Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call continued second reading debate on Bill 36, Gaming Control Amendment Act.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 36 — GAMING CONTROL
AMENDMENT ACT, 2019

(continued)

C. Oakes: It truly is a privilege to have the opportunity to rise as the member for Cariboo North and add my contribution to the debate on Bill 36 and to bring forward the concerns from my constituents with a thoughtful approach on how we can improve upon legislation and make sure that, for constituents in Cariboo North, decisions, policy and legislation that are being debated here in this House reflect the needs of constituents, First Nations and Indigenous communities in Cariboo North.

Having reviewed this piece of legislation that is before the House, there are three areas that I wish to touch upon today. The first is the mechanism of distribution of this bill. The second is the formula that is being discussed. The third element is the community gaming grant discussion that I think is incredibly important to bring forward in the discussion of this bill.

[1:45 p.m.]

Following the member for Maple Ridge–Mission and his comments about the importance of going out and listening before designing programs first, I believe that a critical component to the aspect of listening is actually going out and talking to the First Nations and Indigenous communities first.

Based on conversations that I’ve had with my local governments, local First Nations, local alliances and Indigenous populations in my communities, their experiences and stories, I wish to take a moment to bring forward to this House their experiences with some of the programs, policies and legislation that have been actually brought forward by the government and the impact that is actually having in our rural communities.

We have instances in our communities where revenue-sharing has been incredibly successful. I think that is an important foundation of what we’re discussing today. We want to ensure that all people in British Columbia, whether Indigenous or non-Indigenous, have opportunities of prosperity and economic growth and that they can know their next generation — and generation and generation and generation after that — will have opportunities in the fantastic communities we are so incredibly blessed to live in.

The first element that I wish to discuss, as it plays into this piece of legislation, is the mechanism of how these funds will be distributed. The top-down approach that is being presented in this legislation…. I believe we need to have a more thoughtful conversation on and recognition, in truth, of what is actually best and what will have the greatest impact for our First Nations and Indigenous populations.

We understand that revenue-sharing agreements that are in place, which actually put funds into the hands of our local First Nations and Indigenous communities — respecting that they know best, that they understand their communities best and that they know the needs of their communities best — are a principle that we should be following.

We hav, again, had some significant examples — for example, revenue-sharing agreements in the Cariboo, such as the forest consultation and revenue-sharing agreement. That has been supported in our community. That has helped support both Indigenous and non-Indigenous in our region — workers, businesses — that have found economic opportunity through these types of revenue-sharing agreements. That has helped increase prosperity and has helped create work for people in communities.

You know, I am very proud of Nazko First Nations logging. They are one of the largest contractors in our community and one of the oldest, actually, First Nations logging contractors in British Columbia. They have been incredibly successful. They have hired and employed and supported not just Indigenous communities but non-Indigenous as well. I think examples of programs that recognize that we all can benefit and all of our communities have a great opportunity when we invest in rural communities is an important foundation.

Where there is nervousness right now, which I think is important to bring forward into this House, in communities like Nazko — and, in fact, quite frankly, the entire Cariboo — is that policies and legislation that are being brought forward by the NDP government, while looking good on paper, often have unintended consequences in our rural communities and, quite frankly, can be devastating for our individual communities.

That is why, as we debate bills that are being brought forward, we are trying to bring the voices of our communities: to make sure there are not unintended consequences to policies that I believe are brought forward, of course, in good faith and wanting to improve the lives of British Columbians; to make sure that the reality in our communities, that the boots on the ground — that we are seeing the impacts and that we’re seeing the revenue actually coming into our small communities.

[1:50 p.m.]

I found it deeply discouraging that it required a convoy of logging trucks, which had to make a difficult journey from our communities down to Vancouver, to ensure that our voices were heard on the implications and decisions that this government is having on the forest sector.

Our First Nations do not want decisions being made top-down. We do not want to see people living, sometimes, in the urban settings or in Victoria — this very building — who may not understand the realities of what it means to live in rural British Columbia, making those decisions.

There is real evidence of the type of top-down approach in decisions made by this government that is concerning to constituents in my region. Evidence, for example, of the recent cancellation — or you can spin the language however you wish — of the rural dividend program. Our First Nations communities had critically important applications in to this fund. This fund was designed to respect and understand the unique challenges, the needs that small and rural remote communities, First Nations communities face — communities, First Nations communities, such as Lhtako Dene First Nation.

You see, they had an application in for a sawmill. We all know of the devastation that we’ve had with pine, and now we have fir beetles in this area and, of course, our wildfires. They had an application in to build a sawmill that would employ nine people to help remove the Douglas fir beetle infestation that we currently have in our community, that the First Nations community needs to address.

Now they have to find a way to figure out what is next in communities where, really, work is limited, and they are very challenged. They’re disappointed that funds that have been put forward for rural communities, for First Nations communities, have disappeared.

Lhtako Dene also shared a story with me when I was talking about the impacts of legislation being brought forward in this House. What was their experience on the ground? They shared a story of what they are currently witnessing and, actually, all of us in the Cariboo are seeing. We regularly get press releases that there are large burn piles that happen regularly in the attempt on fire mitigation, and we support the efforts that are being made to keep our communities safe. I think it’s critically important.

What the First Nations are asking of us is: why are we burning that fibre? Why are we not using that fibre? They have partnerships with other companies for pellets. Why are we not utilizing some of the land-based fibre that currently exists to create value? In press releases that the government last year had put forward, that was where the government was moving.

First Nations communities in our area, many who are out of work, are asking why those decisions are not happening — value-added opportunities with companies such as C&C Wood Products that develop panelling and wood products, that are not subject to softwood lumber tariffs. The First Nation resource worker asked me last week why the stumpage is the same rate on the value-added products that we could be producing in our communities that are not subject to softwood lumber but would actually get people working in our communities.

The language that consistently comes out of this government is that they spin some of the communications that: “Hey, things are better than ever. We have these policies, these legislation tools that are coming forward that are going to make things great in our rural communities.” But the challenge becomes that we’re not seeing that money delivered on the ground in our communities.

[1:55 p.m.]

Earlier today the Premier discussed the money that’s being reallocated to support forest workers, and this fund, of course, was being pulled away from the rural dividend program, a program that helped First Nations and smaller rural communities. Both the Premier and the Minister of Forests brought forward that they are important announcements.

What is happening on the ground in our communities — and I have had multiple calls into my office, as I’m sure other MLAs have had as well — is that there is no access to this funding. The application process has not been set up yet. So we make press releases saying: “Things are great. The government’s here to help. Money is on its way.” But the reality is that it’s not getting into the hands of the people in our communities. As rural MLAs, we have to fight. We have to advocate. We have to make sure that the decisions that are happening in this House go into the hands of our communities.

Literacy Now is another example of an important application that had been put forward to the rural dividend program — $50,000 to help improve literacy for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, important upgrades that are required to improve the work outcomes for natural resource workers who are out of work, who are now required to have grade 12.

Imagine that you’ve worked in a mill for 30 years of your life, and that mill is now closed. You have to go back out into a workforce, and you have to find a new job. The challenge is that you now need grade 12. For many people in our rural communities and Indigenous populations, 30 years ago, the idea of going in and working in a forest community was that there were opportunities out there where we didn’t require grade 12. To cut those very types of funds that would help our communities move forward is incredibly troubling.

Another comment that my constituents, my First Nations, wished for me to express here in this House is around the fire-mitigation experience. I certainly appreciate the funds that have been put forward by the government. I think it is important to put that investment into the communities.

When I talked to the Chief of the ?Esdilagh First Nation, Chief Stump, he asked me…. He would use my name, but I’m not allowed to do that. “Why do we keep getting consultants? Why does the government channel and say: ‘This is the type of funds that you are going to get. We will get you consultants. We will get you somebody to write a plan for you.’?” The First Nations are saying: “We know our community best. We do not require a consultant to come in for us to understand what we need to do to protect our communities.”

The member for Langley East graciously raised a story that really has been something that, as an MLA, is not only troubling. Quite frankly, it breaks your heart that communities, year after year, who’ve felt the devastating impacts of wildfires and floods know what they need to do in their community to protect their communities and to make their communities safe, continue to get denied access to very simple capital funding — two trailers and some firefighting equipment that would help keep their communities safe. Why is it so difficult to get access to funds into the hands of our communities, our First Nations communities, who know what they need in their communities?

Programs and services are continuing to be gutted. And while the members opposite continue to heckle, if they had heard the first part…. There are three components of the challenge of this legislation. The first challenge is the distribution of the funds. We feel that those funds should go directly into the hands of our First Nations communities.

The second piece of the legislation — I encourage the members to read, because I’ve heard them talk about the formula time and time again — is that the formula that is currently being used, a component of that is population-based. When it is population-based, our rural communities always end up on the short end of the stick.

[2:00 p.m.]

For rural communities, for First Nations communities to have funds that are based on population versus needs means that we will always not have the same access to funds that other First Nations communities may have.

We have stories. It’s not just us creating some element of cynicism on what is happening. They are real, on-the-ground stories that we’re hearing. It doesn’t matter how many press releases you send out and how many times you send our mayor out and say how things are great in Cariboo North, I can tell you that there are real challenges that we need to overcome, and there is real support that needs to happen into the hands of individuals.

The third component which I wish to address is the community gaming grant program and how the conversation of what we need to secure not just revenue-sharing for Indigenous and First Nations populations directly into their hands…. We need to secure funding to ensure that all of our volunteer organizations across the province of British Columbia that rely so heavily on community gaming grants have the same opportunities. It needs to be fair.

I have multiple examples that I wish to bring forward, but I’m going to start with a story. The member for Maple Ridge–Mission talked about the importance of storytelling, and I agree. So let me share a story that has recently come into my office.

“I’m writing to you on behalf of the Quesnel Figure Skating Club. We were recently denied from community gaming grant which has left our club about $28,000 short of funding to pay for our season. This is a huge problem for us and a lot of money to make back in fundraising. I have been on the board of this organization for six years, and we have never had this happen before.

“Normally, we receive our gaming by early August. But this year, we hadn’t heard anything going into September. So of course, we had to go with our registration programs like we were going to receive this money. One month into our program, we received the email stating we were denied. Anyways, long story short, I’m contacting you to see if there’s anything you can do.”

It’s not just the Quesnel Figure Skating Club that has seen a significant reduction and gutting of programs. It is multiple agencies that we have seen in rural British Columbia. The Baker Creek Enhancement Society received $44,000 last year, and to date, they have had no announcement.

The Quesnel Women’s Resource Centre. And it was great that this morning in the introductions I believe we had a women’s resource centre announced in this House. They do great work, so we supported the community gaming grant back in 2017 of $122,000 to our Quesnel Women’s Resource Centre. This year they received $80,500. That’s quite the reduction.

How about we look at the Scouts? The Scouts do great volunteer work — last year $7,700, this year $5,600. Quesnel Rotary — last year $32,235, this year $20,000. How about the Quesnel Lions service club? In 2018, $29,058. This year it was $20,000.

How about victim services? Victim services is a critically important organization. This week we are recognizing the importance in all of our communities to stand up for those who’ve been impacted by domestic violence. At a time when our communities are being devastated in the forest sector and at a time when we have, unfortunately, seen increases in domestic violence in our communities because of the incredible stress of people being out of work, the North Cariboo Métis society has had their healthy relationship program cut — completely cut. Now, I met with the minister to talk about that. His response to me was that the program has been oversubscribed.

Forgive me if I stand before you and raise the concerns that my constituents are having when, time and time and time again, programs and services are being gutted in our communities, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, at a time, Member, when the numbers speak for themselves.

[2:05 p.m.]

I have pages, and I can show you, because they go on line. I encourage the members to see where the funds have been last year on community gaming grants in our communities and where they are now.

My message to anyone who may be listening to this conversation is: contact your local non-profit volunteer organizations that have put in applications to the community gaming grant program, and find out where your funds are this year. Are they delayed? Have they been denied? Have they declined? I want you to contact your local MLA. I want you to share your story, because your story is powerful.

It is as powerful as those 250 logging trucks that came down to Vancouver because it was the only way they would get the attention of this government. While the Minister of Transportation laughs and points her finger at me, here’s the message I would say from ?Esdilagh First Nation.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

C. Oakes: “We have written multiple letters. We have letters to the minister on the orders of questions around West Fraser Road.”

Do you remember that road, Minister? Year after year we have received letters from this minister. “Oh, we will be fixing these funds.”

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members, one member at a time.

C. Oakes: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is the element, again, from First Nations communities who do not have a lot of trust in this government, because we continue to hear that funds are coming to your community. We get wonderful press releases, and we continue to wait.

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Member.

C. Oakes: I’m incredibly proud as the member for Cariboo North to bring forward the voices of my constituents, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous. I believe that our community members know best the needs in their community. I believe that they shouldn’t have to wait for a government to say “I know best” and to control the types of social engineering funds that come into our communities.

Again, in closing, if you’re a community member that has seen a reduction in your funds, please contact your local MLA. If you want to make sure that funds are distributed directly into the hands of your community, make sure you raise your voice on this particular bill. Finally, if you believe in self-determination, if you believe that the fact that the First Nations know best in their community, I invite you to make sure that you read this bill, understand this bill and to contact your MLA.

Hon. C. Trevena: I’m very proud to stand up to talk about the Gaming Control Amendment Act introduced by our government.

Unfortunately, I think that the member who spoke before me, the member for Cariboo North, hasn’t read the bill. If she had done, she’d know there was, as she describes it, self-determination — that it is up to those communities that are getting their share of the gaming grants to decide how best to spend the money.

I’d also just like to put the record straight for all those many people who are going to be getting in touch with their MLAs as a result of the conversation from the member for Cariboo North. Nothing has changed. There is still 31 percent of gaming revenues going to community organizations and health services and local governments.

The member’s various social clubs, organizations and others that have applied…. You don’t always get it. It happens in my constituency. It happens in everyone’s constituencies. You apply. You don’t necessarily get it.

Of the $1.391 billion of net revenue from gaming activities, 31 percent of that is going to health services, community organizations and local governments. The balance, as the member…. She was, I believe, once a member of executive council. So she should understand this but most likely has forgotten: that the balance goes into general revenues. The new gaming revenue share does not change any of that. This 7 percent comes from what would go into general revenues, just to put it in context for the member, who clearly has forgotten some of the things she may have learnt while she was on this side of the House.

[2:10 p.m.]

As I say, I’m very excited by this act. It’s a very important act, because it’s going to entitle B.C. First Nations to a portion of B.C. Lottery Corp.’s net income for 23 years. That’s 23 years where Indigenous communities can plan, where they know that they’re going to get a source of revenue, where they know that it’s stable funding. I think that everybody is aware that we shouldn’t always be relying on lotteries, that we have to be funding in other ways. But on this, there is a large amount of revenue available, and there will be a 7 percent share of this for the next 23 years — very significant.

Members opposite have been debating this for some time and are getting very concerned about various parts of this bill. They could have done this. First Nations have been asking for gaming revenue to be shared by the province for years. In fact, back in 2007, when Premier Campbell was there and he had his “New relationship” — I think that’s what his banner was that year — First Nations leaders presented that government, the B.C. Liberal government, with what was a First Nations investment plan. It recommended allocating 3 percent — just 3 percent — of revenue towards economic and community development initiatives in Indigenous communities.

At that time, back then, 12 years ago…. The members on the other side of the House forget that, for 16 years, they were government and could have made an impact for Indigenous communities but didn’t. At that time, First Nations leaders described the plan of a 3 percent share as the single most important action that the provincial government could take to “ease First Nation’s poverty and begin to close the economic and social gap for all First Nations.” It is significant.

But somehow…. I should not be surprised. On this side of the House, we should not be surprised that the former government, the B.C. Liberal government, didn’t do anything, because their record on First Nations relationships, to be honest, is, frankly, distasteful. It is awful.

It started back…. They formed government in 2001. In 2002, I think people can remember the referendum, the referendum on First Nations treaty rights. The then Attorney General Geoff Plant put it to the public. Well, he said that the public should have a say in the treaty process.

At the time, they said it was an experiment in direct democracy, but even pollsters were saying that it was amateurish and one-sided. Among those people who criticized the outrageously racist referendum were the Anglican Church, the United Church, the Presbytery of New Westminster, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Canadian Muslim Federation, the B.C. Federation of Labour, Council of Senior Citizens and the David Suzuki Foundation. It was described as immoral and amateurish and racist, and it was. It was a racist approach to First Nations relationships.

I mean, that was a significant stain on the B.C. Liberal government’s record, their 16-year record. But it went on. We’ve had the failure to implement the calls to action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Back in 2015, Christy Clark, the Premier — watch this space — refused to appoint a new chief commissioner to the B.C. Treaty Commission, unilaterally undermining the treaty process. She was, like always, thinking only about politics and not what was in the best interest of Indigenous communities, First Nations and our relationship as the Crown with First Nations.

Earlier we had the Missing Women’s Commission urge the then B.C. Liberal government — they had been government for a number of years — to bring in an enhanced public transportation system on the Highway of Tears. The former Minister of Transportation, the minister from Kamloops–South Thompson, said at the time that it was “not identified as a practical solution by the people who live up there.”

[2:15 p.m.]

I’m very proud to be the Minister of Transportation. It’s an honour to be working for the people of B.C. on this file, and I have to say that one of the areas of which our ministry is most proud is the bus system that is operating along the Highway of Tears. It is an extraordinary, extraordinary system. It links communities. It means that Indigenous communities off the highway can get to the highway. It means that people can get a ride, an affordable ride, from community to community. It keeps women safe because they don’t have to hitchhike. It keeps families safe because they don’t have to hitchhike.

I’ve ridden on the bus and talked to the communities, talked to the people who are riding it. It has made a huge difference. That is working for Indigenous communities.

We know their record for Aboriginal children in care. They had recommendations after recommendations from Grand Chief Ed John and took little action, and they were reprimanded by the Representative for Children and Youth in 2017 for their underfunding of delegated Aboriginal agencies. So I think that their record on Indigenous relations stands for itself.

What has been quite haunting — and I’m sure my colleagues will have more examples than this — is that in this debate, in this House here in 2019, when we are discussing something as fundamental as sharing some of the prosperity of British Columbia, some of the wealth that comes in through gaming, back with Indigenous communities, we have had — I’m not going to label them — such worrying, worrying comments from members opposite.

The member for Nechako Lakes, a former Minister of Indigenous Relations, talked about First Nations being addicted to government cheques and asked: “Is this not just another government cheque coming in?” He said that this legislation seems to be “more about paying off friends than…about getting resources to the bands.” I think that’s disgraceful — that they could even be thinking about that when we’re talking about revenue-sharing, through gaming funds, with Indigenous communities to let them determine how best to invest in their communities to make their communities and the lives of their community members better.

Indigenous people. I think everyone should be aware of the history that they have lived through and that they continue to live because of what happened to their families, their forefathers. It’s gone on for generations. We are still dealing with that. Indigenous communities are dealing with that. We are trying to assist through this process.

I’ve got to say that the member for Kelowna West was questioning the financial accountability that could come. I quote what he said. I find it, as I say, very disturbing that a member of this House could have this sort of view — express it and stand up to talk about this bill and still express this — questioning the financial accountability of Indigenous communities. He said their processes are not the same as what we would have in terms of our democratic systems, in terms of accountability.

He went on to say that almost five million B.C. citizens represent the non–First Nations population, and they haven’t had a chance to have a say in it. As I say, I find this extra­ordinarily worrying.

Our government has been acting. I think everybody could say that we could act faster, that we could do more. Everybody wants to do more. But we have done a huge amount, made great steps in working on Indigenous relations, on building out. We have talked about reconciliation, are absolutely committed to reconciliation. In this session, I think everybody’s very well aware, we’ll be bringing in legislation to ensure that reconciliation is a true reality in our province.

Just to hit a few highlights. I mentioned Grand Chief Ed John’s recommendations; we’ve committed to implement them. We have spent $6.4 million to keep Indigenous families together to improve outcomes for children and youth.

[2:20 p.m.]

We’ve been working on implementing a strategy to increase the number of Indigenous employees to train child welfare staff. We have broadened the education experience requirement for front-line child protection. We have ensured that we have a First Nations law degree now. Through my ministry, again, we have our community benefits agreements which are putting Indigenous hires first in the line for local hiring. We are working, day in and day out, to ensure that we work towards true reconciliation, whether it’s acts of individual ministries, acts of government or acts that are, like this, directly assisting Indigenous communities.

As I say, I think that the member who spoke before me clearly hasn’t read the legislation. We committed, in our budget back in the spring, to share 7 percent of net provincial revenue from gaming for 23 years, 25 years. Two years are already set. That is expected to give First Nations $100 million a year. If you get a roughly 2 percent annual growth, which would be a very nice annual growth to have, year after year for the next 25 years, it will be a $3 billion share with B.C.’s First Nations over the term of the agreement — $3 billion. Communities can do a huge amount with $3 billion.

It’s set up. I think if the member had read the bill, she would find out that it’s set up to be administered through the First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership. They will receive, manage and distribute these funds to participating First Nations. I hope the member from Kelowna West was listening to that when he talked about accountability. There is absolute accountability, and there is absolute trust that this will be, I think, very positive.

There will be a share, on formula, of participating First Nations. It’s going to be by community, by population and then waiting for those that are geographically remote. I know that in my constituency…. The members opposite like to act as though they are the only rural members in this House, but there are a number of other rural members in this House, myself included.

I represent an Indigenous community who have lived for millennia in Kingcome Inlet, which is an extraordinarily remote and difficult place to get to. I think for the community itself…. I would say that one of the benefits of that was that they avoided the Indian agent. They were just too far away for the Indian agent to come, so they were not taken to residential schools.

I think that we have…. The opposition does not have the lock on representing rural communities. Our side of the House understands the needs of rural communities, and we want to work with Indigenous communities to ensure that they are served well.

I go back to the division of the money. I just talked about that. How can it be spent? I think it’s important that we recognize that it’s not us that are dictating anything. It is First Nations governments determining their priorities for the use of funds. There are basically six areas that support governance, capacity-building and strength in program and service delivery. It’s on health and wellness; infrastructure, safety, transportation and housing; economic and business development; education, language, culture and training; community development and environmental protection; and capacity-building, fiscal management and governance.

Basically, it’s money. It’s money that will promote creative approaches to help design programs and help deliver services in these broad categories. It’s not directed to individuals. It’s working with communities for these categories. I think this is something that every member in this House should be supporting. Every member in this House should be recognizing that this is the way forward — that we have to be allowing Indigenous communities to invest in their future. They need revenue to do that. What better revenue than some of the money that is, at the moment, going to general revenue coming from gaming?

[2:25 p.m.]

The member for Cariboo North talks about all the potential loss of community grants. There is still the same 31 percent going to community grants, but 7 percent, an additional 7 percent, will be taken out of general revenues to ensure that First Nations can have an opportunity to invest in economic development, in housing, in so many different ways that will benefit their communities.

It makes me very proud that this is another act of our government. Working with First Nations, working for First Nations, we’re making sure that when we come to discuss reconciliation, we discuss what it means to each of us. It means something different to everyone. It’s one of these: how do you define it? It is so important that we do this.

I’m extraordinarily proud of our record on our relationship with Indigenous communities and moving forward on the UN declaration and on the Truth and Reconciliation recommendations. I would hope that the other side of the House joins us in supporting this bill, but I have to say I have been absolutely shocked by some of the comments that my colleagues on the other side of the House can still express in 2019.

With that, I’ll take my seat.

M. Lee: I also want to join this discussion on Bill 36, the Gaming Control Amendment Act. Certainly, I think this has just been a discussion around the need to find and strike the right balance of the gaming-revenue-sharing agreement with First Nations in British Columbians.

There are certainly a number of considerations on Bill 36, which I’d like to discuss, recognizing that there needs to be a more detailed discussion to follow during the committee stage of this bill. I would agree with the member opposite that we have more to do on reconciliation in this province with First Nations. Revenue-sharing has been a continued desire of First Nations in British Columbia and, if structured correctly, could serve to strengthen the relationship between First Nations and our province, furthering the goal of reconciliation shared by all members of this House.

Reconciliation certainly is an incredibly important issue. We need meaningful recognition for reconciliation to make progress against closing the gap on issues of health, education and employment for First Nations. This province, through leadership of the previous government, has a strong record of supporting greater economic prosperity in First Nations communities, partnerships which are built on mutual trust and respect, and agreements that need to be balanced and fair.

Revenue-sharing is certainly a path to partnership. It’s one path, and the previous government certainly recognized that. The previous government worked to improve the quality of life for Indigenous people through new economic partnerships, resource development revenue-sharing and closing gaps, as I just mentioned, in health, education, skills training and employment.

There was sharing with 40 First Nations of mineral tax revenue from mining, with payments beginning in 2013. As of December of 2016, British Columbia had signed over 260 forest consultation and revenue-sharing agreements with 156 First Nations. As all members of this House know, and as this government has come to realize, the LNG sector in British Columbia has presented opportunities for our government and First Nations to work together. Throughout the province, 62 natural gas pipeline benefit agreements have been reached with 29 First Nations, for four proposed natural gas pipelines.

[2:30 p.m.]

The previous government had also put in place over 500 economic and reconciliation agreements with First Nations, including strategic engagement agreements, reconciliation agreements and forestry and clean energy project revenue-sharing agreements. Many of those agreements were put in place under the leadership of the member for Nechako Lakes. As he indicated yesterday in this debate, the previous government in British Columbia was the first government in Canadian history to share resource revenues. Other governments across Canada, while they may have the same intentions, did not go down the same road. Instead, they went with a sharing of gaming revenue.

The previous government certainly believed that it was more appropriate that revenue go to First Nations from the resources and activities that were happening in their traditional territory. That says something in terms of the division of the revenue under this revenue-sharing arrangement. But I’ll come to that in a moment.

[J. Isaacs in the chair.]

In reviewing the Gaming Control Act amendments under Bill 36, it does provide an opportunity to look at the underlying agreement that was put in place between the province of British Columbia; the new entity, the B.C. First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership; the First Nations Summit; the British Columbia Assembly of First Nations; and the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs. This is an agreement that was dated, made as of August 2, 2019, just over two months ago. What’s appended to this agreement is a list of 198 eligible First Nations that have the opportunity to sign on to this revenue-sharing arrangement to become a limited partner, but only if they’re accepted by the general partner.

As the Minister of Transportation invited all members of the House to look at it, we have looked at this agreement. We have looked at the details. And there are many questions to be considered as to the nature of this arrangement and how it’s going to work, not just for the 198 eligible First Nations but all First Nations in this province. We’ve been using the number of 203. Where did the other five go? They’re not even listed in this agreement.

Let me say that the government is in the course of negotiating, as we understand from the briefing that the member for Richmond-Steveston and myself received two days ago, a long-term agreement for 23 years. This long-term agreement is for a net present value of $3 billion — $3 billion of an important financial resource that I believe we all want to see put in the hands of First Nations across this province so that they can meet the needs to build the capacity, to continue to fill the gaps on health, education and poverty and to continue down the road of shared prosperity with this province.

Revenue-sharing is an important tool, but how we do it is what we’re discussing here. There are some concerns, as members on this side of the House have been trying to articulate over the last day and a half of debate.

The agreement that’s in place currently is for a two-year period. It goes until August 2021. It has a one-year renewal term on it. There is time. There is time to ensure that there is proper consultation with all First Nations in this province, that all First Nations understand the nature of this further 23-year revenue-sharing arrangement and that we consider how the funds are being distributed and on what basis they’re being distributed.

[2:35 p.m.]

As we know, there’s a limit to the partnership that has been formed. As I just mentioned, eligible First Nations have the opportunity to become limited partners of that partnership, but it is by acceptance of the general partner. If you’re not accepted as a limited partner, that First Nation will be an unsigned First Nation. And as an unsigned First Nation, you won’t be entitled, won’t be receiving these funds.

This is an example of the layer of administration that this government has put in place. From what we understand from the member for Maple Ridge–Mission…. He indicated something that we’ve been asking for. What was the level of consultation with First Nations? As I heard him say, it was by listening to the First Nations Summit, the British Columbia Assembly of First Nations and the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs. I didn’t hear him say “consultation with each First Nation directly.”

This is something that the member for Langley East attested in respect of his ability to reach out to a number of First Nations in the last day. He heard back from five. None of those five First Nation leaders — five, presumably, of the 198 — were aware of the terms of the agreement.

This is an agreement that was brought in place only two months ago. So when we look at to what degree that level of consultation has occurred, the government wants to talk lots about how they’re attuned to reconciliation and First Nations, but where is that example? It sounds like they’re primarily relying on the leadership council. It sounds like they’re not consulting directly with First Nations on this. It sounds like they’ve set up a partnership, put some money across, and that money will sit there until the general partner for this partnership accepts an eligible First Nation. If that acceptance doesn’t occur, the funds don’t flow.

This is an example of the complexity and the administrative burden that this government has established. Now, we are still trying to learn more about this arrangement. This bill gives us the opportunity, for all members on this side of the House, to talk about our concerns, and that’s what members on this side of the House have been doing for the last day and a half. We are still trying to learn all of the details of the arrangements.

The amendments that are proposed in Bill 36 are relatively straightforward to understand on their face, but they need to be understood in the context of this 50-page interim agreement. And I certainly would invite all First Nations, leaders and others, who have not reviewed this yet to get a copy of this on the ministry website — it’s a public document — and take a look, because there are elements of details here in the agreement itself….

Certainly, I believe all members of this House would support the principles. There are six named principles of focus: health and wellness; infrastructure, safety, transportation and housing; economic and business development; education, language, culture and training; community development and environmental protection; capacity-building, fiscal management and governance of First Nations. These are the principles for which funding will flow under this arrangement.

In terms of the common objectives, certainly we all want to continue to work with First Nations and Indigenous peoples in this province to enhance economic opportunities and improve socioeconomic outcomes and to provide a way to support First Nations in their right to self-determination, including establishing their own governance models.

[2:40 p.m.]

In looking at the specifics of the agreement itself, there is, for example, a reference to initial periodic review. Here is another opportunity for this government to ensure that the proper consultation has occurred. Presumably, that was the thinking. They put the agreement in place first, with what sounds like top-down consultation, and then provide for a period of time, which is not specified in the agreement as to how long it is, for some review, some reconsideration of the terms of this arrangement. We are still in that interim period, yet this government chooses this time as being the time to bring forward amendments to the Gaming Control Act.

They’re bringing forward amendments not before they entered into this agreement but after, after they’ve committed this province to 25 years of funding without proper consultation with First Nations. We haven’t heard that. And as they go forward, there’s a lot of backfilling going on, because as we understood in the briefing, the reason this amendment’s being provided, of course, is that there’s a $3 billion commitment that we will recognize in this current budget year if this amendment doesn’t go through.

Well, we know the state, unfortunately, regrettably, of the finances of this province under this current NDP government. There’s no room for a $3 billion current commitment.

As we look forward at more details in this agreement, we need to look at….

Interjection.

M. Lee: It would bring forward that $3 billion cost recognition into this current budget year. That’s what we understood in the consultation.

As we look at the individual eligible First Nations, their funds will effectively be kept in trust by the partnership. When they look at the term of the actual agreement itself…. If you look at recital K, it talks about allowing the relationship, effectively, between the province and the provincial territorial organizations, which are, specifically, the First Nations Summit, BCAFN and UBCIC…. That relationship may continually evolve.

Well, this is a very fluid arrangement, with a companion partnership agreement which, as we heard from government staff, is not being made available to government because, of course — we understand this part of it — this is for the First Nations to administer. Now, likely we’d have more comfort around that arrangement if there was proper consultation with every First Nation. But when it’s just with the leadership council and when that relationship can continually evolve, these eligible First Nations have no voice in that arrangement.

First of all, they need to be the limited partners of the partnership in the first place. Secondly, if there’s any change to this arrangement, it needs to be agreed to by extraordinary resolution. That’s not unanimous.

The actual balance that’s occurring here is one that doesn’t favour every First Nation. It sets up a situation where the funds that First Nations need to deploy it in their communities, as the member for Skeena spoke about in detail yesterday — those very-needed funds — will not be available.

[2:45 p.m.]

So we ask this government: why is it that they found the need to put in place this administrative partnership structure? It seems that it would be more effective to directly provide the funds to First Nations, each of them, to ensure that they’re quickly and effectively deployed. The same governance and accountability requirements that are under the partnership agreement or under the interim agreement that’s referred to can be ensured or put on each of these First Nations to ensure that they meet those requirements.

There’s reference to an indemnity under section 7.3 of the interim agreement. We’ll be asking, at committee, the nature of this indemnity and what potential exposure there is to the province.

Of course, the purpose of the amendment under the bill takes away any Treasury Board ability to alter this financial arrangement. So we need to be pretty sure at the beginning of all of this how this is going to function for First Nations and what expectations First Nations have about that revenue flow. It is tagged at 7 percent, and as we know, that 7 percent may not be the same in dollars every year. So we need to look at what expectations this government has raised with First Nations about that revenue flow.

There’s also a schedule at the back of the interim agreement regarding expenditures. What is that gaming revenue, anyway? Well, it turns out that that gaming revenue doesn’t include certain deductions for certain expenditures. Now, we are talking about gaming. This government wants to talk a lot about their new focus on gaming, yet enforcement and investigations are excluded from this.

There are many elements in terms of how BCLC is run, categories of expenditure that are not being taken into account. As I mentioned, there is no line of sight on the partnership agreement. So we do not know at this time, for those First Nations that have not signed on and been accepted as limited partners, what their criteria are — the conditions, the terms — that are necessary for a general partner to accept an eligible First Nation into this partnership.

This is the very concern that many members on this side of the House have been speaking to. It’s the concern around what we are giving up here — when I say “we,” that’s all of us, including First Nations — to this partnership, this new structure. Why the need for that? The government should have the responsibility to ensure that those funds get provided directly to all First Nations.

We’ve talked at length about the distribution formula here. We understand, of course, that it’s a 50-40-10 split — 50 percent to all First Nations, 40 percent based on population, 10 percent to be distributed based on whether a First Nation is in a remote geographical location.

Well, that last category is an indicator, certainly a recognition, that for some First Nations who are in remote geographic locations, there’s likely — and there is — a greater need for a greater share of funds beyond population and the mere dividing up of funds amongst all the eligible limited partners. That’s an indication of need. That’s an indication that not all First Nations are in the same economic benefit in terms of their current geography — where they’re located, close to resources — and, as I mentioned earlier, the previous government being the first government in Canada to share revenue from resource development.

[2:50 p.m.]

Well, much of that sharing has been going on. That’s one aspect of economic partnership in this province. It’s one way for real change for First Nations. Certainly, we recognize remote geographic locations and those First Nations that are in areas of the province that are remote — areas that don’t have the benefit, necessarily, of the rich resources that others may have.

If we’re taking into account remote geographic location, aren’t there other indicia or factors of need that we should be taking into account? This is our second suggestion. The first, again, that government distribute the funds under this gaming revenue-sharing arrangement directly to First Nations. Secondly, that the distribution formula take into account other considerations around need. Those considerations can be, in other ways, based on the economic capacity of that First Nation.

There are some First Nations, including ones that are with the traditional territories around my riding — Musqueam First Nation, Tsawwassen and others — that have access, certainly, to greater economic capabilities.

Those that don’t…. Aren’t those really the First Nations that we’re trying to be working with and assisting here? There should be a greater recognition of that need. That’s when we have the discussion around whether that distribution model should be altered.

Again, with First Nations who haven’t been properly consulted, how will they get their voice heard? This is the opportunity to ensure that we have an ability to ensure that those First Nations are getting the funds that they require and need.

I think that in the context of dividing up the pie…. I heard the House Leader for the Green Party, the Third Party, talk about the other day, in reference to the miscellaneous stats bill, a recognition of the tax base. Well, as we all know, there’s only one taxpayer, and we need to consider what’s available.

When the Minister of Transportation just spoke, there’s one thing that I would quibble with her about, which is that under the Gaming Control Act, there is no set guarantee or limit threshold for funding for community gaming grants. It is at the discretion by appropriation under the Financial Administration Act.

As much as it’s been the case that there’s been funding made available and that community organizations, like the ones that I used to sit on the board of, that enable, in the case of Arts Umbrella, for example, the expansion of important arts education and training programs to the municipality of Surrey through two new locations…. Community gaming grants are very important to support those initiatives: after-school care, after-school training for vulnerable children and youth who weren’t receiving access to any of those additional opportunities to learn, in this case, visual arts.

There are numerous examples, and the member for Cariboo North just went through a number of stories which were very compelling about the reliance of various communities on community gaming grants.

I understand, from the briefing, that the government has said that in their view there will be no impact in this arrangement. I think it’s important that we consider, as we look at the Gaming Control Act and we look at the opportunity of setting up a much-needed…. This is the way the government has chosen to do it. Again, as I say, we would see it as based on revenues from resource development and other economic opportunities.

[2:55 p.m.]

If this government wants to follow the lead of other provinces in this country — to put it on gaming revenues — then we need to consider the access and the continued reliance of community gaming grants, that program — that they have steady, reliable access to those funds. Those funds, of course, as we’re hearing, are shrinking, in terms of meeting the number of needs in our community.

I appreciate that when we look at this revenue-sharing arrangement, looking out 23 years, we need to ensure that there has been proper consultation with First Nations; that we are working to establish the best funding arrangement to ensure effectiveness of these dollars, these much-needed resources, for First Nations around this province; and that we take into account the recognition of those needs. What are those needs? Treating every First Nation the same, at least for 50 percent of these funds, and then based on population, and only leaving 10 percent of that funding pool for any recognition of geographic or other needs…. We’re suggesting that that ought to be considered.

We will have the opportunity to ensure that this funding model, in the interest of reconciliation with First Nations, be done in a balanced and fair way for all of British Columbia, and that we look at, as we go into committee stage on this bill, addressing those concerns.

J. Sims: It’s my pleasure today to rise and speak in support of Bill 36, the Gaming Control Amendment Act, 2019. I’m really very proud of our government and of the minister who has brought this legislation forward, because I believe that this is long overdue.

I know that for the First Nations community, this has been a major concern for a number of years. I believe that as far back as 2007, they did raise their concerns with the then government of the day. The First Nations leaders have been presenting a variety of proposals to get game sharing. They had talked about 3 percent of the gross gambling revenue. They wanted it towards economic development.

I also — when you look at history, history is always a great teacher — looked at what the First Nations leaders had to say. They talked about this revenue-sharing being the single most important action the provincial government could take to ease First Nations’ poverty and, again, to close the economic and social gap for all First Nations. That’s quite a significant statement coming from the people who are the most impacted.

Now, I don’t have to review our commitment to truth and reconciliation. As you know, the Premier and our whole government take this very, very seriously, every person on this side of the House. It’s not just words that were written in ministers’ mandate letters. Every member that is part of our caucus — it doesn’t matter where they sit on this side of the House — has a very strong commitment to making truth and reconciliation a reality.

I know there are lots of people who are going to be saying: “Well, we’ve been talking about this for a long time.” I certainly feel that I’ve been talking about it for a long time, even as way back as the time that I was a teacher.

[3:00 p.m.]

At this time, I do want to recognize the work done by the B.C. Teachers Federation in the area of truth and reconciliation. I have nothing but huge admiration for the commitment of the teachers of this province to move the dial forward, to truly, truly, in this province, have an understanding about truth and reconciliation and to include that and to say that that does not just mean words. It means looking at, first, as the words imply, facing the truth and then moving towards reconciling.

It’s not about punishments for the past, because we can’t undo the past. We know terrible things happened. I, like many of you, have listened to the stories of grandparents who spent time in residential schools and said that once they came out, their lives were not that great. As a grandfather, he could say that he never learned how to be a dad, how to be a son, how to be a brother, how to be a father and how to be a husband, and that that experience in the residential schools impacted not only him but generation after generation of his family.

We can’t undo that, but we acknowledge the harm that was done. What we can do is reconcile and move forward in a nation-to-nation partnership. That is what our government is committed to.

As I started off by saying, I’m glad that we’re bringing this forward and that we’re bringing this forward this early on in our mandate. Just so you know, Madam Speaker — I know you know this already — we have already forwarded $194.84 million in revenue to account for the first two years of this 25-year agreement that we have reached. For the next 23 years, it is going to be 7 percent, which translates into about $100 million per year. That does factor in the growth rate, about a 2 percent growth rate.

Unlike some of the terms that were used yesterday — and I will be getting into that a little bit later — this money is not being put in a vault. This money is being shared with First Nations across this province so that they themselves can determine how they’re going to use it for economic boosts, capacity-building, for education, for language, for culture retention. Part of truth and reconciliation is not in having the answers for others but in enabling. That’s what this will do.

This is also a commitment to the long term. You know that when funding is announced on an annual basis, it creates a lot of angst, because people feel they cannot do long-term planning. This allows First Nations to do that long-term planning, knowing that the funding is coming.

I did hear from my colleague across the way that, well, there is no guarantee that it will be $100 million, because the revenues are unpredictable. But we based it on past history. That’s why it says 7 percent. It talks about a percentage point. I think all of us — First Nations communities, those on the government side and my colleagues across the way — understand that if it’s a percentage, it is a percentage, and that’s what it’s going to be.

I’ve also heard: “Well, you know, there are a whole lot of things that could be done with this legislation that isn’t in here.” I found that a little bit difficult to listen to, coming from members who were in government for 16 long years and had the opportunity to address many of the issues that they now see as a problem. I just want to remind them that it was under their watch that colossal money laundering was allowed to flourish as it did. I want to go on to say that on this side of the House, we are committed to working with the First Nations.

[3:05 p.m.]

We didn’t just create a structure. What we need to know is that the First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership — a long name, I know — was set up at the direction of leadership from the B.C. Assembly of First Nations, the First Nations Summit and the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs through the First Nations Gaming Commission. So this is not an imposed structure. This is another structure that has been established nation to nation — a structure that we respect. There is a formula, but no set prescription beyond the formula. That’s what going to nation-to-nation agreements means.

Yesterday I also heard some of my colleagues across the way talking about equality a lot — that this was not fair, that this was not equal. I have found, over a huge number of years, that the word “equality” is often used to confuse people.

What we need to focus on is the word “equity.” We all must admit that inequalities have existed for over 100 years — inequalities in the type of education and the type of infrastructure, inequalities in the treatment of the First Nations people. Yes, when you have huge inequalities, that’s when we talk about equity. Maybe we will have to focus on equity for the next 100 years — I hope not — in order to undo the inequality that has existed for such a long time.

At this stage…. I’ve heard people say: “Well, you know what? We don’t really know what the money is going to be used for.” But I think if you take a look at it, it’s sort of does talk about it. It can be used for capacity-building, to support governance; health and wellness; infrastructure; economic and business development; education, language, culture and training; community development and environmental protection; and capacity-building, fiscal management and governance. You could go on and on.

I can tell you, as I have travelled around this province over the last two years, that I have seen firsthand the colossal divide that exists between First Nations communities, our rural communities and our urban communities. This is an opportunity for the First Nations to start addressing, with these funds, some of those inequalities that have been imposed on them for such a long time.

Let’s talk about education. I hear about that a lot from First Nations leaders — how education is their focus, not just the K-to-12 education and the post-secondary. I want to do a shout-out to the Minister of Advanced Education for the amazing work that she has done in this area to move forward the dial, to encourage First Nation youth in apprenticeships, to establish a master’s and a doctoral program, and also to really focus on education in our First Nations communities as well that responds to those First Nations communities.

Also out of that education, we often forget about language. I’m proud that the minister has allocated money for the reclamation, retention and growing of First Nations languages. I think every one of us in this room recognizes the importance of the mother tongue. I think, as I talk with First Nations, that one of their top priorities is to capture languages that are dying and languages that they are very close to losing. When you capture your language, you capture far more than words. You capture your culture; you capture your history. The importance of first language is recognized by every First Nation across this province.

I know that amazing work is being done. When I’ve visited some of the communities, I’ve actually ended up in a room where a class was being given in a first language where the grandmother, the daughter and the grandson were all in the same room, learning a language that that nation almost lost. So some of this money can also be used to augment the teaching of language.

[3:10 p.m.]

Let me also now talk about infrastructure. My other colleagues have talked about housing. I will say that we’re very proud of the work that we have done on building homes with First Nations on First Nations lands. But there’s also other infrastructure. We know that there is a huge digital divide between our rural and urban communities and an even bigger digital divide between First Nations communities and the rest of us.

There are things so many of us take for granted. For example, when I’m in Surrey and I’m visiting a high school, they’re doing a deep-sea dive. They’re talking to a diver in the ocean off the coast, just off Bamfield, and they’re actually beginning to talk about the flora and the fauna of the ocean bed. They’re able to ask questions.

It’s hard for us to believe, I know, because there’s a lot of connectivity in urban areas, but there are parts of the province, in many, many of our First Nations, which don’t have cell service. They can’t text. They don’t have access to Netflix. They don’t have access to education on line. They don’t have access to the economic potential that exists when you have that basic infrastructure.

Because of that disparity, the digital divide gets bigger and bigger, of course, as we move forward. We know the importance of having connectivity, not only to access government but to support traditional businesses, whether it is your traditional mining, forestry industry, tourism and fishing, or whether it is to attract the new industries that exist into your area when you have high-speed Internet and you get that connectivity.

Only last week I was in Haida Gwaii and in Port Clements. There, you had tears in the eyes of people because they now have cell service. It’s something we just take for granted, but they have that now, and they were so, so happy. But there were other priorities that they laid out at that meeting. Funding like this will allow people in our remote and First Nations communities to be able to focus on what is really important in their community.

I also, at this stage, would like to say that — I was talking about language earlier — my first language, in case any of you didn’t know, is Punjabi. I grew up speaking that to the age of nine. When my family moved to England, I then learned English and, later on, French as well.

I know how important it is to retain your mother tongue. I know how important it is. Even then…. I can tell you that when we did the Connected Coast announcement a year ago, at that time, when a director from Haida Gwaii was at the mike, what he said was: “Having connectivity — having a cell phone, having high-speed Internet — is going to allow us to bring our children home. It’s going to allow us to keep our language. It’s going to allow us to promote our culture, keep our culture and keep us connected.”

I think there isn’t anything more moving than when somebody says that having access will allow them to bring their children home. As a mother, grandmother and now a great-grandmother, I can tell you that I am so moved every time I think about that clip.

I’m now thinking that as this money, $100 million a year, is shared out amongst the First Nations, they’re going to use it for what is a priority in their communities. I cannot decide what is a priority for each one of these First Nations. They know. This is going to allow them to do the capacity-building that needs to happen. That is always part of it. We talk about capacity-building, even in government and in our own spheres. It’s very, very important for everybody.

[3:15 p.m.]

I can tell you that yesterday, when the member for Nechako Lakes — this is an exact quote — talked about a quote from a book by Helin, he goes: “It’s not about drug or alcohol addiction. It’s about addiction to government cheques, money that’s coming in from governments. I wonder if there’s an attempt, in terms of the gaming revenue and this process….”

I was sitting in my room when I heard this, and I can say that not too many times in my life do I become speechless, but I was made speechless by this. We give out grants as a government — and the previous government did — all the time, to a myriad of groups and organizations.

Having grants given is not new. Having revenue-sharing from gaming is not new either, because we already give out grants. We give out grants to municipalities. We give out grants to community organizations and health services. I have never heard my colleagues across the way talk about that as an “addiction to government cheques.” So why is it, when we’re talking about revenue-sharing with First Nations, that what is quoted — they’re the exact words — is: “It’s about addiction to government cheques”?

Let me tell you that many, many amazing leaders and community members I have met in the First Nations community are hard-working, determined, working for the best of their community. I don’t see them as being addicted to government cheques. They are fighting to improve the living conditions on their reserves, on the land and their nation. They’re struggling with housing. They’re struggling with health care, with access to doctors, with access to nurses. They’re struggling with young people who need to be steered and to address mental health issues and other types of addictions.

They are struggling with retention of the language, which is so, so necessary for the preservation of a culture and a nation. They are struggling with economically moving away from some of the older economies and moving into the new economies that require high-speed Internet and other infrastructures.

I hear them talking about how they want to make life better. I hear them talking about how they want to work in partnership, nation to nation. I don’t ever see them coming here saying: “I want a cheque because I want to be dependent on you.”

I really, really felt badly that those who listened to this would be so hurt by it. Then for the same member for Nechako Lakes to say that this whole thing was “more about paying off friends than it is about actually getting the resources to the bands….” I found that to be insulting and disrespectful and also not comprehending the challenges faced by our First Nations community.

I go back to what we heard from the First Nations. First Nations leaders described the plan as “the single most important” action the provincial government could take to “ease First Nations poverty and begin to close the economic and social gap for all First Nations.” That’s a quote from the First Nations leaders. That’s not something I have just made up.

[3:20 p.m.]

We on this side of the House heard that loud and clear, and we have a clear commitment to reducing the gap that exists, that is so huge.

This small step — because it is a very small step — is not going to set everything right, but it is a small step in the right direction: $100 million a year. As you know, over the course of the next 25 years, that’s $3 billion — $3 billion that is going to go into addressing health and wellness, infrastructure, economic business development, education, language, community development, capacity-building and governance, all what I am so proud that our government is committed to doing.

Truth and reconciliation is not just about sharing here. We have been living that for the last two years, and very soon there will be legislation brought forward that will show the commitment that we do have to this. But I do want to say that we have a fairly good record. It would take me a long, long time to read everything into the record, but let me just read a couple of things.

We have been implementing a strategy to increase the number of Indigenous employees to train child welfare staff to provide culturally relevant, meaningful and safe services for Indigenous children, youth, families and communities, because we know that we don’t have all the answers. As many books as we might read, as many movies as we might watch, only the First Nations communities really know how to address this, and we’re working in partnership with them.

In February 2019, MCFD broadened the education and experience requirements for front-line child protection positions. That’s a good thing, because we’re doing things from our end that will help to improve the services. We passed legislation that allows MCFD to share more information with Indigenous communities to keep children from coming into care in the first place, so the first priority is to have the child stay in the community.

We’ve invested $30 million to create more than 600 new, free, licensed child care spaces and expanded Aboriginal Head Start in over 30 communities across this province. These programs support Indigenous families and help them to become stronger and united.

You know what? There’s a lot going on in many, many ministries. The work that has been done…. For example, a cell tower in Witset, which was the last First Nations community along the Highway of Tears without cell. As we know, that went live not so long ago. Four provincial parks and one watershed protected area have been renamed to reflect the traditional Indigenous name, to reflect the historic and cultural significance.

There is still so much more that we still have to do. As people travel across the province, and as I have had the pleasure to meet with so many First Nations communities, I hear from them how, for the first time in a long time, they feel heard, they feel included and they feel listened to. When I was in Williams Lake, and we announced a project there, I heard the chief say: “I never believed this would happen.” Those are the kinds of things that are happening as we are trying to move down the road of truth and reconciliation.

[3:25 p.m.]

As I said earlier, our truth and reconciliation cannot possibly make up for the wrongs of the past. It cannot. I think it would be foolish for anyone to think that it could. But what it does enable us to do is to have a dialogue, to listen, to face the truth, to acknowledge the truth and, once we have it, to move towards a path of reconciliation that we can travel down together respectfully, nation to nation. And for us not to see, when we give a grant or grant money from the gaming fund into the aboriginal communities…. I don’t want that to be seen as just cheque dependency, when we don’t see the grants that we give out to all the other agencies in that way. That just seemed so, so wrong.

Also, you know, one of the steps you have to take as you move towards this road of truth and reconciliation is of using your courage and taking a step forward. When you’re stepping forward into unknown territory — which it is, as we move towards nation-to-nation partnership — yes, there are going to be some who are going to say: “There’s no level of accountability.” But the accountability is there.

The accountability is there with an organization set up by the First Nations that is going to distribute this money. They know the criteria that they’re going to be using. I’ve read it out twice just so that everybody knows that the money isn’t just given without anything. There is a list of the things that the money can be used for.

We’ve got to have that faith. When we give money out to community organizations across this province, whether it be in municipalities or in health services or whatever, we don’t then say: “Well, where’s the accountability?” The accountability comes as the program gets delivered.

In this province, we do have 203 First Nations. I think we have about a third of Canada’s First Nations right here.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Sims: Thank you. I support this legislation.

Hon. S. Simpson: I’m pleased to have the opportunity to stand and speak a little bit about the Gaming Control Amendment Act, 2019, Bill 36.

This piece of legislation is intended to fulfil a commitment that was made by our government, a commitment to share a portion of B.C. Lottery Corp. net income with First Nations across this province, and to share it with First Nations in a way that ensures that they make the decisions, that they are the decision-makers, about how that money will be expended and what the priorities for the expending of that money will be.

The commitment is a significant one. It’s a commitment for 23 years of dollars, approximately $100 million and increasing annually, as 7 percent of the revenue from lottery net income revenue. It’s an important source of dollars.

I know that in discussions that I’ve had with First Nations who’ve come to see me in my responsibilities around poverty reduction…. I’ve had extensive discussions with First Nations around those issues, both on and off reserve, and often the discussion, particularly on reserve but not exclusively, is very much about the ability, the capacity, for those nations to be able to make choices about how they move forward, to be able to make choices about how they provide supports to folks in their community.

They talk a lot about supporting young people and creating opportunities for young people. They talk a lot about the need to have…. As one leader said to me, when he was very excited about this money coming forward — I think at the last leadership gathering, where the announcement of these dollars was made….

[3:30 p.m.]

I had leaders there, and one in particular I remember talking to me about this money and saying: “When those dollars come, we will be in a position to use that almost as a secured line of credit to be able to deal with other issues in our community.”

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

In that particular case, it was the opportunity to build housing where none had been built for a very, very long time and where the need for housing for members of that nation on reserve was desperate. It was very hopeful and expecting that the ability to go to the bank with this guaranteed revenue source coming in to the nation would allow them to be able to arrange the agreement that they would need to start to address for themselves the housing challenges that they were facing. That really was only a single example.

The resources that are going out…. The first $200 million has gone out to the Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership, which will be the body. It’s a body that was structured under the advice of the First Nations Leadership Council and its member bodies to ensure that there was accountability around the money, which the partnership provides, and, at the same time, that the decisions were being made by First Nations themselves.

What we heard, of course, is the desire to ensure that First Nations would be the people who would make the decisions about how those dollars would be expended and about how those dollars would move forward. That’s why, when you look at the criteria, the criteria are very, very broad for the use of this money. Pretty much any legitimate project will find a place within this criteria if need be — for health and wellness; for infrastructure, safety, transportation and housing; for economic and business development; for education, language, culture and training; for community development and environmental protection; and for capacity-building, fiscal management and governance.

That’s a very wide net that is cast around the criteria that have been established working in consultation with First Nations to determine that criteria. It’s a very wide net that has been cast and consciously so, to ensure the decisions are made by the nations about how they will expend the dollars they will now come to expect every year.

I heard talk on the other side, of course, about whether there should be other sources of money. Well, you’ll know this has been a discussion around gaming revenue for a very long time in this province. I recall it was in 2007 that First Nation leaders presented the previous government, now the opposition, with an investment plan that recommended allocating 3 percent of gross gambling revenue directly towards economic development — to the previous government.

That recommendation and that proposal fell flat. It did not get a positive response from the previous government. We have responded with 7 percent of the net income and created a fund here that will be under the control of First Nations and that will be invested by First Nations at the local nation level, as they see fit, to meet the needs in their communities as they move forward.

This is a critical piece. It’s a piece that fits in with the ongoing work that we are doing as government around reconciliation and around what reconciliation on the ground means. We’ve been investing in housing. We’ve been investing in looking to support child welfare initiatives. We have invested in supporting the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

There was significant participation and a path forward developed around the work of TogetherBC, my work around poverty reduction that we continue to work on in partnership with First Nations moving forward, both on and off reserve. We’ve been supportive of friendship centres, which provide critical services to First Nations people living primarily in our urban centres. And, of course, we will be talking at some point here, not too far down the road, about UNDRIP again and about legislation related to UNDRIP.

[3:35 p.m.]

This is a Premier and a government that is committed to the hard work of making reconciliation work. It was Grand Chief Stewart Phillip who said: “Reconciliation isn’t for wimps.” He acknowledged that it is work. It’s challenging work, and it’s work that’s complicated. But what’s not complicated is to understand at some point that where you determine to share revenue, you don’t tie a bunch of strings to the revenue. You share the revenue, and you ensure that the nations have the authority, the authority they quite appropriately deserve, to make those decisions about what will and what won’t happen with that revenue that they have.

This legislation, the Gaming Control Amendment Act, does exactly that, and it does that in a structure which is the partnership group, the limited partnership that, in fact, ensures that it is guided with accountability and transparency, but it is guided by First Nations themselves. Of course, as part of this, the Lottery Corp. has had appointed, added to the board, a director from the First Nations communities.

Now, as we move forward to do this, we’ve heard from the other side, the opposition, a lot of reservation about this. We’ve heard comments. But what we have to understand is that as much as they would like to rewrite history, history is what it is. The history of the other side started, very clearly, shortly after they came to power in 2001. When they did that, many will remember, mostly sadly and with some shame about it, the B.C. treaty referendum in 2002, a provincewide referendum on First Nation treaty rights in British Columbia.

The Attorney General of the day called it a chance for ordinary British Columbians to have their say about the treaty process. The government called it an experiment in direct democracy. But as a number of people said, including Angus Reid, a well-respected pollster…. He called it “one of the most amateurish, one-sided attempts to gauge the public will that I have ever seen in my professional career.”

Critics called for a boycott of the referendum. Critics, including Indigenous and church leaders, called the plebiscite stupid, immoral, amateurish and racist. That was how the people on the other side started, when they formed government, to engage the relationship with First Nations. Quite honestly, that relationship…. I don’t believe they ever recovered from that in terms of building a meaningful, substantive relationship that was based on respect.

Here we are today. We’re here today, where we have challenges, including where the other side failed to address issues around the Truth and Reconciliation Commission; where the previous Premier refused, until forced under public pressure, to name a new chief commissioner to the treaty commission that would allow the treaty commission to proceed with treaty work.

In 2012, the Liberals refused to address the Highway of Tears, regardless of what Missing and Murdered Women said. They refused to address the issue of transportation on the Highway of Tears. It took…. Thankfully, when our government came in…

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Member for Kamloops–South Thompson.

Hon. S. Simpson: …we addressed the problem. It’s something that side….

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Minister. Minister, hold it.

Hon. S. Simpson: Disingenuous is the label for that side. Disingenuous.

Deputy Speaker: Minister. Minister, hold it.

That’s good. The member has to be in his chair if he wants to make any comments. Thank you.

Minister, continue.

Hon. S. Simpson: There’s nobody more disingenuous. They abandoned women in that community. They abandoned women. The ex–Transportation Minister abandoned women in that community.

Interjections.

[3:40 p.m.]

Deputy Speaker: Members.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: The minister has the floor.

Hon. S. Simpson: What does this party say now? Unbelievable. What does this party say now?

Let’s talk about what the member for Nechako Lakes had to say, his comments regarding this piece of legislation: “It’s about the addiction to government cheques, money that’s coming in from governments. I wonder if this is an attempt, in terms of the gaming revenue and this process….” Or is it “just another government cheque coming in?” He went on to say, the member for Nechako, as he was talking: “It seems to be more about paying off friends than it is about actually getting the resources to the bands.”

Well, I’m not sure who those friends are, but what I do know is that there are thousands and thousands of First Nations leaders around this province — chiefs, chief councillors, councillors, others in First Nations communities, Elders — who are excited about this money, money that will roll, money that will be invested in communities, communities that the Liberals abandoned and ignored for 16 years. They ignored for 16 years. We have an ex-minister over there who turned her back on First Nations communities time and again, has a history of turning her back on them — a history of it.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

Hon. S. Simpson: We have a party over there, a political party, that has misrepresented their position around First Nations time and again.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members. Members.

Hon. S. Simpson: And sadly….

Interjections.

Hon. S. Simpson: Maybe it’s a good thing. Maybe this is a good thing, but during this debate, they have reinforced and demonstrated that again and again and again. It’s very sad.

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Member.

Hon. S. Simpson: The good thing about this is that people can read this debate. They can look at this debate. They can look at what that side did as they tried to couch in words about caution and accountability…

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order.

Hon. S. Simpson: …the fact that they do not believe that First Nations should get this money. That’s the truth. They do not believe it. This is the group over here.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order, Members. Members.

Member, take your seat.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Order, Members.

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: The member for Prince George–​Valemount will come to order.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members will come to order now.

That’s enough, member for Prince George–Valemount.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members, are you not listening? Members, come to order, please. Enough. One member at a time. This member has the floor, and if people disagree with it, they will have time to counter it. Please let’s be respectful.

The minister will continue.

Hon. S. Simpson: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I don’t want to just….

Interjections.

Hon. S. Simpson: Let’s talk about other members on that side. What about the member for Kelowna West? What did the member for Kelowna West say in the debate on this bill? That “…lots of money has gone to First Nation communities and through organizations where perhaps maybe there’s no level of accountability.”

This is about a side that just…. It’s the nudge-nudge, wink-wink implications that we hear from the other side. That’s what we hear.

[3:45 p.m.]

What I’m pleased about is that this bill is going to pass. It’s going to pass, and it’s going to put in place a structure that ensures that there are core dollars going to First Nations across this province, dollars that they will have control over, dollars that they will make decisions about, whether it is to support young people, whether it’s to support housing, whether it’s to support necessary infrastructure improvements, whether it’s to lever, moving forward, by being able to access other dollars by having these dollars to lever those dollars forward.

This is part of what reconciliation’s about. This is part of what coming to responsible agreement is about. This is about what partnership will be about.

We are doing the right thing here in terms of moving this bill forward. I’ll be very interested to see where the other side votes when it comes to a vote on this bill. I’ll be very interested….

Interjection.

Hon. S. Simpson: Oh, the member says that. I’ll tell you that the nudge-nudge, wink-wink on that side is pretty good, but we’ll see where they actually vote when they have to actually stand up and vote.

We can make decisions here. We are making a decision here about whether to move forward and show respect for First Nations and for their leadership. But that side…. Respect for First Nations has not been part of the history of that side. That’s sad and unfortunate. We’re changing that, and one of those changes we will deal with, with this bill.

Thank you very much. I appreciate the opportunity to spend some time.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Let’s talk about respect.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

This House will be in recess for five minutes.

The House recessed from 3:47 p.m. to 3:48 p.m.

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

J. Brar: I feel proud to stand up in this House to support the Gaming Control Amendment Act.

This is about historic justice. This is a choice. Our government made a choice. The previous government made their choice. This is about building a province that’s more fair, more just and more equal. This is about providing equal opportunity to all British Columbians.

Indigenous people deserve respect and equal opportunity to realize their full potential. We cannot pretend there is no issue with First Nations. We cannot pretend that. They are struggling with a number of issues, whether it’s the economy, poverty, child welfare and other cultural issues.

[3:50 p.m.]

I will tell you a story. In 2012, I accepted the welfare challenge to tell the story of the people living in poverty. I stayed on welfare for one month — 15 days in Surrey and 16 days in downtown Vancouver. During that time, I met a lot of people and listened to their stories. Those stories were very painful.

I just want to say to you, Mr. Speaker, that the experience I went through was shocking, painful and eye-opening.

I will tell you a story. One day I was walking in the evening in downtown, on Hastings Street. I met a fellow. He came to me, and he told me a story. His story is this. He told me that he was 40 years of age when he came to Vancouver. He was desperate to find a job, and he did find a job. He found a job in the construction industry, and he worked in the construction industry for 15 years — 15 long years.

After 15 years, because of the situation in the economy, he was laid off. What he told me at the end was that he was now looking for a job. He did everything possible that he could do to find a job. But he couldn’t find a job, because he’s 55 and he’s First Nations. That’s what he told me. He’s First Nations. He ended up on welfare, and he was living in a downtown SRO building. He told me he was living in that building with 20 other people on the same floor with one washroom. That’s the story he told me.

But what happens, what I hear from the members of this community from time to time, when they blame people like that individual — that they don’t want to do work, that they just want to stay on welfare…. That is shocking to me, going through this experience, that we blame people who are honest and who want to work and who want to live a life with respect and dignity. That’s one issue.

If we look at the challenges that First Nations are facing, poverty is a huge issue. We all know that. It’s surprising to me that poverty in First Nations is bigger than even the newcomer communities who just came to this country a few years ago. That is shocking. That is really shocking to see — that they have way more poverty than the newcomer communities.

The child welfare issue is also very serious. Forty percent of children in the care of the government are children from First Nations. That also is very, very disproportionately high when we look at the number of those children.

The First Nations have been looking for help for too long. They tried to work with the previous government. The First Nations leadership, they asked for the gaming revenue-sharing to be negotiated by the previous government in 2007. They actually presented a plan to them. But the previous government didn’t listen to them. They refused to listen to them at that time.

In fact, the first thing I want to say is there are two different perspectives. We want to work with them. The other side, they clearly don’t want to work with the First Nations people. The first thing the B.C. Liberals did when they came to power in 2002 is they conducted a referendum. The B.C. treaty referendum was a provincewide referendum on First Nations treaty rights in British Columbia, Canada.

B.C.’s Attorney General at that time, Geoff Plant, called it a chance for ordinary British Columbians to have a say in the treaty process. The government at that time called the referendum “an experiment in direct democracy.” The polling expert Angus Reid called it “one of the most amateurish, one-sided attempts to gauge the public will that I have seen in my professional life.”

[3:55 p.m.]

This strategy is very simple. For them, when you want to help the minorities, call for a referendum. It’s a divide-and-rule strategy. It’s very simple. That’s what happened at that time, and that’s what they did.

The First Nations at that time presented the previous government with the B.C. First Nations investment plan. The plan recommended allocation of 3 percent of B.C.’s gross gambling revenue directly towards economic and community development initiatives in Indigenous communities. At the time, First Nations’ leaders described the plan as the single most important action.

But what happened? B.C. Liberals didn’t listen to the First Nation leadership at that time. This is, again, not the first time they failed to listen to First Nations. If you look at the history at every step, the B.C. Liberals have failed to take any meaningful action to support First Nations. That’s the reality.

Highway of Tears. I know the previous speaker, my colleague here, mentioned about the Highway of Tears. I went to Prince George in 2012, I think, and there was a community forum. At that time, it was a forum where the First Nations of the local area came together to talk about the Highway of Tears and how the First Nations’ young females, particularly, get abducted from the highway and then raped and, subsequently, murdered.

At that particular event, there was family after family…. I think there were seven families, and they told their stories about their situations. At that time, the key thing they were asking for, of course, was reliable transportation on the Highway of Tears.

I know my fellow member who spoke before me, he made the question that the government of the day, at that time, did not listen to their requests. That’s true, because nothing happened at that time. That’s absolutely true.

What else can we actually say? The member on the other side will believe that whatever that part of the situation is…. The choice is very clear that we want to work with the First Nations. They don’t want to work with the First Nations. That’s a very clear choice.

We are proud to introduce the Gaming Control Amendment Act. The act will entitle B.C. First Nations to a portion of B.C. Lottery Corp.’s net income for 23 years. In Budget 2019, the province committed to sharing 7 percent of the net provincial revenue from gaming with B.C.’s First Nations for 25 years.

I’m going to repeat. I know there were questions from the other side about what exactly is the amount. The amount is 7 percent of the net provincial revenue from gaming with the B.C. First Nations for 25 years. That’s what the sharing is. It also increases the maximum number of directors of the B.C. Lottery Corp. to 11 to facilitate the appointment of one position for a First Nations’ nominee. This will create a reliable, long-term revenue stream for First Nations as part of our commitment to reconciliation.

It will ensure First Nations have a stable, predictable source of income to fund economic, social and cultural activities that directly benefit the people who live in their communities. Each First Nation can use the gaming revenue to support their own priorities, like improving social services, education, infrastructure, cultural activity and self-government capacity. It’s all about giving them power to make determinations about their own futures and creating their own services, whether it’s building infrastructure or improving education and social services. That’s the key.

[4:00 p.m.]

We have already transferred nearly $200 million to the newly formed B.C. First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership, providing the first two years of shared gaming revenue.

One of the questions the members from the other side have asked is if this revenue may intervene on other revenue streams. But I would like to make absolutely clear that this new gaming-revenue-sharing arrangement will not affect the funds that currently go to municipalities, including First Nations, who host gaming facilities, community organizations and health services. The agreement is expected to provide participating First Nations communities with approximately $100 million. It’s $100 million per year, and the province is expected to share about $3 billion with B.C.’s First Nations over the term of the agreement, which is 25 years.

This is a commitment made by this government. I think this is the right commitment, and this is a long-term commitment so that the First Nations can make decisions about their futures and build the services or the infrastructure they need to build. This will of course allow them to make a determination about what kind of services they need. Sometimes the services that are available outside in the community may not be culturally appropriate to First Nations, but with this stream of money they can certainly improve the social services they need, they can improve the infrastructure they need, and they can certainly improve the capacity moving forward. That’s the intent of this bill.

I just want to conclude by saying that this is a matter of choice. We made the choice. Our government is making a choice to support the First Nations, to provide them long-term, sustainable funding so that they can improve the services they need to improve. That’s our position. On the other side, the First Nations have been asking for this kind of funding for too long.

As I said earlier, in 2007, they approached the previous government with a very specific proposal, a proposal asking for sharing the revenue at that time. The government of the day, which was the B.C. Liberal government at that time, completely refused to provide that funding sharing at that time.

We, the B.C. NDP government, at this time, have made this determination, and we are going to provide the funding they need to improve their services, to build their infrastructure so that they can move forward. This is all about building a province that’s more equal, that’s more fair, that’s more just, that provides equal opportunity to all people — particularly, in this case, to First Nations people so that they can realize their dreams, as well as other people in the province.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank you for the opportunity for me to speak on this bill.

A. Kang: I rise today to speak in support of Bill 36, the Gaming Control Amendment Act.

This act will ensure a stable, long-term source of revenue for B.C. First Nations by providing First Nations with 7 percent of B.C. Lottery Corp.’s net income for the next 23 years. This new revenue-sharing agreement will support self-government and self-determination for First Nations communities across B.C., making lives easier for families.

Mr. Speaker, as you have heard many of the members on this side of the House comment, our government is committed to true and lasting reconciliation with Indigenous people, and this is one of the most important steps that we are taking. This long-term agreement will result in approximately an additional $100 million per year of funding for eligible First Nations. By 2045, this will add up to approximately $3 billion.

Under the current government, our economy continues to grow, the lives of our workers continue to improve, and all British Columbians continue to have more to spend in their pockets. In fiscal year 2017-2018, the province collected approximately $1.4 billion in net revenue from gaming activities.

[4:05 p.m.]

With our strong economy, Bill 36 is a major step to share the prosperity of this province, and it allows our government to uphold our commitment to reconciliation.

In 2007, as many of our colleagues have mentioned already — I would also like to emphasize this historical change — First Nations leaders presented the previous government with the B.C. First Nations investment plan. They recommended allocating 3 percent of B.C.’s gross gambling revenue directly towards economic and community development initiatives in First Nations communities. In that conversation, First Nations leaders described the plan as the single most important action the provincial government could take to ease First Nations poverty and begin to close the economic and social gap for all First Nations.

But their voices fell on deaf ears. Unfortunately, the former government did not make the commitment at that time. Now, more than ten years later, earlier this fall, the province shared $194.84 million with First Nations under an interim agreement to cover the first two years of a 25-year commitment to shared gaming revenues.

The B.C. Assembly of First Nations, First Nations Summit and the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs have directed the establishment of the B.C. First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership, which receives, manages and distributes gaming revenue funds. Our provincial government has already transferred nearly $200 million to the newly formed B.C. First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership, providing the first two years of shared gaming revenue. All First Nations communities in B.C. are eligible to become members of the limited partnership and receive distribution of revenues.

This agreement has been long overdue, and the interim agreement ensures that there was no delay in funding while this legislation was to be introduced.

This legislation is important in creating a reliable, long-term revenue stream for First Nations to participate in the wealth of our province. The long-term revenue stream also offers opportunities for First Nations to prioritize community issues that are important to them. Just to name a few, these issues could include health and wellness, infrastructure, safety, transportation and housing, economic and business development, education, language, culture, training, community development and environmental protection.

B.C. will be the first province in Canada to introduce legislation to implement the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples, mandating all provincial laws and policies to be in harmony with the declaration.

Being a teacher, I am always especially excited to talk about education. I am very proud of the work that the Minister of Education is doing in our school system and for First Nations students. Our government has been making progress in the area of education. Education is one of the key parts to reconciliation. Our government built Indigenous content into all grades and subjects in B.C.’s new curriculum.

I want to use this opportunity to thank all the teachers out there, the BCTF, for your efforts and commitment to be part of truth and reconciliation and to bring our children into the conversation. Now students from K to 12 will be able to gain knowledge of Indigenous content, to be in the conversation of truth and what B.C. is committed to doing about reconciliation and to learn about the beautiful and rich history of Indigenous people in B.C.

B.C.’s new professional standards require teachers to commit to truth and reconciliation and also healing. To highlight the successes of our Indigenous students, our public schools have designed one non-instructional day for teachers to focus on Indigenous student achievements. Our government has invested $400,000 towards Indigenous teacher training, seats and curriculum development at B.C. universities. In addition to that, we’ve built new Indigenous-focused courses to be offered in a new B.C. graduation program.

Improving education outcomes for First Nation students is central to the self-determination and well-being efforts for First Nations in British Columbia. We are leading the way as the only jurisdiction in Canada with a tripartite agreement that ensures an equitable education for First Nation students, no matter where they live.

[4:10 p.m.]

Our government remains committed to creating an equitable education system that supports all students to succeed. In fact, this is an issue that is cross-ministry.

True and lasting reconciliation takes time, and our government is making progress because working together means a stronger B.C. The ministry of Advanced Education, Skills and Training is investing $2.7 million in Indigenous teacher training programs. With our commitment to First Nation education of students, I’m so happy to see that Indigenous students in B.C. are completing secondary school at the highest rate in history, with 70 percent completing high school. That’s an 8 percent increase over the last four years and a 4 percent increase in the last year alone.

There’s so much more that we need to do to continue our work to support true and lasting reconciliation with Indigenous people. Our government remains committed to creating an equitable education system that supports all students to succeed. Bill 36 will guarantee financial security to First Nation governance and allow long-term fiscal planning.

I would like to take a moment to thank Grand Chief Joe Hall, a former chair of the B.C. First Nations Gaming Commission, and all of the First Nation leaders who have long advocated for revenue-sharing agreements. It is incredibly exciting to see decades of advocacy and hard work come to fruition. The least that myself and all my colleagues in this chamber can do is to pass Bill 36 to formalize this agreement.

Bill 36 will also provide an additional $2 million to the B.C. First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing to cover legal fees. Continuing our commitment to reconciliation, Bill 36 also increases the maximum number of directors of the B.C. Lottery Corp. from nine to 11 to facilitate the appointment of one position for a First Nation nominee. This will bring their voices to the table as well. To truly share the wealth from gaming revenues, it is important for this government to invite First Nations to have a voice.

Finally, it is important to note that the new gaming-revenue-sharing arrangement will not affect funds that currently go to municipalities, including First Nations who host gaming facilities, community organizations and health services. Currently, five other provinces in Canada already have this revenue-sharing agreement. Bill 36 will allow British Columbia to move forward and align ourselves with those provinces. This bill is long overdue.

When First Nations are well funded, stronger, our prov­ince becomes stronger. With that, I strongly urge all members from all sides to vote in favour of Bill 36.

Hon. G. Heyman: It gives me great pleasure to rise to speak in support of Bill 36, the Gaming Control Amendment Act, one of a number of measures our government is taking to walk the long road to reconciliation and help, in collaboration with Indigenous nations, build a more stable, predictable, sound model of funding and support for a whole range of community, cultural, social, educational and economic needs.

One of the privileges that I’ve had in my position as a minister is to regularly be involved in initiatives of collaboration with Indigenous nations and peoples; to be asked to address gatherings, whether it be at the First Nations Leadership Council, the B.C. Assembly of First Nations; and to attend individual nations’ events or meetings with individual nations or groups of nations, the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs.

At each of these events, it’s been a privilege to learn the history, the culture, the approach of these nations to government-to-government engagement and also to hear firsthand about the challenges, the hopes, the aspirations, the activities and the initiatives that Indigenous nations are taking to rebuild, in many cases, the fabric of their culture and societies that have been torn apart for a variety of reasons.

[4:15 p.m.]

Not the least of which is the colonial history of this country as well as the many, many — “regrettable” hardly begins to describe it — initiatives such as residential schools, the taking of land, the killing of languages, the outlawing of cultural practices and the general impoverishment of nations. In that context, it is always surprising to me that Indigenous people have goodwill. They have hope. They have incredible intelligence. They retain and rebuild that connection with their culture, with their language and with their values, while at the same time adapting those to a modern world and looking for ways to have genuine engagement and respectful interaction with the rest of us who now live in this place.

In my ministry in particular, we had a long process that led up to last fall’s introduction of the Environmental Assessment Act. It’s an act that’s built on the principles of the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples and the desire of our government to see environmental assessment and consensus-based decision-making and collaboration with Indigenous nations be a tool, along with the environmental assessment office, for implementing the principles of UNDRIP.

It’s for us to provide greater certainty for Indigenous nations, for communities, for industries in British Columbia and for all of us as we develop a model of culturally respectful, environmentally sensitive and sustainable economic development through a process that involves, engages and collaborates with Indigenous people from the very first stages of assessment, that respects Indigenous culture and language and that respects the knowledge that Indigenous people have of the land on which they live and we live, and on which we often propose industrial development.

We are currently working in collaboration with an Indigenous implementation committee, with the B.C. First Nations Leadership Council and with the First Nations Energy and Mining Council to develop regulations that will give life to this act, on policies that will eventually give life to the application of Indigenous knowledge to a process that I think will make British Columbia a more stable, better, respectful and reconciled place in which we can all live and prosper.

That’s one action that we can take to implement the UN declaration and reconciliation. This act is another one. This act, I think, is not the only step but a critical step on the path to reconciliation and the path to saying to Indigenous nations: “You have ideas. You have capacity. You have intelligence. You have needs. And you need some stable sources of funding in which to develop your economies; protect your culture; develop infrastructure; address the health of your people; protect education, language and culture; and develop your communities as well as your capacity to implement sound fiscal management practices and procedures.”

Since 2007, Indigenous people have been seeking a share of gaming revenue as a way to achieve this ideal. They were repeatedly told no. They were repeatedly told no by the previous government because it was easier to say, on a transactional basis: “If you do this, you get this. If you do this, you get that.” But that is not providing stability. It is not providing capacity. It is not a respectful way to engage and to recognize that we, overall, as British Columbians, have a debt to Indigenous people.

That debt isn’t simply a monetary debt. The debt is one of replacing decades and decades of neglect, of taking advantage, of impoverishment and of removing resources with a repayment of helping to build capacity and taking steps toward real reconciliation and real collaboration.

[4:20 p.m.]

When First Nations told us again that receiving a share of gaming revenue on a predictable, steady basis and allowing them, themselves, and their people to make decisions about how to use that funding to support a variety of defined initiatives…. We found a way to say yes. And that yes, of course, was to say that we will dedicate 7 percent of gaming revenue over a 25-year period to First Nations. That is incredibly important. We’re factoring in a 2 percent annual growth rate. We expect over the term of the agreement to share $3 billion with First Nations. Earlier this fall we shared almost $200 million in revenue to account for the first two years of the agreement while we were negotiating the remainder of the agreement.

The First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership will be responsible for receiving, managing and distributing these funds to participating First Nations. Participating First Nations, of course, will be living within the guidelines and the parameters that are established around this funding envelope.

That’s important to note, because it is disappointing to me that we can’t all come together in this House and recognize the safeguards that are needed to ensure that the revenue is used for the stated purposes. The purposes are health and welfare; infrastructure, safety, transportation and housing; economic and business development; education, language, culture and training; community development and environmental protection; capacity-building, fiscal management and governance. Those purposes are ones on which we should all be able to agree.

We should all be able to agree that it isn’t up to us within those parameters to be mistrustful of the capacity, the goodwill, the checks and balances that will be built into the structure that has been established — the gaming revenue-sharing partnership — to ensure that the funds are productively used as they’re meant to be used.

It is not up to us to control every piece of the pocket of money. It is up to us to say to Indigenous people: “You have for many years asked for a small share of gaming revenue to replace decades of resources and capacity that were taken from the land that you originally inhabited, from your traditional territories.”

This is not everything that we can or need to do, but it is a step. Part of the step is not just the financial nature of the step. Part of the step is the relationship. Part of the step is building capacity in Indigenous nations or providing funding for them, themselves, to build the capacity to continue their traditions and culture of self-governance and support each other with capacity. It is not up to us to be controlling and judgmental in that regard. It is up to us to negotiate with the Indigenous peoples themselves, and the agreed-upon set of parameters for the use of this portion of the funding, and then sign the agreement and let it happen.

Again, I’m not clear why we can’t agree upon that universally in this House. I hope that in the end, we will, because I think it is an important signal to Indigenous people in British Columbia that all of us have a goal of reconciliation, that this is a piece of the path toward the goal of reconciliation, the path that we have all agreed to walk.

Let me go back to what I’ve learned in many of my meetings with nations and the stories I heard that shattered stereotypes I didn’t even know I had, stories about the history of some of the Elders and what they used to experience in their territories and land, how they used to govern themselves, how they used to pass on knowledge, tradition, laws and culture and how they’ve been trying to rebuild that.

It was rent asunder, as families were rent asunder, as the governments in Canada and British Columbia believed that we knew better, that we had the best model and that Indigenous peoples needed to fit into our model rather than continue their own culture, their own traditions, their own knowledge, their own laws and their own ways of life on their own unceded territories.

[4:25 p.m.]

This is not new in Canada. As my colleagues have pointed out, this revenue-sharing agreement will align with other governments in Canada — like Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Nova Scotia — which already share gaming revenue with First Nations.

This isn’t a question of a system that is not going to have safeguards, controls, reporting mechanisms and parameters. All of those things are in place. This is not a bill or an act on which we should have partisan agreement. This, I believe, is an initiative that we should all agree is long overdue, that we should all support, that we should all celebrate, that we should all agree together is a small piece of our commitment and our obligation to reconcile with Indigenous peoples in this province, Indigenous peoples who almost universally never ceded their territory or signed treaties but who have simply been living in this province, which we have occupied to great profit.

There is much remaining to be done, but this is a small piece of a step forward. It is an important concrete as well as symbolic move we can make, and I urge all members of this House to support this bill and to say in unanimity to Indigenous people in British Columbia: “Our intention is true, meaningful and full-hearted reconciliation.”

Hon. M. Mark: It is always my honour to stand in these chambers and to take my seat as the member for Vancouver–​Mount Pleasant. I’m also very proud to be Nisg̱a’a and Gitxsan and Cree and Ojibway. I wear my grandmother’s necklace with pride, from the Nisg̱a’a Nation. So it is my honour to stand here in these chambers to support Bill 36 and the gaming revenue-sharing act.

I appreciate many of the remarks that have been delivered in these chambers. I guess that I just want to start with what an historic time we are at. It is 2019.

Former politicians, former elected officials, went to great lengths to wipe out my relatives, and we survived. Not only have we survived, but Indigenous people are the fastest-growing population in this country. We know the statistics of Indigenous peoples with respect to overincarceration in jails and overrepresentation in the foster care system, and poverty and missing women. That is a narrative that we need to stand up and reject. We have to reject, as the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation says…. We have to disrupt the status quo.

I believe that our government is doing just that. Reconciliation without action is meaningless. This is a negotiation, what we are talking about. The changes that are going to happen that I referred to as being historic have been called for by First Nations since 2007, for some First Nations. First Nations have been asking for gaming revenue-sharing to be negotiated by the province for years, and in 2007, First Nation leaders presented to the previous government the B.C. First Nations investment plan. The plan recommended 3 percent. Our government is taking things a little bit further — 7 percent.

I’ve heard all sorts of remarks in these chambers, from the members opposite, on why 7 percent, why this or that. The bottom line is: we have a lot of work to do to turn things around when it comes to our relationships with Indigenous people, the true stewards of this land, the caretakers of the land, which many of us are proud to acknowledge when it comes to an opening of an event or what have you. But the real reconciliation means making choices, and our government believes that this was the right choice.

[4:30 p.m.]

Members opposite can talk about all of the choices that they made, but for 16 years, they didn’t make this choice. This was an easy choice for us.

I want to share with you what this means to Judith Sayers. “We’ve been waiting a long time for this,” says the president of the Nuu-chah-nulth Nations. “I have personally been involved in trying to get this going for 13 years, and it’s been at least 30 years that First Nations have been doing it. So it’s a good day.”

[J. Isaacs in the chair.]

I can spend time talking about the mechanics of this legislation. Bottom line: it will create a reliable, long-term revenue stream for First Nations as part of our commitment to reconciliation. This stable, predictable source of income to fund economic, social and cultural activities, the use of the gaming revenue to support their own priorities — this is self-determination. It will enhance social services, education, infrastructure, cultural revitalization and self-government capacity.

But I want to pause for a moment, because I think it’s important for those that are going to look back at the historic time that we’re in. I’m the first Nations woman to ever get elected to stand in these chambers, and that only happened in 2016. So the fight has been….

Interjection.

Hon. M. Mark: Thank you. I will always thank you for acknowledging the resilience of my relatives to survive and their goal to have thriving communities. That drive is for self-determination.

It does bug me. It irks me. It hurts me when people stand in these chambers with such pride to represent their communities and bring fear into these chambers as though those dumb Indians aren’t going to be able to manage their affairs.

Those days are over. We need to stop talking about Indigenous people like they’re some dumb Indians. That paternalistic approach is the way of the past. What my generation is calling for and what my ancestors have been calling for is change. We want prosperity in our communities.

I want to quote some of the fearmongering, because I think that people at home need to understand. When you look at an MLA, we should all stand with pride that we represent all of our constituents equally. This act is about sharing gaming revenue, a long-term commitment for 25 years, embedded into legislation. We had some members opposite — former cabinet ministers, to add to that — saying that this is about paying off friends. Seems to me more like “about paying off friends than it is about actually getting resources to the bands.”

Let’s quote another one: “The challenge that the nations have faced can be summed up quite nicely in a book that Calvin Helin wrote called Dances with Dependency. It’s a very interesting book. It’s not about drug or alcohol addiction. It’s about addiction to government cheques, money that’s coming in from governments. I wonder if there’s an attempt, in terms of the gaming revenues and this process…. Is this not just another government cheque coming…?”

Shame. Shame on the member opposite for saying such an ignorant thing. Shame on going around and acting like: “Ho, ho. We’re all in this together. We respect our First Nations.” You know, say that to the Chiefs. Go out and tell the Chiefs that you think that we’re standing there with our hand out.

We were and we had thriving conditions as Indigenous people. The only reason why we’re talking about reconciliation is because elected officials of the past took deliberate and calculated measures to take our communities apart. The fact that we’re standing…. I am so proud. I’m so proud that my families, families across this province, have fought for our land.

We are fighting for a share. That is what this is about. This is about a share in resources. It is about a share in saying that we, our B.C. NDP government, are going to do things differently.

I know I don’t have a lot of time because my colleagues are very passionate about having the opportunity to talk about turning things around. That is reconciliation in action.

[4:35 p.m.]

It’s a historic moment. When I think of the list of Indigenous people bringing programs into their communities on health and wellness, infrastructure, economic business development, education, language…. These are going to be game-changers. The gaming revenue-sharing is going to be game-changing for First Nations people across this province, and I’m so proud to be standing in the chamber, to be able to take that action to make it happen.

I want to acknowledge one of the members opposite’s comments, who referred to visits as a cabinet minister to the significantly shoddy conditions these people live in. We cannot turn our eyes. We cannot be blind to the issues. Right now, in a federal election, we are talking about Indigenous people, people across this country that don’t have clean drinking water. Shame. Shame on the people that ignored those issues. Shame on the people that have ignored, didn’t have the guts to stand up and do the right thing for First Nations people.

This isn’t about my bias as a First Nations person. It’s not because it’s my relatives that might have better conditions than those shoddy conditions that the member opposite referred to. Our job as elected officials, to be in government, is to make our communities stronger and brighter, and this gaming revenue is going to do just that.

Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to share a few words.

T’ooyaḵsiy̓ n̓isim̓.

N. Simons: My friend and colleague the Minister of Advanced Education, I know, has another meeting to go to, and I was just really pleased to hear her comments on this bill — from the heart and from her experience and from her teachings, and I appreciate that very much, as I appreciate the comments from all of my colleagues that were intended with goodwill and with hope for the future.

It’s in that spirit that I’d like to just offer my support to this important piece of legislation that is just one part of many parts of many efforts, in past and future, to address the situation, the circumstances that our province is currently in. And that is that we are decidedly on a path towards improving, strengthening and creating a relationship among each other as citizens of this province that is healthy, that is based on mutual respect, and that’s based on an understanding of where we’ve come from and where we hope to be. And I think that this bill in itself is specifically addressing some inequality that has existed in the past.

The province receives a lot of revenue from the Lottery Corp. — everything from the gambling and gaming and lottery and Scratch and Wins. The province gets a lot of money as revenue. It has been a long-standing concern of ours that this fund, these funds, are shared among our communities, and I’m really pleased that after a long, long time, after significant effort and years of advocacy, government has agreed and has figured out, in discussions and deliberations with the leadership council and those that they represent, to find a way, a mechanism, to ensure that Indigenous communities have access to a share of that gambling revenue.

I’m pleased, because I know that it’s part of a larger effort. It’s not, in and of itself, the accomplishment that we look for. It’s part of one step towards addressing some of the issues that we’ve never before addressed. For that reason, I think that the legislation before us should be celebrated. I’m disappointed a bit that some of the comments from the opposition didn’t reflect that celebratory tone and, rather than addressing certain issues that may be of concern, some words were used, I think, that create more division than necessary.

[4:40 p.m.]

I don’t want to ascribe any motivation to those words, but they were not based in what I believe to be British Columbians’ understanding of where we are now, where we are as a society, as British Columbians. We have to do a lot to ensure that our communities are healthy — all of us, throughout the province. We have poverty in every community. We have challenges around opioid use, around crime. We have challenges around the environment. We share these challenges. We recognize these, and we try to address these challenges with good policy, good legislation.

In this particular case, the government of the province has recognized the need for funds for programs in Indigenous communities that don’t have other sources of funding, per se. When we see an opportunity for communities to apply for funding for projects that are specifically important to their communities, I think that’s a good thing.

With respect to this legislation, Indigenous communities will have access for funding to deal with health and wellness; infrastructure, safety, transportation and housing; economic and business development; education, language, culture and training; community development and environmental protection; and capacity-building, fiscal management and governance. I, for one, am very pleased to see that.

It’s not a question of this in itself addressing all of the issues that we need to address, but it’s an important part of that. I recognize that many people don’t like the idea that we can pass laws that will lead to reconciliation, and I think reconciliation is truly between people, with an understanding of history that recognizes that we’ve made mistakes. We have been, perhaps, not forthright and, clearly, not quick enough in addressing some of those failures, but here we are now. Where there might have been ambling towards a better relationship, I think we’re now in a jog.

I think we’re getting more…. I think that we, as colleagues and as government caucus, recognize that in order to be successful as a province, we need to have equality. We need to have opportunity, equal opportunities around this province, and this is what, in part, this legislation strives to do.

Yes, there have been revenue-sharing agreements in the past on resources. There have been agreements and memorandums of understanding addressing many areas, many sectors. This, in particular, is the sector where revenue is accrued by government and should be allocated where needed. And communities apply for gaming funding. Indigenous communities will apply for gaming funding, and I can see nothing negative about that.

I have confidence in the capacity of agencies to manage the funds. We have a system of accountability that is for everyone. There are opportunities in this legislation that provide for communities that may not have had opportunities for funding in the past. So $100 million a year, with $200 million already in the fund, for 25 years is a significant investment. I think British Columbians around the province are going to be very pleased that this opportunity exists.

We don’t need praise. It’s not about that. The government is doing what is necessary in order to address some of the wrongs of the past in order to create a better future. I’m glad we’re doing this, and it’s about time that government did this. But, really, the credit goes to the Indigenous communities that have, as we heard the previous speaker talk about, the resilience.

[4:45 p.m.]

This is a result of that resilience. This is an example of what happens when that commitment towards justice doesn’t stop. It will continue, and there will be more efforts, and there will be more agreements that will address the wrongs of the past. This is just, as I said, a small step in that larger picture.

It’s not a partisan thing. It happens to be that at this time, we’re here, and we’ve made this a priority. I’m quite sure that members opposite recognize that this is an important step. And I’m quite sure that they’ll be supporting this legislation. They may have questions about how it’s administered, and I think it’s fair. The opposition is, having been all too familiar, all too familiar…. I recognize those benches still.

Interjection.

N. Simons: I didn’t say 16, because I was only elected for 12 of those — for 12 years.

I think it’s important to know whether the structure, the format, is correct. I know, from the communities that I represent — in particular, the shíshálh Nation has expressed pleasure — that they’re pleased that this program is going to exist. They’re entirely comfortable with the process. I haven’t heard much negativity about it, and I think that as it’s explained from a neutral and a reasonable perspective, most people in this province will see this as a good tool to help communities address needs that are specific to them.

There are larger Indigenous communities and smaller ones. They have their unique needs. And I only hope that this funding will go some distance towards improving the quality of life of Indigenous people wherever they live in this province.

I think that our record in this area is good. I think we also recognize that we have responsibilities, as government, to ensure that we adhere to court rulings, that we commit to the values that we got elected on — and that includes incorporating the United Nations declaration as a basis for the legislation that we pass — that we commit to the calls to action that were made, in addition to responding to, for example, the Ed John report on child welfare.

We’re not going to accomplish it all at once. There will be bumps in the road. We will have challenges. We will not always find unanimous agreement, but I think that from the perspective of the provincial government, a sharing of the gaming revenue is a good way to continue that process towards, in the spirit of, reconciliation. I don’t think reconciliation is actually a goal, but rather a process, and I think that we just always have that process.

I’m not going to get into a debate about reconciliation specifically, but I think that our government has an understanding. First Nations communities understand our intent. I think we’re judged on our intent, as well as our actions. And I think we’ve been clear with our intent, and this legislation before us today is an example of our actions.

With that, Madam Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to speak.

M. Dean: I’d like to start by recognizing that we’re gathered here today on the traditional territory of the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking people, now known as the Esquimalt and Songhees nations. That’s really important to me because my constituency of Esquimalt-Metchosin includes the lands and the now-established communities of Esquimalt and Songhees, and also Scia’new at the west end of my constituency. That’s the Beecher Bay First Nation band as well.

[4:50 p.m.]

I serve and represent all of those communities, and I mention that because I’m very proud to stand here today representing everybody in my constituency, to be here today to talk about this bill. This bill is an action that is taking us on our journey of reconciliation, so I’m really proud to stand and speak in support of it.

We can’t just talk about reconciliation. So many people from the Indigenous community say to me: “We have all these reports. We know what’s wrong. We know the history. We know our history. What we need to see now and what we need to do together now is take action.”

One of the earlier speakers today was actually our Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Training. She’s the first Indigenous woman to hold office in cabinet in the provincial government of British Columbia. I feel so honoured to actually be in a caucus with her and amongst colleagues who have brought us to this place where she can stand here in chambers today, debate this bill and make some really important points and highlights.

This is a choice. Our government is making this choice to share gaming revenues. The other side was in power for 16 years. They could have made that choice. They didn’t make that choice, but we are. And we’re really proud of it.

She called attention to how her family used to thrive, living here in these lands. Now, they have to survive. Well, we need to move past that and beyond that, where everybody is thriving, and this bill is going to take us further on that pathway. She called shame on the conditions that…. Some Indigenous communities still don’t have potable drinking water. This is the 21st century.

There is so much poverty because of the systemic racism and colonization, and we need to dismantle that. We need to disrupt the status quo, as our Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation says. This bill is going to contribute towards that.

What this bill does is it entitles B.C. First Nations to a portion of the B.C. Lottery Corp.’s net income for 23 years. In total, that’s going to be $3 billion. What that does is it creates a reliable, long-term revenue stream for First Nations. That is us stepping into what we mean by reconciliation: revenue-sharing.

By having that security of a stable and predictable source of income, Indigenous communities, First Nations, can fund economic, social and cultural activities, infrastructure — priorities that benefit the people who live in their communities. It can support their priorities, whatever they are. That could be social services, health services, education, infrastructure, cultural revitalization, capacity-building.

Already we have shared nearly $200 million. We’ve actually transferred the money to the newly formed B.C. First Nations Gaming Revenue Sharing Limited Partnership. That’s two years of shared gaming revenue. But what’s important here in the bill is that it’s creating that predictability and that long-term stability.

This isn’t a paternalistic handout. This is something that Indigenous leaders have been asking for regularly, trying to get some movement in the provincial government for nearly 20 years.

I want to just highlight a few of the key principles in this bill. Firstly, each nation is going to use it for their own priorities. These are going to be decisions based on the identified needs and the priorities of each nation. This isn’t a manipulation of what Indigenous communities should be doing or what they should look like. This is about saying: “You have the wisdom, you have the experience, you have the capacity, and you have the competency to use these funds in the best way that serves your community. You are the experts in your community. You know what’s best for your community.”

[4:55 p.m.]

It’s self-directed into those critical areas. It’s informed by knowledge of the community, caring for the community and bringing that Indigenous perspective of honouring ancestors, honouring tradition and looking ahead seven generations — looking ahead for the children of the community.

The formula itself is also very clear. It’s a clear formula, and it’s transparent, so it’s being fairly applied across the province. There is 50 percent base funding, divided equally per community; 40 percent based on population; and 10 percent for geographically remote communities. That formula was built in partnership with First Nations leadership.

Again, that isn’t the provincial government coming in and just laying down a rule and saying: “Run with it. See how that works for you.” This has been a long process. We made the choice. Our government was sworn in, in July of 2017. In January 2018, we started this process, because we knew. We’d already been hearing from the First Nations leadership about wanting to find a way to share revenues and to be able to build capacity in communities.

This is long-term and reliable funding. What does that mean for Indigenous communities? It means that you can create a multi-year plan. It means you can be strategic. It means you can phase things. You can actually plan for the health and the benefit and the capacity of your community.

What else can you do? You can borrow against it. You can even increase capacity. You can leverage so that you’re actually even meeting the needs of your community earlier, faster, better, deeper, broader. Whatever is decided to be the priority in the use of this money is up to each community, because they know their community. They’re the experts in their community.

Let’s not have any scaremongering about the money. Let’s not worry other people that there is some kind of distribution here that’s going to put other people at a disadvantage. Indigenous communities have been impacted by discrimination and colonization for hundreds of years. That has created systemic disadvantage, oppression and poverty — deep and broad poverty.

This revenue-sharing doesn’t affect municipal funds. This is about sharing resources with everybody in British Columbia. This is about helping everyone in British Columbia thrive. We know that it’s the best thing for the whole of the province when we’re actually sharing our prosperity and enabling self-determination. That is what benefits everybody in our province.

I can think of some examples right here at home of how self-determination really can create some wonderful ex­amples and project results. I know colleagues in chambers here have been to the Wellness Centre at Songhees. That is a beautiful building. It provides a lot of space and services, builds capacity, creates jobs — really honours the territory, the tradition. It is a great economic driver as well, because it created lots of jobs, and it’s still available to be rented out.

The Songhees Nation decided they wanted to do that, and they went about and did it and created a beautiful building. It’s a jewel in the constituency of Esquimalt-Metchosin. That was their priority, their plan, their land, and they secured the funding and financing to be able to do that. It’s a wonderful success story.

Further along the coast, out on the west coast, you get to Scia’new and Cheanuh Marina. This is Beecher Bay First Nation. A beautiful marina. The Scia’new Nation is actually building because it’s a priority for them, for the protection of land and water. They are giving it priority and putting their efforts in to secure the funding and the partnerships.

They’re going to become the regional spill response marina. They’re going to be providing a service to everybody up and down that coast in the case of an emergency. They’re going to have the marine emergency services there. They have the expertise there, and they’re creating jobs there. The marina is getting enhanced. It’s a place to go. It is a beautiful place to be.

[5:00 p.m.]

That infrastructure is all being built because of their prioritization, because of their ability to build those partnerships and to step into that self-determination and to move forward with plans and examples like that. These are the kinds of things that can be successfully moved forward, whatever is chosen by Indigenous communities.

I just want to say that I’m really proud of our track record in terms of reconciliation. In fact, I was very proud to stand in chambers on Monday during private members’ time. I spoke in the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ language, and I had the privilege and the honour of doing a statement on reconciliation as well. I talked even then about how every single ministry in our government has a mandate to ensure that they fulfil their responsibilities and duties in accordance, also, with the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples and with the calls to action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

We know the work, for example, in the Ministry of Children and Family Development has been concentrating on the recommendations in the calls from the report by Grand Chief Ed John. We’ve actually made historic investments in decisions on investing in housing off reserve and on reserve — affordable housing for Indigenous peoples in the community and in their communities. I have a fantastic project going up in Colwood, in my constituency, at the moment.

We’ve invested in revitalizing language. The killing of language was part of the effort of trying to kill the culture, so we’re investing in revitalizing that. I’m learning the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ language to send a signal that I understand the language is important. I want to show respect and honour to that language.

In our Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions, we’ve developed an Indigenous pillar in the Pathway to Hope, and in our Ministry of Advanced Education, Skills and Training, that minister has created the first-ever Indigenous law degree.

I’m really proud, and personally, I’ve tried to step up and illustrate how individual actions can make that contribution to reconciliation. In fact, just yesterday we had Elder Shirley Alphonse, originally from Cowichan and now from T’Sou-ke Nation, here to offer smudging to every MLA and staff member here in these buildings and to do some smudging of the Speaker’s and the Clerk’s offices as well. It was really heartening to me to see a real diversity of people come, line up, show their respect and acknowledge Elder Shirley’s generosity in bringing that here to the Legislature.

I take part in the Moose Hide Campaign. I take part in the Stolen Sisters walk. I think it’s really important for all of us to step into this space, individually, in our leadership roles and in our roles as members of this Legislature.

I go back to sharing gaming revenue. It has been a priority for Indigenous communities for 20 years. We chose to step into that space and to find a way, with Indigenous leaders, to create a system whereby we can share gaming revenue and we can support and facilitate that self-determination and that building of capacity. So I’m very proud today to stand here and speak in support of this bill, and I would hope that every member in this Legislature would be doing the same.

R. Kahlon: It’s my privilege and honour to rise to speak to the Gaming Control Amendment Act. I think it won’t be a surprise to you that I am speaking in favour of this act. I’m really proud of this, but before I go into the particular details of why I’m proud of this, I think it’s important to talk about why this is needed.

[5:05 p.m.]

I spent this summer travelling the province into communities, listening to people explain to me their heartfelt stories about racism issues that have come up in communities. It was a very powerful and moving experience. We had the opportunity to sit down with Elders in various communities and hear from them directly about racism and colonialism — how the history of this place affects them in their daily lives.

I’m reminded of a couple of things that particularly struck me. There were all these front-line service providers in the Downtown Eastside who gathered, and we had this discussion about institutional racism. We talked about structural racism. One of the front-line workers who works with vulnerable women in the Downtown Eastside said that the issue isn’t that the system is failing people. He said that the issue is that the system is working exactly the way it was designed.

That really struck me. I really had to take a moment, step back and think and process the history of this province and how systems were created to keep First Nations, essentially, behind: take away their language, get rid of their heritage, take them away from their families and their culture. All those systems that were built — the laws and systems we are building are being built on top of them.

So there are some core flaws in the way we operate. These people were telling me how they do their best to ensure that First Nations don’t actually get engaged in the system. They want to avoid the system, because the system is failing them.

When you hear stories like that, or you hear stories of Elders in Osoyoos who, after the racism forum, asked me to walk out with them so they could show me where the barbed fence used to be. As a child…. This woman was telling me that she still remembers looking over at the barbed fence and seeing her mom leave, cross the fenced area to go into town, and then not come home for two days because they couldn’t find the Indian agent to get permission to return back to their home. For two days, she’d have to stay with aunts and uncles, wondering where her mom was.

When you think of all those things, it makes you feel overwhelmed both at the challenge we have and the responsibility we have to start to address these core issues. You know, a lot of the conversations we had around racism were about the things people say in their community, things that people hear. What really frustrated me, particularly talking to the First Nations folks, was that when these terms are used, after a while, they said, they just get used to it. That is scary. When people hear something so often that they get used to it, I think there are some real challenges there.

They hear things like: “Oh, well, First Nations, all they do is just take, take, take. We just continue to throw money at them, and what are they doing with the money?” We hear: “Oh, well, this will create dependency.” I’ve heard all those things in the debate here in this House. It’s really troubling to hear people stand up and use that term — talk about just throwing funds at First Nations, just doing this to support your friends. I heard someone say it’ll create dependency in these communities. Create dependencies? These communities are….

You know, I have a lot of respect for my colleague across the way, the member for Stikine. We’ve had lots of conversations around First Nations history. I respect his lived experience. He speaks from his personal experience. I might not agree with him. In fact, I don’t agree with him on a lot of things, and some of his own colleagues don’t agree with him all the time either, but I respect his….

Interjection.

R. Kahlon: My colleague across the way is correcting me. The member for Skeena. Yeah, yeah. I’m not going to refer to it as Bill C-36.

What I was saying was that I don’t agree with a lot of his positions, but I respect that he’s speaking from his experience. He and I have had many conversations. I’ve actually pulled him aside and said: “I don’t agree with you, but let’s talk about it. I want to hear about why it is you think that this is the way it is.”

[5:10 p.m.]

I think for anyone to suggest that First Nations communities don’t need this money, that First Nations communities, in particular his community, don’t need the money for housing, don’t need this money, is…. I think the Chief there would strongly disagree, because they were standing beside our minister when we announced money for housing, and they said how important that money was. When we have quote after quote from First Nations leadership….

I know that he was critical when our minister was speaking about this issue. The minister was referring to a quote that was given around this being “the single most important” action the provincial government could take to “ease First Nations poverty and begin to close the economic and social gap for…First Nations.” He was very critical. He said: “How dare you say that?”

This is not the minister’s quote. This is what the communities are saying. This is what First Nations leadership is saying to us. This is “the single most important” action the provincial government could take to “ease First Nations poverty and begin to close the economic and social gap for all First Nations.” These are their words.

There are a lot of things that people have been saying. “We’ve been waiting a long time for this,” said Judith Sayers, the president of Nuu-chah-nulth Tribal Council. “I personally have been involved in trying to get this…for over 13 years, and it’s been at least 30 years that the First Nations have been doing this. So it’s a good day.”

We had Regional Chief Terry Teegee from B.C. Assembly of First Nations, who said: “This is a historic and progressive action.” B.C. First Nations and the government have finally landed on a renewed vision and plan for reconciling Aboriginal title and rights, with asserted Crown title and jurisdiction. If we have prosperous First Nations, that will mean extra revenue.

Another piece that my colleague across the way had said was that, well, his community doesn’t need the money. That money is not just going to be wasted. That money is going to be invested in communities.

When we hear from my colleague, the member who represents the area where shíshálh Nation is, and he shares with me the remarkable action taken by the shíshálh Nation — where he tells me that Chief Warren Paull has a vision of using funds to rebuild the soccer fields in his community — that’s not just for the shíshálh Nation. That’s for everybody in the community. This is money that’s being invested in the community for everyone. This money is going to be invested in….

I was recently in Mackenzie and met with members of the McLeod Lake Indian Band. They said: “You know what? We’re making investments, and we are looking for people. Please find us people.” First Nations communities are not just going to take this money and do things that are not going to benefit everyone. These investments that they’re going to make are going to benefit everyone in their community, everyone in the region.

When I was on this trip travelling with folks, this was the core issue. We talked about how racism for new immigrants exists, but everybody acknowledged that we have to understand the history of this place. New immigrants understand, and we have to understand that we’ve come to a place.

People who come from India have a particular knowledge and a particular sense of what colonization is. We have a good understanding. When that context is played for them, about what’s happened to their homeland, what happened when the British came…. When you give it to them in that context, “Imagine if your language was taken away from you. Imagine if you could not be who you are. Imagine if you, in the context of where you’re from, were living in poverty because someone took away your language, took away your culture, took away all the things that you value most. What would be of your community?” then people understand.

We had lots of new immigrants that came to these meetings. You know what they said? They said: “Yeah, we’re facing racism. We’re facing these issues. But we really think that you need to address the issues that First Nations have been dealing with for a long time.”

This Gaming Control Amendment Act is a step in that direction. I’m very proud of our government for taking this step to address this. It’s about building capacity in communities. It’s not about saying: “Here’s some money, because we think your project, in our opinion, is valid.” This is about saying: “Here’s money. Do the projects that you think your community needs most.”

[5:15 p.m.]

There are some focuses — health and wellness. I don’t think we can spend enough money on health and wellness. We had lots of discussions when I was in Prince Rupert, where there’s an amazing initiative being taken by local First Nations around mental health supports. I was in the Interior recently, and one of the most prominent wellness centres is run by First Nations there. People come from all over to get well. That treatment centre, again, is not just for the local First Nations. People are coming from all over the world and all over Canada, in particular, to get well.

When we talk about infrastructure, safety, transportation, housing — all these investments are about the region. You know, sometimes we hear this debate, and it gets made into we’re giving “them” money. Or what was the term used? We’re “throwing funds at First Nations.” When we hear the term that we’re throwing funds at First Nations…. This is giving First Nations the tools to have the capacity to do things.

Some communities will need money for other initiatives. Some communities will use it to make investments in infrastructure, which will create jobs not just for local First Nations but people in the region overall. The roads that get built — it’s not just First Nations that are using these roads. Everyone is using these roads.

When we hear that this money could be used for economic and business development…. The member earlier spoke about the Haisla Nation. Yes, doing fantastic things, creating huge employment — employment for their own members, employment for everyone in the region — again, economic development. We heard just recently, also from the member, that they sent someone to learn how to be a yoga instructor. Investment is not only in their community but made for everyone in the community.

Also, there are initiatives for environmental protection. We also hear from speakers who say: “Well, there are some First Nations that are great. They’re doing economic development. We support them.” But just because they’re doing economic development in their context and not in our context, it doesn’t make them any better or any worse.

Any sort of economic development, any sort of investment in the environment — all these things are good for the community. It’s all good for everyone in the region. I don’t think we should be picking whether a First Nation is good because they support the project we support. I think any investments made in any region are a good thing.

We also heard some concerns about whether the system that’s being used that was adopted and brought to us by First Nations — about how the money would be distributed through this fund, through the limited partnership. This is not a brand-new model that’s not been done anywhere. This is coming from the First Nations. We didn’t just create this and say: “This is how we’re going to do it for you.” They’ve said: “This is how we’d like it to happen.”

Some members have made it sound like this is groundbreaking stuff, that this is the first time it’s ever happened. We’re the last province to join on board to provide gaming revenue for First Nations for capacity-building. Many of them use a similar model. Why is it, all of a sudden, that this is a stumbling block?

I’ve got a lot of respect for members on all sides of the House here. I think it would be very disappointing to have members not vote in favour of this because they don’t like the way that the First Nations presented the limited partnership model to us, the way that they’ve said that it should happen. I know, deep down in the core — I’m not going to say everyone — most people here, I think, understand that this is going to a good thing. Most people here.

I look at the members across the way who, I know, worked with lots of First Nations in their communities, well respected in their communities. It would be a shame if we were to have a vote today and members from across the way would not support money going to First Nations communities for capacity-building when they’ve said, the communities themselves have said — I have to read this again — this is “the single most important” action the provincial government could take to “ease First Nations poverty and begin to close the economic and social gap for all First Nations.”

[5:20 p.m.]

I mean, if this is what they are saying, how can anyone in this place not vote in favour of it? I just don’t know, but I guess we’ll find out very soon.

I can continue to talk. I know the members would love to listen to me talk. One of the members from across the way, my friend from Surrey, was falling asleep while I was talking.

Interjection.

R. Kahlon: No, I’m just kidding. He was not. He is not. He’s the most attentive gentleman in this place, and I appreciate him giving me guidance and always providing me feedback as I share my thoughts.

Interjection.

R. Kahlon: I don’t know. We save criticism for the ferry ride home, I think.

Again, I just want to go back, before I start my closing remarks on this, to those people that I’ve met along the way in all the communities — Comox, Nanaimo, Cowichan, Victoria, Vancouver, Abbotsford, Prince Rupert, Prince George, Mackenzie, Dawson Creek, Fort St. James, Fort St. John, Osoyoos, Oliver, Kelowna, Cranbrook.

All those communities that I visited, all those people who brought their stories forward, all those people who said that we need to address the legacy of First Nations — to all those people, if they’re listening…. Maybe many of them are not, but I think this is an important step for them to see that we take this seriously, that we’re taking steps not only that we think are right; steps that First Nations leaders and communities are telling us are the most important steps.

Shortly, we’ll be voting on this, and it’s my hope that everyone in this House will support this. I want to thank the Attorney General for bringing this forward, and I look forward to hearing the next speaker.

Hon. L. Beare: I’m so excited to get up today and speak to Bill 36 and our government’s commitment to First Nations. We are so proud to introduce the Gaming Control Amendment Act, which will entitle B.C. First Nations to a portion of our B.C. Lottery Corp.’s net income for the next 23 years.

This is huge for First Nations. As we travel around the province as ministers, we get a chance to visit First Nations in communities in every corner. When I think about the needs I’ve seen in communities and the conversations we’ve had with them, this bill is going to impact communities everywhere. First Nations have made it very clear this is something they’ve been asking for, for a very long time.

In 2007, the First Nations leaders presented the previous government with an investment plan. That plan recommended 3 percent of B.C.’s gross gaming revenues going directly towards economic and community development initiatives in Indigenous communities. Our bill, which we’re putting forward today, will ensure that we’re transferring 7 percent of gaming revenue to First Nations. In fact, we’ve already transferred nearly $200 million to First Nations across the province. This is amazing.

These investments may be used by individual First Nations for things like health and wellness, infrastructure, safety, transportation, housing, economic and business development, education, language, culture and training, community development, environmental protection, capacity-building, fiscal management and governance. This is important.

When I think about my local First Nation, the Katzie First Nation…. They have a Katzie wellness centre. When you hear Chief George, the newly Chief George…. She was previously Chief Cunningham, but was married a week and a half ago, and I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the newly Chief George on her nuptials. When you hear her talk about the Katzie First Nation wellness centre, she talks about it being a place to heal the spirit as well as the body and how important that is for her community to ensure that that spiritual healing help is available as well.

[5:25 p.m.]

These are the types of investments that communities will be able to use with the gaming revenues all across the province.

I recently had the chance to tour the Nisg̱a’a Memorial Lava Bed Provincial Park, up in the Nisg̱a’a Nation. Before I was Minister of Tourism, I actually didn’t know we had lava beds here in British Columbia. It’s such a spectacular sight and such a treasure, and an unknown treasure to many British Columbians. So when I had the opportunity to go visit the Nisg̱a’a Nation and to go take a look at this spectacular park, I stopped in at their visitor centre and talked to them about how their park is an economic generator for their region and how they want to expand the number of visitors coming into their park.

Economic investment and business development are what these funds will allow nations to do — to be able to do things like expand these visitor centres in these amazingly pristine areas of our province for visitors not only in their own backyard but from all across the world to come visit.

I think about how in the Nisg̱a’a Nation, as well, you round a corner, and all of a sudden you fall upon a world-class cultural centre museum, glass from floor to ceiling, with Nisg̱a’a treasures inside and the history of their nation. These are the types of cultural spaces that these funds will be able to support. These are the storytelling opportunities and the protection of the cultures of nations that these funds will support.

I travelled to the Ktunaxa Nation and had a chance to visit St. Eugene Resort. St. Eugene’s, I’m sure many members know, is an amazing story. It’s a story of resilience and of reconciliation. St. Eugene’s was a former residential school, and the Ktunaxa Nation, in collaboration with the federal government and other partners, was able to purchase back the school and turn it into a hotel for their nation, creating economic revenue for their community, but more importantly, taking ownership of their story and how they want to move forward as a nation.

They have a tourism product at the resort called Speaking Earth, where guests are able to go sleep outside in a tent under the stars. They can share a bowl of bison stew around a campfire and listen to stories being told by Elders. This is a tourism product. This is what economic development will do for these nations — the ability to invest in these products.

This is true, authentic reconciliation. This is that true, authentic experience that people travel from all around the world to come experience here in B.C., and we are giving First Nations the ability to create these remarkable experiences that B.C. is known for. We are giving First Nations the ability to tell their stories in a manner that they want to tell, in a way that they want to share with the world and with us here in British Columbia. It’s a chance to take back their stories, to take back their history, to take back their choice on how they want to move forward.

We are giving that opportunity. We have placed $200 million into nations to make that choice on what they want. Do they want to build a health and wellness centre? Do they want to invest in infrastructure? Do they want to create a product like Speaking Earth that tells their story and their history?

We have 203 First Nations here in British Columbia, and we have only 400 tourism products. That is something I am working so hard on as the Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture — to help partner with nations, to work with Indigenous Tourism B.C. and nations all across our province on ways that they can increase the number of tourism products in their community and how they can move forward.

When I go to the First Nations Leaders Gathering, typically the two conversations I get are: “I want to build a longhouse and a cultural centre” and “I want to find a way to build a tourism product to increase economic development in my region. I want to be able to tell my story. How can we do that?”

[R. Chouhan in the chair.]

These funds will allow nations to do this in a manner that they would like to do. So I couldn’t be more proud to be part of a government that understands the rights of First Nations to determine these things on their own, to provide them the funds and to make choices in their own communities.

[5:30 p.m.]

With that, I encourage members across the way to support this bill. It’s so important for individual communities, from coast to coast, all across this province, from corner to corner, to have that ability to invest in their communities the way they want to, to tell the stories they want to and to build their economic development the way they want to.

With that, I’ll take my seat.

Hon. H. Bains: It is an honour to stand here to speak about this bill, Bill 36. This act will entitle B.C. First Nations to a portion of the B.C. Lottery Corp.’s net income for 23 years. This is very basic, fundamental, to who we are as a society.

This House has seen and heard debates. You could purely say that they were racist and discriminatory. I remember when the Nisg̱a’a treaty was being debated here — the debate that took place at that time, in the 1990s, and the commentary coming from the members of this Legislature. I will go back to 100 years ago with what happened here in this House, and as recent as the 1990s, and then what has happened since that time — the first pure denial that First Nations have rights.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Then when the government of the day, Glen Clark’s government, decided that we needed to work with First Nations and empower them to make their own decisions that impact them — about education, about their culture, about their children, about their future — the Leader of the Official Oppo­sition, who became Premier later, said that there should be a referendum. Glen Clark very famously said: “You can’t have a referendum on minority rights.”

Those are the basic fundamentals that guide us when we make decisions here. Those words that were used here at that time and the action they took will be seen and heard for the next 50, 60 and 100 years, as we are going to reflect back to 100 years ago and what was said about other visible minorities here.

This thing, Bill 36, is about equality. It is about recognizing rights. It is about giving equal rights for those who were here before us — for them to make their own decisions.

That’s why I think that I could speak for a long time on this, because there’s so much to talk about. Many members were very eloquent here and made very good points. I will not go too far into it because the clock is also ticking.

With that, I want to say that I urge all members of this House that if we really mean reconciliation with our First Nations, we must show it with our actions. This bill talks about our actions. We must show that we actually are serious about what reconciliation means, and this vote in this House will show that.

I am urging everyone in this House to support this bill so that we can move on and make sure that we show — through our actions, with decisions like here tonight — our First Nations people that we actually mean what we say.

Mr. Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, Attorney General.

[5:35 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: I’m rising to close debate.

I will, just in brief comments, note my appreciation to many colleagues for standing up and supporting this bill and recognize the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation, whose team did an amazing amount of work on this bill. I also want to thank the members of the opposition who rose to speak on the bill.

I think we’ve some work to do across B.C. in terms of helping people understand why this is happening, why it is that it’s important to share gaming revenues with First Nations, what it will mean for so many communities across the province. We already share gaming revenues with many municipalities. I don’t think, during that debate, we heard statements like it was paying off friends or that maybe there wasn’t enough accountability within municipalities.

I would urge all members to look at what’s happened on reserves in terms of school funding even, where kids going to schools on reserve receive less funding per capita than the kids off reserve. There aren’t huge benefits flowing to reserves — in fact, many times, the opposite. So this will go a really long way in a lot of Indigenous communities across the province, and I hope all members find their way to support it, because it will be incredibly influential and impactful not just on Indigenous communities but on neighbouring communities as well.

With that, I move second reading of the bill.

[5:40 p.m.]

Second reading of Bill 36 approved unanimously on a division. [See Votes and Proceedings.]

Hon. D. Eby: Hon. Speaker, I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to be considered at the next sitting after today.

Bill 36, Gaming Control Amendment Act, 2019, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Motions Without Notice

APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE
TO APPOINT AN AUDITOR GENERAL

Hon. M. Farnworth: By leave, I move:

[That a Special Committee be appointed to select and unanimously recommend the appointment of an Auditor General, pursuant to section 2 of the Auditor General Act (SBC 2003, c.2).

The said Special Committee shall have the powers of a Select Standing Committee and in addition is empowered to:

(a) appoint of their number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee;

(b) sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

(c) adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and

(d) retain such personnel as required to assist the Committee;

and shall report to the House as soon as possible, or following any adjournment, or at the next following Session, as the case may be; to deposit the original of its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly during a period of adjournment and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, the Chair shall present all reports to the Legislative Assembly.

The said Special Committee is to be composed of the following Members: Doug Routley (Convener), Shirley Bond, Adam Olsen, Janet Routledge, and John Yap.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 10 a.m., October 21.

The House adjourned at 5:45 p.m.