Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading of the Miscellaneous Statutes Act.

[11:05 a.m.]

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 35 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES
AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2019

Deputy Speaker: The second reading of Bill 35 now starts.

Hon. D. Eby: Mr. Speaker, thank you for a moment to change gears here.

I move that the bill be now read a second time.

This bill amends subsection 3(1) of the Family Maintenance Enforcement Act. This amendment clarifies that child and spousal support provisions in a family law arbitration award may be filed with the director of maintenance enforcement. The amendment supports the use of arbitration to resolve family law disputes by ensuring that the family maintenance enforcement program can enforce the support awards for the benefit of children and families in British Columbia.

Amendments to the Judicial Compensation Act update pension provisions for Provincial Court judges and align the act’s language with recommendations from the 2016 Judicial Compensation Commission. The 2016 Judicial Compensation Commission’s recommendations reflect the changes to the Pension Benefits Standards Act, which was repealed and replaced effective September 30, 2015, as well as changes to the early retirement pension reduction formula contained in the public sector pension plan rules. The commission’s recommendations were enacted by resolution of the Legislative Assembly in 2017.

These amendments update the language in the act to ensure that the act reflects current practice respecting the pension vesting period, the early reduction factor for members with less than two years of contributory service and options for receiving the commuted value of a pension if a member retires before age 55.

The amendment to the Professional Governance Act will provide regulatory bodies with the interim authority to increase annual membership fees under their current statutes to ensure they have sufficient resources while they transition to the new professional governance legislation over the coming year. This interim authority fills a gap until the professional associations are fully under the authority of the Professional Governance Act, which already provides regulatory bodies the authority to set annual fees. To use this authority, the professional associations must be prescribed by regulation.

In addition to this amendment are housekeeping amendments to amend an error in wording in section 31 and to correct a cross-reference in section 118 of the act.

Amendments to the Provincial Court Act address the term and reappointment of judicial justices, in response to concerns from the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court about losing a number of experienced judicial justices at the same time, due to the expiry of their term-limited appointments. In 2017, the fixed term of appointment for judicial justices was extended from ten years to 12 years as an interim measure to address the issue. These amendments reduce the term of part-time judicial justice appointments from 12 years back to ten years and provide for the reappointment of judicial justices for one additional fixed term of ten years.

Judicial justices who have served on either a full-time or a part-time basis may be reappointed, but a reappointment will only be available on a part-time basis. To help ensure there is no infringement on judicial independence, the proposed amendments will vest reappointment with the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court upon recommendation of the Judicial Council, rather than with government.

Amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act enhance the existing anti-reprisal protections for those who disclose a wrongdoing, seek advice about making a disclosure or cooperate in an investigation.

[11:10 a.m.]

These amendments will ensure that reprisal protections apply whenever adverse measures listed in the act are taken by reason of a person’s good-faith participation in a disclosure, request for advice or investigation under the act.

These amendments also clarify that adverse measures taken for the purpose of managing or terminating an em­ploy­ment relationship, contract or agreement are not prohibited as reprisals, as long as they are not taken by reason of a person’s good-faith participation in a protected whistle-blowing activity.

Other amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act include clarifying that the prohibitions on the disclosure of confidential information in other B.C. enactments do not prohibit a person from disclosing that information under the Public Interest Disclosure Act, including the newly appointed Human Rights Commissioner within the scope of the act; and correcting cross-referencing errors.

The amendment to the Trespass Act adds “aircraft” to the definition of “premises.” This amendment makes the Trespass Act consistent with the Occupiers Liability Act and brings B.C. in line with Ontario and Saskatchewan. The omis­sion of “aircraft” from a definition that includes ships, trains and other vehicles was noted by the legislative committee that reviewed the Trespass Act revision in 2018.

Amendments to the Child, Family and Community Service Act are in response to feedback received from Indigenous communities following the implementation of previous amendments to the act made in 2018. These amendments will enable Indigenous communities to be more involved in planning for the needs of all their children in care, not just those in continuing custody. Additionally, Indigenous communities will be able to provide services to any child and family, not just members of their community.

The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act has two purposes: to promote accountability by providing a right of access to information and to protect personal information held by public bodies. The two amendments to this act are urgently required to ensure that the public sector can continue using the technology it needs to provide quality services to British Columbians. Without these amendments, public bodies would be forced to choose to operate in non-compliance, forgo the use of basic tools or invest millions of public dollars to develop custom technology solutions. I’m not talking about specialized systems. I’m talking about basic business tools such as email or presentation software.

The Carbon Tax Act, Provincial Sales Tax Act, Motor Fuel Tax Act and Tobacco Tax Act have service-of-notices pro­visions which describe how and to whom a notice or other document is conclusively deemed to have been served. Currently it is not clear when these provisions apply, as the language in provisions where notices are required is not consistent.

The amendments provide consistent terminology respecting the giving of notices. The intent of the amendments is to provide clarity for taxpayers and government and improve government’s ability to effectively and consistently give notices under these acts.

Also included are three minor language changes to the Speculation and Vacancy Tax Act. These are housekeeping amendments for the provision of good governance, clarity and consistency across all provincial tax acts.

The Health Care Costs Recovery Act was enacted in 2008 to permit government to recover from a wrongdoer the costs and expenses incurred in providing health care to an injured person in circumstances where injury is caused by a wrongful act or omission. Amendments to section 24 are made to clarify that the act does not apply to a particular wrongdoer who is insured by ICBC when that wrongdoer’s use or operation of a motor vehicle causes personal injury or death.

Amendments to section 4 are made to impose a requirement for defendants in class proceedings initiated in provinces and territories other than B.C. to provide written notice of the proceeding to the B.C. government. The goal of these amendments is to enable the government to maximize the recovery of health care costs under the act. There are also a few amendments to include gender-neutral terminology within the act.

The amendment to the Assessment Act will provide that solar power plants are “power plants” for the purpose of assessing those plants in the same manner as other independent power producers. It will also ensure there is sufficient authority to apply exemptions under the assessment authority regulation. This amendment will result in an equitable property assessment and tax outcome for existing and future solar power plants. Without it, the future development of solar projects may be discouraged.

The amendments to the Motor Vehicle Act by the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General will create a statutory presumption on the presence of a speed sign to support the successful prosecution of intersection safety camera speeding tickets and will clarify that the visibility of a speed limit sign is a defence to a charge of speeding, rather than an essential element of the offence.

[11:15 a.m.]

The intersection safety camera program began issuing tickets for speed in July of this year. Fourteen of the 35 planned speed enforcement sites are governed by a sign rather than the legislated speed limit, 50/80 kilometres per hour, and so rely on the presence of a sign. The presumption and clarification on sign visibility will provide greater legal certainty for prosecutions. The program will monitor the presence of the signs every 14 days to support the presumption. There is wide support for this program expansion by municipalities, police, health authorities, public health officers, Doctors of B.C. and the coroner for its ability to prevent accidents.

Amendments to the Employment and Assistance Act and the Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act support the poverty reduction strategy TogetherBC and the government’s action on homelessness.

These amendments aim to improve income and disability assistance by ending the need for clients to pursue Canada Pension Plan retirement benefits before age 65, protecting vulnerable youth by eliminating the two-year independence rule as a barrier to assistance, improving fairness for couples and children in need by recognizing modern living arrangements when calculating assistance, ensuring that information and verification requirements do not create homelessness, enabling maximum repayments for client debt, reducing delays in determining eligibility by clarifying the treatment of evidence on appeal and removing the requirement for reporting forms to be prescribed in regulation.

These measures continue the ministry’s efforts to make assistance more compassionate and effective, ultimately reducing poverty and preventing homelessness for the most vulnerable citizens.

Technology is rapidly changing the way people use streets and sidewalks in the province. To support the use of new, clean modes of mobility, it is important that people know when, where and how emerging forms of transportation technologies can be used. Amendments to the Motor Vehicle Act by the Ministry of Transportation will provide an important tool to drive reform in this regard.

As part of government’s active transportation strategy, amendments to the act will provide enabling authority to establish regulations for new and emerging forms of personal mobility devices that are increasingly prevalent on roadways in the province. Further amendments enable pilot projects to research, test and evaluate new approaches to regulate what happens on our roads.

These amendments to the Motor Vehicle Act will ensure that the province finally has a mechanism to shift the act from a statute governing the roads of the last century to a modern framework of laws supporting people on our roadways and sidewalks in this century.

M. Lee: I rise today to speak on the proposed amendments to the 17 statutes in Bill 35, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2019.

First of all, I’d like to thank the Attorney General’s office for quickly arranging briefings on the numerous amendments being proposed yesterday afternoon. There certainly will be a number of sections of this bill that my colleagues will speak to here on second reading. We will all want to explore in more detail these amendments at the committee stage.

Let me just say first that it’s really disappointing that when members were called back for four days of sitting this week, on the first day, yesterday, there wasn’t sufficient business for the House to sit. It rose 2½ hours earlier than scheduled. Given that this government doesn’t have any other legislation to put forward this week, other than the Gaming Control Act amendments — this is the only bill — it makes you wonder, Mr. Speaker, what other priorities this government is focused on when it doesn’t have its act together in the orders of the House and the business of this House.

When you look at the majority of the amendments in this bill, they’re primarily amendments of a housekeeping nature. In fact, some of these amendments, including to the Trespass Act, went through the Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform. That being said, certainly — I’m sure, Mr. Speaker, you’ll agree — there are better uses this week for the time of the members of this House. We certainly could have used that 2½ hours yesterday for more pressing matters, more urgent priorities for British Columbians.

That being said, there are a number of points of interest that this set of amendments to the various statutes provides. Certainly, there are some jumping-off points, I would suggest, as to other priorities that we need to focus on as British Columbians.

[11:20 a.m.]

For the last two days, there has been tremendous focus on, in part, the allegations made by a whistle-blower against the now former Minister of Citizens’ Services. Of particular note in this bill are amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act, or PIDA. These changes include the definition of “office” to include that of the Human Rights Commissioner, rewording the act to make it clear that PIDA overrides other enactments and providing protections for employees who, in good faith, seek advice, make a disclosure or cooperate with an investigation under the act. All of these amendments serve to improve the act and make it easier for whistle-blowers to come forward about wrongdoing.

It’s curious — the timing of this. This government is making changes to this act, an act that was introduced to this House 16 months ago yet has not been enacted by this government. All during this time, there has been this whistle-blower coming forward, with respect to allegations that are now, presumably, under investigation by the special prosecutor and the RCMP, forming the basis of that investigation.

Yet this government has delayed bringing in force this act, this act that would certainly be a benefit to this whistle-blower and other whistle-blowers that might have other allegations against this government. So we question the delay. It’s one thing to continue to tweak a bill they introduced 16 months ago. But why is it that this government has not yet put this bill and this act into force?

I know that the member from Chilliwack will be speaking to the Trespass Act and appreciate that there is one amendment here that’s proposed, but certainly, there are other concerns of British Columbians as to the rights of private property owners, landowners and farm owners, given recent activities by protesters and the like. So again, when this government looks at those concerns of British Columbians, why is it that it’s only addressing one specific technical amendment at this time?

Another example of this is the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Certainly, we’re glad to see the government continuing to update our laws and procedures to keep up with technological advancements. However, when we were in the briefing yesterday, questions were raised by my colleagues and myself as to what really is driving this particular change in respect of this bill.

Were the changes that deal with enabling temporary processing and metadata handling offshore — through the United States, for example…? That would still be in compliance with FOIPPA, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Was that necessary due to the significant amount of personal data that over 1.6 million British Columbians had to provide to this government in connection with the speculation and vacancy tax? Is that the reason why this government is now filling in the gaps of how it was able to manage that data — again, now under the former Minister of Citizens’ Services, under her oversight?

When it comes to something as critical as personal data that British Columbians had to provide to this government, we’ll be asking questions at committee stage as to what the procedures were that government put in place in order to have this happen, to manage that data and why the need for this gap to be addressed.

Under the Health Care Cost Recovery Act…. We’ve seen examples, of course, and concerns around the continued function of this government as it props up ICBC, with the continued rise of premiums and an inability for British Columbians, including young British Columbians, to purchase insurance for vehicles that they have just bought to go to school or to go to work.

[11:25 a.m.]

There are amendments in this miscellaneous statutes bill that raise concern around whether this government is attempting further to ensure that the playing field between ICBC and any other insurance company that might provide auto insurance in this province, including optional insurance coverage, is being made to be an un-level playing field…. On the read of the bill, as the Attorney General just indicated, if the desire is to maximize recovery of health care costs…. Is it that, or is it to ensure and put another roadblock in front of insurance companies that want to provide insurance to British Columbians in this province?

Under this arrangement, under the Health Care Costs Recovery Act, ICBC is under a separate agreement with government, whereas any other insurance provider that is not covered under that agreement needs to provide for those health care costs on a recovery basis under this bill. We’ll be looking at that in committee stage as to whether that provides and puts up another block or barrier to other insurance companies coming forward.

There is also an amendment in this bill to the Assessment Act, under part 6. It is another good step forward in promoting the use of clean energy in this province, ensuring that with solar power, in this case, their plant and their assets are potentially taxed, from an assessment point of view, at a lower rate. That is something that is good for this province to consider for its future, in terms of its energy security and renewable power.

Again, with what has happened since the last spring sitting of this House, there’s been a continued press and a need for this government to consider other aspects regarding the Assessment Act, and that includes the consideration by that joint task force, including with the city of Vancouver, for split zoning.

Mr. Speaker, I ask this House: why is it that this government has not considered, on an expedited basis with the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, that proposal which was supported by the Vancouver city council to create a property subclass for unused airspace above small businesses? This would allow that subclass to be taxed at a lower rate than the existing businesses and keep costs lower for owners and operators of the local businesses that play such vital roles in our communities.

In my own riding of Vancouver-Langara, there are many examples of businesses that are fighting to stay afloat and many others that have been forced to relocate to areas where property taxes are lower, resulting in the loss of valuable parts of our community. Implementing the split-zoning proposal by amendments would lower property taxes dramatically, enough to make a real difference to those who are challenged with making ends meet, and we would revitalize neighbourhoods that have suffered the loss of local shops, restaurants and other businesses to financial pressures.

It is clear that such a change will be welcomed by local businesses and communities. So it would be important to see this government move forward to the necessary changes to enable this to occur.

Lastly, I will say, to part 9 under this bill, changes to the Motor Vehicle Act include further ability by this government to regulate motorized personal mobility devices. Of course, with the growth of the use of e-scooters and other similar devices on our city streets and bike lanes, we need to ensure the safety of the public, to work with municipalities to have the right regulations in place for pedestrians and others who are on our bike lanes and our city streets.

I welcome this particular amendment under this bill and also see the need for the necessary updating and modernizing of the use of terminology around the definition of “pedestrian” and the new language, which is more appropriate, around person-centred mobility, including for those in wheelchairs and other persons with disabilities.

As I mentioned, we’ll be looking forward to discussing in detail many aspects of this bill in committee stage. I look forward to joining other colleagues of mine to do so, as there are many questions, as I mentioned, including the ones that I have outlined in my comments here.

[11:30 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: I’d like to recognize the territories of the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking peoples of the Songhees and the Esquimalt First Nations where we meet here every day in this Legislature.

I’d also like to introduce a friend that’s in the gallery. I know this is a little unusual, but I just happened to notice her. Amanda McDonald is from Castlegar, has just moved to Victoria. She’s here with a friend from Victoria. Everybody knows her as Mme. McDonald because she used to teach French immersion to many, many kids in the Castlegar school district for a number of years, including a lot of my relatives, and they love her. It was great to see her in the gallery today.

Welcome.

I just have to tell you, Mr. Speaker, how happy I am to be here for a fall session and how great it is to be able to have the fall session. It’s our third fall session since we became government. It is an unusual thing, because this is….

Interjection.

Hon. K. Conroy: I know, this is somewhat new, because when I was in opposition, we rarely had a fall session. In fact, I think we might have had one or two — one. One in 16 years. In 16 years, we had one fall session. Maybe I might be….

The member for Vancouver-Langara is relatively new to the Legislature, so you know, fall sessions are new to him. I think he would appreciate that we actually have a fall session. It’s great to be here and to be able to speak in the chamber and to have a number of weeks to deal with very important legislation, including this bill, Bill 35, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act.

This bill does contain some minor amendments to the Child, Family and Community Service Act. These proposed amendments — they clarify the intention that Indigenous communities have the ability to plan for their children and youth in care and are able to deliver a broad range of supports and services to their children and families, as well as to the children who identify as non-Indigenous or members of other nations. These proposed changes are in response to feedback that was received from Indigenous communities following the implementation of previous amendments to the act, to Bill 26.

Now, Bill 26 was the first bill I introduced as Minister of Children and Family to give Indigenous communities greater involvement in child welfare decisions. These changes are helping Indigenous children out of care, safe in their home communities and connected to their cultures, and they speak to the mandate letter given to me by the Premier. This letter was very clear: things need to change in the child welfare system for Indigenous peoples. We all know that that system has failed them. We know it needs to change, and we have been acting on that.

Bill 26, introduced in spring 2018, was brought into force in April. It was incredibly important for me to introduce that bill, my first bill, for a number of reasons.

For years now, Indigenous communities and leaders have demanded urgent changes to keep Indigenous children out of care. One of the sad realities of our colonial history is that more than half of the children in government care are Indigenous. It’s a legacy of colonialism that must change, and Bill 26 helped to start that change. The amendments in this Miscellaneous Statutes Act, Bill 35, continue the change.

Shortly after taking on the role as the Minister of Children and Families, the leaders of the September 2017 First Nations Leaders Gathering told me that I needed to make changes now, in order to ensure that our social workers do the work they needed to do. This message was again driven home to me at the emergency meeting on Indigenous child welfare called by the federal government in January 2018.

Reducing the overrepresentation of Indigenous children in the child welfare system by working with Indigenous communities is a priority for our government, as we move towards meaningful and lasting reconciliation. Bill 26 gave us practical, meaningful ways to do just that. Our government believes that Indigenous children connected to their community and culture are Indigenous children growing up in a safe, healthy and loving environment.

The changes to the Child, Family and Community Service Act…. It gave Indigenous communities greater involvement in child welfare decisions to help keep their children out of care, safe in their home communities and connected to their cultures. The message was further strengthened in speci­fic recommendations in Grand Chief Ed John’s report. His report was developed after extensive consultation with First Nations and Indigenous peoples and called for changes to the legislation that commits government to work more collaboratively with Indigenous communities, right at the beginning of a child protection concern.

While we’ve reduced the number of Indigenous children in care by almost 100 in our first year by focusing on prevention and supporting families in communities, we needed to do more.

[11:35 a.m.]

For that, we needed to change the legislation. We listened to what communities were telling us, and we reviewed Grand Chief Ed John’s report to inform us of what aspects of the legislation we needed to change urgently, in order to reduce the number of Indigenous children coming into care. We also looked to what the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples and the Truth and Reconciliation calls to action tell us about the best interests of Indigenous children and their entitlement to connection with family and community.

I knew we were heading in the right direction when I learned that because of Bill 26…. Two children from the Interior were returned to their community because of the withdrawal provisions. They were able to stay in their community with their extended family, learning their culture. Now, some people might say to me: “Well, that’s just two kids.” But to those two kids, it meant an incredible difference in their lives, the lives of their family and the lives of their community.

And the numbers have grown. Fewer Indigenous kids have come into care, with the tabling of Bill 26. The withdrawal provisions came into effect a year ago and are helping keep kids out of care. The changes give social workers the ability to withdraw from court proceedings when there are agreements between the parents and an Indigenous community that will keep a child safe.

The proposed changes in this miscellaneous statutes bill are in response to feedback received from Indigenous communities during consultations that continued on the implementation of Bill 26. It became really clear that some of the wording in the act was too narrow to fully make the changes we were intending and that Indigenous communities had been asking for. The original wording in the act allowed Indigenous communities to enter into an agreement with the ministry to plan for the needs of children in continuing care only. This has been amended to include children in care under any legal status. These proposed amendments respond to these concerns that we’ve heard.

Amending legislation is one way we’re acting on our commitment to help Indigenous children remain safely in their families, with their family’s communities and connected to their culture. We’re working in partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Métis partners to reduce the number of Indigenous children and youth coming into government care.

Through the Tripartite First Nations Children and Families Working Group, we’ve been working with the First Nations Leadership Council and the government of Canada to explore systemic changes to the child welfare system, including governance and jurisdiction.

Additionally, we have committed to ensure the new federal Indigenous child welfare legislation aligns with the work we are doing in B.C. We’ve also started meeting quarterly with the First Nations Leadership Council executive — an important opportunity to hear from the leadership what’s working and what’s not.

Our work includes partnering with individual First Nations and the federal government to sign agreements that will ultimately see the nations exercise their jurisdiction over child and families themselves. We’ve entered into separate agreements with the Cowichan Tribes, the Wet’suwet’en Nation and the Secwépemc Nation. Every time I meet with different nations, I’m struck by their commitment to their children — their belief that what happened in the past can’t be forgotten but that we must ensure that children are raised in healthy and happy communities.

At the Wet’suwet’en gathering, at the ceremony, we had a huge feast to celebrate the signing of this agreement. Before the ceremony, I met with the Hereditary Chief and Elders who talked about their past and why this agreement was so important to them and why their children needed to be raised in their community learning their culture.

The young children from the school danced, and they sang for us in their language. I could see the pride and happiness on the faces of the Elders and Chiefs as they listened to the children sing in their language — something that one Elder said to me she never got a chance to do as a child. Whenever I get frustrated that things don’t always move quickly enough, I’m reminded of those Elders and how happy they are that these changes are happening in their lifetime, and it inspires me to work harder.

In June 2018, I signed a joint commitment with Métis Nation B.C. to work toward their authority over child welfare. We signed it in Kamloops at the Lii Michif Otipemisiwak, the Métis family and children services organization. I’ll never forget when I was told that of all the kids they provided supports to, none had to come into care, because they had been able to keep kids with their families. They also said none were adopted, because again, they were able to keep kids with extended families.

Another thing I learned: adoption doesn’t always work for everyone, especially Indigenous kids. We know children do better when they live and are connected to their families, their communities and their cultures. We want to support families to stay together. One way we are doing that is by offering more financial assistance through the extended family program. We have nearly doubled the monthly rate paid to family members caring for young family members under the program.

[11:40 a.m.]

This is a long-standing practice with Indigenous communities to help keep kids connected to their families. Now a granny caring for her grandchildren is receiving the same amount of monthly financial assistance as a foster parent.

Last week I had the honour of kicking off Foster Family Month at a dinner for foster parents from lower Vancouver Island. I got to meet all the foster parents there who were being honoured for the incredible work they do each and every day.

Parenting can be hard. I think any of us in this room would be stretching the truth a little bit if we all said that parenting was a breeze and we’d never had any trouble or things that didn’t quite go right with our kids, because I’m sure we all have had those issues. I’m sure we all had. I’m the first to say I did.

Interjections.

Hon. K. Conroy: Maybe not you, Minister of Health.

When we are raising kids who have had a difficult start to begin with, that makes it even tougher.

At the dinner, I met some couples who are grandparents raising their grandchildren. All of them spoke about how incredibly helpful the MCFD staff have been, but one grandmother in particular got quite choked up when she talked about the support and the differences the extra funds have made in their lives. No one expects to retire and then suddenly be raising your grandchildren. But none of them would have changed what had happened other than to have had their grandchildren stay with their child — their own son or daughter.

Not only are we better supporting those who care for their relatives, but we are better supporting expectant parents to help keep families safe and newborns together. We’ve also ended the practice of birth alerts. Health care providers and social workers will no longer share personal information about expectant parents without their consent. Instead we are providing voluntary early supports and preventive services to help them plan and safely care for their babies.

This change to practice allows for a more trusting, collaborative relationship with service providers right from the beginning. It empowers women, their families and their communities to work together to care for the children.

This change was welcomed by B.C.’s independent Representative for Children and Youth, and professors and leaders across the country are calling on other jurisdictions to follow our lead. Mary Malebranche, clinical lecturer at the University of Calgary, has said all provinces and territories should promptly end birth alerts. Additionally, Cora Morgan of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs has said our province is leading the way and hopes our actions will start a trend.

We are working with Indigenous peoples and local communities to put the practices of the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples into action. Together we are making progress to build a more prosperous future through agreements with First Nations, agreements that support economic development that’s making a difference on the ground to everyone. We’re creating a predictable path forward for everyone that means good jobs and opportunities while protecting our environment. Meaningful reconciliation takes time, but we’re committed to getting there with a balanced approach and a real plan.

And we do have a plan. We have a plan that…. We’re working to provide affordable, quality child care for all families that need it and want it, including Indigenous families. We are working closely with Indigenous communities to understand how our child care plan can better support their families.

We’re investing $3.6 million to support 11 early learning and child care planning and navigator positions. We’re investing $30 million for our early learning and child care agreement with the government of Canada to create and expand Aboriginal Head Start programs in more than 30 communities across the province. In addition to this investment, Indigenous governments are eligible for up to $3 million through the childcare B.C. new spaces fund to create new licensed child care spaces in their communities, with Indigenous non-profit organizations eligible to up to $1.5 million.

I have to tell you that when I was in Grand Forks recently with the COINS society, where we announced the expansion of Aboriginal Head Start in the Kootenays…. We are actually going to have one in Grand Forks. The excitement and happiness, especially of the elders that were at the ceremony to announce the opening of this Aboriginal Head Start centre….

I also saw it in Prince George, where I was actually at an Aboriginal Head Start centre that has been built, that has been working for a number of years and that is going to expand their program. The fact that the kids were learning their language…. Little three, four and five-year-olds did a demonstration for us on what they had learned in the program. It made me realize that we are on the right track here and that we are doing the right things.

We still know that we need to do better for Indigenous children and families. We are helping to increase the rate of family preservation for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous families.

[11:45 a.m.]

The number of Indigenous children and youth in care is starting to go down, but there is still an overrepresentation of Indigenous kids in care in B.C. It’s unacceptable, and we are working to change this. I know the amendments in Bill 35 will help that.

A change in child welfare will take concerted efforts and meaningful collaborations by all levels of government. It’ll take some time, but we are committed to this work to ensure that children or youth are living in strong, healthy families where they are connected to their cultures and tradition.

The amendments that are part of this bill, Bill 35, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, will do just that by clarifying the intention that Indigenous communities have the ability to plan for all their children and youth in care and are able to deliver a broad range of supports and services to their children and families, as well as to children who identify as non-Indigenous or members of other nations who live in their community to get the supports they need in their community.

I would just be remiss if I didn’t comment on a few…. I know all of us, as ministers, are getting up to talk about how the amendments in Bill 35 affect our ministry. I just have to say there’s a…. I do want to just acknowledge the changes that the Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction is bringing in, because they are amazing in so many ways. Kudos.

I have to say that when I was on the other side of the bench, in opposition…. I was the Seniors critic. For many years, I would meet with senior women who talked about how they struggled to make ends meet. And when we would go to food banks, the food banks would tell us that the largest-growing sector of people accessing food banks in the province were senior women who just couldn’t afford to make ends meet.

By improving the financial security of low-income seniors, by taking away the punitive action of not having them apply early for Canada Pension — to not have to apply until they’re 65 — is a step in the right direction. It’s a step to ensure that we can get those numbers of senior women who do live in poverty down, so they don’t live in poverty. It’s something that women, once they reach over the age of 65, shouldn’t have to face. Kudos to the Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction for ensuring that that is part of the amendments of Bill 35.

The other one is protecting vulnerable youth by eliminating the two-year independence rule as a barrier to receiving income assistance. We are talking to youth. We are changing the way we look at agreements with young adults as they transition out of care into adulthood, and we are looking at ways that we can ensure that we can provide supports to young adults.

We have made some incredible changes. We’ve increased the amount that they can apply for. We’ve extended it to a year. I talk to youth who, when they didn’t have the AYA program for a whole year, were homeless for four months of the year while they weren’t going to school. We’ve made sure that we’re looking at the way we provide those supports so we can provide more supports to youth aging out of care.

This is another way of helping youth that are not…. You cannot expect youth to be independent the minute they turn 19. This is eliminating a barrier that will help youth. I know that working together, we can carry on ensuring that youth aging into adulthood out of care can get the supports they need, through this amendment but also through the work that we are doing with the agreements with young adults in the ministry.

I just want to recognize those amendments that the minister is bringing in because they so affect me — on a personal level, from work that I did in the past, but also as it affects our ministry.

With that, I thank you for the opportunity to speak to Bill 35, and I’ll sit.

N. Letnick: Thank you to the members present and those watching on TV worldwide for this fall session. Absolutely.

I’ll be speaking about Bill 35, intituled Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2), 2019. I won’t be too long. I don’t want to keep people from their lunch plans, lunch meetings.

Two particular sections I want to speak on. None of them are health-related, to the Health Minister, so he can go about his business.

[11:50 a.m.]

I do have one piece, which is the speculation and vacancy tax that’s being amended. The other one is the Motor Vehicle Act. I’m glad to see that the Minister of Transportation actually looks like she’s following me. So after lunch, I’ll get to hear, maybe, some of the answers to these questions.

First, on the spec tax…. I’ll be very simple, very blunt on this. It’s being proposed to be amended. I would actually propose it be abolished. It’s done a very bad job for the Okanagan — Kelowna, in particular, and West Kelowna — and the places around British Columbia where it has been instituted. It’s not a tax on speculation; it’s a tax on wealth. It should be removed so we can get back to the business of creating wealth for all British Columbians by ensuring that we have a robust industry and robust economies.

On the Motor Vehicle Act, I would say that of all the pieces in this miscellaneous bill, one of the pieces people will actually see the most and interact with the most, I would think, would be this particular change. Even though it’s in part of a miscellaneous statutes act, I would ask the Minister of Transportation to actually get her own bill and really expose this to the public, because when this passes — and I hope it does — it’s going to have a very different feel for all British Columbians, motorists and pedestrians, around the province.

I go back…. A couple of years ago I was travelling abroad, and I saw this thing. A child was on this beast that I’d never seen before in my life. Basically, it was a unicycle with a battery and an engine, and it was called an Airwheel. He just zoomed past me, and I was going: “Whoa, isn’t that great? I’ve got to get one of those so that I can go through my streets and areas of my community without having to incur greenhouse gases. I can go and commute to work without having a negative impact on the environment.”

Lo and behold, I come back to home, and I find out that they’re actually not legal on roadways in British Columbia. So there went that dream. But as you know, you don’t quit after the first no, you keep trying and trying. That’s exactly what people around British Columbia have been doing together to really get to the 21st century when it comes to pedestrian uses on the roads and also on the sidewalks.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Now, Mr. Speaker, I’ve seen that you’ve taken your chair, so I’m going to go on longer than the time. Just give me a nod when you want me to make any motions.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you.

N. Letnick: Okay, so what are we doing here? Through this amendment, we’re actually empowering the government, through regulation, to define what can and what cannot be used on our roadways. Now, when I say roadways or highways in British Columbia, I mean streets in our cities, so that, for instance, if you want to use an e-powered scooter or an Airwheel or something else — I’ve seen hoverboards that have motors in them as well, and other things — you could, if and when this passes and if and when the regulations pass, be on the bike path, for example, and use these modes of transportation.

What I’ve also seen in the legislation — and I’m hoping the minister can clear this up during her speech — is that it looks like there’s also going to be an opportunity to use the same vehicles, e-vehicles, on sidewalks. If that’s the case, then there might be some safety concerns. There might be some really tough regulations as to speed limits, because obviously, someone choosing to be on their e-vehicle on a roadway is one thing. They’re the ones taking the risk, because they’re now competing with cars. But by putting them on the sidewalks, now you’re making the pedestrian take the risks. I think we need to have some discussion on that. Maybe I misread the statute and the minister would be happy to correct my limited interpretation of that.

Now, the city of Kelowna — I have to really thank Coun. Ryan Donn on this; he’s been a champion for these kinds of vehicles in the city of Kelowna — completed a pilot this past summer with the scooters, the e-scooters. They had over 25,000 trips in three months — really a great testimony to the city of Kelowna and what they were after.

I just have some of the words that they used to get the system up and running. They said: “Shared low-speed electric stand-up scooters are a new type of service that has provided safe, sustainable and low-cost ‘last-kilometre’ transportation to tens of millions of riders across North America. In doing so, they have reduced carbon emissions and relieved congestion.”

[11:55 a.m.]

Absolutely right. If we are going to reduce our greenhouse gases, we need to look at ways that, individually, we can help, and collectively. I know people who have looked at buying local as a way of doing that, people who have put more insulation in their homes, people who walk and bike and use transit for transportation. Now, of course, in addition to the electric vehicles that we’re all supporting, we now have, potentially, these low-speed e-vehicles.

I would, again, continue to ask the minister to move forward. She did a public consultation on this. She heard back, government heard back, that this is something we should move forward with — obviously, keeping public safety in mind. But the day has come when we will see, I hope, these e-vehicles, with due regulations and safety measures, brought in to British Columbia streets.

I look forward, during committee stage, if it’s not clarified during second reading, to asking further questions as to how we make sure that the balance is there so we have these vehicles that people can use in a safe manner, in particular on our roadways, and make sure that we continue to improve our transportation options throughout British Columbia that reduce greenhouse gases.

N. Letnick moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. A. Dix: I move that the House do now adjourn and look forward to seeing everyone at 1:30.

Hon. A. Dix moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:56 a.m.