Orders of the Day

Presentation of Estimates

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR ENDING MARCH 31, 2021

Hon. C. James presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021.

Hon. C. James moved that the said message and the estimates accompanying the same be referred to the Committee of Supply.

Motion approved.

[2:25 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call Committee of Supply to consider the supplementary estimates.

Committee of Supply

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES:
OTHER APPROPRIATIONS

The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); M. Dean in the chair.

The committee met at 2:27 p.m.

The Chair: Members, we will take a five-minute recess just to organize the committee.

The committee recessed from 2:27 p.m. to 2.32 p.m.

[M. Dean in the chair.]

On Vote 52: contingencies (all ministries), pandemic response and economic recovery, $5,000,000,000.

The Chair: Minister, do you have an opening statement?

Hon. C. James: I do. Thank you very much, Chair.

I want to begin by recognizing that we’re on the traditional territory of the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations and thank them for the ability to meet on their land.

I think there is no question — you can certainly see it here in the Legislature today, but I know communities are feeling it all across the province — that these are unprecedented and difficult times. Communities across the prov­ince are pulling together to keep one another safe.

I think we’ve all seen, in the midst of the challenges, incredibly heart-warming experiences, certainly in my community. We all received from our Block Watch captain a week and a half ago a list of people who are available for volunteering — to be able to go and pick up groceries for people or prescriptions or help them out if they were self-isolating. I think it has really been quite extraordinary to see — no surprise in British Columbia — the communities pulling together.

We know that if we want to overcome the challenges, we will need to rely on the cooperation and the support of communities, of all levels of government, of everyone in this Legislature, of individuals, of families and businesses and workers. Certainly as government, we’re committed to doing our part, and that’s what this estimate is about.

I want to introduce the staff who are here today. People have heard me today as well, when we an­nounced the package, talk about the extraordinary work of the civil servants across government — certainly in my ministry, but across government — providing support in very short timelines to be able to put together these kinds of packages.

I have Richard Purnell with me, Doug Foster and Fisnik Preniqi, who are here to provide support as we go through committee stage on these estimates.

Funding for contingencies — what have we included in this package? This is a pandemic response and economic recovery that provides $5 billion to support a provincial response to the corona disease COVID-19. Our response is built to coordinate with the government of Canada’s plan and to help boost support where we think it’s needed.

Our response will be evidence-based, and there are three areas of focus. Supporting services to protect the health and safety of British Columbians has first priority; second, immediate relief to individuals and businesses; and third, looking ahead to economic recovery in partnership with the business and labour community.

[2:35 p.m.]

Our response is going to be phased, and we’ll need to be responsive to the changing environment. To date, the federal response has had three areas of focus: health care, short-term support for individuals and short-term continuity of business, but as we know, there are gaps. The federal response provides very modest support for health care and critical services.

B.C. will only receive our portion based on per capita. That’s a challenge. When you look at our health care system, when you look at the per-capita number of cases, when you look at the demographics in British Columbia, per capita creates some challenges. We will be working to ensure that there are supports, as I said, to fill the gaps for the area that’s there.

The federal response is focusing on liquidity through borrowing and tax deferral. Again, we can balance those off and supplement those measures by making sure there are tax deferral supports in place and by providing tax relief for businesses as well.

Our strategy includes timely measures to be able to support individuals and families who may be coping with potential illness. It adds key funding to areas like health care and housing, supporting vulnerable populations and making sure that the core social services British Columbians rely on are there for them as well.

We know that British Columbia has a very strong economic foundation, but we also know that COVID-19 is going to impact the entire globe when it comes to the economy. Every aspect of our economy is going to be touched by this pandemic.

The plan that we have put together, yes, looks at the immediate but also looks ahead and provides support for future initiatives that will be needed to make sure that we can look at recovery. That will be put together with the business community and with the labour community to make sure that we’re able to do what we can to look at, when we’re ready, how we kick-start the economy. So $2.8 billion for individuals and families, $2.2 billion for businesses and longer-term economic recovery.

I just want to finish up my opening remarks by noting that this is an ever-changing situation. The plan is the plan today, and we know that it will need to be flexible. It will need to be responsive. It will need to be able to address the pressures that we may see in the days and weeks and months to come.

In the theme that really has fit today, I think we all are in this together, and we all need to do our part. Certainly, as government, we’re pleased to bring this forward.

I also want to recognize, again, the members from the opposition parties, both the official opposition and the Green Party, who have come forward and provided ideas and responses. I’ve had lots of emails from individuals who weren’t able to be here today who have been providing advice and giving ideas as well.

With that, I’ll take my place.

The Chair: I recognize the member for Richmond-Queensborough.

J. Johal: Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank yourself and my colleagues across the way in regards to this extraordinary moment to talk on this issue.

The business of supplementary supply generally is the process by which a government asks the Legislature to appropriate the funds required to meet its financial obligations and to implement programs already approved by the Legislature. In other years, this would be considered a matter of routine. Today is far from routine. It’s an extraordinary day for an extraordinary time as this province, this nation and the international community fight a global pandemic.

It’s hard to imagine now, but just a few weeks ago we were debating, inside and outside this House, about blockades and, to a certain degree, even debating the issues around Brexit. Those issues are distant today.

The needs of British Columbians are our priority, and those needs are immediate. Those suffering from the effects of COVID-19 also deserve to know the resources will be there for them in the weeks and months ahead. Our front-line health workers — who have been doing tremendous work in very challenging and, at times, gut-wrenching conditions — need to know we are working to meet their needs.

This supply bill must also address the needs of parents who need child care facilities to remain open so that they can go to work for our many essential services.

This bill is not only about providing quick action but protecting the health and safety of British Columbians and also protecting our economy.

[2:40 p.m.]

What we’re seeing today is not just a health care crisis but an economic crisis as well: 500,000 Canadians have already applied for employment insurance, with that number expected to increase significantly in the weeks ahead. In its most optimistic assessment, the United Nations International Labour Organization says the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak will cost 5.3 million jobs globally. In its bleakest scenario, that number would rise to just shy of 25 million jobs, meaning it would cause more unemployment than the global economic crisis in 2008.

What the government is seeking with this approval is nine months of supply for a budget one can easily argue is out of date because of circumstances. This great House is built on a foundation of checks and balances. The approval of this bill and the supplementary conversation that we’re having today comes in a climate where we do not know when this House will sit next. We are forced to be absent for obvious reasons. But when this conversation resumes in this great House, the government should expect questions on its spending and priorities, particularly around the consequences of COVID-19 on people’s health as well as impacts on the economy, small businesses and their employees.

When we are back in chambers, the opposition will want to know what specific measures the government will introduce to help our battered hospitality and tourism industry survive and thrive once again. In its worst-case scenario, the B.C. Restaurant and Food Services Association says the COVID-19 pandemic could result in up to 15 percent of restaurants shutting for good in British Columbia.

Our hotel industry employs 60,000 people across British Columbia. Two-thirds may lose their jobs because of the economic fallout surrounding COVID-19. Those employees will want specific answers in regards to their economic well-being.

In a recent survey of 8,000 small businesses by the B.C. Chamber of Commerce, 90 percent of B.C.’s small businesses are already reporting some hit in lost sales, cancelled contracts or layoffs due to the COVID-19 response. The survey also found that of those impacted, 83 percent are seeing a drop in revenue, 91 percent anticipate a further decrease in revenue in the near term, and 73 percent of businesses expect their revenue will drop by 50 percent or more, with nearly a quarter saying that revenues will drop by 100 percent.

The impact of COVID-19 is being felt throughout the economy, in every sector, and with that, people’s pocketbooks. The opposition will want to know how this government will help British Columbians pay their monthly mortgage, rent and utility payments. The people of British Columbia want to see a coordinated plan that is meaningful and appropriate to the current crisis. That means economic relief programs that will keep British Columbians employed and provide clarity to small business owners when it comes to payroll and property, sales and income taxes.

There’s no doubt that public safety and health is our primary concern. But the opposition will want to know what this government will do to provide resources to our social agencies, including groups like the food banks, which are struggling to meet demand, at the same time softening the economic impacts on individuals and businesses.

In closing, I want to remind those in this House that we are up to the challenge presented by COVID-19. There may be those who feel scared right now, but I would tell them to have faith in their fellow British Columbians.

I want to thank our front-line health care workers, our doctors, our nurses and caregivers. I want to thank our police, our paramedics and firefighters, who will be leaned on even more in these challenging times. I also want to thank our workers in grocery stores, retail outlets and restaurants. I want to thank our truck drivers, warehouse workers, child care workers and delivery drivers. They continue to keep our supply chain moving and care for our children.

I want to say that we are a strong, resilient and empathetic people. We have shown these traits many times in the past few weeks. Volunteers are dropping off groceries at the homes of seniors. It’s picking up the phone and calling your neighbour and saying: “How are you doing?” It’s the care workers in Richmond walking out of the hospital to go grab a cup of coffee at Starbucks and a patron buying a $500 gift card to say thank you, thank you from all of us in this community of ours — in Richmond, in my case, but throughout British Columbia.

What I want to end with is to say we are a great province of five million people, and we’ve responded to this challenge with five million acts of kindness. We’ll need more acts of kindness in the weeks and months ahead. In that spirit, I look forward to a constructive conversation in and around the issues that British Columbians want us to deal with here and now.

[2:45 p.m.]

The Chair: Do other members have any questions or comments on the vote?

J. Johal: I listened to some of the comments from the Finance Minister and, certainly, watched the press conference, some of the conversation in and around this bill. Does the minister believe that the $5 billion is sufficient to deal with the issues surrounding COVID-19?

Hon. C. James: I think this is an important question, because I think, given the evolving situation…. I think the Health Minister described it well when he said: “Could any of us have imagined a few weeks ago being in the situation that we’re in?” I don’t think any of us could’ve imagined that.

I think this is sufficient for now. But as we said in the press conference when we delivered this plan, it is a first step. We will need to be flexible. We will need to be responsive. We will need to see where it goes over the next days and weeks and months ahead. So I cannot commit to whether this would be sufficient for the next three months, the next six months, the next two months, depending on what kind of situation we’re facing.

We believe that this package is a fulsome package. I think the member mentioned it as well. We’ve tried very hard to make sure that we address both immediate needs for people and businesses and that we coordinate with the federal response. That’s very important, again, so that we can get the best bang for our buck. We can provide the best support to families.

For example, you’ll see the federal government is bringing out a GST credit in April. We hope to get our payment out to people in May. There’ll be another payment in July. So again, looking at how that coordination occurs to provide the best support for families and for businesses.

Again, we’re looking at deferring a number of taxes until the end of September, which will provide what many businesses have been calling for, which is that cash flow pressure.

So we certainly feel that right now this is sufficient. But the situation, as I said, will continue to evolve, and we expect that we will need to be flexible to meet the needs as well.

J. Johal: I raise that question simply because of what we’ve been hearing in the last few days. Here’s a quote from Dan Kelly from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. He says: “A wage-subsidy program is our best protection against large-scale unemployment.”

Goldy Hyder, the president and CEO of the Business Council of Canada, agreed. He says: “The way we’re thinking about stimulus is into a job-preservation program.”

There seems to be an immediate need by small business — all businesses, but particularly small business — in regards to seeking help. I understand that we are a subnational economy. We’re not a national economy. But when I look at some of the help that is being provided to businesses…. In Britain, the government said that it will provide government grants to cover 80 percent of furloughed workers’ salaries. The Danish government says that it will pay 75 percent of worker salaries, up to a cap of $4,700 a month. In New Zealand, the country is offering a flat-rate subsidy paid in one 12-week lump sum to help businesses avoid layoffs.

I bring that question again to you because it seems like it isn’t about two months from now. It’s literally seven days from now when you have to meet payroll, potentially, or rent. Do you feel there’s any way these programs, the help that is being provided, can be moved faster, between the federal government and the provincial government, in regards to meeting those needs? Because what we are hearing is that there are immediate needs, not a need two or three months from now.

[2:50 p.m.]

Hon. C. James: Thank you for the question. I think, as the Premier said, every jurisdiction is looking at what they can do and adjusting what they can do over the next while.

I think this is an important piece to look at from both a perspective of what we’re doing and the perspective of what the federal government is doing because, in fact, some of those supports are being taken on federally. We’ve certainly been clear that we believe the federal government has to take a lead. We have to add and supplement and support, but the federal government also needs to step up on this situation.

The member probably knows some of the supports that have been put in place from the federal end. It does include, in fact, temporary wage subsidies for small employers. That’s a piece that the federal government is looking at. They have a number of loan programs that have been put in place as well.

The waiving or deferral of tax payments gives the immediate support to businesses that built that in to their books. That’s, I believe, one of the reasons…. We’ve had, of course, great discussions over the last couple of weeks with the business community.

Almost every one of the communities that sent out their list of the kinds of things that they think are important mentioned the deferral, because that gives an immediate payment for people who expected to make a payment at the end of March or expected to make a payment in the middle of April. That gives them instant cash flow, instant liquidity that they can address some of the pressures that they’re facing and make the choice they’re making.

Do I believe that there’ll be further measures that we’ll have to take a look at over the next six months? I think that’s likely, given the situation we’re facing. But I think the measures we put in place now, around the deferrals, around providing liquidity for businesses, around the cash through the school tax, the 50 percent reduction — which isn’t a paying-back; that’s an actual reduction for businesses — will provide them some of that cash flow to address some of the pressures that they need.

J. Johal: I appreciate the answer.

I want to talk about one individual. His name is Bill McKnight. He owns a small clothing store in Ladner. He has laid off all of his employees. He’s 73 years old, and rent is due the end of this month, or the first of the month of April. He’ll have to pay $8,000. There is no revenue coming in. May 1, the same.

How will Bill McKnight be helped by the provincial government and the federal government, in your mind, in regards to holding on to his business and moving forward? That’s $8,000 per month.

Hon. C. James: I’ve talked about the federal programs. Again, hypothetical, because I don’t have the specifics around the individual, but he certainly may be eligible for some of the programs that have been talked about through the federal government. There are a number of discussions with banks and credit unions — we’re having the discussions with credit unions as well — about deferring mortgage payments or deferring rent payments or deferring payments that may be in place. The federal government has loan programs, as I mentioned already.

[2:55 p.m.]

Deferral of the property school tax will be a direct support, again, if the individual is paying property tax. Deferral of tax payments, which again, will be built in — most businesses build those into their budgets. They will have six months where they don’t have to look at making those payments, which, again, can be significant for some businesses as well.

The individual, depending on the circumstances, could be eligible for the $1,000 benefit, the one-time payment. Again, that’s going to small business owners if they’re eligible. So that’s a possibility in that as well.

Then depending on his income, he could be eligible as well for the top-up to the climate action credit coming in July. That’s going to impact 86 percent of people who will see a large amount. He could be eligible for that amount as well.

J. Johal: I appreciate the Finance Minister’s response. It does speak to the challenge of meeting the targets of rent at the beginning of the month of $8,000, a hard target. With all these deferrals that you’ve talked about, it does still speak to the challenge of meeting that deadline every month. Every business and every sector is going to be impacted. It is a daunting task for government to fill in those holes on a federal level and a provincial level.

I appreciate the Finance Minister’s answer. But there are literally thousands of businesses in the days ahead, never mind weeks or months ahead, that are going to have to make those tough decisions. I think there’s a lot of work ahead for not only government and opposition but for all of us to make sure we meet the needs of British Columbians in regards to that one example that I gave. There are many other Bill McKnights out there in different sectors as well.

We’ve talked about the $5 billion that government is going to be spending. There are impacts, of course, of businesses, like Mr. McKnight’s, that have shut down. Has there been any modelling done on the impact of COVID-19 on government revenue?

Hon. C. James: I would say that it has preoccupied and occupied the work of people particularly, obviously, in the branch that looks at our modelling around the economy each and every day. I would suggest that that is their focus right now. I certainly have been getting reports.

I think it would be no surprise to the member to know that every area of our economy is being impacted right now by COVID — everything from exports, imports and the challenges there, obviously the hospitality industry, the tourism sector and arts and culture. You name it. The impact is great.

Specifics on what that looks like in the economy are early yet. There are a number of tax payments that come at the end of March and the beginning of April, so again, we’ll take a look at those and see where the drops are. We haven’t quite seen that impact yet because the numbers don’t come on the immediate. So we’ll have to wait to look at those numbers.

Certainly, first quarterly of this fiscal year that comes at the end of the summer will be key. Public accounts will be key. We’ll be looking at how we can do updates on a regular basis on how these dollars are being spent, just to touch on the member’s points around accountability, which I think is really critical. We’ve been talking about how we can give updates to the members from all parties in the Legislature around where the package is going, what dollars are being spent and how we can provide those regular updates if the Legislature isn’t sitting for a while as well.

So I couldn’t agree more that the accountability piece is going to be important and the economic updates are going to be important. But it’s early yet, because the numbers are still, really, coming in from the last couple of months where the biggest impacts will have occurred.

J. Johal: In these extraordinary times, I think the minister would agree that we need to be forthright, open and available, almost as much as the Health Minister, on a daily basis in regards to numbers. I think they do matter, and I think British Columbians also want to hear exactly where their dollars are going and the challenges that we have in regards to revenue on the revenue side in government. I appreciate you acknowledging that and wanting to share those numbers as much as possible with the people of British Columbia.

This is a moving target, as you have said. The modelling that is being done and will be done — is there any sort of chance that modelling will be done where you have a two-month scenario, a six-month scenario and a year scenario?

[3:00 p.m.]

I think this is a moving target. This is going to continue. I just wanted to see if the minister can acknowledge that we would get different scenarios, because I think the people of British Columbia would want that.

Hon. C. James: Certainly, I think the easiest way to put it is…. This, again, will be looked at each and every month. We will have better information and more up-to-date statistics coming in over the next couple of months as we start to see corporate income tax and all those kinds of things.

We can certainly estimate the numbers and the drops that, I think, every jurisdiction will see. This won’t be unique to British Columbia. We’ll be watching other jurisdictions as well. I think, certainly, each month we’re going to have to take a look.

We’ll also get an idea, then, of applications that will come in, of program pressures that will be put in place and of what we see for people with disabilities or on income assistance. Will there be pressures there? What will you be seeing with applications for the additional payment through EI? If you look at the EI numbers the member mentioned — jumping from 22,000 to 500,000 — we know that that kind of caseload pressure will need additional resources, obviously, from the federal end. We could be sitting in the same kind of situation as well.

This will be a month-to-month estimation of a program. We believe these dollars, as I said, will hold. We’ve been conservative in our estimates around the spending of these dollars. So we believe there is room to get us through. But again, in these unprecedented times, is there a chance that we will need to look at more resources to be able to support the economy? I think none of us could imagine the situation we might be in.

J. Johal: We are talking about people losing their jobs or who have already lost their jobs and small business owners wanting to stay afloat. Government needs to work towards that.

Has there been any conversation or a push to move infrastructure programs — move them quicker, build them quicker — so we can get people to work? That could be, potentially, the Pattullo Bridge, SkyTrain projects. Is there any conversation, in and around large public sector infrastructure projects, on moving the timelines earlier so we can get them up and going?

Hon. C. James: Thank you very much to the member. That’s the reason, in fact, that we’re putting together the recovery team and the economic advisers, people from the business community and from the labour community — to have exactly those discussions. So we’re ready to go, when the opportunity is out there, and to put stimulus into the economy when we have the chance to build the projects.

Obviously, right now people are being told to stay home. We have to follow the health and safety rules and the orders that have been put in place by Dr. Bonnie Henry. But we know, as Dr. Henry says, this is not forever. We will be at a place where there’s the opportunity.

That’s where British Columbia certainly is very well situated. We have had that reinforced by some of the rating agencies as well. British Columbia will be very well positioned because of the large capital spend that we have in the budget. We, in fact, have one of the largest capital spends, which has been in place, in British Columbia. So we’ll be well positioned to move those along.

Whether there’s the opportunity to speed those up, again, will depend on the situation of the economy and of employees to be able to do those projects. But it’s not off the table. As I said, that’s part of the reason we want to have this recovery team in place: to look at exactly those kinds of questions so we’re ready when things turn around.

[3:05 p.m.]

Although the $1.5 billion probably won’t be spent for the next few months as they determine a workplan, the work will start, and that will get going. That’s exactly the kind of question that will be part of that discussion.

J. Johal: The minister, in her opening remarks and, certainly, I know earlier today in her press conference talked about tax deferral around EHT and carbon tax. If the concerns around COVID last many months, could deferral be pushed further?

Hon. C. James: Yes, no question.

J. Johal: What does the minister say to the persistent conversation, which is in the public sphere, that these tax deferrals don’t work? People need wage subsidies. Business owners need wage subsidies now, today. That’s a better way to keep people working and keep people solvent, and liquidity stays in the system, rather than these tax deferrals. What would you say to that argument?

Hon. C. James: In fact, deferral of the taxes was probably the most common request from all of the business communities that have written in, businesses large and small: B.C. Business Council, Victoria Chamber of Commerce, Surrey Board of Trade. The requests that came in, in fact, did focus on deferrals, because that provides the support for businesses that, again, have those dollars written into their books and now can take those out of their books for the next six months and know that they can use those resources in another way.

I don’t think it’s either/or. That’s why, I think, you see the federal government plan does have a portion around wages. I think, again, this will be a changing, ever-evolving situation that we’re going to have to watch.

J. Johal: A couple more questions. The minister talked about, I think, setting aside $1.7 billion, focusing on health and social services. Obviously, housing is a very important part of anybody’s life. A roof over your head is so very important in regards to dignity and the day-to-day living.

The comments from the Premier, I think during question period, were that no one will get evicted due to COVID. Can the Finance Minister confirm that that is the case?

Hon. C. James: I can’t talk about the specifics around housing because they’re coming this week. The member may know that there’s already been a decision around evictions being banned for B.C. Housing, and there’ll be further information coming around the evictions piece as well. I’ll hold that until Wednesday. I believe that information will be coming out on Wednesday.

When it comes to people not being able to afford rent, a number of the measures I’ve talked about — the $1,000 and the other supports that we’ve put in place — obviously help towards that.

We’re also looking at — and, again, this is the Minister of Housing who will be working on this — whether we can use existing structures and retool the requirements in place. An example would be the SAFER program, the seniors rental supplement program, or the RAP program for people who are working and are low income but are holding a job. Those rent supplement programs could be expanded so that…. There are people who are at risk of not being able to pay their rent who could then access them through the program.

Again, I talked earlier about the work of the civil servants and making sure that we had both the accountability mechanisms and the flexibility and the speed to get these supports out. That’s exactly the kind of thing that’s being looked at right now.

J. Johal: I think that’s wonderful, especially helping those on low income in regards to keeping a roof over their head.

Now, if you’re in downtown Vancouver and you’re a young person starting out your career, you’re probably paying $2,000 a month for rent, if not more. In fact, it’s $2,500 to $2,700 a month in certain neighbourhoods in downtown Vancouver.

I’m glad that there are programs available for those on the low-income side, but there are those who are just starting out their careers. One of the things I’ve seen in the introduction of this bill is that there’s a lot of emphasis put on those that are most vulnerable. I don’t see a lot for those that I could describe as working class, middle class — those making $40,000, $50,000, $60,000, $70,000 a year. They’re also going to be hurting. That may be layoffs, the inability to pay your rent.

Will we see more specific programs geared towards the middle class, the working class — those that, you know, may be making more than lower-income salaries but still will need help? Will we see more programs geared towards the middle class?

Hon. C. James: Thank you for the question.

[3:10 p.m.]

A couple of pieces. The $1,000 is not income-tested, so that, in fact, will go to middle-income earners. People who are on employment insurance — who are accessing employment insurance, so who have lost their work — will have the ability to access that $1,000 as well. That’s part of the program.

Student loans. Those go to people who’ve finished and graduated. Many of those young people, as the member talks about, would be people carrying student loans. They will, again, have a deferral on those loans, both federally and provincially, which will make a difference.

Then when I talked about expanding the low-income supplements, that’s exactly the kind of situation that I’m talking about: “Could you expand the criteria? Could you adjust where people can access that so that people who are struggling — who may not be in the very low income but are still struggling — will have an ability to access supports?” Those are the kinds of things that are being explored with those supplement programs.

J. Johal: My final question, and I thank the minister for her response.

You see the challenges there, whether it’s $1,000 an individual may receive as a one-time payment, not having to pay student loans for many months…. That may cover one month’s rent on April 1. You’re in trouble again the next month. So you can see the financial challenges and the anxiety that people are going to have to deal with in the very near future, literally weeks away, and the challenges that are before us as legislators.

My final question is also focusing on the social programs, but that is food banks, which I think every community relies upon to help those who are in need. In grocery stores, as we’ve seen, some of the shelves are bare because of hoarding and just everyday British Columbians stocking up as well. In the past, there would be excess that could be donated to those food banks. People who weren’t afraid of losing their jobs were donating to those very food banks.

Today there’s a tremendous challenge — a tremendous, tremendous challenge. Food banks today are in trouble here in British Columbia, from Richmond to Prince George, from Cranbrook to Kitimat.

Can the minister address — particularly for that part of our society, the food bank — what will be done to help immediately, and any other social agency and sector that does the front-line work in our communities? It’s so valuable. They’re the most vulnerable members of our community, and they need our help as well. So if can the minister could address that.

Hon. C. James: Thank you to the member for asking the question and recognizing the critical…. I call it the fabric of British Columbia. Not-for-profits, our social service agencies and the people on the front line really are the fabric of our communities and fill in those supports that need to be there. There are a whole number of pieces that are being put in place right now.

I mentioned, as part of our package, that we are continuing the contracts with agencies who may be retooling how they’re providing services. They may need to do it in a different way to ensure that they are following the orders of the public health officer — have reduced down staff, perhaps, because some staff may be working from home or not be in the office. They will continue to get their contract money. They will continue to get those funds because we need those not-for-profits and social service agencies to be in place in the community. They will continue to receive supports.

I have to give huge credit to a number of groups and organizations that are looking at how they can utilize their staff who may not be working — they may have closed their business — to provide supports. B.C. Housing, for example, is looking at food service delivery, starting this week, for tenants in subsidized and affordable housing in the Lower Mainland. They’re looking at whether they replicate that in other agencies.

Seniors. I mentioned — perhaps I didn’t mention it in the House — the $50 million that will be going to the United Way for the Better at Home program. That’s, again, a program…. I give credit to the members from the Green Party and from the official opposition who are involved in looking at how we could expand that program, who worked with the Minister of Health’s staff. That will help seniors stay in their own homes. That will provide support so that they can live independently and give them the little extra that they need to be able to provide that support.

Then the Health Minister mentioned the Vulnerable Population Working Group. That, again, is a group that’s in place, that’s working with communities. I know they’ve been doing some work in the Lower Mainland and on the Island. That, again, is looking at exactly the kinds of needs that the member is talking about and how we ensure that the supports are there.

We recognize that it’s critical to have those supports in the community from the not-for-profit sector. We’re looking at how we continue to both utilize them — because they have the expertise, and they’re in the communities now — but also provide them with the support that they need.

[3:15 p.m.]

Through this centralized Vulnerable Population Working Group, there’s an ability to access resources that are needed, like handwashing stations, as the Minister of Health mentioned, or other priorities that they may have.

J. Johal: I just want to close this with a comment.

I thank the Minister of Finance and staff today for coming out. It’s a valuable conversation. I have many more questions; I could be here all month. But we know we need to move quickly to help British Columbians.

I think that on behalf of the opposition, what I would like to say is that the help is immediate and now. I brought up the issue of the food bank, but there are many other questions and many more vulnerable groups that need our help.

I hope we can work collectively and constructively, moving forward, for the people of British Columbia. We have many more specific questions on how those programs will be implemented, how we handle our valuable taxpayer dollars, but at the end of the day, making sure this is still about public service and making sure we get those dollars out to the people of British Columbia as fast as possible.

I thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank the Finance Minister and all of you here today.

S. Furstenau: Following up on some of the questions from the member opposite, more specific to government services. We’re wondering if the minister can provide us some information about the actual mechanics of how people will be receiving services they need — for example, Ministry of Children and Family services, support services for families. What are the mechanics of continuing that level of government service to people that are vulnerable and in need of help?

Hon. C. James: Each of the ministries is involved in their own emergency plans, so each individual minister and ministry will be putting in place how they provide those critical services and supports, what resources they need to be able to do that.

That’s why the $1.7 billion is put aside, because we know there will be pressures. We know there will be pressures on a variety of services that I talked about earlier to the previous member, everything from income assistance to disabilities to areas where people are vulnerable. We talked earlier about violence against women and some of the challenges that self-isolation, in particular, can cause.

Those ministries will be able to look at the programs and services they’re providing through their emergency programs and through the work that they’re doing and be able to access those dollars as they need them. That’s why we’ve left the flexibility, because we know that those are going to go up and down, just in the same way that we talked about how businesses may need more support or employees may need more support. Agencies and ministries will need different kinds of supports at different kinds of times, depending on what situation we’re in.

It will be done, as you will see, so there’s accountability. It will be done through Treasury Board submissions and an opportunity for people to say: “This is where the need is greatest. These are the kinds of supports that we need to put in place.” So the accountability is there. There will be accountability around the dollars but also flexibility to make sure that we can provide them where the need is greatest and where the pressure is greatest as well.

S. Furstenau: Thank you to the minister for the answer there.

The member opposite asked about food banks and other services. I think one of the criticisms that has been raised about the federal response has been somewhat of a lack of support for NGOs and the important role that NGOs are going to play as we weather this health and economic crisis.

Could the minister elaborate a little bit more on how the province is working to fill in the gaps that have been identified in the federal response and what’s being done to support non-profits?

Hon. C. James: The Minister of Social Development has been working closely with the not-for-profit sector, has already held a round table this past week and I know is back in touch, again, with his colleagues in the social services field to make sure that he’s hearing firsthand from where the pressures are and talking to us about those pressures. Obviously, Social Development, as well, will be providing support and looking at programs that will assist their clients.

But they also, whether it’s Social Development or Ministry of Children and Families, contract with a number of these not-for-profit agencies. And as I mentioned, I think the member will have seen the release around child care as a very good example, where child care centres may be staying open to provide supports for emergency personnel. That could be everyone from nurses and doctors and first responders to grocery clerks and people that we need to keep our system running.

[3:20 p.m.]

Normally, if they would only have six children, for example, in a 20-child centre, they would have that money taken back. They would be able to only get support for the children that are there. That’s not going to happen.

We’re going to make sure that that support and more is provided, covering off the parent fees so that those centres can stay open, that they can operate, that they can provide support for people who need child care to be able to provide all the services that all of us rely on in communities. Even centres that close down, that aren’t able to stay open because parents are keeping their kids at home, which is encouraged if they’re able to do that…. Those centres that close down will still receive a portion of their funding that they utilize to be able to pay their rent or their lease, so we don’t lose those child care spots.

That’s a really good example of the kind of work that we’re doing with the not-for-profit sector and with the social services sector to make sure that those critical services that, yes, will be needed through this difficult time…. But also, we need them there in good times. We need them there to provide that support. So we’re working very closely with those sectors as well.

S. Furstenau: On the more fiscal front, could the minister give some insight…? With the deferment of tax payments that we’re looking at as part of this larger package, is that going to limit the revenue that government will be able to bring to bear to address the crisis with all of these initiatives, and what is the approach that’s going to be taken on that?

Hon. C. James: I think one of the important pieces I want to start with is that this $5 billion is additional spending to the regular government budget. So this is not counting existing government spending. I think that’s important to note — that these are additional dollars that will be spent on the COVID-19 action plan.

The deferral of taxes has an impact on government, has an impact on our debt. We will have to borrow for over that time period to be able to cover off the resources. Because it’s a deferral, it isn’t lost revenue, but we will have to borrow for that time period to be able to cover off those resources. That’s the strategy that we have for government.

A. Olsen: I also would like to raise my hands to the Finance Minister and the people working in the Finance Ministry for being able to work in these really difficult…. I think it’s difficult to work from home and remotely, just a small office like a constituency office. It must be incredibly difficult to work in a large ministry under these circumstances and with the pressure. So I just want to raise up and thank you all.

I want to circle back around to a few questions that were asked around small businesses and, particularly, the approach to defer taxes rather than provide some direct support. I think the tax deferrals help much larger businesses more than they assist the small businesses.

I have a number of small businesses in my riding that are reaching out, and they’re right on the precipice of just not existing any longer. They are really looking at how they can pay their rent, as was raised with an example that I think I could raise, as well, in my community, of rent being due in just about a week and nothing there to pay it, and the business will likely not exist.

I’m just wondering if maybe the minister can highlight the difference between how this tax deferral approach will impact a large business as compared to what I’m really hearing — that that’s not what the small business owner in my riding is looking for. Perhaps you can shed some light on that.

[3:25 p.m.]

Hon. C. James: We’re certainly hearing those stories. I think we’re going to hear those stories for a while. I think it’s going to be a very difficult time. And I think it’s going to be a very difficult time for all of us, as was said earlier, for all legislators across the country, across the globe, to make a determination around the supports that need to be out there for various sectors.

We know there are a number of sectors that are immediately hard hit, including tourism, including the arts and culture sector as well. So again, we’re looking at those particular areas. The hospitality industry, as the member raised, is another area that we’re taking a look at. We certainly have heard…. I recognize that the member sees that big businesses will benefit from the deferral, and there’s no question about that. But small businesses do often have those pieces built into their budget, so those will be pieces they’ll be able to take out of their budget and utilize for some of the other services and programs.

The federal government, as well, has put in place a wage subsidy for small employers. So that’s, again, when we looked at how we balanced off what the federal government was doing with the provincial government. Does that mean we may need to still look at doing more for businesses? I think all of this, as I said, is evolving, so I don’t rule anything out over the next while.

A. Olsen: A question with respect to how the tax deferment process works at the six-month mark. Maybe I’ll just have a couple of questions, and you can respond to them, around what’s expected at that six-month date. Is the full amount due? I’ll just leave it at that.

Hon. C. James: We’ve given the six-month date to make sure there’s a date so people know that there’s a review that will go on. The deferral of the payments, the deferral of the increases in the carbon tax or the deferral of the increase in the e-commerce piece and the sugary carbonated drinks, again, will all be reviewed before we get to the six-month mark, so we’ll be able to give a clear direction.

We know that businesses need that advance. You can’t just spring it on them and say that all these pieces need to be in place. We need to see what the situation is like, quite frankly, to see whether you’re seeing the economy start to turn around or whether you’re still seeing great challenges and we’ll have to look at an extension or some other issues that will need to be addressed. Again, ever changing as the situation evolves but confident that we will do the work that needs to be done before we get to the six-month mark for businesses.

A. Olsen: Serves me right for trying to package up a bunch of questions into one. It doesn’t work. So with respect to how the province expects the businesses to be able to handle six months of backlog, has there been some thought into whether or not a business would be required to pay for the entire six months? How does a business who defers their tax payments catch up? What is the expectation of the government?

Hon. C. James: Again, that’s got to be part of the discussion with businesses. We have to be having that discussion as we’re going along, not at the six-month mark or not to give them notice, as we get closer to the end of September, to say: “Now you’re going to have to pay the whole amount.”

There will be discussions around what’s the best or what will be the most-needed strategy. Will it be a further extension on the deferrals? Will it be a payment plan around how they add that to monthly payments that will be in place? There’s a whole variety of ways it could be looked at. We’ll make sure we’re working closely with business to address the situation in the time and place that we’ll be in, probably by the summer, I would expect, to see where things are at and make a determination.

A. Olsen: Just one final question around this for now, and again, I need to highlight what the member for Richmond-Queensborough said. There are many, many questions to be asked here, and I think, recognizing the steep slope that we’re climbing up here, there’s no way that we’re going to be able to get to them all.

[3:30 p.m.]

I do have a concern that has been raised in our community — I think it’s probably been raised in many communities across the province — where a commercial landlord is not being flexible in terms of their tenants getting some relief from rent in the short term.

I know that this question has been asked, but I’d just like to ask it again here in this forum. What is the provincial government able to do or willing to do for those small business owners who are facing landlords where there is no relief coming? They’re expected to pay rent at the beginning of next month.

Hon. C. James: I think as much as we hear the great stories — and there are some amazing stories of landlords who have been flexible, who have been generous in these kinds of difficult times and who are working well with their tenants — I expect that there will be some of these stories as well, where there are difficulties.

That’s why the federal government put in place their loan program for businesses. So they can have some liquidity. So they can deal with the cash flow. That is available to businesses who may be struggling around the rent piece.

Certainly, if it’s a triple-net lease example or they’re in the situation of a triple-net lease…. Again, the reduction of the property school tax by 50 percent is expected to be provided to the business that is in that lease so that they can get that break. That is the expectation of government in providing that 50 percent cut.

We’ll be watching that piece very closely as well.

S. Furstenau: We’ve spoken a lot today about the most vulnerable people in the province. Some of the points that have been raised by some economists, in light of both the federal and provincial packages, are the people that are currently, today, living below the poverty line. So people who are collecting welfare, disability, guaranteed income supplement.

My question for the minister around this is: for, particularly, people who are receiving social assistance, will the work search and training requirements be relaxed during this crisis, and will there be a look at increasing those payments while we are enduring this crisis?

Hon. C. James: This is, again, a piece that the member and others will hear about shortly. It’s work that’s going on with Social Development right now. It’s how those supports can be in place. That’s really why…. Again, as I mentioned earlier, the $1.7 billion is there to provide those supports. I know the minister will have something more to say about that shortly.

S. Furstenau: Another question that’s come up very regularly is around a rent bank. Is there work being done to implement a rent bank?

Hon. C. James: Rent banks are in place in a number of areas, but a very small number of areas. Rent banks were certainly one of the discussion points and are not off the table. They still continue to be one of the discussion areas.

Again, the challenge with rent banks is they’re not in every community so couldn’t be accessed by everyone. That’s why I mentioned earlier the existing rent supplement program. Perhaps expanding the criteria might be another option as well as supporting the rent banks that are in place in communities. I think we’re going to need as many opportunities and as many examples as we can to meet the needs of all British Columbians.

S. Furstenau: Could the minister just give us some insight into how the hydro deferment will work?

[3:35 p.m.]

Hon. C. James: There are two pieces to the hydro piece. These will be pieces that…. People will be able to apply through Hydro and talk directly to Hydro. One is a deferral of bills, of payments. They have the opportunity to do that. There’s a crisis grant that people can access through Hydro as well.

So it’s a two-part piece. People will have the opportunity, through Hydro, to be able to apply for those supports.

S. Furstenau: Just the last one on our most vulnerable population members. For those who are concerned with just meeting their basic needs, the Finance Minister has indicated that there will be a $1,000 tax-free cheque, but it won’t be available until May. What are the measures right now, as people face looking at how to pay for their groceries and other essential needs?

Hon. C. James: A couple of pieces. There’s no question. I think this is a piece that not-for-profits…. We mentioned food banks earlier, mentioned the social services agencies. They will be coming forward and having that discussion around their needs with the committee that’s in place.

I think it’s important to note again, just for those who may be listening, that this doesn’t take away any of the supports that are already in place for people on income assistance and disability — things like crisis grants and those kinds of things, where people are very stretched and they have the opportunity to be able to apply for those. None of that changes. All of that structure is still in place for people who are in need.

Then I think the other piece has been talked about. We will do everything we can to move along the payments that are in place, as well, because we recognize the pressure that people are in. But I think there are opportunities for people who are in very difficult situations, through the crisis grants or through not-for-profits and other agencies that are coming forward and talking about their request to look at how we provide support for those individuals.

A. Olsen: Just a couple of other questions…. I recognize that this House is not built to be answering questions from down this end. It’s very difficult for you.

Just a couple of questions around the economic recovery. We’ve canvassed the immediate support. I just want to, I think, maybe plant a flag here more than anything that there’s also a $1.5 billion allocation for the economic recovery. This is an area which our caucus is very much interested in. The government has mentioned that there will be a committee that’s formed. I’m just wondering if maybe there has been some thought about what the composition of that committee is and how it operates.

Hon. C. James: Thank you for the question. We will focus, as we need to, on the health and safety. We will focus on the immediate right now. But the purpose of putting those dollars in place, and the purpose of having it as a third leg in the plan, was to make sure that we didn’t forget about the economic recovery.

As I said earlier, you know, this is the situation today, but it’s not going to be the situation in the future. We haven’t gotten into those discussions as yet. I look forward to hearing advice and ideas from everyone in the Legislature around the makeup of that committee.

Certainly a number of business leaders have stepped up and said that they’re interested. The Federation of Labour is interested. But I expect it will be broad based. It’ll be a challenge to make sure that it’s small enough to be workable and able to be nimble, but I think there are a number of pieces that will be critical. We haven’t talked yet about ministers that the Premier will appoint or involve as well. So that’s to come. I’d encourage you to get your ideas forward and into my office so that we’ll be ready.

Vote 52: contingencies (all ministries), pandemic response and economic recovery, $5,000,000,000 — approved.

Hon. C. James: I move that the committee rise and report completion and resolution and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 3:40 p.m.

The House resumed; S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.

Committee of Supply (Section B), having reported resolution, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call for the consideration of the reports of resolution from the Committee of Supply.

Supply Motions

REPORTS OF RESOLUTIONS FROM
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

Hon. C. James: I move:

[That the reports of resolutions from the Committee of Supply on March 23 be now received, taken as read and agreed to.]

Motion approved.

FUNDS GRANTED FOR PUBLIC SERVICE

Hon. C. James: I move:

[That there be granted to Her Majesty, from and out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, the sum of 5 billion dollars towards defraying the charges and expenses of the public service of the province for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021.]

Motion approved.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL 15 — SUPPLY ACT (No. 2), 2020

Hon. C. James presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Supply Act (No. 2), 2020.

Hon. C. James: I move that Bill 15, Supply Act (No. 2), 2020, be introduced and read a first time now.

Bill 15 provides interim supply for ministry operations and other appropriations for approximately the first nine months of the main estimates for the ’20-21 fiscal year and the full amount of the supplementary estimates for the ’20-21 fiscal year as laid out before the Legislative Assembly in the present session.

Bill 15 also provides interim supply for government’s financing requirements for the ’20-21 fiscal year, including the full amount of the year’s capital expenditures, loans, investments and other financing requirements and the full amount of the year’s disbursements for revenues collected on behalf of and transferred to specific programs and entities.

Deputy Speaker: The question is first reading of Bill 15.

Motion approved.

Hon. C. James: Hon. Speaker, I ask leave that the House proceed with all stages of the supply bill this day.

Leave granted.

Bill 15, Supply Act (No. 2), 2020, introduced, read a first time and ordered to proceed to second reading forthwith.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, we will pause for a moment for the distribution of the bill.

Please, we’ll take a brief recess of no more than five minutes, if that’s acceptable.

The House recessed from 3:44 p.m. to 3:52 p.m.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 15 — SUPPLY ACT (No. 2), 2020

Hon. C. James: I move that Bill 15, Supply Act (No. 2), 2020, be read a second time now.

Existing voted appropriations will expire on March 31, 2020. Bill 15 provides interim supply for ministry operations and other appropriations for approximately the first nine months of the 2021 fiscal year, as presented in the 2021 main estimates. Interim supply for ministry operations and other appropriations is required to ensure continuation of government services until the final supply bill comes into force.

Due to the coronavirus pandemic, it is unknown when the House will complete the debate of the appropriations presented in the 2021 estimates. Therefore, Bill 15 provides for an additional supply compared to what would normally be a very typical year. Bill 15 also provides the full amount of the 2021 supplementary estimates to support services to protect the health and safety of people exposed to or impacted by the coronavirus disease, COVID-19, which will bring relief to the people and businesses affected by COVID-19, and to build and implement the province’s plan for economic recovery related to the impacts of COVID-19.

Hon. Speaker, Bill 15 also provides the full amount of combined voted amounts in schedules C and D of the 2021 main estimates for disbursements related to capital expenditures, loans, investments and other financing requirements. The full authorization provided for in relation to these disbursements is again higher than that authorized in relation to ministry operations, as the disbursements described in schedules C and D are not evenly distributed throughout the year. As with interim supply for ministry operations and other appropriations, due to the pandemic, Bill 15 provides for an additional supply compared to a typical year.

Bill 15 also authorizes the full amount of disbursements referred to in schedule E of the 2021 main estimates. Schedule E of the main estimates outlines the revenue collected on behalf of and transferred to specific programs or entities. There is no impact on the operating results, borrowing or debt resulting from the collection and transfer of this revenue. These interim supply appropriations are based on the accountabilities and allocations outlined in the 2021 main estimates and the 2021 supplementary estimates.

[3:55 p.m.]

The final supply bill for the 2021 fiscal year will incorporate these amounts to ensure that it reflects the sum of all voted appropriations to be given to government in that fiscal year.

M. de Jong: Again, I won’t be long, except I think it bears emphasizing that the concept of a supply bill or what we generally refer to around here as an interim supply bill is not unusual. It is standard fare that between the introduction of the budget in February and the passage of the final supply act, usually towards the end of May, government operations need to continue and the House provides for a portion of the budgeted amount to flow to the Crown.

What is unusual here is the length and the amount. That, as the Minister of Finance has indicated, is attributable to the fact that we simply do not know when the estimates process will resume and complete. But to those who might say to all members of the House, “Haven’t you virtually passed the budget…?”

The minister will, I’m sure, agree that that is not the case. There is a scrutinizing process that will eventually occur, and the minister and her colleagues understand that the opportunity will exist to pose questions about decisions that are being made, will be made and decisions that will be made in the interim, including decisions around the allocation of the sizeable contingency amount that the House has approved for the minister and the government today.

The official opposition, I think, along with all members of the House, appreciates the urgency and the necessity for ensuring that there is reliable supply, which is, I suppose, a technical way of saying that the Crown has to have money to pay for government, and the people need to know that that funding is there for all of the services and more that will be called upon particularly during the difficult days ahead.

It is on that basis, of course, that the opposition is lending its support to the much larger amount, three-quarters of the budgeted amount that is referred to in the Supply Act, Bill 15.

A. Olsen: Just in recognition of the extraordinary measures that are being taken here today, I’d just like to take a few minutes to outline and to provide some comment with this.

Every British Columbian owes a debt of gratitude to the professionals that are working on the front lines and in hospitals, care homes and all those helping in immeasurable ways to ensure people get the care and support that they need.

I want to extend some special recognition to the chief medical officer in our province, Bonnie Henry. Dr. Henry has become a household name and a trusted voice for countless British Columbians, and I echo the many British Columbians who have reached out on line to say that I hope that she is well and to thank her for the service that she is doing for our province.

This is an unprecedented moment in time. The best medical advice here and around the world is that physical distancing remains the best way that we can limit the spread of the virus to save lives. For many, this means businesses are closing down and workers are being laid off.

I think it’s critical to understand that the supply act in front of this House today isn’t a traditional economic response. It’s part of our immediate health response. What legislators must do is make sure it is economically possible for people to physically distance themselves from each other. If we fail to provide the support necessary for workers and business owners to survive a period of economic shutdown, then we risk losing one of the most important health policy responses that we have, physical distancing.

The federal government led the way last week when they rolled out their phase 1 of the federal COVID-19 economic response plan. Today the province responds with some additional measures. We’re happy to support those measures. Governments at every level have a role to play. Sometimes that will mean developing coordinated programs and approaches. In others, it will mean filling the gaps in our policy responses.

[4:00 p.m.]

My colleague and I stand in full support of the need to address this crisis with rapidly rolled out and coordinated health and economic policies. All parties have made an incredible effort to meet this crisis united, putting partisanship aside in favour of what is necessary in this initial response.

Let’s be clear. This is the provincial government’s first response. There may very well need to be additional policies as we get more information about the trajectory we’re on or as we identify gaps in this policy response. Where the speed of money getting to people and in small businesses’ hands is most important is in this immediate response. We must be more deliberate and targeted in subsequent policies to ensure that we’re not leaving people behind or failing to think about how our policies will affect the long-term recovery of our economy.

In response, we’ve seen so far that there are at least three areas where more support looks to be warranted. First, for renters, we heard that more is coming this week. We expect that policies will be rolled out to ensure that people are not being evicted and that renters have access to additional support, should they need it. This cannot simply be passing the cost on to landlords, many of whom are renting out suites in homes or single units. This must be a thoughtful approach to supporting the rental ecosystem.

Second, we need to think about the NGOs, the non-governmental organizations that already take so much responsibility across countless communities in supporting those most at risk. COVID-19 increases those risks. It is NGOs that already have support programs in place that, in many cases, can be our strongest ally in ensuring that we don’t leave people behind.

Finally, we should take a hard look at how our response supports small business owners and their ability to maintain payrolls and keep the doors to their businesses from closing permanently. The fewer businesses that are forced to take these drastic steps, the better shape our economy will be in on the other side. These businesses hold communities together, employing more people than any other sector of our economy. We do not want to emerge on the other side of this and have businesses unable to reopen and struggling to return to the jobs that they once had. This will slow down the recovery and increase the cost government will pay.

This bill provides nine months of funding to implement the 2020 provincial budget, which was introduced just over a month ago. It feels like a completely different time. It also adds room to spend an additional $5 billion to respond to the emergency before us as a result of COVID-19. This includes $1.7 billion to address immediate health care and social services needs created by this pandemic: funding for housing, income assistance, Community Living B.C. and other social supports, shelter programs and corrections. It includes ongoing funding for contracted services that deliver crucial programs on behalf of, or in partnership with, the province.

There’s $1.8 billion allocated for the supports for individuals and businesses. The province will be topping up the expanded EI programs at the federal level, $1,000 tax-free to anyone who is eligible under the new federal criteria. This is a welcome top-up. This is also somewhere where we must be carefully monitoring these programs to see who is falling through the cracks. We need to ensure that nobody is left behind in government’s response to this pandemic. There will also be extra supports going to people in early July through the enhanced B.C. climate action tax credit. As well, there will be a six-month moratorium on student loan payments.

As I mentioned, I’m concerned about how long it will take before people actually see many of these supports. Many people are in the financial crunch now, facing rent payments due in one week, on April 1, or facing imminent mortgage and bill payments. People need help now, and I urge the government to do everything it can to get supports out the door immediately.

There’s also some relief for businesses, including the financial package enabled by this bill, though I do worry that it may not be enough to keep many of our small business owners and businesses viable. The supports are mainly tax deferrals, which will no doubt help some. Businesses will be able to defer PST, municipal and carbon taxes and the employers health tax until September 30. Businesses in commercial properties will also have their tax rate cut in half for 2020. But I think that there is more that the government may need to do to ensure that B.C. businesses remain viable in the months ahead until we pull through this.

[4:05 p.m.]

One area that many experts have called for is enhanced wage subsidies to support and encourage businesses to keep all of their employees. In the coming months, when we get the next opportunity to come back, we’ll be questioning the government on why they’ve chosen to not go this route and if it was a good decision. That will be part of the process that we talk about when we go through the budget and the accountability aspects of this.

I want to conclude by making a couple of comments about where we are as a province and what recovery must look like. I’ve heard from many people that they appreciate that the three parties in B.C. have put aside differences to share a unified, immediate response to this crisis. You can see that in the House here today. This ensures that health and economic policies are brought into place as quickly as possible and that we’re all truly working in the best interests of our constituents — the people across B.C.

While there’s no room for partisanship in the midst of this crisis, we still need to ensure that there’s transparency in decision-making. We can seek accountability and transparency from government on the decisions that they make and work collaboratively on all sides to get solutions. Both aspects of the role are critical ones for us all to play at this moment in time, and British Columbians should expect, on the other side of this health crisis, that politicians look at the recovery as an opportunity to build a stronger and more resilient province and economy.

We need to ensure that we’re providing the immediate supports so desperately needed to people in the immediate term; that we’re taking care of the most vulnerable members of our society; that we’re supporting everyone to do their part to respond to the public health emergency before us; and, as we look at the months and years ahead, that we rebuild our economy. We need to be absolutely clear about what we’re trying to build. We need to build an economy that is stronger, more equitable and truly sustainable as we come out of this crisis that we’re in.

I will work day in and day out to ensure that the government is supporting everyone who needs the help today and that we’re building the foundations of a healthier and more prosperous society as we come out of this together.

HÍSW̱ḴE SIÁM.

S. Furstenau: I’m honoured to have the privilege to speak to this bill today in the House. It is with a heavy heart, however, that I stand in a chamber that, like the world around us, looks and feels very different from the one that we left just over two weeks ago. There’s much to say about what is currently unfolding, but I will aim to make my comments sharp and concise as we strive to fit the slow, deliberative democratic process into an urgent and evolving crisis.

I know it may seem strange in an emergency to still follow the stages of debate, but it really does matter. We have all put partisanship aside, but we must continue, as elected members, to be completely and entirely engaged with the process so that the needs of every riding of this province are represented. I want to add to that that our institutions in times like this need to be recognized for how precious they are — and how much we also owe to protecting those institutions.

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented emergency, requiring an unprecedented response. My colleague and I are here today to endorse and mobilize a rapid response economic package and to ensure that in the coming months, British Columbians and businesses are able to get the support they need, when they need it, and that to every extent possible, our medical system is protected and fully resourced.

The hit of this pandemic is twofold. The first is health; the second, economic. Following the direction from Dr. Bonnie Henry and Minister Dix, in addition to federal guidance and the Centre for Disease Control, we must isolate to limit the spread of the virus, to protect our loved ones and community members and to protect the capacity of our health system. Slowing the spread of the virus gives us a fighting chance.

In doing so, it also dramatically suppresses our economy, which has already resulted in a staggering number of job losses. It is really tough and scary, and I am so sorry that so many people are hurting. But please know that we will get through this. Governments will provide the bridge funding needed to get us through to the other side of this crisis. The federal government started the work last week, and today all parties in B.C. are adding to it and making it stronger.

[4:10 p.m.]

The first part of this second supply act is a request for the equivalent of three-quarters of the voted appropriations listed in Estimates. These funds will be allocated, consistent with the direction set out in Budget 2020, for a total of $36.9 billion. This includes expenditures for disbursements and voted capital spending, as well as transfers to Crown corps and agencies.

The second part of this bill will create a second contingencies vote under Finance for a total of $5 billion. Of that, $1.7 billion will go to immediate health care needs, $1.8 billion will be spent on workers benefits and $1.5 billion will be reserved for long-term economic resiliency. This funding will support the services needed to protect the health and safety of people exposed to or impacted by coronavirus. It will bring relief to people and businesses affected and help build the province’s longer-term economic response.

Equally as important as jump-starting this emergency response is being willing to revisit each policy to address limitations that emerge. We are moving quickly here, and necessarily so, but that doesn’t mean we will get everything right from the beginning. This initial package will be needed to support additional targeted measures that address gaps and help people in businesses who fall through the cracks. For example, I think an additional focus on NGOs and small businesses would be critical. The fewer businesses that have to lay off their workers or close their doors for good, the better. This helps hold communities together and can make a huge difference when we start to recover.

When the health crisis passes, we don’t want to be in a place where the businesses that closed have trouble reopening and the people who worked there have no jobs to return to. This would slow down recovery and likely increase costs. Additional policies in this area could take the form of a commercial rental support or working with federal government to enhance the wage subsidy.

For non-governmental organizations, we need to ensure they can continue to operate. They already play a huge role in helping the most vulnerable and should be viewed as partners who can help ensure that nobody is left behind.

When the time comes for our attention to turn to recovery, and I pray that time will be soon, my colleague and I will be putting everything we have into ensuring we rebuild for the future instead of trying to recreate the past. The crisis has the potential to shatter the existing cracks in our social and economic structures. We now see, with excruciating clarity, weaknesses of our current system around the world and ways in which we have undervalued caring professions and the people who feed and nurture us — people, we must note, who are disproportionately female, disproportionately immigrants.

In the span of two weeks, child care workers, grocery workers, cleaners and care aides have gone from being underpaid and undervalued to being the people who are holding the threads of our society together. Our doctors and nurses, first responders and front-line workers are immensely brave, and we are indebted to their service.

When we start to rebuild, we must embed everything we are learning in this emergency into our policies. We can build an economy and society that is equitable and sustainable. We can build it to prioritize health and well-being and hold caring for one another at the centre of everything we do. I know that this is possible, because the entire world is currently recognizing and reaffirming that health and well-being — your own, that of your family, friends, loved ones, neighbours and strangers — is more important than anything else.

Of course, we already knew this. It is a realization that comes flooding back to us any time someone we love is gravely ill. But to have every country and community going through this at the same time is truly staggering.

There’s another important subject I have to raise today, although I will not go into it in great detail — now is the time our priority is rushing this economic support out the door — but it is vital, and it is something we will need to return to very soon. COVID-19 has rightly become our sole focus, but we cannot forget that it is unfolding in addition to climate change. As we begin our long-term economic planning, rebuilding for sustainability and climate resiliency will be essential.

My colleague and I in the Green caucus will continue to work with our partners in government to ensure B.C. can weather this storm and rebuild stronger than ever. Partisanship has rightfully been put aside, but we cannot lose the spirit of democracy.

[4:15 p.m.]

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, I ask the Minister of Finance to close debate.

Hon. C. James: Thank you for the comments made by the members in the House, and thank you for the work that we are showing our leadership in, in this place, by working together, by making sure that we are coming together to address the pressures that businesses, that families, that communities, that workers, that individuals are facing in our communities. I think it speaks volumes about the work that can go on in this place when we see this kind of coming together around the critical needs that are here.

I want to echo the words of the member for Abbotsford West. There is no question that these are unprecedented times for us to be bringing forward this kind of supply bill, for us to be bringing forward the additional piece to be debated and to be discussed, and to give the authority to begin spending, to support people in British Columbia.

As the member has said, we will have the opportunity for questions, for estimates. When that happens, none of us will know. But that certainly will be there, and the accountability will be there. We’re not taking that away by passing this bill today. That accountability remains for the dollars that are spent.

As I said, I know the weight of this crisis weighs heavily on all of us in this Legislature. We all, as leaders elected in our communities, have a responsibility and carry the weight of the people who are hurting in our communities, the businesses that are hurting, both in the short term and the long term. Although we certainly hope that this shifts in the next number of months, we also know there will be a long-term impact that is going to be there for our province. We will be a changed place.

So the fact that we can all show our leadership and come together on these pieces, I think, again, speaks well and really speaks to the importance of focusing on the people of British Columbia and the work that they need us to do.

Certainly as Finance Minister, this is a very big step. It was not a step taken lightly. It was not a step taken without a lot of thought and a lot of discussion — and, I’m sure, as all members would know, a lot of sleepless nights — to look at bringing forward these kinds of measures. But I believe the package that we’ve put together will begin to address some of the pressures that people are facing out there.

Again, I ask all members in this Legislature…. I heard reinforcement of that, but it will be critical to be flexible and to recognize that this is simply the beginning. This is simply a start. We will need to make adjustments. We will need to look at new programs and services that perhaps need to be put in place. We will need to look at how things are done differently across this province.

To come back to the start of this debate, I know that British Columbians are up to the challenge. We live in an extraordinary province, a province that is diverse, a province that has people from all parts of the globe. This is a huge strength, again, for our province when we look at rebuilding the economy, when we look at the connections, the entrepreneurs, the creative folks in our province, the caring institutions. I know that by working together, we will get through this as well.

With that, I move second reading of Bill 15, Supply Act (No. 2), 2020.

Motion approved.

Hon. C. James: I move that Bill 15 be referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Bill 15, Supply Act (No. 2), 2020, read a second time and ordered to proceed to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 15 — SUPPLY ACT (No. 2), 2020

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section B) on Bill 15; M. Dean in the chair.

The committee met at 4:19 p.m.

Sections 1 to 4 inclusive approved.

Schedule approved.

Preamble approved.

Title approved.

Hon. C. James: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 4:20 p.m.

The House resumed; S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.

Report and
Third Reading of Bills

BILL 15 — SUPPLY ACT (No. 2), 2020

Bill 15, Supply Act (No. 2), 2020, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Motions Without Notice

WITHDRAWAL OF BILL 12

Hon. C. James: By leave, I move:

[That Bill (No. 12), Supply Act (No. 1), 2020, be withdrawn from the Order Paper.]

Leave granted.

Motion approved.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL 16 — EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS
AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2020

Hon. M. Farnworth presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Employment Standards Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.

We are in an unprecedented time in the history of this province, and people are concerned about their employment, their health and the safety of their loved ones. As other provinces have done, we are proposing to amend the Employment Standards Act to better support workers both immediately, during this crisis, and in the long term by making changes to ensure that no worker in B.C. can lose their job for following the directions of the provincial health officer.

That’s what this piece of legislation is about.

Deputy Speaker: The question is first reading of Bill 16.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I ask leave of the House to permit Bill 16 to proceed through all stages this day.

Leave granted.

Bill 16, Employment Standards Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020, introduced, read a first time and ordered to proceed to second reading forthwith.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, we will pause for a moment for the distribution of the bill in the chamber. We’ll recess for five minutes.

The House recessed from 4:24 p.m. to 4:27 p.m.

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 16 — EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS
AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2020

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that Bill 16 be read a second time now.

Bill 16 amends the Employment Standards Act to provide unpaid job-protected leave to employees in British Columbia during the COVID-19 crisis. COVID-19 is an unprecedented public health emergency for British Columbians and for people across Canada and around the world.

The most important part of our work is protecting British Columbians. During this crisis, no employee will lose their job or be fired for following an order of the provincial health officer or for needing to care for a child whose school is closed.

Specifically, this leave may be requested by an employee if, in relation to COVID-19, they have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and are acting in accordance with the instructions or an order of a medical health officer or the advice of a medical practitioner, nurse practitioner or registered nurse; they are in quarantine or self-isolation in accordance with an order of the provincial health officer, an order made under the federal Quarantine Act or guidelines of the B.C. Centre for Disease Control or the Public Health Agency of Canada; they have been directed by their employer to stay home because of concerns about their exposure to others; because they are unable to return to British Columbia because of a travel or border restriction; or they are providing care to their minor child or a dependant adult who is their child or former foster child, including when a school, daycare or similar facility has closed.

The bill will also allow government to extend the leave by regulation to other COVID-related situations. This will enable us to provide job-protected leave in additional situations, if necessary, as the COVID crisis evolves.

The leave will be available for as long as one of these eligible COVID-related situations applies to the employee. While an employer may ask for reasonably sufficient proof that the employee is entitled to the leave, the expectation for evidence will be low because people should be staying home at this time. So the bill specifically provides that a worker will not need a doctor’s note to take this leave.

The leave will be retroactive to January 27, the date that the first COVID case was confirmed in B.C. This means that job-protected leave will apply to employees who are already off work because of an eligible situation such as being ill with COVID-19 or in self-isolation. It also means that if an employee was let go before this bill came into force because they had time to take off for self-isolation or another eligible COVID-19-related situation, their employer will be required to offer them their same or comparable job back.

[4:30 p.m.]

We are not alone in recognizing the need for this important support for employees at this critical time. Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan have passed laws granting unpaid leave during the COVID-19 outbreak, and other provinces are considering the same. Bill 16 recognizes that the need for this leave is time-limited while COVID-19 remains a threat, and it may be repealed by regulation once the crisis has passed.

In addition to providing leave for COVID-19, Bill 16 also provides employees in British Columbia with up to three days of unpaid, job-protected leave each year for personal illness or injury. This leave will be an ongoing entitlement, not specific to COVID-19, and will be available to employees who have worked for their employer for at least 90 days. Consistent with other types of leave available in the act, employers may ask for reasonably sufficient proof that an employee is entitled to personal illness or injury leave.

This new leave ensures B.C. catches up with the rest of Canada. All other provinces as well as the federal jurisdiction already provide unpaid sick leave under their employment standards legislation.

These amendments are the right thing to do for British Columbians now and on an ongoing basis. This bill supports employees who, in relation to COVID-19, cannot work because they are ill, they are required to self-isolate, their employer is concerned that they may place others at risk, they are unable to return home to British Columbia or they need to care for their minor child or dependent adult child or former foster child.

While this bill will directly impact those who are closest to COVID-19, it will also help keep all British Columbians as safe as possible and mitigate the impacts of the outbreak. We want British Columbians to know their government has their backs throughout this crisis, and together we will get through this.

I look forward to members’ comments on this bill.

M. de Jong: Thanks to the minister for those second reading remarks. It is not a time for, in my view, lengthy rhetoric or speeches. The opposition is going to support the bill.

I am able to say that mere moments after its distribution…. We were fortunate enough to have a briefing from the Minister of Labour on the weekend, yesterday, and were apprised of the contents of the bill. All of my colleagues are appreciative of that fact. The member for Chilliwack, who occupies the post of official critic, was able to conduct an analysis for us that informs the decision as well.

I’ll make a few brief comments that, perhaps, the minister acting on behalf of his colleague the Minister of Labour, the Public Safety Minister, can address when he wraps up the debate on second reading here in a few minutes.

The essence of the bill is contained within section 2, which is the provisions dealing with the effects of COVID-19 on an employee and the need and the desire to provide protection to that employee. It speaks to a period of unpaid leave, which is significant. It provides job security. Of course, the challenge in all of this is to balance the desire to protect the worker, the employee, with the reality that many businesses are going to be facing very, very difficult circumstances and are going to be hard-pressed to meet a variety of obligations, including keeping their employees employed.

There are, of course, concerns about what happens in the event that a business does not survive. We hope those circumstances are limited, but it is a reality that I’m sure the government has had to take into account and that all of us will, unfortunately, be confronted by in our communities.

The government has opted to include provisions that are specific to the COVID-19 situation, a serious situation. I believe Ontario and Saskatchewan opted for more general provisions relating to an infectious disease provision. Perhaps, if the minister is aware, he can offer an indication of why the government thought that was a preferable approach.

[4:35 p.m.]

He also indicated in his second reading remarks that the government has included — and he’s correct about this — a provision by which the bill or sections of the bill — I believe he would be referring to sections 2 and 3 — can be rescinded by order-in-council. Is that the government’s intention following the resolution, following the passage, of the threat posed by COVID-19? As I say, some provinces have included provisions like this, similar to this, but they have more general application than just the COVID-19 circumstance.

I would make this observation as we move expeditiously to breathe legislative life into this bill: that the government recognize that for all of the good intentions that we may possess, there may be unintended consequences that flow from these provisions. They are unintended because we can’t think of them now.

To that extent, I’m hopeful that the government — in six months, nine months, 12 months or whenever that appropriate time is — would be prepared to provide this chamber, when it is more fully inhabited, an opportunity, via a committee or some mechanism, to articulate its views more fully on whether the provisions have acted in the way intended or whether there have been unintended consequences from the provisions here.

Section 1 is interesting. I think the government’s argument would be that it brings British Columbia in line with other jurisdictions as it relates to unpaid illness leave. It doesn’t seem to be connected directly to the COVID crisis. Three days — we’re talking about circumstances that extend far beyond the need for three days’ unpaid leave, in the case of COVID-19.

My understanding is that the provisions are similar to those which exist in several other provinces, many other provinces, and that it is not cumulative. There is not a carryover of the three days. For employees, the definition is 90 consecutive days of employment. I’m not sure whether that has implications for a full-time versus a part-time employee. As I say, it’s interesting that the government chose to include section 1, which seems to be of far more general application than an attempt to update B.C. employment standards law in a bill that is, I think, primarily directed at addressing protections for workers impacted by COVID-19.

But the opposition is satisfied, given the urgency of the situation, that the bill in its entirety — when I say “in its entirety,” it’s the four sections that comprise the bill — is deserving of support, and the opposition is prepared, obviously, to facilitate expedited passage of the bill. There are some areas that, were we to embark on a far lengthier and more standard discussion and debate, I might be querying the minister on. In these unusual times, I have chosen to alert him, and to the extent that he can provide responses this afternoon in this forum, I am grateful for that.

S. Furstenau: On behalf of my colleague, the Green caucus would like to indicate that we welcome and support these changes, the Employment Standards Amendment Act, ensuring that workers will not lose their jobs if they are impacted by COVID-19 or complying with public health orders as we respond to this pandemic. We recognize that supporting people who need to stay home is actually a key piece of addressing this pandemic and flattening the curve and saving lives.

[4:40 p.m.]

Allowing workers to immediately take unpaid job-protected leave if they are unable to work for reasons related to COVID-19 is exactly the right step to be taking. To make it retroactive to January 27, 2020, is also a good step for the government to be taking.

The bill does also make a permanent change to bring in the three days of sick leave, as has been indicated by the minister and the member opposite. We see this, actually, as a long-overdue change to support workers in B.C. We were an outlier in Canada in not providing guaranteed sick leave to employees. I think if we are learning anything from this time, it is that we all need to take care of ourselves when we are sick and not go to work when we are sick.

We will ask a few questions at the next stage of debate. British Columbians need to be certain how this change applies to them and their situation. So we will seek some further details that we can share with our constituents and explore, also, how this bill will apply to people who may not be complying with an order to stay home but feel it’s necessary to stay home to protect their health — for example, a person who is in a job where there’s a high-risk exposure to this virus and who has an underlying health condition where they might get seriously sick if they catch the virus.

I’ll close very brief comments with reaffirming our support for this change. It’s a critical piece in a very large puzzle of how we are going to navigate through this. The last thing anybody should need to be thinking about if they’re unwell or responding to an order from our provincial health officer is whether they will have a job to go back to when they get well again. I’m glad to see us as a House taking this critical step to support workers in this province today.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, I recognize the minister to close the debate.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I want to thank members for their comments today. In response to my colleague across the way, I can provide some details to his questions.

He is right. Some other provinces have taken a broader approach to the issue of leave in terms of pandemics. We have focused specifically on COVID-19 because of the urgency of the situation.

I know that after we are through this and we are able to learn the lessons that we will all undoubtedly have learned from this particular issue and how it’s been dealt with, that will allow us to, I think, put in place a more — I don’t want to say thoughtful — in-depth approach in dealing with these issues in the future as the best way to do it and the experience that we will gain. That’s the key reason why we have not done what some other provinces have in that regard but have strictly focused on COVID-19.

The member is correct that the provisions don’t carry over, in terms of the changes that we’re making on the permanent aspect. Again, this is being done at this time because I think there is a considerable focus by British Columbians on, all of a sudden, “Wow, there’s a pandemic,” and the issue of sickness and illness: “Do I go to work? Do I not go to work?”

These changes allow us an opportunity to move into line with other jurisdictions in the country, both provincial and federal, that make it clear that you can have three days of sick leave that are unpaid to help reinforce that message that when you’re sick — you know what? — in the interests of yourself and your co-workers, you should not be going to work when you’ve got the flu, for example. So that’s the purpose of this, and we think that this is the appropriate time to do that.

With that, I look forward to passage of second reading.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that Bill 16 be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to be considered forthwith.

Bill 16, Employment Standards Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020, read a second time and ordered to proceed to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 16 — EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS
AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2020

The House in Committee of the Whole (Section B) on Bill 16; M. Dean in the chair.

The committee met at 4:45 p.m.

Section 1 approved.

On section 2.

S. Furstenau: Just a few very quick questions. Could the minister provide clarity on how this change will provide leave for people affected by public health orders versus recommendations of the chief public health officer that are not formal orders.

Hon. M. Farnworth: The recommendations in the legislation…. The legislation takes into account those two issues. So whether they are orders or guidelines, they are built into the legislation, and the legislation will apply.

S. Furstenau: Could the minister just elaborate a little bit about individuals who have underlying medical conditions who don’t feel safe going to work — for example, someone with a significant respiratory issue who works in a job with a high risk of exposure, such as a cashier. Are these individuals covered by the changes, and if not, why not?

Hon. M. Farnworth: While not specifically mentioned in the legislation, in fact, the legislation is written in such a way that it is encompassed by the guidelines of the medical health officer, again, whether through order or recommendations.

S. Furstenau: My last question is just about the mechanics.

How will workers ask for the leave, what are their obligations, and can the minister confirm that they won’t need a sick note of any kind?

Hon. M. Farnworth: All the employee has to do is to request the leave. The mechanics will be worked out between the employee and the employer. The beginning of the question is actually dealt with in the subsequent section.

Sections 2 to 4 inclusive approved.

Title approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move that the committee rise and report Bill 16 complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 4:48 p.m.

The House resumed; S. Chandra-Herbert in the chair.

Report and
Third Reading of Bills

BILL 16 — EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS
AMENDMENT ACT (No. 2), 2020

Bill 16, Employment Standards Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, I am advised the Lieutenant-Governor is in the precinct. I would advise and ask that you please remain in your seats while we await her arrival.

Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor requested to attend the House, was admitted to the chamber and took her seat on the throne.

[4:50 p.m.]

Royal Assent to Bills

Clerk of the Legislative Assembly:

 

Employment Standards Amendment Act (No. 2), 2020

In Her Majesty’s name, Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor doth assent to this act.

Supply Act (No. 2), 2020

In Her Majesty’s name, Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor doth thank Her Majesty’s loyal subjects, accepts their benevolence and assents to this act.

Hon. J. Austin (Lieutenant-Governor): Good afternoon, everybody. It really is wonderful to see you here. I did want to just express my truly heartfelt appreciation to all of you for the outstanding job that you’re doing in a cross-partisan way. It’s wonderful to see the kind of teamwork that we have in our province among our political leaders.

I have to tell you honestly that I’ve heard from friends and colleagues across the country who are so impressed with B.C.’s leadership and B.C.’s collaboration and the teamwork that we see happening here.

I’ll also share that I heard this afternoon from Admiral Auchterlonie. I told him I was coming here, and he said: “Well, if you have a chance, would you please tell them all how much I appreciate what they’re doing and what an outstanding job they’re doing.”

So I want you all to stay safe and wash your hands, because we need you here in British Columbia.

Thank you so much.

HÍSW̱ḴE.

Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor retired from the chamber.

[4:55 p.m.]

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move:

1. That the House, at its rising, do stand adjourned until it appears to the satisfaction of the Speaker, after consultation with the government, that the public interest requires that the House shall meet, or until the Speaker may be advised by the government that it is desired to prorogue the fifth session of the 41st parliament of the province of British Columbia. The Speaker shall give notice to all members that he is so satisfied or has been so advised and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice, and, as the case may be, may transact its business as if it has been duly adjourned to that time and date.

2. That, by agreement of the Speaker and the House Leaders of each recognized caucus, the location of sittings and means of conducting sittings of this House may be altered if required due to an emergency situation or public health measures, and that such agreement constitute the authorization of the House to proceed in the manner agreed to. The Speaker shall give notice to all members of the agreement.

3. That, in the event of the Speaker being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, the Deputy Speaker shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order; in the event that the Deputy Speaker being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, the Deputy Chair of the Committee of the Whole shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order; and in the event that the Deputy Chair of the Committee of the Whole being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, another member designated collectively by the House Leaders of each recognized caucus shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I wish everyone safe travel home. Wash your hands. Maintain social distance.

With that, I move the House do now adjourn.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Deputy Speaker: This House now stands adjourned until further notice. Be safe. Be well.

The House adjourned at 4:58 p.m.