Orders of the Day

Private Members’ Statements

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE

R. Leonard: Apart from hearing about the criminal justice system on the news, it isn’t a part of our lives until we become victims of crime. Once we’re involved in the court system, it can be a long and arduous process that hangs over us. Despite the hope that justice will be served so that the healing can begin, it doesn’t always work out that way.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

What if there was another way? Well, here in Canada, there has been another approach in place since 1996. It’s called restorative justice. It has its roots in Indigenous customary laws and practices and is practised in many different forms across the world. Today restorative justice or RJ, as it is known, is used in both Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities across Canada to repair the harm caused by a crime or the harms caused by other forms of conflict.

Here in B.C., RJ programs are provided by dedicated, community-based non-profit organizations and are most often delivered by a group of passionate, trained volunteers. If the matter is suitable for diversion, the victim, the complainant and the offender can agree to this alternative process, and the healing can begin very quickly.

What does RJ look like? The offender expresses remorse and accepts responsibility for their actions. The victim describes the impact of the offender’s actions on them and then communicates what they need to heal and feel whole again. In response, the offender proposes how to heal the hurt and to fix the damage done and what they will do to try to prevent it from happening again.

Finally, the offender can ask for forgiveness, opening the door for the healing of relationships and finding the path to a more harmonious community. Speaking of community, there are community representatives in the process, because crime affects the entire community.

All involved sign an agreement in the spirit of conflict resolution and healing. The process can be undertaken at any point along the way, from before a charge is laid, through sentencing, to after a person is released from custody. If diversion is early in the process and the agreement is completed, the offender has no criminal record on the matter. If it’s not completed, the police may take further action.

The Vancouver Island Region Restorative Justice Association and the North Peace Justice Society explained to the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act that restorative justice not only encourages offenders to take responsibility for their behaviour. It also reduces recidivism, reduces the growing backlog and financial burden on police and the courts and helps make communities safer.

Just yesterday I heard the story of one municipality that was a victim of vandalism by a youth. Everyone agreed for the matter to be diverted to RJ. When the mayor explained the cost and other implications…. Faced with the weight of the consequences of their actions, the youth broke down and cried. Not only was the matter diverted from the courts, but the use of RJ diverted this young person from the destructive path they were on. Years later they continue to thrive and are well on their way to having a productive and fulfilling life.

Another example we’re hearing a lot of these days is the proliferation of shoplifting. Only yesterday, on CBC radio’s Cross Country Checkup, one expert spoke of what’s behind shoplifting. There were a number of reasons, but let’s focus on one in particular: experimenting with defiance by adolescents. Some parents will be relieved to hear that the teen defiance they hear is a natural part of growing up. It is, unfortunately, also sometimes expressed by shop­lifting.

Another family was at its wit’s end as their child spiralled down with drugs and crime. They told their child’s lawyer that maybe jail would smarten them up. The lawyer responded that his experience was that prison only hardened the youth to a life of crime and diminished the likelihood for the child to make better choices later in life.

In both these circumstances, RJ has value.

It was also noted to the special committee on Police Act reform that by improving access to restorative justice, we will meet our obligations under the UN convention on the rights of the child. It requires states to develop and use alternative mechanisms to formal criminal proceedings that respect human rights, provide procedural safeguards and are child and gender sensitive.

[10:10 a.m.]

Communities across the province have stepped up. The province currently supports RJ through over 83 community-based programs that deliver restorative justice approaches, including 52 community accountability programs, CAPs, and 31 Indigenous justice programs. CAPs address over 1,000 referrals a year.

While these programs are eligible for annual funding of up to $4,000 to support training and administrative expenses, in June of this year, the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General announced an additional one-time funding of $3 million to expand and enhance RJ across the province, in partnership with the Law Foundation of B.C.

While traditionally criminal justice systems have focused on punishing offenders and removing them from society, RJ seeks to repair the harm caused by crime and violence, helping to divert youth and adults from the criminal justice system and to create opportunities for victims and communities to have a voice and agency in the justice process.

Restorative Justice Week is recognized every year during the third week of November to raise awareness of restorative justice, to reflect on how it can be applied to daily challenges and how it can be used to contribute to social change.

M. Morris: Restorative justice. I do agree 100 percent that restorative justice is an integral part of the justice system right across Canada and British Columbia. But it’s been practised longer than since 1996.

I recall that as a young cop on the street we practised restorative justice informally when we would pick up offenders for various minor criminal acts. We would take them home, speak to the parents or other influential people within the communities. Those types of systems worked back in those days.

In addition to that, within many of the First Nations communities that I worked in over the years, I would identify who the influential Chiefs and leaders were. With the Nisg̱a’a, for example, when I worked up in the Nass Valley, the House Chiefs were responsible for peace and order within their houses. When I found individuals within the communities that were colouring outside of the lines, so to speak, in peace-and-order situations, I would go straight to the House Chief, and I would ask for their recommendations and their advice on how to deal with those specific offenders.

You know, there’s a notion out there that the police officers charge everybody that they come across with criminal offences, and that’s just not the case. I would say, based on my experience as a criminal investigator — and I spent 32 years as a police officer, many of those years policing in small rural communities — probably 90 percent of the criminal cases that I came across within a community were dealt with informally in some kind of restorative justice program. It was only the more serious ones that went before the courts and went before the Crown counsel officers for court appearances.

In the Hazeltons, when I was stationed there back in the early 1990s, we established a more formal restorative justice program that worked quite well. It was community-owned, and when it becomes community-owned, it’s far more effective in the community. They take ownership of that. I think that’s where the ownership, the foundation of restorative justice, must remain, with the community.

The old saying that it takes a community to raise a child couldn’t be more accurate when we talk about those kinds of things. The police are merely a tool within the community to help keep law and order and to try and keep a lid on some of the things that happen there. It’s the community that has to take ownership for the level of safety that is exhibited throughout that community as a result of the intervention by seniors, by Elders, by various community groups and whatnot that play a significant role in those communities.

What has happened in the last number of years that places more pressure and makes it harder for these community groups to provide that restorative justice is the fact that addictions and mental illness have crept into these scenarios, more often than not. It makes it very difficult to deal with somebody on a restorative justice level when they’re addicted or suffering from mental illness or both.

[10:15 a.m.]

That’s why it’s important to establish addictions recovery centres throughout British Columbia: to channel these folks into a recovery program so that they don’t commit any more criminal offences, to channel people into a recovery program so that their mental illness may be properly diagnosed and some therapeutic regime entered into with that individual to lower the chances of them committing those crimes again within the community.

It’s a multifaceted approach. I think the addiction and recovery treatments are part of the restorative justice program. The mental health treatment program is part of the restorative justice program. We’re looking at that. When we look at a future policy — for my party, for an example — we’re looking at those kinds of treatment centres. We’re not going to let any crime go unnoticed.

That’s part of the problem too. I think the communities need to realize that and ensure that no crime goes unnoticed. It doesn’t mean that they have to go to jail. It doesn’t mean they have to go to court. But no crime should go unnoticed. The individual that’s committing those crimes should be taken to task by a community restorative justice program or a group, in addition to the police officer.

The police officers, like I said, are just one part of the equation. But it’s the community that has the meaning and that puts the results into a restorative justice program that that young individual will remember forever. Even an older individual will remember forever that the community has taken an interest in them and that they’re there to help.

R. Leonard: Thank you to the member for Prince George–​Mackenzie for the thoughtful comments. I appreciate his sharing his long service and his experience with restorative justice in all its forms.

In continuing to celebrate restorative justice, I wanted to share some highlights of the very successful Comox Valley Community Justice Centre. It’s been on the move since 1995, when our inspired community began work to bring RJ to the Comox Valley to enable those who’d been hurt by others to meet face to face with those who had caused the hurt in a safe, neutral environment within the community. They opened their doors in 1998 and have not looked back since.

I’d like to recognize Bruce Curtis, who was instrumental in those early days as RJ was being developed and who provided stability, continuity and growth until his retirement this past year. As the province moves forward to see RJ grow, the new managing director, Karen McKinnon, is busy with the Comox Valley’s transition in leadership.

Thanks go to the board of directors, including the president, the hon. Timothy Ray, a retired justice from the Ontario Superior Court and also a retired member of the Law Society of B.C., along with social workers, a CPA, a doctor, a lawyer, a film producer, five local government elected officials and a member of K’ómoks First Nation council.

Impressively, too, there are over 100 trained volunteer facilitators and panelists who are just as diverse and committed to building skills and helping build stronger relationships and community in the healing process of RJ.

Former Lieutenant-Governor Iona Campagnolo was an active supporter of the Comox Valley Community Justice Centre. In her honour every spring, the Iona Campagnolo Lecture Series sees an unforgettable presenter come to the Comox Valley to share their insights and ideas on enhancing the practice of restorative justice in modern society. I think that meeting the Rt. Hon. Beverley McLachlin, former Chief Justice of Canada, the longest-serving and first woman Chief Justice of Canada, topped my bucket list. There are so many others.

On another front, this past March, Karen McKinnon and Bruce Curtis facilitated a difficult but very respectful community conversation where members of the Courtenay Downtown BIA and panelists from the city, Island Health, RCMP, the fire department, myself and others could hear and be heard on the matter of street disorder. Their restorative justice referrals come from the RCMP, ICBC, federal Fisheries, loss prevention officers, and they do so much more. Check them out at communityjusticecentre.ca — all one word.

Thank you to them and all the restorative justice activists here in B.C.

AVIAN FLU

I. Paton: I rise today with a deep concern for the farmers and poultry producers across British Columbia. These people are a significant part of food security in our province and are facing an increasingly concerning situation due to the surge of H5N1, also known as avian influenza.

[10:20 a.m.]

Although avian flu was first reported in 2021, infections continue to spread. The severity of this outbreak cannot be overstated, and it demands our urgent attention and concerted efforts.

Imagine the emotional and financial toll that this devastating virus is exacting on our poultry farmers. I recently heard the story of Jacqueline Boer and her husband, who have been poultry farmers for a decade. Sadly, their birds tested positive for avian flu on November 13, just a few weeks ago.

Despite complying with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency policies, their family was forced to wait until November 18 for the CFIA to euthanize their birds. Almost 60,000 birds on their farm were killed that day, with countless others facing a similar fate across this province.

The aftermath is a significant food safety concern, as millions of birds are now out of the food chain.

The CFIA compensates for the cost of the birds and their disposal, but critical areas like cleanup and disinfection costs, feed left in bins, waste material removal and the prolonged loss of income are not covered.

I would like to pass along the emotional conversation I had with Jacqueline Boer, a poultry producer from Chilliwack, just a few days ago.

“Our birds tested positive for avian flu on November 13, 2023. We were told that the birds were all to be ordered euthanized, which is required by CFIA. We have four flocks of birds on our farm, in four different barns, and only one flock was sick. After the birds were ordered destroyed, we waited until November 18, 2023, for CFIA to come on site and euthanize these birds. However, all four barns had to be destroyed.

“CFIA will compensate us for the cost of the birds at the date of the order of destruction and for the disposal of the birds. CFIA does not cover the cleanup and disinfection of our barns, the cost of the feed that was left in our bins on the date of destruction, the cost of removing the waste material that it left after composting the birds or for the six months of loss of income that we will have on our farm.

“We estimate the cleanup and disinfection costs will be upwards of $25,000, the price we were quoted to get rid of the waste material $18,700, the loss of income from egg production will be estimated at $373,000, and the loss of income from the loss of the whole cycle of broiler birds, which we’re not sure we can even replace.

“We are young farmers. We are highly leveraged, and we are not taking any wages from this farm at all, just trying to get ahead and pay the bank. We have $60,000 in monthly bank obligations. The CFIA compensation is not enough. I am asking that the government acknowledge this for the emergency that it is and create programs that can help us to get through this financially.

“We don’t need handouts but access to interest-free funds while we wait the five to six months that is expected to get CFIA compensation and to get our feet back on the ground. We are paying interest to the banks while we wait to be reimbursed. On our farm, it will be $5,000 to $6,000 a month just in interest, at the current rates.”

Jacqueline and her husband estimate their costs will soar to over $400,000, a staggering amount that includes cleanup, loss of income and the uncertainties of restarting their operation.

This situation is not unique to Jacqueline and her family. Forty-five other farms have been affected as well, including two or three more just this past weekend. The compensation provided by the CFIA is insufficient coverage, and the government needs to step in to help ease the financial burden this can have on our food producers.

This issue of insufficient and delayed compensation is something that we have heard from multiple different producers. They have noted that in some cases, there are farms that are still waiting to complete compensation from ten or even 12 months ago.

For many of these farmers, this is not something they can handle for consecutive years. Having to shut down an entire operation is costly and also emotionally draining for all those who are involved. This leaves farms in a very difficult position to catch up, facing the potential reality of being forced out of business.

Considering these heart-wrenching stories, we must recognize that the response from the government, though improved, is still not good enough. Farmers are waiting four to five days for the destruction of infected birds, a timeline that increases the risk of disease spreading to other barns and other farms.

When barns are infected with this terrible virus, it spreads at an unprecedented rate. This is also because of how dense the Fraser Valley is when it comes to poultry farms. Due to sheer density, the longer the infected barns stay up, the virus can travel, on feathers, down the road and onto other barns. This then adds up to another cost, as poultry producers must now pay for all the feed to keep the birds fed until the CFIA comes to depopulate the barn.

[10:25 a.m.]

After speaking with a few producers over the years, the most common needs from there are the following three critical points.

First, we must expedite compensation to producers, ensuring it covers all aspects from destruction and disposal to disinfection and cleaning.

Second, we need to further reduce the timeline for reporting to destruction and disposal, addressing localized hot spots and farm-to-farm transmission. New measures are key here and so is working with experienced producers in the sector who understand these operations inside and out.

Lastly, there is an urgent need for research and innovation to prevent the spread, exploring methods such as different ventilation techniques and potential vaccinations.

We must also acknowledge the emotional and mental toll this process can have on our producers and their families. Many have heightened biosecurity measures while facing uncertainties and the fear of a virus that can wipe out their livelihoods in a matter of days.

For many producers, back-to-back years of fighting influenza, paying out of pocket and then waiting long term for compensation is not sustainable.

The threat of avian influenza is not subsiding, and we cannot afford to be complacent. We must do better to ensure the livelihood of poultry producers in British Columbia. The virus, with its rapid mutations, poses a persistent risk, and we owe it to our farmers and communities and our province to respond with innovation, urgency, compassion and better compensation.

M. Starchuk: To our guests in the gallery for this very important topic that you’re going to hear about, we need to know more about what’s going to be on that Christmas table when it comes at the end of December.

Thank you to the member for Delta South for his comments on an issue that’s going to affect an awful lot of us.

I often like to take the time to make it personal. A number of years ago in my community, the great turkey farmer, as I like to call him, Mike Bose, gave me a tour of his place after the first time H1N1 made its appearance, and all of the rigours that you had to go about to get on to the property to get near the barns.

At that time, you thought that this was the only time it was going to take place. That’s where I got my introduction as to how the migratory birds became a big part of what we’re dealing with today.

Avian influenza is a federally regulated disease, and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency leads the investigation and response with provincial support, including things like testing, mapping, surveillance and disposal.

That takes me back again to my time as a city councillor and that weird thing about mapping where your backyard chickens were. Why in the world would we want to know? This is one of those reasons right now. It’s so important to the industry to know where every single one of those backyard chickens is.

There have been widespread outbreaks of avian influenza across Canada and the U.S., with CFIA confirming that in addition to the 142 total cases in B.C. since April 2022, there have been about 70 in Alberta and 50 in both Ontario and Quebec.

Our ministry works closely with CFIA and B.C. poultry producers to ensure enhanced prevention and preparedness measures are being taken to protect our poultry flocks as the risk of outbreak increases when waterfowl migration occurs in the spring and the fall.

We are proactively working with the poultry and egg sectors to ensure all poultry producers, including those backyard flock owners, are remaining vigilant with their biosecurity practices and monitoring for signs of avian influenza in their flocks, particularly around migratory seasons.

Recently the province introduced a $5 million farmed animal disease program, early in the year, to help farmers prepare for the risk of animal disease, such as avian influenza. The program helps fund the planning and purchasing of equipment needed for disease response, training exercise, enhanced biosecurity measures and the research and implementation of strategies to reduce the risks of infection and disease.

While these are important tools to help prevent disease spread and protect flocks and farms from viruses, we have to know that those viruses can adapt and spread. So it’s important that farmers and small flock owners remain vigilant.

[10:30 a.m.]

There have been more than 35 cases this fall, and it was more than was expected with the annual southern migration of waterfowl. In order to reduce the risk of the virus spreading, the chief veterinarian has ordered birds on commercial farms to be kept indoors and placed restrictions on poultry events like shows, markets and auctions. It’s important to note that the public health risk is extremely low and no risk to food safety as it is today.

On Saturday, Natalie Veles, the executive director of B.C. Turkey, was on Global TV and spoke to the current conditions of the avian influenza that’s currently affecting the poultry industry. Natalie said: “The turkey industry was one of the hardest hit by bird flu last year.”

This year, unfortunately, I think she doesn’t have an answer to questions that the industry is currently grappling with: why are farms getting it, in which pattern and which farms? “It has not hit our turkey sector quite as hard this year. But unfortunately, our poultry farms, ducks, laying hens, chickens and breeder chickens are experiencing quite a few infections this year.”

When something happens like this to that industry, they go into what’s called a red biosecurity status. In that kind of situation, the farmers are being very vigilant on their farms. They’re doing things like changing their boots and coveralls before they go into their barns and only allowing essential visitors to the farms. That would be a feed truck, a vet and other people who are allowed on the farms, just to get equipment-washing trucks and other things into the farmyard areas, just to keep the barns as secure as they can.

I look forward to what the member for Delta South has to add to this.

I. Paton: Thank you to the member for Surrey-Cloverdale, who also is a good friend of mine — as you, Mike Bose, the Heppell family and many producers in Surrey that are poultry farmers for chickens and turkeys as well.

I will continue to express my deep concern for the farmers and poultry producers facing the devastating impact of the avian influenza surge in British Columbia. However, I want to ensure that this House knows that the outbreak demands our urgent attention. It is important to hear the emotional and financial toll on farmers like Jacqueline Boer, whom I just spoke about, whose story reflects the struggles of many operations in the poultry industry.

However, there are other stories from our agricultural sector that I’d like to just key on for a moment or two. We’re going through a very difficult time in British Columbia with our dairy industry. I was just at the B.C. Dairy Industry Conference on Thursday. The cost of production in this province is devastating, for just about all types of farming.

When you consider the feed, the fuel and the fertilizer, the different things that prairie provinces are using, are there in the prairie province or Quebec and Ontario, whereas the feed, fuel, fertilizer and different products that we use in British Columbia have to come over the Rocky Mountains by rail. It’s adding to the huge cost of production for our farmers in British Columbia, especially when you think about the farmers here on Vancouver Island that also have the added cost of getting feed, fuel, fertilizer and farm supplies transported on barges or B.C. Ferries over to Vancouver Island.

Not to mention just dairy, but there’s the beef industry; the poultry industry that we just talked about, with avian influenza; people growing the vegetables; large-scale potato growers that deal with the volatile diseases such as blight, scab, root rot, different things like that; our tree fruit industry. In the last few years, farming in general in British Columbia has dealt emotionally and financially with flooding, with frost, with rain, with heat and, of course, with the terrible forest fires that have affected all our farmers and ranchers in British Columbia.

Moreover, it’s crucial to acknowledge the remarkable resilience of our farmers. They are no strangers to adversity. Despite the challenges, these hard-working individuals remain dedicated to their craft, understanding the pivotal role they play in ensuring the food security of British Columbia. These experiences, though daunting, reinforce their determination to contribute to our province.

As the avian influenza threat persists, we must not be complacent. Innovations, urgency and compassion are essential to safeguard the livelihoods of poultry producers in British Columbia.

[10:35 a.m.]

CONTRACEPTIVE FREEDOM

S. Chant: Thank you for the opportunity to address the House today.

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that I am speaking from the lands of the lək̓ʷəŋən-speaking people, particularly the Songhees and the Esquimalt. I am grateful for the opportunity to work and learn here.

When I’m in my own riding of North Vancouver–Seymour, I am in the territory of other Coast Salish people, the Tsleil-Waututh and Squamish, from whom I am fortunate to learn about the past, their present and our shared future.

As a woman, the decisions you make about your own body should be yours, yet all over the world, many are persecuted for making their own choices, and many more are prevented from making any choices at all. Regimes are trying to dictate who women can kiss, who they should love, how they must dress, how women identify themselves, when they have children, and how many children they have.

Sexual and reproductive rights mean you should be able to make your own decisions about your body and get accurate information about these issues, access sexual and reproductive health services — including contraception — choose if, when and whom to marry, decide if you want to have children and how many. They also mean that lives should be free from all forms of sexual violence, including rape, genital mutilation, forced pregnancy, forced abortion and forced sterilization.

Let’s talk about supporting reproductive rights here in British Columbia. In my primary and secondary school years, reproductive health was not a topic of any classes, unless you counted sex education — which essentially warned everyone to remain celibate; however, not managing to tell us what that meant, nor what the alternatives were. Never mentioned were such things as sexual abuse by a family member or friend, mechanisms to prevent pregnancy or what to do if you got pregnant. Nor was there discussion of how to tell your family or if your family would support you.

As a result, there were many instances where teenagers became pregnant with no control over the outcome of their pregnancy; no option of abortion or whether to take the fetus to term; or how, or sometimes where, to live; or how to gain financial and emotional support. As you can imagine, these circumstances can and did have profound impacts on the lives of young women. I remember hearing about camp babies, usually born in April or May, that were a result of summer camps for cadets or for guiding and scouting.

My girlfriend, assigned to a cadet camp as a military policewoman, ended up teaching reproductive education and contraception methods as a regular part of the training syllabus. She took this on as the statistics of post-camp pregnancy were consistent at about 7 to 10 percent each year. She found that the teenagers, boys and girls, often had very little accurate information about how to protect themselves and to make thoughtful relationship decisions.

In my mother’s time, adult women were expected to marry, have kids, stay at home to care for the kids and not have a career. When I joined the military in 1979, my female departmental chief was the first woman in Canada in the Navy reserves to stay in the reserves after she became pregnant. Up until then, you were expected to resign from your role once you were having kids.

Another set of statistics that was evident was the number of teenage pregnancies associated right after graduation, particularly in all-girl schools. Again, these are events that can have the effect of completely changing the trajectory of the lives of the girls, their offspring and their families. There were also those who did not finish high school, because they became pregnant.

Fast forward to today, where families are urged to support their kids to learn about and understand their rights to decide about their own bodies; where schools and organizations offer information about reproductive rights and options — contraception, abortion, morning-after pills; where other organizations help women deal with unexpected, unwanted or traumatic pregnancies; where consent is a word that gets explained in a variety of ways, including an analogy about a cup of tea; where bystander training is done in organizations to increase the possibility of others stepping in to avert circumstances of inappropriate sexual, violent, racial or harmful behaviour; where some high schools have childcare facilities on site so young moms can complete their studies; and where an abortion is available for a variety of reasons — mental or physical health, fetal health or accidental pregnancy, to name a few.

[10:40 a.m.]

This year, through providing free contraception in British Columbia, reproductive and sexual rights have become much more accessible to all B.C. residents. Now, in a time that is financially challenging, anyone can access over 60 different contraceptive measures of various kinds — oral or injectable medication, intrauterine devices, vaginal rings and morning-after pills. This coverage is through the B.C. PharmaCare plan — no-cost, universal, full coverage.

British Columbia is the first and only province in Canada providing universal free contraceptives to all residents. Since the province implemented a universal coverage plan for contraceptives, making them free for residents in B.C., over 178,000 people have received free contraceptives and saved on costs. Approximately 136,000 of these are in the age group of 20 to 39.

The number of people receiving contraceptive dispensing has increased by about 2,500 per month, with an average savings per person of at least $125 over a year, depending on what you were using. A person still needs to get a prescription from a physician, a nurse practitioner, a sexual health clinic or through virtual health. However, no amount is due when picking up that prescription.

Of particular importance is the impact on youth. In B.C., youth under the age of 19 are legally able to consent to health care, including preventative health care on their own behalf, as long as the health care provider — for instance, the physician or nurse practitioner — has explained to the youth and is satisfied that the youth understands the nature and consequences and the reasonably foreseeable benefits and risks of the health care, and the health care provider has made reasonable efforts to determine and has concluded that the health care is in the youth’s best interests.

If these conditions are satisfied, a youth is able to get a prescription and fill it without having to have parental consent. This continues to be the case for prescription contraceptives. Parents or guardians will not be notified that their child has obtained contraceptives per the laws already in place. Parents or guardians are not able to access PharmaNet dispensing records on behalf of youth over 12 unless the youth consents in writing or is incapable of giving consent.

R. Merrifield: Well, I rise today to speak about contraceptive freedom and in response to the speaker before me, the member before me, from North Vancouver–Seymour. I think this is a huge matter of profound importance to our society, the freedom of contraceptive choice.

As a legislator, I firmly believe in the principles of individual liberty, personal responsibility and the sanctity of family values. It is through this lens that I view the topic of contraceptive freedom not merely as a health issue but as a cornerstone of a responsible and empowered society.

First and foremost, contraceptive freedom is about personal choice. Every individual, every couple has the right to decide when and if they want to start a family. This freedom is intrinsic to our personal autonomy and dignity. It empowers women and men alike to make informed decisions about their futures, careers and families, ensuring that every child is a wanted child, born into a loving, prepared and stable environment.

Moreover, this freedom is essential for the health and well-being of our citizens. Access to safe and effective contraceptives reduces the risk of unintended pregnancies, which can have profound implications on the physical, emotional and economic well-being of individuals and families.

It’s a preventative measure, a way to safeguard the health of our women and children and, by extension, the health of our society. I’m a champion of the value of personal responsibility. Contraceptive freedom is a testament to this value. It encourages individuals to take charge of their reproductive health, to make responsible choices and to plan their families in a way that is sustainable and mindful of their circumstances.

This is about fostering a culture of responsibility and foresight. Parents who are prepared for parenthood are more likely to raise children who are healthy, well-educated and capable of contributing positively to our society and economy. It’s a cycle of empowerment that begins with the freedom to choose.

There is an elephant in the room, however, that we must address. It’s a pressing concern that often intersects with the topic of contraceptive freedom, and that is the issue of plummeting birth rates and the escalating cost of living in B.C.

As a society, we are witnessing a demographic shift where the birth rate is falling below the replacement level. This trend poses significant challenges for our future, impacting everything from workforce dynamics to pension sustainability.

[10:45 a.m.]

While some may argue that promoting contraceptive freedom could exacerbate this decline in birth rates, I contend that the opposite is true. By empowering individuals with the choice of when to start a family, we are also enabling them to do more so in a financially stable and secure environment.

But the high cost of living in B.C. is a substantial barrier for many potential parents. The expenses associated with the highest cost of housing in Canada and the inability to pay for food while paying for transportation and utilities can be daunting, deterring many from starting families or having additional children. Contraceptive freedom, therefore, should be part of a broader strategy to address these economic challenges.

Families are more likely to have children when they feel confident in their ability to provide for them. Therefore, our focus in this House should be on creating economic policies that reduce the cost of living, increase housing affordability and support young families. Otherwise, our intentions for children born into families that are ready and able to give them the best start in life will not be able to be realized.

I fought for free contraception for all. I will continue, as part of the B.C. United caucus, to fight for not just contraception but also for in vitro fertilization to be covered. Because contraceptive freedom is about quality over quantity, ensuring that each child is valued, cared for and provided with opportunities to thrive. As we address the economic barriers to starting a family, we will likely see a positive impact on birth rates driven by choice and capability rather than economic fear or uncertainty.

Lastly, in upholding contraceptive freedom, we are not diminishing the value of life or the importance of family. Rather, we are enforcing it. We are advocating for families that are formed with intention, love and readiness. We are advocating for children who are brought into this world with the best possible prospects for a bright future.

In conclusion, as we champion contraceptive freedom, let us also commit to addressing the high cost of living and the economic pressures facing potential parents. These issues are interlinked. Our solutions must be holistic, considering the long-term well-being and sustainability of our society.

S. Chant: Thank you to the member for Kelowna-Mission for their comments.

In B.C., by providing free contraception, we’ve taken a big step forward in providing access to sexual and reproductive rights to all, the step that time will demonstrate as being critical in improving the lives of all women and their health. Given that studies have shown that approximately 40 percent of pregnancies in B.C. are unintended, the increased access to more effective contraceptives allows individuals to determine the number and spacing of their pregnancies, which may decrease the number of unplanned pregnancies and associated abortions and hysterectomies.

We have seen throughout the world circumstances in which reproductive and sexual rights are not protected or acknowledged: forced marriages; lack of access to contraception or abortion, even to protect health or preserve the life of the fetus’s mother; female genital mutilation; rape as a part of war, power or dominance; and sexual abuse of women and children, resulting in pregnancy. In North America, we now have courts denying the rights to abortion and cultural and religious entities that forbid the use of contraception or abortion under any circumstance.

In B.C., we strive to do better. We offer accurate education and information freely to women of all ages through school, clinics, cultural organizations, women’s groups, physicians, nurse practitioners, pharmacists and other options. Access to contraception and abortion is available and free, with all personal information maintained as private and confidential. A woman or couple or family can determine if, when and how many children they want to have. An accidental, unplanned or traumatic pregnancy can be managed safely, with ongoing physical and emotional support.

Free contraception is an important step in supporting the reproductive and sexual rights of women. Again, B.C. is leading Canada in taking this significant action that lifts everyone closer to a place of choice, equity and equality. I note that Manitoba is also considering this measure and is watching our implementation.

Our women — mothers, daughters, sisters, cousins and friends — deserve to be able to freely decide what is best for their body and themselves. Now they can do so without a financial barrier, because contraception in B.C. is free.

[10:50 a.m.]

SUPPORT FOR B.C.’S WINE INDUSTRY

B. Stewart: It’s an honour to rise in this chamber and talk a little bit about something that I think most people know I am a bit passionate about.

Every bottle of B.C. wine holds a rich narrative, a story crafted by generations of dedicated grape growers and winemakers. It’s a tale that resonates locally and captivates enthusiasts globally, firmly placing B.C. on the international wine map.

This has not always been the case. The B.C. wine industry got its early start after the Second World War when veterans returned home from Europe, the benchmark of superior wines. The homegrown wines of the day were Calona Royal Red, St. Michelle, Toscano Rosso, Andrés Baby Duck, followed by Sommet Rouge, Lonesome Charlie, Schloss Laderheim and Hochtaler.

In the 1970s, some of the grape growers had a greater vision of much greater quality wines. Marion Jonn of Chateau Jonn de Trepannier and George and Trudy Heiss of Gray Monk Cellars had a vision and put it into action by different growing techniques and varieties to make much superior wines.

This was a hard-fought process and steady research with the likes of the Becker project, the Duncan project that John Vielvoye led and better-trained winemakers coming into the country. This was the start of cottage wineries, now land-based wineries, licensing by Vic Woodland of the B.C. liquor control and licensing branch. It was a big change.

A bigger change: free trade with the United States in 1987 led to the creation of the B.C. Wine Act in 1990 and the steady qualitative improvements with VQA.

And what about movies like Sideways? The stigma of Pinot Noir being grown in another place besides Burgundy? Oregon was all of a sudden on the front lines.

Today, with a steady sense of urgency, I want to shed light on the challenges facing our province’s wine industry. But before delving into the intricacies, let me emphasize the pivotal role played by this sector in its almost five decades since those early pioneers set in motion today’s success.

The economic impact of our wine industry cannot be overstated. Generating billions in revenue, providing employment and significantly contributing to tax coffers, this dynamic force extends its reach from agriculture to hospitality, creating a web of prosperity that touches every corner of the province. B.C.’s. wine industry serves as a beacon for tourism, drawing visitors with exquisite wines, picturesque vineyards and unique winery experiences. It plays a pivotal role in driving revenue for local businesses, particularly in rural areas.

I remember being asked in 1995 to host a luncheon for a very famous wine writer and author, Hugh Johnson. I asked John Bishop of Bishop’s Restaurant on 4th Avenue if he’d consider coming and hosting this luncheon, which was a small group of about 20 of us talking about the wines and showing the Okanagan. I clearly remember Hugh Johnson saying he knew about the beauty of British Columbia, the forest, the landscape, but he had no idea about the wines.

What precipitated that was the 1992 Avery Trophy award to Mission Hill only the year before for its Chardonnay. That was a pivotal time. That was really the start of some of the history that these people aspired to.

Culturally, the industry has become integral to our identity: a symbol of craftsmanship, innovation and the art of blending tradition and modernity. Our wines, celebrated for their unique terroir and exceptional quality, tell a story of the land, the people, the rich history that has shaped our province.

Despite these contributions, the industry now faces unprecedented challenge. The past two winters, with temperatures plummeting to minus 30 degrees Celsius, have left indelible marks on our vineyards: frozen buds, uprooted trunks and once vibrant landscapes reduced to desolation. This severe frost damage tests the resiliency of an industry characterized by the slender shoots, with the delicate buds of each plant turned black and lifeless.

Many vines unable to recover face removal under crop insurance requirements, exacerbating the financial strain on the industry already grappling with rising costs. Grape growers and winemakers, often not large-scale farmers, find themselves on the brink of closure. Wineries are left without the essential B.C. VQA grapes, compounded by challenges like wildfires, smoke taint. It’s a poignant narrative of dreams crushed, livelihoods dismantled and cultural heritage hanging in the balance.

[10:55 a.m.]

About 30 percent of British Columbia’s 12,000 acres in the industry have suffered severe winter damage, with an additional 30 percent facing permanent viral diseases, demanding immediate replanting, and 3,800 to 7,500 acres urgently require attention. The estimated cost is staggering. Re-establishing an acre of vineyard is over $42,000 per acre, overall costs ranging from $160 million to $320 million. The economic impact is profound, with a devastating 54 percent crop loss in the last vintage. A staggering $133 million decrease in total revenues.

Regions like the South Okanagan, Kelowna, the Similkameen Valley — the heartland of our wine country — are grappling with potential losses exceeding 60 percent. Jobs of full-time equivalent workers…. Over 380 hang in the balance, underscoring that this crisis is not solely a challenge for our grape growers and the winemakers, but it’s a challenge for our entire communities.

As we ponder the gravity of the situation, let us not forget the human faces behind these numbers: the grape growers labouring in their vineyards, the winemakers pouring their creativity into every barrel and the families who invested their lives in a noble pursuit. Their struggle demands our attention and united action.

R. Russell: Thank you to the member for Kelowna West for his comments. I share that bit of passion that he describes. I certainly don’t have the roots and the history in the industry, so I appreciate his expertise there and the opportunity to work across the aisle on providing supports for the industry.

The member spoke about the struggles faced after the winter freeze event. Early indications certainly came to me early in the year, in 2023, about that, and then as the summer rolled on, the data came in to indicate that the reality was much worse than what was expected. More broadly, as the member spoke to, there is a suite of headwinds that the industry has been navigating.

I’ve been working with industry and government for about two years now trying to help navigate those supports across multiple ministries and multiple topics. By my count, there are about nine separate unique action points that the wine sector is asking for help with, with this winter freeze simply being the most acute and most devastating of that list.

Before we get to the opportunities for support, I want to take a moment to acknowledge why this whole conversation matters, even for those in the room or in the province that don’t already love and fully appreciate B.C. wine. Even if you don’t have any interest in wine, this is a sector worthy of your attention and your support.

Economically, the sector delivers $3.75 billion in direct and indirect economic activity in B.C., almost $1 billion more than it did in 2015 and almost double what it was only ten years ago. This translates into 14,000 FTE jobs. An average bottle of wine sold in B.C. generates about $29 of business revenue. For every dollar spent on Canadian wine in B.C., $3.10 in business revenue is generated across the province. For that same dollar spent on a bottle of imported wine, we see a $1.12 in economic impact.

Let’s talk. Let’s touch on some of those nine challenges that need support. One, first and foremost, is the ’22 winter kill event: 29 percent of the vine area will need to be replanted. That is an enormous number. The Premier recently got that translated from a statistic to very personal stories from grape growers and winemakers in the Similkameen when he visited. Job losses are estimated at 380 and $133 million in local revenues lost. I’ve heard that 50 wineries are now up for sale in B.C.

Let’s talk about what those supports are. One early ask was respite from the LDB’s 25 percent minimum local production for land-based wineries. Asked, and that was delivered in September. Another ask: the B.C. LCRB manufacturing requirement to produce a minimum of 4,500 litres of wine annually. That was asked, also delivered.

The largest request was around replant support. This is an active and ongoing conversation. There was some delivered in the spring, oversubscribed, and we’re now looking at trying to figure out how to add more to that. Finally, as the member spoke about insurance, the whole suite of risk management tools for wine producers and grape growers…. There’s an enormous amount of work there and many challenges that I don’t have time to get into here.

[11:00 a.m.]

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Tourism. The focus on tourism and an ask for $2 million in investment per year in wine tourism. It’s estimated that $2 million would deliver $55.5 million in new direct tourism revenue, $87.2 million more in indirect tourism spending and an average of 640 tourism-related jobs. That’s an amazing return on that investment.

There’s been active conversation around single-site licensing, and I’ve been hearing from wineries that feel like they’ve been buried in a tangled web of authorizations and licences. We’re hopefully on track to see significant movement in the year ahead to consolidate this into a single-site system.

We don’t have time to get into the myriad number of climate and ecological challenges that are being faced and the opportunities such as the replant program, the opportunities through CleanBC and SCAP or the opportunities in the regenerative ag field. I’ve spoken to those stories in this House here before.

We don’t have time to get into land-based versus commercial distinctions and the work happening there, but government has responded with both attention and intention to this. I’ve been actively working to raise awareness of these challenges the sector is facing, and I’ve seen a strong response.

The minister responsible for LDB and LCRB has visited multiple times. The Minister of Tourism has come to hear the concerns, as has the parliamentary secretary for tourism. The Minister for Agriculture has also visited. The Minister of Environment heard these concerns in community. Certainly not least of all, the Premier has taken the time, boots on the ground in the Similkameen, to hear from grape growers, vintners and orchardists.

The diversity of attention reflects the complexity of the obstacles that the industry is currently navigating and is behind the actions I described. I look forward to working with the member opposite on helping advance these supports further.

B. Stewart: Well, I appreciate the member opposite and his descriptive nature of the magnitude of all of the actions that we need to take collectively. I appreciate — I know he’s in the heart of it — the member for Penticton, and the members for Kelowna-Mission and from Lake Country. This is a big issue.

The good news is the fact that we have diversified the industry from those early days when we started out with the Becker project in the Okanagan. We had a project in Duncan, and now we have a thriving wine industry on Vancouver Island, in the Lower Mainland and on the Gulf Islands. They have, fortunately, not been impacted by the devastating winter.

As Miles Prodan, President and CEO of Wine Growers British Columbia, aptly puts it: “Following bud break, our industry-wide research concluded that our worst fears were realized.” In response to these pressing challenges, the B.C. Wine Grape Council has initiated opportunities assessment for the B.C. wine and grape industry. The primary recommendation underscores the imperative need to revitalize our beloved B.C. wine and grape industry, and that may require further projects like the Duncan and Becker projects that go on to help continue to assess what qualitative things we can do.

The current oversubscription of wine growers to the provincial perennial replant program serves as a clear indicator of the significant demand for assistance, highlighting the urgency for comprehensive and timely support. It is crucial that our response aligns with the magnitude of the disaster, necessitating adaptive regulations that directly aid wine growers in managing the challenges they face.

The survey data provided by B.C. Wine Growers offers valuable insights. The objective extends beyond seeking immediate recovery support, but a steadfast commitment to the sustained viability of this cherished tradition.

By addressing the root causes of the current crisis and implementing effective measures, we can fortify the B.C. wine industry for the long term. Now more than ever it is imperative that we amplify our efforts to preserve an industry that goes beyond mere economic contributions. This is value-added agriculture, from the most important steps of growing, adding value, selling, creating tourism, all sorts of economic impacts we never had in those early days, back after the Second World War.

The B.C. wine industry is a linchpin of our economy, drawing in tourists, safeguarding our cultural identity and fostering community ties. But it is not just about saving an industry. It’s about ensuring that British Columbia’s wine industry not only survives this challenging period but emerges from it stronger, more resilient and ready to continue its vital role on the province’s cultural and economic landscape.

[11:05 a.m.]

Let us commit to the preservation and prosperity of this integral aspect of our identity and heritage.

Hon. D. Coulter: I ask that the House proceed to the consideration of Motion 60, standing in the name of the member for Vernon-Monashee.

Deputy Speaker: Members, unanimous consent of the House is required to proceed to Motion 60 without disturbing the priorities of the motions preceding it on the order paper.

Leave granted.

Private Members’ Motions

MOTION 60 — ACTIVISM AGAINST
GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE

H. Sandhu: Today I rise to move the following motion:

[Be it resolved that this House agrees to work to eliminate gender-based violence, support survivors, and denounce the type of cuts made by the previous government between 2001–2017 that put women and gender-diverse people at risk.]

From November 25 to December 10, governments, organizations, communities and individuals come together to mark the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence, to rally together and demand an end to violence against women, girls, two-spirit, trans and gender-diverse people.

Every day so many people bravely step forward to break the cycle of domestic violence, end the silence and stigma around sexual assault and seek safety and healing for themselves and their families. We grieve friends, family and community members who have been stolen from us by violence, including thousands of Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people who have been murdered or who are missing.

Gender-based violence occurs in all communities and cultures: women and gender-diverse people from every background, from marginalized women to even the ones in prominent positions. Indigenous women and girls, racialized people, transgender people, non-binary and others in the 2SLGBTQIA+ community, as well as those with disabilities and seniors, are at greatest risk of being targeted and face the most barriers to accessing services.

Unfortunately, many start facing gender-based violence since their childhood. Around every two days in Canada, a woman or a girl is murdered, most often by a man she knows. Many are reluctant to share their experiences, and they don’t report due to the fear for their safety or safety of their kids, or fear of being judged or seeming vulnerable.

There are many stories around us. It could be any of us facing this situation or people we know. We need to reach out and create a safe place where everyone feels safe to share their experiences before it’s too late.

Gender-based violence between intimate partners can sometimes start with insults or verbal abuse, financial abuse. This violence often starts with yelling, which can escalate to punching walls, throwing objects, threatening, physical violence and even death. Many have to share a space feeling scared every day, worried and trapped with someone who regularly abuses them or their children.

Ending gender-based violence will require all of us working together. It starts with us as individuals and as elected officials. Therefore, a government that is proud to have more than 52 percent strong women, from diverse backgrounds, recognizes our responsibility to address gender-based violence.

We are delivering on a plan to end gender-based violence and bring people and services together with a common goal and ensure survivors have the access to the supports they need. We have taken some initiatives like giving women who experience violence a safe place to go, by investing $734 million in building transition housing in every part of the province. Between 2020 and 2021, our government provided $20 million and an additional $10 million annual stable grant funding to support the delivery of emergency sexual assault services in regions across the province.

We now provide stable funding of $54 million annually to support more than 470 victim services and violence-against-women programs across the province. B.C. is now the first and only province in Canada to introduce free contraceptives.

[11:10 a.m.]

Our government re-established B.C.’s Human Rights Commission. It was dismantled by the previous government in 2002, leaving B.C. as the only province in Canada without one.

We created new paid, job-protected leave for people who have experienced domestic abuse or sexual violence. We have expanded women’s access to child care, education and training, affordable housing, counselling and crisis support services, and supports for victims of domestic and sexual violence.

Stopping gender-based violence is everyone’s business. I really look forward to hearing from all the other members of this House in support of my motion, so we can create a safe province for all women and gender-diverse people.

C. Oakes: Today I rise to address the pressing issue of gender-based violence that is having devastating impacts on people living in our province. The situation demands urgent attention and meaningful action from this government. I’m deeply troubled by the deteriorating situation that is happening in our communities.

Let me draw your attention to a major concern when it comes to combating gender-based violence: the absence of sufficient funding for public post-secondary institutions to establish sexual misconduct policies, with resources, on campuses in British Columbia. A critical initiative introduced by the B.C. Liberals in 2016, it became a law to ensure the safety and well-being of students. However, this NDP government has yet to commit the necessary resources on campus to carry forward this essential work.

Under this NDP government, their policies and their approaches are having terrible results. The terrible fact is that under the NDP government, a staggering 71 percent of students witness or experience unwanted sexualized behaviours in a post-secondary setting, an outrageous and unacceptable reality.

I echo the voices of students from across this province who demand proper funding and resources for sexualized and gender-based-violence supports on campuses. Leaving these supports under-resourced is a failure on the part of this government to prioritize the well-being of students. We continue to witness a government that consistently falls short in delivering needed results, preoccupied with the past instead of creating a better future.

I want to share with members of this Legislature the story of one of my constituents, Rhonda. Rhonda lost her beautiful daughter on May 27, 2017, to domestic violence. Over the years, Rhonda, my staff and I have shared many tears and precious memories of Jessica. Through this emotional journey, we learned how disconnected resources are in our community and how difficult it is to get real help, waiting years for coroner reports, changing staff and just a feeling of being abandoned.

Out of this experience, we hired a staff member dedicated to pulling together all available resources in Quesnel for women fleeing domestic violence, producing a resource guide just to try and fill in these gaps. However, despite these efforts, the overall situation remains grim.

We have a heartbreaking 28 missing and/or murdered women and girls from our community. This number, unfortunately, continues to increase. Every one of these women and girls leaves behind a precious family, grieving friends and a community. In my community, we are demanding justice.

Data from Stats Canada confirms that women who live in rural areas experience rates of intimate partner violence twice as high as those in urban ridings. This is a stark reminder that there is still so much more that needs to be done. The province’s plan on gender-based violence has been severely delayed, and survivors cannot wait.

Lastly, I would like to note that this is a non-partisan issue. We all have people in our communities who have been impacted, and we need and we can do better.

[11:15 a.m.]

Often it’s not necessarily just about the dollar amount or the resources. It’s about making sure we’re prioritizing to make sure that we eliminate the gaps that exist in our communities. I don’t want any mother to go through what Rhonda has gone through. It’s simply not acceptable, and we can and we should do better.

J. Rice: I appreciate the comments from the member just prior to me and, of course, the MLA that moved this motion. We know that just two days ago, on November 25, was a United Nations–recognized Day For the Elimination Of Violence Against Women, and it’s the beginning or the start of the 16 Days Of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence.

I wanted to just talk about the fact that we know — and I think we all agree in this House, from all parties — that everyone should feel safe, and they should feel secure in their home and in their community. However, gender-based and sexualized violence too often impacts women, girls, two-spirit, transgender, non-binary and other gender-diverse people, with devastating and long-lasting effects — and, as the member prior just mentioned, perhaps disproportionately to those in our rural communities.

It’s for this reason that we are working together to help address gender-based violence and ensure survivors can access the care that they need. While it is really unfortunate I cannot mention an MLA’s name in this House, I will say that the NDP MLA for gender-based violence, or the parliamentary secretary — my sincere apologies….

I think she’s done a phenomenal job, looking at the list of actions our government has taken. I just wanted to offer my strong kudos to her for the work she has done. I know she’ll be humble and say that the path was led by previous colleagues, but she’s really bringing things home.

The list of accomplishments that we’ve had on improving the lives of women and two-spirit, gender-diverse people is quite lengthy, longer than I expected while I was preparing for this speech.

We’re committed to developing an action plan to help gender-based violence and help advance the hard work being done by our parliamentary secretary and by the service providers and the community groups, which are so numerous, providing important services. And every day community organizations, advocacy groups, sexual assault centres, victim services, transition houses all work tirelessly to support survivors in their communities with expertise and compassion. Ending gender-based violence will require all of us working together to make our province safer for all.

I wanted to actually talk about some of the services provided in the north coast. But unfortunately, there are so many more than I knew and expected that that would take up the entire five minutes that I’m allocated for today’s motion. I will list them later on, in my social media.

Some of the things that we’ve been working on, led by our parliamentary secretary for ending gender-based violence, are that we’ve provided $20 million in grant funding to support the delivery of emergency sexual assault services in regions all over this province, including rural communities, and stable funding to support more than 475 victim services and violence-against-women programs across this province.

This includes $10 million annually to provide stable funding for 70 sexual assault services programs, beginning this year; five newly announced centres to be located across the province — once again, in the North, Interior and the Lower Mainland — that will provide wraparound services to survivors of sexual assault during a time when support and compassion are most needed.

[11:20 a.m.]

We have new provincial policing standards on sexual assault investigations. Then in 2021, we released A Path Forward: Priorities and Early Strategies for B.C. in response to the sacred work of Reclaiming Power and Place: The Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and its 231 calls for justice. So much more.

I’m running out of time, I see. We have mandatory sexual violence and misconduct policies in all public post-secondary education….

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Member.

J. Rice: I wish I had more time. Thank you, hon. Speaker.

E. Sturko: I had a different set of speaking notes prepared, but I received a text last night that actually has inspired me to change the way in which I am going to address this private member’s motion.

I’m so tired of the platitudes. I’m tired of hearing about action plans and not action. I feel very strongly, as well, that to see things like a motion made that wants to denounce cuts, the majority of which happened over 20 years ago….

When I get a text message from someone last night, a constituent, whose 14-year-old daughter was raped…. They were raped the day before yesterday. This is an individual…. This 14-year-old girl is currently receiving treatment for an addiction. She has still, even with outreach to things like Foundry, not been able to connect with adequate services to support her for her complex mental health and addictions needs.

She disappeared from her family’s home. They didn’t know where she was. She ended up going and hanging out around the Save-On-Foods in Port Coquitlam and was only located when an individual was arrested for trying to pass a fake $100 bill at the Save-On. The girl had been held against her will. She had been given drugs to smoke, and she woke up with her pants around her ankles with a stranger kissing her.

She was brought over to my town, to Surrey, to go to the forensic nurse, where she sat for over four hours waiting and became extremely agitated and ended up going. She fled. I get it. I mean, hospitals…. We don’t have a lot of forensic nurses that can do this important work.

We had a 14-year-old girl sitting in a hospital. Someone who has an addiction isn’t going to be able to sit in pain and now has left without getting that forensic exam, which will likely result in nothing happening to the person that committed the sexual assault against her.

These are the realities that people are facing every day. So it’s not about action plans. We have things that we could have been actioning for the last seven years. I’m talking about health care. That was a failure of health care. What about the services that could be provided to this young girl, who is only 14, to ensure that she does have the adequate wraparound services? I can tell you that her parents have gone to hell and back trying to find help for their daughter. She’s already had another young friend overdose and die.

It’s individuals, particularly young girls and boys — but really hard hit are young girls — who end up being exploited, sexually assaulted, raped, pimped out because of our opioid crisis, because of addiction, because people are not receiving the services that they need.

Another case in point. Long before I ever heard this motion was coming forward, I started to do some outreach. I was going to Surrey Women’s Centre. I reached out to the Elizabeth Fry Society, and I started reaching out to other women’s shelters across the province, because back when I was still policing, I knew that when times get tough and when people can’t afford their daily life anymore, their ability to flee domestic violence goes way down. People end up staying in situations that are extremely harmful to them because they just have nowhere to go.

When I went to the Surrey Women’s Centre, the shelter there, they told me that they have an example for me, and they hoped I would bring it up here.

[11:25 a.m.]

The example is a woman fleeing domestic violence this year. She is a person with a disability, has a severe autoimmune disease, and she’s living on someone’s couch right now. She can’t go home because of domestic violence. She submitted her application with the help of the centre, so they made sure that all of those documents that you need, all that access to ID, all those photocopies — that was all done.

It took them over ten weeks just to respond that they received her application — not to say, “Yes, we have housing for you,” but just to confirm they have an application from her. God knows how long it will take for her to actually get a place to go.

When we’re talking about violence against women and helping people, it’s not just about how much money you put in or who cut what. It’s about how you are implementing the important services that actually provide havens for people to go — whether it’s health care, housing, education or just about anything else.

I recognize I only have five seconds left. But you know what? We need to do better, and it comes from a lot more than just increasing programs to shelters. The entire system needs work.

M. Elmore: I’m honoured to rise and speak in favour of the motion moved by the member for Vernon-Monashee in support of activism against gender-based violence.

November 25 is the United Nations–recognized International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women and the start of 16 days of activism against gender-based violence. It’s an international campaign. We heard from Angela Marie MacDougall, the executive director of Battered Women’s Support Services, about efforts underway to collaborate and work with organizations across the province and across the country in this non-partisan effort to address the scourge of gender-based violence.

I know everyone in this House agrees that everyone should feel safe and secure in their homes. Every day we need to make commitments and take steps to ensure that supports are in place to support victims and to end gender-based violence. That’s why we need to take action. We need programs in place. We need supports. What does that look like?

It is a commitment of our government to put in place $20 million in grant funding to support the delivery of emergency sexual assault services in regions across the province, so that when somebody reports, they are supported and those services are in place. That’s a commitment, and we need those resources on the ground.

Stable funding to support more than 475 victim services and violence against women programs across the province, $54 million annually in stable funding, so that those services are in place, and they can count on that funding so that wherever you go across the province that service is available.

Stable funding for 70 sexual assault services across our province and new centres, as well, to deal with the need for service delivery. These are concrete programs on the ground to help victims who have been victimized.

We know, as well, that those most vulnerable are Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit. That’s why we have prioritized our relationship. And make a commitment of resources, $10.8 million to support an Indigenous-led path forward community fund. It’s working in partnership. It’s putting resources in place, and it’s providing those services in the community for those commitments to move forward.

We know that we need support across the board. When we look at the record in terms of what the record of the Leader of the Opposition is, we know that they have not supported women, removing the requirement for cabinet submissions to be elevated under a gender lens.

We know we heard about the importance of Surrey Women’s Centre. The previous government cut core funding — I remember when that happened — to women’s centres across British Columbia and also cut legal aid by 40 percent and cut wages for women in sectors, a lower training range, the minimum wage and rolling back wages for the lowest-paid healthcare workers and racialized workers, really exacerbating the vulnerability of these women.

Our government has taken action to invest in services for women, as well, to deal with ending the stigma and providing support for 2SLGBTQIA+ people in British Columbia by removing instances of gendered language and regulations across government — the first province in Canada to systemically amend provincial laws to remove outdated gendered and binary language.

[11:30 a.m.]

We need this support and effort across the board. We need resources in our communities to provide support. We’ve invested in transition funding, over $1 billion, for places for women and children and people who are fleeing violence to have somewhere to go — a commitment to 3,000 new spaces in our province to provide support.

I’m proud of our commitment. We have more to do, a plan to be put in place. I appreciate the opportunity and look forward to the support from all sides of the House to take steps to eliminate gender-based violence in our province.

M. Morris: I’m at a loss for words sometimes when I hear government members politicizing something so serious as gender-based violence right across our province and bringing up history to divert the public’s attention, in my estimation, from focusing on their abysmal record that we see today, where things haven’t been done, haven’t been addressed, as my friend from Surrey South was speaking about earlier.

The resources that we have out there are inadequate to deal with the gender-based violent situations that we see right across our province, particularly in our more remote communities that we have. When I see the police crying for resources to address the sexual assaults that take place within their area. The individuals that present themselves to the police are looking for the forensic support at our hospitals to do the necessary examinations. They’re looking for the support from victim services in order to support the victims moving forward.

There’s nothing more traumatic to a victim. I have investigated way too many very serious sexual assaults over the years, gender-based violence, where the individual has to relate the story to me, a complete stranger, so that I get all the details so I can make an assessment as to whether or not a charge is applicable that I can forward to Crown counsel.

Then we have to go to court, and that victim is revictimized again as she sits in court to tell her — or his, because it affects both sexes — story in court in front of a number of strangers and reveal the most intimate details that occurred to them. Yet we haven’t worked out any way to get around that particular situation. It just makes it worse, and that is driving the situation underground.

There are so many victims of sexually oriented crimes out there that refuse to come forward with it because the process is so onerous. The process is demeaning. The process embarrasses them to the point where they leave town. They will go and move to some other location and try and start their life again. Oftentimes, it’s derailed, and it forces them into a life of drugs and alcohol just to forget about those traumatic situations that have taken place.

We’ve got nothing in place to prevent that. We talk about all these great programs that we have, but we don’t resource them. The government seems to measure everything by the amount of money they put into a program, but they don’t measure the results that we see. The result that we see is increased sexually oriented violence towards both genders, all genders in British Columbia. An increase, not a decrease.

We don’t have the resources in place, as my colleague from Surrey South talked about, in the hospital. I had a recent case brought to me not very long ago, within the last couple of months, in a remote community in British Columbia where an individual raped somebody who had some challenges. The individual went to the police. The police attempted to investigate it, but the individual who had been sexually abused didn’t reveal the details.

The police couldn’t really do their job effectively because nobody else in the community spoke up. No one else in the community spoke up, even though they knew full well a lot of the details that had taken place. There was no place that we could or individuals could take this individual for safety, for examination, because it’s a remote community. Where do you take somebody in areas like that? So she suffered, and it just got worse.

Those kinds of situations are playing out right across our province. We don’t have adequate policing resources in much of rural British Columbia. We don’t have adequate health resources in rural British Columbia. We don’t have adequate psychological services to help these people get over a lot of the trauma they experience in these gender-based types of situations.

[11:35 a.m.]

Domestic violence, you know, that’s part of this motion…. Every single domestic violence case that I investigated over my lengthy career was precipitated by alcohol or drugs, yet we don’t see anything taking place with alcohol recovery, addictions recovery, mental health recovery. If those things were looked at, I think we would see a drastic decrease in the amount of gender-based violence that we see right across the province here.

If we just looked at those two issues themselves and put a lot of the resources into that, to help these individuals that are committing these crimes and to help the individuals that are susceptible and vulnerable to these crimes being committed on them due to alcohol or drug addiction or mental health issues as well….

There’s a lot that can be done without speaking about all these other programs and the amount of money we’re putting into it.

J. Routledge: I rise to speak in favour of this motion. Specifically, I want to talk about domestic violence.

I once worked in a transition home for women and their children escaping domestic violence. That was in Ottawa in the late ’70s and early ’80s. We did not have core funding at that time, so while the protection we offered was anchored by a few hard-working staff, most of us were volunteers.

We ran a 24-hour crisis line, and I took my turn on the night shift. I still remember a whispered conversation with the wife of a physician. She was agonizing about how she could possibly provide a good life for her children while keeping their location hidden from the family’s sole breadwinner. She was worried about both physical and financial retaliation.

We’ve come a long way since then. Today programs like Be More than a Bystander exist to train young men to develop healthy relationships and community members to intervene discreetly and safely when they think they see evidence of domestic violence. Employed survivors can take paid domestic violence leave to meet with their lawyers, attend court hearings and take care of other things they need to do to start a new life.

The Interval House, where I volunteered, had four bedrooms to serve the entire city of Ottawa. Today there are hundreds of spaces available in British Columbia, but it’s still not enough.

In 2018, our government created the women’s transition housing fund, a $743 million investment over ten years to build and operate in the area of 1,000 additional spaces for women and children leaving domestic violence.

The safe spaces and supports provided by transition houses are only meant to be temporary. Too many women eventually take their chances and return to abusive relationships so they can put a roof over their children’s heads. That’s why second-stage and long-term housing is so critical.

I was a part of the groundbreaking ceremony for Cindy Beedie Place in Burnaby earlier this month. Soon women and their children fleeing violence will have 56 new, affordable long-term homes and 37 new child care spaces on site.

Cindy Beedie Place is made possible through a partnership between the province, through B.C. Housing, the Beedie Foundation, the city of Burnaby and YWCA. The province is providing approximately $40 million, the YWCA will operate the building and the city of Burnaby is leasing the site at a nominal fee.

Cindy Beedie Place will be a four-storey building with 41 two-bedroom and 15 three-bedroom homes, each with bathroom, kitchen and dining area. Eleven of the homes will be adaptable and accessible. The building will have heat pumps. It will include an amenities room and a communal kitchen, a courtyard and a children’s play area.

A YWCA community development worker will be on site to connect residents with services such as bursaries, legal supports, local food banks, farmers markets and a pathway to training and employment.

Similar housing for women and their children fleeing domestic violence has been built or is in the process of being built all over British Columbia.

What our government is doing to protect and support women experiencing domestic violence would have been inconceivable when I worked in a transition home. Indeed, it would have been inconceivable under the previous government. Our government views our women’s transition housing fund as an investment in a safer future.

[11:40 a.m.]

K. Kirkpatrick: I’m glad that we’re talking about this today, but I must say I’m very disappointed with the motion that the MLA for Vernon-Monashee put forward. If you had ended it halfway through, “Be it resolved that this House agrees to work to eliminate gender-based violence and support survivors,” you would have everybody in the House saying: “Absolutely, we support this.” But unfortunately, that is not what the motion says.

As we discuss once again this grossly inaccurate motion put forward by the opposite side, I do find it crucial to confront the stark reality of gender-based violence in this province. Again, I am frankly dumbfounded that a motion like this would even be moved by this government.

The recently presented statistics further underscore the severity of the issue. Last year in British Columbia, the rate of intimate partner violence reached an alarming 293 persons per 100,000 population, with women, of course, comprising the majority, at 79 percent of all of those victims. This is a number that is higher than the national average.

Additionally, in 2019, British Columbia experienced the largest provincial increase in Canada, with a staggering 25 percent increase in the rate of family violence. So although the rate has moderated slightly since then, it remains unacceptably high and certainly not something that this government should be proud of.

Now, to set the record straight, the previous B.C. Liberal government, our government, initiated the provincial office of domestic violence to provide essential support to victims. Now, regrettably, this vital institution no longer exists under the current NDP administration, probably something that the majority of NDP and the NDP backbenchers are unaware of. If we are genuinely committed to addressing gender-based violence, we must re-establish the provincial office of domestic violence and reinstate the domestic violence action plan, currently in a state of neglect.

It was in 2015 that the B.C. Liberals, our government, set out a ten-year vision for a violence-free B.C. strategy supporting women to rebuild their lives. This plan included funding for more integrated DVUs and anti-violence support services, which funding increased annually. So I would also ask this NDP government to begin to fully fund the costs associated with domestic violence unit programs and the Stopping the Violence counselling programs to address the unacceptable long wait-lists for these programs.

Moreover, legal aid, which is vital for the well-being of survivors of domestic violence, finds itself today in a state of disarray. Despite a comprehensive review highlighting necessary improvements in the legal aid system, this government has regrettably neglected to take any meaningful action. To the dismay of all, representatives of single mothers now face a shocking situation where the Premier is actually pursuing legal action against them, undermining their legitimate claims for increased legal aid support.

Now, another pivotal tool in the battle against domestic violence is public awareness campaigns. Nevertheless, the perplexing decision by this NDP government to discontinue the #SaySomething campaign is a cause for concern, as it cancels a proactive measure that aims to cultivate a cultural shift where silence is no longer tolerated and to foster an environment where open dialogue and awareness take precedence.

Equally disappointing is this NPD government’s delay in providing essential transition housing for women fleeing violence. Results matter, and the women and children seeking refuge deserve more than promises. They deserve a home. And this NDP government has only opened 270 of its promised 1,500 transition homes. The people of this province deserve nothing less than a government that takes decisive action, fosters awareness and provides concrete support to those affected by gender-based violence.

[11:45 a.m.]

So let’s hope this NDP government is going to do better for those victims of gender-based violence in British Columbia.

A. Singh: I’m blown away by some of the hypocrisy, actually, from the other side. When they were in government, they scrapped pay equity legislation. They cut the B.C. NDP’s child care program. They removed the requirement for cabinet submissions to be evaluated under a gender lens. They eliminated the women’s equality ministry. They cut legal aid by 40 percent. They froze it and laid off victims’ services workers, people who help rape and domestic violence victims through a torturous time.

They cut wages for majority women sectors by introducing a training wage lower than a minimum wage and rolling back wages for the lowest-paid workers in health care by imposing a new HEU contract. The single largest firing of women of colour and lower-paid women in North America…. They cut welfare rates for single moms and made them go back to work when their kids turned three. The list goes on and on. I’m going to stop there, because I want to talk about what our perspective is.

Government is all about choices. All policy is driven by choice. Sometimes it’s a choice brought on by unexpected and unprecedented challenges, like the pandemic. What do we do? Do we follow science? Do we leave the technical decisions to the scientific experts in the field and step back and offer as much support as we can, or do we get in the way?

But for the most part, it’s about who you prioritize. I’m proud to be part of a government that recognizes historical disparities, not on a shallow hashtag level, but on a deep, systemic level and has taken action over the last seven years to rid our society of those disparities. Every decision this government makes has an equity lens on it, including a view on how a policy may or may not have a disparate effect on gender.

Gender-based violence has its roots in the deep misogyny that has permeated society for so long. To really get at it, you have to not only surgically target the symptoms but the deep-rooted causes. One of those deep-rooted causes of disparity and discrimination in economic well-being is probably one of the largest ones. This is why our value-shifting policies in child care are so vital to a future where economic participation for everyone can actually be a reality. We have made unprecedented investments and seen unprecedented returns in child care spaces opening up and making child care more affordable for so many more British Columbians.

The Premier often talks about a young woman engineer who spoke at an event with incredible emotion on how the new child care subsidies meant that she could finally afford child care and go back to work as an engineer, something that she had essentially thought was not going to happen. I was there at that event. I can bear witness to the emotion of that speech, the real significance to this one British Columbia person’s ability to fully participate economically in our province and the strength, resilience and revival of self that I could feel from that person.

I know that we are short on time. I really want to hear my friend from Chilliwack-Kent speak. So I’m going to sit down at this moment.

S. Bond: I can’t begin to, first of all, tell you how profoundly disappointed I am in the comments made by government members today. From the back-patting that’s going on here, one would suggest that they have all the answers. They’ve fixed all the challenges in British Columbia. Nothing could be further from the truth.

As we speak, people in British Columbia are fearful for their safety, many of them women facing the issue of domestic violence. What do we hear? “Let’s stand up and trade statistics. Who did what? When did they do it?”

Here is the stark reality. In 2020, 47,000 women and girls were killed by their intimate partners around the world, or by family members. While this discussion is going on, we should remember that, on average, a woman or girl is killed every 11 minutes.

What do we see? This government, government members…. I was hopeful, at the beginning, because there were actually some comments about how we all need to work together. Instead, it has resulted in cheap partisan discussion in this Legislature about an issue that is emotional and personal. That is shameful. This is an incredibly serious and emotional topic. It shouldn’t be a wedge for any government to use. It is literally a matter of life and death for people in this province.

[11:50 a.m.]

Supporting victims is not a partisan issue, and it shouldn’t be. It is irresponsible for the members opposite to suggest that their government is the only one that’s done any important work to support survivors. In fact, the previous government, our government, provided $70 million a year in prevention and intervention services for victims of domestic violence and other crimes.

Just as the members have a list…. I have one too, but I am not going to take two minutes and 47 seconds to go through a list of things when I know that today, in British Columbia, there are survivors that need help. They need safety. They need security. It is the responsibility of every member in this Legislature to actually do their part.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Of course we join our colleagues in committing to work to eliminate gender-based violence and to support survivors. We have a duty to protect British Columbians, particularly those in vulnerable situations.

We know that gender-based violence takes many forms. One of the most common is intimate partner violence. Tragically, despite the comments we’ve heard this morning, the rate of intimate partner violence in B.C. remains unacceptably high. It isn’t about whose government is in control. It’s about…. What are the results protecting British Columbians who are vulnerable?

Women made up 79 percent of all victims of intimate partner violence in British Columbia. And guess what. That is higher than the national average. So for the members who are standing up and taking political shots in here…. They might want to take a moment and stop and think about the 79 percent of victims of intimate partner violence and remember that it is higher than the national average.

We all have to do more to support people who are facing dangerous, abusive situations. We have a responsibility to provide them with a pathway to safety, to security and to healing. Instead of political partisanship, looking in the rearview mirror, maybe what we should have been debating this morning is what we need to do differently.

What are we each going to do, especially when it comes to things like holding perpetrators responsible for their crimes and abuse? What do we do to educate the public on the signs to watch for? When it comes to gender-based violence, people often think it doesn’t involve them if they’ve never experienced or seen it themselves.

We have a collective responsibility to stand up and change the culture around gender-based violence and sexual assault. I can tell you. It should start in this place, with a different and more respectful discussion, instead of trading statistics about who did what and when.

There are people in British Columbia who need us to demonstrate leadership across every line in this House. It is embarrassing and shameful that this motion was tabled in the way that it was today. We need to do better. We need to start right here in this Legislature.

K. Paddon: That was a really powerful posture from the previous speaker.

I think one of the things that we need to acknowledge right off the bat is…. Absolutely, ending gender-based violence is the focus of everyone in this chamber.

What we also need to acknowledge is that how women are treated — women’s life-or-death situations — is a political issue. It is an issue of the decisions that have been made and that have resulted in exactly the life-or-death situations. It is a political issue because we have a former leader who has made choices that have hurt women and that continue to hurt women.

We have to make this a political issue. In this building, in this place where we do the work of political policy…. That impacts people at the end of the day.

Some of the work being done right now by our government is on the gender-based violence action plan. Absolutely, a plan that is important. It is critical that we get it right. The consultation happening on that is deep and robust and broad. We know that intimate partner violence, gender-based violence…. However we want to frame it, depending on who we’re talking to and depending on who owns those stories in that moment, we know we have to include everybody’s voice.

[11:55 a.m.]

Everyone should feel safe and secure in their home and in their community. Everyone in British Columbia, regardless of gender, should feel safe at home and should be able to know that they are safe.

The member for Cariboo North talked about a deteriorating system, post-secondary, how nothing is happening, despite the fact that sexual violence policies are required in all B.C. public post-secondary institutions and that the “…Is Not Yes” consent awareness campaign is alive and well. This is after the current Leader of the Opposition eliminated the Women’s Equality Ministry and removed the requirements for cabinet submissions to be evaluated under a gender-based violence lens. Those are political decisions.

The member for Surrey South talks about platitudes — action plans, not actions. They’ve not been paying attention. We haven’t been waiting for the action plan to be ready for all the voices to be captured. We have been taking action the entire time.

The Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General has invested in stabilizing sexual assault services, creating new sexual assault centres, changing police standards. We’ve even changed how we’re responding to victims of crime. We understand that there’s a majority who are women. We understand that that is gender-based violence.

The member for Surrey South described a situation with a young constituent. My heart breaks. I understand that they are impacted, and I thank them for sharing the story. It tells us how serious things are, and I wanted to acknowledge that. The wraparound services that they discussed absolutely are critical. The sexual assault centres will be critical for that as well.

The member for Prince George–Mackenzie talked about whether this is political or not. I’ve already canvassed this, but I can’t help but be confused and be triggered by the cognitive dissonance of members who have stood up, criticized us for making this political, criticized the government for inaction, for not doing enough, while standing behind a leader whose decisions and actions hurt women and continue to hurt women.

While we share the statistics of the increased numbers, while we share the statistics of the work being done…. The need for that comes from the decisions that were made previously. They cut legal aid by nearly 40 percent. They made it harder for those who need it most, low-income women, to get legal representation. In the same budget, they gave a 5 percent tax break to the top 1 percent of income earners.

In 2022, the Leader of the Opposition defended the cuts that hurt women. When the Leader of the Opposition talks about reining in government spending today, he’s talking about cuts like that. He’s talking about continuing to hurt women.

We are dedicated to taking real action and to creating a plan to end gender-based violence in British Columbia. And if I am going to be criticized for making that political, I will remind everybody that the lives of women, the lives of British Columbians…. That is political, and I will not be shamed into silence.

K. Paddon moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Hon. M. Farnworth moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

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

The House adjourned at 11:58 a.m.