First Session, 42nd Parliament (2020)
OFFICIAL REPORT
OF DEBATES
(HANSARD)
Thursday, December 17, 2020
Morning Sitting
Issue No. 13
ISSN 1499-2175
The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.
The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.
CONTENTS
Routine Business | |
Economic and fiscal update, fall 2020 | |
Orders of the Day | |
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2020
The House met at 10:05 a.m.
[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]
Routine Business
Prayers and reflections: T. Wat.
Mr. Speaker: Members, we will be doing the introductions. As you know, introductions are a very important part of our daily proceedings. But I want to caution members before we start that introductions are supposed to be very brief — not more than 30 seconds.
In the last few days, we have seen some introductions that became a two-minute statement and, in some cases, even a private member’s statement.
Please be careful. I don’t want to interject when you’re making introductions. So keep that in mind.
Introductions by Members
B. Banman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will keep this very brief.
It is my pleasure to introduce Travis Len McIntosh, one of the newest members of Abbotsford, who is the son of Dave and Gillian McIntosh. His mother got to meet him for the first time. She was the one that was induced and then put into coma due to COVID. I just want to say a very merry Christmas to the McIntosh family and wish his mother a speedy recovery.
I. Paton: This morning, the last day in the Legislature here in Victoria, I just want to do a shout-out to the great organizations in my riding of Delta South. We have the Ladner Business Association. We have the Tsawwassen Business Improvement Association. We have the Delta Chamber of Commerce and also the city of Delta.
The city of Delta has done some wonderful things during this COVID time with amending bylaws for small businesses and restaurants to be able to move out into their parking lots and put up tents to keep their businesses going. The Ladner Business Association and groups such as that have done an unbelievable job at this Christmas season. I’ve never seen so many beautiful lights in our trees throughout the villages of Ladner and Tsawwassen.
They also do such wonderful things during the year in our community — the Ladner Village Market, the annual car show, the Tour de Delta, the Tsawwassen Sun Festival and parade, the Ladner May Days and the Boundary Bay Airshow. Thank you so much to all the great groups that have helped us to get through this COVID area and helped to give our small businesses a fighting chance through these trying times in the last eight or nine months.
Hon. K. Chen: This morning I dropped by the Society to End Homelessness in Burnaby’s outreach resource centre for their year-end Christmas outreach. It’s actually in the Speaker’s riding, so I brought greetings on your behalf.
I want to recognize all the non-profits and food banks in our community that have served so many families, including the Society to End Homelessness; North Burnaby Neighbourhood House; and Ryan’s Rainbow, where I volunteered, whenever I could, every Thursday since the beginning of the pandemic.
I’ve learned so much from them and also from the families they serve, as they share with me their stories. Together, we’re really like a big family here in Burnaby. Thank you to all the volunteers and groups out there across B.C. communities for supporting so many of our neighbours in need during this challenging time.
A. Mercier: I’d like to introduce my younger sister, Emily Mercier, who’s watching the proceedings virtually today.
Emily has decided, at 27 years old, to finally move out of our parents’ house. She’s joined the RCMP, and she heads off to Depot on January 6.
Would the House please join me wishing her luck in her new career.
Hon. S. Robinson: Yesterday we forgot to wish one of our newer members of our caucus a happy birthday. The Minister for Municipal Affairs had a birthday yesterday, and today is her birthday in the House. Can everyone please join me in wishing her a belated happy birthday.
Statements
(Standing Order 25B)
CAPRICE WHITE ROCK THEATRE
T. Halford: One of my best childhood memories was going to see the movie E.T. It was at the Clova Theatre in Cloverdale, a small little theatre. The floors were sticky. The chairs were worn, but it was still majestic to me at the time. A lot of our theatres have been replaced by larger ones that have the technology to keep up with the movies, but a few of these gems still do exist, and one of those gems is in my riding. We had two; one closed down. The Rialto closed down about three months ago, but the Caprice is still there.
This is a theatre that has been owned, in the family, for over 24 years by the Manji family. They are struggling right now, and they are finding ways to keep open. One of those ways is offering popcorn. Every Friday and Saturday, the Manji family is opening their theatres, and they’re selling popcorn.
Last week my daughter and my house have instituted a have-fun Friday. Have-fun Friday is mandatory. Everybody is in the house. Phones are off. Takeout — usually her choice, which can be debatable sometimes, and a movie.
Last week I went and picked up popcorn at the Caprice, and I was proud to say it was lined up around the block. That made me so happy and proud of my community. I want to make sure that we’re all finding ways to support our local businesses, to make sure that they’re there for us tomorrow, but we need to be there for them today.
I want to thank the Manji family for being so creative, and I will be there tomorrow to get our popcorn.
FOOD SECURITY AND FOOD HAMPER
SERVICES IN
NELSON-CRESTON AREA
B. Anderson: I would like to share the important work so many people are doing in communities across the Nelson-Creston riding to ensure everyone has access to nutritious food. We know this year has been hard on so many people in our community, and the holidays are an especially challenging time for our communities’ most vulnerable. I am grateful to share some of the inspiring work being done by organizations and individuals across my constituency to ensure everyone has access to good food this holiday season.
Some of these initiatives provide year-round support to community, while others step up for the holidays. These organizations provide a range of services such as hot lunch programs, Meals on Wheels for seniors, food bank services, community gardens, cooking programs, Harvest Share and holiday hampers.
In the expansive riding of Nelson-Creston, several organizations provide these important services, including: the Kaslo Food Cupboard, Salmo community service, the Creston Ministerial Association, Creston Valley Gleaners, Valley Community Services, East Shore food hamper program, the South Kootenay Lake Community Services Society, the Nelson Community Food Centre, Our Daily Bread, the Salvation Army, the West Kootenay EcoSociety and the Nelson Youth Centre. We’re truly blessed to have so many organizations supporting our communities.
In rural areas, we rely on the goodwill and neighbours helping neighbours. These initiatives rely on private donations, student-led projects, the generosity of local businesses and grants to be able to provide to those in need. Those are only a few of the very important initiatives that are happening across my constituency this holiday season.
Please join me in thanking all of the amazing volunteers and service providers who make sure that everyone has a joyful holiday season.
WILDLIFE AND HABITAT RESTORATION
IN EAST
KOOTENAYS
T. Shypitka: We as British Columbians put a value on our forests, minerals, oil and gas, but we put no value on perhaps our greatest resource of them all: our wildlife and habitat. There is no example of this that is more grossly obvious around our province than in my riding of Kootenay East.
At one time, the East Kootenays we were referred to as the Serengeti of North America, home to the most diverse populations of predator and prey on our continent, but no longer. We still have diversity. However, our population numbers have plummeted. So how do we prioritize wildlife and habitat in the province?
For starters, I want to celebrate all of our strong stewards of the land across the province. I’m talking about our regional biologists, our hunters, trappers, guide-outfitters and wildlife enthusiasts who all want the exact same thing, and that is to restore our wildlife populations and habitat to where they need to be in order to enjoy the beauty and recreation that we all deserve. In a concerted effort, these fine stewards will work with government and First Nations to make decisions that are specific to their regions of this massively diverse province in a way that is science-based and culturally practised for hundreds of years, if not thousands.
Finally, we need political will and an independent funding model dedicated to wildlife and habitat that will ensure that this priority will be with us for many generations to come.
In closing, I would like to say that this is not radical thinking. Many jurisdictions have done this with great success. However, to my knowledge, no government in our province’s history has ever been able to accomplish what I’m suggesting. I know we have enough bright minds in this House to do it. I invite this entire Legislature to open your ears and minds to this enormous issue and to please put wildlife and habitat high on your list of priorities in order for a stronger British Columbia now and in the future.
DISTRICT OF MISSION
COMMUNITY SERVICE AWARD
RECIPIENTS
P. Alexis: Today I want to take a moment to recognize the incredible volunteers from my riding of Abbotsford-Mission who have continued to support our community throughout the pandemic. For many, many years, the District of Mission Community Service Awards have recognized those who have demonstrated exemplary volunteer service within the Mission community. I can tell you that the volunteers that have stepped up during this difficult time have been outstanding.
Recently the district of Mission hosted a virtual celebration for the 2020 award recipients, which I had the privilege of participating in. I have actually been very fortunate to know many of them personally through a number of different events and organizations that I’ve worked on with them.
I hope that the House will indulge me as I read out their names: Rocky Blondin; Dr. Carol Pomeroy; the Stave Valley Salmonid Enhancement Society; Sebastien Onyemaobi; St. Joseph’s Food Bank and its volunteers; Simone Redburn; Brenda Davison; Jean-Pierre Maher; Mission Health Care Auxiliary Society, celebrating its 100th birthday; Jim Hinds; Dwight Elliott; Andrew Hale; Helen Yannacopoulos; John Glendon Flett, presented posthumously; Mission Community Services Society Food Centre and Christmas Bureau and its volunteers; Angel Elias; the Mennonite Central Committee thrift shop volunteers; Bert Pulles; Elke Katzenbach; Dr. Peter Robson; and, finally, Lloyd Rash and Ken Selvaraja, who were presented the Freeman of the City award this year.
I want to acknowledge all the volunteers in both communities of Abbotsford and Mission for their exemplary work throughout this entire certainly challenging time.
SERVICE OF LEGISLATURE STAFF
DURING
COVID-19
S. Furstenau: Hon. Speaker, I’m delighted to see you in your role as Speaker. However, without you on the floor, we do not have the sharp eyes and witness reports that we have come to expect about the comings and goings of the smallest Legislative Assembly occupant, the mouse in the House. The mouse has much to report this year and would like her observations to be put on the record.
The mouse has seen the Legislative Assembly Protective Services staff go above and beyond this year in their efforts to keep all of us safe and secure. The mouse has quietly observed the legislative librarians continue to dig through archives and records and keep all of our spirits afloat with books uploaded to our devices throughout this year.
In the dining room, where the mouse dare not go, chefs and servers have been perhaps less busy but no less cheerful and caring in their efforts to keep all of us fed.
In recognition of the rather challenging year it has been for IT and Hansard staff as they have risen again and again to every challenge, the mouse has made a commitment to chew through no wires whatsoever.
While the mouse recognizes that her relationship with facilities and cleaning staff is a strained one, she still reports her deep admiration for their extra efforts this year as they have focused their attention on keeping out an intruder even smaller and more invisible than herself.
The mouse has seen the Clerk’s office make this hybrid model work marvellously, but she does express her regrets that there are far fewer tasty crumbs in the building with so many of the MLAs beaming in virtually.
The mouse and I would like to thank everyone in the Legislative Assembly who has worked so hard and brought us through so well this very difficult year.
I wish for all of you a restful and peaceful break and a far less interesting 2021.
GURU NANAK’S FREE KITCHEN
A. Singh: Quite interesting, the mouse.
I’d like to speak on the tradition of giving. Gibran says: “There are those who give and know not pain in giving, nor do they seek joy, nor give with mindfulness of virtue. They give as in yonder valley the myrtle breathes its fragrance into space. Through the hands of such as these, God speaks, and from behind their eyes. He smiles upon the earth.”
The people of Guru Nanak’s Free Kitchen in Queensborough are people grown from this soil, a soil that breeds empathy and love. Guru Nanak’s Free Kitchen is a site that was formed in 2007 by volunteers who wanted, needed to make a difference in their fellow humans in the Downtown Eastside.
Their motto is “Love all, feed all.” They feed an average of 4,000 hot, nutritious, vegetarian meals in the Downtown Eastside every month. Everything is donated by the community. The Sikh gurdwara in Queensborough generously shares its commercial kitchen with the volunteers so they can cook fresh meals every Saturday and every Sunday morning to be served in the Downtown Eastside later that day.
They gather food donations from several sources and help distribute thousands of pounds of free groceries to over 15 different shelters and organizations, including Indigenous-led organizations. Several hundred people now volunteer with the Guru Nanak’s Free Kitchen — I volunteered with them as well — an amazing organization.
During the holiday season, they organize a toy drive. Last year they were able to get over 3,000 toys to kids in need over Christmas. They’re hoping to exceed that this year. They hold an annual school supply drive where they have been able to provide elementary school children in need with much-needed school supplies, including laptops.
Every Valentine’s Day they distribute care packages to shelters all over the Lower Mainland. Last year they were able to distribute about 1,200 care packages. Again, they hope to exceed that this year, all with volunteers and the care of the community.
Their mission. They’re a Sikh faith-led volunteer organization that works for the benefit of all communities that wants to enrich the lives of people through Guru Nanak’s teaching — honest living, sharing and selfless service.
Please stand with me in recognizing their courage, strength and generosity.
Oral Questions
COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR DISABILITY
AND INCOME ASSISTANCE
RECIPIENTS
S. Bond: On Tuesday, Sam from Port Moody wrote an email to the Premier. This is what Sam wrote. “I had been observing how the NDP is handling the PWD rates clawback, and, Premier, you chose to make the harsh changes after the election by clawing back the PWD rates when these people are some of the most vulnerable people during the pandemic. It is incomprehensible”.
The Premier has, throughout the course of the last days, tried to dodge accountability by making the absolutely ridiculous claim that he is only one voice at the cabinet table.
Well, to the Premier, that’s simply not good enough. Will he stand up, do his job and end the clawback?
Mr. Speaker: Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction.
Again, Members, I just want to give you a heads up. His Wi-fi may not work as we expect, so he’ll do his best.
Hon. N. Simons: Thank you from Tla’amin territory.
I appreciate the question from the Leader of the Opposition.
As we’ve said quite clearly, we are pleased that the recovery benefit, which is available to 3.7 million British Columbians…. To just review, the member should know that, in March, the province introduced the workers benefit, for which these individuals were not eligible. A supplement was put in place of $300 a month, and that was put in place for three months. It was renewed twice.
We have the new recovery benefit for which individuals on income assistance and disability assistance are eligible, as well as those receiving the seniors supplement. I would point out that by the end of March, all of these individuals will receive more money than they otherwise would have.
Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a supplemental.
S. Bond: What the minister should know and be paying attention to are the voices of people in British Columbia, people with disabilities, low-income seniors. Frankly, they’re getting tired of listening to this minister give the same answer day after day after day.
Here’s what Sam had to say to the Premier. “Again, the focus is now, not what happened 16 years ago or two years ago. It is now, and we will be watching you to keep your word, because right now you don’t appear to be advocating. Instead you took action, clawing back PWD rates. This is the saddest decision this government has ever made.”
Will the minister, the Premier, somebody stand up and answer Sam’s concerns — Sam and thousands of other British Columbians like Sam? Will the Premier stand up and end the clawback today?
Hon. N. Simons: If the opposition wanted to ask a different question, they would get a different answer. But the question has been the same, and the answer has been clear. Individuals receiving income assistance and disability assistance are eligible for more money by the end of March.
If the member will just cast her mind back not that long ago, she’ll remember that her government was responsible for not just the clawbacks of the transportation supplement, maternity benefits, parental payments…. They made seniors apply for their CPP at age 60, causing them to lose significant amounts of income.
The province is committed to reducing poverty, and we’ve made important steps in that direction after years and years of inaction. I’m pleased. I think the member should remind all her constituents that they are eligible for this funding as part of the recovery benefit.
D. Davies: Jewelles Smith with the Council of Canadians with Disabilities said: “Cutting this $300 benefit in half and then eliminating it completely in three months is shocking and, frankly, quite cruel. We certainly did not expect the benefit to be cut before the pandemic was…over.”
To the Premier, will he end this clawback?
Hon. N. Simons: Thank you very much to the member for Peace River North. I can tell him quite clearly that the recovery benefit being available to 3.7 million British Columbians is a benefit that will benefit all our communities.
I expect that the member knows the story of how, in March, a workers benefit was established to which they were not eligible, and the recovery benefit is now made available to 3.7 million British Columbians.
Let me give you an example. Maybe this will help the member for Peace River North understand. An individual would’ve received $900 under the current system. With the benefit, they will receive more, $950. But it’s even more significant for a single parent. Close to 20,000 single parents will receive $1,450 instead of $900. By my calculations, that’s $550 more.
I understand the member has his job to do, but the province is providing assistance to those most in need, and we will continue to do so.
Mr. Speaker: The member for Peace River North on a supplemental.
D. Davies: The minister, I think, is the one that is doing the math wrong. Every other British Columbian and everybody that’s on social media — everyone who has been reaching out to myself, as well as, I’m sure, the minister — sees this in a very different picture. One of the words I hear: this now is Christmas clawback. That’s what this is, right before Christmas.
Government loves to go down memory lane recently. So let’s go down memory lane. On March 2, 2016, the now Premier had this to say. “I want to ask…. I want to plead with the Minister” — the then Minister of Social Development — “listen to the people you’re supposed to represent, not the spin doctors back at public affairs…it’s your decision. Do the right thing.”
Maybe the Premier…
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members.
D. Davies: …will listen to his own advice, and he will do the right thing. Will he reverse this decision today?
Hon. N. Simons: I thank the member for his supplemental. I’m not travelling that far down memory lane — in fact, just to March of this year.
In March of this year, we instituted a workers benefit. That was made eligible to a certain number of people that did not include people on disability assistance or income assistance and did not reach to the seniors who were receiving the supplement. We instituted a $300-a-month supplement. That $300-a-month supplement was scheduled for three months. It was extended twice and continues until the end of this month.
We now have a recovery benefit, for which people on income assistance and disability assistance are eligible. I’m pleased to say that at the end of March, those on income assistance and disability assistance and, indeed, those receiving the seniors supplement will be eligible for more money than they otherwise would have.
COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR
SMALL
BUSINESSES
A. Olsen: As we move into the winter months, B.C. businesses are facing challenges like they’ve never seen before. It’s heartbreaking to see how many family-owned businesses, the entrepreneurs, the investors in the communities, are going to be closing their doors permanently. So far, this government, frankly, hasn’t acted quickly enough to throw the lifeline to these businesses. The programs that have been developed have been difficult to access, with a lot of red tape, and it’s unclear — the timeline — about when the money will flow.
Today’s fiscal update did not shed any light on the $300 million small business program that this government created back in September. This money is an essential lifeline for businesses and needs to be landing now to have the greatest impact.
My question to the Minister of Jobs, Economic Recovery and Innovation: how many businesses have applied; how many have been found eligible and actually gotten out the door to help support small business owners through this winter?
Hon. R. Kahlon: I want to thank the member for his question. Of course, on this side of the House, we know that it’s a challenging time, not only for small businesses but for people throughout B.C. The member talks about one grant, but I think he has to also acknowledge the host of things that we’ve been doing as a government to support small businesses.
Just recently a survey came out that two-thirds of all businesses in B.C. are functioning right now with supports from government. That’s a significant number. So 95 percent of jobs that we lost during COVID have come back. That’s something that was raised again by the Minister of Finance today in the economic update. And $470 million went to PST rebates. We’ve brought in tax credits for payroll for employers that want to either hire new employees or bring employees back. There’s a whole host of others.
I appreciate the member’s question. We also know how difficult of a time it is. We’ve been working for the last two weeks, since I’ve been named in this portfolio, with stakeholders, to find ways that more businesses can get access to this program. I appreciate the work of all of these associations with us, and there will be more to come shortly.
Mr. Speaker: The member for Saanich North and the Islands on a supplemental.
A. Olsen: I think what we’re trying to get to with the point of this question is some actual substance. Unfortunately, what we continue to get, and what we’ve got quite often in our responses in this session, is rhetoric.
We’re looking for the numbers. We want to know how much of the $300 million which we in this place have put forward to businesses has got to businesses. We want to know how many businesses have applied. We want to know how successful this program has been. Unfortunately, there was a missed opportunity this morning. The minister just missed another opportunity to highlight the success of this program if, indeed, this program has been successful.
It’s December. This program is now three months old. It’s been eight months since this House authorized the government to spend $1.5 billion. The only report that we’ve seen so far suggests that 500 businesses have applied, meaning that if they got the full subsidy, only $15 million of the $300 million, 5 percent, has actually been allocated. Those are old numbers. We’re just looking for new numbers.
My question, again, is to the Minister of Jobs, Economic Recovery and Innovation. When can we expect a full and comprehensive update about how this money that has been earmarked for small businesses has been spent, and when will we know how many businesses have actually been supported for these holidays?
Hon. R. Kahlon: I’ve already shared with the members that over 1,400 businesses have already come through the door. It’s important to note that the program was set up in a two-stage approach. First stage for these businesses was up to $2,000 for supports for them to build a financial plan for their own recovery, which has been well received by many businesses throughout B.C. The second stage was the financial supports.
The member has to acknowledge the amount of investment we’ve made to support businesses throughout B.C. It’s considerable. I mean, we’ve got $190 million in tax credits for them to bring back employees or hire new employees. A 25 percent property tax cut. That’s significant. Also, 65 percent of rent support from the federal government.
You know, even the restaurant sector — we know they were hurt. We took actions to expediate the patio licences.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, let’s listen to the answer, please.
Minister, continue.
Hon. R. Kahlon: It’s difficult to hear all the investments we’re making, but they should hear this. It’s important. It’s important because it’s a responsibility of all of us to make sure that businesses know that these supports are available for them.
We’ve been meeting with stakeholders in various sectors — the associations. They all agree that they’re going to work together to make sure every one of their members knows all the things that are available for them. I encourage all members of this House to reach out to small businesses in their communities, encourage them to apply for these supports. We want to help as many businesses as we can in this province.
BUDGET PROCESS CHANGES
M. de Jong: Well, the Finance Minister has been busy. In just three weeks, she has managed to violate her government’s commitment and legal obligations to First Nations, has created further uncertainty around the budget process by altering basic timing and reporting requirements, and today we are witnessing yet another blatant attempt at budgetary manipulation.
The minister and her government are asking for authority to spend an additional $2 billion. It’s $2 billion the government doesn’t have. They’re going to have to borrow it. But to the point made by the member from Saanich, why did she purposely wait until the final hours of this legislative session to provide a fiscal update that includes information about matters that are directly relevant to the decision facing members of this chamber?
Her behaviour obligates me to ask this question: what is she trying to hide? Why is she trying to hide, and why is she taking a budget process that has been recognized across the nation for its openness, its transparency, its predictability and turning it into exactly the opposite?
Hon. S. Robinson: Well, the member’s accusations are insulting at best. We have been transparent. We have brought in legislation. We have passed legislation. We’ll keep doing the work to take care of the people of this province.
COVID-19 IMPACT ON SERVICES FOR
SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN
AND YOUTH
AND REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
J. Tegart: In her report Left Out, the Representative for Children and Youth told the heartbreaking stories of parents of children and youth with special needs who have been supported by the province.
Pandemic support was stopped in the fall. Parents have struggled ever since, as the snap election meant no support. The representative was clear: the pandemic supports should be restored for a year. The government has refused.
To the Premier, will he immediately provide families of children and youth with special needs with the support they need and deserve?
Hon. M. Dean: I thank the member for the question. I really want to thank the families who took part in that report and shared their very powerful stories. I want to thank the Representative for Children and Youth, as well, for putting together such an informative and powerful report.
I share her concerns. My heart goes out to the families who are impacted. Daily life is tough and difficult and a struggle and a challenge, anyway, for many of these families. When the pandemic hit, of course, that made it even more difficult. The system has been fragmented for far too long. So the cracks in the system have been exposed with this pandemic.
We did step in. We did offer support, and we’re continuing to offer flexibility in the use of resources for respite, and families and people who serve families have told us that has been very welcome.
But the system needs a fix. We need to put children and youth at the centre of the system. In my mandate letter, the Premier has tasked me to do that. I’ve already instructed staff to get moving on this as quickly as we can and to strike an advisory panel.
CHILD CARE FUNDING
K. Kirkpatrick: Yesterday the government seemed surprised that they had promised parents an extra $250 million for child care in this fiscal year. The response from the Minister of Finance was “it would be an inappropriate place for those investments to be made.”
Moms and dads are feeling extra pressure this year and believe that government’s promise was not an empty one.
To the Premier, the promise was for $250 million in new funding this fiscal year for child care. Where is that money?
Hon. K. Chen: Again, as a parent myself with a young child, I know that parents in B.C. have been struggling during this pandemic, making the very tough decisions about whether to return to work, put their kids in child care and about the safety and the health of their children.
This is a challenging time for the sector as well. That is why our government has been working hard to make sure we have the support available, including our temporary emergency funding and all the other programs in place to support child care providers, to support early childhood educators and parents.
The $250 million that the member opposite keeps quoting was from our platform commitment. The member opposite should know very well that we’re going through the budget process. There is a process to follow, and our government has been committed and has been working hard to make sure we bring an inclusive universal early learning and care system for all British Columbian families, when the other side of the government had neglected the crisis until 2017.
COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR
SMALL
BUSINESSES
T. Stone: The NDP promised that it would put small businesses at the front of B.C.’s economic recovery, and that simply hasn’t happened. The only thing that the small business community has seen from the NDP thus far, in terms of help, has been a single economic recovery grant program, which very few are applying for, because very few are eligible. It’s a red-tape disaster.
Now, if we want confirmation on this, you just have to look at the numbers. The Minister of Jobs has thrown out the number of 1,400 businesses that are in the process of applying for the small and medium-sized business recovery grant. That’s of an estimated 15,000 businesses that the government projected would be eligible for this benefit.
Now, I’ve asked these questions multiple times last week and this week. I asked them in supplementary estimates yesterday. I’ve asked them in question period. The member for Saanich North and the Islands has asked questions. We’re looking for detail.
I’m going to ask one more time. A question to the Premier would be this. Of the $300 million that’s in this grant program, exactly how many dollars have actually been allocated to those that are in the process of applying for this funding? I’d like the government to answer that in detail today.
Hon. R. Kahlon: There are a couple of….
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister.
Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you, hon. Speaker. The member wants to know how much money is allocated, and I’m going to tell the member that $300 million has been allocated.
The member also fails to acknowledge that we have one of the most comprehensive recovery plans in all of Canada.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members, let’s listen to the answer, please. There’s no point in asking questions if he can’t get the answer.
Continue, Minister.
Hon. R. Kahlon: We have one of the most comprehensive plans across the country — $470 million in PST rebates. The member failed to mention that in his remarks. And $300 million, of course, he mentioned, $190 million in tax credits for businesses that want to either hire someone new or bring employees back.
We know many sectors face different challenges. We know that the restaurant sector faces significant challenges. We accelerated permits so that they can allow more people to have patio space during the summer. We brought in wholesale prices for them so that they could see savings on liquor pricing.
This is not to even mention….
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, please.
Carry on, Minister.
Hon. R. Kahlon: That’s not even mentioning all the supports that the federal government has put in place as well, hon. Member.
I would say that the stats were clear, and the Minister of Finance confirmed it today. Ninety-five percent of jobs that we lost pre-COVID have come back. We know, with the new COVID restrictions, that there are going to be some significant challenges for businesses over the holidays. We’re going to continue to work with them to ensure that we make this program as accessible as possible so that as many businesses as possible can get the supports they need. That’s our goal. We want to support as many businesses and people through this difficult time in this pandemic.
COVID-19 RESPONSE FOR TOURISM
INDUSTRY AND REPORT
RECOMMENDATIONS
T. Wat: Yesterday we asked the minister a simple question, when will the tourism industry receive the financial support this government promised them, and what was her response? She used the pandemic as an excuse. What the minister doesn’t seem to understand is these businesses need help now because we are still in the middle of a global pandemic.
My question is to the Premier. I hope the Premier will answer this question. The Premier promised the tourism sector relief, and the Premier has failed to deliver it. Why has your government failed to keep its promise?
Hon. M. Mark: I’d like to thank the member, again, for the question. The first week on the job I met with the chair of the task force that our government put into place. One of the key actions that we did was set aside $50 million to the task force. We have, in the middle of this pandemic, set aside $100 million for recovery to invest in infrastructure.
The most immediate focus right now is people’s safety, but when this pandemic is over, we need to return to the business of tourism being on the map for visitors to come to British Columbia. We want it to be safe.
For right now, we are working to implement the recommendations of the task force. I received it last week. I’ve met with the task force. There are seven recommendations. I am doing the work, following the process. The members opposite are maybe suggesting that I shouldn’t follow the rules. There are processes with public funds. You have to go through Treasury Board. There are processes.
The public service is working around the clock to deliver good news. Good news is coming. Good news is coming to the tourism sector. I thank the member opposite for the question, because tourism is vitally important to our province, and we are going to help.
GOVERNMENT ACTION ON OPIOID CRISIS
S. Cadieux: So far this year there have been 1,386 opioid deaths in British Columbia. They were brothers, sisters, mothers and fathers. They won’t be there to celebrate Christmas with their families.
To the Premier, how can we all work together to ensure that next year fewer families have to face such a tragedy?
Hon. S. Malcolmson: I thank my colleague for sharing our deep concern about the tragic loss of life, something that had hit British Columbia hard and early compared to the rest of the country, and something that the pandemic has made worse in every single turn.
We extend our deep gratitude to the organizations on the front line, from paramedics to grassroots organizations to parent groups, that have been advocating and proposing such constructive solutions. I’m encouraged that some of the measures that my predecessor, the first Minister of Mental Health and Addictions across the country, brought in over the last three years had started to curve down the line of overdose deaths, but sadly, the pandemic has made everything worse.
So we have been working flat out. The mandate that the Premier has given me to build more treatment beds, to expand overdose prevention services, to work on prescription safe supply, to advocate to the federal government for the decriminalization of small amounts of illicit drugs — the personal possession — as a way to reduce stigma is going to help all of those pieces. But no one single measure will do the work that is necessary to save the lives that we are committed to saving.
I will note the new mental health and addictions treatment response centre that was established in Surrey, in the member’s riding. That’s just one example of when we work together and treat this crisis as the health care crisis that it is. Pulling together, with so much more work to do, we’re determined to save lives.
[End of question period.]
Petitions
Mr. Speaker: We have two petitions, the first one from the member for Saanich North and the Islands.
A. Olsen: I rise today to submit a petition with 124 signatures from concerned citizens in my riding with respect to the rules around driver’s licensing and the requirement of 80-year-old seniors in British Columbia to get a medical test every two years.
Hon. N. Simons: I rise in the House today to present a petition from Pesticide Free Powell River, signed by well over 1,000 people locally and from afar, asking Western Forest Products, local governments and the Ministry of Forests and the Ministry of Environment to stop the use of pesticides in our forest industry.
I’ll be forwarding this petition to the Office of the Clerk.
Tabling Documents
Hon. S. Robinson: I have the honour to present the Fall 2020 Economic and Fiscal Update.
Hon. L. Beare: I seek leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
Introductions by Members
Hon. L. Beare: I see in the gallery with us today, Daniela Gardea, who, for those who may not know, is a senior ministerial adviser in Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport. It will be her last question period today as she is retiring this week.
On behalf of the Minister of Finance; the Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport; and myself, I want to thank her for all of her dedicated service to British Columbians and, on my behalf, for being our friend. We will miss you in this building.
Orders of the Day
Hon. M. Farnworth: I call Committee of Supply for the supplementary estimates of the Minister of Finance.
Committee of Supply
SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES
(No. 3):
OTHER
APPROPRIATIONS
(continued)
The House in Committee of Supply; S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.
The committee met at 10:58 a.m.
The Chair: Members, I would just like to put us on a short recess as we have some issues we’ve got to work out, communications-wise, for the minister. I’ll put us on a ten-minute recess, if I might.
The committee recessed from 10:58 a.m. to 11:06 a.m.
[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]
On Vote 52(S): contingencies (all ministries), pandemic response and economic recovery, $2,000,000,000 (continued).
A. Olsen: I just have a question for the Minister of Finance with respect to a situation that has arisen in my riding. A small business owner has brought it to my attention that despite her sales dropping over last year 26.5 percent, her wages have only dropped 3.3 percent. This is in large fact due to the reality that she retained a bunch of staff because of the Canada emergency wage subsidy. So where she would have furloughed greater numbers of her staff, she decided to keep them on staff. That was the goal of the program.
Unfortunately, the provincial government is now requiring her to pay the employer health tax to the full amount, as the number that she has paid her staff is over the $500,000 deductible for EHT.
I’m just wondering if the minister is considering any kind of relief for these. I recognize that there’s some complexity in trying to figure out which businesses would qualify for this — but recognizing that businesses such as this one did exactly what we wanted them to do, yet now this business owner is on the hook for the full employer health tax.
Hon. S. Robinson: We did look at the EHT component. Operationally, it’s very difficult to sync a federal benefit and a provincial tax component. It became very, very difficult. Also, wanting to make sure that we can target appropriately, to make sure that it’s going to small businesses, is really important to us. So being able to narrow it sufficiently within the framework that we have was going to be very difficult under the EHT.
That’s why we developed the IEI program, the increased employment incentive program. That is part of this supplement. It will provide a refundable tax credit to employers who increase their payroll, just like this person retained employees, which is what we want. They’re doing all the right things.
An increase in payroll in the fourth quarter from the third quarter for 2020 is eligible for a 20 percent refundable tax credit. That can go against their EHT. If they don’t pay an EHT, if they don’t hit the threshold, then that will actually be money directly given to them to help them, to help them through that.
But I also think it’s important to acknowledge that we’ve provided significant property tax relief for small businesses, as well as PST relief. We’re continually listening to small businesses to identify how we can tailor programs that best meet their needs.
M. Bernier: I thank my colleague for the questions. I’m going to kind of go in a little bit of a different direction, because I think it’s important that we get some questions, hopefully, answered by the minister.
Let me just start by kind of rounding things off a little bit from the last few days as we go into some of the discussion. The minister provided a fiscal update. Yesterday we talked about what the difference would be, and we didn’t get a clear answer, technically, on the difference between a fiscal update and a Q2 report, although those were both referenced in her announcement this morning.
It was a little disheartening to find out that the minister is in front of the House right now, again asking for $2 billion, which, again, qualified to make sure that’s going out to help people who need help. There is no argument in the House on that. But again, it’s all around the responsibility of the accountability and reporting of the minister. There were specific questions asked in question period today, from media this morning and the House yesterday around that accountability and disclosure that the minister should be providing, especially in light of the fact that we’re in front of the House asking for more money.
When we hear that there’s $1.5 billion that was allotted and announced right before the election for economic recovery, and then to find out today that there’s still no analysis…. There’s still no reporting. There’s still no information that that’s even gone out, let alone helping people. This House voted on that money because we wanted it to go out and we wanted to help people. I bring that up because we’re at the same place today, where this minister is now asking for another $2 billion to go out and help people, which we want to see and do. We want to see that go out. I just think it’s important to highlight that, when we have to be looking at being accountable for the money that goes through this House.
I’ll ask some questions maybe later on today about that specifically, because it’s, again, not about the concerns that we’re hearing and not helping people. Of course we want to do that. But we also have to look down the road of…. At some point this has to be paid back. Who is going to be responsible? What are the plans for that?
I’ll get into some questions in more detail later, but I bring that up only because the minister is here asking for more and more money and has not been able to provide this House with any information that the money is actually going out, technically, into the people’s hands that need it and the people that are actually out there right now asking for help.
Maybe I’ll start my first question today. The minister keeps saying that 3.7 million people are going to be affected and going to be helped. What analysis was done, since this was an election promise in the middle of a campaign, where everybody was getting $1,000 by Christmas? That’s not the case now. But the minister keeps saying, and her members keep saying, 3.7 million people are going to be helped. Obviously, analysis has been done year-to-date before this campaign promise and the minister being in front of this House asking for $2 billion. Analysis must have been done to show that there are 3.7 million people that need this help and how it’s going to help.
Hon. S. Robinson: The member prefaced his question by referencing the fiscal update. I need to remind the member and the House that that was to September 30. That’s what we have information on. It’s based on the end of September. Many of the programs that went live in September, that were launched…. We still have some analysis to do about the impacts of those because the fiscal update only goes to September 30, so there’s absolutely lots more activity going on, and we’ll be monitoring that as we go forward.
Related to the member’s question, the analysis that was done, that was undertaken to make the determination about how many British Columbians would benefit from the recovery benefit, was done based on taxpayer information.
Of course, as a provincial government, our public service has lots of information about taxpayers. Based on the data that they have, we were able to do the modelling about how many people would be eligible for this benefit, and 90 percent of British Columbians are eligible for this benefit, and 85 percent of the 90 percent are eligible for the full benefit. This is something that we’ve heard from British Columbians — to help.
I know that the member opposite is interested in helping British Columbians. The House pulled together in March and then again in August, and I hope they’ll continue to do the right thing and continue to support British Columbians as they need it.
M. Bernier: I just want to understand a little bit more what the minister just said. Today’s fiscal update, the minister has stated and her staff have stated, is based up to September 30, which was around the same time of the start of the election. Commitments were made during that election. The minister is now trying to follow through on one of those commitments. But she’s in front of the House asking for $2 billion.
Now, the minister keeps saying it’s based as of September 30. Is this House to believe that the minister’s knowledge is also based, and she’s only been briefed with those stats, up to September 30?
Hon. S. Robinson: Year-to-date reporting is all we have — the six months. That’s standard practice in terms of reporting into the Ministry of Finance. That’s what happened when the member was on this side of the House and continues to be the practice.
With regards to actuals, what we have is what’s been reported to date. However, the forecasting component certainly takes into consideration more current information as it is released from various different agencies.
M. Bernier: Maybe I’ll rephrase my question. Maybe the minister didn’t understand the way I put it. It’s not so much what was being reported, it’s what the minister knows.
The minister must get briefings from staff. The minister must know the fiscal state of the province of British Columbia. She doesn’t require, on quarterly updates like what she’s presenting to the public…. I’m asking if the minister actually gets daily, weekly, monthly or quarterly briefings. What’s her knowledge, as the Minister of Finance, of the fiscal state of the province?
Hon. S. Robinson: I know that the member understands that when reporting out happens, we pay very close attention to what various economic indicators are and what’s happening globally. These are regular updates. When it comes to seeing how we are managing through these very turbulent economic times, that is what we presented in the economic update — taking a look at whatever is certainly most current.
How government spends money is done on a quarterly basis and reporting up and reporting out. So this update is based on year to date for the first six months. I also think it’s important to recognize — and I know that the member appreciates this — how things are continually changing. Even acknowledging the quarterly update that my predecessor gave back in September, there have been some significant changes and some really good numbers that represent hope, that represent the beginning of good news.
I also think it’s important that we remain thoughtful and mindful that it’s an ever-changing situation. So we do monitor quite regularly. The economic update is the most current information that we have.
M. Bernier: Things are ever changing. We actually have a new Finance Minister. I congratulated her at the beginning of this.
The minister is saying that things are ever changing, that there’s information. But at the same time, she’s saying that this information is based on September 30. Is the minister telling this House that as a new minister, that wasn’t sworn in until November, she was not given any information of the fiscal state of this province, other than what we heard today? Maybe I’m wrong, but it sounds like that’s what the minister is saying, that the information that she has is based on the Q2 report or fiscal update that went out today. That’s the only briefing that she’s had, and that’s why she’s presented it to the House.
If that’s the case, we have a couple of months’ gap there where the Minister of Finance for the province of British Columbia doesn’t know what’s going on in the province. I sure hope that’s not the case. I’ll give the minister an opportunity to stand up and say I’m wrong. That’s why I’m asking the question. She’s in front of the House asking for $2 billion. Sounds like she doesn’t know what the fiscal state of the province is.
That’s why I’m just trying to understand why she’s not willing to say where we’re actually at, other than the Q2, or the fiscal update. However we choose to phrase it. I’m just trying to square the circle here on the two-month gap of what’s happening in the province. The minister, so far, makes it sound like she doesn’t know what’s happened over the last two months. Is she going to correct me on that?
Hon. S. Robinson: I find it continually insulting. There seems to be this pattern of questioning that suggests, perhaps, some incompetence that I find very disrespectful in this House. I have reported the most recent data. That is standard practice in this House, in this chamber. The member knows that full well. To suggest somehow that I’m incompetent or less able, somehow, perhaps, than a man…. I don’t know if that’s what’s going on here. Certainly, I find it disrespectful.
I will give the member a little bit of space, and perhaps suggest that it’s more that he’s also new to his role and doesn’t understand how quarterly updates are provided and how information flows from the ministries into the Ministry of Finance.
I have an amazing team of people who regularly update me on the state of affairs, and we work quarterly. We work quarterly, understanding all the various component parts and how they all feed into the system. This update was provided to the people of British Columbia, so that they know exactly where this spending is. They know exactly where the revenues are and that we are preparing an outlook based on some of those real numbers.
The member also knows that it does take time each quarter for those reports to come in. We are in the middle of the next quarter. As a result, I look forward to getting more information. Like I said, it continually changes. Every quarter, you get an update, because there are standard practices here in government that happen. We are going to continue to inform British Columbians about the state of affairs, about the outlook and, also, remind them that there’s hope on the horizon.
We have spent the better part of a year dealing with a pandemic that has worn everybody down. I know that it has worn the members opposite down. It has certainly worn me down. I’m sure it has worn down the Speakers and the Chair as well. It has worn down British Columbians. But we are a resilient bunch. The numbers today that I shared, that we’ve been monitoring regularly, tell us that things are moving in the right direction.
We’re not out of the woods by any means. We need to manage the risks that still lie before us, and we need to be prudent in our approach. But there is hope. We’re seeing job numbers coming back up. We’re at 98.5 percent of pre-pandemic employment levels, which is a good sign. This is a good thing.
I’m not ready to celebrate yet. There’s still a ton of work to do. I want to see it more than 100 percent. But we see retail sales rebounding. We see housing starts remaining strong. We know that there are lots of investments, certainly, from government and others in the construction sector and building up capital projects.
There’s certainly still more work to do. The tourism sector has been heavily impacted. We know that many people are still struggling to pay bills, to pay rent, to pay for food. That’s why we are back in the House today. We’re here today to continue to help British Columbians through what continues to be a difficult time.
M. Bernier: Yeah, we are here to do that. We’re also here to ask tough questions. It’s unfortunate that the minister had to digress into insults towards myself or perceptions of how this House is running when, in fact, I’m just asking serious questions about the knowledge of the minister.
I’ll make this easy. The minister could have easily stood up and said…. I am very well aware of how this works. I spent time on that side of the House. The minister could have said: “We do quarterly updates. That’s when we present them publicly. That’s when I talk to my cabinet ministers. Of course, as the Minister of Finance, I’m aware of the fiscal situation of the province, and I work with my staff constantly to understand that.”
That’s all I was looking for as an answer, and we could have moved on. She didn’t have to stand up and throw insults. That’s not what this is about. This is actually about just trying to get the information from the minister, of her knowledge of the ministry, as we move forward through her requests of this House for more money to help people, which is why we’re here today. It’s my job, not only as the critic but as a citizen and a member over here on the opposition, to ask the questions of the knowledge of the minister for the role that she has been granted in this House. That’s all I’m doing.
So it definitely wasn’t…. I’m not going to ask for her to withdraw. I doubt if she would. But it is insulting, across, as well, when there was no reason to bring it to a low level like that.
I will go to a point, though, since the minister…. You know, we’ve received the fiscal update. She’s here to ask for $2 billion. Let’s talk about that. I’m trying to understand, again. I appreciate the heckles from her colleagues across, that…. Maybe they can just jump up and speak about how they’ve supported this. Oh, wait. They had that opportunity, and none of them did that. I guess they prefer to heckle rather than speak to it. They probably don’t understand what we’re debating right now; otherwise they would have spoken to this.
I’m trying to understand some of the rationale — just the numbers. The minister just said 90 percent of the people are going to be able to apply, and 85 percent of the people will get the full amount. The Premier originally said 100 percent of the people were going to get it. The Premier then changed it to 80 percent. So we’ve heard 80, 85, 90 and 100.
Just for the record again. I believe the minister will stand up and say the Premier was wrong. She’ll probably phrase it more delicately — that he was. Is it 90 percent eligible, 85 percent full amount, and not the 100 percent, as the Premier said?
Hon. S. Robinson: First of all, I would like to apologize if…. My intent wasn’t to insult the member. I apologize if that was, in fact, the case or heard that way. But I have fielded a number of questions this morning suggesting somehow my incompetence in some way, shape or form, and if that was not intended, then I apologize to the member for that.
Our platform was really clear. It said that we would bring forward a recovery benefit that would be income-tested. That’s exactly what we’ve done here. We have an income-tested proposal here that we’ve brought forward to help British Columbians who need it the most. So this is about making sure that we can help those who have low, moderate incomes. Again, I’ll go back to…. There have been numerous ways that we’ve been working to support people.
We introduced the B.C. recovery benefit, in this case, here in December. It’s a one-time tax-free payment of up to $1,000 for families with household incomes under $175,000 annually and up to $500 for single people earning less than $87,500.
We do know the numbers of people, those who make…. Families where there’s $125,000 or less are eligible for the full benefit, and those that make, I believe, $62,500 will receive the full amount — the $500, individuals. And we do know, based on tax data, because we have a significant amount of information about the incomes of British Columbians, we’re able to identify how many people this will benefit. From that — and I thank the public service for doing the modelling and running the numbers — we know that about 3.7 million British Columbians are eligible to receive this recovery benefit.
The recovery benefit…. Today is Thursday, so tomorrow, Friday, it will be opened. I want to urge all British Columbians who are eligible to go online. It will be the fastest, most efficient way to access these supports. And then starting next week, we’ll have telephone applications available.
Again, I want to thank the public service. They are moving very quickly on this. They have seconded people to be available by phone, to help people. They’re ramping up to have dozens and dozens of people answering phones over the next number of weeks, and I want to urge everyone to make an application.
The benefit is about, really, helping people through what’s been a difficult time. We’ve seen the value of doing that in March, where we had a worker benefit of $1,000 and some rent supplements and really making sure that people can do the best they can in very, very trying circumstances.
I think we’ve seen a little bit of that come back at us when we take a look at retail sales and how they have rebounded in such a strong way. It means that households are able to manage. That doesn’t mean that the entire retail sector is doing well. There are certainly parts of the retail sector that are continuing to struggle, and it’s for that reason that we’re putting in, certainly, business supports to help them as well.
The Chair: Thank you, Minister.
I just want to reflect shortly on the exchange that went on — just to remind all members that I believe British Columbians want us to seek the best out of each other and to give the best to each other so we can do the best for them, who elect us to sit in this place. Of course, moderation, temperance in our language and how we treat each other are signs of good parliamentary language. I just want to remind everyone, especially now in this season of giving, let’s try and be good to each other. So thank you, everybody.
Member for Peace River South.
M. Bernier: Thank you. With all due respect to the minister…. I mean, in that last answer…. I’ve heard that answer about 30 times. I’d like to try to finish today. I’ve got lots of questions, though, so I’m going to agree with most of what the minister just said — of the intent, why we’re here and what we’re trying to do, which is help people. I say that only to try to save her some time in her responses, if she so chooses, so we can get through the questions so we don’t have to stick around tomorrow. I’d rather get through this today so we can help people.
What other mechanisms were looked at for distribution? I’d rather stick to the $2 billion conversation — mostly the $1.4 million to $1.7 million. We’re going to talk about that mostly for the next while. The minister has said this has been means-tested or income-tested.
Was there only the one mechanism for how this was going to go, or did civil servants come by with a couple of different options, and this is the one that was chosen best to impact the most people? I’m just curious if this was the only option.
Hon. S. Robinson: The member had asked, sort of, what mechanisms were used and what options were presented. When we do a means test or an income-test program, the most efficient way to do it is by using tax returns. It’s where we have the most data. So that was the recommended option, certainly by staff, in terms of how we would target this to those who need it the most.
In terms of operationally, in terms of how it would run, in terms of application and what information was needed, we leveraged the emergency benefit for workers process that was used back in the spring, because that was already set up. It was already established, and it was familiar, because we want to move quickly. We want to work quickly. So we used work that had previously been done, so that we could apply it to this program and continue to support people.
M. Bernier: I appreciate that the civil servants are trying to figure out how to, at the last minute, I guess, change a program or try to figure out how to make something happen based on an election promise, and that happens all the time. I’m not saying it doesn’t. But I also recognize the fact that the election promise was to get out to help everybody who needs help.
After lunch, I’m going to get into some specifics that have been sent to me as examples, because the minister said that she wants to make sure this money goes out right away and for people to apply that qualify. Of course, we’re going to get into a position. I want to ask some scenarios around qualification for myself and for the public that are asking on whether they should or should not apply and whether it fits in to them.
But is the minister saying, based on what I just heard, that that means everybody who’s going to need help, who needs help right now, based on the rollout that they’re putting…? Everybody will qualify that actually needs help?
Hon. S. Robinson: One of the reasons why we picked such a significant threshold, $125,000 and $62,500 for the 2019 income, was to capture as many people as we could that would be certainly low and perhaps moderate income so that we can get help to them as quickly as possible. Those who have been most impacted by the pandemic can get the help that they need.
M. Bernier: With that scenario that the minister just described, does that mean that there are people that have not been negatively affected by COVID in any way, in fact, might even be in a better financial situation, and that they still qualify?
Hon. S. Robinson: Again, this is an income-tested program. I mean, we’ve been over that. It is targeting low and middle incomes, capturing the vast majority of folks that have been impacted.
Again, I know the member appreciates that to roll out a significant, big program like this requires that you have criteria that captures those that need it the most — and that’s how this has been designed — especially when we want to be working quickly. We felt that that was also really important. I know that the member agrees that getting this resource into people’s hands now, while they’re experiencing the impacts, is a critical component of this program. It’s for that reason that we’ve designed the program to be this way to capture those that need it the most.
M. Bernier: Again, I appreciate what the minister is trying to do. I’m just trying to understand if there was a better way to do this. Throughout the year, as different crises have been recognized, as people have come forward, the government, to its credit — and that’s why they came to the House and asked for $5 billion more — have been trying to figure out how to help in some of those situations.
There was the B.C. emergency benefit for workers, I believe, earlier this year, if I’ve got the program right, that wasn’t required on 2019 data. I’m pretty sure, if I remember, it was rolled out, then, based on people who were needing help then.
When you apply for your EI, whether you qualify for the next two-week cheque, it’s based on what happened in the two-week period that you’re claiming. There are so many other programs that government has or government does or, in this last year, that government has tried to put out that’s based on the present circumstances of people’s lives, not where their life was last year.
That’s why I’m just asking this question of what other programs were considered. The government was able, in other areas, to get money out the door — targeted money — to, specifically, people that were affected on whatever challenge it was at that time. It’s taken a lot longer than we want for other things, like small business and tourism, but there were some successes earlier on in the rollouts.
I think what I’ve heard from the minister, by encompassing 3.7 million people, that there’s going to be a lot of people who actually have not been negatively affected that can and probably will apply, taking out of this pot of money. Is that what I just heard correctly?
Hon. S. Robinson: When we tasked the public service with building a program to help British Columbians, those most impacted, there’s certainly a number of things to balance in the design. One is it needed to be administratively easy. It needed to be easy for people to make application, it needed to be with information that they had readily available to them, and it needed to be done in a timely way. Those were the elements that I think everyone in this House agrees are important elements, and that there should be some sort of eligibility requirement.
We tasked them to do an analysis about how many people that would help, and would it help those who are most impacted? The analysis came back that constructing it in the way that we have would capture those who needed it the most. It’s for that reason, for all of those elements, that we constructed it this way. It’s for that reason that we have this program.
M. Bernier: I by no means want to blame the public servants, by any means. They came forward with a recommendation. They were tasked with a very short timeline to come up with a new program and figure out how to roll it out to try to meet a political agenda, so it’s by no means their fault, but it is their challenge to try to meet that.
Before we break, Chair, I guess…. I’ve got a lot of questions that obviously we’re going to be going into through the afternoon for a while, at the minimum.
The minister said that it’s means-tested and that they’re going to help lots of people. Where did they come up with the analysis, then, of the thresholds of the 124,000, the 69, the 175 — all the numbers that the minister brought up earlier? To some, it sounds very interesting that somebody that makes $175,000 a year can apply for this, albeit a reduced amount, as the minister has acknowledged. But the numbers don’t match other programs that the government has put forward in the past or, rather, commitments they’ve made around monetary thresholds of people’s incomes.
Where did these numbers specifically come from?
Hon. S. Robinson: I’ll be quick with my response.
The ranges that were chosen are actually not inconsistent with other programs of the federal government or provincial programs. They were grounded in that.
Noting the hour, I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Motion approved.
The committee rose at 11:56 a.m.
The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.
The Committee of Supply, having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.
Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.
Motion approved.
Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m.
The House adjourned at 11:57 a.m.