Fifth Session, 41st Parliament (2020)
OFFICIAL REPORT
OF DEBATES
(HANSARD)
Thursday, August 13, 2020
Morning Sitting
Issue No. 357
ISSN 1499-2175
The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.
The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.
CONTENTS
| Routine Business | |
B.C. Arts Council, annual report, 2019-20 | |
| Orders of the Day | |
THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2020
The House met at 10:05 a.m.
[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]
Routine Business
Prayers and reflections: M. Stilwell.
Introductions by Members
J. Rice: I was going to introduce Lu̓á, my son, today, but he is a little bit cranky and taking his time getting here.
M. Stilwell: Joining us in the gallery today are some special guests of mine. First is my son, Kai, who is here again just two weeks after his 19th birthday. He did survive the night out. Joining him today are close family friends, Isabelle Crepin and her son, Kai Lamb, who are visiting us for the next week. That’s right. We have double trouble with the two Kais. We’ll be out exploring beautiful British Columbia, showing them all the sights and sounds as tourists as we explore our own backyard here on Vancouver Island.
Would the House please make them feel very welcome.
Introduction and
First Reading of Bills
BILL M210 — HIGH DOSE INFLUENZA
VACCINE FOR SENIORS
ACT, 2020
J. Isaacs presented a bill intituled High Dose Influenza Vaccine for Seniors Act, 2020.
J. Isaacs: I move the bill intituled High Dose Influenza Vaccine for Seniors Act, 2020, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read for the first time now.
Over 2,000 deaths in Canada in 2018. These deaths are not attributed to the number of loved ones that died of drug overdoses. It’s not deaths related to car accidents nor deaths related to COVID-19. These are the number of lives that were lost to influenza-related deaths.
Our immune system weakens as we age. The older we get, the more likely our risk of contracting the flu increases. Those who have compromised health conditions or a compromised immune system, like heart and stroke, diabetes, kidney disease or lung conditions, are at a higher risk of influenza-related complications. Seniors are more likely to be hospitalized after getting the flu, and for those who are hospitalized, over 65 percent had an underlying health condition, and nearly 85 percent of deaths were linked to those underlying risk factors. Many of these deaths would have been preventable were a vaccine more readily available for our seniors.
Many seniors who contract the flu suffer a decline in mobility. The virus can severely impact both mental and physical health, resulting in a loss of independence and a greater need for additional care. COVID-19 has shown the world the devastating outcomes when an outbreak occurs in shared spaces like long-term-care homes. While there is currently no vaccination for COVID-19, a high dose influenza vaccine is available. Vaccination is the best way to avoid the spread of this highly contagious viral infection. It’s the best way to reduce hospital visits and the high, high cost to the medical system.
I introduced my High Dose Influenza Vaccine for Seniors Act in 2018 and again in 2019. I urge government to move forward with this legislation to protect our seniors living in long-term-care homes.
Mr. Speaker: The question is first reading of the bill.
Motion approved.
J. Isaacs: I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day for the second reading of the next sitting of the House after today.
Bill M210, High Dose Influenza Vaccine for Seniors Act, 2020, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
BILL M211 — LAND TAX DEFERMENT
(CULTUS LAKE PARK)
AMENDMENT ACT, 2020
L. Throness presented a bill intituled Land Tax Deferment (Cultus Lake Park) Amendment Act, 2020.
L. Throness: I move that a bill intituled Land Tax Deferment (Cultus Lake Park) Amendment Act, 2020, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and now read a first time.
Cultus Lake Park Board was established in 1932 by a unique act to this Legislature called the Cultus Lake Park Act. Residents of the park own their homes, but they lease their land from the park board, and for this reason, they cannot defer their property taxes like other British Columbian homeowners are able to do. This causes hardship for many long-term residents on fixed incomes in Cultus Lake as homeowners age and housing prices experience significant increases. It’s happening at a time when it’s more and more important that we enable people to age in place and live independently.
While the park board leases last for 21 years, they are perpetually renewed according to the terms of the lease, providing ironclad assurance to the government that the ministry will be able to collect those deferred taxes in the future, plus interest. The taxpayer would not lose a penny from the enactment of this bill. The bill would alter the B.C. Land Tax Deferment Act to enable tax deferment to take place for Cultus Lake residents.
I would welcome the government bringing forward my bill for debate or proposing its own so that my constituents in their unique situation can be treated like most other homeowners in B.C.
Motion approved.
L. Throness: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for the next sitting of the House after today.
Bill M211, Land Tax Deferment (Cultus Lake Park) Amendment Act, 2020, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
Mr. Speaker: Before we begin the next matter, if we could go back to introductions for a second.
Introductions by Members
J. Rice: I’d like to introduce Lu̓á Alan Rice, my son. This is his second visit to the B.C. Legislature. He just recently turned eight months, and this week, while at the Legislature, he graduated from butt-scooching to mastering his forward crawl.
Would the House please make him feel welcome.
Statements
(Standing Order 25B)
DRIFTWOOD VALLEY OUTFITTERS
AND TAKLA FIRST NATIONS
YOUTH TRAINING PROGRAM
M. Morris: Michael Schneider owns Driftwood Valley Outfitters and has been taking international clients out into some of the most beautiful remote back country our province has to offer for over 30 years. He operates within the traditional territory of the Takla First Nations and works closely with Chief John Allen French and the Takla community.
Over the past year, Michael has put together the Driftwood outdoor guide and business apprenticeship program designed for Takla First Nations youth. He has combined learning opportunities and remote wilderness guiding, tourism and the business aspect of this sector. Working within the school district, he has been able to include regular school curriculum into his program to give youth the opportunity to complete high school.
Michael designed this three-year program to provide First Nations youth opportunities to learn life skills: how to use a chainsaw; build, maintain cabins; field dress wild game; trap fur-bearing animals; and provide exceptional customer service to clients intent on experiencing beautiful British Columbia’s outdoors in a safe and secure environment. Significant in this program is the cultural and traditional knowledge embedded in all activities, creating a platform to share this rich heritage with clients well into the future.
While I speak, the current enrolment of students in this program are hiking and learning while on a month-long wilderness excursion into the mountains in the central northwest part of our province. Support from the Wood Wheaton Supercentre in Prince George and the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C. ensures that these students are well equipped with top-of-the-line outdoor apparel that will keep them dry, warm and comfortable throughout their excursion.
This is an exceptional initiative that will provide an enduring employment legacy for Takla First Nations youth to enter the tourism field and offer professional services to clients and to pass their skills on to other interested community members.
NANAIMO COAL-MINING HISTORY AND
SOUTH END COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
D. Routley: I rise today to speak about Nanaimo. Its history reads the history of British Columbia, the history of working people and the history of the labour movement. I’d like to speak briefly about one particular incident: 133 years ago on May 3, 1887, when 148 men who were working in a coal mine — the number one coal mine in Nanaimo — died in an explosion. That was a time when Nanaimo had little more than 2,000 people as a population, so it was a very significant blow to the community, and it is memorialized today.
The real subject of what I’m going to speak about is the South End Community Association, formed in 1978, some 91 years later, by some of the direct descendants, children and even some of the people who were present that day. This group is a community group that is engaged and is propelling this community forward.
Just like the lives of working people, the lives of the South End have been challenged by the same factors: uneven employment, uneven income and a lot of challenges. But it is the strength of the community that brought people back to do a Miner’s Picnic that has gone on for a quarter of a century, establish a food forest, establish art cans — garbage cans that are artistic — and improve the community. They’re involved in community engagement and consultation with the city. They have a great partnership with the Snuneymuxw First Nation. They have contributed with a neighbourhood plan.
This is a great group chaired by Sydney Robertson with members Sandy McLelan, Starr Faux, Blake McGuffie, Kathryn-Jane Hazel, Elody Bothers, Petra Sochor and Michelle Crowley, among others. It’s a really fantastic group that speaks today to the same fibre and character that was present in Nanaimo those 133 years ago.
SIMON DUFRESNE
E. Foster: It gives me great pleasure to speak in the House about a constituent of mine from Vernon, Simon Dufresne. To say Simon is an overachiever would be an understatement.
Just a few of his accomplishments. In high school, he was on the roll of distinction every year and won the community service award several times. He was a charter member and president of the Vernon Leo Club. The Leos are the youth wing of the international Lions Association. He won the Leo Award of Honour, Leo president’s 100 percent certificate and Leo of the Year and was the first Leo ever to be asked to sit on the district governor’s cabinet.
As a member of the 63rd Kalamalka Royal Canadian Sea Cadets, Simon was awarded the Lord Strathcona medal, the Royal Canadian Legion Cadet medal of excellence, the Navy League medal of excellence, the service and citizenship award, service achievement award, top marksman leadership award and sea cadet of the year. He was one of 50 cadets across Canada awarded a deployment on a tall ship through the Gulf Islands. He was awarded the silver Duke of Edinburgh’s Award, which was presented here in Victoria at Government House by the Lieutenant-Governor.
All of those took place while Simon was in high school. After graduating from high school, Simon enrolled in the culinary arts program at Okanagan College, where he graduated at the top of his class. Simon was chosen to go with one of his instructors and another student to the five-star Hotel Belvedere in Riccione, Italy to cook a traditional Canadian dinner for the guests.
Most recently, Simon was presented with one of the Stober Family Foundation Trades Awards, an award based on in-class performance, academic achievement and recommendations from instructors.
This would be an impressive resume for a 40-year-old. What makes it more impressive is Simon turned 19 on the 30th of May this year.
Congratulations, Simon, on all you’ve achieved. It’s an honour to call you my friend.
SUNSHINE COAST FERRY SERVICES
DURING
COVID-19
N. Simons: There are over 50,000 residents of the Sunshine Coast. We have hospitals, we have doctors’ offices and health clinics, and we are the home to many seniors. Most of our medical specialists live and work in North Vancouver or Vancouver, making it necessary for residents to travel on one of the particularly busy ferries.
In phase 1 of the pandemic, when sailings were cut dramatically, the province ordered that residents and essential goods would be given priority loading. When travel picked up, B.C. Ferries hadn’t had enough time to hire and train their regular contingent of summer workers, so we were left with busier ferries and fewer sailings. People going to their rescheduled surgeries or pre-surgery consultations with specialists were missing their ferries. The company’s own complicated medical-assured loading program, with its restrictive eligibility requirements, couldn’t meet our community’s needs.
That’s why I was pleased when the province made a medical-travel order that states quite clearly that a medical professional’s letter — along with a regular travel assistance, or TAP, form — will get a person, travelling for medical reasons, on a ferry if they arrive 30 minutes ahead of time. Gone was the requirement that the travel had to be urgent or that waiting at the terminal would have to cause risk to health. Gone, too, is the burden on B.C. Ferries in trying to determine who qualifies and who doesn’t. Medical priority is determined at the discretion of the professional medical practitioner, to ensure that people travelling for medical reasons will get to and from their destinations.
I’d like to thank the province and B.C. Ferries for acknowledging the unique circumstances facing residents of ferry-reliant communities, and I look forward to working on finding better long-term solutions to residents’ needs.
SERVICE OF LEGISLATURE STAFF
AND MEMBERS DURING
COVID-19
S. Furstenau: It has been a remarkable achievement, this historic hybrid legislative session. While most people see only us, the members of the House, the reality is that there are hundreds who’ve made this possible. The Clerk and all of her staff in her office are unrelenting in their commitment, and their professionalism, grace and good humour abound as they’ve guided us through this whole new landscape.
Hansard and the IT crew, henceforth to be known as the miracle workers of the B.C. Legislature, have set a very high bar for the rest of Canada to aspire to. While we were mostly working from home in April and May, they were working here, laying the foundation for this precedent-setting parliamentary session.
The Sergeants-at-Arms have protected us in ways that none of us could have imagined before 2020. They have been modelling Dr. Henry’s mantra of staying calm and being kind, even before she’d started offering her daily guidance to all of us.
The dining room staff have maintained their sunny disposition while figuring out how to keep all of us fed. The maintenance and cleaning staff have gone above and beyond to keep us as safe as we possibly can be. The librarians have continued to provide answers to all of the questions — and the reading material that has helped carry us through these strange times.
Ministry staff and legislative drafters, tasked with what must have seemed like the impossible, have kept the government’s agenda moving forward, even when much of the world seemed to be at a full stop. Constituency office staff around the province have found ways to continue to serve citizens, and the caucus staff have made our work and efforts in here possible. The ministerial assistants have been the pillars the ministers can count on.
All of us have done our best to rise to this occasion, but I think it’s important to acknowledge and recognize that the ministers and the Premier, who are bearing the burden and responsibilities of steering the ship that is our province in the midst of a global pandemic, have risen very high. For a moment, let’s consider the weight that they are carrying and its toll on them and their families, and let us remember to be grateful for their service.
If I may just take this opportunity to thank my colleague the member for Saanich North and the Islands for his calm, kind, compassionate and wise leadership over the last eight months. It’s been a true gift to work alongside him. I’m deeply grateful to be his colleague and his friend.
SOWARAN KAUR HOTI
J. Sims: I rise today to celebrate the life of a constituent of mine who also happened to be my mom, Sowaran Kaur Hoti, who died at the age of 95 on the sixth of April.
She was born in a small — tiny, I would say — village in the Punjab, in Gurre, and born with the last name Nahall. Her nankay, her maternal village, her mom’s village, was Takkarki. The name Binning will always, always, have a special place in her heart, because for my mom, the Nahall family and the Binning family were always paramount. They were what made her world rock, and when one of them moved into the house or came to visit her, she would just light up.
She was the oldest of five kids — one sister and three brothers. She lost her sister back in ’75 due to cancer. Her two brothers also passed away, and she is survived by her youngest brother, who lives in San Francisco. She married my father, Bikrama Singh Hoti, and moved to the village of Pabma, also in the Punjab — which, when I was younger, seemed like a thousand miles away but, when I went back, is only a few kilometres away.
In 1962, with four kids under the age of ten in tow, she moved to England. I am in awe of the challenges that she faced, arriving in England in the month of October — rainy, miserable, dark, cold; moving to a totally different environment where she didn’t speak the language and moving into a house where her uncle and my dad, who were there before us, had to show her how to use the amenities in the house. How quickly she adjusted.
In the ’90s, she moved to B.C. But before moving to B.C., while she was in England — she had four kids from India, and then two were born in England — raising six kids on one income was not easy. She went out, and she got a job. She worked in the health care system. She started off working as a housekeeper, and before we knew it, with her dedication to work, she picked up the language, and there she was working in the maternity ward very, very quickly and where she stayed until she retired.
Her love always was her house, her family. Her love was her garden. In England they had victory gardens, and my mom applied for one of those. None of us could understand when she was going to have time to work on her allotment, but she did. She would go to work, do all the housework, and still go take a 20-minute walk to go to the allotment and work there, and she loved that.
She loved flowers. I wear this scarf in her honour today because when this was gifted to me, I walked in to visit her, and she looked at this scarf, and she said: “You need to wear colour and flowers more often.” Life is very, very short. She had many challenges, but the amazing thing with my mom is that she never saw the challenge; she saw the opportunities. For her, the cup was always half-full. Even when I would say to her all the terrible things that were happening, she would say: “Don’t think about that. Think about the positive things.”
She had six kids, as I mentioned; 14 grandkids; and 11 great-grandkids — my little Alliya, my great-granddaughter, is her only great-great-granddaughter; and she is survived by them. For my mom, we were not just her family, not just us. It was the six kids that my aunt, the one who passed away in ’75, had. I can say that except for the last three years, there wasn’t a wedding, there wasn’t an anniversary, there wasn’t an engagement, there wasn’t a party that was held in England, the United States or in Canada that she would miss, because she felt it was her responsibility, being the oldest, to always be there.
She was Bibi to everybody. My kids ask me sometimes: “What does the word bibi mean?” I said: “I don’t know.” Because at one stage my mom was called Bibi by her brothers and her sisters-in-law, I started to call her Bibi. Then my kids called her Bibi — and the grandkids, everybody. Even in the nursing home, for the last year, she was Bibi there too, to all the staff.
A big, big thank-you to the staff at Laurel Place, who provided awesome, awesome care for her.
Mom, your love, your tenacity, your resilience and your willingness to take an opportunity are inside each and every one of us. Thank you. We love you.
Oral Questions
ECONOMIC RECOVERY PLAN
A. Wilkinson: Five months ago, on March 23 of this year, the Premier announced that there would be an economic recovery plan put together by a group known as the Economic Recovery Task Force.
On July 29, the most prominent member of that task force, the B.C. Business Council, released their own plan out of frustration that there has been no work product to see from the Premier’s Economic Recovery Task Force. What the head of the B.C. Business Council, Greg D’Avignon, had to say was: “The provincial government has not had an economic recovery strategy. We’ve had a health recovery strategy masking as an economic strategy.”
The obvious question to the Premier is: where’s the plan, Premier?
Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. Certainly, we have been going through an extraordinary time here in British Columbia, an unprecedented downturn in the economy and a closure of many sectors.
But unlike other parts of the country, we were able to keep many components of our economy going and moving throughout the pandemic. We’re all very proud of the work our front-line workers did, whether they were in health care or whether they were keeping our supply chains going, making sure that people could access their food. These were all imperative components of our recovery.
We started by focusing on keeping people safe. I know the member and I have disagreed on this, but we believe that without confidence in our public health, we will not have confidence in our economy.
We’ve been making investments systematically over the past number of months with the advice and counsel of the Economic Recovery Task Force. I’m very confident that the $3.5 billion that we put into the economy over the period of a number of months and the now $2.5 billion that the Minister of Finance will be announcing more about in the days ahead is the exact direction that the Economic Recovery Task Force wanted us to go in.
The member has mentioned one group, the Business Council, which represents the largest employers in the province. The B.C. Chamber of Commerce was there, the boards of trade from our two major cities, the Federation of Labour, representatives of the not-for-profit sector, from the creative sector and also Indigenous people.
In addition to the task force, we invited all British Columbians to participate, as I believe we should. We’re assembling all of that information, focusing on making sure that people are safe in their communities and people can productively get back into the economy. I believe we’ll see more fruit from that labour over the coming days.
Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a supplemental.
A. Wilkinson: Well, British Columbia is the third-largest province in Canada, with five million people. The three other large provinces all have announced economic recovery plans: Quebec on June 3, eight million people; Ontario, July 6, with 15 million people; and Alberta, June 29, with four million people. Somehow, British Columbia’s left out of the parade.
Another one of the members of the Premier’s economic recovery team, Bridgitte Anderson of the Vancouver Board of Trade, had this to say: “We’ve known for months that many businesses were suffering, and now we’re starting to see the true picture, and it is a terrible one. Thousands of businesses have ceased to exist.” The number provided by the Vancouver Board of Trade, backed up by B.C. Stats and Stats Canada, is that 14,000 businesses have permanently shut down in British Columbia since March 23.
Premier, where is the plan?
Hon. J. Horgan: Well, the plan has been evolving from the beginning. Again, I want to remind all members of this House that if the people of British Columbia are not confident to come out and participate in the economy, then they’re not going to see the success that we need here in British Columbia. That’s why we focused on keeping people safe. That’s why we focused on making sure that those that were dislocated….
Interjection.
Hon. J. Horgan: Do you want to hear the answer, Member? It’s clear that the official opposition, this being the first time this week that the Leader of the Opposition has stood in this place, are not necessarily interested in the answers that I want to give. But I will persist. I will persist to get through the challenges of only a dozen hecklers on the other side.
Despite that, they don’t want to hear about $2.5 billion worth of economic stimulus that will be coming from the Minister of Finance in the days ahead. We’ve been working with all British Columbians — not just the Economic Recovery Task Force but all British Columbians — so that we can continue to lead the country, as we were before the pandemic.
Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a second supplemental.
A. Wilkinson: Well, I suppose it’s understandable that the Premier is a bit irritable, because the people of British Columbia are becoming very irritable with the lack of any kind of plan coming from the provincial government. Their lack of confidence has a good basis in the inaction of this Premier.
The Premier said, on March 23: “We’re putting together a task force so that we can indeed lay out, with confidence, to the public that there’s a plan.” That was five months ago, Premier. The rest of the world is already moving ahead.
The Premier seems to lay his hopes on a health recovery plan. That’s not going to do it, Premier. Health is one of 20 ministries in your government. The other 19 have roles to play. They’ve got to be out there, establishing consumer confidence, telling people that it’s okay to participate in life again, saving thousands more businesses from insolvency in the next six weeks.
The obvious question, Premier, is: is there any plan at all, or have you been dithering for five months while other organizations release plans behind your back?
Hon. J. Horgan: Again, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his participation this week in question period.
We have been working diligently with every sector to ensure that we can have a secure restart of the economy, focusing on people, focusing on making sure that people in every corner of the province have confidence so they can go back into the economy. I can say that when the members of the Economic Recovery Task Force, myself, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Jobs, Economic Development and Competitiveness were meeting weekly, we were talking about how we could kick-start the economy by providing confidence.
That confidence does not come from hectoring from the opposition. It comes from the cooperation that existed until just recently between all of us in this House, with one common purpose to lift all British Columbians up, focusing on people, making sure that every corner of the province, every element of the economy, was firing on all cylinders.
That’s what we’ve been working on. That’s what the Minister of Finance has been doing, and every other minister of this government, with great success.
SITE C POWER PROJECT
G. Kyllo: Now, Site C is the largest capital project that the current government is undertaking in our province — a ten-year construction schedule — and therefore deserving of significant attention and oversight.
Only a few weeks ago the Minister of Energy and Mines announced serious concerns around the construction of the Site C dam project. Now, the former minister, the member for Nelson-Creston, had confirmed in June 2017 that Site C was “on time and on budget.” Now we see the current minister attempting to shift the blame to the pandemic, even though the report from B.C. Hydro covers a period largely before COVID-19 arrived.
To the Energy Minister, when exactly — and details matter here — was the Energy Minister informed by B.C. Hydro that both the project construction schedule and cost were at significant risk?
Hon. B. Ralston: It is useful to review the opposition’s record, when they were in government, on Site C. They started the project without proper oversight and without a credible budget. They rushed through the approval of the design, which included significant geological risks. I’m sure they will remember the two tension cracks that occurred under their government, which led the B.C. Hydro to announce an increase in cost and construction time in November of 2017.
Our government asked the B.C. Utilities Commission to review the project, and they found that it was already over budget and behind schedule. Let me quote from the 2017 B.C. utilities review. The BCUC is “not persuaded” that the Site C project “will remain on schedule for a November 2024 in-service date.”
That’s the record of the previous government, and that’s the factual record that’s before the public at this time.
G. Kyllo: Well, the B.C. Utilities Commission actually informed government that they had choices, and it was this government that made the decision to continue construction. It was also this government that put in place the oversight board that reported directly to Treasury Board. On May 9, 2019, the member for Nelson-Creston said Site C reports “are reviewed and approved by the public assurance board…which is accountable to government and reports regularly to Treasury Board.”
What is the minister saying now? That B.C. Hydro has been concealing information, has kept him in the dark? That he was not aware of the scheduling and construction cost risks at Site C until this presser just a few weeks ago? Or is the minister and his government saying that they have let the project run adrift and have not been asking appropriate questions?
A question to the Minister of Energy. Why should British Columbians have any confidence in this government’s ability to manage a project that was on time and on budget when they took over responsibility?
Hon. B. Ralston: The previous government recklessly pushed Site C past the point of no return. Indeed, the then Premier said: “I will get it past the point of no return.” They refused to let the independent energy watchdog, the B.C. Utilities Commission, review the project. They signed off on a design that included known geological risks. They spent billions of dollars without proper oversight in their efforts to push this project past the point of no return.
Our government has been clear. Site C is not a project we would have started, but we weren’t willing to ask British Columbians to take on $4 million in debt with nothing in return. Because of the choices made by the old government, there were cost pressures on the project in summer 2017, but we had been managing them. We are now facing geological risks in the design that the old government approved.
It’s important to remember that the project was on schedule prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. In March, B.C. Hydro significantly scaled down the project and focused only on essential work and meeting critical milestones. This was done in line with advice from the provincial health officer to ensure the safety of workers and local communities. Thanks to this approach, we are on track to achieve river diversion, a key step in constructing the project, this fall. B.C. Hydro is in the process of safely scaling construction activities back up in line with advice from public officials.
I’ve been clear. I’m concerned with the reports that the member mentions that B.C. Hydro recently filed with the Utilities Commission. B.C. Hydro has initiated a re-baselining process of the Site C project to review the cost and time required to complete the project. I’ve also brought on Mr. Peter Milburn, a former deputy minister, as a special adviser. Mr. Milburn will play an important role in examining the project. He will provide me and our government with independent advice and a fresh perspective.
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO COVID-19
A. Olsen: We hoped that the fall would mark the beginning of the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public health officials and British Columbians, though, are wary of the possibility of a second wave. Just yesterday we had an announcement of 85 new cases. That’s the third-highest, single-day jump since the beginning of the pandemic.
There’s growing tension in our province around kids going back to school, our loved ones in care homes, the fall flu season, individuals’ financial security and, as well, stalled sectors of our economy. There are fears that we might be facing a second lockdown and another round of social distancing measures.
In March, all parties in this House got together to unanimously approve a $5 billion fiscal package to address the immediate health challenges as well as to seed an economic recovery. However, we’re seeing the impact of the lockdown, particularly on the mental health and well-being of British Columbians.
My question is for the Premier. Few people could have predicted this pandemic and the impacts we’ve experienced. As we go into the fall with the uncertainty and the real possibility of a second wave, what will his government do differently if we’re forced to bring back more severe social distancing protocols?
Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the interim leader of the Green Party for the question.
We have learned a great deal, as British Columbians, as legislators and as individuals, about the consequences of COVID-19 and a global pandemic. We are a small, open economy. We depend on trade. We depend on other jurisdictions being as robust as ourselves. Of course, in a global pandemic, that is absolutely not the case.
We’ve learned a great deal, and we’ve taken several steps that I believe will put us in good stead going into the fall. Firstly, we’ve worked with the federal government to ensure that our borders can be closed until such time as our neighbours and those who want to come to British Columbia have a similar positive outcome with respect to cases, with respect to hospitalizations and so on.
We worked with the federal government to establish a national sick leave program, which will, as we go into the fall and into the traditional flu season, be in a position to ensure that workers will not put their colleagues and their customers at risk by going to work when they’re sick. They’ll be able to stay at home with some economic certainty that they won’t be penalized for that.
We’ve worked on ensuring that PPEs are in place — significant amounts, not just for those in the health care sector but in every sector, including education. Although there has been a lot of discussion this week about the education restart that will be beginning in September…. In my conversations with regular families, they understand the challenges we’re facing. You articulated them very well in your question.
I think all of us, at the end of the day, understand that these are extraordinary times. That requires flexibility. It requires cooperation. By and large, for the most part, all of us in this place have been cooperating with a common purpose in mind. That is, to support our neighbours, to support our constituents, to lift ourselves up so that we can come out of this stronger than we went in.
What does the fall hold? Hon. Member, if you had an answer to that, we would probably be moving a lot faster than we are right now.
Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Third Party on a supplemental.
A. Olsen: Thank you to the Premier for his response.
Throughout this session, the B.C. Green caucus has used question period as an avenue to propose and bring into the public discourse various ideas, programs and projects that could benefit British Columbians.
We’ve asked for greater transparency and accountability in our senior care homes to protect some of our most vulnerable citizens. We’ve advocated for a 12-month project to offer mental health support under MSP to help British Columbians with this overwhelming health crisis. We’ve pushed for additional support for child care centres and before- and after-school care programs so parents can go back to work without worrying about the safety of their children.
In the passing weeks, we’ve seen some of the challenges of partisan politics. The Premier referred to it earlier in his responses. We’ve also seen the power of working together. We remain committed to collaborative, evidence-based governance.
My question is again to the Premier. If a second lockdown occurs, what specific changes has his government made to ensure our systems and structures are better able to protect the mental health and well-being of British Columbians?
Hon. J. Horgan: I can say that the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions has opened 143 treatment beds since the beginning of the pandemic. We’ve put in place more counselling services for British Columbians. We’re working diligently to make sure that the well-being of British Columbians, whether it be…. Their physical health, their mental health and their economic health are high priorities for us. People are the economy, and without all people working in tandem to lift us all up, we’re going to be falling behind.
I do know that as we go to the fall, the Minister of Health and public health officials, led by Dr. Bonnie Henry…. We meet regularly. We discuss trends. We look at other jurisdictions. We look at other approaches from people in other parts of the world. How are they addressing these issues? We take advice from the Green Party. We take advice, in some cases, from the official opposition. We most assuredly listen to people.
That brings us back to the K-to-12 restart. We know that school is fundamentally important to our young ones. It’s absolutely critical. Now we have to find a way to continue to provide that service for children and for families in a way that is safe. That requires cooperation. That requires listening to everybody — school districts, teachers, parents and kids.
That’s what we’ve been doing, and I think that’s the best way forward, hon. Member. Continued cooperation and collaboration are what British Columbians want, and that’s what we intend to do.
GOVERNMENT PLAN FOR
EDUCATION SYSTEM
REOPENING
D. Davies: I’d like to thank the Premier for that segue into my question on plans, which we seem to be lacking endlessly.
The Minister of Education has had five months to plan for back to school. But so far, he has only made it worse for parents. He has made it worse for teachers. He has made it worse for school districts. He has made it worse for children.
First, there would be a plan, one plan. Then there are 60 plans. All of the students would be in class on September 8. Well then, maybe not. There’d be a hybrid model. Then, in rare cases, there might be a hybrid model. Well, then maybe more students would be in the hybrid model after all.
I bet the Minister of Education is wishing he’d actually released the plan on the 29th. All of the posturing from the minister won’t change the fact that parents still have no idea what is going to be happening in September. People are looking for leadership.
My question to the Minister of Education is: does he really believe that waiting to tell parents until August 26 is fair to them or their families?
Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the member from Fort St. John for his question. Again, I want to unpack the question and the accusations and the vitriol and come back to the key question. The key issue.…
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members, Members.
Hon. J. Horgan: The key issue for parents, the key issue for teachers, the key issue for people in the K-to-12 system is making sure that it will work. There are as many ideas for what will work as there are people, and the best way to come to consensus is to listen, to be flexible, and that’s what the Minister of Education has been doing. He’s been listening to teachers. He’s been listening to parents. He’s been listening to the people of Fort St. John and finding out that what they need is not the same as the people in Parksville.
That’s what collaboration is all about — working together to create plans that are individually focused on success for students and comfort for families. That’s what we’re doing. I thought you’d be on board with that.
Mr. Speaker: The member for Peace River North on a supplemental.
D. Davies: I thank the Premier for whatever that was.
Parents want a plan. Parents need a plan. They need to know what their children are going to be doing in the fall, if they need to find care for them. Work schedules for families need to be sorted out.
A plan. We’ve had five months. The minister has said this over and over again, that he has been planning the return to school since schools were suspended in March. Well, we did not get anything on July 29.
I’m going to quote one family here. You’re right, Premier. I’ve talked to many, many families, and I know that they’ve reached out to the minister as well.
“Both my husband and I are facing unprecedented work schedules in September, and now I not only deal with my work; I have four kids at home, one with autism. My children are in grades 2, 4, 5 and 7. I am not a teacher, and I have no child care for our kids.” This is one message that echoes so many concerned, scared families across the province. Whether it’s child care or after school or returning to work, why is the minister, why is this government, leaving it until August 26 to get a plan out to families?
Mr. Speaker: Members, before we get to the answer, I just might say that, of course, this line of questioning is particularly important to parents around the province, so it will be important that we have every opportunity to clearly hear the question and clearly hear the answer. Thank you.
Hon. J. Horgan: With respect to the family that the hon. member cites, I absolutely understand the anxiety and apprehension that that family and countless families across British Columbia are feeling. The start of the school year in a normal year is apprehensive for many families. The challenges that the member outlined exist in a pandemic and outside of a pandemic. The challenge, of course, will not be resolved with accusations and criticism. It will be resolved with cooperation and collaboration, and that’s exactly what we’re doing.
Now, I appreciate that the Leader of the Opposition would want us to table a plan so that he could immediately criticize it. We have been working with the people who deliver education in British Columbia, the vice-principals, the principals, the school trustees — the duly elected school trustees who want to have input into how services are delivered in their community. The families that are concerned about their children want to know that everyone is behind them, and that’s what we’re doing.
The Minister of Education has been focusing on bringing people together, finding the best way forward, to have a mix of in-class and virtual education for the hundreds of thousands of students in British Columbia. That is not good enough for the official opposition, because they’ve got nothing else to do but complain.
S. Bond: It doesn’t matter how much the Premier stands and attempts to bluster and create an answer today. Our job is to bring the concerns of parents to the Legislature, and that’s exactly what we are doing today. They are real, and they are significant concerns.
Parents have been counting down the days on their calendars to the beginning of school. Well, apparently the Minister of Education hasn’t been. Parents know that September is coming, and they’ve tried to start their planning. They’ve looked for child care. They’re trying to arrange after-school care. They’re talking to their bosses about what a return to work would look like. The key to all of that is knowing that their children would be back in class. But instead of putting parents at ease, the minister has actually made it worse. Every day something changes.
How does the minister expect parents to plan when he has failed so miserably to have a coherent plan for a safe return to school?
Hon. J. Horgan: I thank the member for her question.
Again, I will repeat what we’ve been saying for a number of weeks now. There is apprehension within the community. There is concern within parent communities, within the education sector about how we will proceed in a global pandemic. Sometimes I think you forget about that, hon. Members. We are in a global pandemic where circumstances are changing by the day.
I know with absolute certainty, even though there’s anxiety in the community, the vast majority of parents understand that we will have to work together with teachers, with child care providers, with others in the community to make sure that we can deliver this vitally important service. That’s what we’ve been focused on. By and large, we’ve had cooperation and collaboration throughout this House to do that. Today’s not one of those days.
Mr. Speaker: The member for Prince George–Valemount on a supplemental.
S. Bond: Well, the Premier, I am positive, and the minister have heard from parents all across British Columbia. To suggest that there is a plan that is comprehensive and understandable is simply not true.
Parents understand the need for students to return to class, and so does the opposition. They also understand the need for everyone to stay safe when doing so, and so does the opposition. What they don’t understand and it’s our job to bring to this House is why the minister had five months to plan, he ran a trial in June, and he still is only figuring out the basics.
Will all students have access to a hybrid model? Why did the minister cut $12 million out of distance learning for the fall? Why can’t he tell students the day that school will start? That’s what parents are asking, and frankly, to the Premier, they expect answers.
The minister’s inability to plan has left parents in a lurch. So to the Premier, who just yesterday said, “At the end of the day, the decisions rest with me and my government,” this mess is on his shoulders.
Can he actually stand up today and tell parents that he thinks it’s fair that they’re going to have to wait until August 26 to reveal details about a return to school?
Hon. J. Horgan: Again, I thank the member for her question.
Listen, we all understand the importance of education to our kids, to our communities, to our economy. We all understand that we’re in a global pandemic. At least, I thought we all understood that. We all understand that we need to ensure that parents, trustees, administrators and, most importantly, teachers and other support staff within the school community are all on the same page.
These are disparate people. I appreciate that the opposition didn’t pay a lot of attention to education, other than through the courts, over their time in government, but we’re trying to bring everyone together to have a genuine discussion about how best to deliver services in communities. That’s what we’ve been doing — the only jurisdiction in North America that had kids back in classrooms in June so that we could shape out where we’re going to go in September. That puts us light years ahead of every other jurisdiction in the country.
I don’t know if you’ve been paying any attention, hon. Members, but just to the south of us there is absolute chaos when it comes to delivering education services in the United States. Here in British Columbia, we continue to work every day with the providers of education, the kids who need it and the parents who are waiting for it. That’s the appropriate way forward. I thought you would see that.
GOVERNMENT ACTION ON
HOMELESSNESS AND COMMUNITY
SAFETY
T. Stone: For months now, we’ve been highlighting in this House and outside this House how much worse homelessness has been getting in communities right across British Columbia. Small businesses being broken into daily. Small businesses worrying about the safety of their employees and their customers. People having to step over other people on sidewalks. Parents worrying about finding needles in playgrounds. Property damage and crime is getting worse and worse under this government’s watch.
Now, this is happening right here in Victoria. Just steps from this Legislature in Beacon Hill Park is an encampment, which is getting worse and worse by the day. It is in the heart of the Minister of Finance’s riding. She has the ability to do something about it, and she’s choosing not to do anything about it.
Just a further few blocks away, in downtown Victoria, there is a rapidly deteriorating situation because of the government disaster which they call the hotel acquisition program. It’s been a disaster. People are running around with machetes, businesses being broken into, personal safety being threatened. Presumably, the Premier and a whole truckload of cabinet ministers and NDP MLAs drive right through this area every single day, and they choose not to do anything about it.
Of course, this is happening, we know as well, in the Minister of Housing’s own riding in Coquitlam. The problem there is getting worse and worse by the day. Now: “We are tax-paying citizens trying to raise a family and being held hostage in our own community. This is not what a young child needs to be experiencing. Something needs to be done to protect the community.” Those are the words of Rob Lewis, who lives just down the street from an NDP hotel that’s warehousing homeless people in Coquitlam. For Rob and his neighbours, the situation in Coquitlam is getting worse and worse by the day.
To the Minister of Housing, it’s time to stop blaming others. It’s time to step down from the high horse and actually be accountable for the decisions and the actions that she is making and that the government is making on this file.
When will the minister provide the 24-7 on-site supports so desperately needed to help our vulnerable and at-risk citizens get better, and when will she, when will the Premier, when will this government start listening to small businesses and communities who are being negatively affected by this government’s actions on this file?
Hon. J. Darcy: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. Members opposite have been raising these issues about homelessness and the overdose crisis over the last number of weeks. I don’t need to speak on the Minister of Housing’s behalf, but I think every member of this House knows that this government has made historic investments in ending homelessness and in building the supports that people need who are struggling with mental health and addictions.
It is absolutely true….
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, if you could kindly respect the minister’s opportunity to respond. Thank you.
Hon. J. Darcy: It is absolutely true that many of the people who are homeless and that we have been working to house are struggling with mental health and addictions. The Leader of the Opposition, in his heckling earlier, said: “No plan for the overdose crisis either, hon. Speaker.”
Well, let me be very clear. We know that the spike in overdoses…. We know the overdose deaths were going down under the previous government’s watch. They were going up. Beginning in 2012, the numbers went up for five years. The next year, they went up, and then under our watch, we began to bring them down.
Hon. Speaker, I want to read you a quote.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members.
Hon. J. Darcy: I’d like to read a quote.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.
Minister.
Hon. J. Darcy: I want to read a quote: “There’s no question that during COVID, in particular, the illicit drug supply has become increasingly dangerous, because what is actually in these drugs, what they’re laced with, you just really don’t know. COVID has just introduced a tremendous amount of additional uncertainty. We’re hearing that from front-line workers. We’re hearing that from law enforcement. I do believe that that’s factually accurate.”
That’s not a quote from me. That’s a quote from the member for Kamloops–South Thompson to the media in his community within the last couple of days.
Since COVID-19 hit, we have been working at breakneck speed. We are the only province that has been responding across the continuum with harm reduction, with access to safe supplies of prescription alternatives to separate people from the poisoned drug supply and also with treatment beds — with the recent announcements, 150 adult treatment beds. Today the biggest investment ever in youth treatment beds in the history of this province — 123 new beds on top of 20 new ones in Chilliwack.
Under that government’s watch, youth treatment beds actually went down the same year a public health emergency was declared. This is something we need to be working on together. Let’s bring the same non-partisan spirit to solving the overdose crisis and the homelessness crisis as we have done in keeping each other safe and caring for one another through COVID-19.
[End of question period.]
Tabling Documents
Hon. L. Beare: I have the honour to table the 2019-2020 report for the B.C. Arts Council and its supporting documentation to you.
Petitions
Hon. A. Kang: I rise virtually today in the House to present a petition to the Minister of Health on behalf of my constituents in Burnaby–Deer Lake regarding the modernization of traditional Chinese medicine practitioner and acupuncturist regulations.
I’ll be forwarding this petition to the Clerk’s office. There are more than 800 signatures, and the petitioners from the B.C. Association of Traditional Chinese Medicine and Acupuncture Practitioners are still in the process of gathering more signatures.
N. Simons: I’m presenting a petition from residents of the Sunshine Coast calling for improvements to the ferry service between Langdale and Horseshoe Bay, including hourly sailings, more boats, faster boats, resident priority, medical priority and a redesigned reservation system.
Orders of the Day
Hon. M. Farnworth: In this chamber, I call continued estimates debate, Ministry of Finance.
Committee of Supply
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(continued)
The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); R. Chouhan in the chair.
The committee met at 11:10 a.m.
On Vote 25: ministry operations, $267,491,000 (continued).
S. Bond: Good morning, hon. Chair. Thank you for the opportunity to continue in the estimates process. We appreciate it. Thank you to the minister for the work that was accomplished yesterday.
Again, we have provided her and her team with a bit of a road map. Just to recap, we’ve had some discussion about the general budget questions. Yesterday near the end of the day we moved into a section that we want to spend some time on — looking at the supplementary estimates, the COVID-19 action plan, the $5 billion. So let’s start there again.
I’m going to repeat the question for the minister that I presented late yesterday. She was going to do some work on trying to break out the numbers. I think British Columbians and members of the opposition, people in the Legislature, probably even members on the government bench, need some clarity about the spending and the notional allocations.
In question period today, for example, we heard the Premier repeat over and over: $2.5 billion. Well, the minister, in her public statements around pandemic spending, talked about $2.8 billion for people, $2.2 billion for businesses. Yesterday we asked the question about the original conversation that the minister had about the $1.5 billion economic recovery fund — and $700 million, we think, trying to get to the $2.2 billion total. But to be clear, to the minister, there is a significant lack of clarity about the split of the funding, where it’s going and how much is being allocated to what.
Let’s start there. The funding for businesses originally included $1.5 billion and $700 million, but we now know the property tax cut is outside of the $5 billion allotment. Let’s start with that. Can the minister please outline for us and clarify some of the discrepancies with the numbers, including, perhaps, the number the Premier was using today, which was $2.5 billion? We have no idea what that referenced.
Hon. C. James: I believe, because it’s the way the members had outlined the process…. They want to walk through and look at the supplementary 1 and then supplementary 2, which is the federal money.
The member mentioned the additional $2 billion. The discussion around the additional $2 billion will come in the second discussion. If we can just right now focus on the $5 billion and the first supplementary vote, and then focus on the second, I think it just makes the numbers a bit clearer, if that’s fine with the member. I can talk about the second vote if the member wishes, but I think that’s the way the members outlined it for us.
When the plan was originally announced on March 23, we put together…. As the member will know well, and this was part of the discussion in the Legislature…. As I said at the very start of our estimates discussion, it’s extraordinary times, knowing that we would need to put together supports. I’ve expressed my appreciation to the official opposition — to the Third Party, as well — for coming together in those extraordinary times, recognizing that we didn’t have specific programs at that point, that we were looking at a need and that we all wanted to come together in the Legislature to be able to address that need.
The member is quite right. The initial estimates talked about $2.8 billion for individuals and $2.2 billion for businesses — of the $5 billion. That was the rough allocation, again, that we put together as a notional allocation, given the fact that we were then going to look at where the programs and services were needed. We’ve continued to allocate expenditures based on need, based on critical services, based on the financial supports that need to be there and based on economic recovery. As the needs arise, additional dollars get allocated and additional dollars and expenditures will go out.
Just to give the members the specifics around the numbers and the expenditure allocations that are in place right now — again, based on the $5 billion — it’s $3.115 billion for individuals and $1.885 billion for businesses. That includes the $1.5 billion that’s put aside for economic recovery.
In addition to that, there are tax measures of approximately $1.35 billion that have been introduced in this time period — again, a request that came forward from a number of businesses and organizations. We were able to look at adding those additional dollars: $543 million for individuals and $803 million for businesses.
Then, finally, there were some additional revenue measures that total about $37 million that have also been introduced, $5.5 million for individuals and $31.5 million for businesses.
Again, as the pandemic continues…. I know the member knows this, but I want to emphasize again that as further needs come forward, as further shifts happen, perhaps, in the pandemic, and as we’re continuing to go into the economic recovery, there could be additional shifts as, obviously, needs arise and as we get the additional dollars out the door around the $1.5 billion as well.
S. Bond: I appreciate the numbers that the minister has shared. Let’s just start with her last comment, that there may…. To be clear, I think it is important…. The minister has been very good about recognizing the other parties in the House who made the $5 billion allocation possible. All of us recognized that government needed to move quickly and that government needed to provide additional supports for businesses and for British Columbians who were impacted by COVID. All of us agreed on that. I think that was an important part of getting down to business, in essence, and trying to figure out how those supports are being put in place.
While I appreciate what the minister has just listed for us, we’re interested in as many specific details as possible. We were clear about that in our agreement to support the $5 billion plan — that we needed to make sure people knew exactly how that money was going to be spent. Even after the minister’s last answer, I’m not sure that we have a specific sense of the spending.
Let’s start with her last comment, at the last answer, that shifts may occur. Is the minister committed, and the government, to working within the announcement that was made — $2.8 billion for people, $2.2 billion for businesses? Is the shift that she’s referencing talking about being within that envelope — for, in the case of business, $2.2 billion — or looking at, perhaps, a shift less for business, more for people? Ultimately, we know that supporting business actually helps support people with jobs and all of those things as well. But maybe the minister could just describe what she meant by “there may be more shifts.”
Hon. C. James: I want to start with the discussion around the $5 billion and the conversation the member just raised around accountability, because I think it’s a really critical piece. It’s a critical piece for the public, and it’s a critical piece for all of us in this Legislature who came together to approve the $5 billion.
As I said at the time that we were having the debate around the $5 billion, it was important to recognize that this would be a contingency vote. We would be accountable for those dollars — accountable to the public, ultimately, as it’s none of our money. These are the public’s dollars. That’s important.
That has continued as programs have been developed. Again, they’re posted on the website. The information is available.
I also think it’s important because not everyone will have taken a look at the July economic statement that we put out. In fact, we updated the $5 billion spend in the July economic statement. We did provide further information, again, to the public in that announcement and updated the fact that the $5 billion had expanded to $6.3 billion. We talked about that in the July statement. We also included, in fact, a list of approved amounts and the notional allocations that we’ve made for businesses and individuals. That was actually released as part of that.
We have, in fact, continued the accountability that I think the member and I would completely agree is critical through this process. That was updated, in fact, in July — past March.
I think it’s also really critical to recognize — and this is part of the unprecedented times that we’re in — that we are not through the pandemic. We are not through, as we know when we look at numbers, when we look at people talking about a second wave and when we look at talking about the preparation for the regular flu season that occurs in British Columbia. We have a long way to go. We are only partway through this year.
We have put notional allocations in for programs and services, as we should, to be fiscally responsible, to make sure that we’re being responsive. But we also know that there are immediate needs that will arise and that we are going to have to look at those immediate needs.
We are still, as I said, dealing with the pandemic. I think it’s just important, as we go through this process, to recognize that, yes — I couldn’t agree more. In fact, we have been accountable, as I said, bringing forward updates in July. We’ll continue to bring forward those updates.
I think it’s really important to recognize, when I talk about meeting the needs of people and businesses and talk about the fact that things may shift, numbers may shift, depending on those needs, additional supports have to be put in place and the spending allocations based on the actual needs that are out there.
S. Bond: Thank you to the minister. I certainly, to a large part, agree with what the minister said. We will continue to find ways to try to not only support the idea of transparency, but to make sure that that continues to happen.
The minister is correct. There have been various updates. Obviously, right now the public is more worried about how they’re going to get through their day and how they get their kids to school. You know, we have these questions, but I think we have to put it in the context of families and what they’re actually trying to manage.
As, I think, a fairly straightforward question, I hope…. We’re still sorting out what the $2.2 billion in business supports looks like. I understand the need for shifts and being responsive. Perhaps the minister can tell us today or confirm that the $1.5 billion recovery plan…. All of that $1.5 billion — will that go to support businesses?
Hon. C. James: I just want to recognize the approach that we’re taking through the economic recovery, because there’s no question that jobs are the primary focus of the economic recovery. Obviously, that’s a key place — building a sustainable economy and jobs — which obviously focuses on business.
The member will know the values that we’re utilizing to look at proposals as they come forward, to make sure that they focus on jobs, to make sure they focus on the hardest-hit sectors, because, again, we have to remember that COVID has not been an equal opportunity, so to speak, pandemic. It has been a pandemic that has harder hit hospitality, tourism, youth, women.
Again, we’re taking a look, through economic recovery, at how the proposals that come forward address that piece. We’re also taking a look, as the member has heard me talk about previously, at the values that matter to the people of this province — reconciliation, equity — and making sure that everyone has an opportunity to be able to succeed in the economy. The announcement, obviously, is not out yet, but there are a number of different ways and tools the government has to be able to address that.
The member asked about the $1.5 billion. Will that be spent specifically on businesses? I think we have to remember that we have lots of levers, as government. There will be tax pieces, not necessarily a spending piece. There will be a tax piece, a revenue piece, that could come into play, as we’re looking at this.
One of the areas…. I won’t second-guess, but I can certainly assure the members — and I think it will be no surprise — that a large portion of the focus in a lot of the presentations that have come forward to us has been around training and retraining opportunities for people. That’s something that benefits both people and businesses.
I think we also, just to come back, again, to the numbers…. We have to remember that, in fact, there’s already more than $1.5 billion spent on businesses with the numbers we already have. As I already read out to the member — the $1.8 billion for businesses. In addition to that, the $803 million in tax approaches that have benefited businesses. Again, it comes back to the range of levers.
I’m not going to second-guess what the specifics will be, but just as we’ve done with our July update, where we updated the numbers, where we updated the notional allocations, that will occur again after the recovery plan comes out in September. That will give us more details and more specifics to be able to look at the allocations.
A reminder that we are not through the pandemic, and we are not through the fiscal year. I expect that there could be further items that come forward over the next while.
S. Cadieux: The minister’s answers are very interesting.
I do appreciate that this is a difficult time. As my colleague said, there will be some shifting of spending. Some things that were proposed…. Certainly, the value of the rent relief program, when announced, was significantly higher than the actuals. Numbers have shifted around, and additional supports have been added, where needed. I understand that.
The minister’s answers today are actually making the situation much more cloudy, in terms of where the $5 billion has been spent, than they are providing clarity. So I’m going to go back for a minute.
The minister, in her answers, referenced that $1.885 billion of the $5 billion is earmarked for businesses. A simple question. Let’s break that down. The minister, in providing that number, said that that includes the $1.5 billion in economic recovery dollars, which leaves us $385 million.
Can the minister please explain what the $385 million contains? I assume that includes the $120 million outlined in table 3 — $79 million for the commercial rent assistance program and $40 million in emergency financial relief for organizations. But where is the other, then, $165 million? If the minister could please clarify what’s in that $385 million.
Hon. C. James: I understand the member and the focus on the…. I hear some frustration as well. I think it’s just…. It is no question, as I talked about the unprecedented times. It is no question, as well, when we are building in allocations. I think that’s the most important piece to remember in all of this. We are talking about allocations that have been put into the $5 billion, allocations that we expect need to be there. I think the member recognized and acknowledged at the beginning that there will be shifts in those allocations, depending on need.
The member is right quite. The $1.885 billion — to break that down, the $1.5 billion for recovery, as we’ve talked about, and then the member asked for some specifics around the $385 million in that area and financial supports. So $254 million of that has been allocated for child care providers, for businesses to ensure those spaces. The member will know we provided funding for child cares to be able to hold onto those spaces so that the child care spaces are there for workers when they go back to work. It’s a key part of our restart and a key part of, obviously, economic recovery as well.
And $79 million is notionally allocated on the commercial rental assistance program that’s in place. Then there’s a $50 million allocation for a number of other groups and organizations and businesses that have come forward. At this point…. Again we expect that there will be others utilizing this area, but so far it has supported the agriculture sector, animal care sector, park operators and tourism. That provides the member with the $385 million allocation.
S. Cadieux: I think that differs from the table, in that the table says $40 million for the emergency financial relief for organizations, not $50 million. The $254 million for child care, I understand that comes up, up above. Again, that number is slightly different because from the table…. So we’re spending more on child care than was anticipated, by $4 million at this stage.
I think the minister can understand. We’re not trying to criticize that the minister is having to make changes or adjust allocations. We’re not criticizing what, necessarily, the money is being spent on; we’re just trying to get clarity and keep track of where the $5 billion is going.
I understand that a number of the pots won’t yet be spent, because the minister is planning and allocating, notionally, for the potential for a second wave in the fall, in both critical services and financial supports. I recognize that, and I recognize that the minister is hedging her bets on the $1.5 billion for economic recovery with her comments that, although jobs are the primary focus, that they might need to spend on people.
I think the minister can understand. We are trying to get clarity here, not just for ourselves as critics, understanding where the money is being spent and how the money is being spent that we cooperatively agreed needed to be spent to support both people and businesses. We have yet to see the economic recovery plan that the province is going to bring forward for that $1.5 billion. The $1.5 billion that is down from the $2.2 billion promised for business, initially.
Understandably, the business sector, largely, is going to want to know and understand that government is going to be there for them, too, through this. They’ve been told that that’s the case. They’ve been told the economic recovery fund is there for that purpose. That’s the reason that the group was put together, to help advise government on what was needed for businesses to get through this, for us to prevent additional closures of businesses, which means the loss of more jobs on a permanent basis.
The minister is now talking about the fact that her government is going to want to look at the hardest-hit sectors. I think that’s a legitimate focus and focus on their values. Those are all things that I think have to go into any decision — a focus on youth and women and these sort of things in the recovery process. But then she also goes on to hedge her bets and suggest that there are other levers for government to use to support business — tax pieces and revenue measures.
They still affect the government’s budget. They still affect the bottom line. If the minister is suggesting that she’s going to need to spend less than the $1.5 billion in economic recovery supporting business, instead needing to pull in new measures outside of what’s proposed in the pandemic contingencies, then that is going to have an impact on the budget and put the government in further deficit.
I’m trying to understand where things are going. I’m trying to understand what’s going to be available to the business sector. They’re waiting. They put out a proposal, a recovery plan, that outlined all sorts of things that needed to be done. We’re going to go into more detail on that as well.
This is about accountability, Minister. The commentary that’s being provided doesn’t give a lot of confidence that the minister is committed to that economic recovery where business is concerned.
I’m going to come back to the economic recovery. I’m going to move on with my question here for the minister, just to get a little more clarity on the other allocations. The minister said that notional allocations have been set aside inside the health and mental health section, the financial supports — so the emergency benefits — section and the crisis supplement section.
Can the minister tell us, to date, what has been spent in those sections, therefore telling us what is notionally still available should that be required in the fall?
Hon. C. James: I want to start off with the discussion around the member asking about specific numbers and why numbers change. The member is quite right. These numbers are going to change. The member recognized that herself in this discussion — that we have put together notional allocations.
The member talked about hedging bets, putting numbers in to hedge bets. It doesn’t have anything to do with hedging bets. It has to do with meeting the needs of the people and the businesses of British Columbia. It has to do with making sure that we can be responsive, that we can address the crisis that is here and the issues that are arising.
We are fully accountable for the spending of those dollars, both through this process and through the Q1 report that will come out. That’s where the member will get the specific expenditures that have occurred on each specific line. Again, these are allocations that we’ve talked about. We put out the allocations in the July estimates as well.
The specifics around what has been spent thus far occurs in each individual ministry. Again, we need to make sure that those numbers are accurate. They will come out in the Q1 — that will happen in September — around how far along we are in those actual expenditures. We, again, will be fully accountable.
As I’ve done and as I’ll continue to do, I’m happy to provide ongoing briefings for the members, if they wish, to be able to know where things are coming once these reports come out. We’re more than happy to sit down and go through where the changes occurred, why the changes occurred, where the notional numbers are and where the allocations have gone. That’s important to do. As I said, it will be a public reporting out as well, through Q1, around the actual expenditures.
Yes, there will be shifts. There’s no question. That’s important, as I said, to be able to meet the needs.
The member also said that there may be spending in other areas. Yes. I’ve talked about the other levers that government has, the other tools that we have. Whether it’s through the tax system or otherwise, there may be additional pieces that we can look at as government to, again, provide relief for businesses and to provide support to individuals.
Again, we’re, obviously, accountable. All of those get reported out, as we go forward, with the regular reporting time periods. So more than happy to provide, as I said, ongoing support and ongoing briefings as the specifics come out in each of those Q numbers.
I see the Speaker noting the time, giving me the eye from the corner. Noting the time, I ask that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Motion approved.
The committee rose at 11:58 a.m.
The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.
Committee of Supply (Section B), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.
Hon. C. James moved adjournment of the House.
Motion approved.
Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.
The House adjourned at 11:59 a.m.