guides to help people plan and even a dedicated website.

This will truly be a step forward in the journey to full inclusion for financial security for people with disabilities. It’s now up to people with disabilities and their allies to take the fullest advantage.

GLOBAL WARMING

R. Glumac: Global warming and climate change. There is no issue that will affect more people on this planet in our lifetimes. We spend a lot of time talking in the House. We talk about the bills that we’re bringing forward. We talk about the challenges that we face, but we don’t spend enough time here in the House putting our thoughts and our words to the most important problem that humanity faces.

We know about climate change, but we can’t see it until we see the disasters — the wildfires that burn out of control, the storms and the floods that destroy lives and communities. These disasters are happening with increased frequency but, apparently, not frequently enough for us to collectively and globally put forward the resources that are needed to deal with this problem.

So today I’m going to take us all on a little journey of what our future looks like here in B.C. according to the latest projections, if we don’t take action. The year is 2050. The temperature outside is warm. In fact, it’s warm almost every day. More than half of the days of the year, the temperature reaches 18 degrees Celsius. Today that happens 49 days of the year on average. The air conditioner is probably on, and the average energy needed to cool your home is six times greater than it was in 2017.

If it’s a nice day, you can go to the beach, but the beach might not be there — eroded away by rising oceans or more frequent storms. If you look up to the mountains, you may not see any snow. The average snowpack in the summer will be 11 centimetres, compared to 73 centimetres today. This, of course, will mean less water for our rivers and streams.

Our wild salmon may find that when they return to the rivers, the rivers are too low and too warm, making it harder and harder to sustain salmon populations with each passing year. And the low flow in our rivers and streams means less water replenishing our reservoirs in the spring and the summer — less drinking water and less ability for the dams to store energy.

Yet in the fall, there’s 30 percent more rain than we see today. And when it rains, it rains a lot harder. The wettest days can be 60 percent more wet, which can mean a lot more flooding. In order to protect against the flooding, we’ll need to have spent at least $10 billion to upgrade the dikes in Metro Vancouver alone — a heavy cost to the taxpayer but a fraction of what it would cost if we had a major flood.

[10:35 a.m.]

Today we have rare flood events, one-in-500-year events, but these events will happen much more frequently in 2050, with more probability. If it does occur, it could cause $20 billion worth of damages to homes, businesses, public infrastructure and interruption of cargo shipments. Although there’s more rain in the fall, there’s less in the summer — 20 percent less than today — and the dry spells will be 20 percent longer. This will make things harder, in many ways, for B.C. farmers. Although the growing season is longer, more droughts will mean lower crop yields, and warmer winters mean more pests will survive. Of course, there are going to be more wildfires.

As you know, this year the provincial government spent more than $500 million combating wildfires that burned 1.2 million hectares of land. Insured damages topped $127 million, and 50,000 people were forced out of their homes.

In 2050, the fires will be bigger. They’ll be more expensive to fight, and the damages will be more costly. Insurance costs have been based on historic patterns. All of this is going to be thrown on its head. Increasing severity of extreme events will increase insurance costs to homeowners, business owners, farmers and many others. Insurable damages across the country last year for wildfires, floods and severe weather reached almost $5 billion. This cost will keep rising exponentially.

Back in the ’70s, the federal government spent $40 million on disaster relief. Recent numbers hit $1.4 billion. Just imagine what the costs will be in 2050 if we don’t act today.

This is just a little snapshot of what life will be like in B.C. in 2050, and life in many other places in the world will be much worse. We have to act. All of us — in every part of the world, in every level of government, in every business from small to large — need to take action. We can’t wait any longer.

J. Johal: It’s an honour today to speak about global climate change. There are many important issues discussed and debated in this great House, but in a global context, climate change truly is the greatest challenge of the century.

As the member across had mentioned, one only has to look back to this summer and see the devastating impacts of the wildfires or watch and read about the tropical storms and their impacts on the United States. It is fair to say there is a growing consensus that climate change is a clear and present danger to humanity.

The numbers are quite striking. In the northern hemisphere, the last 30 years have been the warmest since Anglo-Saxon times. Atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases are at levels not seen in 800,000 years, and the rate of sea level rise is quicker now than at any time over the last two millennia. Since the 1980s, the number of registered weather-related loss events has tripled, and inflation-adjusted insurance losses from these events have increased from an annual average of around $10 billion in the 1980s to around $50 billion over the past decade.

The evidence is quite clear: human activity and consumption are most likely the main drivers of global climate change. A human-induced warming trend of two-tenths of a degree per decade has continued since the 1970s. The evidence is clear, so we must play our part and be a part of the solution.

I’m proud British Columbia is one of the few jurisdictions, globally, that introduced a carbon tax many years ago. We’re also a province, thanks to the leadership of W.A.C. Bennett, that built a network of hydroelectric dams that provide clean energy to our vast province. It’s bold thinking that required leaders to look beyond traditional horizons. It meant looking beyond a business cycle or even a political cycle.

Fighting climate change means British Columbia has to play its part, but we must also remind ourselves, it has to done in the context of other global players and the impact it will have on B.C. families.

Removing the revenue neutrality for the carbon tax is a move that we believe will harm B.C. business and consumers. The previous system saw our carbon tax revenue returned to business and individuals to reduce their tax burdens. This meant that carbon was being taxed, not economic growth. Our revenue-neutral carbon tax required any increase to be offset by a reduction in personal and business taxes. It was not a tax grab.

[10:40 a.m.]

This increase will take an estimated $500 million out of the pockets of taxpayers over the next three years, which hardly makes life more affordable. We must understand the fight against climate change has to be seen within a global context. B.C. taxpayers and businesses, being one of the few jurisdictions in the world that pay a carbon tax, cannot shoulder the financial responsibility alone.

When we discuss energy transition, we must take a few things into consideration beyond our borders as well. First, the world population will grow. There are currently over seven billion people on the planet, and the UN expects that number to exceed 11 billion by the end of the century. Secondly, all those people will seek to improve their living standard. That could mean a first car, or it could mean a first lightbulb. All of it will involve the consumption of energy.

When you combine these two factors, it makes it likely that the transition will take place against the backdrop of an energy system that is doubling in size. That leads to the third founding fact. The world is going to have to meet much more demand while significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

The challenge would be complicated enough if only those three factors were at play. But there is more to it. The population of Asia, for example, is predicted to rise 900 million by 2050, with its energy demand increased by around half.

Now, when you dig into the numbers a little deeper — the UN projections, if you look though them — another thing that hits you quickly is that 3.2 billion of the 3.8 billion extra people we can expect on this planet by the end of the century will be in Africa, with the vast majority in sub-Saharan Africa. That has big implications for the energy system and for emissions too.

None of that lets Canada and the developed world off the hook over climate change. What happens in B.C. is important. But what happens in China and India, home to nearly 40 percent of humanity, is at least as important. These fundamental global facts mean that simple solutions and slogans are not good enough.

There is no doubt wind and solar are being added to the world’s energy system. Growth of renewable energy has been explosive, and that is great news for humanity. We must remind ourselves that “modern renewables…are growing from a tiny base and are often less dependable than dirtier power generators that do not rely on the weather.” Wind and solar power accounted for just “4.4 percent of global electricity in 2015, and big battery systems can only store enough power to satisfy a few seconds of global electricity demand,” says the International Energy Agency. Electric vehicles last year were just 0.9 percent of all vehicles sold.

There are, however, many bright spots globally when it comes it comes to the emerging energy transition.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Johal: Wrap up?

Deputy Speaker: Take a seat.

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you. We understand that.

R. Glumac: Climate change will result in water shortages; food shortages; severe droughts; acidification of our oceans; melting of our polar ice caps; increased frequency of severe storms, flooding and wildfires; the collapse of long-stable ecosystems; and massive migrations of people. So what are we going to do about it?

The previous government convened a team of experts in 2015 to answer that question and came up with 32 recommendations, which established greenhouse gas reduction targets and expansion of B.C.’s carbon tax and numerous recommendations for industry, transportation, buildings and communities. But the recommendations were not followed. Instead, the recommendations were rewritten, in Calgary, with representatives from the oil and gas industry.

Seven of the original members of the climate leadership team wrote a letter expressing concern over the lack of action. They wrote:

“B.C. is in no position to delay or scale back its efforts. The rest of Canada and the rest of the world have been taking action since B.C.’s initial climate plan in 2008, and B.C.’s increasing carbon pollution is taking us in the wrong direction.

“The climate leadership team recommendations implemented in their entirety provide the blueprint for a B.C. climate plan to put the province back on track for the 2050 and interim 2030 targets. Anything less is not climate leadership.”

[10:45 a.m.]

Last week this government followed through on its promise to renew the climate leadership team within the first 100 days of being in government and created the Climate Solutions and Clean Growth Advisory Council, with a mandate to provide advice on implementing the 32 recommendations of the previous climate leadership team and further advise government on how to do this while growing a sustainable economy and creating jobs.

Climate action and job creation go together, hand in hand. B.C. is poised to be a leader in climate action once again. And maybe, in 2050, things will be just a little bit cooler.

SMALL BUSINESS AND RURAL RECOVERY

C. Oakes: It is an honour for me to talk today about small business recovery.

As many British Columbians are all too familiar, this summer we experienced the worst ever wildfire in our province’s history. In addition, many of these areas also experienced floods and slides. People in my riding of Cariboo North and the neighbouring ridings of Cariboo-Chilcotin and Fraser-Nicola have been hit the hardest. Some people were wiped out completely. Many more lost their homes and their livelihoods. The trauma has inflicted long-lasting economic damage, especially to small businesses.

In many instances, we’re talking about those who rely on the summer for the lion’s share of their annual revenues. This is especially critical for our tourism sector, where fear and misrepresentations harmed the tourism sector right across this province. Even those areas that were not affected in the fire zone experienced challenges. An early estimation of cost on the tourism sector is $23 million in the first five weeks. I will go into a little bit more detail later.

In order to assess the needs in Cariboo North, I held a listening forum at the Quesnel seniors centre to learn what people need most. My purpose was to meet with people that work in all of the vital sectors like agriculture, forestry, mining, tourism, retail and small business in general. In follow up, I know that my colleagues from these areas, MLAs, and folks from our areas have had the opportunity to speak with many others.

I think it’s best for me to share, perhaps, some of the stories that we have heard from our small business sectors to help us understand the steps that we need to take in order to support these small businesses. The first story is from a rafting company.

“2017 was a year beyond what anyone could have imagined, starting off with an amazing June and with more multi-day bookings throughout the summer than we have ever had. We were confidently looking forward to our best season yet. Then a few things out of our control happened, starting off with the washout on Highway 20, which completely cut off our access to the Chilcotin River and caused many cancellations, as well as much hard work on the backs of the tourism sector, the Cariboo-Chilcotin Coast Tourism Association, local and provincial governments to get the message out that we were still open for business. We just had to shift our operations temporarily.”

Within days of Highway 20 reopening, the wildfires began. The fire weather conditions meant that the fires grew quickly and with extreme intensity to a large size. Again, the cancellations poured in. Within a few days, it was apparent that the weather wasn’t going to change soon enough to allow these fires to be manageable.

Between the highway closures, both Highway 97 and 20, and evacuations of the communities that approximately 60 to 70 percent of their clients are from, their business was severely impacted — 70 to 75 percent of revenue lost and significant business impact.

This, of course, has trickle-down effects due to approximately $70,000 to $80,000 per year that their business spends regularly at other local businesses. Uninsurable loss, access cut off, as well as tenured areas damaged by the fire. These areas of Crown land are unable to be insured.

[10:50 a.m.]

Businesses themselves that were not evacuated were not able to go through…. They were also uninsurable. These were completely out of these business’s control. Long tenure timelines, as well, for these businesses — over one year for an amendment to be processed, due to heavy workloads of the land office — and tenured areas severely damaged.

Another business, Stewart Fraser, a local guide and outfitter who had significant loss on their property, as well, due to the wildfires. Trappers who had had 60 to 70 percent of their tenure affected by the wildfires. A local farmer who contacted us because he has a private power pole but still is without electricity, because in order for hydro to go in, the danger trees must be removed. The costs of removing these dangerous trees often are falling on the private small business.

These are the effects that small businesses are currently dealing with in our riding and in ridings around the region. They’re concerns that are important that we find an opportunity to address. I share these personal stories because it reminds us that the economic support that we require in the region needs to be developed with an individual in mind. It is important that the types of programs that are developed from the ground up need to address the very significant day-to-day operations of our small business.

An initial survey estimates that $23 million in lost business occurred in the first five weeks after the fires. Roofed accommodations, hotels, motels, bed-and-breakfasts, campgrounds, RV parks, dining and food service businesses, attractions, tours, festivals and events throughout the region were all affected. These numbers, cautiously, are just the first ones in.

As we move forward, we need to make sure that as we work with the communities…. We need programs like loan support, diversification tools, procurement support for small business, capacity support for organizations that work on the ground — like Community Futures, which does business support — financing support, training, access to employees. There is other work to be done, like manuals for fire evacuation, evacuation for agricultural areas, funding for people who’ll have to diversify, compensation for individuals without insurance and who lost properties and structures. There’s so much more to do.

J. Rice: Thank you to the member for Cariboo North for relaying the experiences of her constituents. She shared two stories, but in fact, there are many more stories of people impacted all across the province. I think she’s been a great advocate for her community and for small businesses in the Interior. I’d also like to acknowledge the members for Cariboo-Chilcotin and Fraser-Nicola. They have been truly representing their constituents’ voices and explaining the often dire situation that people impacted by wildfires have faced this season.

As you know, it’s been an extraordinary fire season. We’ve seen more evacuees. We’ve had the longest state of emergency in provincial history. We had over 65,000 people displaced by wildfire alone, compared to the 2003 wildfire season, where we had 45,000 people displaced. Thousands more — over 2,000, 2,500 people — were displaced due to flooding earlier in the season.

It’s been an extraordinary season in its length, in its intensity and widespread impacts compared to 2003. In 2003, for example, we lost about 260,000 hectares, while this year alone, this summer, we lost 1.2 million hectares to fire. The last provincial state of emergency lasted 43 days or about six weeks. This year, starting on July 7, we had a state of emergency for over 70 days. It was ten weeks long. In April, emergency management B.C. paid out over $3 million to emergency social services, to the voucher program. That’s only the numbers till April.

[10:55 a.m.]

Normally, the processing of these forms is handled by one employee. This year alone we had to get in at least 16 and then further employees to manage just the input from this wildfire season.

As a province, we are grateful for all the contractors and the local businesses and the important job that they had to play in this wildfire season. It’s estimated that about 800 contractors provided services during the wildfires.

I just want to acknowledge that we have a plan for rural development in the longer term. We’ve put in resources now in the short term. We’ve been gathering the input from local governments and from businesses and from individuals, and we are working now on a longer-term strategy.

We’ve actually seen a decline in jobs in small communities since 2008. In growth, last year alone we saw jobs growing in Vancouver, Lower Mainland and Victoria. But we’ve seen a decline in rural areas. Rural areas are already facing the impacts, and then to be compounded with this year’s wildfire season, it is a huge challenge. The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources now has the words “rural development” in its name, and it’s there for a reason. The plan is to have a long-term plan.

The member talked about her listening forum in Quesnel, and I hope that she takes the feedback that she’s had and brings that back into the broader provincial consultations that are just starting now with EMBC and with the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources so that we can be better prepared for next year’s fire season.

The member before her spoke about global warming and climate change. The wildfires are an inevitability that we must cope with, adapt for and mitigate to the best of our abilities. Her feedback, the feedback that she’s gathering, is tantamount to the process, and I really hope that she contributes the feedback.

C. Oakes: I want to thank the member opposite for her comments today and for her support. We’ve had a number of conversations, and I appreciate that.

I do want to talk a little bit about the plan for rural development and the long-term strategy, as well as the comments around the broader consultation. It is my hope that the members in opposition have the ability to be a part of the consultation. As it stands right now, it’s led by local communities and local government agencies. The MLAs, to this point, have not had the ability to participate, and I think our offices have very valuable input, from what we are hearing from our constituents.

I also raise the small business recovery, because the first thing I know is that our small business community is incredibly resilient. I know they that will be strong leaders as we look to economic recovery in our region.

The challenge that we face, as we’ve gone through the estimates in, now, a variety, whether it was Agriculture; Forests, Lands, Natural Resources, rural economic development…. We’ve gone through Finance. We’ve gone through all of the estimates, and we’ve asked, specifically, the dollar amount, just how much is actually in place right now for this rural economic development plan.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Currently the task at hand is looking at next year’s budget cycle. We need to find other opportunities, other programs that currently exist within government to help support small business recovery now. We need to look at ways where we have programs, where we can diversify those programs to allow small business to have access into them.

Many of the programs we have, while local governments can apply for funds, while organizations can apply for funds, while First Nations can apply for funds — the current gap that we have in the framework for small business support is that there is no framework currently in existence with the government to look at how small business can help access funds.

For example, we have about 150 placer miners in our region who can only work for about five months of the year, due to weather conditions and freshets. Most placer miners lost their entire season, yet they still have bills to pay. They depend on the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources to facilitate permits in their operations. Yet, of course, ministry staff had to be pulled away, understandably, from the regular duties due to the wildfires. This will issue in the delaying of issuing permits.

[11:00 a.m.]

Permits are critical for most of the small businesses that exist in our sector. We heard, through estimates of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources, that there will be no additional staff to support this. This is going to have significant impact on a variety of small businesses in our sector.

We talked about trappers. Some of the other areas…. For example, Horsting’s Farm normally has 400 to 500 visits a day. This year they saw ten to 15 cars.

Hon. Speaker, much more work to be done, much more work to support our small businesses. They are a resilient bunch. We just require a little support for our small businesses.

Hon. M. Mungall: I call Motion 11, which is on the orders of the day.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 11 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 11 — MONEY LAUNDERING
IN CASINOS

R. Singh: It is my honour to move:

[Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly urge the government to take seriously the allegations of money laundering in casinos.]

Since the release of an MNP report by the Attorney General last month, we have seen that the previous Liberal government was not taking the issue of money laundering seriously and was allowing warning after warning to go unheeded. The early warning was made in 2009 in an RCMP report on money laundering, which was titled Extent and Scope of Illegal Gaming in British Columbia and was prepared for the integrated illegal gaming enforcement team, IIGET for short.

“A section of the report says that Canadian casinos are at high risk for money laundering, and ‘the integrity of gaming in B.C. could also be impacted by the presence of influence of organized crime figures at B.C. gaming facilities.’

“The 2009 threat report said known gangsters were gambling in B.C. casinos and that Asian organized crime groups, Italian crime groups and Hell’s Angels operate illegal casinos in B.C. Some of these underground operations are linked to crimes, including prostitution, extortion, loansharking and kidnapping.

“The 2009 report made a number of recommendations, including ‘that IIGET be the central repository for all gaming-related criminal information.’

“The report also said that IIGET should take a leadership role to combat organized crime in gambling, similar to the role played by the Ontario Provincial Police’s organized gambling unit.

“In April 2009, then B.C. gaming minister Rich Coleman,” now member for Langley East….

Deputy Speaker: Member, only refer to members by their constituency names.

R. Singh: Okay. The member for Langley East “shut IIGET down” right after the team had issued such an important warning about the threat of organized crime. Following the disbanding of IIGET in 2009, the retired commander of the force, Fred Pinnock, went public with the concerns over the decision and the leadership within the RCMP and government. Over the following years, Pinnock’s warnings were proven time and time again.

In 2010, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada fined BCLC $650,000 for a persistent chronic failure to comply with the law regarding the requirements to report large money transactions. In 2014, it was reported that, over three months, $27 million worth of suspicious cash transactions went through two Lower Mainland casinos.

The B.C. government has committed to get to the bottom of this matter, and the Attorney General has appointed an independent expert to conduct a review of British Columbia’s anti-money-laundering policies and practices in gambling.

[11:05 a.m.]

A. Wilkinson: This, of course, is a very important issue for all of us to be aware of because it affects the widespread role in our society of both gaming, which has become the norm, and also the ability or the possibility for money laundering to occur in our society, which is something that we have to be very vigilant about.

Most of us will remember that gaming was illegal in this country until about 1976. Some of us are old enough to remember people celebrating winning the Irish sweepstakes because they’d bought a lottery ticket from Ireland. In 1976, to pay for the Olympics, the phenomenon of lotteries was legalized across Canada. Subsequently, people realized that we were letting an awful lot of revenue travel to Las Vegas and Reno rather than being invested here in Canada. As gaming developed over those decades, then gaming became a structured part of our society.

Of course, here in British Columbia, it is very tightly regulated, and it is an industry that has grown up to be, really, part of the fabric of our society. We’re glad, of course, that people enjoy gaming and spend their money here rather than in the United States. That whole business of the free bus service down to the Tulalip Casino seems to have disappeared because we did a better job of running the industry here than they did in Washington state.

As we have watched the emergence of this industry, there’s obviously concern about this possibility of money laundering. These stories in the media are largely based on work that’s been done by the authorities in the past, and we, of course, have to have faith in the ability of our authorities to address these questions.

It’s dealt with by national bodies such as FINTRAC, and we’ll come back to the jurisdiction of this, which is largely federal. It’s done by local law enforcement agencies, which are largely administered by the RCMP, and it’s done by the gaming policy and enforcement branch here in the government of British Columbia.

The history of this has evolved. In 2009, the integrated illegal gaming enforcement team was actually disbanded on the advice of a study that was done that found it was an inefficient allocation of resources. It was disbanded by the agreement of the board of directors, which included a number of chiefs of police and representatives from the provincial police services branch.

These things have to evolve. They cannot remain static. The perpetrators who are trying to engage in money laundering continue to evolve around us, and we have to catch up with their activities.

There has been ongoing investigation related to these issues. Of course, the release of information to the public could have and may have jeopardized investigations, which none of us want to see happen. It’s very important these investigations be allowed to unfold in the normal fashion, without political interference. So our role in this is, of course, as the opposition, to make sure that the government is taking this matter seriously and that these investigations are allowed to proceed without undue influence.

Now, the company involved, Great Canadian Gaming, which is the subject of the media reports, has been around since 1982 and has about 6,000 employees across Canada. They, of course, are cooperating in any investigation because it’s in their interest to maintain their credibility both as an entertainment industry and also with the authorities in our country so that they can continue to operate without undue hindrance. At the same time, they have a great interest in catching the perpetrators. They, of course, do not want to be involved in any kind of crime, whether it’s organized crime or not.

The anti-money-laundering protocols are set out in federal legislation. They are actually a result of the federal Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, which is administered federally. A significant part of that regime is FINTRAC, which is also federally regulated. Those of us who have been in legal practice have abundant experience with FINTRAC and the role it plays in monitoring the flow of significant amounts of money both in and out of Canada and within Canada in certain circumstances.

The compliance of FINTRAC is a federal phenomenon. When issues arise, whether in the gaming industry or otherwise, they have to be pursued by the appropriate level of authorities. That, in general, in this country, is the RCMP. They take on this role in conjunction with the gaming industry itself.

River Rock is subject to about 25 compliance reviews per year by the B.C. Lottery Corporation gaming compliance officers. FINTRAC, of course, has its own audit regime. What the gaming industry does is feed them information. They’re required to collect and retain information and to feed it to the authorities, and the authorities have to process it and decide what to do in terms of pursuing investigations and, potentially, prosecutions.

The gaming industry itself is hardly in the business to prosecute anybody. That’s up to the authorities. What they do is provide data and evidence to the authorities, who have to process it in a sensible way so that the appropriate kind of investigation is conducted and, where appropriate, charges are laid. Now, those transactions pile up in terms of the data set and the evidence that’s provided to the B.C. Lottery Corporation. Then it provides an independent assessment of whether to proceed with any further investigation or any prosecution.

[11:10 a.m.]

The Attorney General recently released a report commissioned by the gaming policy and enforcement branch that is now two years old. Since that time, there has been significant activity in terms of pursuing the issue, collecting evidence and pursuing the possibility of prosecutions.

B. D’Eith: I’m going to talk a little bit about public safety and the issue of money laundering. On September 22, 2017, more than a year after the report about possible money laundering at Richmond’s River Rock Casino was delivered to the Christy Clark government, the Attorney General released the MNP British Columbia Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch: AML Report, dated July 26, 2016, which I’ll refer to as “the report.”

This report and its troubling findings were buried by the previous government. Quite frankly, the suggestion from the member for Vancouver-Quilchena that it was simply because of not wanting to interfere with or jeopardize the investigation is just weak.

The report set out a number of findings that show that the public was put at risk. The report says: “Reasonable grounds to suspect money laundering activity through the use of unsourced funds has been confirmed by the service providers and BCLC through the EDD processes. Interviews have confirmed that players are indeed wealthy non-residents, or business persons with interests both in Vancouver and China, coming to Vancouver to gamble.”

It also says, “River Rock staffs have fostered a culture of accepting large bulk cash transactions” and that “the use of possible underground banking operations using large volumes of unsourced cash have become increasingly common and accepted as a convenient feature for VIP players who may not be able to send funds to Canada due to currency restrictions in their own country.” And finally, that “BCLC’s current systems and technology do not allow for analytics or system alerts for activity which is deemed to be suspicious or excessive.”

The previous government’s inaction on this file is unconscionable, given that they’ve been aware for years that known organized crime figures are gambling in B.C. casinos — something that raises serious public safety concerns.

Paul King Jin, a 50-year-old spa owner who resides in Richmond, is the heart of the controversy. Postmedia News alleges that his associates used an illegal money transfer business in Richmond to lend suspected drug dealer cash to high-roller Chinese gamblers recruited from Macau, who — with troubling ease — used massive wads of small cash bills to buy chips at River Rock Casino. The network is suspected of including over 500 accounts.

There are also allegations that this money laundering is also tied to the distribution of fentanyl. These underground finances are suspected of being connected to international drug dealers. From January to August 2017, fentanyl was detected in approximately 81 percent of illicit drug overdoses.

If the money-laundering scam is linked to the international drug trade, then the previous government’s failure to act on the findings and recommendations of the report could be seen as not only allowing our publicly administered casinos to launder drug money but also allowing the drug trade in fentanyl to continue and flourish in British Columbia, and that puts B.C. lives at risk.

The Attorney General has moved quickly to appoint Peter German to investigate this matter. But while casinos, through their association, took steps to tighten their own security and procedures, the previous government did not act on the recommendations of the report.

Why didn’t the previous government act? Is it because B.C. casinos bring millions of dollars into the government coffers? Was the government willing to turn a blind eye to public safety in order to help to balance the books? Perhaps was the previous government not wanting to rock the boat with wealthy non-residents spending money in our province, buying our real estate? Or was it that the government didn’t want an embarrassing scandal to come out before the provincial election?

Maybe there are reasons that we have yet to learn, but I can’t find any reasonable excuse for ignoring the report and not acting on it. The previous government had a duty to act to protect public safety and chose not to act. That’s not acceptable in anyone’s books.

G. Kyllo: It’s my pleasure to rise in the House today on behalf of the hard-working constituents of Shuswap. Money laundering is a serious criminal offence, one that should be non-partisan. I think we can all agree that countless British Columbians from all corners of our province work hard day in, day out to earn their pay.

[11:15 a.m.]

Anyone who circumvents the law in order to obtain money through illegal means should not be allowed to use that money, let alone to filter it through legitimate businesses like our B.C. casinos. To ensure that money laundering isn’t a problem in our province requires appropriate action, not only from law enforcement officials but action from members of this House.

As representatives, we’re all elected to create legislation that accurately reflects the core values of our constituents and work to ensure that we are improving the lives of British Columbians. With that being said, our job is not to intervene and demand answers from law enforcement officials but to take information that they provide and use their knowledge to inform and create legislation that protects the public and allows law enforcement officials the necessary means to carry out their duties. When we step outside of the boundaries of our publicly elected duties and release information about ongoing investigations, we run the risk of jeopardizing investigations in their entirety.

Recently there’s been a slew of stories in the media regarding foreign nationals making large cash transactions in casinos using funds from unknown sources. Given the sensationalism of the stories, the large amounts and the ambiguity surrounding the source of these individual incomes, it is easy for outsiders to draw conclusions. However, these stories in the media are based on work currently being done by the authorities. We need to have faith in their abilities to handle criminal investigations without political input or interference.

Any input or disclosure of an ongoing investigation could not only create a public prejudice but also could influence the investigation in a negative way. Giving criminals any knowledge of the depth or speed at which an investigation is proceeding could provide them an advantage to stay ahead of law enforcement officials.

Officials are still actively investigating money laundering through our casinos, and releasing information to the public could have and still might jeopardize the very investigations that those are working on closely.

As members of this House, it is our job to trust the judgment of the professionals that are currently working on this file. These are sophisticated criminals, and I know that the RCMP are working as hard as they can. I am confident that our law enforcement officers will get to the bottom of this in a timely and appropriate manner.

M. Dean: Gambling establishments have been operating in B.C. for many decades. Gambling in British Columbia is a source of entertainment for adults, a revenue driver for the province and an attraction for tourists. There are thousands of British Columbians employed in this industry, and it also contributes to local economies.

For example, there is a casino in View Royal, in my constituency. The company that operates this reports that 141 local vendors are used, with $9.4 million spent in the local economy. The View Royal Casino supports a number of local municipalities. They disbursed $4.1 million in gaming revenues in 2015-16 and contributed $320,000 to View Royal in municipal taxes.

On the occasions that I’ve had to visit and tour our local casino, I’ve actually learned how it’s a major social hub for many seniors from our community. During the day, they’re the most frequent customers. They spend very little money, spending time mixing socially with their friends and acquaintances.

The casino is often used for community or business events, and it’s expanding. It’s going to actually build an entertainment venue for the region. However, unregulated or under-regulated gambling or inadequate compliance can lead to problems with organized crime, fraud, violence and addiction. These are problems that no community wants to or should have to deal with.

The NDP has been warning about the danger of money laundering in casinos for years. We raised it six times here in this House. Now in government, we have taken real action to address this problem. July 18, 2017, gaming moved from Finance to the Attorney General’s ministry to remove the conflict of interest between revenue and enforcement and problem gambling. September 28, 2017, the Attorney General released a July 2016 report, which the B.C. Liberals sat on, and appointed an independent expert to conduct a review of British Columbia’s anti-money-laundering policies and practices in the gambling industry.

[11:20 a.m.]

I’m very pleased to see that Attorney General David Eby has done this. “We’re going to make sure the gaming policies and procedures that protect the interests of British Columbians are in place and are being followed,” the Attorney General said. “There are concerns about money laundering that have been growing for years. Our government is taking action to deal with them quickly and thoroughly.”

The Attorney General has asked lawyer Peter German, a former deputy commissioner of both the RCMP and Correctional Service of Canada and the author of Canada’s leading anti-money-laundering law textbook, to conduct an independent review and make recommendations, if necessary, for reform. He’s asked German to determine whether there’s an unaddressed or inadequately addressed issue of money laundering in casinos and the history, nature and extent of any of these issues that he finds.

As part of the review, German will meet with government’s gaming policy and enforcement branch, the B.C. Lottery Corporation, the Joint Illegal Gaming Investigation Team within British Columbia’s Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit, casino service providers and employee organizations at any identified facilities, as well as with any other parties who would like to assist. He’s also been asked to provide advice to the Attorney General about connections between any identified issues in other areas of the economy or provincial laws or policies that may require attention as a result of the information he gathers.

The review will be completed by the end of March 2018, and he’s been asked to make recommendations to government as they are identified, rather than waiting for a final report so that any changes can be implemented in a timely way. I urge the government to take seriously these concerns and the allegations of laundering and to pursue appropriate action in the interest of all British Columbians.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member. Just a reminder that we only refer to members by the name of their constituency.

P. Milobar: It’s my pleasure to rise in the House today to speak about this serious issue. The allegations of money laundering through B.C. casinos requires action from law enforcement officials and from members of this House. We take these matters very seriously, as the repercussions of these investigations will undoubtedly affect the lives of many British Columbians.

The revenues generated by the B.C. Lottery Corporation provide a significant percentage of the provincial budget, and these contributions have provided us with the means to allocate funding for health care, education, community programs and many other services. The fact is, as we’ve heard from previous speakers, the evolution of gaming in British Columbia is long and continues to evolve to this day.

As someone who comes from a city who has the B.C. Lottery’s headquarters in from day one…. We take gaming very seriously in the Kamloops region and do realize the benefits it can bring to the province and the seriousness of what happens as politics get into the play of gaming.

In order to maintain the integrity of BCLC, it’s important that we are able to verify that the funds that go through the BCLC, be it through casinos or other gaming measures, are coming from legitimate sources. We cannot in good conscience allow the proceeds of criminal activities to be filtered through any of our gaming products that we have within the province of British Columbia.

In order to ensure that we are appropriately charging those responsible and protecting the innocent, law enforcement officials need to be able to conduct a thorough investigation without outside or political interference. This is fundamental to any type of investigation going on within the criminal elements that we see out there, but with gaming in particular, which we’re talking about today, it’s every bit as important.

As I’ve mentioned, we’ve seen gaming evolve over time. I can remember back when I was much younger going into smoke-filled bingo parlours in Kamloops for hockey fundraising or in Nanaimo for hockey fundraising in that particular bingo hall, and from there we’ve evolved where the youth groups no longer have to go in to sell but are still able to access those funds.

We’ve also seen what happens when there are questionable activities around gaming and gaming licences with regards to political interference. It wasn’t that long ago, when you think back to things happening around bingos or the North Burnaby Inn casino licensing. We always have to make sure that political interference is not getting in the way of our gaming rules and our gaming regulations.

That’s where we shouldn’t underestimate the sophistication of these criminals. They’ve obviously put a lot of work into their money-laundering operations, and I know the RCMP and other agencies are working as hard as they can to make sure that if there is wrongdoing going on, it is being investigated, charges will be brought forward in a timely fashion and changes will be made.

[11:25 a.m.]

Any input or disclosure of an ongoing investigation, as I said, not just in gaming but in any style of law enforcement, creates a public prejudice but also can influence the investigation in a very negative way. Doing so runs the risk of jeopardizing the investigation in its entirety, especially in this day and age of legal challenges. By the time charges get brought forward, sometimes we can see that because of other political manoeuvring going on, those words then get used against the government and the Crown when the charges do indeed get brought forward.

I view a lot of the commentary around money laundering. It’s troublesome in that respect because I do know many times I would have constituents come to me and want something done with, say, a particular drug house in their neighbourhood. You’d have to assure them that the RCMP are well aware of it, they’re working on it, and you have to be patient.

It takes a long time to build a criminal case, and their investigation is ongoing. Usually, once charges were finally brought forward, the public would find out that half of the traffic or a good portion of the traffic they saw coming in and out of that drug house was actually undercover police officers coming in to do a buy to build that evidence that they need to be able to shut down those types of operations.

These investigations into money laundering should be taken just as seriously by both sides of this House and to make sure that the investigators have that freedom to employ every tool they have possible to make sure that any wrongdoing is brought to light, as well as making sure that afterwards we review our policies and our procedures to figure out how we change them to reflect what is going on in real time as the sophistication of the criminal keeps expanding.

In short, I think that members of this House are in favour of making sure that we’re always looking at changing and updating and making sure things are being done to a very high level. However, we do have serious apprehensions around doing that in a very public political realm when it comes to gaming, because as we’ve seen in the past, political interference is not a good place within gaming.

D. Routley: Let’s be very direct about what’s happening in British Columbia. Money, drug money, is being laundered through our casinos in hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s being wired overseas, being used to purchase drugs in Mexico and Peru. It is actually being wired to Iran where it is suspected to be funding terrorism links. That is happening in British Columbia right now, and it has been happening in British Columbia for the past eight years at least — back before the time the government decided to disband the original investigative unit. That’s what is happening in British Columbia.

In an interview with Sean Holman, the person who was in charge of the file for so many years said, as reason for disbanding the unit: “Sometimes you pick one and it just doesn’t work.” It never got staffed up. He cancelled it in a quest, he said, to discover how we could do things better.

Well, the clear talking points from the government presenters — the last speaker said it at least seven times — were that there shouldn’t be political interference in investigations. That’s hogwash.

What’s happened is there was a political interference that suspended an investigation. The report that we’re talking about here was provided by the RCMP to the government with an expectation that government would take action. What did they do? With a history of cancelling the investigative unit because there wasn’t funding, on February 18 in 2009, the RCMP were told that funding pressures and criminal enterprise activity as well as other operational priorities wound up cancelling that unit.

Now, this is outrageous. How could anyone having been briefed on what was happening in our casinos, particularly anyone with policing experience, then ignore what’s happening? Now as an excuse for turning the other way, for looking the other way and whistling while this was going on, the government claims that they didn’t want to interfere in an investigation.

[11:30 a.m.]

Again, that’s hogwash, and it’s coming directly from the member who is most involved in this — the member for Langley East, who had the control over that unit and cancelled it. That member has enough policing experience, surely, to realize that hundreds of millions of dollars….

Drug dealers were going to a house in Richmond with duffel bags full of money. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were then taken directly into the casinos and loaned to high-roller gamblers who were recruited from mainland China. These people were gambling $100,000 to $1 million in a weekend.

That’s the reality of what was happening. How could anyone in the previous government look the other way while this was happening? This is outrageous. The people of B.C. finally have a government that’s going to investigate this and get to the very bottom of what was happening.

The implications for anyone — anyone — who allowed this to happen, who knew it was happening and took no action…. That defines the government’s response to this. That defines the response of the member for Langley East, who in fact took this file with him through several ministerships.

I think there are several questions that need to be answered by the previous government. This investigation will likely show that in one year alone, this money house wired over $300 million to international bank accounts in China — over 600 accounts connected and controlled by that money house. They laundered at least $220 million through the casinos in that year. One year, over half a billion dollars from one illegal trade.

This is B.C., beautiful B.C. Has B.C. been made a gangster’s paradise? We can’t allow this to happen and look the other way. This government won’t. This government is investigating, and it will be unafraid in challenging the situation and showing British Columbians what’s truly happening and showing them how responsible the previous B.C. Liberal government is for allowing that to prosper.

M. Polak: When you become a government minister, there are many things that you learn. One of the things I learned very early on was that when you are a minister in charge of anything regulatory, it’s very important that you don’t begin forming conclusions based on partial information.

It also becomes a real challenge, as a minister in charge of some kind of a regulatory body, when things find their way into the media and you as minister are not able to discuss matters that are confidential, that might jeopardize something that is potentially going to be before the courts or before law enforcement. Great care must be taken. It is the flip side of the regulatory piece where aggressive action can go on, but commentary from ministers needs to be very, very careful and restrained.

In light of the previous speaker, I think it’s important that we start to piece this together from a basis of fact, and that would be using the report itself. People have spent a bit of time today talking about things they have read in the media. That’s all well and good. We all value good investigative reporting. But in this House, it’s also important for us to respond based on the facts.

I’m going to quote a couple of pieces from the MNP report. First, this:

“Although a specific compliance effectiveness review of gaming operations was not within the scope of this review, MNP did review a number of processes and did not observe anything material to suggest that the compliance program in effect at B.C. Lottery Corporation and River Rock Casino Resort is not functionally suitable to meet obligations under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and TFA and implementing regulations.”

Further, it says this:

“This engagement was not designed to, nor does this report provide any analysis about whether money laundering or terrorist financing is actually occurring, nor does it provide any analysis about the potential that money laundering or terrorist financing will occur through the organization in the future.”

So let’s be very careful that we approach this discussion from where we are and not leap in a speculative manner beyond what the facts present at this point.

[11:35 a.m.]

Why is that important? Well, it’s important because the things we say in this House don’t just have political effect. I mean, often we say things here for political effect. Question period is all about political effect. But our words here have an effect on the outside world. Saying things without proper caution and restraint when it comes to investigations of this nature can be potentially dangerous.

When I look at our casino operations, I recognize there are two sides to this coin. There’s the community facility, such as the casino we have in Langley, Cascades Casino — wonderful place. All manner of people go there, including my father. My father doesn’t gamble. Why does he go to the casino? Well, because, as somebody else pointed out, casinos can often be a place of socializing for people in the community.

Many seniors go to the casino to do just that. My father found out early on that they have free coffee that they give out there, so he goes and has his free coffee and sits and talks with people. And a lot of seniors do that kind of thing. My own grandparents, back in the day, used to take the bus trip down to Reno and enjoy themselves at a casino in Reno.

Then there are those unsavoury characters who will seek to find any way possible to engage in their nefarious deeds. Here is where we all, in this House, need to be supporting our law enforcement agencies and following along with the advice that they give us. We know that the criminal element, especially when so much money is involved, will continue to change and shift and evolve their tactics such that they can elude the arms of law enforcement. They will constantly be doing that.

That is why our law enforcement agencies, together with the support of government, need to be doing the same. They need to be constantly evaluating their effectiveness. They need to be able to shift in a nimble manner when the technology and the strategies and tactics of the criminals…. When those change, law enforcement, supported by government, needs to be able to change too.

That isn’t always suitable for good politics. Sometimes what happens is that you support the law enforcement agencies to the extent that they can do their job, and sometimes at the expense of being able to score a political win. That’s where all of us should be very careful.

This is a serious matter that we should all be addressing, and I’m supportive of the motion.

B. Ma: As my colleagues have all eloquently discussed, something smells rotten in this House, and it’s coming from that side. The recent investigative journalism by Sam Cooper of the Vancouver Sun has revealed a deep and dark undercurrent of crime, corruption, money laundering, mischief and disregard for the law in B.C.’s casinos.

The more that’s uncovered, the more it appears that despite knowing exactly what was going on, the former government consistently, insistently failed to take action, even making decisions that appear to exacerbate it. There is evidence that the B.C. Liberal government had been receiving warnings about potential money laundering in B.C.’s casinos since as early as 2003 yet did nothing about it.

In 2009, the RCMP integrated illegal gaming enforcement team issued a threat assessment, warning of the potential influence of organized crime in B.C. Lottery Corporation–regulated casinos. The report was titled Extent and Scope of Illegal Gaming in British Columbia, 2005 to 2008. The enforcement team was asking for an expanded role to investigate money laundering in casinos.

Instead, the then Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General of British Columbia of the B.C. Liberal government, currently the member for Langley East and Leader of the Opposition, disbanded the entire force. What followed since have been ever-escalating signs of serious trouble within the B.C. Lottery Corporation.

In 2010, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada, also known as FINTRAC, fined the B.C. Lottery Corporation for what they called a “persistent and chronic failure to comply with the law.” This fine gave the B.C. Lottery Corporation the new-found notoriety of being the only provincial gambling body to be fined for failing to report suspicious or large transactions at casinos. But the current Leader of the Opposition, the then Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General, continued to defend the embarrassed Crown corporation, despite the evidence, saying: “We have a very well-run company here. They’re doing a good job. Nobody’s done anything wrong.”

[11:40 a.m.]

The escalation of suspicion peaked in 2015, when the RCMP investigation into underground banking and alleged laundering of drug cash revealed suspicions of terrorist financing through British Columbia’s casinos. Yet the allegations were still not investigated — not by the current Leader of the Opposition, the then Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General, and not by the current Opposition House Leader, the then Minister of Finance. I guess the laundering of drug cash and terrorist financing just wasn’t a concern for them.

The member for Esquimalt-Metchosin has outlined, in detail, all the work that the current government has already undertaken. So in contrast, our government has been quick to take action. Mere months into forming government, this government’s Attorney General appointed lawyer Peter German, a former deputy commissioner of both the RCMP and the Correctional Service of Canada, as well as the author of Canada’s leading anti-money-laundering law textbook, to conduct an independent review and to make recommendations for reform.

This government has done more in its first 100 days to address money laundering in casinos than what the B.C. Liberals have done in nearly 14 years. It’s another item on a long list of scandals under the B.C. Liberal government that has eroded the public’s trust in the ability of that government to make decisions on behalf of the public interest.

The people I talk to about this in my community don’t even bat an eye now at the news of another example of unlawful activity, benefiting the rich and powerful, being swept under the rug by their government anymore. The failure of the previous B.C. Liberal government to take these kinds of matters seriously has undermined the credibility of governments to behave in the best interests of the public and seriously damaged public faith in our democratic institutions. This damage will take years to repair.

Thank goodness we now have a government that is ready to work to turn the tide to regain the public interest. So I guess it’s not so critical that the Legislative Assembly urge the government to take seriously the allegations of money laundering in casinos, because we already have.

M. Morris: I listened to the discussions here this morning and the members of government that have been espousing how poorly the police and the enforcement agencies have been dealing with illegal gaming, with money laundering, with terrorist activities in the province of British Columbia.

I find it shameful that they can make these allegations, based on a newspaper article that has been recently written, with information that hasn’t really been verified. I’ve heard them a couple of times refer to a report from 2000, dealing with intelligence that the RCMP and the police agencies in British Columbia had with respect to organized crime and the proliferation of organized crime right across the province, dealing with money laundering.

Of course, we’ve seen an influx of terrorist activities and the funding of terrorist activities across Canada and around the world. All are issues that the RCMP and law enforcement agencies take very seriously.

They reference some of the changes that were made back in 2009, with the integrated illegal enforcement team, which they accuse the member for Langley East of shutting down. I can assure this House, and I can assure the people of British Columbia, that no minister has the authority to shut down anything operationally within the police environment. When I was the Solicitor General, those decisions were made by the operations within the police services branch, within the Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia or CFSEU or whatever the respective unit would be.

It was determined at that time in 2009…. There were a number of changes that the RCMP and police forces were going through at that particular time to address the proliferation of organized crime in the province. That was to develop an organization like the Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit–British Columbia, which would target those prolific organized crime figures to try to put an end to their activities. They had to take resources out of the existing milieu of units and whatnot that the RCMP and the various police forces had and redirect that expertise into the organized crime element.

[11:45 a.m.]

That’s exactly what happened at that particular time. It just so happened that the member for Langley East at that time, and now our leader…. He happened to be the Solicitor General, and the decision was made to go with that.

As the police started focusing on the prolific offenders in organized crime, organized crime became very much aware, and they started changing their tactics as well. They’ve become a little bit more sophisticated. So we see the sophistication of organized crime rising as the police techniques increase.

That report that was referenced by my colleague a little while ago, by MNP, basically highlights a concern that was brought to them by provincial gaming and the concerns that perhaps the RCMP had brought to their attention as a result of their investigations. I think the Attorney on the other side probably should reflect a little bit on his decision to make public some of these issues around illegal gaming and this particular report. The investigation that was ongoing, and is still ongoing, at that particular time was international in scope, was very sensitive and involved a lot of high-level, perhaps undercover, operations.

I’m just speculating here, but based on my experience as an investigator in the RCMP and as a senior manager, there are probably all kinds of techniques — technology that’s been used in this particular investigation that is sensitive. There are probably people’s lives at stake, which is very sensitive, depending on the kind of information that gets released and gets out there.

There’s a lot of speculation taking place right now as a result of that newspaper article and as a result of the horrendous things that the members in government are saying right now that could actually jeopardize the prosecution of that particular case if and when it ever gets to that particular stage. The members have to be very cautious and very careful about what kind of information they put out there, for political gain or whatever their motivation might be.

It could have a dire effect on the consequences of what could literally be a multi-million-dollar investigation, and that money would be all for naught at the end of the day. So I caution the members to be very careful. I know they’re reading from prepared statements on information that they’ve been provided to try and make some political gain, but I caution that.

L. Krog: I’m always delighted to hear the official opposition urge patience as being such a virtuous activity, when, after 16 years of B.C. Liberal government, this government has inherited all of their many, many problems, a myriad of which are coming to light so quickly that one can barely do a count.

Now, let’s draw us back to what the resolution actually says. “Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly urge the government to take seriously the allegations of money laundering in casinos.” Emphasis on the word “seriously.” I have heard a litany of excuses this morning about the possibility of substantive investigations, about being part of a massive international investigation, all of these things.

I think the member for Langley said it best, though, and she said: “This is a serious matter.” She is absolutely right. This is a very serious matter. But it happens to have been a very serious matter for a long time in British Columbia. You’d have to be a turnip that just rolled off the back of the truck if you live in a community that has a casino where the public wasn’t raising these issues from time to time. And there seemed to be, in the public’s mind, a fairly lax regime, in cooperation with FINTRAC, the RCMP, and the B.C. Lottery Corporation, in dealing with what most people understood was happening in their own communities.

When known drug dealers wander into casinos and wander back out, you’ve got to get the feeling they’re not just there for recreation. They’re not just there for recreation. They’re not going in to have a free coffee with the seniors that everyone has talked so eloquently about this morning. Yes, we’re delighted to have casinos in our communities. The casino in my community supports the city of Nanaimo and a lot of very important activities.

But let us not be unrealistic. Let us not turn a blind eye to what is, pretty clearly, a method for organized crime, for those who are guilty of criminal activities, to launder their money. And it’s big money. It’s very big money.

[11:50 a.m.]

I was surprised, honestly, that somehow the members opposite were trying to make a virtue of, you know, keeping suppressed the report that the Attorney General made public. Now, I do recall this government promising openness and transparency, so when a succeeding government actually delivers on openness and transparency, suddenly it’s no longer such a virtuous thing to do.

Is there anything actually wrong with the concept that the public be apprised of — be made aware that notoriety be given to a serious matter that affects public policy in this province, that affects communities across this province, that affects people, that allows organized crime to carry on its nefarious activities and to launder the money that it’s gained from illegal activities? Is there something wrong, somehow, with doing that? I think not, with great respect.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

I’m surprised at the members opposite, although I would give them credit for attempting…. I’m surprised at the members opposite over there this morning, making every effort they possibly could to pretend that somehow things would be all right in the end.

As year after year has passed in British Columbia, millions and millions of dollars have been laundered. Organized crime has been allowed to increase its operations. People engaged in illegal activities have been able to continue to make their profits, while that government, as they formerly were and now the official opposition, somehow pretend that just everything was fine. It was all part of a grand investigation.

Eventually the guilty would be punished and the innocent rewarded and the good work of every organization involved would somehow come to fruition and we’d all be so terribly pleased.

Well, with great respect, if you’re bleeding to death and the surgeon is determining which is the best suture to use, it’s not a happy occasion. The fact is that there was trouble in our system. People knew it. That opposition knew it when it was government, and they didn’t do as much as they could have, if they did much at all. That’s the problem. I come back to the use of the word “seriously” — to take seriously the allegation of money laundering.

This government is taking seriously the allegation. This government is finally putting some emphasis where it needs to be put to send a message to organized crime in British Columbia, to send a message to those engaged in illegal activities, that they are not going to be able to do it without enforcement, without their activities being stopped, without a government that takes seriously its responsibilities to the people of British Columbia.

I am just surprised this morning that we have had this continuous defense of: “Nothing to see here. Just move on. Nothing to see here. Just move on. Everything is fine.”

Well, perhaps that’s another reason that they’re over there instead of over here.

L. Krog moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Mungall moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:53 a.m.