Fourth Session, 42nd Parliament (2023)
OFFICIAL REPORT
OF DEBATES
(HANSARD)
Tuesday, February 28, 2023
Morning Sitting
Issue No. 277
ISSN 1499-2175
The HTML transcript is provided for informational purposes only.
The PDF transcript remains the official digital version.
CONTENTS
| Routine Business | |
| Orders of the Day | |
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2023
The House met at 10:04 a.m.
[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]
Routine Business
Prayers and reflections: G. Kyllo.
Introductions by Members
K. Greene: I want to welcome the Richmond Chamber of Commerce, which has made the arduous journey across the waters to join us here in Victoria. I’m very happy to have them here. They work very hard on behalf of Richmond businesses and non-profits and do great work in our community.
Thank you for joining us, and please make them welcome.
Hon. M. Rankin: Today I rise to welcome two constituents from my riding of Oak Bay–Gordon Head, Linda Brown and Lupo Minciarelli. They are both here today with us.
Linda formerly worked in the B.C. Legislature, and her husband is a former police officer. They are Lupo’s host family. Lupo is an international student attending grade 12 at Mount Doug Secondary as part of the international homestay program.
Lupo was born in Paris, lived most of his life in Italy and has incredible experiences changing school systems some three times, speaking four languages fluently and looking to add either Mandarin or Arabic to his repertoire. His experience has put him on a path towards politics and diplomacy, and he has applied to three universities in Europe to date.
Today is a great opportunity for Lupo to experience how our Legislature operates, and I look forward to visiting him and Linda later today.
I would ask the members to please make them feel welcome.
B. Stewart: It’s a pleasure to welcome two people from my constituency office today, here to get to know more of the people in this House. Many know them as tenacious, hard-working CAs.
Please welcome Cheryl Doll, and Jane Inkster, who has just completed her first year with me.
Hon. G. Heyman: Joining us in the gallery today are four staff members from my minister’s office. I’m pleased to welcome them. My administrative assistant, Emma Murray; my administrative coordinator, Caroline Hogg; my ministerial adviser, Reamick Lo; and my executive assistant, Nicolas Bragg.
Nicholas and Remick have worked for me for many years. Emma and Caroline have been in my office for quite some time. As far as I know, it is the first time in the gallery for all of them.
Will the House make them very, very welcome.
E. Ross: Today in the audience, we have representatives from my band, the Haisla band, as well as representatives from the Tsimshian First Nations, of which there are probably at least six bands in my region, including Gitxaała, Kitselas, Kitsumkalum and Port Simpson, which is Lax Kw’alaams.
Anyway, we’ve got Arthur Renwick, who is not only the deputy chief councillor of Haisla Nation Council, but he’s also the chair of the Northern First Nations Alliance health and wellness. Brenna Innes, from Gitxaała First Nation, is the Northern First Nations Alliance health and wellness vice-chair, and Jeannie Parnell is the interim executive director.
They’ve actually authored a report called Feasibility Study, Northwest B.C. Indigenous Detox and Wellness Centre. They have been diligently trying to find government support for the last six months, and they’re not going to quit.
Would the House please welcome the representatives of the Northern First Nations Alliance.
Hon. R. Kahlon: Today I see up in the gallery a special guest, Rajmeet Virk who worked in this building for a long, long time and now is working with Métis Nation B.C. in intergovernmental relations.
Would the House please make Rajmeet welcome back.
A. Olsen: Today I introduce three guests to the Legislative Assembly. I’m welcoming Talia Cordero, the engine of the B.C. Green Party over in the Lower Mainland; Simran Sarai, who ran for us and was an incredible candidate in Surrey South and is a student at Simon Fraser University; and as well, Michael Wiebe, a previous Vancouver Green councillor in the city of Vancouver.
Would all the members of this House please welcome our guests and make them feel very welcome here today.
H. Yao: I want to take a moment to express my gratitude to the member for Richmond-Steveston for coordinating the visitation from the Richmond Chamber of Commerce.
I presume I echo North Coast and Richmond-Queensborough if I want to say thank you.
First of all, I want to take a moment to express our gratitude for Shaena Furlong, president and CEO; Dan Sakaki, director for members and stakeholders; Carolyn Robertson, chair. We have Fan Chun, treasurer; Grant Bryan; Lisa Wong; Bernard Loh and Connor Williams.
I want to take a moment to express my sincere gratitude for your joining us today for our Budget Day. Thank you, and welcome to the Legislature.
M. Dykeman: I’d like to take a moment to welcome to the gallery some very special guests that have come over to visit us today. We have, from Langley Community Services, Sanjeev and Greg. We have Langley Hospice. We have Shannon Todd Booth and Kathy Derksen, and we have my amazing constituency assistant, Carly Haugen. We have joining us, with Langley Community Services, Shawn Bouchard.
I was wondering if everybody could please take a moment to welcome them to the precinct.
Statements
(Standing Order 25B)
NORMAN EMBREE
G. Kyllo: It is with a heavy heart that I rise in the House today to pay respect to the life of Norm Embree. Loved dearly by his loving wife, Ruth, of over 50 years, Norm was truly a family man. He and Ruth were blessed with two accomplished daughters, Lee and Regan, and four amazing grandchildren, Sammy, Jay, Shae and Macey. Norm was a husband, a dad, a brother, an uncle, a friend and a mentor but most affectionately known as Bubba.
I know Norm would also want to recognize his sons-in-law, Mike Stanfield and Ross McKeever. I fondly recall Norm sharing many years ago the three stages of relationship with those that were courting his daughters. Norm shared that initially, any young suitor should be referred to as sin-in-law. Norm chuckled that after advancing to a marriage proposal, these young men advanced to the title of soon-in-law and, once wed, rose to the esteemed role of son-in-law.
Norm was truly a family man. He and his best friend, Bruce Cook, would take great joy in sharing stories of their children and their grandchildren. Norm was immensely proud of his family.
Norm spent a lifetime working as an entrepreneur and devoted decades to public service, most notably as former chair of the Interior Health Authority board of directors and as chair of the board of governors of Okanagan College in their transition to Okanagan University College in 2004-05, serving until 2007. His career began in securities and eventually joining his family’s machining business, Embree Industries Ltd., of Hamilton, Ontario, which was founded by his grandfather in 1913.
Norm and his wife Ruth took early retirement from the family business and moved to Salmon Arm in the late ’90s, becoming deeply involved in a number of not-for-profit organizations. He served as a board member of the Salmon Arm Economic Development Advisory Committee, OUC, Haney Heritage House, Shuswap Hospice Society, the Nature Trust of B.C. and the College of Pharmacists of B.C. He was a driving force behind fundraising efforts of the Shuswap Hospice Society, B.C. Liberals, the Shuswap centre for Neskonlith First Nations and the Rotary Club of Salmon Arm.
An athlete from an early age, he played competitive football, tennis, squash and sail racing, and upon arriving at the Shuswap, he continued his love of sport with boating, skiing, golfing, old-timer hockey and tennis.
In 2015, Norm was recognized as an honorary fellow of Okanagan College for his many years of service.
Norm was a force to be reckoned with and 10,000 other things. His family fondly shared that “Norm was the best we could have ever hoped for.” The world has lost one of the great guys.
UMOJA SOCIETY IMMIGRANT
AND SETTLEMENT
SERVICES
G. Begg: Twenty years ago, two recent immigrants to this country from Uganda reflected on their early experiences in their new homeland and vowed to build a program that would help to bridge many of the gaps that they had experienced when they first arrived here with their four sons.
They are Amos Kambere, who was first elected in the 1980 Ugandan general elections as the youngest ever member of parliament in the National Assembly of Uganda, and Edith Kambere, his loving wife and mother of their sons. Together, while he continued his work with Canada Post and she looked after their active boys, they began Umoja, which translates as unity, to strive for and maintain unity in the family, community, nation and race.
On Saturday night, the member for Surrey-Whalley and I gathered with hundreds of others to celebrate the 20th year of Umoja’s existence in Surrey. It is a charitable and newcomer settlement organization formed to work with recent immigrants and refugees of all cultural backgrounds living in Surrey.
Their culturally attuned, trauma-informed programs are particularly essential for those at risk of socioeconomic marginalization based on language and skills gaps; race, culture and religious background; trauma; or perceived status. The society supports integration into Canadian society while recognizing each person’s dignity and unique worth. In so doing, they aspire to bridge the privilege gap and to work towards an authentically thriving Canadian society in which no one is left behind.
Over their 20-year existence, they’ve supported the successful mainstreaming of over 4,000 newcomers and families to Canada. It is truly a labour of love for Amos and Edith Kambere and their staff, and I know that all members of this House join me in celebrating this amazing Surrey organization.
SAM PETERS
AND ATHLETIC
ACHIEVEMENT
B. Stewart: Today I’d like to take a moment to recognize a remarkable young man who was born a double amputee but refuses to be limited by his disability. Sam Peters, who hails from West Kelowna, has made the Team B.C. para team and will be competing in the Canada Winter Games this week at Mount Crabbe in New Brunswick.
The 15-year-old new member of Big White Racers, who joined the team just this year, has enjoyed skiing for the past eight years. Sam attributes his success to the volunteers at Powderhounds on Big White Mountain, who work with the disabled to get them onto the mountain. Sam’s physical setbacks have never stopped him from pursuing his dreams or ambition. He has unparalleled courage and determination, which have enabled him to reach his goals, despite the obstacles that he has faced.
Sam’s story is an inspiration to all of us and serves as a wonderful example that our abilities are not defined by what we are able to do with our bodies, but rather by how hard we work. At the same time, Sam’s story reminds us of the importance of fighting for inclusion and equality, as every individual deserves to have the chance to pursue their dreams, regardless of disability.
I wish Sam the very best of luck as he competes in the Canada Winter Games, and I have no doubt that he will give it his all and make us proud. We know that, with his commitment and perseverance, he will have a successful and rewarding experience.
Good luck, Sam.
VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS AND
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
FUNDING
D. Routley: Our government recently announced a $6.3 million fund, through the community emergency preparedness fund, to help 110 volunteer and composite fire departments throughout B.C., including four in my riding — North Cowichan, Thetis Island, Cowichan Tribes and Gabriola Island.
While supporting firefighters throughout the province is a key priority of our government, this support goes even further in smaller communities, where volunteer firefighting departments are often called upon to assist in a variety of ways. For instance, a few months ago there was an incident on Gabriola Island which knocked out the main Telus cable and left the community with no phone or Internet services for close to a week, putting everyone at risk if there were an emergency.
While Telus and B.C. Hydro work to identify and repair the damage, the Gabriola volunteer firefighting department opened up their facility to the community, 24 hours a day, until the communications services were restored, ensuring that people could still access emergency services by visiting the station.
Recognizing the impact that these programs can have, last week we announced an additional $180 million in funding for the community emergency preparedness fund. This increase will go a long way to helping local governments, First Nations and volunteer firefighters better prepare for emergencies.
Over the past few years, we have seen our fair share of climate-related emergencies in B.C., and I am proud to be a part of a government that recognizes the importance of supporting communities in being better prepared when disaster strikes. I’m equally proud of the amazing volunteer firefighting organizations in my riding and throughout B.C., who work hard every day to ensure our communities are safe.
HOWARD MILLS AND SENIORS
HOUSING PROJECT IN
KITIMAT
E. Ross: Dr. Howard Mills has been a full-service family doctor in the city of Kitimat for over 40 years, raising his family there and operating a large practice the entire time. He continues to serve our community extremely well and provides stellar care to those who have been visiting his practice for all these years, including me.
In his time as a doctor, he has seen the struggles of hospitals around British Columbia and specifically how the Kitimat General Hospital has been grappling with staff shortages and limited beds for patients. Most notably, at the Kitimat Hospital, more than half of the available beds are being used by elderly citizens who have nowhere else to go.
Dr. Mills realized this and has taken a great initiative by starting the process of acquiring an empty lot across from the hospital to construct a four-storey, mixed-use building to help relieve stress on hospital services. The project would contain a senior living residence with 45 residential units that have adjacent medical care and include multiple medical services on the lower floors.
This facility has the potential to provide housing for many elderly citizens with no other options and to centralize multiple medical officers for the residents of Kitimat. The core idea behind the proposed facility is to provide a building that will enhance the community and add benefits to local medical businesses and health care services.
Dr. Mills has received approval from the city of Kitimat, which is very supportive of the project, but is also looking to secure funding and government support to take this project across the finishing line.
WILD BIRD TRUST AND COAST SALISH
FAMILY DAY AT
MAPLEWOOD FLATS
S. Chant: I, too, would like to acknowledge that I’m speaking from the traditional territories of the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ people, the Songhees and the Esquimalt First Nations.
I come from the traditional and unceded territories of the Tsleil-Waututh, Squamish and Musqueam Nations, where my constituency office is based.
On Family Day, I attended the Coast Salish Family Day event at the Maplewood Mudflats in my riding of North Vancouver–Seymour. Maplewood Flats is a 126-hectare area of nature preserve right beside the bustling port and the industrial areas of North Vancouver. It’s managed by the Wild Bird Trust fund of B.C., strong advocates for the protection of wildlife and the restoration of native plants and also for genuine reconciliation. The Coast Salish Family Day event was just one amazing example of the work that this organization does.
The day started with an introduction acknowledgment by Irwin, the president of the organization. Then Nick George gave us a welcome song and greetings from the Tsleil-Waututh Nation to open the proceedings in a good way. I was able to speak briefly to acknowledge the important work that the trust continues to do and outlined some of the grants that our government has given the trust, including a recent $200,000 gaming grant, which will go a long way in ensuring its continued operation.
The day continued with a planter box workshop from LifeSpace, teaching how to build self-watering urban planters for office spaces and apartments, allowing increased green space for vegetables and flowers; talk on soil health; a panel discussion; walks and workshops about local flora and fauna. There’s a native plant nursery there, and they have found a local plant that competes with our non-native blackberries.
I had an amazing time at the event, as did the other families I spoke to. I look forward to attending future events such as the annual Osprey Festival.
If you’re coming to visit in North Van–Seymour, I’d love to take you on a walk through the Maplewood Flats and share this hidden gem that provides safe shelter for many of our birds and some of our wildlife.
J. Rice: I seek leave to make an introduction.
Leave granted.
Introductions by Members
J. Rice: I recognize we’re not supposed to be acknowledging whether our presence is in or out of the House, but I wanted to state that I am Zooming in today from the unceded and traditional territory of the Tsimshian peoples.
I’m here in Prince Rupert. I do wish that I could be at the Legislature today to also welcome some of my constituents and some of our northern partners that the member for Skeena introduced.
I just wanted to talk a little bit, quickly, about the work that the NFNA, Northern First Nations Alliance, health and wellness community endeavours do, which is to actually provide more treatment options for drugs and alcohol in the North Coast.
With such a high Indigenous population, it is very difficult for many people to actually leave their home territories to actually seek treatment. I’m certainly in alignment with the endeavour to bring more treatment options to rural, remote and First Nations communities, particularly in the north and on the coast.
So thank you, acknowledge the guests in the gallery and please make them feel welcome.
Oral Questions
DISASTER RECOVERY FUNDING
FOR FARMERS AND
RANCHERS
I. Paton: Today is the second provincial budget since disastrous flooding hit farmers and ranchers from the Fraser Valley to the Nicola Valley. Unfortunately, for many, the physical, mental and financial toll continues.
As shadow minister, my phone and email has lit up for over a year from distraught farmers in Abbotsford and Merritt. Despite the promise of $228 million in federal-provincial funding, many farmers who suffered severe losses feel frustrated, forgotten and abandoned by their government.
My question to the Premier. After over 15 months, why are farmers still waiting for the help promised to them?
Hon. P. Alexis: Thank you, Member, for the question.
It’s my very first time to rise today, and I want to acknowledge the good work that has been done previously by the Minister for Tourism, Arts and Culture now. So thank you for the opportunity.
These last few years have absolutely been incredibly difficult for farmers and food producers affected by flooding and landslides. The 2021 flooding was B.C.’s biggest ever agricultural disaster and resulted in our biggest ever response. So far over 950 payments have gone out to impacted farmers and food producers. The Ministry of Agriculture and Food has contacted every single farmer that has reached out to us about flood recovery supports.
Mr. Speaker: The member for Delta South, supplemental.
I. Paton: This is cold comfort to the hundreds and hundreds of phone calls that my caucus is getting still today from farmers all over Merritt, Nicola Valley, Abbotsford, Princeton. Farmers are fed up with slow, inadequate government assistance. Ranchers on Highway 8 between Merritt and Spences Bridge are still dealing with devastating mudslides with zero compensation in sight.
Farmers like Rolf and Jaswant on Sumas Prairie need costly home repairs but face bureaucratic red tape and inadequate support. Jaswant received only 70 percent compensation for two years of lost blueberry production, leaving a four-year income gap before new plants start to even produce.
Farmers feel incredibly frustrated and abandoned. When will the Premier take responsibility and provide the much-needed support that these farmers deserve?
Hon. P. Alexis: We have worked with farmers and farming organizations at each step of the development of this response to make sure it works for them. In my travels around the Fraser Valley and British Columbia, I’ve heard so much positive feedback about the program and the speed of its delivery.
For example, Rhonda MacDonald, the owner of Bar FX Ranch in Merritt, said: “The government did come out with an AgriRecovery program for the flooding. Actually, it’s quite an extensive program, and it’s very helpful. I really have to give them props, because it’s a decent program that helps out those of us that were affected by the flooding.”
Finally, if there is someone you know that hasn’t already been in touch with the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, please reach out and connect. We’re only too happy to assist.
B. Banman: It may be working for one farmer, but blueberry farmers in the Sumas flats have some major concerns — rising costs for replacement plants, sawdust, fertilizer, a maze of red tape and dense paperwork — and the NDP are missing in action.
Farmers like Mr. Sangha have been set back a decade, and there is no compensation from the NDP for income replacement. They feel the system is designed to make them just give up. When will the Premier provide the support these farmers desperately need?
Hon. P. Alexis: We understand that many people in British Columbia are impacted by rising costs, and we recognize that the global inflationary trends and uncertain economic conditions continue to impact farmers and farm producers. The provincial government will continue to look for additional ways to support farmers as we navigate these challenging economic conditions together.
Mr. Speaker: Member for Abbotsford South, supplemental.
B. Banman: To the minister, this government needs to look harder. Let me give you another example.
Daljit, a retired farmer and widow with limited funds, lost six acres of blackberries in the floods. She was denied financial assistance for rebuilding a farm building submerged in over six feet of water that was used to house farmworkers. Daljit feels like the NDP is simply looking for excuses not to help, leaving her drowning in red tape.
It’s been over 15 months. When will the Premier and this minister step up and provide the support that farmers like Daljit desperately need?
Hon. P. Alexis: We have stepped up, and we have been working for over 1,000 different farmers in the region.
If there is someone that needs additional assistance, please ask them to reach out to the ministry, because we’re only too happy to help, as I said before.
OLD-GROWTH LOGGING DEFERRALS
AND ROLE OF FIRST
NATIONS
A. Olsen: Yesterday, my colleague asked the government who stopped the development of species-at-risk legislation. The Environment Minister stood and blamed First Nations, but that was 2018.
Interjections.
A. Olsen: Groan if you want. That’s what he said.
So 2018 was when that….
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members.
A. Olsen: I did. That was before the Declaration Act, and that was also before section 3 in the interim approach.
The minister knows, and the minister knows that I know, that First Nations are not the reason that this government is not protecting species at risk or biodiversity. It was terrible and infuriating to sit in this place yesterday and hear First Nations be the scapegoat for this government’s inactions.
While this B.C. NDP government talks, trees die. While they promise a new policy, trees die, because of the agreements made under the old policy. The old agreements paid First Nations for dead trees. Now the province is proposing to defer logging on 2.6 million hectares, and once again, the agreements they have in place with First Nations under the old policy is being blamed for the inability to defer the death of these critical forests.
To the Premier, are these forests doomed to the death economics and scapegoating of this colonial institution, or will he provide immediate funding for First Nations to defer old-growth logging in their territories?
Hon. B. Ralston: British Columbians care very deeply about our forests and the many social, environmental and cultural benefits they provide. Forestry is the foundation of British Columbia’s economy.
To deal, specifically, with the question that the member has raised, indeed, following the Merkel report, the future of forests in British Columbia, we have embarked as a government upon a process of deferral of old growth.
That process is a very inclusive one. It includes every First Nation. The responses from various First Nations have been different, but nonetheless, they are all included in that process.
So far, 2.1 million hectares has been deferred. We’ve made a commitment, recently, to establish what are called forest landscape tables. Where, in the past, the companies would provide a logging plan, this process will include First Nations, communities, companies, unions and develop an enduring plan that will have community support and provide a new path forward for forestry in British Columbia.
Mr. Speaker: House Leader, Third Party, supplemental.
A. Olsen: I’m glad the minister states that his government is working with all First Nations. This should be a fairly easy question for the Premier to answer.
Yesterday I sat in the Mungo Martin Big House with MÁN ZÁWIZUT Hereditary Chief Walas ’Namugwis, David Mungo Knox, the head chief of the Kwakiutl; Ma’amtagila Chief Makwala, Rande Cook; Tom Child; and others around the fire. Those Chiefs carry the powerful names of their ancestors, names that they looked after and honoured in a good way.
These are the leaders this government has always overlooked and ignored, and that continues. The provincial and federal governments are willfully undermining and eroding the governance structures that have existed on this landscape since time immemorial and elevating people who will, frankly, sign their agreements.
This government promises to protect old growth, but they are clear-cutting the territory that the Chiefs of the Kwakiutl and the Ma’amtagila must protect. The Chiefs have sent multiple letters to the former Premier, the former Ministers of Forests and now the new Premier seeking to meet in a good way, at the fire, to discuss the sacred responsibility that their ancestors left for them.
My question is to the Premier. Will he sit with the Chiefs as they have requested?
Hon. M. Rankin: Thank you to the member for the question. Our government has concluded that we must work with First Nations. Whether that leadership is hereditary, elected or fused, we will work on the ground with them to meet their needs both in forestry and other areas.
Since the Declaration Act was enacted, that Indigenous governing body we take from the nations themselves and work in consultation and cooperation with those nations on issues such as the one that my colleague has raised.
OPPOSITION TO COASTAL GASLINK
PIPELINE PROJECT AND
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO INCIDENTS
E. Ross: For years this NDP government has been cozying up to the protesters and spewing anti–resource project propaganda. Three years ago those same protesters caused chaos, shut down critical infrastructure all across B.C., including rail lines and ports. They even successfully blockaded this Legislature. That was three years ago, and it’s only gotten worse, with increasing violence today.
A little over a year ago masked thugs armed with axes stormed a construction site on the Morice River, destroyed equipment and terrorized workers. Last fall eight vehicles, including four RCMP cars and an ambulance, were burned in downtown Smithers, on the streets of Smithers. Just this past weekend we learned of more acts of terrorism: sabotage, drilling holes in pipes, even pouring hydrochloric acid on concrete pipes that are meant to protect steel pipes.
There have been no consequences for these acts of terrorism — nothing. And this government’s complete silence and lack of information have left everyone in the dark.
My question is to the Premier — not to the ministers, to the Premier. When will this Premier finally take action to restore the rule of law and end the violence and terrorism?
Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question, but I also want to correct some things he has just said in his remarks. First off, this side of the House — in fact, everybody on this side of the House — condemns in no uncertain terms any act of violence, intimidation, terrorism against people doing lawful activities in this province. We have made that clear right from the get-go.
To suggest otherwise, hon. Member, is just plain wrong.
I also want to let the member know this. Police take this very seriously and are doing thorough, independent investigations to ensure that those who are responsible for these kinds of actions are in fact brought to justice. That means working to ensure they’ve got the strongest possible case that they can build. It’s often working with very difficult circumstances. What they need is information. What they need is people who know things to come forward to assist them in their investigations.
I want to assure you that the police are doing everything they can. They brief me on a regular basis in terms of what’s taking place and what’s happening. I can assure you when charges are laid — and at some point, they will be — we expect them to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Mr. Speaker: Member for Skeena, supplemental.
E. Ross: Mr. Speaker, just saying that you condemn something doesn’t mean anything. Actions speak louder than words.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. Let’s hear the question.
E. Ross: We have seen no results of these supposed investigations, and this is three years running now. We’ve seen nothing coming out of the attack in Smithers. We’ve seen nothing coming out in terms of what happened to the workers on the pipeline. In fact, a group, the ICBA, put out a reward for tips to figure out who exactly was behind all this. Now we’ve got this anonymous posting on the Internet talking about how they’re sabotaging infrastructure in the province of B.C.
If you do have this information, let the public know, because we’re talking about the safety of B.C. citizens. We’re talking about the safety of B.C. workers. Yes, we’re talking about the safety of front-line workers, including the RCMP.
So if you are so concerned about condemning these actions, back it up. Show the public what you’ve done to date. What charges are you talking about, and who are you going to lay them against? Who’s guilty for these acts in B.C.?
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members, Members. Hold it.
Please finish off.
E. Ross: The NDP, aligning with protesters, have made incidents even more serious than anyone could have ever imagined. Imagine talking about terrorist activities in B.C.
Look up the definition of “terrorism” while you’re at it. Back in the day, when the NDP sided with protesters, that was just playing politics. I get it. But today the inaction actually equals terrorism. This is serious.
Mr. Speaker: Question, Member?
E. Ross: This is reckless.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Shhh.
E. Ross: I’ll repeat the question, gladly, but it’s to the Premier, who used to be the Attorney General of this province, who fully understands the consequences of what’s happening on the ground.
My question is to the Premier, not to the ministers. When will this Premier finally take action to restore the rule of law and end the violence and terrorism?
Hon. M. Farnworth: I want to make a couple of points. First off, I’m sure the member did not intend to call members of the government terrorists. I’m sure he did not, and if he did, he would withdraw those remarks when he has the opportunity to do that.
I also want to take exception with his comments about supposed investigations. The police do not take supposed investigations. They take these actions seriously, as does every single member on this side of the House and on that side of the House. So to suggest that the police are doing supposed investigations — that’s insulting.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members.
Hon. M. Farnworth: To suggest that government does not take this…. I’m not even going to dignify that with an answer to that. The police are doing their job in terms of thorough investigations. If they need resources, they get them from us.
We have an independent judicial system. I can tell you, as I said a moment ago, that at some point when they’ve concluded their investigations into often difficult and complex situations, and they’re determined to get to the bottom of it, I expect charges will be laid. When those charges are laid, they’ll go to court, and I expect them to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
People who are engaged in work that sabotages the lives of individuals or puts their lives at risk should spend a maximum amount of time in the penalty box behind bars.
HEALTH WORKER VACCINATION
AND REHIRING OF
STAFF
D. Davies: Every day we hear stories of the crisis in our health care system. Every day we hear stories of the shortage of health care workers. But at a time when we need all hands on deck, thousands of doctors and nurses who want to work are sitting on the sidelines.
Since June of last year, the official opposition has repeatedly urged the government to provide a pathway for all British Columbians to return to work, just like the federal government and nearly every other jurisdiction in Canada. There is no reason why we cannot follow their lead, especially with safety protocols in place.
On behalf of the tens of thousands of British Columbians waiting without basic health care, when is this Premier going to allow these doctors and nurses back to their jobs so that they can provide the care that people desperately need?
Hon. A. Dix: The actions that have been taken in British Columbia against the COVID-19 pandemic in support of people who are most vulnerable, I think, have led Canada and have been leaders in the world. The reason they’ve led Canada and been leaders of the world is that provincial health orders have been directed by the provincial health officer, with the support of myself and the government.
We have, in British Columbia, vaccine mandates in place because people who are in acute care and people who are in long-term care and other circumstances are the most vulnerable to COVID-19. So we have and we continue to take actions to protect them, and we are going to continue to do so.
I understand it’s the position of the hon. member. This is a public debate, and I say it with the greatest of respect, because I never criticized anybody for taking a contrary opinion to ourselves or Dr. Henry or anybody else. But what he’s suggesting is that we overrule the provincial health officer on a matter of public health in a pandemic — I don’t agree with that — and not take due care for people who are the most vulnerable to COVID-19, those who are in acute care hospitals, as we speak, and are in long-term care. I disagree with that.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members.
The minister will continue.
Hon. A. Dix: We are going to continue to take steps to ensure that we keep people safe in this public health emergency.
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF QUESNEL
RIVER BRIDGE AND RAIL
OVERPASS
C. Oakes: Wildfires, floods and landslides in Cariboo North have caused dramatic damage in recent years, with hundreds of roads impacted, washed out and/or collapsed. Urgency is desperately needed for preventative work and maintenance on rural roads, bridges and culverts. The current condition of the Quesnel River Bridge and rail overpass are very concerning, and the lack of a concrete plan is equally alarming.
Record levels of snow have already fallen this year, and more is expected. People are bracing for a potential disaster with spring freshet.
To the Premier: what is the plan for the Quesnel River Bridge and rail overpass, a vital link for Highway 97’s transportation network?
Hon. R. Fleming: Thank you to the member for the question. She and I have had an opportunity to speak on many occasions, over many freshets and recent calendar years, where roads in the Cariboo have sustained significant damage and where slide activity has emerged where it was previously not a factor. This is due to the impact of wildfires, as the member correctly noted.
I think the member also knows that in every instance where we have literally restored connectivity for hundreds of roads, this government has spared no expense to get people to and from work; to and from school; to use the construction seasons in the spring and summer; and to work as quickly as we can to restore the Cariboo communities that have lost road access. We will continue to do that.
I know we have a budget pending this afternoon. The member will have an opportunity to see what the investment plan looks like in her region as, indeed, all MLAs will look in their own region. But we have worked with the federal government on disaster financial assistance. We have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the West Fraser Road, for example, to in fact reallocate corridors to areas that are away from climate risk and further damage in the future, to build resiliency. We will continue to do that.
DISASTER FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
AND WILDFIRE RECOVERY
FUNDING
B. Stewart: The disaster financial assistance program is just that: a complete disaster, as it fails to provide proper and necessary supports to people who have lost everything in devastating wildfires. In August of 2001, over 80 of my constituents, including Neil Morgan, lost everything — his home, his sawmill — in the devastating White Rock Lake wildfire that struck communities all over the region.
The official opposition has called for a grant program to offer to high-risk wildfire area homeowners. My colleague from Kamloops South has introduced a bill to improve the DFA claim process dramatically. When will the Premier call the bill — when? — and make the necessary changes to ensure that the government support wildfire victims like Neil?
Hon. B. Ma: Thank you to the member for that very important question. What we have seen in recent years as a result of climate change is an increased frequency, duration, scope of extreme weather events. There can be no doubt. The climate crisis is here, and it is here now. The impacts are very, very real. We only have to point to….
Actually, you can point to a lot of different extreme weather events. But certainly, the atmospheric river events of 2021 are a perfect example of that. During that event, the DFA program, the disaster financial assistance program, received a record-breaking 2,300 applications — absolutely unprecedented in this province.
Emergency management British Columbia, EMBC, which was the organization that existed before EMCR was created by the Premier, recognized very quickly that changes needed to be made in order to evolve the program to expand eligibility so more people could be supported. We also recognized very quickly that the volume of applications we were receiving was not a volume that EMBC, at the time, was equipped for, so many more people were staffed up to support that process. Even after all of these learnings, even at this point, at which point….
To the member, we have now successfully processed 99 percent of the DFA applications from that event. But even today, we recognize that there is a lot more that needs to be done in the years….
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Shhh.
Hon. B. Ma: I apologize. The member is talking about wildfires as well. There is extraordinary work and damage that has happened about wildfires. I apologize for focusing on the atmospheric river events. The reason why I focus there is because a lot of what we learned about the DFA program and its inability to fully support people through extraordinary events was learned from that event.
We know that the DFA program must be modernized. We know that the program must be evolved, and that is work we’re going to be doing this year. The federal government will also be revising their eligibility requirements for the DFAA program. That will, of course, inform our work. So that work will happen this year.
LABOUR DISPUTE IN
FRASER VALLEY TRANSIT
SYSTEM
T. Halford: The Fraser Valley is a disaster zone for commuters, and it’s not just because of the snow. Bus services in Abbotsford, Chilliwack, Hope, Mission and the Fraser Valley Express route have come to a complete stop.
The strike is already causing frustration and anger for those who rely on it to get to school, to work, to their medical appointments. Last year the NDP failed to help people during the Sea to Sky transit strike, the longest strike in B.C.’s history. It’s unacceptable that this government sits idly by while people are stranded in the Fraser Valley.
My question is to the Premier, and it’s a direct one. Is he going to sit there and let commuters and the people in the Fraser Valley be unable to get to work, to school, to medical appointments? Or are they going to do something to end this strike?
Hon. D. Eby: Making sure that people in the Fraser Valley are able to get to work and get home, spend time with their families and get there efficiently has been front of mind for this government since we were sworn in. You’ve seen the Surrey-Langley SkyTrain expansion. You’ve seen the extension of our expansion work around Highway 1. These are front of mind.
The member, importantly, raises an issue affecting people right now — the strike. I have every confidence that both the employer and the workers are going to get to work and get a deal that works for people in the community. But we’re not going to leave those commuters stranded. We are focused on making sure that they get to school and get to work. That’s a priority for our government.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Shhh. Members.
Hon. D. Eby: Now, we’ve heard a lot of questions from the opposition here today. They’re concerned about farmers, food security, housing for farm workers. They’re concerned about health care…
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, please.
Hon. D. Eby: …and making sure that health care is available for people. They’re concerned about public safety. They’re concerned about disaster and flood recovery around essential infrastructure for people up the valley and across the entire province.
Well, so are we. That’s why we’re putting the surplus to work for people, investing in these very areas that they’re talking about. That’s why the budget today that will be delivered by the Finance Minister is going to invest in exactly these areas.
But can you believe that this morning, on Global News, the Leader of the Opposition didn’t get the memo from all his colleagues? He said that if he was in charge right now, he’d be using that surplus — not for people. He’d be using it to pay down the debt.
So there’s a difference. There’s a difference.
Interjections.
Mr. Speaker: Members. Members, please.
Members will come to order, both sides.
Member, that’s enough.
The Premier will continue.
Hon. D. Eby: I’m proud to say that we will be making a significant payment on provincial debt, but we’re putting the surplus to work for people in British Columbia, exactly what member after member after member on their side asked about today. We’re doing that work. We agree with them. We need to do that work.
The Finance Minister is going to do that in the budget today. I’m so proud of her and the work she and her team have done, and every single member of this House, fighting for people in British Columbia. That’s how we’re doing things differently.
[End of question period.]
Questions of Privilege
(Reservation of Right)
Hon. G. Heyman: I reserve my right to raise a point of personal privilege regarding remarks by the member for Saanich North and the Islands.
Hon. N. Cullen: Mr. Speaker, I stand on a point of order today, arising out of the comments in question period from the member for Skeena. Not only did the member, I believe, harm the reputation of the police….
Mr. Speaker: That’s okay. Just reserve your spot. Thank you, we’ll do it later.
Orders of the Day
Hon. R. Kahlon: I call continued debate on Motion 17 on the order paper.
[J. Tegart in the chair.]
Deputy Speaker: If members are leaving the chamber, could they please do that as quietly as possible.
Government Motions on Notice
MOTION 17 — ADDICTIONS CARE
(continued)
Hon. S. Malcolmson: I am pleased to be carrying on my remarks from yesterday. I was speaking to our government’s support for recommendation 14. This is one of the all-party consensus recommendations to see “a substantial increase in publicly funded, evidence-based, accredited treatment and recovery beds, including managed withdrawal and aftercare supports, ensuring a variety of treatment options.”
To finish my comments in this area, I wanted to pick up on the Minister of Jobs and Economic Development and her comments about the Peardonville investment that we’ve made in addiction treatment beds in Abbotsford. A place that I got to visit two summers ago, I believe. One of the, again, beds that we are publicly funding, but I believe one of the only places in British Columbia where part of the funding involves having a built-in daycare.
I understood from the practitioners working there, some of them who had been working for decades in the child care part of the addiction treatment, that in some cases, women — well, parents battling addictions — have had other family members really providing the bulk of the care for children.
To see the women in programs through the day getting the counselling that they need to overcome addiction while their children are in the daycare below and to have the parents, the mothers, come in and learn about putting their kids to bed, dressing them for a bedtime story, meal preparation — all with the support of early childhood educators.
Another way that, when we can bring people into addictions treatment and bed-based treatment, and we are funding this and want to fund more, we really end up reuniting families and building skills beyond simply the physical withdrawal and overcoming addiction.
I wanted to speak also to Red Fish Healing Centre, which was opened a year and a half ago. It started, as the opposition correctly noted, on paper in plans while they were still in government. It took them 12 years to permanently close Riverview. Unfortunately, they did not establish the community supports that should have been in place when people exited Riverview. The promise was that there would be community supports they’d be moving to. That didn’t happen. They didn’t build that support of help that people wanted.
The Red Fish Healing Centre only had five more beds than the facility that it closed. We did, because of the speed and the urgency, carry on with that 105-bed hospital, the Red Fish treatment and healing centre. We sure wish it were double the size. That would have connected more people with this very high-end and specialized care that now is in existence. We’re grateful to the practitioners that are there doing the work.
A third piece — again, I’m just pulling out some of the models of new forms of addiction treatment that we have been funding over the last five years, all ones that we continue to expand and absolutely need to expand more — are the integrated treatment teams operating in every health authority.
I was particularly compelled by hearing about integrated treatment teams. Where people who have been — in Interior Health, because of travel, child care, elder care, shift work — unable to walk into an addiction treatment centre or unable to walk into some of the out-patient, more urban-focused, treatment, for them to be able to get out and meet people where they are and deliver to them, in their homes, that kind of counselling or medication-assisted treatment that can attend to withdrawal and have them overcome addiction is extremely encouraging. I’m grateful to people in every health authority that we are funding to do that work.
Another recommendation is also related to addictions treatment: recommendation 17, to ensure opioid agonist treatment is available in all areas of the province. We agree with that recommendation. We agree with it so much that OAT is available across British Columbia. This July, 24,500 were prescribed OAT, just in that month alone.
More options for medication-assisted treatment are available than ever before, including injectable opioid agonist treatment and low-barrier pharmaceutical alternatives like tablet iOAT. So a multitude of different ways, from the medication perspective of delivery, across the whole spectrum of delivery areas: a centre, a medical clinic or a family doctor’s office. Also, we’re the only province in the country where nurses are allowed to prescribe medication-assisted treatment, again as a medical intervention.
The final thing I’ll speak to, one of the really encouraging areas of consensus in this select committee report, was the support for decriminalization. I want to speak again about the context for decriminalization.
We are building up health care interventions and a diversity of supports and ways to have people overcome addiction and stay alive, through harm reduction, in order to be able to stabilize them and give them the opportunity to step into treatment. The benefit of decriminalization is to remove that stigma and to very clearly assert by removing the criminal penalties for possession, for individual people who have small amounts of illicit drugs.
My sidebar is the drugs themselves remain illegal. The selling, trafficking or possession of a large amount of these illicit drugs remains illegal, but we have decriminalized people because our government believes — and, as it turns out, every party in this House believes — that addiction is a health care matter. It is not a matter for the criminal justice system. Because the need is so deep, and because we are still losing so many lives to the overdose and toxic drug poisoning crisis, we have to do things differently.
I talked with a Nanaimo city councillor this weekend, who said: “Decriminalization is not working.” It has only been in place for a month. Our application to the federal government said it will probably take five years for it to have the change in psyche, the change in attitude, which right now is causing too many people to hide their addiction from their families and from their family care practitioners, and use drugs alone.
We’re in this climate where using drugs alone terribly, sadly, so often means dying alone. But immediately, the benefit will be that police are able to focus more of their attention on the drug dealers, the true criminals in this situation. On some of the stigma around people walking into a drug-testing centre or asking for the kind of help that they need from their primary care provider, we start to lift that stigma.
Decriminalization alone, it’s true, does not solve our overdose crisis, but building out every form of support across the entire continuum and diversity of offerings, as represented by our Pathway to Hope plan that we are building out, and also as represented by the consensus agreement in the all-party committee, which we are speaking to today.
It has been a tremendous breakthrough to have all-party support for prescribed safe supply, for supervised consumption sites, for decriminalization. All of these used to be controversial things. We need to embrace, fund, expand and implement the full continuum of care to save lives at this really tragic time.
With that, Madam Speaker, thank you for your attention and the opportunity to speak to my remarks.
Question of Privilege
Hon. N. Cullen: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I won’t take long in interruption of the order of debate today. I rose, as you recall, just at the end of question period, on a point of order. We’ve clarified our process to make sure that this is the right standing time for me.
It came out of question period with regards to some comments in a question from the member for Skeena that were twofold and which I would focus on. One was a suggestion and, I think, a harming of the reputation of our police forces by alleging that investigations were supposed investigations, with regards to criminal matters that may have taken place in the northwest.
The second, and this is the primary focus of my point of order, is that the member for Skeena insinuated criminal activity on behalf of members of the government, equating some, from his perspective, inaction — equating that with, in his words, terrorism. This is not something that we can allow to take place in our Legislature.
We can have vigorous and important debate about all of the issues that we seek to clarify and raise on behalf of our constituents. I, of course, will look to the Blues, once they’re produced, for the very specific phrasing, but I heard very clearly, and I’m sure other members did as well. The insinuation was direct. It was a quid pro quo that the alleged inactions, which, in fact, are not true, he equated to terrorism, thereby equating an illegal activity, a criminal activity, upon members of the government.
He was offered an opportunity, I noticed, in question period to withdraw those comments and apologize. He has not, at this point, chosen to. I would hope that he does, so we can move past this matter and not have to see it again.
Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Minister. It is so noted, and the Speaker will address it at the appropriate time.
Debate Continued
A. Olsen: I rise to speak to Motion 17, with respect to the motion that was tabled by the Government House Leader yesterday, asking that “this House affirm” — or reaffirm, I guess, in this case — “its support for a spectrum of addictions care, such as lifesaving harm reduction measures — including safe consumption sites, decriminalization and safer supply — and for a rapid, unprecedented expansion of drug treatment and recovery spaces.”
It’s unfortunate that we’re using this time to debate this motion work that, frankly, has already been done, in terms of the coalition-building or the consensus-building process that an all-party committee completed last November.
I’m not sure what the point of this motion is, other than maybe politics, and that, to me, is very problematic. The work that the then Leader of the Official Opposition, interim leader at that time, and my colleague, the Leader of the Third Party, undertook to encourage the government and to work with the government to create an all-party committee was done under the approach and with the approach that we need to depoliticize this work.
When we have 2,200 British Columbians pass away in 2022, just a few less than the record number that passed away in 2021, or when we’re seeing, still, six British Columbians passing away each day due to the illicit and toxic drug supply, or when we’re counting numbers like 11,000 British Columbians who have passed away since the 2016 declaration of an emergency in this province, or when we see many countless other British Columbians being poisoned on a daily basis, sometimes multiple times a day, because of the increased toxicity, it was incumbent upon this House to depoliticize that discussion.
That was, indeed, the entire point of asking it to move from the toxicity of question period to the Douglas Fir Room, where committee deliberations happen in a much less partisan, far less charged manner.
That work was good work. It was months in the making. It was a consensus-building process, intentionally designed to build consensus across party lines. The people that are dying, the families who are losing family members, can ill afford the political division that you see by this red carpet further hampering action from the government. Shame on this government for dragging this conversation back and repoliticizing it after so much work was done to depoliticize it.
The things that are written in this motion, as has been pointed out, are all in this list of consensus recommendations, 37 of them. I know the process started and there wasn’t consensus. That’s committee work. Over and over again, they deliberate in camera to come up with a list of recommendations that all the members of this place can get behind. And now, here, what we’re doing is separating. We see, “Well, for 16 years, you ill-prepared British Columbians to be able to deal with this toxic drug crisis. For six years, we’ve done this or we’ve done that” — drawing the line, defining the line, separating the parties, trying to create political advantage of, frankly, a public tragedy.
I find it distasteful. I find it distasteful to the members of the committee, who spent hours listening to the testimony of British Columbians, of stakeholders, of experts, academics, people with lived experiences. It’s certainly distasteful to all of the people who provided that testimony, that they would then see their work be dragged back out here onto the floor of this Legislature and to the very same situation that we were faced with prior to the calling of that committee starting to take shape and take form here on this chamber floor again.
I think back to last year, after that committee was called. Once the debate stopped showing up here at question period for 30 minutes each day, questions being lobbed across this way, responses being volleyed back — the minute that that committee started its work, those questions ended in here. To me, that was a success because the questions and the responses didn’t help us advance any further. Accusations from this side, defensive responses from that side: we were not making any progress on actually solving the challenging problem that far too many families face in this province.
By removing it and by giving a committee the responsibility for taking on this important work, the Premier, the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions, the Minister of Health, the government cabinet were able to successfully depoliticize this and send it away to have good work be done.
I really see this as a process where the survivors of this incredible situation that we face, with the increased ramping up toxicity, where they’re being forced to relive the trauma over and over and over again and now this debate here again today…. It’s not for, really, the purposes of the debate because, as has been pointed out, we agree.
There is a consensus list of 37 recommendations that are right here. They include life-saving harm reduction measures, including parameters around safe consumption, around decriminalization, safer supply, the de-stigmatization of people who use addictive substances, support for the rapid and unprecedented expansion of drug treatment. That’s what all of these recommendations represent.
The only thing that’s left is the execution of these recommendations, the delivery of them, either through policy or through legislation or through programs and services. I’m not sure what benefit this debate is having, other than to spend time in here, because remarkably, we’re in the third week of this legislative session, yet, again, no bills tabled this morning, no bills tabled yesterday, no bills tabled Thursday, no bills tabled Wednesday.
Actually, that’s unfair to the opposition members who have been standing up and tabling private members’ bills. We’ve got a few. Members of the official opposition have a few. So there are bills to be debated, but instead, for the first time in my six years, or 5.75 years, in this Legislature, when we should be debating bills — this would be normally the time where we are either in second reading or committee stage of bill debate — we’re here debating motions, government motions, to fill time.
The one that they dragged up here…. I was very grateful for the one that they brought forward last week. It’s been a part of the program that we’ve been trying to advance in terms of reforming the democracy of this institution. I spoke supportive of that motion and look forward to it being sent to a committee.
It’s curious though. It seems like a completely unnecessary measure when every other committee got members added to it and a job given to it by the government by moving a quick motion by the Government House Leader, and off we go, and the members of the committee get on with the work. Never before have I seen a committee debated here.
Now, I suppose, as I mentioned in my previous debate, it’s of benefit to the momentum-building process that needs to happen with these committees, where we want to see a positive outcome. We’d like this place to become more democratic in its function. That’s fantastic. We’ve got members of the government side saying that they support it. We’ve got members of the opposition saying they support it. We support it. We’re going to move on and, hopefully, by October, get some good reforms on paper, and then it will be up to the government to do the work. That’s the committee process.
For the second motion that we’re debating, they’ve undertaken that work. They have the recommendation. We have dozens of pages of a report with the discussions, with an outline of the deliberations, with an exhaustive list of recommendations built on all-party consensus, and the only part that was missing was the partisan fight that happens in this place, apparently. The government had to circle back around and re-dredge up all the old battles.
Shocking that the previous government left them with nothing. Shocking that now we have a government who is acting on all of the things. It’s a narrative that gets told and retold in this place over and over again. But it’s not the work. The work is the work. Delivering on the recommendations is the work. In fact, what this debate is doing is taking us backwards in time. It’s unnecessarily creating divisions where they need not be.
I sense it’s because, actually, the official opposition came forward with some ideas. So now we have to…. I guess we can’t possibly have it where the other ideas are in conflict or whatever it is. Now we have to show the definition between the parties. We’ve got to make this about a campaign.
But it’s not necessary, and it’s not supporting the families whose children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews and parents have a health care need that needs to be met by a government whose responsibility is to meet health care needs.
Often when we hear government’s responses to the questions or government’s responses in this debate, speeches that have happened on this motion, there is the context of the things that they have been doing. Very rarely is there a context of the size and scope of the problem.
So while we have an exhaustive list of actions being taken, we have no context as to whether or not they are enough, are good enough or are far from good enough. Maybe they’re more than good enough. There’s no context that’s been provided. That is what has framed this debate on Motion 17 as well — a list of actions, no context.
The coroner has come out repeatedly…. If we want to look for context on what the scale and scope of the problem is in this province, we need to, I think, listen to what the coroner is saying. In the last coroner’s report…. This was reported on the CBC. Dr. Paxton Bach, the co–medical director of the B.C. Centre on Substance Use, said, I think, some things that this government can take to heart and act upon.
First of all, an apology. I think that it would be nice to see that be reiterated here, as this conversation gets brought back out onto the floor in order for us to argue about it again, when we had gotten past arguing about it.
“To the families of the 45 individuals who passed away in the last week alone….” This was in the last week of January. Forty-five individuals passed away in that week. “To their friends and their colleagues and their communities and loved ones: my heart goes out to you, and I’m so sorry that we’re continuing to fail.”
That’s not the story that’s being told right now about the situation. We’ve just heard about the remarkable progress. Yet the co–medical director of the B.C. Centre on Substance Use is apologizing where the government, frankly, should be apologizing.
He goes on: “I hope that we can sit with that grief and that outrage. I hope that every citizen of the province reflects on this report and feels that outrage and uses that to drive the advocacy that is needed to generate change.”
That advocacy had started. The report had been written. The recommendations had been tabled. And here we are, being dragged back in here to fill time so we can argue about it again.
On decriminalization measures, chief coroner Lisa Lapointe said the following on the change for decriminalization, which came into effect the week that this article was written, the last week of January — a month ago. The change is a “key first step,” but “only one measure of many that are necessary to end this crisis.”
Is that what’s happening in here today? Are we doing the work? Are we talking about the work that needs to be done? Are we rehashing what has already been outlined and on the record? It doesn’t feel like we’re doing the work that should be done. That’s in the hands of the government. Only the government has the power and is empowered to actually do the actions that are outlined in this.
Bach continues: “The province needs a critical and comprehensive response plan with ‘everything’ from a regulated safe supply, effective patient-centred treatment to investment in upstream drivers of substance use in order to prevent use.”
People are still giving this government advice, still advocating on what needs to be done. Nowhere in the conversation was: “Drag this back out for the House to debate and fight over again.” Nobody I’ve seen has said that this would be a good way of doing this work.
When you had just gained the support of all of the House, drag it out here and beat each other up over it again. Nobody is saying that’s a good idea, yet here we are. This is what we’re doing. The damage of this needs to be noted, the potential damage that’s caused, dragging us backwards.
I’m just going to say this because I believe that this motion here today is a government response to a proposal that was put forward by the official opposition. I feel like it’s a good time to make a comment about that proposal that was put forward by the official opposition.
Certainly, we have heard over and over and over again that access to treatment is one of the critical obstacles for people who are suffering from substance use and abuse, addiction and health care needs. The ability to get treatment when you need it, where you need it, is one of the key challenges that people have, and it’s costing us lives.
The official opposition offered an idea. Let’s privatize it, essentially. Paraphrasing — it was more detailed than that. The one caution that I have and feel needs to be on the record and on the debate of this is that we need to be very careful. It was pointed out to me that it will be public funds that are paying for this. “Don’t worry; it’s public money that’s paying for it.”
We do not want to create a pipeline for an industry. It feels like we need to keep feeding it people who are suffering. That is not the job of this government. The job of this government and the job of the provincial government is to ensure that people are well. And if we create an industry around treatment, we’ll find ourselves in a similar situation that we found ourselves in the other privatized industries that we’ve created that then need us to continue to feed the industry.
We might be able to find some comfort in that it’s public money that is going to be paying for the treatment of these folks. But once we start to create privatized treatment, then there will be a need for us to continue to feed the industry, and that’s very dangerous. We need to be focused on ensuring people are well. We need to be making sure that we’re covering off all of the continuum of someone in this process. We need to really be starting the process, and the investments need to be really on the prevention side of it, at the very beginning.
There’s more that will be said on the plan. I think that the plan that the official opposition have produced…. The government is probably going to have a response later today in the budget to that plan. There are a lot of discussions, but I just really felt uncomfortable not mentioning the feelings that I had around the announcement that was made, since I believe that this motion today is in response to the official opposition’s plan. This is the government’s response — to spend time further dividing this House rather than bringing us together.
True leadership brings together. True leadership uses the committees. True leadership trusts the work of the committees, takes the recommendations and implements them. Too often we see committees being used as a way to distract the conversation, set it aside, move it aside. The reports come in, and then they collect dust.
I really hope that later today what we hear from this government is leadership on the aspects of this report that are fully under their responsibility for implementing now and that we stop using this time in this space in here to foment mistrust, to erode the confidence of people in this institution and to take good work and undermine it, which is effectively what’s happening in the Legislature as we debate Motion 17.
With that, I take my seat and thank you for the opportunity. HÍSW̱ḴE SIÁM.
N. Simons: It’s a pleasure to take the opportunity to speak to Motion 17, which speaks to the Select Standing Committee on Health’s report on Closing Gaps, Reducing Barriers.
I want to thank my colleague from Saanich North and the Islands for his words. I’m not necessarily agreeing with all of what he said, but many of the points he made were very valid.
I think, based on what he said, I’m going to do my best to ensure that this isn’t an argument, that this is just a discussion around some of the findings of a committee. In fact, those who chose to take it, make it an argument, maybe were just upset at what…. They repeatedly stated that they wished there were other things to talk about. But this is what’s on the order paper, and this is what we’re talking about.
I want to say that the work of the committee was very well appreciated, and, you know, the work of all the select standing committees, the other committees, is much appreciated. They get a varied degree of support and acceptance and a varied response from government, regardless of what government it is. I’ve sat on committees under previous governments and seen very little action. I’ve seen action from other governments.
I don’t think this is necessarily an opportunity to argue. There remain…. Despite 37 recommendations that are consensus-based, there are some nuances to the debate that can be brought up if there’s a desire to find differences rather than similarities.
But I don’t have a problem talking about this important issue, having spent some of my career working with vulnerable communities, working as the director of health for First Nations for a number of years and working in the Ministry for Children and Families, coming across issues around addiction on a very regular basis, quite frankly, and seeing the responses over time, over the years, the varied responses that were available for people seeking out treatment.
Obviously, part of government is to show the work that it’s doing and to reassure the community that efforts are being made to address the concerns that are primary in their minds. So I do believe that we, as members of the government caucus — and in fact, all members of this House — support the work that government is doing.
It’s really just a question of…. You know, people would like faster responses in some areas. It would be nice if there were some shortcuts to some of the resolutions to this toxic drug supply issue.
I do want to just say to the moms and the dads and the siblings and the kids of people who I know who have been affected by the overdose crisis, in fact, the deaths of children who were on my caseload as a social worker…. I’ve been to funerals. These are people in our community there. They live on our streets. They live in houses on our streets. Some do live on the streets.
It’s just important to say that first and foremost, our response should be compassion. Our response should be one of understanding that these addiction issues results don’t come about just on their own. They’re often a secondary response to, perhaps, childhood trauma or other challenges that young people might have faced as they grew up — adults as well.
I’ve spoken to people who have been personally impacted, whose family members I may not have known, but I’ve certainly recognized the grief and have recognized the desire for things to be better and for things to get better faster. I agree. I would love to see….
You know, I remember in the ’90s and in the 2000s trying to get young people into detox and treatment, and it was a struggle. It was always…. There were challenges because of wait-lists. This is not a new thing. Treatment wasn’t always successful the first time or the second time or the third time. We have to recognize that it’s not….
I’m not going to say that anyone has tried to simplify it, but to build out a recovery treatment program in its fullest possible way does take time. We don’t have…. Even today in question period, we heard about the challenge in finding people to fill professional vacancies across the province. Here we’ve increased the number of beds for adults and youth, and that’s a very, very important thing.
It’s important, also, to talk about…. What I would like to talk about is the prevention side, and not just the prevention through the reduction of stigma and for the education of young people about the harms of drugs, but prevention in ensuring that people don’t grow up in abject poverty in this province — that we address issues around poverty, that we address issues around food security and that we address issues around recreational opportunities. If we can invest properly in the young people of the province, then we will get better results as the years go by.
I can’t help but suggest that there was a time in this province that investments in young people, health care, education and child care weren’t what they needed to be. I believe that ensuring young people and families have the supports around them necessary to raise children in a healthy way and be healthy families…. We need to continue to invest in those, even if those immediate results are not measured in the outcomes that we see from the coroner. We do need to invest, and we need to continue to do that.
I’m pleased this issue finds consensus in this place. Not always 100 percent consensus, but I’m thankful for that. I think the work just needs to keep going, and it keeps going hard.
N. Simons moved adjournment of debate.
Motion approved.
Hon. A. Dix: It’s a very exciting day here in the Legislature. We’ve got the budget coming up this afternoon. I move that the House do now adjourn.
Motion approved.
Deputy Speaker: The House is now adjourned until 1:30 this afternoon.
The House adjourned at 11:42 a.m.