Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

MEN AS ALLIES FOR GENDER EQUITY

B. D’Eith: March 8 is International Women’s Day, and we honour women, girls, two-spirit, transgender and non-binary people in our province. Today, I’m going to speak about how men can be allies in the fight for gender equity in our society.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Now before I start, I wanted to point out while gender equality is focused on providing men and women with the same equal opportunities, gender equity works to correct the historical wrongs that have left women behind. We only have to look so far as our own Legislature to see these historic barriers. These barriers have been slow to come down.

It wasn’t until the 1970s that Rosemary Brown was the first elected Black woman in the British Columbia Legislature. In 2016, the MLA for Vancouver–Mount Pleasant was the first Indigenous woman in British Columbia to be in cabinet. It took until 2011 for the MLA for Prince George–Valemount to be the first female Attorney General. Now, of course, we’re very honoured to have the MLA for Vancouver-Hastings to be the first woman of colour to become the Attorney General of British Columbia. [Applause.]

Thank you. Absolutely.

It is quite incredible that our Legislature, for the first time, saw an equal number of women in caucus and in cabinet in 2017. It took that long. This only happened because our party made a deliberate effort to create policies to ensure that our caucus represents all of the people in our communities.

[10:05 a.m.]

Being an ally means recognizing that there’s a problem and supporting actions that lead to moving the dial to making these systemic changes. It means being willing to listen and learn.

A great example of this was in my first term as MLA. As a self-professed champion for women’s rights, I was the first to jump up and defend women in caucus after the presentation of an important gender equity policy. The member for Burnaby North, who was sitting next to me, put her hand politely on my arm and said: “The whole point of this is to allow women the chance to lead. So don’t jump to our rescue. Let us lead, and support us.”

That, folks, was a very valuable lesson learned. To be a true ally, men have to aid in the empowerment of women to lead on gender equity issues and then support them. Be their ally. It’s about learning, not always leading.

This couldn’t have been more important to me personally as the father of a transgender child. My daughter Violet is an incredibly courageous person who’s had to deal with prejudice, bigotry, shaming and attacks. She was forced to quit her computer game programming job. The trauma that she encountered has made it hard to work in the tech industry again.

My job as a father is to support her, love her and to provide a safe place for her. Her siblings and other family members are all part of this circle of care. It’s nothing easy to find your true self and try to express that to the world, especially with the number of folks who have antiquated and bigoted world views.

Another personal story is my daughter Amy, who is now a career firefighter in Maple Ridge. Firefighting is a perfect example of a traditionally male-dominated profession that is opening its doors to women. But there’s a long way to go. Only 3 percent of firefighters in Canada are women. What I can say with Amy is that she was encouraged to become a POC, and once she was in, she thrived in that environment.

I’m incredibly proud of her, but I am equally proud of her chiefs, captains and co-workers, who are shifting the culture of firefighting in our community to allow women and people of diverse backgrounds in. That is what is being an ally is about.

Now, men in our government caucus have learned a great deal as allies. Women are seven times more likely to experience sexual assault. Indigenous women are 3.5 times more likely than non-Indigenous women to experience violence and seven times more likely to be murdered. LGBT2QS+ individuals are two times more likely to be a victim of violence, and nearly half of transgender people have been sexually assaulted in their lifetime.

One in three women experience gender-based violence in their lifetime, and over half of women in B.C. have experienced physical or sexual violence since the age of 16. That’s more than one million people in this province. Domestic violence is not just about physical abuse. It includes sexual, emotional, financial and psychological abuse, including threats.

Now these are all things that I’ve learned and we’ve learned as men in our caucus. In our first term, I was Chair of the Finance Committee. At first, the Minister of MCFD, the former Parliamentary Secretary for Gender Equity, had to remind all of us to look at the myriad of issues in the province through a gender equity lens. Then over time, I began to actually apply that lens myself every time and also apply the lens of environment and Indigenous rights and other key lenses. You know what? A whole new world of possibilities opened. This changed everything and opened up the possibilities for change.

I want to say that it is so important, when we look at gender equity and being allies, that we work together, that we listen, that we learn and that we allow the people fighting for gender equity to lead. That’s so important, and as allies, we can be support to that.

I’m a proud ally of gender equity, and I will allow my colleague on the other side a chance to respond.

G. Kyllo: It’s truly an honour to stand to speak in response to the statement on men as allies for gender equity. I want to thank the member opposite for the opportunity to speak this incredibly important topic.

International Women’s Day certainly provides us with the opportunity to reflect on how we can better support women and achieve equity. But quite honestly, it’s something that we should be thinking about each and every day, especially when women continue to tell us that change is desperately needed. Perhaps we should feel a bit troubled that they need to tell us.

[10:10 a.m.]

Sometimes men are surprised when a woman shares negative or unsafe experiences, whether it’s in the workplace, in the home or in the community. But just because we as men have never experienced certain situations or behaviours, it doesn’t make them any less real for the women who do.

One way we can be allies is to listen earnestly and to avoid going to the defensive when these feelings are shared with us. Instead of making their words as a personal attack, we can see them as an opportunity for growth, because things will never get better in the boardrooms, the offices, the neighbourhoods or homes that we share with women if we can’t speak freely about their experiences and if we can’t look inward and reflect on how we can make things just a little bit better.

We often celebrate the increasing number of women in political life, in senior management roles and in traditionally male-dominated industries, as we should. We also need to think about how we treat women once they get there. Do they feel safe to openly express themselves? When they do express themselves, do we truly listen and value their perspectives? Do we acknowledge their experiences, even if we’ve never faced them? Are we inclusive? Are women invited to the table, rather than discouraged, overtly or not, from showing up?

Do we speak up when we hear of a woman being harassed or treated unfairly? Are we willing to change our own behaviours if they are a barrier to women feeling included and safe in the workplace, even when they are unintentional? Do we give them credit for their ideas? Do we amplify their voices, promote their skills and talents and compensate them equitably?

In the home, even if we have split household duties and split physical work, is it distributed fairly? Do we offer to help reduce the burden of the tremendous emotional and mental load that in most cases is carried by women? This is the thinking work, remembering and keeping track of where everyone in the household needs to be and when and with what and with whom. Do we value that work? Can we try to take more of it on for ourselves?

If we’re not doing any of these things, I think we need to ask ourselves why not, because achieving equality is not just a woman’s job. Men need to put in the work as well. That work might feel difficult and uncomfortable at times, but it is necessary.

As a parent and a grandparent, I want a bright future for my loved ones. I have four amazingly talented and kind daughters, and people often remark how I’m also outnumbered by so many females in my life. My wonderful wife, Georgina, and eight granddaughters bring a lot of joy to my life. When I imagine the future for my granddaughters — for Maya, for Eve, Kylie, Siddhalee, Nova, Hannah, Journey and Adison — and for other girls, I don’t want them to ever feel less than or treated that way by anyone.

I’ll note that I do have four grandsons as well — Nolan, Harvey, Sawyer and Noah. I want to thank them, and I want them to grow up as allies for gender equity as well. I think it’s important that kids are taught at a young age that a woman is equal to a man and that she deserves the same rights, that everyone deserves respect and dignity, no matter their sexual identity.

Let’s all be good to each other and model this for future generations as well. We have certainly supported pay equity for women. I think it’s something that is definitely long overdue in this province, and I do know that there’s wide support for that for all members of this House.

B. D’Eith: Thanks to the member for his comments on this issue.

As an ally for gender equity, I’m really proud of the work that our government has done in this area. For example, starting on April 1, British Columbia will be the first jurisdiction in Canada to make prescription birth control free to its residents.

Interjections.

B. D’Eith: Yeah, absolutely. Including oral contracep­tives, IUDs and plan B pills. Of course, male vasectomies were available for years. Go figure. It was wonderful to see our entire caucus and the women of the opposition cheer this announcement when it was made in the House. At a time when women’s reproductive rights are being challenged to the south and by certain Canadian parties, this move is a clear indication by our government that we support a woman’s right to control her own reproductive rights.

[10:15 a.m.]

Since launching the Childcare B.C. plan in the budget in 2018, the government has invested over $2.4 billion to build affordable, accessible, high-quality child care to ensure that families, especially women, can participate in the work force. More women than ever are entering or returning to the workforce because of this child care program, and the province is also supporting survivors of sexual assault by providing core funding to more than 50 sexual assault services, undoing cuts that were made to these critical services in 2002. Our government is putting people and survivors of violence first.

We’ve invested $3.2 billion to improve health care services that people rely on, including by improving wages, working conditions, job security and stability for thousands of support service workers being repatriated into our public health services, the majority of whom are racialized women.

We’ve done work to make more period products available for free, building housing and supports for women fleeing violence, increasing the B.C. family benefit, and expanding food programs in our schools. And since 2018, we’ve used a gender-based alliance lens on budgets to make sure that gender inequities are taken into account when we’re looking at programs, services and funding.

Now these are just some examples of the tremendous strides being made by our government to promote gender equity in our province. I’m proud to be an ally for the incredible leaders that we have in our caucus for women’s rights, including our ministers and former Parliamentary Secretary for Gender Equity and the other women in caucus who have taken the lead on these important issues for women in our society.

I’m also very proud of the men in our government caucus who are allies — listening, learning and supporting these transformative changes in our government and our society.

ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE
ON THE NORTH SHORE

K. Kirkpatrick: Today I rise in the House to speak on an issue of growing concern in British Columbia and one, I’m sure, that all of those in the House can agree upon.

As a Canadian and as a British Columbian, I’ve always been very proud of having a medical system that I, my family and my community could have timely access to life-saving medical treatments, but that system has fallen apart. Emergency rooms in rural communities have been forced to close, wait times for emergency and specialized care continue to climb, and a lack of paramedics has severe and sometimes fatal consequences.

Especially in my community, residents are continuing to struggle just to even get on a wait-list and maybe to see a doctor. And we all know that if you don’t have a doctor, you can’t have referrals, prescriptions, diagnostics. A family doctor is your entry level into the medical system and life-saving medical treatment.

Our health care system is failing British Columbians. Hospital closures, doctor shortages, concerningly high wait-lists at walk-in clinics are becoming the norm across the province. Our communities are suffering, and people are feeling like there’s just simply not enough being done to address all of these issues.

North Vancouver, my community, is at the centre of the health care crisis. According to the 2022 Medimap walk-in clinic wait time index, North Vancouver has the longest wait times in all of Canada — not simply British Columbia, but all of Canada, with an average of 160 minutes per visit. The longest wait times in the entire country are in fact occurring in our province. Four of ten cities with the longest wait times are here in British Columbia. The average wait time in B.C. walk-in clinics has increased significantly in the past few years, going from 58 minutes in 2019 to 79 minutes in 2022.

Now it’s important to note that other provinces have these challenges, but British Columbia is more than triple the average time in Ontario. That is significant, and that is a B.C.-grown issue. These growing wait times are evidence that our health care system is struggling to provide basic access to care to residents across the province. And while it’s devastating to see this happening in my own community, I was, unfortunately, not surprised by these statistics. I consistently hear from residents who are concerned about their access to primary care and lack of a family doctor.

The number of calls my office receives has not been slow­ing down. Access to health care in B.C. is not improving.

[10:20 a.m.]

This is not only a problem in my constituency of West Vancouver–Capilano, but I also hear from other residents across all of the North Shore in my nearby constituencies who are desperate for access to all forms of health care and are not receiving the help they need.

As of July 2022, there are officially 287 general physicians working on the North Shore, and that includes those who are working at Lions Gate Hospital and the UPCC, and those who work in specialized services or on a part-time basis.

However, the North Shore is currently seeing a growing number of family doctors retiring, with no new doctors there to take their place. This has left thousands stranded, with no access to a primary care provider. At present, over one million people, or one in five British Columbians, as we know, do not have a family doctor. Many of those are in my constituency. We know that there are at least 7,600 patients on the North Shore who are on a centralized wait-list for a family doctor.

Now, this list continues to grow every month, and it only includes those that are actually registered on a wait-list. The actual number of those who are without a family doctor is significantly larger, as 20 percent of respondents to a North Shore News poll said they do not have a family doctor. Without a family doctor, people are forced to go to walk-in clinics for anything from referrals to diagnostic testing. This is adding to the strain on our walk-in clinics, which can’t handle the increased capacity of patients.

At our clinics on the North Shore, you can no longer simply walk in for care, as they have now turned into “two-hour wait-outside clinics” or “require appointments to be booked in advance” clinics. In many cases, people must call the walk-in clinic as soon as it opens, at 7 a.m., to book an appointment for that day. In worst cases, residents will arrive to book an appointment in the morning, only to find the clinic already fully booked for the day.

There are often people who are neglecting their own health care because they simply cannot afford a seven-hour wait in order to seek urgent care. Many patients, single parents, don’t have the option to leave their kids alone for seven hours while they get the care they need.

There have been a number of cases where elderly patients simply cannot walk in and sit down in a clinic. So their families choose to call an ambulance to take them to the hospital emergency room instead. They’re even being told by 811 nurses to call an ambulance rather than try and go to a walk-in clinic on the North Shore.

These issues are not exclusive to the North Shore. Across the province, we see communities, both rural and urban, struggling to get basic access to primary health care. Our health care system is broken and has continued to get worse over the past six years. The increased wait times and lack of family doctors are a huge concern for any community, particularly an aging community like we have on the North Shore.

When a family doctor retires, there’s no guarantee that their patients will be able to find a new family doctor. The doctors are extending their careers and not retiring, for fear of their patients being stranded.

It should be a priority of this government to start delivering on their commitment to improve access to health care on the North Shore and across British Columbia.

S. Chant: Thank you for the opportunity to rise and respond to the motion expressed by my colleague and neighbour from West Van–Capilano.

To begin, I acknowledge that I’m speaking on the lands of the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking, specifically those of the Songhees and Esquimalt people.

I also acknowledge the unceded territory of the Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations, where my home and riding are situated. It is indeed a privilege to work, learn and live on these territories that have been and continue to be stewarded for so long and so well.

It must be difficult to be on the opposition in any political realm, as it seems that, as opposition, all debates are in the negative. You don’t get the chance to extol the positive things….

Deputy Speaker: Of course, this is private members’ time, so it’s not opposition versus government. Thank you.

S. Chant: My apologies, Mr. Speaker. I do take that back; I apologize.

I get the chance to extol the positive things that go on in our communities, our ridings and our province. Let’s start with the $1 billion that was distributed last week amongst all of the communities and regional districts throughout the province. It translated to just about $30 million across the North Shore municipalities, for municipal projects that might not have otherwise been afforded.

[10:25 a.m.]

Let’s talk about the strategies that have been actioned over the past couple of years to remediate the gutting of the health care system that took place in the early 2000s. I was there then, and me and my teams continued to try to provide effective and community-based client care over the next 16 years, in spite of the cuts and in spite of the empty promises that community health would get increased funding to keep clients closer to home.

Now we can look to actions that have been implemented to support our health care providers, which, in turn, support our patients — 600-plus new training positions for nurses in B.C., funding for internationally trained nurses towards getting their education and skills recognized in a timely fashion so that they can join our nursing workforce much sooner than in the past.

I was recently in the skills lab in Kwantlen College where internationally trained applicants are able to demon­strate their expertise so they can be signed off as ready or work on areas that need improvement.

Recent changes in payment and fee structures were accepted by both family physicians and resident physicians. Additionally, some specialists, such as those working towards cancer diagnosis and treatment, were also getting their funding increased.

A new medical school is opening at Simon Fraser University so that more medical students can be trained in our province. The number of residencies has also increased, and we have the opportunities for associate physicians, who are internationally trained, to work with the oversight of local doctors while getting accredited towards working independently.

Around 2017, we were able to see a difference in the community setting. My case management team was comprised of nurses and social workers who carried a caseload of approximately 100 to 120 clients each. These were clients that had conditions that could result in long-term-care placement. However, we were supporting them to stay at home.

We also supported the caregivers. We initiated and managed home support, arranged for respite in or out of the home, attached clients to public or non-profit resources and helped transition them home from hospitalizations, as well as moving them on to a higher level of care if they could no longer be managed in the home.

Imagine how much more we were able to do for our clients when were able to add three licensed practical nurses and two community liaison workers to our team. Not only were we able to have more clients on our caseloads, but we were able to provide a broader range of services, such as wound and catheter care or helping eligible clients to apply for benefits that they had not known about or accessed. Finally, in 2018, we were getting the help in community that had been promised for years.

There is no denying that there is more work to be done in rebuilding, maintaining and supporting our health care system. I am continually grateful for the ongoing valuable and exceptional work that all of our health care clinicians have been providing and continue to provide to the people of British Columbia.

Thank you to nurses, doctors, community health workers and care aides, physical and occupational therapists, social workers, dieticians, first responders and all of the health care providers that are part of our complex, caring and strengthening health care system.

I am so proud to be part of a government that continues to value all of their work.

K. Kirkpatrick: I’d like to thank the member opposite for their thoughts on this issue, and I would like to express my appreciation to her for the time that she spent as a nurse and a health care practitioner during her career. I would like to remind the member for North Van–Seymour, however, that the amount of criticism is only equal to the size of the health care crisis.

I think we can all agree that this health care crisis is an urgent matter. It should be discussed in this House more frequently, and it needs to be addressed. It genuinely is now a matter of life and death for people. Results are desperately needed. The health care system is collapsing, with record-high wait times at walk-in clinics and consistent emergency room closures.

I recently received a letter from a local doctor in my constituency who has been practising on the North Shore for 31 years. She’s part of a three-doctor family practice and has, on her own, 2,500 active patients. One of her partners is planning on retiring after having delayed that retirement and is terrified that this will lose more than 2,000 patients without a health care practitioner on the North Shore.

Dr. Simon Bicknell, who specializes in diagnostic and interventional radiology, says that if the problem is cancer, if you put off getting that assessed by your primary practitioner or a specialist, that can change a stage, just by letting it sit and wait for months. The lack of doctors and the length of wait-lists is having a devastating impact on the North Shore and all of British Columbia.

[10:30 a.m.]

Residents are worried about not having access to a family doctor. We have the longest wait-time clinics in all of Canada. People should not have to routinely wait two hours at a walk-in clinic just to get basic primary care.

It is not just the health care system on the North Shore that needs more support. There are few plans of any sort for investing in resources in this community for the long term. No plans for the SkyTrain line to the North Shore. Additionally, no mention of a new bridge connecting the North Shore…

Deputy Speaker: Member, private members’ statements are to be kept to one statement area.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is also connected to a lack of doctors. We have doctors and other professionals who simply can’t afford housing on the North Shore. But with traffic congestion so significant and the time it takes to commute, they’re choosing clinics closer to home.

It’s time to step up and support the residents on the North Shore by lowering the highest walk-in clinic times in Canada. Seventy-six hundred patients on the North Shore and 287 general doctors — those numbers speak for themselves.

SUPPORTING REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS

K. Paddon: As we know, later this week we will be marking International Women’s Day. This day is to honour the many women, girls, two-spirit people and non-binary people in our province who are so often the cornerstones of our family, neighborhoods and communities.

B.C. has a long history of incredible people who are making change in our society — people who fight sexism, gender-based discrimination, harassment and violence every day. From well-known public figures to ordinary people working quietly behind the scenes, these trailblazers are breaking barriers, standing up for change and fighting for the rights of all people.

I’m proud to be working with so many women and girls who make an impact every day towards making life better in our province. With this in mind, it would be difficult to discuss equity and access for women, girls, two-spirit and non-binary people without acknowledging the need to support bodily autonomy. Today I rise to discuss reproductive rights specifically.

It has been less than a year since the conversation about reproductive rights was changed by the reversing of Roe v. Wade in the United States, a case where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that the U.S. constitution protects the liberty to choose to have an abortion for its people. Now I know that we are in Canada, of course, and that we are in British Columbia specifically, where Roe v. Wade was not the case that set our foundation. But it is undeniable that our news, conversations, parts of our culture and even sometimes our understanding of the world around us and issues here in Canada are heavily impacted, if not influenced, by media, politics and issues from the United States.

Here in Canada, we have R. v. Morgentaler from 1988. In the case of Morgentaler, the Supreme Court of Canada held that abortion provisions in the Criminal Code were unconstitutional, because they violated women’s rights under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to security of person. Since this ruling, there have been no criminal laws on abortion in Canada. The decision sounds a little familiar, right? This was 35 years ago in Canada, even longer than that in the U.S., but the conversation and the fight for bodily autonomy and making medical decisions is still front and centre. We see and hear it every single day.

Abortion is health care. It is health care for those who could be pregnant, whose bodies are at the centre of the decision. We are watching, since the reversal of Roe v. Wade, different states making laws or tabling bills that would criminalize women for abortions, criminalize medical practitioners for offering medical care and jailing and threatening those who would choose to exercise their bodily autonomy.

Now, there has always been a question of different levels of accessibility. But now more than ever I know that so many of us here in Canada are watching in horror.

I have had the privilege to hear from many people in my community and in our province about the experiences with choice, with access and even the decision to access abortion care. I have heard fear and sadness. I’ve heard hope and frustration. I’ve heard about being made to feel shame, embarrassment and loneliness. I have heard about where it has saved lives, where it has saved families and where there was support and love. Each story is different. Each story is individual. Each choice belongs to no one but the person who is making it.

We are all in this chamber, and we have many roles. Here, we are representatives for our community, but that’s not all we are. For myself, I am the MLA for Chilliwack-Kent but also a daughter, a mother and a partner. Those things are linked to everything I do.

I bring this up because as a woman whose right to reproductive decision sometimes feels like it’s up for public debate in our current climate, one of the moments as a member of this Legislature that I continue to think about happened less than a year ago, right here. The cognitive dissonance still impacts my thinking. I know others who walked these halls might be familiar with this as well.

[10:35 a.m.]

Last May, there was a protest on the front lawn. An anti-abortion group was here, and as was their right, they were protesting to draw attention to the issue of abortion. Their message was that abortion should not be allowed, should be illegal, and, as a woman, a person who could be pregnant, that I couldn’t be trusted. It should be governments or courts who decide, not the person who is pregnant.

It was not the first time I’ve seen this or heard this. I don’t live under a rock. But this time it was different, and I’ll try to describe why.

That day I walked in this building. I sat in this chamber where we debate and vote on the laws of British Columbia. As an MLA, I am elected and entrusted, empowered by a community, to use my vote to make decisions that will impact my neighbours, my community and my province, where my vote on issues to our collective future is meant to be equal to all the other votes in this room.

Still, at the same time, on the front lawn, as a woman, as someone who could be pregnant, I felt reduced to a uterus and not to be trusted to make decisions about my body. I am not to be allowed, if the beliefs of the protesting group were to be entertained.

What continues to loop in my mind is that if this experience can have such a lasting impact for myself, who has access and support and is so privileged to be in this room with so much information, what impact must the rhetoric, the stories, the debate over reproductive rights be having on another who may be feeling isolated, terrified and alone? This is why we must support reproductive rights so that information, support options and treatment can be open and accessible.

Here in B.C., abortion is health care, and I’d like to share some information with everyone. The majority of abortions are medical abortions. This means a medication, Mifegymiso, is used to produce abortion. Since 2016-17, the number of abortions accessed has increased by 39 percent, while the dependence on surgical abortions has decreased by almost 50 percent. The medication is available by telehealth and dispensed by community pharmacies throughout the province. Anyone seeking a medical abortion with this medication should call 811 to find out the best way to access it.

Emergency abortions are performed at hospitals in every region of our province. However, for those who want or need to schedule a routine surgical abortion, there are approximately 30 sites providing abortion services in B.C. These sites are not all disclosed to protect the privacy and safety of health care staff and patients. Let’s just take a minute on that. No matter where you live, there is support available from the province to ensure you can access abortion.

We can’t be silent. We must be clear in our support for reproductive rights. I hope that we can all speak together in one voice on this topic today. Access to contraceptives is a right. Abortion is health care.

R. Merrifield: Today I rise to speak about the importance of supporting reproductive rights. I’m going to focus my comments not on the federal jurisdiction but rather, what we as a province and as provincial legislatures can do. Because when preparing my remarks, I was almost overwhelmed with the love towards and the thoughts of the angst of people who desperately want children, who are maybe feeling torn between children, career, focusing on whether or not to start a family or the angst of an unwanted pregnancy. It’s not easy to find a balance today in society with all of the barriers that are there.

Reproductive rights are fundamental human rights that empower individuals to make informed choices about their bodies, sexuality and reproduction. Reproductive rights include the right to access contraception and the right to comprehensive reproductive health care.

Access to reproductive health care is an important and critical component of public health. It enables people to plan their families, prevent unintended pregnancies and protect themselves from sexually transmitted infections. It is also essential to reducing maternal and infant mortality rates, improving maternal and child health and promoting gender equality.

[10:40 a.m.]

Access to reproductive health care is often limited by legal, financial and social barriers, and these barriers disproportionately affect marginalized communities, including women, people of colour, Indigenous peoples, LGBTQ2+ individuals and people with disabilities. They can also have serious consequences — including unintended pregnancies, unsafe abortions, childless families and poor health outcomes — sometimes with generational impact.

With free contraception being announced in the last budget, all British Columbians will now have access that continues gender equity promise. This was something that all three parties agreed on and something that we have been fiercely advocating for a while. Why is it so impor“This disproportionately happens amongst women who are quite young, so those that are 15 to 24 years of age, those who live in rural and remote communities in Canada, who belong to Indigenous communities, or are newcomers to Canada. This is the group that has the most difficulty in accessing contraception at large, but in particular, are long-acting reversible contraceptives, which are the most effective form of contraception.”tant? Equity. Contraception is expensive. The types of contraception that typically have less side effects are usually the ones that cost more.

Many people can’t afford contraception, which leads to unwanted pregnancies. It is estimated that 30 to 40 percent of pregnancies in Canada are unintentional, according to Dr. Vivian Tam, a family emergency physician based in Ottawa. I quote:

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

Having free contraception allows those from marginalized communities, whether rural, remote or lower socioeconomic backgrounds, an equal footing when it comes to family planning. Access to medical personnel is difficult, so having reliable and long-term contraception is important.

Free contraception also decreases the disparity between those with additional medical coverage or the means to afford different forms of birth control. Free contraception is another small blow to the cycle of poverty. Additionally, contraception allows a greater degree of choice and is a form of gender equality. The need is true now more than ever.

While this government has made huge strides to equality by making contraception free, there’s lots more to do. We can’t afford to be waiting six more years for any of the rest of it. Not only do we need publicly supported contraception; we also need fertility treatments supported by MSP and covered.

I was diagnosed as infertile when I was 14 years old. My medical issues continue, and I was able to have children through a medical study in Alberta, combined with divine intervention. I understand that grief and angst of not being able to afford the treatments necessary to have a family.

Currently, with the exorbitant cost of fertility treatments, couples are having to choose between a family or a home. This socioeconomic differentiator needs to be eliminated to fully support reproductive rights in B.C. Furthermore, it is crucial that we support reproductive rights and work to remove these barriers. It also means addressing systemic inequalities that impact reproductive health outcomes, such as poverty, racism and ableism. However, without timely and results-based government action, we just won’t get there.

Hon. Speaker, legislators, we have a responsibility to ensure that all individuals have access to the reproductive health care they need.

K. Paddon: Thank you to the member for their comments.

We celebrated the great news last week, with the introduction of Budget 2023, which included free contraception starting April 1 for British Columbians. As a mom with a teen daughter, I know this is huge. To outline the impact for individuals, for a person who pays $25 a month for birth control pills, that’s $300 in savings every year. For us as British Columbians as a whole, we have research that shows an estimated net cost savings to B.C.’s health system of $5.4 million after just three years and more in the years to follow.

The universal coverage extends to over 60 prescription contraceptives, including most oral hormone pills, injections, copper and hormonal IUDs, implants and the morning-after pill. All of these will be 100 percent covered, reducing out-of-pocket costs for people to zero. These savings could mean as much as $10,000 in a person’s lifetime.

[10:45 a.m.]

Everyone should be able to make their own choices about their reproductive health without being limited or burdened by cost. No one should have to choose between their health and being able to make ends meet. It’s a right, not a luxury. And making prescription contraceptives free for everyone means that people will face fewer obstacles in taking charge of their reproductive health.

Improving access isn’t just about cost. To help those who do not have a primary care provider to seamlessly access the contraceptives they need and want, pharmacists will soon be able to prescribe contraceptives to patients. This will make a big difference for people and is good news for the entire province — no-cost, accessible choice for British Columbians.

I know that the member for Kelowna-Mission clapped as hard as I did when this announcement was made last week, and the support was evident. It’s critical to acknowledge that the support, however, is not universal across our communities, province or country. When the good news was shared, I saw and heard comments saying, “This isn’t necessary. Women need to take responsibility for their behaviour,” and even old tropes about promiscuity, using defamatory feminine slurs.

I hear from people in my community that the politics of the child-bearing body in the neighbouring jurisdictions is anxiety-provoking. I feel it too, not only because it reduces a human down to the utility of their uterus but because it is too close.

Although we have come so far, the fight for equity for bodily autonomy and medical decisions is not over. I will say it as plainly as I know how.

As we talk about this today, and any day, and recognize International Women’s Day this week, we cannot afford to have any ambiguity about where our leaders stand on a person’s right to their body, including their right to make their own reproductive choices.

INVESTING IN OUR FUTURE

T. Halford: I rise in this House today to speak to the important issue of investing in the future.

Somewhat on the future and before I do that, I see that my daughter — she’s going to be really mad now — Alexandra Halford is here today, along with her aunt Marnie Bailey. They will be joined by Shaun Bailey and their daughter Bella Bailey, who are constituents, I believe, of the Speaker. So I want to welcome them to the House today.

This is a place that Alexandra is very familiar with. I think the last conversation was very important, and I’m glad that my daughter was here to see this, because what was just spoken about is…. I know I’m eating up time when I’m speaking about something else, but every opportunity we should be talking about what was just talked about, and I am so grateful that she was there to hear that today.

But on that note, when we talk about investing in the future, investing in our children, we talk about rapid growth in this province. The resources are already stretched to their limit, and increased demands for new infrastructure projects grow daily. It’s key that we see major capital projects launched to help make life better for people.

Now, many British Columbians were looking to this government’s budget for some relief, whether it was from student overcrowding, which I’ll get to in a second, or hospitals bursting at the seams, which I’ll also talk about, or roadways clogged with traffic. Being a resident of the Lower Mainland, that’s near and dear to my heart.

Looking back, we see that 21 projects are delayed or over budget or both, and we only have a finite amount of tax dollars to invest in for British Columbia. As the MLA for Surrey–White Rock, I have to say that in terms of schools, hospitals and transportation, we do feel that we continue to come up short over the last six years.

Now, Surrey schools have been facing classroom shortages for years, and many students — I’ll point out Alexandra as one — are in portables. That has not changed, and I think it’s disheartening to see that after years and years of promises to eliminate portables, we’ve actually seen portables continue to increase.

In fact, as of 2022, there are now more than 300 portables just in the Surrey school district alone. I think when we talk about the future, we have to acknowledge that that lack of progress is beyond unfortunate.

Laurie Larsen, the chair of the Surrey school board of education, reports they currently have more than 40 building projects and school site acquisitions that are seeking funding. So choosing not to invest in these projects is choosing not to invest in the future.

[10:50 a.m.]

Furthermore, we talk about the SFU Surrey medical school. I know that there have been recent announcements there, but there’s also been delay after delay there.

When we talk about the need to invest, we need to talk about the need to invest in making sure that we not only train doctors in British Columbia but we retain doctors in British Columbia. I think many lessons can be learned from those delayed announcements. When we think about the primary care crisis we’re in now, we would ensure swift action to see students in those spaces as soon as possible, yet that continues not to be the case. Expanding education access for the medical field is just one solution to the crisis, but it must be made a priority.

We only have to look at the fact that when we talk about…. This government talks a lot about the second hospital in Surrey, but we need to remind ourselves that when we talk about planning for the future and how important that is, there’s no intensive care unit. There’s no maternity ward there.

When we looked at the situation we saw at Peace Arch Hospital just last year, when I stood outside with my colleague from Surrey South and other members of the community, when that maternity ward was looking at a closure and parents were being diverted at the last minute…. Whether it was to Langley or Royal Columbian or Surrey Memorial, those hospitals were coming to us and saying: “Please advocate for us, because we’re bursting at the seams as well.”

We say: “How do we plan for the future?” When we’re talking about an additional hospital in Surrey, I think many people are surprised, and then they become frustrated, that we’re not talking about a maternity ward, an intensive care unit.

We see that in other areas. I will talk a minute about transportation and the need to invest there as well, that we look at…. Quite often I get stuck through the Massey Tunnel, whether it’s going south or northbound. I’m sure a number of members in this House face the same dilemma.

We’re talking about a bridge crossing that should be open by now that we should be able to access. Now that’s investing in the future. Taking $100 million of taxpayers’ money and scrubbing it to replace a tunnel with a tunnel…. I think some would argue, I would argue, that’s not investing in the future. That’s shortsighted. Not only are we delaying the project a decade, but we’re shortchanging commuters. We’re shortchanging the commercial traffic that utilizes that corridor every day. That is one of the worst bottlenecks in western Canada.

When we talk about the future, we talk about the need to invest adequately. The need to invest so if we are going to build a bridge, the Massey crossing, that bridge would have been designed for rapid transit — perhaps, to south Surrey. Now that is investing in the future.

Interjection.

T. Halford: Exactly.

When we talk about other areas, whether it’s Kamloops or Nanaimo, both areas where they were promised cancer centres, we see slow progress there as well. That is one area where we can’t afford to wait. We’ve talked about education. We’ve talked about transportation. We’ve talked about health care. With health care, we talk about cancer care. We talk about the fact that when we delay these investments, we are shortchanging our future.

I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak, and I look forward to the next speaker.

With that, I will take my seat.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

Of course, to remind everyone, this is private members’ time.

R. Russell: Thank you to the member for Surrey–White Rock for having the opportunity to speak to this topic, investing in our future. I struggled a little bit originally thinking what to talk about, because I feel like this really is everything we do in this place and, I think, is what our government’s intention is. It’s to deliver on just that. How do we best invest in our future?

I think the vision we have is investing in the potential of people. Investing in the potential of our communities can help us build an economy that is rooted in both advancing our goals for climate action as well as enhancing social well-being. I think that is really the challenge at hand.

[10:55 a.m.]

I’ll go through some examples. One that is quite literally close to home for me. The community that I live in is a few thousand people. We have a branch campus of Selkirk College. Adult basic education, a handful of years ago, was on the chopping block. It was something that the government at the time had decided they would not support.

Changes that were made by the subsequent government brought that potential back into our community, that opportunity for adults to live up to their own dreams in terms of what they wanted to be. Those are examples to me of investing in people that work well for all of us and invest in our future.

The member mentioned health care, for example. A health human resource strategy that has been delivered by government is exactly that. It’s saying: how do we best invest in fixing the broken parts of this system so it works well for people. Team-based health care or bringing care closer to people in rural communities or reducing the barriers people have accessing that care remotely — those are investments, financial and human resource investments, in our future.

I look to the natural resource economy. I look to the electrification of the Copper Mountain mine in my riding outside of Princeton. Those are the kinds of investments that help make those enterprises, those industries, competitive on a global market at the same time as advancing our climate commitments. These are the opportunities, in my mind, to invest in our future.

Modernizing a forest sector that has become challenging in a place of incremental change over decades…. We’ve taken on the hard work in government of figuring out how we modernize this so it works well for people and provides jobs for decades to come. That’s the goal. How do we secure more value out of our forests, as opposed to managing them simply for volume?

As a matriarch on Haida Gwaii said to me: “I’m tired of economic development meaning people taking things away from us.” This is the sentiment of how we have to change how we’re investing in our future.

Connectivity. The work the government is doing to deliver connectivity to all communities across this province is remarkable. The case study that was done in the southeast of B.C. demonstrates that the return on investment for that government investment is five times, immediately, in terms of the economic return, and 14 times. So for every dollar invested in connectivity in those rural communities, 14 times the return in terms of local economic activity over the medium and long term. Those are the investments in our entrepreneurs and in our local communities that help bring youth back to those places and help advance social determinants of health.

This morning’s announcement, around $100 million for watershed security. Minister Cullen mentioned in this announcement an hour ago that the watershed sector in 2019 delivered 48,000 jobs into the B.C. economy and $5 billion. We can quibble about numbers, but that is equivalent or on par with some of our enormously important sectors like mining, like agriculture. These things matter. These are investments in jobs that will be around forever for us.

What about other jurisdictions? As we have heard, we have some things we certainly don’t want to learn from the United States, but there are other opportunities, like the passing of the Inflation Reduction Act in the U.S., which allocated $369 billion to invest in developing their clean economy and transitional economy. These are opportunities that we’re set to learn significantly from.

The opportunity exists for us here to seize this confluence of traditional low-carbon economy, advancing our climate targets and catalyzing innovation in our economy — in other words, delivering a vibrant, economic future that delivers environmental successes and ad­vances social health.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

Of course, members are reminded we don’t use names in this House.

T. Halford: I want to thank my colleague for his remarks previous. When we’re talking about investments in the future, I think it’s important…. I know that the minister, actually…. I was heartened to hear the minister actually highlight some of the private sector investments.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

I will note that it is a little bit…. I wouldn’t say strange, but it is somewhat noticeable that when we have here in B.C. the largest private sector investment in Canadian history. That’s through the LNG Canada project. The member doesn’t mention that at all.

[11:00 a.m.]

When we talk about building for the future, we should be talking about LNG, whether it’s LNG Canada, the project up there in Kitimat, or whether it’s potentially Cedar LNG, which I know is something that everybody here is anticipating, waiting for the minister to make a decision.

But when we talk about investing in the future, I will say…. I had the opportunity last week, with my colleague from Surrey South, where she and I hosted International Women’s Day at the Kwantlen Polytechnic University campus in Newton. It was an absolutely fantastic day. It was great, because we were surrounded by women who were driven to enhance other women.

There was one particular case where…. It was two female electricians now that are actually teaching at that campus. They had gone through, and they told their story. In a lot of ways, it was a very, very personal story, about the trials and tribulations that they faced going through in the work sector and then in the private sector, how they’ve now come back and how they’re giving back to that campus, giving back to that profession.

I want to take my remaining time here and just say that those two individuals that spoke…. That is about investing in the future. That is about investing in a workforce that we need more of. We need to see more women in the trades.

We’ve got to be proud of that, and we’ve got to make sure that we are not just having those conversations at the university level. We’ve got to make sure that we’re having them at the high school level. We’ve got to make sure that we’re having them at the elementary school level, to make sure that women know that there is nothing that they cannot do, whether it’s electrician, whether it’s fitting. It does not matter, and they are doing it.

When they are doing it, we need to make sure that that is being seen, that we are shining the spotlight on that, because that is important. That was such a great experience.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

T. Halford: I want to thank the member for that, and I want to thank the Speaker for noting that my time is up.

Hon. M. Dean: I ask that the House consider proceeding with Motion 22, standing in the name of the member for Nechako Lakes.

Deputy Speaker: Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed to Motion 22 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper. If any member is opposed to the request for leave, please indicate now.

Leave not granted.

Deputy Speaker: Leave has not been granted. In accordance with Standing Order 25, we will resume debate on Motion 3 on the order paper.

M. Babchuk: I ask for a five-minute recess, as this was not the process or the motion that was agreed to, just so that the members in government can get themselves ready.

Deputy Speaker: I do believe there are members prepared to speak. I will give a two-minute recess.

The House recessed from 11:04 a.m. to 11:06 a.m.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 3 — COVID-19 RESPONSE
AND PROTESTS

(continued)

R. Merrifield: I rise in response to the motion before us.

First, I want to just take this opportunity to get some things off my chest. Recently, some deeply offensive and disparaging comments were made about me and other fellow members in this House by certain members of the government in response to this motion, especially from the member for Parksville-Qualicum. I want to give that member an opportunity to check the media, my Twitter account, my public statements and withdraw his statements, with apology, for misrepresenting me and my actions before I pursue my point of privilege officially.

This is just another example of how this debate has been turned into misleading comments about a female member, the government’s use of divisive tactics to politicize events from a year ago to this day and their tendency to create false narratives — simply throw something at a female member, see what sticks — and hammer through an us-versus-them mentality.

We can all agree that this government, if anything, has done one thing, and that is fail to stand up and support the people of British Columbia. The government bringing up such a baseless motion based on events from more than a year ago is appalling, and if anything, the exact opposite of standing in support of the people of B.C.

If this government truly wants to debate issues of importance, something that actually means something to people, let’s talk about how today alone an average of six people are going to die from a toxic overdose. Let’s talk about how, today, multiple people from Vancouver to Kelowna to here on the Island to north will be subject to a random violent stranger attack under the Premier’s catch-and-release justice system.

Today one million British Columbians can’t get access to a family doctor. One million more British Columbians are actually waiting to see a specialist, yet this government is focused on this.

They’re so focused on yesterday, except the promise to build 114,000 affordable homes was completely missing from the unveiled Budget 2023. If we’re so desperate to be talking about issues from the past…. Well, after six years of delays and broken promises by the Premier, the renters rebate has been turned into a tax credit with multiple problems, not to mention it’s a yearly tax credit that won’t even cover a single half-month’s increase.

Housing has never been worse, and it’s all under this inefficient and disappointing leadership. In Kelowna, rents are $1,944 per month for a one bedroom. And a two bedroom? Well rents cost $2,486 per month. This is broken politics and out-of-touch governance.

In my riding of Kelowna, people aren’t as concerned about our debates on protests that happened a year ago because, clearly, affording this month’s rent is a much bigger problem. Walking down a street in our cities…. It’s scary when, from 2020 to 2021, the violent crime severity index in B.C. increased by almost 5 percent. In cities like Kelowna, we increased by 14 percent, and Victoria — 12 percent. We’ve seen double-digit increases in violent crime severity.

[11:10 a.m.]

Government can try and distract from the very real concerns all they want, but the fact is the opposition has been holding this government to account, and the Premier and his caucus just can’t seem to handle it. I don’t understand why we have to waste our time and energy discussing matters that people have, frankly, moved on from.

Check the records. We worked together to fight COVID. We also support the right of all Canadians to express their views in a lawful, peaceful and safe way. It’s disappointing to see this government resort to divisive motions like this for political gain when British Columbians would much rather their elected officials discuss matters of importance today.

We, together with all members of this House, supported and respected compliance with public health orders and joined the entire country in our fight against the virus and not each other. Our society was in an immense crisis, and we stepped up appropriately. If there is one party in this House that didn’t…. There was not much good faith when the snap election of 2020 was called.

Today there are crises in housing, in affordability, in health care, in child care, in public safety. People want results. The opposition has given constructive ideas on changing B.C.’s approach and getting those results, but this government just can’t seem to step up to the task.

M. Elmore: I’m very pleased to rise and speak to the motion before us in the House, in favour of the motion moved by my colleague: “Be it resolved that one year after the anti-vaccine protests in Ottawa and communities including Victoria, South Surrey, Kelowna and Cranbrook, this House denounces the freedom convoy protests and affirms that public health orders, including vaccine requirements, have been an essential tool in B.C.’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

I want to reference the comments, as well, that we heard just recently from my colleague across the way here and really affirm…. I think we know that British Columbia came through the pandemic — an unprecedented time, a challenge globally, very challenging, difficult. A lot of hardship, sacrifices and difficulties encountered in British Columbia, but because we came together and supported the public health officer in terms of agreeing on how to unite and move forward, B.C. emerged, really, across Canada and around the world, in protecting citizens, keeping our economy open and keeping kids in schools. We’re seeing the benefits of that.

We’re coming through the pandemic. But the importance to reference…. I want to bring my perspective, as well, in terms of the importance, not only in our agreement in unifying and backing the provincial health officer, supporting science-based claims on vaccinations and really coming together as a community. One of the biggest challenges that I saw in Vancouver-Kensington, and that persists today…. This is why it’s important to continue the conversation. In British Columbia, we continue to support the leadership of our provincial health officer and also our provincial health authorities in upholding science-based claims around the importance of vaccination mandates.

That is a point of contention with some — certainly, with freedom of expression, to hear that — but it’s clear in terms of our government. I would hope that all members of the House continue to support the science-based direction of our provincial health officer and our medical profession in terms of the importance of upholding those vaccine mandates.

Now, the motion references what we saw across Canada in the context of the pandemic, and certainly, a response around the anti-vaccine protests in Ottawa, and the impact. Why are we discussing it here? What’s the importance, what’s the relevance, and what’s the significance? I will say to you that these issues, the COVID-19 pandemic — we’re seeing our way through. The repercussions continue now.

[11:15 a.m.]

I’ll share with members of the House what I have previously in terms of the impact on communities, a disproportionate impact on racialized communities, and what we saw in anti-Asian and racist attacks in the context of the pandemic. We’re still dealing with these and wrestling with these realities today.

The importance of affirming in this House that we support our public health officers, that we support science-based policy and that we stand against the type of anti-Asian hate that we saw in British Columbia, across Canada, and reflected, as well, in some of these protests…. That’s a reality that is with us today in our community and in communities that I represent and am connected with — racialized communities.

This is a reality, and we are still grappling with this. We continue to need to take a stand against that. Unfortunately, we saw, in terms of what’s referenced here in our motion, the impact of — and not across the board, but some individuals and leaderships in terms of the convoy and these anti-vaccine protests — some of those components. So that’s why we’re saying….

I stand here in firm support of this motion and a commitment I ask from all members of the House: commit to ensuring that British Columbia respects human rights.

T. Shypitka: I’m happy to stand and speak to this motion and clear the air, so to speak.

When we spoke to this motion three weeks ago, there were not only extremely disparaging remarks made to me, which were spiteful, but there were also remarks that were made towards my constituents, both completely uncalled for. I found it insulting. So do the people I represent, who look up to politicians as figures that they hope represent all British Columbians. I hope the members across the floor realize their words carry weight, and the things they say in this chamber can cause harm to others. I will not be more specific than that, because it will only play into what this motion is all about.

Divide et impera. For those that speak Latin, they’ll know that translates into English as “divide and rule.” Most of us here to refer to it as “divide and conquer.” The definition for divide and conquer is “the policy of maintaining control over one’s subordinates or opponents by encouraging dissent between them, thereby preventing them from uniting in opposition.” This strategy goes back to the ancient Babylonians in some 1200 BC. It has also been attributed to Philip II of Macedon back in 338 BC. It was also utilized by Julius Caesar in 49 BC and the French Emperor Napoleon in the early 1800s.

But divide and conquer is still key to warring strategies in the 21st century, it appears, but not on the battlefields. This division of right and left political systems is splitting British Columbians as effectively as Caesar’s war plans. We see this with all false choices we are given — rural versus urban, government versus government, environment versus economy — and now, today, in this chamber, in this motion.

There is only one purpose for this motion. It is clear to every member of this chamber. This government is clearly okay with spending time discussing events from over a year ago, with the intent to further divide and inflame conflict within this chamber and, ultimately, with the people of British Columbia. This government is intentionally politicizing this event, and it’s frankly disappointing. It is disheartening that we have to stand here and talk about events from so long ago instead of what we should really be debating.

We have so much to do in this province. Yet here we are talking about this motion that does absolutely nothing to solve the challenges by British Columbians. The government’s failure to address the real issues has resulted in a loss of trust in their leadership. British Columbians have legitimate concerns about the increasing costs of living, including rising prices for housing, fuel and groceries. Many people are struggling financially and are living paycheque to paycheque, leaving them worried about their ability to cover their bills and pay their debts.

Many continue to struggle with rent, while the thought of purchasing a home is no longer even on their minds anymore. Today British Columbians are faced with the reality that there are no signs that housing and rental prices will be coming down anytime soon, and they have yet to be provided with much help from the government to combat these rising costs.

[11:20 a.m.]

B.C.’s health care system continues to deteriorate with regular hospital emergency room closures, crisis-level wait times in all kinds of treatment and nearly one million British Columbians without access to a family doctor. It happens that rural communities are bearing the brunt of this crisis. We’re isolated, and we feel forgotten by this government.

Our communities continue to suffer, with residents feeling as though nothing is being done to address the situation. Rural hospitals are particularly vulnerable to shortages, as just one staff member calling in sick is enough to shut down an emergency room. In the Kootenays, the Elkford hospital has been officially closed now for 523 days. That’s a full year and a half. That is just plain unbelievable.

There’s a growing sense of frustration among people in British Columbia. They’re also increasingly worried about public safety and the survival of their businesses. Throughout the province, business owners are in search of relief from rampant vandalism and property crime that is plaguing British Columbia. Communities are feeling increasingly concerned and fearful, and businesses are feeling the economic impact. This needs to be addressed immediately to keep people safe and to ensure that our cities and towns are places where businesses can thrive and families can live without fear.

Unfortunately, we’re still losing close to seven people a day to an opioid crisis. This government needs to focus their efforts on improving life for British Columbians. We should be spending our time debating serious issues that people in B.C. are facing every day. I hope this government can be responsible moving forward and work with all members in this House to help our communities, as they need to be our priority.

I eagerly look forward to the member’s rebuttal to this irresponsible motion.

H. Yao: I stand here to respond to this: “Be it resolved that one year after anti-vaccine protests in Ottawa and communities including Victoria, South Surrey, Kelowna and Cranbrook, this House denounces the freedom convoy protests and affirms that public health orders, including vaccine requirements, have been an essential tool in B.C.’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

As I’m about to continue, I do want to make sure that we actually have some clarification, because the member opposite continuously emphasized that we are all having this conversation. I know that the member from Nechako Lakes actually expressed interest in having a discussion about electrification of the economy. That’s actually one of the topics we would love to have a discussion about right now. I do want to remind the members opposite that they’re the ones who brought us back to this discussion.

As the member for Richmond South Centre, I want to emphasize that as Chinese-Canadian communities, we face many, many challenges, especially when it comes to anti-Asian racism. When COVID-19 first struck our community, Chinese Canadians and Asian Canadians were the first ones to put face masks on. Chinese Canadians and Asian Canadians were the first ones to do social distancing. Chinese and Asian Canadians were the first ones sharing with their neighbours and talking about how we can better protect one another, when the global community was still struggling with the challenge at that moment. Yet it is the Chinese Canadians and Asian Canadians who get the blunt end of racial and racism attacks. The challenges that we have to face continue through our time, even until today.

We believe in democracy. Our government believes in democracy. We believe that people have a right to express themselves. We have a right to protest, but not in a way that disrupts people’s livelihood, creating noise that disrupts people’s peace of mind and actually setting fires in people’s hotel rooms, just so they can get their way.

Protest is a way to foster dialogue, not to force one person’s opinion upon another. The reality is that B.C. is doing so much better than so many Canadian jurisdictions because we followed Dr. Bonnie Henry’s guidance. Our government actually chose to not play politic with COVID-19.

Minister Adrian Dix took a step back to allow Dr. Bonnie Henry to lead our province in the charge…

Interjections.

H. Yao: I beg your pardon?

All I’m going to say is that very clearly, Dr. Bonnie Henry led us in the health care charge as a way of addressing it. And you know what? We actually are recovering. B.C., Richmond South Centre, many of our constituencies fully support how Dr. Bonnie Henry has led us here today. We actually have a strong, healthy economic recovery. We can see other jurisdictions around the world struggling because they chose to play politic. Even some Canadian jurisdictions chose to play politic with the COVID-19 response.

[11:25 a.m.]

Let’s be clear. We are having this discussion today because members opposite chose not to cooperate and to break the agreements. Let us be clear. Today we could have been spending our time discussing how electrifying our economy plays a vital role in our economic development. The member for Nechako Lakes had prepared a motion for us to have a good, healthy discussion about our future. It is the members opposite who chose not to cooperate and who brought us back to the topic again.

All we’re saying here right now is that we are ready to try to solve British Columbia’s challenges in a cooperative manner, reflecting what we had discussed in our own Health Committee, where we’d been discussing these various issues in a cooperative manner.

One of the things I want to take pride in is just to mention, as our Premier mentioned very clearly, that good ideas come from everywhere. We want to have a good discussion, but we have to also be clear. Don’t confuse British Columbians by playing word games or playing some kind of word and logic gymnastics.

We have seen this happen in the past, when you guys utilized language barriers to create confusion among people. That is unacceptable behaviour. Now we’re talking about various kind of challenges where you’re playing politics. All I’m asking right now is that we could have good, healthy discussions.

In representing Richmond South Centre, we truly believe in what our government has been doing for our health care, for our COVID-19 response, and the importance of working in a conversation, a dialogue, instead of putting up with protesters who deny conversation and proper communications.

L. Doerkson: I would like to inform the member previous that the reason that you’re receiving push-back this morning is because of a complete lack of respect for the House time in this building and for the process that is happening in this building.

Usually, Madam Speaker, I would say it’s a pleasure to rise to respond to a motion, but it’s hard to say that today. This motion represents this government….

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Carry on.

L. Doerkson: This motion represents this government at its absolute worst, trying to sow division among people rather than working to create a better future for all British Columbians. The members opposite could have chosen to use this time to debate something constructive. They could have used it to echo sentiments from their budget, which they should be proud of, but again, they chose to make intentional decisions to divide members of this House. Because of that, we’re back here again, having the same conversation that we had a few weeks ago.

It’s more important than ever that this place spend its time to work on the issues that matter most to British Columbians, the challenges that they deal with every day, rather than to focus on things that needlessly — dare I say intentionally? — inspire conflict. There are so many challenges facing British Columbians right now.

There are pressing issues, like public safety, impacting nearly every community in this province. We have an average of four people a day being randomly assaulted on our streets. Violent prolific offenders are wreaking havoc. Even in my communities of Cariboo-Chilcotin, we’ve seen residential property crime increase, as well as businesses which are left to deal with broken windows, graffiti and thefts — all while little is done by this government to prevent these crimes, to bring these perpetrators to justice or to support the people and businesses that are being impacted.

There’s the affordability crisis, which has made it more difficult than ever for people to make ends meet. B.C. has the highest gas prices in North America, the most expensive housing and rents in the country, and last year alone we have seen the price of groceries increase by over 10 percent. Nearly half of British Columbians are just $200 away from insolvency at the end of each month. Seniors have begun a letter-writing campaign in my riding, because they too are feeling the impact of the affordability crisis.

People are desperate for this government to honour its six-year-old promise to make life more affordable, and when we talk about broken promises, it’s worth focusing in on housing in more detail. Rents have increased astronomically under this government, and housing prices have literally broken nationwide records, yet this government has just abandoned its promise to build 114,000 homes over ten years. Instead, they have essentially said: “We’re going to take a mulligan, and we’ll be back in the fall with a new program.”

[11:30 a.m.]

The renters rebate, first mentioned in the 2017 election over six years ago, was just announced, but it was the worst possible version of what this NDP government has promised the people of British Columbia. Thousands of renters in need of support will simply not be eligible for it, and they won’t even see any of the supposed support for another year.

Meanwhile, our health care crisis rages on, with people literally dying while waiting for care, whether in hospitals or while waiting on diagnostic testing. Ensuring that British Columbians have access to the care they need to survive should be the government’s top priority, not motions like this that are meant to score cheap political points. As elected officials, we should be focusing our time and energy on moving forward together.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Recognizing….

Point of Order

B. D’Eith: A point of order. The member is not speaking to the motion. I’m saying to the Speaker, please…. He’s absolutely not speaking to the motion, Madam Speaker. I’d like a ruling on that.

Deputy Speaker: Members are aware that there must be relevance to the motion, and I would encourage members to bring their comments back to the motion on a regular basis.

Debate Continued

L. Doerkson: Thank you very much for your helpful guidance, Madam Speaker.

In closing, I wanted to say that as elected officials, we should be focusing our time and energy on moving forward, working together, as we did during the pandemic, to improve the lives of all British Columbians. We should be rolling up our sleeves and getting down to the work that truly makes people’s lives better.

The challenges facing our province, the affordability crisis, the collapse of our health care system, people feeling unsafe in their neighborhoods…. These problems are not going to go away until the government steps up and does the work required to deliver real, tangible results for the people of British Columbia.

R. Glumac: Apparently, today we are debating a motion that denounces the freedom convoy and anti-vaccine protests and affirms our public health orders. At the root of this motion is the belief in science. We as MLAs need to stand in this House, and we need to stand up for our experts, in this area and in many other areas, and embrace science. The B.C. Liberal government had issues with science, I think, and I believe that the Leader of the Opposition needs to denounce their repeated anti-science comments from this caucus.

The MLA for Kootenay East went to Kelowna for a convoy protest, and he referred to the protesters as great Canadians, strong Canadians — in this House. What about standing up for science?

We have to remember that not long ago…. Today in the House we have a member of the B.C. Conservatives, but that member was a B.C. Liberal. He said something where he questioned science. He questioned climate change.

In response to this, the B.C. Liberal leader said that the member started “tweeting out things that were in denial of climate change as a reality. I said to him, ‘If you’ve changed your position, that’s fine. We can have that debate and discuss that in caucus, which we’re always willing to do, but you’re not going to be out there publicly doing that.’”

Then the leader of the B.C. Liberals booted him from the party.

Their leader says it’s okay for MLAs to deny climate science.

Interjections.

[11:35 a.m.]

Deputy Speaker: I am giving the speaker leeway, but I would remind you to bring it back to the motion.

R. Glumac: The motion today, Madam Speaker, is about denouncing anti-science, anti-vaccine protest. That’s what the motion is about. We need to stand here today and embrace science.

Deputy Speaker: Recognizing the member for Cariboo-​Chilcotin.

L. Doerkson: Just on a point of order, I don’t think that what the member just introduced is the motion.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: The member has the floor. Please continue.

R. Glumac: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Members of the opposition have been speaking about everything except the motion, and then they call on me, where I’m trying to bring relevance to this motion and talk about what this motion is about. It’s about embracing science. That’s what this motion is about — not to go to Freedom Convoy protests where people are denouncing science. What about…?

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Members.

R. Glumac: How many other members of the B.C. Liberal caucus denounce science? What about the member for Skeena? He attended a pro-oil documentary in Alberta a few years ago called Over a Barrel. Afterwards he was interviewed in a panel discussion. He said: “There was a question raised about global warming and climate change. You know what? Even the scientists and experts can’t agree on what’s going on.” The scientists and the experts can’t agree, similar to, I guess, the Freedom Convoy. There’s some disagreement there about science.

The scientists and the experts can’t agree. Actually, when this documentary was released, there was a study published by James Powell, a scientist that reviewed the latest 11,602 peer-reviewed articles on climate change and global warming and found that 100 percent of them concluded that climate change is real and caused by humans — 100 percent.

So where are these scientists that don’t agree — Fox News? The documentary that questions global warming is not science. The scientists, the real ones, are telling us that in order to avoid a catastrophic 1½-degree increase in global temperatures, we have to reduce emissions.

Deputy Speaker: Excuse me, speaker.

Recognizing the member for Vancouver-Langara.

Point of Order

M. Lee: I would join my colleague, the member for Cariboo-Chilcotin, once again to rise in this House to ask the Speaker here to rule on the relevance of this member’s speech, as it continues to vary into Fox News. If he wants to start quoting Fox News in here, let’s talk about what’s important to British Columbians.

Our concern is the waste of time that this government continues to do to Monday morning statements.

Interjections.

Deputy Speaker: Excuse me, Member. Thank you. I have heard your point of order.

To the member who is on the floor, I have asked members to bring their comments back to the motion to show relevance. I would remind members that that will be expected.

I’ve been pretty lenient. I would ask that you remember that there is a motion on the floor, and that’s what we’re speaking to.

Debate Continued

R. Glumac: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I look forward to the enforcement of that during the next speech.

Deputy Speaker: Are you challenging the Chair?

R. Glumac: No, no. I’m just saying that I support what you’re saying, 100 percent.

Deputy Speaker: Thank you.

R. Glumac: I would like to conclude that, as elected MLAs, we all come together to embrace science. The time to question climate change is over. The time for action is now.

D. Clovechok: Just that last, whatever we just heard, demonstrates the reason why, I think, we’re here. That member doesn’t have a clue of what he’s talking about. You know, here we are. We’re standing here today listening to a bunch of folks that don’t have a clue of what they’re doing.

[11:40 a.m.]

They brought a motion to this floor that was a housekeeping motion, which we’ll talk about a little bit later on, while so many other things are going on in this province.

Just the other week when the NDP government tabled this motion, they were rightly condemned and called out for their crass and divisive politics from journalists to pundits and, most importantly, to everyday British Columbians. People were quick to point out the clear and petty and disappointing intent of what the NDP were trying to do with the wording of this motion.

That should have been it, but oh no. Here we are again playing trickery and an inability to run this House….

Deputy Speaker: Member, I would remind you that we have a motion on the floor. I would ask that your comments be relevant, or I will call you out of order.

D. Clovechok: Okay. So the motion speaks to bringing this all together in the way that…. Here we are debating a motion that is irresponsible. It requires the lack of a mature mindset and no professionalism. It’s a housekeeping motion when British Columbians are facing some of the hardest times they’ve ever faced — skyrocketing costs, health care in crisis. The past Premier actually said it was crumbling.

We see a government that wants to play partisan games with this motion rather than debate what’s going on. I find this debacle, which these fine folks across the aisle continue to bring to the stage, disappointing and egregious.

Under this government, gone are the days of trying to give people something to vote for. Instead, they figure they can sit back on their laurels and devote resources to villainizing others. That’s part of what this motion is all about. The discussion of this motion here on this floor should never have been brought forward in the first place, when we have so many….

Interjections.

D. Clovechok: Madam Speaker, continually we hear from them over there talking about the things like this motion.

Interjection.

D. Clovechok: You brought it here.

So no, hon. Speaker, it’s entirely about us versus them, as we saw, firsthand, in the NDP message guide, which leaked in 2020. It’s divisive politics. But the theme continues — putting politics before people.

While these hard-working folks continue to contact our offices, they don’t want to hear about the convoys. They don’t want to hear about what these guys are talking about when there’s 46 percent of our province $200 a month away from insolvency. They ask the government to do something about the fact that we have the highest rents in Canada.

In Columbia River–Revelstoke, how about some public transportation instead of this? How about some rural transportation or wildlife management or provincial health care services in Alberta? They ask to stop filibustering their own bills. Across the international border, which these members wouldn’t have a clue about, health is incredibly important to the people where I live.

I’m going to continue using my time, which is almost over, to represent my people, represent British Columbians, because that’s what they deserve. They deserve better than this that was presented here a couple of weeks ago.

No more games, NDP. It’s time you actually got to work and show some results. Do your damn jobs.

Deputy Speaker: I would ask the member to withdraw that obscenity.

D. Clovechok: Withdrawn, Madam Speaker.

K. Greene: I’m very pleased to be speaking today to Motion 3. It seems like there’s some confusion over what the motion is, so I’m just going to read it in full so that everybody has the opportunity to hear the full wording.

[11:45 a.m.]

“Be it resolved that one year after the anti-vaccine protests in Ottawa and communities including Victoria, South Surrey, Kelowna and Cranbrook, this House denounces the freedom convoy protests and affirms that public health orders, including vaccine requirements, have been an essential tool in B.C.’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

I do find some of the comments on this motion to be a little bit confusing. It’s been categorized as irresponsible. Categorized, also, as a waste of time, and that this time could have been spent constructively. I find that very interesting, because this is the second time that we’re speaking about this at the choice of the official opposition.

I’m delighted to speak to this motion. Thank you so kindly for bringing it back so that we can talk about how these convoy protests blocked access to emergency services, hassled and terrorized health care workers, prevented people from getting the services that they needed and, quite frankly, scared a lot of people that just wanted to be safe in a time when it was unsafe.

We have been going through a pandemic. We needed all the tools in the toolbox, and some people took that as an opportunity to use their outsized voice to exert their will on society. I have heard a lot of bluster and outrage, and I have not heard any denouncement of the Freedom Convoy.

I am here to very firmly say that I am denouncing the anti-vaccine protests and Freedom Convoy people who are exerting their will to tell people what they can and cannot do and making communities unsafe. I have heard bluster and outrage, repeatedly, and I have not heard denouncement.

Protesters were described by the RCMP as a hostile mob. Isn’t that worthy of denouncement? We have had a member stand in this House and call the convoy protesters great Canadians, strong Canadians. It’s very, very difficult to call somebody a strong Canadian when they’re a strong-arm Canadian. I have not heard denouncement.

I would also like to say that while I’m speaking to Motion 3, I heard a lot of responses that sounded like responses to the budget. I’m happy to speak to Motion 3. I do offer my congratulations for your creativity in having additional time to respond to the budget.

I really want to say that as MLAs, as people that uphold the law and look after the well-being of every person in this province, I would expect that there would be denouncement of people who are actively trying to undermine public health orders, actively trying to keep people from getting vaccinated, actively trying to influence and intimidate and harass people into choosing something that they want. It’s not fair, and it’s not right.

I’d love to hear something that didn’t sound like bluster and outrage, and I’d love to hear something that didn’t sound like a response to the budget speech. I’m waiting. We’re all waiting. We’re all waiting for you to respond in favour of the motion — that you are denouncing these activities of the Freedom Convoy and anti-vaccine protesters.

With that, I will conclude my remarks.

[11:50 a.m.]

E. Sturko: I’ve heard members today talking about the racism, a lot of the hate that was expressed by some people that were participating in protests — Freedom Convoy, anti-vaccine protests. Of course, I have to say, especially as a member of the LGBT community, that I was disheartened to see that kind of rhetoric in our communities.

It hurts. It hurts all of us, regardless of what party we’re in. I have spoken a lot to my colleagues about what it was like for me to be on the front line of those protests as a police officer. Of course, we denounce all forms of hate and discrimination in all its forms. But our actions have to speak louder than our words. I was disappointed.

I’m going to mention something about the budget, because not once did victims of crime come up in our budget, particularly when hate crimes are up 45 percent in British Columbia. It’s disappointing. My comms team has helped me, actually, to prepare a statement, because they know it’s difficult for me to speak about my time on the convoy protest because it was such a tinderbox of emotion.

Interjection.

E. Sturko: The member from Kensington may have not heard, but I denounced the racism that took place at the Freedom Convoy. But I would not….

Interjection.

Deputy Speaker: Member, I would remind you who has the floor. You have already spoken.

E. Sturko: But I, myself, faced numerous calls of homophobic slurs. I think people on both sides of this House are familiar…. I was called a Nazi because of my Ukrainian heritage. I saw many people spouting anti-scientific rhetoric. That is true.

Some people said very hateful things, but I would not ever denounce a person’s right to their freedom of expression. I do denounce hate, and freedom of expression does have its limits. We all know. But we still, in this province, must, regardless of sometimes how hurtful and horrible things are that people say, recognize their right to protest.

My team had helped me write a very nice speech. But instead, I’ll use my last couple of minutes here to talk about my experience as a police officer at the Freedom Convoy. It is actually difficult for me. I am a person with PTSD, and I’m affected by my policing career. It’s as difficult for me today as it was when I was on the front line.

I have to say that one of the things that really was hurtful was to see how much division there was in our province, particularly knowing that this House actually wasn’t divided during the pandemic. We worked together. In 2020, the House unanimously passed more than $5 billion in emergency spending to ensure that British Columbians were supported, from small businesses to the tourism sector to purchasing PPE for schools so that they could reopen.

There was a lot of good done in this House. We can’t forget that. And there were a lot of people that were acting hateful. I experienced that firsthand in policing, but I also talked to hundreds of people who were there. Many of them also felt divided and felt that they hadn’t been heard. Even our former Premier had used divisive language, telling people that they should get a hobby.

None of it is helpful. It’s not helpful from this side, not helpful from that side. We need to recognize that we were together. We stood united, and we need to continue to work together.

While I speak to this motion, I was extremely disappointed even to see it appear in the first instance. There was a lot of rhetoric coming about who is anti-scientific, who has got these ideas, who has that. But the reality of the work that was done in this place during the COVID-19 response is that we work together.

Of course we denounce hate. Of course we denounce racism and discrimination in all their forms. But we have to recognize people’s right to freedom of expression as well.

Thank you for your time.

[11:55 a.m.]

A. Singh: Again, I rise in favour of this motion. I’ll read it, as my friend from Richmond-Steveston did.

“Be it resolved that one year after the anti-vaccine protests in Ottawa and communities including Victoria, South Surrey, Kelowna and Cranbrook, this House denounces the freedom convoy protests and affirms that public health orders, including vaccine requirements, have been an essential tool in B.C.’s response to the COVID 19 pandemic.”

Thank you to the member for Surrey South for almost getting there, for denouncing hate and racism and bigotry, but not getting there fully. There is nothing incompatible with denouncing hate and freedom of expression. Those can happen at the same time — absolutely free to go and express themselves, nothing wrong with denouncing it.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

When the convoys were happening, when they were coming down into Vancouver, I was driving with my wife and my child, and we drove past a swastika. You saw those images not only here in British Columbia; you saw those images everywhere. They were an integral part of the convoy.

If you’re at a party with fascist signs, you’re probably at a fascist party, right? No one in the truck…. No one there condemned those. They allowed those to be there. Again, nothing incompatible with denouncing hatred, nothing incompatible with denouncing the truck convoy and freedom of expression. We’re not saying to go down there and not let people express themselves. We’re just asking you to denounce this.

As my friends have said before, I did not hear one member from the other side denounce this.

Interjection.

A. Singh: No. I heard her denounce hatred and bigotry, not the whole truck convoy. Again, you can’t denounce one part of it. As I said earlier, if you’re at a party and there are fascists there, you’re probably at a fascist party. Denounce the whole thing. And I didn’t hear that.

I heard a lot about wastage of time. We spent one hour talking about a motion that we brought originally but that you brought back. I just find the hypocrisy just palatable. It’s phenomenal.

You know, the wasting of time — this is coming from a side, on that side, that cancelled the whole fall sitting a few years ago. Okay, maybe I’m going back a few years.

They keep on saying…. The other side keeps on saying that this is baseless, that there’s no point going back a year to talk about this. I disagree wholeheartedly. If you don’t know where you’re coming from, you have no idea where you’re going to. It’s very important — I’ve got to quote Bob Marley there — to not let things slide.

My father is sitting in a long-term-care home. The reason it’s important to look at all of this and how it’s relevant today is because you hear, repeatedly, calls from the other side about unvaccinated health professionals and letting them back into the health industry.

My father is sitting in a long-term-care home. He’s 80-something years old. He’s vulnerable. Do I want someone who is not vaccinated taking care of him? No. There is solid science behind this. Follow behind the science. If you’re a health official, if you’re a health professional, follow the science. I don’t want someone taking care of my father who is not vaccinated, who could possibly infect him. I want him to be around. There’s nothing unreasonable there, and for them to be talking about that….

There’s nothing baseless about this, because this all stems from these protests. This whole anti-science, anti-vaccine movement…. This whole thought stems from that.

Noting the hour, Mr. Speaker, I call for adjournment of the debate.

A. Singh moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Dean moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:59 a.m.