Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

YOUTH AND TRADES

M. Dean: “We’re opening up the doors of opportunity for more people by investing in skills training throughout the province,” so said the Premier of B.C. when he announced that more than $5.4 million is being invested in industry-standard training equipment to give trades and tech students the skills they need to succeed.

The funding allows 15 public post-secondary institutions to replace obsolete equipment and acquire the latest technology — to respond to industry changes and curriculum requirements, which will benefit students and employers. Training equipment funded by the program ranges from a computer lab set for a digital media technology program to 3D printers, industry-standard cooking equipment, and hot water boilers and furnaces for plumbing and gas fitting programs.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Getting K-to-12 students involved and interested in pursuing a career in the trades is one way the province is ensuring a steady supply of homegrown talent. We need to ensure that we’re training enough tradespeople, because we expect 100,000 job openings in trades in the next ten years.

In partnership with the Ministry of Education and secondary schools, the Industry Training Authority, the ITA, delivers youth trades-training programs that help get students involved and interested in the trades earlier in their school years. The mission of the ITA is to build the trades that build B.C.

The Industry Training Authority’s youth trades-training programs allow youth to start apprenticeship training and earn high school credits at the same time. ITA works with employers, with apprentices, industry, labour, training providers and government to fund training, issue credentials, support apprenticeships, set program standards and increase opportunities in the trades.

The programs map out a clear path for youth to start their trades training earlier in high school, through post-secondary and into the workforce. Discover, explore, train and work.

Youth Discover the Trades provides hands-on events to connect students, parents and teachers with local tradespeople and employers.

Youth Discover the Maker Way allows students to build creative solutions to design challenges. It encourages design thinking and building prototypes.

Youth Explore Trades Skills is a 120-hour, for-credit course delivered in high school and covers three trades plus core content.

Youth Explore Trades Sampler is a 300-hour, 12-credit course, delivered with post-secondary partnerships. It covers five or more trades, plus essential skills and common core. Workforce certificates are also included.

Youth Train in Trades is dual-credit, where students attend a foundation program and can earn credit for the first year of technical training. They can earn credits towards graduation at the same time.

[10:10 a.m.]

Youth Work in Trades is also a dual-credit, where a student works with an employer to earn work-based hours towards an apprenticeship. They earn credits towards graduation at the same time. They may also be eligible to receive a $1,000 scholarship.

There are 4,795 participants in the ITA’s youth programs. More than 40,000 B.C. secondary students are also participating in school-based applied skills training, including work experience.

Now, this year, ITA’s youth trades training programs will connect more than 5,000 students each year with trades training. Recently we have increased access to trades training with 562 additional seats at 13 public post-secondary institutions throughout British Columbia that offer foundation and apprenticeship programs. Through this approach, more students will be further along the path to trades certification and a career when they leave high school.

For example, Chris Kilshaw achieved his Red Seal status as a construction electrician. In high school, Chris participated in ITA’s dual-credit programs, Train in Trades and Work in Trades. By the time he graduated high school, he already had his first year of technical electrical training completed, along with lots of hands-on experience in the field and work-based hours that counted towards his apprenticeship.

ITA also works with the First Nation Education Steering Committee to introduce trades to Indigenous youth across B.C. As of March 31, 2017, 10 percent of those that are enrolled in apprenticeship technical training at B.C. public post-secondary institutions self-identify as Indigenous.

Through the Canada-B.C. job fund program and its predecessor labour market programs, 3,904 Indigenous peoples participated in pre-apprenticeship training. ITA’s Indigenous initiatives focus on breaking down barriers to entry and providing access to opportunities, matching the skills of Indigenous peoples with the needs of B.C.’s labour market.

Not only is it important to break barriers for Indigenous youth to enter trades, but it’s also important to build equity in the trades for women, starting with young women. This is an exciting time for women in the trades. Doors are opening across B.C. for women who want to pursue careers as plumbers, electricians, sheet metal workers, carpenters or heavy-equipment operators, to name just a few. The WITT, women-in-trades training program, provides training, financial assistance and support for eligible women who might be thinking about a career in the trades but are unemployed or may need skills upgrading.

Through the Canada-B.C. job fund program and its predecessor, more than 3,800 women participated in pre-apprenticeship training. They were registered in 70 different trades with nearly 50 percent registered in traditionally male-dominated trades.

Services and programs include outreach and mentoring; leadership development training to improve workplace culture by addressing bullying and harassment in the workplace; employer–human resource supports, including a virtual team, to help develop customized workplace policies, plus on-site mediation to manage staff situations; and exemplary employer campaigns to recognize employers.

For example, as a single mother….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

G. Kyllo: Thank you to the member for Esquimalt-Metchosin for providing me an opportunity to speak about the importance of trades training for our youth.

Many of the programs that were announced and actually spoken about by the member opposite were those that were identified in the skills-for-jobs blueprint, something the B.C. Liberal government was very proud of.

Interjection.

G. Kyllo: There we go. Thank you, Member.

It’s extremely important to talk about the importance of trades training for our youth. All students do learn differently. Not all students are going to follow an academic career to be doctors or lawyers or nurses. I think the opportunity of providing opportunities for our youth to get that on-the-job skills training is so important.

[10:15 a.m.]

As a father of four daughters, I know that our four girls were very different with their academic pursuits. One of my daughters, Brittany, was having a bit of a time struggling in school, but there was a program that was offered by the Pleasant Valley Senior Secondary, in Armstrong, where they actually provide apprenticeship training opportunities within the school. Brittany actually applied and took a program on hairdressing.

Here we had my daughter who was struggling in the academics at Eagle River in Sicamous, and she participated in a trades training program at PVSS for two semesters. She went from struggling to actually near the top of her class. She followed her passion. She was very excited about it. After high school, she went on to Blanche McDonald school of makeup artistry and design, and she has had a very successful career in hair and makeup. Certainly, we have to provide those opportunities for trades training for our youth.

I shared with my daughters, when they were at a very young age, that it mattered not what career path they chose, but it was really important that they find something that they were passionate about, something that they were interested in. I knew if they found a career path that they were interested in, they’d work hard at it. And if they worked hard at it, they’d be successful.

I think that the trades training opportunities that have been provided, largely through the skills-for-jobs blueprint, have been very successful and provide that opportunity for youth across our province to get those opportunities for skills development and education in the trades.

There was a number of programs that actually were put together, some which were mentioned by the member opposite. The skills-for-jobs blueprint was…. A panel was put together by the previous Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Labour, as well as the Ministers of Education and Advanced Education. By coming together and pulling all of those three ministries together, they developed a great program, which included about seven different programs, including Youth Discover the Trades.

The Youth Discover the Trades program is a program that provides an opportunity for youth to get hands-on experience in a trade at an event in local communities. The events connect students, parents and teachers with local tradespeople and their employer, showcasing firsthand what a career in trades is really like.

There’s also the Youth Discover the Maker Way program, currently called Maker Day, where youths discover the maker way. Students get an opportunity to put away the books for a day and work in small teams in their classrooms to build a creative solution to a design challenge. The program has offered one-day events throughout the province.

We also have the Youth Discover the Lions in the House. This is a partnership with the B.C. Lions, where the Lions in the House initiative is focused on the power of choice and being the best that you can be. Students are challenged to examine their choices as they relate to their own personal opportunities and those available in the trades.

We also have the Youth Explore Trade Skills. This program gives students hands-on experience in four trades: carpentry, electrical, plumbing and automotive. Students will learn the basics, explore their interests and get a sense of what trades career they could potentially pursue.

We also have the Youth Explore Trades Sampler. It’s currently…. There are various programs, such as TASK. This program allows students to explore up to five trades in greater depth.

We have the Youth Train in Trades program, currently called the ACE IT program, as well as youth work in trades. Now, this particular program gives students the opportunity to get on-the-job training as a youth apprentice. Students get a head start on the work-based training needed for trades apprenticeship, with up to 480 hours while they’re still in secondary school. They’ll be able to earn income, while also earning up to 16 credits towards their secondary school diploma.

Youth in trades is certainly a very important aspect of our economy, but the most important part for youth training in trades to be successful is to have a strong and growing economy — to actually have job opportunities for our youth to participate in the workforce in order to get that hands-on experience.

M. Dean: Thank you to the member for Shuswap. I wish his daughters very well.

I would say that we do still have an awful lot of work to do. As I said earlier on, 10 percent of apprentices are Indigenous, and 10 percent of registered apprentices are also women. Now, 15 percent is considered to be the tipping point. When 15 percent of a workforce is composed of women, workplaces become more accommodating and welcoming, and momentum starts to build as the workplace dynamic changes. So we really need to be continuing our investment in these programs and encouraging people, especially youth, to change the culture through participating in trades development and apprentices.

Tawny Fortier, for example, got her start in the skilled trades with the help of ITA’s women-in-trades training program. She’s now a fourth year electrical apprentice in Kamloops.

[10:20 a.m.]

The program gives her opportunities in skilled trades that she never thought were possible for a young woman. It helped her get her start by connecting her with funded training opportunities and providing her with the support she needed to overcome the circumstances that were holding her back from a fulfilling career.

She says: “The WITT program helped me get a head start on my electrical training by providing the tools, safety gear, tuition, books and even child care I needed to succeed. For all the powerful women out there who might be hesitant to take the first step, my advice is to know your worth and go for it.” What a great message for young women.

Amy Carr, who just recently earned her Red Seal with Sheet Metal Workers Local 276, says: “I love my work, and with these new supports, more women like me will have the opportunity to not only find a trade they love but to stay in it.”

Remember, it isn’t just about recruiting women; it’s about changing the culture so they want to stay.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC FUTURE
OF FIRST NATIONS

E. Ross: I appreciate the opportunity to introduce this morning’s private member’s statement entitled “Social and Economic Future of First Nations.”

May 9 marked one year since the last provincial election and, for many of us in this House, our first year of service as members of the Legislature. I can attest to the fact that it has been a steep learning curve on how best to represent the interests of my constituents, whether they voted for me or not. Everyone deserves a voice in the Legislature.

Before I became an MLA, I already had committed myself to public service as a councillor and, later, a chief councillor of the Haisla First Nation. I evolved throughout my entire experience on council and so did my views on how to best serve my people and my community. That’s why I thought it would be useful to consider the social and economic future of First Nations, especially in the context of the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples, otherwise known as UNDRIP.

UNDRIP is a product of the United Nations General Assembly, of which Canada was a founding member of the UN charter in 1945. Canada is recognized for its contribution to the UN organization through numerous and dangerous peacekeeping missions, participation and leadership in specialized agencies like UNICEF and UNESCO and for our support for the multilateral solutions to some of the world’s most challenging conflicts.

One would therefore expect that Canada might have been a full supporter of UNDRIP when it was adopted by a vote of the UN General Assembly in 2007, yet it was not. At that time, there were 192 member states of the General Assembly. A majority, 144, voted in favour of UNDRIP. In fact, only 42, less than a majority of the 88 countries with Indigenous peoples, voted in favour of UNDRIP. Furthermore, four countries took a principled stand and voted again UNDRIP, notably Australia, New Zealand, United States and Canada.

This begs the question why some of the most highly developed countries in the world fundamentally rejected UNDRIP. It was not just the government of Canada that rejected UNDRIP. Many First Nations in Canada also opposed the declaration. The fact is that there never was any unanimity among First Nations respecting UNDRIP. That’s because First Nations in Canada cannot be regarded as one single, solitary entity.

There are 654 First Nations in Canada, speaking more than 50 distinct languages and each having their own distinct culture, history and traditions. A well-known columnist recently pointed out that there are 203 recognized First Nations in B.C. alone. That’s more than the number of countries belonging to the UN who adopted UNDRIP at the time. The chance of gaining unanimity amongst First Nations in Canada is about as likely as having unanimous consent at the UN.

While many objectives of UNDRIP may be laudable, the issues for Canada are both legal and constitutional. UNDRIP is not consistent or compatible with section 35 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 35 affirms and recognizes the rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada, including existing Aboriginal and treaty rights.

This section of our constitution upholds the legal standing of Aboriginal peoples in confederation; affirms Aboriginal treaty rights, regardless of gender; and commits the government of Canada to include Aboriginal people in any constitutional conference that would consider amending the constitution itself. In fact, section 35 of the constitution has evolved into a duty to consult native populations. UNDRIP is a far less relevant or even significant document to Aboriginal people in comparison.

Retired Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci went as far as to say: “Future legislation and judicial interpretation will determine whether UNDRIP differs significantly from Canada’s existing jurisprudence on the duty to consult.”

[10:25 a.m.]

In other words, section 35 of the charter already put us on a path towards reconciliation about 30 years ago, long before UNDRIP was even considered in 2007. Even today UNDRIP has no standing in Canadian law. Although Canada did remove itself as an objector to UNDRIP in 2016, it remains only a broad statement of values.

Recently legal expert Thomas Isaac appeared before the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Indigenous and Northern Affairs to provide his comments on a federal private member’s bill, Bill C-262, that would supposedly ensure that the laws of Canada are in harmony with UNDRIP. Isaac argues that this bill, and UNDRIP by association, fails to take into account 70 hard-fought court decisions taken since the landmark Supreme Court decision of Regina v. Sparrow in 1990.

Isaac concludes that UNDRIP does provide a benchmark for the rest of the international community to follow, but in no way does it approach the clarity that Canada has already established itself as a world leader for the protection and respect of Indigenous rights.

Deputy Speaker: Esquimalt-Metchosin seeks the floor to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

M. Dean: Today we have students and teacher Stuart McLatchie from Wishart Elementary School. I’d just like the House to make everybody very welcome.

Debate Continued

A. Olsen: It is an honour to stand and to continue the debate, the discussion with respect to the comments made from the member for Skeena. I note the opportunity now that is evolving right here in this place, the opportunity for Indigenous people of British Columbia to be elected into this place, to stand and put forward important issues that face the communities that we were raised in, that we grew up in, that we call home, that we love, and indeed, to lead, as the member for Skeena has indeed led his community for quite some time.

Now we find ourselves here on a Monday morning having a discussion about the future of the social and economic future of Indigenous people. This is truly another example, I think, of the evolution that’s happening in this country but also in this province, where these debates are happening on this red carpet.

There has been a time in this province’s history when, in these debates and these discussions, these private member’s statements, we may have been talking about it, but the one most important ingredient has been missing. Of course, that ingredient is, I think, critical to this discussion and these debates, and that is to have Indigenous people leading them and being a part of them and being a part of working it back and forth.

These are difficult discussions. None of this is easy. This is all extremely difficult. While we may have an inclination to take offence or to be emotional about some of the things that we hear, especially in this place, I think that at most times, it’s good to pause and take a breath and to work through what it is that’s being said for the benefit of not only the Indigenous communities and nations that we are a part of but also recognizing, as the member for Skeena did, that there is a broad diversity in this province.

Of the 50 languages across our country, about 30 if them are right here in this province. So not only do we come a diverse heritage in this country with respect to First Nations and Indigenous cultures, but in fact, right here in British Columbia, we have some of the broadest diversity of anywhere in this great country, this beautiful place where we live and now call British Columbia.

See, we were all Indians under the Indian Act, and the Indian Act has so strictly defined who we are and what we can do. There was a time in this country in which to leave the reserve, we had to get a pass from the Indian agent. We’ve seen, certainly as things have evolved, that we’re much further than that now, and we continue to evolve.

[10:30 a.m.]

The question about UNDRIP…. I think that it is fine to stand and ask the questions of UNDRIP. I have a significant challenge, of course, when there are a number of First Nations in this province that are, in fact, looking at UNDRIP as a tool to implement their rights, their inherent rights, treaty rights, rights over their land. So I think that it’s important that we have to be careful that we’re not undermining those that are working towards their self-determination.

That is part of the challenge that we have in this place as we navigate through these conversations. While we may stand in this place and represent the communities that sent us here, there are other Indigenous communities across the province that are taking their own way and taking their own path. That is, in fact, their right, and we have to respect that. Where we disagree, we can push back. We can continue the struggle that has been characterized in this country.

It is an honour to be able to stand and begin this dialogue with the member for Skeena, a member from the Haisla. To have a WSÁNEĆ and Haisla having this conversation is a unique opportunity in this place, and I look forward to continuing this over the years. We can continue to put these statements on and work these incredibly important issues for this province and for this country and, indeed, for the world — back and forth over the coming weeks and months.

I’ll take my seat and thank the member for Skeena for raising this for discussion today. HÍSW̱ḴE.

E. Ross: Thank you to the member for his contribution to this debate. The fact remains that UNDRIP is a non-binding declaration by the United Nations General Assembly that doesn’t require member states to ratify it or bring it into law.

UNDRIP does not exist in federal or provincial legislation anywhere in Canada, including British Columbia. As a matter of fact, Canada’s Justice Minister and former Cape Mudge band Councillor Jody Wilson-Raybould addressed the Assembly of First Nations in 2016 and presented the clear fact that UNDRIP is unworkable with Canadian law. The minister went further and stated: “Respectfully, it is a political distraction to undertaking the hard work…to actually implement it.”

I wholeheartedly agree with this, because it’s the truth. While it’s commendable to acknowledge an expression of international support like UNDRIP, nevertheless it carries absolutely no weight in Canadian law. Mi’kmaq lawyer and Aboriginal leader Pam Palmater had this to say about UNDRIP: “Governments can literally talk about good ideas, plans and commitments for years and never take any real, concrete action.”

That’s all that UNDRIP really represents — a feel-good document. Progress on real issues has been my agenda for 14 years — issues like reducing the tragic number of suicides on reserves, combating the cyclical poverty that prevents a generation from finally liberating itself, or giving First Nations the opportunity to benefit socially and economically from natural resources located on their traditional territories. These are the real issues.

UNDRIP cannot be reconciled within the existing Canadian legal framework, period. In no way is it a binding instrument like a treaty, which can be ratified and incorporated into legislation.

To suggest that no progress or reconciliation in Canada has taken place is false. UNDRIP has the potential to bring Canada back to 1982, which is not in the best interests of Canada or Aboriginals. Canada’s relationship with First Nations has come a long way. We have a strong foundation to build on. It would be a shame to waste the decades of hard work in reconciling all Canadians’ interests for a better future.

HOUSING THE HOMELESS

J. Brar: It’s a real honour for me to rise in this House today to make a private member’s statement on housing and homelessness. It’s hard for me to imagine that in a province as wealthy as ours, we have homeless people living on the streets. I have absolutely no doubt that we can do better. I’m sure that British Columbians want us to do better.

[10:35 a.m.]

We have a collective responsibility to bring about a more stable and more prosperous society, a society in which every person in our province can reach their full potential. Our government has already taken some crucial steps to make life better for the people of British Columbia. We have established three key priorities to build a better B.C.: make life more affordable for all British Columbians, improve the services that people count on, and build a strong and sustainable economy in every part of the province.

Our government believes in shared prosperity, where a good economy benefits everyone, not only a selected few. Former U.S. president Franklin Roosevelt once said: “The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have enough; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.” The most serious challenge to reduce homelessness, in my respectful opinion, is not the resources that we have but the denial that it doesn’t exist or the inaction based on a particular ideology.

After years of neglect, our new government has taken bold steps to tackle the issue of homelessness. We want to give all British Columbians a chance at a better life. We opened more shelters during the wet and cold winter, but we realized very quickly that this is not a permanent solution, which is why the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has been working hard to find practical and permanent solutions.

Budget 2018 makes the biggest investment in housing in B.C.’s history. It lays out a comprehensive housing plan that invests more than $1.6 billion in the next three years to build and maintain affordable rental housing, to increase rental assistance for low-income seniors and working families and to provide supportive housing for at-risk British Columbians.

New modular housing was also funded in cities across the province of British Columbia. That includes Prince Rupert, Terrace, Vernon, Kelowna, Kamloops, Smithers, Maple Ridge, Surrey, Victoria, Vancouver, Chilliwack, Penticton, Abbotsford and New Westminster. It’s so that people have access to safe and affordable housing in which they feel safe and secure until they have a place to call home and to live in dignity.

Similarly, new supportive housing is also springing up all over the province. In January, our government announced funding for 450 new affordable rental units in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. Government also collaborated with the city of Vancouver and Vancouver Coastal Health to build approximately 100 affordable rental homes, as well as a new withdrawal management centre for people seeking treatment for addictions. It’s because we are actually taking a kind of holistic approach to homelessness.

A homeless count was coordinated in many communities across B.C. this spring to help inform B.C.’s homeless action plan, which will focus on permanent housing and services. Through the age-friendly grant by the Ministry of Health, a mobile community care centre will provide support and services directly to seniors who are homeless or unsettled in the city of Surrey.

Helping the homeless helps everyone. The construction of supportive housing is creating thousands of new jobs and boosting local economies throughout the province. So it’s a win-win situation. We continue to build new modular housing for homeless people, and the construction of this modular housing is creating new jobs for the people of British Columbia. We will continue to take major steps to make housing more affordable, with a comprehensive ten-year plan to make life better for the people of British Columbia.

L. Throness: It’s a truism to say that homeless people need homes, but it’s also true. In Chilliwack, we’ve had an influx of homeless people over the past few years. With it, there are many problems. There is an addiction problem, a crime problem, a victimization problem of homeless people themselves, a public health problem and what I would call a public security problem.

[10:40 a.m.]

What I mean by that is that homelessness casts a pall of insecurity over a city. We have, at last count, about 230 homeless people, up from 76 a few years ago. They’re very visual. The sight of 20 or so homeless people camped out in the city square is unsettling. No one likes the needles or the human waste or the garbage or shopping carts filled with junk, and so on. People just don’t feel comfortable in their own city.

In Chilliwack, we’ve been endeavouring to find solutions for homeless people, assisted by a network of partners under the umbrella of Chilliwack Healthier Community. A number of people have been working very hard for several years to address this problem, and to very good effect. Mind you, there are many obstacles. We will never house everyone if for no other reason than some people will refuse help, but there is much that we have done.

In this regard, I’m glad to see that the new government is participating in what the former government started, and that’s more help for homeless people. I will want to make sure that Chilliwack gets its fair share of continuing government assistance just as my colleague the member for Chilliwack and I made sure of in the previous parliament.

Let me describe for you some of the things that we’ve been doing. Yesterday I drove by the Salvation Army, which has just erected 46 modular units, temporary housing for homeless people. These are little apartments. They’re new, they’re neat, and they’re clean. I think they’re very acceptable. I lived in much the same thing for many years as a student in dormitories. Across the street from the Salvation Army is the MQHS project, just off Yale Road. It will be a total of 80 suites of low-income housing. It’s nearing completion. It will be open to anyone, but it targets, in particular, First Nations people who are at risk. I was at the groundbreaking, and I hope to attend the opening soon.

Near the downtown core is the old Traders Inn, which has been an eyesore for a number of years. It will now be torn down and turned into 46 units of sorely needed affordable rental housing.

Close by, in the city centre, we have Ruth and Naomi’s, a mission to the homeless that served, for example, 70,000 meals last year alone and operates a wide number of other programs. It’s a sterling example of a collaboration among churches in the city, now funded by B.C. Housing, which gave approval last year to build another building for Ruth and Naomi’s. It’s now under construction. It will have a daycare, a teaching area, 35 suites for low-income singles and families.

Another private sector mission is the Cyrus Centre on Wellington Avenue in Chilliwack, a four-bed centre that serves homeless youth 24-7, because one in five homeless people are youth. It’s also a faith-based mission. They’ve done a lot of private fundraising and have a bit of B.C. Housing funds as well. They’ve just partnered with Chilliwack Community Services and a church to open a new drop-in centre for youth downtown.

Recently I went to the PEARL Life Renewal Society fundraiser, which is yet another faith-based ministry to women who have been sexually exploited on the street. We heard one woman’s story, which was disturbing and redemptive as well. They now have an office in Chilliwack from which they provide services to workers on the street, which is a marvellous thing. Another project forecast for downtown is called the Paramount project, proposed by Chilliwack Community Services — 45 suites for low-income seniors and youth. Fraser Health has just an­nounced a 20-bed regional treatment centre for youth to be built in our city, which is great.

We can’t forget the food banks operated by the Salvation Army in Chilliwack and community services in Agassiz. Every year there are fundraising events. I walked the Coldest Night of the Year, which raises money for homeless people. We always have emergency shelters in the winter at various places in the city. We can’t forget the Pacific Community Resources Society, which provides services to people with addictions.

We received notice about a month ago that we’re going to get an assertive community treatment medical team from Fraser Health Authority. We could talk about Griffin Security, which is a private company that takes 20,000 calls per year about the homeless, and they try and keep order in the homeless community.

I don’t have time to talk about the rent supplements or supportive housing that the province has operated for many years, helping about 1,100 families that would otherwise be on the verge of homelessness.

To close, in composing this little talk, I have counted 276 suites recently built or soon to be built, and that will add, to those that were already existing, another 40 or so. Not all of those will be filled by homeless people, but many of them will be. I’ve simply been amazed, once again, at the range of services that Chilliwack offers to the homeless, often at great private expense. I’m so proud to represent a community that has such compassion for those who have so little.

[10:45 a.m.]

J. Brar: I thank the member for Chilliwack-Kent for his thoughtful response to my private member’s statement on housing and the homeless. This is a very important issue.

I just want to correct the member, to begin with. The member said that maybe over 200 people have come to Chilliwack. I just want to correct the member.

I’m the person who actually accepted the welfare challenge and went through the province to understand what homelessness actually is. I just want to say to you that 75 percent of the people who are homeless come from the local community, not from anywhere else. There are no aliens coming from any other part. It is from within the community.

There was a time when homelessness was limited to, probably, the city of Vancouver, and there were reasons for that too. But now homelessness is in every community — when you talk about Chilliwack; when you talk about, even, Prince George; when you talk about other communities. It’s everywhere.

I appreciate the member talking about the response from the private sector and the faith communities. I know they do an exceptional job to help the people who are homeless and who need help. But the question for us in this House is as to what we do in this House. That’s the question, Member.

That’s where there’s a difference between our approach and the approach from the other side of the House. They believe that the only way you can eliminate homelessness is if you give wealth to the people who are already wealthy, the top 2 percent of people, and they will somehow address the homelessness issue. That’s what we don’t believe. We believe that we need to step forward. We need to start working and helping these people.

For 16 long years, the members on the other side, the previous administration, have done absolutely nothing. When it comes to housing, they listened to one person. There was one person in Vancouver — his name is Bob Rennie — who was heavily involved in what you call the B.C. Liberals’ fundraising committee. They didn’t listen to the people at all. They continued singing the songs of the economy until it became very hard, and then they suddenly introduced a 15 percent tax without consulting anybody.

We believe in a more comprehensive plan, Madame Speaker. As I said to you earlier, we are listening to the people of British Columbia. We want to make life better for the people of British Columbia. That’s why we are taking actions. We are taking actions that are going to deal with the situation. That’s why we have a budget. We have put numbers here. Budget 2018 makes the biggest investment in housing in the history of the province. That will lay out the comprehensive housing plan that invests more than $1.6 billion in the coming three years for building housing for the homeless.

THERE IS ONLY ONE TAXPAYER

T. Stone: All members come to this chamber with the same intentions in mind. I believe that that really boils down to coming here with good intentions — to offer ideas, to debate changes to public policy, to make a difference and to help people, to help our constituents, to help British Columbians.

We differ on how to get there, on how to ensure that these objectives are best met. I’m proud to get up each morning to go to work as part of a team that’s focused on advocating for everything that can be done to create jobs and opportunities for British Columbians. On this side of the House, the official opposition members are united in our core values, which are rooted in championing the spirit and the drive of the individual. These core values are rooted in recognizing that a strong, growing economy is the only way resources are available to do what really matters and why we are all here. That is to encourage opportunity for all British Columbians, to make investments in the services that people need.

To make all of this possible, it means encouraging risk-taking, celebrating entrepreneurship, generally getting government out of the way of the private sector so that it can do what it does best, and that’s to create good-paying, family-supporting jobs. It means valuing investments in the public services that we all depend on — education, health care, environmental protection, to name a few — investments in our communities and investments in our loved ones.

It means honouring decisions made today for government to live within its means and pay back debt so that our children and our grandchildren aren’t saddled with the poor decisions of their parents and grandparents. It means recognizing that British Columbians who work hard for their money know how to better spend their hard-earned money than government does.

[10:50 a.m.]

It is a widely accepted view that upon assuming office one year ago, the current government inherited perhaps the strongest fiscal framework of any incoming government in British Columbia’s history, possibly the country’s: very strong economic growth leading the country, the strongest jobs market in Canada, the lowest unemployment rate in this province since 1976, five consecutive balanced budgets. The former government was poised to eliminate B.C’s operating debt for the first time since 1975.

The government inherited amongst the lowest corporate taxes in the country, amongst the lowest personal taxes in the country. There was a revenue-neutral carbon tax in place, proving that you can put a price on carbon and grow your economy at the same time. The former government had negotiated over 480 economic and reconciliation agreements with First Nations. And, of course, there was a triple-A credit rating that was created and that resulted from all of that strong economic opportunity in this province.

Yes, less government is better than more. When government spending goes up, private spending tends to go down. The countries in the top quartile of economic freedom had an average per-capita GDP of $37,691 in 2010, compared to $5,188 for bottom-quartile countries. In the top quartile, the average income of the poorest 10 percent was $11,382 compared to $1,209 in the bottom.

If you think about that…. The poorest 10 percent in the most economically free countries are ten times as well off as the citizens in the least free countries. Every time government takes an additional tax dollar out of someone’s paycheque, whether at the local level, the provincial level or the federal level, that’s another dollar that can’t be spent on that parents’ kids’ activities or used to purchase products and services from a local business or, if that family chooses, to invest in their future.

Keeping a laser-like focus on job creation, as well as ensuring that a competitive tax environment remains in place, are the best ways to attract investment, create jobs and ensure that resources are there for the services that people need. In order for employers to feel secure enough to invest and create jobs, they need to know what their cost of business is going to be, including government’s take, and that the rules of the game are not going to change. Employers cannot have governments releasing policy on a trial-and-error basis.

Over the past year, the jobs numbers in this province have remained flat, since the summer of 2017. There are trade wars with other provinces that have been instigated. Uncertainty has crept into our economy due to numerous reviews and new and expanded regulations. Major projects have been killed, delayed or are under major threat of not proceeding. Yes, taxes have also gone up. Corporate taxes are up. Personal income taxes are up. Carbon taxes are going up. Of course, the carbon tax is no longer revenue-neutral.

Fuel taxes are up in greater Victoria by two cents per litre. In the Victoria area, it’s worth noting that governments collect 41 cents of tax on every litre before this additional two cents per litre is added. Gas taxes in Victoria are already the fifth highest in North America, rapidly moving into the third-highest position. Victoria drivers pay over $135 million in gas tax annually.

As for the Lower Mainland, it now can boast of having the highest gas taxes in all of North America. Forty-eight cents per litre at the pump is actually tax. TransLink used to collect four cents per litre. Today that is now 22 cents per litre when you include the federal transfer TransLink collects.

Of course, we know that the Medical Services Plan premiums are being replaced with the new employer health tax. This will hurt organizations, from small businesses to school districts to non-profits. It means businesses will be dissuaded from expanding. It means jobs will be lost for some. It means higher costs to consumers. It also means higher property taxes. In Kamloops, the community that I represent, it means an additional hit of $700,000 per year in property tax, which will have to be paid by local taxpayers.

Tolls will be replaced with a higher carbon tax. There’s a development cost charge tax that’s coming from TransLink. The government is talking about mobility pricing in the not too distant future. Of course, there’s the new speculation tax, which has nothing to do with speculation. There’s the school tax on luxury homes, which has nothing to do with schools. There’s the hydro rate hike of 3 percent, even though there was a commitment not to do that. And photo radar is coming to an intersection near you, which will represent nothing more than another tax grab for motorists in British Columbia.

There are some who want everyone to pay more tax. Folks’ costs are going up. So much for the much-vaunted focus on affordability. And lost in all of this is the simple reality that there is only one taxpayer.

[10:55 a.m.]

N. Simons: It’s amusing a little bit, on Monday morning, to hear the fiction being relayed. It’s almost like a series of extended cliché sports interviews when the former minister responsible for the destruction of ICBC gets to stand up and wax eloquent about the needs of our province, as if he knows.

The title of the statement was: “There Is Only One Taxpayer.” Well, the way I look at our system…. We have a lot of people who contribute to the betterment of our society. We have a lot of people who contribute what they can afford to the betterment of society. Because we want to make sure our streets are safe. We want to make sure our children are well-educated in our school system. We want to make sure that our systems of protecting the environment are adequate.

This former minister, who had his own wake of destruction in his career, is now talking about how, somehow, paying taxes is a punishment, as if somehow he’s not been a singular beneficiary of the generosity of the people of this province in order to get where he got today — for his daughters, who he brings up constantly.

The success of our communities is in their safety, in our economy, in running our system well, and that does involve the contribution of British Columbians to the well-being of our communities. Different people pay different amounts of tax. We try to make it fair. We try to make it so it isn’t a bunch of regressive taxes punishing the least who can afford it.

This member was part of a government that systematically made life less affordable for middle-income and lower-income people in this province. He looked out for his 2 percent, who he talked about proudly just now. He looked out for his 2 percent. He looked out for the richest of the rich and the most powerful of the powerful.

What we have to do here is regain a little bit of balance in this beautiful province. We have to make sure that we invest properly to ensure that our food systems are safe. We have to make sure that we invest properly so that our children have the proper resources in their schools.

This is a member who spent a lot of time making things very difficult for families in this province, raising money to pay for playgrounds for their schools. Isn’t playing an essential part of a childhood, a part of an education?

No. This government did so…. In their first year of power, they managed to put us in a position of being in need. Our social safety net in this province has been ripped to shreds under that opposition when they were in power. What we’re trying to do is restore a little bit of balance.

We never saw homelessness the way we’ve seen it in the last ten years. We never saw child poverty like we’ve seen it. Did this government ever make an effort to address those inequalities in our communities? No. That’s the sad part about this. He’s using dog-whistle politics in order to try to get buddy-buddy with people who don’t like to pay taxes.

I, quite frankly, like it when I see a school go up, a new school. Guess who pays for that new school? It’s his family. It’s people in Kamloops. It’s people in Fort St. John. It’s people in Powell River. We all contribute to a better system of government. We all contribute to better public services.

We all benefit when our brothers and sisters are not living homeless on the street. You know, we all benefit when we have access to proper educational systems. We all benefit when our air is clean, and our waters are kept clean. But if this member…. If we took his ideas and put them into practice like he put them into practice under his previous government, we’ll see a continued erosion of the safety net that protects our citizens and protects our environment.

I don’t think anybody on this side is going to take any lessons from his clichés, from the empty words that he puts forward. I think we, obviously, have learned a lesson from 16 years of bad government. We’re investing in people. We’re investing in affordability, making things better for the average people of this province who have sent us here to do the work on their behalf.

I’m very proud to stand with the government — with their actions to address the homelessness crisis; to address the health care issues, wait-lists — that all grew under the previous government.

Yeah, there are many taxpayers. There are many people who are served by the services provided by this government, by the province of British Columbia. We’re proud of those services. We’re just going to make them stronger.

[11:00 a.m.]

T. Stone: There’s nothing like a vigorous, high-energy debate first thing on Monday morning.

The simple fact of the matter is this: this current government inherited one of the strongest balance sheets in the history of this province — almost a $3 billion surplus. In that context, this is a government that has decided to increase taxes by $5.5 billion over three years.

When the member opposite sits there and spews his rhetoric about the former government’s record, let me refresh his memory on a couple of points. Child poverty actually decreased by 42 percent during our time in office. We had the best health care outcomes across the country. Our children were doing amongst the best in the world in most subjects. We built billions of dollars’ worth of world-class infrastructure in every corner of the province, and we had amongst the highest take-home-pay levels in all of Canada.

Now, in the context of that robust economic growth, that exceptional job creation record — a triple-A credit rating, a $3 billion surplus — the members opposite, the new government, decide it’s a good time to impose $5.5 billion over three years onto the shoulders of British Columbians.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

T. Stone: It makes one ask: what would the motivation for this be? Is it because the members opposite come by it naturally? Is it because they do believe that more government is better than less? I would suggest that that’s partially the reason. Is it that they don’t believe that the province’s balance sheet was as strong as it was when they inherited it?

I don’t think that could be the case, because the Finance Minister spends a lot of time trumpeting the strong economic record that is in place, and it’s not due to any economic miracle of the current government. Or is it because — and I think this is what is probably the driving motivation — the government has got massive spending plans in mind?

Public sector union contract negotiations begin to come up in the months ahead. Perhaps this is a government that has decided they need to squirrel away as many chestnuts as possible in order to be able to afford the continued ramp-up in spending that we’re going to see.

At the end of the day, it’s British Columbians that have to pay this bill. It’s British Columbians that have to foot the bill for this government’s decision to crank up spending and, as a result of that, crank up taxes while they’re at it.

Hon. S. Robinson: I’d like to call Motion 22 by the member for Delta North.

Deputy Speaker: Unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 22 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 22 — IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE
ON COMMUNITIES AND ECONOMIES

R. Kahlon: I move the motion:

[Be it resolved that this House recognizes that climate change is in­creasingly impacting communities and economies.]

I’m amazed that it’s 2018 and we are actually even debating this topic, but here we are. I hope all members of this House will be speaking in favour of this and speaking about how issues are affected in their communities.

I was actually quite moved last week. I was listening to the member for Fraser-Nicola speaking about how climate change was affecting her community. First it was fires and how her community was affected by fires. Then she also spoke about how flooding now is affecting her community.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

As I started looking into this, after listening to the member speak, I actually found, on the ministry website, some pretty alarming stats. What can we expect in B.C. with climate change?

“Temperature increases of 1.3 to 2.7 degrees Celsius expected by 2050, with projected impacts including growing seasons that are longer, though hampered by more frequent and severe droughts; and shifting infectious diseases and pests, with effects to our health, agriculture and ecosystems,” such as the pine beetle. I’ll go into that a little bit more.

[11:05 a.m.]

“More frequent and severe heatwaves resulting in increased heat-related illnesses. Average rainfall is expected to increase from 2 percent to 12 percent by 2050, but summers will be drier, with projected impacts including increased frequency and intensity of heavy precipitation, resulting in damage to buildings and infrastructure; higher risk of wildfire, insect outbreaks and disease in our forests.”

I look across, and there are many members who know the pine beetle devastation quite well. Their communities have been hit by it — climate change. If you drive through some of these communities, you can see it visually. Whether you’re talking to people who work in the mills and who are trying to process some of the pine beetle or the safety impacts of that product coming through the mills and explosions and all these things that we’ve seen because of that product coming in…. Not only is it affecting the environment and communities, but it’s affecting people who are working in the forestry industry as well.

“Farmers and ranchers experiencing more frequent and severe droughts, soil erosion and new pests. Up to 70 percent of our glaciers may have disappeared by 2100, expected to result in changes in river flows and temperatures, affecting fish habitat and hydroelectric power generation; drinking water decreasing in quality and quantity; water shortages, increasing competition between various water users.

“Sea level is expected to continue to rise along the B.C. coast, with projected impacts including coastal communities and ecosystems seeing more frequent and severe flooding; rising sea levels, straining drainage and sewage systems and intruding into groundwater aquifers; and low-lying agricultural lands becoming too saline for cultivation.”

My community of Delta. I hope my colleague from the south will speak to this motion as well, because he knows the effects that are projected for the south of Delta. There was a study just done by a non-profit recently. The study was focused on everywhere, but what the study found was that the worst effects will be felt in Asia — in Shanghai, in Osaka, in Hong Kong. Globally, 275 million people live below five metres of sea level, 60 million within a metre.

What this study found was that with even the most conservative flood mapping, the projections were that if the water levels rise to what’s expected, Richmond, Delta and parts of rural Abbotsford and Coquitlam could be under water by 2100.

What we’re starting to see is communities start to make those investments to build up the dikes. Delta alone has, I believe, 62 kilometres of stretch that is protected by dikes. We’re starting to see issues. We had a storm last year, I think it was — the hon. member across the way may correct me — where the water levels from the storm knocked water overtop our dikes. We have a huge farming community in south Delta, and the dikes that we have are not going to be efficient for their protection.

We’re starting to see fires more frequently in Burns Bog.

My time is up. I look forward to hearing from members across the way.

D. Barnett: I’m pleased to participate in this morning’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House recognizes that climate change is increasingly impacting communities and economies.”

As you can well imagine, I and my fellow MLAs in the Cariboo region and central Interior are fully experiencing the devastating effects of climate change. We felt it with last year’s floods and, later, the worst wildfire season in the history of this province. We still haven’t come close to addressing all the damage, both to property and to people’s lives, that occurred last year.

Now we are once again experiencing terrible flooding throughout the province. Without question, climate change poses all sorts of challenges for the natural resource sector that drives our provincial economy. In the Cariboo region, we are still dealing with the harm that has come to guides and outfitters, tourism operators, the ranching industry and, most certainly, the forest industry. Wildfire damage leads to less forestation and greater soil instability, thereby increasing the risk of debris flows and unpredictable stream flows.

[11:10 a.m.]

Moreover, outbreaks of spruce and pine beetle are increasing with wildfire severity. In the 1990s, no mitigation was done when the pine beetle devastated the forests. We talked about it, but nothing was done. I was mayor at the time, and we begged the government of the day to do mitigation work. We knew it wouldn’t stop it, but we knew it would slow it down. Alberta listened.

Last week the final report of the independent review of the 2017 flood and wildfire seasons was released in the Legislature. It contains 108 recommendations that still require much review. Certainly we, as official opposition, welcome the independent review. But the time to act is now, not wait, like we did in the ’90s, until the forests were totally devastated.

The government says it is already making progress on 13 or 14 of the recommendations. I do recognize that we are talking about structural damage over the long term. However, there are a lot of people out here and there who need reassurance from the authorities that their property, their livelihood and their very lives are better safeguarded right now based on lessons learned from last year.

One cannot help but be impressed by all the volunteers and members of our communities that pulled together in a time of crisis last year to help our neighbours and friends. We owe it to them to learn from our success and our mistakes from the last fire and flood seasons.

Governments can make up all sorts of climate targets 20 years from now, but these benchmarks well exceed the shelf life of the current government. Proposed greenhouse gas reductions are laudable goals, but that doesn’t mean a lot to someone who just lost their house from fire or being flooded, or their workplace burnt down. What we do need is a concerted effort. We need to take practical steps in the next three years, two years, or even this year to effectively combat climate change.

Charging more carbon tax during record gas prices does not instill a sense of confidence among the general public. Starting trade wars with neighbouring provinces and isolating British Columbia from the rest of the country does nothing to advance the national climate plan. Nor do deliberate efforts to halt natural resource development at the expense of the next generation of this country. Yes, we need a long-term climate plan, but that doesn’t include putting a national economy at a standstill.

The people of British Columbia deserve a government that looks after all their interests in the long term as well as the short term. We are coming up on the first anniversary of the NDP and Green Party coalition government that has achieved nothing and only divided a country in the process. The time to act is now, and I’m sure that’s how voters in B.C. feel at this moment.

D. Routley: I promise to remain non-partisan. I will be political, but I won’t be partisan, as we’ve just heard from the previous speaker.

I rise to speak to the motion and emphasize that, indeed, our communities and our economies are deeply impacted by climate change. I want to talk specifically about the greatest of those impacts that B.C. has felt so far — that to our forests. Our forests in B.C. are our biggest contribution to the fight against climate change. They should be. We can do everything that we’ve promised to do and are working towards in terms emission targets, but the biggest effect, I would argue, that B.C. can have, the biggest contribution we can make to mitigating climate change, is to have healthy forests.

What I’m going to talk about has affected every community in this province — every lake, every river, every species, every economy, every family. That is the mountain pine beetle infestation.

[11:15 a.m.]

Of course, mountain pine beetle and other pests of the forest have been present over millennia, but only in the recent past, with warmer winters, have these pests survived one cycle after another and spread to the extent that the mountain pine beetle did. It required three weeks of lower than 30-below-zero Celsius weather to kill the mountain pine beetle. We’ve had many years since we’ve had three weeks of that kind of weather in this province.

That’s what led to the problem, which started in the early 2000s. It presented as a risk to our province in the early 2000s. The peak was in 2004 and 2005. A total of 731 hectares has been affected by the pine beetle at this point, and that’s 54 percent of the pine forests in this province. At that time, at the peak, it was affecting 140 million hectares per year.

Currently there’s an effect on about a million hectares per year, which is significant. But it has slowed down. It’s expected to end by 2020, at which time 55 percent of our pine forests will be lost — very bad but better than the 80 percent predicted in the beginning. It’s a cumulative effect, and the cumulative effect is 18.3 million hectares of lands five times the size of Vancouver Island.

They talk about the green, red, grey attack, and that profiles the colour of the trees as the attack occurs. It occurs over about a decade. I would wager that not many British Columbians could answer you this question: what is the green, red, grey attack? Even though it is the singular issue propelled by climate change that has the singularly biggest effect on all the lives of British Columbians, we have not had the adequate discussion about this issue.

We have seen, instead, logging practices relaxed, waste in the forest grow, fibre shortages throughout the province. We’ve seen the abuse of forest practices that has, in fact, led to our problems with the softwood lumber crisis.

The community effects have been deep and far-ranging. Jobs in the community have been lost. Community members who were coaches and volunteers now work in camps, or they’re not in those communities at all. These are family disruptions. Local government is coping with the lower income to be able to support more need, as is the province in fact. First Nations communities are disproportionately affected throughout the north and central regions of this province.

We all inherited this issue, with its baked-in effects — climate change. We must mitigate and protect our province, do what we can to solve the crisis, just as we are living the consequences of decisions taken and not taken in the past 16 years when it comes to the pine beetle crisis and the shortage-of-fibre crisis. It is devastating the forest industry of this province. Those who come after us will live with our decision.

This is a crucial time. British Columbians need a conversation on which species should be replanted, on how we address this problem, on what new products — biofuels and engineered wood products — we can turn to, to add greater value to the fibre volumes that we currently and, in the future, will have.

That requires a government that will not be pushed over by the interests of the contributors to the previous government that got the forest policies that they wanted at the expense of the forests, the people of B.C., the economy of B.C. and the future of the province.

M. Morris: Lots of discussion on the pine beetle, climate change and how it affects the environment that we work in. Contrary to the previous member speaking, the issues surrounding pine beetle were widely recognized back in the 1990s. That had, actually, manifested itself over the years.

British Columbia has been planting monocultural pine plantations since the 1970s, perhaps earlier, because it’s a quick-growing tree, and it was commercially viable. So a lot of the plantations that we replanted back in the 1970s, the ’80s, the ’90s and 2000s were significantly affected by the mountain pine beetle epidemic as a result of climate change. We didn’t have the cold winters that we’d normally had in British Columbia over the years.

[11:20 a.m.]

That affected about 20 million hectares of land in British Columbia, of pine. The hardest-hit areas were the small communities that rely on the forest industry. Quesnel, Vanderhoof and the Lakes District. Over 50 percent of their pine trees were killed during the pine beetle epidemic. And 100 Mile, Williams Lake and the Prince George area in my own riding also suffered significant losses from that.

Industry adapted to deal with the pine trees that were dead. They retooled their mills. They came up with technology that could do it in a safer manner than we’d ever done it before — and more quickly. As a result of changing their mills and adapting to the type of wood that we have, production went up. They’re able to cut more wood with less people, with the electronic and technology systems that they have in the mills. Even in the logging industry itself, it’s far safer. There are far fewer people getting injured in the bush because of the technology that we have — with the machinery that we have in the forests, which reduces the number of people that we have working there.

In addition to the pine beetle that we have in British Columbia, we also see the spruce beetle taking over in many parts of the province here. In my riding alone, we have about 500,000 hectares that have been killed by the spruce beetle in the last four or five years. And 500,000 hectares is far greater than the GVRD. So an area larger than the greater Vancouver regional district has been killed by spruce beetle.

That was the mid-term timber supply that the interior of the province was going to rely on for a robust economy. The spruce trees that we had there were going to replace the pine trees that had been killed off by the pine beetle. Even though there were aggressive replanting schemes in place that saw a large portion of the forests replanted, we’re still seeing that it’s going to be years before we get back to that robust forestry economy that we had before.

The other effect of the spruce beetle, the pine beetle and the fir beetle — we’re losing a lot of fir trees throughout the Cariboo region as well — is the effect that they have on hydrology. That’s the amount of water that comes running off in the springtime, when we have the melts like we have right now, affecting the stream flows, affecting the lake levels that we have across the province here. All that is affected by the millions and millions of cubic metres of wood that has been killed by the pests out in the forests in this country of ours.

It’s a serious issue. Climate change is something that we have to adapt to. It’s something that our economy has to adapt to in order to look forward into the future and to make sure we’ve got the social programs and the infrastructure in place that British Columbians have become used to. With the differences in urban and rural British Columbia…. Rural British Columbia has been so reliant on the resource sector, and the forest sector has played such a significant role in that area. There are going to be some big shoes to fill there.

Again, I can’t reiterate enough the impact not only on hydrology but the effect that it has on wildlife, on fir bear populations, on ungulate populations, on our bird populations. The number of species that we have out there that are so reliant on mature forest canopies and a robust forest that have been affected…. We see our moose population is down by 80 percent in the Omineca — higher than that in some other regions. We have our mule deer populations on the decrease. We have our caribou herds on the decrease as a result of the loss of habitat. We see that a number of our bird species have decreased right across the province, here, as a result of the loss of habitat as well.

Climate change has done a lot to this province. It’s changing the total landscape of this province. It’s something we’re going to have to pay attention to.

B. Ma: Climate change is real. While there are those who still insist on expending valuable, clean, fresh air debating this fact, the overwhelming consensus across the globe is that it is in fact real and that mankind is in fact causing it.

Not only is climate change real, but the impacts of it are as well. Glaciers have shrunk. Ice on rivers and lakes is breaking up earlier and faster, creating flooding, including flooding observable right here in British Columbia. Plant and animal ranges have shifted. Precipitation patterns have changed. The effects that scientists had predicted in the past would result from global climate change are now occurring — loss of sea ice; accelerated sea level rise; longer, more intense heat waves; longer, more damaging droughts; stronger, more intense hurricanes.

[11:25 a.m.]

There is fear. I hear from my peers and those younger than me that they worry about the kind of world that they would be bringing children into — one that, perhaps, they would not want to subject their children to. So they aren’t sure if they ever want to procreate.

Then there’s the painful reality of knowing that climate change has already resulted in disease, in famine, in death. The painful reality is that even if we globally were able to meet the conditions of the Paris accord to hold the increase in global average temperature to well below 2 degrees Celsius, even then, millions will have died. The painful truth is that a 2-degree global warming target protects the privileged. It protects us in North America, those of us in countries away from the equator. The painful truth is that 2 degrees means that millions in the global south will have already died from the effects of that change to our world.

It’s no wonder that so many have vividly, desperately cried out that we must act immediately to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and move towards renewable energy — hydroelectric, solar, wind, geothermal. The possibilities for alternatives are endless.

Now, I know what some of you might be thinking. You might be thinking: “But you use products every single day that wouldn’t exist without petroleum. Isn’t it a little hypocritical to complain about an increase in the use of oil and gas products?”

My answer to that is no. Despite the underdeveloped imagination of some, it is actually possible to honour and appreciate what the past has given us, while still pursuing an even better future. It is possible to say, “Thank you, I am grateful for the successes of our forefathers in making possible all of the advances that we benefit from daily,” while still saying: “Let’s keep moving forward.”

I think one of the challenges with this transition is the chasm it creates between generations, the feeling that our older generations might get when younger generations insist on change. Perhaps what is being heard is that their old ways are evil. It’s hard not to feel defensive when something makes you feel disrespected, unwanted and antiquated. But the conversation doesn’t have to be this way. I love my parents. Their sacrifices, their trials, their tribulations have brought me to be the person I am today. But I don’t want to be my parents. I’m not interested in taking on the same challenges that they took on in their lives. They would not want me to either. That is not what they did all of this for.

The generations that have come before us have given us a gift in petroleum. But the greatest mistake is thinking that the advantages of petroleum products end at our ability to burn it, rather than recognizing that the gains we have made with it should help us launch towards a better future together.

We disagree on so many things, so many issues in this House — so much talking, so much posturing — that sometimes we forget. The question isn’t really about pipelines and whether they are better or worse than tankers, or if they’re better or worse than railcars, for transporting whatever substance it is that we are debating about today.

The real question we need to ask ourselves is: what kind of future do we want for our children? What kind of world and what kind of life do we want for our grandchildren? What opportunities? What experiences? How clean their air, how crisp their water? If we could see the forest from the trees, we would have our answers.

R. Coleman: I’m glad to take my place in this debate, or discussion, this morning. I am planning a trip to Kona in June, hopefully. Looking at the extreme power as something that’s totally out of control in nature, which is the volcano that’s taking place on the Big Island in Hawaii, should be a message to us that we as humanity don’t really have control over everything that’s in our society.

We have been dealing with fires and floods and changes in climate now for decades. As a Minister of Forests at one point in time, I know we invested millions of dollars to try and deal with the pine beetle, but the pine beetle brought with it its own aspects. The weather wasn’t cold enough to kill the pine beetle at a certain time of year. That grew in nature. Of course, the trees couldn’t be salvaged. They die, they dry, and then we get catastrophic fires, like we did last spring and at other times we’ve had it.

[11:30 a.m.]

I know that in the flooding that’s taking place in British Columbia, it’s not just about climate. In actual fact, the word has always been in emergency management: “It’s not the size of the snowcap; it’s the speed of the melt.” If the melt is very fast, no matter what the snowcap is, you get the pressure of nature coming down with the water, which is probably the most unbelievable thing you can ever see — the devastation of water and how we’re going to manage it.

It really shouldn’t be about saying who should be doing what with regards to the air. People always talk about California as being a clean state, yet 33 percent of its electricity still comes from burning coal. A larger portion of the state’s power comes from burning natural gas. In actual fact, even though people think it’s green, it’s not. It’s less green than British Columbia, with the portion of power that comes from green sources and renewable sources in B.C.

I think what we face is how we predict and how we manage the future. We can’t go spring to spring or fall to fall like we’ve tried to do, even though we’ve done things to basically do stuff within the areas in and around our communities, to take down the trees and try and build things up so we can anticipate what would happen with an interface fire, with homes built out in small communities across B.C.

It’s important that we do that. We should learn from something like, for instance, Grand Forks. After that flood is over, what do we need to do now with infrastructure to build up to protect and divert that type of flood in the future? What’s the reality of it? If you look at the areas across the United States like Houston, which is actually built just below sea level…. Thinking that you can have dikes and barriers built, that you could actually hold the ocean back, is somewhat crazy, when you think about it. When that water decides to breach, it breaches. There’s nothing you’re going to do about it.

What we need to do, basically, is continue to plan and be ready. But we need to actually invest more in infrastructure. Even though we’ve spent millions of dollars on the infrastructure in and around pine beetle, for instance, to be able to manage and try to cut the timber as quickly as it was serviceable, at the same time, recognizing the fire was coming, we just couldn’t predict how the winds would react with it. We cannot predict those things.

I’ll never forget the Kelowna fire. We were trying to put in equipment to take out about 20 $300,000 homes. We couldn’t get the equipment up. That was to build a fire guard. That was at five o’clock in the afternoon. At six o’clock, the front of that fire was like a hurricane. It was actually creating its own weather. It came through and devastated 300 homes.

You cannot predict this, so you have to find ways to be ready for it in how you use the products that are fire retardant for fire and how you’re going to deal with floods. It is a challenge for all of us to recognize that we are going to be spending more and more on infrastructure to deal with this in the future. It’s important we recognize that, because that’s what our citizens expect.

After Grand Forks is over, the work to be done is really important. There are communities that will tell you that the things that were put in place the last time they had a flood are today standing up and protecting their community because somebody made the investment after the fact to make sure it didn’t happen again. Yet we still can’t control nature. All we have to do is look at that volcano and those fissures that are popping up out of the ground and what’s coming out of that as well — pollutants that are actually entering our airspace.

We have a country like China still building more coal plants at a more rapid pace than anyone else. They need to replace it with a cleaner form of energy. They put more particulate in the world from that alone than we do in North America, in our communities and in places like B.C. that are trying to be green.

We had a carbon tax that was revenue-neutral. It was reinvested in the environment. We need to recognize that that’s where it should be invested — invested in technology to do things that would make it better and easier for us to do our jobs.

R. Glumac: Climate change affects every aspect of our natural environment. No matter what we do, it’s going to get worse. It’s just a matter of how much worse it’s going to get.

It’s difficult for me to sit here and listen to the opposition. Some of them are claiming they care about climate change, when, in fact, their previous government did nothing regarding greenhouse gas emission reduction. They set targets, but they didn’t meet the targets. In fact, greenhouse gas emissions went up. Who pays the price? We heard the previous member talking about volcanoes in Hawaii, basically saying: “Well, since volcanoes are emitting all of this stuff, we can’t do anything about climate change.”

[11:35 a.m.]

Who pays the price? Who pays the price? Our communities pay the price. Our economy pays the price. Unexpected costs are going to continue to go up, with more storms, more flooding, more fires, more drought. These events will cause major disruptions to business operations, which can severely restrict economic output. What’s the solution?

When Donald Trump walks away from the Paris accord, joining countries like Nicaragua and Syria, things look grim. But are they? The reality is that despite Donald Trump, despite other higher levels of government that aren’t taking action, cities all over the world are taking action.

In the United States, 250 cities have made a commitment to reach 100 percent renewable energy by 2035. Chicago has embarked on an ambitious energy retrofit plan, reducing carbon emissions and saving $45 million a year on heating and cooling costs. New York is investing substantial money, billions of dollars, in energy retrofits.

San Francisco has met its goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, at 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2017, and they did this when the population increased by 20 percent and the GDP grew by 111 percent, proving that dealing with climate change is not bad for the economy. It’s, in fact, an economic opportunity.

Each of these cities alone won’t solve the climate crisis, but together their impact is incredible. The climate crisis won’t be solved by focusing on the enormity of the problem but by supporting existing efforts of cities and businesses and individuals.

I met the CEO of a tech company recently, a clean tech company in Vancouver. Vancouver is the greenest city. They’re doing great work on this. He was trying to do energy retrofits on his home. He had so many challenges doing this — finding the contractors, getting the grants. He doesn’t think he’s even going to be able to get the grants because it’s too complicated.

I met a city councillor who described to me how a homeowner wanted to replace an oil furnace tank because it was leaking. There was a great opportunity there to put heat pumps into the home. But they didn’t do that. They bought another oil tank because it was easier to do.

This city wants to provide low-interest loans through local improvement charges to help homeowners upgrade to heat pumps, but it struggled with the provincial legislation. Cities are at the front line of the climate crisis. They produce 70 percent of global CO₂ emissions. They’re trying to do the right thing. We, as a higher level of government, can partner with them and help.

A lot of these emissions, for example, are coming from existing buildings. Together, we can remove the barriers that stand in the way of energy retrofits on those buildings.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Together, we can provide a mechanism to amortize the high upfront costs of these retrofits. Together, we can help reduce the complexity of doing the upgrades, helping to find the appropriate contractors, navigating the grant process and the permitting process. Together, we can share knowledge of the benefits so that everyone knows how easy it can be to upgrade their home and what the benefits are in terms of greenhouse gas reductions and savings on energy costs.

The problem of climate change is enormous, but the solution is simple. We can work together and work towards a solution that’ll address the climate crisis.

R. Sultan: I am pleased to respond to the motion of the member for Delta North concerning the impact of climate change in our communities. Quite appropriately, much of the debate this morning is focused on the impact of the forest industry.

I have in front of me two important but contradictory documents. The first is a summary report by Susan Yurkovich, the redoubtable head of COFI, dated December 12, 2017.

[11:40 a.m.]

She points out the central role the forest sector plays in the British Columbia economy — 140 communities dependent on the forest industry, $4.1 billion in payments to various levels of government, $12.9 billion in provincial GDP. On it goes. Then she goes on to mention some of the issues and challenges, including the mountain pine beetle, decreasing timber supply, constraints on the land base, ongoing softwood lumber disputes with the Americans, not to mention the wildfires.

Ancillary to that, I have in front of me a report from the Forest Products Association of Canada titled Tackle Climate Change: Use Wood. This very interesting report points out two fundamentals. Namely, forests are extremely important carbon sinks, and regeneration of the forest plays a key role in CO₂ management.

Every year the industry plants about half a billion seedlings. Beyond that, the gradual introduction of wood as a construction product in high-rise buildings — say, seven storeys and higher — is proceeding apace, and there are 13 such buildings under construction now.

Juxtapose this essentially optimistic but realistic view of the industry with a second report that came out, not so long ago, by our good socialist friends at CCPA, our always reliable socialist think tank. It’s by Bob Williams, who cut his spurs both in the Barrett and Harcourt regimes, and it might be summed up by saying: “The story of the industry decline and the case for regional management committees.” He paints a very bleak picture of the fact that we are a remnant of what we once were, and the data are there to prove it. It’s a rather gloomy report, I must say.

Mr. Williams, not to be content with criticism, suggests a solution. He’s going to turn it all over to regional committees. And I’m sure regional committees will come up with an answer to all the issues he raised.

As I look at the industry, myself, I draw upon my experience 25 years ago when I was president of a joint venture with the giant Bechtel Corporation out of San Francisco, and we were intent upon building a large $150 million fibreboard mill in Williams Lake.

My forester, the experienced late Neil Desaulniers, reminded me that the spindly Chilcotin forest had sprung up since the European settlers had arrived and introduced firefighting to the equation and that, inevitably, the forest we relied upon would be harvested, become decadent and the bugs would eat them, or they would burn up.

That was 25 years ago, pre–Al Gore, pre–pine and –spruce beetle epidemic crisis. Nobody thought we would end up, actually, with all three, but we did.

After an investment of about $35 million, the B.C. Investment Management Corp., which had been funding it, decided to go home. Bechtel went back to San Francisco, and there was enough money left for me to repay at least the money advanced by the good, hardworking citizens of Wil­liams Lake, and the project was abandoned.

We regretted we had not chosen OSB instead, where the markets were somewhat more robust. But the people who did, down at 100 Mile House, had to shut down their mill the other day for lack of fibre supply. When the chief forester told us our project couldn’t proceed because there wasn’t enough fibre, he actually did us a big favour.

I’m not sure how the Williams committee would have resolved these issues, but I will conclude with one sentence, if I may, Mr. Speaker. I’ve figured out what the problem is. To quote Pogo: “We have met the enemy, and it’s us.”

[11:45 a.m.]

J. Rice: Right now people across B.C. are reeling from the effects of flooding rivers. People are displaced from their homes, defending their properties with sandbags and preparing for more to come with an expected record flood season.

Recent emergency events, both here in B.C. and around the world, have highlighted the importance of emergency management and preparedness, particularly in light of climate change. These events have a devastating impact on individuals, their families and communities, as well as the economy.

Recovery from these events can take many months or years. Often these same communities are exposed to the very same risk year after year. The taxpayers of British Columbia and Canada pay hundreds of millions of dollars in costs related to emergency operations and recovery efforts.

In addition, damage to the provincial economy from these events can be substantial. For example, as the costliest natural disaster in Canadian history, the Fort McMurray wildfire will ultimately cost over $5 billion for rebuilding and repairing homes and restoring businesses.

Scientists agree that the incidence, severity and fre­quency of natural disasters will continue to increase as the effects of climate change develop. According to the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, the average annual temperature in B.C. will increase by 2½ degrees Celsius by 2050, and that’s only if GHG emissions are reduced by half. These changes in temperature will have wide-ranging consequences on a local and regional scale with numerous negative provincial impacts.

The following impacts are occurring and are anticipated to intensify: sea level rise, resulting in increased erosion and accelerated decay of currently exposed infrastructure; rising tides in coastal communities, which lead to more frequent flooding and an increase in the potential for a catastrophic flood in the Lower Mainland; melting glaciers, which result in less cold water in river systems, negatively affecting fish populations; an increase in the fire season in susceptible communities by a number of weeks; an almost doubling of days that exceed 25 degrees Celsius, exposing vulnerable populations to heat-related illness; and variations in precipitation patterns, resulting in an increase in coastal and inland flooding in some regions and sustained drought in others.

Factors such as climate change are increasing B.C.’s vulnerability to a number of natural hazards, such as wildfire, flooding and landslides. If B.C. is to become more disaster-resilient, we need to collectively understand risks more fully; guide and coordinate the efforts of governments, including First Nations, partners and the public more effectively; prevent and reduce risks proactively; and prepare for robust response and recovery efforts.

These needs align with the four priorities identified in the UN Sendai framework document for which Canada is a signatory. The importance of addressing all phases of emergency management — mitigation, preparedness, response, recovery — and involving all partners are two of the concepts that are central to the United Nations Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction.

This document sets out an all-of-society, long-term approach to reducing the impact of disasters. It sets out a practical and evidence-based system that involves the following priorities: understanding risks, strengthening disaster risk governance, investing in risk reduction, preparing for effective response and to build back better in recovery.

Hon. Speaker, as of yesterday, there are nearly 2,000 homes under evacuation order, 1,300 homes on evacuation alert and more than 4,000 people estimated to be displaced from their homes at this time due to flooding-related events in B.C.

Snowpack levels in many regions have reached 150 to 200 percent above normal. The warm weather has started about a month earlier this year, and average temperatures were six to ten degrees above normal this past weekend.

With this combined high snowpack and rapidly warming temperatures, British Columbia is facing beyond historic high river levels. The river forecast models show river levels reaching heights never recorded before. In the next week or two, many rivers are about to exceed what experts call 100-year return rates. That is, we only expect to see this much water in the river systems once every 100 years.

Adopting a disaster risk reduction framework, such as the Sendai framework, here in B.C. will help us better prepare for and mitigate the costs of climate change on communities and our economy.

S. Thomson: I’m pleased to rise and take my place today in debate around the motion: “Be it resolved that the House recognizes that climate change is increasingly impacting communities and economies.”

[11:50 a.m.]

I wanted to talk a little bit…. We’ve, obviously, seen this firsthand in Kelowna and in the Okanagan and are certainly experiencing it again this year.

I want to just comment on the comments made by the member opposite, the member responsible for emergency management B.C., and recognize the very, very important role that emergency management B.C. plays in responding to all of these situations. We’ve seen the good work firsthand on the ground in terms of the systems, the community volunteers that are in place, first responders, neighbours helping neighbours through the process.

This really is a time when communities do come together, because, as was pointed out, as we speak now, we’ve got hundreds of people on evacuation, without homes. We’ve got hundreds more on evacuation alerts, and if you watched the news this morning, those alerts keep growing. New alerts for the whole of the Similkameen, new alerts for the South Okanagan, all continuing to grow — very, very significant impacts.

The snowpack levels are greater than those in 2017, and the melt is really just getting underway. As pointed out by the member for Langley, often it’s not the level of the snow melt or the level of the snowpack; it’s how the melt occurs and how it comes off that overwhelms the systems.

All of this points to the fact that climate change, climate variability, is really having a very significant impact on our communities and on our local economies. Members have commented about the impacts of fire, the impacts of flood, and how the fact that the fires…. Then floods follow, and the fact that you’ve had the fires exacerbates the impact of the floods, because the ground doesn’t hold water like it did previously.

All of those situations compound to promote and lead to these promptings of local states of emergency, shutting down roads, causing drinking and separate water issues, not to mention the financial impacts to individuals, businesses and government.

Now, as the Okanagan and our ridings in the Okan­agan…. I’m not discounting at all the impacts through­out the province from this. But in the Okanagan, our residents are bracing for another battle with nature and the floodwaters encroaching, and these are very, very significant impacts. In fact, just looking, as the member responsible for emergency management just noted, at the river forecast — the forecast for Mission Creek, which runs right through the heart of my riding in Kelowna…. Forecasts for the middle of this week have Mission Creek rising to those one-in-100-year levels. So it’s going to be nervous, nervous days as we look to that.

I know that at the local level, the communities have prepared. There has been more mitigation work and preparation being undertaken — the management of the lake level to bring the lake down to as low a level as possible, respecting fisheries values and international agreements and creating a reservoir that can take some of this. We hope that that’s going to mean that the impacts this year are not like they were last year.

We, as a previous Liberal government, committed additional funding for flood mitigation — $173 million along with federal and local governments for 168 mitigation projects. We topped up funding for emergency management B.C., $15 million for public safety preparedness initiatives, and $50 million for 17 community-based hazard mitigation projects and upgrades to dikes and flood protection. All is important work that will need to be continued, to be enhanced, and continued investments are going to be made as we work on all of this together.

[11:55 a.m.]

The members opposite talked a lot about the impacts of climate change on forest health and forest mitigation, another area that’s going to require continued attention. We must work together to manage this as best we can, and it will take collective efforts.

B. D’Eith: I’m pleased to rise today to talk about climate change in our province.

First, I’d just like to, as the last speaker, get back to some of the core issues and some of the work that people have done in the world. For example, Al Gore has spent pretty much all of his time since getting out of office dealing with the crisis of climate change.

He kind of brings it all together in a very understandable way, and you know, the science is basically there. The science community overwhelmingly says, “We have to change,” but the question is: why? As he says, 110 million tonnes of man-made carbon pollution is released into the atmosphere every 24 hours. That’s amazing.

We have a thin shell of atmosphere, similar to the skin of an apple. What’s happening is that layer is getting thicker and trapping the heat, so the temperature is rising. What’s happening is the oceans are heating up rapidly and leading to extreme weather, and we’re seeing record downpours and record flooding. We’re seeing this right now in B.C., with Grand Forks, Midway, Osoyoos, Kelowna, Smithers, East Kootenay and all over British Columbia.

Land is drying out. Vegetation dries out. That means droughts are deeper, which means wildfires are increasing. We saw that last year in our summer. It cost the province over half a billion dollars and affected the lives of thousands of British Columbians.

The heat is also melting the ice. Greenland’s glaciers are melting, which means a rise in the ocean levels. Many cities in the world are at risk, which means a refugee crisis.

The warmer temperatures also mean insects and the rise of disease. We’ve seen the increase of invasive species like pine beetle, for example.

Climate change is one of the biggest threats to the world economy, but can we change? Absolutely. Renewable energy such as solar and wind is becoming far more economical now, and we’re lucky that we have hydro already. But we really should be making the change to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, and that’s happening. We have the ability, now, for large storage batteries. We’re using LEDs, making electricity more efficient, and nearly all automobile manufacturers are now offering electric vehicle options. But will we? Will we do this?

Well, the Paris accord happened, and nearly every country in the world agreed to reduce carbon emissions to a net zero by 2050, notwithstanding the fact that the Trump government in the U.S. has pulled out of the Paris accord. As some of the other members have mentioned, many of the U.S. states and cities are actually moving aggressively to meet their carbon targets and, in fact, are showing that you can actually increase your economic benefits while decreasing your carbon footprint.

Many say: “Well, B.C…. We’re a small player. What kind of difference can we make?” The fact is that Canada should be, and can be, a leader in creating industrial models that reduce carbon footprints, and B.C. can be a leader in Canada. Our cleaner industrial models can be exported around the world.

We need to make sure that the world acts, because flooding and wildfires in B.C. are going to get worse until we can turn this around. This means that, in the meantime, we have to adapt to the present reality of climate change.

As we move forward — our mining, forestry and energy industries — the world is going to demand that suppliers provide more green products for export. B.C. can and should be a leader in producing export products that are an example to the world about how things can be done. In fact, with many industries I’ve met with in the past year — mining, LNG, cement, forestry…. Many of these companies are showing a commitment to producing the cleanest products to export in the world. That drive to produce a lower carbon footprint is laudable for many of our companies.

Having said that, though, the government has a huge role in ensuring that we actually move towards a smaller carbon footprint, and companies need to be encouraged — shall we put it? — to reduce their carbon emissions. In fact, the previous government had a plan for meeting climate change reduction targets, and none of those targets were met. We’ve actually set legislative targets of 40 percent reduction in carbon emissions from 2007 levels by 2030, and 60 percent reduction from 2007 levels by 2040. The current target of 80 percent reduction in emissions by 2050 remains.

The new Climate Change Accountability Act will now require detailed public reports from public sector organizations on climate change adaption and enable the minister to set sectoral greenhouse gas emission targets.

On carbon tax, we are gradually phasing in the federally mandated carbon price, starting with a $5-per-tonne increase in the budget of 2018. The higher price on carbon will help put the province on a path towards meeting B.C.’s legislative 2050 greenhouse gases. That is the plan that we’re taking.

B. D’Eith moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Robinson moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 12 noon.