Orders of the Day

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

[2:35 p.m.]

[L. Reid in the chair.]

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Hon. M. Farnworth: It’s my pleasure to rise and continue debate on the throne speech, which I adjourned so many, many months ago. It was not something I expected to be doing on this particular day. In fact, my expectation was that we would be debating another piece of legislation which was tabled in the spring session. The plan was that while we would not be debating that legislation at that time, we would be debating it in the fall. Unfortunately, there is an issue related to the legislation and another province. So we are not.

I made the decision that we will not call that. Therefore, as members know, the default piece of legislation that often gets called for a time such as this is the throne speech.

Before I get into that, it’s probably a good idea to maybe, just for those who watch these debates at home, give a little bit of background on the throne speech and why, for example, we tabled three pieces of legislation today and we’re not debating those three pieces of legislation today. I see my colleague from Prince George–Valemount nodding and smiling.

The fact is that in this chamber, legislation is tabled. Today three pieces of legislation were tabled, important pieces, but they sit on the order paper so that the opposition has a chance to look at them before they’re called for debate. My expectation is that there will be additional legislation tabled also this week, tomorrow, and that we will have a full parliamentary calendar to look at, debate and discuss, both in this chamber and in committee stage, legislation that the government has brought forward. Much of it is related to what was outlined in the throne speech.

Also, to remind those people who are watching this, the throne speech lays out, at the beginning of a session, the government’s agenda, the government’s vision, the government’s plans for that spring session and for the fall session. I have noticed with interest some of the discussion that takes place in the Twitterverse, and I’m often surprised at people’s understanding of how this place works. For many people, they were under the impression a new session: a new throne speech. That is not the case. This session is a continuation of the spring session. We will not be dealing with the budget but, rather, solely with legislation.

As I said, this legislation flows from the throne speech which was read by the Lieutenant-Governor in February. That throne speech outlined a number of issues and priority areas that we as a government campaigned on and that we intended to move forward on this session. Many of those areas are of critical importance to my own constituency of Port Coquitlam, where I have had the privilege of serving now for a number of years.

[2:40 p.m.]

It always gives me great pleasure when I can report to my constituents on the progress that is being made on issues that matter to them. In this year’s throne speech, one of the key issues talked about was education. I have a fast-growing community. The average family size is larger than the provincial average, according to the census data.

We’ve seen significant construction of new residential units in Port Coquitlam, particularly on the north side of my community — in fact, the neighbourhood that I live in. There have been literally hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of townhomes that have been built for families. It’s remarkable and amazing to see the number of kids living in those townhouse complexes.

That, of course, puts pressure on our education system by means of the need to have more teachers but also in ensuring that we have the classroom space available for those young kids who are entering our education system and who are going to be there — well, the ones that moved in — for the first 12 years in the K-to-12 system.

That’s why I’m so pleased that we’re seeing the construction, for example, of the new Lee School, the new Minnekhada Middle School. Both are critical pieces of education infrastructure that are taking place in my community. Those were promises made prior to the election campaign. These are commitments outlined in the throne speech that we’re moving forward on.

What we’ve seen with that growth…. That growth is going to continue, and not just in my riding but throughout the Tri-Cities. I know my colleague across the way in Coquitlam–Burke Mountain has seen similar kinds of growth as those subdivisions march across Burke Mountain, and it’s been great to see that happen. The bears aren’t too happy about it. We’ve seen a significant increase in human-bear interaction.

The reality is that we’re a very fast-growing region, so the increase in residential development needs an increase in school investment, and that school investment has been taking place. That school investment has been taking place not just in my riding, in the riding of the member for Coquitlam–Burke Mountain and other ridings in the Tri-Cities, but also throughout British Columbia. We’ve hired additional teachers to meet those needs but also to meet the issues raised by the previous government when it came to the Supreme Court decision.

Along with this growth, transportation issues are also of critical importance in the Tri-Cities. We have seen, obviously, an increase in growth. We’ve seen an increase in ridership or more vehicles on the road. We’ve seen realignments in the bus routes that are providing better and increased service. Part of that is the cooperation that’s taking place between local governments and the province and TransLink to ensure that we’re able to provide the transit and transportation services that a growing province and a growing economy need. Again, that’s something identified in the throne speech that we’re following through on.

It builds on our first budget where we removed the tolls off the Port Mann Bridge and the Golden Ears, and I can tell you that that’s had a profound impact on the people in my community. They’ve been able to travel back and forth. Whether it’s Port Coquitlam to Langley, in the case of friends and family members whose kids, whether they’re in PoCo or Maple Ridge…. Whereas before you wouldn’t have bought a place in Langley, often now they do, because we’ve made it easier for families to stay connected.

They’re saving money, money in their pocket — hard-earned, after-tax dollars. When you think about what the cost of those tolls were and how much it’s saving a family, that’s significant — you know, $300 a month for a person in a vehicle, after-tax dollars. That’s something that this government made a priority in terms of making life more affordable — again, a key element of the throne speech.

[2:45 p.m.]

An element related to my portfolio has been…. I’ll come back to my community on some of the key issues in a moment.

One of the key issues in the throne speech was around the legalization of cannabis — an important issue, a significant shift in public policy and probably the largest shift in public policy in this country since the mid-’60s and the introduction of medicare, of universal health care in this country.

It has required a significant amount of effort and time, in terms of legislation — legislation that we dealt with in that spring session and legislation that came about through a significant process of consultation. It was consultation that involved tens of thousands of British Columbians in communities right across the province, working cooperatively to put in place regulations and rules that meet the needs of individual communities right across this province — recognizing that one size does not fit all and that the approach that’s required in Vancouver is not the same as the approach that’s required in Richmond, for example, or in Vanderhoof or in Port Coquitlam.

I am pleased in the direction that that has been going and that British Columbia will be ready on October 17 when legalization takes place. Again, it’s a commitment in the throne speech — that this was a critical issue that we would be addressing.

We have been operating under a very tight timeline. In fact, it was only in June that the federal government finally was able to get through the Senate the enabling legislation — the two bills, Bill C-45 and C-46 — that dealt with the critical issues that the province was going to have to be responsible for. Given the time frame, I think the staff in my ministry, the cannabis secretariat, have done an amazing job — an amazing job — of getting legalization ready to the point that it is in this province.

As we are well aware, October 17 is not the beginning or the end of the process but rather a key step in what I believe will be the evolution of cannabis regulations and legalization in the years to come. Much is still to be determined with the federal government. We are in constant contact with them and watching as they work to bring in the next stage, which, we are told, will be next year.

Along with that, one of the key issues around that has been the drug-impaired driving. Again, this is something that we’re mindful of and is part of that entire issue addressed in the throne speech. We have a lot of questions around the drug-impaired driving technology. As I’ve stated before, we fully expect that there will be court cases around that issue, whether it’s here in British Columbia or whether it’s in another jurisdiction. But from the moment that technology is tested, we can be assured there will be a court case. That’s just a fact of life.

It’s important to recognize that safety of the public, both in terms of ensuring that drug-impaired driving is something that the public takes seriously and also from the health care side of things. Again, that’s part and parcel of our throne speech in ensuring that when it comes to health care, those issues related to cannabis are addressed, that those issues that my constituents are concerned about…. For example, wait-lists, MRIs and all of those parts of the health care system that people rely on….

That’s why it’s a significant focus of this government. It’s about the services that people rely on. That’s what this throne speech is about — dealing with the issues that matter to people, dealing with the issues that they know are important to them. Of course, health care is a critical one.

What we’ve seen since the throne speech is the work of my colleague, the Minister of Health, who has been across this province ensuring that that health care infrastructure, which is needed to sustain our first-class, world-class health care that we have in this province, continues long into the future.

We’ve seen the Health Minister up in Fort St. John at the hospital up there. I see my colleague across the way nodding in appreciation of the initiatives and the work of the Minister of Health. Likewise, I know that the member who represents Terrace is thrilled by the announcements that have taken place.

[2:50 p.m.]

What’s really fascinating…. I would be remiss, if I did not mention for the public that those two significant projects are in opposition-held ridings. We are doing health care improvements in ridings held by the government and ridings held by the opposition. These are decisions that are being made not on a partisan basis, but on the basis of what is right for the communities. Where is the need at its greatest?

I mean, Mills Memorial Hospital in Terrace is one that has been on the drawing board for a very long time — election after election. I know that there are those…. In fact, there is a former Premier — I shall not mention his name — who once said: “Why waste a good election promise by keeping it?” Well, as much as I understand that logic, I think most people want to see, particularly, especially when it comes to issues like health care, the government following through on its commitments. That’s why I’m so pleased that we are, in fact, doing just that.

Another initiative that came about, that I think is really worthwhile pointing out…. I think there’s something that often does not get recognized enough, and that is that it’s not always conflict in this House. There are a lot of times where both sides work together. There’s a recent initiative that happened because of just that. It’s an issue of very much concern to women’s health, a situation where women would go for a mammogram and were not told that if they had dense breast tissue, the mammogram was not necessarily as effective and as reliable as it could be.

Thanks to work by the women’s caucus on the government side and the women on the opposition side, who listened to a presentation and made the case, that change has now taken place. Women in this province, the first in this country, will receive what is now common practice in much of the U.S. That is, when they have a mammogram and it reveals that they have dense breast tissue, they are, in fact, told.

Prior to this change, they were not told. They didn’t know, so they sometimes left with a false sense of comfort. Now they are told, and they will be able to get follow-up treatment or different kinds of examinations to ensure that there is not a health issue or a tumour that might have been missed through a mammogram. That’s an example of this House working together, and members on both sides putting forward and achieving, I think, a significant change in public policy.

I can see that the green light is probably going to turn to red momentarily. [Applause.] I will take that as applause for a great speech. As I said, I had not expected to be speaking on the throne speech today, but I know other members will be speaking, and I look forward to their interventions on this debate. With that, I thank the members for paying such close attention.

D. Davies: As mentioned, we are returning to the Speech from the Throne. A lot has happened since that speech so many months ago. It was quite enjoyable reading through my reply to the throne speech. In fact, it took me a while to find it once I started looking. But it was quite interesting, going through some of the points before I did update them.

It is my pleasure, on behalf of my constituents of Peace River North, to comment to the Speech from the Throne. I would love to agree with the hon. colleague who just spoke before me, but I cannot. There are some points there that I will certainly have to speak against. Some of my comments that I did develop so many months ago certainly still hold merit today. Honestly, if I were to choose one word that could have described this throne speech, it would be “vague.” In fact, if I could choose more than one word, it would be “empty” or “void.”

[2:55 p.m.]

“Lacking substance.” “Shows little regard for rural and remote British Columbians.” “Shows little regard for the average British Columbian.” But I will stick with “vague.” Those words that were written almost eight months ago are still a defining term for this government: vague presentiments at attempts of progress. This is somewhat surprising, though, because the throne speech is usually what maps out what the government stands for, a road for all of us in British Columbia to get us from here to there with this government. But I think I might have got better results from using Google maps to get the throne speech.

Unfortunately, this throne speech, in my opinion, sounded more like an apology than anything else. During the election, the NDP came out with a number of big-ticket promises designed to win over voters, a bit of a honey trap of sorts to persuade voters on a number of false promises. The problem, though, is it became even more apparent when the government delivered its budget. This throne speech was designed, in my opinion, to actually lower the expectations of British Columbians.

For example, there are a few well-known and often-talked-about campaign promises that are now completely missing in action. The $10-a-day daycare: missing, presumed dead. The $400 rebate for renters — I think we know that that’s probably over. The 114,000 housing units, once a solid campaign promise, are now purely aspirational. In fact, the budget was about 80,000 units short. Promises, promises, promises. I feel like I’m living in Narnia or the enchanted forest or something.

Perhaps the most glaring omission is any real plan to grow the economy of British Columbians, which I believe explains why they are breaking these expensive promises. It’s because there’s no plan to pay for them all. Of course, since the throne speech has happened, this government is now engaged in a trade war of sorts with Alberta. They’ve antagonized the federal government. They’ve presided over 40,000 private-sector job losses. This is a government that says it wants to make life more affordable for British Columbians. LOL.

For the middle class that was looking forward to seeing this government deliver on at least a few of its campaign promises, the situation looks dismal at best. Since forming government, we’ve seen the NDP introduce more than a dozen new taxes, totalling more than $8 billion — $8 billion out of British Columbians’ pockets. This is rather disappointing, because there are a few things that the government did, in fact, do right. They were our campaign promises that they did right. They got our campaign promises right.

The September budget update actually followed through on some key tax breaks that the B.C. Liberals announced, including the MSP premiums being cut by 50 percent, which represents nearly $1 billion tax savings; cutting the small business tax rate from 2.5 down to 2 percent; and the phasing out of the PST charged on electricity by industry. We in the opposition supported these tax cuts because people in British Columbia were already counting on them. But if I can read between the lines on this throne speech and some of the things that have happened recently, I think this might be the last time that we hear the phrase “tax break” in a long time.

To prove my case, let’s look at the new increase in taxes that we’ve seen so far from this government, starting with the carbon tax. British Columbia had received international acclaim on bringing in one of the most progressive carbon taxes in the world because it was revenue neutral. British Columbians knew that the increase in carbon tax had to be offset by a decrease in personal taxes or other forms of taxation. It was fair, and it was transparent. But the NDP has now abandoned the revenue neutrality.

British Columbians should be concerned about this new stealth tax. It’s gone up five bucks a tonne starting on April 1, and that was no April Fools’ joke. Now, with the federal carbon tax plan, I do have to question. The federal carbon tax plan is now being threatened. We’re starting to see it unravel across the country. What will the plan be then in British Columbia? Up and up?

[3:00 p.m.]

Well, yes, it will rise. In fact, it will rise for the next four consecutive years. The average British Columbian should be concerned, because consumers will be the first to feel it at the pumps. We’re already starting to see that. Prices at the pumps will go up to about 8½ cents a litre for gasoline and more than 10 cents for diesel. This means that consumers will pay more than $5 extra in carbon tax every time they fill up and nearly $10 if you drive an SUV, more if you drive a larger pickup.

For Lower Mainland drivers, the NDP even increased their gas tax, causing them to pay, now, the highest gas prices in North America. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has this to say: “With more than 5.7 billion litres of gasoline sold in B.C. last year, it means that the provincial government will take in an average of $490 million in gasoline taxes, and when the diesel carbon tax is included, that jumps to more than $600 million in tax revenue taken from motorists in just one year.” Think of how that would affect the entire economy in British Columbia.

Someday our economy will eventually become less dependent on fossil fuels. We know that. But in the meantime, diesel is still an incredible driver of much of our economy. Just come north, and you will see that. Anywhere from tractor-trailers that deliver our food in grocery stores to school buses that take your child to school and the remote communities — and I have a number of them in my riding — that rely on diesel generators just to provide electricity for their residents — all of these run on diesel.

That means this NDP stealth tax increase is going to cost us a lot more than we bargained for. When the cost for transportation increases, most companies — I would, probably, almost safely say all companies — pass this on to the consumer. So much for making life more affordable for British Columbians.

There’s no explanation as to where the revenues will go from the carbon tax. There’d been talk about putting more money directly into public transportation — no indication of that in the throne speech. I guess the next time that you go and book a flight, take your family on a trip, you can thank the NDP for making that trip a little more expensive.

We’ve seen the double-dipping employer health tax, which will cause property taxes to increase in municipalities as they try to brace for this unexpected blow. We’ll see school boards, like Surrey, Vancouver, Coquitlam and many others, that have to deal with multi-million-dollar deficits as they now work through these unpredictable costs.

We have a speculation tax, which was unanimously condemned at the recent UBCM convention in Whistler and is causing thousands of affordable housing units to disappear as investment dries up. This is something that I heard when I talked to many municipal leaders at UBCM.

We’ve seen a broken promise on hydro rate freezes. Instead, the government’s raising it by 3 percent. That’s a very strange freeze.

If you’re wondering about affordable housing, though, the throne speech provided soothing words with little substance. Promising 14,000 units during the election — that sounds really, really good to many people that are relying on that. We’ve been reminded a few times in this House of the cost of that plan, $23 billion. And that’s not including the land.

You know, housing could become more affordable if we were looking at supply increases. But the NDP’s so-called 30-point housing plan does not have one point that addresses supply in the market for the middle class. Not one. It only looks at demand, which has led to a tightening of the market and demand being pushed into the condos, townhomes or other smaller starter homes. That is the very market that British Columbians were already struggling and trying to enter.

I think that increasing supply is a better option, a better option for making housing more affordable. But the government is now doing its level best to lower expectations on all of its campaign promises by stretching this one out for ten years. That is quite a lofty stretch, considering they would have to win the next three elections.

[3:05 p.m.]

If you are a renter and you voted for the NDP promise, because they did promise the $400 rebate, I think you’re going to be waiting for a while. In fact, that estimated rebate would cost $265 million a year. I think the government has walked away from this promise because, well, they just didn’t think it through.

A universal benefit — any British Columbian renting a property would be eligible for this $400 rental rebate. That’s any British Columbian who is renting. So a person who is renting a townhouse in downtown Vancouver for $5,000 or $6,000 a month is eligible for the $400 rebate, as is a single parent struggling in a basement suite. It doesn’t make sense. And, again, it’s one more broken promise.

As mentioned a moment ago, I’m also rather disheartened by any lack of plan or any lack of real mention about growing the economy of British Columbia. There’s nothing mentioned in the throne speech about how the government plans to pay for these large, big-ticket items that were speckled like magic fairy dust throughout the campaign time a little over a year ago.

This raises a red flag too, because we still do, believe it or not, face economic uncertainty in this province. Some of my remarks on the economy during our original throne debate have still not been addressed to this day. In fact, I would say they’ve gotten worse. At the time we were speaking some months ago, it looked like the NAFTA agreement would be abolished. Well, it has been. The United States has undone the North American Free Trade Agreement, which has caused another level of uncertainty for industries in British Columbia.

The B.C. lumber industry is still under attack by the softwood lumber dispute. The soured relationships with our close trading partners within our own country have been destroyed — for instance, our relationship with Alberta.

I could talk on a number of points, but I am limited to the time. So I’m going to move on to talking about education. This was supposed to be a party that was going to be the saviour of our education system, which is not true. British Columbia had an unbelievable record on education before. In fact, we were the envy of the world. British Columbia was the envy of the world when it came to results and delivering education. I can speak from experience as a former school teacher. Top results in math. Top results in science.

Well, to the rescue, the NDP government talks about fixing the education system in B.C. To really be honest, I was quite surprised. Hearing this all through the election campaign, I was really surprised that there weren’t a couple of pages on education in the throne speech. No, there were two small paragraphs on saving British Columbia’s education system, two paragraphs of really nothing, of really no offer of doing anything different. Well, a little bit of an offer of doing things different.

Now, fast-forward. Here we are eight months later, and we see where they’ve delivered on their throne speech. In the time since then, we have seen a lot of reannouncements from the government on promises and commitments that were made by the previous government. In fact, there’s actually less spending by the NDP government on education planned than there was already set in place by the previous government, less spending on capital projects.

[3:10 p.m.]

Let’s talk about the portables for a moment, the lofty goal of eliminating portables in Surrey. In fact, I recall that during our estimates following the budget debate, the Minister of Education told me: “Just watch. You will be seeing trucks backing into Surrey and dragging out the portables.” Well, eliminating portables in Surrey, the number one priority. Guess what happened in September? There are now more portables in Surrey than there were last year. I’m not too sure how that is recognized as a decrease, recognized as fixing the problem, or recognized as being the saviour to B.C.’s education system. I just don’t see it. It is a shame.

I do want to begin closing. I think that one thing that we can look at eight months later as I went through this throne speech, as I was looking through the throne speech — updating it, taking some stuff out, leaving much in that has not been looked at. With members sitting on the other side of the House the day that this speech was read…. They must be asking themselves some pretty tough questions right now about where the government is going.

What a failure in setting a road map for British Columbians in this province. Again, I sure hope that things do change and that we truly can start providing great services to British Columbians and giving some hope for British Columbians.

M. Dean: Well, it’s a great honour for me to take my place here in the chamber and to rise to deliver my response to the Speech from the Throne. I remain very grateful to represent the constituency of Esquimalt-Metchosin. My community is full of hard-working citizens, seniors, young families. My constituency is the home of Canada’s west coast naval base. We have four municipalities and three First Nations. All of our communities are coastal, and they’re all very diverse as well, from urban to suburban to rural.

Wherever I travel through the whole of Esquimalt-Metchosin, I hear from citizens who are having trouble with the cost of living. I’m very pleased to be able to share with them that the first and most urgent priority in the throne speech is to make life more affordable. That is very vital for residents of Esquimalt-Metchosin.

As the throne speech says: “Too many British Columbians are working paycheque to paycheque. Many can’t pay the bills without going further into debt. They’re anxious and uncertain about the future because no matter how hard they work, they can’t seem to get ahead.”

A local single mom — she put herself through college; she works really hard; she’s employed in the education sector — has got to take a second job and even occasional casual work, and she still finds that she can’t make ends meet. She’s now looking into getting a second mortgage on her house so that she can consolidate and clear her debts and then try and get ahead. She doesn’t have the option of selling her house because if she did, she would then have to pay more in rent than she does for her mortgage.

When life is unaffordable, the doors of opportunity and doors of self-determination slam shut. People in my constituency who are being forced to work two or three jobs to make ends meet certainly don’t have the time or the energy to complete education or upgrade skills. They’re trapped. Our throne speech offers different ways to tackle affordability.

Now, it will be no surprise to anybody in this House that housing is the biggest expense for families in my community, and I strongly support the action that we’re taking on tackling the high cost of housing by stabilizing B.C.’s out-of-control real estate and rental market.

We can see the results of speculation all around the province, with distorted markets, sky-high prices and empty homes. Legislation to crack down on tax fraud, tax evasion and money laundering will help to address some of the factors distorting the market. It’s all aimed at getting some sanity back into the market so that British Columbians can live here and stay with their family here and build their career and contribute to the economy here.

[3:15 p.m.]

Just as importantly, we’re also leading the way to encourage the construction of more affordable housing. We’re on the way with the largest investment of affordable housing in B.C.’s history, with social housing, student housing, seniors housing, Indigenous housing and affordable rentals for middle-income families.

Increasing the supply of affordable housing is crucial in my community. We have had years of near-zero vacancy rates for rentals, and when people can find an available unit, it’s often too expensive or it’s not well maintained.

We have a couple of exciting projects that are developing in my community that support increased densification and renovation of affordable housing units. One project in my community has actually been razed to the ground — of affordable units. Everybody has had proper services to relocate them, and then there’s been a plan to actually increase density on the same footprint of land by a non-profit housing association. Everybody who wants to move back in will move back in, and then more people will move back to that neighbourhood.

In another part of my community, there are going to be some new affordable units, 100 new affordable housing units, going up in a new development with a different non-profit housing organization. In order to renovate another building that they’re currently housing people in, they’re moving those people into this new housing unit so they can then do a renovation.

A single mom of three kids that I know — just as an example — was given notice to leave her rental home. She wanted to live in the same catchment area. With three kids going to school, she needed to be close by. She didn’t want too much disruption for them. When she would go for viewings of available homes to rent, she would turn up and find that she was one of nearly 20 families. It was really depressing for her. She always knew that she wasn’t going to be able to compete with them, and eventually she had to downsize and take a smaller option in order to stay in the same community. Stories like this are being shared everywhere across my community.

Last year our government took the first steps to help renters by closing fixed-term lease loopholes, ending geographic rent increases and increasing support to the residential tenancy branch. This year, as outlined in the throne speech, government introduced stronger protections for renters and owners of manufactured homes and protections for renters facing eviction due to renovation or demolition.

I’ll tell you about another single mom who lives in my community, another hard worker. She works, and she has a professional career in the community’s social services sector. She has two daughters that she’s responsible for, and they’re at the mercy of the rental market. She’s living paycheque to paycheque, but when she’s been forced to move due to a renoviction or an increase to rent, she has had to turn to her employer to ask for an advance on her wages.

In my community, there are examples of renovictions that have affected hundreds of people. An entire community living in mobile homes were given notice to leave so that all of the land could be redeveloped. Many of these residents were living there because it was affordable, and they were recipients of some kinds of supports. They were seniors, people with disabilities, people unable to work. And now many of these displaced people in our community had to turn to family, and they’re still living with them now.

The move to enhance the SAFER and RAP grants has made a big difference in my community. Esquimalt-Metchosin is home to very many seniors, and SAFER can mean the end to choosing between paying the rent or buying groceries. One local resident, Lillian, recently contacted my office to say that because of the increase in the amount she receives every month, she can now pay her entire B.C. Hydro bill without having to borrow from her daughter. So I’m very proud to support SAFER and RAP and very pleased to see that amounts paid out have increased to help those who need those extra dollars to help make ends meet.

Many families in my community have been struggling, also, to find child care of any kind, let alone child care that’s affordable. That’s why the child care plan referenced in the throne speech is very crucial. In my community, there are many families where one or both parents are working extra shifts and driving well out of their way for child care they feel lucky to have found. Commuting for child care and then commuting for work? Can you imagine the strain on those families?

[3:20 p.m.]

Well, they are some of the ones who will benefit most from our plan of affordable, quality child care for everyone. Because of the vision in the throne speech, safe, affordable, licensed care is becoming B.C.’s standard, giving parents the peace of mind they need and the quality of care that they can rely on. This is the largest investment in child care in the province’s history, and by working together with providers, advocates, communities and parents, this plan is already making a difference.

I hear it from parents in my constituency. I hear it from early childhood educators and teachers. More licensed spaces are increasing availability, and by bringing costs down, we’re opening doors of opportunity for families. We’re training more early childhood educators and investing in recruiting and retaining the dedicated professionals who work with children around the province.

A mom living in Colwood was telling me about her dire child care needs. She has to commute to drop off her infant. She leaves her daughter at the daycare at the earliest possible time because then she has to join the commute into town to get to work. If there are ever any issues, she has to drive out of town to get to the daycare. If there are any holdups in traffic, she is full of anxiety about being late for her daughter’s pickup from daycare. Increasing local child care spaces gives more choice, reduces stress and keeps families together more.

Now I’m going to turn my attention to education. Education is the greatest equalizer, from the very young to seniors. Investment in education is an investment in a better collective future. By fully funding class-size and composition requirements, more than 3,500 new teachers, librarians and counsellors are in B.C. schools helping students learn in smaller classes with more individual attention.

The West Shore, in my constituency, is one of the fastest-growing communities in the province, with loads of young families moving in over the last few years. So there’s a lot of pressure on our schools, and it’s vital that we continue to fund infrastructure improvements to reduce the number of children learning in portables.

In school district 62, we had two new high schools built over three years ago. Yet as soon as they were open, they were oversubscribed. The population in the school district continues to grow quickly, and it’s projected to continue growing. We will continue to invest in education in these communities, as we have committed to in the throne speech.

We are also investing in improving education with smaller class sizes and recruiting more teachers into our education system. A whole generation of children graduated from our education system with inadequate resources, and we are now supporting our children and students to fulfil that potential.

Now, I strongly believe in lifelong learning. I’m very lucky to have Royal Roads University in the heart of Esquimalt-Metchosin, and I’m actually an alumnus of the university as well. I’m very proud that our government is dedicated to addressing some of the obstacles to affordability in post-secondary and adult education. By cutting student loan interest by 2½ percent, graduates can get out of debt more quickly and on the path to their chosen career. By making adult basic education and English language learning tuition free, many members of my community are now able to prepare for a degree and upgrade their skills for work.

A strong economy is where everyone is doing better, where people have the opportunity to apply their skills, are paid fairly and share in the benefits that their hard work helped create. Exciting initiatives in my community include a partnership between the First Nations Technology Council and Royal Roads University. I learned about it at the announcement of the partnership earlier this year. This partnership takes Royal Roads’ groundbreaking technology-enabled teaching and learning expertise to expand programs from classroom to on-line delivery. Students build their skills in web development and coding, GIS and GPS mapping, software testing, network testing and more.

[3:25 p.m.]

I’m very proud to stand here on the traditional territories of the Songhees and Esquimalt peoples. My constituency also includes the Scia’new Nation. As referenced in the Speech from the Throne, we know that true and lasting reconciliation will take time. If it is to be meaningful, it will require deep transformation. It is a journey that I’m committed to taking step by step.

Yesterday was Orange Shirt Day, and my colleagues from Victoria–Beacon Hill and Victoria–Swan Lake attended a local event here in Victoria to honour and remember residential school survivors and their families. A shameful period in our shared history was recognized. The resilience and bravery of residential school survivors, their families and communities was honoured. We acknowledge the trauma and abuse inflicted on generations of Indigenous peoples. Today and every day, we commit to working together with Indigenous peoples to heal and build a better future.

I’m going to turn my attention now to helping citizens stay well and caring for those who are sick. We know that rapid access to health care is one of the keys to getting well and staying healthy. But for too long, too many people have not had access to the health care they need. Hospitals have been overcrowded. Wait-lists for surgeries are too long. Many people in my community cannot even find a family doctor.

Our health minister has travelled the province of B.C. with announcements of improvements in the health service over the last year. Improving services is a foundation of our throne speech. People need services where and when they need them. Health services are so critical and the best models of service need to be delivered according to need in every different community across the province.

By bringing together family doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners and other health care professionals, a team-based approach to care will improve access while reducing pressure on emergency rooms, like the one at Victoria General in the constituency of Esquimalt-Metchosin. There’s a wealth of research evidence from around the world indicating that team-based care has significant benefits for patients, providers and the sustainability of the health system. Team-based care has been shown to reduce hospitalizations and physician visits while improving outcomes for patients with chronic diseases.

In addition to the work of the Ministry of Health, the Victoria Division of Family Practice, which includes people living in my community, is recruiting new family doctors and locums to the community. They are also supporting physician retention through succession planning, coaching, medical record optimization and other initiatives to improve efficiency and allow doctors to accept more patients.

Our community needs more family doctors as we have one of the lowest rates of connection of individuals to a GP. Many of the issues raised by residents with my constituency staff are concerns about not having a family doctor, either for themselves or for someone else in need in their family. Working with local leaders, the ministry and health professionals, we can build capacity in the community and attract and retain more health professionals.

Our government is also taking action to reduce wait times. One example is the new south Island hip and knee program. I was so pleased to attend the announcement by the Minister of Health at Royal Jubilee Hospital earlier this year. This new strategy is dramatically increasing access to hip and knee surgeries on the south Island and getting people back on their feet faster.

Another example that I’d just like to talk briefly about is making free the treatment of Mifegymiso. This is now available for all women across British Columbia. This is what’s known as an abortion pill, and what it means is that women across the whole province have choice. It also protects vulnerable women, and it supports women, especially, in remote and rural areas.

Now, by cutting the medical services premiums in half, our government has put up to $900 a year back into the pockets of thousands of hard-working people. And soon MSP premiums will be gone altogether. That is going to make a really positive difference to people in my constituency.

I’ll tell you about Martha. I was chatting with Martha just a couple of days ago. She lives in Esquimalt. She’s 86. She told me how worried she has been for her granddaughter. Her granddaughter is just starting a family and has been struggling to make ends meet. Well, with the MSP being reduced by half, her granddaughter is now more able to get by.

[3:30 p.m.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Then when I told Martha it would be eliminated entirely in January 2020, she was visibly relieved and was going to call her granddaughter to make sure that she knew as well. What a strain was going to be lifted from that family.

My constituency is home to a large number of seniors, and many of them are single women. As a retirement capital, Victoria is well-equipped, with exceptional services and supports for our elders. Yet again, there is a gap that also needs to be addressed.

As referenced in the throne speech, we’re focused on improving access to services and providing a better standard of care in places like residential care homes. By investing $240 million over three years, the direct care that seniors receive will increase over the next three years to an average of 3.36 hours per resident per day. Staff in the residential care homes in my community work incredibly hard and do a fantastic job. These extra dollars will be such a help to them.

Then just one more point, before I wrap up, that relates to affordability. ICBC was created to provide affordable insurance to all B.C. drivers, but years of reckless decisions by the previous government have thrown the corporation into financial chaos. We’ve started making the tough decisions that will stem ICBC’s losses, keep insurance affordable and provide enhanced care for people injured in automobile accidents. We are going to make ICBC work for people again.

Now, this is really important in Esquimalt-Metchosin. This is a mobile community. A lot of people in my community drive. In fact, people in my community rely on their vehicles. They’re running kids to clubs. They’re running them to sports. They’re driving between shifts or between different jobs. They’re driving to and from child care across the region.

So I hear from local people who are grateful that we are putting ICBC’s priority back where it should be: providing fair and affordable rates for British Columbians and giving drivers peace of mind, with appropriate care if they’re in a collision. As the throne speech puts it: “We cannot build a better future if British Columbians can’t afford to be part of that future.” We hear this from businesses across the province. They tell us that they can’t hire staff. I hear this from chiefs of fire departments. In my community, they’re concerned that they won’t be able to recruit firefighters because of the cost of living in our communities that we expect them to protect.

We hear from families that generations might not be able to live close enough to each other to offer support and those family connections and relationships as people grow up and grow older and need each other. Young families are telling their parents that they can’t live close by. It’s not affordable. They have to move further and further away. Seniors who are on fixed incomes are saying to their professional, working children that they can’t afford to stay close by in their community. They just can’t afford to live there.

Our task is to increase the opportunities available to people, give them relief and provide a life that they can afford. So I’m honoured and grateful to be part of a government that is already making a difference. There’s so much work to be done, and the throne speech lays out some of the ways that we’re getting there on the journey ahead. I’m very proud to stand here today and support the speech from the throne.

Hon. K. Chen: Hon. Speaker, I would like to seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Hon. K. Chen: I’m really happy to be here today to welcome 50 adult education learners from National Open University being with us in the gallery today. National Open University is an on-line adult education institution based in Taiwan, with a lot of members taking courses here from Canada and here in B.C. Both the member for Burnaby–Deer Lake and I have joined many of their events in B.C. and have seen how passionate they are with lifelong learning.

From my understanding, one of the oldest members of their class is over 90 years old. Many of them, over the age of 65, are really happy to be able to take the ferry for free, as our government has restored seniors’ ferry discounts. I would like to ask members from this House to make them very, very welcome, and I hope that they enjoy their visit here today in Victoria.

[3:35 p.m.]

Debate Continued

J. Isaacs: I am humbled and deeply honoured for the opportunity to speak here today as the representative for the riding of Coquitlam–Burke Mountain. We return today to this Speech from the Throne, but so much has happened since this speech was first delivered that my previously prepared comments were outdated. Like my colleague before me, it was quite entertaining to go back and read the comments before updating them.

Before I get to the speech itself, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge my community and the wonderful place that I have the privilege to represent. I understand and fully appreciate the responsibility that has been entrusted to me to not only act on behalf of my constituents but to also act in the best interest of all British Columbians. I take that responsibility seriously.

I am grateful to be living in one of the most beautiful and safe cities in the world, a city that embraces and welcomes diversity. Coquitlam is an active community where celebrations take place throughout all seasons.

Soon, after the trick-or-treaters visit our doors, the winter light displays will start to take shape. Each year has seen a showcase of spectacular lights for residents and visitors from all over the Lower Mainland and elsewhere to enjoy. The walk around Lafarge Lake brings friends and families together to reflect in the joy of the holidays and to take in the brilliant and colourful displays.

There are numerous sports tournaments throughout the year, hosted at Percy Perry Stadium, that bring together players and teams from across B.C. and Canada. These players are talented athletes who represent their regions and exhibit the highest level of competitiveness and sportsmanship.

This November, Douglas College will host the Canadian Collegiate Athletic Association Women’s Soccer National Championship at the Percy Perry Stadium. As stated by Brian McLennon, athletes’ manager at Douglas College: “This event will celebrate women in sport and leadership as well as showcase the excellence of Douglas College, particularly our Coquitlam campus.” Of course, we wish victory to our home team, the Royals.

The Scottish Highland Games, Teddy Bear Picnic and Canada Day fireworks are just some of Coquitlam’s signature events that bring families and friends to our vibrant downtown.

Last July the Michael Cuccione Foundation once again inspired soccer teams and competitors to participate in skills-training activities and games in their annual Kick for a Cure fundraiser. The foundation has raised more than $23 million for childhood cancer research, significantly advancing pediatric oncology.

I had the privilege to attend the Order of British Columbia ceremony at Government House in Victoria a few weeks ago. This is the highest order bestowed to individuals. The awards were presented by the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, Her Honour Janet Austin, and the Premier.

I was so excited that one of the 14 British Columbians selected by the advisory council from 203 nominations was my constituent Dominic Cuccione. Dominic was recognized for his exceptional dedication and commitment to honour his son Michael’s memory and Michael’s vision to help children and families who face the many challenges of childhood cancer. I am so proud that both Dominic and his wife, Gloria, are recipients of the Order of British Columbia.

Coquitlam’s downtown core boasts fantastic ethnic restaurants, eateries and pubs as well as shops and services that promote economic development and growth and create local job opportunities. You can enjoy the beautiful spring and autumn landscape Coquitlam offers, hike or bike the numerous trails, participate in the Coquitlam Crunch Challenge or simply take in a play or concert at Evergreen Cultural Centre. The new outdoor amphitheatre was a huge attraction that saw people come out for summer concerts and entertainment, rain or shine.

Coquitlam has it all, including a world-class transportation system. The Evergreen Line provides easy access to all the amenities and has itself become a signature piece of Coquitlam’s landscape, displaying beautiful hues of colour to light up the evening. I have lived in Coquitlam for over 30 years and have seen Coquitlam grow into a well-planned, urban city that has benefited from good governance and stewardship.

[3:40 p.m.]

Having been involved in various non-profit organizations, such as youth and family, homelessness, mental health and restorative justice, I know firsthand the incredible contribution that these organizations make to our city and how important their work is delivering programs and services that support vulnerable children and youth, seniors and individual families, who are all in need.

I want to recognize and thank the outstanding volunteers whose commitment and time make a difference and benefit all of us. Volunteers work tirelessly behind the scenes and all year to raise awareness of the work their organizations do and to additionally raise much-needed funds.

I was recently able to facilitate a salmon donation through a partnership with the private sector. This generous donation yielded over 300 pounds of salmon, enough to feed 1,000 people, and an ongoing donation of 30 pounds per week, enough to feed another 100 people per week.

I want to recognize SHARE and, in particular, Claire MacLean, the CEO of SHARE, whose outstanding leadership helped to fill the empty shelves of their new cooler and secured a healthy, fresh, high-protein food source that will serve over 1,000 people who attend the food bank each month.

Special thanks to Jeremy Dunn and Marine Harvest for partnering with this initiative. Jeremy was struck by the need in the Tri-Cities, and he immediately stepped up to help.

There are many, many community leaders, businesses and individuals who also step up to support organizations through event sponsorship, as donors or community partners. Their contribution provides the necessary resources that allow non-profit groups to deliver their services. I sincerely thank each of them for supporting their community and cannot emphasize enough how important their monetary contribution is in sustaining the work that not-for-profits deliver to our citizens.

It is these things — arts and culture, sports, entertainment, social gatherings and celebrating different cultures — that together, along with not-for-profit organizations, collectively provide opportunities that enrich our lives. They keep us connected as a community and create opportunities and jobs. It is these things that allow us to broaden our experience and participate across the spectrum and at all levels. These foundational pieces bind us together. They define our quality of life and create an environment for a healthy and stable society.

With such an abundance of culture and opportunity, it is no wonder that Coquitlam residents are also diverse. We are a community of hardworking families, seniors, students, young families, new immigrants and entrepreneurs. I am pleased to see Coquitlam continue to grow and flourish.

Over this past year, we have had many constituents visit our office and ask for assistance and help. From MSP applications, mental health and addiction issues, health care challenges, senior issues, housing and daycare, we are there to help and support.

I am grateful that I have two amazing constituency assistants, Linda Matthews and Mary Sanzovo. They bring their impressive life experience and business skills to our office every day, and they work diligently on behalf of our constituents. They go above and beyond to serve Coquitlam–Burke Mountain constituents, and I want to thank them for their commitment and passion to serve. Their dedication and support mean a lot to me.

I’ve had the opportunity to have many conversations with parents, businesses, community leaders, advocates, entrepreneurs, industry, educators, health and medical professionals, and seniors. I always welcome and appreciate the conversation.

As Seniors critic, I have heard from patients, advocates and family members who have been involved in one way or another with the health care system. Over the past few weeks, I’ve been touring many different seniors homes, talking with many staff members, care aides and seniors. I’m happy to say that there are quite a number of seniors over the age of 100 who are still healthy and active. There are so many remarkable life journeys that carry their own unique and rich history. Their stories and experiences have contributed to the growth and prosperity of communities all around our province.

Independent living and assisted living create new opportunities for our seniors to experience social interactions, healthy menu choices, entertainment and scheduled outings. It is always a difficult and stressful time for families when their loved one needs to move to residential care.

[3:45 p.m.]

From my own experience with elderly parents, I know the challenges families face when parents are aging — the trials and tribulations that go with finding the right care, the changing care we need as we age and the care that every one of our seniors deserves. There is clearly a need to provide families with timely access to a model of care that works for and with families.

A campus-of-care model allows spouses to remain close together, particularly when different levels of care are needed. It is necessary that the continuum of care be first supported at the primary level and that the care model continue to adapt and change and to offer a range of care options that are flexible and provide for changing needs and requirements.

We all have a responsibility to care for our senior population. We need to look out for the seniors who live in our apartment buildings, and in our neighbourhoods when we are out and about. Loneliness and isolation are two of the greatest threats that impact the overall health and well-being of our seniors.

We need to build on what we already know. Seniors want to live productive and purposeful lives, and they deserve to have options that support them with the best possible care. They do better when they can stay in their own homes, when they are connected to family and friends and are socially engaged. Providing options for support and services will help seniors live independently in their homes for as long as possible. I hope that the government will soon proclaim the changes that we introduced in 2016.

Half of every dollar in our provincial budget currently goes to the costs of maintaining the health care system. Effective management of our health care budget will ultimately provide the highest quality of patient care and the best health outcomes, while also supporting health care professionals and seniors who are in residential care.

We cannot continue to fund an opioid epidemic without balancing out the root causes of mental health and addiction and recognizing that specialized care and ongoing support are essential to help people get on track and stay on track. It’s time to modernize the delivery of health care and ensure that mental health care receives dedicated, wraparound care and support.

We must also be mindful that addiction is an illness unto its own and needs to be treated independently from other co-concurrent conditions. While a prescribed and therapeutic treatment option may improve and stabilize a person suffering from an addiction, only abstinence from the substance causing the harm will set an addicted person free from their addiction.

There is still a critical shortage of health care providers and professionals, with many in the health care sector retiring. Meeting the human resource targets that are needed to manage all of the aspects of our health care system will be a challenge. These are just a few examples that emphasize the enormity of the challenges we are faced with and how important it is that government has a plan in place that will meet the demands of change and the pressures of increasing financial burdens that consume nearly half of the annual budget.

Quality of life is precious, and each of us deserves to be afforded a reasonable quality of life. It is something that every government should strive to provide for its citizens.

The throne speech came up short and provided no assurance that there is a solid and secure plan in place that generates the necessary revenues to meet even the most minimum of revenue targets.

This government increased taxes by over $8 billion in their budget. In the last 13 months, they introduced a new employer health tax; raised the carbon tax; increased property transfer taxes; introduced a cabin tax and called it a speculation tax; and introduced the so-called school tax, which is really just an asset tax. Yet, as this throne speech demonstrated, they have no plan to grow the economy, no plan to create jobs and no other plans to generate revenue.

A recent report from the Conference Board of Canada predicts declining housing starts, slowing investment spending and a lower economic growth tied to NDP policies. This is particularly disappointing, given that the NDP inherited a $2.7 billion surplus and the strongest economy in the country from the former B.C. Liberal government.

Government has a responsibility to provide all its citizens with opportunities that expand economic development and infrastructure and that create opportunities through the advanced education and skills training that lead to sustainable jobs and prosperity. It does not have a mandate to choose its preferred workforce.

[3:50 p.m.]

Government needs a plan that will grow our economy by developing the gifts that the province of British Columbia was given. Businesses and industries alike face growing and financial pressures. Government needs to support and develop a new economy with technology and innovation, but it also needs to allow for transition, prepare for automation and disruptive technologies. Government needs to expand and diversify our markets to safeguard us from the ups and downs of economic cycles.

We cannot grow our economy and provide jobs and opportunities by increasing taxes and placing an unfair tax burden on those who have worked hard, sacrificed time and family and taken on financial and business risks, nor can we grow our economy by stifling resource development and creating regulations that cripple innovation and diminish opportunities to participate in diverse market opportunities.

We cannot grow our economy by creating debt that is kicked down the road only to land on the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. The consequences of this kind of mismanagement will clearly compromise future generations.

Our economy is best supported when we welcome domestic and global entrepreneurs to our province, when our province provides an attractive environment for business to thrive in, reduces unnecessary regulation and policies and takes positive steps to diminish business risks.

Hon. Speaker, I wish to remind you of my earlier comments and the importance of arts and culture, sports, entertainment, social gatherings, celebrations and the work that is being done by our not-for-profits in our communities. These are the very things that enrich our lives and are a reflection of our social fabric and our desire to broaden our experiences, but they do not address the struggles of the day. They do not support the extent of economic development that needs to take place in order to support the services and delivery of programs. We need economic development to support transit, to pay for our health care, our education and infrastructure.

The promise of affordable housing fell short, with only 2,000 modular units scheduled to be completed by the end of 2018, rather than the 114,000 housing units promised over ten years. As the Leader of the Opposition noted, it will take the government 67 years to fulfil their promise at the current rate.

The $10-a-day daycare plan has been downgraded to a mere slogan, as the Premier put it. The government clearly never had any intention of implementing a $10-a-day child care system when they made their election promise. We have heard from daycare providers and families alike that the confusion around the opting-in process has not resulted in any more spaces and has actually caused some daycare providers to close, and families and operators have still not had their concerns addressed.

The rental subsidy, another election promise that vanished. There was disaster control. We saw an amendment to the rental increase formula, but we still have a major election platform promise that the NDP has completely reneged on.

I see a fulfilment on the B.C. Liberal budget, with the reduction of student loan interest, but no fulfilment on the NDP promise to remove interest on student loans. No mention, either, of the completion grant for university students — another clear election promise.

We have seen a trade war with Alberta, confrontations with the federal government, job losses in the tens of thousands and a refusal to address key infrastructure deficits, such as the Massey Tunnel, the Brunette overpass and the dangerous stretch of road on Lougheed Highway that has claimed many fatalities.

I’m very pleased to see that Burke Mountain opened the first school, Smiling Creek Elementary, in September. Tomorrow is the official opening. During the election, the Minister of Education and the Premier stood on the site and made an election promise that they would fast-track schools on Burke Mountain. It is important that constituents know and understand initial approvals and funding processes were completed under the previous B.C. Liberal government. There is a process to everything, and the completion of the school was already moving as fast as it could under the previous government.

[3:55 p.m.]

We were given a throne speech devoid of detail and full of broken promises. Many of the announcements, in fact, are re-announcements, and they are projects that the B.C. Liberal government initiated and funded.

I sincerely hope that government will fulfil its obligation to provide opportunities that expand economic development for all British Columbians and will not rely on personal and corporate taxes as its unrealistic plan to create much-needed revenue.

D. Routley: It’s a great pleasure to be able to stand on this side of the House and reflect on the throne speech. First of all, I would say, like other members in the House, that when we come back here after leaving home, we must remind ourselves and our families of how important political life contributes in their own way. I deeply want to thank my family and my partner, Leanne Finlayson, for her undying love and support, without which I wouldn’t be standing here right now.

Then to my constituents, I’m very proud to represent the area of Vancouver Island in which I grew up, the mid-Island from the Cowichan Valley up to about a third of the city of Nanaimo. This area of the Island has a deep history of First Nations communities that were interlocked, interlinked in a vibrant Aboriginal culture, economy and many, many First Nations communities.

In fact, now I represent six First Nations in the area. They are the Hul’qumi’num nations — the Cowichan, Penelakut, Halalt, Stz’uminus, Lyackson — and the Snuneymuxw. I also represent an area that overlaps with 17 other First Nations. It’s a very complex situation, both in terms of First Nations overlap but also with the history of Vancouver Island, with the Dunsmuir land grant that privatized Vancouver Island. It makes it so difficult now, today, to settle treaties with such a scarcity of Crown land available to trade for treaty.

Those are important aspects of the communities I represent. Individual communities that I represent. There are six of them — North Cowichan, Chemainus, Crofton, Nanaimo, Cedar, Ladysmith — and several other communities which are more neighbourhood than community but maintain their name and their differences, their uniqueness.

Growing up on Vancouver Island, water is never far away, in any direction. If somebody said, “Which way is it to the water,” you could point in any direction and you’d be correct. I represent the wonderful people of the mid-Vancouver Island region, but I also represent people on several other islands.

I represent Thetis Island; Penelakut Island, which is a First Nation; Mudge Island; and Gabriola, one of the larger Gulf Islands, with 4,500 permanent residents, which swell to about 15,000 in the summertime. Gabriola is the isle of the arts. I think there are 4,500 residents but around 150 non-profits, I believe, one for every 30 people, roughly. It’s a very active, very engaged community on Gabriola. I represent De Courcy and Valdes islands, very scantly populated islands.

I also represent the south third of Nanaimo, the urban part of Nanaimo. The area, the border between myself and the member for Nanaimo — the postal code there is the second-poorest postal code in the province after the Downtown Eastside. The south end of Nanaimo faces many of the difficult challenges of any urban community. The people I represent there are proud. They are struggling, but they are living beautiful lives as well as they possibly can with their families in a wonderful place.

[4:00 p.m.]

Nanaimo is characterized and famous for its history of coal mining and forestry. It’s a very blue-collar town. Many of the houses in the neighbourhoods I represent in the south end of the city are the same houses that those people’s families lived in several generations back as coal miners — small, modest little bungalows, many of them having been replenished, renewed to absolute beauty now. I’m very proud to represent these beautiful communities and all that they offer.

The constituency has a bunch of islands, so I am obviously very much concerned with issues dealing with ferry services. I have six ferry terminals in my constituency. One of them is a major route, the Duke Point terminal. On that route, we have frozen fares, so people who commute on the Duke Point run will not be paying any more. They had their fares frozen. The other runs in the constituency are minor runs. Those have actually seen fare decreases of 15 percent.

Added to that, on the major routes, the seniors of the province now travel for free — again, this having been reinstated by our government — from Monday to Thursday, excluding long weekends. This is something that a lot of people really appreciate and felt very terribly about when it was removed by the previous government. They’re very happy to see that initiative started again and that service provided to them. That’s the constituency that I represent.

Now I’d like to talk about throne speeches generally. What is a throne speech? A throne speech is a document issued by government and read by the Lieutenant-Governor, a message from the throne, from the Crown, to the people of B.C. about what the vision of their government is, what their plans are, what their priorities are, what their aspirations are. These are the things that we should be communicating to people in a throne speech.

I believe I’ve stood here and debated 15 throne speeches and one clone speech. The clone speech, as people will remember, was a throne speech that was delivered by the previous premier, Christy Clark, mere weeks before her government fell. That clone speech basically reiterated every element of the B.C. NDP platform in a desperate attempt to maintain power. What that previous government did was really display the fact that they have such transportable political values that they could actually adopt such a speech and attempt to make it their own.

Really, I could speak to either of those speeches, because both of them framed NDP values and pretty much predicted NDP governance priorities, but I think I’ll stick with the throne speech at hand, the one delivered by the Premier earlier this year. The overarching theme of that throne speech was to make life more affordable for the people of British Columbia, to deliver better services, rebuild public services for the people of British Columbia. This government has delivered on that.

The biggest difference, I can say, in standing up and speaking to this throne speech, is that most times throne speeches are nothing but promises. In all the years of Premier Gordon Campbell before Premier Christy Clark, every time there were big themes. Five great, golden goals. There were overarching statements of values that were very poorly followed through in process or a budget that would follow. But we would debate those throne speeches and debate, essentially, the vision and promise of government.

In this case, I get to stand here many months after the throne speech was delivered and reflect on the throne speech. I’m able to reflect, and I’m able to say, as one of British Columbia’s most noted columnist said, that this B.C. NDP government has completed, completely or substantially, three-quarters of the promises it made — that we made — in the provincial election campaign, that we reiterated through the throne speech.

Already, in barely more than one year, three-quarters of the promises that were made in the election substantially or completely followed through upon. I’m very proud of that. For once, the reflection on a throne speech is one of fulfilled promise rather than vacuous words that were delivered without any intention of fulfilment.

[4:05 p.m.]

The throne speech is about the priorities of government. It is about the values. It is about the judgments that government makes, the priorities it places on the services that it delivers to British Columbians, on things like fairness and equity, on things like justice. This province has had a deficit of those things for a decade and a half. Finally, now, people in the province are seeing a government that actually does put their prosperity ahead of its own.

This government has done more to increase the prosperity and well-being of British Columbians than the previous B.C. Liberal regime did in 16 years. In fact, they took us several steps backwards, with greater inequality, greater poverty, unattended housing crisis. So many problems that the B.C. Liberal government did not want to pay any attention to are finally gaining suitable attention. That’s the experience of British Columbians.

The lives affected by B.C. Liberal policies…. Some of those lives won’t be restored. We’ve seen homelessness skyrocket. It’s our government, now, that is finally joining the rest of the country in formulating and implementing an anti-poverty strategy. We were the last province to do that.

I’m very proud to note and congratulate the minister here now on the establishment of the Mental Health and Addictions Ministry. In a province where people are dying in numbers every single day…. We just saw the coroner’s report on the opioid crisis in the last year and the percentages of people who were housed, not housed, and so on, who died as a result of the opioid epidemic. Our government is addressing that. We are addressing that with resources. We are addressing it by placing the priority of government — a stand-alone ministry — to address this terrible problem. I’m very proud to stand and support that promise that was made in the throne speech.

Throne speeches and government priority describe who we are. They are our definition as a culture, a society. When we look at who we are, we are going to be judging ourselves, but more importantly, we will be judged by the way we deal with these challenging and vexing issues, the issues that we inherit, the legacy of colonialism that has affected so poorly the First Nations of the province of British Columbia.

Our government is fully committed to implementing UNDRIP, the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples, and the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. We have already taken great steps to adjust the business of government to respect First Nations court decisions and the principles of reconciliation. In every ministry, the letters tasking the ministers put as the first priority adjusting their ministry and their business to this new reality of reconciliation.

The education system in this province that was so attacked over the previous 15 years….

Interjection.

D. Routley: The member for Peace River North says that we’re the envy of the world, and we are. We are. The outcomes are great, despite the fact that we had sunk to ninth in per-capita spending on education in this country; despite the fact that over 150 schools have been closed and despite the fact that the government waged war against the teachers in the Supreme Court, only to lose not just the case but also tens, maybe hundreds, of millions of dollars over that extended period of battling with teachers.

In all of that time, more than a decade of warfare in our schools, a whole generation, a whole cohort of students, went through a diminished and depleted system where teachers were falling like flies because of stress, where our teachers put more of their own personal money into supplies in their classrooms. I think they are double the next average of any other province in Canada.

[4:10 p.m.]

We’ve seen that system so poorly managed and put upon by cuts and by increased costs loaded down on to our education system by the previous government, and what have we done in response to that? Mr. Speaker, 3,700 teachers have been hired since the B.C. NDP government took power. In a mere 16 months, 3,700 teachers have been hired. Class sizes are smaller, more teacher librarians, more teachers’ assistants, more supports for students. Better outcomes can be expected.

Simply saying that we’re the best is not taking credit for the conditions that we put our teachers and our students through. So this government is committed to improving our education system and placing us again at the top of the class.

One of the first acts of this government was to raise assistance rates — another promise in the throne speech and during the election that we would help the most vulnerable British Columbians, those who had been most severely left out of the benefits of this great province. Another one of the first actions was to eliminate tuition in post-secondary education for those people who were formally in the care of the province, a huge step to equalizing their chances, to building equity in those lives.

Another big step in the first session, which was promised in the election and reiterated in the throne speech, was to ban big money from politics, which we did. We have taken out the big money that so long distorted B.C. politics. No longer can the biggest corporations in this province purchase policy or affect decisions — and nor, for that matter, can unions.

We have invested in child care, as we promised to do. We’ve made the largest investment in the history of this province in child care. Thousands of spaces are being supported. Thousands of families are benefiting from reduced costs. The child care fee reduction initiative is helping to reduce the cost of licensed child care by up to $350 a month for parents with kids in approved child care facilities. Now, that is a huge benefit to families who are struggling to make ends meet. That initiative, in the first month alone, put more than $2.2 million back into parents’ pockets, money that they spent in their communities, money that helped their local economies thrive. So 86,000 families will benefit from child care subsidies for lower-income families that will be up to $1,250 a month. This is an incredible benefit for families that struggle. This is a benefit that will turn their lives around and change their lives.

I’m so proud to be part of a government that is changing people’s lives positively, instead of standing on that side of the House begging that previous government to care about the people of B.C., to actually invest in the people of B.C. It is with that pride and that sense of accomplishment that all of us on this side of the House look upon the record of our government. We feel that the people of B.C. made a clear choice for progress, and they’re being delivered that progress.

We have reduced costs. We are eliminating MSP premiums. We’ve reduced ferry fares. We eliminated bridge tolls. We’re building housing, thousands of units, and all ranges. We have a 30-point housing plan that is comprehensive and will help deal with the crisis, the number one crisis in this province and one of the primary reasons that we have the highest poverty level.

There is a new view in the government of British Columbia. There is a new way of looking at this world, one that cares about the prosperity of every British Columbian, not just those who have already prospered so well, not just those who are members of some elite, but every British Columbian. The most vulnerable people in this province must prosper. If they don’t, then our own aspirations will never be met. All of us as British Columbians strive to have the best province possible.

[4:15 p.m.]

My friend Rick Doman told me, when he was talking about social investments, that if he ran a railroad, he would not invest all his money in the posh, luxurious parlour car. He would identify the car with the most difficulties, the most problems. He would maintain that car, restore that car and recouple it to the train. Then the train would run more efficiently, more smoothly and more fairly.

That’s why we need to take care of the most vulnerable among us, not simply because it’s ethically the right thing to do but because, economically and practically, it’s the only thing to do.

If we do that, if we make these investments…. And we are. If we wait for the dividend on those investments, that dividend will be prosperity. It will see communities prosper. It will see citizens prosper. It will see justice prosper. It will see balance and public interest prosper — the true definition of prosperity: a balanced approach, a balanced approach to life, a balanced approach to the economy, a balanced approach to the environment, a balanced approach to supporting those who need us.

To me, this entire exercise is about choice. This entire exercise of building this House, this democracy, is about expressing the values, priorities, hopes and aspirations of the people of B.C. through policy and decisions. You can’t do that if you are captured by an elite and a wealthy support base to which you owe favour — which, I think, is what the province has seen for the last decade and a half. That, I think, is the most refreshing difference in this new B.C. NDP government, its throne speech with a different view of the world, this throne speech with a positive take on the problems of today.

A very good friend of mine…. When I was running a small business, I was facing a real challenge that was an existential challenge to my business. I said to this fellow, who was my mentor: “I’m done. I’m going to be out of business. This problem — this one’s going to kill me.” He said: “Yep. Yeah, it will.”

I thought: “Wow, what a mentor. That’s great advice.” But he said: “It will, unless you adopt this principle — that every bump needs to be a boost. No matter what challenge is put in front of you, you have to turn that into an advantage.”

Look at our province. Look at our province having inherited a legacy of colonialism and all the problems we have faced, collectively, with First Nations but that they have fought and struggled with, mostly by themselves, for generations. What an opportunity: a young, learning demographic in the Cowichan Tribes — the largest First Nation in the province — in the Cowichan Valley, which I represent part of. Their average age, five years ago, was under 20. They have such a youthful population, compared to the non–First Nations population. As we look to an economy challenged by a dwindling, shrinking workforce, look no further. We have great opportunity.

Like my friend David Cox said, every bump must become a boost. This problem we face with the opioid crisis — we must find a way to turn it into a strength for British Columbia. By establishing a stand-alone ministry to deal with that terrible crisis, we’re beginning to do exactly that.

All of us are proud to represent constituents. All of us, on all sides of this House, would like to see a better British Columbia. We have different road maps to get there, but I do believe we share that same goal.

[4:20 p.m.]

Having heard members from the opposition last year defend their throne speech — the clone speech of last year, with many of the features of our throne speech, which I addressed today — I would hope that they could examine the hypocrisy of now turning around and attacking those same features they defended only a year ago, in defence of their dying government. But British Columbians have become somewhat jaded and cynical about such a promise, such a possibility, from the previous government, and I think that’s why they sit now in opposition.

Now British Columbians have a government they can trust to put their interests first, that they can trust will follow the ethic described by Rick Doman and fix the most troubled car first so that the train will run more efficiently, more fairly, more smoothly. We’re doing that. We’re trying to take care of people who have been left alone to struggle with their problems for a very long time. I consider that to be a noble pursuit.

Without this kind of approach, the long-term prosperity of British Columbia will be threatened. But with the approach of putting public interests first, of a balanced approach to environment, to economy, to supporting the people of B.C., we can create prosperity now and guarantee prosperity in the future. That ought to be our job. We ought to take that seriously, and I do.

With that, I’ll take my place and thank you for the opportunity to address a throne speech that’s many months past so I can do it in retrospect, be proud of the promises kept and be eager for the work ahead.

M. Lee: Well, despite the helpful explanation by the government’s House Leader, it’s a strange thing to be using the valuable time of this House to be still discussing the throne speech more than seven months, from February 13, 2018, till now.

It does, however, provide us with a good opportunity to look back at this government’s plans and priorities, as the member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan just outlined for us, some seven months later and, with the benefit of hindsight, look at how the government has met its commitments in that throne speech.

The one area in the throne speech that I would like to focus my remarks on is electoral reform. This is the single most important issue, which may change fundamentally the path of our province. On this issue, brought on all of us by this government, there are just 39 words devoted to it in this throne speech — 39 words. They must be important words then, would you say?

The government of the day has said it wants to put people at the centre of our politics and to reinvigorate our democracy. To that end, the throne speech says B.C. will hold a referendum this year to give people a voice in how they vote and make politics work for people again. [Applause.] Polite applause from the government on that side.

Well, let me say, this is a very high bar that the government has set for itself. It’s fair to ask: how is this current government meeting this test? How’s the government giving people a voice in how this referendum will be run when they’re not fully informed? Before this government is in such a rush to achieve the result it wishes, being a proportional representation voting system, isn’t the more pressing question for British Columbians the referendum question itself?

[4:25 p.m.]

How is this government giving people a voice in this referendum when they haven’t been truly engaged in looking at electoral reform and when many British Columbians, just three weeks before the voting period begins, still don’t know what they’re voting on? And how is it that this government is making government or politics work for people again on both sides of this referendum?

When people see this process — how it’s been manipulated — they become cynical. So the way this referendum has been structured, whether you’re in favour of change or whether you’re in favour of keeping the current first-past-the-post system, as I am….

Elections B.C. clearly has been doing its role in administering this referendum. It has run ads. It sent a mailer to households to ensure that voters are registered for this referendum. It has provided information about the referendum on its website, and it’s gearing up to mail out voting packages on or after October 22.

But this is not enough. This government did not have a plan to engage British Columbians with just those 39 words in this throne speech. The government’s engagement with British Columbians, as the Attorney General has trumpeted in this House, has been primarily through a biased on-line survey filled out by 91,725 British Columbians, which represents less than 2 percent of the population of our province. This was completed between November 2017 and February 2018, including over the holidays.

The results of this survey were fed into the Attorney General’s office, and the AG’s recommendations were issued in a report tabled in this House when we last were here together, two days before the House rose at the end of May 2018.

In April, in response to repeated attempts, including from myself and other members on this side of the House, to get more information on the referendum out to British Columbians, the Premier questioned: “What’s the rush?” The Premier suggested that summer is barbecue season and that British Columbians would not be focused on this. He also indicated that we run election campaigns to determine our governments in 28 days, so there should be more than enough time for British Columbians after Labour Day.

Well, there hasn’t been. After Labour Day, children across this province are back to school, municipal campaigns are in full gear being run across this province, but British Columbians are still not engaged about this referendum.

Back in 2009, the then Chief Electoral Officer of the province advised the government of the day not to hold the referendum at the same time as a municipal election. The government took that advice and instead held that referendum in conjunction with the May 2009 provincial election.

[L. Reid in the chair.]

I ask all members of this House to be honest with themselves. You’ve been in your ridings this summer. You’ve talked to your constituents in your communities. We have an issue here. British Columbians are not engaged with this referendum. And we need to engage them. We have less than 21 days left before the voting period begins.

Despite numerous rounds and speeches by members on this side of the House — during the bill debate, QP, estimates, emergency debate — this government has run a flawed process. I know that when I speak to constituents and speak in various communities around this province, that many British Columbians are still not aware of this referendum, and even if they are, they don’t understand what we’re voting on.

Two of the three choices — dual-member proportional and rural-urban proportional — were not even on the on-line survey, and that was the main way for this government to engage with British Columbians. British Columbians have not been consulted on electoral reform — not truly consulted. They have not had any meaningful engagement on any of these systems.

[4:30 p.m.]

When this province had meaningful engagement on electoral reform, when we had a citizens’ assembly in 2004, the third option on this ballot, mixed-member proportional, was rejected by that assembly.

British Columbians, I think, want to know from this government why it is that there’s no stand-alone STV choice on this ballot, which was the recommendation of the citizens’ assembly. Even former members of the citizens’ assembly have said that unlike the single transferable vote, which is a voter-based system, the three proposed forms of PR, prop R on the ballot, are party-based.

These systems shift the power to determine who represents British Columbians in this House from the voters to political parties. The rationale for this shift by this government on electoral reform, to shift from voters themselves to the determination to be made by political parties to top up that representation in this House…. I think British Columbians need to understand that rationale. They need to understand why it is that this government has made that shift.

What are the implications of having two separate, entirely different voting systems, under the rural-urban proportional choice in our province? As members of this House, at least on this side, we go to great lengths to bridge the so-called urban-rural divide in this province. Why is it, then, that this government is proposing a system, under RUP, that entrenches the rural-urban divide and that treats rural voters differently from urban and semi-urban voters? Why do we have two classes of voters in our province? These are just some of the issues that I believe the government needs to address.

Of course, more recently, the Premier has had an opportunity to address these points at the invitation of the Leader of the Opposition. It has been seven days since the Leader of the Opposition made that request, and what do we have? Silence. We have 21 days to go before the voting period begins. I believe that all members of this House should be asking the Premier: why is it that he’s not prepared to stand up to have that discussion, to have the debate at the most critical time of this referendum process — this referendum process that started, arguably, 14 months ago?

Why is it that the Premier is not prepared, at the most critical time, which would have been 28 days before the vote? He equates the referendum process to the 28-day election campaign. Well, we’re seven days into this, then. What do we have? We’ve got stalling. We’ve got: “Well, you know, it’s not really the appropriate forum to have a debate, on mainstream media. It’s better to have it in the House.” Well, we had a debate in the House, as you know, for one hour, an emergency debate, on May 31. Certainly, people who want to watch Hansard could look at that. But the fact of the matter remains: what is this Premier waiting for?

I say this is the most critical time in the entire referendum process. And this Premier is not owning up to the responsibility that he has to lead this province. The Leader of the Opposition, on the other hand, is embracing this challenge. He’s prepared to stand up in front of British Columbians and have that debate. But where is the Premier on this? Where is he? I think British Columbians clearly deserve better from our Premier.

The government had the opportunity to engage the services of the Chief Electoral Officer more in this referendum, but he didn’t. That would mean the Premier didn’t. In June, the Chief Electoral Officer was asked by the Premier to review the wording of the proposed first question on the ballot. The Chief Electoral Officer, in doing so, commented on the wording of the proposed second question. But the main issue is this: the Chief Electoral Officer, as is clearly stated in his letter, was not asked to review the format and the structure of the ballot.

[4:35 p.m.]

This limitation is clearly stated in his letter to the Speaker of this House. It was helpful for the Chief Electoral Officer to clean up some of the wording, but the fact of the matter is we have a confusing and convoluted ballot. What voters are being presented with lacks clarity. As simple and as straightforward as other members on the other side of the House may say it is, it doesn’t even have simple and clear instructions on the ballot.

It’s very clear from the instructions on the Elections B.C. website and also in the rules for this referendum that British Columbians only need to vote on one of the two questions. They don’t need to vote on both, yet the ballot is silent on that.

There is no clear instruction on the ballot itself. So it’s important that there’s been a submission made to Elections B.C. Hopefully, they will receive that comment that a clear instruction should be made on the ballot itself so that British Columbians understand that they do not need to vote on both questions. They can vote only on one, and their ballot will still be valid.

I find it interesting that in the Attorney General’s report that was tabled in this House at the end of May that the ballot structure being followed in this referendum uses the first part of a two-part process, followed in New Zealand in 1992. Yes, they had a similar two-part ballot — the choice between first-past-the-post and proportional representation, with no definition about proportional representation. And then they had a choice between four alternate voting PR systems. That was the two-part question.

I think the members on the other side of the House would like to talk about history here. I’m talking about the present and what’s the most pressing issue that’s facing our province. They can joke around all they like to do, but I don’t think this is a joke. I’m not laughing on this side of the House.

You know, I think this is a very serious matter that all members of this House should share the responsibility for all British Columbians. I don’t see it, quite frankly, on that side of the House.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

M. Lee: Let me just say again that in New Zealand in 1992, as summarized in the Attorney General’s report, there was a similar two-part ballot. Again, a choice between first-past-the-post and proportional representation in a similar kind of conceptual manner that we have to vote on here. An undefined form of proportional representation being the first question.

Then we have a second question — a choice between four alternative proportional representation voting systems. But the difference in New Zealand is they had four real operating proportional representation voting systems to choose from. Here, we have two that don’t exist anywhere else in the world, and one that does. That’s the choice for British Columbians. But as other members of this side of the House would realize, there was a second step in that New Zealand referendum.

What happened was when New Zealanders voted for a mixed-member proportional out of the four choices, the government of the day spent a year developing the detailed mixed-member proportional system — what it would look like and all the details. There was a referendum then held subsequently a year later in 1993 with a single question featuring the choice between first-past-the-post and mixed-member proportional.

Nowhere else in the world do we have this convoluted ballot structure that is being presented to British Columbians. Even the model that this government seems to be doing — the New Zealand model, so to speak — they’re doing half of it. Why is that?

[4:40 p.m.]

I think the reason is, of course, they’re out of time. A commitment they made with the Third Party to form government suggested that this whole system needed to be in place, or this referendum needed to be held in the fall of 2018 — almost three years ahead of the next election in 2021, if we go that long.

Why is it that we couldn’t have followed the simple, more comprehensive approach that was followed in New Zealand? This is just yet another example of how irresponsible this government has been in rushing this process. Of course, when you look at the Attorney General’s report, the reason — and the support he cites for the reason — why he chose and recommended to cabinet what is referred to as the mandate option formulation, a blank cheque formulation, is that the majority of organizations that submitted to and responded to this survey were in favour of this mandate blank cheque option.

Well, we’re talking about submissions where 44 out of 46 that were given are really tied to people and organizations that support proportional representation. This is the biased level of input that this government is relying on to make a fundamental decision about the structure of this referendum.

British Columbians are being asked to vote….

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Excuse me, Member.

If members wish to make comment, they’ll do so from their own seat.

Please continue.

M. Lee: British Columbians are being asked to vote on this referendum without the information we need.

Unlike the last referendum, in 2009, we don’t have the riding boundaries. We don’t know how large the ridings will be under the three forms of proportional representation. We don’t even know what constitutes a rural riding and what constitutes an urban or a semi-rural riding.

How is that possible? We’re going to a referendum. We’re expecting British Columbians to vote, but under the rural-urban proportional choice, they won’t even know whether their riding is referred to as or is a rural riding or an urban or semi-urban riding. They won’t even know what structure or what voting system would be employed in the riding they live in. How are British Columbians supposed to make a decision about that?

As the Attorney General has indicated, there are — and I counted — 29 different items in the Attorney General’s report — details like that which need to be determined after the vote. This government has said: “Well, no one party will have a majority on that all-party parliamentary committee.” But that is besides the point.

The point is, given the current composition of the House, we know that the government and the Third Party — the members that are on that side of the House — will have a majority on that committee. Of course, they have manipulated this process to get the result that they want. So why is it that when the Premier stands up at UBCM Convention meetings in Whistler in early September…? He says: “Well, British Columbians should just take a leap of faith. Go with this government.”

I don’t think with the way they’ve conducted themselves in the course of setting out this referendum that British Columbians should have any confidence in this government to do that. Why should we trust this government, as British Columbians? Given all of the flawed process, the lack of fairness, the lack of clarity, the lack of information, why is it that the Premier of this province can stand up in that case? He’s prepared to stand up at UBCM, but he’s not prepared to stand up to debate the Leader of the Opposition. But that’s another point.

Why is it that he’s prepared to do that and just get…? Why is he able to do that and stand there with a brave face as if everyone should just trust him?

[4:45 p.m.]

Well, let’s look at what that is. When we look at the way that the ballot has been formulated, those who are in favour of proportional representation who want to pick that choice — the second choice in answer to first question on this ballot — they need to be very comfortable that any one of the three forms of proportional representation, which are ill defined on this ballot, will end up being the form of proportional representation for this province.

This is the lack of definition that’s being presented to British Columbians, and it’s the challenge with the 29 items that are still yet to be determined after the vote. Those details include, under the dual-member proportional, DMP, the total number of MLAs, which is to be no greater than 95 in this House; the number and configuration of single-member districts; the configuration of two-member districts. Under rural-urban, it’s the number and configuration of MMP and STV regions, the number and configuration of FPTP districts in each MMP region and whether to permit overhang seats in both cases. Of course, under mixed-member proportional, the ratio of FPTP seats to list PR seats, up to a maximum of 40 percent….

I just want to make a comment about that. On the Elections B.C. website, there is a voters guide that has been provided. I would expect that this is the kind of information that will be provided to voters in their voting package to be mailed out sometime on or after October 22.

In the case of mixed-member proportional — the one system of the three that actually exists, the one system of the three that is not experimental, not a theory — it indicates that British Columbians will have one vote or maybe two votes: one vote for the candidate and the party or two votes; in which case, it would be one vote of the two for the party, the second being for the candidate. Which is it? British Columbians are being faced with a choice that says: “Well, you might get one vote; you might get two votes.”

Okay. Well, let’s look at that. How exactly will the representatives in regional districts be determined to top off the party’s seats in this House? Well, it says it right in the guide. There are three possibilities. It could be a closed list, which means the party puts forward a list, and you don’t know, when you’re voting, who you’re voting for. You’re voting just for the party only, not for the person or the individual candidate. That’s option 1.

Option 2, open list. The parties determine a list of the candidates and the sequence and the order, presumably, and you vote for that. Option 3, open list with a party option. What’s that? I guess it’s the best of two worlds — both choices.

When I say this to constituents I meet with and have discussions with British Columbians about this voting system, I can tell you that every single time I raise this in the way I just talked about it, heads spin, eyes roll — confusion. They don’t understand that.

Interjection.

M. Lee: Well, I think, clearly, I’ve tried to indicate to you what’s merely in this voting guide. And what’s merely in this voting guide is a lack of definition. There are two possibilities of voting — one vote or two votes — and three possibilities in which parties will determine the representatives in this House up to 40 percent.

I think British Columbians, in order to vote for a system and alternatives like this, need to know exactly what this system is going to be and how exactly it’s going to work. And it’s not. There are three ways that this could be proportional. Again, it’s the closed list, and you’re voting off a party list, an open list. Or you’re voting for candidates off the list determined by the party in an open list with the party option.

So when members on the other side of this House say, “Well it’s going to be proportional,” this is the attitude and the approach that’s been taken to this referendum, which I don’t think is beneficial to this province. It’s a lack of clarity, a lack of definition.

[4:50 p.m.]

We’re talking about, fundamentally, our voting system for this province. That’s not something that is just about aspirations. It’s about something that we need to go forward with.

I will say, with the time that I have, that the legal challenge that has been brought forward by the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association clearly indicates there are issues with this referendum: the questions and the process being inconsistent with the constitutional principles in the Charter, the questions themselves being confusing, the level of voting approval being only a bare majority, there being severe restrictions in the ability of British Columbians to explain the implications of these PR systems and the electoral systems themselves being unconstitutional.

When this proceeding went forward at the end of June, the Attorney General and the government said: “Well, we need more time. We need more time to respond to this submission.” Why is it that in this House, in answer to repeated questions from myself and the member for Prince George–Mackenzie and others on this side of the House around the constitutionality of this referendum process and these electoral voting systems, the Attorney General said: “Well, I wouldn’t go forward with a referendum that was unconstitutional, that was illegal, as the chief legal officer for this of province”?

Yet, when the questions are asked — basic questions, basic concerns similar to the ones that we’ve been asking on this side of the House — the government says: “We need more time.” They’ve needed months to respond. It’s gone into September and October, and I understand it may go even further than that, beyond the end of this referendum. How is it possible that this government is not ready to respond to the fundamental questions about this referendum and expect British Columbians to do that?

A. Kang: I am humbled to stand here on the traditional territory of the Songhees and Esquimalt people who have lived here before us. I thank them for the ability for us to gather here and work on their land. I want to begin by thanking the constituents of Burnaby–Deer Lake who have built their faith in me and sent me here. It is their voices that I bring into this chamber with me every single day. Not only that, but as Parliamentary Secretary for Seniors, I also bring the voices of seniors into this chamber.

Over the past year, I have been working very hard, travelling the region, visiting senior centres, adult daycare centres, care homes and seniors who choose to retire and remain at home. I have been talking to care providers, doctors, family members, community support workers, health staff and many, many more. I have travelled to many communities and municipalities all around B.C., and I will continue to do so because so much more needs to be done.

I also want to thank my constituency assistants for keeping things going at the home front in Burnaby and making sure that my constituents are well taken care of while I’m here in Victoria. And of course, where would any one of us be without our family support? I want to extend my heartfelt gratitude and love to my parents, to my mom and dad, for their unconditional love and support for me, as well as to my two children, who are my best cheerleaders, bringing lots and lots of sunshine into my life.

Last but not least, to all my friends who have been there through thick and thin throughout my many elections, who have stepped up to help me with child care solutions, who have helped me organize play dates and who offer honest heart-to-heart chats with me without having me debate my politics. To all my friends out there — you know who you are: thank you very much. Families and friends are part of our invaluable support system, as we work very hard here at the Legislature. I think that many of us here in this House usually use this as an opportunity to acknowledge this support, so once again, thank you so much for everything.

I would also like to use this opportunity to express my most sincere gratitude and make special recognition to our brave firefighters, emergency responders and front-line workers for their sacrifices in order to keep our province safe. And, last but not least, all of the volunteers who worked with us.

[4:55 p.m.]

To the communities impacted by the wildfires, you’ve demonstrated strength and resilience that continues to inspire us. This government, our government, which is working for you, will continue to stand by British Columbians in times of adversity. Our government has shown that when we make a promise, we keep it, and that you can always count on us.

I would also like to take a moment to point out how important it is for us to gather here today. This chamber is a linkage between British Columbians and the government. The linkage is essential to a robust democracy. Whereas the previous government held a record of sitting only 36 days out of 579 days, this government has vowed to do things a little differently.

That is why I’m incredibly honoured to stand here and to share a few thoughts on the Speech from the Throne. Not only is this an opportunity for us to reflect upon everything that we have been able to accomplish together as British Columbians since this government was formed a little bit more than a year ago, it is also an important vision on how we can continue the progress that we have made, how we can fulfil our commitment to every British Columbian and how we can build a better British Columbia together.

From day one, our government has been about people. We hit the ground running, and we haven’t stopped. Since this government was formed last year, we have recognized the people’s frustration with our province’s past, highlighted by the previous government’s neglect, dwindling public services and rising cost of living.

The people’s concerns with our province at present can be summed up by questions of how, what and why. How can I afford to live in B.C.? What do I need to do to retire with dignity? And why is the government not doing more? For too long, too many families couldn’t get the services they need, or afford to live here.

Our government is making different choices to make life more affordable. We’re improving the services people count on and building a strong, sustainable economy that works for people. We’re going to keep working hard for you, putting people first and making life better for everyone in B.C.

Earlier this year the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation published an article that had been tracking this government’s promises to British Columbians, stating that in less than a year, this government delivered more than 75 percent of its promises.

This government, the New Democratic government, is setting an example that its Speech from the Throne is not just empty rhetoric but will always be followed with concrete actions. Our government is not a government of neglect, but a government of commitment, of responsibility, of accountability and of transparency. The throne speech has outlined our government’s promise to British Columbians, and we are checking off the list, one by one.

What I would like to highlight are our commitments to our seniors. To our respected elders: you have been a part of building British Columbia. You have worked hard for your families, your communities and for our province. We are grateful for your contributions and sacrifices and know that we must do more to make sure that this province takes care of you when you retire. Rest assured that when you age, you will have the support that you need to carry on with your everyday lives.

Just a few days ago, I stood proudly with our Premier and the Minister of Health in sharing good news with a room packed with seniors living in the Salvation Army Buchanan Lodge residential care facility in New Westminster. The Premier announced that this government would be committing $240 million over the next three years to improve senior care in residential care.

We have been increasing the staffing levels in residential care facilities to make sure seniors are getting the quality of care that they need and deserve. To get to a 3.36 average of direct care hours by health authorities, facilities have started work to convert part-time and casual staff to full-time, resulting in almost 270,000 more care hours already being provided. Just this year alone, the funding will add more than one million hours of care to our seniors. As well, that means we are investing in good jobs for local people who are working in British Columbia.

I would like to share a short story from that day. I can still vividly remember the announcement, set on that beautiful, sunny and crisp Tuesday morning. As I entered Buchanan Lodge, I was warmly greeted by members of the Salvation Army representatives, and staff walking by welcomed me with big smiles and a cheerful hello.

[5:00 p.m.]

I could tell that this care facility was built around the concept of love and care.

As the time drew close to the announcement, the room was filled with seniors; senior residents; care providers; representatives from the HEU, Hospital Employees Union; HSA, Health and Sciences Association; B.C. Care Providers Association; B.C. Nurses Union; BCGEU, B.C. Government Employees Union members; family members; and many, many more. The room was buzzing with excitement.

The Minister of Health has been working hard and is a fierce advocate for seniors. He thanked all of the seniors for their contributions to B.C. As well, he recognized the great work by staff. He said that the staff in residential care homes work incredibly hard and do a fantastic job, but when residential care homes are understaffed, the staff are challenged to deliver the level of care seniors deserve. That is why our government is working hard to provide the staffing needed to make life better for seniors and the people who care for them.

As the Premier was making this historic $240 million announcement to the seniors care centre, a gasp was heard from the crowd. The Premier looked around, and we all looked around. Was that a gasp I heard? We all looked around the crowd, and we saw a group of care aides hugging each other with tears in their eyes. After the announcement, I had some really great conversations with them. They told me: “Finally, someone is listening to us and doing something about this.”

As our province’s population continues to age, the demand for more capacity at residential homes will continue to grow. We are making sure that we are keeping up with this demand by making sure that these residential care homes are properly staffed. This investment will improve our seniors’ quality of life by providing an average of 3.36 direct care hours that our seniors receive each day. The improved care that our parents, grandparents and our great-grandparents receive will make a substantial difference in their lives. That’s one of the commitments that our government has made: to take action to make life better, and that’s exactly what we are doing.

This investment will also create 1,500 new and good-paying local jobs, including 900 care aides, 335 nurses and 50 allied health care professionals, such as physiotherapists, occupational therapists, social workers and many more. As well, we will be seeing an increase of 100 other health care workers, including rehabilitation assistants and activity aides.

As part of the strategy to improving our health care and senior care, the Ministries of both Health and Advanced Education, Skills and Training are providing approximately $3.3 million to create college and post-secondary spaces to train more licensed practical nurses and more care aides to make sure that our seniors receive the quality of care they need. More hires, more post-secondary opportunities, more care for everyone: these are just many examples of what our government is doing to build a strong economy.

A strong economy is where everyone is doing better, no matter who they are or where they live. We will make sure that every region benefits from the jobs and opportunities our province creates. Our government is also investing in care for seniors for those who decide to stay in their homes by making sure that we work closely with our community and our partners in providing in-home support such as bathing and dressing, medications and home visits by nurses, physiotherapists and other health care professionals. We want to make sure that we broaden our services and provide senior care through different approaches. We want to give our seniors and their families options.

Seniors and their families can do research and make the best decisions for our elders on how they want to receive care. Our job is to make sure that whatever decisions seniors choose, they are getting the best services that this province has to offer. Simply put, there will be more people here to help you. Senior care should not be a privilege to those who can afford it, but something that you deserve for the hard work that you’ve put in, in the service of our province. We will continue to work hard, work hard for you, so you don’t have to worry about outliving your savings or that you won’t be able to afford long-term care.

[5:05 p.m.]

This throne speech is a promise to British Columbians and also outlines a future that we can all look forward to and be excited about. The speech talks about creating opportunity for people. It’s about providing the services, education and health care that people need so they don’t have to worry about just getting the basics in life and can focus on a better future.

We know how hard it is for people to find a doctor, and many British Columbians may be struggling with this. Well, you are not alone. Many people do not have a primary care provider.

To increase access to primary care, in May the Premier announced a new primary health care strategy. As part of our strategy, we’re shifting to a focus on team-based care by providing together doctors, nurse practitioners and other health care professionals to create community networks of care. Primary care networks include urgent primary care centres, and community health centres will be implemented to help coordinate care and improve access for people of all ages. They will help make sure that British Columbians gain timely access to specialized community services which will be linked together under one single program.

We’re also addressing the shortage of primary care providers by providing funding for up to 200 new general practitioners and 200 new nurse practitioners over the next three years. This will make it easier to find a family doctor or a nurse practitioner, and these are big changes that over time will have a profound effect on our health care system.

We are also making investments in public services to make sure they are available, reliable and affordable for everyone. Providing services when and where we need them remains a priority for our government. As I visit seniors across the province, as I speak to my constituents, as I’m on the doorsteps talking to people, I hear from them that they or a loved one are often faced with long waits for surgery. Those who have experienced this directly or indirectly know that often a person’s life feels like it’s on hold while they wait.

That is why, keeping our commitment to providing good services and improved health care, the Premier launched the B.C. surgical and diagnostic imaging strategy. Under this plan, we are working to increase the volume of surgeries performed in B.C. to reduce waitlists for specific procedures and keep waits for other procedures from growing.

More procedures will be performed this year, including hip and knee replacement, dental surgeries and other surgeries. As one of the ways to make this possible, we’re opening five hip and knee replacement programs through this province. Our province has already announced four of the five programs — one at the Vancouver General Hospital, Burnaby Hospital, the University Hospital of Northern B.C. in Prince George, the Royal Jubilee Hospital in Victoria.

Of course, it’s not just surgery that people have to wait for in B.C. Magnetic resonance imaging, more commonly known as MRI, is an exam that many people in B.C. have to wait too long to get. So we are also taking the bold step of dramatically increasing the volume of MRIs performed in our systems. With the Minister of Health’s most recent announcement on improving MRI services, the province will be providing approximately 37,000 more MRI exams by the end of March 2019, which means that 225,000 exams will be completed in 2018-2019.

Improving services also means making them accessible for everyone. We are a multiculturally diverse province, where people come from all over the world to call B.C. their home. Our seniors sometimes need help connecting with services regarding rental housing, affordable housing or transportation support.

The B.C. seniors guide lists all this information and much more in one handy place to help connect seniors with these valuable supports. Our newest investments in B.C. senior guides this year enable the guide to be published in English, in French, Chinese and Punjabi. Our three newest language additions are Vietnamese; Korean; and then, most recently, Farsi — to make services and information accessible to more people.

British Columbians have made their priorities clear. People are frustrated after years of rising living costs, dwindling service and fewer opportunities. They expect this government to take action to make life better, and that’s exactly what we are doing.

[5:10 p.m.]

The previous government failed to address the housing crisis and let the costs pile up for ordinary people like you and me, while cutting taxes for the wealthy. Our government is taking action to make housing more affordable. The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing is providing funding to provide security and safety for renters. The province’s rental assistance programs have not kept up with the rising rents in the private market. We’re making new investments to expand the eligibility and increase benefits of rental assistance programs for low-income seniors and the working families. These programs will help families and seniors stay in their homes and in their communities. These enhancements will benefit 35,000 households, including 3,200 newly eligible families and seniors throughout British Columbia.

The government of B.C., the New Democratic government, is providing $116 million over three years to expand eligibility and increase the average benefits. More than 35,000 households will benefit from the enhancements, including 3,200 newly eligible seniors and families.

The average payments for the rental assistance program, otherwise known as RAP, recipients will go up by approximately $800 this year. The average payment for Shelter Aid For Elderly Renters recipients will go up by approximately $930 this year. These enhancements began September 1, 2018. Recipients are now already enjoying the support they have so long been telling us that they need.

The throne speech provides a clear path to a more affordable B.C., a strong economy and better services. I’m proud to be part of a government that is making different choices and moving B.C. in a new direction, one that is focused on people, all people. While we’ve been hard at work, it’s clear we have a lot of work ahead of us. But we are committed to making sure that you have a government that is working for you. We’re moving forward with actionable solutions to make life more affordable and improving the quality of life for all British Columbians.

L. Throness: I want to begin my response to the Speech from the Throne today by thanking my constituents who brought me here. It’s always a privilege and a pleasure to serve them in one of the most beautiful ridings in Canada. I have a great riding. I was thinking the other day, as I drove through the green, green countryside, what a beautiful place I represent. I also had the great honour of winning third in the goat-milking contest in the Agassiz Fall Fair this year. So I’m enormously proud of my achievements as an MLA.

I want to also begin my response by welcoming a new family member into the world. Lovise Elizabeth Nickle was born to my niece Heather and her husband, Benton Nickle, on September 8. The mother and the baby are over the moon. The husband is a mess, of course. Actually, they’re not. They’re great. I think they received a rude shock, though, in having a baby crying in the middle of the night instead of their blissful slumber. We, as a family, are so delighted to embrace this beautiful child, and I’m proud to be a grand-uncle for the fourth time.

Today is also a different birthday, a different kind of birth. It’s a week, really, of celebration of the long-awaited birth of an LNG industry in B.C. The gestation period was a little long, about seven years, but we expect this week to have a final investment decision.

I want to congratulate the private sector partners who’ve decided to invest here. B.C. is a great place to invest. They will not be disappointed. I want to congratulate the cities and towns and First Nations who cooperated to make this enormous development possible — all of the companies and their workers and their families who will benefit directly and indirectly from this decision. It’s a decision that will shape B.C.’s north for a generation, and we’re so very happy about that.

As has been already pointed out, the NDP, while in opposition, criticized the government all the way. I suppose that’s their job to do so, and we have many choice quotes that we could bring forward. But at least when the NDP became government, they did not oppose LNG. In fact, they lowered revenue to be taken from the LNG after criticizing us for giving away the store when we passed our LNG tax regime. But they still passed it, and we’re grateful they’ve done so.

But I would point out that there’s still work left to do. There’s a protest camp that needs to be taken care of. The government needs to push forward to deal with this. There’s a court case to win, and the government needs to win it. So there’s still time to mess this up before the final investment decision. We hope that the government will continue pressing towards that so we get a positive decision this week.

[5:15 p.m.]

It’s a huge decision. It’s $31 billion U.S., a $40 billion investment. It is ten times bigger than the largest private sector investment in B.C. history. It is huge. Assuming success this week, there are two people deserving of special honour. They are Christy Clark and our own member for Langley East, both of whom articulated the vision. They criss-crossed the province to persuade the people of B.C. to support it. They worked hard to attract investors. They made multiple trips to Asia. They passed comprehensive legislation. They carved a new industry out of the bare earth, and now it is coming to fruition.

I’m just sorry that Christy could not be in the House this week to enjoy the fulfilment of her vision for LNG that she articulated back in 2013. She used to say, in public, that the costs of health care, education and so many other things are growing all the time. Where are we going to get a new revenue stream to sustain these growing programs? We needed that new revenue stream. We’ve almost literally tapped into an abundant river of natural gas that will provide us with economic benefits for the next 40 years.

In my mind, this final investment decision belongs to Christy Clark, and the thanks of all members of this House must go out to her in a big way. When the final investment announcement comes, I really hope that the government will be big enough and honest enough to give credit where it’s due.

Now I want to leave that to talk about a big issue in the government’s throne speech, one of their signature policies. That is child care. I’m privileged to be critic for Children and Family Development. So I want to talk about that for a little bit. I want to point out that under the former government, we already had a significant child care system, in addition to kindergarten for five-year-olds, the early-years program, and so on.

The NDP inherited that system when they came to power just over a year ago, and the NDP hoped to build on our many achievements, just as they are building on our LNG achievements. For example, the former government subsidized almost 106,000 child care spaces. That amounts to 18 percent of the total child population zero to 12 years of age.

The NDP wants to create 22,000 new spaces over the next three years, which will bring that number from 18 percent of children under 12 to 21 percent of children under 12. That is, they hope to increase the number of child care spaces over the B.C. Liberal level of child care by a total of 3 percentage points over their entire term in office. That’s one-fifth of what we did. Even then, 79 percent of children will still be taken care of through some other arrangement that does not receive a government subsidy.

Now, what does this mean in terms of dollars? Under the former government, the whole system cost $222 million in the latest year of record. The NDP is spending a billion in new dollars over the next three years. In addition, they’re getting $50 million a year from the federal government. In all, that’s $385 million per year in new money. In three years’ time, the NDP is going to be spending a total of $600 million a year on child care — almost triple of what we did — but they will still cover only 3 percent more of the child population in B.C. than we did: 22,000 spaces, versus the 106,000 spaces we created.

It remains to be seen whether those spaces will actually be created. That’s aspirational right now. This summer, I surveyed over 3,377 child care providers. Using a public list provided by the government, I sent them an email, and 40 percent responded to the survey, from all regions of the province. That’s a very high response rate.

A third of them were non-profit providers; 251 market-based providers, representing about 8,000 child care spaces, told us that they were going to exit the field early because of the government’s plan. Nine out of ten of them were market based; 78 percent told us that they were not going to create any new spaces because of the government’s plan. So it remains to be seen whether the 22,000 promised spaces will actually appear in the end.

Let’s get back to costs. Part of the reason for the increased costs is that the government is helping families with children already in child care, which doesn’t create new spaces but makes their financial burden lighter. We don’t oppose that. We received that message in the last election in a very clear way, the clearest of possible ways. Another reason, I believe, is that the government is discriminating against market-based providers in favour of non-profit ones. Because it is favouring them, parents will tend to gravitate toward them, but the government is moving toward a higher-cost system.

[5:20 p.m.]

Licensed market-based providers offer just as good care as non-profit ones. They follow the same regulations. I’ve spoken to many of them. They’re very dedicated and efficient. They put their hearts and their souls into their work. For example, they take on more costs and risks on a personal basis, such as personal loans to open their centres. They take what small profits they make, and they pour them back into improvements in their centres. If a worker doesn’t come in, the owner will cover the shift. On and on it goes.

The government is coercing them to opt into their system, in which the government decides and even dictates what their fees will be — so much so that 10 percent of providers have still not opted into the fee reductions, which is amazing. You would think that every single provider would immediately opt in so that their parents could benefit, but this government has made it so difficult for them that they are not willing to hand over control of their business to the government.

Then they don’t receive government help either. The government discriminates against them. How so, you might ask? The government discriminates in favour of non-profit providers in terms of capital grants, both major and minor. Non-profits receive higher fee reductions. Parents who use non-profits get favourable treatment in terms of the affordable child care benefit.

At every turn, the government is demonstrating by its actions that it lacks appreciation for market-based providers, even though market-based providers make up 80 percent of all providers in B.C. Over time, I believe they will be eased out of the system. It’s not all about what parents want. It’s what the government wants as it steers the system toward a more costly public solution. It is truly the nanny state come alive in B.C.

In estimates, I challenged the Minister of State for Child Care about this long-term vision, and she never denied it. Certainly, non-profit care alone receiving government help is the goal of the Coalition of Child Care Advocates. I would remind the House that the NDP adopted their plan completely in every other respect. They pulled it directly into their own election platform.

One would think that the government would be scrambling to get every provider to stay in the field, each of them to adopt a few more positions, a few more spaces. But no, the government’s ideology comes into play here. It wants public dollars to go into public care, not market-based care, because the NDP is ideologically distrustful of markets. Well, I would remind the government that the market provides the necessities of life in an incredibly abundant way — like food and drink, clothing and transportation, shelter and furniture, and every routine daily purchase from haircuts to entertainment, not to mention the entire business economy on which government depends.

It’s the government’s job not to try and replace the tremendous engine of growth and creativity that the market represents but to regulate the market, to control and restrict its abuses, to help those needy people who are left outside the market.

This is the pattern that the B.C. Liberals followed in terms of child care. We regulate market-based child care; we don’t stifle it. We help parents who can’t afford child care to receive what they need. The NDP want to shun the market. For example, they give fee reductions to wealthier British Columbians who don’t need it.

To us, that’s not the way to go. It just doesn’t make sense. The NDP are missing a huge opportunity to unleash the power of the market to quickly provide many more high-quality child care spaces at minimal cost to the taxpayer and maximum efficiency.

We don’t expect that market-based providers will start to quit tomorrow, but they read the writing on the wall. They’re getting the message that in the long term, they’re not welcome. Eventually they’re going to leave. Already we have compared the list in June to the current list maintained by the government, and we find that 83 child care providers have left the system.

The government wants to create an entirely public system. You only have to look at the health care system, which is totally public, to see the problems that will inevitably arise. There will be problems with quality. There are big lineups in the health care system, and there are huge ones right now in child care — waiting lists, all over the province, of over 1,000 people. Before children are even conceived, we found, they will get put on a waiting list.

We can expect that to continue because that’s how a public system works. Bureaucracy tends to grow in public systems. Workers tend to unionize and call for smaller worker-to-child ratios, as they do in the teaching profession; more benefits; pensions; education requirements; and tighter regulations. So we can expect the costs of the system to grow and grow. In particular, the shortage of early childhood educators is a matter of critical importance. We agree with the additional dollar per hour that the government is going to give to those who work with children, but we don’t think that this is adequate to solve the problem.

[5:25 p.m.]

There are simple things that the government could do to help, like rushing ECE worker certificates when they graduate from their training, instead of making them wait for months, as they are now. There’s no excuse for that. It would get them into the workforce more quickly. We could allow workers with equivalent certifications, like nursing, to make a lateral shift into child care.

There are other regulatory changes that the industry providers have suggested and that would open up spaces, make life easier for providers and early childhood educators alike, and help to create child care spaces. We in the opposition will be watching the entire field closely to make sure that taxpayers’ money is used in the most efficient way possible and that things actually improve on the ground.

Now I want to continue on to talk about another signature policy of the NDP, and that’s proportional representation. This is a big initiative of the government.

In Chilliwack, we have a realtor named Freddy Marks, who has officially registered a group with Elections B.C. He calls it “No Pro-Rep Fraser Valley East.” He has a good reason to be very active on this, since he was born and raised in Germany. He has experienced proportional representation firsthand, and he’s very passionate about it. He urges his fellow British Columbians not to go there. I’ve appreciated his passion and his eloquence as he talks about what political life is really like under PR.

About a week ago, he hosted a public town hall meeting where he lives, in Harrison Hot Springs, in my riding. The people who came were very surprised. They didn’t know anything about proportional representation. Many of them didn’t even know that the issue was on the table. They were very worried when they saw the reality of how proportional representation works and how it will change our democracy.

I would say there are two broad areas of concern. First, there is the area of concern about the system itself — a policy concern with the complexity of proportional representation, a concern that they would lose their own MLA who would be accountable to them. They’re worried about the rising influence of party in the proportional representation system and having B.C. effectively run by a small party holding the balance of power, as we have now. All we have to say is: look at our current parliament. This is how it would be permanently. They tend to be really alarmed when they hear that.

What really ticks people off, what really disturbs them, is the way it has been introduced. NDP cabinet members decide the approach and the questions, instead of a broad-based citizens’ assembly. The Premier uses the full weight of his partisan office to support it — his bully pulpit, if you like. There is no geographic threshold, so Vancouver can decide and force a decision onto the whole province. There’s no turnout threshold, so just a few people can decide for everyone.

There has not been adequate time to debate the matter. Nobody even knows about it. The rules under which people can debate are many and complicated. The whole thing is introduced under the cover of the municipal campaign period. The question is confusing; the ballot is confusing. The Premier hides from the public by refusing, so far, to debate the Leader of the Opposition in public.

People get the impression, I think correctly, that the government is trying to disguise what proportional representation really is. The government has stacked the deck. It has tilted the playing field because proportional representation can’t win public support on its own merits. The government has to tilt the field in favour of a minority of zealous supporters of proportional representation who will make sure and fill out their ballot and get out to vote.

In short, the government realizes that it can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, so it has to resort to manipulating the outcome, to hiding from voters, to providing inadequate information in order to win. I think when British Columbians realize this, they will resent this, and they will show it when they get their ballot, starting on October 22.

Now, I want to conclude my remarks to the Speech from the Throne by speaking on my own personal behalf and on behalf of a very great number of people in my riding who appreciate Trinity Western University. I want to talk about the ramifications of the Supreme Court judgment against Trinity Western University this summer.

I’ve not collaborated with Trinity in my remarks today, but this issue, to my mind, is much bigger than just one institution. To me, it’s of real, fundamental importance. It’s more important than the economy or political parties or this politician’s career. I want to quote a line from the Speech from the Throne that I agree with. It goes as follows: “To erase inequality, we must create a province where everyone is welcome to contribute, no matter their ability, race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression or political beliefs.”

[5:30 p.m.]

A decision from the Supreme Court came down on the matter of Trinity Western University this summer which I regard, and many of my constituents regard, as running contrary to the statement in the Speech from the Throne, because Christians who follow a biblical ethic are not able to contribute today to the practice of law. By way of context, over the centuries and even today around the world, Christians whose conscience is bound by the words of the Bible have differed with the values of their broader culture, and they have paid a price for it.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

In this case, the Supreme Court imposed its values on Trinity Western University and effectively shut down a school within a university that had been formerly approved. Since that time, 300 students so far have paid a heavy price, having been denied the education of their choice, been excluded from participating in the public square, even though full participation of all British Columbians is another statement that’s embedded in our human rights code.

Furthermore, Trinity Western has been forced to back down on their deeply held issue of conscience, for which they advocated in the courts for five years, in order to protect students in other programs from similar exclusion.

I have read over the Supreme Court judgment a couple of times. Stepping back to look at the judgment in the broadest sense, I really feel that it was about much more than the Trinity case. The court undertook a critique of Christian morality in general.

To the majority on the court, the biblical ethic is itself “degrading and disrespectful” to individuals, and allowing it to prevail among students of Trinity Western was even “a harm to the public in general,” as if Christians who follow a biblical ethic are not morally worthy to participate in the public square so that it’s reasonable for state actors to discriminate against them. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court even added that the infringement of religious rights was not minor — it was significant — but approved of the discrimination nevertheless.

I find this particularly disturbing, because there are thousands of Christian institutions across B.C. and Canada which follow exactly the same biblical ethic. They include colleges, non-profit organizations, churches, charities, camps, independent schools and others. They all interact with the public in some way, and they could all face discrimination in the future from state actors because of the ruling.

My feelings were echoed by the dissenting judges, who used unusually strong language in their dissent. I would like to quote from them. They said that the ruling “profoundly interfered” with the religious rights. They agreed with the B.C. Court of Appeal that the majority decision was “intolerant and illiberal.” The dissenting justices said that the decision was “highly intrusive” and “substantively coercive.” It was not a “secular and liberal” decision. They said that the majority had “abandoned the state’s duty of neutrality” in these matters, that the logic of the court is “pernicious and potentially far-reaching.” Indeed, “it has led to the exclusion of the community of believers found at TWU.”

These are not my words. These are words of justices of the Supreme Court of Canada. The dissenting justices also dealt with the question of tolerance. Christians who live by their conscience, to follow a more restrictive moral ethic than wider society, are not intolerant.

I would add an aside here that their second-greatest commandment is to love their neighbour as much as they love themselves. They are simply different. They believe different things. And the basis of a pluralistic, free and democratic society is that people can disagree about deeply held issues and still live together in harmony. Both should be allowed to participate, with the government remaining neutral on these questions.

Allow me to quote directly from the dissent in the judgment: “Accommodating religious diversity is in the public interest. Approving the proposed law school does not condone discrimination against LGBTQ persons…The unequal access resulting from the covenant is a function of accommodating religious freedom, which itself advances the public interest by promoting diversity in a liberal, pluralist society.”

In fact, any unequal access is being experienced by Christians. Hundreds of Christian students today are paying the price of exclusion from the private education of their choice, from the public life of this province and from a satisfying career in Christian service which would be heavily oriented toward the weak and marginal in society, just as thousands of Christian charities across Canada do today.

[5:35 p.m.]

This is just the beginning. This judgment sets a precedent that will facilitate further actions against other Christian institutions and justify discrimination by state and private actors. In fact, I saw such a call on Twitter today. Already it begins.

I want to state how I feel about this as a Christian. I’ve lain awake many nights thinking about this during the summer. I feel that this decision excludes and marginalizes Christians, who do not condemn others but simply believe that they must refrain from certain behaviours in order to please their Lord. Their institutions need to be able to follow a biblical ethic if they want to remain a biblical institution. This is essential to the integrity of Christian institutions across this country.

The principle applies to other institutions as well — for example, when the Gay Pride Parade refused to allow B.C. Liberals to walk in their parade because they didn’t sign their own commitment. I support their right to do that, but that right to their own moral code should be accorded to other institutions as well. That’s just a part of pluralism. We have today a less pluralistic society because of the Supreme Court judgment.

I’m not sure how to address this matter further, because it was issued by the Supreme Court, which is a federal court from which there is no appeal. But it is part of my purpose in being an MLA to try to make sure that B.C. is a model of respect and tolerance and that the government of B.C. acts in such a way that all people of good will are welcome to hold their beliefs here and to participate fully in the public life of this province. The phrase “diversity and inclusion” must not be a euphemism for excluding people who follow a biblical ethic. Instead, diversity must include the LGBTQ community and Christians whose conscience is bound by the word of God.

I really think this is a test of kindness for people in B.C. who believe different things. Can we agree to disagree on deeply held matters of conscience and agree to live and to let live? I believe we can and should. And I would call all members of this House to a greater and deeper degree of mutual respect and understanding.

R. Leonard: Hon. Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Speech from the Throne. I referred to the throne speech as setting the table. The budget that followed was the filling of the plates. We’re coming up to Thanksgiving now, and I wanted to express my gratitude that this government has set a table for British Columbians, a table filled with hope and aspiration.

I want to start first by giving thanks to my family and dear friends. After a little over a year now of coming down to Victoria and travelling around the province, I’ve become more deeply aware of the commitment that the families make as we take this journey to provide good government to British Columbia. Time spent away from family is hard. It’s hard on us, and it’s also hard on our family members. So I lift up my hands to all of our spouses and all of our supporters who give us this opportunity to serve British Columbians.

I’d also like to say thank you to my NDP family, both across the province and at home. I have such an incredibly committed executive who has stuck through thick and thin and has recognized that being a member of a party is about more than one issue. It’s about bringing all interests together and moving forward with shared values.

I’d also like to say thank you very much to my CAs. First, Leanne Rathje, who has been with me since the beginning. It’s been an incredible journey as they have come along, learning the job. I lost one of my CAs who moved on to greater works with social work, which was her calling and her career path. I have a new constituency assistant who’s learning the job. They’ve been able to hold down the fort while I’ve had the opportunity to tour the province with different committees.

I sit on the Select Standing Committee on Finance, the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth, the Select Standing Committee on Agriculture and the Rental Housing Task Force.

[5:40 p.m.]

This summer, while people may think that there has been a break, there are a number of us who have gotten to travel around the province speaking to landlords and tenants, speaking to people who are talking about their priorities for what this government should be doing for British Columbians to make life more affordable, to bring the services that people count on and to make life a lot more sustainable in the communities that they live in.

Have I mentioned landlords and tenants? I think I did. That was a big part of the summer. As well, I got to talk to people involved in agriculture, around small-scale meat processing. It’s been an incredible challenge to many British Columbians, after 16 years, to be able to come forward and say: “These are some of the services that we used to have and we don’t have anymore” or “Life has changed, and government has not kept up.” We have had an opportunity to give voice to those concerns that people have raised and to provide solutions.

Also, with the Representative for Children and Youth leaving, I had an opportunity to be part of the appointment of Dr. Charlesworth as the acting representative, and I look forward to the work that’s coming with that particular committee.

I’d also like to express my gratitude to my community. Courtenay-Comox is a very diverse community. I’m sure everybody probably says that. The whole Comox Valley is an agricultural community. We also have an airbase, so we have a lot of military people. We have a lot of government services in the Comox Valley, serving the north Island. There are a lot of different interests that are at play.

Given the election and the way that the numbers fell out, it’s a good example, in my constituency, of the kinds of conversations that we have to have, the way we have to work together to represent everybody in British Columbia and all of the different interests.

Earlier I heard a member making mention of their emergency responders. I would really like to express my gratitude as well. As I travelled around the province, knowing that people who work in our own communities to keep them safe have given up, sacrificed, some of their time to go and help people where there’s been flooding, where there have been wildfires…. Experiencing the challenges that communities have, and knowing that British Columbians are helping British Columbians, makes me very proud to be here today.

I’d also like to mention that our dairy farmers deserve our support. I think the impacts of the trade negotiations that have just been completed give us an opportunity to be a lot more supportive of our local farmers. As the Minister of Agriculture said, look for those blue cows and buy Canadian; buy B.C. milk.

I’d also like to take, at this time, an opportunity to thank the folks who serve the public as elected local government officials. In Courtenay-Comox, there are a lot of folks who have given up a lot of years to serve their communities, both in Courtenay and Comox and in the rural areas. Some of them are retiring, and some new folks are stepping up to take on the challenge. I just want to say thank you to those who have served: the mayor of Comox, Paul Ives; Councillor Barbara Price is leaving; Councillor Hugh Mackinnon; Councillor Marg Grant. There are going to be big changes in Comox. It’s pretty amazing to know that people have served for decades. That kind of caring deserves some recognition.

I’d also like to thank the voters that came out on May 9 and elected all of us, and particularly me, because I have now the privilege to be able to serve in this great Legislature and to work with some amazing people.

[5:45 p.m.]

I want to say thank you as well to folks who sit here today, people who have been here for many long years earning their stripes in opposition. They’ve come to the table with a lot of knowledge and experience and wisdom, and it’s showing. It’s showing that we have a strong direction that we’re taking, and I’m proud to be able to be serving with them.

I’m also proud to be part of a government that works with others, that we have an agreement with an opposition party that makes us more responsive to more people in British Columbia. I’m proud to be part of a government that’s committed to making life more affordable, providing the services that people count on and building sustainable communities with good-paying jobs throughout British Columbia.

Out of the gate, this government worked to help the most vulnerable, those who have been left behind by the previous government for 16 years. The first thing was a $100 increase in social assistance and disability allowances. This is a big thing. It doesn’t sound like a lot, but the hope that came from that announcement, where people could actually stop feeling like they can’t make it to the next day, has been a big change.

More change is needed. Sixteen years is a long time to try and catch up, but we’re heading in the right direction. We also, out of the gate, made tuition free — adult basic education and English language learning — so people could actually get a leg up in life, especially those who have taken the step to say: “It’s time to move forward.”

I’d like, also, to talk about our significant commitments for housing and child care. These are our legacy programs that will change lives for the better, not just for tomorrow but for a whole lifetime.

I’d like to talk about our commitments to the housing issue. We have had so many years of stagnant wages. We have had challenges with the growing cost of housing, and we haven’t had solutions being presented. So I’m very proud that we have committed to $7 billion of investments over the next ten years to make life affordable with housing for families, for First Nations, for seniors, for women and children fleeing domestic violence, for the missing middle.

I’m particularly excited about the housing hub. It’s an opportunity for partnerships, where people come to the table with different assets — developers who know how to work through the development processes; people who have great heart, who have land; non-profits; faith groups — and find someone who can help them work together to provide more affordable housing for so many more people — 117,000 that we are committed to making sure have affordable homes.

Just in the Comox Valley, $1.7 million was added to an affordable housing project called the Braidwood project. That $1.7 million boost is helping make that housing project more affordable by providing opportunities for them to put in better energy efficiencies in the 35-unit development. It’s going to be opening in February.

There’s also the commitment and the ongoing work to open up 46 units of supportive, modular housing. These are opportunities for so many of our homeless to finally have a home. I’m also excited for folks that are struggling to pay the rent every month, who have a home but are in danger of losing it, with the increase to the SAFER allowance.

I’d also like to talk about SAFER, which is Shelter Aid For Elderly Renters. I want to talk about other benefits that seniors are gaining with this new government’s commitment to people.

[5:50 p.m.]

More investments have been made to increase adult daycare. There are more respite beds in the Comox Valley. There’s more home support. They’ve made permanent a number of long-term-care beds. They’ve added 17 more hospital beds, as seniors wait for long-term-care beds that have been taking up the acute care beds.

Thirty-five beds were opened at St. Joseph’s The Views. It’s a long-term-care facility. That’s just, at this point, temporary, because we are getting not just 70 beds, as was the commitment from the previous government, but we are now going to see 120 long-term-care beds brought to the Comox Valley. In the meantime, people are in need of a place to live, and those long-term-care beds will give that transition time, an opportunity for people to be sheltered.

This is a sorely underserved segment of our community. I’m just so excited that this government’s finally recognized that and is acting to serve the growing needs of seniors in Courtenay-Comox.

Another area, another legacy, is child care — $1 billion over the next three years. The first step was the child care fee reduction program for universal savings on fees, saving up to $350 a month in over 50,000 licensed spaces. There are going to be more child care spaces. We just announced, this past summer, an upgrade to the Lake Trail School to the tune of $25.2 million, and it’s going to include 60 child care spaces. And there are more child care spaces coming with different partnerships.

It’s really impressive that we don’t just create spaces but that we hold up the early childhood educators by providing bursaries so they can afford to go to school, recognizing that so many of these early childhood educators end up taking the program but see it as a stepping stone to another career because they can’t afford to pay the bills for their learning. They can’t afford to stay in the jobs that they’re trained for.

Raising the rates so they can afford to stay, finding ways for them to go to school while they’re working — these are well-thought-out programs that are going to help lift the whole child care sector. We’re benefiting from it here in the Comox Valley at North Island College, with more spaces. I know this is true because I talk to early childhood educators who are excited about the direction that we’re taking.

This September we began the expanded affordable child care benefit, providing relief for those with incomes of up to $111,000, giving up to 80,000 families the option to join or to return to work. Not only do women deserve to be in the workforce; we need them in the workforce. The bottom line is that some families will be paying no fees for the child care that they need.

I’d like to turn to one other item that was mentioned in the throne speech and which is on our doorsteps, and that’s proportional representation and the referendum that’s coming up, starting on October 22. It’s an area that’s near and dear to my heart. Democracy is important. Process is important.

What is PR, or proportional representation, about? It’s about choosing a system where every vote counts, giving voice to everyone in the Legislature, all of the diversity of voices that there are in B.C.

If proportional representation happens, if the referendum is successful, we will be bringing people back into politics in a big way. We already did it by taking big money out of politics. Not only do those who are in opposition to proportional representation not want proportional representation; they want to be able to bring big money back into the political system, which will just, in my opinion, bring corruption back into the system.

[5:55 p.m.]

People are working hard in the Comox Valley on the referendum that this government has put forward. They put this opportunity forward with the help of over 80,000 British Columbians who participated in the steps leading up to the referendum.

People will be receiving their ballots in the mail come October 22. This is the opportunity for all of us to make change for the better. We don’t need another government that makes 100 percent of the decisions with 40 percent support from British Columbians. We don’t need governments that swing from one side of the pendulum to another. We need stable governments where parties work together to get things done for people.

The table is set for a fairer electoral system that truly shouts: “Democracy for all.” The table is also set for a more affordable B.C., where people can count on the services that they need and where they can find good-paying, sustainable jobs where they live. I am excited about the progress we’ve made and how far we have yet to go. I’m excited that every British Columbian can be a part of a better B.C.

S. Thomson: It gives me pleasure to rise today to provide some comments in this continuing debate on the throne speech. I didn’t think that I would have that opportunity, but the way things have worked out, we’re getting that bit of an opportunity today, so I appreciate the chance to make a few comments.

First, because I didn’t get a chance in the spring, due to that little bit of a time-out, I want to thank my family for all their support and my constituency assistants, Nan and Janice, in the office, for all the work that they do, particularly for that time period when I was not able to be there. They really did fill in and made sure that everything worked all the way through that time period. And thanks to my constituents for the honour and privilege of continuing to represent their interests here in Victoria.

I did comment before with my great gratitude and thanks to the cardiac care unit at Kelowna General Hospital and all the follow-up recovery services for all their support, and particularly the recovery services COACH, now, that are continuing to make sure that I try to keep that discipline and that I can keep coming back here and representing the community.

I had a chance a few weeks ago to be able to go to an event that was doing a bit of fundraising for COACH to talk about the importance of raising funds in the community for the equipment and things that they use. It was a great opportunity to give those thanks. I gave a little slide show presentation, and I had to make the comments just before I started the slide show like you see on some newscasts where the newscaster says, a little bit of a warning: “Not all images are suitable for all audiences.” It wasn’t actually really pretty in terms of what I showed that evening, but it really did demonstrate the important work they do in our community and how grateful I was then and continue to be for all their support.

Kelowna-Mission is a great riding to represent. Lots of positive things are happening in the community, building on the success of a strong economy in the province and benefiting from local governments that are focused on continuing to move the community forward. Again, as the previous member mentioned, I want to thank all of them for their service as they put themselves back in front of the community in the municipal election process. They’ve done some great work in our community.

[6:00 p.m.]

Kelowna continues to grow significantly. A recent study from the economic development commission: from 2006 to 2011, the population increased 10.8 percent; from 2011 to 2016, a further 8.4 percent increase. All age categories are increasing. We’ve got our highest growth rates in the community in the ages of zero to 14 and 25 to 34, so the community is becoming a younger community. Our demographics are becoming younger. That shows the opportunity that people see in our community, and it provides future opportunity and future challenges in the community.

This study by the economic development Commission also noted that the Okanagan central and Okanagan growth was expected to outpace provincial population growth between 2018 and 2026, and an additional 32,000 people are expected to move into the community — an overall increase of about 1.6 percent per year and, as I’ve pointed out, that highest growth rate in the 35- to 44-year-old category.

All of this investment and work in the community is really leading to some great things in our community. We’re blessed with two great post-secondary institutions: Okanagan College and UBC Okanagan. At Okanagan College, enrolment increased this year 13 percent, up to 9,750 students. This is the 14th year that Okanagan College has exceeded the government enrolment targets. I think it’s leading in all the colleges in B.C. in that respect. There’s growth in both domestic and international students.

Recently we just broke ground on a new health sciences centre, a training centre for health professionals — an $18.9 million investment — that’s expected to be open in the fall of 2020.

We finalized the new trades centre campaign with the community funding commitment that was part of the community commitment to building the new trades centre, which is a fantastic facility in the community. The community committed to raise $8.5 million, and that commitment through the college foundation was just completed with a final commitment that allowed them to reach the completion with a $1 million commitment from the Jacobsen family — Ron Jacobsen, a great community person in our area. In his memory, the family made that donation of $1 million, the largest single donation to the college, and completed that capital campaign that supported the trades centre.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

We’ve got future needs there coming, and we’ll continue to work and advocate for the needs of the college with the growth that is there — the needs for student housing. They also have in their plans the need for a wellness centre, which includes a gymnasium. This college doesn’t have a gymnasium, and as part of college and campus life, I think the building out of a wellness centre and gymnasium is something that’s critically important there as well.

At UBC Okanagan, again, enrolment is up this year to just shy of 10,000 students. That’s up from 3,500 students when UBC Okanagan opened its doors in 2005. So tremendous growth and establishment of this post-secondary institution — a world-leading reputation in terms of research and quality of education that is occurring there.

[6:05 p.m.]

The work is just getting underway on the new $35 million teaching and learning centre for the students there. A little bit of a note on this one. Moving forward with this centre included $10 million from the students themselves. They held a vote and a referendum through the student process, voted on by the students to make that contribution to the facility — which, I think, really demonstrates the respect, the feeling and the quality of educational experience that students are getting at UBC Okanagan. Lots of future opportunities for us there in research, in aerospace. UBC Okanagan is part of the digital supercluster. So there are lots of exciting things to come there.

We’re also seeing, in the community, the real, major benefits of the investment the province made in Accelerate Okanagan and in the Okanagan Centre for Innovation, as one of the contributors to getting the innovation centre established, paying major dividends in the Okanagan and dividends that flow through to the province. It’s also, probably, one of the major contributors to the growth in those age cohorts that I mentioned. A growing number of companies and opportunities are coming through that technology centre as they work with start-ups, build them out, move them to the next stages and provide the mentoring and the support for all of those companies.

They just did a recent study — 12,500 people working in the tech workforce in the Central Okanagan, $1.67 billion in economic impact, 693 businesses. That’s up 24 percent since the centre was established. So real great opportunities for growth.

We have companies like Yeti Farm, an animation studio, that are set to double their workforce, to double the number of people working there. There are just so many examples in the community.

Just last week we had the opportunity to officially open the Okanagan Rail Trail — again, another one where the provincial investment we made, of $8.3 million, in securing that trail corridor between Coldstream and Kelowna, is opening up tremendous recreational tourism opportunities. The local governments came to the table in terms of securing the corridor, and the community came to the table and raised over $8 million in individual commitments, sponsorships and donors, in order to construct the trail. The province and local governments came together to secure the corridor, and the community came together to build out the trail.

It was a great event. Over 350 community members joined for the official opening — school children, seniors, everybody out there with their bikes and hiking and everything like that on this corridor — of the 49 kilometres that connect Kelowna out to the airport, out to the university and all the way on through to Coldstream, up near Vernon.

We’ve got transportation projects that are just in the process of being completed — Highway 97 upgrading, the three-laning, John Hindle Drive.

Our airport continues to grow significantly, in Kelowna. In August, the airport set a new record, serving 201,000 passengers in one month. That was a record over the previous record, which had been set in the month before, in July. It had 1.89 million passengers in 2017 and is projected to have another 3 percent growth on that in 2018. Providing all of those linkages for the growth of our economy in the region and tourism, all of that support, it’s just a tremendous asset and investment in our community.

[6:10 p.m.]

We’re also seeing the growing needs in the schools. We work very closely with school district 23 in terms of moving forward their capital needs, as this population increase and growth in those categories bring new families and children into our community. We’ll be needing to work with them, looking for their top priorities in terms of a new school on the west side, a new secondary school in the Glenmore area.

One ongoing, very high priority for us is a replacement of a very, very old school, Rutland Middle School — one that’s needed to have that replacement for many years. I know the minister has been to see that school. It’s one that is the highest priority on their replacement list for school district 23. We need to find the creative ways for that to move forward now, because it really is getting to the situation where that is getting unsafe. Teaching conditions are not appropriate for teachers, for the students. It’s something that really needs to be addressed as we go forward.

I’ve talked a lot about the very positive things that are happening in the community. There are some things that are weighing heavily on the community. One that we hear about — and I hear about regularly — and one where the local government and citizens have been very, very clear is that the speculation tax that is being proposed and put forward by the government is really having a detrimental, negative impact on our community.

Kelowna, West Kelowna have been targeted in this approach. The case has been made clear in all of the submissions by local governments, by mayors, by community members, that this is not a speculation tax. It’s not addressing the issue for which it was named. It’s ill-informed. It’s ill-advised. It is taxing assets. It’s an inheritance tax on our children and our grandchildren.

It’s impacting investment in the community. It’s impacting jobs. It’s impacting confidence. And it’s resulted in the cancellation of a number of projects that would provide that very, very important housing that’s needed as the community continues to grow. It’s something that, I know, all of the submissions have made. There is example after example in terms of how this is targeting people that are making investments in our community, people that are not speculators.

They are — I’m not sure just how strong the view is — insulted. They are dismayed to be labelled and targeted as speculators in our community. These are people who have made long-term investments in our community. We have numerous examples. Those have been forwarded to the Minister of Finance, many of them. I hope that the concerns have been heard. I know they’ve been heard. I think the question will be is: have they been heeded? We’ll see as we move forward in this fall session.

It is really something that is not addressing its objective and, as I said, is having that very, very negative impact on our community. I was looking into the throne speech to sort of try to see the reference to it, to see whether what is being put forward is what we’re seeing or what was referenced in the throne speech. You look at the wording in the throne speech: “Government cannot solve the problem on its own, but we also know that it must be part of the solution. Fixing the problem will take new ideas.”

[6:15 p.m.]

I really do wonder whether this was that new idea that was being referenced in the throne speech. If that’s what was being referenced as the new idea and the approach to address this, it’s really not meeting its intended purpose, and it really does need to be addressed, not just in our community but in those other communities throughout the province where it is having that negative impact. And I hope that we will see that in this session.

The other area that has caused a significant concern in our community is the employers health tax, another sleight of hand on the part of the government, the members opposite. They made a great deal of reference in the throne speech around removing the MSP, but what they didn’t say and what they didn’t reference at all — and I looked through this throne speech to try to find any reference to it — was the fact that they were going replace this with the employers health tax, or what is also known as the MSP replacement tax, transferring costs from individuals to employers.

We met with many, many in the community who have pointed out the impact of this and the fact that it is going to result in increases in costs or increases in taxes, local government taxes that are going to be passed on to those same individuals that were purported to be benefiting from the MSP removal — and even the further sleight of hand by having a year where it is doubled up. The local governments have said it’s safe to conclude that the employers health tax will lead to property tax increases for the majority of B.C. citizens. We’ll see it in the school system.

We’ve met with a number of businesses. Just as an example, a very, very progressive operation called Nature’s Fare — seven stores in British Columbia — is going to be hit significantly with this employers health tax. At the time, they were just in the process of looking at how they could enhance the benefits package for their employees. This move of an employers health tax put an end to that. They’ve told us that their options are going to have to be to curtail hiring, to lay off staff and not move forward with the benefits that they were going to provide.

This is a company that competes in a very difficult market, the retail grocery market, providing organic and health foods. They compete against major companies like Walmart and Sobeys that are moving on line. They don’t have that ability. It’s a very, very competitive market, and they don’t have the ability to simply transfer or add that cost onto their costs. So it’s going to have those impacts on the very people that are being purported, in the throne speech, to benefit from this MSP reduction. And to simply replace it with a tax is, again, as I pointed out, that sleight of hand.

[6:20 p.m.]

I will talk a little bit, just very quickly, about prop rep, proportional representation. I think members here on this side of the House have articulated, particularly the comments today from the member for Vancouver-Langara, very clearly the concerns about the process. I’m hearing that very clearly in the riding from my constituents around this process and the steps that have been taken to reduce the threshold — no regional thresholds, no minimum voter threshold, so many questions unanswered, left to a future process.

They really do feel like the process is flawed and that critical facts and information are being withheld — riding maps, list management. Let’s point out a definition of rural-urban ridings. They really don’t feel that something so critical as this, something so important to our process, should be done on this leap of faith that the Premier referenced in his comments to UBCM. This is not something that should be done on a leap of faith.

What I’m hearing from our constituents is they feel they deserve much better in this process. There is a lot of support for the call for a provincial debate between the leaders on this. I’m hearing that they can’t understand why that call has not been taken up and answered. The continual delay in answering that and leaving it that maybe…. They just don’t understand that because it is so critical. People need the information to make an informed decision.

Lots of other challenges in the riding, along with the opportunities. Probably the most significant one in our community is supportive housing, affordable housing. We are working very, very hard on it in the community, and we really need to commend everybody in the community for the work they’ve done in bringing home what has now been adopted as the Journey Home strategy, a three-point plan.

There are three key foundations in the plan that have been bought into by everybody in the community. It has, as its basis, a backbone or a structure that oversees it all, that brings all of the agencies and stakeholders and everybody together in a structured-systems process on it. The need is for 300 long-term supportive housing units and 500 new program spaces.

We look forward to continuing to work with our community in addressing those critical needs in the community in that area. We’ve seen some early start with a couple new projects and some on the drawing board, and we hope that those are going to continue to move forward.

I’ll close my remarks here. Just to say that, as I said earlier, despite all of the positive side of it, we do have some key challenges and some real concerns about the direction in the throne speech.

Now having had the benefit of that time between the throne speech and today, seeing the tax-and-spend approach; the tax increases that have actually reduced affordability, not improved affordability; the stumbling out of the gate in terms of the implementation of a number of policies — the speculation tax, the employers health tax, the stumbling in the rollout of the child care program; delays in the transportation and infrastructure; the community benefits agreement, which is going to add cost; a flawed and calculated proportional representation referendum process…. All of those things are key concerns to the constituents in the community and key concerns that I’m hearing from my constituents.

[6:25 p.m.]

I appreciate the opportunity to have made these comments. I look forward to this fall session to continue to address these and other issues on behalf of the constituents of Kelowna-Mission. I thank them again for the opportunity to continue to represent them in the Legislature here in Victoria.

It’s a humbling job, and when we come to work every day, we’re still humbled by the responsibility and opportunity that we have all been given.

S. Thomson moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. G. Chow moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 6:26 p.m.