Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

CHILD CARE PROTOTYPE SITES

B. D’Eith: Today I’m bringing a statement on Childcare B.C. universal prototype sites. Just to start off, one of the key pieces of our platform was to move the province towards universal child care over a ten-year period, and that’s exactly what we’ve been doing — investing $1 billion in child care, the biggest investment in B.C. history.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

This will deliver relief to tens of thousands of families and help us lay the foundation for our universal, affordable child care plan that will benefit British Columbians for decades to come. Too many of our families with young kids are struggling to make ends meet because of the high cost and the low availability of child care.

Childcare B.C. will give families access to quality child care at a price they can afford so that parents have the peace of mind when they want to pursue work in the workforce.

I’ve actually met many young families who are caught in the trap. One partner’s entire salary goes to child care, so often the other partner will choose to stay home, even though the family desperately needs that second income because of the cost of living. We all know how tough it is to live in our beautiful province these days.

[10:05 a.m.]

The partner gets a double whammy, because returning back to work often means the loss of seniority or lower pay. They have to start all over again, and disproportionately, these partners are women.

Now, on the employer side, many employers spend a great deal of time and money training employees. They develop trust with their workers and systems that become efficient and stable. Then when employees leave because of the child care trap, that’s tough on employers.

In fact, if we’re going to meet the demand that we need for our workforce over the next decade — and that is tens of thousands of jobs — women are going to have to work and have that choice to work. Universal child care is good for families, and it’s good for the economy.

Of course, tackling universal child care is no small feat. The government started helping tens of thousands of individuals and families, starting with a $300-per-child fee per month, the child care fee reduction program. Then in the fall of last year, it launched the affordable child care benefit for parents, reducing fees with an additional $900 per month. These programs are already making a huge difference. But of course, the goal is universal child care.

How do we get there? The first thing was to look at ways to make child care more affordable. The ministry looked at a number of lessons learned in other jurisdictions, both in Canada and internationally, and found a few things. Providing tax credits would have required a change to the federal tax processes, so that’s difficult. Also, experience in other jurisdictions has shown that providing funding directly to parents actually resulted in an increase in child care fees, which actually dilutes the intended benefit for families.

Of course, affordability is one of the government’s top priorities. As I said earlier, that’s demonstrated by the child care fee reduction program and the affordable child care benefit program. But we need to test a new child care model that supports parents and providers and has the necessary mechanisms in place to ensure that there’s an accountability for this public funding.

The prototype sites program initiative allows the ministry to partner with providers to look at different ways to provide child care within a universal model and to inform future expansion into universal child care. These sites are on the leading edge of one of the largest social policy changes in British Columbia history.

Now, the Childcare B.C. universal prototype sites are located all over British Columbia, in rural and urban centres, and represent the diversity of British Columbia geography as well as community and parents’ needs. In order to get a strong sense of what will be needed to expand to universal child care, the government has chosen sites that represented all age groups and licensed child care types.

The application criteria for prototype sites indicate a preference for sites that offer specific population program models. As well, a full range of service models have been selected, including ones operated by non-profits, public, band or tribal councils and large and small private organizations — so a whole range of providers.

What’s happened with the prototype site plan? There are 50 sites in British Columbia right now that are becoming these prototype sites. What that will mean is that parents’ fees will be capped at $200 per month for full-time enrolment during regular business hours. Under this initiative, around 2,500 licensed child care spaces will be converted to these low-cost spaces for families. Some parents with children at these sites may pay less, or nothing at all, if they’re eligible for the other programs.

This initiative will run from November 1, 2018, to March 31, 2020. The province will use this feedback from parents and child care providers to shape the future expansion of universal child care over the next ten years.

I was actually very pleased that two of these prototype sites…. One is in Maple Ridge, and one is in Mission. Maple Ridge’s Albion Good Beginnings Daycare is wonderful, and in Mission, there is the Heritage Park Childcare Centre. It’s a non-profit run by the Mission child care society. This will involve 12 children under 36 months and 25 between the ages of three to five.

I had the chance to visit the site recently and a chance to talk with the director, Lorraine Trulsen, who is absolutely ecstatic about the program. She said that they are full and they have a waiting list. In fact, the waiting list is big enough that they could open another child care facility in the same model. She has said how transformative the pilot program is already with families.

[10:10 a.m.]

I mean, imagine a family that’s paying $1,400 a month for child care for two children and now paying $400. That’s $1,000 a month. For a family living paycheque to paycheque, that is transformative. That means savings for a university education. That means, perhaps, being able to afford sports for the children when they couldn’t afford it before. Or it just could simply mean not living beyond their means, which is transformative for these families.

I wanted to thank the hon. Speaker for the chance to speak, and I will say some more in the back half of this.

L. Throness: It’s a pleasure to talk about prototype sites, which are the government’s attempt to put into practice their promise of $10-a-day child care. Allow me to share seven concerns I have with prototype sites.

First, there are now about 109,000 child care spaces in B.C. The current government has added 3,000 to the 106,000 left to them by the former government. And 2,500 of these spaces are prototype spaces. So we can consider the provincial promise of $10-a-day daycare to be 2 percent fulfilled. I’m not sure that parents would be very happy to hear that.

Second, every penny of funding for prototype sites is federal money, through the Canada-B.C. early learning and child care agreement. The province has spent nothing on them. You’d think that the government would want to provide some provincial dollars toward one of their signature policies, but there is no provincial financial commitment to prototype sites.

Third, prototype sites are not new child care spaces. The government simply converted existing spaces into $10-a-day spaces. The prototype spaces have made no impact whatsoever on the shortage of child care spaces that exist across the province. In fact, they may have worsened it. Since the sites are generously funded, they can afford to hire early childhood educators at higher wages, and educators will naturally migrate toward them. It will be interesting to know if in the coming evaluation of prototype sites, the government looks at the impact of the sites on smaller child care providers in the same communities.

Fourth, what about the costs of prototype sites? While we know that they will cost $60 million over 17 months or $17,000 per space per year, if you extrapolate that cost to the 60,000 spaces right now funded by the child care operating fund and add the 24,000 new spaces the government promised within two years from now, the cost of 84,000 spaces would be $1.4 billion per year.

This is just the beginning, because the government wants a universal system. We don’t know how many spaces that means, because the minister refused to reveal any details during estimates, but Quebec’s universal system funds about 300,000 child care spaces. If it were adopted in B.C., with our smaller population, we would fund 180,000 spaces here, which would cost, according to the current funding for prototype sites, $3 billion per year. But that’s not all. You have to add the cost to society of each family also paying $10 a day, privately, for every space. This would amount to another $475 million per year.

These estimates are all conservative, because the government has promised anyone making less than $40,000 per year free child care, with the taxpayer bearing the entire cost. We don’t know how many of these spaces there would be. All of this, of course, doesn’t include after-school spaces for older children, the cost of all-day kindergarten and early years programming. So we can be assured that the total cost of child care to our society, on the basis of prototype sites, would be well over $3½ billion per year. Can we afford to devote 5 percent of our provincial budget to child care, plus the private cost? That will be a hard decision to make.

Fifth, even the minuscule accomplishment of 2 percent of our system now being $10 a day is time limited, because prototype sites are temporary. They will all be closed for evaluation on March 31, 2020, a year from now, and the parents who felt like they won the lottery in being chosen for a prototype site will receive instead hefty increases in fees.

Sixth, what will happen to $10-a-day care after the evaluation? Well, the daily amount might increase, as it has in Quebec. It might become $12 or $15 a day or perhaps disappear entirely. Those parents who are lucky enough to fall into $10-a-day care will feel just like April fools, as their fees shoot upward on this day, exactly one year from now. I wonder how the government will explain that one.

Seventh, prototype sites send an ominous message to the 80 percent of providers in B.C. who are market-based, because 75 percent of the prototype spaces are non-profit. Clearly, in its prototype, its pattern, its mould, its template for child care, the government heavily favours the non-profit sector, just like the scheme of the Coalition of Child Care Advocates of B.C., whose entirely non-profit platform the government endorsed without qualification in 2017.

[10:15 a.m.]

To sum up, given the pattern prototype sites are setting, we can look forward to an enormously expensive non-profit system, one that may not create new spaces — a system that poaches from market-based care — and, finally, a $10-a-day promise that may only be temporary and short-lived, a mirage for parents more than a reality.

It’s April Fools’ Day today, and unfortunately, the joke is on the parents and families of B.C.

B. D’Eith: While I appreciate the comments from the other side, they did nothing about this issue while they were in government. I’m not going to listen to them for advice on child care when this government has invested over $1 billion in child care in this province. Tens of thousands of families are so excited and thrilled to have transformative child care options in this province.

Our commitment is to bring universal child care to British Columbia. This has never wavered. Our goal is to give B.C. families access to the affordable, quality child care they need. We’re making this progress right now, and that’s the point of the prototype sites. The introduction of the prototype sites will allow the minister, allow the government, to gather that valuable information they need about the impact on families, but also the impact on child care providers and the government, and that will help inform the plan to transition to universal child care.

It’s very important to note that we can benefit from learning from other jurisdictions. But at the same time, we can see how a made-in-B.C. universal child care program will work. So I’m very excited about the prototype program. I’m very excited about the tens of thousands of families that are already benefiting from a significant savings in child care from the operators who have opted into the program, and it’s working extremely well.

As I said, when I went to the prototype site in Mission, I can tell you that talking to the providers, talking to the parents, seeing the kids and how happy they are there and the fact that it’s already double oversubscribed in terms of a waiting list…. There’s clearly a demand for quality, affordable child care in this province. We’re committed to universal child care. We’re going to deliver that, and the right way to do that is to do prototype sites so that we can learn about how it works, how to work with our operators and do the best system that we can for our parents.

MAKING LIFE MORE AFFORDABLE

J. Martin: Somewhat with a sense of irony, here we are, the start of the fiscal year, and we’re going to be talking about taxes and affordability, just as life becomes considerably less affordable in beautiful British Columbia.

There’s a host of new taxes. Some kick in today. Some have already kicked in. Some are coming in the near future. Some are new. Some are increases to existing ones. We’ve got the employer health tax, for instance, a new tax that pretty well is going to impact every single person as a consumer of any type of goods and services. I’m not really sure how that is going to make life more affordable.

There is a local Victoria gas tax — 2 cents a litre. How is that going to make life more affordable? A Vancouver gas tax of 1.5 cents per litre. Again, how is that making life more affordable? What about the new Airbnb tax that is expected to generate another $16 million of revenue for British Columbians that may want to holiday in their province?

We’ve got the PTT surcharge — an increase. The foreign buyer tax — an increase. We’ve got the additional school tax, which has absolutely nothing to do with schools. That’s increasing by 0.2 percent and 0.4 percent, depending on the assessed value of one’s property. Again, none of that is going to schools whatsoever. You could have called it a bagel tax. You could have called it a lawnmower tax, or anything else for that matter, because it’s irrelevant to schools.

[10:20 a.m.]

Of course, there’s a speculation tax, which has absolutely nothing to do with speculation. That is just making life less affordable for British Columbians that may have a cottage, may have a cabin in some remote part of the province to share with family and their grandchildren. It might have been in the family for generations. But that’s just become less affordable as well.

We’re not sure exactly when it’s coming in, but something akin to photo radar will be kicking in — another tax. It won’t be called photo radar. It’ll be disguised under a different type of reference.

What about the carbon tax? That kicked in today. Gasoline just went up all across the province, and we are, by no stretch of the imagination, done hiking the carbon tax, which really has nothing to do with clean air or the environment. Eighty-five percent of the revenue collected by the carbon tax is just going into general revenue. It has absolutely nothing to do with environmental enhancement.

What else? Oh, parking sales tax. That’s been increased 3 percent or 15 percent, 15 cents an hour.

We’ve got a whole host of developmental cost charges for single-family dwelling units, duplex, townhouse dwelling units, apartment dwelling units, retail service, institutional, industrial, office and many, many more. Those are all going up.

Of course, because of everything else, particularly with the employers health tax, the typical homeowner is going to see a significant property tax increase, regardless of where in the province they happen to reside.

And never one to miss an opportunity, the government will be collecting a cannabis tax to add to their coffers.

Income tax has gone up, depending on one’s income threshold.

Corporate tax is going up, making things less competitive in British Columbia. Depending on the results on April 16 next door, things may be an awful lot less competitive, as British Columbia continues to be a more expensive place to do business, scaring away entrepreneurs, investment and capital. These are all very, very mobile.

We’ve got the ICBC unlisted driver premium, another $50 per year. I’m not exactly sure how that’s going to make life more affordable. We also have the ICBC learner premium. It’s going up, from $130 up to $230 a year, for young people. They’ll have to dig deeper, and they’ll just have to basically suck it up. Life is going to be a little less affordable for them as well.

What about the B.C. Hydro crisis fund? Each and every one of us, every single month, is obligated to finance….

Interjection.

J. Martin: We’ve got Powell River–Sunshine Coast with his singular skill set: interrupting, disruptive, making noise. Basically a kazoo with hair.

We’ve got the crisis fund: 25 cents a month on hydro.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

J. Martin: I’m happy to provide the information to my colleague for Powell River–Sunshine Coast.

We’re already looking ahead. This one may never come to pass. The per-trip ride-share fee. That’ll be a new one coming down the pike. Basically, 19, 20 or so new taxes or enhanced taxes, and we’re just getting started.

Right now, by the government’s own concession, British Columbians are working multiple jobs — at an all-time high. Almost 170,000 British Columbians have to work multiple jobs, and 36,400 jobs in the goods sector have been lost. Those jobs are gone, and they’re not coming back. Some of these have been offset by increases in the public sector, as we would expect.

We’ve lost 15,000 jobs in manufacturing. We’ve lost 13,000 jobs in real estate, rental and leasing. We’ve lost 9,600 jobs in construction. We’ve lost 8,700 jobs in retail. We’ve lost 8,300 jobs in motion picture and sound recording. We’ve lost 7,200 jobs in agriculture; 5,200 jobs in transportation and warehousing; 3,800 jobs gone in mining, coring, oil and gas extraction; 2,400 jobs long gone in accommodation and food service.

[10:25 a.m.]

Essentially, the GDP growth has slowed under the present administration: only 2.2 percent in 2019, compared to growth of well over 3 percent in years previous. The growth rate of GDP per capita will fall.

I will be happy to hear my friend across the aisle and look forward to his comments.

R. Kahlon: Well, I want to thank the member for Chilliwack for his opening comments on this motion.

Interjection.

R. Kahlon: Yeah, I did think it was a bit of an April Fool’s joke that he was talking about housing affordability the way he was. I woke up a little bit more optimistic than he did. And you know, I hope my optimism will rub off on him a little bit here.

We’re talking about affordability. Let’s talk about affordability. I know the member raised a lot of things. A lot of taxes, he says, are going up — by the way, a lot of them that they created. Carbon tax — I hate to remind him that it was their government that brought that in. And it was never revenue-neutral. People paid it, and they rarely saw anything come back. They did not even see a benefit for the environment. We’ll have that conversation. I’m sure that’s a motion for next week that we would love to have.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

R. Kahlon: I can’t believe that ICBC was even mentioned, because a $1.2 billion debt…. But again, we’re talking about affordability, so let’s talk about affordability. The elimination of the MSP premium — the single largest tax reduction in a generation.

A recent study just came out. Here’s a quote from a recent newspaper article: “To understand the effect of recent changes, we examined total provincial taxes paid by households at different income levels, including income tax, PST, MSP, tobacco and the carbon tax. The total share of household income is called the effective tax rate.”

What this study found was that most of the drop for the vast majority of households is due to the NDP government’s decision on elimination of MSP premiums. Now, this is the single largest tax cut in a generation for middle-class-income families. And this article happened to point out that for the last 16 years…. I won’t say which government was in power, because it’s supposed to be non-partisan. With the previous government, I’ll just say, the greatest benefit from their tax changes went to the richest 1 percent — the richest 1 percent.

When we’re having the debate in the House, I think it’s important to recognize: who are you fighting for? That’s a fundamental question. Who are we fighting for? Who is the opposition fighting for? MSP cuts for middle-class single families.

I spoke, at length, about the seniors couple in my community. When I knocked on their door, they invited me in to talk about how much MSP was hurting them when they had a fixed income. They had a thriving business. They just retired, and they were struggling with this, with a fixed income. They will see a great benefit for themselves.

You can’t talk about affordability without talking about housing. We have a housing crisis. It just didn’t happen overnight. It’s been happening from years of people saying: “Oh, well. You know, people will figure it out themselves. It’s a free market. If they don’t like it, they can go to wherever they’ve got to go to.” Well, that’s not good enough.

We’ve taken steps to address that. Just last week we heard from a member of this House saying we shouldn’t even have limits on how much rent increases can go up. “Free market,” he said. “Just let it go up as high as it can. People will sort it out.” That’s not affordability.

Interjection.

R. Kahlon: You know what? If the member from Kamloops has things to say, I hope he stands up and speaks on behalf of the things they’ve been doing.

The member spoke about child care, and he did it very eloquently. I won’t go too far into that. Again, the member for Chilliwack will know that many of his constituents have taken the bridge, now that it’s toll-free — a huge benefit for them; a huge benefit, in fact, for everybody that’s coming from south of Fraser, heading across the bridges. Because you know what? We’ve seen a huge decrease in congestion in all the bridges, around the way infrastructure is needed.

Interjection.

R. Kahlon: Again, the member from Kamloops woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning, and he’s decided to heckle me. I think the comment for the member for Chilliwack was appropriate for that member as well.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

R. Kahlon: Not to mention, when we’re talking about affordability, it’s about wages, as well, for workers. Wages have been stagnant in this province for almost a decade. Finally, people are starting to see wages go up to match the costs that have been going up in this province, to match the living costs that are increasing. So $15.10-an-hour minimum wage by 2021, helping 400,000 workers in this province — that is what makes life more affordable, an increase in wages.

[10:30 a.m.]

I know the member will talk about that 1 percent increase in carbon tax today as the thing that will drive prices, make more things unaffordable, but….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

R. Kahlon: I look forward to hearing the member across the way.

J. Martin: I thank my colleague. I always enjoy our Monday morning witty banter back and forth. It’s a good way to start the week.

However, the province has some troubling times ahead. The recent budget brought in by the government is planning for revenue and spending increases of roughly $6 billion over the next three years. This ends up being a per-capita tax increase of $1,100 or, basically, $2,500 per family over the next three years. I do not believe that’s an example of making life more affordable.

We’re going to be seeing a 26 percent increase in spending over the life of this government. This is money that hard-working British Columbians are going to have to turn over to the present administration. We’re adding $14½ billion in debt over the next three years — $14.5 billion, and $10 billion of this is taxpayer-supported. This will reach $82.4 billion by 2021. This is approaching a 90 percent debt-to-revenue ratio. This is risking our triple-A credit rating. This puts every British Columbian at risk in the very near future.

They’re talking about the increases to ICBC. What’s it going to cost to insure your vehicle in the coming months and years?

Carbon tax just increased to $50 a tonne. Anybody that hasn’t noticed yet will be well aware of it as soon as they go to gas up here in Victoria or when they get back to their riding. It’s worth noting that because this carbon tax is no longer revenue-neutral, British Columbians are being asked just to simply pay more at the pump, simply as a tax for government. We’re looking at $6 billion in revenue but just $900 million of it for CleanBC over three years — literally the proverbial drop in the bucket. The remaining 85 percent goes to general revenue. That is not making life more affordable.

Now, yes, the MSP elimination process is underway, something that the previous government initiated and the present government followed through with. Hats off to them for doing that. However, the phase-out is going to be incredibly expensive as the government goes through a 12-month experience of double-dipping, where they collect both the new tax and the MSP from employers as well. They are struggling with how to get through this. One of the things we’ve seen automatically is hikes to residential property taxes as city governments struggle to pay this double tax.

I thank you very much for my opportunity and look forward to next time.

SHIPBUILDING

B. Ma: I am pleased to rise today to speak in support of B.C.’s growing industrial marine sector, which includes over 900 companies that range in size from one-person owner-operators to businesses with over 2,000 employees. The industrial marine sector includes six subsectors: shipbuilding, refit and repair; small craft marine; marine products; ocean science and technology; marine industrial services; and marine professional services. These six subsectors together contributed approximately $1.16 billion to provincial GDP in 2016 and employed over 20,000 workers.

One of the most exciting subsectors is the one involved in shipbuilding, including refit and repair. There are 17 companies involved in this work in B.C., contributing nearly $100 million to provincial GDP and employing approximately 3,800 people. Growth in shipbuilding, refit and repair is expected to be approximately 18 percent over the next ten years.

The largest shipbuilder in B.C., and the biggest manufacturer in the Lower Mainland, is a company that operates in my riding of North Vancouver–Lonsdale. It’s called Seaspan. Tucked away at the end of Pemberton Avenue in North Vancouver, North Vancouver’s Seaspan shipyards is one of the sites of B.C.’s growing shipbuilding industry.

[10:35 a.m.]

As I hope the members of this House would know, shipbuilding is an industry that requires enormous investment to create. The skills, training, expertise, equipment and entire supply chains are unique to the industry, and it is not an industry that Canada is known for.

Now, I know members opposite are fond of poking fun at the fast ferries of the 1990s — problematic implementation and hull design or whatever it is that you might want to say about it. With all that aside, the concept of encouraging the creation of a local shipbuilding industry, rather than spending the money on offshore manufacturing, is a very good one. A recent report by PricewaterhouseCoopers, comparing the economic benefit to Canadians of building Canada’s next generation of combat ships at home versus building them abroad, found that for every $1 billion that Canadian governments spend buying ships, there is $800 million to $1.3 billion more benefit to the Canadian economy if the ships are built in Canada.

Pedro Antunes, who is the deputy chief economist with the Conference Board of Canada, said:

“The results are intuitive. Shipbuilding is big and labour-intensive. Building combat ships in Halifax rather than abroad will directly employ Nova Scotians and Canadians. Shipbuilding activities will drive demand across the supply chains — helping to lift employment and profits across a wide range of local and national industries. The direct and indirect lift to employment will bolster household income and spending and result in a subsequent round of economic activity — referred to as induced effects.”

The same can be said, of course, for ships being built in B.C., and the benefits are intuitive. I cannot keep count of how many times constituents have asked me why we can’t build our ferries or other large ships here. For now, the answer is largely that we don’t have the domestic shipbuilding capacity to be able to build them competitively here, though that is, hopefully, changing.

This is why in 2011, the government of Canada launched the national shipbuilding strategy, a long-term project to renew Canada’s federal fleet of combat and non-combat vessels while providing economic benefits to Canadians and rebuilding our country’s shipbuilding industry. Canada formed two partnerships with two Canadian shipyards to deliver much-needed vessels to the Royal Canadian Navy and the Canadian Coast Guard. One of these partnerships was with Irving Shipbuilding in Nova Scotia for a $25 billion combat work project. The other was with Seaspan Marine Corp. in British Columbia for the $8 billion non-combat work project.

Under the promise of the federal government’s national shipbuilding strategy, Seaspan set to work to revitalize the shipbuilding industry on the west coast, investing $200 million of their own money in preparation for the task of building science vessels, support ships and patrol vessels. Today 2,300 British Columbians have jobs at Seaspan, directly and indirectly, because of the national shipbuilding strategy and its 20- to 30-year-long program, which was anticipated to bring in the much-needed stability and predictability of investment that an industry as specialized as shipbuilding needs to create the long-term capacity required to thrive.

Unfortunately, in recent years, concerns about the federal government’s commitment to the national shipbuilding strategy have started to bubble up. A shipyard in Quebec has been lobbying the federal government to break away from the original intent of the national shipbuilding strategy, potentially opening the door to taking away work that was promised to British Columbia’s and Nova Scotia’s burgeoning industries during critical stages of its development.

Now, I should pause and make one thing clear. The national shipbuilding strategy is a federal program; it is not a provincial program. However, as a local MLA whose riding currently hosts many of the jobs and apprenticeships that may be at risk if the national shipbuilding strategy is not adhered to, this is an issue that is important to me.

I am not an expert in shipbuilding, nor am I a federal Member of Parliament, who might have better insight into what is happening with the national shipbuilding strategy. As a local MLA, I can say that I am hearing from my community that people are concerned that the federal government will not follow through on their commitment to award non-combat ships to B.C., which may spell disaster for the ability of British Columbia’s shipbuilding industry to continue to mature and stabilize.

[10:40 a.m.]

It is my sincere hope that the federal government will help ease the concerns that have been growing over the last several years by reaffirming their intention to honour the national shipbuilding strategy and ensuring that the work to build Canadian non-combat ships that were supposed to come to British Columbia do, in fact, come here.

R. Sultan: We have a lot of history in shipbuilding. Between ’42 and ’44 — that’s a long time ago — British Columbia yards produced 230 oceangoing merchant vessels of 1½ million gross tonnage. That works out to one deep-water freighter being launched every week and a half, three years in succession.

We built well over half of Canada’s merchant fleet of the day. That boom collapsed, of course. But today, as my colleague from North Vancouver–Lonsdale has emphasized, shipbuilding and repair are going strong. Vancouver and Rupert are now major, major North American ports, and after a long nap, Canada is slowly beginning to realize its global defence, security and ocean research obligations, which means rebuilding our worn-out fleets.

Seaspan shipyards is, indeed, a good case in point. In Victoria and North America, Seaspan employs approximately 2,300 people. It’s one of our largest manufacturing employers. These are good, high-paying union jobs. Seaspan has invested, as again my colleague has confirmed, a number approaching a quarter of a billion dollars — a quarter of a billion, almost, of its own money to modernize its shipbuilding capacity in North Vancouver and Victoria. Its British Columbia supply base includes over 400 companies working for Seaspan under the national shipbuilding strategy alone, on subcontracts worth in excess of $375 million.

In 2018, Seaspan facilities were the training ground for 225 apprentices and 75 interns. Seaspan has invested over $6 million in trades-training schools, colleges and universities to attract and train the needed generation of shipbuilding tradespeople and professionals.

The rebirth of this industry on the west coast and Seaspan’s investments in it are, indeed, a direct result of the federal government’s selection of Seaspan as its long-term strategic partner to recapitalize the Canadian Coast Guard’s larger vessels and build non-combat supply vessels for the Canadian navy.

Seaspan is invested in and committed to the federal government’s shipbuilding program. It’s good for Canada, it’s good for British Columbia, it’s good for the industry’s workforce, and it’s certainly good for the future generations of shipbuilders coming along.

New welding technologies, new modular ways to assemble our ships and new control and communications technologies must be incorporated. One shipbuilder told me that building a new navy vessel resembles more assembling a Swiss watch, not the metal-bashing and riveting I personally witnessed in my neighbourhood many, many decades ago.

It takes time and money to train the required expertise. Yet Canada’s initial west coast program of work includes only seven vessels, of which four are prototypes, not the 20 to 30 years’ worth of work originally envisaged under the national program and on the basis of which Seaspan invested so much money.

Furthermore, there is no clarity from the federal government of what future work can be expected for the west coast. We must communicate more clearly to Ottawa British Columbia’s need to remove the uncertainty surrounding this important source of technology and jobs. Ottawa should announce a long-term program of work for the west coast, as originally envisaged under the national shipbuilding strategy.

I believe this Legislative Assembly and this government should mend its federal fences and send a clear and urgent message to Ottawa that shipbuilding is very important to British Columbia, and we expect our national government to honour the promises made to North Vancouver and to Victoria.

[10:45 a.m.]

Finally, let’s not be so naive as to believe that fighting Ottawa in the courts, using all available tools, doesn’t have consequences.

B. Ma: I’m very grateful for the words expressed by my colleague across the way from West Vancouver–Capilano. The value of having a major manufacturing industry like shipbuilding in British Columbia is clearly appreciated by both sides of the B.C. Legislature. I think that it would be fair of me to say that we all hope the federal government hears us and responds in a way that adequately eases the concerns that we have been hearing about the reports that we’re getting from our communities and ensures that the federal government carries out its commitment so that B.C. can continue to build its burgeoning shipbuilding industry.

MORE TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS

P. Milobar: It gives me pleasure to rise to speak to the availability of more transportation options in British Columbia. I think we can all recognize — and this House, certainly, I think, acknowledges — that as British Columbia continues to grow — and there’s no dispute about our future growth patterns that we are seeing — we’re going to need more and more transportation options, especially in our more urbanized areas.

The road networks, the core fundamental lanes of travel — when you look in a downtown Vancouver, downtown Victoria, or even downtown Kamloops, Kelowna or Prince George setting — are pretty much set in stone in terms of their width because of the built environment around them. So we really do need to encourage the most robust transportation options possible in our province.

I think back to projects that, fortunately, the majority in this House obviously supported. Unfortunately, a great many in this House, at the time, didn’t support projects like the Coquihalla; projects like the Sea to Sky Highway; projects like the Massey Tunnel replacement, which we’ve now seen put on hold; projects like the Port Mann Bridge and the widening of Highway 1 out into the valley; projects like the Perimeter Road, which definitely makes a big difference as you’re heading east and west trying to get across, down in the Lower Mainland, between Surrey and down all the way to the Delta and Tsawwassen areas.

Of course, who can forget the Canada Line? People definitely did not have a unified view in this House around the Canada Line. A great many, actually, spoke very strongly against many of these projects. I guess for a short time, for four years, there were only two members speaking out against this. But certainly, over the life of all of these projects, there’s no doubt that there’s at least been the majority that supported them and, thankfully, got them started and well underway, I guess except for the Massey Bridge, where we now just see piles of sand stacked up at the side of the road instead of construction happening.

We need to recognize that the times have changed. This is not the 1950s anymore. Certainly, the public demand and want transportation options. They want to make sure that they can get around their communities in the most effective way possible — recognizing that, with technology, with advancements, things have changed. We now have electric bikes. No one would have dreamed of that back in the 1950s, yet you can see people easily….

In my community of Kamloops, where it’s quite hilly, one of the impediments to more bike riding was the fact that going down was great fun, but coming back home, not so much. Now with electric bikes, that’s made it much simpler for people to still be able to get the health benefits of biking and be able to move around. Yet they want to do it safely, and they want to do it in an environment that’s safe.

Then you start looking at what actually keeps people safe. What keeps people safe are safety advancements around real, tangible things — things like seatbelt laws, which, back in the ’50s, didn’t exist. Certainly, they’ve gone a long way to keeping people safe. The reason I keep referencing the ’50s is because that’s essentially what we’re dealing with when we look at things around transportation companies — companies that, for a fee, will provide you with transportation, be it buses….

[10:50 a.m.]

We’re seeing a great change with Greyhound leaving and great gaps in service. We need to figure that out. We need to make sure that people in the rural areas, especially on the north-south corridors, are actually seeing a chance and an opportunity to be able to take transportation options that don’t require their private car. We also see that reflecting in legislation around taxi services and provision of for-hire rides. Certainly, people want to make sure those are safe. Certainly, people want to make sure that they feel secure in those.

I think the average travelling public member would agree that there need to be criminal record checks — I think everyone on this side of House certainly agrees with that — and that there need to be regular safety checks on the vehicle to make sure that those vehicles are operating in a safe fashion and that they’re mechanically sound.

When you say public safety for a fee-for-hire ride, that’s what people are talking about. Those are the types of checks that they’re wanting to see in place. Those are the types of checks that I think everyone in this House totally agrees with. But when you start looking at the difference between a class 4 and a class 5 driver’s licence, that doesn’t actually come into play. That’s not part of the class 4 and the class 5, when we’re talking safety.

With class 4, when you look at the old, old legislation that is there — yes, it allows you to drive a taxi and limos. I think people can understand that if a car the size of a limo, a stretch limo, needed to get through crowded streets, of course there needs to be a little extra training with that. That’s not a usual car that people would usually be driving. Between turning radiuses and blind spots and those types of things, of course you would want some extra training for someone driving a longer limo. But a taxi is typically the size of a compact car that all of us drive with a class 5 licence.

None of us, unless you’re a paramedic, drive ambulances, yet you need a class 4 licence for that. So essentially, we’re saying that if you want to get a for-hire vehicle, you need to make sure that person can drive an ambulance. You need to make sure that person can drive a vehicle with not more than ten persons in it.

Again, the interesting part, though, is that class 4 actually says you can drive any vehicle in class 5. So, by virtue…. We’ve already admitted that a class 5 vehicle is a smaller vehicle. It’s easier to handle. The person driving a class 4 ambulance can easily hop into their personal vehicle and drive around. There should be no greater safety to the public, because that person is now driving their private vehicle, whether or not someone’s in that vehicle.

In the interest of public safety, around Christmastime we have this thing called Operation Red Nose around the province. A great success in Kamloops. People driving those vehicles have class 5 licences. They’re picking people up. They’re driving them home in their private vehicle. They’re driving them with class 5, because people know they have proper insurance.

Again, with safety, we want to make sure there’s a proper insurance regime. We want to make sure there are criminal record checks. We want to make sure that the vehicle is mechanically sound. None of those are required for class 4. None of those are actually required for class 5. That’s why that would be wanting to make sure that the public understands that when they hire a driver for a vehicle, the company has had to go through those regulatory hurdles…. That is absolutely understandable. Having an arbitrary class of licence which requires a much longer time frame does not make sense.

I’ll finish up with my last three minutes after I hear from the members opposite.

R. Leonard: Thank you to the member for Kamloops–​North Thompson for presenting an opportunity to talk about more transportation options. Transportation covers a diversity of options for getting from point A to point B and covering a wide variety of circumstances, and sometimes options devolve into necessity.

I’m only one of thousands of people who really have no transportation option but to drive great distances for their work. But even when travelling the ribbons of highways, there are options to be considered. Whether moving goods or people, we all have a responsibility to do our part to reduce our carbon footprint. The biggest chunk of our day-to-day contribution to greenhouse gas emissions is from our travel. There are options like filling your tank with cleaner renewable fuels or buying a vehicle that runs cleaner or even purchasing a zero-emission vehicle.

Thankfully, CleanBC programs are on the horizon to help us make a big difference with our choices, reducing greenhouse gases by a third of our overall reduction targets in British Columbia with programs to increase the supply of cleaner renewable fuels and make those fuels even cleaner by doubling the amount of low-carbon, locally sourced biofuels. Then there’s requiring automakers to reduce tailpipe emissions and to offer more zero-emission vehicles.

[10:55 a.m.]

Beginning with this incentive program, setting milestones for ever-increasing greenhouse gas reduction targets means that automakers will have the room to offer a greater choice of vehicles at competitive prices to serve the diverse driving needs in B.C.

Vehicular travel is one of our transportation options, and it is an expensive option. On top of capital and operations, there are added costs for parking and other hidden costs. For some people, it means that they simply can’t afford a vehicle. But people still need to move around. Thankfully, there are a number of options.

There are more affordable options that also include vehicles. There’s the old standby, car-pooling, which helps defray costs of vehicle ownership and has the by-product of reducing greenhouse gases by reducing the number of vehicles on the road. An interesting innovation has been cooperative car-sharing. That’s successful where there’s a population threshold to support it, again reducing the number of vehicles on the road.

Then, avoiding the capital cost of buying a car, there are taxis. As more people ditch the idea of owning a car or want to avoid certain trips, soon there will be ride-hailing provincewide. App-based ride-hailing jumped into a void in many cities throughout the world, and after the fact, jurisdictions are trying to wrangle this private service into something that better serves the public.

Our government is being praised for working to get it right going in, regulating this new transportation service. The Minister of Transportation will be working to promote flexibility around key issues of supply, boundaries and pricing to prepare for the introduction of ride-hailing this fall while maintaining her commitment to a safe new transportation sector.

But there’s even more impactful transportation beyond cars. Public transit can move people around more affordably, and it means less congestion on the roads. This government is working to green the province’s fleets of buses, switching more buses to electricity and compressed natural gas.

To get more people out of their cars, transit services need to be regular, frequent and easily accessible. Our government is funding more bus service, with $6 million over three years for 40,000 more hours in 20 communities. In large urban centres, people can look forward to greater transit options that get people to where they need to go, faster.

Our government has also stepped up to make sure the needs of people travelling across rural and remote communities are served by buses, since communities across B.C. were abandoned by Greyhound. And as of today, we’ve restored ferry service on the majority of ferry routes cut in 2014 to meet the needs of island communities up and down the coast.

Active transportation — walking, scooter users, cyclists and all the myriad of other alternatives — are getting attention too, with $6 million for initiatives to grow this transportation sector as well as a myriad of infrastructure improvements to roads and bridges for vehicular traffic. You can see that people everywhere are getting the attention they deserve to have more access to more safe, reliable and affordable transportation options.

P. Milobar: I thank the member for her comments. I look forward to seeing the report of the study of the impact of the 2,700 round-trip ferry sailings on the orca population in the area.

The member mentioned cooperative ride-sharing. That’s a great way to see friends, neighbours and community members, making sure they’re sharing a vehicle and getting around. I would note that none of those people require a class 4 driver’s licence to do that in a safe and efficient manner to make sure that people are getting from point A to point B.

Again, times have changed, and we need to recognize that. A lot of times we hear Alberta held up as an example because of class 4 licensing requirements for things like transportation network companies. I would point out that Alberta was one of the first provinces to bring the rules in, so that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s working very well.

I would point out that in this day and age, when we’re looking at equal employment opportunities, trying to get equal pay for female employees in every walk of life and every form of employment, with the class 4 licence, Alberta actually sees the lowest percentage of female drivers of any province. In fact, only 5 percent of the drivers in Alberta are female. That ties in to public safety around more transportation options.

Public safety cuts across a wide swath of things. We’ve covered off criminal record checks and maintenance of vehicles and insurance being in place. But what about the travelling public’s need to feel safe? That requires timely service. So a young female….

[11:00 a.m.]

I have mid-20-year-old daughters. I would not like them standing around waiting at two o’clock in the morning for hours on end to wait for taxis.

[J. Isaacs in the chair.]

I’ve experienced this firsthand as a former bar and nightclub operator. There are a very long waits. That’s a part of public safety that doesn’t get talked about too much by this government, and it’s unfortunate, because it really should. It’s critical to that.

The member also mentioned scooters. There is an explosion of medical scooters happening. In fact, in Kamloops, we had to start dealing with this in terms of transportation corridors around seniors homes because as we see more and more medical scooters on the road, it is a problem. It’s a problem with respect to the width of the travel area.

Not that seniors want to try to get around…. I think it’s great that seniors are finding ways to be more mobile and get around in their community. Unfortunately, with this government, I can see them thinking that’s a safety risk, and we’re probably going to require drivers of medical scooters to start getting a class 4 driver’s licence to make sure they’re not a risk to the travelling public because they are interacting with cars. They are interacting on the sidewalks, and they’re interacting on the shoulder lanes around bike lanes and whatnot.

Really, what we need to see here is a more comprehensive look at what actually is public safety — not clinging to this antiquated view that you need to be able to drive an ambulance to be able to drive an Uber car or a Lyft car.

Thank you for this time today, Madam Speaker.

Hon. J. Sims: I would like that the House consider proceeding with Motion 5 standing in the name of the member for Burnaby North.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed with Motion 5 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 5 — OPPOSITION
TO WHITE SUPREMACY

J. Routledge: It’s with a heavy weight of responsibility that I rise to move the motion:

[Be it resolved that this House stand united in its opposition to white supremacy.]

This is not an easy topic, and I thank the members on both sides of the House who are participating this morning.

Let me begin by acknowledging that we are gathered on the traditional territory of the Lkwungen-speaking people. While I embrace this acknowledgement as protocol, I also say it to remind myself that my people, white people of British heritage, did not in fact get here first and that our culture is not the standard by which all others are judged.

Now, you may be thinking: “Well, that’s just common sense.” But in fact, it has not always been the common sense. In fact, my sense of self and place has been woven into place with many threads — threads like the mostly pink map of the world on display in classrooms when I was growing up. Why pink? To identify the Commonwealth countries that were former British colonies.

In Sunday school, we learned that European missionaries came to this continent to civilize the people who were here already. My high school textbooks were full of stereotypes of brave, hard-working pioneers who carved a nation out of the wilderness. And at home, I was taught to be proud that some of those pioneers were my ancestors.

There wasn’t much in my lived, day-to-day experiences to counter this common sense. The community where I grew up was entirely white. And my point is this: ethnocentricity, or the dog-whistle notion that one’s culture is the centre of the universe, is the root from which white supremacy grows. And grow it has done.

In 2017, there were 100 white nationalist groups in the United States. By 2018, there were 148. According to Stats Canada, hate crimes are on the rise in this country too. More than 2,000 were reported in 2017 — almost double the number that was reported three years earlier.

We know that white supremacists are becoming bolder here in B.C. They are rallying against immigration, and they are running candidates in elections. If we’ve been oblivious to it — and apparently, only two out of five Canadians think white supremacy has become worse in the last two years — then the recent massacre in Christchurch, New Zealand, by a self-proclaimed white supremacist, should have been a wake-up call. It was certainly what compelled me to move this motion.

What does it mean to say we stand united against white supremacy? For me, it means we politicians need to acknowledge its existence.

Yes, Andrew Scheer and Maxime Bernier, I’m talking about you.

[11:05 a.m.]

We need to acknowledge that white supremacist terrorism is every bit the twin of jihadist terrorism and that it, too, can radicalize. It, too, can inspire murderous hate — maybe even more so — because it continues to benefit from the denial of opinion-makers who refuse to see it as a global threat.

We need to be mindful of how our words and actions may feed and validate someone else’s hate. We need to ask ourselves: whose role models are we? The Christchurch shooter used the words “invasion” and “invader” 53 times in his manifesto.

Too many politicians around the world are cashing in on intolerance, so let us agree not to appeal to that base in our race for political power. Speaking of agreeing, the speed with which the members on both sides of this aisle came together last week to expose an outdated dress code for women was truly remarkable. Can we agree to at least have a discussion about how the tone of discourse in this chamber may influence what is considered acceptable discourse by the public?

Finally, we need to face the fact that there is a direct line between declining expectations and the rise of white supremacy. Have we learned nothing from the rise of Nazism in 1930s Germany when people turned on each other to explain why 30 percent of them were unemployed? Isn’t that what Trump’s wall is all about today?

I’d like to think we’re choosing a different path in B.C. Our poverty reduction plan, our defence of public health care, our commitment to affordable child care and housing and to accessible education — all represent a commitment to social and economic stability. Therefore, it denies hate-based politics the opportunity to establish a foothold.

J. Thornthwaite: Thank you, hon. Speaker, for the opportunity to show my unwavering support for this motion. I know that all members of this House take a united stance against discrimination and intolerance based on race, religion or gender. It is an unfortunate truth that so many of us have come face to face with bigotry or discrimination.

On a national scale, Canada is known as a cultural mosaic, and I am privileged enough to see evidence of that here in British Columbia. Unfortunately, though, there are still persistent dissenting voices that try to disrupt the peaceful coexistence of our cultural mosaic. These voices strive to divide people based on difference rather than unity. It is saddening to see that even in this modern age of technology, where the world is getting smaller and we are all able to see glimpses of other people’s lives and cultures, there still are people who choose to stand divided.

Hate sites like 8chan have renewed the debate over the power of the Internet and whether sites that harbour white supremacist violence should face the same depth of government scrutiny that Islamic terrorist chat rooms do.

There was an article in the Vancouver Sun: “Terrorism experts say U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies have been reluctant to treat white supremacists and right-wing groups as terrorist organizations because they typically include Americans among their ranks, creating complex legal and political issues.” It’s a thorny topic for Facebook and Twitter. When they “blocked white supremacist content after the Charlottesville riots in 2017,” it was “a watershed moment that sparked debate about censorship.”

In spite of all this interconnectedness, there has been a tendency to forget that we are all human. We all have the same DNA. We all love, hurt, laugh and feel pain, and we are more the same than we are different. In these times of uncertainty, we need to stand together, not apart.

Somehow history is repeating itself, allowing intolerance in our society to remain prevalent. An alarming amount of hate speech is firing out of the mouths of public figures, being rapidly fired off of an anonymous keyboard and being spat in people’s faces. We need to do a better job because of these senseless tragedies that started the horrific one in Christchurch, New Zealand. This unspeakable act resulted in the deaths of at least 48 people in a place where they should be safe and free to practise their religion. And for what? For a different religious view, or because someone is different?

[11:10 a.m.]

This senseless tragedy has truly shaken me to the core, and I cannot fathom the pain that the victims’ loved ones must be feeling. Condolences are not enough. We need to make a change. We need to stand together, person to person and neighbour to neighbour, and start making changes to ensure that we create a world in which everyone feels safe, a world where people are proud of their heritage and not afraid to showcase aspects of their culture and their religion and that they’re proud of it.

In the words of Jacinda Ardern, who is the Prime Minister of New Zealand: “Racism exists, but it is not welcome here. An assault on the freedom of any one of us who practises their faith or religion is not welcome here. Violence, and extremism in all its forms, is not welcome here.”

I know that both sides of the House can be united in the pursuit of tolerance and acceptance. Let’s continue to work together to make the world a better place.

J. Brar: I fully support the motion introduced by the member for Burnaby North. The motion reads: “Be it resolved that this House stand united in its opposition to white supremacy.” We are one human family, and in a perfect world, people of different religions and cultures should live in complete peace and harmony. Sadly, that is not the case.

When the flames of hatred are fanned, when people are targeted because of their faith, when people’s fears are played on rather than addressed, the consequences are deadly, as we have seen, so sadly, in New Zealand.

The recent terror attack in New Zealand has left some of us thinking about hate crime in B.C. and questioning what can be done to help prevent its rise here. A recent article in the Vancouver Sun says that a police report indicates that “hate crime in Canada had been on the rise for a few years before taking a sharp upswing in 2017.” There were 2,073 reported incidents in 2017, “up from 1,295 in 2014, 1,362 in 2015 and 1,409 in 2016. The biggest increases in 2017 were in crimes related to race, ethnicity and religion.”

Clearly, hate crime is on the rise. More has to be done to promote the coexistence of different religions and cultures. We, the members of this House, are the leaders, and we must take this very seriously. We must stand together with the people around the world for the elimination of racial discrimination and honour the strength and courage of people of B.C., Canada and around the world who experience and confront racism everyday.

The devastating acts of terrorism in New Zealand remind us that all members of this House must stand together against racism, white supremacy, Islamophobia that are being used by cowardly people as tools for political gains. While we celebrate the value of diversity, inclusion and mutual respect, we must strongly condemn the deeply troubling rise of hatred, nationalist populism and extreme racist ideology around the globe.

We must learn from our past mistakes as well. There were times when groups of people were systematically excluded in this country as well. The Chinese head tax, the internment of Japanese Canadians, attempts to forcibly assimilate Indigenous people and sending back the Komagata Maru ship to India are some of the examples.

I must say that we have made real progress in this province and in this country, but more needs to be done. Therefore, today and every day we must use our voices and platforms to speak out against racism, prejudice and intolerance.

Our government is taking action to make sure everyone in B.C. is treated with dignity and respect. We are in the process of appointing a new human rights commissioner to protect and to promote human rights and create a more inclusive and just society for all British Columbians.

[11:15 a.m.]

We are proud of the diverse and inclusive province we are so lucky to live in, a province built by our ancestors on the fundamental principles of justice, fairness and equal opportunity for all British Columbians and a province blessed by our diverse people who made this province a model of freedom, peace and democracy. Every day is a day to celebrate how far we have come, but it also an opportunity to remember how far we have to go.

We need to continue to fight racism and discrimination and ensure our communities are welcoming for everyone. We have to work together to build a more fair, more just and more equal society. Only with love can we stop hate. Only with compassion can we understand that we are all the same. Our government will always stand up for equality, defend human rights and work every day to make B.C. a better place for everyone who lives in our beautiful province.

J. Yap: I am pleased to address the motion to stand united against white supremacy today, but honestly, this is deeply saddening to me. We’re in 2019, and there is no place for such a toxic ideology in our cities, in our province, in our country. This motion needs to serve as a furious condemnation of the ideas that this ideology pushes and the misery that it has caused throughout history.

Before going any further, I want to offer my sincerest condolences to the people of New Zealand, especially those who lost family members in the recent act of terrorism that took place at two mosques in Christchurch. Places of worship are supposed to be sanctuaries for communities. To see that shattered is painful. It’s especially hard to see such violence in a peaceful, prosperous and diverse country like New Zealand. It reminds me of my own community, Richmond, the most diverse in British Columbia, and it shows us that we need to stay vigilant, no matter where we are.

Richmond is a fast-growing community that attracts people from all around the world. Every year 40,000 new immigrants arrive in British Columbia, with Richmond having the highest proportion of immigrants nation-wide. It also makes Richmond a very ethnically diverse community where more than 76 percent of the population is a visible minority. This is why it is all the more important to talk about standing together against the scourge of white supremacy.

On March 21, we just celebrated the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The theme in 2019 is “Mitigation and countering rising nationalist populism and extreme supremacist ideologies.” This is a time we should all work together “to repair the fissures and polarizations that are so prevalent in our society today.” So said UN Secretary-General António Guterres. Indeed, it is a timely reflection of the challenges and dangers we are facing today.

For us, multiculturalism is integral to the prosperity, culture and identity of British Columbia. Nonetheless, as we have heard from other members, white supremacy is part of our history. I don’t think it’s controversial to say that B.C. has not always been the vibrant, multicultural land of opportunity that it is today. Policies like the head tax on Chinese immigrants, the refusal to allow the Punjabi immigrants aboard the Komagata Maru to land in Vancouver, and the internment of Japanese Canadians during World War II are but a few of the examples of how this province used to treat its minority populations. This is to say nothing of the experiences of Indigenous people with the residential schools.

Many of B.C.’s heroes are people who broke through these barriers. Last week I rose in the House to honour the life of the first Chinese Canadian accepted into the Royal Canadian Air Force, Thomas Wong. Thomas’s service and the contributions of his Chinese-Canadian contemporaries were instrumental in securing equal rights for Asian Canadians. When we are faced with the spectre of hatred, it can be comforting to think about how people like Thomas were able to stare it down and come out on top.

I want to conclude by speaking on a more hopeful note. There are so many great multicultural initiatives happening in Richmond and all around B.C.

[11:20 a.m.]

We have organizations such as SUCCESS, which has done great work in immigrant settlement and community development and contributed to promoting multiculturalism and social integration. We should keep those services in the back of our minds as intolerance shows us how important these institutions are.

We need to take this moment both to decry hatred in all its forms and to strengthen the organizations and institutions that help us guard against it. These organizations are the great bulwark against intolerance. There’s a lot more to do to stamp out the conduct of violent white supremacists. It’s up to each of us, every one of us, to uphold our commitment to equality and mutual respect.

R. Singh: I would like to thank the member for Burnaby North for bringing this motion. As my colleagues have already talked about, it is so timely, and it is very important to talk about this issue. In light of the 15th of March shootings in the Christchurch mosques that left 50 people dead, we must be more vigilant to deal with the growing threat of white supremacy.

We all know that the man who did it was a white supremacist whose connection with alt-right movements in Austria and in Canada must now be taken seriously. It is worth mentioning that these things are not just happening in other parts of the world. We in Canada have also witnessed this menace. Not too long ago, in 2017, six worshippers were killed in Quebec City, and the man who committed this crime had influenced the individual involved in the Christchurch shootings. In 1998, neo-Nazis killed a temple-keeper in a gurdwara in my own community of Surrey.

White supremacy, therefore, continues to exist and poses a threat to peace everywhere in the world. It is rather unfortunate that several politicians all over the world continue to give legitimacy to white extremism by scapegoating the minorities and the immigrants. This has obviously emboldened these elements.

We, as leaders, must provide strong leadership to deal with this crisis. I really want to applaud the Prime Minister of New Zealand for displaying extraordinary leadership under these circumstances. We need to learn from her how to stand up for the communities that are being victimized today because of their religion and ethnicity and also how to stand against bigotry.

By acknowledging that racism does exist in her country, although the Christchurch shooting suspect is of Australian origin, she has shown how important it is to look into the mirror and find fault among ourselves rather than conveniently putting the blame elsewhere. That’s why it is important for all of us to get down to work and start working to keep our communities safe.

As has already been mentioned, Statistics Canada shows that hate crimes are on the rise, not just in Canada but also in our province. This is really, really disheartening.

I made Canada my home. I came here as an immigrant in 2001. One of the reasons that I did so, that I chose Canada, was because of multiculturalism and how people were being accepted in Canada. I would say that since coming here, I have felt very safe. I have been accepted in the community, and I have achieved a lot in this country.

When we hear about these incidents of hate, when we come to know about them, we should take them seriously. Just thinking that it is Canada, a multicultural country, and that we are all safe here…. It is time to take some action. Our multiculturalism — we cannot take it for granted. We have to work, as we know, as the member for Surrey-Fleetwood mentioned.

We have seen the history of racism here in Canada also. Our pioneers who came here, our elders, have worked towards creating the country, creating the nation that is so tolerant, that accepts people for what they are. But what we have achieved — we cannot just let it go. We have to be very, very cognizant of what is happening around us. As leaders and as members of this Legislature, we should be taking steps to protect this multiculturalism and to take strong actions against any kind of hate.

[11:25 a.m.]

I really feel that the steps our government is taking are the steps to, in fact, encourage more multiculturalism and integration and more connections between communities.

One thing that has already been mentioned is that we are bringing back the Human Rights Commission. I was very sad to see that in a province like B.C…. We were the only province that did not have it. Bringing it back is very important for our younger generation — to educate them, to tell them about what creates these differences and, with the fears that the younger generation or the communities have, to abate those fears and to create the scenario and the education so that they get to learn and know about other communities. I think the Human Rights Commission will go a long way in that.

I will take my seat.

M. Lee: I also rise today to speak in favour of the motion that this House stand united in its opposition to white supremacy. All members of this House must stand united in opposition to all forms of hate, violence and bigotry. It is truly regrettable that we would even need such a motion in this House, but last month the world was rocked yet again by another senseless massacre motivated by hatred, ignorance and fear of others.

The day following the horrific murders of Muslims in Christchurch, New Zealand, I joined with Muslims and other members of our community to attend a vigil at the Al Jamia mosque in Vancouver. The tremendous outpouring of love and support that I saw and experienced there for Muslims — and everyone, really — was nothing short of humbling. Members of our community from all walks of life showed up to condemn the hatred and to offer whatever support they could have. In a time of tragedy and mourning, it was a tangible and real display of support.

Sending thoughts and prayers or sharing a hashtag is a well-intentioned show of support. But unfortunately, it’s not enough. Time and time again when confronted with the horrors that people are able to inflict on others, we jump to condemn it. We share our genuine sympathies with those suffering and with all who knew the victims. Then after a few weeks, the world moves on.

In spite of the abject terror so universally condemned, we return to our normal lives without addressing the causes that lead to such tragedies, until, in a few months or weeks, it happens all over again — another city, another country, another senseless series of deaths. We are so quick to distance ourselves from the perpetrators of hate crimes by labelling them monsters, inhuman. But they are human — human beings who, whether through mental illness, goading or radicalization, commit the most vile acts of hatred, ignorance and fear.

Because they are human, all members of this House have a collective responsibility to address this. We all have a role to play in combatting violence and bigotry — to counter it when we see it in person and on line; to encourage the sharing of different cultures, religions and views; to teach compassion, respect and understanding; and to not return the hate.

Hate crimes are on the rise in Europe and North America. Part of that increase is because hatred has platforms where fear and convoluted ideas grow unchallenged. The Internet and social media, coupled with the politics of division, are breeding grounds for hatred. As elected representatives and politicians, every one of us in this House has an even greater responsibility not to fall into the traps of the politics of division. We need to focus on the common good and on what unites us.

Scapegoating certain groups helps no one and sends a message that such things are acceptable. It stokes the coals of ignorance, resentment and hatred. Sadly, we see that all the time, both here in Canada and south of the border: the blaming of refugees, immigrants or foreigners for our domestic problems.

[11:30 a.m.]

We are better than this. As elected representatives and politicians, we are given a greater platform than most. Therefore, we must be accountable for our rhetoric. It is only through education and respect that we can truly move forward.

There is still so much work to be done. It’s easy to take out the responsibility and shift blame to others, targeting individuals because of their last name, what they own or the colour of their skin. I’ve seen it firsthand in personal conflicts and political conflicts. But if we temper and balance our tone and call out all forms of discrimination, focus on fostering greater understanding and respect and work together, then we can make some progress on this front, and perhaps someday a motion such as this will be wholly unnecessary.

That’s a society I want my children and everyone’s children to inherit and live in, and we each have a responsibility to help us all get there.

M. Dean: Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of this motion.

People have been tragically and unnecessarily killed and harmed because of white supremacy. It is a major issue globally and here in B.C.

Police reported that hate crime in Canada has been steadily increasing over recent years, with a noticeable increase in 2017 and with the biggest rises being crimes related to race, ethnicity and religion. This is a dangerous issue that needs to be addressed, and having people in positions of leadership speak out and name the issue of white supremacy is action that we can take here in this House. While here in B.C., we can celebrate the values of diversity, inclusion and mutual respect, we also strongly condemn the deeply troubling rise of hatred, nationalist populism and extreme racist ideologies around the globe and in our neighbourhoods. We must take action and eradicate it.

White supremacy is the assumed superiority of people defined and perceived as white. It is a fundamental premise that points white as the standard and everything else as deviant. As Robin DiAngelo says: “This system rests on the historical and current accumulation of structural power that privileges, centralizes and elevates white people as a group.”

Let us recognize that white populations built and dominate current significant institutions, often at the expense of and on the backs of other exploited groups. Yet we need to integrate the experiences and perspectives of all British Columbians, whatever racial, ethnic or religious identity and status we have. We must call out white supremacy, halt the hate, stop the violence.

I was deeply honoured to be asked to speak at the Inclusion Project at the weekend. This wonderful conference engaged a truly diverse group of stakeholders in critical conversations about the issues of diversity, equity and inclusiveness across civil society, public and private sectors.

We were privileged to hear from young individuals such as Fillette, a Camosun psychology student who was born and raised in a refugee camp in Malawi, and Dansowaa, a Ghanaian student at Pearson College. They both challenged the crowd to recognize how white is seen as prime and default and black and other are devalued. Dansowaa highlighted how the room held more black people in one place than she had seen in her whole two years in British Columbia.

One key message we took away is that we can and we must all act, personally and collectively. In B.C., we must recognize that this is also particularly true in relation to Indigenous peoples. Taking, for example, violence against women and people who identify as women as an indicator, Indigenous women are three times more likely to be victims of violence, and those violent situations are eight times more likely to end in homicide. This deplorable trend arises from patriarchal and discriminatory legislation that led to historical and ongoing oppression in residential schools and systemic racism and sexism.

[11:35 a.m.]

I hear regularly from Indigenous women of their stories of being abused and exploited and not being believed. Indigenous women of all ages get propositioned for sexually exploiting acts any time of any day. So we need to take action, and we need to be led by the people who are directly impacted by white supremacy.

In June, I’m delighted to have been invited by the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs women’s representative to join the Indigenous women’s innovation planning session, which will also include women leaders from other Indigenous leadership groups.

We’ll identify more actions that can be taken, and we’ll add to the actions that have been taken to date, including our government’s commitment to reconciliation and implementing the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples and the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission; working with the Minister’s Advisory Council on Indigenous Women; implementing GBA+, which will help government better understand the impacts of government policy and programs for marginalized, racialized and Indigenous groups across the province; and appointing a new Human Rights Commissioner.

Individually and collectively, we must act, eradicate white supremacy and build a province of acceptance and peace.

D. Davies: I appreciate the opportunity here to speak in favour of today’s motion. In the aftermath of the horrendous act of terrorism in New Zealand which killed 50 innocent people from ages three to 77, it is important that British Columbia take a unified stand on condemning white supremacy and hatred in all forms.

Before I came to the Legislature, I was a public school teacher. Part of being a teacher is doing your best to make sure that every student can succeed. The other part of being a school teacher is educating the next generation to be as great as they can be, which teachers would like to think is better than ourselves. We, as parents, hope the same. If this tragedy and the not-so-long-ago attack on the mosque in Quebec City do not show us one area where we need our children to be better than ourselves, I don’t know what does.

Education is absolutely critical in keeping racism at bay. Instilling values of tolerance while people are young and introducing them to the ways of other cultures without the use of stereotypes or negative depictions is absolutely necessary in changing the way of thinking. This includes education in the conventional sense, in which we learn about the atrocities committed in the name of bigoted ideals throughout our history. This can range from slavery in the southern United States to the genocide committed by the Nazis to the frighteningly recent system of apartheid that existed in South Africa until 1994. Unfortunately, there are many other examples.

We need to teach our children and remind ourselves about the mistakes of our past and why these horrors can never happen again. In the face of such tragedies, though, it is hard to be an optimist at times, but I think we are lucky in British Columbia that all parties in this chamber have come to recognize the importance of having a vibrant multicultural society. We have worked hard to provide people of different races, faiths and nationalities with the necessary tools to share their cultures with us. When discrimination raises its ugly head, we uniformly condemn it.

I want to take a moment to reflect on where we once were with an example. In 1914, British Columbia denied the right of a ship full of South Asian immigrants to dock on our coast, even going so far as to shoot at these people who had hopes to come to Canada to better themselves and their families. The Premier of the day refused to allow these people to land, and it was likely that the population of British Columbia at that time would have stood beside him.

This would be unthinkable today, and we can thank the fact that we grew up with a value system that instils such actions as hateful and immoral. Back in 2008, the member for Abbotsford West introduced a motion in this place to formally apologize for the intolerance shown for these prospective Canadians. Of course, and happily, it passed unanimously.

[11:40 a.m.]

While racism remains a very real threat to British Columbians, I think we should also take stock of where changes and education can take us in moving away from this toxic ideology. My hope is that we, as legislators — whether it be B.C. Liberal, B.C. NDP or Green — continue to push for policies that celebrate and enable multiculturalism and diversity in British Columbia. We can hope that our children, that my children, will come to cherish these ideas and will instil them in their own children.

Through these efforts, we can further inoculate our children, our people and our culture from the virus of racism that, unfortunately, often shows its face.

N. Simons: It’s a pleasure to be able to offer my words on this important motion and to thank members from both this side and the other side for their really thoughtful comments on a subject that is, in varying degrees, close to our own hearts.

As citizens of a peaceful country, we sometimes think our institutions are so strong that we can overcome these incidents of hatred and that we are strong and resilient against them, but it’s important to remember that our democratic institutions shouldn’t be taken for granted. In fact, we need to be very conscious of the fact that not just the democratic institutions like legislatures but our judicial system is one that has integrity. Because if we look at the history of what happened in Germany, we see that signs were there that things were going badly.

I just think of my father, who was eight years old when he left Germany for Holland, and he was 12 years old when he left Holland for Canada. I didn’t even know this as a child growing up, but my father had Jewish parents. He was a Jew. I only found that out later on in my life, and I realize that so much of the impact of that place where he was born had an impact on him. He married my mom, who comes from Nova Scotia and seventh-generation United Empire Loyalists. I saw the contrast. But it also gave me an idea to sort of recognize how it is that people throughout history can change the way they think, and sometimes outside influences have an impact on that.

The member who spoke before me talked about education. I think we really need to talk about education. We need to talk about programs that bring people together. It’s not specifically just for the purposes of mixed people of different cultures coming together. For example, a Powell River choir festival won an anti-racism award. It didn’t actively talk about anti-racism. It brought choirs from around the world, from different continents, to the little mill town in Powell River, and everybody sang. Everybody sang the same kind of music. They sang the same way. They sang with each other.

I just think that sporting events, cultural interactions, ways to promote societal understanding are our best antidotes against the growth of hatred and ensure that young people in our society are looked after. We need to realize that resentment is not always legitimate resentment, and when resentment is fueled by hatred and ignorance, it becomes dangerous.

I think our job here is to ensure that we have a society that’s based on the rule of law, and that law is the way we resolve our disputes with each other. We have the ability to participate in a democratic system. That should be the way we try to figure out how to make changes in our society. We don’t shut people up and hope they go away. We ensure that people are given the opportunity to learn.

I think that the words from my colleagues in this House should be reassuring and they should be hopeful. We should continue to work together to ensure that our communities are welcoming to everybody.

T. Wat: I want to be clear from the start that I fully support this motion and feel it’s incredibly important that all British Columbians take a unified stand in condemning racism and bigotry in all its forms.

[11:45 a.m.]

I’m an immigrant from Hong Kong and have been living in British Columbia for over 30 years. I’m proud of who I am, where I came from, the impact I have been able to have on my community and the inspiration I can provide to immigrants. I’m proud to be living in a multicultural British Columbia, where we can celebrate our diversity and acknowledge that every member of our community is valued, respected and appreciated.

My riding of Richmond North Centre is over 70 percent Chinese Canadians. Unfortunately, three years ago our city was blanketed with anti-Chinese, pro-white flyers that sent a shock through our community. This is not the Richmond I know. I see a multicultural city in a multicultural country, a place that welcomes, values and respects diversity, not a place that rejects it.

Many ethnic groups have been the target of systemic racism here in B.C. for over a century. This ranges from the countless lives lost building the CPR railroad, the head tax on Chinese immigrants, a prolonged lack of voting rights and, in some cases, the inability to even risk one’s own life in spite of this legislated bigotry, as the case of recently deceased war hero Tommy Wong illustrates. To put it mildly, we have come a long way, but still, we must persevere, even through the arduous times.

I also want to mention that it’s not just white supremacy that we should rally against but all forms of bigoted hatred, all extremist behaviours and ideology. We all want a multicultural society that builds bridges, not walls, between communities. We want a province where we can celebrate our different cultural traditions but not at the expense of sharing common Canadian traditions. We want a province where new traditions and perspectives are deeply respected but where we can also share basic values, like a belief in human rights, a belief in gender equity, a belief in equality of opportunity and a belief in the rule of law.

Racism and the notion that any one person, be it the colour of their skin, their religion or something as seemingly inconsequential as where on a map they were born…. It’s born out of fear — a fear of understanding, a fear of love, a fear of acceptance. Strength in character comes out of the respect and admiration of your fellow person. Hatred comes from weakness.

However, we live in a complicated world now, a world where far-right politicians can go on prime-time news and spout, irresponsibly, malicious talking points that are rarely challenged or shut down. How do you even begin to combat the prevalence of evil that exists on the Internet or social media, a place where we see young men and women radicalized by rhetoric on line to a point that a divisive, fear-based narrative tragically results in mass murder? This presents a new problem for our society.

I do not have answers to these questions, but I do have a solution that anyone sitting in this House or that sees this today can start right away. Read history. Educate yourself. Talk. Have a discussion, an open dialogue with someone of a different cultural-religious background and help build close cultural understanding. Promote inclusion, and celebrate integration between our communities and our shared values.

Understand that we all are here together and have the right to go through this life alongside each other in our multitude of differences. Life is beautiful because of the colours, because of the smells and textures and tastes that make it unique. A life steeped in dark grey is not a life I want. I want a rainbow, a Jackson Pollock painting. That is the goal. Marginalization, bigotry, intolerance and ignorance are the problem. Openness, acceptance, love, an appreciation of differences and building on our shared values are the solution. So alongside my colleagues, I ask that we all focus on solutions and cohesion, not fear, hatred and division.

Madam Speaker, I support this motion.

[11:50 a.m.]

A. Kang: Today’s private member’s motion is: “Be it resolved that this House stand united in its opposition to white supremacy.” I stand in solidarity with all my colleagues of all cultural and heritage backgrounds to speak on this statement.

Quoting Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.: “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” I want to thank all members from all sides of the House in standing united this morning to voice the support of today’s statement.

With the turning of each century, we see new challenges being addressed. With great leaders and great, courageous heroes, a new victory takes us forward to a better future. We must learn from our past mistakes, mistakes that our predecessors made due to ignorance, fear and lack of understanding for people who looked, acted and spoke differently.

Government has recognized a historical wrongdoing from the mistreatment of Indigenous people to the prejudice towards new immigrants, from the Komagata Maru incident to the Chinese head tax to Japanese internment, and many more. We must continue to move forward together to build a future where we celebrate diversity and inclusion, to build a future where everyone is treated with dignity and respect.

Most recently we have seen two consecutive horrific acts of terrorism at the mosque in New Zealand. The attacks reportedly killed 50 people and wounded 50 others. There has been a rise in the recent decade in white supremacy and alt-right extremism globally. We must stand together against racism, against white supremacy and against Islamophobia. Violence and hate propaganda are being used by cowardly people as tools for political gain.

These racist acts are also happening close to home. In 2017, New Westminster was subjected to extremist hate propaganda, where posters appeared at a bus stop. In the months to follow, more hate propaganda appeared in Abbotsford and Chilliwack. Anti-Chinese posters were distributed widely in Richmond. In Burnaby, white pride flyers were found at the Metrotown Burnaby Public Library.

It breaks my heart and angers me that in this day and age, in the 21st century, there still remains a lot of work to do. As Canadians, we have abolished slavery. We fought against discrimination and gender inequity. We fought for the rights of Indigenous people. We fought for the right of all Canadians — of all genders, of all heritage descent — to vote. We fought for human rights through reinstating the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal so that people can participate equally in the economic, social, political and cultural life of British Columbia.

We will continue to fight for social justice for people of all race, ancestry, religion, age, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression. We will stand up for everyone.

I implore everyone to speak out and speak loudly for social justice, for equality of human rights, for peace around the world. Everyone in our community, in any community around the world, has the right to be free from coercion, intimidation and violence.

Today’s private member statement is a platform for all of us to speak out against racism, prejudice and intolerance. Our government strongly condemns the deeply troubling rise of hatred, nationalist populism and extreme racist ideologies around the globe. Only love can stop hate. Only with compassion can we understand that we are all the same.

In March, B.C. celebrated the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Our government spoke out against discrimination. We honour the strength, courage and perseverance of those around the world who experience and confront racism every day.

Our government will be appointing a new Human Rights Commissioner. We have updated the multiculturalism grants program to support organizations that are working to improve intercultural interactions, reduce barriers and eliminate discrimination alongside our Organizing Against Racism and Hate program. But lots more remains to be done.

Let me be loud and let me be clear. Violence of any type against anyone will not be tolerated in British Columbia. I quote Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.: “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”

Let us all stand in unity. Take on this challenge with action, courage and love.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Deputy Speaker: This House is now adjourned until 1:30 p.m. this afternoon.

The House adjourned at 11:55 a.m.