Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call continued debate on the throne speech.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

J. Rustad: It’s an honour to be able to continue my response to the throne speech, from last Thursday.

I want to start, taking a moment…. Last Thursday I didn’t have the opportunity to recognize Paul and Raven Lacerte and to thank them for the work that they’re doing on the Moose Hide Campaign. I was participating in that fast last Thursday. Ending violence is an important piece, an important work that they’re doing. They’ve taken it, now, from a B.C. initiative to something that’s gone across the country, and I just want to thank them for that work and for the continued efforts to bring about an end to violence against women and girls.

Along those lines, last Thursday I was talking about this continuous assault by this government on business activities, whether it be small business delays, whether it be on the forest industry or mining or the oil and gas sector. But I want to talk a little bit, as well, about First Nations in some of the time that I have remaining.

First Nations are an important component of our society, an important component of this province. But for too long, First Nations have missed out on economic opportunities. Under the previous number of years, under our government, we had signed a tremendous number of agreements to try to help bridge that, to try to move forward. It was Joseph Gosnell from the Nisga’a First Nation that said it’s long past time that First Nations not only catch up economically but, if possible, surpass the rest of Canada. To that end, that is something that we work towards, that we try to find the ways to bridge.

What I find interesting in the throne speech…. The throne speech talked about wanting to close the gap, close the economic gap for First Nations. Those are nice terms, a nice thing to talk about doing. But the reality is they have opposed every opportunity to do that.

You can’t close the economic gap unless there are actual investments in this province, and those are investments that have to come in the resource sector for the most part. Tourism plays an important piece, and that will be, certainly, a makeup of the composition for where First Nations can close the gap.

[2:40 p.m.]

The reality is, whether it’s liquefied natural gas and the NDP’s opposition to projects like Pacific NorthWest LNG, whether it is gas projects up in the northeast, whether it is other projects, forestry activities, mining, etc., we need to find ways to be able to have First Nations be able to come to the forefront of these projects, capitalize on their rights and title, work with government and work with industry to be able to see the success of these projects and the lifting of First Nations people out of abject poverty and social challenges.

When you look at any statistic, whether it is the suicide rate or poverty numbers or children in care or the number of people on unemployment, there’s no question in my mind that those problems cannot be solved by government. Government needs to play a role. They need to be able to support First Nations. But the only way those numbers are truly going to be meaningfully changed is to engage in economic activity.

I’ll give you some examples. My colleague from Skeena has talked about his nation, where they were around 60 percent unemployment, and through engaging in the economy, they got down to around 15 percent unemployment.

I’ll give you an example from my own riding, though, Lake Babine Nation. When the mill blew up in Burns Lake a number of years ago and the tragedy that happened to Babine Forest Products…. The aftermath of that, of course, was people unemployed. There was the tragedy of the loss of life, but there was also the tragedy of people having an uncertain future. The number of social issues and family issues that happened increased significantly. A number of counsellors were brought in to and tried to support families through that challenging time.

The reality is that with the loss of economic activity, we saw deterioration in the social conditions for the nation. As soon as the mill started its reconstruction, made the decision, those numbers came down. As soon as the mill actually started opening again, those numbers came down again. It’s a real-life example of what happens when you have economic activity engaging and how it can change the outcomes for people on the ground.

I find it interesting that we were signing agreements at a rate over…. I think it was over 200 agreements that were signed just in the last year alone that we were in government, yet I haven’t seen any signed by this current government. Maybe there has been some, but it’s certainly not something that they talk about. They pooh-pahed, if I can use that language….

Interjection.

J. Rustad: Sorry. From my learned colleague, that is unparliamentary language. I cannot pooh-pah. Okay. If that is the case, I will find other words to choose.

They spoke elegantly against….

Interjection.

J. Rustad: Pooh-poohed, not pooh-pahed?

Sorry. I digress. The reality is they opposed all of these types of agreements that we signed, calling them “meaningless.” But when you look at what happened on the ground, a very different story can be told about what the agreements did.

One of the other chiefs in my riding, who is no longer chief — he’s had some serious health issues — said he had, tragically, five attempted suicides in his riding. One, tragically, lost their life. He said it was enough. Enough of saying no. He said they have to find ways to be able to create success, to create economic opportunity in the riding.

The pipeline that went out to the Pacific NorthWest LNG would have made a huge difference for that riding and for the people in that riding — to give jobs, to give hope to the young people that there was an opportunity to be able to build a future, to get people working instead of sitting idle.

There are projects right across this province that need to be promoted, projects right across this province that need to have capital investment pulled into this beautiful province that we have — to make that difference for First Nations and for many communities, like the communities in my riding of Nechako Lakes that I have the honour to represent.

How do people sitting in a boardroom make a decision to spend $100 million or $700 million or $3 billion or $4 billion or $34 billion when the messages that are sent from this government are continually no? “You can’t invest in this province. There’s uncertainty. You’ll have more regulations.” It says that right in your throne speech. “We’re going to create trade wars if we don’t like something that goes on. We’re going to work against various things.”

[2:45 p.m.]

That’s not how you create investment. What you have to do is you have to set rules, and you have to make sure those rules are followed. But at the same time, you have to be able to show that investors can make a decision in this province in a reasonable period of time and create an opportunity that’s going to have jobs, support the economy and be paying taxes.

These guys don’t seem to get that. I think the throne speech was a huge miss in terms of its ability to be able to highlight the need for driving the economy. It’s not by chance that it was more than two-thirds of the throne speech gone before they even got on to talking about the economy. It’s a sad part when you sit down, go through and look at that.

In addition, it’s very troubling to think that there are outside groups — outside of this province, outside of this country — that have come in and have campaigns to oppose economic development in this province, and that spend money. Furthermore, they also support, through a third party and directly, political parties, to fight economic development and resource development.

I know the members opposite are proud of seeing that. They’re proud of that. They go to dinners to be celebrated for opposing economic development. But the cost is to the people of this province, and particularly, the First Nations, where lies and misinformation are spread.

I saw a tweet just the other day from one of these organizations that I’m sure was part of that group that celebrated the Minister of Environment at the dinner on Bowen Island back on January 30, a tweet that said that if more tankers start moving through this coast, it will kill the orcas. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

This is the thing that we forget. We even forget our Canadian history, our own Canadian history. Whales were being hunted to extinction. Victoria, back in the 1800s, used to promote itself as the place to come, to the whaling industry, as an opportunity for development. Yet it was a Canadian invention through oil and gas that, overnight, saved the whales. The oil and gas industry — get that — saved the whales because kerosene, overnight, was substituted for the oil that was extracted from whales. Overnight the whaling industry was obsolete.

Oil and gas. Celebrate that if you celebrate wanting to save the whales. Yet these groups spread this kind of misinformation out there to the public. It’s a real shame.

You think about it when you think about Kinder Morgan and whether Kinder Morgan goes ahead or not. That’ll be determined, obviously, through many decisions other than what’s going on currently with the debate on the throne speech. But let’s be realistic about what it represents.

The current risk in this province of an oil spill from oil moving through from the Kinder Morgan pipeline is about one in 3,036 years — one chance for a significant oil spill in 3,036 years.

Interjection.

J. Rustad: The member opposite just said: “Hey, we’re going to make it seven times greater.” That just shows what the lack of understanding of NDP math is.

There are 23,000 movements of ships in this province annually. The expansion on the Deltaport alone will bring in another 5,000 additional movements on the ship. The movement of oil will bring in another 700. That’s how much more. What does that do in terms of the risk factor? First of all, all those other ships, whether it be B.C. Ferries carrying lots of fuel and vehicles or whether it be tugs, barges or all these other things bringing things around…. Those ships will actually have to be tethered with two tugs. The chances of a spill are virtually zero.

Let’s say that, okay, now you’re going to have this expanded number. Read the National Energy Board report before you start heckling members from opposite. When you actually stand to look at it, the odds will now be, if it goes ahead, one spill in every 2,398 years. Figure out what that minuscule number is.

I see my time is running out.

[2:50 p.m.]

The reason why I talk about this is that I talk about it from a perspective of Nechako Lakes. We don’t have that pipeline going through, but I do have many other projects going through. Whether it is First Nations or non–First Nations alike, we need to see economic activity to be able to prosper for families, to be able to see communities prosper, to be able to bring forward what we would like to see for a healthy environment, for healthy communities, for healthy families.

That is completely missing in this throne speech. That is why it is very unfortunate to see the kinds of attacks and the kind of misinformation that is being spread out there. For my family and for families in my riding, we want to be able to see a new mine in our riding because we know what it means.

We want to be able to see investment in forestry because we know it supports our family. We want to see investment in agriculture because we know what that will mean for our communities.

It’s a tremendous honour to represent the people of Nechako Lakes, to have the chance to be able to stand in here and share a few words. I look forward to the continued debate on not only the throne speech but on budget and other things so that for the people of Nechako Lakes, their voices can be heard, their priorities can be clear and so that we can move forward and push for a better future for all of our people.

Hon. R. Fleming: It’s a pleasure to be able to rise both as the Minister of Education and as the MLA for Victoria–Swan Lake to speak to what was an historic throne speech for this chamber, one that signifies — in very, very stark, contrasting terms — the priorities of a new government that is centred around making ordinary middle-class family life in British Columbia affordable again — with what we endured for many, many years under the previous government.

This afternoon I would like to draw the stark contrast between a throne speech and a government that has emphasized the power and the wisdom of investing in education of our young people, both at the earliest learning years in the child care sector as well as the K-to-12 system, so that we can successfully have confident, young adults with the competencies needed to be successful in the 21st century economy, transition into post-secondary education and be the job creators, innovators, entrepreneurs and skilled people that our economy needs in the future.

That’s what we laid out as our blueprint in the throne speech that was introduced to this House last week. And I’m proud of this throne speech for many, many reasons. I’ll confine most of my remarks this afternoon to the portfolio of Education and why I think this throne speech is visionary and supportive of a government direction that will pay tremendous dividends to this province for decades to come.

That is because the emphasis of the throne speech and of this government over the last six months — a mere six months, if I can put it in those terms — has been all about people. It’s been investing in young people. It’s been investing in people who are struggling to get ahead in this economy. It’s been investing in having a home to live in. It’s been about investing in communities to support business and private sector investment that will create jobs and reduce unemployment and create more GDP, more taxes and more prosperity to share around British Columbia in every region.

Let me return to some of the things that the throne speech committed to solving. Some of these problems, it must be said, are not easy ones to solve. It is very difficult, for example, to try and steer a real estate market in one particular direction. There is no, obviously, magic wand for any Minister of Finance or government to be able to do that.

There are some instruments available for governments to use, instruments that the previous government chose not to use, on the tax side, instruments around creating housing stock that is affordable in communities.

I can tell you, as a previous director in the non-profit housing sector, some years ago here in the capital regional district we saw the programs for affordable family housing eliminated by the previous government, in its very earliest years of the long 16 years which we’ve endured.

[2:55 p.m.]

You have to go back and imagine what the province would look like. Communities like Victoria, which I’m privileged to represent, and Saanich and other parts of the province where the rental scarcity, rental crisis and home ownership challenges are the greatest…. What would it be like if we had built thousands of units of affordable rental family housing over the years, or rent-to-own housing? We indeed had a program like that that was scrapped by the previous government. We would have tens and tens of thousands of additional units, instead of having thousands and thousands of people on wait-lists to get into affordable homes.

The reality is that we’re at a place where we have to account for what’s gone on over the recent decade and a half, where there was an underinvestment, and underbuilding, in affordable family housing in my community and many communities around British Columbia, and we have a scarcity of housing today.

That’s why the emphasis of this throne speech was so ambitious: to turn the page on the neglect of the last 15 years and to declare an intention that British Columbia is going to tackle this problem head-on. We are going to have an investment that is the most ambitious and largest, historically, in B.C.’s history. That was the first paragraph of the throne speech, to which I am so glad to respond here today.

The other major theme around making life more affordable that was committed to in the throne speech — this will come as no surprise to members in this chamber and, I hope, citizens around British Columbia — is that we have a government now that is interested in investing in early childhood education in a way that the previous government never, ever committed to do. We have a partnership with the federal government to do that. But let’s be clear: the majority of the investment will come from our new provincial government.

It sets about to do a couple of things. One, it’s based on the observations in other prosperous jurisdictions that have made substantial investments in universal-like child care systems and the benefits that those countries have been able to achieve. Many of those countries are in the North Atlantic regions of Europe and the northern countries of the European continent. But there are many places around the world that have had significant investments in early childhood education — even in Canada, a number of provinces — whereas B.C. has found itself lagging so far behind under the previous government.

That’s something that we need to correct in British Columbia, for a number of reasons. The first reason is that child care is disproportionately and exorbitantly expensive for young families. We know that it actually changes people’s life choices. They’re afraid to have children in many parts of British Columbia because it is so expensive to do so. Because it makes their employment vulnerable and it makes their ability to contemplate how they will raise a family in a decent standard of living, it influences a choice away from having kids.

That’s wrong. That’s a problem for British Columbia domestically that will accumulate if we don’t address it. It’s also an issue that employers have been asking government to address for years and years and years, both small business employers and large employers in this region and throughout the province.

Chambers of commerce, the business council — all of the major business voices — have been telling government for a number of years that you must make an investment that is significant in helping us to recover and retain valuable employees, to allow business to plan appropriately and also to attract employees from outside of the province to get the skill sets that are in demand in B.C.’s economy. Failure to do so is actually slowing GDP growth in British Columbia.

Tomorrow’s budget will outline an array of strategies to increase the number of daycare spaces; drive quality improvements in the child care sector; have many, many more families involved in child care; and make it more affordable for the pocketbooks of average British Columbians. But we have to remember that this is an investment for everybody in British Columbia, and it’s one that will pay significant economic dividends for all parts of the economy in British Columbia.

That’s what the throne speech spoke to. That’s a new direction that our government seeks to take, and it’s one that I’m incredibly proud of.

[3:00 p.m.]

We have been hard at work since last summer, tackling a number of problems that have been left for us. We know we have a lot more to do. There’s no question about that. Things cannot be fixed overnight or in six months.

We have heard the Premier on a number of occasions talk about the importance of developing an economy that works for everyone. I was so pleased, recently, to hear that the commission looking at achieving a $15-an-hour minimum wage, with the consensus of both labour and business and other interest groups, was able to deliver a substantial pathway and a program to give everybody in the economy a raise. Those 250,000 families that actually earn the minimum wage will have incomes that grow by $10,000 a year by the time our new minimum wage is introduced. That’s one part of the economy, but it shows that, over the last six months, an incredible body of work has been achieved and accomplished by this government.

I want to say that, from my perspective as the Minister of Education, I was very pleased that the throne speech said that education is the great equalizer. It recognized the tremendous power that educating young people has over both an individual’s life chances as well as transforming an economy that is prosperous. It is the single greatest investment that we can make. I think we have enough examples all over the world. We have seen countries that have even arisen from the ashes of World War II become some of the most prosperous, dynamic, diversified economies in the world because they made significant investments in education.

Canada is no stranger to that either, by the way. We have achieved many great things as a country because we have made a number of investments in education. But the reality — and I think the throne speech and, certainly, the budget tomorrow is going to address this even further — is that British Columbia chose a different path as we entered the 21st century than other jurisdictions in the country.

We didn’t choose to substantially ramp up investment into our K-to-12 education system, for example. In fact, we went from the second-best funded provincial jurisdiction in the country, when it came to our school system, to the second worst. That’s a trajectory that we took as a province under the former government, and that’s what we have to deal with now in our school system as we try and drive improvements.

I have to tell you that the agenda that’s been outlined by this government…. Myself, as the Minister of Education, the deputy minister, every part of the Ministry of Education is working on a vision with our partners in the education sector that says: “Look, we have a very good, very strong education system. Various parts of the world have recognized that in British Columbia, but it’s time to strive for more.” We cannot be complacent. We cannot continue to defund education, as the previous government did.

It’s time to do right by more kids. It’s time to pursue excellence in the education system like we have not seen in British Columbia for decades now. That’s what we intend to do, and that’s what the throne speech signalled, in terms of its intentions around this government’s direction of the K-to-12 system.

It’s why, for example, we hit the ground running as a new government to hire thousands of new teachers in the school system. The largest hiring of teaching staff in B.C.’s school system in generations was achieved by this government in this current school year that we are in. It’s why the speed of badly needed new seismic upgrades in our schools has been a major focus of my work, of the government, the Premier, and everybody working in the Ministry of Education.

We’ve said we want to accelerate the safety of kids in schools so parents can sleep at night, knowing that in the event of a traumatic seismic event, we do not have a tragedy, which we have seen in other countries that, unfortunately, has seen the loss of life. We have told every partner in the school system: “Let’s get to seismic investments quicker. Let’s do them better, smarter, more efficiently.”

The sector has responded brilliantly. That’s what we have been able to do, just by turning the page on the previous 15 years of photo ops with no follow-through and to say, instead, to school districts that have a significant backlog of these types of projects: “Let’s work together. Let’s do it as efficiently as we can.” That’s what’s happening right now in British Columbia.

[3:05 p.m.]

I’m so happy, too, in building this new relationship that we have with educators and parents and school boards and communities across B.C., to have a positive, proactive conversation about the power of public education, that there is a distinct enthusiasm in every community across British Columbia to turn the page and have that new positive conversation.

I’m also very pleased, too, that just four or five months after our government announced, as one of its very first actions, the abolition of tuition fees for adult basic education, which the previous government foolishly introduced, I might add….

When we announced the abolition of those fees, we could not have anticipated such a dramatic uptake in interest from people in the economy — young workers, moms and dads working long hours for low pay because they didn’t have a high school transcript that was able to get them into post-secondary education and into a vocation that would allow them to have a better life and earn a better salary and take a better place in the economy.

We abolished those tuition fees, and we saw, immediately, a 30 percent increase in enrolment. That speaks to the people that were left behind by that previous government and the interest in what our government is doing. They grasped that opportunity after that government kicked out the ladders and rungs of opportunity on those very people.

I’m so pleased to have met a number of students who have enrolled in adult basic education courses. Some of them, having the courses they need and having the grades that are required to get into programs, are already transitioning into college and university. It is a fantastic and very early success story for our government.

I’ve spent the last few months travelling across the province. I’ve met with students and parents, school trustees and staff, throughout this great, diversified province of ours. I’ve visited schools across Metro Vancouver and here on southern Vancouver Island. I’ve travelled to Prince George, Fort St. John, Kamloops, Kelowna, Campbell River, just to name a few locations. I even visited I think what may be…. It may not be the smallest school, but at nine students, Surge Narrows….

I was very privileged to take a water taxi out for 45 minutes into the middle of the channel to attend a school on Read Island and to install a satellite system that will allow that community to have Internet and all of the on-line learning tools that are available in the 21st century to that place.

I have seen and learned a lot of things from families and from students and from those who teach or support teachers in our school system. That is that they love their work, take pride in it, and they have great hopes that the work that they do is literally helping to build better lives.

They love their work, and they also like the fact that they have a government that values and recognizes their work, after so many years and years of the previous government deliberately picking fights with teachers, for example, dragging them through the court for 12 years. We could go through the testimony of those divisive trials, but that’s not my intention.

I’m trying to make a point about how our throne speech from last week marks a radical and welcome departure from where we were just a short year ago in British Columbia on something as important as K-to-12 education. We’ve done away with that. Nobody is talking about the kinds of nastiness and divisiveness that the previous Premier and her government deliberately provoked within the school system — that the courts found the government to have acted illegally and unconstitutionally about.

It does certainly leave bitter, painful memories, especially for those who lost income or had significant career displacement caused by the government’s reckless action. There’s no question about that.

There’s a generation of students too, by the way, who literally had hundreds of millions of dollars of annual classroom resources ripped away from them and in their entire learning careers knew nothing else than Christy Clark and her ways of disrupting the school system.

People want to move on to a different conversation. I certainly do as well, as the Minister of Education. So does our government. I think that we are very lucky to have, in Pre­mier John Horgan, somebody whose own life story….

Deputy Speaker: Member, no first names.

[3:10 p.m.]

Hon. R. Fleming: Sorry. The member for Langford–Juan de Fuca and Premier of British Columbia. We’re very fortunate to have somebody whose own life story has such a predominant and compelling story around how the school system helped him out of difficult times — as somebody whose father had died at a young age, who grew up in tough times and who maybe made some choices, as a youngster, that were not the kinds of positive ones that would have led to a good result.

He has credited, on many occasions — and I know you’ve heard him speak to this, Madame Speaker — teachers and those in the school system, those adult professionals who care and are dedicated, for steering him in a positive direction. He has been able to, obviously, lead a very productive life and is now — who would’ve thunk it? least of all him — the head of government in the province of British Columbia, giving back to what the school system gave him as a young person.

What he is giving back is a record investment in our public school system because he believes in it, because he’s seen it firsthand. He also knows that it’s going to be B.C.’s single-greatest bet that we can make as a recipe for economic success.

We have invested $200 million just since September 1 on the seismic safety file. Thirteen replacement schools and seismic projects have been announced, and in every part of the province: Saanich, North Vancouver, Port Coquitlam, Surrey, Richmond. Madame Speaker, I’m very pleased to have been out in your area to make a much-needed, long-delayed announcement in Richmond. Maple Ridge has also been the recipient of welcomed seismic projects, and Delta.

We have found a way to get everybody working and pulling in the same direction, to be able to get capital announcements quicker. I have to say, those of us on the government side now have scratched our heads and wondered how the previous government failed so miserably on so many seismic promises they made. We have to wonder whether it was incompetence or just disingenuous at the time.

I’ll give you an example. In April 2013, on the eve of the last election before the one we’ve just been through — it was literally 12 hours before the writ period, if you must know — the former Premier announced seismic upgrades to 45 high-risk schools. Now, you can imagine I was very curious to get behind the curtain of government and actually track how many of those investments were now supported by real business plans and real dollars. No doubt it sounded great in 2013, but I am very disappointed to say that five years later, half of those schools are still incomplete and many of them are no closer to construction than they were in 2013.

That’s an indication of the situation we have inherited as a government. We are working as fast as we can with school districts to get those projects moving again, but we’re also dealing with a cupboard that was left almost bare for us as a government. There were no decisions that had been made. There were no projects that were proceeding to design and tender in the way that we had hoped we would find so we could get to the next tranche of projects.

No, we have had to clear up a backlog that had no supportive work behind it, in many cases, and go back and make good on commitments the previous government had made in photo ops but then done nothing with for five years. That’s what we’re dealing with as a government. The budget tomorrow, in terms of its capital plan, is going to address some of the symptoms of how the previous government behaved, in terms of putting in some dollar amounts to get at the backlog of projects that I’ve discussed.

We have set an internal target to approve 50 new seismic projects over the next 18 months. That won’t be all of the ones that need to be done. But let me tell you, if the previous government had announced, on a regular basis, 50 projects over 18-month time periods, we wouldn’t even be talking about seismic investments in the year 2018. We would’ve been done with it, as other jurisdictions up and down this same shared fault line on the coast of North America have already completed their projects.

Instead, British Columbia is still talking about it and still trying to come together with timelines that will give parents the security to know that their kids study, and that teachers and support staff go to work, in schools that are safe each and every day.

[3:15 p.m.]

We’re fixing serious problems that were left behind by the previous government. We’re also addressing some that maybe didn’t get the due attention in the media. This isn’t a criticism of the media, but one of the issues that I’ve certainly picked up on over the years as a parent and, previously, as the Education critic is that for bizarre reasons, our school system — cash-starved as it was over a whole number of areas and indicators — did not fund replacement playground equipment.

You had these old 1970s…. I don’t know how many teeth these things have chipped off, but you know the equipment I’m talking about. I’m looking at the member from West Vancouver. I was so pleased to be in his constituency the other day and announce a brand-new Handsworth Secondary in the district of North Vancouver. I know that he was a supporter of that project.

Playground equipment is a major burden for parent groups to have to fundraise tens of thousands, sometimes hundreds of thousands, of dollars to pay for because the previous government didn’t have a funding allocation for that. We’re creating a playground fund. There will be details in tomorrow’s budget; it was referenced in the throne speech.

It seems like a simple thing, but I can tell you that parents around the province are relieved that government has finally listened to them and that they can get on with funding other kinds of things, doing other kinds of activities, spending more time on the learning environment and the education cultures of their schools instead of having a zillion bake sales every year and trying to reach impossible targets.

One parent group told me that they had a 12-year fundraising campaign to have a playground. Some of the parents that were involved had kids that were now in university, but they were still supporting — out of their own wallets, their own pockets — a fundraising campaign that they had initiated 12 years earlier. That is wrong. We’re going to fix that in the budget tomorrow, and the throne speech spoke to that.

We have done a lot to revitalize B.C.’s education system. I have mentioned some of it. Fully funding enrolment growth, I think, is a key commitment that you would think the school district partners of ours would expect at a minimum. But they didn’t always get that treatment under the previous government. That means tens of millions of new dollars into the education system, by making good on the commitment to fully fund enrolment growth. With 3,700 new positions funded as a result of the MOA with the BCTF, that’s a total of $409 million just this year.

There will be more in the budget tomorrow. I know the opposition will be looking for that, because it’s something that they bitterly fought for 12 years. They wanted to keep class sizes overly large. They wanted to make sure that composition wasn’t addressed for special needs learners in our school system. If they protest that that wasn’t their intention at all, they have to account for the fact that they took every legal step that they possibly could, until they lost — in a 15-minute decision, I might add — at the Supreme Court of Canada.

We could go over the transcripts from those court hearings at the B.C. Supreme Court, where government actually found, through sworn testimony of witnesses, that government deliberately sought to provoke a strike for political gain. In other words, government set fire to disputes to make sure they happened, in order to create political chaos that they hoped to benefit from.

I don’t know what more I can add to that tale of what a sad place British Columbia was made to be or of what a ridiculous position for a government to take. I can tell you that in a very, very short period of time — with the infusion of hundreds of millions of dollars of new funding, with the lowest ratios of teacher to student in classrooms in British Columbia in perhaps 30 years — we’ve achieved a tremendous amount.

I’m also happy to say that it’s not just 3,700 new teachers that have been hired in British Columbia, but we have 600 more education assistants, working in the school system just this year, over last year. It’s tremendous. When you think of 5,000 new students coming into the school system this year, that they have 3,700 new teachers, 600 new EAs…. It’s almost one adult in the school per new kid coming into our school system. That is a fantastic sea change of how the education system is being resourced and is being prioritized by this government, compared to where it was just a few short years ago, or just over a year ago, under the previous government.

[3:20 p.m.]

We do know, however, that the work isn’t done. You can imagine how difficult it is, logistically, to hire the most teachers that we ever have in generations. We know, and we have struck a recruitment and retention task force to deal with that. I’m very happy to say that that task force took just six weeks to make some immediate, quick-action items that were recommended. We’re acting on them already.

We’ve just announced $1 million to train more than 100 new teachers — specialist teachers, French immersion teachers, science, math, Indigenous teachers throughout the school system. We will be recruiting and working with our school district partners to hire the balance of teachers required.

We are undertaking a K-to-12 funding review, the first one in 30 years in this province. We have signed off on a set of principles with our partners the B.C. School Trustees Association to guide that exercise. That is an exciting exercise, because it will look at what sustainable K-to-12 education funding looks like going forward. It will look at the new emphasis in the curriculum around core competencies, different styles of teaching and learning and how we align that with a sustainable funding regime going forward.

These are vastly different conversations than the previous government was ever willing to undertake. In fact, they shut them down and would not allow them. Today, just a short period of time since the election, six months, we’ve already launched this exercise. We’re already through phase 1 of the education funding review, and I look forward to being able to complete that exercise within six months and share the results with executive council of government later this year.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the throne speech this afternoon. I’ll take my place.

R. Sultan: Before I get into the main body of my remarks, let me respond to the comments on the throne speech by the previous speaker, the Minister of Education, and express my personal thanks to him and his ministry for the vitally important replacement of Handsworth School, which had always questionable seismic qualities. Thank you for that.

Let me also say I admire the agility with which he wove together two principle points — namely, our school system. Our public school system in British Columbia is truly one of excellence. In fact, this is demonstrated by international comparisons over and over again when countries like Japan, Singapore, Finland and other high-performing, smaller — elite, you might say — education systems are compared with the performance results of British Columbia students across the board.

We’re not talking just the privileged areas of the province, by any means, but a large dosage, for example, of First Nations students. We rank right up there at the front, and that is an incredibly impressive accomplishment by our school ministry. I would suggest to the Minister of Education that if he merely maintains the present level of excellence and replace the odd Handsworth School, he will go down in history as a great Minister of Education.

Anyhow, turning to the Speech from the Throne laying out the current government’s plans and intentions, I had looked forward to this speech with a certain nervous apprehension, expecting some clever and highly disruptive blend of environmental activism and social justice. Instead, we were given a combination of platitudes and motherhood. For the government, I must say, a huge missed opportunity.

Its emptiness reminds me of literary references to the void. T.S. Eliot once wrote: “What are the roots that clutch? What branches grow out of this stony rubbish? Son of man, you cannot say, or guess, for you know only a heap of broken images.” Oh, Mr. Eliot, not very complimentary.

British Columbia, the canvas on which we impose our laws and regulation, is woven from one of the most marvellous combinations of nature’s bounty, strategic location and creative humanity that I think you will find almost anywhere in the world. I’m indebted to the constituents who allow me to represent one corner of this fantastic place.

[3:25 p.m.]

I’m indebted to this province, which allowed my Swedish parents, off the farm and educated to grade 3, to come here in a previous century, help build a new society, raise eight kids in a three-bedroom house in East Vancouver and allow me to pursue my studies to the highest level at Harvard.

The magic ingredient in this story is opportunity. Since those earlier days, my family’s immigrant experience has been replicated thousand-fold in British Columbia. We look to the Speech from the Throne to assure immigrants of today and their children that opportunity will be as undimmed for them as it was for me. But this government’s road map as defined in this Speech from the Throne disappoints me. I search in vain for the foundation stones and accelerators of opportunity.

It’s not as if underperformance and lack of vision is bred in this government’s NDP bones. To the contrary, as I have spoken previously in this House about my admiration for the recently deceased David Barrett, an NDP Premier who was a true public servant and who left behind a lasting legacy.

For all the Barrett government accomplished, and it was a lot, it was accomplished between 1972 and 1975. This is almost hard to believe. They passed 367 bills, something like one new law every three days. You might call this the Barrett benchmark. One informed observer wrote: “Every British Columbian who has ever bought auto insurance, attended community college, ridden an ambulance, taken the SeaBus, tangled with a boss about wages or benefits or vacationed in one of scores of wilderness parks has benefited from the Barrett legacy.”

For those of you unaware of whom I’m quoting, it’s a person nearby — less than about 200 metres distant, by my approximate reckoning. He inhabits the west annex of this Parliament Building, and he serves as our Premier’s chief of staff. Geoff Meggs wrote a history entitled The Art of the Impossible: Dave Barrett and the NDP in Power, 1972-1975.

Now, some may ask why I am quoting a former Communist Party president, even one who renounced his earlier political enthusiasms. Well, firstly, it is to acknowledge a recently departed Premier of this province, one with an enduring legacy. Secondly, it is to remind this chamber that the Barrett government accomplished a great deal in a short period of time. Meggs’s book lists 97 accomplishments. I won’t bore you with all of the details.

How did the 1972 NDP government actually carry out its mandate in comparison with the current government? While I can’t say I’m on the same page, politically speaking, as former Premier Barrett, one does have to admire his fortitude. On day one, it is written, he asked his cabinet, “Are you here for a good time or a long time?” and then doubled down on an ambitious agenda regardless of the political fallout. “We agreed unanimously to strike while the iron was hot,” he said, and they did. And here we are, 46 years later.

Since social commentators today point to the faster and faster pace of modern life, one might expect to see increased velocity in government as well. Certainly for this NDP government, I believe the political clock is ticking faster and faster. But in terms of accomplishment, our current government left the starting blocks at a crawl — nothing like what we saw in the 1970s. Clarity and courage then; confusion, committees and procrastination now.

[3:30 p.m.]

Barrett had an agenda; the government of today has slogans. To Dave Barrett, an election promise of $10-a-day child care would have been delivered within weeks. To this government, once elected, their clear and present platform promises were soon transformed into fuzzy and future good intentions.

Barrett introduced B.C.’s first consumer protection laws, and now his NDP successors are punishing consumers and producers alike in their unnecessary wine war with a sister province in our Confederation. Barrett introduced the first guaranteed income program for seniors, established the Air Ambulance Service, passed the B.C. human rights code, banned corporal punishment in schools and lowered the drinking age to 19. He talked the talk and walked the walk.

He invented the ALR, raised the minimum wage, changed labour law, created Hansard, instituted the daily question period, hired full-time human rights officers and organized the B.C. Cancer Agency. This is an astonishing list, even if it went no further than that.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

By comparison, what has this government accomplished? Well, it has announced review after review, consultation after consultation and committee after committee. All talk and no action.

Let’s go through a partial list: (1) review the provincial Animal Health Centre; (2) review the agricultural land reserve; (3) lobbyist reform review; (4) UNDRIP, out for consultation; (5) FOI review; (6) hydraulic fracking review; (7) professional reliance review; (8) bitumen spill response study; (9) finfish aquaculture and fish processing consultation; (10) Medical Services Plan premiums review; (11) wildfire review; (12) housing review; (13) foreign buyers tax consultation; (14) B.C. HOME partnership program assessment; (15) labour relations code review; (16) rural development strategy; (17) poverty reduction consultation; (18) Massey Tunnel replacement engineering review; (19) ride-sharing report by a parliamentary committee; (20) taxi company consultation; (21) B.C. Ferries review.

Twenty-one reviews, studies and public consultations in seven months does not begin to compare with 367 actual bills passed into law under the Barrett regime in 36 months. Davey Barrett would probably give our government’s current agenda a scornful laugh. There are many comparison ironies. Barrett helped assure our food supply within the ALR. In contrast, today we have an Agriculture Minister threatening lawful agriculture businesses and allowing our wine industry to be pummelled due to a trade war with Alberta.

Barrett gave the North Shore the SeaBus. This government has formed two committees, which will report by June. Barrett created new infrastructure. Our current government has decided to spend $3.5 billion of scarce capital to buy an existing bridge, the Port Mann, which doesn’t add anything at all to provincial infrastructure.

However, the Speech from the Throne does declare: “Safe, secure and reliable transportation options are critical to get British Columbia moving in rural and remote regions.” Who could disagree with that? Not even my friend from the Sunshine Coast.

Stripped to the essentials, the public looks to government for leadership in the economy, their social condition and our environment. What does the Speech from the Throne offer us in each of these three core areas?

The economy. Let’s start here. Government’s housing program will help increase much-needed housing supply and certainly boost the economy, although that particular sector of the economy is already operating close to capacity. There is no mention, however, of their intention to resolve the zoning and permitting bottlenecks. Perhaps we’ll hear more about that tomorrow in the budget.

It is said that there are almost as many housing units in the pipeline in Vancouver as have been built in all of history. Plans will not necessarily lead to shovels in the ground, of course. Government emphasis is on low-income housing for the homeless, the impoverished, the unwell and the disabled. While laudable and important, this is not the mainstream of middle-class housing market desperate for new supply.

[3:35 p.m.]

Aside from its emphasis on housing, the economy as a whole gets a clear miss in the throne speech. Nothing to facilitate growth of industry that I could identify. No words concerning growth of our rural economy — a clear miss. In the high-value international banking sector, the welcome mat was actually rudely and suddenly yanked out from under existing institutions.

Instead of economic development, we have cancelled bridges, wine wars, pipeline follies, a trade war with Alberta and a thoroughly angry federal government. Extraordinarily, we have a Prime Minister denouncing the Premier of British Columbia by name, saying he’s “trying to scuttle the national plan on fighting climate change.”

Interjection.

R. Sultan: That’s what he said.

None of the above is calculated to increase business confidence or grow the economy.

Well, let’s turn to the social condition. What does the Speech from the Throne offer by way of improving it? Well, what it offers is page after page of promises being walked back, as they say in Washington, by the government. It skips lightly over many of the key promises which helped get them elected.

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

R. Sultan: Ten-dollar-a-day daycare, the $400-a-month rent supplement, the 114,000 affordable housing units. Although to give the government its due, it has laid out concrete plans for 2,000 modular units, and I am told 1,700 new affordable units were actually built last year. So let’s call it 4,000 or 5,000 as a start, roughly. Only another 110,000 to go.

There are also many words on child care, where we’re assured that we are firmly headed down the path of affordable, quality child care for all, but that journey will take time. Ten years, maybe? That could mean three NDP-Green governments into the future. That would be a huge leap of political faith. Nowhere can we find any mention of the $10 price tag. My guess is that somebody at last got out their calculator and did some arithmetic.

I do agree with the government that universal child care is an important priority. I will watch with care and more than a little concern the government’s plan on how to pay for it. No small undertaking.

On child care, one promise is quite clear. Unlicensed daycare facilities are now going to be licensed. While no specifics are offered, one can speculate that many existing daycare centres will not fulfil the new licensing criteria.

While we can’t argue over the necessity and value of ensuring quality and safety, and the desirability of standards and inspection, this upgrading of a typical facility, as I would see it, will no doubt be associated with higher costs, unionized employees, perhaps, and possibly fewer facilities available. So the unintended result could be less access, not more.

There was no mention of the much-anticipated poverty reduction plan, which my friend from Hastings is in charge of. I wish him well. Like many other social innovations, consultation is still underway.

While poverty reduction did not make the cut for the throne speech, the government is promising to raise the minimum wage to $15 eventually. Caution here is, in fact, warranted. Abrupt, bold increases in the minimum wage could have negative consequences.

A sharp reduction in part-time employment Ontario actually experienced last month coincided with the announcement of a sharp increase in intended future minimum wage — a huge increase in part-time unemployment. It may have simply been a coincidence, but maybe it wasn’t.

Environment, thirdly. What does the Speech from the Throne tell us about the government’s plans for the environment? One would reasonably expect something special, given the NDP’s alliance with the Green Party, but there’s no mention of the carbon tax that I could find.

[3:40 p.m.]

No mention of climate change at all. No mention of rising temperatures or the apparently melting ice caps. No mention of protecting endangered species, such as the steelhead, where we heard an impassioned plea today from a representative of the Green Party, and the mountain caribou. No protection of the critters in the forest or of biodiversity. Nada.

One might have hoped for something on terrestrial stewardship. After all, the B.C. Liberal government took the first step of setting aside vast tracts of land, some the size of smaller European countries, for environmental protection or, at least, special sensitivity. But the previous government’s plans for management and stewardship were not yet completed.

What does the Speech from the Throne promise? There are a few paragraphs tucked in at the end with the most meaningful sentences devoted to the need for competent protection of our coastline from oil spills.

It doesn’t venture at all into the maelstrom of fighting words unleashed upon B.C. and this government by the Premier of Alberta and the Prime Minister of Canada. In many decades of federal government watching, I have never heard the likes of the harsh public spanking which Justin Trudeau administered to British Columbia’s Premier the other day — not a good omen for future cooperation.

On top of that, Alberta has announced its intention to intervene in B.C.’s application for a $1 billion gas pipeline. Uh-oh. And the feds cancelled the planned joint announcement with B.C. in Ottawa concerning child care. Another uh-oh.

As our own Leader of the Opposition has implored, it’s time for the Premier to hop on an airplane, fly to Edmonton and kiss and make up. While he missed the opportunity of Valentine’s Day, there’s still time.

To sum up, we had a 50-minute Speech from the Throne which left the people of this province scratching their heads. God save British Columbia.

Hon. H. Bains: It always is a pleasure and honour to stand in this House and speak on issues that are important to British Columbians and, today, for an opportunity to speak in support of the throne speech.

Before I start, I would like to comment also on my good friend Dave Barrett. I followed him when I first came to Canada. This was a guy who was leading this province and making tremendous changes. Every day there was something that was being announced, a new law passed, as the previous speaker has spoken about. I will not get into all of those 367-some pieces of legislation, all to make life better for British Columbians.

He has left us such a legacy. I think we have a challenge, all of us in this House, to match or come close to what that government and that leader has done. I say: “Thank you, Dave Barrett. We are going to miss you. But thank you for leaving the legacy behind that we can all look up to and enjoy that you have left for us.”

The previous member for West Vancouver–Capilano started on a very good note in recognizing some 42 years of a good government and recognizing the work that that government did. Then he slowly slipped into the same rhetoric that you hear from that side of the House, ignoring the true facts. He talked about, you know, comparing that government to this government — that that government was doing things and we are, somehow, a government of slogans.

I just want to comment on that. In only six months, if you look at the work that this government has done, making life more affordable for British Columbians, like removing tolls…. MSP premiums will be cut in half this January and will be eliminated going forward.

[3:45 p.m.]

Tuition fees removed for those who are in adult basic education and those with English language learning. And then a $681 million investment in K-to-12 education and 3,500 new teachers hired.

You know what? An announcement of starting to build schools where, in the last 16 years, people were only hoping to have a portable. They have portables, especially in Surrey; 7,000 students are studying in portables right now. We are going to remove them. That is, so far, what we have already done and achieved.

Health care — $600 million already to improve the wait times and ER wait times, especially in hospitals like Surrey, Delta and south of the Fraser and everywhere else.

Just the other day — infrastructure and public transportation. We, rather than playing politics, as the previous government did — you know, going through a referendum because they did not want to take that responsibility seriously — said: “It’s time to show leadership.”

Instead of 33 percent of our share, we said we will move it up to 40 percent. Because federal governments are also showing leadership, they moved their portion to 40 percent so that the local mayors and the local taxpayers only have to look after 20 percent. That’s leadership. That’s doing things. That’s not sloganeering. Sloganeering was the previous government. I think the member was well-adapted to that and knew exactly what that meant.

As soon as we came in, we announced the establishment of the Human Rights Commission. That was missing for the last 16 years. Dave Barrett was the person who brought it in for the first time in North America. That’s the legacy left behind. The previous government took that away. They never thought that it was necessary to bring it back. We will do that.

Mr. Speaker, you were deeply involved in that. I’m so appreciative that those efforts that you put in and many others on this side are coming to fruition.

We also took the big money out of politics, which the previous government wouldn’t dare to even touch. All we are talking about — six months’ work.

Can you imagine what we would do in three years, Member? Three years. You would be, or somebody there would be, talking about this government, I’m quite sure, and the accomplishments of this government and the progressive agenda that we have making life better for British Columbia. I think we’re on that route, and we are going to deliver on that.

It’s not slogans. We have already shown leadership in delivering on what we promised and delivering on what the people of the province actually deserve and need.

That was just a beginning to answer some of the questions that were left by the previous member. Always, when that member stands up, I listen to him with very great interest because he has so much to give and contribute to this House. But, again, politics gets in the way sometimes. That was the last part of his speech, and I forgive him for that.

I just want to say…. Since this is the first time I’m standing up and speaking on our throne speech, I want to thank the people of Surrey-Newton who, for the fourth time, put their trust and confidence in me, once again, to represent them and their interests. I will do everything that I can, as I’ve done in the previous 12 years, not to disappoint them and to continue to stand on their side, continue to work and raise those issues in here. Now, as government, we will work on those issues.

I want to say: “Thank you, Surrey-Newton. Thank you for giving me that support. Thank you for standing with me all the time and bringing those issues to me.”

At the same time, I want to thank my family. I want to thank my constituency assistants. We have just hired a new person on the team, Jas Sangha, a young, vibrant and smart woman. I know she will complement an already strong team that we have with Amber Armstrong and Emily Zimmerman and Koni Marrington, who comes in still as a volunteer and helps us out, and the entire Surrey-Newton executive, starting with the leadership of Darrell Causey. He’s been stellar in being the president of my constituency association.

[3:50 p.m.]

Everyone who comes to Surrey-Newton to help and volunteer…. They don’t just come single. Their partners are always there. I just want to say thank you to them and their families, their children as well, who come and support me.

Her Honour spoke very eloquently about the vision of our government and, as we look to the future, that focus on the priorities of everyday British Columbians who have, for too long, as I’ve said before, been left behind. The people of B.C. are frustrated after years of rising costs, on one hand, and reduced services, on the other, and the neglect of working people in favour of the most powerful and rich in this province for the last 16 years.

As my hon. colleague from Vancouver–West End, just the other day, said in his speech in response to the throne speech…. He said this speech is about hope. This is about hope for families who are struggling to make ends meet. This speech is about hope for quality education and health care, hope for newcomers who are trying to establish themselves and are struggling to establish here in British Columbia and hope for all British Columbians who work hard, pay their taxes, go to work every day and dare to dream for a better and brighter future for them and their children.

That’s what this speech is all about. I’m so proud to be part of the government that has delivered this speech, delivered that vision and given that hope to many British Columbians who were hoping to have a government that will work on their side and help make their lives better.

As you know, the government ran on three key commitments. One commitment was to make life better for British Columbians. The second one was to improve services that they depend on and that they rely on. And the third commitment was to build a strong, sustainable, innovative economy that works for everyone, not just for the top 2 percent or those who are well connected. That’s not leadership in government. Leadership is that we build an economy that everyone can benefit from. It hasn’t happened in the last 16 years. We have created haves and have-nots in our society. That’s not where the government should be.

I just want to talk about some of the labour priorities in my ministry, the priorities that we have. I can tell you it was so gratifying that for the first time in the 13 years I’ve been in this House, the throne speech spent so much time and space talking about workers and protection of their health and safety — bringing in laws that are fair and work for everyone, where businesses and workers have confidence to resolve their disputes, and working together to create wealth and growing our economy. This is the first time the workers of this province have received attention in the throne speech, and I’m so gratified for that.

I can talk about and break it down to what our priorities are on this side of the House. First and foremost is workers’ safety. My goal is to make workplaces in British Columbia the safest in the country, and you can do that by having strong preventative and enforcement programs. We have already started work on that, and that’s where you start.

Workers are going to get injured from time to time and get ill from workplaces. But then they are treated with respect and dignity. That hasn’t happened in the last 16 years. It seems to me, the bottom line was the driving force. How do we save more money? How do we make decisions so that there is a better bottom line?

They forgot about a famous compromise, a great compromise that was made in 1913 elsewhere and, in 1917, here in British Columbia, where workers gave up their right to sue their employer. The employer benefited from getting sued or maybe getting bankrupted, if they were successful in those situations. On the other hand, they promised to look after the workers when they were injured at workplaces. That was the compromise.

[3:55 p.m.]

Seems to me that when I’m talking to workers and their representatives, their side of that contract somehow is missing, or not fulfilled fully. That’s something that is wrong with that whole picture, so we are going to fix that.

I have been working very closely with the WorkSafe board of directors. I’ve asked them to look at and review the Workers Compensation Act, the policies, the manual, to make sure we put workers in the centre of our policy development, where the worker’s health and safety is looked after and the employers have healthy and safe workplaces. Every employer knows this. If you have a healthy and safe workplace, it’s a more productive and efficient workplace. They know that.

I think it’s the government’s role to show leadership — have both sides working towards that goal. And that’s what we are going to do.

I am tired. As a labour activist and then as an MLA and now as a minister, I have attended too many memorials for workers who have died on the job — workers like the four carpenters who died at the Bentall Tower construction site in 1981; the three women who died when their overcrowded work vehicle crashed on its way to their farm job in 2007; the workers who died from two tragic explosions in B.C.’s two sawmills, in Babine Forest Products and Lakeland, in 2012; the three workers who died in the Fernie arena from exposure to ammonia gas last October; and countless of those who continue to die from asbestos exposure many, many years ago.

Many workers, especially our first responders, continue to suffer with mental health injuries, with hardly any support for them, and develop PTSD. We’re going to fix that, because they deserve our support. They deserve to be looked after and receive the care and support and professional care that they need, because they are the ones who are helping us when they develop these conditions through those incidents that are traumatic in nature. We are going to fix that, because they deserve our support.

I could go on for too long — too many injuries, too many fatalities. The important part here is that they’re all preventable. So that’s what we’re going to work on. That’s why I’m so firmly committed that workplaces in B.C. are the safest in the country.

I think this is so important. Every worker who goes to work deserves to come home in the same shape that they went in. Their family deserves that. They deserve it. We, as state and through workers compensation, owe it to them. That’s what we’re going to do.

The throne speech also talked about important rights and protectiosn in workplaces, thanks to hard-fought victories by labour movements. I want to thank all those labour activists and all those people who have worked so hard in promoting worker’s rights, not only just on health and safety, which I talked about, but working conditions, generally speaking, in workplaces.

That is another focus for me as minister — to make certain that legislation aligns with and supports our goals. We must ensure that the Employment Standards Act fully reflects and keeps pace with the changing nature of today’s workplaces. It needs to be updated.

The B.C. Law Institute is going through a review, and their report will be coming back within one month, I think. B.C. Employment Standards Coalition have also conducted their investigation, and they have already come back with their review.

[4:00 p.m.]

I will be looking at both of those reports to make sure that when the non-union workers feel that their rights have been violated, they have a place to go and file their complaint, rather than having this onerous, nonsensical self-help kit, which is so onerous for anybody to fill. Then after you fill it, you have to go back to the same person who has cheated you out of your rights in the first place. It’s so nonsensical. That has to go. We’re going to have to start to work towards that.

Those are some of the things for those areas. We move to other parts of my jurisdiction, which is the labour code. The labour code is one that establishes relationships between labour and management, and it provides a process for workers to join unions, how employers and unions interact and how collective bargaining disputes are resolved. In particular, I think there is room to improve there as well.

One bottom-line principle that I believe in is that those workers who choose to join unions of their choice have a constitutional right to do that, and there should be no interference from anybody. That’s what we need to do, and that’s why we have established a three-panel advisory committee who will be looking at what areas of the labour code need to be changed, how we change them and how we come up with a new era of labour relations regime in this province so that it also reflects the changing world and innovative economy that we all face today.

We have already established a permanent chair of the Labour Relations Board. The Labour Relations Board is also very, very important. I think, through the new chair, the goal is to re-establish the trust and confidence on both sides so that they know that when they take their issues to the labour board, their issues will be dealt with in fairness and objectivity.

We will be doing that as well. I firmly believe…. Unlike the previous government, who picked sides, who caused divisions at workplaces — you know, they’d pick one side over the other — and showed disregard and contempt, in my view, towards working people, we said that we will do business differently.

We think it’s the workers and businesses working together that creates wealth for us and grows our economy, and that’s why we need to re-establish that kind of working relationship between the two parties, to make sure that they are working together towards a common goal.

As was mentioned before and has been talked about quite a bit, part of making life better and more affordable for British Columbians was to raise the minimum wage. I could sit in my office, like the previous government did, and say, “Well, we’re going to raise minimum wage by this much by this date,” as they’ve been doing. They froze the minimum wage for ten years — ten years. In fact, some groups got their minimum wage reduced in those ten years.

Then, in 2011, within 14 months they raised the minimum wage $2.25. That’s what hurt businesses — unpredictability, uncertainty. That’s what businesses have told me. They know that the minimum wages are going to go up, but they asked me to use commonsense, gradual and predictable increases. That’s why we chose to have a Fair Wages Commission that went around and spoke to economists, academics, businesses — especially small businesses — individual workers and labour groups. They spoke to almost everybody they could. Over 1,000 presentations were made to this Fair Wages Commission. They came back with a recommendation to raise the minimum wage by June 2021 to $15.20.

I’m so proud that when that report came back, our Premier, our government, adopted all those recommendations. If it’s good for workers, it’s good for businesses, and it’s good for British Columbia. I think we are going to go through that. I think that is one thing that we want to do, and I’m so happy that we were able to do that.

The other piece there will be…. They still will be coming with the second part of their first report. In March, they will be dealing with those workers who are paid one of the alternate minimum wages, such as liquor servers and agriculture workers.

[4:05 p.m.]

That report will be coming in March. We will be hoping for and looking forward to that report, and then we will look at what we will do with that report. After that, the commission will turn its attention to looking at the gap between a minimum wage and a living wage in this province.

That is a quite complex and comprehensive study that they’ll have to do, but I know the calibre of that board. They will be looking at their research and the presentations from different economists and others so that they will come back and guide us on how we deal with this.

Many people said that the minimum wage is only for teenagers and students who are working part-time. Not so. The study and their research clearly showed, as they heard from a food service worker at a university who has worked for 24 years at the same job. She still is only making $14.30 an hour. One woman, who has worked at YVR as a cashier for 13 years, still makes $13.41 an hour. A young man in Prince George, who has a university degree, has worked at a bank for two years but can’t afford rent and student loan repayments. So he’s had to move back to live with his parents in P.E.I. These are the stories.

This was a critical discussion, a very difficult discussion but an absolutely necessary discussion. In Canada, one of the most affluent countries in the world, and in British Columbia, one of the strongest economies in Canada, nobody who works full-time should end up homeless because they can’t afford rent, have to rely on food banks to feed their families, or work two or three jobs just to pay basic bills. In 2018 in British Columbia, that should not happen. We need to step in as a government and help those workers.

The other area of the throne speech I think the member for West Vancouver–Capilano mentioned a little bit but did not talk about fully is an affordability issue. This member knows full well that there are two sides to every person’s financial picture. One side is a financial burden; the other side is the income and where they spend it. Bills are becoming unmanageable, unaffordable right now. That’s why our government is cutting MSP premiums and will be eliminating them soon, removing bridge tolls, as I mentioned, freezing hydro rates, increasing income and disability assistance, and making changes at ICBC to block rate hikes caused by the previous government. I’d mentioned tuition fees earlier on.

It’s something that the member from West Vancouver…. I’m sure that he was sitting there in pain when ICBC, one of the legacies of Dave Barrett, was being eroded because of mismanagement that left us almost on a road to bankruptcy. That is a shame.

They talked about being a business-savvy government, but this is what they have done — B.C. Hydro totally mismanaged, ICBC on its way to bankruptcy. Is that how you run a business? I don’t think so. That’s why you have left this province in such a mess and left people with haves and have-nots. That’s not leadership; that’s not real government. That’s what we’ve changed here every day, with every decision that we make. I’m so proud that I’m a part of that government.

Housing. One of the key issues in the last campaign was affordability. I can just talk to you about my own experience. The member will know…. I think he drives by it every day. I worked at Eburne sawmills, a Canadian Forest Products company just off the bridge, down the road from the Arthur Laing Bridge. That mill is no longer there. When I bought my first house, I was working in that mill. I just checked my rates. One of the highest in those days, on the industrial side, was about $8.30 an hour. If you times that with the 2,000 hours that everyone works, or thereabouts, it’s about $17,000 gross that I made in 1977.

[4:10 p.m.]

My wife and I were able to buy a house in Whalley, in Surrey, for $54,000. It was a little more than three times the gross that I made, but I was able to save enough down payment and buy that house. If my son was working on the same job in the same mill today, 41 years later, a 41-years-older home…. The same home today is worth over $800,000. His wages would be — I checked the other day — $29.60 an hour in a sawmill — again, about $60,000 gross. You’re talking about 14, 15 times the gross. That’s what has happened.

In the last 16 years, they’ve neglected dealing with this. Mayors, communities, economists — everyone told them to do something. But they ignored it because their friends at the highest level wouldn’t let them do it. They were a government captured by the most powerful. This is the government for everyday British Columbians, and that’s why we’re making changes to make life better for everyday British Columbians.

Part of that affordability, after housing, is child care. Today, in one of the most expensive areas to live, both parents have to work, sometimes two or three jobs, but they are struggling with where to leave their children in order to work and make ends meet. The government ignored that piece as well. We are going to bring in affordable child care because our parents and children deserve nothing less. This throne speech talked heavily about the record investment in housing and child care. That’s vision. That is a government that wants to lead. That is a government that is not interested in too much politics but in actually doing things.

Sloganeering was the last 16 years. Doing what is right and best for British Columbians is making their lives better. Respect for workers. Respect and value the work that they do. Protect their health and safety. Bring in some fairness by lowering their financial burden at the same time as raising their income, because their life will be better with a few more dollars in their pocket. At the same time, the businesses who have certainty about the decisions that we’re making will be benefiting because every single dollar in minimum wage our workers receive, almost every dollar, will be spent in their local communities and local businesses. So they both will benefit.

I can guess the direction this government is going. I think my time is up. Thank you very much for the opportunity. I’m looking forward to the next four years. Imagine what we can do in the next four years.

S. Furstenau: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this year’s Speech from the Throne. I’d like to welcome all the members back. It’s great to be back in session. I also want to express my appreciation to the member for West Vancouver–Capilano for bringing T. S. Eliot into the chamber. Poetry is always something to be grateful for.

The 2018 Speech from the Throne focused largely on affordability, as we’ve all heard. Affordable child care more affordably, as my favourite line said. It is certainly an important theme and something challenging countless British Columbians. People can’t afford housing or care for their kids, but affordability is not what I’m going to speak of today, not exactly. Instead, I’m going to speak of affordability’s darker side — inequality. The fact that fundamental needs are out of reach in our prosperous province is utterly unacceptable. We must take immediate, urgent and bold action to change our path.

People are falling into the dangerously wide inequality gap that grows bigger every day because of decisions made in this chamber. Why are so many of our fellow British Columbians living with poverty, homelessness, addiction or chronic illness? Why is the child apprehension rate so startlingly high? Why are so many of our citizens one paycheque shy of financial crisis? Why are there people working two or even three jobs and yet still unable to cover the costs of living? These are symptoms of a broken social system, one government has helped create by allowing certain groups of people to be consigned to a life of disadvantage and suffering.

[4:15 p.m.]

Let’s acknowledge that the playing field in British Columbia is uneven. It’s the government’s job to ensure that the game is fair, but what we have seen is an increasingly unfair advantage afforded to a few. One need only read the front page of the Saturday Globe and Mail this weekend about the connection between fentanyl and the Vancouver real estate market to realize that the crises we are seeing are linked. When government turns a blind eye to these harsh and unfair realities, the competition is skewed, cheaters are rewarded, and the system does not work.

In that vein, looking for solutions, the building of a child care and early childhood education system presents us with an unparalleled opportunity to provide the next generation of British Columbians with the best possible conditions for success and to set B.C. on a path towards achieving far greater equality.

The first years of life are a phase of prolific neural development, with MRI studies indicating 80 percent of all neural connections are formed by age three. It is also a time when children’s brain development is highly influenced by their environment. Infants and toddlers, research indicates, are capable of complex thought and reasoning, and their development at this stage can impact the course of their life.

There is broad consensus that children who have access to high-quality, affordable child care enter adulthood healthier, better educated and less likely to be involved in the criminal justice system. These outcomes contribute to long-term health, happiness and higher earnings, as well as higher tax revenues for governments and reduced government spending.

Quality, affordable childhood education is good for families — mothers and children, in particular — and good for the economy. Yet the child care sector in B.C. has largely been unable to meet the needs of families and unable to advance these greater societal aspirations.

There is an environment of immediate need to get on a wait-list, to get a spot, to afford a spot, to keep a job and housing so they don’t have to move away from the child care they found. People need help with child care now, not in ten years when their child is 13. The people who voted with child care as one of their top issues in the 2017 provincial election likely have young children or grandchildren who need care now and for the next few years, but these centres could take years to build.

Within this delicate web of public perception, policy realities, advocacy lobbying and potential for early childhood education advancements, the B.C. Green caucus’s work on this file has aimed to culminate in a sense of: “Yes, and….” We are advocating for the importance of early childhood education and educators, while not dismissing the current, pressing needs faced by so many.

Yes, families need affordable facilities to keep their children safe while they work, and those children should be nurtured to learn and grow while they are there. Yes, child care centres absolutely must be clean, safe and have an appropriate child-to-adult ratio, and they should also strive to meet a high educational standard that helps their young students thrive.

Another challenge inherent in the quality early childhood education discussion is its link to ongoing colonialism. How we define and understand the concept of quality early education and care is culturally determined. The criteria used to define quality is rooted in how one sees and experiences the world as well as how one thinks other people should live. However well-intentioned, it often comes from a place of racial or socioeconomic privilege.

As Karen Isaac, executive director of B.C. Aboriginal Child Care Society, explains: “Given the long history of Aboriginal children being forcibly removed from their families and communities to residential schools, and the current high numbers of Aboriginal children being taken into government care, it is no wonder that some poverty-stricken families may be ambivalent about a universal child care system and see it as another type of policing over children and families.”

Likewise, the concept of universality is also problematic. First Nations in B.C., scholars write, have a failed history with universality, a system that tends to serve the majority, while actively neglecting the disempowered minority.

[4:20 p.m.]

Isaac writes:

“Universality, high quality and comprehensiveness as guiding principles for a child care agenda will likely work well for most of mainstream Canadian society. However, we must remember that there is another aspect to this that has to be considered. Policy-making and system-building are complex, and politics rarely embraces complexity. We simplify, distill and capture complicated realities in phrases and slogans, and yet it is important for us to recognize the complexity and, ideally, to refuse to accept that there are simple ways of either understanding or ordering the world we live in.”

We should always strive to be aware of and concerned about consequences, unintended or otherwise, as we move forward with policy-making, particularly that which could impact Indigenous communities and children. We do not have a good record of this in Canada, and if we are serious about reconciliation, which we say we are, then we should be serious about not repeating the mistakes that we have made over and over again in the past.

This is an example where competition cannot be the organizing principle of a new system. I look forward to seeing the details around the first steps towards B.C.’s long-overdue child care and early childhood education system, and I hope and expect that all of us will recognize both the importance and ongoing need for adjustments as new information and insights emerge.

There is another pressing issue that has children at its centre. I quote the Hon. Jane Philpott, who, in November, said: “We are facing a humanitarian crisis in this country where Indigenous children are vastly, disproportionately overrepresented in the child welfare system.” Indeed, Jane Philpott has acknowledged that Canada removes Indigenous children from their families at a rate that ranks among the highest in the developed world.

Let me say that again. Canada removes Indigenous children from their families at a rate that ranks among the highest in the developed world. My greatest disappointment with last week’s throne speech was that there was no mention of Canada’s humanitarian crisis, which plays out every day in this province.

I held a town hall meeting two weeks ago in Duncan. During the question period from the crowd, a Métis woman named Patricia Dawn stood at the microphone, feather in hand, and pleaded with the crowd to engage in the issue of Indigenous child welfare. She shared her experiences as an advocate for women whose children have been separated from their parents and about the tragedy that occurs every time an infant is removed from their mother by the Ministry of Children and Family Development within days of giving birth.

Another speaker was midwife Kate Coyote, who has witnessed infant removals from the Cowichan District Hospital, as she puts it, “over and over and over and over.” She said she can no longer stand by and watch Indigenous infants be separated from their mothers. She nurtures these women through their pregnancies and guides them during birth. She said she does not want to look back on her life and wonder why she didn’t do more to fight for these moms and babies in her care to stay together.

My constituency staff and I witness the reality of this crisis in the Cowichan Valley on a daily basis. Family after family comes into our office sharing deeply troubling stories about their interactions with the Ministry of Children and Family Development, about families disconnected and children separated from their parents, from each other and from their culture. The common thread among them is that they are Indigenous. Many come from generations of families raised in foster care. Many have parents and grandparents who are survivors of residential schools.

The solution to this crisis is, again, both simple and complex. Simply, Indigenous communities need autonomy in child welfare. They are able to raise their own children within their own culture and can support each other through difficult times. Their resiliency is unmatched. Yet our legislation interferes with that autonomy.

[4:25 p.m.]

As one Cowichan elder put it to me so wisely: “Why do Aboriginal people need to prove to the white people that we can raise our own kids?”

The complexity in resolving this crisis is in the journey from where we are today to the goal of autonomous communities. It is not enough to place children in culturally appropriate foster homes. Indigenous communities are just beginning to deal with generations of trauma inflicted by the government that is left unresolved. It is not our place to continue to inflict that trauma.

The solution is culture. There is no doubt. Within their culture, Indigenous people thrive. But during this transition towards autonomy, we must also provide the supports required, as defined by them.

Keeping a mother, who may have her own unresolved trauma, together with her infant means taking different steps in child welfare than the universally applied approach we take today. Recognizing that the bond between mother and child, if nurtured, can be part of a healing journey, while breaking that bond perpetuates the same tragic cycle, must be part of this conversation.

How do we begin to address this truly urgent humanitarian crisis? We can begin by putting in place, at the very top of the administration of the Ministry of Children and Family Development, an Indigenous person, who is an expert in child welfare.

We can immerse the very capable front-line social workers in Indigenous culture so they can witness and truly understand the consequences of separating a family. We can empower and encourage social workers to be flexible in applying solutions that keep parents and children together.

We can follow the advice of the Representative for Children and Youth, who sees an immediate need for far more checks and balances to be in place around the extraordinary power that a social worker has to remove a child from his or her parents.

Perhaps, most importantly, the government must significantly increase the funding of services and supports that help to prevent the breaking up of families, that heal individuals and families and that provide communities with supports for programs that they have developed.

Resolving this crisis means acting on the words we profess as our roadmaps in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s report, the United Nations declaration on Indigenous people, Chief Ed John’s report on Indigenous child welfare in B.C. and the United Nations convention on the rights of the child.

The magnitude of the change in service delivery required to solve this crisis immediately is in direct conflict with the slow pace at which government makes legislative changes. In the past decade, the Representative for Children and Youth has published over 70 reports with countless recommendations on how to mitigate this humanitarian crisis, and yet, many of those recommendations remain unheeded.

The only way that this crisis is resolved with the urgency these communities deserve is if it is a top priority of this government, and the response is swift and meaningful. If it isn’t a priority of this government, which today it appears not to be, then all of us are complicit in the tragic outcomes for each child that is removed from their parents from today onward.

Cowichan is no longer waiting for the government to respond. Family advocate Patricia Dawn and the Red Willow Society, the Cowichan Grandmothers, midwife Kate Coyote and many other community members, non-Indigenous and Indigenous, are committed to working together to find and implement solutions, defined by the community, that support mothers and infants in whatever way they need.

There are some days on this job where the contradictions between what is said and what is actually happening make me feel like I’m living in a George Orwell novel. We are extracting fossil fuels to fight climate change. We want to increase diluted bitumen shipments to protect our marine environment. We are apprehending newborns from their mothers’ arms to protect children. We are trampling on the territorial rights of Indigenous peoples while speaking of reconciliation.

[4:30 p.m.]

We act like the systems we have built are inevitable and unchangeable, but they are not. When we see systems creating perpetual crises, we must intervene. Let us find ways to work together to make things better for all people in B.C., and let us remember we should be judged for how the most vulnerable in our society are faring. Currently there are far too many vulnerable people in B.C. who are not thriving.

For many years, in Shawnigan, I spoke of the vision that our community had for its future. Let us all think of the vision we have for B.C.’s future. Mine includes children who feel nurtured, supported and cared for; parents who feel safe when they ask for help; young people who are given every opportunity to meet their highest potential; and decision-makers who are prepared to be solution-oriented and forward-thinking and willing to take risks.

I support the direction laid out in the government’s Speech from the Throne, but I encourage boldness. Dave Barrett, whose legacy we all benefit from to this day, is famous for recognizing that the greatest potential lies in embracing a bold, forward-thinking vision.

In the face of these crises, government has a duty to be decisive and audacious. Now is not the time for small steps or cautious measures. Now is the time to dare to set B.C. on a fairer, more equitable and, ultimately, more prosperous future.

N. Simons: It’s a pleasure to have the opportunity to respond to the Speech from the Throne.

I’d like to point out the fact that I’ve heard many Speeches from the Throne in this building, and mostly, it was from the perspective of the member from West Vancouver. It’s a perfectly good view you have today, but my view wasn’t as good back in the day.

I’m just glad that I get to speak about a throne speech about which I’m fairly proud. I know that there are a lot of expectations in our province after 16 years of one particular perspective, and I know that we’re not going to be able to meet everybody’s expectations as fast as they would like us to. But I know that we’re well on our way with, I think, a thorough throne speech. We’ll see how it’s followed up tomorrow with the budget, but taken so far, I think we’re in a very good place.

I’d like to start by acknowledging that my constituency saw to it that I came back. The slogan was: “Get Nick off the Sunshine Coast. Send him to Victoria.” So here I am and pleased to be able to represent a beautiful constituency, the only constituency in the province that you cannot get to any part of by road. We are reliant on ferries, reliant on aircraft travel or, if you’re a swimmer, a very good set of lungs. It’s a riding with unique needs and expectations and a unique place in our province — a beautiful riding, like so many parts of our province.

I’m proud to be able to do my best to represent the interests of the people who have sent me here and the interests of those who have not sent me here and the young people who haven’t voted and those who don’t vote. My responsibility is to all of them.

I’d like to thank the people in the community for their support. I also would like to acknowledge Hegus Clint Williams of the Tla’amin First Nation; Chief Warren Paull of the shíshálh First Nation; the mayors — Mayor Formosa, Mayor Milne and Mayor Rowe; the regional district directors; school board elected officials; Islands Trust elected officials — everyone who is doing their part to try and improve and support the conditions that will make our communities vibrant and healthy and good places to live, where there’s active arts and culture, where there’s a strong economy and where we look after one another.

[4:35 p.m.]

Being in a constituency that you can’t get to except by boat or by plane, there’s a certain sense that we have to look after each other. The boats stop running at night, and we’re on our own. We have that sense of independence, of a unique character, and we welcome all visitors, who enjoy their stays.

Many people have invoked the memory of the great Dave Barrett, and I just want to share a story. In my early political career, when I was running federally in the beautiful riding of West Vancouver–Sunshine Coast in 2004 for the New Democrats under Jack Layton, I was told that the NDP didn’t have a good chance to win in West Vancouver.

I took on the struggle, and in fact, we did pretty well, considering. I had the opportunity during that campaign to invite the late Dave Barrett to the Sunshine Coast. Just having a memory of driving around with him and hearing his stories, asking him questions, sharing laughs…. He could be considered the one who got me into provincial politics.

My intention was simply to run for the federal riding and get on with my career in First Nations child welfare. But in his colourful language, which I can’t repeat in this House, he told me I needed to run provincially and not to do so was — let’s say, paraphrasing — not a very good idea. So here I am, with his words still in my head and words of support and comfort.

I think of the accomplishments that were enumerated so well by my friend from West Vancouver — a strong list of very important accomplishments. I had the opportunity to ask him: “What do you think was your most important accomplishment?” I was surprised by the response until I really thought about it, and that was getting rid of corporal punishment in the schools.

I guess as a former social worker himself…. I, as a former social worker, could understand how that was symbolic of a perspective on the world that made a difference in our communities. We took a strong stance that it was not appropriate for governments to condone physical assault, essentially, on children.

I know we’re in an intergenerational space where some of us may have come from families where corporal punishment was used, and some of us may be young enough to think that that was a relic of a past generation. We’re in a place where opinions remain divided. I think we have a long way to go. I’d like to see the federal government do what most western countries have done and say: “We no longer condone spanking. It’s not appropriate. We don’t condone physical corrective measures for children. It’s not appropriate.” There are many studies that demonstrate how it leads to negative outcomes.

When that argument is made, some people who, as children, were spanked think: “How could I possibly have any negative outcomes? Look at me now.” But in the bigger picture, I think that would be an important policy change and, I think, one that we should urge the government to consider.

Dave Barrett was an important figure in our province, a lovely man, and of course, we all offer our condolences to his family.

Another issue that was raised last week during the time of the throne speech was the missing and murdered women — the march in Vancouver that was attended by hundreds and hundreds of people to bring attention to the injustices and the sad tragedy of missing and murdered First Nations and Aboriginal women.

[4:40 p.m.]

Having spent quite a number of years working in a First Nations community, I think that if we look at where we are today in terms of our awareness, our awareness is not always tied to a personal reflection as much as it perhaps could be. As a social worker, I remember looking at the faces of young men whose mothers had been murdered, and I thought about the consequences of such a tragedy on families.

I worked closely with the children of one particular woman who was murdered in Vancouver, and to recognize the impact on a community, on a family, is to recognize that there’s a broad scope of ramifications if we fail to address some of the underlying causes and underlying conditions that lead to such tragedies.

In that spirit, I think it’s important to recognize some good actions that this government has already taken in its, so far, short tenure. It’s not about only talking about what the previous government failed to do. It’s also about what we intend to demonstrate, what we intend to do, as we have four years to carry out a mandate.

One of the first actions of this government, which I was very happy to see, was the establishment of a stand-alone Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions. It’s not just the awareness in society of mental health or the attempt to reduce stigma around mental health. It’s to centralize and coordinate our response to what is, in British Columbia and many parts of North America and around the world, an opioid crisis and a mental health crisis. It’s difficult, often, to separate the two.

The establishment of a Mental Health and Addictions Ministry I think is more than just the creation of a new body. It’s a demonstration of our concern and the seriousness with which we take that concern.

People in British Columbia who are suffering with mental health issues know that there is a government that recognizes their unique struggles and is making an effort to find ways of addressing those. People who struggle with addiction know that we are not in the business of the blame game, the punishment circle. We’re interested in healthy citizens and finding ways to create that health, create the conditions for healthier living.

Now, having been a social worker some years ago, many of the little children who I remember back then are now adults, and I’m in contact with a number of them. Many of them have become quite successful and happy and are parents now themselves. I am pleased to see that government involvement didn’t wreck everything, that they saw that there was an effort to make things better. But I also struggle with the fact that some of these kids got into the criminal justice system, got into unhealthy addictions and struggle now as adults.

I want to acknowledge the words from my friend from Cowichan Valley, who spoke eloquently about our struggles in the child welfare system. I was a social worker in North Vancouver and in First Nations communities. I saw there were some commonalities of conditions that resulted in their involvement in the child welfare system — primarily poverty, primarily the lack of social supports, the inability to find within their family or in their community the necessary interventions to prevent the social worker from coming in.

[4:45 p.m.]

My goal as a social worker in a First Nations community was always to keep the ministry away. We would do what was necessary to ensure that there would be no concerns from the ministry. That always meant making sure that there was food, making sure stress was reduced, helping with getting kids to school and ensuring there was nutritious food.

We were quite successful in, I would say, reducing or almost eliminating the number of removals in the community. Removals is the word we use for apprehending. It used to be an apprehension for a child.

Now, I talk about that partly because I think we have a long way to go. We still have a lot to work on, especially in the child welfare system and in our corrections system. But I’m not going to decry the fact that not every issue was raised in the throne speech. I think our approach and our philosophy and our values were well reflected in that throne speech, the specifics of which will be outlined tomorrow. But the principles which we’ve outlined will carry us through those four years, and I hope that in those four years we address child welfare issues and our correctional system.

I got a call from someone in the provincial correction system just the other day. His concern was, among others, that when he gets released after spending some 18 months in jail, he will be released with $50 and a bus ticket to the location of his last offence.

Now, while in prison he will not be eligible for alcohol and drug programs. He will not be eligible for a proper counselling program. He will not be able to access any job skills training program. He will not be counselled on finding a house or a home to live in. In fact, when he gets out, he’s likely to be going to an unregulated recovery home, recovery house.

It’s within our four-year plan to bring back some structure to the recovery house sector. So when a person comes out of jail with an untreated addiction or an unaddressed mental health issue, what do we as a community expect? We should expect that there will be failure, because without that intervention, there will be.

If we fail to acknowledge or if we fail to address the concerns while those individuals are inside in a place where they can be spoken to or programs can be delivered, then we’re failing our community as a whole. Our crime rate will continue to hover around the same place where it’s at. The lives of these individuals will not be improved, and the lives of their families will not be improved.

I’m hoping that when people look at our throne speech and our budget, we see everything that we’ve…. The incredible commitments that we make, I think, are just the beginning. It may not have the same level of expectations that people had when the Barrett government came in, but let me just point out a few that I think need to be recognized.

One of the first things government did, besides establishing the Ministry for Mental Health and Addictions, was to increase the amount of money that people who were living on disability assistance receive by $100 a month. We also increased the amount of money people on social assistance received by $100 a month.

[4:50 p.m.]

These are individuals who, for reasons that are varied and numerous, are unable to find work and support themselves or their families. But more than just the increase in the rates was a statement that our job is to represent everyone. We didn’t choose any particular sector because of any other reason than it’s the right thing to do.

As much as possible, we have to ensure that people aren’t living in abject poverty with no hope. You think about mental health. You can also think about stress. And when you think about stress, you can think about conditions in which people live in this province. Affordability, being the theme of our throne speech, is not only timely…. We have a lot of catching up to do in this province.

I did describe the situation that we inherited as a bit of…. We came in, in the summer, and we realized there was a lot of work to do. It was almost like a triage government — just to fix the things that needed to be fixed before they got worse fast. I’m not saying that the opposition, when they were on this side, did nothing. There were obviously good things that happened. Nobody is denying that. I see eyebrows raised.

I acknowledge that. I acknowledge that the previous government had some successes. I think they just failed in many ways, in many areas. And it’s our responsibility as the new government to address some of those deficiencies, those areas where they didn’t really want to tread. It wasn’t interesting. It wasn’t beneficial to their goals.

After 16 years, I think the people of British Columbia are being reminded that it’s possible to have a government that listens, consults, analyzes, accepts expert advice and welcomes that input. We welcome the input of the public in public policy creation.

I think the previous government had a bit of a deficiency there. It was not in their interest to consult with everybody. It’s a bit of a joke when I tell people this, but I say…. Sometimes the opposition members stand up and they criticize us for consulting, and I have a laugh about it. It’s good to consult. You get better outcomes when you consult. When you cut corners, you tend to cut out important information. You tend to bypass good solutions.

We need to be conscious of the impact of the policy decisions that we make. My friend from West Vancouver…. I’m quoting him because I can see his riding from the ferry dock. But when he enumerated some 20 examples of our consultation, it’s important to remember that government has some resources. It’s not one person doing 20 consultations. It’s different experts and different sectors consulting on important aspects of public policy.

It’s a good list, actually, and I recommend those who want to see what excellent consultation we’re taking part in should just go look at the list that the member for West Vancouver–​Capilano gave us.

Hon. A. Dix: It’s inspiring.

N. Simons: It is inspiring, in fact. Thank you, Minister of Health.

I wouldn’t say that the fact that we’re consulting is…. Why would that be…? It’s a good idea. You know, it’s possible to overconsult if intentions are to put things off forever. But six months in, consultation is still pretty important. It’s not as if, when we’re finished those 20 examples of consultation, we’re just going to stop consulting. There will be new public policy issues that come along where we’ll need to consult some more.

[4:55 p.m.]

For now, we are going to be talking a bit before we start implementing some of our solutions to problems that have been created over this last decade and a half.

Another thing that we did was…. I don’t know why a government would have started charging people for adult basic education when you realize the step-up that it provides people, that extra strength to succeed in our economy. I don’t know why. Well, we restored tuition-free adult basic education. That’s fixing a problem — that unnecessary problem created by the previous government. We’ve fixed that.

We’ve raised disability and social assistance rates because the previous government did nothing. We fixed that. We have to do a lot of fixing before we can start actually enacting all of the policy changes that we want for the betterment of our community. We’re still fixing. We’re still suturing up some of the gaping wounds that were created by the previous government.

Twelve years in court. Every child who has graduated in the last couple of years went through a school system that was underfunded by this previous government. We’re fixing that. That’s another thing that we have to fix before we can get on to everything else. So 3,500 new teachers — that’s a lot of teachers. Imagine. The quality of school was impacted by that. Let’s be fair. We’re fixing a problem that was created by the previous government.

We’re reviewing the ferry system — you know why? — because this previous government made a mess of it. Made a mess. Fares went up faster and higher than they’d ever gone, and services were reduced. Service reductions at the same time. So we’re fixing that as well.

What about ICBC? We’re limiting the increases. What in the world happened there?

There should be some — what’s the word for it? — contrition on the part of some members of this opposition when they raise questions of who we had dinner with. Abject contrition. They raise questions about who members of our cabinet had dinner with because they’re consulting. You know, it’s just beyond belief in some respects.

What else did we fix? The B.C. disability bus pass. This government eliminated the bus pass for people on disability. What a ridiculous policy move to make. We had to fix that; we had to bring it back. This government is engaged in fixing some of these gaping wounds, and that’s just the start of it.

We got rid of the tolls on the bridges.

Interjection.

N. Simons: Yeah. Well, that’s nice of him. We have different perspectives on it. Let’s be fair. People in my constituency don’t have a bridge on which to reduce the tolls.

Interjection.

N. Simons: But we have ferries. Oh, the member for troubled waters, the leader of the Green Party, felt he had to remind me that we have ferries.

No, my good friend, I’m well aware of that.

When we eliminated the tolls, I heard about the ferries too. I was able to reassure the constituents that I represent that, in fact, we are going to take some action on ferry fares, because we have to fix the problems that 16 years of the Liberal government created.

We have a poverty reduction strategy in its infancy. We’re the only province without one. That’s something else we need to fix. We have a serious poverty issue in this province, serious inequality issues. Our poverty reduction strategy is going to address some of that.

Let’s see what else we have to fix. I have a whole list, almost as long as the member for West Van–Capilano’s list of our consultation.

[5:00 p.m.]

We fixed the fixed-term-lease loophole. That has benefited quite a few people. It has given people a little bit of sense of continuity and feeling of permanence where they need it.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

In my riding alone, we have two new homeless shelters. Is it because suddenly in the last six months we have more homeless people? No. People were living rough. People were living in their cars. People were living in the bush. We’re fixing that. We have a long way to go, but we have a good start. That’s definitely the case.

We’re building new homes. We’re addressing, as best we can, the opioid crisis. Powell River is going to get a community action team. It’s going to help families. It’s going to help individuals.

We need, probably, to look at our Mental Health Act a little bit, because we have some gaping holes that we will eventually work on. I like to see, when people who are committed involuntarily…. They need representation. Their rights need to be protected. We need to ensure that that happens. For 16 years no one’s looked at the Mental Health Act in the way that it needs to be looked at.

I’m confident, I think, by the fact — what we’ve seen in this throne speech — that we have a government that is intent on fixing some of the injustices that have either been ignored or overlooked, fixing the problems that have been created. We’re well on our way.

Restoring the UBC therapeutics initiative — a huge, important step to take.

I’m proud of this throne speech. I’m glad to sit on the side of the House where I can nod during the throne speech and be a little less cynical. It wasn’t full of slogans. It actually had some…. You know, throne speeches are a bit of the…. It’s not where the fine details come out, and nobody should expect that. But it speaks to our vision. It speaks to our values. It speaks to the future that we have, with hope, for our province.

With that, Madame Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity and thank you for the time.

J. Yap: I rise today to respond to the Speech from the Throne and take my place on behalf of my constituents. This throne speech, of course, lays out the government’s priorities for the coming session. The start of a new session, as we know, brings with it a desire to celebrate the many successes and talk about our communities as well as the people who contribute to that success.

My community of Richmond-Steveston is a wonderful place to call home. I’m so proud to be the representative for this historic and unique community.

I’d like to spend a bit of time thanking some of the people who have helped me to earn the honour of coming to this place to represent them, my volunteers: Ray Holme, Bobby Wong, Jeff Uy, Cindy Chan, Melissa Vong, Jennifer Luo and Patricia Hedstrom, to name a few.

I’d like to thank my constituency office staff, who provide outstanding service to the people in my riding, representing me while I’m here in Victoria: Paige Robertson, Po-wah Ng, Trevor Merrell and Angell Yao.

Then there is, of course, my legislative support staff here in Victoria: my legislative assistant, Shala Robins; my communications officer, Tracy Grimsrud; and my research officer, Jennifer Wizinsky.

Of course, as all of us do, I want to acknowledge and recognize and thank my family for their tremendous support and their love that they offer to me. We all know we could not do the jobs that we do without the help of our families, our friends, our colleagues and staff. I know it helps me to do the best job I can for the people I represent, the wonderful constituents of Richmond-Steveston.

People flock to Steveston for a variety of reasons that I’m always happy to boast about in this House. I hope you’ll indulge me. As you know, Steveston is a historic community with a fascinating history. The Gulf of Georgia Cannery was once the leading producer of canned salmon in this province and is now a national historic site that draws thousands of locals and visitors alike.

[5:05 p.m.]

The Britannia Shipyard National Historic Site is also very popular, giving people a glimpse into our local fishing industries and what a typical day was like for workers. These are just two of the many wonderful heritage offerings that take visitors back in time.

I assure you that Steveston’s present and future are just as vibrant and interesting. Some say Steveston has a rather fairy-tale charm. Maybe that’s why it’s been, until recently, home to the hit ABC television series Once Upon a Time, which members know I’ve talked about at every opportunity in this House. Since 2011, film crews have turned Steveston into Storybrooke, Maine. Local businesses and even the post office have been spotted in various episodes, and Tourism Richmond even organized a walking tour, as well as special package deals, for visiting fans of this TV series.

Sadly, all things come to an end, and Once Upon a Time will be wrapping up production in Steveston, as the show will end with its seventh season when it comes to a close later this year. I want to note that this production has been great for our local economy and has highlighted Steveston to those who perhaps had never heard of it or visited before. That’s been wonderful to see.

For those who are familiar with Steveston’s many offerings, they keep coming back for the wildlife sightings, the quaint village and shops, the many fantastic places to eat and gather with friends or to walk through the harbour, the waterfront and the boardwalk. There’s just so much to see and do in Steveston.

One of our greatest local gatherings, of course, is what we call, with great affection, “Canada’s biggest little birthday party since 1945.” That, as you know, is the long-running Steveston Salmon Festival each Canada Day. Kudos to the Steveston Community Society, which organizes one of the largest Canada Day celebrations across the country. About 80,000 people on average attend. From the pancake breakfast and the salmon bake to the big Canada Day parade that winds through Steveston village, to the entertainment throughout the day, there’s so much for everyone to enjoy.

A huge event like this can’t happen without many helping hands. The society is helped along by hundreds of volunteers, who are the heart of our great community. Capably and enthusiastically organizing and shepherding these volunteers for many years has been my constituent Janice Froese — who, I know, you know as well, Madame Speaker.

We’re lucky to have so many skilled and generous people in Richmond-Steveston who are so giving of their time, their talents and their energy — people like Loren Slye, a former Canadian navy diver and submariner, retired industrial fire chief and former city of Richmond fire captain. He has been so involved in our community, perhaps most notably as chair of both the Britannia Heritage Shipyard Society and the Steveston Historical Society. He also served as a member of the 2020 Steveston historic design committee.

Another constituent, Sarah Glen, has also been very active with the Steveston Historical Society, currently serving as its very capable executive director, as has Michael Chiu, who also serves as a director. The society has been in place since 1976 to preserve and promote the history of Steveston.

I also want to recognize Robert Kiesman, chair of the Steveston Harbour Authority. This organization is vital to our community, offering safety, service and security to commercial fishers. Of course, Steveston could not maintain its positive pioneer spirit without the Steveston Community Centre, and I wish to acknowledge its hard-working president, Brenda Yttri, and her wonderful team of volunteers, who provide cultural, social and recreational opportunities for members of our community.

[5:10 p.m.]

Meantime, the West Richmond Community Association — the West Richmond Community Centre, also in my riding — does fantastic work with the diverse neighbourhood of west Richmond through programs like child care programs, special events, fitness programs, youth opportunities, and adult and seniors activities. A big thanks to association president Don Taylor for his great leadership.

Another individual worthy of praise is Dave Semple. He has served as general manager of the community services department for the city of Richmond for many years, recently retired, and now continues to work with the federal and provincial governments on issues pertaining to Steveston waterfront. He has also served as chair of the Gulf of Georgia Cannery Society, which I mentioned earlier. The society honours Canada’s fishing heritage by preserving and promoting west coast fishing history.

Also involved in the Gulf of Georgia Cannery Society is Jim Kojima. He has also worked with the Steveston Community Society and Richmond Minoru Senior Centre, among other activities. He has also been recognized as one of Canada’s leading masters of judo and earned the Order of Canada.

Some of the volunteers and special people of note include Nina Graham, the unstoppable senior who has become a volunteer fitness instructor with the YMCA active seniors program. She is an inspiration to people of all ages, as is John Young, who started the Forever Young 55-plus running club, as well as the Forever Young 8K run. He and his wife, Joan, have helped so many people get fit and make important social connections that keep them, yes, young at heart.

Why do I mention all these people? It’s because they are working hard to build a better community, a better Steveston, and they are counting on us at the provincial level to support them in that work.

What does that mean for us in Steveston and in the greater Richmond area? It means more supports for our families and improvements to health care. It includes great schools, which need continued investment, including seismic upgrades and emergency preparedness kits. It means upgrades to important infrastructure, like all the dredging work in the Fraser River and Steveston Harbour, which our former government supported financially.

Dredging involves the careful removal and disposal of sediment from clogged navigation channels. This work helps to ensure that marine vessels can safely travel to their destinations, so it’s vitally important for trade and for our economy. It helps sustain jobs, growth and prosperity.

These are the sorts of things that are top of mind for people in my riding. But sadly, I’m afraid, the throne speech fails to address some of these key priorities.

When it comes to those supports for families, the NDP sure promised a lot in the last election. Let me refresh your memory. They promised $10-a-day daycare, but sadly, it’s not in the throne speech. The NDP also promised 114,000 housing units, but the throne speech references only 117. They also promised a $400 renters rebate, but — yes, again — it’s not in the throne speech.

The government talks a big game about affordability and making life easier for people. They make big promises around that, and they fail to deliver. Instead, those promises are replaced, with thanks to my colleague from West Vancouver–Capilano, with reviews. Review after review after review — all because this is an NDP government that is afraid to do the actual governing.

I’ll tell you about the big one that many of my constituents are curious about, and that’s the George Massey Tunnel. Our former government had a plan well in hand, well in place: a bridge to ease the congestion for about 80,000 commuters stuck in gridlock daily.

[5:15 p.m.]

There have already been studies and reports and meetings and consultations — years’ worth — and 14,000 pages’ worth of information, but that was not good enough for the NDP. So we wait as they conduct another redundant review. We wait in that gridlock, missing medical appointments and kids’ soccer games with the gridlock.

Commercial vehicles waiting to get goods to their intended destinations, delayed. Commuters are tired of waiting. They want action. They want to see any on the horizon from this government when it comes to easing that congestion at the George Massey Tunnel.

Then there’s health care. There’s a huge push in our community — as we know and as you know, Madame Speaker — for a new acute care tower at Richmond Hospital. Just this past week the Vancouver Sun highlighted the efforts of three Richmond council members who started a petition to the B.C. government to step up and commit to funding the tower. Since the petition was launched last fall, more than 1,840 people have signed it, and it’s still going strong.

The Richmond Chamber of Commerce also launched a campaign recently to gather support from the business community. We hear from a local paper, the Richmond News, that 47 Richmond businesses employing nearly 8,000 people have so far put their names behind the push for a new acute care tower. And as we know, the Richmond Hospital Foundation, which does great work, has done a tremendous job raising funds and awareness for this important need, with, at last count, over $27 million raised towards a new acute care tower.

The community is really rallying behind this cause because they understand the pressures currently faced by this facility, which is more than 50 years old, and because they see the challenges ahead, given our aging population.

Our former government got the project to the concept stage, but what happens next is anyone’s guess — other than the Minister of Health, who I see giving the thumbs-up. I’ll take that as a potentially good sign. In his ministry’s estimates, the good Minister of Health vowed to deal with this concept plan in an “expeditious” manner. That was the word that was used. We still don’t have much by way of a timeline or specifics on what expeditious means to him or the government. But I do know our entire community will be watching tomorrow’s budget closely for more detail.

Another health care project that’s very important to my community is Richmond Lions Manor. This complex care facility for seniors is in need of a complete rebuild. In fact, the site is ready to be built on.

It’s worth noting that the 100 or so residents were moved to another facility built in the north of Richmond, Richmond Lions Manor–Bridgeport. The old facility demolished a few years ago, plans were started, formulated to build a new 144-unit residential care facility. That process has gotten underway, and I was encouraged by the discussions that I had with the minister on this project during the estimates last fall. I do hope that this process continues to unfold. We’ll continue to keep an eye on this, as it is such an important project for our seniors in Richmond and beyond.

I’ve spent some time here reflecting on the priorities of my community, Richmond-Steveston, given remarks on the NDP’s priorities for the coming session. But I also want to highlight something that will be a big priority for me and many others in Richmond-Steveston in the coming months, and that’s fighting the NDP and Greens on their campaign and referendum around proportional representation. We know that to guarantee the outcome that they desire in this referendum that will be put to British Columbians later this year, they are skewing the parameters of it to their greatest advantage.

[5:20 p.m.]

This referendum, unlike the last two already held on this matter, will require a bare minimum of 50 percent plus one in order to pass. That’s much lower than the previous threshold of 60 percent. There will be no regional thresholds, as we have heard, as was the case in the past two referendums, which means voters in Metro Vancouver could have a bigger say in the outcome than those in rural communities. We also know the question would be decided by the NDP executive council behind closed doors.

Now, I’m not against electoral reform. But I believe that we should take a fair and balanced approach to this issue, one where the outcome will not lead to fringe parties with potentially extreme views gaining power, or legislative stalemates, nor one where political parties abandon the values that got them elected in the first place just so that they are able to form government and assume power.

Both of the aforementioned practices have been seen in many PR systems across the globe, to the detriment of the citizens that they govern. And we’ve heard and will continue to hear those examples where the minority governments that are formed often result in inconsistent policies due to having to placate the variety of opinions within the ruling party.

For over a century and a half, first-past-the-post voting has helped create a stability with majority governments often being produced, even governments led by the NDP. I give the example of a man who has been honoured, rightly so, in this House. Dave Barrett, when he was Premier — a majority government. They got a lot of things done. It’s a system which has resulted in only six members crossing the floor since the 1950s in British Columbia. Simply put, first-past-the-post allows voters to know what they are getting, and PR does not.

However, I guess today one could argue that’s the case with this current NDP government. You never know what you’re going to get. They made a pile of promises to the electorate, but at the end of the day, this is a throne speech that promises more reviews and little action. And I would argue that some of the actions that have been taken are to our province’s detriment.

Look at the trade war with Alberta currently underway and all the B.C. wineries suffering because of it. It’s completely unnecessary. And it’s amazing to me that a dispute over something as big as a pipeline is now trickling down to our hard-working grape growers and winery operators. We’re not seeing any effort by this government to de-escalate this trade war that they started in the first place.

In our view, British Columbians deserve better than what they’re getting from this government. Therefore, I can’t support the complete lack of action that we see on many fronts, including this Speech from the Throne.

Hon. B. Ralston: It’s a privilege to rise in the House and respond to the Speech from the Throne. When I heard the Lieutenant-Governor deliver her speech, I was filled with a sense of hope — a hope and optimism about the future, hope for a better and brighter future for people here in British Columbia.

In the recent campaign, what I discovered when I spoke to people in my riding and in other places in British Columbia…. Many people have become frustrated because they can’t keep up with the basic costs required to feed themselves, for clothing, for shelter. Many cannot afford to buy a home, let alone pay their rent. People are looking for something better, for solutions that actually work.

The throne speech lays out an ambitious agenda at a high level, of course, as all throne speeches do, to ensure that British Columbia is synonymous with affordable child care, affordable housing, sustainable economic growth and the creation of good jobs in every corner of the province. It puts people at the centre, as our Premier has often stressed, as government takes action to make life better for families everywhere in the province.

[5:25 p.m.]

My ministry, the Ministry of Jobs, Trade and Technology, has a role to play in helping government meet its top priorities of making life more affordable, improving the services that people need every day and creating good jobs for people across the province. My ministry is acting to meet those goals.

Let me give some examples. Last week we established British Columbia’s first-ever innovation commissioner in partnership with our Green Party friends to support our growing tech sector. That commissioner will advocate on behalf of the sector in British Columbia, in Ottawa and abroad.

The person chosen, Alan Winter, has a distinguished record of service and advocacy. He’s a scientist with advanced degrees and worked in the communications sector. Most recently he was the CEO of Genome B.C., which works collaboratively with Genome Canada, and, in recent years, has received a very high percentage of research money from the federal agency, Genome Canada — in fact, disproportionate, although I probably shouldn’t say it too loud, to the population of British Columbia.

He is someone who is very skilled in advocacy at the federal level. He knows the tech industry very well. He will be hiring a very small staff, who will enable him to have his pulse on all sectors of the technology industry in British Columbia. He will work also with other provinces and generally coordinate alignment with the federal government programs.

The present federal government, in its new mandate in 2015, set out what they described as an innovation agenda. So there is an opportunity to work with the federal government on that agenda, and I’m convinced he is the person that will be able to carry that out. I’m looking very much forward to working with him, as I know many other members of the House are. Certainly, the event in which we announced and launched his job as innovation commissioner was one with a lot of industry leaders congratulating and praising the choice of Alan Winter as the person to begin this task.

We’ll also soon be creating an emerging economy task force — again, a joint mandate in the confidence and supply agreement — which will focus, in my view, on an over-the-horizon look at the longer-term trends in the British Columbia economy as a relatively small subnational economy in a very competitive world.

It’s important to examine how we might continue to be competitive and prosperous, to create the kinds of jobs and opportunities for our citizens now and into the future and how we might lay the foundations through appropriate and thoughtful government action that will enable us to do that. Certainly, it’s a challenge, but I think mobilizing thoughtful leaders, who will be able to work together and come up with some important thoughts and plans for the province, will be a good step forward.

We are also, in the ministry, working to help B.C. businesses grow by implementing new policy to make it easy for businesses to succeed and improve the competitiveness of B.C.’s business climate. We have lowered the small business corporate tax rate by 20 percent — that is, from 2.5 percent to 2 percent, retroactive to April 1, 2017 — which will allow business owners to invest more money into the growth of their companies.

We’re also making it easier for businesses in smaller regional communities to export their goods overseas and expand their reach, and that’s increasingly important. Again, the size of the Canadian market relative to other markets is small, speaking in a more global context. It’s important, for growth of business, to consider…. At a certain point, if you want to expand the marketing of your product or expand the provision of your service and grow your business, it’s important to consider markets beyond local markets, although local markets are obviously the place where everyone starts. But it’s important to do that.

We have a program called export navigator, which has enabled more regional businesses to get help accessing new markets for their products and services. When those companies reach new markets and are able to make new contacts, make new sales and establish new business relationships, they have the power then to grow and create new jobs in their own communities.

[5:30 p.m.]

Opening up new markets for B.C. businesses will continue to be a strong focus for the government, and I’m proud to say we’re on the right path after a very successful trip to Asia last month. Regrettably, the member for Kamloops–South Thompson disparaged the trade mission as simply…. He called it “traipsing across Asia.” I’m surprised. Frankly, I’m disappointed.

Obviously, that’s been an effort of the previous government, even well-known members of the government. The member for Richmond North Centre was instrumental for a number of years in running the…. It was the Minister of International Trade. She certainly didn’t take that approach. I hope that’s not the policy of the opposition. Certainly the member for Kamloops–South Thompson is a prominent member of the opposition, and I hope his comments don’t reflect the attitude of the new order over there on the other side of the House.

I accompanied the Premier, the Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture and the Minister of State for Trade to China, South Korea and Japan to develop government and business relationships and pave the way for job creation throughout British Columbia. I think what made the trip particularly productive was that in each city that we went to, there were established trade and investment offices, whether in Guangzhou and Beijing in China, Seoul in Korea or Tokyo in Japan.

Those offices established, in some cases, for many years, have a well-established staff and group of contacts. The relationships there are established ones, and I think the opportunity to meet new businesses and investors who are interested in British Columbia was an important one.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Those three countries are British Columbia’s second-, third- and fourth-largest destinations for exports, by dollars. China is approximately $6 billion a year; Japan, $3.8 billion a year; and Korea, $2.2 billion a year.

Korea, in particular, is a growing market, given the new Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement, which was signed rela­tively recently. Almost all Canadian goods enter Korea with no tariff at all. It’s been particularly a boon for the agrifood business — seafood, in particular. That’s much valued in Korea. Of course there are the traditional energy products, but certainly it’s been an occasion for rapid growth of British Columbia exports to Korea.

I also was able to visit with companies that have already made investments in British Columbia. In Seoul, I met with a company called Netmarble, which owns a studio in Vancouver called Kabam. That is a studio that develops games. They have the Marvel franchise, for those aficionados of Marvel. Perhaps the member from West Vancouver is particularly interested in the Marvel franchise. I know he plays a lot of video games himself, so I expect his interest in this topic.

Kabam, that studio, has a couple of hundred people. The CEO of Netmarble, which is a rapidly growing global company, was very interested in British Columbia and the quality of the talent that they had at Kabam and are interested — and, certainly, I was trying to persuade them — to consider expansion here in British Columbia. Certainly, it was not something that they had not considered, given their experience of the quality of the kind of people that they had working for them in British Columbia. They were anxious to consider expansion.

[5:35 p.m.]

Similarly, in Japan, I also visited with Sega, which is a well-known game company. They own another studio here in Vancouver called Relic, which develops a different kind of game. They’re World War II strategy games. I think Company of Heroes is one of the titles. They have a couple hundred people, again, working in a studio in Yaletown. They’re expanding to a new facility in Mount Pleasant. They’re going to hire some more people, so I was anxious to encourage them to do that.

I think, generally, this venture was a constructive one and contributed to deepening our trade ties. I know the Minister of Tourism was on the China leg, and 2018 is the year of China-Canada tourism, to develop tourism. There were approximately 300,000 tourists from China who visited British Columbia last year. So one can well imagine, given their vast population, that a modest increment in the number of tourists who come to British Columbia would mean a very big expansion of tourism opportunities here in British Columbia.

The minister was anxious to impress upon them…. The government signed a deal with the WeChat platform which will enable opportunities to visit British Columbia and some of the attractions, whether it’s the wine country in the Okanagan or skiing or wildlife viewing or the scenic west coast. All of those experiences we treasure here as a matter of course in British Columbia but that others look enviously at and look forward to travelling to experience them themselves were things that we put forward in the meetings and presentations that were made there.

As the previous minister will know, the member for Richmond North Centre, British Columbia’s international network has doubled since 2011. There are now 60 representatives based in priority markets across Asia, Europe and U.S.A. The growth of B.C.’s exports…. Whether pulp, lumber, copper, seafood, agrifoods, machinery and equipment exports — all of those are growing. It’s important for jobs here in British Columbia that those exports continue to grow and that we continue to make the case in other countries about the quality and desirability of exports from British Columbia.

There’s never a bad time to call on your best customers, and calling on China, Japan and Korea, our No. 2, 3 and 4 export destinations, is good business. It’s good for British Columbia, and it’s good for jobs here in British Columbia.

In addition, among the other responsibilities that the ministry has is to open markets for B.C. businesses. It also seeks to protect British Columbia’s interests through a number of trade agreements. I think we’ve seen a recent demonstration of some of the challenges of trade, whether it’s the recent actions of the government of Alberta in deciding to issue a directive to the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission not to purchase B.C. wine…. But there are other opportunities to promote the wine industry, which the Minister of Agriculture has taken.

Clearly, wine is an important contributor to B.C.’s economy, generating many jobs and economic benefits. We on this side of the House stand with B.C.’s wine producers. In fact, British Columbia will proclaim the month of April as B.C. Wine Month, in conjunction with B.C. liquor stores throughout the province.

We are also working in conjunction with the Minister of Agriculture to open new markets for B.C. wines within Canada and around the globe. B.C. wines have a very deserved reputation for quality and purity and are much sought after in other jurisdictions. We’re hoping and working to build an enhanced knowledge — and, ultimately, purchases — of B.C. wines in other countries.

[5:40 p.m.]

Looking to the south, which sometimes induces vertigo when we look at what’s going on in the United States…. Resolving the softwood lumber dispute is a top priority for the government. We will work with the forest sector to ensure that it stays competitive and continues to generate good jobs here in British Columbia. We will defend, absolutely, the 60,000 people here in British Columbia who rely on the forest sector for their jobs and livelihoods.

We clearly disagree, flatly, with the recent U.S. decision on tariffs. It has put many thousands of jobs in British Columbia potentially on the line.

Fortunately, the price of lumber, as it heads south to the United States, is high. The producers are, at this point, able to absorb the tariff, but that will not always be the case. Anyone who is familiar with the cyclical nature of commodity prices knows that commodity prices will not continue, always, to go up. In the cycle, they, at some point, will go down. That will impose increasing pressure on, particularly, smaller producers, which will have consequences which are negative for jobs in British Columbia.

In the past, when the United States has imposed these unfair tariffs, courts have sided with British Columbia. I’m advised, and I’m confident, that historic precedent will prevail and serve the province well in those disputes again.

Elsewhere on the trade front, the seventh round of NAFTA negotiations is expected to take place later this month in Mexico City. I want to say that the federal minister responsible for those negotiations, Chrystia Freeland, has been in constant contact with ministers in all provinces and has kept all of the ministers advised of the progress of negotiations — or the setbacks, as well.

Certainly, from my perspective, we have every reason to be confident in the tack that’s being taken. The Canadian delegation is well prepared and has a very deliberate and thoughtful strategy. It has considered all the possibilities and contingencies and is pressing forward with the Canadian case in the best way possible.

We support the federal government’s position that any modernization of NAFTA, as it’s sometimes called, needs to take the North American relationship forward and not backward. If done properly and correctly, the negotiations offer the opportunity to integrate progressive, free and fair approaches to North American trade. We have a provincial official at the negotiations to represent British Columbia, and we continue to work with the government of Canada, along with stakeholders here at home, to advance and protect British Columbia’s interest.

While there is some obvious uncertainty in Canada’s trade relationship with the United States, we recognize that the United States is still our leading trade partner. We recognize that there are untapped opportunities that we can take advantage of, and we should take advantage of, in the United States. It’s still the world’s biggest market and a very rich country, although one might sometimes question the distribution of wealth. But that’s a separate debate, which I don’t want to enter just here at the moment.

We’ve taken steps to expand British Columbia’s trade ties along the U.S. west coast in conjunction with the efforts of the federal government, who are present in American markets, particularly Rana Sarkar, who’s the consul general in San Francisco, and Brandon Lee, who is the consul general in Seattle. They are both very effective, energetic and high-profile envoys on behalf of Canada and its trade interests both in Washington State — in Seattle, in the case of Mr. Lee — and in California, with Mr. Sarkar in San Francisco.

We’ve strengthened our support for the Cascadia Innovation Corridor between B.C., Washington and Oregon, which will help grow life sciences, clean tech and data analytics industries across borders. British Columbia has opened new trade and investment offices in Seattle and San Francisco to raise B.C.’s profile as an attractive place to invest.

[5:45 p.m.]

In parallel and in conjunction, working closely with Mr. Sarkar in San Francisco and with Mr. Lee in Seattle, we have again very small, effective trade offices in both Seattle and San Francisco to keep an eye specifically on British Columbia’s interest.

One can well imagine that in those markets, there are important opportunities, whether it’s Canadians who have work in the United States or B.C. companies who seek capital or venture capital investment for their companies here in British Columbia or whether it’s companies who have started here and wish to expand to Washington or California. All of these are business opportunities that generate jobs and prosperity here in British Columbia, in which these offices are geared to assist and to advance. So there are some opportunities, I think.

Sometimes people speak of it at this particular juncture, given the political climate in the United States, that perhaps Canadians who live there are more willing at this point to consider returning to Canada and to British Columbia, particularly in the tech sector. While I was there in Palo Alto very briefly, I did meet with an expatriate group of Canadians, and some of them are interested. It does depend on the stage in life that they’re at. They’re not necessarily automatically inclined, as some of us here might feel instinctively, to return. They’re usually well established, they’re receiving very good pay, and their families are established.

At different stages of life, people are, perhaps, more prepared to return. There is, certainly, some pull towards returning to Canada, so we intend to work on that and take advantage of that.

To talk further about the tech sector, if I might…. Most recently British Columbia participated in a good example of federal-provincial cooperation in the supercluster competition. It’s a competition established by the federal Minister of Innovation, Mr. Navdeep Bains. The premise of the competition was to, in a competitive process, attract bids to establish what are described as “clusters.” A cluster is not necessarily…. It’s a geographic but also a conceptual link between a group of companies, universities, colleges and non-profits, which are focused on a particular sector and have opportunities for competitive and effective growth in the future.

The leading bid from British Columbia, which was successful, was digital technology. British Columbia has particular strengths in data analytics and in visualization technology — what is sometimes called alternate reality, virtual reality and mixed reality. They’re a cluster of terms. But what that means is that….

The origin of British Columbia’s leadership in this area started with the gaming industry. I think many people refer to Electronic Arts as the genesis of this sector. There’s a real expertise in animation, in visualization and in 3-D effects. While that initially was deployed in the gaming sector, for entertainment, what’s become apparent is, in the era of big data, if you wish to display or analyze or use data, sometimes it’s much more helpful and effective to put it in a form where it might be visualized or presented in 3-D.

There are companies…. For example, there’s one called LlamaZOO, which does a 3-D representation that’s used in the mining industry. It does a 3-D representation of an ore body after inputting data about the ore body and the work that might have been done in the mine up till that time. It then uses that digital double of the ore body, if I can put it that way, to plan the extraction of ore in the future.

[5:50 p.m.]

Because it’s done in virtual reality, it can therefore lead to a more efficient extraction of ore and ultimately be more profitable. That’s the reason for doing it. That’s a British Columbia company, actually right here in Victoria, that is revolutionizing some of the traditional resource industries, and there are many others.

There’s another company called MineSense, which uses — through the Internet of things, through a vast array of sensors — an ability to sort ore that’s extracted in a much more efficient and fine way. Again, if you extract the ore from the dross and the overburden more effectively, you reduce your costs and you increase your efficiency and, ultimately, your profitability. So that’s a company that has recently attracted some attention — again, a B.C. company that is revolutionizing the resource sector.

The supercluster bid for British Columbia was successful. It’s basically a group of about 200 companies. One of the genius — I suppose, the effective — parts of the process was to require companies to collaborate. The collaboration in British Columbia was led by Microsoft and Telus and a number of other companies, institutions, colleges and non-profits.

The sector is elated to win and, I think, poised for future growth in that particular sector, which will benefit not only British Columbia. The technologies and, I suppose, the strategies that will be developed in developing new products and new analytical tools will benefit many industries and will create more jobs and prosperity here in British Columbia.

It’s very good news for British Columbia, and I’m very proud to have some small part in that. Certainly, the ministry provided some support for that endeavour. I’m looking forward to working with the supercluster secretariat and with the new innovation commissioner as we move forward there.

We’re also in the process of trying to attract and grow new and emerging technology companies and also to attract more skilled workers provincewide. It’s clear that one of the drivers for growth in the sector here is British Columbia talent, and it’s very clear that many companies consider that the major reason for locating here in British Columbia.

That’s why the government just recently announced 2,900 tech spaces — for example, in Prince George and the University of Northern British Columbia, spaces for civil engineers; and in the College of New Caledonia, also in Prince George, spaces for civil engineering technologists. Announcements were included in other universities, whether it was in Thompson Rivers University…. There was a digital cluster in Kelowna, which is emerging as a tech centre, and Simon Fraser and other institutions in the Lower Mainland.

That announcement was, in fact, the biggest announcement of new spaces in ten years in the post-secondary sector — well received by the sector. Those talented people who take those spaces and are educated in those institutions will be able to contribute to the jobs of the future and the growth of the companies in those sectors.

The existing tech strategy has a number of commitments that the government will pursue to completion, and we look forward to building on previous commitments after proper consultation with the industry.

I’ve toured the province to participate in tech-focused, regional roundtables….

Oh, I’m sorry. I’ve run out of time. There’s so much to talk about. I’m only just scratching the surface of the opportunities in British Columbia.

S. Gibson: It’s a pleasure to be here today, in the people’s House, to speak to the Speech from the Throne, which lays out the priorities of this government. It’s good to represent the constituents of the Abbotsford-Mission riding.

[5:55 p.m.]

I want to thank just a few people before I make my remarks. My two assistants in my constituency, Jean Hooge and Joyce Hill, do a tremendous job of just really working with our constituents, helping them solve their problems and directing them to the resources they need.

Here in Victoria, Legislative Assistant Elishia Butler looks after me, as well as Research Officer Ryan Mitton and Communications Officer Heather Clifford. Great big help to me here.

I should not miss out in mentioning my family. My wife, Joy, who has put up with me being in politics for 37 years. She’s starting to get used to this now, actually. She retired from being a primary school teacher after many years. She wanted to have time to focus on me, of course. But seriously, I can’t think of a more important job anywhere in the world than being a first-grade teacher.

My wife gets the kids at the beginning of the year. They can’t read or write. At the end of the year, they can read and write. Very important job — probably more important than an MLA, frankly.

I have two daughters. Shari-Anne, who we got to move with her husband and three kids, our three little grandsons, to Yarrow, in the riding for the member for Chilliwack here. It’s about a 20-minute drive from our home, and we’re so thankful to be able to do that because they were living in Vancouver near city hall in an apartment, very small.

Some of you know our special needs daughter, Alisa, is with us a lot and has brought a lot of challenges and also a lot of satisfaction to our life, having a daughter with some cognitive limitations. It’s been good to have them in our life.

I appreciate family support and also friends and colleagues who have supported me over the years in my different challenges in politics and roles, as I got involved municipally, formerly the district of Matsqui, which amalgamated with the city of Abbotsford in 1995. It was a privilege for me to serve on both those councils over the years.

Abbotsford-Mission is a wonderful riding. It’s just a great place. For some of you who haven’t maybe ventured out into the valley lately — you’ve been spending all your time in Metro Vancouver — it’s okay to come out. We’re pretty friendly out in the valley.

Interjections.

S. Gibson: I see the Minister of Health is acknowledging that with a lot of relish, and I appreciate that. It’s great, also, the member for Surrey-Whalley is certainly being very encouraging here. I just appreciate that a lot. This will not go unnoticed.

I want to acknowledge, too, the little communities. Sometimes we look around our ridings and we don’t realize, of course, there are lots of little communities that make them up. The member for Powell River–Sunshine Coast would acknowledge that as well.

McConnell Creek, Clayburn, Matsqui, Deroche, Dewdney, Lake Errock and many others — these are small, bucolic communities. Also, we have a lot of attractive urban areas: Mountain Village, Eagle Mountain, Glenn Mountain and many others. If they made a movie about my riding, it would be called A River Runs Through It because — thank you for appreciating that — on one side is Mission, and on the other side is Abbotsford.

We noted just recently the passing of a former Premier, Dave Barrett. I’m wondering if anybody here knows the first riding he represented in the Legislature.

Hon. A. Dix: Dewdney.

S. Gibson: Dewdney, which is a part of my riding today. Interesting history.

We’re so fortunate now to, of course, have me represent the riding now. It’s quite a change.

Interjections.

S. Gibson: Thank you.

We’re at the heart of the Fraser Valley. Agriculture is a key economic driver in my community. Raspberries, strawberries, blueberries, a few cranberries and many other crops are grown — cold crops and others throughout the area.

We also have significant horticulture and a lot of dairy farms, chickens and big greenhouses. One of my constituents has a large greenhouse, and he grows red, orange and yellow peppers and ships most of them to the eastern U.S. There’s a lot of agriculture.

[6:00 p.m.]

A bit of a disappointment there when I looked at the speech — not a lot of mention of agriculture, just one passing mention. It leads me to be worried that perhaps this government isn’t valuing agriculture as they should, based on the speech. Now, I’m hoping that I won’t be disappointed in the near future, but certainly they’ve lowered the bar a little bit. I’m sure that we’ll be notified if something changes there.

Our former government worked really hard in the agrifoods sector. I think we all know about that. International markets clamour for our diverse offerings. Of course, Okanagan tree fruit is an example. The other member from Kelowna here, who is not present at the moment, did a big, big push on Okanagan fruit trees’ growth and all of the apples, peaches and cherries, etc. I just hope that this government has not intentionally left out agriculture in its speech. The throne speech did touch a little on the tragic wildfire situation, but again, the impact on agriculture wasn’t mentioned. That was a bit troubling.

Another concern for me is advanced education. I have the privilege of serving with the member for Surrey-Cloverdale. We’re co-critics on the Advanced Education file. Having taught for 16 years at the university level and having received a grad degree in education at SFU, it’s something I take a high interest in, frankly. Again, I thought that the speech was a little disappointing. It did re-announce some B.C. Liberal initiatives. That’s encouraging. I think we can learn from us here, and I just want to acknowledge that. These are not folks that are shy in adopting others’ values, and it’s very encouraging.

As well, there are the additional tech seats around the province at TRU and UNBC. That’s encouraging. They didn’t seem to give the proper attribution, though, which I thought might have happened. I should note that the NDP platform in the last election promised to eliminate interest on student loans. I’m not quite sure how that’s going. Reducing the interest will help — indeed, allow — our post-secondary graduates to get out of debt more quickly. That’s encouraging. With additional seats, we can get more people trained and ready to take on the skilled jobs of tomorrow.

The $1,000 completion grant for college and university grads — I didn’t see that either. It’s probably coming, just missing at that point. I recall that during the September budget debate, we brought that to her attention as well. It didn’t get mentioned. So it’s probably just delayed. We’ll have to wait for Tuesday’s budget to see about that. As far as big promises, there was one about providing more services to students, a promise to eliminate portables, getting back to schools, in Surrey. That wasn’t mentioned either.

A lot of renters were eager for the $400 rebate that the NDP was offering. I’m sure that’s forthcoming. A commitment seems to have temporarily disappeared. The $10-a-day child care, apparently, by all accounts, may be a theme rather than a destination at this time. We’ll kind of keep an eye on that one. The 114,000 housing units — people are kind of wondering a little bit about that. What happened to these commitments to make life more affordable? We’ll stay tuned. I think that’s a fair question they’ll have to eventually answer, and perhaps this will happen shortly.

Now, these promises cost money. We know that. We were well regarded as a fiscally conservative government — 16 years of carefully managing the resources of the people. These promises that we’re hearing cost a lot of money, but without a plan to bring in more revenue, create jobs and attract investment, it’s going to be a challenge to raise those kinds of funds. Government needs to take a balanced approach. We see a lot of spending aspirations, but not very much revenue to generate these ideas.

[6:05 p.m.]

Their Speech from the Throne said: “We will grow our economy, and we will foster prosperity that is sustainable and broadly shared with British Columbians.” It sounds kind of hopeful, but so far we don’t see much proof that they’re actually doing the work to pursue this goal. They seem to be spending most of the time scaring away investment instead of attracting it.

We’re still in the midst of a totally unnecessary trade war that the Premier and Environment Minister started with Alberta over a pipeline that’s actually under federal jurisdiction. That dispute is having far-reaching consequences. Our hard-working grape growers have been dragged into it, and now Alberta has banned B.C. wine. It’s a real tragedy. It’s a huge blow to our agriculture industry, yet the NDP has done nothing to diffuse it. Now, I know the NDP think they’re putting a few ads in the paper. Wine Month might help. But I think this is really cosmetic.

We also see Alberta suddenly noticing its opposition to the North Montney mainland extension. This critical outflow pipeline would help connect B.C.’s natural gas with eastern markets — $2 billion worth of natural gas. They never opposed it before, but now, coincidentally, they’re doing just that — 2,500 direct jobs.

This trade war is causing problems for multiple industries that contribute so much to our economy, and there are other problems being created by this government, actions that serve only to create more uncertainty and instability. George Massey Tunnel — good example. We’ve heard a lot from our member from south Delta here. I think the member from south Delta has done a very good job of articulating his concerns. I’m hoping the government will carefully listen to that message.

Eighty thousand commuters a day have to deal with congestion that is at times unbearable and, my personal feeling, is dangerous, frankly, if you’ve ever driven through there, having those trucks coming right at you. Frightening. It’s not called B.C.’s worst bottleneck for nothing.

Our former government studied all the options thoroughly, gathered input from stakeholders and the public — 14,000 pages of study. A new bridge was determined to be the best way to go. It would have created 3,000 construction jobs. Make that 9,000 construction jobs. But the NDP cancelled the project and ordered another review, a redundant review. Now they’ve decided to proceed with a new Pattullo Bridge, which is some good news, bad news, frankly.

Interjection.

S. Gibson: Well, the bad news is that it is probably underengineered, frankly, for the size that’s going to be needed.

Interjection.

S. Gibson: That’s right. Here’s a member from Surrey that knows, speaking to it right here. You can get a lot of good advice over here.

What about all the question marks around Site C? They finally made a decision, but in stalling it, squandered millions of dollars to dragging it out. All the research was done. We knew it was going to be needed, and I am thankful, for the record, that the NDP made the right decision. A lot of delay there.

I believe this government is tarnishing B.C.’s reputation as a place that welcomes business. We want to make business outside our province welcome here. We’ve got a trade war on with a neighbouring province.

What about the relationship between the NDP and their Green partners? I am going to be interested to see how this ensues as we get closer to more of the budget deliberations reflecting the philosophy of both the government and the Third Party.

What about the referendum? We’ll be talking about that a lot more. I am personally very worried about this referendum. As I talk to constituents in my riding, they’re really worried about it. I believe all over the province, in many constituencies represented by government members, there’s a concern.

[6:10 p.m.]

The rules of the referendum are really pretty vague. The decisions are going to be made behind closed doors, like cabinet. The threshold is lowered to 50 percent plus one for a significant change. Think about all the wars that were fought by our soldiers, going out and fighting for our political system that will be changed almost capriciously — pretty concerning.

There’s no requirement for regional representation at all, like we used to have in the two attempts that were made a few years ago. There’s no decision on voter turnout. You could have an incredibly low turnout and dramatically change our political process — perhaps forever. This is very disturbing. As the public finds out about this, they increasingly say to me: “How can this be?” I say: “Well, talk to the government.” It’s shocking. Our current system has served us very well.

Also, this bill allows for a ranked ballot where voters have the choice between multiple electoral systems. Given that, it’s possible that people will accidentally vote for electoral systems that they don’t like simply because they rank them, and they have to put them second, third or fourth. This is also troubling. There’s little chance of maintaining our current system unless it succeeds on the first ballot.

When you look at all these moves, it seems clear that the NDP, very closely associated with the Greens, are working together to produce a win for proportional representation. They have a vested interest in the outcome, because it will serve both these parties very well. That’s not the way we do government — is it? — in this province. I don’t think so.

They were much different, the ways that we did it in 2005 and 2009. Both times there was an independent and non-partisan Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform. They defined the process and the question. It was done very, very carefully and respectfully of all the regions of the province. The thresholds were such that folks in rural areas of the province felt they had a say.

We’re changing government dramatically. I would argue that the process used in those two years was free of political interference and manipulation, unlike what we’re seeing now. I just reviewed the questions. Did you see the questions on that survey? I was very alarmed. I was quite worried. It’s slanted. The survey is slanted. We need to stand up to that.

I’ll continue working hard for my constituents here in Abbotsford-Mission to make sure that their needs are being met. It’s a real pleasure for me to represent them here in this Legislature.

The throne speech left much to be desired, so I hope we’ll hear more detail on how this government will fulfil its many lavish promises as we move forward through this legislative session.

M. Elmore: It’s a great honour to respond to the throne speech and represent folks on behalf of Vancouver-Kensington. I’m very pleased to rise and speak in support of the throne speech. I say that it’s been a long time coming, as I’m now in my third term.

It’s just a real pleasure to speak in favour of a throne speech that’s really focused on making life more affordable for people in British Columbia, improving the public services that people depend on and also ensuring that the investment in a sustainable economy provides opportunities for all British Columbians. These are the three themes, during the election, that I engaged in conversations on with folks in Vancouver-Kensington, and I certainly heard a lot of feedback, a lot of hardship and a lot of suffering.

[6:15 p.m.]

For the throne speech to address the reality of folks in British Columbia and to acknowledge the cumulative impact of 16 years of decisions by the previous Liberal government in creating the situations that we’re in…. Recognizing that but also moving forward as a government, listening to people and understanding the hardship and making commitments to move forward, I think it’s a very positive direction we’re heading in, being in a minority situation and also working in partnership with our colleagues from the Green Party.

I’ve heard from folks in Vancouver-Kensington and also in my role as Parliamentary Secretary for Poverty Reduction. It’s a great honour to be working on bringing in a poverty reduction plan in British Columbia. British Columbia is the only province that doesn’t have a poverty reduction plan, which also contributes to having record-high poverty rates, having the highest inequality gap across our country and, in reality, a lot of folks experiencing a lot of hardship.

In terms of the commitments that were made in the throne speech, we have made recognition of what the challenges are that people face around the crisis of affordability, just the crunch that folks have around affordable housing. We’ve heard that as a very consistent theme.

As part of our plans to also bring in a poverty reduction plan, I’ve had the opportunity to travel outside of Vancouver to visit many communities across the province — to really have conversations and community consultations and to hear the experiences of folks in communities. That’s been one of the challenges that have been raised to me and that I’ve heard in meeting with mayors and councils, meeting with First Nations councils, having discussions at Aboriginal friendship centres with service providers and also in community consultations with folks who live in poverty.

A near-zero vacancy rate for affordable rental housing is a reality. There are challenges around folks who are homeless or need supports, as well as safe, affordable and adequate housing for folks right across the spectrum — in particular, for middle-class families. That’s a real need, a real priority.

I’m very pleased that there is a commitment acknowledging that, addressing the need for British Columbians and recognizing the right of British Columbians to have access to safe, affordable and adequate housing. We’ve seen, also, some initial steps addressing this, taking some steps to announce the 2,000 modular units with supportive services. That’s a positive step. The 1,700 units of affordable rental housing are a first step in the right direction.

In addition, hearing from folks who live in poverty, hearing their stories in different communities, is also just a real wake-up call. It’s difficult to hear their stories. We know our government made an initial commitment to increase income assistance rates by $100 a month for people on income assistance and people with disabilities and also to increase earning exemptions for both by $200 a month, to ensure that people with disabilities have access to a transportation amount to support them. These were all positive first steps, but certainly more needs to be done. That’s part of our commitment around bringing in a poverty reduction plan in British Columbia.

Certainly, it’s not an easy task. It’s a challenge. It really cuts across a number of different areas, and it’s complex. Of people who live in poverty, the number living below the poverty line are 700,000, but 40 percent are also the working poor. They’re working, bringing home a salary but not able to make ends meet. So housing remains a big challenge. We have challenges on the supply and demand sides.

[6:20 p.m.]

On the one hand, there have been a number of housing units that have been constructed, but it’s more on the high end and not on the affordable end. There’s a need to ensure that we have adequate housing for folks on low income and also medium income. That’s a priority.

In addition, there’s the need to address the reality around child care, which is the second-highest cost that we’ve heard for families. There’s just a real shortage in terms of families, single parents, being able to have access to affordable, accessible and quality child care. There’s a real shortage in communities right across the province, particularly for infant-toddler, parents with young babies. That’s a real need.

The commitment to ensuring that there’s adequate child care is much needed. It’s the second-highest cost after housing for families, and there’s just a tremendous shortage. We’ve made initial steps towards that.

I’m very pleased, in the throne speech, that we’re going to continue and ensure to build a child care system on the three principles of affordability, accessibility and also quality — ensuring that there are spaces available, that it’s affordable for families and also that there are qualified, early childhood educators who are able to provide that quality care. So those are three components.

Travelling across the province, also hearing about just the challenges around…. We have a lot of British Columbians who go hungry. The issue of food security is very pressing for folks who don’t have access to quality food. In particular, when going outside of the Lower Mainland, there are challenges around transportation.

These are some of the stories that I’ve heard, and these are some of the components that we want to address in terms of a poverty reduction plan being put in place. The throne speech making the commitment primarily around the two large pieces, housing and also child care, is a positive step in that direction.

I’ve heard some remarks from colleagues on the other side that we made commitments in terms of our campaign and our election promises, and: “Why haven’t we delivered anything?” I think that our record after seven months is…. We’re moving in the right direction. I think British Columbians can see our commitment. We have taken action to address the reality that British Columbians face.

In addition, the other aspect that’s important in terms of access to opportunities…. We want to ensure that British Columbians are supported and that services are in place to ensure that they have opportunities. This is around access to education. Removing the fees for folks that want to complete their grade 12 and access adult basic education…. I’m very happy that we have removed those fees as well as removed the fees for folks who want to access English-language-learning courses.

These are very key in terms of ensuring that people have the opportunity to finish their grade 12 and also continue on to upgrade their skills in either post-secondary vocational training and trades training, either in a diploma program or in college or university.

Those are of keen importance, as well as our commitment to ensure that children in care have access to free tuition. This is also a positive investment in folks. We know that children in care have one of the highest levels of poverty in our province. So our view — and it’s my view — is that access to education is a foundational piece, and it’s important in terms of providing opportunity.

I’m going to reserve my right to continue debate and move adjournment of the debate.

M. Elmore moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow morning.

The House adjourned at 6:25 p.m.