Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

IRAN PROTESTS FOR
WOMEN, LIFE, FREEDOM

B. Bailey: Zan, zendegi, azadi — women, life, freedom. Following the death of 22-year-old Kurdish woman Mahsa Amini in police custody in Tehran, the country has erupted into protest.

[10:10 a.m.]

Amini was accused of allowing her hijab to slip and letting her hair show. It is alleged that she was beaten in custody, leading to her falling into a coma and dying a few days later. This incident was a spark on a tinder-dry forest of discontent.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

The people of Iran, and women in particular, have been subjected to repeated oppression at the hands of the Islamic Republic, who continue to deny the abuses being described by their citizens. I rise today to add my voice to the call for freedom to the women of Iran. I speak to draw attention to the continued and worsening human rights abuses being perpetrated by state actors of Iran against its own people. Currently, peaceful protesters are being sentenced to death.

My riding, Vancouver–False Creek, has a large number of people of Iranian heritage contributing to our economy and building their lives in Vancouver. This is a terrible time for these constituents. They live each day knowing that the people they love are being arbitrarily detained, arrested and, worse, raped and killed.

Human rights organizations estimate that more than 400 people have been killed. Many of my constituents estimate it to be much, much higher. These numbers include the deaths of many children and youth.

A network of human rights activists with a mandate to follow up on the condition of detained protesters in Iran has reported dire human rights violations, such as torture and sexual abuse, not having access to medical services and detention in secret locations. The committee announced that it was able to identify over 1,600 detainees, including 65 minors. These prisoners include 969 ordinary citizens, 393 students, 145 civil activists, 42 journalists, 40 political activists, 38 women’s rights activists and 26 attorneys.

At the 10,000-person-strong march held Saturday in Vancouver, attendees said that they hear from within Iran that the number is closer to 60,000 people detained. Because of state efforts to silence media, shut down the Internet, jail reporters and to control the message, it’s very difficult to verify numbers. People all over the world are raising their voices to force the Republic of Iran to stop this violence. Protests have taken place in hundreds of cities in countries all around the world.

On October 30, the New York Times published a full-page letter. In it, women leaders called to expel the Islamic Republic of Iran from the UN women’s rights commission. Signatories included Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, Minister of Foreign Affairs Mélanie Joly, past Prime Minister Kim Campbell, Michelle Obama, Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton and many other notable women.

At the United Nations last week, Canada brought a resolution condemning the human rights abuses in Iran. On November 15, the UN Commission on Human Rights urged the Iranian authorities to immediately release all those detained in connection to peaceful protests and to drop the charges against them.

International human rights law protects the rights of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression. A UN spokesperson said that “rather than choosing dialogue to air legitimate grievances, the authorities were responding to the unprecedented protests sparked by Ms. Amini’s death in police custody ‘with increasing harshness.’”

Last week, “recriminations reached a new level with the first sentencing to death of a protester by an Islamic Revolutionary Court in Tehran, which found the un­named defendant guilty of moharebeh, or waging war against God…. At least nine other protesters have been charged with offences that carry the death penalty,” said the United Nations. “Under international law, countries that have not yet abolished the death penalty can only impose it for the ‘most serious crimes,’” which is interpreted as crimes involving intentional killing.

“‘Crimes not resulting directly and intentionally in death can never serve as the basis for the imposition of the death penalty,’ he added. According to news reports, the protests have spread to at least 140 towns and cities” in Iran. Hundreds of protesters “have been killed during the violent crackdown, including more than 40 children.” The UN spokesperson called on Iran “to immediately impose a moratorium on the death penalty, to refrain from charging capital crimes and to revoke death sentences issued for crimes not qualifying as the most serious crimes.”

[10:15 a.m.]

On November 11, Germany and Iceland requested the convening of a special session to address the deteriorating human rights situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran, which will be held and livecast on Thursday, November 24.

The situation in Iran is worsening daily, and so many innocent lives are at risk. To all the people of Iran, and to British Columbians of Iranian descent, please know we stand with you. For those of us who are not directly impacted, please know that people of Iranian descent in your lives are suffering. They’re suffering for the people in their home country and are being traumatized by what’s happening.

They need our kindness and our support at this time. There is a very real layer of pain being carried by our neighbors tied to this crisis. The trauma they face is real, even if they are not there but are here — maybe especially because they are not there but are here.

Zan, zendegi, azadi.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you to the member for speaking on this very important topic. As the House knows, I sometimes get emotional in here, and I think, with this kind of topic, women in particular feel the pain of other women. So this may or may not be one of those times where I have trouble getting through my words here.

The brutal death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in custody of morality police, after she was arrested for allegedly violating the hijab law, has sparked sweeping protests across Iran and around the world. Many of my constituents come from Iran and are watching us to see what we say and what we do.

Young protesters, mostly women, have taken to the streets chanting “women, life, freedom,” as they cut their hair, burnt their hijabs and faced down police to demand fundamental rights, bodily autonomy and an end to oppression. How many of us here in Canada fear for our lives when we protest something? These women fear for their lives and are taking a chance that none of us here can understand or empathize with.

Since protests erupted in September, the Iranian regime has arrested an estimated 14,000 people. This includes children, journalists, lawyers and activists, according to the UN. At least 326 people have been killed — this is based on information from the Norway-based NGO Iran Human Rights; and five people have been sentenced to death by the revolutionary court in cases linked to this protest.

We cannot turn a blind eye to what’s happening in Iran as women unite in defiance of theocracy that deems itself the government of God. It concerns all of us because it’s part of a larger struggle against institutionalized, systemic oppression. In Iran, girls and women have been unfairly treated as second-class citizens with domestic violence, child marriage and gender discrimination that continues to exist today.

Women’s issues have long been catalysts for broader political action and the key to challenging this regime. For at least the past 20 years, women’s movements have been simmering since hijab became mandatory in Iran after the 1979 Islamic revolution, with laws regulating women’s behaviour and restricting their participation in public life as a hallmark of the regime.

Each and every one of the women in this House should appreciate that we not only get to vote, but we get to stand in here and participate in building the policies and having the honour of voting on who is representing us. Compulsory dress rules interfere with basic human rights. Everyone should be free to choose what and what not to wear.

[10:20 a.m.]

Governments have an obligation to respect, protect and ensure an individual’s rights and to create an environment where everyone can make that choice freely, free of coercion by family members, society or religious leaders. Fundamentally, such dress codes reflect and exacerbate underlying gender discriminations that have been around for far too long.

International society has a key role to play in reducing the gender gap, because gender equality not only helps children fulfil their potential and stimulates economic growth, but it’s also the foundation for an inclusive, peaceful and sustainable world. We are sending a clear message — we must send a clear message — to support Iranians’ legitimate demand for freedom and justice. We remain, and must remain, steadfast in upholding the rights of girls and women in every part of the world.

A lot more work remains to be done through legal instruments and on-the-ground activities, but to everyone who stands up for those who face discrimination and fights for basic human rights: you are not alone.

B. Bailey: Mr. Speaker, this Saturday the MLA for Nelson-Creston and I attended a massive protest in support of freedom for the women of Iran. This protest was one of the largest so far, with an estimated 10,000 people marching from B.C. Place to the Vancouver Art Gallery. This protest was part of a global action, and similar protests took place all around the world.

While at the event, we spoke with a woman who was in a cast. Through her tears, she explained that she was a nurse and that as soon as her foot was healed, she was heading to Iran to help the protesters. She shared that she had a cousin who had been killed already in the protests in Iran, and she shared that another relative had been imprisoned and, due to the torture experienced there, when released, took her own life.

Last week there was a renewed wave of demonstrations to mark the anniversary of a previous round of deadly protests in 2019, when hundreds of people were killed as they took to the streets following a fuel price increase. At the protest in Vancouver, the families of the downed flight PS752, in January 2020, have been there, and they’ve been there at all the protests, to remind us of the brutality Iran is capable of.

Despite the increasing violence, the protesters are not letting up. It is reported that the home of the prior supreme leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, made into a museum after his death, was burned to the ground.

Al Jazeera reports that numerous cities across the country saw chaotic scenes last week, with deadly incidents taking place on Wednesday night in the southwestern town of Izeh, when at least seven people died, including two boys, aged 13 and nine. This weekend there were deadly IRGC attacks in the northwestern area, including in the city of Mahabad.

The brutality of what is occurring in Iran is almost unimaginable to those of us who have been lucky enough to live in peace our whole lives. But we must imagine it. We can’t turn away and pretend it’s not happening. Our friends and our neighbours are traumatized.

How does this end? Well, there’s hope to be found. There’s hope to be found in the stories of bazaar merchants who are closing their shops, there’s hope to be found in the stories of Iranian armed guards refusing to fire on civilians, and there is hope in mounting international pressure. International pressure can make a difference. Think about the impact the anti-apartheid movement had on the government in South Africa.

We cannot, and must not, allow the Islamic regime to continue to impose death penalties on protesters. We cannot, and must not, allow the continued killing of children. This is not just the fight of women in Iran anymore. It is even bigger now.

I was told by the protesters this weekend that this is now the fight of a nation against a regime that has lost all legitimacy due to increasing oppression of its citizens.

[10:25 a.m.]

SUPPORTING THE
PULP AND PAPER SECTOR

L. Doerkson: B.C. is, of course, an incredible place, and certainly one that I feel very lucky to live in. It’s full of good, hard-working people; warm and welcoming communities; beautiful scenery; and an abundance of natural resources. These resources and the industries that have grown up around them have profoundly shaped our province. They have powered our economy, created cities and supported the livelihoods of so many British Columbians.

Of these industries, forestry has been one of the most significant, both throughout our history and into the present day, of course. Timber and fibre products are a major export, and the sector employs tens of thousands of people directly, while also contributing to our province indirectly in so many ways.

However, as vital as this industry is, we know that it’s getting increasingly difficult for the sector to operate, and we are hearing growing concerns about a looming crisis. Right now, B.C. is facing the potential of a serious fibre shortage, something that will affect the viability of the entire industry. When talking about forestry, our minds often first jump to just logging and lumber, when the forest sector is so much broader than that, encompassing not just the traditional lumber producers, but also pulp and paper producers, value-added industries, forest-reliant communities and recreation and tourism industries.

Recently pulp and paper producers have expressed their concerns about the problem of the fibre supply and how the lack of fibre is going to impact every part of the sector. It’s estimated that B.C. is facing a four million cubic metre shortfall, driven by a combination of issues, including both environmental factors like wildfires and pine beetle infestations as well as, of course, forest policy.

Many mills currently have only five days of fibre inventory available, when they usually target inventory levels of 45 days. Analysis shows that if the situation continues without being urgently addressed, multiple pulp mills and more than ten sawmills around the province will likely be shut down and lost in just the next two years, with more to follow in subsequent years.

In fact, we have already seen examples of devastating effects of this shortage on pulp and paper producers. Last November we saw Powell River paper mill shut its doors, with curtailments and production cuts at Taylor, Crofton paper, Cariboo pulp mill and Canfor pulp mill, in addition to curtailments at numerous sawmills.

These kinds of closures and curtailments have far-reaching implications. They represent the loss of meaningful First Nation engagement opportunities and operations, the loss of livelihoods for so many small and rural communities, and if we keep on with the status quo, the loss of $9.2 billion in GDP, $2.5 billion in tax revenues and 50,000 job-years of employment.

It’s clear that urgent investment in forestry, including pulp and paper producers, is desperately needed to keep this industry functioning. This is both to keep the current operations functioning but also to enable the industry to continue to evolve.

Pulp and paper producers have been at the forefront of revival within forestry. There has been a recent movement to reduce dependence on traditional printing and writing papers — for which demand, of course, is decreasing — towards products like packaging, toilet paper, tissue and towel and specialty papers. The demand for these products is growing at rates of between 2 percent and 7 percent per year, and they present new opportunity for the sector.

The demand for pulp and paper products is sure to continue to grow over the next few years, especially as consumers continue to become more environmentally conscious. We have certainly witnessed a growing global preference for paper products as green alternatives to plastics made by using fossil fuels. It’s increasingly common to see a consumer preference for things like paper straws, cups and packaging as more sustainable options.

Pulp and paper producers want to be able to keep up with this demand and be able to provide the alternatives that people are looking for, but the worsening fibre shortage and the lack of support are making it difficult for the industry to stay afloat. It’s estimated that after Paper Excellence indefinitely closes its paper mill in Crofton at the end of the year, B.C. will have lost 58 percent of its paper production capacity and 13 percent of its pulp mill capacity.

[10:30 a.m.]

It is a very, very serious concern not just for our prov­ince, to be able to produce the goods that people need, but for many communities and families dependent on the industry. The average mill employs hundreds of people, directly and indirectly, with good, family-supporting salaries.

On a provincial level, pulp and paper are incredibly valuable as well. Last year, pulp and paper was B.C.’s fourth most valuable export, accounting for 20 percent of B.C.’s forest sector GDP and 34 percent of the total value of forest exports. It’s clear that if we let this industry collapse, the results will be disastrous, both for individual families and communities directly impacted and for B.C.’s economy as a whole.

We cannot let this happen. We must ensure that we are taking the steps necessary to protect this industry and ensure it has the resources needed to keep operating and providing for British Columbians well into the future.

We know that the industry itself has been asking for specific actions to be urgently taken to provide relief and to prevent more mill closures in the coming weeks and months. I sincerely hope that these steps are being taken and that we don’t lose more of the valuable pulp and paper producers as a result of inaction.

I very much look forward to hearing from my colleague opposite about the work that is hopefully being done to immediately address these problems.

R. Leonard: I want to say thank you to the member from the beautiful constituency of Cariboo-Chilcotin for bringing forward the topic of supporting the pulp and paper sector.

I thought I might start with a little bit of personal trivia related to the subject. A hundred years ago, my grandfather trained as an electrician in Vancouver and found employment in the remote wilderness of British Columbia. It was a time when the possibilities for generating hydroelectric power opened up opportunities for resource industries to grow and thrive, bringing workers and families deep into our water-rich province. He and others like him were part of some of those remote rural resource towns taking root.

Pulp and paper has certainly been a big part of our history, and we know that it continues to be an important part of people’s lives and livelihoods in our forestry communities. It is our forests that provide the wood fibre that is processed into products that are sought after around the globe. That’s why it’s important that we take better care of our forests and steward the landscape to secure the rich biodiversity it holds to be sure that this natural resource is there for future generations.

As we embrace reconciliation with Indigenous peoples throughout B.C., and as we move to reduce our impacts on the climate, the pulp and paper sector is in step to transform the industry to embrace those shared goals.

Our government is working cooperatively with the Pulp and Paper Coalition and has acted on many of their recommendations to address a major concern: improving fibre access for pulp mills within this new way of looking at forests and forestry. The coalition identified a number of initiatives to address the forecasted shortfalls, which our government has acted on.

One, the Forest Enhancement Society of B.C. funding has been renewed to access greater volumes of fibre, and $25 million will fund projects that make use of slash piles and burnt timber.

Two, we’ve introduced the fibre recovery zone on the coast. These zones aim to improve harvest performance and provide more fibre to pulp and paper by enforcing how much unused fibre can be left after timber harvesting.

New timber pricing policies and waste penalties for fibre that is left in the bush…. A take-or-pay system requires licensees that leave waste to pay a stumpage rate on what fibre is left on the forest floor. This has reduced waste in the Interior by 38 percent and 61 percent on the coast between 2017 and ’21.

Just last week, streamlining the process to salvage fire-damaged timber took a leap forward with the introduction of new wildfire salvage opportunity agreements with First Nations. This is a trifecta, as First Nations who have tenure will have an opportunity to participate in forestry with employment and economic benefits to their communities through salvage volumes under licence, adding to the work done by forestry companies.

[10:35 a.m.]

Secondly, it adds to the fibre supply, as the salvage of fire-damaged trees is accelerated before they degrade and lose their commercial value.

Thirdly, forest lands can rehabilitate faster. As Vern Louie, forest manager of Osoyoos Indian Band, noted, they can rehabilitate, emphasizing their management values for water protection, wildlife corridors and culturally significant areas.

A new fibre supply task force with industry is underway to develop further improvements in fibre access and use. It’s impressive how something like what…. Fire-damaged wood used to be considered waste, and we are now opening avenues for its use by the pulp and paper sector.

It’s encouraging to see Kruger’s recent investment in the purchase of the Kamloops pulp mill. I read that Kruger intends to maintain the 320 jobs there and is committed to continuing the modernization of the mill. This is a positive signal, along with the coalition indicating that this industry is undergoing a revival, as the marketplace is growing for different paper products.

The goal to leave no fibre unused while preserving our rich biodiversity through better care of our forests will keep our pulp and paper mills thriving as we keep people rooted in their communities, and it will advance reconciliation with Indigenous people and reduce our climate impacts. I think today my grandfather and his peers would approve.

L. Doerkson: Thank you to my colleague opposite for the contributions to this discussion. I certainly hope that members of this place understand the gravity of this situation and the urgency with which action must be taken. I appreciate some of the comments, and I want to touch on one of them specifically in a moment.

Experts from within this sector believe that if steps are not taken immediately, we will see multiple mill closures in the next 90 to 120 days, and even more in the months to follow. We’re dealing with an industry that is literally on its knees, and any delay will have serious consequences for the whole province.

Pulp and paper producers have been clear about the many possible solutions to this growing crisis. They need to see investment to help with the transition away from traditional products to the packaging, tissue and towel — especially papers that are in high demand — as well as support ongoing work in biomass-based energy systems and biofuels.

Additionally, the chronic lack of fibre supply needs to be addressed. This is not a simple issue, but there are simple steps that could be taken immediately to make a real difference. Pulp and paper producers depend on the waste from sawmills, but they can also utilize harvest waste from logging. This is a clear solution that deals with the by-products of logging. It reduces waste, and it will provide pulp mills with more fibre.

Right now much of that harvest waste is simply being piled up and burned in slash piles. In my own community, we have massive piles that are set to be burned when it could be used as a creative solution to the problems facing the industry. It’s estimated that if timber waste was redirected, there could be an additional 1.2 million cubic metres of fibre going to pulp mills.

It’s these kinds of sensible and creative solutions that this industry needs, and government should be partnered in that process. I hope that the serious concerns of the forest sector are being heard and that we will soon see the action that is so desperately needed. Our pulp and paper producers cannot afford to wait any longer for relief.

WAITING FOR CANCER CARE

R. Merrifield: “Lengthy wait times have some B.C. cancer patients dying before their first consultations.” These are the headlines that our province is making in newspapers such as the Globe and Mail, as British Columbians face extraordinary and sometimes tragic wait times when dealing with cancer care in B.C. According to the Globe and Mail investigation, only one in five patients referred to an oncologist received the first consultation within the recommended period of two weeks. This is unacceptable.

[10:40 a.m.]

Cancer is a ticking time bomb in our bodies. When cancer care is delayed or inaccessible, there is a lower chance of survival, greater problems associated with treatment, and higher costs of care. We know that early diagnosis improves cancer outcomes by providing care at the earliest stage possible and is therefore an important public health strategy in all settings. However, the failure to do so and to provide timely cancer diagnosis to those with cancer in B.C. can be deadly.

With our growing population and a health care system that isn’t able to keep up, specialists are warning about the tsunami of cancer that is about to ensue. They are also warning that they are seeing later-stage cancers in greater numbers than ever before. They have also been sounding the alarm bell that those waiting to get in to see a specialist are now in the millions.

Is it really that serious? Well, the difference between life and death for cancer patients can be the time it takes for diagnosis and treatment. In a British Medical Journal article by Hanna in 2020, it was shown that for every week of delay after diagnosis, survival is shortened by 1.2 to 3.2 percent per week of delay. Imagine waiting three months. A 12-week wait time would bring down one’s chance of survival by roughly 26 percent. Sadly, that is what British Columbians are doing right now. They’re waiting months and months for treatment. This is why our outcomes keep getting worse and our wait-lists longer, with more lives on the line.

I’ve been speaking with constituents who are being given these wait times. A patient given six months to live if not treated and then being told that the first meeting with a specialist is going to be in three. A woman in her 40s waiting months for minor surgery to remove cancerous tissue in her cervix, only to have it grow and then need a full hysterectomy after wait times. Another who is being told that she has to wait two months for radiation to even start. We need better cancer care.

B.C. is experiencing the longest waits in Canada, and this is simply unacceptable. No other province in Canada has seen such a colossal decline in its cancer system. This decline represents a huge failure in governance and oversight. Radical change is needed, and it is needed now. Patients are being forced to wait months before their first consultation, and many don’t survive much longer, after losing precious time waiting for their turn.

Many of these deaths would have been avoidable had the government taken the necessary steps to ensure that our cancer care wait times are actively being mitigated and addressed. These lives can be saved, and we need to make sure we give everyone the chance to fight for their right to survive. With wait times that far exceed expert recommendations, the cruel reality of waiting for cancer treatment in B.C. is that it’s only increasingly dangerous and tragic.

The excuses have to stop. Radical change is required. We’ve heard the excuse for the increase in cases due to aging, but we were warned, and we all knew that this would happen. It could have been planned for, but it wasn’t. The increase in cases is not the reason. Failure to plan for capacity in a timely manner is the issue.

What can be done? Well, we need systemwide changes. It’s not just about tweaking the edges or giving minor amounts of money. Small cheques are not going to fix a broken system that this government failed to fix. It’s about radical overhaul. B.C. Cancer delivered a ten-year cancer plan but has yet to see it accepted or funded, and meanwhile, people die on wait-lists.

Let me be clear. Oncologists, radiologists, technicians, nurses — they are the heroes of this story. But B.C. oncologists are burning out because of the lack of resources and massive underfunding. A study recently done shows that B.C. is the worst for burnout in Canada. The same study showed that they are not being consulted enough in policy decisions.

The Minister of Health spoke about new positions being funded but neglected to say or give indication that there are 18 oncologists who have actually left B.C. because of the working conditions and the lack of support that doesn’t allow them to properly do their roles.

[10:45 a.m.]

Things have to change with the leadership structure and how cancer treatment is being administered. We need proactive, funded, predictive planning that will accommodate the capacity necessary to treat cancer. Clearly, it is not working.

B.C. has fallen from first place in cancer outcomes in Canada to last place in wait times in Canada, according to the Canadian Institute for Health Information. We’re moving backwards, not forwards, as cancer care quality and efficiency, under the current administration, are worsening.

Families of cancer patients are tired, and they deserve answers. Why? Why have we gone from best to worst? Why are oncologists leaving our province? Why are patients paying the price with their lives?

What we can’t see in the numbers, which would even be worse for B.C., are the layered effects of waiting: waiting to see a family doctor, waiting for imaging studies, waiting for a biopsy booking, waiting for results to be reported, waiting to see an oncologist for a consultation, waiting to have treatment once a decision has been made to treat.

The current system is placing an incredible amount of unfathomable burden on patients who are already facing the fight of their lives. This has to stop.

A. Singh: There’s nothing quite like a cancer diagnosis, the surreal feeling one gets when they’re first told they have cancer. The anxiety it creates for oneself and one’s loved ones, especially, is a phenomenon within itself.

I’ll tell you a short story, my story, from May of 2021, when I went in for a regular FIT test. Having done them before, I didn’t think much of it until my doctor called me back and told me that they’d found a microscopic amount of blood in my stool. That’s what a FIT test is. Nothing likely to worry about but better to move forward, given my age and demographic, with a colonoscopy to rule out cancer. Just the idea that I might possibly have cancer was frightening, and then came the associated wait before I was scheduled for a colonoscopy.

Now, I remember the wait times. I remember them from my father’s experience in the mid-2000s, 2004 to 2005. He had been diagnosed with prostate cancer. His journey — and the wait time, from the very first test, where something was suspected, to the final diagnosis and treatment — I think created more anxiety in all of us, his family, than in him. I experienced something similar. Maybe it’s a survival instinct or mechanism. My poor family, I believe, had it much worse than I did.

My colonoscopy wasn’t until the middle of August, when they found a mass that was likely a cancerous tumour. A few weeks later pathology confirmed that I had stage 3 colon cancer. It was shocking. I had had no symptoms, and I was already at such a late stage. I had gone in for what was a routine yearly test.

By the end of August, it was confirmed that I had stage 3 colon cancer. The treatment didn’t start until the middle of October, radiation first, then chemotherapy for a few months — for months and months, actually — and then two surgeries, the last one being in late August. I’m pleased to say today that I stand here. My CT scans show that I’m cancer-free. My tumour markers show that I’m cancer-free.

On today’s topic, I’m essentially a walking, talking, living representation of cancer and wait times within our system, a very recent representation. I have to say, throughout the whole process…. When my loved ones here and overseas expressed concern about the time between each step and the next, I reminded them and myself of my father’s journey — again, almost 17 years ago — with similar waits and the positive outcome that he’d had.

My mantra was that our health care professionals are exemplary, and I chose to trust that I would be taken care of. I know not all are as lucky, but I chose that. I was treated with nothing but kindness, care and respect throughout my whole journey, and I remain eternally grateful for that.

We all understand that there has been a shift. We cannot deny the jarring fact that we have been in a global medical crisis for the last 2½ years. That has exacerbated an already stressed system that, frankly, should have been funded — cognizant of the population growth, cognizant of the aging of the population — a long time ago, maybe in the times that my father was getting his treatment.

There are always improvements to be made, and we’ve been doing that for the last few years. I know how scary it is for a family to be faced with this and the uncertainty of how long they will wait and what kind of treatment they will get. Again, I’ll stress how exemplary our health care professionals are. They, more than anyone else, know firsthand the stressors that exist within the system.

[10:50 a.m.]

In terms of patients now, patients who are waiting for a new patient appointment are triaged and retriaged to ensure that those urgently in need of care are seen as soon as possible. There are a number of factors that go into how patients are triaged for appointments, including tumour type, stage of disease, symptoms of the patient and treatment options available for the patient. Generally for cases like mine, there’s a team of oncologists that has a meeting to discuss and decide the best course forward.

For new patient appointments, we see, approximately, in British Columbia, 50 percent of people within the first four weeks of referral and 90 percent within eight weeks. Recent investments from the Ministry of Health, including $41 million added to B.C. Cancer’s base funding, will have a meaningful impact by improving access to care and improving the quality of care. This follows an additional funding of $25 million in the previous fiscal year.

Collectively, these investments enable B.C. Cancer to hire just under 400 new physicians, clinical and support staff. That includes, I believe, 48 new oncology positions and 25 new alternate payment program–funded physicians.

What this means is that we’re building capacity. We will continue, in the next few years, with our ten-year cancer plan — 17 new MRI machines and an additional 200,000 CT scans. This ten-year plan lays out the necessary resources that we need to deal with the system now but also to deal with the fact that over the next ten to 15 years, with the increase in our aging population, we need to be able to respond by increasing our capacity.

R. Merrifield: I’m so pleased about the positive result from my colleague across the aisle. Unfortunately, his story is unique, because as of this fall, only one in five patients referred to an oncologist received the first consultation within the recommended period of two weeks in B.C. About 75 percent of patients in Ontario are seen within that two weeks. So why are the patients in British Columbia waiting so long for their treatment, and why does this government not have a solution?

My colleague also mentioned the new positions for oncologists. He neglected to mention the 18 that have left B.C. in just the first nine months of this year.

So what happens when patients wait? Well, other than a lower chance of survival, there are higher costs. Increased wait times have also led to very significant psychological suffering for patients.

Dr. Applewhaite says: “Many patients are choosing MAiD because of both their physical suffering with their disease and the mental suffering of not knowing when they’ll hear the options and whether they’ll be able to take up those options when they’re offered to them. I’ve seen it many times now, and it’s heartbreaking. It should not be that way.”

Months-long wait times mean patients are being left both in limbo and in pain when treatments could help them. Patients as young as 40 die before they even have their first consultations, but these patients are able to access MAID in as little as two days, allowing them the choice of death before the disease progresses and their pain worsens. The fact that choosing death over waiting for a failing system is now a reality for too many cancer patients in B.C. is not something that this government should be proud of.

From April to June, just 4.7 percent of patients with endometrial cancer on B.C.’s Mainland were able to have surgery within the target time of eight weeks from diagnosis. Only 3.9 percent of patients with grade 1 and 2 tumours were able to have surgery within the target time of six weeks from referral, while no patients with grade 3 tumours were able to have surgery within the target time of four weeks from referral.

I have a story, too, because I watched a family member on this excruciating waiting journey, resulting in a far more difficult surgery after a six-month wait time from diagnosis. Patients waiting, oncologists devastated, cancer progressing, patients dying…. Timely cancer is literally a matter of life and death.

Change starts at the top. Responsibility is the leadership.

[10:55 a.m.]

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House now consider proceeding with Motion 15, standing in the name of the member for Vancouver-Kensington.

Deputy Speaker: Members, unanimous consent is required to proceed to Motion 15 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave not granted.

Deputy Speaker: As leave was not granted, we will be proceeding to the next order of the day, and that is the Equal Pay Reporting Act, Bill M202.

Second Reading of Bills

BILL M202 — EQUAL PAY REPORTING ACT

(continued)

R. Merrifield: It is my pleasure to take my place in the second reading debate. This debate is not about whether women are equal. This is about how this House goes about moving the dial forward on equality, how we continually push for greater measures to ensure this, because inequities still exist.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

Women and gender-diverse people in this province continue to face discrimination and bias despite the efforts of extraordinary women — women like Jeanne Mance, who founded Canada’s first hospital in 1645; Viola Desmond, who challenged segregation practices; B.C.’s own Emily Carr, whose legacy continues to inspire artists from across this country; or Mary Ellen Smith, the first woman elected to serve in this Legislative Assembly in 1918.

The sacrifices, passion and determination of these women, amongst many, many others in history, have allowed generations of women like me to accomplish what would have otherwise been considered impossible.

While I’ve listed Canadian women, we could also speak of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and all she did in her lifetime to move the dial forward: the right to sign a mortgage without a man, the right to have a bank account without a male cosigner, the right to have a job without being discriminated based on gender, the right for women to be pregnant, have kids and work.

The international movement for women’s rights has been ongoing for more than a century. Yet here we are again with an opportunity to move the dial forward with this equal pay bill. Will we do it? I will. I am. Will you?

What have we done so far? Well, do we have free contraception? Nope. Why free contraception? Why does that mean so much? Well, it is expensive to be a woman. Yes, there are hair products, clothes, nail products and makeup. But then there are feminine hygiene products and contraception. If you have ever figured out the costs of these last items, you’ve realized how expensive it is just to be a woman.

Interestingly, there have been studies done that show that there’s actually a pink tax. Women’s products cost more than men’s. This phenomenon is real. Have you ever looked?

There’s also a phenomenon called period poverty, where the costs of being a woman become unbearable. I would argue that the first items, perhaps hair and makeup, could be considered discretionary. But the last two are not.

In the last provincial election, I celebrated the fact that all three parties promised free contraception for women. This was something that everyone could agree on. It was something that could have continued to ask for. But I’m disappointed that the NDP government has had six years to deliver on this promise and hasn’t.

Why is it so important? Equity. It’s the same reason this bill is so important. Contraception is expensive. The types of contraception that typically have less side effects are usually the ones that cost more. Many women can’t afford contraception, which leads to unwanted pregnancies. It’s estimated that 30 to 40 percent of pregnancies in Canada are unintentional, according to Dr. Vivian Tam, a family emergency physician based in Ottawa.

[11:00 a.m.]

I’m going to quote her. “This disproportionately happens amongst young women who are quite young, so those that are 15 to 24 years of age, those who live in rural and remote communities in Canada, who belong to Indigenous communities or are newcomers to Canada.” This is the group that has the most difficulty in accessing contraception at large, but in particular, long-acting, reversible contraceptives, which are the most effective form of contraception.

Having free contraception allows those from marginalized communities, whether rural remote or lower socioeconomic backgrounds, an equal footing when it comes to family planning. Access to medical personnel is also difficult, so having reliable and long-term contraception is important. Free contraception also decreases the disparity between those with additional medical coverage or the means to afford different forms of birth control. It’s another small blow to the cycle of poverty.

Additionally, contraception allows a greater degree of choice as a woman and is a form of gender equality. Making sure that women have access to birth control is imperative when reducing gender disparity, and it’s vital for equality that we see this come to fruition. Similarly, this bill is another way to advance gender equality. We have extraordinary women in this province, employed in all sorts of jobs, and despite this, deep inequality continues to persist in B.C. in the gender pay gap. The worst in Canada — this is not a badge that any province should want to wear. Women in this province are earning 18.6 percent less than men. On average, women earn $5.90 less per hour. This is unacceptable.

The Equal Pay Reporting Act takes the first step in remedying this pay gap by requiring businesses of a prescribed size to report the pay gap between male and female employees. These employers will be required to disclose the mean and median pay to a designated registrar. The gender pay gap must also be published on the employer’s website and on the website designed by the registrar. Closing the pay gap is a necessary measure for equality and in support of our economy.

A few years ago, when I was still in the private sector, we were interviewing for a new role within our company. I’d asked to take a look at the final three candidates and weigh in with the hiring team. Candidate 1 — engineer for six years, worked in a few roles, no management experience, wanted $95,000 a year. Candidate 2 — engineer for seven years, had some management experience, wanted $105,000 a year. Candidate 3 — engineer for seven years, most project management experience of any of them, had some management experience on the team and wanted $85,000.

I asked what the difference between the candidates was. Well, they all received excellent reviews, especially candidate 3, the last one. When I asked, “Was there any noticeable difference between the three candidates?” the manager looked at me and sheepishly said: “Well, the third one was a woman.” “Hire her,” I told the team, “but we’re going to hire her on merit alone, and we are going to pay her what the other candidate asked for in pay.”

This shows a societal norm of how women underestimate our skills. Do we not negotiate as hard for wages, or do we just not know what anyone else is getting paid and need a bill like this to make sure that there is more open and transparent data?

If we thought things were bad before, things have only become worse for women. The pandemic has highlighted and exacerbated the existing inequalities in this province. During pandemic closures, women were particularly impacted by job losses due to their disproportionate representation in service industries; 1.5 million Canadian women lost their jobs in the first two months of the pandemic.

[11:05 a.m.]

This isn’t just a job loss. This is a huge setback in your career, in your advancement, in your ability to actually move forward. But this wasn’t the only change during the pandemic. You see, women also found increased responsibilities in the pandemic, both in the workplace and in the home.

Being highly represented in care industries, the additional responsibilities in health care and long-term-care settings created more pressure and stress on women, in addition to the increased risk exposure. Women are more likely to perform precarious work, especially women of colour and newcomer women in this province. The lack of recognition for their contributions and responsibilities leaves them underpaid and overworked. I actually had female executives coming to me in tears, feeling that they were failing their kids, failing their businesses, failing their communities, failing their families, all because they were having to manage a household a full 24-7, kids in Zoom school who they felt were falling behind, and trying to manage businesses with such great uncertainty. They were completely overloaded.

So it’s no wonder that the pandemic had a massive impact on mental health, particularly as many British Columbians of all genders experienced financial distress. Even pre-pandemic, however, women in B.C. were more likely to experience stress as well as lower confidence about their finances. A Vancity study in 2018 found that compared to women across Canada, women in B.C. had more concerns about their financial health. Almost half of female Gen X’ers and millennials said that money worries make them feel physically unwell and cause extreme emotional distress. More than ever, we understand the importance of mental health.

While all British Columbians are worried about the increased inflation and unaffordability challenges, women are especially impacted, as they perform equal work with less pay. The long-standing unequal distribution of family and child care responsibilities were also exacerbated. A study in 2019 found that Canadian women did 50 percent more unpaid housework than men. Women were also twice as likely to spend ten hours a week or more caring for a senior. I shudder to think what those statistics were during the pandemic.

Societal expectations place the burden of caring responsibilities on women, leaving them to juggle both paid and unpaid responsibilities. When child care facilities and schools closed due to the pandemic, many women found themselves pressured to balance work and child care. The increased stress of caring for seniors vulnerable to COVID also added to the burden of responsibilities. Now it’s even worse. Inflation has skyrocketed, making things less affordable and more expensive just to get by. Rent or food? Food or contraception? Contraception or utilities? Utilities or gas? Gas or kid’s soccer? Kid’s soccer or daycare? Daycare or my job?

Women are giving up. Because of these increased challenges and pressures during the pandemic, and now with inflation, many women are leaving the workforce, citing reasons such as uneven parenting responsibilities, lack of flexibility in their jobs and layoffs, or the money isn’t worth it.

Women will play an integral role in our economic recovery, but the current conditions do not foster a welcoming environment for their participation. This is not only concerning for women’s rights but also for the sake of our economy and our future here in British Columbia. We need women in the workforce, and we need this House and this majority NDP government to step up and make this happen.

[11:10 a.m.]

As we face a labour shortage in this province, the majority of small businesses in B.C. are struggling to find enough staff. In the next ten years, it’s forecasted that we’ll have another million jobs to fill. Eighty percent of these job openings will require post-secondary education or training, so it’s necessary to have skilled talent in this province to ensure a thriving economy and B.C.’s future as an economic leader. This, however, is not possible when half of the population is unable to achieve participation in the workforce.

Women in this province are surpassing men in obtaining post-secondary degrees, so school, education, intelligence — well, those aren’t an issue. According to Statistics Canada, 56.4 percent of post-secondary graduates in 2019 were female. Every year more than 40,000 women graduate with post-secondary degrees in this province. They graduate with high expectations for their futures, and rightly so. When female graduates in this province are outpacing male graduation rates, it seems like we’re starting to move in the right direction. What is the issue, then? Let’s go back to it: contraception, health care, child care, seniors care and equal pay.

Unfortunately, women still continue to be underrepresented and underpaid. The average annual salary for a woman with a bachelor’s degree in British Columbia is $62,000. The average annual salary for men with a bachelor’s degree is $86,000. This $24,000 difference is not only astounding, but it’s unfair. This legislation is a clear signal that this is no longer acceptable in this province and that women can and should expect equal pay for equal work.

Women and gender-diverse peoples must receive the respect, recognition and pay that they deserve. Without these conditions, we’re going to see our economy lose out on incredible talent. Our female graduates want to work in B.C., but if they know that they will not receive the compensation that they deserve, they’ll move elsewhere, where the pay gap is smaller. Taking action on the pay gap means doing what is right for our communities, our economies and our future.

It is also pertinent to highlight that the pay gap affects women and gender-diverse peoples in British Columbia in different ways. The intersectionality of experiences means that other identities such as race, disability and gender identity often lead to some women facing an even larger gap.

According to Statistics Canada’s 2016 census data, racialized women earn an average of 33 percent less than non-racialized men. That’s 67 cents to the dollar. Indigenous women face a 35 percent pay gap, and women with disabilities face a 46 percent pay gap. According to a 2011 survey, about half of transgender individuals earn $15,000 or less per year, despite 71 percent having some level of post-secondary education.

Here in British Columbia, diversity is our strength, but in order to embrace the full benefits of a diverse society, we have to uplift these identities and champion equality. Through legislating pay transparency, we can encourage businesses across B.C. to close the pay gap. By making visible the biases that exist in our workplaces, businesses will understand what gaps exist in their teams and hiring processes.

So what does this bill do? Well, right now women cannot make complaints if they don’t know how much their male colleagues are making in comparison. Workers aren’t supposed to discuss their salaries with each other, but it’s this critical information that keeps women in the workforce from arguing for and getting better wages.

[11:15 a.m.]

Back to the three candidates. Women don’t know what their male equivalents are making, and it’s taboo to talk about it. We need this bill to actually make sure that women know what they should be advocating for. Imagine the impact of this legislation if any woman could just suddenly go online and see what that job is worth in the marketplace, figure out whether they’re being paid less and be able to approach their bosses with that information. Better yet, what are the chances that the employer would just do it, would make those pay grades equal because they didn’t want that data out in the public to see?

According to West Coast Legal Education and Action Fund, the current “complaint-based system…places the onus of ensuring equal pay for work of equal value on individuals, companies and unions, rather than employers, to bring forward a complaint and spend their limited resources to pursue lengthy litigation.” In order to achieve true gender equality, women cannot be the only ones working towards equity. The current system transfers that responsibility of companies to the workers.

This bill would actually allow a voice of advocacy. It would empower women. Pay transparency gives that tool to negotiate equal pay, so rather than any company holding the upper hand in that negotiation, it would actually allow women to speak up and advocate for themselves. We know this works, because it has been implemented for public servants in our province since the 1990s.

If you look at the salary disclosure list for university faculty members…. One study has done that. It found that the wage gap narrowed between 30 to 40 percent after pay transparency was legislated for public sector wages. The banks — they’ve done a great job in this as well, in sharing their statistics and closing the gaps. But then we see headlines about surgeons and female surgeons and how dramatically they are underpaid.

B.C. is an outlier. We’re an outlier because we are one of the last, the very last, to implement any measures for equal pay. This bill is going to ensure that our province finally takes a small step forward, a step towards gender equity and, at least, just falls in line with the rest of the country.

Yes, there have been measures that have been implemented in almost every other jurisdiction across Canada. I mean, the federal government is the most recent to embrace pay transparency, having passed the Pay Equity Act last year. That helps the federally regulated workers with more than 100 employees, but it’s one small step.

In 2019, Ontario introduced pay transparency legislation that requires employers to include a salary range for publicly posted jobs and prohibits employers from punishing employees for disclosing compensation. In B.C., we’re one of four that does not have any pay equity legislation, and the impact is clear. I’ve already stated what that impact is. We have the worst pay gap between men and women. It’s time that we support this very basic measure for women’s rights.

This is not a reinvention. This bill is actually largely based on the United Kingdom’s gender pay gap. That came into force in 2017. Has it worked? Yes, it has.

Understandably, women avoid working in companies where they know that women are being paid less, but right now in B.C., we don’t know if we’re being paid less. We need this bill. We need equal pay, and we need legislation to actually make that happen.

[11:20 a.m.]

To quote Francesca Lawson: “You can’t say that you’re doing really well for equality if you’ve not got the numbers behind you to support it. We don’t want to see nice headshots of your female employees. We don’t want to see panel discussions that you’re running. We want you to tell us how you’ve identified your problems, what you’re going to do to fix them, and if you have something to shout about — if you’re doing well — well, show us the data.”

This is only the first step. But as we know, if we don’t measure it, we’re not going to change it.

Will this completely make an equal playing field? No. We know that there are so many other barriers. But this equal pay legislation is the foundation for action. If we continue on the trajectory that we’re on today…. Well, I mean, we could choose to do that. This NDP government could choose to do that, But it will take us 267.6 years. That’s how long it will take us to close the gender gap. I don’t want to wait. I don’t want to wait ten generations.

My colleague the former MLA for Surrey South was the one who championed this. She introduced this bill five times. Five times she introduced it to this House, and five times this majority NDP government refused to take it forward. While they wait, well, women lose out. They lose out on wages. They lose out on advancement. They lose out on moving it forward — the cause for equality between men and women.

G. Lore: What a pleasant surprise this morning to get to stand and speak about gender equity here in the House. I am the designated speaker to this bill.

I was appointed the Parliamentary Secretary for Gender Equity two years ago, and for me, this is an absolute dream post. I believe the previous speaker once used a metaphor about real cowboys and fake cowboys and dirty jeans and callused hands. I’ll put my dirty jeans on for this issue any day.

There’s no question. Too many women in B.C. are still making less than men. Last year in B.C., women earned, on average, 16.7 percent less than men. The majority of part-time, minimum wage and low-paid workers are women. Many continue to face barriers to employment, including affordable child care.

Closing the gender pay gap is essential. That’s why we are planning to move forward with our commitment to introduce pay transparency legislation.

Now, part of that has to be a journey where we work collectively with employers, with employees, with labour, with advocacy organizations, with First Nations. I’ve been undertaking this work over the last several months, having conversations with those who are in the labour movement, who are employers, who are the employees that we’re talking about.

How do we build a system that works here in B.C., that rises to the challenge before us, that is workable from the perspective of employers, that gets us what we need in terms of data as government, as prospective employees, as investors?

[11:25 a.m.]

We know people are looking to work in places, to invest in places, to shop at places where more than the bottom line is at stake, where there’s a commitment to more than the bottom line. That includes equity. It includes opportunities for growth and leadership. It includes pay.

One thing that I find just a little challenging this morning in this conversation is how selective the other side is when it comes to taking steps to reduce the pay gap. We know there is a myriad of causes. The causes are diverse. It is the unequal burden of unpaid labour. It is sectoral concentration, where we continue, collectively, to undervalue the work that is traditionally done by women, work that is…. It’s hard to imagine anything more important — traditional caring roles, child care, front-line service for anti-violence organizations, nurses.

We continue, collectively, as a society, not here in B.C. but all of us, to undervalue work that is traditionally done by women. This is part of the pay gap. So is blatant discrimination. We know that’s one component of this.

The steps that we need to take as government, as British Columbians to address the pay gap include pay transparency. People need this information to make decisions about where they’re going to work, about where they’re going to shop, about where they’re going to invest. It also has to involve a multi-point plan, steps getting at every source of the gender pay gap. This is where the selectiveness of support for addressing the pay gap comes in.

The previous speaker to this bill mentioned child care. Without a doubt, this is so important. Parents can’t choose between an income to pay for and support their family and a safe, healthy, quality, affordable place for their child to live — maybe it feels like that sometimes — and to be during the day, when they’re working.

We have made unprecedented investments in child care. The cost of child….

Interjections.

G. Lore: “No results” is what was mentioned on the other side.

Parents are going to see that when they write their cheque for their child care in December. That is a huge, huge difference to families when they’re making decisions about employment, about where they can live, about the growth and wellness of their babies.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: I’d remind members that the member has the floor.

G. Lore: The investments in child care are a massive part of reducing the pay gap.

Related to that and a piece I don’t want to miss — and something that was voted against by the previous member — is the early childhood educator wage enhancement. If we want to talk about pay equity, we need those who provide our child care to be receiving wages that reflect the value of the service they provide. The early child care wage enhancement is about making sure that we have more people in this field.

Without a doubt — to one of the members opposite — we have a lot of work to do to make sure that all parents can find a space in their community. We are doing that work, and part of that work is the early childhood educator wage enhancement. This is about building a more robust child care system for everyone in our community who needs it. It’s also about the wages of those child care workers, the vast majority of whom are women.

[11:30 a.m.]

The wage enhancement is a double whammy when we’re talking about the gender pay gap. It is about making sure we can pull more people into this incredibly important sector, a sector that was abandoned and undervalued for so long.

But it’s also about making sure that those people who provide that service have a wage that reflects the skill set and the value they bring to children, to families and to communities. I can’t tell you, as a parent of….

Interjection.

G. Lore: I think there were lots of issues covered.

I can’t tell you…. As a parent of two kids who are just recently out of child care, having a space that I was able to have my kids safe and healthy and learning during the day — I can’t put a dollar value on that. But there is a dollar value, and it needs to be affordable for families while ensuring that those care providers have wages that they can live on. And that is what the early childhood educator wage enhancement is about.

So as much as I’m thrilled to also talk about pay transparency, the consistency and support for the range of issues that address the pay gap would sure be nice.

I also want to talk about raising the minimum wage. Sixty percent of minimum-wage earners are women. When you freeze that for years, you are not addressing the gender pay gap; you are cementing it. You are enshrining it in legislation.

Interjection.

G. Lore: Sixty percent of minimum-wage earners are women. If the member opposite wants to talk about leaving this issue at equal pay for exactly the same job, we can sure do that. But when we think about what the pay gap means, the numbers that were cited, that is not just about two people in exactly the same job, nor is it what would happen under this pay transparency legislation.

The gap is due to unequal burdens and unpaid care, sector concentration — that is, sectors that we have undervalued over time — and it’s due to discrimination. We need to think about all aspects of those.

The liquor server wage, less than minimum wage — 80 percent of those workers were women. We got rid of that. That is a legislated pay gap.

Now, for folks who want to talk about gratuities and other things that go into that salary, we’re talking about leaving folks vulnerable to what we know happens in the service sector sometimes. We’ve seen it here in my community regarding sexual harassment, because you’re not worth a minimum wage at the starting point.

More pieces of this puzzle that the opposition has been selective about supporting: support to women in skilled trades, to women and other folks in tech and other fields in which they are underrepresented — fields that are high-growth, high-paying. If you want to address the pay gap, you cannot ignore the ways in which there is underrepresentation in high-growth, high-paying fields.

Upskilling, micro-credentialing — these are part of the answer. And it would sure be nice if we also had support and agreement on these ways to tackle this issue.

I want to talk about the repatriation of health care workers. If what the previous speaker says is the motivation behind having this conversation this morning — and that is inequities; that is financial inequity; it is the risk that comes with being not financially independent — then we need to talk about health care workers who saw their wages cut, their job security lost and their access to pensions and stability gone overnight. The vast majority of those workers — racialized women.

Deputy Speaker: I would ask the member to address the bill.

[11:35 a.m.]

G. Lore: I believe, Madam Speaker, contraception was part of the previous conversation, a whole host of aspects, but I’m happy to speak to questions around the legislation.

I want to raise a couple of things. As the previous speaker to this bill noted, the gender pay gap is not just about gender. The other things I’ve raised are also not just about gender — for example, the repatriation of racialized health care workers.

We can agree that the gap is bigger for racialized women, that Indigenous women face a way bigger gap, that people with disabilities…. We need to do the work to ensure that pay transparency does not smooth over the intersectional nature of the gender pay gap. The gaps…. We need to make sure that the pay transparency does not smooth over the gaps that racialized, Indigenous and women with disabilities face.

There’s nothing in this legislation that addresses the intersectional nature of the pay gap. If we meaningfully want to address the gap, we need to actually understand and get into the ways in which it differently affects people here in B.C., because the consequence of a lack of financial independence is extremely significant. We cannot miss the ways in which it impacts people differently.

As part of that, we’re incredibly lucky to have the heavy lifting that was done on the anti-racism data legislation, these essential first steps that work with communities about how their data is collected, how their data is stored and how their data is used. We know that this kind of data around gender, around gender identity, around race, around indigeneity has been weaponized, in the past, against communities. In order to have pay transparency that fully paints the picture of the pay gap here in B.C., we need to build on what we know and the groundwork that has been laid in the anti-racism data legislation.

I also want to address some of the questions raised around the impacts of the pandemic. Without a doubt, women lost more work, and they lost it for longer. They were in these hard-hit sectors: tourism, hospitality, retail. We know that the impacts of the pandemic on these sectors were significant. Having a look at pay transparency as part of the solution to that needs, as I said, to address that sectoral concentration, which is why women lost more work and for longer. Pay transparency is one component of that. So is the upskilling. So is the investment in women in trades. So is the work to ensure that these workplaces are safe.

Getting a job is one thing. Being able to retain it and work in safe places is another. This is work we have to do. And so as we are undertaking this work, we are doing so in consultations, so that we can hear from partners and stakeholders on their experiences; so that we can hear the ways in which the transparency and the reporting can work for B.C., for employers, for labour; so that we can hear the other ways in which the gender pay gap is reinforced.

Transparency on pay is going to be a really significant piece of this puzzle, but it is one piece of this puzzle. By engaging in consultations on the legislation, we’re able to identify those other key spots. It’s really important that we hear this.

[11:40 a.m.]

As PS, some of the things I heard in those consultations mirror some of the things that the member opposite raised in her thoughts on this bill. But I also heard a lot of other things about the ways that we need to work cross-government, how the roots of that pay gap won’t be addressed in pay transparency, with the exception of some of this bringing to light, this illuminating some of the opportunities for public accountability, some of the opportunities for individuals as they’re looking for work and as they’re looking to spend their dollars.

Where do I want to spend that? Where is the place that is treating its employees equitably and that has their lens to this? Let me tell you, there are such important and interesting and exciting examples here in B.C. of companies that are leading the way on this, because they know it’s good for business, because they know it’s the right thing to do.

Unbounce is an incredible organization in the tech industry. They’ve been working on this for ages, calling in other companies. How do we get this right? What are you doing? Have you looked inside? Have you looked inside your organization? Have you identified the spots where you’re not doing great? Pay transparency is going to be part of the solution to that for companies, for businesses, for organizations that are not there yet.

In those consultations, we heard a whole host of other things we need to have our eye on. I’ve mentioned some of them already.

Again, the work that we’re doing on this legislation — legislation we have committed to, legislation that will be rooted and grounded in consultations and collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders — is already cross-government. We’re working with the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Finance, but as part of what we hear already in these two ministries, we’re reaching out to our other colleagues regarding the sources of the pay gap that exists.

I want to speak a little bit to what’s happening in other provinces, because we learn a lot when we see what our colleagues across the country are doing and what is and isn’t working. The member mentioned Ontario. The legislation there did receive assent from the former government, but it has not yet been enforced. If the bar of what we’re talking about is to have something passed but not in operation, we could do that now.

Interjection.

G. Lore: It’s so interesting, heckling when I’m talking about gender equity in this place. So interesting.

The bar, for us, is building something that works. Ontario passed legislation. It did get royal assent. It’s not in operation. We need to build something that’s going to work here for our diverse stakeholders.

The federal government has taken really important steps on this front. Pay transparency measures are in place for federally regulated employers. We have a nice dashboard where we get a look at what that gap looks like across the country in federally regulated employers.

What learnings can we do? What do we need to know from our federal counterparts for how we build this bill, how we build regulations and how we work in the experience that has been had on pay transparency federally? How do we work it in to make sure that it works here in B.C.? How do we do something other than have something that lands royal assent and then doesn’t go into force? I don’t know about the members opposite, but when I think about what I want B.C.’s pay transparency to look like, I’m not landing at a bill that’s not in effect.

[11:45 a.m.]

We can point to examples around the country. We should also point to examples around the country where it working.

I want to also speak to leadership. I talked about the need for pay transparency to be combined with other aspects of getting at the roots of the gender pay gap. Now, part of this is about not just sectoral concentration, which I’ve spoken a little bit about, how we address that, but also where in organizations folks are concentrated. We need to have a sense about where in an organization folks are.

As I mentioned, the vast majority of minimum wage earners are women, so when we freeze minimum wage, we enshrine the gender pay gap. But we can also think about the other end of the spectrum. We have been undertaking work to ensure that there are more women on public sector boards, increasing that to more than 51 percent. That’s a 23 percent increase from 2017. When we talk about the pay gap, we need to talk about where people are in organizations, where they are in sectors.

Another way I want to ground this conversation, and maybe the selective support for it, is in the impact on my other main responsibility — that is, the gender-based violence file. When people do not have financial independence or opportunities for financial independence, that is a cause of violence. Folks cannot seek safety if they cannot support their families.

We have made unprecedented investments in another area that was just frozen, and that is the anti-violence sector. We’re talking about a sector that provides essential care and often does so heavily on the basis of volunteers or work that is supplemented by volunteer hours, the vast majority of whom are women.

Again, we’re talking here about both addressing the wages of people who do this essential work but also the care for folks who’ve experienced the outcomes that are sometimes linked to the lack of financial independence.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Now, I want to raise a couple of other things. One is…. I’ve done it here. We often talk about the pay gap on a gender binary. Lots of that is because we have the data we have. We know what we know, and lots of our systems are built around a gender binary. But the reality is that folks who are trans, non-binary or gender-diverse, from all indications of the data that’s out there, face even larger gaps.

We need to be attentive to that when we build this legislation. If we’re meaning to fully understand, recognize and address the gender pay gap, we can’t rebuild it on a gender binary. Yesterday was the Trans Day of Remembrance. We saw overnight in Colorado that transphobia, homophobia continues to kill. We’ve seen threats here, including in my community.

We know the barriers to employment, to advancement in employment, to financial independence are significant for this community. We cannot recreate that in this legislation, and we must continue to take steps to increase opportunities for safe employment.

We made changes to how folks can correct their gender markers. If you do not have an ID that reflects who you are, seeking employment, interacting with government or employers can be an incredibly unsafe place.

[11:50 a.m.]

Our work on SOGI, starting with kids but also thinking more broadly about our obligations to the 2SLGBTQ community, is about financial independence, does lead to financial independence, when people can have jobs where they’re safe, earning an income that they deserve.

When we undertake this work for pay transparency, part of our consultations, part of our conversation is about how we take into account, work in, make safe for folks who are outside the gender pay gap.

Again, we need to learn and build from the work done on the anti-racism data legislation. It is often not safe for folks who are trans to share that with their employer. So how can we build that into our system so we have the data we need, so we recognize the rights and the safety of trans people and also make it safe for them to share their data?

Now, again, it would sure be nice if some of these other aspects, the true root causes of the gender pay gap, were part of what was supported as a solution to this.

I, in my last couple of minutes, just want to speak to a couple of other examples that were raised. One was: who asks for what kind of salary? This is a huge challenge.

Another was people not being able to share what their salary is, this culture of silence around pay and around compensation that leads to less transparency. Well before we’re at the point of reporting to government and reporting publicly the pay gap…. We have aspects — and the member before me mentioned it — that keep things quiet or prevent people from knowing what their colleagues are making as a way to reinforce the gender pay gap.

The private member’s bill that’s before us does nothing to solve those. It does nothing to ensure people have the information when they’re applying to jobs, right? They can see a gap in an organization. But in terms of having the information about where to start their ask, about what they can expect to be paid, about being able to talk to colleagues and saying, “Hold on a second. Is there a gap here, which is existing in my organization, between me and this other person?” this private member’s bill does nothing to address those.

If we want to take meaningful action, in addition to getting pay transparency, where some of these measures are public, some of these measures actually address the intersectional nature of the pay gap, we also need to look at the other mechanisms, the other tools of transparency. How can people have an even starting foot?

So often when someone goes from one job to another, they’re asked about their previous salary. That’s a place where the pay gap is reproduced. If you have a gap at your previous organization…. You’re moving to a new organization, and this question is being asked. There’s no pay scale on the job application. You’re being asked about your pay in a previous position. That’s a lack of transparency, and that’s a place where the pay gap is reproduced. This private member’s bill does nothing to address it.

We need to take an all-hands-on-deck approach to this pay transparency legislation, which we’ve committed to, working with, not on our own, stakeholders. That includes employees, employers, precarious workers. It includes advocates, people who have been asking for this. How are we working together to make this right? It is also, fundamentally, about hearing the other parts of the system that continue to uphold the pay gap.

Noting the time, Mr. Speaker, I’d like to reserve my place to continue. There is a lot to say. I’m seeking and hoping for support on all approaches to this issue, not a singular one.

On that note, I reserve my place to continue my remarks and move adjournment of the debate.

G. Lore moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. S. Malcolmson moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:55 a.m.