Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: I call second reading on Bill 6, Home Owner Grant Amendment Act.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 6 — HOME OWNER GRANT
AMENDMENT ACT, 2021

Hon. S. Robinson: I move that Bill 6 be read a second time now.

These amendments enable the full centralization of the homeowner grant program, a program that provides property tax relief for 1.1 million B.C. homeowners each year.

In December 2020, government introduced the Finance Statutes Amendment Act. This act ensured that all homeowner grant applications must be provided to the province for the 2020 and 2021 tax years, effectively removing local government’s legal obligation to collect and process homeowner grant applications. This was the first step in centralizing the homeowner grant program. The amendments in this bill are the final steps to ensure the province meets its commitment to fully centralize the program as announced in Budget 2020.

After listening to our municipal partners, who said that administering this program was a burden, we made the decision to centralize the program. The province already administers homeowner grants for rural properties, and it makes sense to centralize and streamline the program. Local governments support this change, as it removes an administrative burden and ensures that they will not need to collect and store sensitive personal information.

This is important as the province meets its commitment from the 30-point plan for housing affordability to collect social insurance numbers on homeowner grant applications. Collecting social insurance numbers adds rigour to the homeowner grant administration to help fight tax evasion, reduce fraud and ensure people are paying the right amount of tax.

Centralization not only lifts an administrative burden from our local government partners but will also make it faster and easier for homeowners to apply. This means all owners will have access to an online application as well as being able to apply over the phone with a government agent. Centralization also ensures all B.C. homeowners are treated fairly. This means that eligible applicants will receive the full grant they are entitled to, while ineligible applicants will not receive a grant. These amendments do not change existing eligibility criteria for homeowner grants and do not change grant amounts.

The amendments also modernize the Home Owner Grant Act, ensuring consistency with other modern statutes and providing more tools to increase efficient recovery of amounts owed to government. Ministry staff consulted with local governments and the Union of B.C. Municipalities on changes to the program before the amendments were finalized for introduction. Ministry staff have also worked closely with local governments on process and system changes to ensure that the transition to centralization is as seamless as possible.

As well, we have confirmed that there is no notification required under British Columbia’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act because the province’s homeowner grant program does not apply on treaty First Nations lands or Nisg̱a’a lands. Treaty First Nations and Nisga’a Nation administer their own homeowner grant programs. Although they have the same eligibility requirements as the provincial homeowner grant program, these eligibility requirements are not changing with centralization. The treaty First Nations and Nisga’a will continue to administer their own homeowner grant programs under their treaty property tax agreements and in accordance with their laws.

Similarly, the provincial homeowner grant program does not apply on the reserve lands of a taxing First Nation. If they provide homeowner grants to residents, they do so under independent property taxation authority. The province will continue to be available for discussions with treaty First Nations and Nisga’a Nation on future alignment with the administration of the homeowner grant program.

[2:40 p.m.]

In summary, these amendments deliver on the commitment made in Budget 2020 to centralize the homeowner grant administration, enable our government to meet another commitment in the 30-point plan for housing affordability and benefit both local governments and B.C. homeowners by ensuring that a more efficient and effective homeowner grant program will be delivered.

M. Bernier: Thank you to the minister for her opening remarks on Bill 6. I understand there are going to be a few people getting up and speaking to the bill.

Let me start by maybe just highlighting some of the issues, challenges and things that we’re going to bring up when we get to committee stage on this bill later on in this session, whenever that may be. I think it’s fair to say that, obviously, there are some reservations around this and some skepticism that we might have on this side of the House.

When you look at the government’s success rate right now, lately, of trying to administer and roll out programs, it hasn’t been very successful. Obviously, we have to really scrutinize and ask the tough questions — is government ready for this? — because government has been trying to roll out programs with no success.

We heard today in question period that 16 percent of money that was approved by this entire House a year ago has managed to go out to help businesses. We continue to get phone calls or emails day after day from people in the province of British Columbia who were expecting a COVID recovery cheque in their bank account by Christmas, as was promised by the NDP government, and so many have, unfortunately, not seen that assistance and help.

Whether it’s citizens on the ground, whether it’s businesses or whether it’s communities, people in this province have not seen this government fulfil their promises. So I have a hard time understanding why, at this time, government…. As the minister mentioned many times in her brief opening remarks on this bill: centralization.

Well, centralization…. What I see under the NDP government is more about control. It’s about gathering information that they can use on people. These are some of the concerns that I’m hearing: “Is this just another attempt by this government to get more of my personal information? Why do they want it, and how are they going to use it in years down the road that could negatively affect me?”

We’ll get into discussions again in committee stage. I’m pleased to hear the minister acknowledge that the idea here is not to change the eligibility requirements or the monetary amounts that people will be eligible for under a homeowner’s grant. That’s good news, but I want to dive into that a little bit further later on.

The minister, I think, was acknowledging that it’s simple and straightforward, this process. Well, unfortunately, I don’t know if it is.

Right now, in a lot of parts of rural British Columbia, it is…. For 25 years, it’s been a process where, you know, a senior couple goes to city hall. They fill out the forms for the application for their homeowner’s grant. While they’re there, they give a cheque and pay their taxes minus that amount to the city. I don’t know if I have confidence that this change is not going to negatively affect some of those people who, for 25 years, have done something a certain way.

There are a lot of parts of British Columbia, especially in rural B.C., that don’t have the connectivity, that don’t have access to the Internet. We saw that actually roll out, the negative problems with that, this last December when people were trying to apply for their COVID recovery benefit, unanimously approved by this House to try to go out by Christmas.

The amount of people that said, “I couldn’t apply because I don’t have Internet, and the phone number you gave me didn’t help,” or people who did apply, who didn’t receive the funds, who were asked a whole bunch of questions to actually have to prove that they were married for 50 years or lived in B.C. for 75 years or that they’re actually on a pension which, by the way, the government knows about because it might be a government pension….

These are some of the frustrations that we’ve seen in the province over the last few years, specifically the last year with some of these COVID recovery programs that have not worked. Now the government wants to centralize, as the minister says, to get more information.

[2:45 p.m.]

On the one hand, we’re always telling people: “Don’t give out our social insurance numbers to people.” Now the minister is saying: “The government wants your social insurance number in gathering for the homeowner’s grant in order to make sure they know who you are and they can gather more information on you.”

I guarantee you that just that comment alone is going to spark people wondering: “What’s up?” People are going to wonder why the government wants yet more information from them that they may or may not have had to submit before. For me, the comments that I’m hearing from people are: “This is just another example of government trying to control me. This is government trying to control my life by them centralizing and getting that information.”

Now, I hope the government is going to be doing, when this passes, which I assume it will — the government is going to support this — a very robust exercise on education for people who are going through this.

The minister said 1.1 million people, obviously, are homeowners in this province. But when you look at the record of this government of targeting and almost penalizing through taxation, through information and through programs that they’ve done in the past — almost targeting and penalizing homeowners — there is a reason why homeowners might be a little skeptical about why government wants to centralize and start taking on this information.

I’m seeing this on social media already. People are saying: “What’s up? What’s the hidden agenda?” Of course, we have to ask those questions in this House to get government on record of what their plans actually are, if there are any other ones. If there’s not, I welcome the minister and this government to set the record straight for the people who have concerns that there might be a hidden agenda by government doing this.

We’ve also heard from local governments that do have some frustrations or challenges with this that it’s actually something that they weren’t quite prepared for. Obviously, the minister has mentioned support for this. Well, that’s great, I guess, for some, but not for all. We want to make sure we get some of those issues addressed and brought forward.

One of the big things, again, that we’re going to want to talk about during committee stage is making sure, as I said a few moments ago, that government is not centralizing, as the minister said, to gather this information to further target and penalize and hurt homeowners in British Columbia. The government keeps touting their 30-point plan. There has been new legislation that’s been brought forward, too, recently. It just goes to, again, the fact that there is unease out there with the intentions of government.

I look forward to getting up in committee stage and addressing some very specific detailed questions about this. But at this point, the government and the minister have given me no reason why I should be able to support this bill. I don’t have the comfort that has been given to be able to support something without that information that so many people in B.C. are asking about, about the intentions of this bill. There has been no communication around it, for the most part, to actual homeowners. That’s why we have 1.1 million people who are homeowners who are going to have those questions on the intentions of this government.

I look forward, on their behalf — and any future homeowners, hopefully lots of them, in the province — to what this will mean going forward. With that, I will look forward to some of the further comments and look forward to committee stage.

J. Sims: It is a pleasure today to rise and speak in the people’s House.

There is nothing more important to the people of British Columbia than housing. I can remember just a few years ago, and hearing from members…. I hear almost every day how important housing is. It’s fundamental. It’s foundational. I’m so proud of the work that the government has done to address homelessness. We still have a lot to do. We have to address affordability.

[2:50 p.m.]

It was very difficult for me to listen to my predecessor speaking about some of these issues and not acknowledging the problems they created in the housing market when they were in government. But the bill we have before us today is fairly straightforward. There are no hidden agendas here. I don’t think you could have anything clearer than this piece of legislation.

What we have been going through over the last year has been…. I’m sure we are all aware of it. We live it every day. It’s a worldwide pandemic, a pandemic that has turned the world on its head, inside out, upside down, however you want to say it. During this time, so many things have been highlighted to streamline work and to make it easier for the people of British Columbia to deal with processes.

Over the last year, we’ve had to learn to do so many things online. I can tell you I ended up doing things online, paying bills and things, which I had always said I was not going to do. I ended up doing banking online. I’ve ended up communicating with my grandchildren on FaceTime ad nauseam because there is no other way to communicate with them.

What I’ve learned during this time is how we can all adapt. People have got so used to dealing with so much stuff with the magic devices in their hands or on their desktops that they are looking for more and more things that they can do online, do safely and proceed. Don’t get me wrong. Like me, many others cannot wait to get back to the pre-COVID time, somewhat the pre-COVID time, so that we can go out and do things in person.

This particular bill is in response to the minister paying attention to what the municipalities were telling us. And you know what? I’ve been very proud of the work of this government, because we have focused on listening. Listening is very important. We learn so much from it. What we heard from the municipalities was how cumbersome, time-consuming and costly it was for the municipalities to administer this legislation, the homeowner’s grant, which, by the way, they have been doing since 1957. They have been doing it since 1957.

Our population has grown. Home ownership has grown, though I can still tell you that many are still struggling to afford to buy a house. If any of us watched the news this morning, we know that the real estate market has picked up again, maybe due to the low interest rates. People are getting concerned. “Can we afford to buy a house?” But we do have a large number of people who do own homes already, and they do access the homeowner’s grant. So what this bill will do is allow online applications, and the system will be centralized. This is a way to take away an administrative burden that existed on municipalities.

Only my colleagues across the way, in opposition, could turn a piece of legislation that actually assists another level of government with administration and to lower the workload for them and streamline this as something nefarious and something underhanded that is going on with a different agenda.

Let me assure my colleague that over the last year we have learned that we do have to have more safety systems and security systems in place, but we’ve also learned that different levels of government are finding safe ways for us to engage and interact online. This is what it’s going to be. This is instead of manually filling out a form and then having to mail it. You will be able to go to the government website, hit a click button. The form will open up. You will complete it, and you will send it.

[2:55 p.m.]

If you need assistance and you need help with it, there will be call centres, and you will be able to call and get this done centrally. There will also be help available for people at Service B.C. centres. Everybody knows that there are MLAs in every part of this province who also will be a resource to assist people who are absolutely struggling with this.

I think, when I look at the work that the minister has done, this is long overdue, probably. It is streamlining. It is making things easier. It is, in many ways, compatible with the way we are doing things right now.

Also, for me, I always look at, if another level of government is being impacted, what their reaction is. You know, they’re happy about it.

Let me read to you a quote so we can get it into Hansard. Here we have a quote from Brian Frenkel, who is the president of the Union of B.C. Municipalities. That means all the local governments across B.C. from corner to corner to corner.

This is what he has to say. “For more than a year, local government and the Ministry of Finance staff have been working together to ensure the smooth transition of this program to the provincial government,” said Brian Frenkel. “This change will provide administrative improvements requested” — and I really want to focus on that, requested — “by local government and supports the implementation of the provincial housing plan.”

How unique to have a government that is responsive, that listened to local government, heard their concerns and moved forward with a legislative agenda after a year-long consultation. So what could be secretive about this? What could be hidden about this? And when I’m looking at how this will make things easier for people, I’m thinking it’s common sense.

As all of you know, I am a teacher, and I always have to use a teacher analogy somewhere. I always think if something will pass the nod test with somebody in kindergarten, it’s okay. It’s okay to move forward with that. I would say, if I was to explain to my great-granddaughter, who is not in kindergarten yet — she is four — that this is what we’re going to be doing and this is why, she would be sitting there going like this, because it does make sense. It does make sense.

I am very, very proud of the work done by the minister, in consult. I know two ministers have worked on this, and I acknowledge the work done by all of them.

Once again, I want to assure people that this is to make it easier. You can go to the government website online. And by the way, just to make this crystal-clear, this is not an increased cost for individuals. The threshold has already been determined, right? There is nothing that’s going to be taken away at all. It’s just a way to access the homeowner’s grant.

If you’re finding it difficult…. I do know that there are parts of this province, having travelled from corner to corner, that do have connectivity issues. There are parts that do, and I acknowledge that.

For them, they do have phone calls. They can pick up the phone and get a lot of this done on the phone. They can also visit their local Service B.C. centre and the MLA office as well, if they need additional help, because usually the connectivity in our government offices is a little bit more stable at times. Well, I’m not going to say too much there, because we have had issues. But let me tell you that there are many, many places people can go for help.

[3:00 p.m.]

While I’m up here talking about this legislation, as we talk about a homeowner’s grant, I know. They are my children, my grandchildren and many other people’s children and grandchildren who are thinking: “I want to be able to afford to buy a house and how challenging housing affordability is.” I want to remind everybody how the housing market was out of control when we first got elected. We did put a 30-point action plan in place, and some of it began to have an effect. It was having an impact. But now, with the interest rates….

I was shocked the other day, when I was looking on their website, at a bank offering interest rates of 0.99 of 1 percent. This was about a week ago. I couldn’t get my head around that, because I was a house owner at a time when interest rates went up to 18 percent, and I know the impact that had on us.

What has happened is that because of COVID, for a while, people were not buying. Right now, interest rates are low, so more are qualifying for mortgages. The housing market is hot again. This is a concern.

I know for everybody who is in the housing market, you see your house price go up, and it makes you feel good. Your equity is being built up. But for those wanting to enter the market, they begin to have cold sweats, thinking: “Will I ever be able to enter the housing market?” That is why I am proud of the billions and billions of dollars that our government has committed to building affordable housing and also housing for the middle class as well as addressing the homelessness issues that exist.

I wish there was a magic pill for this, but we don’t have one. But I can tell you that having addressed some of the major concerns around the money laundering issue, which was allowed to run rampant by the previous government, we did begin to see an impact of that.

We all have a lot more work to do, and I’m looking forward to getting on with that. But in the meantime, what I do want to say to folks is: when you get new pieces of legislation, sometimes they’re very simple and they have a lot hidden behind them. When I was listening to my colleague from the opposition speaking, I kept thinking: is there something here that I might have missed in my reading of it? Is it more than it is saying?

Then I began to do my reading again, and I thought: you know what? This was a request. This is a result of consultation. I know that the opposition, when in government, really did not believe in consultation or listening. I don’t think it was part of their vocabulary or their actionability, so for them, it often does come as news and often as a bit of a shock that there is a government that does listen to people, that does want to be responsive, that does listen to other levels of government.

We do believe in working together in collaboration. Working in collaboration is very, very critical. That doesn’t just mean within a party and outside or within one caucus or the other. I believe in working in collaboration with all of us in the House to find the best way forward to serve British Columbians. All of us come here to do that.

I think this is a good time for me to thank the constituents of Surrey-Panorama for having elected me and sent me here to represent them again. I am always honoured and in awe of their trust. I would also like to thank everyone who worked on my campaign. Once again, I will say it is a privilege, always, to represent the people and to fight for them.

As we look at this legislation, I’m hoping every member in this House will find a way to support this legislation, because this legislation is there to help to streamline and to make sure that we reduce the burden on municipal governments as they try to administer this particular provincial program.

The municipalities seem to be very happy with it. They don’t seem to have concerns. I think the public, when they realize how much easier, more streamlined, everything is, will be much happier with this as well.

[3:05 p.m.]

As I said before — and before I stop talking — they can go online, get information from gov.bc.ca, homeowner’s grant. They can go to the call centre. It’s a toll-free phone call, folks — 1-888-355-2700, Monday to Friday, 8:30 to 5 p.m., excluding statutory holidays. Go to a Service B.C. centre nearest them, and if all else fails, they can contact their local MLA and get some assistance that way.

As I was saying, a big shout-out to the minister for the work she has done with the municipalities and for this collaborative moving forward to find a solution for a problem that existed.

D. Davies: I’m pleased to rise here today — well, not in the House but in the House virtually — to continue debate on this bill. I’m certain that my colleague from Peace River South, as well as others, is looking forward to examining this in committee stage.

My remarks will be fairly short today. I just wanted to bring up a few points from an angle of more rural and northern remote communities that are within my riding of Peace River North.

I want to follow up on the member for Surrey-Panorama, her comments. I’m glad that she did go back and talk about how that connectivity is maybe not necessarily great all over the province. I can attest to that, Mr. Speaker. I have communities in my riding, and they are, across the province….

As the member said, you cannot just pick up your magic devices, because they don’t work. There are many areas across the province where there is no cell service. There are many parts of our province that have poor, if any, connectivity to the Internet. There are still parts of the province where people have poor landline connectivity.

I’ve had people reach out to me since this was first brought up. Please, you would have to excuse me and many British Columbians if they’re not fully confident in the government rolling out more online services, more “call us; we’re here to help” services, because we’ve seen those fail and fail again over the past number of months. My colleague already spoke to this briefly. Whether we’re talking about the business grants rollout, whether we’re talking about the COVID relief, we have seen nothing but issue after issue with people trying to get through on this telephone line.

There are 1.3 million homeowners in British Columbia. Well, that was a 2016 stat. Those are a lot of people that are going to be phoning, all at around the same time, when those tax notices come out across British Columbia. They are worried, and people have reached out to me. Even some municipalities in my riding have reached out to me. They’re really concerned about how this is going to roll out.

If you look at home ownership amongst 65-year-olds and older, 78 percent of people in that age bracket own their own homes. It’s probably safe to say that many of those in that age bracket aren’t necessarily avid Internet users, who are quite content with going into their city hall and signing off their piece of paper and handing it in, in a one-stop-shopping manner. Of course, that is now not available. So our concern is: is government ready for this?

What has been demonstrated over the past number of months is…. We don’t think so. British Columbians certainly don’t think so. I can read lots of things. I’ve had people reach out to me. This is one elderly person in my riding. Those people who are not connected to the Internet, like senior citizens who never use a computer…. What exactly will happen when others cannot apply, but they might still qualify? Is that task going to be administered or picked up by the municipality? Or is the province going to have some alternative means to fix this?

[3:10 p.m.]

These are questions that people are asking me. One of my friends goes: “Well, I guess this is one more thing that I’m going to have to do for my parents.” We are already seeing kids of elderly folks now having to pick up doing these other online pieces that we’ve already seen government move to in many ways.

I said I was going to keep my remarks short. I just wanted to bring forward some of the concerns that have been raised to me over the past weeks. It’s really about people. Unfortunately, this bill is not about people. It is not going to be as easy as I think the government thinks it might be. Many people, again, don’t feel that government is going to be ready, as they’ve demonstrated already, to receive, really, another 1½ million phone calls or interactions via Internet.

We have a lot of concerns. They will be brought up a little bit more during committee stage. I hope to be able to also speak during that time. It is important to know that these points are addressed by government. We do look forward to some robust discussion as we move forward. As I said, I’ll keep my remarks very short. I will leave this to the next speaker.

M. Starchuk: It is my honour to stand here for the first time to speak on a bill that is so pointed at what I used to do.

We see here that the local government is asking for this. I can tell you, from my four years as a councillor, the lineups, the streams that were there at city hall of people that were trying to pay their taxes. They were trying to get their grants and the confusion that was there. It was confusion young and old.

This program that’s inside of here, to streamline it, to put it in concert with the rest of the province, is a very, very wise thing to do. It’s expected to be quicker; it’s expected to be fairer.

We hear the stories about how we’re worried about a social insurance number, and what’s going to happen. There’s a level that makes believe that it’s nefarious when, in fact, it’s the actual tool that will be used to ensure that that person making the application will get what’s justified for what level of a grant they’re going to get back to themselves.

When we think about and when we hear about the seniors’ population — they’re not capable, or it’s tough for them to be online — I want to just say one thing. I will not give the age of my mother out, but I can tell you that she will be in the first dose of vaccines. She has no issues with learning how to get online. She’s fortunate. She has a computer. She has other people to talk to.

Those are the simplicities of how this thing works. Those of us that have taken the time to go online and do the clicks that are there ahead of time will be able to see that it’s not a difficult situation for the people that are there.

When we take a look at the municipal governments, they’re asking for the provincial government to do this. They know the amount of time and effort that’s there for their staff, that they have to pay out of their budgets to administer something that is a provincial grant. It just makes sense to listen to those municipal governments and release them from the burden of the application process that’s there.

We talk about the phone network that will be there for those people that may not have a computer, that may not be able to connect. We have those services that are there. The majority of the people that we find, that are out there, are able to do it online. So the phone system should not be overburdened.

For those people that feel that they still need to have some in-person help, Service B.C. is there. But I want to stress that our constituency assistants are there as well. They will be well-versed in that. They have our phone numbers. A special little shout-out to Denise and my new employee Naz, that will be there to help out those people that need that extra help to walk them through the steps that are there.

[3:15 p.m.]

No changes have been made to the program’s eligibility requirements or benefits. It’s the same program that was there before. The same eligibility that’s there. The only minor change is the amount of dollars that are assessed to your home to make you qualify. It has gone up a small bit. Over 90 percent of British Columbians will qualify for this grant. Those 90 percent will benefit from that in a time when housing markets are on the rise again.

One of the other parts to this program is that it says that there’s no cost. It’s in there as “no cost.” But the cost that’s there to its savings to the municipalities will be the cost of the time that they don’t have to have those people administering this program. Again, I want to emphasize that it’s the municipal governments, it’s the local governments that are asking the province for this service to continue the way it’s going.

The program, when it unrolls, also has the ability for that person that does not have a computer, does not have a phone line, does not have that ability to meet somebody in person, to still go through that paper application process that’s there. You can call an agent. They can make arrangements. They can ensure those paper trails that that person would like to do. We’ve got many people in our constituency that still like to receive their notices. They still like to receive their bills. They still like to have that tactile feeling of paper before they pay something that’s out.

When the province takes over this part — when the billing comes through, the grant application comes through — it’s going to be the centralization that’s going to be more efficient for the actual homeowner. As it sits in today’s world, with the municipal governments providing that service, there are errors that can happen within the municipalities because of the familiarity that’s there for them to process these grants.

By going to a centralized location, we’ll be able to have those people in a more productive way, that are doing that grant application on a regular basis, to be more efficient than the system that’s there today. Going to this grant application process makes it consistent throughout the province of B.C., where we already have areas that have this grant application process in place for those smaller communities.

I stand here today supporting this bill, supporting the minister and those people that were in consultation with those municipalities in getting what it is that they were after. The burden that was there on the municipalities was greatly provided to us to take a look at.

I know from my riding, Surrey-Cloverdale, it is just a portion of the city of Surrey where the local governments take care of all the ridings that are there, and they speak on their behalf as a whole. They are the ones that are asking for us to do what we are doing here today.

I support this motion. I like everything about this motion. I like everything that’s inside of it with regards to the consultation that the government has had with the local municipalities.

T. Shypitka: Bill 6. I’d like to take my place and talk to the Home Owner Grant Amendment Act, 2021. We’ve heard from a couple members on both sides already on this.

This is about switching gears. It’s about switching the process. I think it was the member for Surrey-Panorama that said it has been in place since 1957. We also have heard words on making it more simple and more fair.

We can take both those descriptions. I think the minister herself said fair. This makes it more fair. We heard the member for Surrey-Cloverdale say it makes it more fair. I’m just wondering what they mean by that. Are they meaning it was never treated fairly in the past, since 1957, where people seemed to get a quick response on filling in their homeowners grant application? They’d go down; they’d pay their taxes. Seemed pretty fair for, you know, 60 years almost.

[3:20 p.m.]

The simple part…. I think the member for Surrey-Panorama and the member from the North Peace region talked about the magic device. The member for Surrey-Panorama talked about listening to people.

Well, this magic device isn’t so magical when you’re in places like Grasmere or Baynes Lake or Hosmer or Newgate and many places in my riding that just have no connectivity at all, whatsoever. They enjoy what they’ve been doing for many years. That’s simply going to their local municipality and paying their taxes and, you know, making a day of it. “We’ll go into town and go shopping.” It’s all been done very simply in the past. I don’t think this addresses simplification at all.

There are also issues with personal information that the government is getting. A lot of people don’t think that’s right. They get a little freaked out, to tell you the honest truth. I don’t blame them, seeing what’s been happening so far with this government in the last three or four years.

A hidden agenda perhaps. There are a lot of conspiracy theories out there. What’s this leading to? Only time will tell. Some are very worried about where this may go. Maybe the elimination of the homeowner’s grant altogether. Who knows?

I was in municipal government for a number of years. This issue was never raised at the table, of this being an administrative burden to the municipality. I understand how municipalities and councils…. Any time you can get rid of any kind of provincial downloading, sure, I’m all in. But it’s got to be done in a way that is good for the constituents and the citizens of the area. I don’t think this is really addressing that, in this bill.

The member for Surrey-Panorama says that we need to listen more. She was really eager to give some quotes.

I pulled a few quotes, just from my page for today, mentioning this bill. We’ll throw a couple at you. First one: “This makes no sense. How will it streamline it? Now we fill out the grant and sign it when we pay our taxes. How simple is that? Now I have to apply to the province? Ridiculous.” Another person quoted here: “Wow, huge mistake. Passing more authority to the province, or to Ottawa, only leads to decisions that will hurt you later.” Next quote: “This makes me very angry.”

The next couple of quotes here are from very strong, I know, NDP supporters. That’s cool with me. I get along with all of my constituents. This person is a really good friend of mine. He believes in what this government has been doing to a large part so far, and this is what his quote was: “It was already as streamlined as possible.” The next person says: “I wonder how much will be saved by people failing to apply. Not a good thing.”

There’s already a groundswell on this bill. I don’t think it’s as simple as what government is trying to make it look like right now. I think it needs to be a relook at this bill. I think that’s what we’ll be doing when we get to committee stage, dissecting a little bit, maybe asking for some changes. Who knows? I think we need to do what’s best for the people of British Columbia and really examine it as a whole.

I’m going to make it quick here but just alert members of the House that this is not as simple and as fair as what government is saying right now. If government is truly genuine about making this simple and fair, then perhaps a hybrid system could be put in place. Perhaps we could have a little of both. Maybe we can have our cake and eat it too. That might be something that might be suggested in committee.

I want to go forward. I want to just reach out to both sides of the floor and say: “Let’s make this right for the people in B.C. and not for what you’re told is right.” Look deep, and see if this is actually going to help or hinder.

I mean, we look at some of the online processes that have gone on so far. We look at the B.C. recovery grant. This is something that was done online, a grant that was promised before Christmastime. Here we are into March, and I think only half of it’s been applied for so far. Not a lot of people happy with that process.

If we look at the speculation tax applications, a lot of people missed those deadlines. I’m not too sure how many people got caught in the cracks on that one. I know there were a lot of angry British Columbians about that process.

[3:25 p.m.]

The B.C. Parks reservation process last summer. What a disaster that was. It was a simple online reservation process, but it fell very short of what was promised. Then, of course, government grants for small businesses here in the province. We don’t need to go into too much detail on that one to shine a light on how disastrous that has been so far. People are skeptical about what is simple and fair.

I’ll leave it at that. We’ll look at joining you all later in committee stage.

S. Chant: I’m honoured to have the opportunity to address the House on this important topic.

I am speaking to you from the unceded territories of the Squamish, Musqueam and Tsleil-Waututh Nation. I appreciate the opportunity to be learning, living and playing in these areas.

I find it really interesting that a group of people can look at something that is straightforward and that is moving us into the 2000s and say that it is some kind of conspiracy to defraud our seniors or to make things more difficult — when we have an alphabet of communities throughout our province, all of which have people that we are committed to supporting as best as can be, when we work with the municipalities and we hear from the municipalities that tell us that this process has been a burden for many years.

I can attest to that. I’ve stood in those lineups. That it was equitable and fair at all times….

My niece, who is an adult — I am old — purchased a home two years ago, and she knew nothing about the homeowner grant until her parents said: “Have you applied for it?” She said: “No. It doesn’t apply to me.” She had to learn about it.

Across the board, there’s always going to be a challenge with anything we implement, anything that anybody implements.

[N. Letnick in the chair.]

It surprises me that we’re talking about connectivity still, 20 years later. There was another government in power for many, many years that maybe could have addressed this connectivity problem but apparently hasn’t.

That’s another thing that we’re looking at addressing. Is it something that we are going to consider in terms of implementing this program? Of course it is.

There are structures in place to support people that have not the capacity to use…. Whether it’s connectivity, whether it’s cognition, whether it’s capacity to have equipment, whether it’s economic, the structures are there to support those people. Every person in this House that has risen to speak to this matter is part of that structure to support these people, to do what needs to be done in order for them to benefit from this.

The question of fair and equitable treatment. We’re not looking at what’s fair for everybody. I don’t know…. Here we are back at The Lion King. Life is not fair. All of us have things to do in our lives that sometimes are harder to do than at other times. This is not one of those things. This is going to be relatively straightforward; it’s going to be relatively simple.

The connectivity issues. I heard it. I’m sure we will get further discussions on that, and we will work on solving those problems. That is our commitment to the people of British Columbia. That is why we collaborate. That is why we work together.

The bit about the municipalities. Absolutely, anything that we can do to reduce the workload for the municipality, to give them the time and the resources to devote to other things that are more [audio interrupted] with their own areas, more concerned with the myriad of things that they can do — fantastic. Give it to the provincial government — it is something that applies to people right across the province — and let the municipalities use their resources of time and people, get them so that they can use that elsewhere.

[3:30 p.m.]

We also make sure that this gives the people access to their tax benefits. Again, we have people that actually have not ever applied for their homeowner’s grant, for whatever reason. Is it a language issue? Is it a knowledge issue? Is it a “because I don’t need it” issue? There are many reasons why people don’t apply. If it’s because it’s an oversight, let’s figure out a way to deal with that.

I heard somebody say: “You know what? This is just one more thing to add to what I do for my senior parents.” Okay. If you’re having difficulty with managing your senior parents, look for other ways to support that. There are other things available.

We’ve got to come into the 2000s. We’ve got to allow our systems to move forward. If we keep doing a lot of these things on independent and different bases, it will allow for inequalities amongst the folks that we are trying to provide service for. It already has, in a couple of ways. What we want to be able to do is move forward and provide a steady and effective system for this.

Perhaps we are learning, over and over, from the different things that we’ve tried to do during the pandemic. Over and over, people are talking about having challenges getting through for their COVID benefits. My constituency assistants have been working every day with folks to get them access to their COVID benefits and to circumnavigate and work around these various barriers that everybody is tossing up.

We will get there. It’s not easy. The province is very large. We’ve got a huge variety in what we serve. We can still do it, but we have to work together, and we have to hear what people have to say. I appreciate what everybody has offered, from across the House, about things that are concerns. Great. Bring it to the committee. Let’s work it through. Let’s get it solved. Let’s keep moving forward. Let’s not stay in 1957, when this all first started. We’ve been doing this method for all that long.

I can tell you that all of your communities have evolved. We all know this. I hope that when people are looking at things that government is bringing forward…. It’s a hope; it’s not a guarantee. There is no intent of nefariousness.

We are very, very lucky. We live in one of the parts of the world where we are safe to bring forward our discussions, to bring forward our concerns, to bring forward our arguments. We can do this in a safe and respectful environment, listen to each other and work things through — rather than being removed from our place, sent away or imprisoned for saying what we have to say. We need to celebrate that.

We have bills that are straightforward and simple and — need I say, a very bad word — housekeeping bills, which are based on work that was done last year. We’re bringing it through to get it sorted out and finished so that we can get on to other stuff that’s important and that needs to be addressed as well.

Thank you so much to our Finance Minister for the work that she is doing on so many different fronts. Let us support something that is good for the people across the province and that is something that we can get behind readily. Let’s not tear it apart.

I thank you for your time. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity to speak to the group.

L. Doerkson: My comments will be brief today. I just wanted to make a couple of comments around the word “simplicity.” I’ve heard that a number of times today.

Certainly, I think most of the members on this side of the House would appreciate simplicity going forward. The problem is that we really haven’t seen that in the track record. For the short time that I’ve been in office, I haven’t seen simplicity in anything that we’ve done.

[3:35 p.m.]

I understand that the bill will centralize the administration of this program. I guess I have to start by asking: why fix something that isn’t broken? Many of our residents have conveyed to us that, simply put, the program works. I think the last member spoke to the fact that we might look to taking the burden away for other things in municipalities. I think municipalities would be excited to hear that from the member. Ultimately, I guess my question is: why would we fix what isn’t broken?

As to the simplicity, I can assure you that offices in the Cariboo-Chilcotin riding, which I’m pleased to represent here today, have been extremely busy trying to sort out what was supposed to be a simple project in the B.C. recovery benefit — not just for businesses. It has been a nightmare figuring it out for our residents as well. The complexities around that are many. Simply put, we have people that applied back in December and still have not received their $500 in March. I’ve seen the application process myself. It should be simple; it hasn’t turned out that way. I’m definitely fearful of that.

I also wanted to bring rural B.C. — of course, I’m the critic for Rural Development — to the forefront, because I believe a couple of members here have referred to connectivity. I think one of them laid the blame at our feet for 16 years of ignoring connectivity. I might point out that it has been four years for the government to deal with it, if they saw it as a problem, but I can assure you it hasn’t been dealt with in my riding. I can assure you that in much of rural British Columbia, it is a very significant issue — very significant.

I know it’s not just connectivity. But when you get into, I think, comments that we’ve heard earlier here today…. We heard about the magical device and online. Simply put, at Big Creek in rural British Columbia, those devices don’t work, and online is not an option. In many cases, phone lines may not even be an option in some of those rural areas. I think we need to understand exactly what we’re referring to when we talk about rural.

I wanted to talk about seniors a little bit. This came up about a month ago in my riding. I can quote Glenda Winger, who advocates on behalf of seniors in our community and runs the seniors centre in Williams Lake. Glenda Winger reached out to me and suggested that seniors in our community are going to have a massive issue with this.

Now, I can appreciate the comments that were made earlier. My mom is pretty good on an iPad too. I can appreciate that. But we must acknowledge that there are a lot of these seniors that are not good with an iPad. They’re not good with a computer. In fact, they may not even have a computer. I can point out just how important this is, because that seniors centre that Glenda Winger operates…. She is actually committed to bringing in volunteers to help seniors in our community to fill out any of these online applications.

I guess my question to that point is this: if the burden was supposed to go to the province, why is it ending up at a seniors centre? Our seniors centre is now going to accept that burden that was at the city level and is now at the provincial level, but ultimately, they will find themselves dealing with it. I also have no question that our office will have very much time invested in this as well.

At the end of the day, I believe that connectivity, those types of things, are definitely issues throughout all of rural B.C. I appreciate what the government is trying to do by offloading this burden from our cities, but I am very, very concerned, going forward, how it will play out.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise today.

I’m joining you from the traditional territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations in our virtual hybrid sitting.

[3:40 p.m.]

I’m very pleased to speak in favour of second reading for Bill 6, the Home Owner Grant Amendment Act. I just want to give an overview of that and some of my remarks and thoughts on the significance of Bill 6.

Starting in 2021, B.C. homeowners will apply for their homeowner grants through the province, not their municipality, which many had been doing. The advantage of that is that it will make applying for the grant quicker and easier.

The homeowner grant program provides tax relief to B.C. homeowners each year. I know that my office and many offices across the province assist in this process with homeowners in our area. The change to provincial administration will streamline the process and ensure that everyone who is eligible receives a reduction in their annual property taxes.

Prior to this change, local governments administered the program in municipalities. The province administered the rural grant program. We had different administrative responsibilities. It was Budget 2020 that announced the centralization of the program following discussions with municipalities that told government that administration of the yearly grant program was a burden.

Annual tax notices will continue to be sent by municipalities but will include a link to the province’s online grant application. Homeowners should apply once they’ve received their property tax notice. If they’ve not yet applied for their 2020 grant, they can do so retroactively. It will now be online at the government website to be accessed.

In terms of Bill 6, I’m pleased with these changes. I think it will help to assist, to streamline the process, make it more effective. Fundamentally, I’ve heard, particularly from municipalities…. It was after hearing from, and our government engaging in consultations with, local government partners that the province is now taking over administration of the homeowner grant program to ease the burden on municipalities, which was requested.

What are the advantages? Centralization has other benefits, such as full online access, phone service, quicker application processing and ensuring that those who are entitled to a reduction in their property taxes receive it. There’s some difficulty in terms of the rural administration in Metro Vancouver being administered differently. That’s an advantage in terms of it coming together under the provincial government.

It doesn’t result in a change to program eligibility for B.C. homeowners. Let’s be clear. It’s working in partnership with municipalities, who levy the property taxes in May. In terms of streamlining the process, similar to previous years, new grant applications will be reviewed in May 2021, when tax notices are mailed out.

We know that over 90 percent of B.C. homes are eligible to have their property taxes reduced through the homeowner grant program. This provides tax relief to B.C. homeowners throughout the province. The province is now administering the homeowner grant program. Municipalities are no longer receiving homeowner grant applications. It’s important for folks to know that. The province is currently also accepting retroactive 2020 homeowner grant applications.

Besides the online application portal, there’s a telephone line for folks to access. I know the previous speaker was talking about accessibility and facilitating a service, particularly for seniors and older folks who own their homes but may not be that familiar or comfortable with the online process or, across B.C., have issues around connectivity. Certainly, there’s a toll-free line that’s available for folks to also avail and get that service, if they require it. That, I think, is an important consideration and important support for folks who are not comfortable with accessing the online portal.

[3:45 p.m.]

Why did we move to centralize? I mentioned we heard from local governments that administering the program is time-consuming and a burden. Certainly, listening to municipalities is important. They have a lot on their plate. I’m pleased that the provincial government was able to work in collaboration and take that recommendation from municipalities and support municipalities in terms of delivering this service. So that’s positive, certainly in my mind.

I think the benefits, as well, not in terms of relieving municipalities of that administrative responsibility but that there is also a benefit to homeowners themselves, where we expect that this process will lead to quicker application processing and also help to be more systematic and have more transparency and be able to help prevent ineligible homeowners from being penalized as well. We look at those as real benefits to the overall program that have been identified.

Folks will be advised of these changes on the website, information which is important to advise everyone across B.C. in terms of this change, besides us discussing it in the Legislature as we’re doing now. There will also be notices sent out with municipal and rural property tax notices. So everyone will be advised, and municipal websites will be updated, as well, to direct homeowners to the gov.bc.ca homeowner grant online portal. Then there’s an information line available as well. These are all positive steps.

In terms of the phone call-in centre to address support that’s needed, there are also in-person visits that they can make to a nearby Service B.C. centre. So we have the online portal, which we’re encouraging folks to access. We also have information on the websites. We also have a 1-800 number that people can access, and there’s in-person support available at Service B.C. centres. The locations of Service B.C. centres are listed online, and we have a number of offices across British Columbia.

We’re really making an attempt to ensure that we can provide these services, support British Columbians to be able to successfully fill out the application and submit their application for the homeowner grant.

What’s different? Obviously, no longer will individuals be applying through their municipality. It’s the program and eligibility. There are no changes that have been made to eligibility requirements or benefits. As of January 2021, the B.C. homeowner grant threshold is set at $1.625 million, and this ensures that the same percentage of homes in British Columbia, more than 90 percent, are under that threshold and eligible for the full homeowner grant in 2021. The eligibility requirements and benefits are not changing. There’s also no charge for homeowners to apply. So certainly that’s an issue of fairness, which I think is positive.

Overall, I’d just like to summarize, I think, that this is a key component. It’s positive to support, to listen to municipalities and to be able to deliver better service to B.C. homeowners applying for this grant. It’s in the context of efforts of our government to bring affordability to the housing market right across the continuum.

We have a number of initiatives, from supportive housing to rental build to social housing to supporting homeowners, right across the continuum. This is an important key, an important part of that plan, to ensure that our priority around ensuring that affordability is central and an important priority for that government, for our government, that we make this commitment to British Columbians. Bill 6 is one step towards that goal.

I want to just end my remarks there. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak in favour of Bill 6 at second reading.

[3:50 p.m.]

Deputy Speaker: Are there any other members that would like to speak to the motion?

The member for Saanich North has put up his hand.

You have the floor.

A. Olsen: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Nice to see you in the chair this afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to Bill 6, the Homeowner Grant Amendment Act, 2021.

I’m just wanting to step in on the second reading debate here to note general support for these changes in easing the administrative burden on our colleagues in local government, noting that this has been a responsibility that they have taken on, on behalf of the province, to administrate the homeowner grant.

I’m just wanting to note that with respect to the provincial government, who is now going to be accepting the challenge of administrating this grant, some of the questions that I will have at the committee stage of this debate will be on the delivery of that grant and the ability of the government to administrate this new responsibility that is going to be coming in-house to the province.

As we’ve witnessed and heard over the last number of weeks and months with the personal benefit, the individual B.C. recovery benefit, as well as the small and medium-sized business recovery grant, the provincial government…. A lot of the language that I’ve heard from my colleagues on the government side of the House here today has been: “Don’t worry. We’re going to deliver this. It’s going to be fine. It’s just a few clicks online. It’s going to be all done, and everything will be fine.”

That’s the same kind of language that we heard prior to the new year, the change of the calendar year, with respect to the several other benefits that the provincial government has put in place. “Don’t worry. It’s easy. We’re going to roll out this money; $300 million will be rolled out.” In fact, we haven’t seen that to be the case.

I have constituents in Saanich North and the Islands that are still waiting for their recovery benefit. I’ve been told, and my staff have been told: “Don’t contact us on behalf of individuals who are waiting for that recovery benefit, because we’re just overwhelmed with requests on this.”

I think what’s important is that the government understands that the support for these changes comes from the Union of B.C. Municipalities. For all of us whose careers in politics started at the local government level, we know about that relationship between the province and local government. We know the challenges. We’ve experienced the challenges. So on one end, it’s with arms raised and with hands raised that we thank the provincial government for taking on this responsibility.

However, I think that it’s important that the administration of this is smooth and that it be much smoother than we’ve witnessed over the last number of months. We heard in question period today and question periods past the challenges that the government has had in administering these programs that we’ve all been told will roll smoothly.

Going a little further, I think that it’s important to recognize that the government has had some advice, I believe, in the MSP Tax Force, the basic income panel, around the homeowner grant and around some changes that could be made to the homeowner grant that would support more residents and support British Columbians, and there are some recommendations that are not appearing in this legislation.

[3:55 p.m.]

As we go forward to the committee stage of this bill, I think it’ll be a good opportunity to canvass with the Minister of Finance whether or not the government is considering those other recommendations, whether or not this is the full suite of changes that are intended for the homeowner grant, or whether we can expect to see some further changes to this important program for many homeowners — in fact, for most homeowners — in British Columbia.

With that, I just wanted to be able to step into this debate and to raise those points. It’s really, I think, to encourage the government to ensure that if, in fact, members of the government are going to stand in the debate and talk about the ease of administration for this program, that that, in fact, be what is delivered should this bill pass — that British Columbians who are applying online are able to do so with ease and that there are not huge delays, like we’ve seen in the administration of other programs for British Columbians who are looking for the support from their government.

With that, I’d like to raise my hands to the Speaker for giving me the opportunity to speak today on this bill. I do see some of the others now have entered this space, so I will take my seat, or I will just roll back a little bit and thank you for the opportunity to speak to Bill 6.

HÍSW̱ḴE SIÁM. Thank you.

A. Mercier: I’d like to thank the House for giving me this opportunity to speak to the Homeowner Grant Amendment Act.

I can’t think of a better example of administrative competence than this act. I mean, this is just the hallmark of political competence to be able to centralize administration like this and reduce red tape. I would hope that even the members of the so-called free enterprise coalition would line up behind something that is just so bureaucratically competent as this practice. What this does, ultimately, at the end of the day, is centralize administration of the grant in the hands of the province. What that does is alleviate the pressure on our municipalities and our municipal elected officials. That’s just good, competent public policy.

I can’t think — other than, of course, the members of this House — of a harder-working group of elected officials than the people, the women and men, that represent our local communities. They work so hard. I’m just thinking of all of the elected officials in the two Langleys, of the mayors and council, and all of the hard work that they put in, day in, day out, to serving the public and doing it competently. We owe them that same diligence of returning that type of competent administration.

The centralization of the administration of the homeowner grant into the hands of the province is the way to do that. It’s a benefit that’s going to pay off in spades. I’d like to really…. I don’t intend to speak to this motion for too long, because I think that just the legislative competence of this is so evident that it’s hard to belabour that point. But the fact is that the Minister of Finance, the former Minister of Housing, has done such a good, strong, credible and competent job, in not just this act, but in representing the province to municipalities.

That’s something I know, because I hear about it from elected officials all of the time, from local elected officials in my region, and not all from my riding or ridings of even the governing party of the NDP. I hear mayors and councillors from Liberal ridings tell me constantly that the Minister of Finance has done a tremendous job at repairing the relationship of the province with the municipalities. That’s a relationship that, over 16 years, the previous government, the B.C. Liberals, did everything in their power to destroy.

[4:00 p.m.]

At the end of the day, we need to bring back that political and administrative competence. We’ve been doing that over three and a half years. I’m proud to be a member of a government that’s doing it. I’m proud to stand up and speak to this act. I’m excited to see this implementation. Really what this is, is this is the other side of the debate we had the other day about the Residential Tenancy Act, which was relief for renters. Well, this is about helping homeowners and would-be, prospective homeowners.

This is going to be applicable…. The eligibility requirements haven’t been changed. So this is going to be applicable to over 90 percent of folks buying homes in this province. This is just good, competent public administration that helps our residents and our communities and really alleviates the burden and the pressures on municipal governments across this province.

Deputy Speaker: Were there any other members wishing to speak to Bill 6?

Minister of Municipal Affairs, you have the floor.

Hon. J. Osborne: Thank you very much, hon. Speaker. Great to see you in the chair.

It’s a pleasure to stand, or rise, in the House and speak in support of this bill. As most of the members know, I am a former small-town mayor and can speak with some direct experience in watching a town administrate the homeowner grant program.

I want to spend a little bit of time talking about that, and I also want to spend a little bit of time talking about what I am hearing as the Minister of Municipal Affairs from local governments on the monthly calls that I undertake with them, having been a mayor on those same calls when the former Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing was in her office.

We know, and we’ve heard directly from local governments, that they are looking for every opportunity they can to simplify their lives and to streamline processes like this. This is an excellent example of that.

When I say streamline, what I mean is: This is a grant that comes from the province directly to a homeowner. But for years, municipalities have played this middle-person role. That provides a point of contact for citizens to walk into their local government offices and speak to somebody and ask questions. But it increasingly, with the growth in our communities, has become more and more of an administrative burden to municipalities.

Sometimes what people don’t see from the outside is how much of the administration and operations take place behind the scenes. It is more than simply filling out the paperwork or going online to your city’s website and filling out the form there. It’s what happens behind those doors and behind the scenes where staff are working to align the homeowner grant with the property tax roll and make all the decisions that they need to as they compile the paperwork and present it to the province in order to receive the money back.

Again, this is a grant program that goes directly from the province to the homeowner. So this removes the middle person, which is municipalities right now, and streamlines in that sense. All orders of government are continually looking to improve their services. This is another example of exactly how the province is helping local governments do this.

We’ve had indications that this would be coming for some time, so municipalities and regional districts that I’ve been talking to are saying that they’re preparing and they’re getting ready. Now, many larger urban centres already have online enrolment programs, and it’s the smaller centres that maybe are still using the paper method. But they’re preparing too.

They know they’re going to have to communicate to their residents. Local governments communicate to their residents really well. They have systems in place. They’re able to let people know what’s going to happen. They’ll be able to answer questions and direct them to the appropriate site so that people can enrol and get their homeowner grant.

It’s also important to remember that for those folks who don’t have access to technology, there will be a phone line set up. It’s already underway, and people can phone in to get the help that they need to be able to register properly for their homeowner grant.

Again, this is about being responsive to local governments, hearing their concerns. I spoke today to a director of financial services in a municipality. I asked her directly: “How do you feel about having this alleviated from the work you do?” She explained to me exactly what happens behind the scenes, once again, and how it is going to simplify her life and make it easier to focus on the services that local governments are delivering to people in their communities, make it easier for them to focus on the work that they need to do.

[4:05 p.m.]

Once again, we heard from local governments that administering this program is time-consuming. The preparations are underway. Municipalities, regional districts are ready to do…. Regional districts, of course, people living in rural areas, already did apply directly to the province. But all local governments will take an important role in communicating this information out to their residents.

With that, thank you very much.

Deputy Speaker: Are there any further speakers on Bill 6?

I recognize the member for Chilliwack.

D. Coulter: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m happy to be speaking in the House for my second time while you’re in the chair. It’s great. It’s like nostalgia for me.

I’d like, first, to just…. This might grate the nerves of some of my younger colleagues. I am a Gen X-er. So I was able to buy a house and have applied for homeowners’ grants in the past. I think I’m the last generation. That’s what they’ll refer to us as, shortly, when everyone’s renting.

I’ve applied for many homeowners’ grants in my time, and I find that this bill is eminently reasonable. It will streamline and make things a lot better. Having to go down to city hall and apply, often in-person, is a bit of a burden to apply for the homeowner’s grant.

I’ve already applied this year and last year online. That was the system, so we’ve already been doing this. I think we can continue on with it. We heard from local governments that administering the program is time-consuming and a burden. If we do it this way, it will lead to quicker application processing as well.

Homeowners who would like to pay their taxes or defer their taxes…. I’m also very lucky — well, maybe not lucky — that because I have a disability, I get to defer my taxes, which is kind of a bonus. Maybe not the best way of putting it, but there’s always a silver lining in every cloud. This will make it a lot quicker and a lot easier for me to go and defer my taxes when I go to defer them.

When we centralize this, we’ll be able to definitely streamline it. We’ll have quicker application processing. We’ll also have online access, phone access. The province already administers this program. It’s just basically in rural areas, so this will help that. There will be no change to the eligibility to any homeowners that currently get it or homeowners that will get it in the future.

I also found it easier not just for the basic homeowner’s grant, but — I might have said this already — I have a disability. So I also applied for the disability grant online, which was really terrific.

We’re going to have to pay our taxes shortly, in May. So along with the information on that, there will be information on how the new process works and how easily to apply. Similar to previous years, new grant applications will be reviewed in May 2021, when the tax notices are mailed out. So a great idea.

Over 90 percent of B.C. homes are eligible to have their property taxes reduced through the homeowner grant program. This will provide tax relief to B.C. homeowners throughout the province.

That’s about all I have to say. This bill is a bit of a no-brainer. It cuts red tape. It streamlines the process. I think it gives fair access to everyone who needs to apply.

Interjection.

[4:10 p.m.]

D. Coulter: I know we can rely on you and your good nature and generosity to allow that, though. Thank you very much.

This is going to be a great program. You may ask yourself: where can homeowners apply in person? We can encourage homeowners needing additional assistance to phone our call centre. Agents are able to help them complete the application themselves, or agents are able to complete applications on their behalf. If homeowners need additional support, they can have a call centre agent help them complete their application over the phone.

Homeowners who still feel they require in-person assistance are able to visit a nearby Service B.C. centre, which also makes this a great way of applying for this program. Instead of having to go down to city hall, it’s located in one centre.

Can homeowners still apply through their municipality? No. Homeowners can find the link to the new provincial online application at gov.bc.ca/homeownergrant. They can also apply to the program through an agent.

Did we change the program eligibility? I mentioned before that we had not. Everyone who has already gotten the homeowner grant the old way is still eligible. The eligibility remains the same.

What is the homeowner grant threshold for 2021, and how does it compare to threshold levels in recent years? The homeowner grant threshold for 2021 is $1.65 million. The threshold in 2020 was $1.525 million, while it was $1.65 million in 2018 and 2019. In the majority of B.C. communities, almost every home is valued below the threshold.

The 2021 threshold will keep approximately 92 percent of homeowners eligible for the grant, the same percentage as last year. Homes valued above the threshold may qualify for a partial grant. The grant is gradually phased out at the rate of $5 per $1,000 of assessed value.

There’s no charge to homeowners. There will be no extra levy applied for this program, which is terrific news. B.C. homeowners can apply now for their 2020 retroactive grant, and that’s terrific too. They can apply for their 2021 homeowner grant coming up. They can’t pay their taxes or, in my case, defer them yet, but that will come soon too.

Any 2021 homeowner grant applications will remain in the application system until municipal property taxes are levied in May. Applications will be marked as pending approval until our local government partners confirm how much tax is due. Once municipalities confirm the tax amount, applications will be reviewed and, if eligible, approved.

What about B.C. homeowners who want to apply before May 2021 or who want to apply for a retroactive grant? Can they do that with local governments?

Interjection.

D. Coulter: I will tell you, member for Surrey-Panorama. No, local governments will no longer be accepting homeowner grant applications. The province is accepting retroactive 2020 applications to the homeowner grant program, once again, at gov.bc.ca/homeownergrant.

They can apply for their 2021 homeowner grant. Please note that any 2021 homeowner grant applications will remain in the application system until municipal property taxes are levied in May. Applications will be marked as pending approval until our local government partners confirm how much tax is due. Once municipalities confirm the tax amounts, applications will be reviewed and, if eligible, approved.

Do you know any other questions I’ve been getting?

Interjection.

[4:15 p.m.]

D. Coulter: Yes, I will.

“I still want to make a paper-based application. Can I?” We understand that some people are not comfortable using an online application to access programs.

The province’s online application is safe and secure. It uses the same technology the B.C. government uses to administer all of its major programs, including the provincial sales tax and the homeowner grant for rural property owners.

There will….

M. Bernier: Does that mean the answer is no? I’m trying to understand. It’s a good question.

D. Coulter: Yes. It’s a great question. The answer isn’t necessarily simple, member for Peace River North. South. Sorry, that was….

Interjection.

D. Coulter: Yes. I know where you are from. You were Education Minister when I was….

Oh, sorry. Sorry. Yes, I will only talk to the Chair.

Continuing along with the paper-based application, there will also be phone-based support to help them successfully complete their application. If you still want to make a paper-based application, please phone 1-888-355-2700, Monday to Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., excluding statutory holidays. Ask a call centre agent. You want to receive the paper-based application.

Interjection.

D. Coulter: Yes. A very good point, I just heard. Someone was asking if the MLA’s office could lend a hand.

All of us in here…. We all have a constituency office, or we will shortly. Yes, we can do casework. We can help people out with applying for their grant. Absolutely. That’s a terrific point.

“What if homeowners don’t have access to the Internet or a computer?” one might ask. Homeowners will be able to complete their applications with an agent at a call centre. They can have a call centre agent help them complete their application over the phone at 1-888-355-2700.

“Why do I have to provide my social insurance number?” many people have been asking me.

Interjection.

D. Coulter: Yes.

Collecting information such as a date of birth and social insurance number will also allow us to better determine eligibility for those who qualify.

We also know, from reviewing this program, that often seniors are not applying for the correct grant amount. This means they are not receiving the full grant they are eligible for. By requiring eligible B.C. homeowners to provide their social insurance number, we can confirm their eligibility and ensure they receive the maximum benefit they are eligible for, and it helps us prevent fraudulent claims.

“What if I don’t want to provide my social insurance number?” other people have been asking me. Well, all homeowners applying to the grant program will be required to provide their social insurance number. Collecting information such as a date of birth and social insurance number will also allow us to better determine eligibility for those who qualify.

We know, from reviewing this program, that often seniors are not applying for the correct grant amount. This means they are not receiving the full grant amount that they’re eligible for. By requiring eligible B.C. homeowners to provide their social insurance number, we can confirm their eligibility and ensure they receive the maximum benefit they are eligible for, and it helps us prevent fraudulent claims.

I think I mentioned this before, but I’d just like to put a point on it. Why did the government decide to centralize homeowner grant administration? Well, we’ve heard from local governments that administrating the program is time-consuming and a burden. It is expected to lead to quicker application processing as well, which will help prevent ineligible homeowners from being penalized for late property tax payments.

[4:20 p.m.]

How are we telling B.C. homeowners about this change? Our website has up-to-date information about this change as well as the homeowner grant thresholds for 2021. You can find this information at gov.bc.ca/homeownergrant.

Municipal and rural property tax notices will also include information about centralization and a link to the website. Most municipal websites have been updated and direct homeowners to gov.bc.ca/homeownergrant for information to apply online.

How will homeowners now apply to the program? I’ll let you know. All B.C. homeowners will now be able to apply for their homeowner grant online at gov.bc.ca/homeownergrant. Homeowners can now apply, but their applications won’t be reviewed until municipal property taxes are levied in May. If homeowners need additional support, they can have a call centre agent help them complete their application over the phone at 1-888-355-2700, Monday to Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., excluding statutory holidays.

I will say, Mr. Speaker, that I’m very happy I got to speak in front of you again. It’s been my pleasure.

I will say that this program makes tons of sense. I cannot think of a better way to streamline it. I know all members in this House should support it, especially those who are talking about cutting red tape.

M. Bernier: You should do the website and phone number one more time.

D. Coulter: Oh yes, without a doubt, just in case people missed it.

The website, again…. The member for Peace River South has suggested I read it again. I think he’s right on this score: gov.bc.ca/homeownergrant. And the number, once again: 1-888-355-2700. You want to do this Monday to Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., excluding statutory holidays.

I hope everyone has got the website and the phone number by now. I think I’ve said it enough.

With that, I just want all my colleagues to support this. I’m sure they will. It is just really a no-brainer and makes a lot of sense for our province of British Columbia.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Once again, it was great to be here with you.

J. Brar: First of all, I would like to say a super job done by the member for Chilliwack. I think for a lot of the questions asked by the member from the opposition, you have given very clear, straightforward answers to them, with full patience and respect. Thanks to you.

I also would like to join and say I’m really pleased to support Bill 6, the homeowner grant program.

[4:25 p.m.]

First of all, I would like to make it very clear that this bill doesn’t change the homeowner grant program’s eligibility requirements or benefits. The 2020 homeowner grant threshold is set at $1.625 million, ensuring the same percentage of British Columbia homeowners continues to be eligible to reduce their property tax bills.

Over 90 percent of B.C. homes are eligible to have their property taxes reduced through the homeowner grant program. This provides tax relief to B.C. homeowners throughout our province.

There is no change to program eligibility for B.C. homeowners. I want to make that very clear. What we are changing is the administration of the homeowner grant program. Starting this year, the province is taking over administration of the grant program to reduce the burden on municipalities.

There will be only one place for people to make applications for this grant program. I think that’s a good thing for people, a good thing for local governments.

Deputy Speaker: Excuse me, Member for Surrey-Fleetwood. If your TV is on, or something else, could you turn it off? We’re getting a lot of feedback.

Thank you very much. Please continue.

J. Brar: Thanks for that intervention, Mr. Speaker.

Centralization of the homeowner grant program has other benefits as well, such as full online access, phone service and quick application processing, ensuring that those who are entitled to a reduction in their property taxes receive it, making sure they receive it. This is a good change for everyone in the province of British Columbia.

We are doing this after listening to local government partners. We’re not doing it in isolation. We’re listening, and we’re acting on that. I’m very proud of the work done by the Minister of Finance to make it easier for homeowners and for the local governments.

It should be noted that the province already administers the grant for rural homeowners. So it makes sense to centralize and streamline the total program.

This bill opens the door for homeowners in all municipalities to submit their applications directly to the province instead of through their municipal offices. That’s the change we’re making in this piece of legislation. This will make it easier for people, on the one hand. On the other hand, it will reduce the burden on municipalities. It is that simple.

We are going to inform B.C. homeowners about this change. This is a big change, as the member for Chilliwack said very clearly. The B.C. government website has up-to-date information about this change already, as well as the homeowner grant thresholds for 2021. People can find the information at gov.bc.ca/homeownergrant.

Municipal, local and rural property tax notices will also include information about the centralization and a link to the website. They will do that as well. Most municipal websites have already been updated and direct homeowners to the B.C. government website for information and to apply online. So it’s made it very simple for people.

If, after all of the information on the website, they have…. They view the information. In case they need any additional information, they can call the call centre. The number there is 1-888-355-2700. It’s Monday to Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., excluding statutory holidays.

I would like to conclude by saying that Bill 6 brings good changes for people, good changes for local government. Therefore, I’m very proud to support Bill 6, and I’m very proud of the work that the Minister of Finance has done on this bill.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the opportunity.

[4:30 p.m.]

Deputy Speaker: The Chair recognizes the Minister of Finance to close the debate.

Hon. S. Robinson: I want to thank all the members for participating in this important debate, recognizing that, as a government, our commitment is to make life easier and better for the constituents that we all represent in this House and the recognition that this bill will, in fact, deliver just that for British Columbians.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

With that, I’d like to move second reading. I look forward to the committee stage with the Finance critic.

Motion approved on division.

Hon. S. Robinson: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to be considered at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 6, Home Owner Grant Amendment Act, 2021, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. S. Robinson: I call Bill 8.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

We are now moving to Bill 8, Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2021.

BILL 8 — FINANCE STATUTES
AMENDMENT ACT, 2021

Hon. S. Robinson: I move that Bill 8 be read a second time now.

These amendments will fulfil the commitment of my predecessor, Minister James, to establish a single regulator of real estate under the B.C. Financial Services Authority.

This bill responds to recommendations from a report the government commissioned on the regulation of real estate. Those recommendations were later echoed in an expert panel’s report on combatting money laundering in B.C. real estate. Both reports noted the inefficiencies of the existing co-regulator model where the office of the superintendent of real estate and the Real Estate Council of B.C. share responsibility for regulating real estate in the province.

The B.C. Financial Services Authority currently regulates financial institutions, pensions and mortgage brokers. By making the CEO of the BCFSA the superintendent of real estate, we are moving to create a more unified system across sectors. In addition to bringing the office of the superintendent of real estate and the Real Estate Council together under the BCFSA, we are also making amendments to ensure that the regulation of real estate is more efficient and more transparent.

The first change involves changes to the discipline process. The current model has the majority of cases, even those that are uncontroversial and uncontested, proceed via a notice of discipline hearing. This has created a backlog of complaints and proceedings.

Under the new proposed model, there will continue to be three levels of escalating discipline: letters of advisement to provide a warning for a marginal infraction, administrative penalties to impose fines and/or education requirements and discipline hearing orders for the most serious infractions.

Under the new model, administrative penalties will cover all but the most serious of contestable contraventions. Furthermore, when discipline hearings are required, there will be no requirement for board members to be involved in the discipline process. Instead, the superintendent will have statutory authority over discipline hearings. This should ensure that complaints are dealt with quickly.

We are expanding the conduct that is subject to administrative penalties. We are also expanding the maximum penalty from $50,000 to $100,000. The superintendent may also require remedial education as part of the penalty structure or allow penalties to be discounted for early payment, incentivizing a quick resolution.

It’s important to note that individuals who receive an administrative penalty may still request a hearing. If the request is granted, they cannot receive a discipline penalty that is more than their original administrative penalty.

[4:35 p.m.]

When licensees do appeal a discipline decision to the Financial Services Tribunal, the decision of the superintendent will remain in place until the tribunal grants a stay of the decision. Under the existing model, any appeal to the tribunal means an automatic stay of the decision. This poses a significant risk to the public, as real estate licensees can continue to operate until the conclusion of their appeal.

We are also changing how the rules that govern licensee conduct are made. The rules will now be subject to the Regulations Act, which will ensure that rules are drafted consistent with government drafting conventions. This includes ministerial approval, which means that the government will have an opportunity to ensure that its priorities continue to be reflected in the regulation of real estate.

Under the proposed legislation, licensing fees will now be set by regulation. The BCFSA will have the authority for setting fees for education and will also collect fees on behalf of the Real Estate Errors and Omissions Insurance Corp. and the Real Estate Compensation Fund Corp.

Regarding the real estate compensation fund, the fund that provides compensation to consumers if their deposits are misused, the superintendent will now have the authority to hear compensation claims and to determine compensation amounts for consumers. This will continue those consumer protections previously provided under the authority of the Real Estate Council.

To ensure that the corporations under the act, like the compensation fund corporation I just mentioned, continue to meet their obligations, we are ensuring that board members who were formally appointed by the Real Estate Council are now appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council, the BCFSA and/or others, per the regulations.

The proposed legislation also includes amendments to the Financial Institutions Act and the Credit Union Incorporation Act that vest most regulatory functions currently with the BCFSA board in the superintendent of financial institutions.

The amendments will allow delegation by ministerial regulation of certain other major regulatory functions — primarily in respect to the incorporation, amalgamation and winding up of financial institutions — to the superintendent. These changes will shift the focus of the BCFSA board to a corporate oversight model, allowing BCFSA to operate more effectively as an organization as it acquires a new major set of responsibilities under real estate.

Finally, I would like to note that we have done an assessment of this legislation as it relates to aligning with the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples and the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Bringing the office of the real estate superintendent and the Real Estate Council of B.C. under the BCFSA, as Bill 8 proposes, does not uniquely affect the Indigenous rights described in the UN declaration.

We will continue to work with the Financial Services Authority, as we do with all of our Crown agencies, to ensure that we work in cooperation with Indigenous peoples to establish a clear and sustainable path to lasting reconciliation. This includes asking the authority to create opportunities that implement the Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommendations through the authority’s mandate.

M. Bernier: Thank you to the minister.

I’ll be very brief with my comments, unlike the bill itself, which is quite lengthy. I look forward to digesting it in a lot more detail and listening to some of the answers when we get to committee stage.

This bill that the minister has put forward is 179 sections long, and it covers 11 acts that need to be modified or adjusted in some way. It’s very, very comprehensive. Even though it sounds simplistic, what we’re trying to accomplish here, there’s a lot of detail that needs to be done.

Obviously, we want to look…. We’re in favour of anything that’s going to help streamline and make things a little bit more efficient and effective for our regulators. This actually builds on the previous work that was done around consolidation and that was going to take place within the B.C. Financial Services Authority. This is something, more specifically….

As was mentioned, the bill is looking at that authority being moved to the superintendent of financial institutions and some of the work around the work that they do.

One of the things, because it was brought up in the past, that we brought up was just around making sure the…. The concern is that there could possibly be fee increases, specifically around the financial sectors, as a result of some of these changes. We want to make sure that we talk about that, find out if that’s indeed moving forward, what the plan will be, if fees are going to be fair — that’s what’s very important — and make sure that the accountability around organizations is still strong and still present there with the amalgamation.

[4:40 p.m.]

Obviously, we support this being nimble, forward-looking, to make sure that it’s going to address the challenges but also some of the opportunities that we have here in balancing the interests of the sectors that we have in the province as we move forward with the consolidation that we have here and that the government has put forward under this act.

With that, the big hope, like always, is…. We hope it works as it’s intended and look forward to further discussion with the minister.

J. Sims: It is my pleasure today to rise and speak, at second reading, on Bill 8 — I am wearing my glasses, as you can see — the Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2021.

I want to thank the minister for her words and for the hard work that she has done on this file. I also want to acknowledge the work of her predecessor — who did gargantuan work over the last parliament to get us to where we are — and her stellar work in this area as she looked at the regulations that existed and the ones that had to be streamlined.

I love it when I hear the words “efficiency,” “transparency” and “accountability” together. We heard the minister speak about this. I think that is exactly what this bill has the potential to achieve in the real estate industry. I am delighted to see these regulatory changes brought forward, because it was important that we bring everything under one umbrella.

Currently, as we all know, BCFSA…. That is the B.C. Financial Services Authority. Sometimes we use all of these acronyms in here, and people are thinking: “What are they talking about?”

The B.C. Financial Services Authority currently regulates B.C.’s financial markets, including our credit unions. All of us have credit unions right around the province. Many of us use them religiously and are very, very touched by the work they do in every community. They regulate trust companies, registered pension plans — always grateful for that — insurance companies and mortgage brokers.

What this amendment today does is add the Real Estate Services Act. It will give the BCFSA authority with respect to these three things: education and licensing for real estate professionals, establishing new rules governing the conduct of real estate professionals and investigation and discipline for licensed and unlicensed individuals.

You know, sometimes when we pass legislation in here, we think: “Okay. Is it really…? What impact is it going to have on people out there in the real world?” Well, I can tell you that this is going to have a huge impact on people out in the real world.

All of us in this House know…. I think my colleagues from both sides of the House have to agree. What we saw happening to our housing market and what we saw in the arena of money laundering and the many other not-so-nice practices that came to light all made it very, very obvious for the need to centralize and to have an umbrella regulation so that you could move forward not only on investigation but then on enforcement as well. It does not help when you have a fragmented approach to something that is that critical to almost every British Columbian.

We heard reports of money laundering happening throughout our real estate, and they were deeply disturbing, not only for us as elected people. I know people were glued to their TV sets. They had that aha moment. The aha moment was…. House prices kept going up, but there was no rhyme or reason at that time. Then they saw the videos of bags full of money — rolled up, an elastic band around them and thrown into duffle bags — going into our casinos.

[4:45 p.m.]

A lot of people had that aha moment and said: “If we’re going to do anything, money laundering has to be addressed.” As you know, in 2018, the government did set up an independent review of B.C.’s real estate regulators, because we wanted to make sure we were being protected from some nefarious practices that we were hearing about. A lot of them were in the media at that time.

One of the key recommendations that came out of this particular review, the report, was for the province to move to a single real estate regulator. They said that would improve efficiency and help close any investigative loopholes that existed. They were there, and they were pointed out to us.

Now, this recommendation was also brought forward, surprisingly — not — by the expert panel’s report on money laundering. They absolutely saw the need to address this, to close loopholes and to make sure that many of the nefarious practices would stop and that we could once again look at a housing market….

We know that we live in a free market, mixed economy and that the real estate market is open to supply and demand. But the spikes we saw in real estate, going up by hundreds and hundreds of percent, were really far more than that. I’ve been around for quite a while and lived both in England and Quebec and then, since 1977, here in B.C. I have never seen those kinds of increases that I saw during that time. Many people, in their minds, have linked that to the money laundering that took place.

Now, as I said earlier, all of us want to put systems in place that will provide us with efficiency, transparency and accountability.

When I think about money laundering and the gargantuan work done by our Attorney General, as well…. I really thank him for his work. I think British Columbians had their eyes opened wide. They were glued to the TV set, as they are now, where they got reports of updates from the inquiry that was going on. It’s because of the work that was done by the Attorney General, the Finance Minister, the Minister of Housing and everybody working together that we were able to get to this point here today.

You know, whenever we pass legislation, always one of our biggest concerns is: is this really good? And if it is, who actually supports it? I think that’s always very, very telling.

Well, let me tell you that Erin Seeley, the CEO of the Real Estate Council of British Columbia, has this to say about this legislation. “Today’s changes will help modernize and strengthen our regulatory system, while keeping the focus on protecting consumers. Public protection continues to be our priority as we move toward a single regulator and beyond.”

Then Micheal Noseworthy, who’s the current head of the office of the superintendent of real estate, had this to say: “By concentrating our expertise under BCFSA, we will be building on our strengths and streamlining our work to better protect consumers in B.C. As the financial services and real estate markets are rapidly changing, we will focus on innovation and continuous improvement, bringing a single lens to the oversight of financial services and real estate with enhanced information-sharing.”

That is good for consumers. That is good for the public. It is good public policy.

I’m very, very proud, once again, of both our Finance Ministers for the work they’ve done on this file and for bringing this forward. As I said, any time we can improve accountability, transparency and efficiency, it is always a good thing. British Columbians are always, always looking out for that.

[4:50 p.m.]

Not too often do we pay attention, those of us who are not involved in regulatory oversight. We just carry on. It’s only when things start going wrong, either with an individual or with a group, that suddenly we wake up, and we realize that there are loopholes that have to be closed There are systems that have to be changed, and I am glad that we are doing that and, in doing that, by making sure that we are coming under the umbrella of the BCFSA.

What we’re doing is bringing in investigative capacity, making more efficient use of our resources, and we will have increased confidence, both in buyers and in sellers. That’s what our regulatory bodies are there for — to make sure that the public has confidence in the system.

We also want to make sure — and I’m, once again, very proud of the work in this area — that our province has world-leading protections against money laundering and tax evaders. Creating a modern, efficient and effective regulator is an essential part of that.

Yes, the inquiry is going on. Yes, we’ve taken many steps to address money laundering. Many more to take. But an essential part of that is putting regulations in place so oversight, as well as enforcement, can all come under an umbrella and are overseen by the same body.

As I was saying, I’m very happy with these changes. I know that a number of real estate agents in my riding I talk to…. I had a conversation about this with them. They were happy that we were moving forward. Those who are doing their jobs…. Sometimes certain groups get a bad name. Let me tell you, real estate agents — there have been some amazing ones, and there still are. There will be a few who may engage in nefarious practices. I’ll use the word nefarious. Again, it seems to be that we’re into a lot of repetitive use of certain words today, so why would I change that.

For me, absolutely…. Those who do their jobs well, the professionals who care…. They do care very deeply when they provide services, whether it’s to the seller or to the buyer. They do want to do their job well, and they do want to weed out those who are giving their whole profession a bad name. So they do want to have regulations. They do want to have enforcement.

A big shout-out to the real estate agents who gave their input into this and saw the need to move forward to improve a system and to make it more efficient, more transparent and more accountable.

With that, Mr. Speaker, thank you. As always, it’s wonderful to see you sitting in that chair.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

Now recognizing the member for Chilliwack.

D. Coulter: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think that this is my first time speaking before you. So this is a real treat.

You know, all my fellow MLAs and all the staff here at the Legislature have been just terrific with me. This is my first week ever being here. I’m a little rusty sometimes, a little wobbly when I speak. Sometimes rote when I speak off of paper and stuff like that. So I really appreciate it.

I hope you don’t mind, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to do just a quick shout-out to my LA. She helps me all around the building, opens doors for me and makes sure I find it to the west annex, wherever that is. All I know is how to follow her, so far, but I’m learning my way. Her name is Cailin Tyrrell, and she is terrific.

I’d like to speak to this act today. Like the act previous that I spoke to, this is very sensible, seems like a no-brainer, again. It streamlines a process that we don’t need to make any more complicated than it is.

I do like what the member previous to me was talking about: money laundering. That has been a big problem in our province, and it has filled the housing market and made housing more expensive, for sure.

[4:55 p.m.]

This act is great in that respect, where it will reduce any risk of that. It’ll streamline the regulation in British Columbia. It’ll centralize expertise with a single organization that will make it much harder to get around the rules.

These recommendations come from an expert panel’s report on money laundering. So you know, coming from there is a great spot to be coming from.

By bringing it under the one group, we’re consolidating regulatory overview of almost the entire provincially regulated financial sector, including real estate. We want to build on this strong foundation to make sure we’re regulating in the most effective way possible, and having a single regulator is a way of doing that.

I know the previous member gave out some acronyms. There are members of these places. There are CEOs and stuff, and I thought that it’s worthwhile to read the quotes of how they feel about this.

From the B.C. Financial Services Authority, or BCFSA. Blair Morrison is the CEO there, and he says: “Bringing the regulation of financial services and real estate under one roof will allow BCFSA to become a modern, efficient and effective regulator for B.C.’s entire financial services sector. By integrating and enhancing its investigative, compliance and enforcement capacity and approach, BCFSA will provide strengthened consumer protection and foster increased…confidence.”

The chair of the board of directors of the B.C. Financial Services Authority is another supporter of this amendment. He says: “BCFSA’s board of directors welcomes the evolution of B.C.’s regulatory regime with the introduction of these legislative amendments. The board of directors takes its accountabilities relating to approving BCFSA’s strategy and providing operational oversight seriously. We look forward to working closely with the CEO to deliver BCFSA’s mandate as we move forward.”

This will help reduce the effect of money laundering on our real estate market and make housing cheaper. I think I mentioned this to this chamber before. I’m a homeowner. I am from Chilliwack. Prices in Chilliwack have gone up 140 percent in the last year. The average price of a single-family home in Chilliwack is up over $610,000. Last month, February, saw over 500 single-family home sales. The year previous in Chilliwack only saw 200 home sales in the month of February. So housing is already becoming out of reach for folks.

I would have a very difficult time affording it today, coming up with a down payment and getting into the housing market. I got in, in the 1990s, because I’m still a Gen X’er and, like I said before, probably the last generation to be able to afford to own their own homes, or at least for now. But once we make changes and make life more affordable for British Columbians, including homes, I think that will change.

The other organization my friend from Surrey-Panorama talked about was the office of the superintendent of real estate, the OSRE. The current head of the office of the superintendent of real estate said…. These organizations are pro this amendment, if I hadn’t put a point on that before.

[5:00 p.m.]

Micheal Noseworthy says: “By centralizing our expertise under BCFSA, we’ll be building on our strengths and streamlining our work to better protect consumers in British Columbia. As the financial services and real estate markets are rapidly changing, we will focus on innovation and continuous improvement, bringing a single lens to the oversight of financial services and real estate with enhanced information-sharing.”

Do you know who else is for this, Mr. Speaker? The Real Estate Council of British Columbia. The CEO of the Real Estate Council of British Columbia, Erin Seeley, says: “Today’s changes will help modernize and strengthen our regulatory system while keeping the focus on protecting consumers. Public protection continues to be our priority as we move toward a single regulator.” What our government is about is making life better for folks. Combining money laundering, streamlining regulation and regulators is going to make life better for folks.

I’d just like to say, Mr. Speaker, and I’ll maybe leave you with this, that it was a pleasure to be able to speak to you today. I hope I have many more opportunities to do this. I thank you for the hard work you’re doing in that chair.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you very much, Member.

Recognizing the member for Vancouver-Kensington.

Welcome, Member.

M. Elmore: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I’m speaking to you from the unceded traditional territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh.

I’m very pleased to be speaking today in favour of Bill 8, the second reading of the Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2021. This is an act that will be of benefit to the real estate industry. Overall, the impact will be to ensure that there’s more efficient and coordinated oversight from the B.C. Financial Services Authority.

The province is making these legislative amendments to pave the way for the B.C. Financial Services Authority to become the single regulator for real estate in B.C. later in 2021. Just to back up and to understand the context in terms of where Bill 8 has come from….

In 2019, the province announced that B.C. would be moving to a single regulator of financial services and real estate by bringing the responsibilities of the Real Estate Council of B.C. and the office of the superintendent of real estate, those two, together under the BCFSA. The amendments that we’re discussing will help create a single authority responsible for regulating real estate in B.C. to ensure a more coordinated approach to all segments of the financial services sector.

I want to get into some of the initiatives and, really, the recommendations for the bill today that we’re discussing and why it’s a good move for the sector, for the financial sector, but also for all British Columbians. Creating a single regulator for real estate was a key recommendation from the real estate regulatory structure review in 2018 as well as the Expert Panel on Money Laundering in B.C. Real Estate in 2019.

I want to get into some more of the problems of money laundering that have really come to light in British Columbia and that have contributed towards distorting our real estate market and why Bill 8 is so crucial to really take steps to ensure that we close those legislative and regulatory gaps that allow money laundering to really continue unchecked in our economy in British Columbia.

The BCFSA currently regulates B.C.’s financial services market right across the continuum. So that folks are familiar, it includes credit unions, trust companies, registered pension plans, insurance companies and mortgage brokers. The amendments that we’re discussing today, introduced to the Real Estate Services Act, will give the BCFSA authority with respect to, also, a continuum in a range of areas, including the education and licensing for real estate professionals, establishing rules governing the conduct for real estate professionals, and investigation and discipline for licensed and unlicensed individuals.

[5:05 p.m.]

It will bring together all of these aspects in a central body in terms of the administration, investigation and discipline and in terms of a greater efficiency in the sector. In addition, amendments here in this legislation were introduced to empower the superintendent of financial institutions with most regulatory decision-making functions. This will enable the BCFSA to operate more effectively. Really, we’re calling on the BCFSA to acquire a new set of responsibilities around real estate. These changes in Bill 8 will enable the BCFSA to become a fully integrated financial services sector regulator later in 2021.

What does all of that mean in terms of British Columbians, going forward? I know that my colleagues previously have talked about the issue of affordability of housing in real estate, the unchecked experience of money laundering that was brought to light and these different matters. So the work of the Real Estate Council of B.C. and the office of the superintendent of real estate and the B.C. Financial Services Authority have been vital and important in terms of setting up a framework to regulate the real estate sector.

All British Columbians will know. We’ve heard the stories, and we have seen the skyrocketing increase in terms of real estate really putting home ownership out of the reach of so many British Columbians. We’ve all witnessed that. So the recommendation is in terms of, number one, what has been causing that and brought to light the stories.

My colleague from Surrey-Panorama mentioned the videos of folks coming into casinos with bags full of cash, $20 wrapped in 10,000 groups, sums — laundering through casinos, connected to how that was raised through means of particularly the drug trade and really fuelling the laundering into real estate and other luxury goods. We need to take steps to put an end to that.

I’m pleased that Bill 8 is looking at closing some of those regulatory loopholes and gaps and ensuring that we have the regulatory framework in place to really send a message and that British Columbians can be confident that their government is taking this issue seriously and that all authorities do not tolerate money laundering and this type of illegal criminal activity in our province.

Bill 8 builds a strong foundation to make sure that we’re regulating this sector in the most effective way possible. We’re bringing real estate regulation under the BCFSA. We’re also consolidating — bringing together the regulatory overview of our entire provincially regulated financial sector, including real estate.

This is to get away from the tendency for silos to operate and for agencies not being able to coordinate and communicate amongst themselves and really not being able to have an integrated system to be able to identify and track problems, particularly around money laundering or other issues that come up. That’s one of the advantages in terms of having a more efficient system.

This change, as well, streamlines regulation in B.C. and centralizes that expertise within a single organization so we have the confidence that the oversight is there and that our systems are functioning, that the departments are able to communicate amongst themselves and that we can be assured that the oversight is functioning in British Columbia. Clearly, it was not. Clearly, there was a failure previously in terms of these types of activities mentioned around money laundering really being able to proceed unchecked in our economy.

[5:10 p.m.]

We want to make sure that our province has world-leading protections against money laundering and tax evaders. It is just a terrible example that British Columbia is known for worldwide. We’re referred to now as the Vancouver model around money laundering. The unchecked money laundering happening in our province is recognized as a model in itself, worldwide, in terms of how money laundering really goes unchecked.

I note the Finance Minister taking this very seriously, the previous Finance Minister and our government taking this very seriously. We need to take concerted action and to send a message that Vancouver is not the model for criminals to launder money in our province.

In British Columbia, with Bill 8, we want to send a message to the world that our province has world-leading protections against money laundering, against tax evaders, and we will create a modern, efficient and effective regulator. That’s an essential part of that.

Just with reference, in terms of the…. We’ve heard from previous colleagues about the impact of money laundering into real estate, particularly, and how it has distorted real estate, driven up prices. Where did the money that was laundered in the millions of dollars, through casinos and other ways and into real estate and into luxury goods, come from? There are currently panels underway to really investigate the ill-gotten millions of dollars, often funnelled through the illicit drug trade and connected to the tragic opioid deaths and the opioid drug trade.

Just a really inexcusable lack of oversight, lack of investigation, lack of regulation to allow these types of activities to continue unchecked in our province, not only distorting our real estate market but really just wreaking destruction on the lives of so many British Columbians. It is unacceptable, and that is why I’m pleased that Bill 8 is coming forward and taking a strong stand in terms of ensuring that these types of illegal activities will not continue unchecked in our province.

What will these amendments do? Once the legislation comes into force, the BCFSA will take over regulating real estate. That was previously the responsibility under the RECBC and OSRE. To facilitate this, in terms of the responsibility, there would be consolidation with resources and staff. That is added in addition to the regulation of the…. The BCFSA already oversees the regulation of the financial services market, which, I mentioned previously, includes credit unions, trusts, pension plans, insurers and mortgage brokers, so it’s an integrated and efficient model.

We know that including and bringing the real estate sector under this umbrella, in terms of the continuum of the financial sector, will allow for joint investigations and the opportunity to streamline resources. I mentioned that it gets away from the silo effect, where we don’t have the ability to communicate for these types of…. It creates gaps in terms of communication between agencies. So that’s an important step.

This was a key recommendation. It doesn’t come out of thin air. I referenced that it was brought forward in the real estate regulatory structure review in 2018. As well, the recommendation was echoed by the expert panel on money laundering in their own report. Certainly, going forward, this is an important recommendation, recognized by experts in the field and really guiding us in terms of our way forward.

Bill 8. I feel very passionate about this. We have a responsibility as a government to make sure that people in our province are buying homes with confidence, that there are securities in place and that they can be assured that criminal elements don’t get a free run in our real estate, in our economy or in our province.

[5:15 p.m.]

We’re building recommendations. This is a strong foundation, bringing the two organizations together and really improving efficiencies and providing the clarity, with a single regulator model versus a dual model or areas that end up in different silos. So this is a positive step.

It also can be characterized as a single real estate regulator model, with a clear recommendation that has stemmed forward from, also, the real estate sector’s regulatory framework as well as the review of money laundering in real estate — so how those two areas came together, unfortunately, in the history of our province here in British Columbia.

We know that we want to ensure that our real estate market is not vulnerable to manipulation and abuse, so this is a step to ensure that there are safeguards against that. It’s also a step…. I mentioned the ability for an integrated investigative capacity and the efficient use of resources. This was identified as well, previously — that different departments weren’t able to communicate and that created these regulatory gaps. We want to ensure that we learn those lessons and that we ensure, going forward, that we have an efficient and modern and also very robust regulatory framework.

Once these amendments pass — I know we’ll go through the committee stage — we can expect that the timeline expectation as well is for BCFSA to take over the regulatory oversight of real estate later in 2021, later this year. It’s been a process many years in the making. That is what we’re looking forward to.

I just want to end with the commitment and also the message that the concern that I’ve heard from constituents from Vancouver-Kensington — really, across British Columbia…. I think it’s important for us to send the message, loud and clear, to British Columbians that our government is committed to cracking down on tax fraud and money laundering. It won’t be tolerated.

That’s why we launched an open, independent public inquiry into money laundering. It’s currently underway. We need to get to the bottom of this and really ensure that we understand really, with the full depths of investigation, how this was allowed to occur in British Columbia — not just British Columbia — really making us the worst example around the world, known as the Vancouver model. Unacceptable.

The inquiry is underway, but we’re not waiting for that to conclude. There are a number of recommendations that were made by the expert panel on money laundering that we’re bringing forward.

We’ve undertaken consultation to update and modernize the Mortgage Brokers Act as well as a consultation to look at potentially creating a regulatory framework for money services businesses and also requiring businesses to keep transparency registers in their corporate records and consulting on creating a central registry of beneficial ownerships of B.C. companies. It’s really along the lines of ensuring that we have transparency, that we have accountability and that the regulatory framework is clear, in place, and that there’s oversight in the sector.

Significantly, in November, we launched the landowner transparency registry, which is Canada’s first public registry of beneficial owners of land and an important step to ending the hidden ownership of real estate in B.C. We know that this was one of the avenues — that money laundering in real estate was able to be transacted through the hidden ownership of purchases of land. So that’s an important step to really stop that practice.

[5:20 p.m.]

There’s still more work that needs to be done in terms of bringing transparency to B.C.’s real estate market and making sure everyone is paying their fair share. That’s expected of British Columbians. The majority of British Columbians play by the rules. We want to ensure that British Columbians can be assured that their government is putting rules and practices in place to bring an end to criminal participation and manipulation in our real estate sector, in our economy, and that it won’t be tolerated.

I’m pleased with Bill 8. It has been a long time coming, and there’s still more work to do. But it’s a positive step to send a clear message and to bring in a consolidated and centralized regulatory body to oversee real estate and the financial sector, to provide certainty.

It’s also appreciated in terms of support from real estate agents and financial agents, too. The vast majority observe the rules and are penalized as well. They are the legitimate businesses. The vast majority of businesses and real estate agents in British Columbia play by the rules, and they’re ones who are also victims of illegal activities and money laundering. To be able to continue unchecked in our province….

I’d just like to close my remarks and say that I’m pleased to speak in favour of the second reading for Bill 8, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2021. I look forward to the committee section and to seeing this act, Bill 8, enacted and bringing important, needed changes here in British Columbia.

A. Mercier: I’d just like to start by echoing some comments made by the member for Chilliwack. I would also like to thank my LA, Cailin Tyrrell. She has been showing the member for Chilliwack around, and I think it’s great that she has been doing that.

Aristotle said that virtue was to call a thing by its name, and I can’t think of another word to call the Finance Statutes Amendment Act except for “competent.” This is a competent act and a mark of competent public administration. Frankly, this type of competence legislatively has been a breath of fresh air over the past 3½ years. It’s a big part of the reason why I got elected in my community of Langley: people were sick of the Liberal incompetence of the previous government.

There are so many examples of that — just a litany of examples of that — that we can go over and that have led to us this act here today and to me standing in this House here today speaking to that act.

We can talk, first, about contract flipping. This was a government — the last government, the opposition — that, the last time they were in, laid off more women in a single day than any other government in the history of this country. I’ve got family members that were laid off there. My nephew’s mother took a $10-an-hour pay cut to do the same job because the last government, the Liberal government, didn’t respect collective agreements, ripped them up, until they were smacked down by the Supreme Court of Canada.

We saw that behaviour again. They didn’t learn that lesson. They went and they provoked a strike with the BCTF as some kind of collective bargaining strategy. Now that’s just…. It’s incompetent, and the people of British Columbia are tired of that level of incompetence.

I mean, you look at the breath of fresh air that the NDP has brought. You want to talk about collective bargaining in public sector education. We got a deal. You want to talk about the free enterprise coalition. It should be the Wild West coalition, for the things they’ve done to this province. They tried to turn this province into a casino. Look at what they did to our housing market.

Deputy Speaker: Just to remind the member — sorry, Member — that we are speaking to Bill 8, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act.

Thank you, Member.

A. Mercier: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I’m just laying out here the history of how we’ve gotten here to this act, which is money laundering. You want to look at the fact that our housing market was turned into a casino. The reaction to that, once the public pressure mounted to be great enough, was to act in a reactionary manner and set up a dual regulator.

[5:25 p.m.]

What this bill does is that it acts on the advice from an expert committee to set up a single regulator to competently streamline administration and to administer financial services, to administer and to regulate the real estate sector. The only people who have anything to fear from this act are bad actors. This is a model of administration that will allow for the more efficient regulation of tax evasion and money laundering in this province, something that was very eloquently spoken to by the member for Vancouver-Kensington just moments ago.

It’s hard to think of ways to be against this act. The current model was put in place quickly in 2016 by the previous government, in response to pressure from the now Attorney General, on reports of shadow flipping in the real estate industry. We took a step back, and we said: “Okay, let’s do a thorough review here, and let’s act on the expert advice.” That’s how we’ve gotten to where we are now with the introduction of this bill.

This bill will, as has been said, transfer regulation to the BCFSA so that joint investigations can be conducted, so that you’re not in a dual-model regulatory environment where you’re regulating in silos and where there’s the ability for bad actors to game the system in a very complex financial and business environment. This is the kind of competent administration that we need. It’s the kind of competent administration that the people of British Columbia, and the people of Langley, expect from their representatives.

This has broad support — broad support. That’s because the only people that I think who can legitimately say that there are issues with this bill have to be, just by the fact of it, pro–tax evasion and pro–money laundering. This bill is aimed at addressing those harms, those social ills, that we have identified as a problem. There’s a place for gambling, and it’s in a casino. There’s no place for money laundering, whether that’s in a casino, in our housing market or in our province more generally. I think that’s just a hallmark of competent public administration.

I’d just like to say a word, as well, about the former Minister of Finance, who has really been a paragon of administrative competence. We’re seeing that continued by the current Minister of Finance in the work that she has done on this bill. I really think that that ought to be lauded by this House.

I’d like to thank the House. I think the points here are very self-evident. I think it would be very difficult to vote against this. I think that anybody that actually believes in free enterprise, that actually believes in having a functioning, working market in the province, is going to support this bill.

S. Furstenau: I’m delighted to stand today and speak to Bill 8, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act.

Just sort of following on the comments from the member I just heard, I think it would be really important to recognize that there’s a great deal of common ground in the Legislature, across all three parties, when it comes to understanding how essential it is that money laundering be addressed in British Columbia. Also, I would say how essential it is that we ensure that housing is used for people to live in, in this province. I think that if we were to spend more time focusing on what we agree on, we might actually be able to deliver the best policies and the best legislation for the people of British Columbia.

Bill 8 creates a single regulator for real estate in British Columbia, bringing the responsibilities of the Real Estate Council of British Columbia and the office of the superintendent of real estate together under the B.C. Financial Services Authority.

[N. Letnick in the chair.]

Government announced in 2019 they would do this, and it follows from a recommendation from the Real Estate Regulatory Structure Review in 2018, known as the Maloney report. I want to just look at some of the conclusions of the Maloney report, because I think it’s important to put into context what this bill is trying to address: the extent of the money laundering problem in British Columbia.

[5:30 p.m.]

The conclusions of the Maloney report include that “money laundering significantly damages our society and causes ongoing harm” and that “it facilitates other criminal activities, contributing in particular to drug trafficking and the violent crime and opioid deaths that result” in British Columbia.

I think that this is another thing it’s incumbent on us to do in our work here: to recognize that initiatives, policies and legislation are connected to a multitude of real-world problems that people are living with right now. In our efforts to solve these problems, let’s always pull ourselves back up to that place of being in service to the people of British Columbia. How do we most effectively solve these problems?

Another conclusion of the Maloney report: “The amount of money laundering is significant, but it’s difficult to measure.” They estimate conservatively that in 2018 it was $7.4 billion in British Columbia. One of the reasons why it’s difficult to measure the extent of money laundering — this is something we’ve been talking about a great deal this week — is the lack of data. Conclusion 4 from the Maloney report is that the analysis that they did “demonstrates the need for data collection, combination and sharing improvements to distinguish between legitimate and money laundering real estate activity.”

The Maloney report also indicates — this is where we get to with Bill 8 today — that “regulatory responses to money laundering are best-practice anti-money-laundering measures.” So having regulations in place, having a regulatory body, having clear expectations and then enforcement is going to be essential if we’re going to effectively address money laundering in British Columbia.

One of the other conclusions of the Maloney report — this is going to take me to another report on what we’re doing here in British Columbia — is that “B.C.’s proposed beneficial ownership registry for land is a major step forward.” British Columbia has brought in a public registry to combat money laundering, the beneficial registry. Unfortunately, there is still quite a bit of work to be done on that. I’m hoping that in conjunction with bringing in a single regulator for real estate, we’re also going to see improvements to the beneficial registry that was brought in.

There’s a report from the C.D. Howe Institute, B.C.’s Public Registry to Combat Money Laundering: Broken on Arrival. This report indicates some of the significant problems that we have with the registry. There is no system in this registry for proactive verification of the identity of the true beneficial owner of real estate. That’s one of the problems. So the registry might not be able to provide us with who the ultimate owner is, as opposed to just the person’s name on a land title.

The registry has restrictions on key-word search tools, limiting the ability to connect beneficial owners with money-laundering criminals. The registry has no confidential tip line associated with it. It doesn’t have sanctions that include prison time. So the costs of being sanctioned under the registry can just be seen as the cost of doing business, because money laundering is indeed a very, very big business.

Also, “the information on the registry will be unreliable, difficult to access, difficult to process. And even if it helps a searcher spot a falsely declared beneficial owner, the ability to communicate that discovery to…law enforcement officials and their ability to leverage it to catch criminals will be curtailed.” Finally, what the C.D. Howe report indicates as “the biggest flaw” with the registry is that “there is no requirement that registry officials…independently verify…identification information filed on the registry.” As in, you don’t need to produce ID.

If we go back to Bill 8, I think what we want to be very aware of is that we take steps in British Columbia to address money laundering, which is a significant problem connected to unaffordable housing prices. It’s connected to the opioid and overdose crisis that we’re facing, connected to a lack of revenues that should be flowing to governments because of money that is being moved without access to governments’ being able to identify it.

[5:35 p.m.]

Let’s ensure that if there are issues that are raised, if there are flaws, that government is very proactive in addressing those flaws, because it’s essential that as we proceed with trying to fix these very serious problems in British Columbia, we’re not creating ongoing loopholes, ongoing weaknesses in our efforts to address them.

With that, I will indicate that we are going to support this bill. I think this is a good step. But I also think that there is a significant distance for us to go in British Columbia before we’ve actually truly solved the money-laundering problem that we have in our province.

P. Milobar: My comments will be brief, but I did feel it important to add our voice one more time. I know our critic has done a good job outlining with his brief comments as well, but it seems that the government side of the House took a lot out of those three minutes’ worth of comment from our critic.

I just want to make sure it’s very clear at this point that we are supportive of the bill. We’ve made that clear with our critic’s comments, but as with any legislation and as with any good governance structure, any piece of legislation should be able to stand up to the scrutiny of questioning to be able to understand what exactly the clauses in that legislation mean to people in the broader community so that people in the broader community have a good sense of what is actually being proposed and being brought forward under legislation.

As we’ve seen time and again by this government, both before the snap election and after, a lot of legislation has come forward with serious flaws in it. It’s had to either be withdrawn before the debate even happens, as we saw, which was then used as an excuse for a snap election because it was so seriously flawed in legislation, or there have been significant amendments that needed to be made both by the Third Party and by our party on several pieces of legislation.

I can remember one particular piece of environmental legislation when I was the critic. I believe there were about 12 to 13 amendments that the minister had to agree actually had to happen because there were structural flaws within the legislation that had been rushed forward.

I just want to assure the new government members…. When we see that level of incompetence in some legislation, because we heard competent raised quite a bit over the last few speeches, we want to make sure we’re doing our jobs on behalf of all British Columbians so we can be supportive of a piece of legislation but indicating we want to question and scrutinize and make sure that it has been well-thought-out and is actually going to accomplish what the stated goal is. It’s actually what people in British Columbia are paying us to do.

I hope that the government members will understand that’s a crucial part of democracy. That’s actually what we should have. Any legislation that’s worth enacting, by any political stripe, should be willing to stand up to the scrutiny and the proper questioning that is required, let alone in a piece of legislation that has 179 sections in it. This is not a small piece of legislation.

Of course, we have to take ongoing steps against money laundering. No one ever disputes that. This side of the House certainly looks forward, after waiting for over four years, to see some sort of money-laundering charge issued somewhere in the province of British Columbia under the current Attorney General, who has been the Attorney General for four years now.

We, unfortunately, have not seen anything brought forward in the way of a money-laundering case. So perhaps this legislation will help the Attorney General figure out a way to bring forward charges for money laundering. It certainly does happen in British Columbia. It happens around the world. We’re aware of that. We’re all aware of that, and we need to take those actions.

[5:40 p.m.]

Again, I just wanted to assure the other side of this House that although they may feel that this is a competent way to bring forward legislation, legislation of this size and complexity…. To make sure that it’s not full of incompetence, it’s important to have that scrutiny. That’s what we look forward to in committee stage — making sure that things have been thought through properly, that there are not bigger loopholes or problems that are going to be created, as the Leader of the Third Party just indicated as well.

That is why, at this point, we support this bill, but we also reserve the right to do the people’s business and properly scrutinize this same bill to make sure the interests of British Columbians are truly being protected by anything being brought forward.

J. Brar: I’m really pleased to support Bill 8, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act.

Once this legislation comes into force, the B.C. Financial Services Authority, BCFSA, will take over regulating real estate. This was previously the responsibility of two organizations: the Real Estate Council of B.C., RECBC, and the office of the superintendent of real estate, OSRE. Bill 8 creates a single regulatory body for the real estate industry. That’s the major change we have as part of this bill.

To facilitate this, resources and staff will be moved over to the BCFSA. The BCFSA already oversees the regulations of the financial service market, including credit unions, trusts, pension plans, insurers and mortgage brokers. Bringing the real estate sector under this umbrella allows for joint investigations and the opportunity to streamline these forces.

This was a key recommendation brought forward in the Real Estate Regulatory Structure Review in 2018. That recommendation was echoed by the Expert Panel on Money Laundering in their own report. We want to make sure that our province has world-leading protections against money laundering and tax evaders. Creating a modern, efficient and effective regulator is an essential part of this.

Why are we making these changes, and what does it mean for the people? I think it’s an important question to ask. We have a responsibility as a government to make sure people in this province are buying homes with confidence and securities in place. When I buy a house, I should be absolutely confident and clear that the only work done by professionals is done with…. That I can trust all the work. That’s very important for me, and that’s very important for the people of British Columbia.

The work OSRE and RECBC, the two organizations, have done so far has been very vital in our effort to regulate the sector. We are building on the strong foundation that the two organizations have created. Thanks to them for their work. While eliminating the inefficiencies and lack of clarity created by the dual regulatory model, we are now moving to a single regulatory model.

What exactly is changing when these amendments come into force? The BCFSA is led by a board of directors and Blair Morrison as CEO and superintendent of financial institutions. The amendment today will make the CEO of BCFSA the new superintendent of real estate and will transfer over the associated authority with that role. These changes will also ensure that the BCFSA has authority over education and licensing for real estate professionals, establishing the rules of all the conduct for real estate professionals, and investigations and discipline for licensed and unlicensed individuals in the market. That’s very important.

[5:45 p.m.]

As well, most regulatory functions currently with the BCFSA board will be transferred to the superintendent of financial institutions under the financial institutions legislation. This change will allow BCFSA to operate more effectively as it acquires a new, major set of responsibilities regarding real estate.

Our government is committed to cracking down on tax fraud and money laundering. That’s why we launched an open, independent public inquiry into money laundering, which is currently underway. However, we are waiting for the results of the inquiry to act.

We have made progress on several recommendations provided by the Expert Panel on Money Laundering in B.C. Real Estate, including requiring businesses to keep transparency registers in their corporate records and consulting on creating a central registry of beneficial ownership of B.C. companies, consulting to update and modernize the Mortgage Brokers Act and consulting to potentially create a regulatory framework for money services businesses.

Most significantly, in November, we launched the land owner transparency registry, which is Canada’s first public registry of beneficial owners of land and an important step to ending the hidden ownership of real estate in B.C.

Prior to this, people were able to establish numbered companies, and nobody knew, if you looked at the company, who actually owned the company. With this, that is going to be changed. Now people have to actually declare who the real owners are of the company and where they live.

We will continue to work to bring transparency to the B.C. real estate market and make sure everyone is paying their fair share. This work is timely and much needed at this point in time for the people of British Columbia.

I would like to conclude by saying I fully support Bill 8, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act, and thanks for the opportunity.

Deputy Speaker: Recognizing the Minister of Finance to close the debate.

Hon. S. Robinson: I’m pleased that a number of my colleagues here in the House took part in the second reading of Bill 8 and spoke of our commitment as a government to establish a single regulator of real estate under the B.C. Financial Services Authority and that this bill will do just that.

With that, I move second reading.

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Robinson: I move that the bill be referred to a Committee of the Whole House to be considered at the next sitting of the House after today.

Bill 8, Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2021, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. S. Robinson: I call Speech from the Throne.

Throne Speech Debate

(continued)

Hon. N. Cullen: Do I indicate through voice or raising a hand if I would like to speak to the Speech from the Throne?

Deputy Speaker: Either is fine. You have the floor.

Hon. N. Cullen: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. We are all growing accustomed to these new ways of doing things.

As a former Member of Parliament, I’m used to just jumping up and trying to catch your attention in order to speak. Those days are not with us yet. Hopefully, they’ll return soon so we can all gather together in the Legislature and be with one another, because I think the debate is always benefited by proximity, in most cases. I’m sure there are some exceptions.

I join the House this evening from Smithers, British Columbia, my home, which resides in Wet’suwet’en territory, specifically in the Gidimt’en clan. It is an honour for me to be raising my family here and to have so many friendships that I cherish in that community and in the broader Bulkley Valley community.

[5:50 p.m.]

I have lived here for quite a number of years now. As I mentioned, I previously served the residents of northwestern B.C. as a Member of Parliament, which I ended a couple of years ago. Very few of us in elected office get to choose the time of our departures. Often it is chosen for us.

I’m in that fortunate minority where I was able to step away from federal politics and, lo and behold, found myself re-entering public life, maybe to the chagrin of my family and definitely not in my plans, but an opportunity to work with others to make our province better, stronger and more progressive. It was an opportunity that supporters of mine and many friends from across many communities urged me to do.

I now represent Stikine, which is the largest riding in British Columbia. In my response to the Speech from the Throne, I think it is important for the voices that come from rural and remote British Columbia to be represented in this conversation.

There is often the old turn of phrase in our province that there is no hope beyond Hope. As I was scrolling through the various government programs and the constant looking for equity from this government towards not just servicing the large populations in this province but also looking to the smaller communities, the more remote communities — be they on Vancouver Island, in the Interior, in the north or in the northwest where I live — it makes me quite proud to see the lens through which this government is looking at issues.

Knowing that we, of course, have to pay good mind and attention to the large cities — the Vancouvers, Victorias, Kelownas — and making sure that infrastructure is being done and that our cities are thriving and bringing those deep cultural benefits, economic benefits, international relations that we all benefit from, it is also important and a needed constant reminder that those of us who live in small-town British Columbia are often those that are going in to work in the resource sector.

Those of us that are intimately connected to the natural environment are stewards of the land and looking to constantly protect and hold sacred what all British Columbians, and in fact many people around the world, come to enjoy, which is beautiful British Columbia.

It is also the place in the throne speech that spoke to this where reconciliation hits the ground. This is where the ideas and the hoped-for aspirations in the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples often meet the real world — the real-world challenges of decolonizing government structure, of changing the way that institutions that are long-entrenched in our province have to adapt and rethink the way that we make decisions when it comes to the land base, child care services, health care, education and on and on.

What I’ve seen from this government is that in the passing of the UN declaration, it was putting a marker in the ground — that this is the way, the path forward for this province to realize its full potential. It was required of us, of all of us, whether we are new to this province or have been here for generations — or, like the First Nations, since time immemorial. All of us have to meet at some place in the middle, where we can find that common ground that is so sacred, to build up our province in a more full and prosperous way. That starts with reconciliation.

Now, the Speech from the Throne was one of the most brief, I suppose, in our province’s history. Many commentators noted that it was direct and to the point. I would like to aspire to that same goal. I’m reminded of times when I’ve stood in the feast hall of the Wet’suwet’en. As I’m being introduced, often by an Elder, they will use a phrase in Wet’suwet’en in their instructions to me as a speaker — and then, thankfully, translate for me, because my Wet’suwet’en is terrible — that they will invite me to come and address the community and that, hopefully, I can do that while standing on one leg.

It’s a nice reminder. Of course, the objective — as you can’t talk for too long, most of us, while standing on just one leg — is to speak to the community with full heart and mind, but don’t talk too long. Oftentimes, at these occasions, we are also breaking bread, and I never aspire to stand between a good community and dinner. So my comments, hopefully, tonight will not do that for anybody, realizing that it’s near the dinner hour for many.

[5:55 p.m.]

Now, of course, the speech itself, the Speech from the Throne. Much of what has happened to us in these last 12 months has been seen through the lens of a global pandemic — something some may have said they had foreseen. But for many of us, COVID was not a term that we were too familiar with, and it was hard for us to imagine all of the different implications that a pandemic would have on our lives — not out of the ridiculous Hollywood thrillers about what a pandemic might look like but in the real, day-to-day interactions.

The changes that we would all have to make, the sacrifices we would all have to make, the extraordinary changes in the way that we conduct business in just our daily lives — everything that has happened since then has been seen through this lens. As many have said, it has exposed both the good and the bad about our society, our individual communities and what may be happening in our lives.

It grieves us: the loss of each and every person in British Columbia, in Canada, and globally who has passed away due to this pandemic. The losses have predominantly been experienced in our elder community. Those that hold the stories in our communities have been most susceptible to this pandemic, falling ill and, unfortunately, sometimes passing away. It has also affected the most vulnerable. Those with other health pressures, economic pressures going on in their lives, have also been more vulnerable to this pandemic.

What I am most proud of is the way that our communities have responded, that people have taken up the directions and the guidance from the good Dr. Bonnie Henry, putting on masks — something that you’d have to think that, about a year ago or more, was hard to imagine — each of us, with our own different ways of being around the world, all following to the most part, prescriptions that will allow us to keep each other safe and finding in each of us that common decency to protect that store worker, to protect that nurse, to protect that teacher, and that we would all look in different ways to keep ourselves and one another safe.

This government certainly understood that, looking through the lens of equity and social justice, which, I think, are at the core of what it is to be a New Democrat in a New Democrat government. It meant that we had to make sure that we were taking care of the most vulnerable.

That’s why you saw support for those with the lowest income. You saw support for those in rural and remote communities when the vaccines began to roll out. We made sure that we were paying attention to the evidence and the science and not playing politics with any of this, in trying to understand where the supports could go the furthest, and that we’d help people stay at home, because we were requiring them to do so.

Also, we’d support those locally owned businesses that are the very lifeblood of the communities that I represent, in Telkwa, Smithers, Hazelton, New Hazelton, South Hazelton, all the way down the line in Stikine and further up north to Dease Lake, Iskut, Telegraph Creek, and all the way to the far north in Stewart. It’s remarkable to see how we’ve been able to adapt. It’s remarkable to see the resiliency.

That’s a word I would like to focus on in this speech. It may be a term that we throw around casually from time to time. “This is a strong person” or “This is a resilient community.” But we only know it when we see it. We only know how strong we are, how resilient we can be together, when we’re actually tested. Of course, that’s what this last year has been: an incredibly difficult test on many of us — showing how we can be resilient and adaptable, how we can do things, behave in ways and conduct our businesses and our daily lives in ways that just adapt to the circumstances that are in front of us. It is quite remarkable.

I give particular kudos, of course, to our Health Minister and his staff — who have guided much of this process — and also, as we’ve formed a new Ministry of Mental Health, to that new minister who has come in. Because the mental health side of this equation is so difficult to put our arms completely around, it’s often hidden. It’s often filled with too much stigma to talk about depression, anxiety and all of the things that can come to anyone. Rich or poor, of whatever ethnicity, religion or not — this can affect all of us.

For much of my life, this stigma surrounding mental health has been so strong that people were unable to talk about it. But increasingly — not just with average, ordinary people but also with celebrities, politicians, people of certain public stature — being able to talk about their own mental health struggles has opened up the door, as I know it has, to allow us to be able to talk to that friend, to the neighbour, to a relative who doesn’t seem like they’re doing as well as they could be.

[6:00 p.m.]

Then it’s making sure that we have supports in place. As Dr. Bonnie Henry said, there was no mental health system, really, of coherence in this province when we formed government a few years ago. We’ve been building it, slowly and steadily, providing more beds for people struggling with addictions, making sure that we’re addressing different issues simultaneously, and wrapping around individuals who need that support, rather than treating it like it’s the hidden disease that it has been in the past.

Of course, the pandemic has added extra weight to that issue and the importance of being able to address it in all the things we do, as colleagues.

In my former political life, I watched colleagues struggle with mental health issues. But for those of us in public life, that was not an acceptable thing to talk about, it seemed, because it showed weakness. It showed vulnerability. It showed something that would make you perhaps unelectable, in a career-limiting move. That was difficult, because if we’re not able to talk about it, address it, as elected officials, does that not, then, affect the way that we govern ourselves, the policies we push forward, the budgets that we approve?

We need to be able to talk about it more, and I’m seeing more and more of it. It is nothing but encouraging.

Our government has been dealing with a double pandemic, really, at the same time. The second one hasn’t gotten nearly as much attention as it ought to, and that’s the opioid crisis. We saw the numbers recently out from the coroner’s office — one of the highest numbers ever in a January release in this province — and the devastating effect this is having on so many families in our communities. Again, a crisis like this knows no bounds. People could have tried to stigmatize drug addiction and the effect that had on people and who they were. It was always a “they” conversation.

This crisis has brought it, unfortunately — and in some ways, fortunately — home to many of us that we are one degree, two degrees, three degrees at most removed from somebody who has been dealing with an opioid addiction.

We’ve seen all the lawsuits and the unethical behaviour of some of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world pushing opioids through prescriptions at the doctor’s office. People end up getting hooked and then going to unclean sources on the street. The border closures and whatnot certainly affected that.

We were bending the curve down. We were wrestling this issue to the ground, talking about it in a fulsome way, bringing in program supports, and then of course the pandemic hit. The supply questions came up — the challenge of dealing with two pandemics at the same time — and the effect has been devastating.

Now, as we think about this pandemic, and it was addressed in the throne speech, it seems like if we think back to the early days, it’s been sort of one difficult crisis after another. First was: what do we do about travellers, and how do we close borders? Can we even close our borders as a country, as a province, as communities?

I saw many of the northern communities that I represent, particularly First Nations communities, who have a deep and horrible history with pandemics. We’ve all — well, we should have all — read about the various smallpox epidemics that settlers brought in, governments brought in, we think, as a institutional practice of an attempted genocide. And then we saw communities shut down entirely. That was our first question dealing with this. What is this disease, and how do we do it?

Then there was workplace safety. What can stay open? What can be closed? What do we do with kids? What do we do with our schools? Are they safe, or are they not? Do we have enough PPE, protective equipment, for hospital workers, never mind those of us going about our daily business? Each of these presented another challenge for this government, for us as communities and for the national government. And with each of these, we’ve been struggling and accomplishing things that we didn’t think were possible. Now we’re dealing with variants, all the different variations of this disease and what that impact has on health care policy.

And now vaccines. Happily, we have a discussion going on in this country and in this province right now on what all the different vaccines mean. What a good problem to have, where we have a challenge over how this vaccine is good for this and the extension of the length of shots.

It was nice to see that it was confirmed today by our national health advocates and by the CDC for Canada that the extension of first shot to second shot is backed up by credible evidence and that that now enables us to be able to apply first shots to 70,000 more British Columbians, who will all be grateful. Their families will be grateful, because we’re talking about the most vulnerable still. We’re talking about people north of 90 years of age, 85 years of age who will be able to receive their shots. So many of them have not been able to see their grandkids, their neighbours or talk to anyone face to face in a real human way in more than a year.

[6:05 p.m.]

Now, with distribution, how do we distribute vaccines equitably, safely and in a manner in which everybody can patiently understand that help is coming. They might not be first in line, they might not be second, but we’re doing this based on the evidence. We follow the numbers. If the numbers lead to us saying that this is the conclusion around vaccines and vaccinations, then that’s where we follow. Vulnerable populations on the Downtown Eastside, rural and remote First Nations communities — we know the social determinants of health guide us that way.

Again, as I said earlier, the idea that the politics was taken out of these decisions, that we were looking to the evidence, that we were following the CDC’s advice, Dr. Henry’s advice, was so much better throughout all of this, as we watched in contrast to other jurisdictions, be it other provinces or in the U.S. or in other parts of the world, where politics was at the centre of the conversation. Politicians — some of them now former politicians — who led their people astray, I would argue, as many have, ended up costing much more human suffering and loss of life.

Staying connected has been incredibly important. I’ve watched, just in the small communities that I represent, a new attention to our elders, making sure that we’re finding ways to reach out and care.

Now, the response from our government was what a good social democratic government should do. We’ve hired more health care workers. Now, we saw other provinces that are led by much more conservatively minded leadership, and they cut health care workers into a pandemic.

We’ve hired more contact tracers, more than 1,500. I don’t have the current numbers. I don’t have that near photographic if not totally photographic memory that our Health Minister does in being able to recall the specific number each and every moment. It’s an incredible gift, and one I would wish for.

Hiring those contact tracers gave us the ability to look at, when there was an outbreak, when there was COVID being spread, who those people also contacted and then be able to contain the spread and get things under control. Because every time we would hear of another outbreak, we would also hear news of an outbreak that had now diminished.

The only way that happened was because we were able to tell British Columbians: “You may have been exposed. It’s time for you to stay home, keep yourself safe, stay away from your family, until we can get you a test that shows that you’re clear of COVID.” Think about the number of people who were affected by that, who were saved the grief of having to go through COVID, being sick or being hospitalized.

We were also able to recover back all of the surgeries that had been cancelled because our hospitals were not able to handle them. In the fall months of last year, and going into this year, we were performing a record number of surgeries, getting the backlog taken care of — all those other vital surgeries. Because that’s the secondary effect, as we all learn about pandemics. It’s not just the pandemic itself, as brutal as that is — all the people that fall sick, all the people that unfortunately pass away. It’s the pressure on our health care system, that health care systems can go to a certain point and then past that into a breaking point.

Again, we didn’t see it in British Columbia, thankfully, but we did see it in other jurisdictions, very wealthy jurisdictions that didn’t invest in health care workers, didn’t invest in contact tracers, just simply thought that wishful thinking and some sort of divine providence was going to save them. It didn’t. It just simply didn’t.

Of course, the worry is now that we see other jurisdictions relieving all of their measures now they’ve had a few vaccines — mostly south of the border. I fear for their people, that the politicking of this again is leading to very, very difficult outcomes.

Now, part of protecting people is making sure that we’re protecting people in their homes — making sure people have a home, that there wouldn’t be evictions during this pandemic, that we would freeze rents and make sure that people could stay in their homes if they were renting, and that we had income supports to individuals and to families to make sure that they could pay the rent.

I grew up in rental homes, a single mom, a cashier at a grocery store. And getting month to month, it always…. Kind of opening up the electricity bill, the heating bill, and hoping that it all added up. I watched my mom struggle with this. I know what that’s like. I feared sometimes, when I looked at some in the opposition, that there was a lack of sympathy or a lack of understanding.

I guess I could understand that in that it’s not a lived reality. If you were born privileged, through no grace of your own, you just happened to come to upper middle class or a wealthy family, you never had that moment, that experience, the experience of what it’s like to not be able to pay the rent, of making the decisions between enough food on the table and making sure the kids have shoes to be able to get to school. Those are real decisions, really hard decisions that families face every day.

[6:10 p.m.]

I’m proud that our government understood that and that we saw that the nefarious practice of renovictions that have gone on for too long in this province under highly speculative owners…. That practice is now not just being stopped in the pandemic, but we’re making structural changes, fundamental changes similar to those structural changes like in our democracy, making sure that big money was taken out of the politics. I know much to the chagrin of those on the other side, no longer could big corporations, big unions, big donors write massive cheques.

Remember the former Premier? She took a flight over to Alberta at one point and, I think, raised somewhere near $1 million in one night from very, very happy donors in Alberta because she was going to push projects that helped Alberta, I suppose, or helped them specifically. I don’t know if it actually helped the province of Alberta, but that’s all gone. That’s a structural change that this government went down through.

I listened to a member in the previous debate from the opposition talk about how much he really wanted to see charges in money laundering. I’m not sure if he’s been watching the Cullen inquiry — no relation, but certainly proud of what is being accomplished there — in exposing what was going on under the last government in this province, the amount, through casinos, in rentals and property speculation…. Canada had become known….

I saw this as a Member of Parliament. I watched the reports coming in. B.C. was known, in particular — Vancouver especially — as a good place for narcotraffickers and gangs to wash and launder their money through real estate and through the casinos. Our spy agencies and the Interpol people that we work with had identified British Columbia and Vancouver for years as contributing to global crime.

If you think about who these actors were…. This is not a movie. This is not some, you know, interesting little subplot. These were people who made their money off of the destitution and the elimination of entire peoples and needed a place to take all of their ill-gotten gains and clean it all up. British Columbia was welcome to them. This past government, either through incompetence or a blind eye, just simply allowed this to go on for years. Now we’re seeing the testimony that messages were brought to leaders in the past government. They probably didn’t think to themselves that it was that important.

Back to our small towns, because that’s what I care about. I’m looking out my window of my basement here, and I’m thinking about all the small businesses on our Main Street in Smithers and in Telkwa and all down the line in Hazelton — those that have been struggling to keep their doors open, being able to continue to hire people with living wages, family-raising wages so that we could actually keep this community alive. And you just don’t see in most communities…. Some have suffered, for sure. Some businesses, especially in the tourism sector, have really been hit hard, and we’ve brought support to them as well.

A lot of these small businesses have stayed open. They’ve adapted. They’ve found ways. They’ve gotten support both from our provincial government in putting out funds and the federal government offering wage subsidies that were critical to keep people going, keep businesses going. I’m so grateful for that leadership from our local chamber of commerce and from all those local business owners and from our government in understanding how important this was.

Something that doesn’t get talked about enough was that one of the largest tax cuts in B.C. history was under this government, in that we cut MSP premiums that every British Columbian had to pay. For a lot of families, this was a savings of somewhere between $900 and $1,500 a year, each and every year, money that they could go out and do other things with.

It seemed so important to us to do this, because not only was it a tax cut, and that was a beneficial thing to working people; it was also a declaration about what public health care and public medicine meant — where it had become eroded, less and less and less under previous governments, where it was public but you were paying more and more and more. The encroachment of private health care was coming up greatly under previous governments who had ripped up contracts with HEU workers, reneged on legally binding arrangements with those workers who were predominantly women, predominantly minorities with, I suppose, a lot less power than the previous government was concerned with.

In Stikine, representing this beautiful part of the world…. I would say to members and other people watching tonight, if you haven’t spent the time, when it is safe to travel, come up the road through these beautiful communities here in the northwest. Travel all the way up through the far north up into Atlin, the little nook at the top left corner of your map, if you’re following along at home, and visit these exceptionally beautiful and resilient communities, places that have been here, in some cases, since time immemorial and with deep and vast cultures.

We are connecting these communities better, investing in transportation, better roads, better airports, better Internet so that people can stay connected, that they can do their business. They can raise their families in these communities. We’ve seen — there have been recent reports nationally but also here in British Columbia — that there has been wave after wave of young families, in particular, but other British Columbians, realizing that the cost of living in the cities, the cost of living back east, has become so extraordinary.

[6:15 p.m.]

There’s this amazing quality of life that can be had. But we have very little vacancy in many of our small towns, and we are investing in more affordable housing to that effect, to make sure that people who are living on working wages, as we call them, are able to get a home and a roof over their head and getting rid of the speculation in our markets, getting rid of the money laundering and the rampant excess where people have for too long — some — treated the ownership of a home as simply some sort of investment deal, treating it like an investment rather than the home that it is.

It seems to me that we’ve been moving increasingly in good ways that way so that homes are what they are. They’re able to support families, able to keep people with a roof over their head, and hopefully, it’s something that they can pass on to their children.

Of course, we’ve been investing in schools. I’m looking at the Walnut Park school that’s being built right now, where my kids attend class in the old school. They’re very excited to get into the new school when it’s ready. Hospitals in places like Terrace and other health services that we’re able to invest in….

I note — and I know my time is coming short now — that this government, when I look through the spending announcements, has been doing an incredible job of avoiding the temptation of previous governments of putting a political lens on where the money goes. I’m thinking, in particular, of the Terrace hospital, which is one of our largest hospitals here in the northwest, and a lot of our very important surgeries go on there. It’s this government that’s going to build that hospital. Despite electoral losses in the Skeena riding, we’re making sure that the investments are going in.

I’m thinking of the investments we made in Fort St. James and in other places, in Burns Lake and Fort Fraser, in Vanderhoof and Prince George. I’m thinking of the reflections of the mayor of Vanderhoof when the Premier visited some time ago, when we could visit, that he was the first Premier to come by. This is not a community, historically, if you know the politics of Vanderhoof, that votes for our party. Yet this government has taken upon itself that it is government of all British Columbians.

I see that reflected in the throne speech. I see it in the recent funding for arts and culture development in our province. The money is being spread around, and it’s being spread around to the best needs and the best impacts, which is what I think British Columbians ultimately hope for. Whatever their political persuasions, they’re looking for competency. They’re looking for some sense of decency.

While we all have our political opinions, and the voters of this province, the citizens of this province, have their political opinions, at the end of the day, we’re hoping for a better province. We’re hoping for a better place to live, a better place that we can pass down to future generations.

That’s why this government put $1 billion into the CleanBC program. The Minister of Environment is administering, with all sorts of developments, the electrification of our transportation system so that we can drive cars that no longer pollute.

I look to the mandate letter that I’ve been given — my working orders from the Premier. I’ll wrap up here. I’ve been charged with working with the Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development to be able to reform or give options of reforming that ministry, developing a coastal strategy for British Columbia — because we’re one of the only coastal provinces without a coastal strategy — and supporting the good work of the Minister of Environment in building a watershed strategy, which will have funds attached to it to be able to sustain our watersheds in this province so that we do leave a better province for future generations.

I’m very proud to have listened to the words in the throne speech — the general direction and guidance for this government. I’m excited and looking forward to the budget that will be coming imminently that will set out the next year’s plan and looking forward, as so many of us are, as all of our constituents are, to a day when we can gather back again together, that we can move past this pandemic safely and know that we came out of it stronger, because we are a resilient people. We are a resilient province.

I thank you for your attention, Mr. Speaker, and the House for its attention at this time.

K. Greene: I’m speaking in support of the throne speech. I just wanted to take a moment to thank the people of Richmond-Steveston for their belief in me. I’m humbled to be able to represent you in the province. I’m able to be here because of the support of my family, without whom this wouldn’t be possible at all.

I did want to speak about how it’s important — the work that we’re doing as government and what is set out in the throne speech — and why it’s important to us in Richmond-Steveston.

[6:20 p.m.]

Richmond-Steveston is — I’m sure, like every other member — the best place in British Columbia. But we have a few issues that I think are really well addressed by the direction that we’re heading.

First up is housing. I can’t underscore how much the housing crisis has really affected us here in Steveston, being one of the most desirable places to live in the most desirable province in the world, but then also being hit by the money laundering crisis and speculation crises. It’s really affected us. We’ve had quite a number of families and people not unlike myself or other young families where this is the place they’d like to live. They’ve been here for quite some time, and it’s become unaffordable, and there are no options for them to be able to stay.

They move away. That damages…. Every time we lose somebody because of the affordability in our riding, we lose part of the fabric of our community. I think it’s just such a shame that we have families literally moving 50 minutes down the road because it’s just not affordable. There are streets in some of the small neighbourhoods in our riding where there are so many vacant homes. There are more vacant homes than occupied homes, and that’s just tragic.

Homes are meant for people to live in. They’re not meant for investment vehicles. They’re meant for people to live, reside, work and play and be part of the community. We’re losing seniors. We’re having those folks move away to find those affordable options.

I’m really happy to say that we’re already making progress. We’re already seeing those empty homes starting to be rented. We’re already having…. I received a call not too long ago from somebody in one of those affected neighbourhoods. She expressed how difficult it was to walk her kids to school past empty home after empty home. In the wintertime, when it’s dark, it felt a little bit scary, because you’re alone.

We’re humans. We desire connection. She was very happy to say that there are people moving back into the neighbourhood, and there are neighbours to wave at. That feeling of aloneness is improving. But obviously, there is still more work to do in getting the speculation out of the market, getting more empty homes rented and making sure that seniors and families have a place to live in the community and participate.

One of the other things that’s really important for our riding…. We’ve got such interesting geography. We have suburban neighbourhoods. We’ve got more density, but we’ve also got a lot of agriculture. Agriculture is definitely a value that we share in the riding. We’re very happy to have so many small-scale farms producing wonderful food that is bought very locally — like hyper-local. It’s amazing to be able to go on a ten-minute bike ride and collect all the groceries that your family needs for the week — all the fresh produce.

We’ve got small-scale farms producing CSA baskets. If you’ve never heard of a CSA basket, I really recommend looking it up. It’s a really affordable way to get really good local produce and then support farmers at the same time, because then they have more certainty on their product being purchased for the year so that they can get that money up front and be able to plant accordingly.

We also have lots of farm markets. So if you miss out on your CSA basket, you’ve got the option of going to a farm market for that fresh food. I think some of the programs that we’re working on with Buy B.C. and bringing forward food hubs are definitely speaking to the values of the people in our riding.

I’d also like to talk about the economy. It’s also very important for folks in Richmond-Steveston, especially with supports for tourism and small business. We have a plethora — I never thought I’d use that in a sentence — of small businesses in Steveston.

[6:25 p.m.]

We have everything from speciality lingerie to help women who have fitting problems because of mastectomy or other issues, or you’re looking for that customized experience, all the way through to tea. We’ve got an amazing tea merchant with specialized blends. I recommend the Steveston blend if you’re looking for something with as much kick as coffee; it’ll get you going in the morning. We’ve got all those small businesses. We have the breweries, with the Taphouse. Such a bounty. So having these supports for small business and tourism is really important — being able to reach into the community and make sure that they’re supported.

We also have a lot of filming in Steveston, so we’re making sure that we are going to situate ourselves so that when things start getting better, we have these options. Filming. I don’t know if anybody has heard of the program Once Upon a Time. It ran for quite a number of years. It made Steveston quite famous. Their merchandise was even sold, and we would have tours going through. So we’ve had Once Upon a Time, a big show when it was filmed. Supernatural was filmed for quite a number of years.

One of the interesting things that happened because of COVID is that sadly, one of the productions was shut down, just basically overnight. On Garry Point, there was a creepy abandoned village that was built in a way that respected the local ecology, and it was just left as a set. There was fencing around it to keep it safe, but there was, in Garry Point Park, a creepy abandoned village for quite a number of months before they could return to filming. That program was called Midnight Mass, and that was apparently a Netflix production. If the set is anything to go by, it will be a very creepy show indeed, if you’re into that sort of thing.

We also have a vibrant fishing scene. I know that a lot of folks may think of Steveston as a place with a lot of restaurants, which we are very fortunate to have. Lots of opportunity to choose your dinner there. We also have the Steveston Harbour Authority, and that is the biggest small craft harbour in Canada.

This, I think, is a really interesting place to be, because you think of the fishing industry and you might not think of Steveston. You might think of Steveston as a tourism destination, but it’s really fantastic. If you ever have the opportunity to head down to the harbour authority and take a look, you will see that it feels like boats to the horizon. So it’s really fantastic. You can buy your fresh produce at the dock, but they’re also selling, wholesale, to all over the Lower Mainland and beyond, really.

We have other operators, such as Skipper Otto. They have a community-supported fishery, so you can prepurchase your fishing product for the year, very much like one of the CSA baskets at a farm. Then that helps them get more certainty on who’s purchasing their product as well. It’s ethically caught. You even get to find out who was the fisher that caught that particular product that you bought. So if you bought salmon, it’ll have the fisher’s name, maybe even a picture, the name of their boat. So you really get a sense of: where did this food come from? It’s so important that we understand where our food comes from.

One of the other issues that is important to the residents of our riding is action on climate. There is definitely a sense of vulnerability in Richmond about climate change. We are, on average, one metre above sea level. We are surrounded by many, many kilometres of dikes that are very well managed by the city of Richmond — planning ahead into the future, raising the dikes appropriately and maintaining them very well.

You do feel that vulnerability, and I notice that when we do have king tide events at the same time as we have storm surges, the water comes up quite high, and there is quite a lot of concern in the community, a bit of anxiety when you see the water that high.

[6:30 p.m.]

We are safe. It is a great diking system, but there is still some of that anxiety.

It’s really important that we continue to support action on climate. I’m really appreciative of how that is worked into the mandates for us to move forward. This government’s also supporting local action on climate, which is really great when you have those really functional partnerships where each party respects the other.

For example, in Richmond, we passed a plastic bag ban. It was wonderful that we could get cooperation from the ministry to be able to have that be passed and approved so that the local government was supported in taking that action. One of the reasons that plastic bag bans are so important to the people in my community is because of the externalities that plastic bags have in the environment. A plastic bag discarded into the environment doesn’t degrade. It doesn’t turn into anything except for smaller bits of plastic. If it’s a large bag, it can choke sea life. If it breaks down into smaller pieces, it’s consumed by smaller things down the food chain.

What happens is those smaller creatures get eaten by the bigger creatures, and we eat the bigger creatures. Now we’ve got plastic in us. Speaking as a parent that doesn’t want to think about her children consuming food that could have plastic in it, which could contaminate our own bodies, this is definitely something that it’s really important that we think about and support, particularly our local governments that are working so very hard, with the resources that they have, to make their communities the best possible place for their residents.

We also have a lot of green jobs in Richmond. We’re actually a hub of innovation and leadership in green technology. We have two businesses in Richmond that, within the last five years, have won the Ernst Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award. I have been at those award events and seen the calibre of businesses that are coming up for nomination on these kinds of awards. They are really exceptional. For us in Richmond to have the very, very top calibre is, I think, really something to be proud of.

We’ve also got leaders and new ideas in Richmond — for example, recycling battery technology and LED lighting technology. There are a lot of technology companies that I think we can be really proud of in Richmond that are leading in a number of different areas, but in particular in green technology.

It’s also really important for my riding to take action on antiracism. We need to be antiracist. Our community is diverse. It’s vibrant. It’s so important that every single person in our riding feels like it’s home, like they belong, because it is their home. We need to continue to do antiracist work. We need to fight back against the abhorrent actions of a few, and we need to continue to do the work of examining systems to ensure that there is equity in our systems.

I want to really emphasize how much value there is in Richmond-Steveston for the diversity in our community. We all chose that place to live because we enjoy that kind of community. We enjoy the exchange of ideas and the camaraderie that we can have with each other, coming from around the world and bringing diverse perspectives. It is an absolutely wonderful place to live. I absolutely think that my children are fantastically lucky to be able to have the experience of having such a wonderful place to grow up.

[6:35 p.m.]

This government is also working on bringing much-needed infrastructure to Richmond. For quite a long, long time, we really felt that we weren’t quite getting the attention that we needed. In particular, I’m so proud that this government is bringing forward the Richmond Hospital replacement tower, which is just so desperately needed. It had basically been sitting on a shelf, collecting dust. Nothing had been progressing at all until we came forward and started the ball rolling. Not only getting the ball rolling — doubling it.

I think that that really speaks to thinking about the future. Not thinking about just what is going to be right for tomorrow or next year but what’s going to fit a decade from now. We can’t shortchange our community. We’re growing very quickly.

We’ve got an aging community. We are expecting to have a very high percentage of seniors in the next ten to 20 years. That’s great. We’ve got fantastic longevity. If I am correct, and I’m quite sure I am, we have some of the longest-lived seniors in the world — I think second to Japan. I think that we’re doing something wonderful in Steveston, in Richmond. Maybe the water is particularly good and the air is fresh off the sea, but these are the things that we need to think about as we’re looking into the future.

School seismic upgrades are something that particularly hit close to home. Parents fought so hard for seismic upgrades in 2016, and they’re being delivered now. There are so many schools that had absolutely been neglected. It’s not acceptable to have schools that will fall down in even a moderate earthquake.

It’s really great to see Hugh Boyd high school has been delivered. It looks great and is functionally great. The technology wing has been moved. The old technology wing has been taken off. The school is now safer and more functional than when it started.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

We’re also seeing upgrades on McKinney. Dixon is going to be upgraded. For Dixon, it is particularly special for me because they were going to have their school be closed in 2016. It was a hard fight. That school was kept open. That school is at about 110 percent capacity, so it needs to be open for the community. It needs to be safe. It’s going to be made safe. A school that was on the chopping block is now open, and it’s being made safe. That just speaks to the values that we have here.

I did want to talk a little bit more about our Steveston small businesses. We have such an amazing group of dedicated small business owners delivering services and delivering goods to the people in our riding. We have very loyal customers, which is what makes it so fantastic.

We have the Steveston village area. It looks like heritage, but it is also forward-thinking. We’ve got that one foot in the past where we appreciate what has come before us. We value that, and we also look forward into how we are going to grow. How are we going to adapt?

Adaptation is something that the Steveston businesses have done particularly well, even overnight. It is no small thing for a business owner of a small business to be able to say: “You know what? We need a website. We need to be able to order online. We need to be able to do curbside pickup. We have to do all these things.” And you know what? They have. They’ve turned and leaned into this crisis and continued to safely deliver the products and services that people in the riding depend on.

[6:40 p.m.]

The customers have been particularly loyal in making sure that they are deliberately building into their routine that they are going to be supporting local businesses, that they are going to be ordering dinner from their favourite South Asian restaurant, that they are going to be able to get gifts from their favourite gift shop. That’s one of the ways that I think Steveston is so special. It really is a community. It’s not a collection of people; it is a community.

Speaking about community and heritage, I think that Steveston has got a great collection of tourism destinations, so when it is safe to do so, I really encourage people to come and visit Steveston. We do have these amazing heritage assets. We’ve got the Britannia Shipyards. They’re from the turn of the century. This is from when boats really were wind-powered, and they were wooden. This is the way back track.

We’ve got the Britannia Shipyards with the Chinese Bunkhouse. We’ve got the Murakami House. Farther along, in the village centre itself, we’ve got the Japanese Fishermen’s Benevolent Society building, which was built from community efforts of the Japanese nikkei in Steveston when they first arrived in the village, all the way through until internment.

It was built as part of a collection of buildings to support the nikkei community and make sure that the needs of the people were met. I think it’s really fantastic that we were able to preserve that building. It’s right next to the heritage post office. It tells the story about the village of Steveston.

Steveston, for those who don’t know, is named after one of the founding families in the area. One of the original settlers was the Steves family. The Steves family has been there since the founding of the town all the way through to today. They are still living in the area, still farming in the area, the same area. Coun. Harold Steves is on Richmond city council. He has been on for quite some time — very dedicated to Richmond and has an amazing historic knowledge about the area.

We do have Doors Open Richmond, which is an amazing opportunity to be able to go through the city and learn about really interesting things that you might not have known about Richmond. If there is the opportunity to go to Harold Steves’s farm, I really recommend it. He has got amazing artifacts, and it is a working farm, so you really get to understand the history of Steveston — and some of the more colourful stories that you’ll ever hear.

We also have the Gulf of Georgia Cannery, which is another cannery from the turn of the century. I do recommend, even in the summer, bringing a hoodie or a sweater. It’s quite cold in there. One of the reasons is it’s built over the water. It’s wood construction. It is not airtight, which is good when you’re handling and packing fish. It was a fish-packing facility.

They do have a line set up as if it was a working facility. If we’re able to, by next October, they often have ghost tours, which I highly recommend. It gives you a little bit of the flavour of that industrial building. There honestly have been horrific accidents there when it was in use back at the turn of the century. So mark that on your calendar for when we all are vaccinated and we can travel safely.

[6:45 p.m.]

Moving farther along, we have Garry Point Park, which is really a shining jewel. According to Coun. Harold Steves, who is the expert in the area, that was saved from development in a very forward-thinking moment of council, to make sure there is that wild nature right on the very corner of Steveston, right where the ocean meets the river, where the wind whips through your hair no matter what kind of weather is happening in other places.

There are 255 Akebono cherry blossom trees planted at Garry Point Park. When they are in bloom, they’re absolutely stunning. Right now, we’re asked to stay close to home, so maybe not this year, but do put it on your list of things that are really fantastic about Steveston. We would have a cherry blossom festival and really celebrate the nikkei culture and other cultures that have been in the area since the founding of the village.

I was fortunate enough to talk to folks of Japanese descent at the cherry blossom festival. A gentleman said to me how much the cherry blossoms reminded him of his youth, where they would sit…. The tradition is to sit under the cherry blossom tree and drink sake with your friends. That is a very important tradition so that they could feel connected in the turn of the season. It was very special to me, because to me, it meant that no matter where you are from in the world, Richmond-Steveston welcomes you. We have something for you, and we’re here with open arms.

With that, I would like to support the Speech from the Throne and recommend Richmond-Steveston to our domestic tourism industry when we get there.

K. Greene moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. J. Osborne moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow morning.

The House adjourned at 6:48 p.m.