Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: T. Stone.

Introductions by Members

Hon. B. Ralston: It’s my honour today to welcome leadership staff and project partners from the Forest Enhancement Society of B.C. or, as they are sometimes known, FESBC. This organization works with Indigenous groups, local communities, contractors and forest companies to implement projects that help protect communities from wildfire, provide the fibre that keeps mills running, and improve forest ecology.

This year the society funded 61 projects, including 19 just announced today.

I’d like to mention the members of the board and staff: Dave Peterson, board chair; Trish Dohan, secretary; Ken Day, director; Mike Kelly, director; Steve Kozuki, executive director; Joyce Clarke, finance and administration manager; Aleece Laird, communications liaison; Kimberlee Baggio, communications support; and an important partner, Percy Guichon, executive director, Central Chilcotin Rehabilitation Ltd.

Would the House please join me in giving a warm welcome to all the members of FESBC.

C. Oakes: It’s not very often that we get visitors from Cariboo North here in the Legislature. I’d like to welcome Fred Rogger and Anna Rankin, who are visiting us here from Quesnel.

Fred is a retired teacher and taught one of our long-serving B.C. staffers, Cam Ehl, who is also from Quesnel. Fred is one of the reasons why Cam developed an interest in politics and was an inspirational teacher to so many students in school district 28 over the years.

It’s not just Cam. Fred, you have inspired many people in our community to go on and take leadership positions. You’re an excellent teacher, and we’re grateful for all that you’ve done.

I had the opportunity to work with Anna on the airshed management work in the community over many, many years. You’re a tireless advocate in our community.

Would the House please make these two exceptional people welcome.

R. Parmar: I’ve got two sets of introductions today.

Firstly, it’s an honour to invite to the House today two incredible residents of the West Shore area. We’ve got Christine Lervold, a proud SD 62 trustee, who took over for me on the school board earlier this year; and from the city of Colwood, Bruce Brown, retired staff sergeant with the West Shore RCMP.

I’m going to be talking more about these two incredible people in my member’s statement a bit later, but will the House please make them feel very welcome.

[10:10 a.m.]

For those of us on this side of the House, this question period and this session mark the end for one of the one of the hardest-working staffers on this side of the House, and that’s Peter Dalla-Vicenza.

He’s a senior research and communications officer with the B.C. NDP caucus and a reporter turned political staffer who spent the last 20 years supporting NDP governments in Manitoba, Alberta and now here in British Columbia. I think all of us have been touched by the incredible work he and his team do.

I hope all of us will recognize him for, again, the incredible work that he’s done over his career and wish him all the best in his retirement.

T. Halford: I want to welcome home a South Surrey–​based fighter who went and competed in Fort Worth, Texas at the 16th World Wushu Championships. That is Joseph Piccolo and his coach, known in our community as master Mostafa.

Joseph won second place in the men’s sanda division in the 90 kilogram category. This is actually the first time this has been done in Canadian history.

I want to congratulate him on this historic achievement.

Hon. A. Kang: In the gallery today, I have my entire team from the Municipal Affairs minister’s office: my chief of staff, Thuy Pham; my senior adviser, Jocelyn Fan; executive assistant, Nick Hsieh; administrative coordinator, Ngaire Lord; and administrative assistant, Don Privett.

I love coming to work every day, because I get to see them and work with them. They have been a real support, not only as colleagues and partners but, as well, just like a family.

Would the House please make them feel very welcome.

Tributes

GORDON GIBSON JR. AND HARBANS BHULLAR

K. Falcon: I’d like to make two acknowledgments.

The first is all of us serve here as MLAs, and we’re privileged to have the ability and the right to do that in our free and democratic society. I want to recognize a former member who’s no longer with us, and that’s Gordon Gibson Jr.

Gordon Gibson served with distinction on behalf of the entire province of British Columbia. He was first elected in 1974 in the riding of North Van–Capilano. He was a party leader of the B.C. Liberals up until 1979.

He was also chair of the Citizens Assembly that our prior government put together that, for the first time, allowed randomly selected citizens to come together and make a recommendation as to what kind of electoral system we should have. Although the public ultimately decided not to go with the recommendation, the very fact that that trust was put in the hands of regular citizens could not have happened without Gordon Gibson Jr.’s leadership.

He was also a senior fellow at the Fraser Institute and wrote a number of books about governance and was awarded the Order of B.C. I want to recognize his contribution to the province.

Secondly, I’d like to also recognize the passing of a woman named Harbans Bhullar. This is a classic immigrant success story. Came here in 1956. Husband died at much too young an age, and she was raising several children on her own. As a single mother, that’s always hard to do. All of her children excelled and served with distinction in their various endeavours.

One of them, Tarsem, or Tony, Bhullar actually served in this Legislature for four years. It’s another example of how immigrants have enriched our society, and I want to just make a notation that we thank her for the great contribution she made to our province.

Introductions by Members

Hon. S. Robinson: Today we have in the gallery a whole crew from my ministry. The Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills Ministry has joined us here today, and I would like everyone to please give them a very warm welcome.

These are the folks that do so much heavy lifting on behalf of British Columbians everywhere.

S. Chant: I have two guests here today that I’m very, very pleased to see. They’re both from Capilano University. They work with the students union there.

Manpreet Kaur is the vice-president external, and she’s also the chair of the Alliance of B.C. Students. She does a lot of work both listening to students around the province and bringing their concerns when they come and talk to us here to advise us of how it’s going in the post-secondary world and to let us know their concerns so that we can listen and help.

With her is Josh Thomas, who is the director of policy and campaigns with the Capilano University Students Union. Josh has been there for quite some time and has been a really strong and effective mentor and guide for the students who come into the student union and are learning the role of representation and advocacy.

[10:15 a.m.]

I’m very glad that they’re both here, and we’re going to hopefully be doing some visiting during today. I hope when I arrive at your offices, it’s fine to have a quick visit.

R. Merrifield: Well, this morning I have the privilege of having two of our city of Kelowna staff members here for a visit this morning for coffee but then also here in the gallery this morning.

As we know, the city of Kelowna punches above its weight, and it wouldn’t be possible without the extraordinary staff members. I’d like to introduce to us all, Axelle Bazett, who is the intergovernmental relations manager, as well as Michelle Kam, who is the grants manager and here for some visits and meetings today. Would the House please join me in welcoming them.

I also have one more and that is that I’d like to introduce Ryan Painter, who is also here this morning for a meeting. I just wanted to welcome him to the House.

H. Yao: I think we all can agree that as MLAs, we have bosses back at our constituencies. They work hard. They help us do casework and often manage our schedules, in order to ensure we do not miss any important appointments.

Today I want to ask the House to welcome my three CAs who are here: Amy Li, Robert Chuand Rishika Selvakumar. They are here, they are here listening, really watching QP, so hopefully we are all on our best behaviour.

Please join me in welcoming them here in the chamber.

B. Banman: I think in this House we can all agree that the heavy lifting is done by staff. Our team is small but mighty, and one of the very important parts of our team is actually up in the gallery today. I would like this House to welcome Hannah Driedger.

I appreciate you, and on behalf of my leader and myself, we just want to thank you and wish you a very merry Christmas as well.

B. Anderson: I know everyone in this House is excited that today is the last day of session. I am particularly excited, as I get to go home tomorrow. It should take me about 12 hours, and I get to celebrate my partner’s birthday this weekend.

Happy birthday, Paul. I love you, and I can’t wait to be home with you and the dogs.

C. Oakes: I forgot one other individual today. Joining Fred and Anna today is John Hefferan.

I, too, would like to acknowledge all the student representatives here today. They’re doing a great job with advocacy. We appreciate all the work that they’re doing.

Would the House please make all the guests welcome.

Hon. G. Lore: I’m really pleased today to introduce Dr. Azin Nasseri. He is the executive director of the Vancouver Island Counselling Centre for Immigrants and Refugees. He’s a clinical counsellor with a PhD in international psychology from the Chicago School of Professional Psychology, with a special focus on psychological trauma.

VICCIR, the Vancouver Island Counselling Centre for Immigrants and Refugees, is an incredible organization that provides counselling and support that is trauma-informed in language and culture for newcomers in B.C.

They continue to step up in my community and across the region to provide support to people displaced by war and violence, including from Ukraine, Syria, Afghanistan, Iran and more.

Will the House please make this incredible individual feel very welcome.

R. Russell: I think we all have people back home that are real champions for community. One of those for me is on the precinct today.

Dan Macmaster is a forester for Osoyoos Indian Band and is also a leader in the community forest sector. He’s somebody I’m proud to call my friend. We all know how much toll that takes.

A belated birthday wish to his partner, Elly. I may have witnessed him receiving a Forester of the Universe Award this morning. I’m not entirely clear on that, but please make him feel welcome.

Thank you, Dan, for all you do for our community.

[10:20 a.m.]

H. Yao: I also want to take, today, a great opportunity to wish Lao On Hing a happy 75th birthday. I know Lao On Hing has been in Hong Kong for 60 years as a tailor, and I also know he’s the father of one of my staff members.

For him to raise such an exceptional staff to support us and support our community, I want to say thank you and happy birthday.

G. Chow: I’d like to welcome the Seaquam senior boys volleyball team from Delta to the Legislature.

The team won the bronze medal two weeks ago at the South Fraser Championship and earned a spot to compete here in Oak Bay at the B.C. High School Boys Provincial Championship. The top 16 teams in the province, out of a total of 75 teams, are competing this week in Oak Bay.

The Seaquam team is led by head coach Leanne Chow, who happens to be my daughter and who teaches at Old Yale Road school in Surrey. With her are three assistant coaches — Ryan Blandford, Alex Lam and Nathan Yang; as well as two parent sponsors, Doug MacKenzie and Melanie Funk.

There are 11 members in the team. They are Luke, Alex, Tim, Will, Saagar, Jjay, Lynden, Loreno, Brendan, Mattias and Tariq.

Would the House welcome them and wish them luck in the championships.

Statements
(Standing Order 25B)

GRANDCHILDREN

G. Kyllo: Well, grandkids, the next generation, truly are God’s greatest gift. My lovely wife, Georgina, and I have been blessed with 12 grandkids. The best part is that our four daughters and their families all reside within about 15 minutes of our home in Sicamous.

Georgina is affectionately known as Nanny and un­doubtedly is all of their favourite person, and I’m just referred to as Pops or, as the kids oftentimes like to teasingly refer to me, as Popsie. Okay. I get it. It may not be quite the coolest handle that I might have desired, but I do want to get their names on the record. From oldest to youngest, we have Maya, Eve, Kylie, Siddhalee, Nova, Nolan, Hannah, Journey, Adison, Harvey, Sawyer and Noah.

Now, hon. Members, I turned 55 this year, and I’m very proud to profess that I’m doing my best to not act my age. I must admit that being active and involved in our grandkids’ lives makes it increasingly easy to do just that. Nothing like the presence of a gaggle of grandkids to remind us not to take ourselves too seriously.

Near any activity is greatly enhanced in the presence of grandkids, and Georgina and I are increasingly finding ourselves changing our lives and our activities in order to ensure that we can spend as much time as possible with the grandkids.

My favourite time of year is definitely Christmas, the Christmas season. As we look to leave this House and head back to our home ridings, I hope that all members are able to surround themselves with family and friends and, for those that have the fortunate opportunity, with their grandkids.

It is certainly worth repeating. Grandkids are truly God’s greatest gift.

HUMANITARIAN WORK BY BOB BECKETT
AND MISSIONS TO UKRAINE

R. Parmar: Over 600 days ago, Russia began its unjust and unprovoked war on Ukraine. In Langford, in my community, retired fire chief and humanitarian extraordinaire Bob Beckett began the important work he’s been doing for over 30 years of supporting communities and always thinking globally.

Bob has had a history of over 30 years of outreach and visiting communities as a humanitarian, whether that was building new schools in Haiti, being there in Bosnia, bringing a used fire truck to Mexico or being there just days after 9/11 in the United States.

Bob, since the war began, has led three missions to Ukraine, with the last one just returning last week.

I had the honour of joining Bob on one of his humanitarian missions to Ukraine just this past February, and I can share with you and all members of this House that it was an incredibly moving experience.

[10:25 a.m.]

I had the honour of participating in some FaceTime calls with Bob and the team just in the last couple of weeks, as they were delivering some incredibly important initiatives and experiences and supports and services to people in need.

I want to acknowledge the accomplishments of this team and what they were able to do in their last mission: $50,000 donated to a hospital for medical supplies, two large diesel generators to keep students warm and out of the dark as their schools were impacted by power outages, $10,000 towards an orthopedic drill, $32,000 fundraised for a new school bus.

Really the icing on the cake, and what I’m most looking forward to, is welcoming four students from Ukraine, four different communities, to the Sooke school district as part of an international experience next year.

I hope the House will join me in acknowledging Bob, but also his entire team: Stew Young, the former mayor of Langford; Bruce Brown, former staff sergeant with the West Shore RCMP; Brendan Strain from CTV News, who’s captured all of these tours; as well as Christine Lervold from the Sooke school district.

On behalf of all of us, I want to thank you for everything you’ve done to help the people of Ukraine.

CHRISTINE SINCLAIR

T. Halford: I rise today to celebrate a true Canadian icon. That icon is, of course, somebody that has inspired British Columbians and Canadians across this nation. That is, of course, Christine Sinclair.

Soccer fans, including myself, eagerly anticipate her final game with Canada’s women’s national soccer team on December 5. Emotions are running incredibly high.

Now, I will tell you this. I remember my dad taking me to go see Wayne Gretzky as a kid to make sure that I actually was able to see one of the greatest. I know families, including myself, on December 5 will be doing that. I’ll be doing that with my kids to make sure that I, along with 40,000 other people, am witnessing the final chapter in one of our most storied careers of women’s soccer.

Christine Sinclair’s trailblazing journey from the fields of British Columbia to becoming the highest-scoring player in international soccer history, encompassing both men’s and women’s games, is nothing short of extraordinary. Her dedication, skill and leadership have not only propelled her to greatness but have elevated the status of women’s soccer on the global stage.

I’m sure many of us fondly recall watching Sinclair fight for the Canadian team’s historic gold medal win at the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympics.

Her contributions go beyond the field. They inspire young athletes across our province to dream big and pursue their passions with unwavering determination. Recognizing this profound impact she has made on our community, B.C. Place will be renamed, rightfully, Christine Sinclair Place for one day on December 5. It will be a moment cherished by soccer enthusiasts, British Columbians and Canadians alike.

The significance of Sinclair’s retirement extends beyond this game. It resonates the values of perseverance, excellence and the pursuit of one’s dreams.

May her retirement be as remarkable as her storied career.

ACHIEVEMENTS OF
CRESTON VALLEY RESIDENTS

B. Anderson: Today I want to talk about some of the incredible talent in the Creston Valley. Creston, for those of you who haven’t been there…. When you’re coming down Kootenay Pass, it opens up, and it is absolutely spectacular. But that is not what makes it so special. It is the people.

I’m sure many of you know The Great Canadian Baking Show, season 7, just ended, and Loïc Fauteux-Goulet, who is a teacher from the Creston Valley, was the winner of season 7.

Interjection.

B. Anderson: Yes, so a big round of applause.

I know that I myself really hope I get to meet Loïc and his partner, Alison. Apparently his love for baking started as he started to design elaborate birthday cakes for her. I think it’s a really special story of some of the talent in the Creston Valley.

We also have Jayli Wolf. She is a singer, songwriter, filmmaker, poet and a member of the Stó:lō First Nation. She grew up in Creston and now lives in the Kootenays. She debuted as a solo artist in 2021, winning CBC’s top ten Canadian songs. She is also a Juno nominee and Contemporary Indigenous Artist of 2022, and recently she was just featured on the big screen in Times Square.

[10:30 a.m.]

Erin Harris is co-owner of Kootenay Meadows. They produce milk and cheese on their farm. If you ever get to go visit, those are some of the happiest cows you’ll ever see. It’s an organic farm, and they produce really incredible products.

Erin was chosen to be on season 2 of Farming for Love, which will also get to showcase the beauty of the Creston Valley.

We wish Erin all the best.

I just want to thank all of the really incredible, talented people in the Creston Valley for everything that they do to make the place so special.

IMPORTANCE OF DEMOCRACY
AND ROLE OF MLAs

S. Furstenau: As world leaders meet for COP in Dubai and the Legislative Assembly rises for 2023, it’s an opportunity for all of us to reflect on the state of the world.

We’re in a period of change and uncertainty, of increasing inequality, of fragmentation and division. At times like this, our imperfect but hopeful form of organizing our­selves — where we aim to give equal voice to the strong and the weak, the rich and the poor, where we aim to find consensus and work together — is more important than ever.

Instead, disinformation, driven by social media companies focused on clicks rather than accuracy, aims to divide us and to distract us from focusing on the issues that matter. At times like this, democracy can feel fragile. Across British Columbia, across Canada and, indeed, across the world, we see the re-emergence of fascism and populism, of people who would do anything or say anything for power, no matter the harm that it causes to people and institutions.

As members of this House, we will spend the next two months spread across British Columbia, talking to the people about the work we have done over the last two months, seeking their views on what we should do with the remainder of the electoral term. It’s an opportunity to reconnect with what has brought us to this House, to make ourselves accountable to the public and to reconfirm our commitment to the fragile democracy.

I wish all members the best for this holiday season, and I hope all have an opportunity to reflect, to remember and to recommit to upholding the values of British Columbians.

HOLIDAY SEASON AND EVENTS
IN CHILLIWACK-KENT AREA

K. Paddon: Today marks the last day of the fall session and, for so many of us, the beginning of celebration season as we return to our ridings just in time for the business of holiday preparation.

In Chilliwack-Kent, last week marked the start of our season of celebration as my team and I hosted a 2023 wrap-up party at our community office.

A huge thank you to my team, Jennifer and Lorna, for making it happen, and to all the guests who took the time to be there to enjoy the hot chocolate bar, treats and great conversation.

An extra special thank you to local artist Nina Kroeker for sharing her paintings with us. She’s on Instagram. There are cows. It’s worth checking out.

As we leave this busy season, I’m excited to jump into the spirited sprint of the next few weeks. This Saturday is the Rotary Christmas parade in Chilliwack. For those who can’t make it, it will be livestreamed on chillTV. They also have a Rotary Christmas show available online that is lots of fun, and I’ll be sharing it on my page.

Anyone looking to get into the Christmas spirit can check out Christmas lights at Cultus Lake or in Harrison Hot Springs. Just be sure to bundle up.

I’m looking forward to picking up some special treasures at the G.W. Graham Secondary free Christmas market on December 7. All products are made by students.

Between now and December 25, I will be a grateful guest at the Chilliwack and District Seniors Resources Christmas luncheon, the Streams Foundation Canada community holiday celebration and the Christmas lunch program with our Rotary, just to name a few. I’m looking so forward to spending this time with people at home.

Although I couldn’t possibly choose a single favourite event, I am especially looking forward to joining the mayor of Kent, Sylvia Pranger, for the CPKC Holiday Train and to seeing all the kiddos bundled up and excited about the train, the lights and the music. There’s more that will be going on, too many great times to name. I’m so grateful that I get to celebrate with friends, businesses, organizations and my neighbours.

To my community, I will see you soon.

To my colleagues, all of the staff, Hansard, our ASL translators, the entire Legislative Assembly team — through the Speaker, of course — I wish you all a very merry Christmas.

Oral Questions

CARBON TAX AND COST OF LIVING

K. Falcon: After seven years of this NDP government, British Columbia is now recognized as the most unaffordable province in the entire country.

[10:35 a.m.]

Highest housing and gas prices in North America. Highest average rents in the entire country. Grocery prices going through the roof. And a Premier and government that celebrate the fact that they’ve more than doubled the carbon tax and are planning to triple it over the next six years.

But worse, when every other Premier in the provinces answered my call to eliminate the carbon tax on all home heating fuels, including, by the way…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

K. Falcon: …the NDP Premier of Manitoba and the NDP opposition leader in Alberta, only this NDP Premier stood up and said: “No way, no how.”

Well, let me tell you…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, let’s listen to the question.

K. Falcon: …our plan for immediate relief includes permanently eliminating the provincial fuel taxes, saving British Columbians up to 15 cents a litre in gas. It includes stopping the NDP’s relentless carbon tax hikes, which are hurting families at a time they can’t afford to hurt anymore; removing the carbon tax from all home heating fuels; scrapping the cost B.C. plan, which their own numbers show will reduce family incomes by an average of $11,000 a year; and reducing grocery bills by making transportation costs more affordable with lower fuel prices and eliminating carbon tax.

My question for the Premier is this. Why does the Premier stubbornly ignore the plight of British Columbians who are struggling each and every day in the most unaffordable province in the country?

Hon. D. Eby: This is the last day of session. I want to thank all members. I know you put in long days and that we’ve had debate on important bills.

It’s been a helpful session, I think, to really illustrate the differences in the parties. We have seen, in this session, the Leader of the Opposition and the BCUP party stand up and vote against literally every single housing affordability initiative that this government has brought forward.

Now, there is one more opportunity for the Leader of the Opposition to stand up and vote for housing that’s near transit, that people who actually use transit can actually afford to live in. I hope he takes the opportunity, because what we’re hearing from British Columbians, what we’re seeing come in, correspondence from British Columbians — maybe I’ll read just one — about the challenges they face….

One of the major challenges is the affordability of housing. I cannot understand how that member can stand up and say he’s for affordability and then vote against literally every single affordability initiative.

One letter from April. This is to the Minister of Housing: “Good evening, Minister. We wish to extend our gratitude for the opportunity to attend and speak at the announcement of small-scale and multi-unit housing regulations. As you’re aware, we’ve been advocating for this within our neighbourhood, in our city. We deeply appreciate your dedication.”

A letter from Althea: “I want to thank you for the hard work you’ve been putting in on building more housing for the people of British Columbia. As a renter in Victoria, my husband and I struggle with the cost of housing, especially housing near good transit.”

“Hi, Minister Kahlon. I feel it was important to express my support, as these policies often receive push-back from the different sectors, and I wanted to try to counteract that with my voice” — from Costanza.

I could go on. I hope I have the opportunity to.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Official Opposition, supplemental.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON HOUSING
AFFORDABILITY AND CURRENT ISSUES

K. Falcon: The problem is their so-called hard work has actually got us the most unaffordable housing in North America. Not just Canada; they stretch higher. North America — imagine that.

Actually, it’s interesting that the Premier reads out some letters and some comments. Well, I’d just like to quote a great former Premier of British Columbia, Mike Harcourt. His comments about the bills that you introduced include “a blizzard of arbitrary measures,” “arbitrary, top-down changes,” “setting aside years of local and regional infrastructure and service plan.” And this is my personal favourite: “providing a field day for land speculators.”

That’s actually what other people are saying. Perhaps the Premier should listen to a lot of people who have a lot of experience and understand what’s happening.

I’ve said from day one that we must hold governments and politicians accountable not for what they promised, not for the announcements and photo ops but for the results they actually get for British Columbians. Right here, instead, we’ve got a Premier that focuses on big and shiny announcements to distract the public.

Why would they? Well, health care — worst outcomes we’ve ever seen, sending patients, amazingly, down to the United States to get basic cancer care.

Housing — as I said, the most unaffordable in the country.

Gas and rent — highest in North America. Not very good results.

Crime — well, under the Premier’s catch-and-release program, we’ve got chaos and disorder on our streets.

Again to the Premier, when will the Premier stop scrambling for big and shiny distraction announcements and focus on getting actual results for British Columbians?

[10:40 a.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: I’ll just remind the Leader of the Opposition that when he was on this side of the House, his government funded 140 units of student housing in 16 years.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, shhh.

Members. Members.

Members, it’s a two-way street, please. If you want to hear the question, we also have the responsibility to hear the answer, please. Okay? Thank you.

Hon. D. Eby: I saw them take credit for Brock Commons at UBC. They funded less than 4 percent of that 400-unit project. They took credit for funding 400 units. We’re building 8,000 units of student housing. We’ve in­creased our own targets to 12,000. That’s just one example.

I heard the member mention Mike Harcourt. I love Mike; he’s a fantastic guy. He’s an adviser and a mentor to me. He’s a leader of our party, and Mike bought a piece of property in Vancouver. He tore down a single-family house, and he built a duplex.

Now, what’s the problem with that? The problem is that the duplex cost $4 million. He had to hire an architect to do it, and he had to go through lengthy processes to do it. The problem is that we can’t have duplexes just for the rich. We have to have affordable, middle-income townhomes, duplexes, multi-unit construction for everybody.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members. Members.

Members, shhh. Members.

Hon. D. Eby: Hearing from the member for Abbotsford West about property speculation is a bit rich. If the member wants to get into….

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Member for Abbotsford West, there’s no need to, please.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: No, he has the floor. No.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Member.

Member, you are wasting your own time.

Interjection.

Mr. Speaker: Okay, keep talking. We’ll wait till you are finished.

Hon. D. Eby: Now, there was a Delta city councillor last night that stood up and spoke out, despite his historic affiliation with the BCUP, Dylan Kruger. He said: “Big problems need big solutions. Kudos to the province for listening to voices of housing advocates across Canada and getting this done. This legislation removes arbitrary barriers to new housing supply in local neighbourhoods. No more time capsules. Let communities evolve.”

Then Simrath Grewal tweeted Dylan and said: “Dylan and I have been friends for years, so I’m going to share some advice with #bcpoli that I give myself, usually in retrospect: I should listen to Dylan more.”

I think we should all listen to Dylan. We should be advocating for more housing for British Columbians that they can actually afford. I hope the member votes for the transit-oriented housing, because it will ensure people who use transit can actually afford to live close to transit.

DISCLOSURE OF
HOUSING LEGISLATION INFORMATION

S. Bond: Seven years and two elections, and B.C. has one thing that we are 100 percent certain of — the Premier failed to read that out of his yellow folder: the Premier has actually managed to attain the most dubious distinction of having the least affordable housing in North America.

That is fact, and that is on this Premier’s watch. In the face of over 500 announcements by the NDP, what are we seeing? Housing prices are going up, and housing starts are taking a nosedive.

This government released a flurry of bills this session, yet they refuse to release critical information. We’ve actually heard from Jens Von Bergmann, the very person who did the government’s own modelling, who says they have been silenced by non-disclosure agreements. In other words: “No, you can’t talk about that.” Not only can we not finish the debate on the bills; apparently you can’t talk about the work you’ve done for the government.

A straight-up question to the Premier. He could say yes today. Will he do the right thing and remove the non-disclosure agreement so that British Columbians can understand exactly what this government based this legislation on?

[10:45 a.m.]

Hon. R. Kahlon: There has been lots of discussion on housing, as there should be, because we know that there are many people struggling to find homes in British Columbia. We have said that many times. We have heard that from people in our communities. That’s why we’ve taken the significant efforts that we have to ensure that we can get that housing built in our communities.

I’ve shared with the members that the economic analysis will be released publicly so that everyone can see the impacts of the legislation changes that we’ve made. But you know, the member says to take his word for it.

Neil Moody, the CEO of the Canadian Home Builders, said: “The legislation introduced today will make it easier and more predictable for…B.C. homebuilders to work with local governments to speed up the approval process and increase the variety of housing choices in our growing neighbourhoods.”

Not only the homebuilding community thinks this is going to help us get more housing; environmental groups who are advocating for more healthy, vibrant communities…. The organization Happy Cities said: “To solve the housing crisis, we need a provincewide effort to build more diverse housing options, both market and non-market. Legalizing multi-unit housing everywhere is an important first step to creating healthy, walkable, connected and resilient communities.”

That is what we’re fighting for, and we’re going to continue to do that work.

Interjections.

COST OF LIVING AND BASIC INCOME
PANEL REPORT IMPLEMENTATION

S. Furstenau: I was so enraptured with the debate there.

The cost of living is soaring in this province, and people are slipping closer and closer towards homelessness every day. More than 100,000 households in B.C. pay more than 50 percent of their income on rent and utilities. This is a crisis-level amount.

In my riding, people with developmental disabilities and low-income seniors are being forced into homelessness. Food banks are increasingly serving people who are working full time and still can’t make ends meet. How is this government responding to this crisis? Inadequately, to say the least. A new approach is needed.

The basic income expert panel made it clear that the current social assistance program in B.C. is punitive and ineffective. It traps people in poverty, rather than lifting them out.

My question is to the Premier. Has this government implemented any of the recommendations from the 2020 Basic Income Panel report?

Hon. S. Malcolmson: Thank you to the member for the question.

It was the agreement between both the Green Party and the NDP in the historic Confidence and Supply Agreement that initiated the Expert Panel on Basic Income. It is a rich document that is being implemented across government in many pieces, particularly in its basic conclusion on raising income assistance rates for the people most in need. It was the very first thing this government has done. That’s why we’ve increased income assistance rates five times, after them having been frozen for a decade under the previous government.

Many of the recommendations have been built into the extensive public consultation that we were legislatively required to do in order to update our second poverty re­duction strategy. We’ll be bringing the results of the poverty reduction strategy into this House in the spring. I believe the member will see many of the recommendations that remain of the expert review report embedded in that work.

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Third Party, supplemental.

S. Furstenau: Unfortunately, in this province, we have a poverty-increasing strategy that seems to be underway. People are, more and more, falling into deeper and deeper poverty in this province, and the social assistance program forces them into stigma and shame.

It treats them as though they don’t deserve to get assistance. It makes the hurdles and the hoops that they jump through almost impossible for so many people. They often give up in despair. This government has failed, and more and more people are dying of poverty and inequality.

They have had years to act with the urgency that this crisis requires. Instead, they provide one-off cheques, in­sufficient rebates and flashy announcements. For a government that’s supposed to care about people, why have they continued to fail to make a fundamental difference in the lives of people who need it the very most?

My question is to the Premier. When will his government fully implement the recommendations for basic in­come for women fleeing violence, for youth aging out of care and for people with disabilities?

[10:50 a.m.]

Hon. S. Malcolmson: That British Columbia was the last place in Canada to have a poverty reduction strategy was something that we remedied when we first formed government. We have been implementing across government, from investments in child care to minimum wage to unprecedented investments in affordable housing, not to mention increasing income assistance rates five times already, doubling the senior supplement, and much more to do because absolutely, the impact of global inflation has hit people very hard.

I want to also, though, say how important our investments in employment have been for me, because my ministry funds it in cooperation with the federal government, to be able to visit, for example, commercial truck driving training programs in Prince George to meet two women, Jordan and Amanda, who were funded to leave their homes and families to get new training, to then have the training, the course paid. They’re now both commercial truck drivers in the north, something that is badly needed.

That is embedded into our income assistance program too. That’s something that the basic annual income panel asked us to do. That’s work we’re doing right now, and we will continue.

CARBON TAX AND COST OF LIVING

J. Rustad: We’re hearing a lot about affordability today, but the carbon tax is one of the pieces, I think, that strikes at the heart of many people. As we see from polling, the majority of people in this province want to get rid of it.

The carbon tax, when you’re filling up a tank of gas of 60 litres, equates to about $16 when gas is at $2. Just to put that in perspective of what that means for British Columbians that are going to Costco, that’s the equivalent of buying two rotisserie chickens.

Hundreds of thousands of British Columbians are struggling just to put food on the table. They’re struggling with the difference between being able to afford food or gas. They’re flocking to food banks as prices continue to rise.

Perhaps to the Premier: can you explain why these families are struggling to make ends meet, and will he commit to getting rid of the carbon tax that is taxing two chickens out of every family’s pot every single time they go to fill up the tank of gas?

Hon. D. Eby: Thank you to the member for the question. This is a challenging issue.

How do you discuss sensible climate policy with a member that doesn’t believe that human-caused climate change is real? How do you discuss how to address this issue of our forests burning, our rivers drying up, the pine beetle overwintering, the atmospheric rivers, farmers struggling with drought, with a member who thinks that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant?

How do you have a sensible discussion about how British Columbia shows climate leadership and seizes the economic opportunities like the 450 family-supporting jobs in Maple Ridge at the new battery plant or at the refinery in Prince George, Canada’s first renewable diesel facility? How do you have a sensible conversation in this place when the member doesn’t even believe that climate change is real?

His opinion is that we should do nothing on climate. And that opinion, despite the fact that it got kicked him out of the BCUP caucus, is now the official position of the BCUP as well — that we shouldn’t take climate action.

I see that he’s an influential guy…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. D. Eby: …but if your opinion is that we should take no action on climate change, then you really do need to explain the impact on British Columbians of fire, of drought, of flood that are costing literally billions of dollars to taxpayers here in this province, right across Canada and around the world.

Why would you abandon our climate leadership position? Why would you abandon our economic growth? And frankly, how can you justify your position on climate change?

Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Fourth Party, supplemental.

J. Rustad: I find it incredible that this Premier actually believes taxing people into poverty can change the weather. I mean, seriously, how can anybody take this government’s position seriously when that’s what they believe?

You know what, Mr. Speaker? The NDP used to be the party of the working-class people.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Let’s hear the question, please.

J. Rustad: They used to be the party of the working-class people. As a matter of fact, I think it was Tommy Douglas who once promised a chicken in every pot. And here we are. The Premier is standing up, defending a tax that is actually literally taking two chickens out of every family’s pot every time they fill up this tank of gas.

[10:55 a.m.]

Will this NDP Premier please explain to British Columbians, when they’re living paycheque to paycheque…? What are they supposed to do when they have to put food in the pot and when they’re waiting for the end of December to just get their carbon tax rebate?

Hon. D. Eby: The member stands up and pretends to be interested in affordability. He’s also voting against our housing initiatives to provide affordable housing for British Columbians.

I assume he’s got some kind of a position about the floods and the forest fires and the impacts we’re seeing in British Columbia and around the world as we set record-high temperatures — about what British Columbia should do about that or how we embrace opportunities like hydrogen battery manufacturing, other clean economy. It’s just hard to know what it is.

He stood on this side of the House supporting the carbon tax every single day as a B.C. Liberal before he flipped over to that side. If it was a good idea when he was over here, why is it suddenly a bad idea when he’s over there?

We’re returning carbon tax revenues back to British Columbians to make sure that they’re supported around affordability. But what we can’t do is give up on climate action, pretend that climate change isn’t real, cover our eyes and our ears and insist that now is not the time, because now is the time.

British Columbia will continue to lead on this, and we will be the party that stands up for climate action and affordability and housing, and it is the only option for British Columbians if they want action on this.

GOVERNMENT ACTION ON REPEAT
OFFENDERS AND CRIME IN COMMUNITIES

M. Lee: Yves Castonguay is a prolific offender with 150 convictions, including 50 property crimes, 24 crimes of violence, anti-Asian hate graffiti, public incitement of hate and three dozen breaches. He recently added to his criminal record by brazenly robbing the Granville Street London Drugs in downtown Vancouver and threatening staff. Within 48 hours of his crime, he was back at it, breaking into an apartment building on West 8th and Cambie. Then he was caught on camera in yet another break and enter.

Time and time again, it’s the same story of this Premier’s catch-and-release regime, until this prolific offender escalated to violence, pulling a knife and breaching his probation. This week we found out the consequence of his string of thefts, threats, break-ins and violence: he got one day in jail. Just one day.

When will this soft-on-crime Premier finally admit that his catch-and-release regime has utterly failed and start treating all crimes seriously, with real consequences?

Hon. N. Sharma: Everyone deserves to feel safe in their communities. As a government, we’ve been taking specific and direct action on repeat violent offending in this province.

We have the strictest bail policy in Canada. We’ve been advocating and taking a leadership role across this country because we see that the Criminal Code needs to be changed around repeat violent offenders so communities can feel safer and so courts have the tools necessary to keep repeat violent offenders off the street.

I’ll continue my advocacy. I’m told that that bail reform passed in the Senate yesterday and the day before. It’s now before the House. This government will continue to push for the federal government to pass that bail reform so we have better tools for repeat violent offending.

SURREY SCHOOL DISTRICT PORTABLE USE

E. Sturko: The NDP promised to eliminate all portables in Surrey in four years, but instead, they’ve done the exact opposite. We now have more portables in Surrey than ever before. Double-decker portables are on their way, and kids are already forced to use portable toilets.

Now Surrey schools are considering more drastic and desperate measures. A survey presented to parents outlines disruptive options such as uprooting students to other districts, dividing the school day into shifts and abandoning traditional classroom learning.

My question is to the Premier. How can he excuse his abject failure to deliver on his promises to parents, and will he outright reject these extreme options that are putting incredible stress on Surrey families?

Hon. R. Singh: Thank you to the member for the question. I’m really glad that the member opposite is asking about Surrey, because while they were in the government, they were not looking at the needs of Surrey.

[11:00 a.m.]

We know that Surrey is the fastest-growing community. In the last four years while they were in the government, there were zero schools built in Surrey. But we as a government are doing things differently. Since 2017, we have invested $700 million in school capital.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Let’s hear the answer, please.

Continue.

Hon. R. Singh: We have six new schools, seven new additions, and we are building more schools. At the same time, I understand the growth that our communities are facing. It is not just Surrey. It is many other communities, like Langley, Sooke, many other communities. We as a government are committed to look at those needs.

That’s why we are coming up with innovative ideas. Just last week I announced the new way for how we can bring more classrooms to our school communities. We are looking into prefabricated classrooms, looking at different ideas, and we will keep on working with the school districts to resolve this issue.

SEARCH AND RESCUE TEAMS

J. Sturdy: NDP red tape is creating a crisis among search and rescue teams across this province.

Initially given two weeks to agree to yet-to-be-written regulations, the deadline hastily extended last night, the NDP’s top-down approach threatens the ability of SAR teams to respond to emergencies this winter.

The teams have serious concerns about government overreach, unrealistic deadlines and bureaucratic interference in volunteer rescue operations. The bottom line is if they don’t sign on by the government’s arbitrary deadline, they can’t be deployed.

Why is the Premier compromising SAR teams readiness, and will he stop the overreach and let critical volunteer teams operate without the strong overreach of the government?

Hon. M. Farnworth: I thank the member for the question. What I can assure the member is that this government remains committed to working with search and rescue teams to ensure that they have the tools that they have done. That’s why this government took the unprecedented step to ensure long-term, sustainable funding for search and rescue teams across the province, the first of its kind in this province and indeed the country.

That’s why we will continue to work with search and rescue teams to ensure that they’ve got the tools that they need and that we work and will address their concerns.

CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT
MINISTRY UPDATE TO
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

T. Stone: After seven years and two elections, B.C. has the least affordable housing in North America.

We have the highest gas prices, the highest gas taxes. The cost of groceries is through the roof, and cancer pa­tients are being sent out of the country by a health care system in collapse.

The Premier loves to admit how bad things are but never seems to fix it. It’s the political equivalent of letting the dishes soak and claiming you were going to get to them eventually.

Well, Premier, we don’t want bright and shiny an­nouncements. We want results. That’s why I was looking forward to an update from the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts in monitoring the results achieved by this government.

My question is to the Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts. Has a date been set for MCFD to appear before the committee to provide an update on the status of implementing recommendations from the report on oversight of contracted services for children and youth in care?

P. Milobar: Unfortunately, the government might not like the answer. Well, they probably do like the answer that will be coming.

[11:05 a.m.]

On November 6, the Public Accounts Committee re­ceived a report of an update from the Auditor General on that date with unanimous support of both government and opposition members. We agreed that we would call back MCFD to explain to the committee why zero of the four recommendations that were levelled by the Auditor General back in 2019, three of which actually deal with Indigenous youth in care, had not been actioned at all.

Unfortunately, at last night’s meeting, on November 29, the government members decided that we don’t need to hear from MCFD and have them explain why there has been zero action taken on the audit results for Indigenous youth in care.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Let’s hear the answer.

P. Milobar: It’s troubling, because the government does, obviously, control the committee with their numbers. Despite pleas from the opposition members to still hear from MCFD on the public record and have the public be informed of what is actually happening in an agency that we’ve heard repeatedly, through this session and by multiple other reports other than the Auditor General, is failing to meet the basic needs of youth in care, especially Indigenous youth in care.

Unfortunately, at this point, although we had MCFD engaged to present to the committee at the end of January, and although preliminary dates were already found in the calendars to make that happen, the government last night, in another act, frankly, of making sure there’s not transparency in this place, decided that Public Accounts can no longer do the most basic work they do, which is actually scrutinizing the progress of audits by agencies within the government.

Unfortunately, to the member’s question, there is no date to hear from MCFD on their utter failure in regards to youth in care and Indigenous youth in care. This government, frankly, does not want to have any discussion around those failures.

[End of question period.]

Tabling Documents

Hon. N. Sharma: I have the honour to present the an­nual report on multiculturalism for 2022-23.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members, shhh. We have more business to do in the House, Members.

Attorney General, could you repeat, please?

Hon. N. Sharma: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the annual report on multiculturalism for 2022-23.

Hon. B. Bailey: I’m honoured to present the InBC Investment Corp.’s annual legislative report for the year 2022-2023.

It has been a busy year for InBC, during which time they developed their investment policy statement, which guides their decision-making and ensures that they strike the careful balance between economic, social and environmental impacts.

As of March 31, 2023, InBC committed a total of $35 million in capital, which has been followed since by $19 million in recent months.

Hon. N. Sharma: On behalf of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, I have the honour to present the 2023 Climate Change Accountability Report, as required by the Climate Change Accountability Act.

This report is a cornerstone of our transparency and accountability on climate, as it provides a full accounting of government climate action spending and results.

Reports from Committees

PUBLIC SERVICE ACT PROVISIONS
REVIEW COMMITTEE

G. Chow: I have the honour to present the report of the Special Committee to Review Provisions of the Public Service Act.

I move that the report be taken as read and received.

Motion approved.

G. Chow: I ask leave of the House to move a motion to adopt the report.

Leave granted.

G. Chow: I move adoption of the report. In doing so, I would like to make some brief comments.

As this House will recall, amendments were made to the Public Service Act in 2018 that gave the Merit Commissioner the mandate to review the just cause dismissal processes of public service employees to ensure they are consistent with government’s required practices, policies and standards. The Public Service Act requires a one-time review of these changes five years after they came into force — in other words, a review in 2023.

This review was undertaken by our committee. This work included receiving input from key stakeholders and the public.

On behalf of the committee, I would like to express our sincere appreciation to the organizations and the individuals that took the time to participate.

[11:10 a.m.]

Our committee heard that the provisions in the act related to dismissal process reviews are working as intended and that the Merit Commissioner’s work has contributed to improved just cause dismissal practices.

Our committee agrees that dismissal process reviews provide important independent oversight of government practices to ensure just cause dismissals are handled appropriately and that the related provision of the Public Service Act should be maintained. The committee also made nine recommendations to address specific concerns raised by the Merit Commissioner and to increase timeliness, transparency and fairness throughout the just cause dismissal investigation process.

On behalf of the committee, I wish to thank the Merit Commissioner, the Public Service Agency and the Ministry of Attorney General for their continued work supporting dismissal process reviews.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all committee members for their thoughtful contribution and discussion during this review. In particular, I’d like to thank the Deputy Chair, the member for Prince George–Mac­kenzie, for his collaboration.

On behalf of the committee, I would also like to acknowledge and extend our appreciation to Legislative Assembly staff in the Parliamentary Committees Office and Hansard Services for their support. It was great teamwork. Members did the talking, while staff finished the work.

M. Morris: I echo the comments made by the Chair.

My colleague from Abbotsford West and I sat on this committee. The professionalism exhibited by the presenters we had certainly helped us in arriving at the decision, and the collegial working relationship we had amongst all committee members, of course, went a long way.

For the great support from the Clerk’s office and the staff that supported us on this endeavour, thanks very much.

M. de Jong: Just very briefly, in echoing the Chair and the Deputy Chair, the committee heard, I think, very helpful submissions that lead logically to the conclusions.

We also heard from a witness. I think the committee acknowledged that the area…. A former employee demonstrated great courage in coming forward and providing to the committee a perspective on processes that exist that I will say — these are not the committee’s words — have not served her well. Embedded in the body of the report is a suggestion that this House, at some point, may wish to expand the work of a committee to review circumstances such as the one faced by the witness, a dismissal without cause that was not covered within the mandate.

I’m very grateful that the committee had an opportunity to hear from the witness. It took great courage for her to come forward and present her circumstances, very personal circumstances, in that setting. I commend the committee and thank the committee for giving her that opportunity — and the Chair and the Deputy Chair for giving her that opportunity — to present those facts and those circumstances to the committee.

Motion approved.

Tabling Documents

Mr. Speaker: Members, I have the honour of tabling the Legislative Assembly Management Committee re­port 2022-23.

Questions of Privilege

T. Stone: Yesterday I reserved my right to a point of personal privilege, and I wish to address that here today. This is in relation to comments made by the Government House Leader yesterday in this chamber that I believe misled the House.

Yesterday the Government House Leader moved a time allocation motion under Standing Order 81.1. His exact words, as captured in Hansard, were: “I rise today in my capacity as the Government House Leader to move a time allocation motion. Under Standing Order 81.1, we have tried to reach an informal agreement on the allocation of time for the business of this House with three distinct opposition House Leaders as well as an independent member. However, we are unable to reach a consensus.”

[11:15 a.m.]

Furthermore, he said: “It is with this understanding, and in accordance with Standing Order 81.1, that I am compelled to bring forth a time allocation motion. This motion is intended to ensure that we’re able to effectively carry out the business of governing in our responsibility on this side of the House. It is a tool to manage our time efficiently and to ensure that all items on our agenda receive the attention they deserve and they are not obstructed.”

I will now make a few initial points for context. First, it is absolutely the right of the Government House Leader to move a time allocation motion. We take no issue with that.

Next, we understand both the intention and the practical application of Standing Order 81.1(2). It says:

“A Minister of the Crown who from his or her place in the House, has stated that an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of section (1) of this Standing Order in respect of proceedings at one or more stages of a public bill, may propose without notice a motion for the purpose of allotting a specified number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at one or more stages of a public bill. The motion shall be decided forthwith, without debate or amendment. Any proceedings interrupted pursuant to this section of this Standing Order shall be deemed adjourned.”

My concerns do not relate to what Standing Order 81.1 actually says. My concerns do not relate to the Government House Leader’s right to move a time allocation motion. However, I do believe that in moving the time allocation motion, the Government House Leader misled the House in his comments, as captured in Hansard, as follows.

First, with respect to the first part of his comments, he said that he had “tried to reach an informal agreement on the allocation of time for the business of this House with three distinct opposition House Leaders as well as an independent member. However, we are unable to reach a consensus.” Those are his words in Hansard. This is not true. It did not happen.

While I don’t speak for the other opposition House Leaders, I will say…. At no time prior to moving the time allocation motion did the Government House Leader engage with me to inquire about any options for our consideration or the official opposition’s intentions as related to the prioritization of our time on remaining bills before the House.

One would think this would be a prerequisite for constructive, respectful interactions between House Leaders seeking consensus. To suggest that we were unable to reach a consensus is a fabrication, as that would imply there was an actual conversation to reach an informal agreement on the allocation of time for the business of this House.

Secondly, with respect to the second part of his comments, he indicated that he needed to move forward with time allocation as “a tool to manage our time efficiently and to ensure that all items on our agenda receive the attention they deserve and they are not obstructed.” This is also a misrepresentation of the very situation the Government House Leader said is driving his need to use time allocation.

Time allocation is needed to manage our time efficiently. An objective observer would not look at the Government House Leader’s management of House business and conclude that responsibility for what has been an absolutely sloppy, poorly managed and, indeed, inefficient use of time in this Legislature falls anywhere but at the feet of the Government House Leader this session.

The Government House Leader has continued his practice of introducing significant legislation with only weeks left of debate time, instead of having legislation on the order paper much earlier in the session schedule. Jamming the opposition with significant bills and then being criticized for asking too many questions doesn’t allow for an efficient management of time. I suppose this was marginally better than having no legislation introduced for the first two to three weeks, as was the case during one of the sessions last year under this Government House Leader.

Earlier this week Bill 45 was called in this chamber with five minutes of notice to the opposition. We were told the appropriate ministry officials were being tracked down. After wasting 40 minutes of time, finally, the Attorney General and the ministry staff made their way into the chamber. Was that an efficient use of time?

The schedule of hours has been routinely manipulated by the Government House Leader. A few more hours here and there. At the same time, the Government House Leader only opened one House yesterday. No Douglas Fir Room. Was that an efficient use of time?

Leaving four major housing bills to the dying days of this session. Was that an efficient use of time, when the Government House Leader is also the Housing Minister?

Eight government bills have had to be amended by the government due to errors. Is that an efficient use of this chamber’s time?

Ramming through four major housing bills that contain sweeping changes which will receive minimal scrutiny, debate and accountability. Does this reflect the opposition or the government not ensuring these government bills receive the attention they deserve and not obstructing them?

Through all of this sloppiness, the official opposition has cooperated. We have given not the slightest hint of belligerence. We have shown up to do our jobs. We’ve supported some of the government bills this session. We’ve opposed many others. We’ve even tried to constructively amend and improve legislation. This is not obstruction.

[11:20 a.m.]

The problem has been a total lack of timely and good-faith communications from the Government House Leader. It has certainly not been consistent with the relationship the opposition has enjoyed with previous Government House Leaders, regrettably.

It is for all of these reasons noted above that I believe the Government House Leader misled the House yesterday in his comments when introducing the time allocation motion, and I believe that he needs to retract his comments and apologize for misleading this House.

A. Olsen: Yesterday, I rose….

Mr. Speaker: Member, is this your point of privilege that you are tabling, or are you responding to…?

A. Olsen: I rose as well.

Mr. Speaker: That’s fine. But let’s deal with the first one, and he will respond. Then we will take yours. It will take only a minute or two.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I rise to respond to the question of privilege raised by the opposition and Third Party member. Let me explain the facts.

Interjections.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I rise to respond to the official opposition.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Government House Leader, finish, please.

Hon. R. Kahlon: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me explain the facts. Consensus using time allocation will require all three opposition parties, plus an independent member, to agree to an informal time allocation. This is a high bar to meet, and I respect that.

Yesterday we were able to reach the Fourth Party House Leader, who said they do not agree with this ap­proach and would not support it. Clearly, with one dissenter, consensus on an agreement would not be met with all the parties.

I stand by my statement and actions. I acted in the best interests of the House and the people of British Columbia to ensure timely passage of the bills that were before us.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Members. The Chair will take this under advisement.

Now we move on to the House Leader of the Third Party.

A. Olsen: Mr. Speaker, I just want to make a point that the minister responded to both, yet I was not able to provide my comments to the initial response.

Yesterday I rose on my right to raise a point of personal privilege. I wish to address it now. Yesterday the Government House Leader said: “I rise today in my capacity as the Government House Leader to move a time allocation motion. Under Standing Order 81.1, we have tried to reach an informal agreement on the allocation of time for the business of this House with three distinct opposition House Leaders as well as an independent member. However, we are unable to reach a consensus.”

The Government House Leader misled this House. He did not try to reach an informal agreement on the time allocation for the business of this House.

It should be known that throughout this session, communication has been chaotic and infrequent between House Leaders. It is the role of the Government House Leader to manage the business of government. So the Government House Leader has a role of convener, because the government creates the agenda. From the beginning of this session, the Government House Leader never created space for the opposition House Leaders to properly manage the House — quick phone call notifications, pleasant, but not really collaborative.

The Government House Leader was unavailable for our standing meeting on Monday and was unavailable for the House Leaders’ lunch that was hosted earlier this week, on Monday. There was no direct communication from him the next day or the next day. I had to go to his office to try to meet with him, and the only time we had available was five minutes before we entered the chamber, in here, where I was handed the motion for closure, for time allocation.

Frankly, partisanship among House Leaders needs to be muted. Along with the Speaker, the Clerk and their teams, the House Leaders need to work together to effectively manage this democratic institution. Currently, there is a reeking toxicity and a deeply unfortunate state of affairs in the way that this House is managed. We’ve said it multiple times, and it came to this.

My colleague the member for Cowichan Valley and I enjoyed regular, respectful House business meetings with the former Government House Leader.

[11:25 a.m.]

No matter the politics in question period, the member for Port Coquitlam was also able to have House management meetings about the activities of this place. With the current Government House Leader, that has never been a priority for him.

I am only saying this publicly this way because the Government House Leader stood in here yesterday and told British Columbians that he attempted to “get an informal agreement” from me on time management and time allocation. He was closing his own legislation, bills that he and I had fiercely debated. He did his job as Housing Minister. I did my job as critic.

But as Government House Leader, he faced a dilemma in the management of this House. All of his legislation…. Extend the session or shut it down. Again, two sessions in a row, this Government House Leader has chosen to shut it down. That’s the debate. That’s the democracy. Our democracy is being actively eroded and undermined.

This administration consistently chooses to drop mas­sive legislation in November: forest bills in ’21, a health bill in ’22 and housing bills here in ’23. They give little time for the public to understand it, and then they shut it down. They rally their majority, who stand every time, no matter what.

Yesterday morning we were notified by the Government House Leader’s office that Bill 45 was no longer being debated, and the Government House Leader had decided to shut down the Douglas Fir Room. He was reducing the debate to just this chamber. The Government House Leader delivered his closure motion to us in the side room off the hallway. If we are under such a time crunch, why are we reducing the number of rooms that we are working in?

Yesterday I raised the point in the debate on Bill 46 that it’s actually policy that is under a different ministry. It is only a choice of government to have the Minister of Housing shepherding through a bill about the Local Government Act. It’s a choice of government that is a totally inefficient use of time and necessitated his motion to shut this debate down. Yesterday, the Speaker read Standing Order 81.1, time allocations, into the record: “A minister of the Crown, who from his or her place in the House, has stated that an agreement could not be reached.” It goes on, but that’s where I’ll end the quote.

I suppose the Speaker may rule that all the minister of the Crown needs to do is state that an agreement could not be reached. A reasonable person, and those watching Bill 44, know that we had a long conversation about “reasonable” — the word. In a democratic institution, a reasonable person would expect that an informal agreement had been discussed, that time management was discussed as well. Well, it hadn’t. There have been zero conversations with all the House Leaders. There was no space given at any time throughout the week.

Prior to the fiasco in here yesterday, frankly an embarrassment, I was already activated, and anyone in in the hallway saw me. I was being told, while being handed the motion to close, that the Conservatives didn’t agree, so therefore, we couldn’t get agreement. Then for him to stand in here and tell the public that I was being unreasonable…. That must not be allowed to stand.

I act honourably in this place. I deeply respect the role of the Speaker in both my culture and in this House. Respect the Speaker; respect the House.

Everybody watching closely knew that this Government House Leader was backing further and further into a corner all week. It’s important context for this. All week he had a choice. Unfortunately, he has decided, again, not to collaborate and put some construct time around the debate, but to shutter the people’s democracy. No opportunity for me to talk to the House Leader of the Fourth Party. He and I actually have a productive relationship when it comes to House Leader business, because it’s strictly non-partisan.

[11:30 a.m.]

This is less about the minister’s need to only state that an agreement could not be reached, because that’s not what he said. What the minister said is that he “tried, but was unable to reach an informal agreement.” That might be semantic for people watching and for the people of this House, but for reputation and integrity and dignity, it’s not semantic. It’s real. I’m not an unreasonable person, especially if you actually try, and that did not happen in this case.

Functional, respectful House management is the re­sponsibility of the Government House Leader. He has not tried. He advanced a fallacy that it was I or my opposition House Leader colleagues who were acting so unreasonable that he wasn’t even able to get an informal agreement.

There needs to be reconciliation. There needs to be an intervention. This is not just the fall session of 2023. This is the spring session of 2023. This is the fall session of 2022. This is 100 percent of the sessions under this new Premier, shuttering important debate, shuttering the people’s House because of unfortunate conversations that this Premier and that Government House Leader don’t want to have.

When I have to stand in here and defend myself as being a reasonable person, I find it offensive.

I’m asking, Mr. Speaker, that you intervene in this situation and that you reconcile this so that spring of 2024 isn’t a fiasco as well.

HÍSW̱ḴE SIÁM.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I want to rise and respond to the question of privilege raised by the Third Party House Leader.

Let me explain the facts. Consensus using time allocation requires all three opposition parties, plus an independent member, to agree to any formal time allocation. This is a higher bar to me, and I respect that.

Yesterday we were able to reach the Fourth Party House Leader who said that they do not agree with this approach and would not support it. Clearly, with one dissenter, consensus on an agreement would not be met with all the parties. I stand by my statement and my actions.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Shhh, Members. Shhh.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I act in the best interests of the House and the people of British Columbia to ensure timely passage of the bills before us.

Mr. Speaker: Thank you, Members. The Chair will take it under advisement and will get back to the House later on.