Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

B.C. SCHOOL FRUIT AND VEGETABLE
NUTRITIONAL PROGRAM

I. Paton: Many of us take for granted the daily privilege of enjoying fresh fruit and vegetables each and every day. For many British Columbians, this isn’t their reality, and for many B.C. kids, not only is it their reality, but sometimes they arrive at school having no breakfast.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

We all know the importance of having access to fresh, nutritious food. For students, it provides the energy and nutrients they need for learning and development. It helps them focus on their studies instead of thinking about the food they need.

Luckily in our province, we have the B.C. school fruit and vegetable nutritional program, which provides fresh B.C. fruits, vegetables and milk to students. Nearly 1,500 public and First Nations schools across British Columbia take part in the program. Teachers have told us this program is the only way for some kids to access fresh produce.

In some regions of the province, fresh options may not be as plentiful as they are elsewhere. One teacher from Tumbler Ridge Secondary writes: “For us in the north, fresh fruits and vegetables are in short supply this time of year, so to receive vibrant green crunch cucumbers is a real treat. Thank you.”

[10:05 a.m.]

For others, the initiative presents a great learning op­portunity, as they get the chance to sample foods they might not have tried before and learn about where they come from and how they are grown. They might later go home and tell their parents about the new items they tried at school. At the next trip to the grocery store, they might encourage their parent or caregiver to buy something they’ve tried and enjoyed and expose the rest of the family to something new. It’s fun and exciting for them to gain that knowledge and share it with others.

Here’s a quote from a teacher from Prespatou Elementary-Secondary school, north of Fort St. John: “Thank you for the treats you are bringing in to our school. It’s neat to see the students eating the peppers like an apple. I have been delivering the treats to the younger classes for years. When we got the first peppers in, the students did not want to eat them, as they were not used to eating them without being cut up or cooked in dishes.”

This program also brings benefits to B.C. farmers, who love participating in an endeavour that nourishes and educates our kids. I would especially like to give a shout-out to B.C.’s fruit growers, vegetable growers and dairy farmers who support this program, along with BCfresh and the B.C. Dairy Association. More than 1,000 B.C. farmers take part in the program, growing and providing the products that are shared with students across the province.

You also have to think about the distributors — the 1,800 trucks, planes, ferries and barges and the people that operate them to get these products to the schools throughout B.C.

This program is run by B.C. Agriculture in the Class­room, a non-profit charitable organization that works with educators to bring local agriculture to B.C. students.

I have to say that I’m a huge proponent of educating kids about agriculture. It’s so important that we instil a connection to the land and an appreciation for locally grown food in our young people. Though in the program, students learn about where their food comes from and how to grow their own food and why farms and agriculture play such an important role in our communities and our society, it is also necessary that we encourage the next generation of farmers, ranchers, fishers, producers and processors.

I’m a big supporter of what groups like B.C. Agriculture in the Classroom are doing under the leadership of executive producer Pat Tonn, who does a terrific job of managing this program. Here’s what Pat has to say, in her own words:

“The B.C. school fruit, vegetable and milk nutritional program was built on food literacy, an educational program for all students to understand the importance of healthy food choices. Fruits, vegetables and milk are delivered right to their classroom 24 weeks of the school year.

“The program is also important for the economic stability of our farmers and growers in our domestic market. Furthermore, it provides stability to our supply chain and distribution of local fruits, vegetables and milk in all corners of the province and our Indigenous communities.

“The domestic supply chain and healthy children are important to our province. This program has all the positive economic and health benefits that are good for working towards economic recovery coming out of this pandemic.”

I think she sums it up — the value of this program — very nicely. So imagine my surprise when I learned that it was in jeopardy.

Since February, the foundation has been asking government for the $3.5 million needed to continue the program for the 2021-22 school year. The foundation needed an answer by May 10 so that farmers could plan in time and so that 4,000 volunteers could be organized, but the deadline came, and it went. The delay baffled us, given the importance of this program. So we asked some very pointed questions in this House to try and get some answers.

We shared some of the comments from parents, teachers and schools involved in this initiative, like the one from principal Karen Goetz from the Community Learning Centre in Merritt. She says: “Students at the CLC are definitely aware of the benefit that we have been receiving and admit that feeding their physical hunger is one of the reasons they attend school. I urge you to please continue to provide this valuable support.”

Luckily, after advocacy from the official opposition, and like many families, educators and farmers benefiting from the program, we received word that it would be indeed funded for the upcoming school year. It’s great news for everyone involved.

Unfortunately, more questions remain. The foundation basically received a no from the government as their communication unfolded over the past few months. Yet suddenly, after some intense questioning by the opposition, within two days, those funds were found.

[10:10 a.m.]

One would hope that the merits of this program would speak for themselves and warrant the government funds being sought to continue with it. Let’s all reaffirm that this program is helping our young people boost their knowledge, nutrition and habits and helping them focus on school instead of hunger.

M. Dykeman: There is no question that the B.C. school fruit and vegetable nutritional program is a valuable program. I would like to thank the member opposite, the MLA for Delta South, for his comments and for his strong and long-standing advocacy for agriculture.

The program is largely education-based, to help students understand where their food comes from, the nutritional value of fruits and vegetables and the importance of local food systems. It also serves the important purpose of getting local fruits and vegetables into our schools and giving students a healthy snack. I want to thank B.C. Agriculture in the Classroom for administering the program, as well as the 4,000 volunteers and the teachers and support staff who make this program a reality.

I also would like to thank the over 1,000 B.C. farmers who supply fresh, local produce that children from kindergarten to grade 12 can try in the approximately 1,400 participating schools. Students in grades K to 12 receive fresh, B.C.-grown fruits and vegetable snacks 12 times throughout the school year. Students in grades K to 5 also receive 125 millilitres of milk.

As with most facets of life, COVID has had an impact on this program over the last year, when the pandemic caused school closures. When schools reopened, we then saw less students in the classroom. This resulted in approximately $1 million worth of funding being left over. Contrary to what the members opposite may say, the application for funding for the 2021-22 school year had been under consideration, and no decision to approve or deny the application had been made prior to last week.

With the funding now confirmed, students will continue to learn about and enjoy the flavours of B.C.’s fruits, vegetables and dairy products through the next school year. Additionally, both the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries and the Ministry of Education have been mandated to work together on creating more local school meal programs. Whether it’s leveraging our successful Feed B.C. program to connect more local farmers and food producers to our schools or taking advantage of our amazing regional food hubs to help provide locally grown and processed food to the school districts, the possibilities are endless.

I look forward to these exciting opportunities as we move forward. Furthermore, our government will continue to extend our successful efforts of serving more B.C. food and beverages in B.C. hospitals, care homes and post-secondary institutions part of Feed B.C. On this side of the House, we’re focused on making people’s lives better. This includes making sure that we are on the right path to strengthening our provincial food system and local food security, especially for our youngest and most vulnerable populations.

The B.C. school fruit and vegetable nutritional program will continue this upcoming school year, and we’re committed to working with school districts to create more local school meal programs so that our children and youth can get a healthy head start — and with that, helping to support our local growers, producers and distributors so that we can stimulate local economies and create lasting relationships between them and our schools.

People want to eat food that’s grown right here in their backyard. They want to support their neighbour, and I’m excited for the work ahead as we look to expand on what are some already incredible programs.

I. Paton: Thank you to the hon. member. I thank her for her comments.

In closing my remarks, I want to share a couple more quotes from some of the schools involved in this program.

From H.J. Cambie Secondary in Richmond:

“Thank you for the grape tomatoes. As usual, students eagerly look forward to our next delivery of fruit and veggies. They not only enjoy eating the fruits and veggies but also engaging in the process of distributing the fruits and veggies around our school and going around at the end of the day to collect the yellow bins. Students take pride in this, and it has provided them with an opportunity to take a bit of an active leadership role in our school. Many thanks for the program.”

You can see that in addition to the nutritional and educational benefits, these kids are learning leadership skills as well.

Here’s another quote: “The Gitanyow school is heavily in support of the B.C. school fruit and vegetable nutritional program, and we hope to see it fully funded for years to come.” That’s my wish as well.

[10:15 a.m.]

Funding this program for another year is great news and an announcement that I certainly welcome. However, it remains to be seen whether it will be funded beyond that. It is an incredibly successful program that has been operating for 15 years. It does so much good in communities across B.C. What we want to see is a long-term commitment to ensuring the health and well-being of the students and their families who benefit from the program. We want to see continuation of support for the 1,000 farmers and 4,000 volunteers who enjoy being a part of this initiative.

If local food and feeding B.C. are indeed a priority, as they certainly appear to be for the Minister of Agriculture, then I hope we can get these assurances. I do want to acknowledge that the minister and I do share a deep appreciation for locally grown and locally produced goods. So much so that Les Leyne, with the Times Colonist, drew that parallel in a recent article, stating that the two of us are “enthusiastically militant about eating locally.” I’m sure the minister got a chuckle out of that, as did I.

In all seriousness, I think all members of this House recognize the significant positive impacts of the B.C. school fruit and veggie nutritional program. Columnist Les Leyne said it best in the same article, when he said: “It’s hard to picture improving on what’s already in place. The fruit, vegetable, and milk in schools program runs with 4,000 volunteers and generous donations from producers and reaches provincewide. It’s a huge return on a minor ex­pense.”

We certainly hope this long-running program will continue in its current form. It doesn’t need tweaking or changing. It doesn’t need to be examined or studied or re­viewed. It just needs assurances from this government that it will be able to keep bringing benefits to B.C. students for years to come.

Komagata Maru

A. Singh: I rise today to commemorate and remember the historic arrival of the Komagata Maru in Vancouver on May 23, 1914. This coming Sunday marks 107 years since that day.

It’s a significant date in the history of not only British Columbia but of Canada and also of India. At the turn of the century, India was under the brutal colonial rule of the British Empire. It was a time of imperialistic expansion for the British. For that, they needed soldiers, many of whom they recruited from the poor margins of the Indian subcontinent. Soldiers were recruited not only with the promise of money and economic stability but, to keep them loyal, were also shown the promise of belonging to the Commonwealth.

As the Queen’s soldiers, the myth was that they were welcome anywhere in the Queen’s realm. The truth, how­ever, was far different, of course. They were welcome to fight and die for the empire anywhere in the world, but they were not welcome in the empire’s white nations, Canada being amongst them. It was very much like the Chinese, who were welcomed to do the work and build a railroad, but were not welcomed as full-fledged citizens of this land.

This was a time of extremes — continued genocide of Indigenous people, the banning of the potlatch ceremony, the head tax placed on Chinese immigrants, the anti-Asian riots of 1907. Few know that those riots in Vancouver, which were aimed mainly at Chinese and Japanese immigrants, were fuelled and started by anti-Indian riots that started just south of us in Bellingham.

Because Indians were part of the Commonwealth, the Canadian government — the federal government at the time — could not openly deny them entry. So thinking about it, they passed what would be known as the continuous journey regulation, an order-in-council seemingly innocent and neutral on its face but discriminatory in practice, designed specifically to allow white European immigration but stifle the same from Asia.

The Komagata Maru journey was not just a journey. It was an act of civil disobedience, organized and orchestrated by superbly intellectual and competent organizers to challenge this myth of a united Commonwealth and to lay it bare. Now, 376 passengers arrived off the shores of Vancouver, and less than two months later most were returned, never having disembarked. Many of them, when they disembarked in Kolkata, in Budge Budge…. About two dozen were shot and killed. Over 200 were im­prisoned. Many escaped.

[10:20 a.m.]

This incident was a rallying point for the small and mostly Sikh Indian community here in Vancouver, in British Columbia — many activists whose legacy remains to this day. I’ll name a few, because they need to be named. Bhai Balwant Singh. He was the first priest of the Sikh temple which was on 2nd Avenue in Vancouver. Bhai Mewa Singh. Prof. Teja Singh, a graduate from Harvard University who came to help and organize and help with the legal battle. They were part of this community.

The impact of the Komagata Maru was not confined to Canada. It reverberated loudly in the Indian independence movement and inspired many who would become integral to Indian freedom, including Mewa Singh, who was hung in New Westminster, and Bhai Balwant Singh — that priest that I speak of — who returned to India to fight for India’s freedom.

In May of 2016, after decades of lobbying by various organizations, the Prime Minister of Canada finally and formally apologized in the Houses of Parliament for the government’s wrongdoing. I was one of the lucky people to be there. I attended with my friend Sahib Thind, my law partner Justin Thind and others from the Prof. Mohan Singh Memorial Foundation. We had been gathering petitions since the early ’90s for an apology and had successfully been able to lobby the federal government for the same. It remains, for me, one of my proudest moments.

Recognizing the errors of the past is easy — or, shall I say, easier — to do. We’re here today, and although we should always remember and recognize where we come from and call out the wrongdoings of the past, we live in the now and here, and we have to advocate against the wrongs of today just as ardently.

The systemic racism that allowed this to happen 107 years ago has not disappeared. It’s still alive and well today, as it was then, sometimes just under a veneer of tolerance.

It’s here, from the rise in anti-Asian hate that we see almost daily in British Columbia — we’ve talked about it; both sides of this House have spoken about it ardently in the last few weeks — to, this weekend, the arrest of retired Justice Romilly, an 80-year-old Black man who served loyally on the bench for years, out for a walk on the seawall, being mistaken for a 40-year-old suspect. All the Vancouver Police saw was a Black man. That’s absolutely appalling.

This hate is still here, and it’s masked by dog-whistle politics. It’s rampant in the anti-masker protest movement, a movement that has significant overlap with the white supremacist movement. It’s stoked by seemingly innocent but discriminatory comments and encouraged by the silence of many in the face of discrimination.

This is why we remember the Komagata Maru. This is why we remember the banning of the potlatch, the head tax and internment camps — so that we are reminded and we do not make those mistakes again.

This is why I’m so proud to be part of this government, a government that takes this seriously. One of the first things it did when it came into power was to reinstate the B.C. human rights commission. It didn’t stop there, though. The government went on to pass legislation that lived up to the commitments of the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. It’s looking at meaningful law enforcement reform and has appointed a Parliamentary Secretary for Anti-Racism, whose job it is to be ever vigilant on racism.

This is why we remember Gurdit Singh, why we remember Bhai Mewa Singh and Bhai Balwant Singh, and why we remember the voyage of the Komagata Maru.

M. Lee: Thank you to the member for Richmond-Queensborough for bringing forward such an important statement on this occasion.

This Sunday, May 23 will mark 107 years since the Kom­agata Maru sailed into the Burrard Inlet in Vancouver, filled with 376 passengers seeking to make a home here in British Columbia. When they arrived on the shores of Vancouver, these hundreds of men were met with suspicion and racism. For months, the majority of the passengers were confined to the ship as it sat in the harbour, while Canadian officials attempted to block their entry into Canada by various means, including withholding food and water from passengers and trying to prevent them from taking their case to court.

Eventually, the ship was forced to leave Vancouver’s harbour and take the majority of its passengers back to India, where an altercation with authorities resulted in numerous deaths, as the member for Richmond-Queensborough outlined.

[10:25 a.m.]

At that time, Canada’s immigration laws were intentionally designed to discriminate against immigrants based on their race. The continuous journey laws and requirements for “Asiatic immigrants to possess at least $200 when they entered the country” — eight times the amount required for white immigrants — were examples of intolerance and racism enshrined in Canadian law. They serve as reminders of a tragic period in our history.

It’s important that we take the time, truly, to consider the realities of our past, how attitudes have changed and the work that still needs to be done. Our collective journey for a more just and racism-free Canada still continues.

The Komagata Maru incident speaks to a truly unfortunate period in our history, but it must be remembered, commemorated and reflected upon. It reminds us of the importance of building a more inclusive community here in B.C., where everyone is welcome and where ethnocultural differences are celebrated and embraced rather than sources of division and discrimination.

On May 23, 2008, 94 years after the Komagata Maru arrived in Vancouver’s harbour, this Legislature passed a motion that made an official apology for the events of that day and the months following the ship’s arrival. The motion also expressed the House’s deep regret that those “who sought refuge in our country and our province, were turned away without benefit of the fair and impartial treatment befitting a society where people of all cultures are welcomed and accepted.”

The events of the Komagata Maru are also remembered and reflected upon through memorials throughout the Vancouver community such as the memorial in Harbour Green Park, near the Vancouver Convention Centre, or the museum at the Khalsa Diwan Society Vancouver Gurdwara on Ross Street, near the Vancouver-Langara constituency I represent. This is a particularly important learning place for students and others about the Komagata Maru. These spaces serve as reminders of our challenging history but also as markers of our desire to build a better future for everyone who wants to call our province home.

There has been much change over the last 107 years, but we know that the work is not done. Hate incidents against visible minorities, including those of South Asian descent, continue to rise. Recently Vancouver was named the anti-Asian hate crime capital of North America. Some estimates show that in the last year, there were more anti-Asian hate crimes reported to the Vancouver police than in the top ten most populous U.S. cities combined. A recent survey showed that nearly one in two British Columbians of Asian descent faced some sort of racist action towards them in the last year.

We speak frequently in this House about the gaps that this pandemic has revealed in our systems and in our society. These staggering statistics also reveal that we are not as inclusive and as welcoming as we would like to be. There is so much more work to be done.

Incidents like the Komagata Maru, which unfortunately are all too common in the histories of our province and our country, are not only important to remember for the sake of attempting to right past wrongs, but they are also important to hold up a mirror to our current society and world. They force us to reflect and to evaluate, and, I hope, encourage us to work together for a better, fairer future for all British Columbians.

A. Singh: I remember that day in 2008, and I thank this House for that recognition.

COVID-19 has exacerbated racism in our province and all over. As the member said, there has been an increase by almost 700 percent in anti-Asian attacks since the pandemic hit. What do you do about this? We know that communities play a really important part in addressing racism. So that is why the government has launched…. I’m really proud of the things this government has done, and one of the things is Resilience B.C., almost $1 million to help communities fight this racism.

Racism is a really complex issue. It will not be solved quickly. As the member correctly quoted, it’s been here for hundreds of years. It’s part of the foundation of this very place. It won’t be solved by a singular action. That’s why we have started with the reinstatement of the B.C. human rights commission.

[10:30 a.m.]

We launched a provincewide anti-racism awareness campaign headed by former parliamentary secretary Ravi Kahlon. A $1.2 million investment in multicultural grants programs. We developed a comprehensive multi-year anti-racism action plan for B.C.’s K-12 education system, because education really is the key here. We invested over $1 million in Haq and History, a Punjabi Canadian legacy program, and initiated dialogues with other communities to help educate.

We launched an investigation into the allegations of discrimination in B.C.’s health care system and introduced race-based data collection to modernize sectors like policing, health care and education. Without data, we don’t know what’s going on. Data is crucially important to this. We’re committed to introduce a new anti-racism act and legislation on race-based data collection. We struck a special committee to reform the Police Act. I spoke earlier about an appalling incident just over the weekend.

How does race-based data collection help? We know that systemic racism exists in policies and programs and that this has a negative impact on police and on people in communities. We also know that with data, you’re able to make programs and deal with these things better. But we need better information to ensure that services are delivered equitably across the board. Race-based data collection is about identifying where gaps and barriers exist, so that we can provide better services for communities.

We’re already doing some early work on our end. In the coming months, we’ll start engaging with community groups to develop a clear framework that guides us. We’re asking individuals to disclose how we store data and how it’ll be used.

We will also be introducing an anti-racism act. The past 12 months have shown us that we need to do more to address systemic discrimination and hatred in this province. We have to face it head-on. The anti-racism act will do just that.

Deputy Speaker: Of course, members are reminded we use the constituency name or the parliamentary role in­stead of a person’s personal name in making speeches in this House. Thank you.

PUBLIC SAFETY

M. Morris: I chose public safety, this morning, as a topic because it’s more inclusive. It’s a more inclusive term and definition when we look at today’s very complex society — multifaceted society — that we all live in here.

Policing is interceding on behalf of the general public with society’s most socially misbehaved people — with the liars, the cheaters and thieves that make up much of our society. Public safety should include all of us — every agency and every citizen.

It’s been 48 years since I first became a police officer. During my decades of experience, I estimate that over 80 percent of the files that I investigated were linked in some way to alcohol or drugs. I believe that this ratio has not diminished in today’s world.

During those 48 years, criminal investigations have become very complex and technical. One of the biggest changes occurred in 1982 with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that was brought into our constitution and affected every single law in Canada and British Columbia that police officers enforce.

I believe that it was in 2002 that I commissioned a study to look at the impacts of the Charter of Rights and Free­doms and the subsequent case law that governed how police operate in this province. That study revealed that it added hundreds of percent more time and resources to just about every single file that we investigate in British Columbia. The workload was tremendous, that it brought to bear on officers. But it’s the society we live in. The letter of law prevails.

During that time, alcohol as a predominant substance has been replaced by deadly synthetic opioids and psychotropic drugs — mind-altering drugs that have caused thousands of overdose deaths and resulted in many British Columbians suffering from permanent brain damage, organ damage and long-term health implications.

[10:35 a.m.]

Our society has become more permissive, and our courts have recognized that. The public increasingly de­fault to the police to solve and address these problems that we see. Social dysfunction has increased, and governments everywhere have been slow to respond.

Our vulnerable adolescent youth have been lured into gang life, innocent bystanders have been shot, and vio­lence prevails. Police across this province are resourced to minimum levels, but during escalating violence we have recently seen, the RCMP can temporarily bring in re­sources from other areas to supplement gang task forces and integrated teams.

Investigations are but the tip of the iceberg when as­sessing the need for resources. Entire teams are taken off the road once arrests have been made in order to comply with the strict disclosure provisions, charge approval processes and compliance with time-sensitive court decisions like Jordan.

No amount of legislation will eliminate the need for human and technical resources in conducting gangland violence investigations. Surveillance teams are labour-intensive. Judicial authorizations are time-consuming and labour-intensive, oftentimes hundreds of pages in length just to obtain a search warrant. Technical intrusions are labour-intensive, and compliance and reviews are labour-intensive. That’s the oversight that’s provided to the police officers as they conduct their investigations to make sure they stay within the confines of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the requirements that case law has determined that they need to follow.

Adding qualified and effective investigators to support staff takes time to ensure that they not only have the qualifications but the resources necessary to backfill them and that they’re trained and ready to go. The process takes two or three years. This government should have initiated these added resources long before now. It may have helped to prevent this recent escalation of gangland violence.

All of this adds to the workloads and the pressures re­lated to complex criminal investigations and calls for service. The folks that are brought in to help out on these specialized teams during rates of violence that we’ve seen right now cause excess pressure back in their communities. It causes investigations that are ongoing in those communities to be put on a shelf for the time being, until such time as those investigators get back into their communities again to have a look at it.

Crime represents only 30 percent of a police officer’s workload. In 2019, police responded to 1.3 million 911 calls. Police don’t pick or target their complainants; they merely respond to the calls. Of those 1.3 million calls for service through 911, there were 441,000 criminal offences committed. There were 54,000 people charged. Of that amount, 80,000 were classified as violent offences — homicide, attempted murder, sexual assaults — and out of those 80,000 files, only 20,000 people were charged.

Of those offences, 270,000 were property offences — break and entering — and most of those, I can guarantee based on my years of service in policing, were probably committed to support a drug habit or alcohol or some substance. Then 91,000 of those offences were other Criminal Code. A lot of those were administration of justice offences. So public safety needs to be everybody’s responsibility.

G. Begg: Thank you to the member opposite for his thoughts on this important issue, one that has caused headlines in the newspaper and has also captured the hearts and minds of every citizen of British Columbia.

There’s a popular Chinese proverb that says: “The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second-best time is now.” Basically, in the context of the conversation that we’re having here this morning, this means that if you want success and growth in the future, the best time to act is now.

[10:40 a.m.]

My friend opposite will enjoy this quote even more, I think, because it refers partially to our age and the amount of time that we’ve spent in policing. The saying is: “A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit under.”

There is another saying that’s important: “If you ask two policemen for their opinion on anything, you’ll be sure to hear three opinions.” There is no unanimity of choice in policing as to how any problem could be answered. Of course, we need actions and results now. We must act against those who are responsible for crime while we take actions that ensure a safe future for all of our citizens.

We must, as a province, find the balance of prevention, intervention and suppression if we’re to be successful in any of our communities. Prevention programs, of course, target youth at risk of gang involvement and help reduce the number of youths who join gangs. Intervention programs and strategies provide sanctions and services for younger youth who are actively involved in gangs to push them away from that lifestyle. Law enforcement suppression strategies and intensive services must target the most violent gangs. Our courts must then follow through with significant and appropriate sentences that will serve as a deterrent.

In the wake of the recent shootings here on the Lower Mainland, the Solicitor General met with the leadership of police services last week. He was able to confirm that the police and the Ministry of Solicitor General are all on the same page, and the objectives are clear: to stop the violence through lawful, proactive and assertive investigations, enforcement and disruption.

The police leaders on the Lower Mainland and across the province have vowed to suppress the current cycle of violence and bring to justice those who are responsible for it. This is a collective priority, and they are coordinated, aligned and committed. They will leverage all of the considerable resources available to the RCMP and throughout the Lower Mainland policing community.

For obvious reasons, their common strategies remain internal operation policing decisions. The only ones now who should be afraid of those decisions are the gang members themselves. They are now all aware of this government’s continued support and that we stand with them against organized crimes and gang violence.

We also believe that the fact that too many youth are becoming involved in criminal activity…. We, as a government, have pledged our ongoing commitment to education programs, such as ERASE, and programs to help people get out of the gang life. As police have said, there are only two ways you can get out of a gang or organized crime. Those are either by going to jail or being confirmed dead.

As a government, we’re confident in B.C. police and the dedication and compassion of officers on the ground and in their leadership. We will get through this. We’ll learn from it, adjust as we go and ensure that the safety of all British Columbians remains our number one priority.

M. Morris: I certainly appreciate the member’s metaphors that he was using.

It takes me back to the tree that I planted when I was the Solicitor General, where we added two new teams to CFSEU to combat gang violence. We put about $25 million into it. We started the End Gang Life program. We started the Illegal Firearms Task Force and did a number of initiatives that are proving successful today. But was that enough? From my perspective, it’s not.

[10:45 a.m.]

The research that I’ve conducted, including back in my day, when we were in government, indicates that 30 percent of the workload of most police agencies across the province is criminal in nature. The 70 percent remaining is social justice issues. They’re dealing with people with addictions and mental illness. They’re dealing with people that commit crimes of survival in order to survive day to day.

The solution falls upon the shoulders of all of us. Up until today, we have had siloed approaches. Even though we have good intentions — we have a number of people that are interested in helping out, a number of agencies helping out — there’s no central coordination. We need to have a more integrated approach. Eliminate those siloed approaches and have an integrated public safety agency that’s comprised of housing, social services, health and education. To address those social ills, we need to eliminate the criminal part of policing from policing itself — or from the public safety agency.

One agency for the entire province, with people focused on technically elegant criminal investigations, so we can get charge approvals, so we can get 100 percent convictions in court at the end of the day, and that we’re effective in eliminating the criminals that are taking advantage of the vulnerable people that we have stretched across our society — those that have been subjected to addictions issues, those that are suffering from mental illness issues.

In the meantime, I would strongly suggest that government take advantage of the opportunity they have right now. The cap for policing in British Columbia is about 2,602 bodies, I believe. We’ve only contracted…. I believe we have room for about 250 more positions in there to the maximum under the contract.

Let’s fill those positions over the next couple of years. Let’s put some dedicated teams together on CFSEU to travel the province, to combat and push down this gang violence that we see, that is affecting the entire province here. It can be done.

INTERNATIONAL DAY AGAINST HOMOPHOBIA,
TRANSPHOBIA AND BIPHOBIA

N. Sharma: Today is the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia. This day happens every year on May 17 to commemorate the World Health Organization decision in 1990 to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder.

May 17 is now celebrated in more than 130 countries, including 37 where same-sex acts are illegal. We owe so much to the tireless advocates who have fought in the courts, marched in the streets, and raised their voices to drive progress and create a more equal world for LGBTQ2+ people in every country.

We still have much work to do. Here in Canada, a Statistics Canada report released just last year found that the sexual minorities are almost three times more likely to experience violent victimization than other people in Canada. And 59 percent of LGBTQ2+ people said that they have been assaulted at some point since the age of 15. Eleven percent of sexual minority Canadians said they have been physically or sexually assaulted in the previous 12 months. That’s compared to only 4 percent of other Canadians. Similar, troubling differences were found to exist in the workplace, where they more frequently experienced unwanted sexual attention and verbal abuse.

These statistics are stark and challenging to hear, but they mask the individual stories of mental and physical trauma that never leaves the victim of the violence and hatred associated with this abuse.

Early in 2021, a girl was physically assaulted at her school in Mission. A video of the assault was heavily circulated on social media, causing more trauma. This child’s mother reported frequent bullying and homophobic slurs towards this young girl at her school. It is hard to think of the lasting trauma upon this girl and the loss of safety, security and the mental and physical hurt.

The story of a long-term resident in Vancouver, saying he no longer feels safe in the city after two attacks in a year while he was walking on the street, or the deep psychological harm that comes from the troubling practice of conversion therapy that still occurs in this country and has damaging and long-lasting impacts upon its victims — victims like Matthew, who said publicly: “I don’t think we’re ever meant to fully recover from something like conversion therapy. It’s traumatizing, particularly because it can destroy relationships and also teaches us to undermine ourselves and our feelings.”

[10:50 a.m.]

It’s discouraging to see LGBTQ2+ rights being pitted against religious freedom. But I think that serves as a wake-up call for many people that we can’t go on treating people like this. Attempting to treat or change a person’s sexual or gender identity is unethical, contrary to human rights and risks exposing those affected to lifelong trauma.

Conversion therapy is already prohibited in our public health care system in B.C., and health professionals are prevented from billing for this service. In August 2019, government sent a letter to the federal Minister of Justice and Attorney General calling on the federal government to add this harmful practice of conversion therapy to the Criminal Code.

I was pleased to see the introduction of federal legislation responding to the community’s and the government’s call to action. This legislation must include specific protection for children, who are at the highest risk of being forced into conversion therapy.

Every individual has the right to love and be loved by whoever they want. Every individual should have the freedom to be their true selves in our democracy. We are all legislators in a country that aspires for equal rights for all Canadians. As our Charter says, every person “is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination.”

As our Supreme Court has articulated, our goal as a government is “the promotion of a society in which all are secure in the knowledge that they are recognized at law as human beings equally deserving of concern, respect, and consideration.”

As legislators, the Charter asks us to continually critically examine and ensure that our decisions steer us in the direction of achieving these goals. This means taking actions like reinstating the B.C. human rights commission, promoting sexual orientation and gender identity awareness in schools, giving people a non-binary gender option on government ID, improving access to gender-affirming surgeries and updating regulations to remove gendered language.

It’s on days like these that we can listen, learn and un­derstand how we can do better. As Martin Luther King and many other leaders have said: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” It bends from our collective will and determination to achieve the goals as stated in our Charter. May we all work hard to ensure that all LGBTQ2+ people don’t just feel safe but are thriving.

I express my solidarity on this International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia, and hope for the day when all these phobias are history.

K. Kirkpatrick: May 17 is International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia, a worldwide celebration of sexual and gender diversities, celebrated in more than 130 countries, even those that still criminalize the LGBTQ2+ community. The theme this year is “Together: resisting, supporting, healing,” chosen in the context of the events and struggles of this past year.

Growing up is stressful and confusing at the best of times. Trying to figure out who you are and how you fit in is part of becoming the person who you are. But imagine if you feel like you don’t fit in, that you’re different in a way that you don’t really understand and you don’t think others are. Imagine that you feel like you don’t even fit in your own body. It just doesn’t feel right.

LGBTQ+ children are often isolated, anxious and confused about why they feel the way they feel. Sometimes they have parents and friends who are supportive and understand, but all too often they don’t.

Walk in the shoes of someone who has walked through their life being told that those around them and the images they see saying that gay, being bi, lesbian or pan or being non-binary, gender non-conforming or trans is being different and that different is wrong. LGBTQ people should be able to be who they are without harassment or attacks based on fear. People shouldn’t be judged for who they are, whom they love or how they express themselves.

[10:55 a.m.]

Conversion therapy is hateful, abhorrent and unacceptable. We can learn from those who have made sacrifices and pushed for cause. Some of these quotes resonated with me from people who have lived experience.

U.S. senator Tammy Baldwin, the first openly gay U.S. senator, said: “There will not be a magic day when we wake up and it’s now okay to express ourselves publicly. We make that day by doing those things publicly until it’s simply the way that things are.”

George Takei, actor and activist — I’m sure you remember him as Mr. Sulu on Star Trek — is a great activist and supporter. He says: “We should indeed keep calm in the face of difference and live our lives in a state of inclusion and wonder at the diversity of humanity.” Let’s think about what that means: the wonder of the differences that people have, not the fear.

Hostility, discrimination against others who are different from us is often a reaction of ignorance. Where does this come from? Perhaps from our parents. Perhaps what we see on TV and from those around us. Perhaps it’s written in some books.

As individuals, we need to do our part to counter our unconscious bias and to create a sense of belonging with our LGBTQ+ community. As a society, we must continue to advocate for equal rights for the LGBTQ+ community, as no one deserves to be evicted, fired or denied accommodation and services simply because of who they are.

In my own community of the North Shore, there’s a group I’d like to mention called Proud 2 Be. It’s a partnership between Family Services of the North Shore and the West Vancouver Youth Services. They come together in the belief that everyone should feel safe, supported and fully at home in our community. Whether you identify as queer, transgender, two-spirited and/or questioning or you’re the parent of a gender-diverse child, this group has programs to support you.

Several weeks ago I was invited by Proud 2 Be to an event that was themed “Health and well-being of transgender youth.” It was attended by the most loving, caring and supportive group of parents and health professionals that I could have imagined.

As a community, we must address the stigma, social exclusion and hate crimes against members of the LGBTQ+ community and put in more effort to improve inclusion for us all. Let’s work together to build and foster a tolerant and accepting society. And on this day and every other day, let’s work to make homophobia, transphobia and biphobia a thing of the past.

N. Sharma: Earlier I spoke of a young girl who was phy­sically assaulted at her school. We must all work to ensure that every child has the opportunity to thrive in a safe learning environment where they are respected for who they are.

No student should be excluded or bullied because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. We know that 15 percent of male and 23 percent of female B.C. high school students identify as gay, lesbian, bi or not exclusively heterosexual;1 percent identify as transgender; and 5 percent of Indigenous students identify as two-spirit.

We also know that they are subject to higher levels of bullying, cyberbullying and discrimination and are at a higher risk of mental health issues, including suicide. Specifically, 64 percent of queer and transgender students in Canada feel unsafe in school because of bullying, violence and verbal abuse.

We need to change this to protect these children. The sexual orientation and gender identity program is vital to doing this in schools. SOGI-inclusive education helps students to understand and respect their differences and helps make school environments safe and welcoming places for everyone. All of our province’s 60 school districts and independent schools have SOGI-inclusive codes of conduct policies in place. The B.C. SOGI Educator Network now has 60 school districts involved.

It is so vital that we all stand behind these programs and quell the opposition to save these young people from lifelong trauma and save lives.

[11:00 a.m.]

I will end my remarks by letting us hear words from the students themselves. “Having SOGI discussions at my school made me feel like people were educated about different families like mine, where I have two moms. Now I don’t feel like if I talk about my family, anyone will tease me, because everybody’s educated.” Ziyan, a grade 7 student from Vancouver.

“I’ve never heard a teacher say this before. She was taking attendance, and she said: ‘If you have a preferred name, then we can change it on the attendance. No problem.’ So I think that for us, it’s really important and it’s a big deal, because I know I wouldn’t want to be called by my birth name. I’d want to be called Kiann, and I’m so glad that they acknowledge that.”

Dora speaks of not having SOGI in their school: “A lot of people are saying that being in touch with this information will give people ideas, but that wasn’t the case for me. Not having SOGI education didn’t prevent me from being queer or being transgender. It just made me confused and afraid and ashamed.”

Deputy Speaker: Members should know that the Legislature is flying the rainbow flag of progress outside today to mark the International Day Against Homophobia, Trans­phobia and Biphobia as well.

Hon. J. Osborne: Hon. Speaker, I ask that the House consider proceeding with Motion 8, standing in the name of the member for Abbotsford South.

Deputy Speaker: Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed to Motion 8 without dis­turbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 8 — GOVERNMENT
OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY

B. Banman: I rise in the House to speak on the motion.

[Be it resolved that this House acknowledge the importance of openness and transparency in government and support meaningful action to achieve these goals.]

As elected officials, every MLA recognizes the importance of openness and transparency. Our fundamental duties, first and foremost, are to serve the British Columbians who have entrusted us to be their voices in their government, to bring their concerns and requests before government and to ensure actions are taken for the betterment of our communities and our province.

[N. Letnick in the chair.]

But trust goes both ways. It is also our duty to convey the intentions and actions of government back to our constituents to keep them informed and to maintain the foundation of trust between government and the people that our democracy is built on. Events have unfolded in recent months that have challenged our province’s trust in our government.

As a newly elected official, one of the very first times I spoke in this House was to call for greater government transparency and to protect the tools we use to keep and maintain trust of the people. One of the fundamental acts of democracy that our democracy uses is the Freedom of Information and Privacy Protection Act, a key tool used by members of the opposition, as well as the media and the public, to access government records and exercise their fundamental right to know what government is doing and to know whether or not they are truly doing what they say they are.

To trust and then to verify is the foundation of good governance. In this case, freedom of information is a fundamental tool to verify and, in return, build trust. Even the Premier has stated: “We’re supposed to have freedom of information so the public understands why their government is making the decisions on their behalf.” Makes perfect sense to me.

[11:05 a.m.]

You can understand, then, why it is difficult to believe that this government and the Premier are building trust rather than eroding it when they claim that a simple request, such as accessing files on the Premier’s own computer — a screenshot — is actually an incredibly arduous task that is taking years to complete.

Despite confidently stating that British Columbians are welcome to view the files on his computer at any time, the Premier and his staff have engaged in a three-year-long legal battle to deny access to a simple list of files on his computer that should be publicly accessible through the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. For more than three long years, the Premier’s office and his lawyers have tried every trick in the book to hide these files from the media, hide them from the public and hide them from their fellow elected officials.

What is even more concerning is how hard government is trying to circumvent the channels and authoritative bodies that ensure government upholds its obligations of openness and transparency. Even when the government’s lawyers attempted to block the information, they were overruled by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. Government has continued to obstruct access. Despite government claims that a few screenshot files were too difficult to create, the OIPC agreed on the methods proposed by the opposition to create records and further found that government failed in its duty to provide access and was required to perform their duty to create the records requested.

Government even chose to obstruct access to the re­cords and billed opposition caucus for 90 hours of lab­our at $2,700, more than double the estimate they provided to the OIPC — 90 hours for a simple screenshot. In spite of the Premier’s own words to the contrary, this government has made it more time-consuming, more costly and more difficult than ever before for the public to access simple pieces of information they have a fundamental right to. British Columbians still have not received the files requested.

This is just one example of a worrying trend we are see­ing from this government, and I know my colleagues will have their own examples that they wish to highlight. I hope that this government and the Premier will listen carefully to these stories and work with the elected officials of this House, the members of the media and the public to move forward with the openness and transparency that they promised British Columbians when they assumed office.

R. Leonard: I rise to speak to the member for Abbotsford South’s motion about openness and transparency in government and meaningful action.

Why is open and transparent government important? Well, it stimulates trust and confidence in our democracy, and it makes sure of the integrity of our public institutions. Some people say there’s no difference between the parties, so what’s the point of voting? Well, we have, in this motion, a great opportunity to demonstrate the glaring differences, the differences that people really do care about, the distinctions that make a difference in people’s lives.

Let’s start with ICBC. In 2014, the Ernst and Young re­port provided recommendations to avoid the now-dubbed dumpster fire at the public insurance corporation. But before they released the report, the government of the day simply cut the recommendations out. Today’s Attorney General urged their release, but the opposition refused. Eventually, the advice was released by media — not exactly an act of openness or transparency by our now former government. That lack of action on the recommendations cost the residents of B.C. $1 billion and put ICBC at risk, hardly stimulating trust or ensuring the viability of our public ICBC.

On the other hand, our government and ICBC worked with stakeholders, a range of health care providers, disability advocates and others to create an enhanced care system that people can have confidence will be there for them. That’s open and transparent government. That is ensuring the integrity of our public auto insurance.

Moving on now to money laundering. The previous government’s record? Nine years of inaction, failing in even an attempt at open and transparent government.

[11:10 a.m.]

Let’s start with 2008. The RCMP presented the then government with a threat assessment on money laundering through casinos. Did the public hear about it? No. In the years following, there was everything from an apparent outright refusal to take action to a five-year delay to implement any kind of police task force.

Our government record? Early in our first mandate, we commissioned four reports, which concluded that the flow of hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal cash was linked to organized crime and impacted the province’s real estate, luxury vehicle and gaming sectors. Our government then created a public commission of inquiry into money laundering to unearth the facts and policy issues for the public to hear.

While the Cullen commission continues, our government has taken significant action already, like requiring proof of the source of cash of $10,000 or more and putting regulators into large casinos around the clock. Justice Cullen, in his introductory remarks, recognized the “significant concern with which British Columbians view money laundering in their communities and the extent to which issues of institutional effectiveness — or even integrity — in combating it” were at stake. In other words, money laundering matters to the people of B.C. Money laundering makes a difference in people’s lives.

Like the stonewalling in releasing of critical documents with the ICBC file, despite repeated requests by our current Attorney General, the opposition once again failed to provide to the public commission the records of government decisions around money laundering. For an opposition that purports to be keen on government openness and transparency, this reluctance to unshackle important information suggests an attitude of do as I say, not as I do.

In our commitment to openness and transparency, one of our earliest pieces of legislation was to beef up our lobbyist rules so they are second to none in Canada. They were based on recommendations made in two reports by the registrar of lobbyists in 2013. I guess an open-book policy involving those who would influence decision-making wasn’t a priority at the time of the previous government.

On just three matters now — ICBC, money laundering, lobbying — our government’s record on openness and transparency is clear. Trust and confidence in our democracy and the integrity of our public institutions are our goals. Unlike the history of the old government, we continue to move forward to a stronger democracy with public institutions that people can count on here in B.C.

R. Merrifield: I rise today in the House in loud support of the motion before us acknowledging the importance of openness and transparency in government and supporting meaningful action to achieve these goals. Openness and transparency are important. They are fundamental to good governance, building trust, empowering society, educating communities and part of any social reform.

This NDP government has failed on all counts when it comes to health transparency. Rather than openness and transparency, the public has witnessed three data leaks and one article through FOI requests that have shown an absolute failure on the part of government to be honest with the people of B.C. It has shown that they have intentionally kept information from the public, preventing many British Columbians from being able to make informed decisions about their health and safety.

Data was being asked for. We could see the gaps. We could compare the COVID-19 data that we had against all other jurisdictions across Canada and see that we were grossly lacking. In fact, B.C. was singled out as being “the worst offender.”

In a report commissioned in October by the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions, it says: “The most problematic jurisdiction may be British Columbia. Its publicly disclosed data has been incomplete, inconsistent and, on occasion, seemingly contradictory.”

Well, I asked for more data as Health critic, but my voice was just one of a chorus of schools, institutions, agencies, individuals, parents, teachers, administrators, journalists, researchers and Indigenous leaders all calling for the same.

[11:15 a.m.]

Instead of transparency, we had Facebook pages, blog posts, journalists sharing data and information, all the while being told that the information wasn’t there, that it wasn’t available. Quoting Bryan Carney, “When challenged on missing or late data, health authorities in B.C. have responded by saying that they don’t have time to compile the information” or claim that they don’t have it or cite privacy concerns.

So why do we require this transparency and openness? Well, providing quality data enables public trust and independent research and is a crucial part of the fight against COVID-19. Jens Von Bergmann, who holds degrees in physics and computer sciences and a PhD in mathematics, has been sounding the alarm bell for months, noting that our data was nothing more than unpredictable and inconsistent.

Rather than being able to make decisions based on which workers were becoming sick, where the infections were, which schools were affected, what age groups and demographics, which neighbourhoods were most affected, where the virus was and how bad it was, we received vague information with platitudes. This was serious. People be­came sick. Some died. Students infected their families, health care workers became ill, hospitals overloaded, vaccinations missed, entire communities infected, anger and racism skyrocketed, fear grew, and this government re­mained silent, secretive.

So why didn’t they share this data in the first place when they had it? Why is this, and what is this NDP government hiding? Well, maybe they thought we wouldn’t find out. They were wrong, and now we’re mad, because we could have known all along how to protect our communities, our elders, our children, our neighbours. This NDP government failed.

We know that a lack of transparency leads to insecurity and a mistrust of government, and we’re seeing this play out in our neighbourhoods today. British Columbians care about their health and the health of their families. They want to be empowered to make the best decisions and to understand the decisions that government is making and why. So while incredible racism raged because of fear, ignorance, assumption and judgment; while COVID-19 and its effects disproportionately impacted youth, women and racial minorities; while the greatest divide between the haves and the have-nots emerged, this government hid the important information needed to address these issues.

Now, only six months into this NDP government’s majority mandate and four years into the government, they continue to fail in being open, transparent and accountable. British Columbians deserve better.

J. Brar: I am pleased to respond to the motion introduced by the hon. member for Abbotsford South “that this House acknowledge the importance of openness and transparency in government and support meaningful act­ion to achieve these goals.”

There’s no doubt that the people of British Columbia would like their government to be open and transparent. But it is amusing and entertaining to hear the members of the official opposition talk about openness and transparency, because it was never a priority when they were in power for 16 years.

The B.C. Liberals’ record is very clear about it. Let me give you some examples. In 2014, the B.C. Liberal government received a report of the impending crisis at ICBC. Instead of releasing the entire report and acting on key recommendations, the B.C. Liberal government deleted the recommendations before making them public. That is their record.

The triple-delete scandal is another example. When I hear about the opposition’s so-called commitment to transparency, I think about three words: delete, delete and delete. A former staffer with the official opposition pleaded guilty to lying, after he triple-deleted emails and other documents connected to the Highway of Tears. The Information and Privacy Commissioner said that this staffer only came clear after being confronted with forensic evidence.

[11:20 a.m.]

Money laundering is another powerful example of the B.C. Liberals’ record. While we are on this subject of integrity in government, let us not forget about money laundering: the damage that money laundering has done to the affordability of housing for the people of British Columbia. Five former cabinet ministers have been called in front of the Cullen commission into money laundering — five. That has to be some kind of record.

When the commission got called, it didn’t have all the records of all the decisions of the former government on gaming. That’s because the opposition would not provide them. Our Attorney General asked them to turn over the documents in May 2019, when the inquiry was called; no answer. They were asked again in January 2020; no answer again. Finally, in February 2020, the opposition agreed to provide the documents, only after unrelenting pressure from the media. This is the record of the official opposition.

On the other hand, the openness and transparency in our government remains the number one priority of our government. We have taken meaningful actions to achieve those goals. Our government has made British Columbia the most transparent lobbying regime in Canada. We made a number of changes — to prohibit former public office holders and their senior staff from acting as lobbyists for two years after leaving office — in 2017.

Secondly, we changed the legislation to ensure that current and past government employees who bring forward concerns about serious wrongdoings or who come under investigation have whistleblower protection. Thirdly, our government has also mandated better accountability, transparency and more details targeted for climate action under our new Climate Change Accountability Act, to make sure that our government is on track for long-term emission reductions.

I would like to conclude by saying that the volume of FOI requests has increased by more than 40 percent over the past two years. In fact, there has been a 250 percent increase, from political parties alone. Under the B.C. Liberals, whilst the response rate for FOI requests was 74 percent in 2015 and 2016, our government has a response rate of 86 percent, and that is despite the 250 percent increase.

I would like to conclude by saying our government understands the importance of openness and trans­parency in government. We are taking meaningful actions to achieve these goals, but the record of the B.C. Liberals is very clear: it was never a priority when they were in power, for 16 years.

J. Tegart: I rise in the House today to speak on the motion: “Be it resolved that this House acknowledge the importance of openness and transparency in government and support meaningful action to achieve these goals.”

When I think of the pandemic and the public calls for greater COVID data and reporting, I often think of the phrase “knowledge is power.” If this year has shown us anything, it is the importance of information, which has been as vital a tool for keeping our communities safe as masks and social distancing. Contact tracing, case numbers, vaccination rates are all indicators that our public health officials and communities have used to determine whether it is safe to see loved ones, to go to work, even take our children to school.

At a time when British Columbians are doing so much, sacrificing so much, to keep each other safe, they have been asking government to give them the knowledge and information they need to make the decisions that will keep them and their loved ones safe. The lengths that parents will go to, to keep their children safe, were exemplified by how hard they, along with teachers and support staff, worked to gather information that this government re­fused to provide.

[11:25 a.m.]

Parents asked government for greater COVID data and reporting, including case breakdowns of schools, identified by staff and student populations. They have asked government for this information, for over a year, to no avail. When government refused to respond, parents went above and beyond the call of duty, setting up webpages and social media groups where they painstakingly gathered as much information as they could by hand, relying on each other and their networks to fill the gaps that government was leaving.

I even wrote to the Health Minister myself on January 11, echoing the concerns of teachers, staff, students and families, and joining the call for greater data and transparency, but I never heard back. To the shock of British Columbians everywhere, leaked reports reveal that government had been gathering the data that families were so desperately asking for but had chosen to keep it to themselves and to keep British Columbians in the dark.

Government has been keeping vital tools out of the hands of British Columbians, who are looking to protect their children and their families. They have been asking the public to trust them but have displayed an unprecedented level of distrust towards the public that they are sworn to serve. Withholding information, cherry-picking what the public is allowed to hear, does more to erode the trust between government and the people. These actions have very real and very dire consequences on the lives of British Columbians, especially the most vulnerable members of our communities.

Throughout the pandemic, our seniors have made up a disproportionate number of our COVID cases and, tragically, the deaths as well. Back in October, in the midst of the deadly second wave of the pandemic, government failed to release an independent report on long-term-care homes until they were pressured by the media and the official opposition. This was a report that should have been released when it arrived in October 2020 — right before the call of the snap election.

The policy and operational recommendations highlighted by the report could have ensured that long-term-care homes were better prepared to mitigate the next wave of COVID-19 risks. Hundreds of seniors have died of COVID in long-term care as our province experienced horrendous outbreaks that ravaged communities. There are many lessons to be learned through COVID, heartbreaking lessons, and I would end my statement today by urging government to take those lessons it has learned, rebuild its trust with the public, and share all of the information.

P. Alexis: I would first like to acknowledge that I come to you from the unceded and ancestral territory of the Stó:lō people, including Kwantlen, Leq’á:mel, Matsqui, Sema:th and Sq’èwlets territories.

I rise today to respond to the member for Abbotsford South’s motion: “Be it resolved that this House acknowledge the importance of openness and transparency in government and support meaningful action to achieve these goals.” A lofty goal, I’m sure we can all agree.

For far too long, government in this province hid its act­ions and motivations, buried its secrets and scapegoated and shamelessly fired those who would call them on it. That government, however, was the one that lost its majority in 2017. Imagine a British Columbia where this motion had been adopted a mere ten years ago. What waste could have been avoided? What faith in our governance could have been restored, all thanks to my colleague’s demands for openness and transparency?

Let’s look at some less than transparent examples. In 2015, that government sold off 150 hectares of land in Port Coquitlam for $43 million below the appraised value, all in the effort to quickly finance their so-called balanced budget for the 2013-2014 fiscal year.

[11:30 a.m.]

In 2016, a former staffer was fined $2,500 after pleading guilty to lying about triple-deleting emails and destroying other documents connected to the Highway of Tears. This young staffer took the fall to protect those above him, shielding the former Premier and many people on the other side of the House who served in that government.

In 2017, the B.C. Liberals told voters everything was under control at ICBC. But after the election was over, this new government learned that ICBC was in shambles, with more than $1.1 billion pulled out of the Crown corporation since 2010 to help the B.C. Liberals make their budgets seem balanced, which they were not.

We made the changes to ICBC necessary to fix that mess, and we’re getting more money back to British Columbians as a result — on average, $400. That money is theirs, the people of this province. It belongs in their pockets, not on a deceptive government balance sheet.

In 2018, we learned that billions of dollars a year were being laundered through B.C. casinos and that the government that fell in 2017 was warned about it repeatedly. They chose instead to look the other way. In fact, they expressed their concept of openness and transparency by firing some of the whistleblowers who had been brave enough to come forward.

Five former cabinet ministers, including two who still sit on the opposite side of the House, got hauled in front of the Cullen commission on money laundering. One was impressive enough to return for an encore performance. It wasn’t until February of 2020, after relentless pressure, that all of their missing documents related to their decisions regarding gaming finally come to light.

As far back as 2014, we knew what their attitude was regarding transparency. After a harsh official report about that government’s culture of secrecy, a columnist with the Globe and Mail lamented: “Once upon a time, this government campaigned on the promise to have the most open, transparent government in the country. We now know that was a complete and utter sham said for the benefit of a gullible public to get votes. The government’s record on this front is a disgrace.” That’s the B.C. Liberal government.

On this side of the House, this government is working tirelessly to prepare for a post-pandemic province, building towards an economy and a society that better serve all British Columbians, not just those privileged enough to have favour with the powerful and influential. I would suggest that this be a lesson to us all when we decide to speak out in this legislative House without the due respect to history or precedent.

Fortunately for the member for Abbotsford South, this House is not made of glass. Please reconsider the stones you’ve thrown.

T. Shypitka: I rise today in support of this morning’s motion moved by the hon. member for Abbotsford South “that this House acknowledge the importance of openness and transparency in government and support meaningful action to achieve these goals.”

In the information age and from a public service perspective, we have the technology and the opportunity to serve British Columbians better than ever before by being more open and transparent. Why? Well, quite simply, because taxpayers have the right to know how their money is being spent.

It goes well beyond that. “How else?” you ask. Well, because today and throughout this entire pandemic, lives depend on having access to vital information. If government has that public information, it is their duty and obligation to part with it to the general public, especially when it comes to public projects.

Let’s take a deeper look at a prime example of how government needs to be more open and transparent in the handling of public money and information. Once complete, the Site C dam will add 1,100 megawatts of capacity and approximately 5,100 gigawatt hours of electricity each year to B.C. Hydro’s system. This will be enough to power roughly 450,000 homes and businesses.

As we transform our economy towards a low-carbon output, Site C will satisfy an ever-growing demand for clean electricity that will electrify our economy. We will see the greenest LNG facility in the world. Our mining, oil and gas industry will have the power to greatly reduce our carbon footprint.

[11:35 a.m.]

Site C will be a big part of British Columbia’s future green economy. Unfortunately, and under this government’s watch, the cost of Site C has suddenly skyrocketed. The cost of construction has almost doubled, from an estimated $8.7 billion in 2017 to $16 billion as of a few weeks ago — all under this government and all under this Premier.

As the budget seems to grow uncontrollably, so too does the reluctance of this government to shed a little light on what’s gone wrong. Again, under this government and under this Premier, Site C now holds the somewhat dubious distinction of being the most expensive public infrastructure project in B.C.’s history and the most expensive dam in Canadian history. That’s quite an achievement, for all the wrong reasons.

It’s times like these that harken memories of a carefree Premier Glen Clark and the New Democrats of the 1990s. We all remember the NDP government’s showcase project to modernize our fleet of B.C. Ferries. Like the debacle of the 1990s, we are seeing the same nightmare play out again with the veil of secrecy that covers public projects. The NDP made history then, and they’re making it again with what still distinguishes itself as a prime example of government ineptitude of epic proportions.

When the B.C. Liberals passed Site C to the NDP in 2017, the project, by their own minister’s admission, had the project on time and on budget at a cost of approximately $8.7 billion. The government, at that time, saw the benefits of the project and decided to keep the project going.

Soon after the Premier announced the creation of a new board for enhanced oversight, a project assurance board, to ensure the project would be delivered on time and on budget. Right from the get-go, the selection of this important board to represent transparency and independence was cloaked in secrecy.

In 2018, members of this independent board that re­ceived reporting from B.C. Hydro were finally realized through court documents…. At least a half a dozen were also B.C. Hydro board members. To put an exclamation point on things, the assurance board was chaired by B.C. Hydro’s very own executive board chair.

The independence and transparency of this project was so questionable that expert witness Harvey Elwin testified he has never encountered the extent of secrecy surrounding the Site C project in his five decades of working on projects around the world. But the secrecy didn’t end there, and it continues four years later: the several-month delay on the Peter Milburn report that still has not been released in its entirety; the non-reported quarterly B.C. Hydro reports and supporting documents; as well as no sign of a recent independent expert report on geotechnical and safety issues.

The lack of transparency and independent oversight has seen the cost of the taxpayers increase by $6 billion. I dare say, with this government’s track record, the bleeding hasn’t stopped yet.

Shouldn’t taxpayers have the right to see how their hard-earned tax dollars are being spent on Site C? Try as we might, this NDP government loves to hold on tight to information, whether it be vital statistics related to the pandemic or what’s behind all the cost increases at Site C. This veil of secrecy and lack of transparency just isn’t fair to the people who end up paying the bill at the end of the day, and that is the taxpayer.

M. Starchuk: Thanks to the member for Abbotsford South for bringing the motion regarding the importance of openness and transparency in government and supporting meaningful action to achieve these goals. I’m proud to be a part of government that continues to provide resources to independent offices that support transparency in government.

When we speak to openness and transparency, the first thing that comes to my mind is the openness of our independent offices like the human rights commission which, by the way, was reinstated on November 22, 2018 in Bill 50, the Human Rights Code Amendment Act. At that time, we were the only province not to have one. This is a useful mechanism for empowering people and making progress towards equity.

The commission was ended in 2002. Unfortunately, there’s no explanation as to why the B.C. Liberals placed this office within the Human Rights Tribunal. This was an attack on the rights of the poor, the disabled, the women, the disadvantaged and the underrepresented in our society.

This commission is in place to make sure that British Columbians don’t have their human rights violated in the first place and deals with the issues of inequality on a more macro scale, rather than on a person by person case, like it was set up in the tribunal. But the B.C. Liberals eliminated that in 2002. Today, during the pandemic, we need this commission to be supported more than ever before.

[11:40 a.m.]

When we speak to the subject of integrity in government, let’s not forget about money laundering. Five former cabinet ministers, including two that still sit on the opposite side, were called into the Cullen commission on money laundering.

What is interesting is that one former cabinet minister held the gaming file for eight years and liked it so much he transported the file from the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General to the Ministry of Housing and Social Development and then finally brought the file to the Ministry of Energy and Mines and the Minister Responsible for Housing. Can anyone see the links to gaming in these ministries?

How does money laundering fit into Housing and Social Development, unless we’re talking about the skyrocketing of housing cost prices with the use of laundered money? How does money laundering fit into Energy and Mines, unless we’re talking about the gold mine for the criminal activities. Where was the openness and transparency with government?

When we talk about today and being transparent, we talk about lobbying and the changes that were made to prohibit former public office holders and their senior staff from acting as lobbyists for two years after leaving office, in 2017.

In 2018, we built on those changes, and we included monthly reporting of the actual lobbying activity. We eliminated the 100-hour registrations threshold for in-house and consultant lobbyists, because a lobbyist is a lobbyist. We increased the reporting of the ultimate client and known beneficiaries of lobbying and a mandatory periodic review of the act. This is very important, given the ever-changing electronic era that we’re in today.

When we talk about openness, we have to go back and remind everyone that the ICBC report was kept under wraps in 2014. The B.C. government then received this report about the impending crisis that was coming forward. The report is identified by the impending dumpster fire. I can tell you from experience that the dumpster fire may look ominous, but what it really does is it stinks.

Instead of releasing the entire report, the government deleted recommendations before making them public. That’s deleted. The Attorney General wrote to the Leader of the Opposition, urging them to compel the former Finance Minister to waive cabinet privilege so we could see the whole report. The decision cost B.C. residents more than $1 billion to put the health of ICBC at risk. Now we’ve issued rebates, lowered the costs by 20 percent, and we’re doing all of this without selling assets of the corporation, like the sale of Surrey Central City, back in 2007, of $245 million.

Our goals are that of openness and transparency in government, and we support the meaningful action to achieve these goals. We’re constantly looking at ways to ensure that openness and transparency are up to date.

T. Halford: I rise today to speak in favour of the motion “that this House acknowledge the importance of openness and transparency in government and support meaningful action to achieve these goals.”

This motion has obviously hit a very sensitive nerve in the government. I can see that, given that the speaking notes seem to be somewhat plagiarized from member to member. I get that. That’s okay.

I do think, though, that we have to realize something: that when the government members are speaking, we’re not seeing any solutions. We’re not seeing…. They’re not addressing the issues that the opposition is bringing forward. I find that troubling. This is not a new government. This is a re-elected government, yet they continue to be stuck in the past. I understand that, to a point.

[11:45 a.m.]

I think we do need to realize that the issues that we are highlighting today are very, very serious issues. They’re issues that this government needs to address. I think, from the speaking points we’ve seen from the members today, they’re not prepared to address them. At least they’re being transparent about that. I have to give them a little bit of credit for that, because if you don’t have the answer, then — you know what? — at the end of the day, you don’t have the answer. This government clearly does not have the answers on why we are lacking transparency.

This topic has never been more critical for B.C. The balancing act of trying to bring the pandemic to an end…. But that can only happen with honesty and transparency from our government.

Open government is not a new concept. It’s a concept that the current government is struggling with, but it is not a new concept.

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, British Columbians have placed their trust in their elected representatives — every member of the Legislature — to come to Victoria and represent the interests of their communities and their families, and they have put their trust in government to act in their best interests and be open and honest with people they represent. I think that’s pretty straightforward. I think that the expectations that we all have as British Columbians, and the expectations that British Columbians have on us as representatives in this House, are for open and transparent government.

Now, no government is perfect. I think everybody ag­rees on that. But when members of this House are reciting the same lines and lines and lines, and they’re not actually addressing the troubling things we’ve seen over the last few weeks — particularly regarding the pandemic and some of the issues that we’ve seen in my riding of Surrey — and the openness or transparency that many, many parents with kids in the school district…. I have three kids in the Surrey school district, and I can say that we need more transparency when it comes to data.

We’ve seen the media reports. We’ve seen the media struggle to try and extract data and transparency from this government. We saw a very troubling issue emerge over the weekend. For the members to stand up and so righteously speak about previous governments…. I will say it again: this is not a new government. So at some point, this government needs to start acting like a transparent government.

Now, this government has certainly been playing catch-up when it comes to responding to COVID-19, because in my community, the leaked data has also shown Surrey has the most significant burden of school exposure notifications and isolation orders. How did we respond? Pop-up clinics. I will plagiarize this line, because it was very similar to what we’ve seen in the Hunger Games. I know other members have said that. Members of the media have said that. Truth hurts sometimes.

Knowing the dire situation here in Surrey, with some neighbourhoods showing the highest positivity rate in the province, the government somehow decided to create a system of chaos with the vaccine pop-up clinics that were not planned nor able to get vaccines to those who needed them most. That’s a lack of transparency.

I do support the motion today, and I look forward to the other speakers after me.

Point of Order

M. de Jong: I do rise on a point of order.

Several moments ago I listened to the remarks of the member for Courtenay-Comox. I wanted to check and verify what the member had said, and versions of it have been repeated. But this is what the member advised the House: despite repeated requests by our current Attorney General, the opposition once again failed to provide the public commission the records of government decisions around money laundering.

Mr. Speaker, that statement, as it relates to a commission that is presently sitting, is fundamentally false. The member, I believe, knows it is false — that every single document has been provided in un-redacted form.

[11:50 a.m.]

Never mind, pursuant to Standing Order 40, the ap­propriateness of comments about an ongoing public inquiry. The standing order is very specific about the appropriateness under the sub judice rule that governs proceedings in this House.

The fact that the member would make such a statement that is fundamentally and absolutely false about the provision of documentation to the public inquiry requires, I believe, a withdrawal from the member, and I hope the hon. member will see the wisdom and do just that.

Deputy Speaker: The member in question from Courtenay-Comox is not on the screen and not in the House at this point. I do recognize the sub judice rule that applies in this case, and we’ll see once we’ve had a chance to have the member back in the House, and make a ruling at that point. Thank you.

Debate Continued

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and speak to the motion: “Be it resolved that this House acknowledge the importance of openness and transparency in government and support meaningful action to achieve these goals.”

I’d like to speak and follow on comments that all members of the House have made about the central importance of openness and transparency in a healthy democracy.

Certainly, it’s so key, and it has really made the case for us in British Columbia and around the world as we struggle with this unprecedented pandemic. I think that the importance of trust in our institutions and trust in our government is so key. We really demonstrated that in terms of how British Columbians have listened to, respected and really come together in an unprecedented way. Certainly, it underlines the importance of openness and transparency in government and trust in our public institutions…. It’s so key and so core, and I’m very passionate about that as well.

We know one of the main instruments in terms of access to information is freedom of information. That’s key and central. I want to lay that out, in terms of the access to freedom of information, which allows individuals, political parties as well, to pose questions to the government on a wide range of issues.

In British Columbia, the volume of freedom-of-information requests has increased by quite a bit — 40 percent over the past two years. In fact, there has been a 250 percent increase from political parties alone. Just to compare and contrast, under the B.C. Liberals’ watch, the response rate for freedom of information requests was 74 percent, 2015-16. Our government currently has a response rate of 88 percent. That’s despite the 250 percent increase. I just wanted to present that. In terms of…. I know we’ve heard requests. Why do we want to reference the past? Well, it’s good to compare what the current government record is with previous records. It’s a good compare and contrast.

In terms of the importance and the centrality of openness and transparency, there are a number of issues where we see this really come to light. I know some members on the other side don’t like to hear about the history of what the impact is where we do not have openness and transparency with previous governments.

I want to reference ICBC — the ICBC report that was kept non-public, that was not released. Actually, the recommendations were deleted. Now, that happened. What was the impact? The impact was, once the report became public, $1 billion shortfall, a mess of ICBC. This government rectified that. We have cleaned up that mess that had been covered up, improving care, reducing rates.

I want to talk about, as well, money laundering, which we heard as well.

[11:55 a.m.]

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Now, what is the connection between a cover-up, a lack of transparency around the dismal record of money laundering by the previous government? We know that there is an investigation underway to bring that out, to bring light to that. The impact is that lack of openness, lack of transparency. All British Columbians know, no question, that Vancouver was the capital of the world in terms known as money laundering in British Columbia. That is on the previous government.

In terms of a commitment to openness and transparency, to bring an end to money laundering and build the foundation of public trust and transparency in our public institutions, what’s our record? In addition to improving freedom-of-information requests, this government has also brought in the strongest protections for lobbyists in our country. We have also brought in whistleblower protection. Previous governments, you know, folks were reluctant to come forward — whistleblower protection. As well, climate change accountability and transparency.

Why? Because our government is on the side of people, not those at the top. We’re going to build and strengthen our public institutions and ensure that all British Columbians have access.

D. Davies: I’m glad she took 20 seconds to cover off all this government has done being transparent.

I want to thank you, hon. Speaker. I rise in complete sup­port of this motion to acknowledge the importance that government is open and transparent.

Listening over the last hour to the government MLAs speak to the motion affirms, I think, to British Columbians, this government truly has an issue with transparency and openness. The continuous attempt to raise falsities from past governments, having all the government MLAs speaking from the same song sheet, really should be concerning to British Columbians. Not really recognizing any of the accomplishments that this government has done, other than the last 20 seconds — we had a couple little things that have been brought forward — should really worry British Columbians.

As a government, transparency goes beyond just promises. It goes beyond just words. That’s all we’ve heard from this government. It’s words, no action. It requires conversations with the public.

For us as public officials, we need to evaluate our practices and learn from our mistakes and always strive to do what is better for British Columbians with the information. Given the information that they have, as citizens of our province, that information allows them to make decisions in their own lives to improve the safety and well-being of their families, their businesses and their communities.

As we have seen in recent headlines, there have been some significant mistakes made recently that government can learn from and, hopefully, move forward with more openness. Throughout the pandemic, the official opposition, along with British Columbians, has requested more information from this government on a range of issues.

In Surrey, the areas suffering the impacts of COVID-19 the most have gone without the crucial information they need. Yet the province hid the disparity in vaccines be­tween communities, with some of our lowest-income communities suffering the most. The neighbourhoods with the highest rates of transmission were being hidden from the greater risks that they faced.

When we talk about data transparency, we also need to talk about the importance of disaggregated data. Members of this chamber have been calling on the government for months to collect and release the data impacts of COVID-19. We need to understand how different communities in our province are impacted by this crisis. Data is the way to shed light on the inequalities that manifest within our health care system and our communities.

We know that there are systemic inequalities within our health care system, and the important data that is necessary to reflect and improve these systems has either gone unmeasured or was held in secret. If we want to build trust and create a better, more equitable system, we need to measure and publish disaggregated data.

Last fall the public was in the dark on information for long-term care homes. These are easily the institutions hard­est hit by this pandemic. Yet, unbeknownst to the public, the government had more information than it let on and willingly chose to withhold it from citizens. Why, you might ask, would the government hide this information pertaining to COVID-19 in long-term care homes in October? I’ll tell you why. Maybe it was the unnecessary pandemic election.

[12:00 p.m.]

Trust in our government is so vitally important when British Columbians are being asked to make the incredible sacrifices that they are being asked. It should not have taken the guilty conscience of a front-line worker at the BCCDC to make this information public. Yet here we are discussing this.

This government has a pattern of failing to be transparent when it is needed most. What is the impact? Members of the hardest-hit communities are left unsafe, parents are worried about their children’s safety, and the most vulnerable are kept in the dark about the dangers around them.

British Columbians have gone to such lengths and sacrificed so much to protect our province. Their request of their government is quite simple: be transparent, release data, and give people the resources they need to make informed decisions around this pandemic.

Unfortunately, from the bungled caribou — and I could talk at least 30 more minutes on the caribou issue, which is still being mishandled today, I will add — to the many hundreds of freedom of information requests that are still unanswered to this purposeful secrecy around COVID-19 data, the government must do better. Citizens expect it.

Just as government has asked British Columbians to trust in them and do what must be done, we only ask the same of government. We ask that you trust in British Columbians and work with British Columbians.

D. Davies moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. J. Osborne moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m.

The House adjourned at 12:01 p.m.