Fourth Session, 42nd Parliament (2023)

OFFICIAL REPORT
OF DEBATES

(HANSARD)

Tuesday, February 14, 2023

Morning Sitting

Issue No. 265

ISSN 1499-2175

The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.
The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.


CONTENTS

Routine Business

Introductions by Members

Statements (Standing Order 25B)

R. Merrifield

M. Babchuk

K. Kirkpatrick

S. Chant

B. Stewart

B. D’Eith

Oral Questions

E. Sturko

Hon. M. Farnworth

M. Lee

Hon. N. Sharma

A. Olsen

Hon. J. Osborne

Hon. G. Heyman

T. Halford

Hon. M. Farnworth

R. Merrifield

Hon. M. Farnworth

E. Ross

P. Milobar

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills

Hon. N. Sharma

M. de Jong

Hon. G. Heyman

Hon. L. Beare

Hon. N. Sharma

Hon. A. Kang

M. Bernier

Hon. A. Kang

Committee of the Whole House

Hon. K. Conroy

P. Milobar

Report and Third Reading of Bills


TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2023

The House met at 10:04 a.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: N. Letnick.

Introductions by Members

Hon. R. Kahlon: Today, very shortly, joining us in the gallery will be the excellent interns that we have on the government side.

[10:05 a.m.]

We’ve got five interns who’ll be working with the government caucus. They are Jenna Hrechka, who graduated from the University of Victoria with a degree in political science; Kevin Wong, who studied political science, law and society, at the University of British Columbia; Isabella Devereaux, who holds a degree in political science at UBC; Zaina Khan, who studied history, Indigenous studies and sociology at Simon Fraser University; and Ben Rutkowski, who is a graduate of political science and economics at UVic.

All members of the government side look forward to working with them throughout this session, and I urge members to go and visit them and say hello in their offices.

Can the House please join me in welcoming them to this place.

Hon. M. Dean: Later on today we have two classes coming to visit and learn about our work, and to watch a bit of question period as well, from Dunsmuir Middle School, which is in Colwood, in Esquimalt-Metchosin. They’re coming with their teacher, Alyson Weber.

Would the House please make them very welcome.

A. Olsen: In the viewing gallery today is a friend, Dave Cowen, the CEO of Butchart Gardens.

I look back very fondly to my time working in the Butchart Gardens as a high school student. A lot of the things that I do today, in business and in preparation to be in this place, came because I had the fortune of being trained very well by an excellent community business.

As we’re getting ready for yet another tourist season here in the capital regional district and the province of British Columbia, we hope the best for our friends at Butchart and at all of the tourist venues here in the city and across the province.

Would the House please make my friend Dave feel very welcome.

S. Chandra Herbert: Six years ago, about this time, I was lying in a hospital bed holding a new baby bundle of joy, and I want to just wish a very, very happy birthday to Romi’s and my son Dev. He has turned six today and is the best thing that ever happened to us. So happy birthday to Dev.

J. Rice: I realize that all of us here are away from our…. Well, I assume we’re all away from our loved ones and our partners and wives and husbands and whatnot.

I’m hoping you’ll humour me with just making this acknowledgment, because it was nine years ago — this is terrible — either yesterday or tomorrow; I can’t remember. I can’t remember, but I feel safe saying that out loud, because that was the day that I met my current partner, my wife, Andrea. It was during the All Native Basketball Tournament, which is going on right now in Prince Rupert. It’s a big deal. It’s a big hubbub.

We had this date that I almost didn’t go on, because her train was late. She was coming from Burns Lake. It was basketball; it was a tournament. It was busy, and we had a snowstorm, which is rare in Prince Rupert, rare. Like, we get the rain. If it snows, it melts in a couple of hours.

Nonetheless, we went on this date. She fed me tea, almonds and dark chocolate, and there was not a cab. My truck was in the shop. There was not a cab to be found in Prince Rupert, because they were driving all the players and coaches and families around. So she walked me halfway home. That was the deal.

However, we were so engaged in conversation that I let her walk me all the way home. It was not a ploy; it was just that I didn’t want to interrupt her. So then we stayed up and drank wine. We moved from tea to the wine, and had the phenomenal first date ever.

While we did get married eight years ago in September, I just wanted to acknowledge that today is the happy-meeting-you anniversary with my wife, and I so look forward to the day where I actually can be present and cele­brate Valentine’s day with her.

Please, I just wanted to acknowledge a special moment for me and my wife.

[10:10 a.m.]

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

STARBRIGHT CHILDREN’S
DEVELOPMENT CENTRE

R. Merrifield: Children with support needs rely on the established and trusted relationships their families have spent years building with their current service providers.

This is the case with Kelowna’s Starbright Children’s Development Centre, which has served the Okanagan for 57 years. When the Starbright CDC was threatened with closure, the entire community came together in a rally of support. The horns were honking, the signs were out, balloons flying and, really, hundreds of people — parents, grandparents, service providers and community members — came out to cheer on the cause.

One of the initiatives led by the organizers was a feelings banner — a banner that the participants could write on to describe how they were feeling that day. The organizers of the event, Amy and Tia, allowed me to share their letter about this banner:

“Each little thing written represents so much. Sometimes an entire family for generations. Sometimes an entire organization of professionals who have devoted decades. And especially the voices of children: the girl who kept returning to the table to underline ‘Starbright helped me survive,’ the little boy who wrote only ‘Irene.’ This is for Irene, the visual language facilitator at Starbright. He was so excited to show her. He sought her out, so she came to see. She was so proud of him, so he was proud of himself. This is what Starbright does for children.

“As families, we never forget those moments, no matter how long it’s been. We can’t describe the magnitude of the difference they’ve made in our lives. We can’t bear to imagine where life would have gone without them. We have deep evidence of the time Starbright saved us from utter destruction. We are permanently indebted to Starbright. That is why we rallied today. Please listen.”

Today I have the privilege of reading their words and also carrying the banner into this House and hand-delivering it to the Premier. They wanted the Premier to know their hearts are for Starbright and the desire is to see it continue.

NORTH ISLAND HEALTH SUMMIT
AND HEALTH CARE SERVICES

M. Babchuk: I care about public health care, and we know it is essential to keep our rural communities strong and thriving. This is especially true in the North Island.

In November, I participated in a meaningful and productive roundtable discussion, the North Island health summit, with community members and health care partners to help identify the challenges and find solutions that will work to meet our needs. The outcome was a large list of investments that were needed to support health care staff, improve facilities and increase everyone’s ability to access care. Advocating for these needs, I could not be more thrilled to see these changes coming.

Recently, I joined the Minister of Health and the Island Health CEO to announce a $30 million health care package to transform and stabilize health care in the North Island. We know that staffing shortages are one part of the challenge, and that’s why our government is making big changes to support staff and recruit more. These changes include staff retention incentives, bonuses for employee referrals and enhanced safety in our hospitals.

We’re also improving staff accommodations and covering wages, mileage and meal expenses for staff that travel between communities. We’re investing in a new shuttle to get patients and staff to and from health care facilities, and we’re working to upgrade those facilities by purchasing a new mobile CT machine and renovating and modernizing spaces in the Port McNeill and Port Hardy hospitals.

To relieve some of the pressures on emergency departments, we are adding more sobering assessment beds and providing 24-7 access to appropriate supportive care. There will be four more long-term-care beds at Port Hardy and increased services for home health, home support, mental health and substance use services in Port Hardy and the surrounding area. These changes will help rotating or last-minute closures and give us reliable emergency hours so people can count on help when they need it.

I want to say thank you to all the participants in the health summit and raise my hands to health care workers for their dedication and service to their patients and our communities.

OVARIAN CANCER AND
FUNDRAISING FOR RESEARCH

K. Kirkpatrick: I only recently learned that 3,100 women are diagnosed with ovarian cancer every year in Canada, and almost 2,000 of those will die. More than 75 percent of affected women are diagnosed at an advanced stage because early-stage disease is usually asymptomatic, and symptoms of late-stage disease are non-specific.

Recently, my friend and fellow North Shore resident, Pamela Martin, told me about an initiative to help support the research required to find a cure for ovarian cancer. This idea came from Jim Shepard, a well-known community and business leader.

[10:15 a.m.]

Events like this are often born out of a personal connection. Jim’s daughter-in-law was diagnosed with stage 3 ovarian cancer in 2018. Jim followed her journey as she went through life-saving treatment at the ovarian cancer centre and B.C. Cancer Agency. And because of her excellent care, combined with a new drug that destroys the protein that this cancer needs to survive, his daughter-in-law’s outcome is positive.

Through her cancer journey, Jim witnessed firsthand the work of the talented researchers here in B.C. While they are leading the world in pioneering treatments and breakthrough discoveries, they are doing so on a razor-thin budget. So Jim decided to raise funds for research and founded the Plunge for the Cure Foundation. With a group of well-known change-makers like my friend Pamela, he’s raising money to fund the gap in life-saving research.

This year the inaugural 2023 Plunge for the Cure will take place on May 28 at Kits Beach. As we know, Mr. Speaker, summer comes early to Vancouver. In fact, the average temperature in May is a balmy 17 degrees.

Sign up online for the Plunge for the Cure at plungeforthecure.org. Together we really can crush ovarian cancer. I hope you’ll consider joining Jim Shepard, Pamela Martin, many others and me in plunging for a great cause.

UKRAINE INTERNATIONAL
AIRLINES FLIGHT 752

S. Chant: Today I’m glad to be speaking again from the territories of the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking people, the Esquimalt and the Songhees.

I continue to work, live and learn in my beautiful riding of North Vancouver–Seymour.

January 8, 2023, marked the third anniversary of the downing of the Ukraine International Airlines flight 752, shot down by the Iranian regime’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps shortly after taking off from Tehran international airport.

This heinous act claimed the lives of all 176 passengers and crew on board. Fifty-five Canadian citizens were on the flight, along with 30 permanent residents and others with ties to Canada and British Columbia. This tragedy is the largest loss of Canadian lives in an air disaster since 280 Canadians died in 1985 after a bomb exploded on Air India flight 182.

Three years later, after flight 752 was shot down, the victims’ families have yet to see the Iranian government be held accountable for this crime. On Sunday, January 8, I joined over 10,000 Iranian Canadians who gathered despite the cold and rainy weather to walk in unity down a lengthy route to commemorate the victims at the event organized at the North Vancouver Shipyards by the Association of Families of Flight PS752. The Premier, several ministers, colleagues and other government officials from federal and municipal levels were there, providing strength and support to those who had lost loved ones and fortifying the calls for justice.

To honour the victims and the role of the Iranian diaspora in the fight for women, life and freedom, our B.C. NDP government is working with the city of North Vancouver and contributing as much as $100,000 for a permanent monument.

Our outrage at the attack of 752 is undiminished by the passing years. Members of this Legislature condemn this horrific act and stand with the victims’ families in demanding justice.

JULIA’S JUNCTION
INCLUSIVE PLAY SPACE

B. Stewart: I want to talk today about Julia’s Junction. It’s an inclusive play space for all abilities planned for the Westbank Town Centre Park. It is the vision of Melissa Grassmick, whose daughter Julia was paralyzed by a blood clot at 17 months old and requires a wheelchair to get around.

People with disabilities represent 5,500 residents in our community. That’s one in six people in West Kelowna, including the families and friends of people with disabilities. There are close to 17,000 affected by the lack of fully inclusive playgrounds.

Julia’s Junction will be a destination play space for people of all ages to enjoy, regardless of their physical or cognitive ability or mental diagnosis. It will include features such as wheelchair-accessible play structures, multisensory play elements, as well as a sheltered area with picnic tables and a water feature. This safe, inclusive space will provide children with an opportunity to engage in diverse play experiences, build relationships and develop their skills in a fun and meaningful way without barriers.

[10:20 a.m.]

A total of $750,000 needs to be raised to build this playground. So far $667,628 has been raised, with an expected construction date to begin this April. This meaningful and important project is getting closer to becoming a reality by the day.

I look forward to the construction of Julia’s Junction and the opening of a place where nobody is excluded from play because of their disability and for our community to come together to make connections through play.

SPECIAL OLYMPICS B.C. AND
MISSION BLAZERS FLOOR HOCKEY TEAM

B. D’Eith: Before I start, I’d just like to wish my amazing wife, Kim, a very happy Valentine’s Day, and I’d also like to express my sincere hope that all of my colleagues in this House have a chance to share a moment with the people that they love today. Love truly does conquer all.

Earlier this month, the 2023 Special Olympics B.C. was held in Kamloops and hosted by over 500 athletes from all over the province. The Special Olympics B.C. began in 1980, and since then they have supported and encouraged athletes with intellectual disabilities. It’s a space for athletes experiencing disabilities to play competitive sports, make connections, get involved with the community and showcase their talents. The five pillars of the Special Olympics — inclusion, diversity, empowerment, respect and excellence — are all values shared by our government and everyone in this House.

In the 2023 games, our Mission floor hockey team, the Mission Blazers, had the opportunity to compete. They were undefeated and claimed a gold medal. The team is led by Coach Brendan Turner, and they played four outstanding games against Kelowna, Delta, Kamloops and Richmond, ultimately winning the gold.

While the entire team did a fantastic job, some MVPs are goaltenders Mitchell Howell and Justin King and my constituent Bryce Schafelberger, who scored two incredible goals against Richmond, giving them the lead and eventually winning the game.

Interjection.

B. D’Eith: Oh, I know. Sorry, my friend.

I want to congratulate Amanda, Bryce, Dan, Doug, Josh, Justin, Liam, Matthew, Mitchell, Paul, Russel, Thien, Thuc, Tony and Coach Turner, also known as the Mission Blazers, on your win.

I’d like to leave you all with the athlete oath for the Special Olympics B.C. It’s a very simple but powerful statement: “Let me win. But if I cannot win, let me be brave in the attempt.” This statement demonstrates the importance of trying despite any barriers one may have, and it represents the true nature of the Special Olympics that provide hope, motivation and opportunity to everyone in our community.

Oral Questions

ATTACKS BY REPEAT OFFENDERS AND
HANDLING OF CASES BY JUSTICE SYSTEM

Mr. Speaker: Happy Valentine’s Day. I’m sure there will be lots of love exchanged in the next 30 minutes.

E. Sturko: There is a massive disconnect between the Premier’s rhetoric and actual results when it comes to crime and social disorder. The explosion of violence that began during his time as a soft-on-crime Attorney General continues to wreak havoc in communities.

Last month we saw example after example. In Burnaby, a woman was savagely attacked and left seriously injured on the sidewalk in an unprovoked attack. In New Westminster, a vicious random attack with a stun gun sent a victim to hospital, and in Vancouver, an armed criminal who was on bail tried to enter a bar on Granville with a firearm.

Prolific offenders continue to be put back into the community to hurt innocent victims. Is this what people will see and have to experience in their lives every day? Will the Premier end his catch-and-release system so people can feel safe again?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for her question. What I can tell the hon. member is that ever since taking over as Attorney General and then as Premier, our Premier has done an amazing job in terms of bringing forward initiatives that are going to deal with some of the challenges that we’re facing in communities.

[10:25 a.m.]

We have seen funding increases now in terms of putting in programs and supports for police and communities to deal with some of the challenges that they’re facing with those who are addicted to substances and have mental health issues, for example: an expansion of the Car program; the creation of peer-assisted care teams so they can diffuse situations and not necessarily have a police officer attend a situation, whereby a mental health worker may be the more appropriate response, freeing up police to be able to do additional duties on additional work in key critical areas around public safety.

At the same time, we’ve made it clear that we want to see changes done at the federal level in terms of the bail situation. The Attorney General and the Premier have spoken with the Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister on that. The federal Justice Minister has indicated a willingness to look at and to make changes to the bail conditions, the unintended consequences from Bill C-75.

There’s a significant amount of work being done by the Premier, by this government on this side of the House, to keep our streets safe.

Mr. Speaker: Surrey South, supplemental.

E. Sturko: What’s amazing is how this government could have stood by for almost six years now and watched people get randomly attacked on the streets of this province. It’s absolutely ridiculous for me to actually hear the word “amazing” come out of someone in this room’s mouth when I know that people have received a pipe to the side of the head, been stabbed in the throat trying to deliver food in Vancouver.

You know what? It’s results that matter. It’s been an­nouncement after announcement and initiative announce­ments. And you know what? It’s results and what people see that actually matter.

Last week another senior was the victim of a vicious random attack in Chinatown. The offender, Alan Kipson, has a history of assault and failing to appear in court. But despite being found guilty of assault just two months prior, Kipson was allowed back into the community, where he went on to viciously attack a 74-year-old woman waiting for a bus. The elderly victim was rushed to the hospital, while Kipson walked free.

When will the Premier end his catch-and-release system and put the right of victims to feel safe ahead of an offender’s right to reoffend?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Again, I thank the member for the question. I will take this opportunity, because she is new in the House, to remind her of the initiatives that this government has undertaken under the six years that we have been in power.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, it’s Valentine’s Day.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thank you, hon. Speaker. You know, I always find it interesting that whenever I’m about to let them know the facts, they don’t want to hear it. They start to get all agitated. I can understand that. I can understand that because when you look…. The largest single investment in policing in the history of this province….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: The largest single investment in policing in the history of this province, which nobody on that side of the House did when they sat on this side of the House.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: The first 277 positions to be filled — this government is funding them.

Interjection.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Oh, the member from Kamloops. I’d like the member from Kamloops maybe to talk to his colleague from Prince George–Mackenzie, who tried to do it but wasn’t able to, because their budget-focused cuts wouldn’t allow it.

We put in place the first witness protection program, made in British Columbia, that’s resulted in a significant increase in charges and convictions of people convicted of murders and crimes.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Member.

Hon. M. Farnworth: We brought in place the first forensic firearms to crack down on gang activity. All of those initiatives done by this government. Sixteen years they had to do that, and they failed every single time.

COMMUNITY SAFETY
IN VANCOUVER’S CHINATOWN

M. Lee: Well, the minister stands in this House talking about the Premier, the Attorney General as he was in his role for 5½ years. He’s had six years to fix this, and under his watch, things have only gotten worse in Chinatown and in communities across our province.

[10:30 a.m.]

People do not feel safe on our streets. What people see and feel in Chinatown is how a once-thriving community is now plagued by violence and hate. Under this Premier’s catch-and-release system, random attacks continue to escalate, and anti-Asian hate crimes are 400 percent higher than in 2018, according to a recent report to Vancouver city council.

Vancouver has become the anti-Asian hate crime capital of North America. Seniors who call Chinatown their home live in constant fear, and it’s time for the Premier to start taking some responsibility. After six years of worsening results, when will people see an end to the random attacks, the constant social disorder and escalating anti-Asian hate crimes in Chinatown?

Hon. N. Sharma: Everyone deserves to feel safe in their communities. When we hear about those traumatic acts, we can all stand together here and condemn them.

As a government, we’re taking action. Two weeks ago I met with Minister Lametti to talk about what’s at the core of this issue, which is a bail reform policy that needs to be addressed. We had a very productive meeting, and I’m looking forward to changes there.

This government is taking action to keep our communities safe. We issued a new bail directive for repeat violent offenders to all Crown prosecutors. We’re standing up 20 new dedicated Crown prosecutors as part of our repeat offenders action team that will focus specifically on repeat violent offenders. We have seen a 32 percent increase in Crown counsel budgets, and that’s after the opposition starved it for years.

This is a government that is committed to taking action to make sure that our communities are safe.

Mr. Speaker: Vancouver-Langara, supplemental.

M. Lee: That response from the Attorney General is simply just not good enough for the seniors and other people living and working in Chinatown who are scared and continue to live and work in fear. This government, this Premier, has had six years to address this, and this Premier’s soft-on-crime approach simply is not working.

What people see and feel in Chinatown is how a once-thriving community is now plagued by violence and hate under this Premier’s catch-and-release system. Every day people are seeing and feeling the evidence that the Premier’s catch-and-release system is a dangerous failure.

On the weekend, we saw the Dr. Sun Yat-Sen Garden in Chinatown maliciously vandalized and, again, with fake blood sprayed on its walls. The garden’s executive director, Lorraine Lowe, says: “These unchecked crimes send an unmistakable message of anti-Asian hate.”

Vandalism in Chinatown has skyrocketed by a staggering 455 percent since 2019. It’s time for this catch-and-release Premier to take responsibility. How much longer must the residents of Chinatown endure these random attacks, rampant social disorder and escalating hate crimes?

Hon. N. Sharma: Thanks for the question. When we hear about these acts of racism and violent attacks, we all can stand together to condemn them, and our heart goes out to the victims.

My role as Attorney General is to make sure that the justice system has the tools that it needs to respond. I spoke about our new bail policy and the directions that were going forward. I spoke about our investment in Crown counsel and the 21 new dedicated Crown prose­cutors that will be focused on repeat violent offence response teams.

Everyone agrees this is a national issue. The Premier has written, along with other Premiers, to the federal government to ask for changes to the bail policy that will help us put more tools in place for our Crown prosecutors to respond to repeat violent offenders.

We’re going to keep doing the work necessary to help make sure that our communities are safe and to address the challenges that we feel and we see in our communities.

[10:35 a.m.]

GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON
FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY
AND ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE

A. Olsen: During the B.C. NDP leadership event last fall, Premier Eby said: “We cannot continue to subsidize fossil fuels and expect clean energy to manifest somehow. We cannot continue to expand fossil fuel infrastructure and hit our climate goals.”

My question is to the Premier. Will he commit to no new expanded fossil fuel projects in British Columbia?

Mr. Speaker: When we ask questions, Members, no names are to be mentioned.

Hon. J. Osborne: Thank you to the member for the question. I appreciate his interest and his passion for this topic, one that our government shares.

We have been very clear all along that all future LNG projects need to fit within our climate commitments. We have said this over and over again. The Premier has backed this up. It has been a strong part of the message from our government. We are going to continue to work with the oil and gas sector to reduce emissions to fit within our sec­toral targets and to hit those targets.

I am so honoured to have this position, to be working with my colleague the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy together to address this. I appreciate the question.

Mr. Speaker: Member, supplemental.

A. Olsen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and apologies.

It’s essentially the same response the Premier gave us last fall — that we are going to be meeting our 2030 and 2050 targets, and that’s the goal of CleanBC. Unfortunately, we’re not on track to meet those targets as we currently stand.

The fact of the matter is that we’ve got multiple LNG proposals in this province being speculated upon, many of which are very bullish in there for the future of LNG in this province, a response this government has yet to tamper down. We’ve got Woodfibre, Tilbury, LNG Canada phase 2, Cedar LNG and Ksi Lisims LNG all ready to go in this province. If they are going to move forward, then it’s going to take CleanBC and the rhetoric around it and completely make it meaningless.

My question to the Minister of Energy: with all of the speculation about these other LNG projects, does she still believe that we can expand the fossil fuel industry and meet our climate goals?

Hon. G. Heyman: Thank you to the member for the question. I appreciate the member’s passion for meeting climate goals, but I simply do not accept a characterization of one of the leading climate plans in North America, in a context when other people are doing absolutely nothing, as empty rhetoric. It’s simply not true.

We have a broad series of actions across all sectors that are designed to reduce emissions between now and 2030, now and 2040 and now and 2050. We’re making progress on them. This is hard work, but we’re doing it. It involves meeting with industry, whether it’s the oil and gas sector, the pulp and paper sector or the mining sector and working with them to drive down their emissions.

This is not some something that can be simply done by an empty statement in this Legislature, an empty statement in front of cameras or a stroke of a pen. This is hard work, and we’re taking it on.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. G. Heyman: That’s why we’ll continue to work hard with our partners and with our communities to meet our climate targets, because that’s what British Columbians expect.

CRIME IN COMMUNITIES AND
ACTION ON COMMUNITY SAFETY

T. Halford: What people see and feel in downtowns across this province is a daily reality of crime and social chaos. This past week in Victoria alone, multiple storefronts had their windows smashed and random acts of vandalism.

It’s actually gotten to the point where small business owners like Tara from Baggins Shoes are at a tipping point and are looking at leaving downtown for good. She says: “Broken glass. Used needles. Human excrement. We seem to be left to our own devices.”

[10:40 a.m.]

My question is a simple one to the Premier. How many small business owners will have to flee before the Premier ends the crime and disorder that we are seeing in all our downtowns across this province?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question, but I want to make it clear: this government takes these issues very seriously. That’s why we work very closely with local governments on ways in which we can deal with some of the situations that they find themselves in.

There are a number of reasons that the member well knows for the problems that we’re seeing. We’re seeing it through the toxic drug supply, we’re seeing it through the mental health and addiction issues and we’re seeing it through the unintended consequences that have come about because of some of the changes made at the federal level.

What we have made clear is that all levels of government have to be involved. That’s why we’ve been working with local government to identify areas where the province can assist them, whether it’s through things such as downtown revitalizations or whether it’s ensuring that they’ve got the housing resources that they need, where we’ve seen some progress being made in a number of areas, in communities such as Vancouver and Victoria.

At the same time, it’s working with communities that recognize that they need additional support in terms of policing. That’s why we’ve put in place the surge teams in places like Prince George, in Terrace and in Kamloops to assist police in doing their job. That’s why we’ve made the largest single investment in terms of policing of the 277 vacancies on the provincial police line, to ensure that they’re able to serve smaller rural communities which are going to assist as well.

We also need… There are changes that need to be made at the federal level, from the issues that have come around from the changes that they made around bail, and the court cases that have come from that.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Please continue.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I’m trying to give an answer to a question, and what do you do. You get heckled.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Anyway, working with the federal government to make those changes, where the Justice Minister himself has said British Columbia has been a leader on this issue. We take it very seriously. We’re going to continue taking the actions, working with local government, police and the federal government to deal with the problems of public safety that communities are facing.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON REPEAT
OFFENDERS AND CRIME IN COMMUNITIES

R. Merrifield: You know, I’m sitting here listening to the minister’s response, and I’m just flummoxed by the fact that it’s just, in his words, always someone else’s fault for this government. It’s either the local governments or the business associations or the federal government’s fault.

But the lip service, the announcements and the long list of rhetoric are not results that are actually experienced by our citizens, who are traumatized and fearful by what they see in our streets daily.

Kelowna has the highest urban crime rate in Canada. This is what people have experienced in my community, just in the last month. A man attacked, left lying on the ground, unconscious and bleeding from his head. Threats and smashed windows from a man with an axe in an unprovoked attack. And last week a prolific offender who personifies the Premier’s catch-and-release system was back in the news. Tyler Newton, the bus killer with over 50 criminal charges, committed yet another crime after being let out again into our community.

When will the catch-and-release Premier prioritize the rights of victims to feel safe over the rights of prolific offenders like Tyler Newton to continue to reoffend?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Thanks to the member for the question. I’d like to remind that member that hiring 270 new RCMP officers that will assist in rural small communities across this province on the provincial line is not rhetoric. It’s action.

Expanding car programs that local governments have been asking for is not rhetoric. It is action.

Peer Assisted Crisis Teams, which have shown huge success on the North Shore and in New Westminster, being expanded across this province to some 20 communities — that’s not rhetoric. That’s action.

[10:45 a.m.]

Unlike the opposition when they sat on this side of the House and cut victim services programs, we’ve expanded those programs. That’s not rhetoric. That’s action.

E. Ross: For years, we’ve been bringing accounts of victims of violence to this Legislature and trying to get government to act. Now, we’ve heard the responses from government, and it is rhetoric. We’ve heard this government blame the federal government, for example. We know that this government downloads responsibility on municipalities and small businesses. We’ve heard all that.

But this is the first time that I’ve heard government get up and say: “The work that we’ve done to protect B.C. citizens from violence is amazing.” That’s the first time I’ve heard that, when the amount of attacks are going up in British Columbia. Just take one account of a victim that gets hit on the side of the head and tell them that this government is doing amazing work.

People across the province are growing tired of the Premier’s excuses amid ongoing crime and social disorder in our communities. A recent rally in Nanaimo saw hundreds of people calling for the Premier to be accountable for his lack of results. This rally happened in January 2023. There was no mention of amazing results.

One resident, Karen Kuwica, spoke out about the devastating impact of crime in her community. This is what she’s got to say. “We’ve already had a loss of life from a robbery that became violent. We’ve had fires in vacant buildings. We’ve had a suspected hit and run that took a life. The list goes on and on, and it’s only been a week.” A British Columbian citizen is saying this. It’s not us. It’s not the opposition.

My question is to the Premier. When will the Premier put the rights of victims and communities ahead of offenders who repeatedly wreak havoc and terrorize people?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question. It’s unfortunate that the member seems to characterize the initiatives that we have undertaken — whether it’s wanting to get changes made to bail reform, which the Attorney General and the Premier have spoken to the Prime Minister about — as blaming someone. It’s not blaming.

What it’s recognizing is that the feds made some changes. There were consequences, unintended consequences, that are impacting them. We are working to get those things changed.

In the same way, we work with local governments in his community of Terrace, where the RCMP were facing challenges in terms of the resources that they were facing. We put additional resources into his community, into Kamloops, into Prince George. I can tell you, on my recent trip to Prince George, the police there indicated how pleased they were that we have put those surge teams in, because they were proving invaluable.

Those are real initiatives, in the same way as the initiatives that we’ve undertaken in terms of victims. This side of the House has put victims first. That’s why we’ve increased the funding for victim services, unlike them, who cut the funding.

Finally, we have not blamed local government; we’ve worked with local government. The Premier, when he was Attorney General, was asked by local governments saying: “We’re facing some challenges.” He asked for additional information, “Come with us and tell us,” specifically to each community, and mayors did that.

The results out of that were the LePard report, which has initiated other initiatives in terms of mental health and addictions, additional police resources, all of those things designed to assist communities and help keep our communities safe.

P. Milobar: Well, the Solicitor General routinely gets up and blusters in this House, but he seems to have missed the plot line here.

[10:50 a.m.]

The sad reality is we’re asking questions of, actually, the third Attorney General that this government has had, and instead of hearing from the Attorney General, we keep hearing from the Solicitor General about policing.

The police are just as frustrated at all the people that are getting randomly attacked in this province. We’re not questioning the work of the police forces in this province. We’re not questioning their attempts at public safety. They’re just as frustrated with this Premier’s catch-and-release system that has been initiated over the last six years, as he has been the Attorney General and now the Premier.

But we don’t hear…. Apparently, this Attorney General is not allowed to answer. The House Leader won’t let her get up and actually answer questions. Two questions have been answered today out of how many? People deserve to hear answers.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. That’s okay.

Continue.

P. Milobar: The former Attorneys General were allowed to answer it well, Mr. Speaker. They seem to be very sensitive today.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, shhh. Both sides calm down.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members will come to order now, both sides.

The member will continue.

P. Milobar: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Government House Leader seemed to have something to work out there.

People are being attacked repeatedly in unprovoked events in this province. This government continues to brush it off as if we’re making things up and that people are actually safer and crime is under control under this Premier’s catch-and-release system. It’s simply not factually correct. It’s just more and more empty NDP rhetoric and promises.

In Nanaimo, small business owners like Jeff Ross say that, just in the last 60 days alone, he’s had two break-ins, three vehicle break-ins, two shoplifting events, two store windows being broken and garbage strewn all over the place. If you listen to the Solicitor General, somehow things are okay.

Well, here’s what the Nanaimo mayor, Leonard Krog, said. Imagine if Mr. Krog had actually been made the Attorney General. Perhaps this province would have been actually safer, and he wouldn’t have left to go to the mayor’s chair in Nanaimo in the first place.

But let’s look at what he says at the rally. He has called upon the provincial government over and over again to “provide the secure involuntary care” people need. That’s one of this government’s former MLAs who is now the mayor of Nanaimo saying that.

Mr. Speaker: Question, Member.

P. Milobar: How much more violence, theft and business closures will people have to endure before this soft-on-crime Premier actually starts taking meaningful action and ends his catch-and-release system to make communities safe again?

Mr. Speaker: Members, it’s the government’s prerogative whoever they want to stand up and answer the question. Please. We all know that.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh.

Deputy Premier.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I will point out to my colleague across the way that he said that I said it’s okay, that the crime is okay. He said that I said it’s okay that all these things are taking place. That is simply not true. Everybody condemns the violence that’s taken place.

What I’ve said in terms of amazing: we’ve got an amazing Premier. We absolutely do have an amazing Premier. But let’s….

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members, enough.

Please continue.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I listened to the member’s question, and nearly all of it related to my ministry. I mean, he specifically accused me of saying something is okay. So you’re darn right I’m going to take this opportunity to answer the question to point out that they cut victim services; that they failed to add additional police resources to communities such as Prince George, Terrace and Kamloops that were asking for them; that they had 16 years to try and fill the provincial police line. They failed to do that.

Those are actions that this side of the House is doing. This side of the House is taking action in terms of working with the federal government to get those changes needed around bail reform.

[10:55 a.m.]

That’s why the federal Justice Minister said that British Columbia is taking a leadership role, hon. Speaker. We have been working with local government, the city of Vancouver, on putting additional resources into communities — whether it’s successful programs we have piloted on the North Shore, expanding them provincewide, such as peer-assisted care teams; or whether it’s expanding the car program; all of those things are taking place — and making sure that victim services get more funding than ever happened on that side of the House.

[End of question period.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. R. Kahlon: Hon. Speaker, I call Bill 3, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, second reading.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 3 — MISCELLANEOUS STATUTES
AMENDMENT ACT, 2023

Hon. N. Sharma: I move that the bill now be read a second time.

The bill amends the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. As part of the November 2021 amendments to FOIPPA, housekeeping changes were made to provide clarity and improve the flow of section 3, which discusses application of the act. It was discovered that a drafting error created an unintended gap in coverage for the records of the independent officers of the Legislature and the Auditor General for Local Government. This bill will restore coverage to what it was before the act was amended in 2021.

This bill also amends the Ecological Reserve Act and the Park Act by enabling administrative penalties. This is necessary to ensure that penalties for offences can be scalable to address the impact of the non-compliance on protected area values and to deter future non-compliance.

The bill amends the Special Accounts Appropriation and Control Act to direct revenues from administrative penalties into the park enhancement fund. This will allow the funds to be used directly to remedy the protected area values that were damaged by the violation and to cover the costs associated with the extraordinary enforcement expenses. This supports the principle that violators, not taxpayers, should shoulder the financial costs of their offences.

The bill enables the minister to suspend a permit issued under the Ecological Reserve Act. Suspensions add flexibility to the minister’s compliance and enforcement tools in a manner that aligns with modern natural resource legislation. It also makes amendments to the Protected Areas of British Columbia Act. The amendment continues the routine business of improving protected area boundary descriptions and correcting administrative errors.

Thorsen Creek is an 8,504-hectare conservancy established in 2008 after a recommendation by the Central Coast land and resource management plan. The proposed amendment will remove 14 hectares from the northwestern corner of the conservancy. This land was erroneously included in the conservancy when it was established in 2008. The land includes industrial activities and infrastructure that existed prior to the conservancy being designated and that are inappropriate in a conservancy.

The B.C. Medical Association is a voluntary association of physicians, resident physicians and medical residents, representing physicians in the province, including in their negotiations with the B.C. government. The hospital appeal board and the Medical Services Commission are statutory bodies with memberships specified in the Hospital Act and the Medicare Protection Act. Both include members from the BCMA.

The BCMA legally changed its name to the Association of Doctors of B.C. in April 2020. The bill will amend the Hospital Act and the Medicare Protection Act to substitute the name Association of Doctors of B.C. for all references to B.C. Medical Association. These amendments will ensure the accuracy of these statutes and the board appointments made under them.

[11:00 a.m.]

In 2021, the B.C. Ombudsperson produced an investigative report into municipal tax sales and vulnerable people. Each year properties on which taxes are delinquent are offered for sale at public auction. We know there are citizens who, for any number of reasons, may not fully appreciate the consequences of delinquent taxes, the potential loss to their property or the steps that can be taken to avoid the sale of a property. The report contains a series of recommendations designed to protect vulnerable property owners whose properties are at risk of a tax sale.

This amendment responds to one of the Ombudsperson’s recommendations. It will require that additional notice of an impending tax sale be provided to property owners. Specifically, a municipal collector will be required to give notice 60 days before the date of an annual tax sale to each owner of a property and registered charge holder on a property subject to a tax sale.

Finally, this bill makes validation and confirmation provisions, consequential amendments and housekeeping amendments.

M. de Jong: It’s my first opportunity, in the confines of this chamber, to extend a welcome to the new Attorney General and to congratulate her on her appointment to that lofty position.

An Attorney General that preceded me once made the observation that amongst the legion of lawyers that patrol across the land…. Some are anxious for an appointment, eventually, to the bench. Some are not. But virtually every lawyer would like to be Attorney General for a day.

The minister now assumes that position for more than a day and, as we have heard just a few moments ago, inherits a long list of challenges that she and the government must confront and deal with. I say, from the opposition benches…. We wish her success in that regard and hope she enjoys somewhat more success on some of these matters than we have seen in the past.

Those days are ahead. Our task today is to briefly consider the first bill that the minister has tabled as Attorney General. I won’t attempt to characterize it as the single most controversial piece of legislation that we have seen.

My practice on these matters, and it’s one I intend to continue, would be, in second reading, simply to alert the Attorney and her staff and, in this case, perhaps staffs in other ministries to the areas that the opposition will look to canvass in more detail when we get to committee stage, as opposed to embarking upon a lengthy discussion of all of the various provisions at this point. The easiest way for me to do that, in a relatively short legislative instrument, is to refer to the clauses. I think we call them clauses now, not sections.

Clause 1 is actually something that falls directly within the parameters of the Attorney General. It is the product of a process that was created in this House a few years ago, whereby errors that are deemed to be less substantive errors can be corrected by regulation as opposed to legislation. This, I think, falls into that category, where a regulatory process was used to correct a cross-reference there. Then those regulations and those changes require ratification in the Legislature.

I may have a question or two about the schedule and the process that was followed here. That will have more to do with the process than it does with the substantive change that is being corrected.

There are clauses, clause 2, dealing with changes to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. I won’t try to anticipate fully the discussion that will take place at committee stage relating to the extended coverage that this purports to create and to apply certain provisions to this chamber and offices of this assembly.

[11:05 a.m.]

I will say this, and it is not meant to be unnecessarily argumentative. For reasons that relate to recent history…. When this government makes changes to this act, the opposition gets suspicious. That is a product of some unfortunate decisions that were made by the government over the course of its nearly six years in office. So the minister and her colleague responsible for the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act should anticipate some questions to clarify and have placed on the record what the intention is with respect to the provisions in clause 2.

The minister has referred to sections 3 to 10, which deal with the environment and parks legislation. They appear, on the surface, to be, especially with respect to parks, technical and corrective, although whenever governments seek the authority to expand their penalty provisions and administrative penalty provisions, it’s probably appro­priate…. There will be some questions relating to those provisions as well.

Sections 11 and 12 deal with health and are, as I read them and as the minister has just pointed out, essentially designed to acknowledge the new name for the Doctors of B.C., the B.C. Medical Association. I wouldn’t expect there to be, really, any questions relating to those sections. I say that only because health officials have got enough to do. It would seem unwise to have a myriad of them waiting around for questions that never arise.

Sections 13 to 15 deal with the municipal legislation and notice provisions. I think my reaction, quite frankly, was the same as most people. I would have thought that on something as significant as a tax sale, there would have already been notice provisions. That, apparently, is not the case or not the case to the extent that there should be.

I think that the opposition’s interest in these sections will be twofold. One is to understand properly, at the committee stage, how those notice provisions will operate. The minister made, I thought, an interesting comment speaking about vulnerable landowners. This may well be one of those cases where it is not just the fact of providing notice but how that notice is provided. A vulnerable landowner who….

If we accept the proposition that no one purposely seeks to avoid their obligations as they relate to property taxes…. Most reasonable people would understand that there are consequences for that, including, potentially, the loss of that land. That occurs either when financial circumstances have deteriorated to a point where the non-payment of taxes is involuntary or the person has lost the capacity to properly understand what their obligations are. If I said, say, seniors…. I wouldn’t want to be accused of suggesting that only seniors can lose their capacity. Other people, for other reasons, can.

If that is true, then receiving a notice in the mail may not be sufficient, although it generally is. That’s how we generally provide notice. It may be that on something….

[11:10 a.m.]

If we stop for a moment and consider what the average value of a home in British Columbia is today…. The fact that an organ of state would come along and, in the case of non-payment of taxes, quite properly initiate proceedings, ensuring that the person to whom that action applies not just has notice but understands the significance of that notice, there should be a heightened obligation on the part of the state to ensure that that is the case.

The second part of the conversation — I think it’ll be my colleague from Peace River South who engages in the exchange — will be our concern that not only are we correcting a significant technical requirement and a missing feature in the act, but that the government is concerned, given the continuing deterioration of our economic situation in British Columbia, that this is a provision that is going to become, sadly, more relevant in the weeks, months and years ahead.

There are certainly signs pointing in that direction. I think the minister or her colleague…. I’m not certain how the government and the minister wish to organize the committee stage debate. I would suggest that in the past it has been helpful to have the folks responsible for the relevant legislation in place to answer the questions, but that will also be a topic for discussion going forward.

That’s my best synopsis of where I think the conversation will take us in committee stage. As is, I think, normal in this case, the opposition is happy to facilitate passage through second reading so that we can get to that more detailed discussion on those matters.

Hon. G. Heyman: I’m just happy to make a few brief comments to my sections of this bill. As my colleague the Attorney General has already noted, the amendment in respect of protected area boundary descriptions just continues the regular practice of correcting administrative errors and improving boundaries as they’re described.

I would like, partly in response to the member for Abbotsford West, to speak a little bit to the amendments to the Park Act and the Ecological Reserve Act that introduce administrative penalties. Perhaps I can offer a bit of clarity; I certainly will look forward to any questions that come up in committee stage with regard to this.

What the administrative penalties will do is give B.C. Parks a wider and more practical range of tools to address regulatory non-compliance in ecological reserves and parks. The province can, as members know, prosecute offences in court, but administrative penalties are timelier, they’re more cost-effective, and they’re less stigmatizing than a court prosecution. They can be, therefore, more effective.

Court prosecutions, of course, are appropriate for some serious offences, but administrative penalties are a common tool used throughout many ministries to achieve the goals of compliance and corrective action on less serious offences. This will help us and B.C. Parks fulfil the mandate to protect the park and ecological reserve values, improve human health and safety and remove less serious cases from a court system that, frankly, does not need unnecessary overburden.

Let me give a couple of examples of some of the offences that could be met with a penalty. It could be a trespass by a logging company that could profit from the sale of timber, whether that is an intentional or unintentional trespass into a protected area. It could be the construction of illegal structures or roads that therefore would leave the Crown to pay for the removal and restoration that might be entailed to restore the park or protected area to its original values.

[11:15 a.m.]

It could be illegal use or removal of other park resources. It could be permittees who simply fail to report their activities. It could be the removal of resources — for example, people harvesting salal, mushrooms or trees within a park and thereby profiting from selling those products. Finally, it could also be just simply a failure to comply with the director’s order to repair or restore resources that were damaged in the course of illegal activities.

The legislative scheme that will be introduced by this amendment is modelled after the Environmental Management Act in four main ways. Directors would have the authority to make administrative penalty determinations, as well as to negotiate a resolution of the matter through an agreement with the violator. Employees, officers, directors and agents can be liable for authorizing corporate non-compliance. Penalties can be recovered as a debt by filing a certificate in court, and penalty decisions can be appealed to the Environmental Appeal Board. Other aspects of procedural fairness are also consistent with the Environmental Management Act and other structures that use administrative penalties throughout government.

Finally, the revenue that would be collected from these penalties will be directed to the park enhancement fund. This will support the principle that where there are costs resulting from illegal activity, those will not be borne by the taxpayer; they will be borne by the offenders. That includes costs needed to detect and prove violations.

With that, hon. Speaker, thank you very much. I will take my seat.

Hon. L. Beare: I’m very pleased to speak with you today about my very minor amendment that I have in Bill 3, the amendment needed to address an error in the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. We’re here to correct a drafting error that occurred in last fall’s amendment.

In November 2021, we made changes to FOIPPA, including structural and housekeeping updates to section 3. This section defines which records are covered or not covered by FOIPPA. The structural changes to section 3 were meant to add clarity. However, the drafter accidentally excluded the records of the independent officers of the Legislature and of the Auditor General for Local Government from most of the FOI requirements and privacy protections provided by the act.

As drafted, this amendment will correct these issues and return coverage to the officers of the Legislature and the Auditor General for Local Government to the same as it was prior to the 2021 amendments. The Information and Privacy Commissioner was consulted on the draft of this bill and is supportive of the changes. The other officers have been notified of the intent to correct the error.

That’s it for our role in the bill. Thank you very much, Chair.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, does the minister wish to close debate?

Hon. N. Sharma: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Just a few comments. I want to thank, first of all, the member for Abbotsford West for his kind words, at the beginning, of welcome to my role. I look forward to working with the member for Abbotsford West.

To answer one of the questions he raised, we will be, in the committee stage, having the relevant ministers available to answer any questions, so you’ll have the detailed response.

With that, Madam Speaker, I move second reading.

Motion approved.

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

Bill 3, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2023, read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

BILL 6 — MUNICIPALITIES ENABLING
AND VALIDATING ACT (No. 5)

Hon. A. Kang: Madam Chair, I move that the bill now be read a second time.

I’m pleased to rise today in the House to speak on this very important legislation. I’m honoured, as the new Minister for Municipal Affairs, to be tabling this bill in the House.

Bill 6, the Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act (No. 5), is an important piece of legislation that has a key goal, which I will speak to in more depth: to maintain protections for the Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory, located in the White Lake Basin in the South Okanagan.

[11:20 a.m.]

To achieve this goal, Bill 6 enacts the Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act (No. 5). The proposed legislation would permit an extension of a unique land use contract within the regional district of Okanagan-Similkameen, despite a sunset provision in the Local Government Act that terminates all land use contracts as of June 30, 2024.

This land use contract, LU-6-D, provides a regulatory framework for the St. Andrews community, which was established in 1973. Its provisions minimize disruption to the Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory by limiting the total number of dwellings and by placing restrictions on the household electrical devices that could cause radio frequency interference. The observatory is a major international scientific contributor and is also a regionally significant economic contributor. It is one of only two such radio telescope facilities in North America.

Its site within the White Lake Basin was selected in 1960 as a result of a Canada-wide search for a suitable location. Location in a radio quiet zone is central to its continued success. The federal government has requested an extension for this land use contract while it explores other options for maintaining protections to the observatory.

We considered other local government land use tools that could be used alone or together rather than exempting LU-6-D from termination. However, none would provide the same long-term certainty on limits of dwellings and, therefore, population density, which is a key interest of the federal government.

Because of this exceptional set of circumstances, we are seeking to permit extension of this one land use contract for a period of ten years with the possibility of a future extension by the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council regu­latory authority.

We have also been attentive to the requirements of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act as we developed this legislation. As a result, 21 First Nations were notified on the proposal to extend the RDOS land use contract, LU-6-D. The First Nation identified as having primary responsibility for the area expressed support for restrictions on development in the White Lake area around the observatory, which is a highly significant cultural area.

Our government is listening to the needs and requests of local communities by clarifying their authorities and providing them with tools they require to respond to their community’s needs. The proposed amendments in Bill 6 are supported by the regional district of Okanagan-Similkameen, where the amendments impact them specifically.

With that, hon. Chair, I want to thank you and all members of the House. I look forward to hearing from my colleagues in the continued debate today on the second reading of this bill.

M. Bernier: I’ll start by also thanking the minister for the synopsis that we just heard on this bill.

You know, at first when I looked at it, I thought I might have to identify myself as the designated speaker and speak for two hours. It looks like on this bill I might not have to. It’s been….

Interjection.

M. Bernier: Yeah, thank you to the member whose…. I know you’d love to hear me speak for two hours on this one.

I want to thank the minister as well for availing myself with her staff this morning within her ministry, who gave a quick briefing on this piece of legislation. As the minister highlighted, it’s been going on for many decades that this issue has been in place for this region. We need to make sure for the Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory that it has more of that protection for the next ten years, at least.

I will say that I think it’s important to almost highlight for someone like myself — who gazes up at the sky quite regularly not just in question period but actually outside of this House as well, with a lot of amazement — that this is only one of two places in North America where we have this observatory doing this work. So obviously understand the importance of that with the federal government and appreciate the minister’s highlighting of the communication with local government and local First Nations as well.

I’ll be sitting in for now on behalf of the member for Penticton until he’s able to speak to this, but I appreciate the minister’s time.

[11:25 a.m.]

When we get to committee stage, I’ll probably have just a few basic questions. I don’t think we’ll have any other speakers from our side of the House. As I said, this piece of legislation seems, on the surface, to be pretty self-explanatory. So I appreciate, when we get to committee stage, maybe a few questions. Again, I thank the minister for bringing it forward.

Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, does the minister wish to close debate?

Hon. A. Kang: Thank you so much to the Member for Peace River South for your comments. I look forward to our continued discussion and debate on Bill 6 in the committee stage.

With that, I move second reading.

Deputy Speaker: Members, the question is second reading of Bill 6.

Motion approved.

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

Bill 6, Municipalities Enabling and Validating Act (No. 5), read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration at the next sitting of the House after today.

Hon. L. Beare: I call continued address and debate on the Speech from the Throne.

I request a brief five-minute recess.

Deputy Speaker: We will be in recess for five minutes.

The House recessed from 11:26 a.m. to 11:31 a.m.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: We’ll call the House back to order.

Hon. L. Beare: Thank you for your consideration. I did err on what we’re calling. We are calling the committee stage on Bill 4, the Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2023.

Deputy Speaker: We’re going to wait for staff to come in.

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 4 — FINANCE STATUTES
AMENDMENT ACT, 2023

The House in Committee of the Whole on Bill 4; J. Tegart in the chair.

The committee met at 11:32 a.m.

On clause 1.

The Chair: We are now in committee stage. I will call the committee to order. We are dealing with Bill 4.

Hon. K. Conroy: I’d just like to introduce the staff that are with me. I have Renée Mounteney, the assistant deputy minister, policy and legislation division; and Tim Prisiak, the director of capital markets policy, financial and corporate sector policy branch. Looking forward to the discussion.

P. Milobar: Thanks to the minister for the introductions there. I don’t anticipate there’ll be a ton of questions on this bill, frankly, so it won’t be my usual repertoire, as can happen sometimes.

Just a couple of questions, though, on clause 1 specifically. This seems to be the area that will be closing the loophole that was discovered in the previous legislation that was brought forward by the previous minister.

Can the minister just confirm that this is indeed the section that will be closing that loophole around pension benefits and how, I guess, the Pasquill court case tied into the wording that we see here today?

[11:35 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: The member is correct. In 2021, in the court case that he referred to, the Pasquill case, the B.C. Court of Appeal held that this ability to enforce against registered plans did not extend to the items exempted from the enforcement under section 70 of the Pension Benefits Standards Act, such as pension funds that are life income funds, known as LIFs.

The proposed amendment closes this gap, allowing the BCSC to enforce against the pension payments currently excluded by section 70 of the Pension Benefits Standards Act.

P. Milobar: I guess I’m just trying to get some certainty here. Bill 33 was originally, in my understanding, in 2019. The government of the day, this government — a previous minister, again, I acknowledge — brought it forward. That’s where this loophole was left. It was then discovered. We have a court case that has wrapped up or is in process, depending on appeals and things of that nature.

Again, can the minister walk me through the timeline of when this loophole was discovered and started to be worked on as it relates to the court case as well?

Hon. K. Conroy: I wouldn’t characterize this as a loophole. This is actually a normal occurrence, for courts to interpret legislation and provide guidance once the legislation has been passed.

Once a decision was made in the Court of Appeal in the Pasquill case that the member is referring to, in 2021, the ministry had clarity in law to make the necessary changes. That’s what we’re presenting today.

P. Milobar: I appreciate that the minister doesn’t want to call it a loophole, but the reality was that there was about a $700,000 LIF in this case, is my understanding, on a $21.7 million fraud judgment, and the government discovered that they could not actually go after the $700,000 LIF based on their 2019 legislation. I guess we can agree to disagree on whether or not it’s a loophole or error or anything of that matter.

The reason I’m asking those questions on the timelines is to gauge the government’s confidence in terms of the timeline that this correction to an error in the legislation that was made….

[11:40 a.m.]

How confident is the government that they have actually closed said loophole or fixed the error in the 2019 legislation they first brought forward, based on not just that case but looking at any other potential cases that may come forward in terms of these types of pension funds that may be captured by this legislation?

Hon. K. Conroy: We’re confident this amendment will address the issues raised in the Pasquill court case. In fact, with the Pasquill court case, it only referred to pensions under the Pension Benefits Standards Act.

The ministry has in fact looked, what you’ll see under clause 2, to deal with also taking this legislation to deal as well with pooled registered pension plans.

P. Milobar: The Pasquill case shone a light on this loophole, I guess, needing to be fixed. It sounds like that’s exactly what this is endeavouring to do, but there’s no expectation from the government that this legislation could be retroactive to that case.

In other words, the Pasquill…. I believe its $700,000 LIF will remain untouched based on previous legislation, and this legislation is just simply forward-moving. Or is it the expectation of government to try to go back after those funds?

Hon. K. Conroy: It’s not retroactive, and I can’t comment on the action the BCSC could potentially take in the Pasquill case.

Clauses 1 to 17 inclusive approved.

On clause 18.

[11:45 a.m.]

P. Milobar: Just a couple of commencement questions here. I get the royal assent side of the commencement.

Could the minister…? Sections 1 to 4 and 5(a) and (c) and sections 6 to 17 — their commencement is all by regulation of the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council, so cabinet.

Can the minister maybe just provide us with the expectation of when those regulations will be set out and will actually take effect, those various clauses?

Hon. K. Conroy: I would say in the near future. It will be determined by when BCSC is ready to have them come into effect. They will need some time to implement these changes, and we will be working with BCSC to ensure that they are ready to implement. Then the OICs will move ahead.

P. Milobar: Will any of the timing be contingent on…? A great many of these clauses are also trying to, in my understanding, have some consistency across the country with other jurisdictions, other provinces.

Will any of these commencements be contingent on waiting for agreement with other provinces, or is it strictly a stand-alone exercise for B.C. and the Securities Commission within B.C.?

[11:50 a.m.]

Hon. K. Conroy: BCSC works regularly with other jurisdictions across the country. We’re always alive to harmonization concerns with other jurisdictions.

Clause 18 approved.

Title approved.

Hon. K. Conroy: I move that the committee rise and report the bill complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 11:52 a.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Report and
Third Reading of Bills

BILL 4 — FINANCE STATUTES
AMENDMENT ACT, 2023

Bill 4, Finance Statutes Amendment Act, 2023, reported complete without amendment, read a third time and passed.

Hon. L. Beare: A big hello to the students who have just joined us here.

Hon. L. Beare moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:53 a.m.