Orders of the Day

The Speaker: Members, pursuant to the order of the House adopted yesterday, the next 45 minutes are dedi­cated to farewell speeches and responses.

The next member will be the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke.

Personal Statements

FAREWELL ADDRESSES
BY RETIRING MLAs

D. Clovechok: I m reminded, speaking to you today, of the first time I sat here in this House as a rookie. I was completely and totally blown away by it, the presence of this room and the people, and I’ve got some stories to tell about that later on. As I sit here today, I’m still blown away by it. It’s an amazing place. It’s a magnificent place where really magnificent things can happen for the people of British Columbia.

When you think that less than 1,000 British Columbians have ever served in the role of MLA and when you think about it again, over 140 years of history of this province, I got to be one of them. I got to be one of them, and I’m so proud of that.

Columbia River–Revelstoke is the size of Switzerland. It’s a little over 40,000 square kilometres. It’s six mountain ranges and a ferry ride away from Victoria. Where I live, it’s closer to the capital of Alberta.

As the MLA, it’s been an honour and a privilege to serve, and I want to express my gratitude to my constituents and everyone that helped to get me to this place. As of today, when I’m leaving this place, I can say that my heart is full. I am humbled. I truly am humbled to have been given this privilege.

Being elected and remaining elected and serving elected is a team sport. There are so many people that I want to thank, and if I miss anybody, I ask their forgiveness, because there’s a long list of folks.

My wife, Susan, who’s up in the gallery — she’s my rock. She’s the best campaigner you could ever find. I can’t tell you the number of doors and phones that she’s been on. She’s my fan; my most honest critic, sometimes too much; my best friend; and there are so many other things.

I love you.

[11:05 a.m.]

My daughters Steph and Jenn and my son Paul stood beside me all the way, supported me all the way through this.

My granddaughter Ava is going to turn 15. I can’t believe she’s turning 15 this week. It’s tomorrow, actually, the same birthday as my son.

Shane, Nate, Parker and Dawson, who live in the United States, give me calls and say: “You can do this.”

And my son-in-law, Devan Dubnyk, who played for — go, Edmonton, go, tonight! — the Edmonton Oilers, retired from the NHL in Minnesota and now broadcasts for the NHL. But I’ve got to stick with the Oilers.

They’ve all been there for me with their love and their support, and it’s been endless. For that, I can’t think of a greater joy that any man could ask for.

I also want to recognize someone who sat in this House for 16 years. I would not be here if he hadn’t taken me under his arm and his wing, and that’s Bill Bennett. Everybody knows Bill Bennett. How could you forget him. How could you forget him.

The first time I met him was in a cafeteria in Kimberley. I was decided to run, and in walks this guy that I saw on TV the night before who had just got kicked out of cabinet. We were going: “Oh my God. This is going to be a gong show.”

Then he sat down right beside me in the restaurant. I was talking away, and then he interjected, which sometimes Bill does. It took me about 30 seconds — he said that’s “because you’re not that bright; it should’ve taken you less” — to realize this guy knows what the hell he’s talking about.

Forgive me, Mr. Speaker. I don’t want to get kicked out of here again. That’s already happened once — just once. Yeah.

I realized I had to listen to this guy. He knows what he’s talking about.

I remember during my first campaign, I’d phone him, and I’d say — this was in 2013: “I’ve got some really good ideas. What do you think?” He goes: “You know, those are really good ideas, but this is what you’re going to do.” I tell you what. I listened to him all along the way, and him and I and his wife, Beth, and my wife, Susan, have become best of friends.

Later in your life, you don’t think that you’ll find a bestie. Well, that’s the relationship that we found. We go on vacations together. We fish; we hunt. I’m going to do a lot more hunting with Bill coming up. But I just want to thank Bill and Beth for the support that they’ve given me since 2013.

He’s still as crotchety as he was always, but I’ll tell you what, he’s still smart, like a fox. I just want to thank Bill for everything along that.

I also want to thank Christy Clark. When I first moved to British Columbia, I was going to run federally. Christy helped me understand that that wasn’t the right idea. I found out that it’s very hard to say no to that woman. But she also never wavered once in her belief in me that I could win an NDP riding.

I remember during my campaigns in 2013 and 2017, specifically in 2017, she showed up with her bus. I had no idea she was coming. She says, “That’s because I think you’re going to win this riding,” even though our pollsters said it wasn’t going to happen. That’s what polls are all about.

But I want to thank Christy. She never wavered. She supported me, and we won, and we held it in the subsequent election. I owe a lot to Christy and the encouragement she gave me.

My brother Larry and wife Mari were all there as well.

Our friends Bev and Al, across the road, that own the resort — they were there for me.

Our riding executive and so many others.

Todd Mitchell was my bag man. That guy can raise money, let me tell you. He was there with me from day 1.

Mark McKee, who was the mayor of Revelstoke, actually ran for us in 2009.

Peter Bernacki.

George Buhler — he’s a hook and bullet guy. A guide-outfitter, he’s 84 years old, and I sure wouldn’t want to fight him. He is a tough old guy.

Judy Blakely, Doug McIntosh, Steven Begin, Wendy Booth, Mac Campbell, Frank O’Grady, Wilma Croisdale and so many others. This is a team sport, and I had a hell of a team behind me, and I’m so grateful for that.

[11:10 a.m.]

In the 2020 election that was supposed to never happen but it did, we had over 150 volunteers on the phones. I didn’t go door-to-door, but on the phones. What I discovered about volunteerism is that there’s nothing stronger than the heart of a volunteer that’s committed. I’m so grateful for all those people who decided I was going to be their guy.

I want to talk a little bit about my political family. There’s no clock running here. That’s good.

We have a caucus that is just truly amazing and a leader that I am so proud to support. My only regret around Kevin Falcon is that I won’t be here to serve with him when he’s Premier of this province. I’m so proud of Kevin and what he’s been able to achieve in bringing us together. We have an amazing caucus together, some of the most amazing people in this country.

We have laughed together. We’ve fought with each other. We’ve bled together. We’ve dreamed together. The thing about our leadership is that we put those dreams into action. They’re people who care about other people. It’s a true team, and they always have your back.

Most of all, they’re a team who cares about the people of British Columbia with all of their hearts, people who will do whatever it takes to help their constituents, like Jackie Tegart and her people in Lytton, above and beyond duty.

The wonderful things they’ve done…. To talk about everything, I’d need days to do that. But I do want to mention a couple of them.

Shirley Bond. When Shirley became the interim leader, she appointed me part of her leadership team. This is one of the most amazing women I have ever met.

Donna Barnett, who was in her mid-to-late 70s when she was here with us and with me. She’s the feistiest woman I’ve ever met in my life. She’ll tell you exactly. You never get a knife in your back; you’ll get a punch in the face.

Then there’s Mike de Jong, who, every time he stands up in this House, I learn something from. Just an amazing orator. I tell you, I’ve been lucky to do that.

Todd Stone, who has been not only an incredible House Leader but has grown so much, and he has got such passion for this job.

I want to recognize Mike Morris, who is one of the most principled men I think I have ever met.

And then Lorne Doerkson, who was my Deputy Whip. We had a lot of fun. We navigated….

I could go through the entire list of people, but I can’t.

Who I do want to talk about really quickly is Greg Kyllo. Greg has been my roommate for the last seven years. I’ve spent more time with Greg than my wife, not that that’s a bad thing. We started out as roommates, but I honestly consider him now to be like my little brother. He’s become my family, and we always will be family. His family is my family.

It just goes to show you that through this job, lifelong friendships can be built. What an amazing experience it’s been to work with these people.

I just want to say to my caucus: thank you so very much, and I love you all.

My riding elected partners: Mayor Gary Sulz from Revelstoke; Ron Oszust from Golden; director Karen Cathcart from the CSRD; Roberta Schnider from area G with the RDEK; Mike Gray, the mayor of Radium; Al Miller, the mayor of Invermere; my wife, the area F representative; Mark Doherty, the mayor of Canal Flats; Jane Walter, the director for area E for the RDEK; and Mayor Don McCormick from Kimberley.

I have ten elected officials with all those councils. That just goes to show you that you can’t swing a cat by the tail and not hit a government official in my riding. Not that we would swing cats by the tail, just clarification. I’m a dog guy.

Together we’ve worked on successes with Three Valley Gap and the fencing around Three Valley Gap. I remember that in Premier’s estimates, I brought that to Mr. Horgan’s attention. MOTI told me they’d never seen anything happen so quickly. We got that done, and I want to thank them for that.

[11:15 a.m.]

The creation of Cherry Creek Falls Regional Park. That’s a long story there, but we did that. We actually got that park taken out of the mining tenure. That was the first time that ever happened in the history of B.C.

We got $300,000 for Angel Flight. It took me two years and a lot of pressure, but I want to thank Mike Farnworth. We got $15 million for Avalanche Canada, which was so needed for 15 years.

Thank you, sir, for that.

BCEMS with their SOCs. I remember being on the phone with the mayor of Kimberley and the mayor of Golden with the Minister of Health. We worked through that, and we told them that it’s not going to work in rural British Columbia, and he listened. He listened.

The Golden water company. As the critic of the Columbia River treaty, water is gold, and our negotiators are doing a wonderful job. But a water company came into Golden from China. Led by a group of passionate women in Golden — the Golden Water Guardians, they called themselves…. They called me, and they said: “We’ve got to shut this down.”

Well, the then minister of forests and lands and water or whatever it was, Katrine Conroy…. I talked to her, and, well, that application still sits on the front desk. We tracked them down. Their office was in a residence in Richmond, so it wasn’t all that legitimate.

I could go on and on about the things…. The Kicking Horse Canyon. That was a huge achievement that we’ve all worked on. But I’ve got to tell you, I want to give creds to MOTI, to two people: Hillary Barnett, who’s now the regional manager; and Katie Ward, who was the regional manager. They are still awesome people. When we had a problem, we got it done. They took care of it.

Also, we were going to lose two of our traffic members with the RCMP. The Public Safety Minister made sure that that didn’t happen, either. So you can work across the lines with each other. That’s what I learned very quickly.

My non-political family. Kevin Dixon, Stephanie Marshall-White, Luella Barnetson and all the other staff in this building. Rachel Loganberg, who was my first CA, set up my offices. Stacey Brensrud, Sioban Staplin and Chelsea Meulendyk.

I could not have done this without them.

The Speaker. Thank you, sir. It’s been an honour and a privilege.

Then there’s Kate.

The Speaker: I love you too, Doug.

D. Clovechok: Well, what’s not to love, pal?

Kate, the kindest person and the most patient person, because you have to be patient with me. I just want to say thank you so much, Kate, for all the work that you’ve done.

Artour popped up the other day and tried to explain to me how a few things work. He didn’t get too frustrated, but we got through it.

Thank you so much.

Thank you to everybody in the Clerk’s office.

The Sergeant-at-Arms. We knew, when he came in, he was going to be great, because he was from Calgary, worked for the best police service in Canada, the Calgary police service. You know he’s got respect, because he’s the only one in this House right now that’s packing heat.

I want to say thank you to the Sergeant-at-Arms and all the other staff in this House, the guys and the women that give us water and keep us well taken care of. It’s been a pleasure getting to know you guys as well.

I’ve had some unique experiences in this building. I’m going to share these with you very quickly. I remember getting lost the first day I was here. I was in a place where nobody’s ever been, I don’t think: in the basement. This security officer that works for the Sergeant-at-Arms said: “What are you doing here?” I said: “I’m so lost. But don’t tell anybody.”

She was able to get me out of there. Then I got lost again, and I was wandering around. The session was in, and, of course, you’re not to be out of the building. I was wandering around the rose garden and our Whip, Eric Foster, said, “Clovechok’s in the rose garden.” Christy, I guess, leaned back and said to one of the RCMP detail: “Go get him. We’ve got a runner.” I was back in the building by the time they came out, but I did hear about it in the caucus that night.

I’ve been the Whip. I’ve been Parliamentary Secretary to Premier Clark. I would like to have had that last a little longer, but in any event, it was a great experience. I’ve been the shadow minister for Tourism, Arts, and Culture, the shadow minister for Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation with Michael Lee. The shadow minister for the Columbia River treaty, Columbia Basin Trust and Columbia Power Corp.

We need to spend more time on that. Water is so precious, and the Americans want it. They want it.

[11:20 a.m.]

Deputy Chair and member of the Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services, Dep­uty Chair for the Special Committee to Appoint a Chief Electoral Officer and a member of the select standing committee on Indigenous affairs and reconciliation — I’ve had some great experiences, and I’m so profoundly grateful for those.

Very quickly here, the protesters, the memories — I could go through a whole bunch of them. But I think one of the ones… They had a protest here, and the Victoria police service was escorting me into the building.

It was kind of like on Seinfeld. Have you ever seen the spitting episode? This guy tried to spit on me. When you do that to somebody from the Kootenays, those are fighting words. So I went after him, but the police grabbed me and said: “We’re going to have to hook up the wrong guy here.” We stopped doing that, but that was an interesting event.

Again, I want to thank my constituents. I made them three promises in 2013. A guy asked me to tell him what I could promise them, and I said: “That’s easy.” I got to go last because everyone was reading off their scripts. I said: “I’ll never lie to you, I’ll work my ass off for you, and the rest we’ll figure out together.” And that’s exactly what we’ve done. That’s exactly what we’ve done.

Just to sum up quickly, because I’m getting the hook….

Interjection.

D. Clovechok: Eleven seconds? Oh, there is a clock now. See, these interruptions give me more time.

I think the future is going to be incredibly exciting for me, as it has always been in my life and my career, what­ever I’ve done, and I’m excited for it.

Since 2017, we faced our fair share of challenges: COVID, the forest fires, wildfire protection issues, health care issues, affordability issues, safety issues, mental health and addictions issues. The issues go on and on, but that’s part of this job.

As a riding and a province… And this is really important because I think we live in some really troubled times. It’s sad to see this. It really is. The conflict in the world, the conflict that’s in this province, that’s in this city, that’s everywhere. It’s rife.

As we as a riding, Columbia River–Revelstoke, and as a province and as a country become more diverse, we must work harder to unite around our common values. We have to work hard on those common values and our common humanity, and that’s who we are as British Columbians. We’ve got to never forget that, that we are British Columbians first.

I think Robert E. Lee said that, and it didn’t work out well for him. I really believe that we can overcome all of this.

I just want to say, Mr. Speaker, that it’s been a hell of a ride. I look forward to continuing to serve until the next election. I’m going to be working hard for our candidate, who is absolutely an amazing guy, a 6-foot-5 guy. You’re almost as tall as him. He’s a little fellow, but he’s going to be an amazing candidate.

I want to thank everybody here again for this opportunity. It’s been amazing. Thank you. [Applause.]

R. Merrifield: Well, it is with a heavy heart and a deep sense of gratitude that I stand before you to deliver my farewell speech.

Serving as a member of this Legislative Assembly has been one of the greatest honours of my life, and as I take my leave, I am filled with just such a mixture of emotions: pride in what we have been able to achieve together, sadness at parting ways, and a profound gratitude for the incredible individuals who have walked this journey with me.

I entered into politics with clear and urgent missions: to address the housing crisis, to help solve mental health issues and to truly revolutionize health care.

In housing, I could see that the youth in our community were losing hope as housing prices soared and affordable options became scarce. I knew that the direction we were heading would result in even higher housing prices, pushing stability further out of reach for so many. It’s actually how the MLA…. I’m going to say his name because Doug got to. It’s actually how Norm Letnick and I became friends, working on affordable housing in Kelowna.

[11:25 a.m.]

And as stability was further out of reach, I wish I had been wrong. But housing is just one canary in our coal mine of B.C. If we don’t have housing, we don’t have workers. If we don’t have workers, we have no industry or services, and then we have no economy. And with no econ­omy, there are no social supports.

It’s with this passion that I started my company, Troika, almost 25 years ago when the NDP were last in power. The economy was obliterated, jobs were scarce, and industry had left. I started Troika to be an answer for the call of housing, for great jobs and for a sustainable future for our province and our country.

But I didn’t stop there, because sustainability is four­fold — economic, environmental, cultural and social. I worked on all of those aspects of sustainability in the private sector, pursuing better environmental technol­ogies, lowering the carbon footprint of the housing we built while doing it, working towards better jobs and a positive economic future.

We also worked culturally on reconciliation and working with our Indigenous partners to help bolster their capacity and contribute to more economic hope and futures for their nations, and Troika continues to do so today.

I also worked on social sustainability, on health care and mental health — they truly became passions — serving on the Interior Health Authority board and overseeing our special priorities committee, which was mental health and substance use when then Health Minister Terry Lake declared the emergency back in 2016.

I also invested personal dollars in mental health knowledge and understanding mental illness and forward momentum on that file. I’ve spoken in this House about my learning from Dr. Goulão and the Portugal model, and I’m so proud that my party has taken the fundamentals of this model and put a B.C. lens on it in our Better Is Possible plan. Seeing all that Portugal has accomplished has me believe that treating everyone with hope and dignity is possible.

And you’re gonna do it, girl.

While my goals remain the same coming out of politics as going in — to ensure that everyone has access to safe, affordable housing, to provide robust mental health supports and to innovate in health care — I’ve come to realize that I can best serve my community by returning to the private sector.

There I will continue to fight for the same principles and advocate for solutions that address these critical issues. But don’t get me wrong. My commitment to these causes is unwavering, and I hope that by working from a different vantage point, I can make a substantial impact.

Being here doesn’t happen without support from people who believe in you and support you.

I want to take a minute to express my profound grati­tude to the love of my life, Joao.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

Your unwavering support, love, and encouragement have been my bedrock. You are my confidant, my cham­pion, my cheerleader, my lover. I’m not sure if I’m allowed to say that. And my friend. You are a political adviser. Really, everyone should utilize you.

It takes an incredibly strong and confident man to be with a woman like me, and I thank you for trying to love me every day. I am so grateful for you and the strength that you provide me each and every moment that I sat in here apart from you. I’m runnin’ to you, babe.

To my three wonderful kids and my two incredible stepkids and daughter-in-law — Mik, Zoe, Dom, Austin and Judy and Connor: you are my inspiration and my greatest joy.

Mikhail, Zovya and Damek, you made my heart so much bigger when you made me your mom.

And Austin and Connor, thank you for welcoming me into your hearts almost a decade ago.

I am so friggin’ proud of each one of you. Thank you for being my anchor and for always reminding me of what truly matters and for challenging me on my thinking and pushing me to see things from a different perspective. You give me and all of us in here great reasons to fight for not only you but the next generation.

[11:30 a.m.]

To my family — my parents, Bruce and Norma; and my siblings, Karine and Dave, Lance and Yvonne, and Lane and Amanda: you are inspiring. And you have truly made me who I am today and supported me all along in this journey.

To my team in Kelowna — Teresa, Susan, Gordy, Parm­jeet, Aman, Colin, Steve, Sonia and Kara: you guys are the dream team of campaigners. You’ve been with me since the beginning, and I’m so proud of each one of you and how you fight to make our province better. And don’t worry. We’ve got a lot of work to do to make sure that the next candidate gets elected.

But I must also thank those who are in the trenches with me daily.

I want to extend my heartfelt thanks to Rob Murphy.

Rob, you were voluntold to work with me, but you’ve become so much more than just a colleague. You and Natalie are dear friends. Rob, your unwavering support, dedication and the many laughs we’ve shared have made me better and made even the most challenging days manageable. Thank you for talking me off the ceiling more times than I can count and for supporting me with your exceptional skills and knowledge.

Then there’s Luella Barnetson, my legislative executive coordinator. She was the first greeting to the Legislative Assembly, the guidance through the morass of this space and the constant emotional support and cheerleader in my days and weeks. She truly wants everyone around her to succeed, and she dedicates all of her expertise and skills towards that end.

You will always be a dear friend.

Then there’s those in the constituency office at home, Jody Cleland and Sonia Sandhu.

Jody, you’re an extraordinary person. The tears we’ve shed together over the plights of those we serve are a testament to your big heart and unwavering commitment to our community. Thank you, Jody, for always seeing our constituents, always remembering our “why,” fighting for each person we serve and being a friend I can count on.

Sonia, thank you for being who you are; for jumping in and learning so much, for being there for the citizens of Kelowna, and for always being a loyal and trusted friend and team member. There are bright days ahead for you.

There’s another team I must thank. I’m grateful for the incredible team at Troika, CorWest and HOD.

To the leadership team: your sacrifices have allowed me to serve in this role.

The whole Troika family — I’m so proud of the growth that you’ve achieved over the last four years. Your hard work and dedication have not only supported me but have also given our organization new heights to achieve while providing housing for so many. Thank you for your unwavering commitment and for continuing to push the boundaries and set new standards of excellence. We’re going to solve the housing crisis.

The other team that I cannot live without is the team sitting around me here, the team at B.C. United. I am so grateful to the B.C. United caucus, each and every one of you. I love how much fun we have together, the friendship that we have created and the fight that is in each and every one of you to fix B.C. I remain steadfast in supporting you and ensuring that you become the next government. Because united, we can fix it.

I’m going to take a moment just to especially thank the fierce women in our caucus. You are warriors for good. Your strength, determination, and unwavering commitment to our shared values have been inspiring. Shirley, keep bringing us in. Keep bringing us in.

To my constituents: thank you for giving me the opportunity to serve you. It has been such an honour to represent you and work towards a better future for our community, from fighting with the business community for safer streets, for better child care, for more trade spaces and specific women-in-trades funding, for better housing, for a new Rutland Middle School and Glenmore high school, for Starbright and better supports for children with needs, for the animation sector, for more cancer care, for a new URBA on-call service, and watershed protections.

Thank you. Thank you for letting me fight on your behalf.

[11:35 a.m.]

But for as much as we’ve accomplished in Kelowna, there’s so much more to do. As I step away from this role, I do feel like I’m leaving things unfinished, with so much more fight to go.

This is my call to my colleagues in B.C. United. We have to get housing under control and the dream of home ownership restored. We have to revolutionize health care so that people stop dying on wait-lists. We need a system of treatment and recovery for those with addictions or mental illnesses and stop drugs from killing our kids.

We need to lower the cost of living. We need more child care that costs less. We need to get our debt under control. We need to bring back our world-class education system. We need more trades. Coralee, you have to do that.

We need to rethink our environmental cause and think way beyond this province and get our natural re­sources to places in this world that can lower their emissions with them.

We need to get our wildfires under control so people can breathe.

We need to get our economy working again for the private sector and for jobs that are productive and give better paycheques.

And we need to get rid of the divisive politics that seek to cancel and instead bring ideas together and listen.

Believe me, just like I told the Minister of Health when he fired me from the Interior Health Authority board, I’m going to come back like a rash. You won’t know when, or you won’t know how, and it will be hella itchy and maybe a little burny. But I will be back, because you won’t be able to get rid of me easily.

I’ll leave you with these, my final words.

Don’t ever stop believing in what can be accomplished, and don’t ever settle for where things are at. You are not Pollyanna or too optimistic or too idealistic.

You just may not be dreaming big enough. Thank you.

Deputy Speaker: Government House Leader.

T. Stone: Government House Leader. Wow. Okay.

Deputy Speaker: Sorry. Opposition House Leader.

T. Stone: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

Tributes

MIKE DE JONG

T. Stone: Well, on behalf of the B.C. United official opposition, it is my honour to pay tribute to a titan among us, a man whose dedication to his constituents — yes, his frugality — his unwavering commitment to public service has clearly left an indelible mark on the fabric of British Columbia. Of course, I’m talking about Mike de Jong, a stalwart MLA from Abbotsford West, whose career spans an impressive 30 years.

Mike was first elected as an MLA in a by-election in 1994. He defeated another titan, Grace McCarthy. That was in the Matsqui riding. I have fond memories of that by-election, because it was actually the very first grassroots campaign that I went door-knocking on. I came down from Kamloops with a whole bunch of others, and we knocked on doors for this young, energetic lawyer by the name of Mike.

Now, that night, he didn’t win by very much, but his victory did mark a significant turning point in B.C. politics, and, of course, the rest is history. Mike won again in 1996, 2001, 2005, 2009, 2013, 2017 and 2020.

During his 16 years as part of successive B.C. Liberal governments, Mike went on to play instrumental roles in the cabinets of Premiers Gordon Campbell and Christy Clark, holding several key portfolios, including Finance Minister, Health Minister, Minister of Aboriginal Reconciliation, Minister of Forests, Minister of Labour and, of course, Attorney General.

As Finance Minister, Mike delivered five consecutive balanced budgets — five of them. He highlighted his commitment every single day he could to fiscal management and his absolute respect for British Columbia’s taxpayers. Under his leadership, the province saw a very significant reduction in public debt and increased economic stability. He was instrumental in implementing policies that were the first of their kind at the time.

[11:40 a.m.]

In 2013, Mike was instrumental in British Columbia becoming the first foreign subnational jurisdiction to issue bonds into the Chinese renminbi market, opening up doors to new investors and raising B.C.’s profile in the Asia-Pacific. The panda bond, it was called.

He worked hard and successfully established educational partnerships in India. This was very, very important for him throughout his career. The University of the Fraser Valley now delivers undergraduate programs in Chandigarh, India. It’s directly as the result of the efforts of Mike de Jong.

As Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, he played a crucial role in signing modern-day treaties, a significant step in reconciliation in this province.

Whether in opposition or in cabinet, Mike has been a passionate advocate for Abbotsford, always working to secure funding for local infrastructure projects.

Now, if you’ve had the pleasure of crossing paths with Mike, you’ll know that he’s not your run-of-the-mill politician. Mike is cut from a different cloth. For one, he’s what you might call famously frugal. Everyone has heard the legendary stories about that same old Mazda Miata that he has been driving around for decades. In fact, there are folks in Abbotsford West that apparently have started a petition to declare it a historical landmark.

He always zips around in that Mazda in style. He’s always got that grin on his face, with the top down, I think harkening back to the time when he could remember the wind blowing through his hair. But let’s not forget or mistake his thriftiness for lack of taste or style.

Speaking of Abbotsford, who could forget that Mike still lives on the family farm? He’s just as comfortable giving a legislative update as he is roaring around on his tractor, and often he does both, we believe. Behind that down-to-earth exterior, lies a sharp mind and a wicked sense of humour.

There are many facets that make Mike de Jong a truly remarkable individual. As I’ve said, he’s not your typical MLA. He’s actually a force of nature and very adaptable. He’s as comfortable sharing a pint and swapping stories in a local pub as he is discussing intricate fiscal policies with the titans of business in world capitals. Often he will do those two things in the same day.

Mike’s ability to seamlessly transition from the festive atmosphere of the neighbourhood pub to the high-stakes world of global finance speaks again about his versatility. Whether he’s charming locals that he bumps into on the streets of Abbotsford with tales from the political trenches or engaging in nuanced discussion with international lenders, Mike exudes a rare blend of charisma, intelligence and warmth that’s adapted to that particular moment within which he finds himself.

Let’s not forget about Mike’s passion for hockey. Despite his busy schedule, he always finds the time — I think, still to this day — to hit the ice and indulge in the love of the game. One year as Finance Minister, as he prepared to introduce a provincial budget, he actually purchased skates instead of new budget shoes. Of course, I don’t think he ever purchased new budget shoes. He would resole his shoes year over year. I think they were the same shoes, and he would resole them up the street at a cobbler that he got to know pretty well in James Bay.

And of course, how can one forget the launch of one of Mike’s leadership campaigns, which is seared in our memories. Part of this video profiled him in full hockey gear. He had either just come from a practice or from a game and he was sweating, and he wasn’t actually wearing all of the gear. There was actually a moment where you could see a jockstrap.

I often wonder if that was the moment that kept you out of the Premier’s office, Mike.

Interjection.

T. Stone: His shortcomings, he says.

It was definitely a bit much.

Now, it’s easy to focus on all of Mike’s legislative triumphs and policy achievements over the 16 years that he was in government and, of course, the 30 years that he’s been in this building. But I think it’s important to take a moment to shine a light on something that also really matters, and that is the immense respect that this man has for this institution, for this Legislature.

You see it in so many different facets. You see it in the unbelievable recollection and knowledge of the most obscure practices of this place, which aren’t necessarily written down but are practices that are taken into account in the proceedings, which he knows about because he, you know, drew upon some practice 16 years ago.

[11:45 a.m.]

You see it in the incredible friendship that he has with one of the other key Mikes in this building, the Solicitor General, the friendship they developed over the years, recognizing that you do get way more done in this place when you actually work together. Fundamentally, while we have partisan differences and a different approach to getting to the same destination, there can always be respect. There can always be mutual respect for one another. You see that in how Mike treats everybody in this place.

We also see it in those moments where we might be in an intense debate in this chamber, and then Mike stands up, and he delivers a one-liner that only Mike could have come up with that just results in everybody breaking into laughter. It certainly happens in our caucus all of the time.

So as we bid farewell to Mike de Jong, let us not only celebrate his impressive tenure as an MLA but also his humour, his unwavering dedication and his profound respect for this place.

Mike, your legacy will endure long after you’ve left these halls. I certainly am very grateful for your mentorship, your friendship over the years. You’re on to new challenges, and frankly, we know you’re going to be successful in this next chapter in your career. And the country that you love, Canada, is going to be so much better for having your service at the federal level.

Thank you, Mike, for your decades of dedicated service and your unwavering commitment to the constituents you have so loyally served and to the people of British Columbia. We wish you very, very well, my friend. [Applause.]

Hon. M. Farnworth: It is a pleasure to rise and to respond and to pay tribute to my colleague across the way, the member for Abbotsford West. I have five minutes, which is 300 seconds, which is literally ten seconds for each year that he has served in this place.

It’s important to look back to February 17, 1994. People say that your vote doesn’t count. Well, if ever there was a by-election that showed your vote counted, it was that one. Forty-two votes he won by; 42 votes that changed the political dynamic and history of this province, that saw a party that had ruled this province for more than almost 30 years disappear and a new one take its place. It’s a pretty remarkable achievement.

Politics is also interesting. It’s like life, because it comes full circle, and 30-some-odd years ago the member for Abbotsford West, or Matsqui then, was elected. In fact, when I look at him, he’s wearing exactly the same suit. He’s wearing exactly the same tie. He’s got the same hair, or maybe not, the same glasses. But looking at that suit, it’s clearly…. He’s added so much to his figure.

As I look now, he’s also sitting on the same side of the House as he did 30 years ago. As I said, life comes full circle. But what’s important is not the beginning and is not the end, but it’s what happened in between. And during that time of what happened in between, I watched a young, bright….

You could tell right from the beginning that he was going to be a character, that he was someone who was meant for this place. You knew it in the questions he asked. You knew it in the way that he asked the questions, sometimes serious, sometimes more like a ticking time bomb — he knows that one — but always, always sharp.

And you knew, when you were on the government benches — at that time when he first got here, I wasn’t a minister but later was — that if he got up to ask you a question, you better be prepared, because he’d done the research, and he knew his stuff.

[11:50 a.m.]

I wasn’t here for four years, when he came to government and started to take the ministerial roles that he has undertaken. But in ’05, I did get to come back. I got to be House Leader, and I got to see a second stage of Mike de Jong, how he had matured to really understand what this place was about and, as the current Opposition House Leader has said, the respect for this institution.

The friendship that developed between the two of us is based on mutual respect, understanding of what this place is about and that this institution matters. What we do here matters. I know it’s often dismissed. I know it’s often put down. I know we’re all…. People say things about the people who are here — not always nice. But at the end of the day, we’re all here for the same thing: to do right by the people of British Columbia.

Part and parcel of that is having a respect for this institution, being able to have a conversation in terms of the business of the day, being able to know that when you have that conversation, whether you’re in the opposition or government, you don’t have to worry about the individual running out to the press and saying: “Mike said this” or “Mike said that.” That’s what makes this place work. Mike de Jong — I know I’m not supposed to do that — emphasized that.

As I said, it’s what happens in between that’s important. I think he has built a legacy that he and all of us and the people of this province can be proud of.

Before I finish my remarks, I just want to make one reference to his frugality. You’ve talked about the Miata, but there’s another reference to his frugality, and that’s the linoleum story. I don’t know how many people know this one.

Mike grew up in and, I think, still has the farmhouse. Apparently, one day he noticed that the linoleum was a bit cracked. This is only in 2008 or 2009. I think he turned to his parents and said: “That needs to be fixed.” They go: “Oh well, we’d better get some new.” He goes: “No, no, no, no.” He says: “I was looking. That linoleum has a lifetime guarantee.”

So he phoned up the company and said, “We need the linoleum replaced,” and they go: “Linoleum — do people even use that anymore?” He goes, “Yeah,” and they go: “Well, do you want something…?” “No. It was put in with a lifetime guarantee.” They come back: “Yeah, that was 1964.”

Interjection.

Hon. M. Farnworth: Exactly, a lifetime.

So the company had to live by its guarantee, and linoleum that was now 40 years old — lifetime guarantee — gets replaced. That’s Mike de Jong.

I just want to finish by saying this. Thirty years is a remarkable career in politics. Eight elections undefeated is a remarkable achievement. To have the respect of everybody in this chamber — not just in this chamber but the people who work here — is a remarkable achievement. I know he’s going on to bigger, not necessarily better, things than this place. Because at the end of the day, British Columbia is a very special province, but it will be poorer for his absence from this chamber.

On behalf of the government and all of us: thank you, Mike, for your commitment to public service over the last 30 years. [Applause.]

Personal Statements

SERVICE TO LEGISLATURE
AND MESSAGE OF APPRECIATION

M. de Jong: Well, how to respond, to begin to thank the House itself for its kindness today in affording me this opportunity.

To the Opposition House Leader, Todd: I remember that by-election, obviously. I remember pushing you around in a stroller.

To my friend across the way, with whom I have shared more conversations and negotiations: thank you. Thank you for the kindness you have shown through the years and for the remarks today.

[11:55 a.m.]

To other members of the government, senior members of the cabinet, Mr. Premier: these are busy days for any government. Thank you for affording me the honour of being here.

And of course, my colleagues. I’ll come to that.

I do want to say to members who have otherwise spoken and are departing, the only thing that distinguishes me from you is having hung around a little longer. We are all, those of us who are departing, doing so voluntarily. That is not always the case in this place.

Someone asked me: “Do you get something?” I said: “Well, you get the tremendous satisfaction.” “No, no, do you get something? Like, do you get some kind of long-term…?” I suppose it’s a bit inappropriate for me to be talking about swag and rewards at a time like this, but I’m frugal, and merchandise is….

I had a nice plaque at 20 years, and some of you probably got one of those. I’ll put it on the record. I have my eye on that wood splitter. I don’t know where it is. I don’t think it would be missed. [Laughter.]

Do you remember your first day? Every one of us. Do you remember the awe you felt coming up the stairs for the first time and looking at this place, probably mindful of some of the history of the buildings, of this room, the days of Bennett and Barrett and even beyond that, Pattullo’s and McBride’s? We don’t have actual memories of those, but the place…. Steeped in the history of this place…. I certainly do.

I have to tell you, honestly, that it feels like it was yesterday. I remember virtually every aspect of that day. I remember driving over here with Isabelle — yes, in the Miata. We pulled in, and I got a parking ticket that day. I don’t know how that happened, but I did get a parking ticket. We came here. My parents were here. They came over. It was 30 years ago.

My mom’s here today — 96. She’s here with my sister Pat to make sure that all of her travel needs… She’s like an EA now. She makes sure all the travel needs are looked after.

Pat, thank you.

My brother Rick came down, a councillor up in West Kelowna. It’s great to have them here.

Sitting amongst them is my roommate from law school, Cam Hope. Someone talked about hockey. He’s the executive director for B.C. Hockey, and he’s going to rejig my draft eligibility. I’m not done yet. Yes, I was wearing the same suit, same tie, with the lapels that would make Don Cherry blush.

How do you summarize, in the time available, the passage of 30 years? I don’t think it’s for me to talk about achievements. Others can decide whether there were. I hope there were. I think there were. Maybe I can take a moment just to talk about some of the people that I have encountered here and some of the things that they have taught me along the way.

I have to first, I think, acknowledge the people in my hometown, the people of Abbotsford West — before that Abbotsford–Mount Lehman, before that Matsqui. We’ve heard, from my friend, those remarkable days in the end of ’93-94, a by-election….

One of the first teachers I had was a lady named Grace McCarthy. She taught me a lesson that I’m sure she didn’t want to teach, because it’s fun to be on the winning side of a 42-vote decision.

[12:00 p.m.]

She taught me this can be a very unjust vocation and that sometimes being in the right place at the right time has as much to do with where you end up as any particular skill you bring to the equation. She was an icon, an irrepressible matron of B.C.

The people in Abbotsford took a chance in ’94. I hope they consider that that chance was, in retrospect, warranted, but I am grateful for them. They have overlooked flaws and a lot of mistakes along the way. They have stood with me and provided me with the honour to come here year after year, election after election. I am very grateful to them for that.

They have been served by this remarkable individual, who’s also in the gallery, named Linda Paluck, who for over two of those decades has provided service to the families and, I dare say, helped save people’s lives. When we are here, engaged in the cut-and-thrust and the fun of debate, people like her — in my case, Linda — are there, attending to the crises that descend upon families. She has done so faithfully and with dedication.

To say that I am grateful diminishes what the community would feel, Linda, for the work that you have done on their behalf over the years. Thank you.

Behind her, Louise, who got me addicted to coffee in my first ministerial position, sits as a receptionist and teaches the importance of meeting people with a smile, engaging with them. Because however bad our day is, there’s a good chance their day is a little bit worse. She does that for us, and with us, each and every day.

Thank you, Louise.

You’ve heard about Luella from my colleague Renee. What an apt description for a remarkable lady who juggles so many responsibilities with panache, with good humour.

Lu, thank you, thank you.

Over the years I’ve been here, I think about the ministerial staff from when we were fortunate enough to be on that side of the House — people like Brian Menzies, Dave Cyr, Mario Miniaci, Marty Snider, and Melissa and Little Em. All people that contributed to whatever success we could boast as individuals.

Of course, the irrepressible Ms. P, with whom everyone in this chamber is certainly acquainted now. She would not want me to go on and repeat all the things that Todd, our House Leader, has said about her, but they are so incredibly true. In a place that is deserving of respect, she sets the benchmark for the reverence that one should have for this assembly and this chamber — not to say that there isn’t a place for change — in a thoughtful way, mindful of what this chamber represents.

There is a time-honoured tradition in this chamber. At times like this, if you want them to pay attention, you say something nice about the media. This is the part where I read. Oh, I’m kidding. I’m kidding.

I have to tell you that my experience has been exceedingly positive. You get to know some of these people, like Vaughn Palmer. He is the dean.

He follows in the footsteps of Bruce Hutchinson, storied amongst political commentators in Canada.

Les Leyne, who taught me about lawn tennis, toils on behalf of his readers faithfully, and he has toiled through­out the time that I’ve been here.

Keith Baldrey, of course, started writing and is still a mainstay — and his colleague Richard Zussman.

[12:05 p.m.]

We remember those people, and I thank them for the work they do. Their business has changed so dramatically. When I arrived here, we actually talked about deadlines. We thought: “Oh well, they have to file by a certain time. If they don’t file immediately, they’re old news.”

How that has changed — don’t worry; I’m not going to give anyone a lecture about technology — the work they do. How that competition now exists with anyone with an electronic device who wants to call themselves a journalist has put a tremendous amount of pressure and changed the economics of the media world.

I am grateful for the friendships, what they have taught me. I left one name out, and it’s not an insignificant name, because I thought about asking Rob Shaw to deliver this speech for me. When I approached him about that possibility yesterday, he said no. The prospect of that troubled him. He opted not to do it.

To the legislative staff…. Robert, thank you.

Thank you and your team, Paul and the others.

All of you will know that there are moments in this chamber when a gentle nudge or a wink can mean the world. These are people who serve us in this capacity here but who have, themselves, served our country in different capacities in the past. We are, all of us, tremendously grateful. I have come to know them and their colleagues over the years, and I’m very grateful for that.

Hansard, which has to listen to us over the years, has been incredibly kind to me in correcting things that I’ve said or deleting things that I’ve said.

I see Jason, who is a faithful adherent to these debates and reminds us constantly, certainly once a year, that there is an importance attached to the collegiality of this place, and that links us together.

Madam Clerk, we arrived about the same time. I think you are still nearer to the beginning of your career than the end.

To you and your staff, I thank you for the years of advice, your willingness to engage, your friendliness and the wealth of knowledge that you dispense to all of us in the chamber.

If I can, Madam Chair, a few words about some of the other people that I have encountered here. I’ll start with the leaders. Not all the leaders became Premiers, but they were still leaders.

I got here, and Mike Harcourt was the Premier. Dignity — another example of what can happen. Though I disagreed with many of the things his government advanced, he’s a leader who was ultimately undone, really, at the end of the day, by a scandal that was beyond his control, that he was not answerable for but was ultimately answerable for.

Glen Clark. I think of Glen Clark. I think of the confi­dence of a young man who became Premier as a young man and then went on to display an affinity for capitalism that none of us really knew existed, and to achieve great results in that regard.

Dan Miller. Now, Dan Miller combined modesty with a tactical genius, and he taught me something I never forgot around this place. In the cut-and-thrust of the debates and discussions we have, especially when you are in government, you’re sometimes dealt a pair of twos.

[12:10 p.m.]

It’s tough sometimes. When you’ve got a pair of twos, don’t pretend you’ve got a full house. You might get away with it once, but you won’t get away with it a second time. Dan Miller understood that and was happy to convey that to me.

Ujjal Dosanjh became Premier. I think of the courage he demonstrated before he was in politics and while he was in politics. It could not have been easy. Whatever our partisan instincts were in competitiveness, it could not have been easy going into the 2001 election campaign.

I’m sensing agreement from at least one member of the assembly.

Yet he performed his duties and went on to perform other duties on behalf of the country.

And in the aftermath of that, Joy MacPhail came to this place as part of an opposition of two and, by any measure, displayed an ability, a respect, a loyalty to the processes of this chamber in the most extraordinarily difficult circumstances you can imagine. But she did it and earned, I think, respect from all quarters.

She did it with a colleague, Jenny Kwan. I’m not forgetting that. But I may meet Jenny later in another setting, so I’m going to be a little bit cautious about heaping too much praise on her. I’m kidding, of course.

Then I met two Premiers that I worked with. Gordon Campbell — a driven individual who had a vision. Some people agreed with the vision. Many people did; many people didn’t. But he was driven to realize on a vision to effect change, to effect what he saw as improvement.

And after Gordon Campbell, Christy Clark, who possessed this irrepressible optimism and affection for people — who could light up a room and can still light up a room, unlike any other.

The thing they both had in common, in a very personal way, is they had the confidence, perhaps bad judgment, to provide me with an opportunity to partake in public service at levels I never would have dreamed possible when my parents brought me here as a ten-year-old. For that, I am incredibly grateful. One vainly hopes that one had a positive impact along the way. Again, others can render their judgment in that respect.

John Horgan drew on a humanity that helped British Columbia through a very difficult time and was able to convey that humanity in a way that a lot of people doubted yet was able to do so in a way that was important for that period of time.

And the present Premier, on whose shoulders the weight of responsibility now rests. Though the debates in this chamber centre on oppositions, emphasizing the shortcomings, critiquing the negativity, understand that anyone who has been involved in government at this level, at the local level, understands that governing is hard. It’s a hard thing to do, and that old adage about pick your poison reveals itself often on a daily basis.

To the people that I see and hear and will continue to hear from who heap derision on governments, I can tell you I have no hesitation in telling them: “Yeah, but someone has got to do it.” And we have a process for selecting who is going to do it.

[12:15 p.m.]

There are members of the cabinet that I have come to know, some over a period of time. The Minister of Health is here. The Minister of Forests. The Minister of Finance, with whom I have worked and with her now departed husband, Ed.

You create a relationship that sort of transcends time. I hope that when I say that I have found these people — you — to be worthy adversaries, which I think in this place is probably the highest form of praise you can offer, it’s that you have been worthy adversaries. I hope, in my own way, that I have been equally worthy.

I notice, by the way…. You’ll pick this up in chapter 3 of my book, but Nanaimo–North Cowichan was here a few moments ago. I think it was about probably 20 years ago I labelled a former member from Merritt by the name of Harry Lali as the member for Harry Rosen. I have decided that on my way out the door I am going to label the member from North Cowichan the member for Dodd’s Furniture.

Of course, my friend from Coquitlam, Mike Farnworth.

Interjection.

M. de Jong: Port Coquitlam. I’ll get it right one day.

You are the remaining link with the 20th century, my friend. You are the remaining link with the 20th century.

Over 12 years we worked together as House Leaders, and there were two things that I reflect upon fondly. He mentioned one of them, and that is the degree to which we could convey information back and forth honestly, reliably and with respect. I think it made this chamber a good place, maybe even a better place.

The second thing I reflect upon in those 12 years is that I spent the majority of them on that side of the House, but that is a bit self-serving on my part.

The opposition benches — the Third Party. We became acquainted in 2017 in rather unusual circumstances. They, too, perform a very difficult task, with a caucus of two.

I remember those discussions and negotiations that took place, upon which depended the outcome of an entire election and who was going to form government. They were, for us — “us” I say was the B.C. Liberal Party at the time — obviously difficult. But the Green Party had to choose a partner with whom to dance. Just like most of my high school career, they didn’t choose me. As they say, the rest is history. But they have grown to become, I think, very respected members of this chamber, parliamentarians worthy of respect.

There’s a Fourth Party. Look, the worst battles in history tend to be civil wars. I don’t know if there’s a negotiation or what that would look like, and I won’t be involved. Well, who knows? Who knows what will emerge in the weeks and months ahead? But one can speculate and remain hopeful.

The independent members, who toil in a fairly lonely way but are no less committed.

[12:20 p.m.]

There are independent members today, and I have known independent members over the course of my time here, and they bring the same, I have found, level of commitment and the same concern for their constituents but are asked to present that without the benefit of the collegiality and the resources that the rest of us enjoy as larger parties or opposition parties or government.

And then, of course, my colleagues in the official opposition, for whom I have had the great pleasure of toiling these past number of years, these past seven years. It does seem like a thankless job, doesn’t it, many days, and it is inherently negative. It is by definition negative, and when you’re not a negative person, that’s difficult. Yet in many cases, that is the task you have, we have — to point out the shortcomings, to point out alternatives. You have gone about that….

Some of you I have known a long time. I have worked with, in government, Todd and Ben and, of course, Shirley.

I’ll go to my grave with your finger pointing at me. I think of the bruising and the cuts and the attacks, and then you leave caucus to come into the chamber to do…. [Laughter.]

But let me just offer this. We serve a vitally important purpose and role in this parliamentary democracy. I know we say that, and we go: “Well, that’s fine; I wish we didn’t have to serve the role for as long.” I’ve done it for 14 years, as Michael has pointed out.

It represented a form of apprenticeship. I have no doubt of that to the extent anyone thinks the government I was a part of served some useful purpose, that it was a better government because of the time that group spent in opposition. Even our friends across the way will, in their quiet moments, concede that no one governs forever. Happily, in a democracy, no one governs forever.

So think of this as that apprenticeship, however long it might last. Maybe I’ve worked with another Premier. We will know when the people decide to tell us later this year.

Lastly, you’ve been very kind. I mentioned my family.

Mom, everything I have, everything I am I got from you and Dad. It’s remarkable that you’re here 30 years on. When we get home, we’re going to pour some more cement and do some other work around the farm.

Isabelle, you have weathered the demands of this job. Everyone in this chamber knows what that represents, and you have been there every step of the way. Thank you. Merci beaucoup.

My brother and sister, whose older brother has quite frequently not been there for them, have understood and never complained. Thank you. Thank you.

So it’s time to say goodbye. It’s time to get out of this suit, get into the Miata — the same car, the same girl — head on down the highway.

[12:25 p.m.]

This place, this garden of democracy. Folks, I have been incredibly lucky to have the gardening tools for 30 years. Now it’s up to you. The democratic garden needs tending. The flower of democracy is fragile. It’s up to you to keep it healthy.

I know you will.

Goodbye. Good luck. [Applause]

Deputy Speaker: Thank you to all the members who have spoken this morning.

Seeing no further speakers, this House will recess until 1 p.m.

The House recessed from 12:26 p.m. to 1:01 p.m.

[S. Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: All right, Members. Let’s call this House to order.

I. Paton: I seek leave to make a brief statement.

Leave granted.

Tributes

MATT ROGERS

I. Paton: I rise today to pay tribute to a remarkable individual whose legacy will endure for years to come.

Matt Rogers, a cherished resident of Delta South, an educator, a community leader, passed away this month, leaving behind a profound and outsized impact in our community.

Matt’s dedication to education spanned nearly three decades, where he served as a beacon of knowledge and inspiration at North Delta Secondary School for 28 years and later at Simon Fraser University.

Matt was heavily involved in local heritage groups and efforts towards the preservation and conservation of built heritage in the community. Matt had a personal history and involvement in the Delta Museum and Archives Society, particularly with the work he put in to help set up the Delta archives in 1979.

In 1992, when the city of Delta issued a demolition permit for Kirkland House, an old dilapidated heritage farmhouse on Arthur Drive, Matt rallied the community to action. With unwavering determination, he spearheaded a volunteer effort that breathed new life into a derelict structure. Despite its interior being wrecked, with only one window intact, Matt’s vision and tireless advocacy led to a remarkable transformation. Through his leadership, volunteers worked tirelessly to clear overgrown shrubbery, replace windows, rewire, plumb and refurbish every corner of Kirkland House.

Matt’s ability to mobilize resources and inspire others was truly remarkable. He orchestrated partnerships with local businesses, engaged students from Delta Secondary School and galvanized retirees to invest their time and skills in maintaining the house and its surroundings. Today, thanks to Matt’s unwavering dedication, Kirkland House stands as a testament to the power of community collaboration and the enduring legacy of one individual’s commitment to making a difference.

Every Canada Day the Kirkland House Society opens up the old house to the community. Local residents get to marvel at the outstanding restoration work, as well as the beautiful heritage Harris Barn and the grounds around Hawthorne Park, which are meticulously maintained by local volunteers.

Matt’s spirit lives on in the volunteers who continue to uphold his vision, ensuring that Kirkland House remains a cherished space for generations to come.

As we reflect on Matt’s extraordinary contributions, let us honour his memory by embodying the same passion, resilience and sense of community that defined Matt’s life.

J. Rustad: This is just a small sampling of over 6,000 postcards that have been collected by volunteers around the province that are very concerned….

Deputy Speaker: Member, you need to seek leave if you’re going to do this.

J. Rustad: I thought you don’t need leave for a petition. I guess….

Okay. I seek leave for a petition, then, please.

Deputy Speaker: We do at this junction. Yes, we do.

Leave granted.

Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.

Petitions

J. Rustad: Thank you once again, Mr. Speaker.

This is a small sampling here of over 6,000 postcards that have been signed by people across the province that have expressed concern associated with the Health Professions and Occupations Act. These are addressed to individual MLAs. The recipients would very much appreciate a response from the MLAs when they receive them.

M. Elmore: I seek leave to make a brief introduction.

Deputy Speaker: A brief introduction, yes.

Leave granted.

Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.

[1:05 p.m.]

Introductions by Members

M. Elmore: I have a very special guest here in the House, Patrick Vachon. He’s part of our team that makes everything that happens here all possible, a legislative assistant. I just appreciate his indispensable role.

It’s going to be his last day here. He’s planning to go into law school at UVic in September, and he’s off to Ireland and Scotland next week.

I just ask everyone to give him a very warm welcome.

R. Parmar: I would like to seek leave to make a brief statement.

Leave granted.

Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.

Tributes

JOHN GOUDY

R. Parmar: I have got some sad news to report to the House.

Earlier this week John Goudy, a pillar of the community, of the city of Langford, passed away, a former councillor, one of the first councillors in the community, served for a number of years, a local philanthropist, as well as someone who immigrated here to Canada and served as a lieutenant commander in the navy, as well as a professor at the University of Victoria.

For anyone who goes into Langford…. They’ll know the name Goudy Branch at the library. They’ll know Goudy Field. They’ll know the investments that he has made at the YMCA.

John is survived by his wife, Gabrielle.

He always had a passion for sports and education. I know that my community of Langford is mourning his loss.

I hope the House will take an opportunity to acknowledge all of the incredible people we have in our communities.

Today I will be remembering John and his family for all they have done for the city of Langford.

R. Russell: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.

Introductions by Members

R. Russell: Briefly, I want to acknowledge and recognize my brother for the first time. He managed to get here the day before we wrapped up.

Welcome to my brother Ty Russell. A pleasure to have him here.

Second, today was the first day that my assistant, my ministerial adviser, was in this gallery, pretty remarkable given all the work that we have done together. I owe an enormous amount of gratitude to Jesse for a lot of time on the road and an enormous amount of help. Both of us share somewhat of a disdain for authority, so we’re a bit of a challenge when we get together sometimes.

In his honour, I would share a very brief poem, “The Uses of Sorrow” by Mary Oliver.

Someone I loved once gave me
a box full of darkness.
It took me years to understand
that this, too, was a gift.

N. Simons: I seek leave to make a brief introduction.

Leave granted.

Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.

N. Simons: In the House today, I have my cousin Christopher Duschenes, who is here visiting the west coast with his son Leo Compton-Duschenes. I’m so happy to have them here. Christopher is a director general with Crown–​Indigenous Relations.

With them are Thomas Simons, my nephew; and his girlfriend, Kiera Bandy; and of course, Slim Milkie.

Deputy Speaker: Members wishing to be recognized, of course, must be in their seats.

We will move on to the farewell addresses.

Personal Statements

FAREWELL ADDRESSES
BY RETIRING MLAs

J. Rice: Thank you for the opportunity to make my final speech in this great institution. I feel some nervousness and mixed emotions in announcing that I’ll not be seeking re-election this year.

I wanted to talk a bit about the beginning years for me in 2013. The night before my very first day on the job, I was incredibly nervous, more so than I am now but nervous. I was unsure. I couldn’t actually believe that I had arrived here.

I took a chance that night, as I lay awake with insomnia, and I reached out to another brand-new MLA, Jane Shin. I sent her a simple text. I said: “Jane, I’m scared.” I didn’t know if she’d reply so late, but she immediately replied: “Jen, I’m scared too.” That was the beginning of building my support network.

[1:10 p.m.]

Being a politician means being confident, projecting strength and at least pretending that you know all the answers. By being vulnerable and taking a chance and reaching out to Jane, I learned that I wasn’t alone and that I can build strength from being vulnerable.

I’ve learned an enormous amount about how government actually works, that there is way more grey than there is black and white and that it takes time and real effort to make lasting change. My motivation for this work has always been rooted in that possibility, in making things better for not just the people of North Coast–Haida Gwaii but for all British Columbians.

I have had the incredible privilege of being mentored and educated about the ancient and profound Indigenous cultures on the coast, and I hold particular appreciation for the Haíłzaqv and the Haida leaders and Elders that have guided and educated me. Before, for me, Indigenous title, Aboriginal title was a concept in a textbook, but through my time as MLA, I have come to understand how real it can be.

Passing the Haida title recognition, Bill 25, yesterday…. Passing that act was a profound moment for me. The irony that this very place, this very room where generations of politicians and governments have tried to disenfranchise and destroy the Haida and First Nations people…. In this very room just yesterday, we stood in this same room to make things a little bit more right — very profound for me.

The nature of politics is often one of division, of being pitted against each other, just like we are physically in this room. But there are times when we are drawn together, and as the Parliamentary Secretary for Emergency Preparedness, I have a memory of Grand Forks during the 2017 floods and how devastating that was. It removed whole neighbourhoods.

I was getting toured in one of the Ruckle neighbourhoods. I can’t remember north or south, really, but it was basically quarantined off. Sewage had overflowed into the homes of everyone. It was all gated up, but I, as the PS, got a special tour to go around and assess all the damage.

No one was supposed to be in there. We were all escorted by police. But I saw, out of the corner of my eye, this gentleman off in the distance, a big, burly guy, pot-belly sticking out of his shirt, shorts, with gumboots on. He looked pretty rough. I saw him. I watched him watch us. I slipped away to go and talk to him, and we had a conversation about what had just happened, how devastating it was, how frustrating it was, how painful it was.

He reminded me of my dad. He’s a teddy bear on the inside, but a roughneck on the outside. He just broke down, and he sobbed. I caught him, and I held him. And while I’m holding him, my mind is scrambling. What can I do? How can I help? How can I get this guy some disaster financial assistance? Everything cycled through my brain, and none of that was going to be good enough. I held him for a long time, and I just came to realize that that was all I had to offer him. I felt like I was shortchanging him.

After that moment, the stress is kind of relieved. He just thanked me profusely, and I felt like I didn’t do anything. But I have this memory, because it’s a lesson that when we’re expected to fix everything and we’re expected to have the answers, our humility and our vulnerability is actually a strength. I’m glad that I was able to offer that to him. To be open and honest and seek help is okay.

[1:15 p.m.]

This is the greatest job I’ve ever had until recently, until becoming a mom. The Leader of the Opposition used that as a discredit to us, that this is the best job we’ve ever had. Well, it is, and I hold that with great pride and no regret. Until I had kids.

So my heart is still here. It’s still in this work. It’s a bittersweet moment because I still want to do the work. But I also just want to focus on being a mom, and that’s what I’m going to do for the next little while.

Of course, there are so many thank-yous, but I’ll keep them simple.

My riding association — some of you have been with me for 11 years.

The constituency, the people who I have had the privilege to represent from the North Coast — Prince Rupert; Haida Gwaii; the entire Central Coast communities all the way down to Wuikinuxv, population 54, 150 during salmon season.

It sounds clichéd, but it is the greatest honour and privilege, and I feel so lucky.

Lastly, I have to thank my wife, my family. This is a great job, but it also takes a toll. I appreciate her relentless support. I appreciate her not kicking me out when we had two family vacations cancelled due to work.

I’m just so grateful to spend the time with my family, with my four-year-old, Lu̓á, and my ten-month-old, Theo.

Thank you, hon. Speaker, for providing this time. It is really healing to have this moment of just a little bit of closure, even though there’s so much I would love to say. So thank you. [Applause.]

N. Simons: I’ve had 15…. I’ve had….

Well, let me start over.

Interjections.

N. Simons: I’m new here. I wrote this four years ago.

Mr. Speaker, I’ve had 19 years to prepare for this, and you can tell I’m not prepared.

I have worked in this territory of lək̓ʷəŋən-speaking peoples, the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations, and in this building for almost 20 years, and I thank them, and I acknowledge them.

Having had the honour of representing the Sunshine Coast in this place has been rewarding, and it’s a rare honour indeed.

It’s the land of the shishálh, the Sḵwx̱wú7mesh, the Tla’amin, the Klahoose, the Homalco, the Wei Wai Kum and Kwiakah Nations.

I’ve sat in opposition 12 years, in government, in the back bench and in cabinet. I’ve chaired committees, travelled the province and met thousands of British Colum­bians over the years. They’ve all enriched my life.

It was in 2003 that I attended an event at the Sechelt Legion, and afterwards Bill Forst, who was a high school counsellor from Gibsons and, I found out later that day, the president of the constituency association, approached me and said that the party was looking for a candidate to run in the next election. I said: “Federal or provincial?” He said: “Federal. We already have a lot of candidates for the provincial one.” I said: “Do I have to join the party?” He said: “Yeah, you have to join the party.”

I told him I’d think about it but that I’d been more interested in provincial issues, having worked in the child protection sector for the province and, at the time, was conducting a director’s review into the death of Sherry Charlie, a toddler from Port Alberni.

I thought about it, and I talked it over with Slim and decided I’d put my name forward, knowing I had not a very good chance of winning. West Vancouver was not typically an NDP hotbed.

[1:20 p.m.]

I had no interest in leaving my position as the director of health and social services for the shishálh Nation, as a director of the Indigenous delegated agency where, I might add, I had the honour and privilege of working with such leaders in the field like Warner Adam, Nita Walkem, Mary Teegee, Cindy Blackstock, Maurice Squires and others.

The election campaign was a fun experience, and our vote climbed to a stratospheric 23 percent. But I’d won the vote on the Sunshine Coast. It was during that campaign that I met Dave Barrett, the first Jewish Premier of the province, who came to the coast to meet with constituents and attend some events. He knew I was acting a bit as a bit of a placeholder for the federal party, but he reminded me it was important to have a progressive voice in the campaign.

After a fun public event in Powell River, we were driving to the rec centre for another event when he said, “Nicholas, pull over. Pull over.” So you do what he says, and I did. He said that I’d be — I can’t say the word — an idiot if I didn’t run provincially. “You’d win,” he said.

We sat by the side of the road and talked politics and religion, and we had a bit in common. We were both social workers. He knew my father’s family was Jewish and had fled Germany in 1936, and we just sat there talking. He told me that when people talk about his big accomplishments, they would mention things like the agricultural land reserve or public auto insurance, but he said that the proudest achievement was prohibiting corporal punishment.

Charles Burns ran my campaign, and he was and still is a wonderful friend. I’ve had incredible support from my volunteers and constituency association over the years.

I’ll mention Michael Goldberg, who was a financial agent and mentor and whose job really was to keep me out of jail. He did succeed. He recently passed away on his own terms, having acquired ALS.

I put my name forward with the provincial nomination and, in the Italian Hall in Powell River, won on the fifth ballot. That first election, I was up against the leader of the Green Party. It was a tough campaign, and all parties were sure they were going to win. It turned out I did, with 43 percent.

In the next 12 years, I sat in opposition, fighting the good fight against a government that had different prior­ities from us. Issues in my riding were dominated by ferries. They’d just been privatized, and my constituents, who were residents of the only entirely ferry-reliant constituency in the province, suffered from the rapidly rising fares.

Farmers were being told they couldn’t sell at the farm gate. Seniors were being forced to take computer tests to assess their driving abilities. Logging and mining were being proposed in our watersheds, and homelessness was beginning to rise. We were dealing with methamphetamines being a new drug creating harms in our communities. We had stagnant income supports. Minimum wages were frozen. Weakened workers’ rights and layoffs and privatization were running rampant.

We were never without an issue to raise in the Legislature.

But my priority was to bring back independent oversight to the child welfare system. The report I had completed on the death of Sherry Charlie was delayed until two weeks after the 2005 election, over two years since I’d begun my investigation and over a year since I had submitted my final draft. When it was released, it was missing some of the recommendations that I’d made.

Knowing firsthand the impact of government interference in the child welfare system, bringing independent oversight back became the focus of our first session in 2005 and resulted in the Ted Hughes report, which called for the establishment of an Office of the Representative for Children and Youth.

I’ve worked with hundreds of constituents on hundreds of issues. I’ve attended concerts, festivals, celebrations, funerals, town halls and endless meetings. But I’ve had the most fun riding my parade bike in the parades when I dressed up as various animals and shapes. I think I always got the seven-year-olds’ votes. I had fun wherever I went.

As the Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction, I was honoured to introduce and pass the Accessible B.C. Act, whose impacts we’ll see more and more in this province. We made the largest ever increase in income assistance rates and were successful in reducing child poverty and the overall poverty rates. Of course, I acknowledge that we always have more work to do.

I thank everybody in that ministry for the work that they do. It’s a ministry I started in, in the early ’90s, as a financial assistance worker and then I later was able to lead as minister.

I’d like to thank, in particular, my chief of staff Samuel Godfrey.

[1:25 p.m.]

I will just mention a few constituents whose advocacy served as an example for others and people whose lives have made a deep impact in our community.

Carol MacLeod fought for the rights of dependents when a workplace hazard led to her partner’s death.

Darrell Powell, whose mental and physical health have suffered in his dispute with the workers’ compensation, yet he perseveres.

Russell Seeber, who would have benefited from safer supply, advocated for regulated recovery homes and better health care in our prisons.

Myles Gray, who died at the hands of the police, continues to be a source of grief with little closure.

Grace Mooney tried to expose fraud in our arts scene.

Angela Nemeth and Beatrice Sorensen, who died during an RCM Search and Rescue exercise.

John Phare, who lost his life fighting the Old Mine wildfire outside Sechelt.

And Sam Fitzpatrick, whose death shows us that we have more work to do to hold companies to account for workers’ safety.

People have asked me what are the highlights of my time as an MLA. It’s not an easy question to answer. There are memorable moments, and there are important ones, and they’re not always the same.

I remember forgetting that it was my day to offer a prayer. That was before reflections were allowed. My legislative assistant, Anne Paxton, rushed me down the hall. As soon as I got to my seat, I pulled on my tie, and Speaker Barisoff immediately recognized me, so I had to wing it. I prayed for the separation of church and state, which I think was the only time the prayer got a laugh in the chamber.

I’ve worked with lots of legislative assistants over the years, starting with Anne and now Helena Keenliside. Their assistance is really appreciated.

I remember getting kicked out of the chamber for refusing to withdraw my remark, calling the government corrupt liars. I think I was the only one that’s happened to. Linda Reid was the Speaker, and I think she broke the standing orders and let me apologize because it was the last day of session, and had I not, I think I would have lost my salary.

I really enjoyed the press gallery dinners and, since they don’t happen anymore, I think we can talk about them. One I particularly enjoyed was a musical re-enactment of question period using musical instruments. I played Bob Simpson, the Forests critic, on the cello and Gregor Robertson played Rich Coleman, the minister, on the tuba.

The questions started off gently with medium pitch, and the tuba answers began melodiously and smoothly, but on supplemental and second supplemental, the cello became a little bit whinier and higher pitched, and the tuba became a little bit more staccato and bellowing and loud.

All the MLAs recognized the daily show they’d been experiencing, but what I remember most of the performance was seeing Bob Simpson and Rich Coleman hanging off each other and laughing together.

My father said never trust anyone without a sense of humour. And thinking back about that, I think he was remembering being a boy in Nazi Germany, and though his family was secular, he understood psychopaths are never funny. He also told me that there were times where humour might not be appropriate, but that wasn’t a lesson I always applied.

We spend a lot of time in this building and on occasion that time is characterized by acrimony and disagreement. But when it isn’t, this place can symbolize all that’s good in our society. Hearing the heartbeat of the drums during Indigenous celebrations and ceremonies or seeing orchestras on the front steps or listening to poetry during the reflections — those are etched into my memory.

A choir from Bellflower near Los Angeles came to the Legislature one day. I heard them as I was walking down the hall. I went into the Rotunda, and I was immediately mesmerized by the incredible sound of their voices. It was a few years ago, but I’ll never forget it.

They sang “O Canada,” which they’d been practising for their trip. It was a beautiful a cappella arrangement, precise with perfect harmonies, carefully executed dynamics. It was a very memorable performance. Then Bob, the member for Maple Ridge–Mission and a brilliant musician himself, asked if they would sing the “Star-Spangled Banner,” which they hadn’t been planning to sing. I can say with absolute certainty, I will never hear the American anthem sung better.

I’m not sure why it was an emotional experience and still is, but I think it’s partly because it’s a reminder to us why we’re here. It’s not just about the issues themselves. It’s not about just income inequality or public safety or health care or biodiversity or fairness. It’s why these issues are important to us.

[1:30 p.m.]

When people have enough to eat, when they’re safe and when they’re healthy and when they can breathe clean air, and when they can trust that it’s not everyone for themselves, we’re capable of creating more beauty, being more inventive and being innovative.

We’ve all spoken about the people who make this building special and a place where we like to be, and I want to mention a few.

The Office of the Clerk, Kate and her team and her researchers. You probably couldn’t find a more intelligent and dedicated group of people.

But then you’d look to the librarians, who are absolute…. We’re not comparing. We’re not comparing. They’re absolute knowledge treasure troves.

Or the Hansard crew.

The security staff are diligent and friendly, and the dining room staff and the gift shop employees and the cleaners over the years have all been approachable and good at their jobs. They’ve added to making coming here feel like an honour.

There are days when the weight of this job can be heavy, days when tempers flare and we say things we don’t mean, or we maybe get yelled at a bit. Far from home, a person can actually feel a bit alone.

But when we walk into this precinct and we run into members of the Sergeant-at-Arms crew, we catch their eye and we know they’re more than people who keep our legislation binders updated or distribute our orders of the day or fill our water glasses or bring us Kleenex. They’re the unconditional friends in this place, whose steadfast presence, immune to the din of the sound of debate, can calm an agitated mind.

I’d like to thank a few people, starting with my family.

I’m the third boy in a family of six children. I have two older brothers, Mark and Andrew; and three younger sisters — Anne, Katherine and Laura. They have wonderful partners and families. Slim says that means I’m the youngest boy and the oldest girl. Being the third taught me a few things: to seek attention and to try to make peace. I know members opposite probably saw one characteristic more than others. But such is the nature of this place.

I’d like to express thanks for having had supportive, loving parents and having close and loving siblings and, indeed, close and loving extended families and aunts and uncles and their families. Slim and I are both proud to be the guncles to Brendan, Neil, Justin, Annie, Thomas, Christopher, Katherine, Lachlan, Makayla and little Auguste, who’s just a year old and who we’re anxious to meet. And great-guncles to Leah and Bruce. We knew we were great, but this proves it. Their parents, aunties, uncles, grand- and great-grandparents have every right to be proud of them all.

Our godchildren came along as I began this career. Jaquie and Mario are loving and kind, and their mother Allie is strong and a source of strength to all those around her. As members of the shíshálh Nation and generational survivors of residential school they are resilient, and they are strong. Having them in our lives has been fulfilling and enriching.

We’ve made friends over the years, and I want to thank them all. But I can’t start mentioning…. They know who they are.

To my Victoria parents, Dr. Maxine Charlesworth and Mr. Derek Reimer, thank you for being such good suppor­ters. Though you’re not mine, you’re also wonderful grandparents.

I’d like to acknowledge the man who’s been by my side since before running for office, Slim Milkie. We met in a gay bar before dating apps, and we’ve been together for 22 years. He’s an artist, musician, philosopher, landscaper, gardener, bodyguard and more popular and famous in my riding than I am.

His parents, who first said they were glad they didn’t live in my riding so they didn’t have to feel guilty not voting for me, have come around. I love them a lot, and I think it’s mutual.

Gail, recover well from your recent fall. I hope the hospital has a good catch-and-release policy.

I’ve had a lot of colleagues over the years. In fact, on this side, there are only eight left from my first election, and I think two of them are speaking after me. They’ve been friends and will continue to be friends.

In fact, when I was put out of cabinet and appointed caucus chair, I told the Premier that I was devastated by the honour. Over the last two years, while the feeling of devastation has indeed subsided, the honour of leading a large and diverse caucus through daily meetings and countless briefings was not lost on me. My choir of soloists recognizes the talent in each other’s voices. We brought out the best in each other, and you’re all my favourites.

I beg forgiveness for not mentioning all my colleagues, but there’s one who’s been close by my side, Doug. We’ve been through a lot together.

[1:35 p.m.]

From my studying of police culture, I think we can compare our relationship to that of patrol partners: a mix of boredom, intensity, comfort, familiarity, but above all, loyalty and friendship.

I’ve had the pleasure of working in the territory of the shíshálh, Sḵwx̱wú7mesh, Tla’amin, Klahoose, Homalco, Wei Wai Kum, Kwiakah Nations, also known as the Sunshine Coast.

And I’ve been honoured to work with the Chiefs of the Tla’amin Nation, including Walter Paul, Maynard Harry, Clint Williams and Jesus John Hackett.

And working with the shíshálh Nation started with Garry Feschuk, a great leader, and continued under Stan Dixon, Marita Paul, Calvin Craig and Warren Paul and now hiwus Lenora Joe.

I was asked what I thought my legacy would be, but like in question period, I reject the premise of that question. If I can be remembered for anything, I don’t want it to be a bridge or a highway or a traffic light. I hope people have seen me as an approachable, interested and active representative. I hope I’ve made a few people without a voice find theirs, a few people who are angry a little bit less angry and a few cynics a little bit less cynical.

I’ve never made a promise I couldn’t keep, but I’ve always promised that I’d try. None of us are perfect. None of us are always right, but like our constituents, we do our best. The media, when they knew I existed, were nice to me.

Nothing I got done was without the help of constituency assistants, now called advisers. I’d like to thank Rob Hill, Amy Clarke, Michelle Morton and Tracey Bellmane, who work in my two offices.

Also, to my CAs who were with me for over a decade, Maggie Hathaway and Kim Tournat.

Maggie, you ran a tight ship. You were efficient and direct and appreciated by the people of the region.

Kim, like the great social worker you are, you were patient and compassionate, with the listening skills and the problem-solving skills second to none.

Mr. Speaker, this has been an honour. Thank you. [Applause.]

Deputy Speaker: To the other patrol partner, the member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan.

D. Routley: After that?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to all of my friends here on both sides of the House, and my dear friend….

I’m proud to stand here in this House. I love this House so much. I love the building. I love what it represents. I love the people in it. I am grateful.

I am grateful to the lək̓ʷəŋən people, upon whose terri­tory we’re standing now.

I am grateful to all the nations upon whose territory I’ve served — the Quw’utsun, the Halalt, the Penelakut, the Snuneymuxw and the Lake Cowichan nations.

It is their accommodation that makes all of this possible. We are able now to celebrate a new era of reconciliation because of their patience, goodwill, empathy and forgiveness.

We think about what brought us here. I always think about my dad and how he was so firmly committed to principle, sometimes frustratingly so. But it is that that really brought me here.

I think of the jobs that led me here. Maybe I’m here because I could never hold down a job, because I had so many. I came through, graduated from school during a very low point in the economy here in B.C. I’ve been lucky to do very many things — logging and working in sawmills and tree planting and working as a courier and travelling to Japan and working as an English teacher and running a business manufacturing bicycles and finally, before this job, being a school custodian.

That role was important to me because all of them taught me that all these universes that exist in our communities all have their different dialects, their different realities, challenges, and we’re lucky if we’re able to absorb some of that in our experience of life. I’ve been very lucky to absorb many of those universes.

[1:40 p.m.]

I think it helps us when we act here, representing people in our communities, to appreciate the very noble challenges that they all face and that they rise up to those challenges. I am proud to be part of a government that has decided that partnering with people and investing in them will allow them to thrive and will allow our province to thrive. I think we are seeing the proof of that now.

We are lucky that we live in a province with a very precious balance between the investments we make in each other through our public services that support a thriving private economy that allows us to achieve things that we have no business achieving so far from economic centres and with such a small population. It’s really an astonishing thing to witness.

I look back to the first day after I was elected. I was driving through Duncan and looking at all the businesses and the people and wondering: “What have I done, and what did they do?” They elected me. There’s no handbook. There’s no instruction sheet that comes with the position.

Each of us develops in this role and finds a way to represent the people that they came from. I think that is why this is so precious — that we all, as a tapestry, represent our communities, kind of whether we like it or not.

It is so important that the people we represent see themselves in this place. In that way, I’m so proud of this caucus, the diversity and the togetherness of this group. It’s a very large caucus, yet it is like a family. We do so well for each other and with each other. So many extraordinary people who are so inspiring by themselves but, together, create such a power and wealth for the people that we represent. It is really an honour to stand here with people.

As the member for North Coast has said, you can feel like an imposter when you sit with so many extraordinary people.

I think of the Minister of Health, Adrian. I’ve never met a more extraordinary person, intellect — a person who you can ask: “Adrian, how is it in Keremeos?” Well, he’ll tell you what percentage of the hospital beds are filled and how many openings there are in that hospital. It’s extraordinary.

It doesn’t stop on this side. I have so much respect for the people on the other side. I’m looking at one of them right now, the member for Prince George–Valemount, who I’ve sat with on many committees.

I watched her as interim leader of this House at a time when she suffered a really great loss, the loss of her husband. They were extraordinary partners who travelled around the province together. Through that pain, she was able to lead her caucus with a grace and skill that was extraordinary.

There was a protest outside the buildings here. I couldn’t leave because they were using my car as a picnic table, so I had to stay. But the extraordinary thing was that at about midnight, when I finally had a chance to leave, the member for Prince George–Valemount, Shirley, was still there until the very last member of her caucus staff team was home safe. I thought that was extraordinary, and I really think it represents the kind of person she is.

So we do have these friendships across the aisle. If we didn’t, this whole enterprise would grind to a halt. It is a place of animosity and contest, but for the right reasons. I have fear that currently in politics throughout our world, there’s a meanness and a degree of hate that we haven’t seen in the past. I haven’t seen that here from the members on the opposite side. I appreciate that. But I fear that it is near to our horizon now, and I hope deeply that is not the case.

[1:45 p.m.]

The notions of this place are so important. My favourite job here is when students come from my constituency. Usually they’re in grade 5. They’re studying parliamentary democracy at that time, so I get to talk to them about the notions of what democracy means, their role in it.

Then I tell them about the most wealthy British Columbian, Jimmy Pattison. I remind them that he controls many of the things that affect their lives: the grocery industry, the billboards they see on the highways, the fishing fleet of the province, forest industry — so many different things.

After I’ve discussed just how powerful he is, I ask them, “How many votes do you think he gets?” and maybe a handful in 19 years have said one. They almost always say 5,000 or 50,000. I’m able to remind them that no, in fact he gets one, just like they will and just like their teacher does and just like their parents do.

Then I’m able to beg them, in fact, not to ever fail to exercise that power that they have at that moment. I’m able to look at the young women in the class and ask them: “You expect to be treated the same as those creatures over there, right?” And of course they do, but that wasn’t always the case. We still have a long way to go to make that a reality.

I speak to the Indigenous children in the classroom, and I acknowledge that this place has been the source of so much of the tragic and painful history that our commun­ities, their communities have endured. But this place is also the place, the tool, with which we can address those problems and bring solutions to them and their families. I just love that.

I ask them if they understand the word “cynicism.” They don’t. But they do when I tell them that it means having faith in something and then becoming disappointed, betrayed even, and losing that faith and not believing anymore. Then I can beg them again never to become that, because they must keep their expectations high in order for us to meet higher expectations.

We tour through this beautiful building and look at the sculptures and all of the grandeur of it, and I’m able to tell them that it’s not there to elevate that person I spoke of who is so wealthy. It’s there to elevate them, the public interest, the interest of our province, And I believe that they believe.

Then I take them down to Hansard, and we look at the spectacular technology, and that’s a drastic comparison. I don’t think I will tell you another story that I have about Hansard.

As Nicholas said, we’ve spent our time in opposition. We understand the role of opposition. We understand the challenge to government. A government must always be strong, must always be critical. We’ve gone around the province and promised people that if only they would support us, we would do these fabulous things. Then we got elected into government and said: “Oh my goodness, I hope we don’t fail to do those things.”

I believe we have done them, and we’re trying our very, very best to deliver on those promises. So I go away with a sense of satisfaction and comfort that, in fact, we have met that test. Not perfectly and no one ever will. But we have. And that is a real pleasure to me.

When I was in opposition, it was simpler. You travelled around the province; you built your role as a critic. It was your own little world. You didn’t need to win votes, right? In government, there’s a greater accountability to be present in a vote — right, Mr. Whip? Mr. Whip there has been so good to me, but if I missed a vote, I’m sure I wouldn’t be popular in his book.

When we were in opposition — I was doing a lot of cycling then. Sometimes, I have to admit, I’d skip out a bit early at lunch and go for a bike ride. Now one day I had said something in this chamber that the Speaker, Linda Reid, had requested that I withdraw. Of course, I followed her instruction, withdrew that remark, went out and got on my bike and went for a ride. It was about this time of year. I was wearing a long jersey and long pants, so I was pretty hot. I stopped to take off the outer layer, and my phone was buzzing.

[1:50 p.m.]

It was my assistant telling me that Speaker Linda Reid wanted me in her office in 15 minutes to discuss what I had to withdraw. So of course, being in Oak Bay, I sprinted all the way back here. I was dripping with sweat. I threw on my suit. My tie was still knotted, so I threw it on. I ran into the Speaker’s office and sat down in front of her with sweat running down my face, and she said: “Oh, Doug, I didn’t mean to get you so upset.” So sometimes things work out for the better.

At one point, when we had a particular spike in homelessness in the Cowichan Valley, I have to admit I embarrassed the government a little bit by opening my office 24 hours a day so that people could come in. We had mattresses all over the floor. They could sleep there. So it was, in a way, a shelter.

That was happening around the same time a former member of this House, Corky Evans…. When he wasn’t in this House, and maybe even when he was, he was usually in jeans, work boots and a jean jacket. He came through Duncan, and he wasn’t feeling well, so he asked me if he could come by and rest on a couch or something. “Do you have anywhere I could lie down?” “Oh yeah, we’ve got lots of places for you to lie down.”

He came in, and he wasn’t looking well at all. My CAs, the constituency assistants, were very concerned. They wanted me to phone a paramedic. So I went into the room where Corky was resting, and I asked him: “Corky, are you okay?” He said: “I’m not doing too well.” I said: “Well, my CAs want me to call the paramedics.” He said, “Doug, be strong. Don’t do it,” and I said: “No, Corky. I’m not that strong.”

I did phone the paramedics, and they came to pick him up. They loaded him onto a stretcher. They were taking him out, and they said, “Has he been doing any drugs?” and I went: “Oh, I don’t think so.” They said: “Has he been drinking?” I said: “I doubt it.” Then I realized that they thought he was one of the people who was staying the night in my office, so I said: “No, no. This is the MLA from Creston.” They said, “Oh, thank god you told us that,” and I thought immediately: why? What was going to happen to him otherwise?

Those were different days than being in government. It has a more serious edge to it now. I’m obviously having to dress more conservatively now that we’re in office. That’ll go away soon, though, when I’m retired. Trust me.

But really, the pleasure of working here has been the people. The pleasure of working in the constituency has been the people.

I look to my friend Nicholas as my dearest friend, and I thank you for all the years we’ve had together.

I look to the Whip, who has been so supportive of me when I’ve had health challenges.

Garry, thank you for everything you’ve done.

And the Premier, David Eby, is so inspirational. He’s extraordinary in his capacity but also his connectedness to our group and his ability to empathize with the people that we represent.

I think of Pahalicktun, Chief Richard Thomas, who has fought all his life for a home for the Lyackson people, a landless nation who have a reserve on an island with no services. He promised his grandmother as a child that he would find a home for the nation but also a place for the Elders to rest. Now in his 80s, every time I’ve spoken to him, he’s cried, and every time I’ve spoken to him, I’ve cried. And finally, we’ve seen that become a reality in the recent weeks.

I think of Kwul’a’sul’tun, Doug White, who’s now working as an adviser to the Premier, and the leadership he showed me in Nanaimo, in the Snuneymuxw band, and how he has influenced my being a person as well as being a representative.

Sqwulutsultun, Bill Yoachim, who is a child and family services agent in the Nanaimo area — his dedication to the people that I represent, that he represents, the families, the children who need support.

I think of the volunteers who have worked on all the campaigns, the volunteers throughout the community. All of us know when we go to different meetings in communities we see the same people, often the same people from one group to another that have made such commitment to community. It’s really staggering.

[1:55 p.m.]

The constituency assistants who have supported me…. Pam Cooling is in the audience now.

I think of my family: my mom, Marion Routley, who’s right above us right now; my sister, Elaine Lablow, who is my little blister; and my darling, wonderful partner, Leanne Finlayson. They are all up above in the audience right now.

All the support that I’ve had from all of these people has been something that no one could ever deserve, really, and something that a person could only hope to be able to repay to people.

It’s bittersweet, no doubt, leaving this place — the challenges, the joys of this place, all the solutions and potential that this place offers to our community if we work together, if our communities are supported. My wish for each person here is that you find fulfilment in this place, that you find solutions for the people that you represent, that you find love with each other and for each other.

I think of all my friends. I think of my dog, right? Now I get to retire with my dog.

The member for North Coast said that sometimes peo­ple will say that for this group, this is the best job they’ve ever had, as though that is a slight. No, it’s not. It is absolutely the best job, not even in terms of pay for some people — certainly for me, it is — but in terms of what it means to be a citizen of this province and a participant, to really be able to stand here and represent the people who you live with, who you grew up with, who surround you in your community. There is no greater honour than that, and there’s no greater trust that they could place in you.

I know that all of the people in this building seek every day to be able to live up to that trust, and I honour all of you for that. I’m so grateful to all of you.

I’m grateful to the Clerks, to Kate; to the Sergeant-at-Arms staff who fill glasses and do so many other things to support this group; and finally, to the custodians. I was a custodian. We all take for granted the beauty of this place, but it’s not by accident. They do a marvellous job every day keeping it so.

Now, one of the things about being a politician, speaking here or in community, is that as soon as you sit down, whatever the event, you go: “Oh, I should have said….” So now I’m going to sit down, and I know in a few minutes, I should have said…. [Applause.]

Hon. K. Conroy: It doesn’t seem that long ago that I was making my first speech in this chamber, and now I’m here today making my last.

Actually, when I made my first — I was thinking of it today — my granddaughter was four. She was hanging over the balcony up there, right where you’re sitting, Danielle, going, “Granny, Granny,” whispering. The Sergeant-at-Arms had to come and take her out. My daughter was like, dang. She wanted to watch my first speech in the House. It just brought back memories.

I’m going to try to stick to my notes, because we only have 20 minutes, and I have a lot to say.

It has been an absolute honour to work here and to represent the people of the West Kootenays since 2005. My colleagues might disagree, and you’re all going to be annoyed with me, but I know it’s one of the most beautiful constituencies in the province. It has amazing people, from the northern boundary of Nakusp and Trout Lake to the U.S. border south of Rossland, with all the incredible communities in between.

Thank you all for welcoming me to your towns…

Oh god, here I’m going to go.

…your villages, your cities and regional districts, to your homes, fairs and events, the parades of all kinds.

[2:00 p.m.]

I know my kids and then my grandkids all grew up doing parades. In fact, Aydenn…. When Sasha said to her last week, “We’ve got to go and do the parade on Saturday in Trail; it’s Granny’s last parade,” Aydenn went: “Oh god, Mom. She’s got three parades this month and four next month. She has parades, and they’ll carry on and on.” My daughter said: “No, honey, it’s her last parade.” And she said: “Well, that can’t happen. That’s not right.”

Anyways, even if you didn’t always agree with me on things and I didn’t always agree with you, I always felt welcomed in your communities. No one gets here without the support of so many people. I hardly know where to start, because there have been so many of you. My executive over the years has been there to get me elected and support me. Your unwavering commitment to our party and to me has helped me do this job.

There have been many of you, and I can’t name you all individually. I do want to thank Duff Sutherland, who has been our president for years. It can be tough to run meetings and a constituency association of opinionated, passionate people, but you have always done it with class and efficiency, getting us successfully through so many meetings, events and elections.

Thank you, Duff.

To the amazing staff that I’ve had in my local constituency office, you have been there for me in so many ways.

Dang; I was going to do this.

Elaine Whitehead since 2005, Edina Brown since 2005, Cyra Yunkws, Angelika Brunner and Sarah Brownlee. You have been the incredible people who have served our constituents. I have always said that I got re-elected because of the work that you all did and do, helping people in such a compassionate and supportive way when they are often struggling.

Thank you.

To all the staff I have had in Victoria, so many of you who have made my 19 years amazing: you all make things work in Victoria. Whether in opposition as a legislative assistant, supporting me in communications or research or when we formed government in 2017 and you supported me as a minister, our government is so incredibly fortunate to have you all doing the work that you do.

In my roles as Minister of Children and Families, in Forests, in Finance and in all things Columbia, you have been stellar. There have been tough times, and there have been some really, really good times and you have been there for me through it all.

Thank you.

With your support, we have accomplished so much as a government. I know that in the fall, when we’ll be re-elected to continue to support everyone in B.C., whether it is through our affordability measures like child care or ensuring people get the services they need and showing we can have a thriving economy, one of the best in Canada, we’ll also bring in initiatives to support a clean economy — so many positive initiatives that it would be really difficult to list them all.

I am going to talk about some highlights for me, because people keep asking: “What’s the one thing?” There isn’t one thing. There just isn’t one thing for me. When we were first elected in 2005, we were so eager to make a difference. Even though we were in opposition, we weren’t going to let that stop us. We did effect change.

One I was extremely proud of was the creation of the seniors advocate. As the Seniors critic, I heard tough stories about seniors not getting the care they needed, not getting proper supports and feeling like they didn’t have a voice.

Then we had the very tragic situation with Fanny and Al Albo from Rossland in my constituency, when Fanny was moved away from Trail to Grand Forks without any input from her family or a chance to say goodbye to her husband of almost 70 years, even though he was in the same hos­pital with her. They were separated from each other, sent to different communities and died within days of each other. That spurred me on even more to make sure that it didn’t happen to other elderly couples.

We knew there was so much work to do, but decided to work on the position of the seniors advocate, a position being asked for by so many different advocates and organizations right across the province. We tabled the first advocate bill and kept doing it every session, until finally, in 2013, the government of the day established the position of the seniors advocate.

Isobel Mackenzie became the first seniors advocate in 2014, a position she just recently retired from. I know the new advocate, Dan Levitt, will continue the excellent work that Isobel did for the past ten years.

Now, while in opposition, many things have happened. One thing that I do remember quite…. I am an atheist. Something that was often difficult was to stand and hear prayers, but I always did it, because I support people. I support people with their religions. One day in the prayer, my phone rang. We all know that’s a no-no. The Speaker of the day, Speaker Reid, glared at me. I got the phone off and was just: “Oh my god.”

[2:05 p.m.]

Anyway, I was called to the Speaker’s office. I played her the message on my phone. It was my grandson, who was just two at the time, saying, “Ganny, when home? Want dinner.” And she just went, “Oh, okay, fine,” and let me go.

Also, I just want to share a story about when, in opposition, I’d decided to take a bit of time off to donate a kidney. As most people know, my late husband, Ed, had a number of health issues. When he had to start dialysis, we recognized that it was going to be tough for him to carry on. A transplant was the only option. It was going to be tough for him to get one.

There was a program called the paired exchange, that had just started in Canada, which allows people who can’t donate to someone they want to because they have incompatible blood types to donate to someone who is a match. In May 2010, Jenny Kwan, my good friend, got up in the House and told the House what I was about to do. I was heading off to Toronto to donate a kidney, and Ed was getting one in Vancouver.

Every single member of the House got up and gave me their support, their love and wished me on my way. It shows what a family we are. In fact, the Premier of the day, Gordon Campbell, came to my office and said: “I just want to ask if I can give you a hug.” I said: “Okay.”

He gave me a hug, and he said: “I can’t believe you’re doing this.”

I said, “Oh, Gordon, I’m sure your wife would do the same for you,” and he went: “I’m not sure.” [Laughter.]

“Oh my goodness. No, I’m sure you are.”

Anyway, I am sharing this story because I think it’s really important to give back. By sharing, I remind people not only to register to become an organ donor, but to consider becoming a living donor. It doesn’t work for everyone, but when it does, it’s amazing.

Ed lived another ten years with his new kidney. So whenever I have the opportunity, I’m going to give a shout-out to the B.C. Transplant Society, the Kidney Foundation and all the incredible people working there who make such a difference in people’s lives. This will be the last time I get the chance to do this little shout-out.

I’m just going to jump to 2017, when things changed drastically for a number of us here, the year we formed government. I remember so clearly the excitement of the day that we knew we would form government. The call from Premier Horgan to tell me I would be Minister for Children and Families and for all things Columbia, the swearing-in ceremony at Government House and my dad so proud. I don’t think it matters how old you are; there is always something about making your parents proud.

That first time in the office, my new chief of staff and I looked at each other and said: “Now what?” There was no staff. There was a lot to do, a sense of excitement and sheer terror, but we got through it together — didn’t we, Paula.

People have been asking me again what thing I’m most proud of, and I can’t pick just one. We did so much, and certain things really stand out for each ministry that I’ve had the honour to be the minister of. In Children and Families, there are a few. Announcing that kids in care would have free post-secondary education is one.

As a government, we are responsible for kids in care. Most parents try to save up a bit to help their kids get into post-secondary education. So it made sense that we would do that for our kids in care. The number of incredible success stories I have heard confirms that we did the right thing.

Also, supporting foster parents for the incredible job they do, when finally after ten years, we increased the amount that they got paid to do what can be a really tough but incredibly rewarding job.

For families who took care of their relatives, we were increasing the amount they got as well. It was heartbreaking for me to hear grandparents telling me they wanted to care for their grandkids, but they couldn’t afford it.

One said to me that she could only afford to keep one grandchild and had to put the other into care and that she felt guilty. She didn’t feel guilty for the one child that had gone into care. She felt guilty for the one who had stayed with her because she couldn’t afford to give him all the things that her other grandchild was getting. She was heartbroken. Changing that policy was a life-changing one for so many kids and their families.

Then, of course, there was child care. As an early childhood educator in a former life, I was well aware of the benefits of good-quality child care but also of the difficulties in the sector.

I think most of you have noticed I can get a bit emotional. I tell you that when former Finance Minister Carole James introduced the start of our child care plan in the 2018 budget, the tears were flowing. We have seen the benefits of good-quality, accessible child care, the whole system, to children, parents, early childhood educators and the economy.

Since 2017, over 120,000 women have returned to the workforce. The majority of them attributed that directly to the child care program they can now access. Parents are saving hundreds to a few thousand dollars a month, money that goes right back into the economy.

Yes, I am so proud of this and look forward to seeing the program now expanding in schools right across our province and to early childhood educators finally getting paid what they are worth.

[2:10 p.m.]

Then 2020 was a rough year. We were all dealing with the ravages of COVID. There were rumours that we might have an early election, but they were only rumours.

In May, Ed and I were talking about whether I would run again, if there was one. He said that I still had that spark in my eye, and I should run again. Then he got up and left the table, and he came back with a cheque in his hand. He’d written it out for $1,000, and he said: “Let me be the first to contribute to your campaign.” We laughed, thought it was the funniest thing and put that cheque away. Three weeks later he had his accident and was gone three weeks after that.

We were all in shock, still trying to work and hold together for the family. It wasn’t until later that summer when I found the cheque and knew by then I had to make a decision. Well, you all know the decision I made. I always felt that I had his blessing when we went into that very unusual 2020 election.

I had told John that I was more than happy to stay as Children and Families Minister, but he had a different idea. “Kat,” he said, “you are going to be the first woman in the history of our province to be the Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resources, etc., etc., etc.” What a change, and I did love it. I got my first pair of Blundstones.

Thank you, Adina. Best advice you ever gave me. Those are boots, for anyone who doesn’t know.

I went to work, making changes to the forest industry when we recognized that the industry couldn’t continue down the same path because times have changed, and we needed to change as well. We needed more secondary manufacturing in this province, fewer raw log exports, more selective harvesting, less harvesting of old growth and more diverse silviculture. Then you add in the beetle-kill trees being harvested, and the last of those, and crazy wildfire seasons. There was work to do.

I kept remembering Ken Kalesnikoff’s mantra: “If you take care of the forests, the forests will take care of you.”

A lot got done, and there’s still lots to do. Forestry is so important to our province, and it is certainly not a sunset industry. When I look at a small company like the Kalesnikoffs starting out as a small family sawmill, growing into a major employer in our region, expanding to producing mass timber and now about to grow again with the addition of another mass timber manufacturing plant in Castlegar, now all being run by Ken’s kids, Chris and Krystle…. An incredible success story. A good example of a company realizing it was time to make changes to their business plan, to ensure a future for their company and the many employees who work there, with more to come.

A few other things were also the work on the wildlife file. With so many incredible people in B.C. — conservationists dedicated to the wildlife we all know and love and B.C. Wildfire Service, where we recognize the need to create a full-time operation for people who work as firefighters…. We already see the benefit.

I do want to give a shout-out to the people, the incredible people, who work in our wildfire service and ensure that they know how grateful we are to all of them for the work they do every day, especially now as the season’s already started.

You keep us all safe, and you keep doing the work. I just want to say thank you to you all.

In 2022, we made another change with our new Premier. I still remember being at the First Nations Leadership Gathering that year and being told I had a meeting with the new Premier the next morning, by myself. It’s like being called to the principal’s office. I went back to the hotel that night and crammed on the old-growth file, because I was pretty sure what the meeting was going to be about.

I walked into that meeting loaded for bear, as we say in the Kootenays. I put my file on the table, and I said, “What do you want to know?” I think my reaction was totally inappropriate. In fact, I can’t say it in the House. He gave me a funny look and said: “I want to know if you’ll be my Minister of Finance.” I’m not usually lost for words, but I did manage to ask: “Why?” We won’t go into that, but so began the last ministry in this journey.

This one has been just as exciting and daunting as the others, just in a wee bit of a different way. I had lots to learn and remember. I want to tell you about my first budget dinner, held here with representatives of the banks across Canada. As they went around the table and introduced themselves and talked about their years of experience in the industry, I thought: “What the heck am I going to say?” So I thought: “Okay, just be you.”

I did tell them about my background, and then I said I had some experience in investing in something none of them had probably ever invested in. My late husband and I raised purebred cattle with a couple of partners, and I have continued to do the industry. We invest in bull semen. There was a moment of silence, and then a good laugh from everyone, and we all got on just fine. In fact, I sat at an investor’s lunch in New York, and the fellow beside me introduced himself and then said: “Aren’t you the minister who invests in bull semen?” It turns out he raises cattle, too, and knew exactly what I was talking about.

[2:15 p.m.]

It’s a different ministry, though, in that you have to know a bit about every ministry. It’s tough saying no to people you have come to love and respect. Everyone is so passionate about their ministries and the initiatives that need to be funded.

But we have done some pretty incredible things, big and small, and I remind myself that some of the small ones have had the most impact, like free birth control or one session of IVF. So my advice to my replacement: even small initiatives in the budget can make a big impact.

I also want to thank former Premier Horgan and our current Premier — I’m allowed to say “David,” I heard — anyway, for allowing me to be the minister of all things Columbia: the Columbia Basin Trust, the Columbia Power Corp., and the Columbia River treaty. No matter what ministry I had, I used to say that we were figuring out how many social workers it was going to take to resolve and negotiate the Columbia River treaty.

I want to give a big thanks to Les MacLaren and Kathy Eichenberger — Kathy, you’re up here today; you are our treaty whisperer and still continue to be — and others in the Energy Ministry who have supported me. It has truly been an honour to carry on the work that Ed and others started in the ’90s.

A big shout-out to everyone who works at or serves on the boards or committees of all things Columbia. You all rock.

I do want to take a moment to acknowledge the incredible people who work for government in the public service. I have been so fortunate to have had amazing people working with me in all three ministries, and I have met so many others who work across government.

To my deputies Alison Bond, Rick Manwaring and Heather Wood: thank you for your help, advice, and in­credible patience.

I also want to acknowledge the late John Allan, my first deputy in Forests. He gave so much to government, and we were always grateful he came back.

A bit of advice I will give to elected officials: respect the public service. They are here to make government work for people in this province, and they do a damn fine job.

I also want to thank everyone who works in the Legislature. You all have a special place in my heart.

Now, how does one explain their relationship with the media? It’s kind of like a love-hate relationship, but I understand that even when you can be annoying, you’re just doing your job. I think, you know, some of you took great pleasure in your job.

Vaughn, you didn’t have to take so much pleasure. I think Ed and I, we must be the only married couple who’ve had the joy of reading about us being trashed in the Vancouver Sun in different decades, or hearing the Premier being questioned about my age at Global.

Richard….

Again, thank you, all of you. I know you’re just doing your job.

I also want to thank all the MLAs who work in the chamber here in the province. It’s a job you could never be truly prepared for. Thank you for your commitment, but also thank you to your families for sharing you with the province. I know it can be tough, but everybody’s here to make positive changes.

To my Leg. family — my NDP family, as Ed and I always called you: thank you for all your support and your friendship. Some of you I’ve known since the ’90s, and others since we were first elected in 2005. You’re an amazing group of people. I love you all, and I know your friendship and support will be with me for many years.

Last but not least, my family. You have been there for us all. You couldn’t be here today, but I know you’re in this…. I know you’re here. As my son Ben reminded me: “Mom, there has been a Conroy on the ballot since 1986 when dad first ran as a school board trustee.” To put it in perspective, he was two in 1986. He’s 40 today. That’s 38 years of our family supporting both of us in public service to our communities.

To our kids Jen, Wyllie, Sasha and Ben; their spouses, Peter, Jayme and Kirk; my nine grands Daira, Alexia, Erik, Ryen, Aydenn, Kaelin, Moss, Sarah and Sayge; my siblings — I’m not going to name them all; and my in-laws; my many nieces and nephews; and so many friends that we call family: thank you, thank you, thank you. You’ve all helped both Ed and I in so many ways, and now I have time to reciprocate to be there for all of you, which means more family dinners; more get-togethers at the farm; yes, kids, more sleepovers; and yes, I’ll even­tually get that puppy.

Again, it has been an honour to serve not only the people of the region but the entire province. I have met so many people, many who will always have a very special place in my heart.

I’ll continue to be your MLA and the Minister of Finance until the fall, and after that you can find me at the farm, hanging with the grands; reading novels — trashy novels, no briefing notes; travelling.

Know if you are ever up my way, you are all always invited. You all hold a very dear place in my heart. Thank you. [Applause.]

Statements

MESSAGE OF APPRECIATION

Hon. D. Eby: It’s hard to follow all of these farewell speeches for such remarkable careers in this place.

[2:20 p.m.]

I’ve heard a lot this afternoon. We had a confession from the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke that he’s an Oilers fan, conveniently after the last question period.

We heard from the member from Kelowna about the importance of her family in supporting her.

Of course, the member for Abbotsford West shared the wisdom of 30 years in this place and still having that fresh remembrance of his first day here, the same experience that all of us have had.

The member for North Coast, the intense emotion of the work here and her commitment to her family but also that day we had just last week with Haida recognition and her amazing work for her community.

The member for Sunshine Coast, who, ironically, is the member who prayed for the separation of church and state but in his speech had a religious awe about every aspect of this place. This is his church, this is how he served, and I’m so grateful for it.

The member for Nanaimo–North Cowichan, your re­markable and sincere and unending commitment to your community…. I can remember all of the two-minute statements about the Colliery Dam, the issues from the big to the small and the fact that you brought your experience that so many British Columbians have in so many different jobs, in so many different communities to this place, reminding us all how important it is that everybody is represented here, and the advocacy that you did.

I also wanted to reflect on your comments about your relationship with members across the aisle, so many members who, in their speeches today, talked about how important it is, those relationships across the aisle, and how it is what makes this place go.

Then the Minister of Finance. I think if I’m going to take one piece away from the minister’s speech, it is her message to all of us that when she was faced with a daunting situation she hadn’t faced before, her message to herself was: “Just be yourself.” Just be yourself. Bring who you truly are to this place. Her family’s commitment to this Legislative Assembly for generations, the public service of the Conroys will be remembered not just in Hansard but in the memories of all of us here for generations to come.

I hope that we’ll all take the minister up on her kind offer and swing by the farm to say hi.

Interjection.

Hon. D. Eby: I believe it was a bipartisan offer, as far as I could tell.

The minister has confirmed that it’s a bipartisan offer.

The member for Abbotsford West noted that we don’t all get to choose the time that we leave this chamber, but those members that delivered your speeches today are leaving on your own terms, having served this province in a remarkable way. I’m so grateful to all of you on both sides of the aisle for your work for British Columbians. I wish you the best.

I wish for all of you to support the new candidates who are going to come forward. We’re going to have a great election. I know the mentorship and the support that you can offer them so that when they come into this place on their first day, it’s as magical and as special as you shared with us today. It’s going to be so crucial.

Thank you again for sharing your experiences, and best of luck in your new lives.

J. Routledge: I seek a leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Deputy Speaker: Please proceed.

Introductions by Members

J. Routledge: I would like you all to join me in welcoming students from Aubrey Elementary School in Burnaby North.

You’re here on a historic day, and I hope we get a chance to have a conversation about what you thought about what you saw today, what you experienced and whether or not someday you see yourselves sitting down here.

Hon. R. Kahlon: In the main chamber, I call Committee of Supply for the office of the Premier.

[2:25 p.m.]

Committee of Supply

ESTIMATES: OFFICE OF THE PREMIER

(continued)

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

The committee met at 2:27 p.m.

The Chair: We’ll call the committee to order. We’re dealing with the estimates of the Premier’s office.

On Vote 11: Office of the Premier, $16,754,000 (continued).

K. Falcon: To the Premier: I’m hoping, Premier, that we can both use some brevity here so we can serve the public by getting some real answers to questions and get them on the record.

I’ll start with Site C. I was proud, in 2010, to be there with Premier Gordon Campbell when we announced that we were going ahead with Site C, a project that the Premier would well know the NDP was very, very strongly opposed to. When the B.C. United government lost the election in 2017, the NDP took over.

The NDP Energy Minister at the time, on November 6, 2017, stated: “Site C was on time and on budget as of June 2017.” The budget, of course, for the benefit of the viewing public here, was $8 billion when the New Democrats took office back in 2017. They have since boosted it to $10.7 billion and then $16 billion.

Yesterday, Premier, we were canvassing back and forth, and I was talking about my eerie ability to predict your capital projects being wildly over budget. I talked about FIFA, that it would be more than double over budget. Sure enough, it turned out to be exactly the case.

So, too, with Site C. I’ve predicted that it will be well over $16 billion. With the project virtually complete, will the Premier confirm today what the projected final cost of Site C is?

[2:30 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: I know the member did ask for a timely response. We’ll do our best.

This is the estimates for the budget for the Office of the Premier. This project is being run by the Ministry of Energy and Mines. I’m happy to provide the information as quickly as we can get it, but it is a different ministry, and those estimates are complete.

Now, I’m able to share with the member some info. I’m sorry the member was unhappy that it took us a few minutes to get the information for him.

[2:35 p.m.]

One of the key issues, of course, in the construction of the project was the COVID-19 pandemic. Delays and impacts related to that pandemic were the single-largest estimated contributor to the cost increase in the budget. This included work to ensure that workers on the site were safe, that there were infection control regimes, and so on. It did briefly interrupt work on the site.

In addition, significant geological issues were identified as early as 2017 on the project. They necessitated significant amendments and changes to the right bank foundation to address those geotechnical issues, specifically the installation of 96 large-diameter, concrete-filled vertical steel piles to extend the foundation deeper into the bedrock, and additional bedrock surface excavations and other components in order to respond to that.

This is not unusual in these kinds of projects. In the Revelstoke dam, completed in 1984, similar issues during construction led to major design changes.

That work is completed within the current $16 billion cost estimate. The project continues within that allocated cost envelope.

K. Falcon: Again just to emphasize what your Energy Minister said in 2017. November 6, 2017, he stated that Site C was on time and on budget, as of June 2017. Now, the budget back then was $8 billion. You’ve now taken $16 billion. I believe I heard the Premier say that he was going to deliver it within that $16 billion envelope. I find that very hard to believe for a lot of the reasons that the Premier just listed off.

I also am curious that in a year in which they overrode the B.C. Utilities Commission so that Hydro was forced to give back an $8 a month rebate to British Columbians, in an election year…. They did that without having public certainty about the total cost of Hydro’s largest project.

Just to make sure it’s on the record and the Premier is being fully honest with British Columbians, because this is an important, if not the largest, government project in the province…. Will it be delivered within that $16 billion envelope, yes or no?

Hon. D. Eby: The member may remember that when this project received approval from the province of B.C. to proceed to construction with its budget, his government, supported by the leader of the Conservative Party, skipped the B.C. Utilities Commission oversight process. They overrode the commission, did not go through that process, prevented that transparency around the budget, the geotechnical conditions, all of these pieces from being evaluated.

Now, who knows in hindsight whether or not the Utilities Commission would have caught that? But I do think it’s surprising that the member is so enthusiastic about the Utilities Commission now. There’s no question that British Columbians need support right now, and that’s on electrical bills, on ICBC, on other costs of daily life.

Interjection.

Hon. D. Eby: Now, there has been a tradition in this place of not heckling during estimates. I see the member is choosing this moment to depart from it, but he is the one raising these issues, and it’s important to respond to them.

British Columbians need support. The hydro rebate goes to both businesses and individuals, and we’re able to do it within hydro rates that are below the projected hydro rates that existed under the previous administration. People are paying less for hydro than they would if that member was sitting on this side of the House, and they’re getting rebates as well.

I told the member the last time I stood up an answer that there’s an estimated cost of $16 billion and that the project is currently within that budget envelope.

[2:40 p.m.]

K. Falcon: I’m going to move to a new subject area, but I’m glad that we have on the record that the Premier of the province has confirmed the budget will not be over $16 billion. I’ll put on the record that I guarantee that will not be the case and it will be higher. We’ll see who ends up being correct.

I now want to talk about drugs and decriminalization. I want to start by reminding the Premier of what he said back in 2009, and I’ll quote the Premier directly. The Premier, who has long advocated for the legalization of illicit, dangerous drugs, said: “We’re in favour of the legalization and regulation of all currently illicit drugs.” Now, that would probably explain why the NDP decided to fast-track their reckless decriminalization effort. It was part of their 2020 election platform.

My question to the Premier. Will the Premier very clearly state, on the record, that he no longer supports legalization and that no further government resources will be spent pursuing any form of legalization?

Hon. D. Eby: The member and I have been over this in question period on multiple occasions. This is a serious issue for British Columbians. We canvassed a horrific case today, the death of Sidney in a dorm room at the University of Victoria, and how tragic and awful this public health crisis is. Dealing with an epidemic, it’s important to constantly evaluate where things are at, what’s working and what’s not, and make sure that we’re responding as best we can to the situation that people are facing.

We have a couple goals here. One goal is to keep people alive and give them the chance to get into treatment. The other goal is to ensure safe communities for everybody.

I know the member has heard me tell the story of prosecuting a young Indigenous woman when I was very briefly a drug prosecutor. It was probably one of the worst days of my life. The entire apparatus of government, my salary paid as a prosecutor, her defence lawyer’s salary paid, the judge’s and all the people in the court’s salaries paid…. The only person who wasn’t looked after was that young woman that had a serious addiction issue, being criminally prosecuted for it.

I don’t believe that’s the way forward. I really don’t. But I do believe that police need the tools to ensure that our communities, our public spaces, are safe. People need support to get into treatment. It’s complicated.

The member and I disagree about some fundamental things. I don’t think someone going to an overdose prevention site should get arrested by police for possession of drugs. The Leader of the Opposition thinks that they should. I don’t think that someone going to a drug-testing site to make sure they know what they’re using should be arrested by police. The member disagrees with me on that.

[2:45 p.m.]

If someone is overdosing at a residence or in a dorm room, I don’t want people to hesitate to tell first responders: “Look, I’ve been using drugs. Please help with this overdose.” That’s why we’ve said that we don’t want people to fear arrest in their own homes or, if they’re being threat­ened with violence and they happen to be using drugs, that they don’t hesitate to call police for assistance. We disagree on that.

It’s very hard to address the overwhelming pain and distress of families across the province, friends who have lost people, and to ensure that as government, we’re doing all we can, when there’s a situation like we’ve heard about, about people making a split-second decision to trust a friend who’s offering them something and think that they know what it is and it turns out to be deadly. It is an awful situation. It is an incredibly challenging issue for us to address, but we’ve got to do all that we can.

We’ll do that coroner’s inquest in Sidney’s case, and we’ll learn all we can from it. Why was there NARCAN in the room that wasn’t used? Why did it take so long to get an ambulance there? All those questions that family has. We can learn from it and ensure that people have that chance to stay alive.

If the member wanted to get on the record that we don’t agree on everything, I think that’s right. But I hope he shares the goal that I have, keeping as many people alive as possible, ensuring safe communities. I have every reason to believe that that’s the case.

K. Falcon: The Premier, again, is not answering the questions I actually ask. I was asking a very simple question: whether the Premier still stands by his previous belief in the legalization of all currently illicit drugs. He refused to answer. I will note that for the record.

A year ago the Premier will remember, we spent several hours in estimates talking about these issues of decriminalization, the Premier’s publicly supplied addictive drug program, in Mental Health and Addictions. On May 10, during estimates, I asked the Premier how he could plunge forward with his risky experiment in decriminalization without any guardrails. The Premier’s response…. After he went through some personal attacks and boasted about his budget, he then finally responded by saying: “I think we’re on the right track.”

Here we were at that time, May of last year, in the midst of a terrible opioid overdose epidemic across the province. It turned out that at the end of that year, of 2023, it was the worst year ever in the history of British Columbia for overdose deaths — 2,511 at the time. It ended up being adjusted even further upwards, sadly.

Of course everyone shares your belief, Premier, that we don’t want to see any situations and the tragedies and people dying. But every year you’ve been in power, the results have gotten worse. Again, back to the common theme that we’ve had during our estimates, talking about results or lack of results, only this government would continue to see worsening results every year and say: “The answer is, let’s just do more of the same.”

Now, it’s not just the number of deaths. It’s also the non-fatal overdoses and the trauma that first responders have to deal with — firefighters, paramedics, people on the streets having to deal with people overdosing and collapsing and trying to respond to those. That also creates a toll.

The official opposition, mayors from communities across the province, even former colleagues — the mayor of Nanaimo, Leonard Krog — are all telling the Premier, “You’re on the wrong track,” so clearly on the wrong track.

My question is: why did the Premier stubbornly refuse to listen and claim he was on the right track 12 months ago, and why is he still stubbornly refusing to listen and completely scrap these disastrous policies of decriminalization and the so-called safe supply of drugs?

[2:50 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: I don’t know why, on this issue, the member is seeking to characterize my answer in this way. I did answer his question very clearly. I explained my time working as a drug prosecutor.

I don’t believe that arresting people and taking them and putting them in court, on trial, when they’re struggling with addiction is the right way to respond to a health issue. Sometimes it’s necessary for police to have tools, though, to respond to ensure communities feel safe for everybody and to address public drug use.

These are complicated issues. I know it doesn’t fit into a convenient campaign sound bite. This is a complicated issue. It’s a very hard issue. It’s hard at a policy level, but it’s nothing compared to what the families are going through.

I regret that the member can’t, also, recognize that his party and the leader of the Conservative Party have changed their position on this issue as the discussion in the province evolves and as we respond to this crisis. He says…. This was just in September of last year: “Some of the chiefs of police were supportive of decriminalization. What they were supportive of is not charging people for small amounts of drugs, and I agree with that.”

Now he says he does agree with it. It’s very hard to know.

The member asked me about my position on this issue. I shared it with him, and then he suggested his position was different. There was a reckless experiment on decriminalization. Those were his words. Right here he said: “I agree with that.”

All of this is beside the core point. That is: how do we respond to the crisis in our streets?

The member says that we’ve just carried on, not paying any attention to the issues faced in our communities. That is absolutely false. The member was here when we passed legislation in this House to address issues of public drug use, provincial legislation.

We got challenged in court. The court issued an injunction preventing us from moving ahead with regulations. When that happened, we had to move again. This time we went to the federal government. We said: “Can you make amendments to the certificate for British Columbia and recriminalize public drug use so that police have the tools they need to respond?” That’s on the enforcement, public safety side.

On the treatment side, we have opened about 200 beds across the province since I became Premier. We’ve also looked at what’s happening in other jurisdictions. Where else can we learn from about what’s happening? We looked at Alberta. They have a 24-hour line that people can call to access methadone or Suboxone. These are treatment medications to reduce peoples’ drug cravings.

While we had some of these services in the province, they were not coordinated. There was an opportunity to learn from Alberta’s experience. Penny Ballem is working for the province right now to deploy that and, eventually, to include not just access to those medications but also access to treatment.

I point out that the challenges we face here are not unique to British Columbia. While we took that model from Alberta and we learned from them…. They’re on track to have their highest number of drug deaths in a year. They saw about 2,000 deaths in 2023. Saskatchewan experienced a record number of drug poisonings in that small province, a 30 percent increase over the previous year, almost 500 deaths. This is horrible.

[2:55 p.m.]

All of us, all the provinces that are seeing these kinds of impacts, can learn from each other. There is no easy and obvious answer here, but all of us, I hope, share that commitment to address addiction, with compassion, while ensuring safe communities and trying to keep people alive.

K. Falcon: I would ask the Premier to try and keep his remarks short so that we can cover some territory.

First of all, to correct the record…. The Premier loves to misrepresent. It’s a very sneaky approach but not very effective.

I will say it again. We have always…. Nobody supports people being charged for small amounts of drugs, including the police. In fact, the Vancouver police will tell you that they rarely charge even ten people in a year for simple possession. It would be rare. That would only be in the case of somebody carrying those drugs on a playground or a school yard, where they want to make an example.

What the Premier’s reckless decriminalization did was take away the one tool the police had, which is the ability to seize drugs from people using them in inappropriate areas like SkyTrains, Tim Hortons, parks, playgrounds, beaches. That’s what you allowed to happen. Your government allowed to happen this explosion of open drug use.

When, finally, after a year of us talking about the lack of guardrails and the problems it was causing…. Only then did they bring in a bill, poorly drafted, way too late, way too inefficient, and it gets caught up in the courts. Then the Premier had to go to the federal government and beg them and say: “Can you please get us out of the problem we’ve created by recriminalizing some of that so that we can try and control the explosion of open drug use that has taken place?” It’s a result of their policies.

This is what’s frustrating for the public. If you had just listened to us and looked at Portland, Oregon and looked at the total disaster that happened down there by following the approach that this Premier has taken — by the way, the only province in the country that has been crazy enough to go down this reckless path….

In Oregon, they said…. Even though they were all progressive, left, fellow soldiers, fellow travellers of this left-wing Premier, they still looked at it and said: “Oh, good Lord. What have we done?” They backed off the entire experiment because it made no sense. Yet this NDP government continues on.

Well, now what’s happening? Now we’re seeing drug diversion as a result of their publicly supplied addictive drugs. Uniquely, we’ve got a Premier and a government that thinks that the solution to those struggling with addictions is to make sure we hand out lots of free drugs to people. Report after report is showing that these so-called safe supply drugs — typically, they’re called hydromorphone, three times more powerful than heroin — are being diverted, flooding communities and significantly lowering street prices and fuelling drug trafficking.

In Prince George alone, thousands of hydromorphone pills from the government have been seized, and police investigators witnessed 84 drug transactions right outside a pharmacy. For the benefit of the viewing public, that means that people go inside. They get their free government drugs, walk out the door and sell them to drug dealers immediately.

Guess where those drugs end up. They end up in our kids’ high schools, in colleges and in universities. The drug dealers tell the kids: “Don’t worry. This is government safe supply.” The worst name I have ever heard associated with a highly lethal, dangerous opioid.

In Prince George and Campbell River, the detachments have seized over 18,000 pills suspected of being diverted from this so-called safe supply. And 3,500 hydromorphone pills on the We Wai Kai reserve near Campbell River, a community of 600 people.

Everyone has been warning and raising concerns for a year and a half, but when I asked the Premier a year ago during the estimates, he said everything was under control. He said: “The important and specific question about diversion in the province has been monitoring this potential risk. It was identified early.”

“Understanding what’s happening is critical,” the Premier said. “It is important all of us know there are not unintended consequences. This is not increasing addiction rates.”

My question to the Premier. In light of the overwhelming evidence of the devastating levels of drug diversion and community harms, can the Premier explain his previous denials, and will he categorically acknowledge drug diversion is causing harm to young people?

[3:00 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: We’re in the middle of a crisis that’s killed over 14,000 people. One of the goals that we have is, for people struggling with addiction, to get between predatory drug dealers and the person struggling with addiction and, specifically, to get a doctor or a nurse practitioner in-between them, to get them into the system, to give them the chance to get into treatment and rebuild their lives.

The prescribed alternatives program is aimed at that. It doesn’t matter the source in terms of the issue. The issue is serious, whether it comes from prescribed alternatives or from family’s medicine cabinet. The dominant use of hydromorphone in the province is for pain. I remember working in the Downtown Eastside. Dillies were widely available, as they’re called, Dilaudid. Hydromorphone.

[S Chandra Herbert in the chair.]

The impact is the same. The addictions doctors that tell us they need this tool to help them support people struggling with addiction are a serious consideration for us in this program. Dr. Henry has issued a significant report outlining specific recommendations to reduce the risk of diversion as far as we can.

The member said that the position of the opposition on decriminalization was something that it wasn’t. He designated a member to speak on behalf of their caucus on this important issue. I will say she has raised some important issues that need addressing. She also articulated, on many occasions, the opposition’s position on decriminalization and on prescribed alternatives.

In March of last year, she endorsed, as did all the members, the Select Standing Committee on Health report. This is the one that recommended that we proceed in this direction. She said: “I don’t want to come across as not in favour, because through the Select Standing Committee on Health, we have supported. The NDP will try to tell you that we are backtracking on decrim, which is not the case. We are not backtracking on decrim. We are not backtracking on the need for harm reduction. Does it mean that our party doesn’t support decrim or harm reduction? Absolutely not. We do. With our whole hearts, we want to save people.”

Then in October of last year, on CBC radio on two separate occasions: “This government has introduced a safe supply where they’re giving hydromorphone and other drugs, slow-release morphine. They give it to individuals to help them get off illicit drugs. That, we need to continue exploring. This government was said to be exploring options for pharmaceutical alternatives to illicit drugs, and that’s what they should be doing.”

The member says one thing one day, another thing another day. The issue here is: is it supporting people? Is it helping people? Yes, it’s helping some people. Is there a risk of diversion? Yes, there’s a risk of diversion, just like any medication. We need to, as government, through the health authorities, through the prescribers, stay on top of that and address those issues as they come up. And that’s what we will continue to do.

[3:05 p.m.]

K. Falcon: I haven’t got time to continually correct the record on the Premier’s repeated misrepresentations of our record, so I’m just going to ignore it so that he doesn’t have to keep reading partial quotes into the record.

I will say this, though. Last year in estimates, on May 11, when I was talking about this with the Premier, this diversion problem, the Premier said…. I was talking specifically about hydromorphone. The Premier said: “The situation is, in fact, that we are tracking hydromorphone.” That would have given the viewing public some sense that government’s on top of this. They’re tracking the hydromorphone.

On April 15 of this year, in 2024, Fiona Wilson, the B.C. Association of Chiefs of Police, said: “Fifty percent of the pills that police come across that are hydromorphone can indeed be attributed to this government’s safe supply.” The very next day, April 16, 2024, the Premier said: “This is the first time we’ve heard that data.”

My question to the Premier: how can the Premier have claimed to me in this House in May 2023 to be comprehensively tracking hydromorphone, and then, in April 2024, admit to being completely unaware of crucial data indicating substantial drug diversion?

[3:10 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: The health authorities are tracking hydromorphone and reporting any incidents of diversion; they have been for an extended time now. Additional recommendations from Dr. Henry about the reduction of diversion have been or are being implemented.

The challenge of tracking hydromorphone’s origin is that 85 percent of the people in the province who use hydromorphone use it for pain medication, and 15 percent use it for prescribed alternatives. The two pills are identical; it is the same medication. So when it is found on the street, it’s impossible to know whether it came from diverted prescribed alternatives or diverted personal prescriptions for pain.

One of the things I have asked Penny Ballem to do is to determine whether there’s a way for us to identify prescribed alternatives, whether using chemical markers or dye or some other method, so that we’re able to be certain. We did follow up with VPD following that testimony, federally. VPD advised that this was an estimate that they were providing, given the challenge of determining the origin of hydromorphone.

We will continue to work to address and identify issues of diversion, the origin of the hydromorphone that’s being sold on the street, including looking at things like chemical markers or other markers, so we can be certain and, ideally, trace it back to the origin.

K. Falcon: This is very important, because it’s our kids we’re talking about. It is very important to understand that hydromorphone is a highly addictive, medical-grade opioid. Earlier this year, an academic article titled “British Columbia’s Safer Opioid Supply Policy and Opioid Outcomes” — that was the headline — was published in JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, internal medicine. The key findings were “significant increases in rates of opioid prescriptions,” and a “significant increase in opioid-related poisoning hospitalizations.”

There has been — I’m glad everyone is sitting down here — a 34 percent increase in the volume of potent opioids distributed in this province, accompanied by a 63 percent increase in hospitalizations due to opioid overdoses. The study is evidence that the increase in hospitalizations is linked to diversion and the misuse of the so-called safe supply program, with drugs like hydromorphone being sold on the illicit market, leading to increased access to these dangerous drugs.

Now, Saskatchewan and Manitoba served as the control provinces in this study, because they don’t have such a reckless policy. No similar increases in opioid prescriptions or hospitalizations were observed in those provinces.

[3:15 p.m.]

I remind the Premier of what he said in estimates last year, May 11, 2023: “It is important for all of us to know that there are not unintended consequences….” That was the Premier’s comment last year.

My question: given the 63 percent increase in opioid-related hospitalizations since implementation of this so-called safe supply policy, will the Premier commit today to end this reckless and dangerous experiment of so-called safe supply?

Hon. D. Eby: The member has raised the Journal of the American Medical Association article. It’s an important article, and it’s informing provincial policy, but one of the challenges is that it doesn’t differentiate — again, because of the issue I’ve identified — between opioids prescribed as prescribed alternatives versus opioids prescribed for other purposes.

We have an aging population here in the province. One of the reasons for the prescription of hydromorphone is for pain management, including arthritis. I put that out there as a caveat, not to discount the seriousness with which we should take the study, just as a caveat.

I know the member knows this too. There’s a British Medical Journal article that studied the impact of this program in British Columbia — in particular, the impact that the program had on reducing deaths and acute care visits. The study showed that this program is reducing the risk of death by as much as 91 percent in people with opioid use disorder, which is medical-academic talk for people struggling with addiction. It’s preventing overdose deaths and helping people stabilize their lives.

Now, these competing studies both have vulnerabilities. The BMJ article looked at a very short period of time, and research is continuing. I would say, here again — just like I did last time: it’s all the more reason for us to know that there are not unintended consequences from this program. This is why I’ve asked Dr. Ballem to identify a method by which we can track prescribed alternatives and be able to differentiate them from prescriptions for other purposes.

[3:20 p.m.]

The member holds up other provinces as having better outcomes in comparison. They are struggling too. Alberta is, tragically, on track to have its highest number of toxic drug deaths a year. Pardon me; this is a bit dated. That was 2023. They had almost 2,000 deaths in 2023. Saskatchewan had a 30 percent increase in deaths over the previous year.

All provinces are working to stem the deaths and address this very serious issue. When we have one journal article that says that this saves lives and prevents overdose in 91 percent of cases, and another one says it’s driving additional prescriptions of opioids in the province, we have obligations to take both seriously.

Now I want to recognize we’ve got some visitors here in the House. I’d like to say welcome to Adams Road Elementary, who are here from Surrey-Cloverdale. Welcome to the Legislative Assembly of B.C. We’ve got Glynis Caw­dell and Rianna Sull, teachers at grades 5 and 6.

Welcome. Nice to see you.

K. Falcon: I’m pleased to see Adams Road here. I used to represent Cloverdale. It’s a wonderful school. I welcome all of them, and these questions are actually on their behalf. This is a very important issue we’re discussing today.

The Premier would know that Purdue Pharma is the manufacturer of Dilaudid, which is the brand name for the hydromorphone that they’re providing as part of their misnamed safe supply program. I just want to read what it says on their medication information sheet. “Never give anyone your Dilaudid. They could die from taking it. If a person has not been prescribed Dilaudid, taking even one dose can cause a fatal overdose. This is especially true for children.”

Additionally, Purdue Pharma goes on and says: “Even if you take Dilaudid as prescribed” — and they bold this part — “you are at risk for opioid addiction, abuse and misuse. This can lead to overdose and death, which underlines the inherent dangers of the drug, even when used as directed.”

I want the viewing audience to know here that at the very same time that this NDP government is suing Purdue Pharma — appropriately, as are many governments across North America — because of their irresponsibility in allowing an opioid epidemic to take place across North America…. That was for the distribution of opioids through doctors’ offices under clinical supervision. Yet this government is suing them for that, saying it’s irresponsible, at the same time they’re buying the Dilaudid from the same Purdue Pharma and handing it out for free, with no clinical oversight.

Somebody explain how this can make any sense, and somebody explain to me how this experiment is going to end well. If it caused a North American–wide disaster and they’re being appropriately sued for the irresponsibility of doing that, how on earth can this government think that providing free, so-called safe supply of a dangerous drug like Dilaudid, and I just read out all the reasons why, without any clinical supervision is going to end well? Well, of course it’s not.

My question to the Premier is in light of the explicit warnings that I just read out from Purdue Pharma, regarding the lethal risks of hydromorphone diversion and misuse. Will the Premier end this reckless safe supply program for the benefit of our kids, not just here but right across the province?

Hon. D. Eby: We’re currently running a youth-focused education prevention campaign talking about the dangers of drugs. It includes messages like, “Any dose can be deadly,” and, “Drugs kill more people than cars do.” It also, for those watching, gives parents and caregivers tools to talk to kids about street drugs. I understand we’ve reached about 7.6 million people across several digital platforms.

It’s targeted at kids in grades 4 and 5. So this is for you guys.

I regret very much the member’s efforts to politicize something he once supported. He suggests that without clinical supervision, government is giving out medication for free. That is simply not true. These are prescriptions. He says that with great ease, like he’s said it many times, and I suspect he has.

[3:25 p.m.]

When he was the Health Minister, he boasted that he supported what he described as replacement drug therapy: “I was one of the ministers that went through many of the trials that allowed for replacement drug therapy.” The SALOME trial, for example, and others. One of the other ones was the NAOMI trial.

Interjection.

Hon. D. Eby: Exactly. Clinical supervision, the member says, just like now.

And one of the findings of the NAOMI…

Interjections.

The Chair: Members.

Hon. D. Eby: …study, the member, I’m sure, will recall, was that people struggling with addiction were unable to tell the difference between heroin and hydromorphone.

The conclusion of the study was that if you had a system where a clinician could intervene, you could potentially maintain someone on hydromorphone instead of street heroin and divert them away from illicit street drugs, breaking somebody’s window to steal their change to buy street drugs, and get them into the medical system. It’s a powerful finding.

He said: “My record is clear. What I’m saying, though, is safe supply is not the only answer.” I agree. It’s not the only answer. It is just one tool, one more tool, as we try to keep people alive. That’s what we’ve got to do, but not without taking into account the risk of harm and addressing harms when they come up however we can, as we have.

S. Furstenau: Taking this in a slightly different direction to start with, last night in estimates, the Premier seemed to be wanting to score points by saying that it was his government, the NDP government, that managed to get LNG projects over the line here in B.C. We know that one of the reasons the NDP succeeded at getting LNG projects is because they were willing to put more public money into subsidizing those projects, over $5 billion in provincial subsidies for LNG Canada alone.

At the same time, the Premier, in his first speech as an incoming Premier, said: “We cannot continue to expand fossil fuel infrastructure and hit our climate goals.” So we have this inherent contradiction in the stance of this party and this Premier. On the one hand, they seem to acknowledge how dire climate change is, how real it is, what the threat is. Then, on the other hand, we have a Premier bragging in budget estimates that his government was the one that managed to get us fossil fuel infrastructure in this province.

The International Energy Agency is saying that no country should be expanding fossil fuel infrastructure. But under this government, we have gone from zero LNG plants in this province to a potential six. Just the first one makes it pretty much impossible to meet our climate targets and our emissions targets. Six is laughable, and net zero is laughable. You can’t pump methane into the air in 2024 and say we’re working on achieving our climate goals.

My first question for the Premier. What has changed since the Premier made the statement: “We can’t continue to expand fossil fuel infrastructure and hit our goals”? What has changed from when he made that statement to today?

M. Lee: I rise to make an introduction.

The Chair: Does the member seek leave?

M. Lee: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

The Chair: Please proceed.

Introductions by Members

M. Lee: I invite all members of this chamber to invite Jeevyn Dhaliwal, KC, the president of the Law Society of British Columbia, who is joined by Don Avison, the executive director and chief executive officer of the Law Society of British Columbia.

[3:30 p.m.]

They’re here to witness royal assent that will be happening this afternoon to Bill 21, the Legal Professions Act that regrettably was brought a closure on in debate yesterday when we only got through 30 of 317 clauses and in the face of the notice that has been provided by the Law Society of British Columbia, the Trial Lawyers Association as well as the Canadian Bar Association, B.C. branch of pending litigation.

The Chair: Members, if we can just have an introduction.

Debate Continued

Hon. D. Eby: Welcome to the members from the Law Society.

Thank you to the member for the question.

There are definitely at least two perspectives in this House on resource development. Some people want us to say: “Let her rip.” That perspective is certainly well represented on the opposition benches. And there are some parties — the member has been consistent; I will definitely say that — that want us to say no to all development, regardless of the impact on the province.

The challenge between those two perspectives is that we are in fact needing to move, as a province, towards decarbonization, needing to have employment for people, needing to fund public services and needing to be able to address all of these things at the same time. It is a big ship, and it turns slowly. We need to support people through that whole process.

The members were part of our work in establishing a North America–leading climate plan. Our requirement for LNG Canada was that it fit within that plan, and we have put in place a new energy action framework that ensures that any additional LNG facility needs to have a credible net-zero-by-2030 plan.

The member raises the important issue of methane emissions. We’ve reduced methane emissions in the province by 50 percent. We’re ahead of our targets on that. We do need to transition away from fossil fuel infrastructure, which is why we’re pushing so hard on critical minerals and on hydrogen as the future for our province. We created a clean energy and major projects office to fast-track investment in the clean energy sector.

At B.C. Hydro, we established a task force to accelerate electrification of our entire economy and to benefit from our affordable, available zero-carbon electricity for new industries like hydrogen and whatever will come next. What we’re certain of is that it will need a lot of electricity.

We’re turning the ship. We’re moving away from that fossil fuel infrastructure. For that which is getting built, it needs to meet the highest standards around emissions — to the best of my knowledge, in North America and, possibly, internationally. We’re going to continue to expect the best, the lowest-carbon and the lowest-polluting projects while we move towards that low-carbon future.

S. Furstenau: It’s I think one of the challenges that people have generally — particularly when it comes to hearing politicians talk about climate action. They hear somebody stand up and say, “We need to transition away from fossil fuel infrastructure,” at the same time as being the leader of a government that has gone from zero to, potentially, six massive carbon bombs, methane bombs, in our province. We had none in 2017, no LNG plants. We have, potentially, six.

It’s like saying: “I’m going to transition away from high-calorie foods by buying a whole bunch of ice cream and stocking my house up. But don’t worry. I’m going to be net zero, because for all that ice cream that I eat, my husband is going to eat celery. It’ll be fine.” I mean, there is a point at which we have to acknowledge how absurd it is to have government say, “We need to transition away from fossil fuel,” while permitting more and more fossil fuel infrastructure. There is just an absolute contradiction in that.

[3:35 p.m.]

In February, Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs called on the B.C. environmental assessment office to pause on the review of one of those six LNG projects, the Ksi Lisims LNG, after an expert review exposed critical flaws in the project’s proposal. Specifically, the Gitanyow challenged Ksi Lisims LNG to prove that its greenhouse gas reduction promises…. I mean, just this: build a fossil fuel infrastructure and promise to reduce greenhouse gases. This is the same as it ever was. This is how we got here. This is how we get to fire season in May.

Gitanyow challenged Ksi Lisims to prove its greenhouse gas reduction promises and detailed their concerns re­garding potential impacts on salmon. They stressed the importance of conducting a thorough evaluation encompassing upstream natural gas development, pipeline emissions and hydroelectric development. But last month, this NDP government dismissed Gitanyow’s pleas to pause the project.

Does the Premier think that government should heed the requests of the Gitanyow leadership and pause the environmental assessment until their concerns are at least addressed?

Hon. D. Eby: The member is critical of government permitting projects. The member will know that the LNG Canada project was already permitted when we formed government, as was Woodfibre LNG.

There are two projects under our administration. One is the Cedar LNG project. Now, this is the project of the Haisla First Nation. They have spent many years preparing their project. They are hopefully closing out on a final investment decision on that project. It’s the largest Indigenous-owned energy project in North America. It is their priority. It is their priority for their community. It is what they want to do on their land, and we will support them in that autonomy, in that direction.

But we will request of them, and we have, that they hit the highest standards possible, that the facility be net zero of 2030, and they are happy to commit to that. The Chief there has indicated this project will enable them to turn their entire community net zero with the benefits that it will bring to them.

The second project the member mentioned, Ksi Lisims, is a project of the Nisg̱a’a First Nation. It’s a very similar situation. The nation has been working on this for many years. They see this as a route to address poverty in their communities, a route to create opportunity for the Nisg̱a’a people. The project exists on a floating barge. It’s not even on the land. They are going through the environmental assessment process. Gitanyow’s objections were part of that process. They were considered as part of that process. And they will be considered throughout the process.

But it is important and the member skipped over that these are projects brought forward by nations that they are initiating, that they would like to see on their territory. We do recognize the importance of that, and we see a role for us as provincial government in ensuring that the highest standards are set and that concerns around salmon streams and other issues that need to be ad­dressed will be addressed through the environmental assessment process.

S. Furstenau: Salmon streams, the Wedzin Kwa River, which the Coastal GasLink pipeline went under….

Just so people understand what it looks like when a pipeline is built to go under a river, it looks like a subway station. It is massive, the drilling under that.

[3:40 p.m.]

All of the promises of all the protections didn’t matter, because a year ago, there was a landslide, and what was a pristine, undamaged river was filled with silt and debris from a construction site of a pipeline that the Wet’suwet’en did not want through their territory, the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs did not want through their territory. Offered another route — no. Government didn’t back the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs on that.

So that river, which had been pristine, was damaged, because we’re going to pave the way for industry, and when First Nations oppose that, we’re going to find a way around that opposition. We’re going to fund the C-IRG unit to put them under surveillance. We’re going to reject the solutions and proposals they bring forward. That’s the reality of this place.

The Premier is not answering the questions directly. I only get an hour, so I’m going to keep moving. But I think that it’s really important to try to at least answer the questions directly.

When we talk about LNG, I think the public thinks, “Oh, liquefied natural gas.” So it’s good branding for the industry. But, in fact, it’s methane gas, and it’s methane gas that is extracted by fracking.

So we’re in extreme drought. The minister, earlier today, in response to a question in question period, acknowledged how extreme the drought is in this province. We’re in wildfire season. We have thousands of people already evacuated from their homes in northeast B.C. Meanwhile, we have a government that sees fit to scale up this methane gas industry, which means scaling up the extraction of methane gas through fracking.

Fracking uses billions of litres of water. So while communities have to determine whether or not farms can use water for growing food, we have an industry using billions of litres of water and then polluting it. Unlike most other uses of water, where the water can get back into the hydrological system, this water can’t be returned because it’s polluted.

In 2022, the fracking industry’s water use, conservative numbers, is projected to double to 10.4 billion litres of water a year in order to support these growing numbers of methane gas plants. Can this Premier speak to why, amidst extreme drought, reduced hydropower capacity, the worst fire season on record last year, potentially going to be the worst fire season again this year…? Why is this province continuing to expand and subsidize fracking?

Hon. D. Eby: I can share the following with the member about water use and fracking.

In the province, the Energy Regulator monitors water resources. That monitoring includes tracking water withdrawals and requires quarterly and annual water use reporting from industry. This assists in two things. One is ensuring that water use is consistent with what’s available and also that companies are not using more water than they’re permitted.

[3:45 p.m.]

To give the member some context, water use by industry accounts for approximately 0.004 percent of average annual runoff in northeast B.C. This was equal to six million litres in 2023.

The Energy Regulator is mandated to prioritize the needs of the environment and communities before in­dustry use. That’s not unique to this industry; that is a general requirement. All water use applications are reviewed by B.C. Energy Regulator hydrologists and other experts to ensure the protection of water flows for fish and water supplies for communities.

In terms of water use, industry has reduced their fresh water withdrawal by using something they call flowback, which is basically just using the same water again. There have been examples during drought season where the B.C. Energy Regulator has limited and even suspended water used. There have been several times in the past year, and it will be done in the future as is needed. This is typically done through a weekly provincial drought working group meeting, which assists in managing regional water levels.

This January the energy regulator warned industry that more and longer water restrictions would be coming this summer, given the lower-than-average snowpack so far this year. I can advise the member that as of May 13, select sources in key watersheds — the Fraser, the Liard and the Peace River — remained suspended. Additional suspensions will be issued as needed to ensure community water supplies are safe.

If there is non-compliance, consequences can range from a violation ticket to charges recommended to Crown counsel or a referral to the comptroller of water rights at the Ministry of Environment.

S. Furstenau: He’s not quite answering the question about why the province continues to expand and subsidize the fracking industry. But again, just the absolute absurdity of this situation….

The Premier responds by saying, “Don’t worry. We can tell the industry that in times of severe drought, they’ll have to curtail how much water they’re using for the fracking,” which is the way to extract the methane gas. Yet we have, 24 hours ago, the minister saying to the Leader of the Official Opposition: “We were the ones that could get LNG over the line.”

I don’t know if the Premier has been up to the northeast, but you can see pipes coming out of rivers, out of creeks, being stored into dams that have been built on agricultural land because the energy regulator can override the ALR rules about the use of agricultural land, something I canvassed at length with the Minister of Energy. These companies are storing up the water that they’re going to use for their fracking at a time when we’re facing such severe drought that it diminishes the potential for creating hydroelectric electricity because the Fraser and the Nechako rivers are running dry.

There’s an absurdity to the situation we’re in, where a government thinks that it can just plow forward with more and more LNG sites, more and more fracking, at a time when the basic necessities for life — water and food security — are at risk. The cognitive dissonance that it takes to exist in a story of: “Don’t worry, our energy regulators who, I don’t know, failed to get these fracking sites to clean up their drill sites….”

We had to get federal funds come in to cover the costs of restoring drill sites that have been abandoned in the past. There’s no evidence to point to this industry having any sense of serious responsibility.

[3:50 p.m.]

This industry, by the way, the oil and gas industry, which has known since the 1980s the catastrophic impacts of climate change, and lied. This industry that puts ads on the sides of buses and in newspapers and all over social media, somehow parroting what the Premier is trying to say — that we can increase fossil fuel infrastructure and somehow magically decrease emissions. This is Orwellian kind of math here.

I am going to ask the Premier again, really clearly: why continue to expand and also subsidize the fracking industry?

B. D’Eith: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

The Chair: Please proceed.

Introductions by Members

B. D’Eith: I know they can’t see me. I’m over here.

We have the Maple Ridge Garibaldi Secondary Duane Kirkpatrick grade 9 band class here today.

Just so they know, we’re in the Premier’s budget esti­mates. The Third Party is asking questions to the Premier.

I wanted to say to all of you that I wouldn’t be here if I wasn’t a musician and didn’t have band in school. It’s important for your mind and your soul and for community, and it’s so important for your life. I really think it’s wonderful that you’re in band, and I wanted to thank Duane for bringing you.

Would everyone please make them very welcome.

Debate Continued

Hon. D. Eby: I know the member knows this. The deep-well royalty program ended two years ago. The reason I know this is because she put out her own press release the day we announced the ending of that program. We established a levy payable to the orphan site reclamation fund to address the very serious issue that the member identified, which is that under previous governments, industry was not required to pay for its own cleanup. That left taxpayers on the hook to clean up after.

Alberta is still grappling with a very serious issue around orphan wells. The program did start with federal funding but now it is completely self-sustaining. No tax dollars are involved.

The member also knows that we have made a commitment to an emissions cap for the province, for the oil and gas sector, as a mechanism to bring down the sector’s emissions. And the member says it’s not possible for us to do that, but actually we have reduced methane emissions by 50 percent from projects in the province.

There is a fundamental disagreement about the speed, except between our perspectives here, at which the prov­ince can move to address these issues, or how we would treat Indigenous proposals for projects. But the fundamental principle of building a new clean energy economy here in British Columbia and being one of the only prov­inces, frankly, standing up still for climate action across Canada is a reality of where we are in British Columbia, the most climate-affected jurisdiction, the one with the most to gain from a transition to a clean economy.

We are doing the work — everything from building the electricity to chaperoning the projects, to recruiting additional projects internationally that get us into a better place in terms of economic development in the province. We’re going to keep doing that work.

[3:55 p.m.]

S. Furstenau: One thing the member knows is that this year, in the budget — and you can look right in the budget; anybody can see this — we got exactly zero dollars in revenue from deep-well drilling because there are billions of credits stored up under that deep-well royalty credit. It may be years before a single cent of revenue comes to this government from the deep-well drilling. That’s what the member knows. No revenue from that drilling. What a deal.

The member also knows that the electricity, all this clean electricity that this government likes to talk about…. They plan to send that electricity to these fossil fuel projects so the fossil fuel projects can then say: “Oh look. We’ve electrified. We’ve reduced our emissions.”

The member knows that in regions that export LNG, and this is available in data from the U.S. regions that have become LNG exporters, domestic gas prices go up. It becomes less affordable for the people who live in that region. They have to pay higher energy bills because suddenly their energy is being traded on a global market. So the member knows lots of stuff and also knows that questions aren’t getting answered very directly.

We introduced legislation this session that would pre­vent at least one small aspect of harm from the oil and gas industry, and that’s legislation that would prevent greenwashing. The Premier’s face is used in advertising by the LNG industry to tout the absolutely greenwashed messaging that they’ve been putting out.

Similar bans on fossil fuel advertising and greenwashing exist in France, the European Union, cities around the world. California recently passed a law that requires both public and private entities to provide disclosures aimed at increasing transparency and accountability around certain climate-related claims. At the very least, with the story that this government is trying to tell and the story that this Premier is trying to tell about how we’re doing such a great job of somehow expanding fossil fuel industry while decreasing our emissions…. At the very least, we could have a government that requires transparency and accountability from that industry.

Can the Premier speak to his intention to making sure that there is transparency and accountability in this industry and preventing the kind of greenwash advertising that’s using his face as a way to try to convince the public that more is somehow less when it comes to emissions?

[4:00 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: The member has raised a number of important questions. Part 2 of the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act in British Columbia focuses on deceptive acts or practices. It may already apply, but I can advise the member that the federal competition bureau is already investigating allegations of greenwashing.

[J. Tegart in the chair.]

They recently launched an investigation into greenwashing allegations against a company. Between the federal competition bureau and our provincial regulator, we are positioned to deal with allegations of greenwashing that are deceptive acts or practices in the province.

In the province…. The member indicates her concern about the price of natural gas. Our goal is to help people get off of natural gas and fuel oil for heating and cooling. Just a week ago, we announced that we got for British Columbians the same deal that was announced for Atlantic Canadians about a year ago with a seamless program with the federal government to subsidize heat pumps. These are combination air conditioner–heating units. They’re not actually air conditioners. They’re heat pumps. But it’s the same principle, so that people, when they’re switching out their old natural gas furnaces, can both cool their homes as well as heat their homes, using electricity instead of fossil fuels.

We are encouraging and supporting people to use electricity. We have credits through B.C. Hydro. We also have kept hydro rates low. We have a price on carbon in our province, and we have a cap on emissions. We are quite unique in our approach here in British Columbia, and I’m proud to say that that work that we’re doing and those actions that we’ve taken are not resulting in the collapse of our economy, as was promised — just the opposite.

We were the fastest-growing economy nationally last month, with more than 20,000 jobs added in a single month. The fastest GDP growth in Canada post-2017. We have done this all while wages are growing at the fastest rate they’ve ever grown in the province, and with the highest minimum wage to make sure that people are better able to deal with some of the global inflation that we’ve seen.

I don’t pretend it’s perfect, but we are moving away from a carbon-intensive economy towards a clean econ­omy. We’re supporting consumers and making choices that are lower carbon for themselves and their families, and we’re going to continue to do that work.

S. Furstenau: I’m just wondering if the Premier thinks it’s fair that the price on carbon for British Columbians is going up, is scheduled to go up every year, but the price on carbon for the LNG industry is frozen at $30 a tonne.

Hon. D. Eby: There’s not currently an operating LNG facility in British Columbia, but the output-based pricing system would apply to projects in the province. So what the member says is simply not correct.

S. Furstenau: As part of the deal for LNG Canada, it was included that the price for carbon for LNG Canada’s project would be frozen at $30 a tonne. Does the Premier think that’s fair?

[4:05 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: To a couple of the issues raised by the member earlier, she suggested that we wouldn’t be seeing activity from the reform around the orphan wells issue for quite a long time. This year the regulator reports $24.2 million was spent on 500 orphan well projects at 350 sites to remediate and restore those sites; 75 percent of orphan wells have been decommissioned in the province, and 25 percent have been fully reclaimed as part of that ongoing work.

The member raised water flow levels in the Nechako River and Fraser River in the context of water removal for fracking. I am advised that no water is removed from the Nechako or the Fraser River for fracking.

The member said that a certain carbon price was applied to LNG Canada. We have transitioned the old carbon price program to the output-based pricing system. The commitment in the EPA agreement was that LNG Canada would receive equal treatment to other industrial projects.

S. Furstenau: Just equal treatment not being exactly the same as what everybody else in B.C. is paying in carbon pricing. Just to be clear, it’s going to be less than what peo­ple pay per tonne.

But I’m running out of time. I want to ask the Premier a few questions about housing and housing affordability, in particular. There’s been a lot of fanfare around BC Builds using public land for housing. But BC Builds is targeted to people who are making $84,000 and more.

[4:10 p.m.]

Additionally, only buildings owned and operated by non-profit societies, First Nation development corporations or public entities would need to rent at least 20 percent of the homes at 20 percent below market rents for the duration of the 35-year lease — 20 percent below market rent doesn’t necessarily equate to affordable.

It is strange in the housing affordability crisis that we’re facing, where people are being priced out of rental housing, where we’re losing thousands of affordable rental units and losing those units at a rate much more quickly than any affordable units are coming online.

My question to the Premier around BC Builds: why are private developers being given access to public land, and why isn’t it ensured that any housing built on public land should be public housing or, at the very least, not-for-profit housing?

P. Milobar: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

P. Milobar: It has come to my attention that we have a visitor here today that is originally from Kamloops, comes from a very well-respected and long-standing family within our community. In fact, her mother, Ambo Dhaliwal, has Freedom of the City in Kamloops and is a long-standing family friend of ours as well.

Today, even though it’s a Canucks game, and she sings the anthem for the Canucks from time to time, we’re joined by Jeevyn Dhaliwal, who’s here to watch the proceedings and watch what unfolds with royal assent, particularly around Bill 21.

Will the House please make Jeevyn welcome.

Debate Continued

Hon. D. Eby: The BC Builds program is indeed targeted at middle-income households. The member did describe the program almost completely but left out that the target rents are 30 percent of income for middle-income households, for rent, and then, hopefully, as we expand the program, for purchase.

The member will recognize that number as the target for housing affordability. This is housing that’s really targeted at the health care workers; the people who work in schools, including teachers, custodians and others; the first responders; and other critical workers that help make our cities go, who are getting priced out of communities.

It is unapologetically a middle-income project. It’s something that is unique in that way. Government used to build middle-income housing for people. They used to build homes for soldiers returning from war. They used to build co-ops. They used to do this kind of work to ensure that middle-income people had an opportunity to get into a place to rent or to buy. They stopped doing it for about a generation, and we’re seeing the impacts of that now.

This program uses public land. It’s not all our land. Some of it is municipal government land, First Nations land and others. The program allows us to partner with private developers, because often they can build these homes at the lowest cost. We did not put in restrictions about the operation of the homes, because some municipalities or First Nations want a private entity to be running these places. Others want non-profit operators. Others want different structures.

[4:15 p.m.]

What we do is we have a website. There are eight sites on it right now, brought forward by local governments. People can check and see what the requirements are of the public landowners, what they’re looking for, and bid on projects to either build or build and operate those projects, depending on what the public landowner is looking for. There are two sites that are already under construction.

I think it’s a very positive, very exciting program and, unfortunately, necessary. It’s just one piece, though, of a much larger piece of work on affordable housing that we’ve been doing. I encourage the member and her colleague to support all of the pieces of the housing work that we’re doing, including allowing single-family homes to be split into more than one unit to give people a chance to get into some of those single-family neighbourhoods where there are schools and community centres and established communities. There are housing-rich but income-poor seniors that could really benefit from this program.

I know certainly we have the votes to pass it through. But I do think that having support across the political spectrum for those kinds of initiatives assists people in understanding the depth of the housing crisis and the need to welcome new neighbours into the community.

S. Furstenau: I agree with the Premier that there should be housing that is geared to people’s income. Thirty percent of income is considered affordable housing, but for people who earn less than $80,000 a year, maybe people who earn $60,000 or $50,000 or $40,000, they do not. They have diminishing access to any kind of housing that would be considered affordable to them.

Yet governments used to build public housing, used to build co-ops, used to build social housing, used to build a lot of housing that was geared to income. That’s one of the problems, that lack of building of that kind of housing, that has gotten us here, but another problem is the financialization of housing.

According to data released by the Bank of Canada, investors were responsible for 30 percent of home purchases in the first three months of this year, up from 28 per cent last year and up from 22 percent in the same period in 2020. Investors also acquired 49 percent of condos completed in the last five years in B.C.

The staggering percentage in home ownership by in­vestors raises serious doubts about whether a market-rate housing policy can solve the housing affordability crisis. Does the Premier believe that the current market-focused approach that has gotten us here can actually solve the market-created problems of a lack of affordability for people in British Columbia?

Hon. D. Eby: I’m surprised to hear the member characterize our approach to housing as a market-driven approach. We have intervened quite actively in the housing market to deliver better outcomes for British Columbians. These outcomes take time, but we are starting to see results.

First of all, on the issue that she raised. Okay, so BC Builds is targeted at middle-income people, income of $80,000. What about people who earn less? We have programs like SAFER that we just expanded. We have other housing initiatives, affordability programs, including everything from student housing to apartments that we’re constructing across the province or affordable housing programs that meet those affordability goals.

[4:20 p.m.]

That is not this program. The member can take one program and say: “Well, this doesn’t address this group.” But actually, on our housing file, we’re going at the housing issue from a whole bunch of different angles and a whole bunch of different initiatives that target different populations.

It’s not a fair characterization of the BC Builds program when you look at it solely in isolation, but it does respond to a critical group that has been overlooked repeatedly for generations in this province of middle-income people who deserve a reasonable place to live for themselves and their family. It’s absolutely necessary, and we’re going to keep doing it.

Now, on the housing that we have and the market-driven approach, we actually established a housing protection fund — half a billion dollars — to purchase existing lower-cost rental housing, take it out of the market and put it in the hands of non-profit organizations.

There were a number of co-ops, for example, in Coquitlam that were under threat of being sold by the pension funds. Their leases were up. The tenants had stopped paying their rents because they knew their time was up in the building, and they were saving up to move out and find other places to live. In this housing protection fund, we were able to buy those buildings and turn them into permanent, long-term non-profit housing for those vulnerable seniors.

The member was here when we passed the bill just recently about ensuring that those folks who live in SROs in the Downtown Eastside are protected from being evicted for rent increases, specifically for that very vulnerable population that lives in these shared accommodation SRO settings.

We also are very cognizant of this risk of investors buying up places as an investment rather than a place to live, which is why we put in the speculation and vacancy tax, so that we can say to people who are leaving a place vacant, their second or third or fourth home, that you have to pay extra tax if you’re not going to rent it out. You can avoid the tax so easily. Rent the place out. We’re desperate for rental housing. That has assisted us in bringing about 20,000 previously vacant homes back on the market, according to the same source the member cited for her statistics.

Airbnb, VRBO. We restricted the excesses that we were seeing there. People buying up properties to use as hotel rooms, buying up, in some cases, entire strata buildings to operate as a private hotel. We said: “No, you can do Airbnb on your own property, in a basement suite or a laneway house, but we’re not having investors compete with other buyers in the broader housing market.”

We have made a number of interventions into the housing market to provide better outcomes to British Columbians, because we are in a very deep housing crisis. That’s everything from using public land to build more affordable housing, directly building affordable housing in communities across the province, 8,000 units of student housing, hitting our target early and then expanding the target.

We know people are still struggling around housing. We’re also looking to the private sector to build more housing because we’re adding 10,000 people every 37 days to this province. With that massive population growth, people need a place to live.

We are eliminating a lot of the process that slowed down the construction of new housing right across the province. We’ve dramatically increased the construction of purpose-built rental housing, for example, in the province compared to the previous administration since 2017.

We need the private sector, we need the non-profit sector, we need government, we need First Nations, we need to control the excesses that we’re seeing in the investment side to address the housing crisis.

B. Banman: It is a very important day here today. It’s the last day of session. As we have heard from some of the people, there is life that happens outside of this House. We have seen many teammates say goodbye.

On that note, I want to ask the Premier a very easy question to begin with. I saw a rather disturbing photo of his name on a jersey which had the NDP orange on it. We all know that the Canucks would have what some people would say is the Conservative colour, blue.

I just want to quickly ask the Premier: which team is he actually supporting tonight, the night that there will be thousands of people watching these games? Would he like to state for the record what team he wants to take home tonight? Make the first question very easy for him.

[4:25 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: Another outrageous piece of Conservative misinformation, propaganda. He’s lucky the rules of de­famation don’t apply in the chamber.

I’ve said it before. I’ll say it again to him. I’m a Canucks fan. I’m cheering for the Canucks. We’ve all got to cheer for the Canucks. I was disturbed and alarmed to hear the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke admit to being an Oilers fan in this place, conveniently after the last question period. It is outrageous, offensive. I hope the whole House joins to censure him.

B. Banman: I’m sure that everyone tonight will be cheering for our home team, and I do appreciate that the Premier is on board with that.

Actually moving along, I would like to get on to forestry.

The president and CEO of Canfor Pulp, Kevin Edgson, has said that when he closed and cancelled three projects in rural B.C., while the region has a substantive supply of sustainably grown timber, harvest levels are well below the allowable annual cut, partly due to natural resource disturbances, but increasingly because of the impact of a range of policy choices and regulatory complexity. In layman’s terms, red tape.

Has the government done analysis on the cumulative impact of policy positions on the B.C. natural resource industry, including forestry?

Hon. D. Eby: Well, Canfor’s recent decision is devastating for the community of Prince George, the community of Houston. It is absolutely a sign of where the industry is at right now but not just here in British Columbia — right across North America. On March 25, the American Loggers Council issued a report: 50 closed mills, 10,000 jobs lost.

The reasons for this are apparent. North America-wide, in the last eight weeks alone, prices for southern yellow pine dropped 25 percent. That American price impacted the U.S. operations of B.C. mills. Most of our forestry companies are North America-wide. Generally speaking, the price of spruce, pine and fir lumber, which is critical to our sector, is about half of what it was in 2022. The price even then was challenging for industry.

Now, it was 2012 when a consultant was retained by government and projected 16 mill closures due to the mountain pine beetle. In 2015, again, under the previous government, they were warned again of mill closures due to pine beetle. That report never came out.

We’ve seen also, since then, forest fires, as well as a shift in the public acceptability, and understandably so, of cutting down old growth forests in the province. This has required significant policy shifts on the part of government. The shifts recognize the loss of fibre and the need to get more jobs per tree out of each tree that we do harvest in the province. That’s why we have 51 projects across the province to support 2,500 jobs in the forest sector around manufacturing and getting more fibre out of the woods.

[4:30 p.m.]

We cover the cost to haul waste wood from harvesting sites into mills to keep people working and keep those mills operating through a group called the Forest En­hancement Society of British Columbia.

It is a devastating time. Particularly disturbing for me was that we worked so hard with Canfor to identify what the industry calls fibre — we’ll just call it trees — to support their mill investment in Houston. We identified 99 percent of what that mill would need in terms of fibre, and Canfor still made what must have been a difficult decision to abandon that community.

I saw the public statements by the CEO. There are pol­icies, without question, that are responding to the shortage in fibre supply, from our government, but they are not the cause of the shortage of the fibre supply.

The challenge Canfor has…. They lost half a billion dollars in the last year in their North America–wide operations. They’re having to make difficult decisions just like every forestry company right across North America right now. This is awful news for the workers. We’ll be there to support them and make sure that they’re looked after. But this is not an outcome that anybody wants to see.

I’ve appointed a minister of state exclusively on the issue of identifying fibre supply that can be brought on faster to support the industry in these challenging times. But as talented as he is, he can’t grow trees. He’s working with First Nations. He’s working with others. He’s working with industry to ensure that the fibre that we do have is going to its highest and best use and is freed up as quickly as possible to prevent closures.

B. Banman: I asked my first question, actually, for a reason. The Premier is pretty easy to respond when it’s a question he wants to answer directly. The Premier jumped up and was in a hurry to actually answer that question. But when I ask a more difficult question, a question that actually relies on the livelihoods of hard-working British Columbians, he starts going off about beetle kill and starts going off about yellow pine and starts going off everywhere under the sun except for the question that I asked.

I would appreciate it, and so would British Columbians…. There has been a pattern of this Premier going down the garden path here, there and everywhere and not actually answering the question that’s been asked.

The response I got from that is: “It’s everybody else’s fault but us. No, we have not done a cumulative impact on the policy positions that this government has put in place.” That’s what I got from the Premier.

Let me move on, because I know I’ll just get more of the same if I ask this question again. It’s kind of futile to ask the same question, because I’ve been watching the Premier mis-answering questions that are direct. So let me ask one that’s a little bit more easy, perhaps.

When it comes to natural gas, there are three natural gas pipelines that have their needed certificates and permits that are expiring this year. As we heard previously from the Leader of the Third Party, this is a hotly debated topic, and I understand that. However, will this government, will this Premier commit here and now to extending these certificates to keep the hope of those LNG projects and the economic prosperity that they bring, and perhaps replace some of the jobs that are being lost in forestry…?

Will he commit here and now to extending those permits to keep the hope of those LNG projects alive and their prosperity alive, yes or no?

[4:35 p.m.]

B. Anderson: May I seek leave to make an introduction?

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

B. Anderson: I would like to wish my grandma Shirley a very happy 93rd birthday. Her birthday is today.

I love you so much, Grandma. I can’t wait for another soak at the Ainsworth Hot Springs with you or a road trip up to Dawson. I love you.

Will this House please wish my incredible grandma a happy birthday.

Debate Continued

Hon. D. Eby: I should have known better when the member asked me something that approached collegiality in this place. It’s disappointing, but there you go.

Interjection.

[4:40 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: There you have it.

The member asked me in the previous question, which he accused me of not answering, for a cumulative impact study on the policies of our government, without naming any of the policies.

One of the policies is that where there is old-growth forest in the province and a nation requests deferral of the logging of that old-growth forest — a First Nation — that old growth will be deferred. Well, the cumulative impact of that is 100 percent. It stops the old-growth logging in that area, and that is an important policy that has deferred millions of hectares of old-growth forests in the province.

We have another policy about raw log exports, where we’re restricting raw log exports. When the member sat with the B.C. Liberal party, he and his colleague the leader of the Conservative Party, endorsed and supported logging trees here in British Columbia and shipping them off to be processed in low-cost jurisdictions, instead of being processed here. So we put that in place. It is a significant restriction on the raw log export industry in British Columbia. I think I explained the intention behind it, but that is a significant impact.

The policies that we put in place are pretty black and white on this. We’re standing with those workers that are in the manufacturing sector in the province so we get as many jobs as possible from the trees. We’re standing with people that are concerned about making sure that our old-growth forests are there for future generations, including the member for Prince George–Mackenzie, who has done multiple public member statements about his regret as he leaves this place that forest policy did not take into account those values of hunting, fishing, being on the land, enjoying natural resources, enjoying our pristine outdoors.

We are doing things differently, and I accept and acknowledge that that has had some impact. But it is in the context of massive impacts to the forest sector, of the pine beetle kill, of mismanagement of the forest sector by previous governments and the forest burning down in the ongoing climate crisis we’re in here in British Columbia — one that the member, the leader of his party, is ambiguous about whether or not is actually human-caused.

Now, on to the member’s next question, to which I will endeavour to provide the best answer I can. We are aware of the Westcoast Transmission line and the Prince Rupert gas transmission line and the Pacific Trail project that have upcoming expiries of environmental assessments.

On Prince Rupert gas transmission line…. This is the line connected with the Ksi Lisims project. The proponent of that project is under construction and expects to be able to hit the substantial start expectation of the environmental assessment office. The decision about whether or not that project is actually at substantial start will be made by the environmental assessment office as an independent statutory decision-maker.

The Westcoast Transmission project is associated with the Petronas project. Petronas made the decision not to proceed with that project when the member sat with the B.C. Liberal party and they were in government. We’re not aware of any activity happening on that project, and there has been no request for extension that we are aware of. The same applies to the Pacific Trail project environmental assessment.

B. Banman: We stood up today, and we talked about a number of things today. We gave up a half hour of our time, because we were going to go through lunch. There was a very important event that was happening with regards to the Moose Hide going on outside. My leader was happy to do that. My leader is also the one that has signed, I believe, more First Nation agreements than any other Canadian in history — 435. When he asks a question, and he has asked me to ask this question on his behalf, I have a tendency to listen to him based on his immense experience.

[4:45 p.m.]

Recently the government passed the Haida Gwaii recon­ciliation act this session, just recently. This act creates an enormous, unfounded liability.

Has the Premier done any analysis on the liability from providing compensation for the alienation of Indigenous title on land, in particular, to currently privately-owned property? Can the Premier commit to providing taxpayers information on how big this liability is? If he cannot answer that question today, will he commit to providing that answer within 30 days?

Hon. D. Eby: The member insists — as does the leader of the Conservative Party, for reasons known only to them — that the agreement with Haida implicates private property. It does not. It is explicit that this will not impact private property, local government or the services that people at Haida Gwaii use every day.

The agreement with the Haida comes after 20 years of litigation by Haida. When the courts talk about Indigenous rights and property, they talk about a Haida level of consultation that the government has to do as the highest level of obligation government has to a First Nation.

That’s because this is an island, and 50 percent of the people are Indigenous. There are no overlapping claims. The Haida have been there for tens of thousands of years, and the court has been pretty clear, starting in 2004, that Haida title exists there. They sent government back in 2004 under the then B.C. Liberals and said: “This is a serious title claim the Haida have here. You guys might want to work that out.”

The government of the day, under Gordon Campbell — this is the same one working in the back rooms with the rich consultants and lobbyists trying to get an arranged marriage between the Conservative Party and the BCUP party right now — sat down with the Haida. He said: “Listen, we’ve got to work this out. We just lost this important court case.”

It resulted in the sharing of a decision-making process recognizing 50 years of the Council of the Haida Nation governing Haida Gwaii. And you know what? I can give the member the best possible account of what the thought process was in the B.C. Liberals at the time, because it was his leader that shared that with the House when the Haida were here.

“I remember when I was minister back in 2016. There was the court case that was coming forward from Haida to claim title over the islands, over Haida Gwaii. I went, at that time, into the Attorney General’s office, and I talked to the staff. I said: ‘What are we going to do about this case coming forward?’

“They reassured me. They said: ‘We have a very strong case. We’re going to win this case in court.’ I looked at them, quite frankly, and I said: ‘Are you guys crazy? The Haida people have defended the Haida Gwaii islands for thousands of years. They’ve fought; they’ve defended it. How on earth do you expect that we would actually win this in court?’ It was into 2017, in discussions with the Attorney General’s office. I said to them: ‘We actually need to put together an offer to recognize title.’”

Well, that effort to recognize title took place, the one that the leader of the Conservative Party called for, and it explicitly excludes private property. The member knows that. He knows that the real liability was the title case that the Haida were bringing against government, following so many other title cases that the government fought and lost, leaving ranchers, infrastructure and businesses in chaos.

[4:50 p.m.]

In the Tsilhqot’in case, for example, that is the liability that we face — the court liability around title litigation. When we reach these agreements outside of court, we’re able to protect and ensure that the key values are there, while simultaneously recognizing title.

The reason why I’m spending a little bit of time on this is because the member and his leader, after he made that speech in the House, then left the House. All the Haida were here; they were all here in the gallery. That’s when the Leader of the Conservatives made that speech. Then he left the House, and he said: “This is terrible. This implicates private property. This is bad. This is a massive liability.”

Well, it doesn’t work that way, right? If you say one thing in this House, then leave the House and say something else, say one thing to one group and say something to another group — especially on something as important as our relationship with Indigenous people, where we’re trying to stay out of court, where we’re trying to reach agreements, where we can move forward together and ensure certainty for people — that’s disappointing, to say the least.

B. Banman: Well, I’ve probably got four days’ worth of questions, but I will ask a very important one.

We all know that we are currently in a health care crisis. We have a million British Columbians who currently do not have a family doctor. Someone I introduced in this House as late as yesterday is one of those. Now, I’ve heard of a health authority that has limited the number of patients a doctor can see or may have on file.

Can the Premier confirm that the Ministry of Health or any health association has set a limit on the number of patients a doctor may have?

Hon. D. Eby: The member is suggesting that government is limiting access to family doctors, when the exact opposite is the case, as is borne out by the numbers.

[4:55 p.m.]

We signed a new agreement with physicians that resulted in an additional 720 family physicians taking patients, in long-term relationships, between the year 2022 and 2023. That’s a 16.6 percent increase in the number of physicians taking patients in that kind of relationship, instead of the drop-in model or some other kind of model. That has meant that in the year ’22-23, 146,570 British Columbians attached to a family doctor and in the year ’23-24, 157,842 British Columbians attached to a family doctor.

We have increased access to family doctors. We’ve got more work to do. We are opening a new medical school to train up additional doctors. We’re recruiting international doctors as well. But for the member to stand and suggest that there’s something that’s restricting access to family doctors, when we’ve done the exact opposite, is simply not correct. In addition, there are 6,500 new nurses. We’re following a similar approach with nurses in the province. We’re talking about almost 300,000 more people that now have a family doctor or nurse practitioner since 2022.

There is an issue around restricting access to health that, I think, the member could help us clarify. The Leader of the Conservative Party handpicked a B.C. Conservative candidate who describes Canada as a death-worshipping society where abortion is killing unborn children, and refused to clarify his own views on whether or not he believes that the provincial government should be providing access to reproductive choice for women.

Our position is clear. We made Mifegymiso free for British Columbians. Free prescription birth control for British Columbians. Also, one cycle free of IVF, starting next year. A massively expanded child care program for the province to support people who are becoming parents and want to return to work.

This is a really important health care question — about restricting access to health care. The member’s leader refuses to address this issue and in fact is recruiting anti-choice candidates. That is a restriction of health care that I think British Columbians will not, and should not, stand for.

B. Banman: Once again the Premier has avoided answering the question. Worse than that, he has got it backwards. He thinks it’s up to us to answer the questions for him.

That’s not his first time at the rodeo here; this ain’t his first time. He decided to go down a political bandwagon and again not answer the question. It’s quite frankly pathetic, and it has probably more to do with the fact that we’re in first place in the polls, and he’s not.

That aside, the question I gave to the Premier was…. I would appreciate a succinct answer for once. He was able to do it for the Canucks; he should be able to do it for this. Let me be more specific.

There is a family doctor in the Kamloops area who was told that 2,300 patients were too many, and they had to reduce that number to below 1,800. At a time when one million patients in British Columbia do not have a health care doctor or access to one, this doctor was told to stand down. Is that something that this Premier agrees with, or finds as outrageous as the rest of British Columbians who are scrambling to try and find a health care doctor?

[5:00 p.m.]

Hon. D. Eby: The member is welcome to provide me with any of the details about this allegation he is making. I’m happy to look into it.

We’ve signed an unprecedented agreement with physicians in B.C. that’s resulted in a very significant increase in physicians that are attaching patients right across the province — 16.6, I shared with the member. We are attaching hundreds of thousands of people to family physicians. The member suggests that this is not consistent with that effort. I’m happy to have a look at it.

The member, I note, reacted with a lot of bluster, except on one key point. Not only does he refuse, given the opportunity, to go on the record and clarify things about a woman’s right to choose in this province should there be a Conservative government but secondly, continues to, with his colleague the leader of the Conservatives, push for allowing unvaccinated health care workers into our medical facilities where vulnerable seniors and kids are while there’s a measles outbreak in Quebec. That’s the kind of judgment you see from the B.C. Conservative Party.

I described it as disappointing, previously, in my answers. But we’ll leave it to British Columbians to decide in the ultimate poll, come election day.

The Chair: Hearing no further questions, I will now call vote 11.

Vote 11: ministry operations, $16,754,000 — approved.

Hon. D. Eby: I move the committee rise, report resolution and completion and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 5:02 p.m.

The House resumed; the Speaker in the chair.

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

D. Davies: I seek leave to present a petition.

Leave granted.

The Speaker: Proceed.

Petitions

D. Davies: Thanks, hon. Speaker. I’m presenting a petition in the form of a postcard on Bill 36. That is it.

The Speaker: Thank you.

Hon. R. Kahlon: I call for the consideration of the reports of resolution from the Committee of Supply.

Supply Motions

REPORTS OF RESOLUTIONS FROM
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

Hon. K. Conroy: I move:

[That the reports of resolutions from the Committee of Supply on March 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, April 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 23, 24, 30, May 6, 8, 14 and 16 be now received, taken as read and agreed to.]

Motion approved.

FUNDS GRANTED FOR PUBLIC SERVICE 

Hon. K. Conroy: I move:

[That there be granted to His Majesty, from and out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, the sum of 76 billion, 833 million, 374 thousand dollars towards defraying the charges and expenses of the public service of the Province for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025. This sum includes the sum that was authorized to be paid under section 1 of the Supply Act (No. 1), 2024.]

Motion approved.

FUNDS GRANTED FOR CAPITAL,
LOANS, INVESTMENTS AND OTHER
FINANCING REQUIREMENTS

Hon. K. Conroy: I move:

[That there be granted to His Majesty, from and out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, the sum of 1 billion, 596 million, 341 thousand dollars towards defraying the disbursements for capital expenditures, loans, investments and other financing requirements of the Province for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025. This sum includes the sum that was authorized to be paid under section 2 of the Supply Act (No. 1), 2024.]

Motion approved.

[5:05 p.m.]

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

BILL 28 — SUPPLY ACT, 2024–2025

Hon. K. Conroy presented a message from Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor: a bill intituled Supply Act, 2024–2025.

Hon. K. Conroy: I move that Bill 28 be introduced and read a first time now.

This supply bill is introduced to authorize funding for the operation of government programs for the 2024-2025 fiscal year. The House has already received, taken as read, and agreed to the reports of resolutions from the Committee of Supply after consideration of the main estimates. In addition, the House has resolved that there be granted from and out of the consolidated revenue fund the necessary funds towards defraying the charges, expenses and disbursements of the public service of the province for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025.

It is the intention of the government to proceed with all stages of the supply bill this day.

Bill 28, Supply Act, 2024-25, introduced, read a first time and ordered to proceed to second reading forthwith.

The Speaker: Hon. Members, I ask you to remain seated for a few minutes while the bill is being circulated and transmitted electronically to people who are online.

I also remind members that the final supply bill is founded on resolutions passed in the Committee of Supply and adopted upon motion by the House. It is considered an administrative act. Accordingly, in keeping with the practice of this House, the bill will be permitted to advance through all stages in one sitting.

Apart from the brief introductory remarks already made by the Minister of Finance, pursuant to practice recommendation 5, the bill is not subject to further debate.

[5:10 p.m.]

Second Reading of Bills

BILL 28 — SUPPLY ACT, 2024-2025

Hon. K. Conroy: I move that Bill 28 be read a second time now.

Motion approved.

Hon. K. Conroy: I move that Bill 28 be committed to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Bill 28, Supply Act, 2024–2025, read a second time and ordered to proceed to a Committee of the Whole House for consideration forthwith.

Committee of the Whole House

BILL 28 — SUPPLY ACT, 2024–2025

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

The committee met at 5:11 p.m.

The Chair: I call the committee to order. We’re dealing with Bill 28, Supply Act, 2024–2025.

Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive approved.

Schedule 1 approved.

Schedule 2 approved.

Preamble approved.

Title approved.

Hon. K. Conroy: I move that the committee rise and report Bill 28 complete without amendment.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 5:12 p.m.

The House resumed; the Speaker in the chair.

Report and
Third Reading of Bills

BILL 28 — SUPPLY ACT, 2024–2025

Bill 28, Supply Act, 2024–2025, reported complete without amendment.

The Speaker: When shall the bill be read a third time?

Hon. K. Conroy: Now, Hon. Speaker.

The Speaker: The question is third reading of Bill 28, intituled Supply Act 2024–2025.

Division has been called.

[5:15 p.m. - 5:25 p.m.]

Bill 28, Supply Act 2024–2025, read a third time and passed on the following division:

YEAS — 42
Parmar	A. Singh	Lore
Chow	Beare	Kang
Ma	Heyman	Osborne
Cullen	Bains	Malcolmson
Bailey	Brar	Russell
Routledge	Rice	Phillip
Yao	Leonard	R. Singh
Whiteside	Farnworth	Kahlon
Eby	Conroy	Sharma
Dix	Popham	Dean
Rankin	Alexis	Sims
Simons	Elmore	Glumac
Routley	D’Eith	Anderson
Chant	Sandhu	Paddon
NAYS — 25
de Jong	Doerkson	Milobar
Stone	Falcon	Halford
Oakes	Bernier	Paton
Davies	Furstenau	Olsen
Banman	Morris	Kyllo
Shypitka	Merrifield	Kirkpatrick
Stewart	Clovechok	Ashton
Sturdy	Letnick	Tegart
	Walker

The Speaker: Members, I also would like to recognize the presence of Grand Chief Stewart Phillip in the House. I am so honoured that he’s here to witness the closing of our session today.

Grand Chief, welcome to the House. Thank you.

Hon. Members, Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor is in the precinct. Please remain seated while we await her arrival.

In the meantime, I would request all the members to go through your desks. If you want to save something, now is the time. After that, you may not find it in your drawers.

Members, I’ll take this opportunity to thank all members for your participation, following the rules, working together with each other, your friendship, coming to my office every day. It was good to see you all. It’s a privilege that we have each other, working together for British Columbians every day.

I wish you all the best summer vacation, if you want to call it a vacation. Otherwise, have a good summer. Keep working hard for British Columbians.

Thank you very much, and enjoy. I hope to see you soon, shortly after the election.

Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor requested to attend the House, was admitted to the chamber and took her seat on the throne.

[5:30 p.m.]

Royal Assent to Bills

Clerk of the Legislative Assembly:

 

Tenancy Statutes Amendment Act, 2024

First Nations Mandated Post-Secondary Institutes Act

Legal Professions Act

Safe Access to Schools Act

Anti-Racism Act

Energy Statutes Amendment Act, 2024

Haida Nation Recognition Amendment Act, 2024

Name Amendment Act (No. 2), 2024

Municipalities Enabling and Validating (No. 5) Amendment Act, 2024

Vancouver Foundation Act

In His Majesty’s name, Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor doth assent to these acts.

Supply Act, 2024–2025

In His Majesty’s name, Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor doth thank His Majesty’s loyal subjects, accepts their benevolence and assents to this act.

Hon. J. Austin (Lieutenant-Governor): Thank you very much.

ÍY SȻÁĆEL NE SĆÁLEĆE.

Hon. Members, friends, I do want to take just a brief moment to comment on the unfolding wildfire situation in Fort Nelson and other parts of northeastern British Columbia, and indeed across western Canada right now, and just to express my heartfelt and most fervent hope for the safety of all the residents and, of course, for all the essential staff and crew who are part of the effort to address the situation.

I’m conscious, as well, that many of you will be returning to communities that are or will be affected by the wildfire situation and other examples of extreme weather that will occur, certainly, this summer. I want to thank you for all that you do to support your communities and the safety of your residents. I know we’re joined by all British Columbians in expressing these views.

Secondly, as we bring this parliament to a close, I do want to express my personal thanks for all of your splendid work over the past year.

Also, for those who will be standing for elected office next fall, I say to you all, bonne chance.

To those who have decided not to continue and will not be standing, I wish you every possible happiness and success in your future endeavours.

Finally, just to express my personal thanks for the privilege of working with you, to say how very much I appreciate the many contributions that you make to our province, the many sacrifices that you make for the privilege of serving us. I will always admire and respect you, and I thank you also for your enduring friendship.

All the best. Take care this summer.

Her Honour the Lieutenant-Governor retired from the chamber.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

The Speaker: Members, on behalf of all of us, I also would like to thank all the staff who have worked and helped us to do our job. It’s every day, day in and day out, they are working so diligently, helping us, standing up for all the values of democracy. Thank you so much, each and every one of you in every department.

Thank you very much, and have a wonderful summer and very safe summer.

Government Motions on Notice

MOTION 35 — ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE

Hon. R. Kahlon: I move Motion 35, the very long adjournment motion standing in my name on the order paper.

[1. That the House, at its rising, do stand adjourned until it appears to the satisfaction of the Speaker, after consultation with the government, that the public interest requires that the House shall meet, or until the Speaker may be advised by the government that it is desired to prorogue the Fifth Session of the Forty-second Parliament of the Province of British Columbia. The Speaker shall give notice to all Members that he is so satisfied or has been so advised, and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice, and, as the case may be, may transact its business as if it has been duly adjourned to that time and date.

2. That, by agreement of the Speaker and the House Leaders of each recognized caucus, the location of sittings and means of conducting sittings of this House may be altered if required due to an emergency situation or public health measures, and that such agreement constitute the authorization of the House to proceed in the manner agreed to. The Speaker shall give notice to all Members of the agreement and shall table it for it to be printed in the Votes and Proceedings of the House at the next sitting.

3. That, in the event of the Speaker being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, the Deputy Speaker shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order; in the event that the Deputy Speaker being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, the Deputy Chair of the Committee of the Whole shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order; and in the event that the Deputy Chair of the Committee of the Whole being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, another Member designated collectively by the House Leaders of each recognized caucus shall act in her stead for the purpose of this order.]

Motion approved.

Hon. R. Kahlon moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The Speaker: This House stands adjourned until further notice.

The House adjourned at 5:35 p.m.