Orders of the Day

Hon. M. Farnworth: In the main chamber, I call continued debate for the supplementary estimates for the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General.

In Committee A, I call continued supplementary estimates for the Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation, to be followed by the supplementary estimates for the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.

Committee of Supply

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
PUBLIC SAFETY AND SOLICITOR GENERAL

(continued)

The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); J. Tegart in the chair.

The committee met at 1:05 p.m.

The Chair: Good afternoon, everyone. I call the Committee of Supply, Section B, to order.

We are meeting today to continue consideration of the estimates of Public Safety and Solicitor General.

On Vote 41(S): ministry operations, $150,000,000 (continued).

E. Sturko: Has the one-time expenditure that the government is seeking approval for been reviewed by the Treasury Board?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes, it has.

E. Sturko: When did the Treasury Board approve the release of these funds? Can I just have the date so that I can take this into account, please?

Hon. M. Farnworth: The answer I gave previously on this was…. The Minister of Finance is the one who can answer that question. That is Minister of Finance jurisdiction.

E. Sturko: Can the minister confirm that the Ministry of Finance approached the ministry to identify candidates for the use of this surplus?

Hon. M. Farnworth: The Ministry of Finance and the Premier asked us to identify priorities that would be available for supplementary estimates and that would fit in with the work that we’re doing within our ministries.

E. Sturko: When did that happen?

Hon. M. Farnworth: About a couple of months ago.

E. Sturko: Did the review at the Treasury Board happen after that?

[1:10 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question.

Again, that’s an area that the Minister of Finance has responsibility for, in terms of when and how they decide to answer.

E. Sturko: Presumably the ministry, though, would have made a presentation to the Treasury Board about this matter. Was that done, and when was that done?

Hon. M. Farnworth: It is the Minister of Finance’s responsibility for when Treasury Board meets, when they discuss things, but also to answer for decisions around Treasury Board, including when, how, why, who and what before Treasury Board. Those questions are best directed to the Minister of Finance.

E. Sturko: The question was: did the ministry that was seeking funding for this project make a presentation, and when was that done?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I’ll give the same answer as I gave before: those are questions that the Minister of Finance would answer. They really do, when it comes to Treasury Board, come under cabinet confidentiality. But the Minister of Finance is in a position to be able to give answers if they feel that that would not be an issue.

M. de Jong: It is actually pure happenstance that I happen to be listening to this very engaging and informative exchange.

Look, the minister obviously is the most experienced member on that side of the House. I think the opposition’s interest is as follows. It extends, obviously, to this ministry, but it extends beyond this ministry.

Something relatively unusual…. A supplementary estimate in and of itself isn’t unusual. The magnitude of these supplementary estimates is fairly unprecedented: approaching, I think, $3 billion, if I’m not mistaken.

My colleague from Surrey is, early on in this exercise with this ministry, trying to establish, which I think is entirely appropriate, the process that not just the ministry but the government has followed in advancing these supplementary estimates and seeking permission and the support of this chamber to spend this money. It’s a lot of money.

There are, within the government, these procedures that have been established over the years and not by any single government. They have involved…. But they are safeguards that protect the government, protect the minister and ultimately are designed to protect the taxpayer, to ensure that funds are being expended appropriately and receiving agencies are the appropriate agencies to receive these funds.

Now the minister and my colleague have had an exchange about the particular project and some of the technical requirements. But this is important not just for this ministry but for the government.

[1:15 p.m.]

When my colleague from Surrey asks about the process that was followed, I am going to suggest, respectfully, that those are entirely appropriate questions for the minister and the ministry, who are seeking the spending authority under a particular vote, to answer.

No one is asking the minister to disclose the nature of discussions that might have taken place at Treasury Board. I think everyone understands that those take place under a veil of confidentiality. It is appropriate, in my view, for the minister to inform the committee as to whether or not his ministry made a submission to the Treasury Board that was reviewed and that this supplementary estimate and request for spending authority comes in the aftermath of approval by that agency that is there to safeguard the taxpayers.

Quite frankly, it’s not, in my respectful opinion, an answer to say: “Well the Finance Minister will answer that.” I don’t think the Finance Minister has a supplementary estimate. So if the minister — and I don’t think he wants to say this, upon reflection — is saying that in order to satisfy this committee around the process that has been followed within the government to bring $3 billion in additional spending, “You should ask the minister,” who isn’t actually part of this process, then that’s a little too clever.

I think the opposition understands the limitations of what can be asked and the limitations that exist for the minister on the kinds of information that can be disclosed. But he has already indicated to the committee that this is a matter that came up in the last two months. I take it that means January or February — the idea of spending this money came up in the last two months.

I think the minister may have disclosed this, and I might not have been listening closely enough about whether or not it was at the initiative of the Premier’s office or the…. I think he gave some information about receiving a request via the Premier’s office. But if I have misstated that, he’ll correct me.

My colleague is asking, in the immediate aftermath of that request: is that when the ministry prepared its submission for review by Treasury Board, or had that taken place previously? It may have. But that is an appropriate question, in my view, to have asked and an entirely appropriate question for the minister to answer. Deflecting it to a colleague who is not even part of this supplementary estimates process actually causes great concern.

[1:20 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question. I appreciate the way in which he has phrased it, in which he has asked it. I would make the following comments in regard to it.

Yes, the process has been followed. Yes, the request came a couple of months ago in terms of: do we have projects that would be available for year-end funding?

I’ll make this particular observation about it. This was one of the key priorities, within our ministry, that we have identified. It has been in the works since 2017. There has been a significant amount of work done at the local level. E-Comm and the municipalities that are responsible for 911 have been working on this. We’ve been aware of that.

They came forward, just over a year ago, and said that they had a plan on how to do it. There was going to be a considerable cost to them. We had identified that. We were aware that they were looking for help.

We, in the ministry, understood the importance and the need to meet that timeline of March 4, 2025. So when the request for submissions came forward, we understood the importance of this particular request. We had done work on it in terms of its importance and where it fits in with overall government priorities and the issues that we’re trying to address. A Treasury Board submission was prepared, a Treasury Board submission was submitted, and Treasury Board dealt with it.

The member will also know that there is a long-standing practice, a tradition…. Timing, in regards to Treasury Board, when and what time, is confidential. It’s not about trying to be saying, “Hey,” for the Minister of Finance, in terms of them either being here or not being here. That’s just how the process has worked.

A submission was made. The work, in order to do a submission, was made, and the Treasury Board did their analysis.

M. de Jong: I can’t remember. Is the Public Safety Minister a member of Treasury Board?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I don’t know whether to say “happily yes” or “happily no.” But no, I’m not.

M. de Jong: I’m glad he didn’t have to seek the advice of staff in answering that question.

That’s partially helpful. The minister will understand…. The opposition’s interest relates, as I’ve said before, not just to this particular supplementary estimate but to the whole broad gambit and the procedures that were followed.

[1:25 p.m.]

My understanding is that the request went out from the Premier’s office to ministries around initiatives and spending that might be accommodated with supplementary estimates. It sounds like that happened early in the new year. If that’s incorrect, the minister can correct me. It sounds like the ministry quickly looked at an existing priority, which was the transfer of funds or the project with E-Comm.

I’m going to parenthetically say this, drawing on some experience, happy and not so happy. Procurements and projects that involve technology, over the last few decades, I have found, can be a pretty good way to clear the room of terrified politicians because they have a habit of going sideways. I say this non-judgmentally, for anyone. They involve, frequently, technology that the laypeople who occupy these posts are challenged to try and understand. All to say that the process of oversight, and technical oversight, is all the more important.

It sounds like…. This is where I’m a bit unclear. There was a submission prepared by the ministry as it relates to the E-Comm project. What I’m unclear on is whether that was merely reviewed by Treasury Board staff or by the Treasury Board. There are two separate agencies. There’s the secretariat, which is the professional people that conduct this work, and then there is the body, comprised of ministers. I’m not sure if there are some private members on the government side that sit on the Treasury Board or not. There were, under a previous regime.

When that happened, did that…? When I say “when,” did it happen prior to the beginning of this year, which, I guess, would have been last year, or at some point previous to that? Or did the review take place after the request came in from the Premier’s office?

[1:30 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I just want to clarify. It would have been in December that the request for projects came.

I totally agree with the member on…. I, too, have been around here long enough to know that whenever technology is discussed, it can be like…. That is why when people have issues with technology, I sometimes look over the other way, and we both smile, knowing: “Hey, we don’t use it.” There are days I go: “I really like that habit.”

That being said, I want to make these observations. First, the technology is not something that has been developed for British Columbia. It’s the technology that’s being used by all the provinces right across the country. We’re all on the same page.

In terms of the work that has been done and in terms of the determination of the funds required…. That planning work had been done by E-Comm. It had been done in discussions with UBCM in terms of the amount of money.

They had let us know, a year ago, that they had this plan. This is what their expectations of the costs were. That was something that was in my ministry. We knew that it was a key priority and that the 2025 date was coming. When the request was out, this was, if you want to use a term that is often used around here, shovel-ready and in line with the priorities of the government.

This is at the top of our list of things that we wanted to move forward, whether it be a Treasury Board submission…. There’s now an issue for supplementary estimates or going into a budget for this year. The analysis would have been done, and was done, by both the Treasury Board secretariat and the full Treasury Board.

M. de Jong: Was this dealt with and approved by Treasury Board as a “minor item”?

Hon. M. Farnworth: No.

M. de Jong: Thank you. That, too, is helpful. It tells me that unless things have changed appreciably, the ministry would have submitted its request, its proposal, which would have been analyzed by the Treasury Board secretariat staff. It then would have been followed up with consideration by what I will term the political level Treasury Board, which then would have given rise to a decision to approve or not approve. Presumably, in this case, the decision was to approve.

Have I described fairly accurately the process that would have been followed?

[1:35 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes, you have.

M. de Jong: I think the final piece in that puzzle, having now clarified, thank you, the initiating step for this project…. That was already considered a priority within the ministry. The thing that elevated it from its status as a “wish to have” to “let’s proceed” being that request from the Premier’s office in December, the remaining question is simply, then, to confirm that that process involving the review and the decision from the political body, Treasury Board, occurred sometime between that date in December 2022 and the date on which the supplementary estimate was issued. Is that correct?

Hon. M. Farnworth: The answer to your question is yes.

M. de Jong: I think this might be the last question, or process-related question, that I would have.

Did the…? Was the review of this project…? I’ll back up and say, just for the record, that the importance the opposition attaches to this is out of recognition that….

Ministries come along with their projects, and there are stakeholders who are very anxious to see these projects advanced. And the objectives are sound. People want…. I don’t expect you’ll hear any quarrel from my colleagues on the opposition benches about the overall objective.

But there is this group of people in the Treasury Board staff whose job it is to poke and prod and make sure that everything is properly addressed, that whatever contracts are signed are properly constituted, and to reduce, to the greatest extent possible, the risk to the taxpayers. So we derive some comfort when we discover that that process would have been followed in this case.

Was the E-Comm project and the $150 million that were part of that approval process dealt with separately by the Treasury Board, or was it part of a much larger submission that went to Treasury Board, including other ministries and other projects?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question. I know the member has got the…. Having chaired Treasury Board, he understands fully the process.

I can tell you that the presentation I made was not part of a larger package. It was there with this item — myself.

M. de Jong: Then I think the remaining piece of the puzzle, if you will, is my sense that that presentation took place sometime between the ministry receiving the invitation from the Premier, in December of 2022, and the date upon which the supplementary estimate was tabled in the House.

I’m not asking for a more specific date than that, but I am asking for confirmation that the presentation to Treasury Board took place sometime in that 2½-month period.

Hon. M. Farnworth: That’s yes.

E. Sturko: In terms of selecting this particular project…. It is a worthy project, but we have a lot of other projects, I think the minister would probably agree, that are also priorities for our province: improving response times for 911 or Alert Ready being fully operational or even ensuring that we have provincial 911 in every community.

[1:40 p.m.]

Can you please provide more clarification on what other alternatives to this project were considered and what the criteria were?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member, and she’s right. There are all kinds of worthy projects and initiatives that government can undertake. There are those that are in terms of the mandate. There are those that are asked for by communities. There are those asked for by outside agencies. There are those asked for by the opposition. The challenge is, of course, that we can’t do everything.

Part of the decision around…. Ultimately, it is a decision of the minister on what to advance forward. When I ask my staff — look, we’ve got all kinds of issues, projects and priorities — one of the key things is: does it fit in with my mandate letter? Does it fit in with the priorities of the government? Are there other external factors?

In this case, the external factor is that we are mandated. There’s a mandate by the CRTC to get this done by March 4 of 2025. We know that it’s a priority in terms of local government. We know that it will have a significant impact on improving public safety. In terms of 911, it has to be done. Local government wants it. It helps people; it helps first responders. So there’s a broad benefit that you can readily see and that’s available. That’s why, in my mind, this is literally right at the top of the pile. That being said, there are lots of other worthy projects to do.

I just want to comment briefly on the Alert Ready system. That’s also a worthwhile project. That’s now in Emergency Management B.C., which is now in its own separate stand-alone ministry.

When I get a request, it’s for the areas under my particular jurisdiction as minister, but it’s not easy. You’ve got competing priorities, and you try and do the best you can. Part of the role, the job, of being minister is to ultimately make that decision and go: “Hey, this needs to go forward, and here’s why it needs to go forward.”

E. Sturko: Next gen 911 — is that in your mandate letter?

Hon. M. Farnworth: It’s not specifically part of my mandate letter, but it does touch on an awful lot of areas that do fall under my mandate, like domestic violence, for example, the ability to be able to text and say: “Hey, I’m in a terrible situation here.” As I said, it touches on so many different aspects, and there’s the mandate that this project needs to go ahead.

E. Sturko: Let me just…. This has been something that, as you mentioned, was identified as a priority for a long time, because in 2017, CRTC has indicated that all the country has to make this, yet it didn’t appear on any other budget.

[1:45 p.m.]

I think back to the heat dome, when 600 people lost their lives. We had terrible floods. We’ve had things that are not predictable happen here in British Columbia. I would argue that having a mandate from the federal government, from the CRTC, to change over our 911 system to a digital system is something that is predictable, that could have been budgeted for before.

When we’re talking about priorities for this government, the Alert Ready, while not also in your ministry perhaps, does touch on public safety. Our natural disasters, perhaps heat domes…. These things, may not be predictable, which is why it would be a priority for our province to have the Alert Ready system and 911 response times and things that could potentially save lives and keep people in British Columbia safe.

If this was a priority for the government, why has it taken so long? Why is it only coming forward at this time when we have many other worthy and potentially life-saving initiatives, also priorities for this government, that have not been put through this process and given these fundings?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I want to go back to the answer I gave to…. The member has asked, in a similar frame, a number of questions on this front.

First off, this is a local government responsibility. It’s under their mandate. The CRTC made the mandate to move to next gen 911. That was done in 2017, right across the country, all the provinces. They have been working on that in terms of how it’s going to take place, how it will be put in place.

It was just a year ago that they came to the province and said: “Here’s our plan. Here’s how we see it being implemented. Here’s what the costs are going to be to us, and we need some help. We would like you…. This is a big burden for us.”

It’s at that point, not back in 2017…. Government cannot budget money in 2017 to implement something for 2025 that they don’t….

Interjection.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I’ll explain it to you, and the Minister of Finance will do that.

If I were to budget in this year’s budget and say $100 million to buy X amount of widgets, and that doesn’t get spent, the money doesn’t just carry over. It doesn’t carry over into the next year, right? That’s money that’s not available to be spent on something else.

And, we don’t know what that cost is going to be. We didn’t know until a year ago what kinds of costs we were looking at. That’s when the province can choose to decide to assist, which is what we’ve done. You can’t do it before you know what the costs are going to be.

[1:50 p.m.]

E. Sturko: I understand. You cannot say that…. You’re not going to save a big lump sum over to be done at the last minute, because you can’t. You’d have to pay back that money, of course.

Why, though, did it take, then, four years before the government knew that it would need to help pay for this? You’re saying that…. From 2017 until 2022, was there no work done on this seemingly tremendous project? So you only learned in 2022 that there would be a cost shortfall, that the municipalities would need this type of assistance.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I want to stress the work for this is done by E-Comm and local government. They are the ones who have to deal with the system. They are the ones who have responsibility for that system. The province is aware that they’re doing the work. It’s when they bring the business case to us that we’re able to assess: “Okay, here’s what they’re looking at. Here’s what’s what they’re saying they need.” This is happening in every province.

As I mentioned in one of my answers earlier, some provinces chose to do a call levy. Ontario did a block grant. We’re looking, going: “Okay. If they need assistance, what’s the best way to do it?” Is it through a call levy or is it a block grant? As I said earlier, I think the block grant, which is what we’ve done, was the right way to do it.

It’s not a question of work not being done. That work is being done in the same way it’s been done in every other province. It’s a very complex process. This is not something…. As the member herself said when they were making changes in Surrey and moving to new technology, it’s very complex and intensive. It takes a lot of work, and that’s what’s been taking place with this. That’s why I think that things will be ready for the 4th of March, 2025.

E. Sturko: I do appreciate that. I do appreciate that it’s complex. As you mentioned, I lived through it at the Surrey RCMP. It is very complex, and there are often unforeseen consequences or hiccups at times. In the process and in the business case that was brought forward from E-Comm and from the municipalities, were there any risks identified?

[1:55 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes. There would have been a full risk assessment done in terms of the development of the business case, which is exactly what one would expect.

That’s the answer to the question. Yes, there was.

E. Sturko: So if there’s a natural disaster…. Thinking of our new system, thinking of some of the potential risks, how will the next gen 911 services be affected? Let’s say we have a natural disaster, something caused by climate change perhaps. If the internet service or cell services go down, how will this affect our 911 services?

Hon. M. Farnworth: One of the big advantages of next gen 911 that’s not available right now is if something happened, there would be a secondary centre that would be available to take over the tasks of the main centre.

E. Sturko: You had mentioned before domestic vio­lence. It actually would be awesome for someone to be able to be, perhaps, in hiding, not have to talk, to be able to have that real-time texting. It’s great. But can we get some more clarity or, perhaps, a timeline? A little bit more for British Columbians about when do we anticipate every community will be able to have this.

Right now we know that 93,500 people in British Columbia don’t have 911 service. Knowing how important this is, knowing that this technology could be life-saving for somebody, what does that look like? When can we anticipate this being rolled out for the rest of the province?

Hon. M. Farnworth: The member is correct. There are those areas that do not have 911 service. That’s why the connectivity initiatives underway by the government are critical. Our goal is to get that done by 2027. Then those communities, once they’re connected and then able to get 911, it would be next gen 911. Those services then start to be available.

E. Sturko: What type of work has been done in terms of quality control? Can you take us through that a little bit?

[2:00 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. Yes, there is quality assurance. That’s built into the $60 million that goes to UBCM, and it’s to deal with just what you have asked.

There are standards. The quality assurance is to ensure that those standards are met. Those standards are not just B.C. standards. They are, in fact, standards that are adopted and recognized as North American–wide.

M. Morris: I appreciate the proceedings here today. I’m operating remotely. There have been some issues with connectivity. I hope it doesn’t occur during these estimate processes here.

I want to thank my colleague from Surrey South for pinch-hitting for me, as I’m stuck here in Prince George, for a variety of different reasons. I think she’s done a good job for her first time up to bat during this process here.

I also recognize the learned and valued staff that the minister has sitting around him. I know they provide good input and advice. It’s good to see you folks again.

Just a comment. I’ve got a couple of questions I want to talk about, with respect to the priorities. The member for Abbotsford West went through some of the process questions that I was interested in as I listened through this debate so far. I guess I have to say that I haven’t been around as long as the minister has, but the magnitude of this process seems a little bit unusual at this particular time.

You know, I’m not supportive of the supplementary estimates. It appears, by the numbers here, that perhaps this government is making this a routine part of doing business, which I have trouble with. This should be for the extreme, unusual cases.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Again, I’ve had this mentioned by different folks in the community here. They lose confidence in the government’s ability to do proper budgeting in the process when we have numbers of this magnitude coming in as supplementary budget issues moving forward here.

Having said that, I’ll focus now on some of the issues. The minister was talking about priorities that his ministry was looking at. He had been approached by the Premier’s office, in my understanding, listening to the conversation earlier on, to come up with a shovel-ready project. They’ve chosen this one. It’s a large amount of money — there’s no question — and it’s within the area of responsibility for municipal governments, regional district governments. So it’s outside of the scope in a normal course of doing business.

A couple of questions. I just wondered why this one was chosen as a priority over, perhaps, looking at increased help for forensic labs to look at the backlog of laboratory analysis on drugs, considering the opiate crisis that we have, or firearms-related offences. Of course, I know that the minister has put some time into that.

The other issue that is causing a lot of police forces some concern is the encryption of cell phones, which are so critical in the criminal investigations they have, not only for the number of homicides and the gang activity that we see across the province but for other major investigations over the province here as well.

I’m just wondering: have the RCMP provided any multi-year plans looking for increases in these areas? If they have, I’m just wondering why the minister would not have considered those issues as a priority over this particular one with 911.

[2:05 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for his question. Those are all legitimate issues and priorities that work has been underway on in my ministry. In some cases, I know, the member, when he was on this side of the House, was involved in a number of those issues, and we’ve made progress on them.

There are two issues in particular about this decision — around why 911. I think it comes down to two things. One, this is one-time funding. It’s not for operational funding that goes on from year to year. That’s crucial in determining what projects can go ahead. The other, which is also important, is that the move to next gen 911 is mandated by the CRTC. It has to happen.

There’s a clear date by which it must be in place. Given the importance of 911 right across the province, questions have been asked by the opposition, and the UBCM and local governments have identified it as an issue of critical concern to them.

I don’t want to stray too much outside my ministry now. When I did have EMBC, for example…. Notification and all of those things tie into each other. They’re all part of what’s required, both legislatively and programmatically, but also in terms of, as I said, the CRTC and the mandate that it is putting in place.

When we have the ability to say, “Okay, we have funding that can go out” — in this case, in the case of supplemental estimates — based on what we’re seeing through the financial situation of the province, through the course of the year in my ministry, we go: “What have we got? What can we do that can achieve a whole series of objectives in public safety and that will have a significant impact?” This is it. This project is ready, it’s supported, and it’ll make a big difference.

At the end of the day, my job as minister is to make that decision on what priorities go forward. That’s why I made that decision. That being said, it does not take away from any of the other issues or priorities that I have on my desk. It is looking at everything and saying: “Okay, what is going to give us the biggest value that is going to have an impact?” This absolutely does. It meets that mandate of when something has to be done by.

M. Morris: I appreciate the response from the minister, and I certainly understand the list of pressures that he has on his desk at any given time.

I’m wondering if the minister can tell me what the next priority or the next two priorities would have been, on his list, that he could have turned his attention to. I say this because there are a couple of questions that I’m going to be asking a little bit later on and that might pertain to this.

[2:10 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member. I will say this, because these are supplementary estimates, and it really is just about this particular ex­penditure of money on this particular project. I know the member has been Solicitor General, so he understands and knows the different pressures in the ministry, and the competing issues that the ministry faces.

I would just say this. We’re going to be going into Solicitor General estimates later on this year. I think, because he and I have talked about it in the past, to me, the biggest priority, and I made the announcement earlier, was to deal with that issue around core policing. To me, that priority of getting that funding of the $235 million was absolutely crucial. That has been my, you know…. But that’s for another set of estimates.

In terms of these estimates, it’s about this. My decision was: “Look, if we’ve got one-time funding, this project will have the biggest impact and support across the province in terms of local governments, in terms of first responders, in terms of improving the ability to communicate.” As I said, it meets that mandated deadline, which we are required to meet.

It’s not one that we can say: “Oh, we’ll do a bit this year and a bit next year.” Sorry; local government can’t say that. They have to meet that deadline, and this funding allows them to do it. It takes a significant pressure, financial pressure, off them, and that’s a good thing.

M. Morris: I appreciate the minister’s response to that. Just a little bit more on this one particular issue here.

I look at, probably because I’m fairly up to date on a lot of the complex technical investigations that are being done across the province here…. I’m wondering whether or not the minister would have considered a one-time opportunity for the RCMP or police forces in British Columbia to upgrade their labs so that they can do that cell phone encryption in a very timely fashion, so that they’re not waiting for a year or more — for a lot of these gangsters, drug traffickers that are killing our vulnerable population with fentanyl-laced drugs — to solve a lot of these crimes. I think there may have been an opportunity there.

The minister has made his decision now to go with the upgrade for the 911 system. I know that’s what we’re dealing with in supplements today, but I think it’s also my job as critic here to find out why some of these other priorities may not have been looked at in favour of this particular one here.

Maybe just: does the minister see this as an issue, and was there any kind of a multi-year plan in front of him that provided him the opportunity to put some one-time funding into this capability for police forces in British Columbia?

The Chair: I would say, just a reminder, that, yes, we are on Vote 41(S), and that is about the local government next gen 911 readiness fund. I would hope that questions could be drawn to the supplementary estimates as opposed to other questions outside of the estimates, which can be raised in the main estimates, which will be coming soon.

M. Morris: Thanks, Chair. This is pertaining to the deci­sion to go in this direction. I think it is critical for us to understand why this decision was made. Then I’ll have some more questions in relation to how that is going to be rolled out whenever it’s approved here, but I do feel it’s a pertinent question to this issue.

The Chair: Totally appropriate to ask about the next gen and why this was selected. I think there was a question about multi-year funding, which was outside of the ambit of this committee hearing.

[2:15 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. I’ll make this observation. The decision to choose this particular initiative for funding does not take away from any of the work on any of the other priorities within my ministry and the priorities in regards to policing.

We have done and put in place a significant amount of work on…. Well, for example, the forensics firearm was set up by our government, and this initiative is supported by the police. This is a key priority for them as well, just as it is for other first responders.

The other thing I want to stress is that this is one-time funding. A lot of other things require operational funding on a multi-year basis. They go through the process of my ministry, determining priorities for ongoing funding, for new programs. That’s the regular work of the ministry.

In this case, the issue is that we have the ability to do some one-time funding that impacts…. It’s coming out of my ministry. When I look at it, I go: “What is going to have, as I said a moment ago, the biggest impact?” I’ll say, given the questions that the opposition has asked in the past around emergency response around 911 and given the demand from local government in terms of the pressures that they’re facing and the ability to have a significantly improved system which can — as I’ve mentioned around domestic violence, for example — allow texting so you’re not having to be on a land line….

Being able to point to exactly where somebody is assists first responders in a host of ways. Those are the kinds of things that police want to have, that firefighters want to have, that ambulance wants to have and, just as importantly, that the public wants to know that we have.

When that’s also mandated by the CRTC at the federal level and all provinces are engaged in having to implement these changes and we’re all using the same technology, if we are…. And there’s a mandate date. So to make sure that we’re able to do that and able to assist in what is going to be a significant…. I absolutely think that that was and is the right choice. That being said, so are other priorities just as important to me and will continue to receive the attention and the work that they require and deserve from my ministry and our government.

M. Morris: I’ve just got a few more questions. I won’t be too much longer here, and we can wrap it up.

The minister mentioned earlier that he chose the option of this one-time infusion of money into the upgrade for the 911 system versus a telephone or cell phone surcharge. I just want to explore that a little bit more, because it’s my role to ensure that public funds are spent in the best way possible, and if there are other options available, we should be exploring them as well.

Now, maybe perhaps from the business case that was submitted by E-Comm or the regional districts, can the minister…? Does he have any idea of how many 911 calls are received from cell phones across the province in a given year?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question.

Right now it’s about 60 percent cell phone and 40 percent land line. I couldn’t give you an exact number of the number of calls, but what I can tell you is, and it is no surprise, that the number of land lines is decreasing exponentially.

[2:20 p.m.]

To give you an example, we have a family friend who was complaining about budgets. My partner asked him: “Well, how much are you spending?” He goes: “I spend this much” — on your bill — “and I’m spending this much on my land line.” It’s like: “Why are you spending that money on your land line? You don’t use it. Get rid of it.” That’s exactly what they did. I think they saved something like 65 or 70 bucks a month. They had some…. We go: “No wonder you’re having money problems.”

But that’s the situation that we’re seeing. Technology is advancing so quickly that we are seeing less and less use of the land line and more and more use on cell phones. The advances in cell phones and their ability in terms of texting, their ability in terms of images — all of those things are playing into a direction that is not going to change and is only moving forward.

M. Morris: I think people get attached to their land-line phone number. Some of them have had them for decades, and they don’t want to let that go. I know that’s the case with some folks that I know.

When it comes to funding for 911, is there a surcharge, or is there presently some process in place to recap some of the 911 costs through a land line? Is that added to a phone bill in British Columbia?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes, there is a levy on land lines but not one on cell phones.

M. Morris: Does that levy also apply to voice-over Internet service providers? When they use a land line that’s connected to the Internet, does that levy apply in those situations as well?

Hon. M. Farnworth: Yes, it does.

M. Morris: When we consider that the cell phones, as you’ve alluded to, are the communications device of choice for most British Columbians…. British Columbians are quite mobile. They go from community to community and from regional district to regional district. A lot of them are in provincial parks when they call their 911 service, in areas outside of where they pay their taxes. This has an impact on some of these lower-populated regional districts that end up with a big tourism influx and a higher number of 911 calls going through the service there. These communities have to bear the brunt of those costs.

Does the minister think that a 911 surcharge for cell phones is an option that should be looked at or explored now or in the future?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I appreciate the question from the member, and I’ll make the observation that I made earlier on this particular issue. This is about the implementation of the new next-gen 911, so it’s about the hardware and the soft component of that — the training and the audits and the communication and those sorts of things. Some provinces have gone to a levy in order to fund that. We, along with Ontario, made the decision to do a block grant to local government to enable implementation.

As I said, somewhat tongue in cheek, to my colleague across the way, if we were to put in place a cell phone levy for this, I would bet some money that you and other members of the opposition would be standing up and asking questions such as: “Why are you making cell phones more expensive for people in British Columbia when, in this country, we already have some of the highest cell phone charges of any jurisdiction in the western world?”

I will just say we made the decision that what would be the most effective way was a block grant to E-Comm and to local government for the implementation. I think it was the right decision.

[2:25 p.m.]

M. Morris: I appreciate the minister’s response. We’re always looking for something to debate, as if we don’t have enough on our list already. I appreciate the answers from the minister, and I appreciate the staff being here to help answer the questions.

We don’t have any further questions with respect to this supplement.

Hon. M. Farnworth: I want to thank my colleague across the way for the questions that she asked. I know we committed to get, I think, a piece of information for her. We will make sure that happens.

I thank my critic for his interventions.

The Chair: Seeing no further questions, shall Vote 41(S) pass?

A division has been called.

[2:30 p.m. - 2:35 p.m.]

All right. Thank you, Members. The vote is Vote 41(S). It is the Ministry of Solicitor General and Public Safety, supplementary estimates.

Vote 41(S): ministry operations, $150,000,000 — approved on the following division:

YEAS — 41
Babchuk	Bailey	Bains
Beare	Begg	Chant
Chen	Chow	Coulter
Dean	D’Eith	Dix
Dykeman	Elmore	Farnworth
Fleming	Glumac	Greene
Heyman	Kahlon	Kang
Leonard	Lore	Ma
Malcolmson	Olsen	Osborne
Paddon	Ralston	Rankin
Rice	Routley	Russell
Sandhu	Sharma	Simons
Sims	R. Singh	Starchuk
Walker		Yao
NAYS — 19
Ashton	Banman	Bernier
Bond	Clovechok	Davies
de Jong	Kyllo	Letnick
Merrifield	Milobar	Morris
Paton	Ross	Shypitka
Stone	Sturko	Tegart
	Wat

[2:40 p.m.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: I move the committee rise, report resolution and completion of the supplementary estimates of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 2:42 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Committee of Supply (Section B), having reported resolution, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I call the supplementary estimates for the Ministry of Health.

Committee of Supply

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES:
MINISTRY OF HEALTH

The House in Committee of Supply (Section B); S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.

The committee met at 2:45 p.m.

The Chair: Of course, before we get started here, just that we are here looking at supplementary estimates for the Ministry of Health. It’s a very focused set of questions. Of course, it’s not the main Health estimates, which will be coming up. I’d, of course, ask members to keep their questions focused on the supplemental estimates — the minister as well, yes.

Hon. A. Dix: I was going to say I have the answers, hon. Speaker.

On Vote 32(S): ministry operations, $150,000,000.

Hon. A. Dix: What I just propose to do at the beginning is sort of lay out what the supplementary estimate is. Then, I know, the member will have, and members will have, lots of questions about that. What we’re doing is asking the House today to approve the $150 million to the B.C. Cancer Foundation to support cancer research and a highly skilled cancer care workforce.

I want to speak a little bit about the foundation. I know members of the House will know the foundation well. It’s British Columbia’s largest charity in terms of charitable donations last year. It’s extraordinarily well-run and plays a central role not just in the lives of people engaged with cancer, who are diagnosed with cancer and who work on cancer issues, but of the whole community. The B.C. Cancer Foundation is the fundraising partner of B.C. Cancer and supports, in its own way, more than 80,000 patients every year.

I’ll just give you a sense of, recently, some of the things that foundation has done here in B.C. in advancing cancer care. The first population-based lung cancer screening program, launched in May 2022. They played an integral role in that; we’ve spoken about that before in this House. The first effective prevention strategy discovered and deployed for ovarian cancer. The first cancer centre to effectively treat a patient based on the DNA of their cancer, which is obviously important. Their work on the evolution of cancer over time and the development of advanced forms of radiation therapy is now used worldwide.

The B.C. Cancer Foundation obviously plays a central role. I think what’s also to be understood is just how successful and connected to community they are. Last year, the B.C. Cancer Foundation raised $77.1 million. That wasn’t based on government grants such as this. In fact, I think only $4 million of that came from various government grants. That’s from the community.

Certainly, in response to the action that I hope the House will approve today, the foundation is setting its sights high. I’m not going to make their announcements in terms of their targets, and so on, but you can imagine that their current campaign, which is called the Beyond Belief campaign, has a number of priorities: advancing innovation, investing in leading-edge research; accelerating access, bringing world-class care closer to home for every British Columbian; and activating the world’s best, expanding and empowering B.C. cancer teams across B.C.

I want to talk about what the grant will do and then sort of the detailed sublines of that grant, and then I know we’ll have an opportunity to discuss each of those in detail. The $150 million grant to the B.C. Cancer Foundation will support cancer research and attract high-calibre talent needed to implement the overall plan and meet key priorities related to accessing specialized and essentially new and novel treatments, and integrating research into cancer care.

The capacity to undertake research and integrate scientific advances in the world, as we all know, is such a positive thing and is occurring at an extraordinary rate. Our involvement in that here in B.C. is critical to ensuring the best cancer care to patients and, of course, the best cancer care for generations to come.

Specifically, this money will fund delivering clinical trials across all cancer centres in the province, allowing for greater access for patients living outside the large centres to participate in clinical trials. That is, I think, of fundamental importance and of fundamental value. Increasing radiation oncology trials that study treatment approaches, which require fewer visits and precision radiotherapy research to enhance efficacy, while reducing toxicity from radiation treatments. Anyone who has themselves re­ceived, or has had a family member receive, radiation treatments will understand the value of that.

[2:50 p.m.]

Enhancing capacity and genomic testing to deliver the optimal treatment for every patient. This includes improvement and development of cost-effective gene panel assays for cancers; the continued development of novel gene assays that are performed on blood samples, cell-free DNA rather than biopsies, reducing health care costs and allowing longitudinal monitoring of patients. They are rapidly becoming an emerging standard in cancer medicine.

In addition, expanding access to new diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, treatments and technologies; establishing innovative cancer treatment programs; supporting emerging multidisciplinary research programs; enhancing capacity in population health and health economics research; providing research start-up and seed grants to attract research talent and support research trainees. The B.C. Cancer Foundation has created a new program to attract trainees in cancer research to B.C. Cancer. The Rising Star Awards build specific criteria to ensure that other students — women, Indigenous and from underrepresented communities — get equitable access to scholarship support.

Creating four endowed leadership and research chairs within the foundation to help recruit and retain key clinical researchers that are vital to the long-term success of B.C. Cancer. Creating scholarships within the foundation to support schooling for critical cancer medical positions, such as radiation therapists and technologists and medical physicists.

Supporting equipment for clinical trials. This includes support for the acquisition and installation of a state-of-the art, ultra-high-sensitivity long axial field of view PET CT scanner, which could upgrade one of the instruments to be installed at the Vancouver centre. This PET CT scanner is more than ten times faster than the current state-of-the-art equipment.

To lay out the numbers of the $150 million, it’ll be invested by the following breakdown. Clinical and multidisciplinary research: $55.7 million. Research equipment and infrastructure: $34.3 million. Start-up and seed grants: $19 million. Recruitment and retention initiatives: $13.5 million. Training and education: $4.5 million. And endowed research chair positions: $23 million.

The last time we did supplementary estimates in Health, members will remember, we were addressing similar questions of research in terms of a long-term investment in research for Genome B.C. and the Michael Smith Foundation. That was the last supplementary estimate we did here. I think it’s fair to say that these research investments in Michael Smith and Genome B.C., which started under the NDP government in the 1990s and were supported by the Liberal government subsequent to that and then our government subsequent to that, have been used in such a process here.

The B.C. Cancer Foundation and this funding will benefit cancer patients, benefit research and help us to recruit high-quality people and cutting-edge researchers. I think it will also, more broadly — and this is beyond cancer — support the innovation economy. I think, therefore, this opportunity, using the supplementary estimates here in partnership with the B.C. Cancer Foundation, is something I hope all members of the House will support.

M. Bernier: I didn’t want to interrupt the flow of the minister, but I just wanted to bring it to the House’s attention that we do not have quorum and should not be continuing without it.

The Chair: There are ten members. We do have quorum, including the Chair. There’s now an 11th member. But I appreciate the support for the Chair to ensure we have quorum. We have 11. Quorum is ten, so we did have quorum.

S. Bond: One would hope we would be able to drum up quorum in the Legislature. Thank you to my colleague for pointing that out.

I do appreciate the opening comments from the minister, but I want to remind us why we’re here today. Certainly it isn’t to question the merit of the work that is done by the B.C. Cancer Foundation. I appreciate the minister reading into the record a number of things that this grant will likely do or accomplish. So that is exactly the line of questioning that I hope to undertake over the next few hours as we go through the supplementary estimates.

I think it’s important to remember that the reason we’re here is because the Ministry of Health overspent its budget. That’s what supplementary estimates are about.

[2:55 p.m.]

While, certainly, the importance of the work that will be done with the amount of money…. It may seem like a small amount of money to the Ministry of Health, $150 million, but it’s a big amount of money to the people of British Columbia. So we are going to talk about what it potentially will do. Before we do that….

When you look at the definition of “supplementary estimates” that is provided to legislators…. Supplementary estimates actually grant approval for one-time expenditures to cover additional spending on items that were unknown at budget time.

Now, this money is being provided to the B.C. Cancer Foundation to support cancer research and do a number of other things. We will walk through each of them. To be clear, I’m not sure how that could not have been known at budget time.

Let’s just start with a basic question. Could the minister confirm for me what the Health Ministry budget is?

Hon. A. Dix: I just take a different view of what supplementary estimates are. This is a decision to spend $150 million more, in this fiscal year, for this purpose. It’s not because we are over budget or over the previous estimate that we’re doing that. It’s because, for this purpose…. We’re seeking to be granted $150 million more to support the B.C. Cancer Foundation.

With respect to the main estimates last year, which we debated last May, and the estimates…. There are, obviously, different numbers, which we will be debating soon, either later in March or in April of this year.

The main estimates were $25,455,895,000.The supplementary estimates would take that to $25,605,895,000.

S. Bond: I’m certainly not going to quibble about the definition of “supplementary estimates.”

The reason we are here having this discussion is because this is outside of a budget that we debated previously. It is outside of the amount that the Ministry of Health was provided in terms of the work that they needed to do. It was not anticipated, or it was not necessarily identified as recently as the last quarterly report we had.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

I certainly want to make sure, as we proceed through this discussion…. This is not about the B.C. Cancer Foun­dation and whether or not we need to do research and a whole pile of things that are included here.

We have a Health Ministry that has, undoubtedly, the largest ministry and budget in government. We are here today debating $150 million that was not included in the original budget estimates or plan of this ministry.

I would like to start there. I’m wondering if the minister could confirm that he received, or the ministry received, a request from the Ministry of Finance to identify items for which surplus dollars could be utilized.

Hon. A. Dix: The Premier, I think, has been clear for some time that government would seek to use the extra­ordinary revenue improvement in the ’22-23 budget year to support British Columbians. This estimate most clearly does that.

The member will know we regularly engage with the B.C. Cancer Foundation on opportunities. It’s clear that they are an outstanding agency that will use this money for the stated purposes of the supplementary estimates. That’s why we brought this forward. Obviously, it was subsequently approved by the government and included in the budget as a supplementary estimate. I think all of that is straightforward.

The reason we’re debating it here today is because it is a priority. We need to bring such a request back to the Legislature for debate, and that’s what we’re doing.

S. Bond: The purpose of having a discussion and debate about supplementary estimates is because it is about choice. It is about the minister, obviously, with the advice and suggestions and partnership of his ministry team. I know that team, and I know what an excellent job they do.

[3:00 p.m.]

This is not about that. This is not about the Cancer Foundation. It is about a choice that was made to spend $150 million. That’s in the context of an environment where we have significant concerns about cancer care in British Columbia. No one is disputing that this isn’t a worthy organization and, heaven knows, we need research. So we’re going to go through those items that are noted.

I would like the minister, if he could, to confirm then for me that he as minister, or the ministry, was approached by the Ministry of Finance and asked to identify candidates for the use of the surplus.

Hon. A. Dix: I think the answer is yes. I think, on the research question…. I think we’ll have the opportunity, and I know the member and I will, I expect, be discussing this at some length during the main estimates coming up, with respect to the cancer plan and other issues, which are immediate and operating issues.

I think this is, from my point of view, a very appropriate way to use the kind of funding for supplementary estimates that the Ministry of Health has asked for in the past, for Michael Smith and for Genome B.C., which I think has been quite effective. It allowed us to significantly increase investments in both those institutions to the benefit of all people in B.C. and, again, this is the same thing.

But yes, were asked. At the same time, we’ve been engaging with the foundation in these very priorities in the recent period and obviously consulting with the foundation widely because of its deep understanding of cancer issues and because of its role in cancer care in the province.

That’s the circumstance, and I think that’s the response that the member was looking for.

S. Bond: I appreciate the answer was yes — that ministries were asked to come up with ideas, basically, to use the surplus.

Were there any…? I would like to follow up with the minister about…. Was there a framework for bringing forward recommendations? Were ministries simply told: “Here; we have a bucket of money”?

One of the things I’d like to point out to the minister is that I have been here, as he has, for a significant period of time, and a supplementary estimate isn’t unusual in and of itself, but I can assure you, then, that when we’re approaching literally…. I think we’re over $2 billion in supplementary estimates. That is not a minor issue. So understanding how the Health Ministry was given approval to spend $150 million that was not identified in their previous budget is actually pretty important.

Could the minister outline for me: was there a framework? Was there any suggestion of criteria that might be used to identify the issues to bring forward for those surplus funds?

Hon. A. Dix: I think this is exactly the kind of funding that’s envisioned by supplementary estimates, because it is one-time funding by definition. When we present a cancer plan again, and we’ll debate that at some point later, the issues at B.C. Cancer and issues in cancer care now and into the future that are appropriately operating funding are initiatives that are ongoing.

If you’re going to, I don’t know, increase services, increase the number of surgeries, whatever the plan you would have for any area of health care, then you would have that in the base of operating funding. That’s what will be discussed in the main estimates.

In this case, this research provides, I think, long-term supports and benefits to British Columbians. It’s being situated with the foundation, and the member and I agree…. I’m not suggesting, by the way, that she doesn’t agree with this. I’m just saying that the B.C. Cancer Foundation, which is an excellent place to support all the work that’s being done in cancer….

In addition, it’s consistent with previous supplementary estimates for this kind of research effort, including with the Michael Smith Foundation and Genome B.C. So on all of those grounds, this represents, I think, the exact, appropriate use for a supplementary estimate.

[3:05 p.m.]

S. Bond: Thank you to the minister for that response. We’re certainly…. The good thing is that there is consistency in terms of the answers from ministers who are facing supplementary estimate debates, because it has been made clear that a call went out. It was: “We have surplus funds, and we’re going to spend them. What are your candidates for that amount of money?”

As I said, it is not an insignificant amount of money. It is, I think, in excess…. Actually, I will have that here when I look at the homework that I did. Yes, we’re at $2.7 billion in appropriations that are being considered in the supplementary estimates. That is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a small amount of money.

The call went out. The minister, obviously, was asked to look for a way to invest in something. Can the minister describe for me how the need for this one-time expenditure was identified? I know the Cancer Foundation does great work. How was it identified? Had the Cancer Foundation made a request for additional funding of $150 million? How did the minister get to the place that this was the item that he took forward for spending of surplus dollars?

Hon. A. Dix: Of course the B.C. Cancer Foundation — the member will know this, because we’ve talked about it before — has come forward with the largest, most ambitious fundraising campaign in history, with high ambitions in terms of what can be achieved with that money in terms of building research in the long term.

Again, we’ll be discussing this at a later time, so I’m not going to go into what we announced and make the case or anything like that. We’ll have the opportunity to have that discussion later. But obviously, the issue of cancer is a central focus of mine and of British Columbians, all the time. So when we look at supplementary estimates, what can you do at the end of the fiscal year under these circumstances?

Just like with Michael Smith and with Genome, this seemed to me — in my meetings with the foundation, my work with cancer — a natural opportunity to advance that work. It’s of fundamental importance. Sometimes what happens, I think…. One of the reasons why research sometimes gets left to the side is because there’s so much urgency in the present. The member and I have had some of these discussions, so we know there is urgency in the present in the Legislature this week. There’s always urgency in the present.

This is an opportunity to do something in the coming years in terms of building out the highest level of research capacity. Many of our top clinicians in cancer care value and see research when you’re recruiting people to the province, when you’re building out your network, when you want to be on the cutting edge of a change, which is constantly on the cutting edge. This is such a positive thing for patients. This was a real opportunity to do this.

Certainly I engage with the B.C. Cancer Foundation often. Last year they fully briefed me on their campaign that they were coming forward with and the ambitions of that campaign and the possibilities of that campaign. Concurrently, of course, we were working on these issues, as the member will know.

I saw this as a real opportunity that probably, I’d say, I was thinking of before the call went out. When the call went out, this was, obviously, with our team, the exact kind of thing you’d want to do for such a call: boost research in cancer and to put B.C. on the cutting edge of cancer research. This supports our whole effort in cancer, I’d argue. That’s why we put forward this amount of money.

S. Bond: Thank you to the minister for that response. I certainly understand and have experienced the list of requests that come to a minister. But it is about choice.

I also understand the nature of a grant and the process of year-end funding. So that does provide some limitations in terms of the kinds of things that can be funded. But it is also in the context of a health care system where the needs are overwhelming.

The minister knows that every single day, both he and I hear stories, and my colleagues and his colleagues, about the desperation that exists, especially in cancer care, at the moment.

[3:10 p.m.]

Just to pursue the process for a bit longer, if the minister would indulge me. Could the minister identify the point in time or a rough timeline for when the call went out in terms of looking for projects for additional spending?

Hon. A. Dix: I know the member knows this, having been a minister, but the broader community may not know that the process for year-end actually begins the previous fall. In the absence, even in advance of a call, when it is looking at year-end requests…. I will give the member an example of such a request that we did for multiple years, last year, for the Alzheimer Society for the First Link program, which has traditionally been funded by our government and then by the previous government at year-end.

What you’re looking at is there’s a look at year-end that begins, probably…. I would look at, first, in the mid to early fall, I’d say. In that period, that September, October period. We’re looking at, “Okay, where are we at, and what are the opportunities here?” What are the things that we’ve traditionally funded at year-end? Some of them going back decades at year-end…. What are the opportunities for that? We start that process. What are the possibilities.

We’ve done this a number of times in the past. For example, to support capital expenditures by physicians, we did a year-end grant, which is not part of a supplementary estimate process. So the Doctors of B.C., for example, which has served them well as they’ve dealt with issues around the province with respect to primary care. That process probably starts September and October of every year.

As we go through, we get requests from different places in that process, including from members of the opposition. I have some good news for one or two of them, I’ll just say, but that’s a different process. It’s not the supplementary estimates process, so I will not be distracted from my laser focus on that process. That’s the process, and then, obviously, with the new Premier and with the fiscal position of the province, the call-outs subsequent to that here.

We were, in that sense, ready for it and looking at the opportunities, particularly in cancer, because there are the immediate concerns, which are appropriately what we debate in the main budget and the main estimates. What this does is support that and invests in the long term, which sometimes is a challenge for governments when faced with immediate demands, particularly in health care. I think this was exactly the kind of research support we provide.

Often, year-end requests — again, I know the member knows this, but for the benefit of the House and the people watching — are research requests at year-end because of this very reason. We get those every year as well. As for the priority given, I think we’re going to go through the details of this, but I know the member understands, as I know all members understand, the priority that has to be given to this area and for B.C. to be in the forefront of cancer research, which is deeply connected to the delivery of cancer services in our province and always has been. That’s why this was an obvious priority.

I’ve had, myself, meetings with the B.C. Cancer Foun­dation on some of these very questions well in advance of that process. Of course when the situation went out, we were able to act on that and come forward and ultimately have this $150 million approved. I’m obviously very pleased and grateful for that.

S. Bond: I appreciate the minister walking through the fact that ministries and ministers do keep a list of things that in many ways they are hopeful there will be year-end funds. I can understand that the Ministry of Health was at the ready when the call came. Obviously with a new Premier and the opportunity to spend that request, at least for specific asks, was likely made post the swearing in of the new Premier, so from the November time frame.

[3:15 p.m.]

Could the minister identify for me what process was used? For example, was a Treasury Board application or presentation made? Did this go through the Treasury Board process?

Hon. A. Dix: Yes.

S. Bond: Could the minister remind me: is he a member of Treasury Board?

Hon. A. Dix: Yes, I am. It’s sitting right now.

S. Bond: I don’t know whether to congratulate him or not. Could the minister tell me whether it was a minor item?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, it was an item. I mean, the member will know — she’s very experienced — that the Treasury Board process is a confidential process, but it’s obviously approved by Treasury Board. I believe very passionately in the item.

She was a member of Treasury Board. I’ve been a member of Treasury Board since 2017. The first Minister of Finance that I served with on Treasury Board told me that they didn’t usually allow the Minister of Health to be on Treasury Board. I don’t know why that was; anyway, they let me on. So yes, I’ve been through that process.

The issue is that there was clearly an item on the Treasury Board agenda, and I think you would characterize $150 million as important.

S. Bond: I certainly would, when you think about the size of some ministries in this government. In any government, that is a substantive amount of money. Again, that’s why this discussion is important, when we’re talking about supplementary estimates, when the total spending is $2.7 billion of supplementary estimates — funds that were not part of the budget process previously. It is important that we have substantive discussion about this.

I’m interested. If the minister could just expand on the amount for me. Did the ministry decide that $150 million was the number and then go and make that ask? Or was it the reverse? Did the Ministry of Finance say: “Here’s an allocation. What would fit from your wish list?”

Hon. A. Dix: What we did I went over earlier. I will just briefly again lay out what the funding is for. We’re going to go through, I think, each of these lines as we go forward.

It’s $55.7 million for clinical multidisciplinary research. Significant work was done, obviously, by the Provincial Health Services Authority and the B.C. Cancer Agency. We had discussions with the B.C. Cancer Foundation and our ministry to determine these numbers. Then $34.3 million on research equipment and infrastructure, $19 million for start-up and seed grants, $13.5 million for recruitment and retention initiatives, $4.5 million for training and then the endowed position of $23 million.

The endowed position and all of these items are based on: “What do we see ourselves doing?” In discussing this with the foundation, $150 million was seen as the appropriate number. We put forward this request based on that and not on: “Oh, Health is getting X amount of money.”

The member has talked about $2.7 billion. This is our one item in the supplementary estimates for $150 million. Obviously Health gets a good share of the main estimates budget, which we will be discussing in a little while. So $150 million, based on the work we did, was the right amount. We didn’t start with the $150 million; we started with what we wanted to do. The $150 million became the number, based on all these different items that we wanted to achieve in supporting the foundation in this contribution.

S. Bond: I appreciate that. I have another question in terms of how the minister landed on this particular amount. There’s one thing that would be most helpful. Obviously, I do not have the advantage of having the breakdown of the $150 million. I can certainly wait for the Blues to come out, but I would prefer it if the minister could share those specific amounts, so that as I go through my questions — and my colleague is going to be asking some questions today as well — we have the advantage of knowing what the breakdown was.

[3:20 p.m.]

I’m wondering. The minister has described the process of trying to figure out…. There are so many needs and so many worthy places that money could be allocated. Were there other considerations made by the minister? He, obviously, and his team landed on B.C. Cancer Foundation with a number of things. We’re going to go through those. Were there other alternatives considered when looking at where to land on additional funding that would be available?

Hon. A. Dix: The member will know that in the year-end process, there are a number of priorities. This particular priority — to my way of thinking, because of what we’d done before on research — for a supplementary estimates request seemed to be the appropriate investment.

Obviously, we’re concurrently doing work on the B.C. cancer plan. I think it’s fair to say to the member: we don’t want to characterize what $150 million is. It’s a breathtaking investment in the cancer research future of the province that comes, I think, at the right moment for that. As I described the year-end process earlier, there are a number of requests that one looks at, but for this supplementary estimates process, this was certainly one that we gave priority to in support for the research.

Of course, because the foundation is doing that research, just as with Michael Smith or the genome…. We make research-dependent decisions that are independent but, really, support our overall effort in cancer. We want to follow the answers where they are. This was, I think, therefore, for this process, an investment that made a lot of sense.

We also have to continue and are continuing to support — we gave a very large contribution to Genome B.C., the Michael Smith Foundation through supplementary estimates two years ago, I think. That’s also an excellent way to promote research. Both our government and previous governments have done that, including during supplementary estimates. For all those reasons, it made sense for one time.

B.C. Cancer Foundation is an outstanding organization, able to receive such an amount of money, to manage it and to deliver what we all collectively want it to do. It gives momentum to a part of the cancer plan that isn’t immediately about services or demands or the increasing number of people with cancer. It focuses on improving cancer care and supporting excellence in cancer care. For all those reasons, it made a lot of sense.

S. Bond: I appreciate that response. Certainly, the minister, as I have been, is a member of Treasury Board. I want to just have the minister confirm for me that a regular process was followed through Treasury Board, that this was an item that was reviewed, rigorously debated and considered. That is the job of Treasury Board when we are expending public dollars.

I fully understand the nature of Treasury Board, having been there as vice-chair for a number of years. I understand the confidential nature of it, but was the process followed in presenting a request to Treasury Board: a rigorous review, with, ultimately, Treasury Board staff reviewing it; political approval; and the allocation given final approval?

Hon. A. Dix: Yes. The process, just in general, for Treasury Board. Again, I know the member knows that; I know the former Minister of Education knows this. Just because we’re having the debates and so that we understand, generally speaking, what happens in government….

[3:25 p.m.]

This can happen even if money is already allocated, because you still have to come back with the detailed submissions. It starts with…. In this case, we were doing work in the year-end — and, obviously, doing the work that everybody knows about — in developing a ten-year cancer plan.

The call went out. We felt this was an excellent proposal and engaged with Treasury Board — in advance, even, I suspect, of the proposal coming forward. The treasury support submission goes in. It’s developed by staff. Version 12 gets signed by me. I’m kidding. It gets developed by staff. I’m very easygoing about these things. It’s developed by staff. Then I sign off on the Treasury Board request. It goes to Treasury Board.

Sometimes the analysis, as the member will know, would be concurrent. Because Treasury Board staff, especially in the budget season, are so busy, we don’t surprise them. They don’t have to wait for the sign-off to begin the work. They do the work together, the people who are in Treasury Board.

I don’t want to describe it as some sort of special, secret chamber. What happens is what happens ordinarily: you have a proposal that goes forward. It gets analyzed by staff, and then a decision is made, either by the Minister of Finance sometimes and then later approved by Treasury Board, or by the Treasury Board itself. Then all of those decisions are ultimately reported out to cabinet. That’s just the general process.

There used to be something called an after-school special. They had a thing in the United States: “How a Bill Becomes a Law.” Well, that’s my after-school special for Treasury Board.

S. Bond: Thank you very much. I do want to see, I will look forward to seeing, the breakdown of the $150 million. It will probably be helpful to some of the questions, because we have a long list of things that are attributed to this $150 million.

I want to just reflect on the fact that this grant has now become one of the key components of the ten-year cancer plan. It is noted in the press release that the minister and the Premier proudly announced. I just want to point out that, again, supplementary estimates are about expenditures that were not considered as part of the main budget estimates. In fact, they require authorization of this chamber, retroactively.

The ten-year cancer plan…. Again, I’m going to keep saying it, because the last thing I want is to have someone tweeting out that the MLA for Prince George–Valemount doesn’t think that money going to the B.C. Cancer Foundation is worthwhile. Nothing could be further from the truth. But our job is to look at it. When you have $2.7 billion of spending, and when you line up what the spending is on, they literally have been the foundation of the press releases that have been pouring out of the Premier’s office.

The ten-year cancer strategy was not a surprise. In fact, the previous Premier announced that it would be in place. He announced it in 2020. Now, the grant that we are speaking about today forms a significant part of the background of a program that was announced in 2020: there would be a plan coming. I admit that this is a lot of money. We will discuss the virtues of the breakdown, of how that money is going to be spent, but this strategy is not a surprise. It was announced three years ago.

Now, we find that one of the key components of the cancer strategy is actually a supplementary estimate. That is a concern for me. Obviously, British Columbians were promised a ten-year cancer strategy. Here we are in 2023. We’re finally seeing a ten-year cancer action plan.

Let me start with this, then. The amount that we are discussing today in supplementary estimates is actually $150 million being granted to the B.C. Cancer Foundation.

[3:30 p.m.]

The cancer action plan was announced, which is a grant to the B.C. Cancer Foundation to support cancer research and all of the things that minister outlined. We’re going to go through them, because the minister put them on the record. The amount announced is $170 million. Can the minister describe for me the difference between the supplementary estimate of $150 million and the announced $170 million?

Hon. A. Dix: The difference is this. We’re seeking $150 million of that amount, the research component, through the supplementary estimate. The other $20 million will be covered through existing resources, and that money is for travel and that, but that’s part of the existing resources of the Ministry of Health.

We made a request for a supplementary estimate, and the other $20 million in this fiscal year would be to support travel, and that’s within the existing estimate of the Ministry of Health. That’s the difference between the two.

The $170 million…. We’re asking for the $150 million today, which is the research component. The travel component, which is a further $20 million, is in the current main budget of the Ministry of Health, and the money had been allocated against that budget.

S. Bond: Thank you very much to the minister.

Can the minister just confirm for me what should be a fairly obvious answer? Did the Ministry of Health expend its entire budget allocation?

Hon. A. Dix: Clearly not. I don’t want to do one of those answers which is cute.

We’re at Q3-and-a-half. We’re 11/12ths of the way through the fiscal year. We’re spending $2 billion a month. We’re obviously not there. It’s often a challenge managing that budget. We do a lot of work, and that’s why we started the year-end very early, just to make sure that we’re on track.

I think the budget of the Ministry of Health is on track, but $150 million contribution to the B.C. Cancer Foundation I think met the criteria of what the Premier was looking for. It meets a major public priority. It makes things better for people in the province, and it met the standard of the supplementary estimates.

So I don’t think that’s correct to say. I expect, and it’s my obligation, in fact, to bring the Ministry of Health budget in on budget. I can tell you that it will be brought in on budget.

What you do…. Remember, we have that. We also have…. There are some contingency budgets, particularly with respect to COVID-19, to continue to do significant effort with the vaccination campaign that continues to be provincewide, for example. So we have those multiple budgets, but I would expect the budget to come in on budget, but we are, as I say, not through our budget yet.

When you’re spending, as you do in the Ministry of Health, a significant amount…. I could break it down by day and by hour, but it’s a significant amount in that budget, obviously. We’re 11/12ths of the way through, and managing the budget at year-end is an important matter. That’s why governments, dating back a long time, probably, I would guess, back to the 1970s, have used year-end in the budget in this way — to fund the priorities.

The challenges is — and we’ve had this discussion, the member and I and, I think, her predecessors from Kelowna–Lake Country and from Kelowna-Mission — the important issues that happen consistently at year-end, year unto year unto year. First Link is an example of that, and whether it’s better or not to put those into the base of a ministry expenditure, that’s been typically how we’ve done it.

We’ve taken advantage of opportunities where there’s room in the budget to ensure that the Alzheimer Society has a couple of years. I’ve tried, in the case of that funding allocation, to make sure they always had a couple of years in advance so they weren’t coming up to a fiscal cliff for a program that is so vital to British Columbians, for example. So that’s the kind of work that happens at the end of fiscal year.

I think our budget in the Ministry of Health is fine, but this is a significant item and appropriate for a supplementary estimate.

[3:35 p.m.]

S. Bond: I know that the minister will forgive me for reminding him that some governments, if they didn’t bring their budget in and balance a) their ministry and b) the government budget, paid a fiscal price for that. This minister will not face that should his budget not be balanced.

I want to just pursue with the minister for a moment…. It is devastating to hear the word “cancer.” I understand, and the minister has provided me with a sense of his rationale for the choice he made here, but I remain deeply concerned about the day-to-day situation in our health care system related to cancer care and physicians and a whole bunch of other things, which he and I will debate and discuss in the main estimates.

Again to the minister, what was the tipping point for making a decision to focus on research — $150 million of money that was made available when the Premier’s office put out a call — and to not make the choice to think about what helps us in the immediate term?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, I think the short answer…. Again, we’re going to have this debate about assurances we have. But this is also an opportunity to take some very significant action working with the foundation to improve things now but also in the near term. Having this, I think it’s fair to call it, breathtaking investment to the foundation and in research supports all of our efforts. I think sometimes we have this debate, and we hear it sometimes around the Provincial Health Services Authority. You’ll say that there are this many people, and most of the people earning the top dollar…. Nineteen of the top 20 people earning at the PHSA, including B.C. Cancer, are doctors; six of them are oncologists.

What you want to do is recruit some of the best researchers and clinicians in the world. Often our clinicians are 70 percent clinicians and 30 percent researchers. So this opportunity to drive and demonstrate a long-term commitment in cancer research, to use this opportunity in March — and you can’t do that for operating funding, really, in a supplementary estimate of this kind — is, I think, an excellent way of improving recruitment and retention, driving research and bringing about the kind of change you want.

The foundation is ideally suited to house that effort and is engaging itself in a major fundraising campaign on the same initiatives, to which this gives even more mo­men­tum. I think this is building support for cancer care, for research in the community that goes well beyond even the expenditure of $150 million.

I’m not going to announce their priorities, but I can tell you they are ambitious. They will build off this. As someone who feels, as I know that the member opposite does, passionately about cancer, I saw that this was a real opportunity for us to drive the research side but also the recruitment side and the opportunity for patients in every part of B.C. to take part in clinical trials and to support that.

I thought this was an opportunity that really is what we should be doing with this kind of supplementary estimate money in the Ministry of Health. I think it’s the right initiative. Those were the frames of the decision.

I don’t disagree that there are other major expenditures to be made in cancer care, and we’ll be debating those, but this was an opportunity in this process, something we were looking at with the foundation, how we could help them achieve their exceptional goals. This is a real opportunity that will help us today, tomorrow and well into the future.

S. Bond: Thank you to the minister for walking through the process with me. I may have a few other questions as we work our way through this related to that.

I’d like to now start to think a little bit about the….

[3:40 p.m.]

Thank you to the minister and his staff for that.

I’d like to pursue something that is incredibly important, and that is results and outcomes. It’s also about measurement and accountability. So let me begin with this.

Was there a process, working with B.C. Cancer, to attach a terms of reference, a set of guidelines in terms of how this would work, a sense of expected outcomes?

I won’t ask the minister to do that specifically yet, because I have a number of questions about the actual items that are being attached to the $150 million. We may not get specifically to those today, because I am also going to cede the floor to my colleague to ask some of her questions this afternoon.

Was there a terms of reference, a set of expectations that are attached to this grant?

Hon. A. Dix: I think in this case, a lot of the work was done for us in advance. We’ve been meeting regularly with the foundation, at the staff level, and I have as well, on their very ambitious goals.

They were laying out their goals, what they could achieve if they raised — let’s just take a number; this is not the number — $50 million. “So here’s what we can do with that.” You see that in their fundraising efforts around the province as well, which often talk about the things that they can do.

I think the reason they have focused on these, as well, in enhancing research is that a huge amount of the workforce is made up of research trainees. There is also, in addition to that, intense competition to recruit mid-career clinician investigators with academic institutions in Canada and the United States, and so on.

What the B.C. Cancer Foundation has done is already identified some of these needs. They already had a campaign, and this, to a certain extent, supercharges that effort.

But you have an organization that is prepared, that can house these research teams within its ranks and that is deeply connected, though, of course, to B.C. Cancer. It would be our expectation that they would deliver, as they have consistently done over time, on what they said they’d deliver, including, by the way, an expectation — and there’s not a number on this — to continue their efforts of fund­raising.

It wouldn’t be any good if we said: “Well, here’s $150 million, and now you can stop fundraising.” That’s not the idea. The idea is to do more fundraising. Believe me, if you’ve met Sarah Roth, you know that that’s what she does, in sort of an exceptional and dynamic way. I think this will actually build out those efforts and the possibility of those efforts.

They’re developing that effort. Obviously, they deeply connect — as all foundations do, in every hospital around the province — with both the health authority and the hospital that they’re connected to about need. There’s an exchange of information, but they house expertise. They laid out what their priorities are, and then we saw this and saw these opportunities of what we could do together by adding to that.

In this case, the work is constantly happening by a foundation that is deeply engaged in this and is, I think, not uniquely qualified. There are many charities that obviously deliver a high level of service and success both in fundraising and delivery from that fundraising. The B.C. Cancer Foundation is definitely one of them.

S. Bond: So in essence, the B.C. Cancer Foundation had a plan, an action plan, and things that they wanted to accomplish. The ask was to government to help support that. I know that they will certainly continue to keep raising funds. What I want to ensure is that when we’re sending $150 million…. Well, in fact, we’re sending $170 million, just out of two different pots, in essence, but $170 million of taxpayer money — albeit, to a worthy and great organization.

[3:45 p.m.]

What are the measurables, in terms of reporting back to government, and most importantly, laying out for British Columbians…? When I go back and look at the supplementary estimates list, there’s a staggering amount of money going out the door here. None of them…. You know, obviously, we’re going to have questions about all of them. For example, there’s $1 billion going out the door from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, and there’s $150 million here and there — half a billion in other places.

So what is the reporting mechanism? The minister has agreed that this is a priority. There’s an action plan being provided by the organization. What is the reporting mechanism? How will we know that that money has been successful?

We’ll go through, as I said, probably on Monday, the specific items, because I’m very interested in things like clinical trials and regional access. Those things really matter to the people of British Columbia. What are the reporting mechanisms? How are deliverables going to be documented so that the public knows where their money went?

Hon. A. Dix: As with all year-end grants, there are requirements for reporting here, and some of the reporting is easier. There are four research chairs that we talked about that are being endowed. That’s not straightforward. It’s obviously…. All of the things that go into that, the member will know, but it’s pretty easy to determine that. They’ll be reporting out on that.

Clinical trials around the province — similarly, they’ll be doing that for some of the items. They’re committing to buy equipment, and they’ll report on it.

So what you’re going to see is a requirement. There is a requirement in the funding agreement for the foundation to report on their use of public funds.

It’s my expectation — and this is the important part with this foundation — that they’ll be spending actually vastly more, because of their fundraising capacity, than the $150 million we’re authorizing in the time of the agreement.

There are specific items, and we’ll go through those and how they will report on them, on the chairs. They’ll show progress. They’re endowed. This is the recruitment process, etc., for that.

For the clinical trials, they’ll be able show: where are the clinical trials? Are they around the province? Are we meeting our requirement to allow patients around the province to take part in that? With respect to equipment, when was it purchased? All the issues around which the foundation will be judged on this $150 million….

But I am, to say the least, confident in the foundation’s ability with its partners to be able to deliver on what they’re committed to do and, in fact, deliver well beyond this $150 million.

S. Bond: Can the minister tell me whether, for example, would the expectation…? What I am concerned about is that we are allocating $150 million of taxpayer money, and I want taxpayers to know what that money is going to do. I want to understand when we would consider that having been successful. So yes, I would certainly hope that the spending exceeds the $150 million, but it’s also important to be able to measure success and look at outcomes.

For example, will results be made public through the foundation’s annual report, or is there another reporting mechanism that would outline: “Here’s the grant we got, here’s what we did with it, and here’s the progress made to date”?

Hon. A. Dix: This is, I think, the real value in having such a trusted partner as this, who’s worked with us on huge initiatives in the past and performed successfully. Yes, they’ll be reporting to the foundation and to their board. They’ll have all their internal reporting, and they’ll be reporting to the Ministry of Health and the province with respect to the grant.

[3:50 p.m.]

We’re going to go through in detail what it supports. What they are proposing to do — we’ll deal with the money, should it be approved, but obviously, that’s our expectation — is significant in every part of the province.

We’ll get into this discussion, but I think it’s particularly focused on communities around B.C. — the involvement in clinical trials, the embedding of research around the province of B.C. That, I think, is something I’m very, very proud of, not on my own behalf but on their behalf and for the work that’s being done here.

The work that’s being done in Indigenous communities and in support of the Indigenous cancer plan and on those important areas is here as well, including ensuring that First Nations British Columbians are involved and are part of the research process and employed in the research process and working in the research process. That’s a key part of what they’re doing.

I’ll just give one example of the kind of initiative that’s being done, which is to support B.C. Cancer’s BioCancer initiative. It embeds regional coordinators at regional cancer centres to enhance participation in outcomes research and will support blood and tissue sample collection and biobanking support for clinical research across the province. They will be able to report on the details of what they do. Some of the outcomes of that won’t become obvious for some time because it’s research, and it’s supporting us now and into the future. That’s an example amongst many. We’ll get into the details of the kind of work that’s being done.

I think what the foundation has done successfully is support people around the province. That’s very important. You see that in the initiatives here.

Often I think there’s a concern with organizations that are centred in Vancouver — and the member will know this — of whether they’re reaching or representing the whole province. Well, this is an organization that represents the whole province. It’s as active in Prince George as it is in Vancouver.

S. Bond: Thank you very much to the minister and his staff. I look forward to continuing the discussion.

I’m going to ask, and thank, my colleague from Kelowna-Mission, who is going to work through some of the questions that she had. She obviously has a lot of experience as the former Health critic and has done a lot of work on the cancer file in particular.

In terms of a bit of foreshadowing, I would like the minister and staff to come back and…. One of the things that government has really focused on is the issue of gender analysis, for example when we look at policies, grants and the allocation of funding.

I’d like to have some sense, although my colleague is the critic for that area — she may well be asking that question — of how that lens was applied. I can wait till next week to get those answers. I’ll just give you a bit sense of that.

We also have an Indigenous cancer strategy. I don’t see, in the specific items that are linked to this grant, a sense of what element or consideration has been given to the whole issue of the Indigenous cancer strategy, for example.

With that, I’m going to turn the floor over to my colleague from Kelowna-Mission.

R. Merrifield: Nice to see you again, Minister. I’m going to just piggyback a little bit on the questions that my colleague has already been starting and just ask for a little bit more detail.

Once the money has been delivered to B.C. Cancer, who has signing authority? Does that fall within the organizational structure? That would be, as we mentioned before, Sarah Roth and her team? Or is there another check and balance that’s actually done with any provincial funds?

Hon. A. Dix: Broadly speaking, it’s the B.C. Cancer Foundation. Once the money is expensed…. The B.C. Cancer Foundation is outside of the GRE, for people enjoying this discussion at home. They would have control of the money.

Obviously, there’s a funding agreement connected to that, but the control of the expenditures, based on that agreement and our collective understanding of what we’re going to do, is the responsibility of the foundation.

You mentioned Sarah Roth, who’s outstanding. The member may know her. Obviously, the team is outstanding as well.

[3:55 p.m.]

R. Merrifield: I fully agree with the minister; the team is absolutely unbelievable. They’re awesome. A question that wasn’t fully canvassed with my colleague: when did B.C. Cancer first submit their plan? We know from the previous conversation that there was a promised plan, as in 2020. When was the minister actually delivered the first B.C. Cancer plan?

Hon. A. Dix: As you know, this vote is connected to this grant to the B.C. Cancer Foundation. The member will know the B.C. Cancer Foundation, in 2022, laid out a huge campaign, a new campaign which they announced. I’m trying to remember. I can get the information for the member, but I know I met with the foundation myself. Obviously, there are a lot more meetings than the ones that I’m involved in, in advance of that time.

They laid out their vision of what they saw for the future and, obviously, they’re closely working with B.C. Cancer as well. But I think the B.C. Cancer Foundation talked about this, and then we saw the opportunity here to build on those efforts, to build out those efforts and do something that is, I think, in terms of cancer research and the work being done by the B.C. Cancer Foundation, really breathtaking.

The great thing about this is they developed their priorities working with clinicians and the broader community around cancer, and then we worked with them on that. That came together in an exciting way with this supplementary estimate. I would say the Cancer Foundation, which does this work all the time, and we can list off, I think — I did earlier on; I don’t need to do it again — all the things that we’ve been working on together, from cancer screening to other things that the foundation has been heavily involved in.

In its fundraising, they raised $77 million last year in B.C. That wasn’t from the government of B.C. So $4 million came from us and one of our partnerships we do with them, and $77 million they raised, which is an exceptional achievement for a foundation. They had an even more ambitious goal for this year. If you know the foundation, you know that’s the way they operate. This adds to that, and I think will do something truly significant.

Many of the priorities came from that. Of course, we have broader priorities for cancer and cancer research that are supported here and by Michael Smith and by Genome and others. That’s how it came together, but I think they’ve been working on this. They do ongoing work, but their latest campaign stems from, I’m guessing, the early fall of 2022, but it would have been planned long before that.

Remember, the foundation works very closely with B.C. Cancer on what those research priorities should be or what those equipment priorities should be. That’s the work we do together. I would say I probably met personally with Ms. Roth. It might have been in July or August. I know it was on Joyce Street.

R. Merrifield: If it was July or August, then the Beyond Belief campaign. That was what it was. But if it was July or August, then what was the reference to the B.C. Cancer plan that was in 2020, and then canvassed by myself in estimates in 2021 and then my colleague last year?

Hon. A. Dix: This supplementary estimate…. The government announced last Friday a ten-year cancer plan for British Columbia, pursuant to what we said we would do. The successful campaign led by Premier Horgan, the member for Juan de Fuca still…. There you go. I haven’t made that mistake in a while. I apologize — led by the member for Juan de Fuca.

[4:00 p.m.]

The member will know, of course, that we made contributions in Budget ’21 and ’22, some of which she and I discussed in the estimates in terms of in addition to the increases to the base investments in cancer, which allowed for the hiring of doctors, and so on. That’s all the discussion for the main estimates, but I just didn’t put it in context for a specific question.

There’s the B.C. Cancer plan. This is part of that, but the decision to include the foundation in that…. We’ve had talks with them. Obviously, this is a great opportunity, and a great opportunity through the supplementary estimates program, to make a one-time investment that’s truly breathtaking, to advance those efforts. I think that makes a lot of sense.

So there are a few. One is the B.C. cancer plan, which we’ll be discussing in the main estimates, I think, at some length. I don’t know; I never want to anticipate the member for Prince George–Valemount. But I believe “at some length” is a fair prediction. Then there’s this $150 million, which is the subject of the supplementary estimates.

R. Merrifield: What I’m understanding from the minister is that the B.C. cancer plan has both. It has B.C. Cancer, as well as the health authorities and the foundation, and they’re all working in lockstep to achieve the priorities that are put forward. I also understand, through the course of estimates, etc., that a significant amount of money has already been spent towards many of these initiatives.

My understanding, though, from what the minister is saying, is that there was a cancer plan that was created by these entities, in lockstep, including the foundation — in terms of establishing these priorities, establishing the amount of funds that would be required.

Then through the iterative process, which the minister acknowledged, with Treasury Board, this has been kind of back and forth in different iterations. I think the minister sort of jokingly said version 12 was the one he finally signed off on. Maybe it was 11, though; I’ll give him credit.

My question is: when was that first plan actually created?

Hon. A. Dix: Again, the ten-year cancer plan was tabled last Friday. It was presented and laid out last Friday. Obviously, in successive budget years, there have been significant investments in cancer that we’ve seen, demonstrating the priority that we all have for cancer and the significant demand facing that. That’s the main estimates debate; we’ll have a significant opportunity to debate all this.

This $150 million is, I think, an opportunity, especially on the research side. We’ll go in, with the member and with the opposition Health critic, on the details of that. It’s an opportunity, especially, to invest in research, which is critically important to aspects of the plan. This is a real opportunity to do something significant.

Obviously, the foundation has a plan to raise a significant amount of money to support that very research but also to support other initiatives that the foundation supports, including equipment and others. They’re pursuing that — we work together on that — and made a presentation. Then we’re here today with the supplementary estimates for that $150 million, which goes to the B.C. Cancer Foundation to support all of the good initiatives that we will describe in subsequent questions.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

R. Merrifield: I do understand, but I don’t believe for one moment that last Friday was the first moment that the minister saw the plan and it was tabled.

We’ve already discussed that iterative process of how those plans actually are presented and then get all the way through the process of the financial aspects, as well as the priorities, etc. Understanding that this $150 million is a key component of the larger plan and a key component to the research aspects of the larger plan, my question, again, is: when was the minister presented the first comprehensive plan?

[4:05 p.m.]

Hon. A. Dix: Well, obviously, with respect to the significant demand for cancer, you’ve seen the significant operating fund increases that go for all kinds of purposes at the B.C. Cancer Agency over the last number of years. You go through processes in government that include committees of government. Those committees include Treasury Board. It might include other committees of government. You present those, and then they’re approved and presented on occasions, such as last Friday, and on occasions such as the budget.

The ten-year cancer plan was presented last Friday. Concurrent with that, I think, an opportunity — hopefully, one that the House will support unanimously — to provide support to the foundation for our joint initiatives was there, and that’s why we sought approval for that money as well. That money, obviously, was approved, and it’s here in the supplementary estimates.

R. Merrifield: The first time that the minister saw the plan was last Friday. Is that correct?

Hon. A. Dix: Obviously, we don’t see or develop a plan on one day, and the member knows that, so I’m not sure what the purpose of the question is.

I’ll say that, with respect to this $150 million supplementary estimate, I’ve gone through a couple of times the process by which it was developed. I’m happy with those responses, but obviously, I appreciate good parliamentary debate.

The member knows that we are working on these issues all the time. We had extensive discussions when the member was the Health critic for cancer. You’ve seen in successive budgets now significant funding in addition to base funding increases for cancer in order to hire staff, etc. That’s part of another process.

We do all that, and then we have this proposal that’s coming through the supplementary estimates process that we’re debating today.

R. Merrifield: I wasn’t meaning to insult the minister but, rather, reiterate the answer that I’m receiving, because I don’t believe that the minister saw the cancer plan for the very first time last Friday.

I am asking the minister: when was the first time that the B.C. Cancer Foundation, of which this $150 million — $170 million, but $150 million of the supplemental estimates is a part…? When was the first time that the minister actually saw that plan?

Hon. A. Dix: The supplementary estimates we’re debating today came through the process I described. We start to look at year-end funding for this particular proposal, which is in the supplementary estimates. Obviously, we’re working with foundations all the time. We looked at the potential for year-end funding, I think, on a number of occasions in these debates.

Now, already I’ve referred to the Premier’s decision, which he publicly called for, to seek ways to assist British Columbia, especially with one-time funding such as this.

The Ministry of Health, in response to that, and as part of the work that we’re doing, came forward with this proposal. It was obviously approved by government, and it is being presented as a supplementary estimate today.

The Chair: Of course, we are on the supplementary estimates 32(S). As long as questions are related to that estimate, they are appropriate here.

R. Merrifield: Thank you, Chair, for the reminder. Absolutely, that is exactly what I’m asking about, this $150 million. What plan is this a part of, and when did the minister see that plan for the very first time?

Hon. A. Dix: I have now answered this question on a number of occasions. I’m happy to do so again.

This proposal, the B.C. Cancer Foundation, which we’re debating specifically in supplementary estimates, is part of the B.C. cancer plan which was presented to the people of B.C. — to everyone, including the opposition — at a press conference last Friday by Premier Eby and myself.

The Chair: No names, Minister, of course.

[4:10 p.m.]

R. Merrifield: I do find it interesting that the minister doesn’t want to answer this particular question. It’s not meant to be any form of indirect questioning, actually — in fact, just the opposite. I’m asking very directly as to when the B.C. Cancer Foundation brought forward the plan and asked for this specific money.

Hon. A. Dix: I can answer the question again, I guess, if that’s the wish of the member. The B.C. Cancer Foundation is working on these issues, as the member will know, all the time. They have announced an ambitious campaign.

Concurrently with that, we’ve been doing work on a ten-year cancer plan. We saw the opportunity to supercharge the research process and other initiatives in B.C., especially around B.C. We worked with the foundation on this. Obviously, the $150 million got government approval. It was included in the budget, the supplementary estimates, and in what was presented last Friday.

The Chair: The questions are starting to get a little repetitive, so I would ask the member just to keep that in mind.

R. Merrifield: Yeah. Thank you, Chair. Well, you know, if the minister would answer the question directly then it wouldn’t get repetitive. But in the interest of time, I do want to move on, because I do have quite a lengthy list of questions here. I’m going to keep moving forward.

The minister has mentioned that some of this money is actually for additional oncologists and oncology capacity. In the breakdown, I would just ask the minister which line item those oncologists are found within and if the minister could just describe what number that relates to.

Hon. A. Dix: I think we’ve shared with the opposition the category breakdown. So you would see those opportunities in several of these items. As the member wishes to ask questions, go through them, line by line….

However, you would see in the recruitment and retention initiatives, you’d see in the training and education, you’d see in the endowed research positions, you’d see in the clinical and multidisciplinary research all of those aspects when you have a broad effort to expand research that involves across those lines efforts. We’d be happy to go through each of those lines in detail.

R. Merrifield: Understanding that there are different positions in each of these line items, does the minister have a breakdown of all of the different positions that are found in each of these line items by staff?

Hon. A. Dix: Why don’t we start at the beginning, on the list that I provided, with clinical and multidisciplinary research and talk about what that $55.7 million will fund. That may assist the hon. member and elicit more questions.

The first priority under that clinical research support funding is to improve support to conduct and manage clinical trials at regional cancer centres, provide enhanced clinical research finance and operations support, enhance support for research ethics and funding for statisticians to support clinical trials’ design, such as real-world trials and adaptive trials.

Secondly, support B.C. Cancer’s BioCancer initiative, which embeds research coordinators at regional cancer centres to enhance population participation in outcomes research and will support blood and tissue sample collection and biobanking support for clinical research across the province.

Third, support provincial clinical trials and radiation oncology, notably to improve access to radiotherapy by studying treatment approaches which require fewer visits, which I think all of us can understand the value of, and precision radiotherapy research to enhance efficacy while reducing toxicity from radiation treatments — also the kind of real-world research that makes a difference for patients and their families.

Support the implementation of a theranostics program at B.C. Cancer across the province, rapidly ex­panding new treatments using radioactive drugs that were recently approved by Health Canada. Our cancer system needs to adapt to deliver the PET-CT scans required for patient selections and form the teams that will deliver those treatments.

[4:15 p.m.]

In terms of the multidisciplinary research funding, it will support the sustainment of B.C. Cancer’s flagship programs in breast cancer research, cancer genomics, gynecological cancers, among others, which have been strong drivers of research excellence and are recognized internationally. These programs have been highly successful in securing research grants.

Again, this contribution plus the other contributions plus the research grants that are won can mean that this $150 million is the start of a much more significant level of training. They also, of course, drive philanthropic donations, as we previously discussed.

The enhancement of their ability to translate research into practice. This includes programs in lymphoid cancer research, leukemia and multiple myeloma, gastrointestinal cancers and others. B.C. Cancer has a number of emerging new multidisciplinary research programs. They’re reaching a critical mass of successful early- and mid-career translational and clinical researchers. In that area of funding, you see the significance of that.

I think I’ll stop there. There is significantly more, but what I would suggest and will suggest to the opposition Health critic, as she’s going to come back next week, is that some of the details of this we can then share, and that will assist the process. But that gives the member a sense of the kind of research that’s being done. Also, I think, fundamentally, in each of these lines, and if we were to continue on, we’d see the importance of that happening in Kelowna, which is obviously important to the member because she’s an MLA from Kelowna, but also in Prince George, also in Victoria, and so on.

I think what I find compelling and what the foundation does is that it raises money everywhere in B.C. It also ensures that research is done everywhere in B.C., and that’s really important for different communities around B.C.

R. Merrifield: Just to ask more specifically and as a follow-up to the minister’s answer, is it possible for us to just get a breakdown of all the FTEs that are within each of the line items? That would help us, I guess, to not spend as much time kind of going through this process in that way. Is that possible?

Hon. A. Dix: I don’t think FTEs is the right way to describe it, but what we can do is provide more detailed information to opposition members and be happy to do that. In some cases, it’s the upgrading of equipment that’s involved here, as noted and as I described at the beginning. In some cases, it’s FTE and research dollars. Some use its money for equipment and processes such as biobanking. In other cases, it’s other scholarships and other support, which is critically important to recruiting in a highly competitive field of recruitment, the students and the younger researchers that we need amid this process.

So I don’t think the process of the B.C. Cancer Foun­dation is best described in FTE terms. It’s best described in describing what they plan to do, and that’s what the initiative does. I’d be happy to share all that information with the opposition.

R. Merrifield: Excellent. Thank you so much. I appreciate that breakdown. Even if the breakdown is: here are capital expenditures, here are FTEs, here’s scholarship money, here’s…. Absolutely, understanding that it’s a very comprehensive plan. It’s a very exciting plan. I agree with the minister wholeheartedly that this is a desperate area that we need to see grow. Our diligence in this way is actually to make sure that those dollars are being accounted for and that we are seeing them go where they’re most needed, and where, I think, we can all agree we are excited about seeing it as well.

Obviously, this is supplemental estimates on this $150 million, so it is a little bit of a surprise. It is a little bit outside of the normal estimates process. So we’re trying to have as much diligence as we possibly can in this way.

Is the minister satisfied that both the critical positions as well as the capacity are being acknowledged within this $150 million and, obviously, the contribution that the B.C. foundation is also coming forward with?

[4:20 p.m.]

Hon. A. Dix: I think it’s an extraordinary package of investment that will serve to — whatever the word is — supercharge, whatever, the work that’s been done by the foundation in this area. I think, from my perspective…. One of the honours I had last week was to, again, as I have from time to time but less so during COVID, be able to meet with B.C. Cancer staff in a town hall, and I think their interest in that is fundamental as well.

You go to B.C. Cancer, and there are profound clinical parts of their work, which we all know, and we all know from our families’ experiences and everything else, and then the research component. Everyone at B.C. Cancer is supportive of both and understands the profound links between the two.

What you have here is something that… And it is, yes, my expectation that they’re going to raise more money. I know they will. They have consistently, and they have a demonstrated ability to do this.

I think the excitement for all of the people that support the foundation — and those are thousands of people in B.C., in the tens of thousands of people in B.C. — for what’s happened here, this moment…. They feel, with their efforts and their links to the community and their links to the international community of clinicians and researchers around cancer….

This is an exciting moment for B.C. and for them, and all of the elements here that you see in it, from start-up and seed grants to the research chair foundation endowments, which is a significant item, to the recruitment initiatives, to the training bursaries — all of those items reflect the serious thought that’s been given to: “Well, what can you do? What could we do if it was more in terms of research? What can we do?”

Well, we’ve given a lot of serious thought to that, and that’s reflected in this proposal. I think it comes with it — the partnership between B.C. Cancer, the B.C. Cancer Foundation and British Columbians.

R. Merrifield: Thanks, Minister, for the answer. I so whole­heartedly agree on the tremendous work and efforts of the foundation as well as all of the people that make not just the foundation happen but are serving within the foundation in terms of research and treatment. We talk about research, but every research and clinical trial that they are performing is actually on people and making sure that we are moving forward in our cancer technology, etc. So I’m very excited about that.

One of my concerns, though, in looking at the list that we have here is that most of this is kind of building on the soft capacity or the people capacity but not necessarily on the infrastructure. What I don’t see in here are the actual facilities.

I’m very interested to know: do we have enough capacity within the system currently to accommodate what this is going to bring in this extraordinary grant?

Hon. A. Dix: Yes, we do. Obviously, the discussion of health capital will also come in the main estimates. I will save the member from my speech on the subject for then, but I’m sure she…. I’ll give her advance notice so she can come in for that if she’s not already there. I know she’s very interested in these areas.

I think, on infrastructure, just to note…. A significant part of this money is for research equipment and infrastructure, and I’ll give the member an example of this just to give a sense of what we’re doing.

Part of the first year of funding — they’ll be, obviously, spending this money over a period of time — will be used to support the acquisition and installation of a state-of-the-art, ultra-high-sensitivity, long axial field-of-view PET-CT scanner, which can upgrade one of the instruments to be installed at the Vancouver centre.

That’s one proposal, and that’s part of what we’re doing. The estimated total cost of all of that — I won’t describe it in more detail — is about $20.8 million of that.

In the second year, there’s a further proposal to fund the acquisition installation of an MRI simulator that’s available in most academic radiation oncology facilities but is currently unavailable in B.C. This is something that we’ve been waiting for.

[4:25 p.m.]

Such a simulator allows clinical research on improved radiation planning methods to account for a patient’s motion during and between treatments, with potential benefits to reduce undesirable effects on normal organs. The absence of MRI simulation capability has been identified as a major impediment to the recruitment of radiation oncologists at B.C. Cancer.

Again, it does connect with those issues. It’s not an FTE response. But when we’re recruiting, it’s saying to people we’re going to provide this equipment, which other people have, that we need to have it to recruit the best, and that’s why we’re doing it. That’s how it’s been identified and why it’s such a good vote to vote for.

R. Merrifield: Oh, that was so sly. That was so sly.

Interjection.

R. Merrifield: I will take my lessons from the master. Absolutely.

The minister brought up radiation oncologists. I’d wholeheartedly agree, again. If we do not have the best technology, we are not going to be able to recruit and keep the best. We need to be on some of that cutting edge and really encourage those to keep learning within our organizations.

The minister brought up radiation oncologists. One of the other asks is: are there any moneys for medical physicists?

Hon. A. Dix: Again, all through the plan, all through this spending, this grant to the B.C. Cancer Foundation, you see different aspects of the health care team that are necessary, from the scholarships for younger researchers, to the support both to recruit and to support investigators in the system, to people involved in all aspects.

We have research chair endowments — part of their teams. We have all of the elements described. Again, we’ll be sharing that information. So that is there as well, and it’s building out the whole team. As the member knows, having worked in this area, you need not just oncologists but technologists and others. You need a team. We’re obviously building out team-based care in cancer, as with everywhere else in health care. So all elements are there.

Yes, you can see that again, as with oncologists, found in various aspects of the $150 million.

R. Merrifield: So I’m to understand that within each of these line items, there are medical physicists.

Hon. A. Dix: Essentially every part, but not part of the infrastructure, to put it that way. You see that in all aspects, from clinical research — obviously benefiting from the infrastructure research, but not directly — to the start-up and seed grants, the recruitment and retention initiatives, to the training and scholarships. Yes, all those aspects of cancer care are found throughout those, because we need a team of people, and the team generally works on all of those aspects.

Other than infrastructure, which is obviously equipment infrastructure, the rest is about people, in large re­spects, and supporting their work in research. That research is in all aspects of cancer care.

R. Merrifield: I understand that within each of these line items, there is both capital and the actual people that it takes. I guess I fail to understand — maybe I’m just slow — which line items the medical physicists are found within.

[4:30 p.m.]

Hon. A. Dix: Let me go through. I think you see them found in all of the work, some of which I have already described about clinical and multidisciplinary research. You see it there. You see it, for example, in the bursaries and scholarships. This is funding. It’s an important aspect of the funding, the training and education part — to support the creation of bursaries and study scholarships to create incentives for new trainees and funding for ongoing educational needs of staff across B.C. Cancer.

There are currently significant challenges that we all know with health human resources in multiple areas. This would include, in that case: the team; radiation therapists and technologists; medical physicists; unit clerks; and others. Those training bursaries and scholarships are a way of assisting in our recruitment in a competitive field across North America in getting the best people in a number of areas, from medical physicists to technologists to oncologists to others.

R. Merrifield: With $150 million that we have — $170 million; the $20 million in the one bucket, $150 million in this bucket — this is a little bit vague right now in terms of where the money is going, how it’s going to be spent and where it’s going to be spent. I know that the member before me also canvassed deliverables. Like, what have been the stated deliverables of these different buckets and the outcomes that we should be expecting from this funding?

Hon. A. Dix: I feel like, when I’m asked about being vague, testing my 15-minute level of response here with more detail than can be imagined. But in what I have said to the hon. member, I’m not being vague at all. We could be very precise. But I think that what would be more useful in the exchange is to answer the member’s questions to provide more detail, as I’ve obviously agreed to do. I can be more precise and not vague.

I’ll give a couple of examples if the member would like. On the research chair endowments, for example, which are very specific, funding will be for four new endowed research chairs, with two being staffed in ’24-25 and ’25-26. These are processes that take a while to develop. Endowed chairs creates sustainable salary and funding support to recruit and retain key clinical researchers that are vital to the long-term success of B.C. Cancer. Such researchers attract other emerging talent, etc.

The endowments will create permanent and sustainable funding for clinical researchers at B.C. Cancer. The revenue from the endowments will further support the research component of their salary, and they are hiring key personnel to support the research activities of the chairholders, so four, and the process around them. That’s a specific, not vague, part of the initiative, which is, of course, one of the things that’s specifically laid out. We can do that for all of them. But I think, in the interests of time in the exchange, I’ll leave it at that one.

R. Merrifield: Well the minister could just submit the entire plan over with all the details in terms of the FTEs and the capital expenditures, etc. I’m understanding that the minister is happy to do that. But I’ll just wait for that to go on Hansard.

Hon. A. Dix: I’ve already said to her colleague the member for Prince George–Valemount that I’d do that. Members of the opposition know that I always share lots of information with them. I’m happy to do so in this case, and I’ve already said that we’re doing that. What we’ll do, because I know that the member for Prince George–​Valemount has said that she’s coming back on Monday, is allow her time to consider each of those parts of the package, which have been developed here. We describe them in detail in some cases here. But it’s sometimes better to have them on paper as well. We’re happy to do that.

R. Merrifield: Thank you. If we could have them on paper, that would be that would be great in preparation for Monday as well. I just wish the minister didn’t look so relieved when he said that the member for Prince George–Valemount would be back on Monday.

[4:35 p.m.]

The minister mentioned the genome science funding that’s within this package. I’m going to forgo some of my really specific questions and hope that the information the minister gives me over the weekend will suffice. But the genome science aspect — I’m curious. Is the Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre part of the funding? If so, how much?

Hon. A. Dix: I’ll take the member through the cancer genomics part of it and what it will support. There are two major parts of it. There are others, but two major parts.

Yes, it would be our expectation that the very significant research funding that we provided in a supplementary estimate a couple of years ago to the Michael Smith Foundation and to Genome B.C., which were two separate and significant buckets of money that have happened over…. That support for those foundations has hap­pened over 25 years and proven to be unbelievably successful for B.C.

The member will know the foundation of that work started under the previous NDP government, supported subsequently by the Liberal government, and has continued to be supported by our government since then. Again, the use of supplementary estimates a couple of years ago was incredibly valuable.

With respect to cancer genomics: that funding will include the improvement and development of cost-effective gene panel assays for cancer, for which treatment options are driven by genomic information. The continued development of novel gene assays that are performed on blood samples rather than biopsies — which will reduce health care costs, of course; will allow longitudinal monitoring of patients — are becoming an emerging standard in cancer practice.

Cancer is a disease of the genome. The identification of mutations that are present in cancer cells is increasingly driving treatment decisions, as many new drugs will only benefit patients whose cancer harbours specific mutations. If you’ve dealt with any cases or people dealing with that, you know this is a significant issue in cancer. The cost of gene testing is low compared to the cost of delivering treatments. Yet introducing these assays into clinical practice remains a challenge. The development of cost-effective, high throughput assays requires financial support. That’s part of what the plan is about.

Also, in terms of recruitment, I’d say there’s a recruitment package for genome science leadership. Funding will support the recruitment of an internationally recognized researcher in genome sciences for succession planning and the continued international success of the Genome Sciences Centre, which I believe the member referred to.

R. Merrifield: If the minister could provide just a breakdown. What the minister read off was a great statement of what was going to happen. I would hope that in the breakdown we would see sort of allocations of what that’s going towards.

My specific question on this is actually on the amount the researchers are currently being paid. Some of our researchers are at very low pay scales. They are there because they love the work, and they believe in what they’re doing, and they believe that they are saving lives, because they are. Is this part of the funding actually going to correct some of those low wages, or is it just to recruit, into succession, the leadership?

Hon. A. Dix: There are lots of initiatives. Included as part of these initiatives is what you describe as upskilling for people at B.C. Cancer. It’s not just people from the outside who will benefit, but it’s people working at B.C. Cancer who we’d want skilled. That’s a significant part of the health human resources plan as well, as the member will be aware.

I think what she’s getting at are some of the issues that we deal with in the recruitment at B.C. Cancer. Recently, we increased essentially the core wage for oncologists significantly. We’re looking at other areas of B.C. Cancer to ensure that we remain competitive.

[4:40 p.m.]

In that case, it was from 410 to 472, but that’s a separate issue and one we’ll canvass in the estimates. There is a lot in this plan to address, for example, start-up and seed grants for researchers. That is significant training, bursaries and scholarships, including for people, existing staff, who would be able to upskill based on that, and all of the other initiatives that are part of this.

[R. Leonard in the chair.]

There are things…. If the member is asking if there are issues around the remuneration of people at B.C. Cancer, that’s a separate question. Obviously, that’s an operating fund question, and it’s not dealt with here.

R. Merrifield: The question was, actually, specific to the research and the researchers that are within some of these aspects.

As we were canvassing the genome science…. Specifically, inside of some of these research clusters are researchers who are being underpaid.

Am I to understand that the top-up or rescale of some of these researchers would be found more in the general funding for B.C. Cancer, or is it part of this funding, the $150 million that we’re discussing today?

Hon. A. Dix: That’s the general funding. That would be the main estimates discussion we’ll have on B.C. Cancer.

R. Merrifield: My next question is actually on performance monitoring. Are we going to have, attached to the entirety of the cancer plan that was released on Friday, a comprehensive performance-monitoring system, similar to what we find in other provinces, that is transparent and easily accessible?

Hon. A. Dix: I think, in terms of the monitoring of this expenditure in the supplementary estimates….

I went through that process earlier, and I won’t give the same lengthy answer again that I gave to the member for Prince George–Valemount. Suffice it to say that there is accountability of the foundation, both internally to the foundation and to the government, for the expenditure of money.

The answer to the other question is yes. It’s one that, obviously, we’ll canvass in the broader estimates debate.

R. Merrifield: Attached to this particular funding, this $150 million…. Is there transparent accountability that would be attached to it? I don’t need a reiteration of the question previous or prior. Is there going to be a public interface that will actually be reporting out on these measures?

Hon. A. Dix: Yeah. The B.C. Cancer Foundation, and I think the member will know this, is not just transparent but uses its successes and what it’s doing as a promotion for more activities, more fundraising, more support, more grant applications that it supports.

The answer is yes, to the government. There is an obligation to report to us, under the grant, within the foundation. Obviously, that is a very public process. They make it their business to make it a very public process.

R. Merrifield: The transparency would be the responsibility of the foundation to relay that information out publicly. Am I understanding correctly?

Hon. A. Dix: There’s a requirement for them to have accountability and to demonstrate the success of the work they’re doing.

Yes, this is a grant to them. They will have not just the requirement, but they’ll have, I expect, the strong desire to want to report out on their successes and what’s happening under the plan to them, including what happens not just with this money but to the money that they raise and then the further knock-on grants that support B.C. Cancer researchers in the province.

R. Merrifield: I’m watching the clock. I really appreciate how quick the minister is being. I love how quick you are to your feet. Also just the brevity of your answers has been phenomenal. So I appreciate — thank you — the brevity of the minister’s answers.

We spoke earlier about the PET scanner that’s going in and the MRI simulator and some of the capacity increase on the radiology as well as the oncology and radiation oncologists as well as the medical physicists.

My question is: what is the minister’s expectation on a reduction on radiation wait times?

[4:45 p.m.]

Hon. A. Dix: As the member will know, we’ll be debating both the cancer plan and the BC Cancer Agency and the Provincial Health Services Authority during the main estimates. We’ll have an opportunity to do that then, as we have, on occasion, in question period as well. I’m sure we’ll have that opportunity again. This is not a broad debate on BC Cancer but a discussion of this supplementary estimates allocation to the B.C. Cancer Foundation.

I appreciate the question and look forward to having that exchange with the member in the main estimates.

R. Merrifield: My question is actually very specific to the $150 million. Right now, we’re sitting at 82 to 83 percent on the waits for decision to treat for radiation. That 82 to 83 percent is actually the worst in the country. My ask is actually on this $150 million. With the capacity increase that we’re going to see with this spend, what should be our acknowledged anticipation of a reduction of that wait at this point with this spending of $150 million?

Hon. A. Dix: I think I’ve gone through in considerable detail what the expenditure on research in this plan is. This is absolutely a fair matter for debate in the Legislature in the main estimates, and we’re going to have that debate around the actions we’re taking now, which are not this $150 million, to address those very issues. Those issues include issues of compensation and other issues.

I look forward to having that debate. We have it from time to time in question period as well. Those exchanges are important as well. We’re going to have that discussion. That’s the B.C. Cancer. That’s the Ministry of Health main vote. We’ve described in detail what this $150 million is for, what purposes it serves, the advantages it has and the extraordinary supercharging of research, and that’s what this vote and this discussion is about today.

I appreciate the member may want to make that point. She’s now made it, of course, but it still doesn’t change the fact that it’s main estimates debate, and there are other occasions in this House to have that debate as well.

R. Merrifield: I wasn’t trying to debate. I was actually trying to give the minister an opportunity for a victory lap. We’ve talked about this $150 million and how it’s going to actually fund radiation oncologists, how it’s going to fund medical physicists and how we’re going to fund these teams of treatment that are, yes, going to be performing research, but in that research, they’re also performing medically necessary radiation treatments.

My question, actually, is what expectation of reduction in wait times are we going to see with this expenditure of $170 million from the two buckets?

Hon. A. Dix: I think the strong purpose of this…. There are aspects of what the member talks about, and we’ll have the occasion to debate this in the B.C. Cancer plan. The work around cancer also includes important works of research that people benefit from, including things such as clinical trials, that this will promote. Again, the member has, of course, every right to make whatever point they want about the debate, but this debate is about this supplementary estimate.

I’m absolutely going to respond in detail to questions about the supplementary estimates I’ve had. I want to provide information to the member, but the opportunity to debate the performance of B.C. Cancer and the immediate efforts taking place to improve outcomes for patients is in the main estimates debate, and I look forward to it.

R. Merrifield: Am I to understand that the minister does not anticipate any reduction in the wait times based on this $150 million spend?

Hon. A. Dix: What you do when you invest in clinical trials, in research is you recruit people to the provinces. You improve overall cancer care for people in the province now, but most importantly, in the future. Sometimes it’s the failure to act in advance that yields negative results in the present.

[4:50 p.m.]

We know this. We know this in our lives and in every­thing we know about the benefits of what we’re doing, which I’ve described at length. I’m very proud of them. I’m very proud of the proposal of the B.C. Cancer Foundation. I think it’s going to improve cancer care, especially into the future, beyond the important discussions around issues in the present, such as wait times. That’s its extraordinary value, I think, to people in B.C.

I understand that other people may say, “Well, this isn’t what you should be investing in,” but I obviously think it is. It’s why I brought this issue forward, why I’m so proud of the investment, and why it’s significant in the long-term provision of cancer care in the province in the medium term and, in some cases, in the short term: to allow us to better recruit, support and build up our community of cancer researchers — all of which is going to benefit British Columbians now, but especially in the future.

R. Merrifield: In the interest of time, I’ll try and combine a couple of my questions.

These dollar figures are an increase of about 9 percent. While I’m excited, and I could get into all the breakdown of all of the numbers, this $150 million is inside $270 million that’s over three years, which is about $90 million per year. Based on a base budget of $971 million. It’s about 9 percent per year, but the cancer costs are actually going up by 10 to 12 percent. That number was canvassed in estimates two years ago.

Back to the minister’s point about actually investing today for the future, are we investing enough, I guess, in order to actually see a reduction in wait times with the tsunami of cancer that we are seeing starting to arrive at our hospitals’ doorsteps?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, again, it’s an operating fund question. The member, in describing that as 9 percent, is actually incorrect. What you do when you add that money is that it’s on top of the lift, the systemwide lift for cancer. I’m not going to get into that, because we have an opportunity to discuss that in the main estimates.

This is, on the operating side plus the research side, a significant step, as have been the previous years. When you announce, for example, $270 million over three years, that’s on top of the lift, right? Health care has a higher rate of inflation in general, but it’s on top of the general lift, and we’ll have that discussion later. Just to leave that there. So we’re not talking about 9 percent.

I think when we were talking about that level of inflation earlier, we were seeing a significant increase in the cases, such that we announced the plan of going from 30,000 new cases of cancer a year to 40,000. We’ve got to meet that and improve care. We do that in two ways: by expanding, but also by making the care better, more efficient and easier, and less radiation treatments, and so on. There’s a number of ways that you do that. Over a ten-year plan, you have to do both of those things.

I think that’s what makes the overall budget lift for the Ministry of Health — which will be discussed later, and which the member just discussed — so significant in this area and in others. Sometimes, I think it’s fair to have those discussions but, again, that’s the main estimates discussion.

What is clear is that there’s significant demand — a drive in demand like we’ve never seen before — in our public health care system. I’m very proud of the system responding to that by delivering more of everything right now than it has ever done before. That doesn’t mean…. For patients who are struggling to get care, it’s not easy. I understand all that.

Again, that’s the main estimates debate, around the overall lift to B.C. Cancer — which, I’m sure, we’ll canvass at length.

The Chair: I’d just like to remind the members that we are on the supplementary estimates for the $150 million for the B.C. Cancer Foundation.

R. Merrifield: Yeah, absolutely. These are all questions related to this $150 million.

The $150 million that we are currently investing — the minister indicated that this is an investment in the future of where we’re going with our wait times. In the future, what should be the reduction, based on this $150 million, in the radiation wait times?

[4:55 p.m.]

Hon. A. Dix: I have answered this question a number of times. The opportunity to discuss those issues around wait times are issues for the B.C. Cancer Agency and are contained in the main vote for B.C. Cancer.

To describe what this vote is: it’s a very significant increase, a turbocharging of cancer research, which is critical to the cancer system. Many clinicians work significantly on research and as clinicians in our system. That’s how you recruit them. So to build out that system is an extraordinary thing.

Again, I’m looking forward to the main estimates debate on these questions because I think they are important questions that the member raises. We’ve been very specific about this $150 million, what it’s expected to achieve, and we’ll continue to be. I look forward to getting questions that are relevant to that, while appreciating and respecting the questions that the member has. Certainly, I’ll be looking forward to answering them in the appropriate moment.

R. Merrifield: This is just about the $150 million. This is just about what the minister has already stated it’s going to do, which is to build the foundation and allow those wait times to reduce. My question specifically about this $150 million is: how much will the anticipated decrease of wait times be and when?

Hon. A. Dix: We’ve described at length these initiatives, and we’ll obviously continue to do so as the debate goes forward. When you, for example, provide multiple start-up funding packages for new clinical investigators, that’s of extraordinary value for people, much as you have cancer diagnosis but will have cancer diagnosis in the future. It isn’t related to the immediate issues around wait times, which are addressed by the B.C. Cancer Agency in the main vote.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

When the member asks about 9 percent, that’s not a question about the $150 million. The member, I think, is well aware of that. I think she said $90 million, which is the other number. When I’m answering that this isn’t about the $150 million, it’s because it’s not about the $150 million. We will go through in detail the justification for all of these initiatives, as we have been, and then we’ll answer questions about wait times in the appropriate debate, which is the main estimates for the Ministry of Health.

R. Merrifield: The minister has stated that the investment of this $150 million in the six areas that were given is specifically to build the foundation for the future. I’m going to ask it more broadly. Does the minister expect that wait times will go down at all, at any point, with this investment of $150 million?

Hon. A. Dix: Well it’s, of course, one of the issues in the cancer plan that we’ll be discussing in the main estimates before the Legislature.

I’m happy to take the member through, in whatever detail she wants, the extraordinary proposals before us, all of which will benefit patients with cancer now and in the future in B.C. To do so, to use this means of a supplementary estimate to supercharge the already supercharged efforts of the B.C. Cancer Foundation, to build out seed grants and research chair endowments and support training bursaries and recruitment initiatives, the supporting efforts in terms of funding of research and equipment: all of this is of obvious benefit. I’m happy to talk about it in detail, and I have been talking about it in detail.

[5:00 p.m.]

We will also be happy to talk, as the member knows, because we’ve worked through estimates in the Ministry of Health together on a couple of occasions. We’ll have the opportunity to do so in the main estimates debate.

The Chair: Of course, we are on supplementary estimates 32(S).

R. Merrifield: Yes, it’s all about this $150 million investment. This $150 million — $170 million investment, because we’ve already talked about the other $20 million bucket — how is that going to actually be coordinated with the B.C. cancer plan? I wanted to just clarify. How will this bucket of money be coordinated through the entirety of cancer care and a patient’s experience?

Hon. A. Dix: The B.C. Cancer Agency and the B.C. Cancer Foundation work very closely together on their activities. We’ve described, I think, in detail already the positive impact of new equipment, both equipment for research and equipment in the system that’s of value that’s on that side.

When you look at the newest immunotherapies, that’s at one end of the scale, but it’s also the work on prevention and the work in the community, which is at the other end of the scale of research in different parts of the research continuum and, indeed, the continuum of care. All of this is integrated — the work of the foundation, the work of the agency and the work of the broader community around cancer. It’s also in the health authorities, also in the universities. It is work that will be dramatically promoted by this.

I think that it represents a very important part of the plan. You cannot simply…. There is a significant portion of it, which we’ll get to later, that addresses both the here and now and the immediate needs of patients. That’s important, and we’ll have an opportunity to debate that. But to have a plan that also focuses on research, making care better, bringing in new precision technologies, reducing the number, for example, of radiation treatments that a person might need — that kind of development is something that benefits us and integrated in the system all along.

You want research that does big-picture stuff, in a way, and deals with breakthrough, but you also want research that supports precision activities that benefit patients. I think the foundation here and in its work with the agency is identifying both.

R. Merrifield: It’s good to hear that those will be integrated funds and working in lockstep, as those two agencies usually are. So that’s great news.

Of this $150 million, are there more funds to be allocated, past the three-year announcements, to B.C. Cancer Foundation, or is this $150 million the entirety? I know it’s $170 million, because there’s the other $20 million bucket. But is that $170 million, $150 million today out of this amount, the entirety of the funds that are required to enact the ten-year plan for the B.C. foundation?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, the short answer is: the B.C. Cancer Foundation is raising money all the time. In the last year, for example, that amount of money was $77 million they raised, $4 million of which came from government in the last year. So a portion did come.

But essentially, that shows their fundraising capacity is very high, and I would expect, if I know Ms. Roth, that that number will be exceeded as we go forward. The foundation and all the people are really committed to it.

What this does is provides one-time funding. Because this is a supplementary estimate, this is one-time funding to the foundation that will benefit the foundation and people in the research community around cancer, and patients, as well, in the next number of years. This money is there.

[5:05 p.m.]

In addition to that, this money will lever other money, in terms of the money B.C. cancer researchers win in national and international competitions for funding and in the funding that the B.C. Cancer Foundation raises for these purposes, which is exceptional and I expect will grow because of this. All of that benefits, ultimately, patients everywhere in B.C. but also B.C.’s role as a leader and continuing leader.

We’re seeing this in life sciences, which, if we recall the COVID-19 pandemic, was profound in the world community. I mean, we’re not necessarily doing this as promoting life sciences, but it does, and it will.

I think we’re looking, in this case, for a supplementary estimate for a one-time investment. This is the right place, the right foundation, the right goals to be investing this money now. Just as the last time, as the Minister of Health, I came to supplementary estimates, our significant investments in the Michael Smith Foundation and Genome B.C. had that same vision in mind. It is not immediate to the debate that we’ll have in the main estimates around issues but fundamental for things to be better three, four, five or six years from now, as well as now.

Some of them will benefit us in the immediate. But if we don’t take some of these research steps now, then our ability to integrate those new systems, those new…. I don’t like to necessarily use the word “cure,” but it’s those that both provide support for patients and improve care in the future. You have to make the investments. This was an opportunity to do it, and I’m very proud that the government put it forward and supported it and that we’re here debating it in the supplementary estimates.

R. Merrifield: The $150 million in the one-time funding grant, $170 million total in the one-time funding grant — does this reach all of the expectations of the research component? When I say that, the provincial funding of the research component in the B.C. cancer plan, understanding they fundraise outside and they have their own other funding mechanisms…. In the B.C. province’s ten-year cancer plan, is this the funding expectation, conclusive?

Hon. A. Dix: Well, considering they got $4 million last year and this is $150 million, I think it’s a pretty good boost. It’s a pretty good boost. I don’t want to describe that in percentage terms, but that’s quite a bit. This is an expensive area of research, an important area of research, but this builds up our strength in one effort that’s organized and thoughtfully presented, that focuses on some of the real needs.

It’s not the Michael Smith Foundation, which we gave money to a number of years ago in supplementary estimates. They will need more support at some point in the future. No question about that. And they will have it, I think, as they have from governments on both sides of the House. It may have been an NDP initiative, but it became a government initiative, and then we built it out.

I don’t think this is the last contribution to cancer research in B.C. Obviously, research is a significant part of what the operating B.C. Cancer Agency does. But $4 million to $150 million — that’s a good increase.

R. Merrifield: I would say it is a very significant boost from $4 million to $150 million.

One of the previous comments the minister had made talked about the regionalization of the funds. Are there specific requirements from the province on this $150 million for regional aspects or regional distribution of the funds?

Hon. A. Dix: I think the member will see this as we go through, and we’ll share information about this. I think the one that I described before but that I think will be important to people across regions is the ability to conduct and manage clinical trials at regional cancer centres, including, obviously, the one in Kelowna — but others.

[5:10 p.m.]

I think for cancer patients in the member’s community but also communities around the entire region, from the North Okanagan down to the border, are significant. In a series of these initiatives….

One of the many things I’m impressed with the foundation about is that it’s a B.C. foundation, and it acts like a B.C. foundation, not a Vancouver foundation with a B.C. name in front of it. So you’re going to see activity from this $150 million across the province — obviously, most focused in regional cancer centres such as Prince George, Kelowna, Vancouver, Surrey, all those others. But also, we have a 41-community oncology network, so some of that work will go there and around the province — the work we’re doing to support the Indigenous cancer plan, and so on, which is part of this research effort as well.

I think that part of it is significant, and I think the member and members of the House will have some confidence in the foundation, which has demonstrated this before, and at B.C. Cancer, where we have seen a return, and we’re seeing a return, to more regional models of care and support — the PET-CT scanner in Kelowna.

I mean, I walk around the streets of Victoria…. We do one there. That innovation in technology, which on the capital side was supported by foundation dollars, in both places…. The operating side, obviously, is B.C. Cancer. People come up to me as much about that as almost anything else, because of the difference it makes of not having to make that drive to Vancouver to have a test that has so much at stake for you, and to be able to do it in the community. So that’s one of the most important things we have to do.

We’re going to see an increase in the number of people with cancer. It’s hard to think of things in these ways, but it does mean that the ability to provide care to larger groups of people in the region will, unfortunately…. And fortunately, because we have excellent survival rates for cancer in B.C. But that also means people living with cancer for long periods of time. Having those things around the province is critically important.

We’re going to see more of that. Because we have an aging population, there will be more age-related cancer. The result of that is, I think, a system which contracted, to a degree, to Vancouver. That’s not a political argument; it’s just what happened. It’s now expanding back out. I think that’s a positive thing.

R. Merrifield: I thank the minister for his answer. It is encouraging to hear that it is going to be a distributed model on the clinical trials.

The minister mentioned the PET scan, which is absolutely a game-changer for communities that receive them. The minister had also talked about the PET scan that was going to go into Vancouver. Along with some of these additional elements that the minister is going to provide, are there also going to be capital upgrades to some of those areas in terms of the equipment and the actual physical structures? I know that Vancouver is fundraising right now for a new facility because theirs is quite aged.

I know that Kamloops is still waiting for a facility. I would be remiss, and I would probably not make it past the twins, if I didn’t actually acknowledge that Kamloops is still waiting for their cancer care clinic. I know that even Kelowna’s was built in the ’90s and bursting at the seams. I welcome the minister to come for a tour at any point.

It is absolutely critical to even some of those clinical trials and some of the research capacity that this $150 million represents…. As the minister said, from $4 million to $150 million. It’s supercharging clinical trials and absolutely critically necessary for the future. Does this also represent some capital capacity increases?

Hon. A. Dix: I’ve described the capital aspects for the equipment and capital aspects of the plan. I failed to mention a third aspect of that, which is that the funding will support the acquisition and installation of a state-of-the-art stereotactic body radiotherapy system to improve capacity for clinical research and precision-guided radiotherapy. That’s another capital investment that will be supported by this plan and by the foundation’s fundraising activities around it. Those are significant capital investments.

[5:15 p.m.]

Again, I appreciate the member’s caucus management there in raising the issue of the capital plan, which I am sure…. In fact, I think I can win a loonie from the hon. member. I’m going to bet that those issues will be raised in the main estimates by either the member for Kamloops–North Thompson…. Maybe we can bet on which one raises it with me. But I’m sure those issues will be raised.

Obviously, that’s exactly what I was saying. Nanaimo…. The new Surrey hospital also includes a cancer centre. All those issues, I’m sure, we’ll be discussing in the main estimates when we discuss those capital issues.

R. Merrifield: So just to clarify, this one-time grant is not part of the capital plan for B.C. Cancer Foundation. Those would be carried into the normal budget of the ministry. I’m seeing a nod, so I’ll put on Hansard that there’s a nod there, which is good. That’s very good information.

As the minister knows, we’ve got new centres required in Burnaby, Kamloops and Nanaimo, all having been promised. Then upgrades are desperately required for Kelowna as well as for Vancouver. So definitely eagerly awaiting those aspects.

On this particular grant funding, was this a lesser or a greater amount than what was actually asked for by the Cancer Foundation? Then I’ll just…. Am I to only take one more question left, or are we still good?

The Chair: I believe we’re going to note the hour after this question.

R. Merrifield: Okay. I’m going to tag my very last question, and that is: can the minister also supply, either tonight or right now — I’ll take them from him if he has them — the supplemental materials, just so that we can get started on those? If necessary, you can email them tonight. But just a commitment to a time frame on those.

Hon. A. Dix: We’ll have something tomorrow morning. We’ll send it over to the opposition Health critic, and I’ll leave it to her to distribute it to the whole team. I’m sure that she will. I’ll ask her to forward it all.

I think it’s fair to say that the B.C. Cancer Foundation was delighted, and that we managed, even though they have very high expectations, to exceed those expectations. I think that’s a fair description of it.

With that, I move that the committee rise, report progress on the supplementary estimates of the Ministry of Health and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 5:18 p.m.

The House resumed; Mr. Speaker in the chair.

Committee of Supply (Section B), having reported progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported resolution and progress, was granted leave to sit again.

Hon. R. Kahlon moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 10 a.m. Monday, March 6.

The House adjourned at 5:20 p.m.