Second Session, 42nd Parliament (2021)
OFFICIAL REPORT
OF DEBATES
(HANSARD)
Tuesday, October 5, 2021
Morning Sitting
Issue No. 101
ISSN 1499-2175
The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.
The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.
CONTENTS
| Routine Business | |
Environmental Appeal Board, annual report, 2020-21 | |
| Orders of the Day | |
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2021
The House met at 10:03 a.m.
[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]
Routine Business
Prayers and reflections: S. Chant.
Introduction and
First Reading of Bills
BILL 17 — PROTECTED AREAS OF
BRITISH COLUMBIA AMENDMENT
ACT, 2021
Hon. G. Heyman presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Protected Areas of British Columbia Amendment Act, 2021.
Hon. G. Heyman: I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now.
This bill contains amendments to the Protected Areas of British Columbia Act. These amendments continue the legislative work needed to maintain and improve the B.C. protected areas system. The bill will add 2,419 hectares to the protected areas system managed by B.C. Parks.
These amendments will establish one new park on southern Vancouver Island, make additions to nine existing parks and one conservancy, modify the boundaries of five parks, improve boundary descriptions and correct administrative errors.
This bill also contains important amendments to rename two parks to include their Indigenous place names, from Newcastle Marine Park to Saysutshun and from Chilliwack Lake Park to Sxótsaqel.
Copies of the official plans that depict the boundaries of most of the parks and the conservancy in this bill will be posted on the B.C. Parks website for public and member review.
Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is first reading of the bill.
Motion approved.
Hon. G. Heyman: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
Bill 17, Protected Areas of British Columbia Amendment Act, 2021, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.
Statements
(Standing Order 25B)
WORLD TEACHERS DAY
AND ROLE OF
TEACHERS
J. Tegart: They are found in every community across the province and around the world. They help shape our lives and are foundational in setting us up for future successes. I think it’s safe to say that none of us would be where we are today without one of them in our lives.
Today is World Teachers Day, a day marked by the United Nations to celebrate all teachers and their incredible accomplishments every day. It commemorates the anniversary of the adoption of the 1966 UNESCO recommendation concerning the status of teachers, which set benchmarks regarding the rights and responsibilities of teachers and helped to create a global standard for recruitment, employment and teaching and learning conditions.
Today is about more than celebrating the incredible achievements of teachers and educators around the world. It’s a day for us to reflect on the challenges they face every day and what steps we can take to better support and invest in them, to ensure that every learner has access to the quality education they deserve.
Even in the best of times, the work of a teacher is never easy. But the COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented challenges into our schools and classrooms, challenges that teachers have and continue to bravely face in the spirit of continuing our children’s growth and education. Teachers also continue to face greater challenges in countries around the world where social or gender barriers prevent people from providing or accessing a good education.
Education is not a privilege; it’s a fundamental right for all people. Today it is great that we celebrate World Teachers Day.
M. Elmore: To follow the remarks from my colleague, it’s World Teachers Day and a day to celebrate the people in our communities who put children first every day. There has never been a more poignant time to celebrate and honour teachers as they continue to work on the front lines during the pandemic.
There is no question: school is the best place for students, for their social and emotional well-being, to ensure they are keeping up with their learning, and for social supports, including meal programs and mental health services. School has been a constant for kids in an uncertain time, and a large part of that calm, caring consistency comes from teachers and the education team in the classroom. Our government sincerely thanks teachers and all school staff for showing up and making sure our students continue to receive a world-class education.
On World Teachers Day, we are launching the nomination period for the Premier’s Awards for Excellence in Education. I encourage everyone who knows a teacher or an education staff member who deserves recognition to submit a nomination. The nomination period continues until January, and the awards will be given out in the spring. More information on the Premier’s awards can be found online at www.gov.bc.ca/excellenceineducation.
To all of B.C.’s more than 45,000 teachers, I say: your work is valued. Your work matters deeply. On World Teachers Day and every day, we thank you.
FIRE DRAGON FESTIVAL
AND VANCOUVER’S
CHINATOWN
E. Ross: Over 100 years ago, Buddha appeared to an elderly villager in a dream and told him to hold a Fire Dragon Dance to drive away a plague. It succeeded, and people began to believe that the Fire Dragon Dance could drive away bad luck and disease. Thus began the tradition of the Fire Dragon.
After a 46-year absence from British Columbia, the Vancouver Chinatown BIA brought the Fire Dragon Festival back to B.C. The rebirth of the Fire Dance was an exciting event for the member for Nechako Lakes and myself to witness, but we were also there to support the initiative to designate Chinatown as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Watching the ancient ceremony brought a sense of familiarity to me.
The desire and interest placed on reviving and preserving cultural heritage is something that First Nations have been trying to address for decades, but my biggest takeaways were the comments on racism. Ethnic minorities understand that issues related to racism are driven by ignorance and fear and that education and understanding are the best tools to bring people together.
First Nations and the Asian community have a connection that goes back to the building of Canada — in our case, the canneries and the fisheries — and experienced much of the same racist treatment. That’s why truth and reconciliation means more to me than just addressing First Nations issues. It actually means addressing all the treatments that all ethnic minorities have faced in the building of this country. We also share a history of perseverance in honouring those who made that difficult walk towards acceptance.
I fully support Chinatown’s designation as another step towards not only recognizing our history but embracing our future together as Canadians. I also want to thank the member for Vancouver-Fraserview, who actually mentioned myself and the member for Nechako Lakes as being members of the audience sitting out there in the crowd — on the ground, I might add, which was actually interesting, to witness the whole ceremony.
As well, I thank Vancouver councillor Lisa Dominato for explaining to me the whole history of the Fire Dragon Festival in the first place.
MARY ANNE COOPER AND
PORT MOODY FILM
PROJECT
R. Glumac: Mary Anne Cooper walked into a kindergarten class, she sat among the children, and she asked them: “What do you see when you walk in a forest?” They all put up their hands, and they said: “Oh, trees and plants and squirrels.” The lesson that she was teaching is that a forest is a community, and all the creatures in the forest needed to be protected.
All the children that were there were eager to put up their hands and say: “I want to protect the forest.” That brought a smile to Mary Anne’s face. One of the children asked: “How long ago was it since you’ve been in kindergarten?” She said: “Oh, about 100 years.”
This was one of the scenes in a new documentary that I had the opportunity to watch last weekend called The Spirit of Port Moody. It’s a film about Mary Anne Cooper, who turns 107 this month, and about the community and about the environment that she cares so much about.
Mary Anne has been a fixture in the community and a champion of local issues. You can often see her at city council meetings speaking passionately about something. She attributes her long life to a positive attitude and a constant quest for learning and adventure. She says: “I think there’s so much to get excited about in life — so much to learn, so much to understand, so much to solve. To me, life itself is a wonderful adventure.”
I’d like to say congratulations to all the volunteers and the filmmaker that put this amazing film together.
And congratulations to Mary Anne for all that you do. Happy birthday and many more to come.
PETER ALDER
J. Sturdy: In many communities across this province, there are individuals whose actions truly shape the landscape. Peter Alder was one of those people, a man who helped turn Whistler and ski resorts across the province into the mountain communities that we enjoy today.
He first arrived in B.C. from Switzerland in the 1950s, an engineer by trade. As one would expect of a Swiss, his parents had introduced him to the pleasures of skiing, and the mountains of British Columbia were in many ways familiar.
Peter began his career working for Kemano on transmission lines and then B.C. Electric installing power lines between the Bridge River and Squamish. He began his ski industry career as general manager of Red Mountain in Rossland largely as a result of his experience with hydro towers and big cables, as well as “his great Swiss accent” — or so the story goes. An anecdote from his memorial says that according to Peter, the two best things about Switzerland were the cheese and the flight back to B.C.
But Peter later held GM positions at Silver Star and Big White mountain resorts. In the late 1970s, Peter returned to the coast and was hired as the general manager for Garibaldi Lift Co., returning to the Sea to Sky just as Whistler Mountain was beginning its rivalry with Hugh Smythe and the upstart Blackcomb Mountain. Peter later worked for Whistler Resort Association, Ecosign Mountain Planners and then Al and Nancy Raine on the Cahilty Lodge at Sun Peaks.
Peter was always involved in the community, whether as a Rotarian, on the chamber of commerce or as a mentor and a good friend to many. He received a Lifetime Achievement Award at the Whistler Chamber of Commerce Excellence Awards, and in 2019, Canada West Ski Areas Association awarded Peter the Jimmie Spencer Lifetime Achievement Award for outstanding contributions to the B.C. ski industry.
Peter died last July and will be sorely missed, but his impact on the industry and the community will live on.
TOGETHERBC REPORT AND
COVID-19
RESPONSE
B. Bailey: Throughout the pandemic, people in our communities have faced unparalleled need and have looked to government for increased supports and services. The TogetherBC 2020 Annual Report, which was tabled yesterday by the Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction, shows how all levels of government, along with community partners, have been working together to meet these needs.
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted pre-existing inequalities and, in particular, affected vulnerable and marginalized populations. That’s why it’s crucial that we continue to address the root causes of poverty, including income inequality, housing instability and lack of affordable child care.
Despite the many challenges we face due to the pandemic, the 2020 annual report shows that measures such as the B.C. emergency benefit for workers and temporary supplements to income and disability assistance clients and low-income seniors have been helping.
The report also highlights the work of some of our amazing community partners who are making a huge difference in their communities, organizations like South Okanagan Immigrant and Community Services, who work with racialized populations disproportionately impacted by the pandemic; RISE Community Health Centre with their care model that addresses the social determinants of health in addition to physical ailments; and BGC Kamloops, a child centre that stayed open throughout the pandemic to ensure parents were able to keep working.
Throughout the pandemic, there have been so many stories of British Columbians pulling together to support friends, family and neighbours in need — too many to be included in the report. But it is that same spirit of resilience that’s gotten us through the challenge of the past year and will help us build a secure future together.
I encourage each of you to take the time to read the annual poverty reduction report and learn more about the progress that’s been made.
Oral Questions
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO HEATWAVE
S. Bond: This June a record-breaking heatwave saw blistering hot temperatures throughout large parts of our province. But the Premier and his government were not prepared to deal with the profound impact that this would have on people and the services that they depend on. Instead, unbelievably, the Premier said he was “giddy” about lifting COVID restrictions.
While the Premier failed to act, 570 people died in British Columbia from heat-related causes. Almost 80 percent of them were frail, vulnerable seniors 65 years and older. The Premier’s response to these heat-related deaths was nothing short of appalling. He said, “Fatalities are a part of life” and that there’s a “level of personal responsibility.”
Today can the Premier explain his government’s failure to respond effectively to the deadliest weather situation in Canadian history?
Hon. A. Dix: Thank you very much to the member for her question.
I want to say at the beginning of this period for me, this fall sitting, how important it is that 100 percent of the people in this House are vaccinated and that 100 percent of the people in this House are advocates of vaccination. I appreciate it, and I’m grateful to the Leader of the Opposition, to the Premier and to Leader of the Third Party for their leadership in that regard. I’m appreciative of that.
There are going to be important questions asked during question period, and that takes away nothing of the respect and the appreciation that I have for the Leader of the Opposition and our joint efforts to work together to deal with COVID-19 pandemic.
It is the case that the heatwave that affected British Columbia affected people in all communities of the province — in particular Metro Vancouver but in other regions as well. As the Leader of the Opposition has said, in her preliminary review, the coroner has attributed 570 deaths to that heatwave. I just want to put it in context. The previous significant deadly heatwave in British Columbia was in 2009, and 110 deaths were attributed to that.
The temperatures on the weekend in question — on the June 28, June 29 weekend — were five degrees higher than that. This was, as Dr. Sarah Henderson has said, a one-in-1,000-year event, but it’s happened. It’s no longer one in a thousand years, and it requires action to deal with resiliency and to support people.
Everyone in this House is gutted by the fact that people that we know in our community passed away that weekend — gutted by it. We know that health authorities responded in advance of the event with heat warnings. We know that those efforts were made around British Columbia. We know our ambulance service responded and was challenged with not just more calls than they had ever received before but dramatically more calls.
People acted appropriately, but we need to learn the lessons of this. That’s why there’s a coroner’s review going on. That’s why the BCCDC is doing a review, and its preliminary findings were delivered to the UBCM. That’s why I’m committed to working with everyone for action so that we have more resiliency.
The fact of the matter is that this is attributed to climate change. It’s no longer a one-in-1,000-year event. We have to take action against climate change, and we have to take action collectively to make our society more resilient.
Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Official Opposition on a supplemental question.
S. Bond: Well, thank you very much to the minister, but we should be perfectly clear that one of the jobs of the Premier of British Columbia is to make sure that when British Columbians are at risk, they understand the seriousness of that risk. A Premier that suggests he was giddy because he got to lift COVID restrictions and then basically says that people had personal responsibility is simply unacceptable, and the minister knows that.
This Premier should not have been surprised. In fact, he was he was warned in multiple reports about the danger — not one, but two reports. He knew that it would have consequences for people like Howard Calpas.
Howard is 60 years old, and he lives next door to Oppenheimer Park in Vancouver. Howard happened to be on Vancouver Island when the heatwave hit, but his neighbours were at home. Three of Howard’s neighbours died as a result of the heatwave. Here’s what Howard had to say: “They died in their apartments, and they found them a day later.”
It’s simply not good enough. A Premier who said he was giddy, a Premier who, in essence, said people had a personal responsibility. Well, so did the Premier and the government of British Columbia. So I hope that today this government will stand up and take responsibility for the lack of an effective response to one of the worst weather situations in Canadian history.
Hon. A. Dix: The member is right, I think, to this extent: that those affected most by the heatwave were the most vulnerable — lower income, people who live in more socially isolated circumstances. We saw that in the report presented by Dr. Sarah Henderson and Dr. Bonnie Henry at the UBCM. You see that in the evidence that we’ve done, and in the case-by-case analysis that will be coming from the coroner I think we’ll see the evidence as well.
There are a number of things I think we need to do in response to this. And this is not just a Ministry of Health question. This is a broader question for all levels of government and for all ministries.
One, we need to, of course, continue jointly to take action on the issue of climate change, the central issue of our time.
Two, we understand that climate change nonetheless is happening, and we have to become more resilient. This event was substantially worse than any other event we have seen in the entire history of British Columbia, and it presented challenges. The health care system responded to an extraordinary extent.
But the member is right. There are 570 stories to tell of people who passed away on that weekend. We want to give value to that, and we want to respond to that with action. The government has already responded with action. We need to do more, become more resilient, and we obviously have to do our share in British Columbia to take action on the issue of climate change.
T. Stone: People not understanding the severity of the heatwave that descended upon our province and that descended upon them — that led to dire consequences, tragic consequences. People not knowing what to do when this was occurring led to tragic consequences.
Sadly, however, in 2019, the Premier commissioned and received a climate risk assessment for British Columbia. On pages 69 and 70, it details the significant risk that a heatwave poses, referencing a high confidence of excessive mortalities.
But the Premier ignored these warnings. On June 27, it felt like 44 degrees Celsius in Chilliwack. Seventy-four-year-old Roberta “Bunny” Lalonde, who lived alone in her condo, turned on fans and opened her windows. But like many British Columbians, she probably didn’t know that this would do more harm than good, because fans can actually cause someone’s temperature to rise when the air is hotter than their body.
As Bunny’s daughter Christine Lalonde subsequently told the media: “My mom was a bit stubborn. She probably thought it would be fine. I don’t know if she really knew the effects that heat like that can have on the body.”
On the afternoon of June 29, Christine, who lives in Ontario, received a call from her uncle, whom she had asked to check on Bunny. The uncle had let himself in, where he found Bunny lifeless on her bed.
I think British Columbians rightfully want the Premier to answer this question. Can the Premier explain, can the government explain, why they failed to heed the warnings contained within a report that they commissioned in 2019, which would have ensured vulnerable British Columbians had a fighting chance to survive the heatwave? Can the Premier explain why, instead of heeding the warnings in this report, he responded to the tragedy by saying: “Fatalities are a part of life”?
Hon. A. Dix: I would say to the member that the story that he told is one, obviously, that affected people in my constituency, people I know, and affected the whole pro-vince. This is, as Dr. Henderson said, a one-in-a-thousand-year event, but an event that we now have to respond to. It is the new reality of our times, and we have to respond. We have already taken action to do that.
That response will be broader than the Ministry of Health. We have responded with more changes in our ongoing efforts to improve and improve resources to the ambulance service everywhere in the province. We have responded with changes in long-term care, in facilities — particularly facilities that hadn’t had air conditioning — to add air conditioning and air-conditioning capacity in those facilities.
The primary place where mortality happened, where people passed away, was alone at home. Steps have to be taken. I will take the member through the steps that were taken by Dr. Henry, by health authorities, by others, by the Solicitor General to warn people of the situation in the heat dome.
But I think it is fair to say, living as I do in an apartment — an un–air conditioned apartment — in East Vancouver, that none of us had felt the actual effects of what happened that weekend ever before, living in British Columbia, living in Metro Vancouver. Simply put, we have to respond by becoming more resilient as a society. I intend to work with everyone to see that that happens.
Mr. Speaker: The member for Kamloops–South Thompson on a supplemental.
T. Stone: Well, the fact of the matter is this. The Premier and the government ignored their own reports, which they had commissioned several years in advance of this tragic situation. As a result, thousands of British Columbians were not truly and fully aware of just how serious the risk was. As a result, emergency systems were overwhelmed. As a result, first responders were swamped, and they were overcome. They were overcome with tragedy.
The government’s actions, simply put, were too little too late for almost 600 families who lost their loved ones and were too late for vulnerable British Columbians like Bunny Lalonde. This fall, Bunny…. She was going to go and visit her daughter in Ontario for the first time in 12 years. Instead, like so many others, she died from the heat, alone in her condo.
This is how Christine remembers the phone call from her uncle: “He said, ‘She’s dead, Christine. She’s dead.’ It was devastating.” On June 29, the same day as that fateful phone call, the Premier called such fatalities a part of life.
We’re talking about vulnerable British Columbians. We’re talking about British Columbians who deserved so much better than this.
Will the Premier admit today that he was wrong to say that vulnerable British Columbians like Bunny had a level of personal responsibility? Will the Premier admit today that his ignoring his own advice, the advice in his climate assessment report, in fact had deadly consequences for hundreds of vulnerable British Columbians?
Hon. A. Dix: The government, as the member will know, is pursuing an exceptional leading climate action plan, led by the Minister of the Environment. The government has been addressing issues of inequality — because this is fundamentally a question of inequality — by increasing income assistance rates, increasing disability rates, supporting vulnerable people in community.
The government raised the level — 85 percent of care homes were below the provincial standard in terms of long-term care staffing. We raised those levels. That helps us prepare, and there’s more needed to be done. There is more that’s going to be done.
This was an exceptional event. Even with the extraordinary actions to address climate change, to address inequality, the largest increase in the history of the B.C. Ambulance Service, which went from $424 million when I became Minister of Health to $559 million in advance of that…. Now we’ve seen, since then, significant action taken.
All of these actions make us more resilient, but we need to do more. That is evident. This is a period of climate change that is going to affect us now, next year, the year after. We need to take action on climate change, and we need to take action to ensure British Columbia becomes more resilient to the effects of climate change.
ISOLATION SPACES FOR COVID-19 CASES
AMONG UNHOUSED
PEOPLE
S. Furstenau: It’s astonishing to hear this conversation back and forth between the two parties — to be discussing climate change and to hear this government talk about their climate change plan and ignore the fact that they doubled the public subsidies to oil and gas that the previous government had to $1.3 billion a year.
This government is funding climate change. It is funding these outcomes with public money.
This province is facing overlapping crises. We had the heat dome. We had the wildfires. And we are now in the fourth wave of this pandemic. One of the communities, the hardest hit, is the unhoused.
As this government touted an early and premature recovery from COVID at the beginning of the summer, supportive housing options to isolate safely were quietly rolled back. A September memo in Vancouver Island Health referred to us being in the endemic phase of COVID and stated that the official response to unhoused people with COVID-19 is to give them a snack, a mask and education. In my riding, that meant a 66-year-old man with COVID and nowhere to go and COPD and a fractured hip was given the advice to sleep in his vehicle.
Now the crisis has reignited after hundreds of cases of COVID-19 were diagnosed in Victoria’s unhoused population last month. The government hastily promised 50 new beds for people to use to isolate and recover, but the number of beds is inconsistent with the number of cases, and people don’t have a month to wait. They’re sick. It’s getting colder, and the virus is spreading.
My question is for the Minister of Health. All of the data this summer showed that the pandemic wasn’t over. Why, in September, were health authorities rolling back supports for unhoused people when the data pointed very clearly to a rising fourth wave?
Hon. A. Dix: Some of that question is for the Minister of Housing, so he may respond on the second supplementary to the member’s question. But what I would say is this. We are in the fourth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. That’s the position of every health authority, and that’s my position.
That’s why, in our step-by-step reopening plan, we are still at step 3. It’s why we did more tests in the month of September than at any time. Our focus, from the beginning of this pandemic, has been to focus on those who are most vulnerable in every way, whether in long-term care or in assisted living or the most vulnerable in the community.
I am very proud of the work of health authorities in communities around the province — that we started in congregate living circumstances to vaccinate people and continued that effort while we provided unprecedented housing options and isolation options for people.
There are challenges now because, as the member will know, some of the facilities where we did some of that cohorting of people who were sick are now being used for guests and visitors and so on. Nonetheless, it is an unprecedented, continuing effort to support, to vaccinate our most vulnerable people.
I think the fact that we did it early and the fact that that effort created, maybe, a false impression that we were ahead in those areas of everywhere else…. The Downtown Eastside, for example, of Vancouver, has over 80 percent of people vaccinated, about 82 percent. Nonetheless, that is below other community health service areas in Vancouver. We started there soon, but they were overtaken when it was offered to everybody.
The efforts to vaccinate, the efforts to support and the efforts to house continue unabated and will continue unabated as we deal with this phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mr. Speaker: The Leader of the Third Party on a supplemental question.
S. Furstenau: Thank you to the minister for his response. However, there is an online memo in Island Health that clearly states that we’re in the endemic phase and that there won’t be supports provided to unhoused people — September 21.
COVID isn’t just impacting unhoused people in Victoria. Across the province, unhoused people are getting sick and have nowhere to go. In Kelowna, 130 cases in the unhoused population weren’t even recorded on Interior Health’s list of public exposure because it wasn’t “a risk to the public.” But unhoused British Columbians are the public, and they are at risk.
These are people with lives and loved ones, people who deserve the supports they need to keep themselves and their communities healthy. The similarities between this and the lack of action on the drug poisoning crisis are striking. Unhoused people do not receive the same level of care or investment.
My question is to the Attorney General and Minister for Housing. Yesterday the minister said that his government is working to find isolation spaces for unhoused people in Duncan, Nanaimo and Prince George. When can unhoused people in these and other communities across the province expect to have their needs met urgently?
Hon. D. Eby: Thank you to the member for the question. There are a number of assertions that the member made in her question and that are not accurate.
People who are COVID-positive in Victoria and who are unhoused can come inside if they choose to. We have space. The same is true in Vancouver; the same is true in Kelowna. But it is not the case across the province, and I accept that. We have a very serious situation in Trail.
B.C. Housing is working overtime with health authorities and with our non-profit partners to make sure, if people are COVID-positive and want to come inside — because, frankly, not everybody does — that they’re able to do that.
I would just underline the fact that the member’s question starts at a certain point in time, omitting all of the work that was done by health authorities, by B.C. Housing and by non-profit organizations to get people inside. Three hundred people were living in an encampment in Strathcona Park and 250 people in parks in Victoria. All of those people are housed now. They’re inside.
It was a heroic effort by B.C. Housing and by non-profit organizations, and that work continues. The system is stretched. It is strained. People are working overtime. Staffing is stretched to the limits. Even so, 50 additional spaces were opened in Victoria to respond in time to make sure people could get inside if they wanted to.
So a huge amount of work is done. I just want to thank everybody who helped deliver those results and who is still working overtime to respond to the fourth wave across the province.
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO HEATWAVE
S. Cadieux: In 2019, government received a strategic climate risk assessment that said: “Over 100 excess mortalities could occur in B.C.,” and “over 1,000 people could experience negative health impacts.” But instead of acting on the warning, the Premier blamed those who died, saying: “It was apparent to anyone who walked outside that we were in an unprecedented heatwave. And again, there’s a level of personal responsibility.”
Ignoring advice has consequences. It was government that was unprepared, with ambulance response times taking up to 16 hours and people dying, waiting for that help that never came. The Health Minister, a minute ago, said a number of things need to be done in response. The report was 2019. Government has had a couple of years to put things in place.
So perhaps the Premier’s cleanup crew would like to explain why the Premier blamed vulnerable seniors and people who couldn’t afford air conditioning for their own deaths.
Hon. A. Dix: I’ll simply just say I disagree with the assertion of the hon. member. What I’ll say is this. What you see in terms of vulnerability is the challenge of social isolation.
Prior to the pandemic, the member will note, we took unprecedented action for adult day programs for seniors; to increase home support for seniors — in fact, people with home support were less vulnerable in this time; to increase respite care for families; to support seniors in community and in care. These are unprecedented actions, actions that had been recommended by the seniors advocate and others for a long time. Action was taken in those areas.
With respect to the B.C. Ambulance Service, a dramatic increase, in the hundreds, of new people hired and new ambulances put in place, including air ambulances to support our ambulance system. In terms of inequality, significant action for people with disabilities. Significant action for income assistance. Extraordinary action in the area of housing.
Yet let’s acknowledge this. On that weekend, we lost people. We lost too many people. My responsibility as Minister of Health, and all of our responsibilities, is to work with everyone we can to ensure that we are prepared for what is coming, because this one-in-1,000-year event will no longer be a one-in-1,000-year event. It has happened, and we have to take action accordingly.
Mr. Speaker: The member on a supplemental.
S. Cadieux: The minister is right. There were too many deaths. But the Premier blamed people for their own deaths.
First responders in British Columbia thought the Premier’s comments were out of line. Take the words of the president of the B.C. Professional Firefighters Association: “It’s sickening to hear those comments. We have a large percentage of our population that don’t have access to proper cooling in the buildings that they live in.”
Again, the Premier needs to explain why he chose to blame the victims of this tragic heatwave for their own deaths.
Hon. A. Dix: Thanks to the member for her question. The Premier, I myself, every member of the government and, I believe, every member of the opposition, understands now, if understanding was needed — I think it’s fair to say that all of the actions taken on the issue of climate change demonstrate that commitment that has been there for years for people in this Legislature — the need to take even more action to be more resilient.
This was an unprecedented event. The member refers to the report. We had, at an event in 2009, at that time, 110 excess deaths as a result of a heat event that was mostly centred in the Fraser Health Authority. But it took, I would say, till 2018 for the heat warning system that applies everywhere else in the country to be applied by the federal government to British Columbia.
These events are the result of climate change, and action is needed to respond to them. Since 2017, the Premier has shown his commitment by addressing inequality, by addressing climate change, by supporting people where they need help. I think he is committed, as every member of this House is committed, to supporting people and to responding to the impact of this unprecedented heatwave.
We are going to receive soon, I believe, some time in the future, the report of the coroner, which will be a case-by-case analysis of what happened. That is the independent review, as required. The BCCDC and the provincial health office is doing its own review. You saw the preliminary findings at the UBCM, which were shared with the opposition.
It’s our intention to continue to become more resilient as a society but also to continue our efforts to deal with inequality, continue our efforts to deal with social isolation and continue our efforts to fight climate change.
K. Kirkpatrick: Now, 570 is a number, and on behalf of British Columbians, we have to continue to put a face to that number and a face to that tragedy.
Brian Bertuzzi is the assistant fire chief at Fire Hall No. 5 in Vancouver. On June 28, Brian describes the chaos at the fire hall like it was a war zone. Every fire truck in the city was out, and firefighters were stretched to their limits and unable to help everyone who needed it. On the fire hall driveway, an elderly man was dying as Chief Bertuzzi administered CPR.
The next day the Premier was giddy and dismissed the heatwave deaths as a fact of life. This after ignoring his own climate report assessment that warned that these kinds of things could happen.
So why did the Premier describe a systemic failure as a matter of personal responsibility?
Hon. A. Dix: First of all, as the member will know, since that weekend but throughout my time as Minister of Health, I’ve done a lot of work with firefighters, with ambulance paramedics, to improve emergency response in B.C.
I think the work that firefighters and ambulance paramedics and emergency room personnel and health authority staff and home support workers and all those people in the health care system in the midst of two public health emergencies who went above and beyond that weekend deserves our thanks.
I believe….
Interjection.
Hon. A. Dix: I was agreeing. I think the Leader of the Opposition is misunderstanding. I wanted to make the point that everybody who worked that weekend and responded above and beyond the call deserves our thanks. I know that the opposition agrees with that. That was not a point to be made, or even a suggestion that anyone else thought differently. This is just to be clear.
I think what’s required now, and what we’ve done with respect to first responders, for example, is taken, in addition to the largest increases…. Other than Mental Health and Addictions, the largest Ministry of Health increases since I became the Minister of Health were to the ambulance service. Number 1 has been Mental Health and Addictions. That’s been dealing with the overdose crisis in particular. Number 2 has been ambulance paramedics — which also, to a great extent, we’d all agree, is addressing the overdose crisis. Ambulance paramedics are frequently and firefighters are frequently on the front lines of that.
What’s required, it seems to me, is continued investment in first responders. When people call for an ambulance, they need to get an ambulance. The fact that we went from $424 million to $559 million is great, but when you need an ambulance and it doesn’t come, that’s not good enough. So we add services.
What has that meant? Since then, we’re hiring 85 new ambulance paramedics, 24 new ambulances, 30 more dispatchers, upgrading services in 24 rural communities, upgrading services to 24-7 full-time staffing, upgraded services in 26 other communities because that response is needed as well. When people call for an ambulance, they need to get an ambulance. That’s what we’re committed to seeing happen.
[End of question period.]
Tabling Documents
Hon. D. Eby: I have the honour to present the 2020-2021 Annual Report of the Environmental Appeal Board.
Reports from Committees
CHILDREN AND YOUTH COMMITTEE
J. Sims: I have the honour to present the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth’s Annual Report 2020-21, a copy of which has been deposited with the Office of the Clerk. The report summarizes the committee’s activities from December 2020 to March 2021.
I move that the report be taken as read and received.
Motion approved.
J. Sims: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the report.
Leave granted.
J. Sims: I move the report be adopted.
In doing so, I would like to make some brief comments. The report covers the activities of the committee from December 9, 2020 to March 31, 2021. During this time, the committee reviewed five reports, including an investigative report on rights of children and youth under the Mental Health Act, an examination of the impacts of the pandemic on children and youth with special needs, and the representative’s annual report and service plan.
The report also includes a summary of the committee’s work in the fifth session of the 41st parliament, from April 29, 2020, to September 17, 2020, in which three reports were reviewed. In light of the recent discoveries at former Indian residential schools in B.C. and across Canada, the committee acknowledges that the residential school system and colonialism have had, and continue to have, a profound impact on Indigenous children, youth, families and communities in B.C. and across the country.
Reflecting on our work as a committee, we recognize that the system of support must improve for Indigenous youth and youth in care. We are committed to continuing to work with the representative to shine a light on the challenges and needs of Indigenous children, youth, families and communities in this province.
Additionally, the committee acknowledges the challenges that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on children, youth, families and caregivers. As we emerge from the pandemic, we as a committee will continue to monitor and bring awareness to the new and ongoing challenges facing British Columbia’s children, youth and families.
On behalf of all committee members, I would like to express our appreciation to the Office of the Representative for Children and Youth and the Ministry of Children and Family Development for their ongoing work supporting children and youth in B.C. during these very difficult times.
In closing, I also want to personally thank all committee members, especially the Deputy Chair, the member for Cariboo North, for their continued dedication and contributions to the committee. I appreciate the adaptability and willingness of all members to work remotely and meet virtually in recent months.
C. Oakes: First, I too want to acknowledge the incredible work of the committee members. The reports are challenging to read. They’re difficult. I want to start by acknowledging the work that Dr. Charlesworth, her office and her team have done on highlighting and bringing forward incredibly important reports for all of us to be reviewing in this Legislature.
When we talk about truth and reconciliation as legislators, we should be ensuring that the recommendations that have been put forward in these reports get moved forward, that the reports that have been identified do not sit on a shelf. For all of us as committee members, I know that it is something that we’re all committed to doing, to ensuring that the recommendations are moving forward.
Finally, I want to thank all of the children, the youth and the families that told their impactful stories. It’s difficult to read. I encourage all members to read the reports. They’re important work. As we look at truth and reconciliation, we need to ensure that these reports do not get lost.
Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is the adoption of the report.
Motion approved.
PARLIAMENTARY REFORM, ETHICAL
CONDUCT, STANDING ORDERS
AND
PRIVATE BILLS COMMITTEE
J. Sims: I have the honour to present the report of the Select Standing Committee on Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills on Bill Pr401.
I move that the report be taken as read and received.
Motion approved.
J. Sims: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the report.
Leave granted.
J. Sims: I move adoption of the report, and in so doing, I would like to make some brief comments.
Bill Pr401, intituled United Church of Canada Amendment Act, 2021, concerns the United Church of Canada. The United Church of Canada was incorporated by an act of the federal parliament in 1924, and certain rights and powers, specifically with respect to property of the United Church of Canada and United Church congregations in B.C., are governed by the United Church of Canada Act, which was enacted in 1924 and amended once in 1927.
The United Church of Canada has recently restructured its governance structure and, having petitioned the federal parliament to amend its act of incorporation, it now requires amendments to its provincial act in British Columbia.
Bill Pr401 was introduced and read a first time on June 17, 2021. It then stood referred to the Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills Committee.
On September 20, 2021, the committee met and considered the proposed private bill and asked questions of the United Church of Canada’s general secretary and the church’s solicitor and certified parliamentary agent. I’m pleased to note that the recommendation for the private bill to proceed was unanimously supported by the committee.
A. Wilkinson: One of the often overlooked functions of this chamber, as with chambers across the country, is to facilitate the civil society aspects that are governed by legislation.
This private bill requires legislation that has already been passed in a number of Canadian provinces, so I think it’s a moment to celebrate our ability to facilitate the activities of churches, of civil society organizations across the country, and we wish the United Church well.
Mr. Speaker: Members, the question is the adoption of the report.
Motion approved.
Hon. R. Kahlon: I seek leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
Introductions by Members
Hon. R. Kahlon: I’d like the House to join me in welcoming Karen Choe-Fichte, who is the Minister Counselor for Economic Affairs, embassy of the United States of America. I know many of my colleagues look forward to meeting with her in the next couple of hours.
Orders of the Day
Hon. M. Farnworth: I call continued second reading debate on Bill 14.
[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]
Second Reading of Bills
BILL 14 — EARLY CHILDHOOD
EDUCATORS
ACT
(continued)
Deputy Speaker: All right, Members. I’d like to get this debate underway. If you have conversations, you can take them outside so we can allow the member her place to share her remarks on this bill. Thank you, Members.
N. Sharma: It’s really an honour to continue my words of support for Bill 14 today.
I want to start by acknowledging that I’m coming to you from the traditional territory of the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking people, where we operate for this Legislative Assembly. I’m so honoured to be here.
I talked a little bit yesterday about how amazing it was, this commitment to building a new social program in B.C. and child care, and how much it’s impacting so many families across B.C. I want to start today talking about the leadership that it took to get here today.
Some of that leadership is in the room with the Minister of State for Child Care, who I know has been tirelessly advocating for child care across this province, meeting with child care providers and understanding what their needs are and really understanding how to build a system. I want to thank and acknowledge all of her team over the years that have been also hard at work to build child care in B.C.
I want to take a step back to thank and acknowledge the $10-a-day child care advocates, one of whom is probably well known to many people here, Sharon Gregson, who is a constituent of mine, who is tireless in her efforts to get $10-a-day on the agenda across the province and now across the country.
I know this. She went across B.C. speaking to city councils, organizing stroller brigades. I remember, before I was elected, being asked and pushing a stroller in one of those brigades. She just has been, along with a lot of the other women that have been advocating for child care, so tireless.
I asked her once how she kept hope for so many years that child care was actually going to come, and she told me that to be a child care advocate is to be an eternal optimist. I take those words here, and I think about that and the progress that we’re making, and I just think about all of those women in all of those decades and those women that were actually left out of the workforce and left out of those spaces and those rooms for decades because of inadequate child care.
I’m so grateful for the progress we’ve made and also grateful that I know that those $10-a-day advocates will continue to hold us to account for the work that we do as we unroll our ten-year child care plan and build a new universal program in B.C.
I want to talk a little bit about the impacts that we’ve seen already. The Minister of State for Childcare spoke very eloquently yesterday about real-life stories, about what these investments mean. So $2.3 billion into our child care programs so far, and because of the efforts of building the groundwork for a universal child care program and the advocacy of our government, the federal government has now come to the table.
I was actually so grateful to hear our federal government talk about $10-a-day child care, and I guess we all, as MLAs of this province, should be so honoured that that movement was a grassroots movement that started here in B.C. and will change lives across this country.
I want to talk a little bit about our affordability measures, because I think a lot of MLAs hear all the time in their community about the affordability of child care and how that impacts everybody’s daily lives. As a mother with a two-year-old in child care, I know firsthand some of those struggles. That is something that was a key priority in our child care plan.
The number of $411 million back into parents’ pockets. I just want us to all think about that in terms of what that means for our economy, what that means for affordability for those parents that have that money and what it means for the families and the stresses that they had and helping them overcome that challenge. It’s pretty huge. It comes down to real-life stories about people telling us that they now have more money to put their kids into extracurricular activities or save money for once, instead of it going into child care. It’s pretty huge.
We often hear also about the availability of child care spaces. I’m just…. You know, it is one of, I think, the hardest things of our child care plan but also one of the things that I think we should all be really proud of — 26,000 new licensed child care spaces across the province, and that number is growing every day. We have announcements every day. That means better accessibility for families, which is pretty huge. I remember it took me, with my daughter, years ago, years to find a child care spot, and obviously that’s not acceptable.
We inherited this government child care chaos, which is a term that I think came from $10-a-day. But over the 3½ years or four years that we’ve been chipping away at it, it’s getting better. I couldn’t be prouder of the work of all of the strong women that we have, including our Finance Minister, for advocating so much for child care and doing the work to get it done.
I want to talk a little bit about early childhood educators as well. I know that we all have at some point trusted our kids, if we have them, in the hands of early childhood educators. Many studies have shown that it’s the years between zero and five that are the most important for a child’s brain development, and who do we trust with that work? We trust these early childhood educators to do that every day.
Bill 14 really is about elevating our respect not only for the profession and those mostly women that spend their time working with our kids, but also helping to support them and the important work they’re doing for so many kids across B.C.
I want to say a little bit more about the respect and the trust that we put in early childhood educators. If you travel the province and hear about early childhood educators and their experiences with kids, they often talk about how they love their job, how they’re around those kids because they love that time period in their lives, and they love the idea that they could influence these kids’ futures. But for far too long, they were paid really, really minimum wage or below.
It’s mostly women of colour in a lot of places, especially in my riding, that are doing the work. It’s one of the most undervalued professions, I think I would say, in this province. That is unacceptable. So the pillar of our child care plan — which dedicates the time, resources and effort to early childhood educators — really can’t be, basically, held up enough, because it’s one of the important things that we can do not only for women working in our province but also for the kids that they serve.
I know that the Childcare B.C. plan has many pillars, and Bill 15, which was in its second reading yesterday, had some of those components that will be enshrined, along with the piece of legislation today, into law in this province. That is to uphold Indigenous child care and to listen to Indigenous leaders about their particular needs of child care in their communities and how to serve Indigenous children.
Accountability. We can only build this child care plan with constant communication with child care providers and understanding how it’s impacted, but also built-in accountability. I know the minister of state is open to this accountability. She works so hard every day. There will be a way for people to tell us how we’re doing in building this plan and to keep pressure on us to make sure that we keep on making it more affordable, keep on building spaces and keep on supporting the workforce. I think that’s a very vital component of the plan.
I’m really grateful for what this legislation — dual legislation that will be passed, hopefully today, with the support of the House — will do. Child care really — I think the advocates will say this a lot — was kind of a patchwork within our ministries. That meant that there was no focused attention given to child care. That really changed with the Minister of State for Child Care and key investments. These legislations still have to bring that together so that we can actually have what we need — the scaffolding to implement a universal social program in B.C.
These are really exciting developments that I know will just support more of our work when it comes to building child care in B.C. I know we’ll hear from more and more families every year about the impacts that we’re having in communities. These have real impacts for gender equality, for our economy and for early years for our children.
I know that there’s much more work to do, but I’m so grateful for the progress and honoured to be part of a government that’s committed to child care. I look forward to the passing of this legislation so we continue on our journey for universal child care for B.C.
A. Olsen: Thank you for the opportunity to rise in support of Bill 14, the Early Childhood Educators Act. It’s an honour to be having this conversation here in British Columbia.
I think that it’s important to first acknowledge the importance of our children in our families and the importance that they get a safe education and a safe place to be when parents need their children to be looked after while they’re at work and are taking care of the other parts of life. I raise my hands in gratitude for all of the early childhood educators in Saanich North and the Islands and across the province for providing that safe space for our children.
Safe, regulated, early childhood education is a critical component to lifelong learning. It’s where our kids will get introduced to each other, in many ways, where they will first learn how to forge friendships and establish the skills that they need in order to be able to communicate and to succeed in life.
Along with my colleague, I’m thrilled that child care will become a part of that education system — which, I think, we’re proud of here in this province and which we need to continue to advocate for — and that it’s not being deemed as part of the Ministry of Children and Family Development but rather a part of our education system.
It’s something that we’ve long advocated for in the B.C. Green caucus: that early childhood education absolutely must be founded on good principles, with a sustainable model and supporting professionals that meet the needs of our children today and for the future.
Frankly, aspects of the debate that I have listened to for this bill have been mystifying to me. One of the things that I’ve heard from my peer group is that they need and want accessible child care today, right now — they need it immediately — and that their lives are incredibly challenged without access to this early childhood education.
Very few of my friends have complained to me about what’s happened in the past, whether it be 30 years ago or 20 years ago or even 10 years ago. What they’re really focused on, and I think what the debate in this Legislature needs to be absolutely focused on, is what we are doing today and going forward. The debate of 30 years, the debate of 16 years…. “They did this.” “This happened.” “They didn’t do this.” “This was neglected for….” To me, it needs to be focused on what we’re doing.
The debate around this bill about regulating early childhood educators needs to be about what we’re doing right now, which is setting up a system that is going to support parents, our peers, to be able to take part in life as they need to be able to, a life that’s becoming increasingly unaffordable. Unfortunately, the debate in this place often focuses on what didn’t happen in the past. Let’s focus on what we’ve got immediately in front of us and going forward.
We must, I think, move forward with this process that is outlined in this bill — essentially, professionalizing early childhood education. That’s not to say that there are not professionals working as early childhood educators. I want to be very clear on that. I don’t want anybody to hear that if you’re working in this field, you’re not a professional. But there are aspects that we do in this House that allow for an industry to be regulated and for standards to be put in place. That’s what this bill is laying the groundwork for.
Creating a registry that allows for a designation, for example, is really important. Creating a system to review and investigate complaints from early childhood educators is a very important step that needs to be taken, and then, also, facilitating the recognized post-secondary institutions and programs, which would then lead to being able to be designated as a registered early childhood educator.
These are all really important steps we do in this place to ensure that wages will actually continue to improve for early childhood educators, which has been one of the criticisms that I have heard from people working in this field in my constituency, and will attract more people to work in the field.
One of the things that I think is acceptable to be talking about from the past, that has been inherited, is that when you’re trying to ramp up a program from where it was, having the people working in the field is one of the challenges — having enough people working in the field. So we definitely need to attract more people into wanting to become early childhood educators. One of the ways that’s going to happen is by ensuring that there are standards and there are regulations and that there is registration and that people can carry that designation.
Again, I think I’m a little bit challenged with some of the arguments that we’re making. Perhaps I’ll be corrected if I’m wrong in this, but I was hearing, I think, some of the messages from my colleagues in the official opposition arguing against this creation of standards and regulations, talking about it as if it’s like red tape and that there are obstacles to this.
I think that’s really an unfortunate way to characterize the situation. Because I think that…. From my peers and the people that I talk to that need to have early childhood education and child care for their kids, they’re desperate. The desperation creates a vulnerability, and without standards and without regulations and without registered professionals working in the field, that is a very, very challenging situation for our families and for our children.
Just any person walking in off the street should not be able to call themselves an early childhood educator. I recognize that there might be some more obstacles than that. However, let’s not call this red tape. Let’s not suggest that these are unnecessary obstacles. I can’t imagine us arguing that with many, many other professional industries in this province.
You just can’t walk in off the street and become a nurse. There’s a reason why there are registered nurses. It’s because they have to achieve a certain level of education from a specific program that’s been regulated and identified as being one that is able, then, to carry that designation. Then they’re actually able to work in the field professionally and achieve a livable wage and all of the things that come with that.
So as we are creating these standards and this registry, let’s not suggest these are unnecessary obstacles. There are obstacles. I certainly agree that we shouldn’t be creating obstacles unnecessarily, but registering and regulating the standards for this, in my opinion anyways, is not one of those.
Initially it felt like, back in 2017 when the government started on this work, that there was no plan. I recognize that there was no plan until there is a plan. There were a lot of investments that were made in trying to increase the number of spaces. It was very focused on the number of spaces that were being created.
There was also a real challenge with the number of people working in the field and available to be employed in order to create more spaces. So there was this real kind of tug-of-war that was happening, I guess, in this field. I want to raise my hands to the minister of state for the work, the dedicated work, that she has done in order to try to focus this into more of a planned approach.
With that, though, I would like to say that one of the things that I’ve heard, especially from providers that are in…. I’m going to honour the comments that they said to me when I met with them. They’re a for-profit business, but as was suggested, there might not be a lot of profits in the business.
Nonetheless, they’re quite concerned that the supports that they have and the encouragement that they have been given from this government…. They’re concerned that that might end, specifically with the relationship with the federal government and the parameters that the federal government puts in place for the funding. They’re very much wanting to ensure that the preference from our perspective is that government is investing public money into the not-for-profit area, but the…. Sorry, I should say this is for the for-profit. I’m getting myself turned around.
The preference would be to be investing in the not-for-profit child care providers, but those for-profit child care providers that have had investments and encouragement to build and to invest in those spaces…. They’re quite concerned that those investments might stop. I just encourage the minister of state and the government to continue to support those businesses in our riding that have been providing quality child care for our youth and work with them, especially if there are some conditions that are put in place by the federal government and the money that’s flowing.
The other thing that I think is a concern that’s been raised is around the $4 wage increase. This isn’t a concern that people don’t like it. People are concerned that it might end and that the support for the workers might. So there needs to be some, I think, discussion with some of those child care providers to ensure that they’re able to continue to pay proper wages for regulated and registered early childhood educators. There needs to be some certainty in that.
Overall, I just want to end by saying that we need to really move away from scarcity in our education system. As we’re creating this early childhood education system that’s going to be connected to education, I really hope that the government of British Columbia continues to invest in our public education system, that we can get past the chronic underfunding that we’ve seen and that we move towards a scenario where we view education as the best investment that we can make in our society.
I’ve often had these conversations with constituents who are encouraging me to encourage the government by saying what I just said. They will kind of put a caveat around it and say: “Well, I recognize that the government doesn’t see immediate return on the investments in education, because it’s a 12-year process for our children.”
But I can tell you, as a parent myself, an investment in my child’s classroom is an immediate investment in the quality of life of our family, in the quality of life of our children, in the quality of the education that they get today, tomorrow and every day that they’re in the education system. It’s a good investment for the long term, but it’s also a really good investment today. We’ll see the benefits today.
If our kids have got up-to-date materials, if our kids and their teachers have the resources, if there’s space in their classroom and they’re not overcrowded — those are all really important aspects of the quality of education. We’ve advocated for this through the Ministry of Education for our public education system. We’ll continue to advocate this for our early childhood education component to that.
I just want to end today by saying that we support this work the government’s doing to create this program, this service that so many of our peers have articulated desire to have and the need to make their life work. We look forward to being a champion for more investments in this service and in this system.
I’ll just leave it at that. Thank you to the minister. We look forward to seeing a well-funded early childhood education, child care system for British Columbia families.
HÍSW̱ḴE SIÁM.
M. Dykeman: It’s an honour to rise and speak to the ECE Act brought forward by the minister of state. I’m thrilled to have the opportunity to talk about how this act benefits my riding of Langley East and how excited I am that it’ll benefit our future generations.
I recall the first time I met the minister, actually. She had come to my riding to talk to…. We had a round table on child care. We talked about the challenges. Langley East is a very fast-growing riding. We have so many young families moving in with young children.
As school board chair, one of the things that I probably received…. I’d say probably over half of my emails had something to do with child care, which, as school board chair, was really difficult, because we don’t necessarily create child care spaces. We, in the Langley school district, have a great relationship with the ministry and have been able to create child care spaces within our schools, but we didn’t have the direct ability to create more spaces.
I, myself, recall the first time I took my son to preschool when he was three. Walking your child in the very first time is one of the most exciting, but also difficult, moments of your life. Your stomach is turning. Your heart’s racing, and you’re leaving your child — your whole life — with someone. You know, sort of anecdotally, about the benefits, but it’s still a difficult moment for a parent to take their child to leave them.
I was really excited to read about the changes coming forward with the ECE Act, including creating a stand-alone statute for registration oversight of the ECE workforce, creating a public registry for ECEs, assistants and approved post-secondary early childhood education programs, giving the registrar authority to get information needed to review complaints, requiring criminal records checks for all registered ECEs.
These are important changes, as the member opposite prior spoke. These are positive, positive changes. I know I was a little dismayed to hear that it was being viewed as, perhaps, a barrier, especially since June of 2018 we’ve invested $1.5 million in the start-up grant program, which supports individuals and unlicensed child care providers to become licensed. This wasn’t a situation where this was a surprise. There was funding provided to facilitate this excellent change.
As a parent, we want to know that our children are going to a safe place, a place where they’re going to benefit from the incredible opportunities that exist for socialization and other excitement. My son always came home excited after. He talked about all the things he learned, about all the friendships he made, about all of the people he cares about in there.
In the first few years of life, there are more than one million neural connections that are formed with a child each second. It’s a pace that’s never repeated again. These are formative years, where experiences that children have shape their future. We know that it’s a wise investment to invest in children.
Actually, education is one of the greatest indicators of a robust democracy. So the opportunities that we provide for young people early on come back threefold at least. For instance, in Langley East, we received 818 new licensed spaces, with total child care investments of over $57 million, which saved families over $25 million through fee reductions.
That $25 million goes right back into the economy in many ways, through purchases, through other investments and also through people being available to work in places. It often benefits women who are then able to return to the workforce. I know, myself, as a single mom, opportunities to have child care were so important for me — opportunities for my children to be able to go to good places with qualified people who then provided exciting opportunities for them to learn and be around people.
I’m thrilled with this act and what it means for our future generations. I’m thrilled to see such support within the House for child care, recognizing how important it is to make these investments. With that, I know that there are others that would like to speak on this act, so I will take my seat. I’d like to thank the minister for all of her work on this.
K. Paddon: I am thrilled to rise in support. I want to thank the minister of state as well as the ministers who came before and who are there now for all of the work here.
I became a mom in 2005. What I didn’t know when I became a mom is that I’d have to make a very hard decision a couple of years later. I became a mom at a time when this government was not in power, and the decisions that I had to make in order to make sure my children were taken care of were substantial.
My husband and I — I’m very lucky to have a very supportive partner — are a two-income family, and we have had to be since the children came. The choice that we made is we looked around at the spots. We looked around at what was available. We looked around at: how would we know the quality of the care providers available to us? There are so many quality care providers available in Chilliwack and Chilliwack-Kent and across the province.
Ultimately, we couldn’t afford it, so we made the choice that I would work nights and weekends and my partner would work Monday to Friday. He would build his career. Now, this is a choice that women need to make, that families need to make together about whose career can go forward. This is a child care issue. Child care is an equity issue, and it doesn’t only impact women.
But I do need to talk about the impact it had here. I was an educated, independent, career-oriented woman. I made the choice to work evenings and weekends because somebody needed to care for our children. That was the environment that was present.
Now, I do know that members opposite have mentioned that if I had been single, I would have had more options. Had I chosen to leave my husband, there would have been, under the previous government’s plan, options for me. I would have been able to work during the day. I would have been able to pursue the field that I was educated in.
At the end of the day, I have no complaints, because I stand in this House, and I’m very privileged to do so, and it was my path that led me here. But this was part of my path, the path where I had to choose how we were going to move forward as a family. The irony is that because we chose to move forward as a family, it almost cost me my marriage. It almost cost my children their family and that unit, because I didn’t see my husband, essentially, for four years while we worked that schedule.
Child care spaces weren’t available, and the ones that were, weren’t affordable, because I didn’t qualify, we didn’t qualify, for any supports. It wasn’t affordable because we were both starting our careers.
Another thing that I saw were my friends who were entering their careers as early childhood educators and the uncertainty about what that job looked like, where they would work, who their colleagues were to be when they got there, what credentials were needed. All ECE spots at that time were not created equal. The training was not created equal. As a parent, it was difficult, but for my friends who were entering the field, it was difficult — again, a field that is hugely made up of women.
So the decision to professionalize early childhood education, to recognize a profession as a profession, even though it’s only women…. I say “only” not out of any sense of contempt myself but because traditionally we do not see women’s professions recognized. We have our nurses, and I’m so grateful for them. Their field is professionalized. But how many others can we think of?
I worked as a community support worker, residential support worker, mental health support worker. It wasn’t professionalized. Again, predominantly woman. Now, when I was working in these roles, my wage…. I could not afford child care, and as I just mentioned, in the previous reality, I didn’t qualify for the programs because I was still part of a marriage.
What I want to say is thank you. Thank you for adding this professionalization. Thank you for adding a standard so that people know what to count on. I am so excited, because I know….
In my world, I have a Miss Lana. I’m just going to leave it at that — no last name. She’s an ECE worker, and she’s amazing. My kids loved her. I had a Mrs. Knelson. Both of my children benefited from her. It’s only because I had these women in our lives that I was able to take steps and pursue my career, pursue my education and continue on my path.
Now, this might not…. You know, it seems far away. When we’re far away from the hard times, they feel far away, which is good. It’s a blessing. I’m grateful for it. But I remember how close we came just because there weren’t opportunities, just because the programs weren’t available, just because the policies and the decisions being made were not supportive of my family.
I come from a place where the idea is that 24-hour universal child care is available because every child is born with two parents and one really could stay home, couldn’t they? That’s a hard lesson to try to internalize. That message came from a member of this House — that as a mother, I should be making a better decision for my children.
Now, the work I get to do here, the work that my friends get to do here on both sides of the House, whether they are women or men, whether they have children or not, is a privilege, and it is one that for many of us, we can only do because of ECE workers, because of child care. Our position here comes with a paycheque, so maybe we can afford differently, but the path to get here didn’t start here.
I am happy that in this House now, we are no longer saying and we are no longer accepting the idea that I am my child’s universal 24-hour child care and that there ought not to be any government program that would cost the taxpayer money.
I am proud to be part of a team that recognizes the value that we have by creating equality, by creating access and by allowing full participation. Whether you have a two-year-old or you have a 32-year-old, there’s something to be gained there.
I am proud that I’m part of a family that recognizes female-driven professions deserve professionalization. They deserve the respect and the notoriety — maybe notoriety is not the right word — the recognition, the achievement that comes with being part of a profession that is recognized as its own thing with its own regulations, that training is identified as what is and isn’t part of that profession.
Now, I’ve heard some suggest that this means we’ll lose that more holistic approach. I don’t understand that argument. The people who are coming into this field…. More people can come into this field now, because they’ll be able to earn a living wage, because they know for sure what training they need to enter.
These people bring this range of experience and life experiences and knowledge and come from different kinds of communities, different kinds of families, different cultures. So that holistic nature is still very much a part of it. Nobody is saying that we have a minimum standard now, and that’s all that should be done. Do you know what? I have yet to meet an early childhood educator who would ever accept the minimum anyway.
The early childhood educators I know have hugged my children and wiped their tears. They’ve taught them how to be autonomous human beings in the world. They’ve given them things that I can’t. I have two teenagers now, and I’m telling you right now that the advice I give is never going to be as well-received as that of an expert. So let’s recognize that they’re experts.
I feel like the idea that there’s more red tape, when what we’re actually calling for is that there’s recognition, and the idea that there are barriers when what we’re actually saying is: “Here’s a definition; here’s an identity….” Public policy and being part of this team…. The public policy produced here with regard to ECE and child care and this movement of this social program will make it so that my daughter hopefully does not have to leave her career, her profession or her husband in order to get child care.
All of these things are identity statements. This is who we are. This is who British Columbians are. We recognize and we’re taking the action to make sure that families can stay together and that that doesn’t come at the cost of women having to take a step back and sit down.
I loved the time I got with my babies. I loved the time I got to take care of them. Now that they’re teenagers, I remember it fondly, because they slept a lot, and despite the crying, there was more silence in my house. I love that I have my teenagers now. Most of all, I know that my friends and my family who are making decisions to start families right now are not doing so at the peril that was in place under the government when I was making my little humans.
The proposed ECE act will help strengthen and support quality as well. This will be able to lift everybody. The training and identifying what training is necessary — what training is helpful, what training is inclusive — will go a long way into a second part that’s been very important to me, especially with regard to these bills, this bill specifically but also the one discussed yesterday.
Inclusive child care is critical — child care that doesn’t leave anyone out, child care where we know that the training provided and the training available and the standards will create environments that can include all of our children. Now we are, more than ever, recognizing the diverse abilities of our children and adults, of ourselves, of our colleagues. The diverse ability isn’t going to fit into that cookie-cutter model.
Focusing on inclusivity, focusing on this being for all children, focusing on what can be gained by raising up all of our ECE workers, which raises up all of our children, which opens up options in our economy, which opens up options for families, which opens up options for our entire communities….
This is not only about recognizing a profession that it is long overdue that we recognize. This is not only about standards and regulations. This is not only about definitions, and it’s not only about babies and women. This is a way we can raise up our entire communities, and we can move forward together. This is a way we can protect our families. This is a way we can protect our health, our mental health. We can have safeguards in place for our children.
I can’t think of enough things that are good to say about this. I know in my community of Chilliwack-Kent and Chilliwack, because they’re very intertwined, this government has invested over $31 million in child care. That’s already saved $17 million for parents. Now, that doesn’t speak to how many families that saved. That doesn’t speak to how many people have better mental health because they’re able to have that resource, because they’re not having to make those difficult, life-changing choices.
It doesn’t speak to how many kids have that extra set of eyes on them, or have access to those different ways of seeing the world, and those people who will hug them and who will wipe their tears away. It doesn’t say how much has been gained from any of that.
I think of 2006, when I was trying to put my first child into daycare so I could continue my career, and 2006 was a long time ago. But I know I’ve heard from constituents who are making that choice now. It is a choice. It ought to be a choice. It wasn’t a choice for me in 2006.
Now, I know I also heard comments during around that same time that it was harmful for kids, anyway, for me to put them in child care; that they should really be with their parent, their mother; that maybe I should make a better choice. I mean, ultimately, the result was the same, but I would like to clarify that there wasn’t a choice.
Anything that raises ECEs, that supports them in their training, that provides standards, that allows parents to understand who they’re hiring, who they’re leaving their children with, who’s watching and nurturing and teaching their babies — anything that does that, I’m a fan of.
Hon. B. Ma: I could not turn away from my colleague as she was giving that speech.
What an incredible story — thank you so much for sharing your personal story.
In listening to her speak, it honestly felt as though I was listening to the culmination of all the hopes and dreams of generations of women who have graced these chambers on both sides of the House, who have believed that better could be possible for women outside of the House as well. This work towards universal child care is something that I’ve become quite passionate about, which is perhaps a little bit ironic, because I have no children of my own.
So I’m also very grateful to you for sharing your personal story, because the only comparable story I could have offered from my personal life would probably be the care of my cats, which, I have to admit, my partner is extremely diligent about. I think he would be very much in favour of a universal cat care–giving act. But we are not discussing that today.
I also found that it was an incredible story to hear from somebody representing Chilliwack-Kent, because of some of the comments that were made from the predecessor that she defeated in the last election.
The change in tone in terms of how the communities of Chilliwack-Kent are being represented on this file is like night and day. We went from hearing comments about how women should make different choices about….
You know, I really don’t want to rehash it. I’m just going to leave it there. I think a lot of the members of the House know what came out of the previous member for Chilliwack-Kent’s mouth on this topic, and to hear the new member for Chilliwack-Kent speak this way about child care is incredibly refreshing and, honestly, very heartwarming in terms of the direction that we are going, collectively.
Now, just because I don’t have children of my own doesn’t mean that I don’t understand, though perhaps not to the full extent that somebody who does have their own child does, the importance of child care. My community is a community where nearly one in five families is led by a single parent. I cannot imagine the kinds of difficult choices that these parents have to make day in and day out about how to support their children, how to go to work and how to make money to feed their child while ensuring their child is safe throughout the day.
The increased access to child care has been incredibly important to my community. I hear stories all the time from families about how the three affordability programs have changed their lives. That’s the child care fee reduction initiative. There are the affordable child care benefit and, of course, the $10-a-day child care pilot sites.
I have the incredible privilege, of course, to actually look at the Minister of State for Child Care as I give this speech. It’s been her incredible work that’s gotten us this far, and I know that we will be able to continue that work.
I want to speak a moment about the pilot project. In the pilot project, I met a number of families who have benefitted from the pilot project. We have a pilot project in my home community of North Vancouver, run by the North Shore Neighbourhood House. The pilot project gives every family that is enrolled into their program access to $10-a-day or less child care, and this is regardless of their family status or their income level. It’s a pilot program for the universal program.
I met a single mother who broke down in tears when she discovered that her child would be enrolled into this program. She realized that she could actually return to work full-time so that she could make enough money to keep a roof over her head for more than one month at a time.
I met a family that some people may consider to be better off. A father, a mother, two children — twins. The father makes pretty decent money, in the mid-$100,000s. But even with the $150,000 a year and a family of four, these days, that’s pretty middle class. So the mother had chosen, for a long time, to be a stay-at-home mom. They were able to afford maybe about a day a week of child care.
When they discovered that they were enrolled in this program, they were able to put their children into full-time care. She was able to return to her profession that she was very passionate about, and it happened to be a profession that we need a lot of people in. She was a nurse. So she was actually able to return to full-time work as a nurse in the months leading up to the global pandemic, during which we needed a lot of nurses.
I also met a mother who was struggling in the few weeks ahead of when I met her, before she found out about her child’s enrolment in the pilot project, who was debating whether or not she was able to stay in her line of work or whether she would have to take leave and become a full-time mother as well.
The line of work she was in was…. She was an early childhood educator. The number of children that she would have had to give up caring for, because she was not able to afford her own care for her own child, greatly outnumbered the…. It would have been many more children than her own child.
Because of this pilot program, what was really wonderful is she not only was able to stay in her line of work, but she was actually able to stay in her line of work at the pilot site itself. So she was able to have her child enrolled in the pilot site that she was working at, which enabled her to care for her own child and many more at the same time.
It’s that last story that really, I think, is most relevant to this particular bill, Bill 14, the Early Childhood Educators Act, because the importance of the introduction of this bill is that we’re taking care of the people who are taking care of our children. It recognizes the value of early childhood educators, which is a profession that has been grossly undervalued and underestimated in its importance for a long, long time.
Having this act strengthens and supports the quality of care, the quality of training, the importance and the quality of the certification. It enshrines into law the importance of this field of professions, not only to individual families and our communities but also to our economy and our province as a whole.
I’m so grateful for the work that all of my colleagues have done and that has led up to this point. I named specifically the Minister of State for Child Care. I also want to acknowledge, of course, the work of the Minister of Children and Family Development and of the member for Vancouver-Hastings, who joins us now as an MLA herself but was actually working with the Minister of State for Child Care, when the position was first formed, as a ministerial adviser. She was also there to help build up this program.
I’m really grateful for all of your work, so that I can stand here and speak a little bit to it.
I can’t offer anything more eloquent than what the member for Chilliwack-Kent has already offered. I just wanted to get on record that I’m so grateful for this work. I’m very pleased to support it, and I look forward to voting in favour of it as well.
Noting the hour, I will note that I live in fear of saying the wrong words and accidentally closing down the House or something. So please correct me if I’m wrong, but I move adjournment of the debate.
Hon. B. Ma moved adjournment of debate.
Motion approved.
Hon. S. Robinson moved adjournment of the House.
Motion approved.
Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Members. The House is now adjourned.
The House adjourned at 11:57 a.m.