Proceedings in the
Douglas Fir Room

The House in Committee, Section A.

The committee met at 1:39 p.m.

[George Anderson in the chair.]

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of
Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills
(continued)

The Chair: Good afternoon, everyone. Before we start, I neglected to do something, which is to wish my sister a happy birthday. So I just want to wish her a very happy birthday. Thank you for being such a great sister.

On that note, I call the Committee of Supply, Section A, to order. We are meeting today to continue the consideration of the budget estimates for the Ministry of Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills.

[1:40 p.m.]

On Vote 41: ministry operations, $3,515,868,000 (continued).

Lawrence Mok: My question to the minister: what measures are in place to support Indigenous students in post-secondary education, and what are the outcomes of these initiatives?

Hon. Anne Kang: Indigenous learners are opting to enrol in varying institution types and programs to show increasing enrolments, so the FTEs we have seen increase, as well, in credential attainment after COVID.

[1:45 p.m.]

There has been consistent enrolment growth of Indigenous learners in Indigenous language programs, aligning with language revitalization efforts and the StrongerBC future-ready action plan.

We are working closely with Indigenous partners and other lead ministries to advance our declaration action plan commitments. My ministry leads four specific actions and supports another five actions led by the Ministry of Education and Child Care or the Ministry of Indigenous Relations. We do work very closely with Indigenous and First Nation partners. My ministry is the lead for four declarations and actions.

Specifically, our action 1.8, Indigenous institutes. The First Nations Mandated Post-Secondary Institutes Act passed in May of 2024, continuing to collaborate on regulations, policies and procedures to implement the act. Work with Métis Nation B.C. on Métis Institute continues.

Also, action 1.9, Native Education College. Our ministry staff are working with NEC staff to bring it into alignment with public institution standards, as well as the urban Indigenous youth and education project. The business case is in development, and it’s underway.

Action 4.05, Indigenous policy framework. Our ministry work will begin in 2025 and ’26 with Indigenous and sector partners. We are working on two subcomponents; the Aboriginal service plan and the student housing have been underway for some time.

As well, action 4.41, Indigenous skills training and education funding. Some funding allocated directly to First Nations and Métis partners, as well as First Nation and urban organizations. A program review is planned for 2025-26.

Lawrence Mok: Thank you, Minister. It’s wonderful to know that your ministry is doing a lot for the Indigenous people.

My question to the minister: how does the government ensure that post-secondary education institutions are accessible to students in rural and remote areas.

The Chair: Just a reminder to members in the chamber that you are not able to eat in the chamber. Just a reminder to all members.

An Hon. Member: Unless you share.

[1:50 p.m.]

The Chair: Not even if you’re sharing.

An Hon. Member: Is candy okay, hon. Speaker?

The Chair: It depends what type of candy.

An Hon. Member: It’s for my throat.

The Chair: I’ll allow it. But chocolate bars and chips, not so much.

Hon. Anne Kang: I’m very proud of the 25 public post-secondary institutions that we have here in British Columbia. All 25 are located in various locations around British Columbia. That way we can serve learners of various different regions, including remote and rural communities.

There are options of distributed learning, where people are able to learn where they are. Our colleges have a regional mandate. That means that rural and remote learners will be able to access education. As well, through Thompson Rivers University, there’s an option of open learning available to access courses online or to be learning remotely.

I also understand that our post-secondary institutions work very hard to keep in mind how they can be more accessible to learners. So there are options of blended learning. They also work very closely and in partnership, in collaboration, with First Nations learners, as well as using technologies to make sure that barriers are broken.

Lawrence Mok: It’s good to know.

My next question. The Federation of Post-Secondary Educators of B.C. is calling for a plan to stabilize the post-secondary system in light of this crisis. Does the ministry have a clear, concrete strategy for supporting B.C.’s institutions through this crisis?

[1:55 p.m.]

Hon. Anne Kang: I believe the member may be speaking in terms of the financial challenges in our post-secondary system, and we are very much aware of them. B.C.’s public post-secondary institutions continue to face operational pressures from post-pandemic inflation, labour shortages and declining student enrolment, and it’s worsened by the sudden federal cap on the international student permits that was introduced this year.

[Nina Krieger in the chair.]

I’ve had the opportunity to speak with the previous federal minister about the challenges we’ve been having and the unilateral decisions that they have made that have had very negative impacts to B.C.’s post-secondary sector.

[2:00 p.m.]

Our ministry is considering how to best support institutions to reduce costs and increase revenues in the coming years, and we are working closely with all of our post-secondary sectors on the pathway forward.

Lawrence Mok: When I look online at the app for international nurses in B.C., it says that licensing for international nurses in B.C. is currently a 14-step process, even as we experience a dire health care shortage. Does the ministry budget cover improvements to the credentialing process, and can we expect to see these changes implemented?

Hon. Anne Kang: Thank you so much to the member for that question. As I have said previously to the other member, health care professionals are regulated by the Ministry of Health.

You may come back and ask that question to the Ministry of Health during…. I think she’s already gone. Okay, maybe you get a briefing from the Ministry of Health. Internationally trained nurses are under the purview of the Ministry of Health.

The Chair: Recognizing the member for Abbotsford West.

Korky Neufeld: Thank you, Chair, and good afternoon. Good afternoon to the minister as well.

Private institutions. This government, I believe, needs to give more recognition to private institutions. I believe this government also needs to increase the support for private institutions, not necessarily financial, because they play a very important role by providing trained and qualified young people into our workforce.

We need to remove the barriers of adding new programs which can take up to three years or more to process by this government. Especially today, with all the uncertainties, we need every institution to produce as many qualified and trained individuals to enter our workforce as possible and as soon as possible. Private institutions are more nimble and can respond quickly to emerging needs and still meet the regulatory requirements and quality assurances.

Is this correct — that this ministry oversees all programming and course requirements for all 330-plus private institutions across British Columbia?

[2:05 p.m.]

Hon. Anne Kang: That is correct. My ministry is in charge of the regulation of private institutions and review and approval of their programming.

We do recognize that they play a very valuable role in our post-secondary sector. They are flexible. They develop and implement training programs, and we thank them for the work that they do.

Korky Neufeld: I don’t know if the minister has been to Western College, just in Surrey. They also have a medical district there, and it’s just a phenomenal institution, with five towers now that they’re planning to build, all privately funded.

The number of students that they push out of there…. Ninety-seven percent are in the workforce after graduation, so I think that’s very commendable of them. But it still takes three years for some of their courses and new programs to be put through the system.

How many ministry staff actually exist to oversee the quality assessment, the certification and the monitoring of these 330 private institutions? How many staff members, under the ministry, oversee the quality assessment, certification and monitoring of these 330 private institutions?

Hon. Anne Kang: Approximately 40 staff.

[2:10 p.m.]

Korky Neufeld: Why does it take up to three years to go through the government’s process? Either they don’t have enough staff, or they’re not moving quickly enough through all the processes when institutions apply for programming, courses and changes.

I’ve got it specifically from certain institutions. It takes up to three years for some of these to run through the process in the government. I guess the question is: why?

Hon. Anne Kang: The length of the approval process varies from application to application. Generally, it takes about ten months for any new program approval.

It all depends on the quality of the application that has been received. Sometimes the completeness of the application plays a huge role in how much time goes back and forth to collect the complete data that is needed, and, as well, the number of applications that are in the process.

[2:15 p.m.]

Korky Neufeld: I think it would be helpful if the ministry would look at the institutions that are requesting the courses and look at their history — if they have a really solid reputation of actually completing and doing what they say they’re doing: they’re graduating qualified students, their attrition rate for graduation is high, and their employment is high.

I’m wondering if we could speed up some of those processes and have, maybe, different avenues to check and balance. When an institution has a great track record, I’m hoping that the ministry would say: “You know what? They’re a quality institution, they have quality programs, they have quality staff, and they produce quality outcomes. Let’s move it through the system a little bit quicker.” I’m hoping you can do that.

The question I have: do those 42 staff also oversee compliance and quality assurance in the Ministry of Post-Secondary? Is that part of their job?

Hon. Anne Kang: Just to make sure that we’re talking only about private institutions, the answer is yes, they are the same team that are responsible for compliance and enforcement at private institutions and programming.

Korky Neufeld: The reason why this is important is that it takes up to three years to get through the compliance and quality assurance process. Our society and economy is changing at an ever-increasing pace. Can you imagine that three years later, the program gets initiated, and it needs major revisions or it may be obsolete altogether, because of the changing times. So I’m hoping that the minister can work with the private institutions and shorten that time frame to the shortest possible outcome.

[2:20 p.m.]

Also, there’s a lack of certified teachers. I know that in our district we have about 50-plus uncertified teachers in public education classrooms presently. I know that throughout the province…. I think especially in the Interior, it’s more so, because people don’t want to live there, but now it’s happening locally, and it’s happening in urban centres as well.

How many teachers short are we now, today, across the province of British Columbia?

Hon. Anne Kang: Thank you so much to the member for that question.

We do work very closely with the Ministry of Education and Child Care, and that question of numbers would be best directed towards that ministry. My role, and our ministry’s responsibility, is training of teachers. Since 2018, government has invested $10.2 million in teacher education, including $4.1 million in targeted one-time funding to create 430 additional student spaces.

We are working closely with the Ministry of Education and Child Care, as well as education partners, on implementation of a K-to-12 workforce plan. We are investing to train more teachers and improve program accessibility by expanding UBC’s rural and remote teacher education program to allow students to remain in rural communities while studying, supporting the creation of two new teacher education programs to be delivered partly online and funding additional seats in French teacher education programs.

In 2023-24, 1,720 new teachers trained in approved B.C. public teacher education programs received a certificate of qualification from ECC’s teacher regulation branch.

Korky Neufeld: How many speech pathologists or speech-language pathologists are we short of, and how many seats are available today across the institutions?

Hon. Anne Kang: In B.C., we currently have 44 SLP seats.

[2:25 p.m.]

Korky Neufeld: Thank you to the minister.

It’s very important. Once students fall behind, it’s most likely they will never catch up in their education. They say that in K-to-3, you learn to read, and then from grade 3 on, you read to learn. So it’s very important, that.

I know that there are challenges in our public school system. The complexities of the classrooms are ever changing, so I just want to publicly say thank you to all the public education teachers, teacher assistants, staff for the wonderful work that you do each and every day. The students show up as they are, and you deal with each and every one of them with the best that you can. So we just want to make sure that the supports are there for you.

Autism assessments are completed by pediatricians, psychologists and psychiatrists. How many available seats for these crucial positions are in B.C. today?

Hon. Anne Kang: Supporting a student with autism requires team-based care, and there are so many professionals inside school bases or in the community supporting a child with autism. It’s hard to really identify how many when you talk about it in those terms.

But a pediatrician and a psychiatrist are medical doctors, so this question would be best determined by the Ministry of Health. In terms of psychologists, there are many pathways and routes to becoming a psychologist, so the exact number would be hard to determine.

[2:30 p.m.]

I do want to recognize that it is very important for all children to have a high-quality education and to be supported and met where they are in terms of education. Previously, coming into the MLA role, I was a special education teacher as well, supporting students in their classroom. This is a very important job that we need to do, and I recognize the importance of it.

Korky Neufeld: Well it’s unfortunate that we can’t get a clear answer. I mean, it’s interesting how we kick things from one ministry to the other.

But these are trained professionals, and it takes, I think, up to five years before a kindergarten student sometimes can receive a proper diagnosis, which means they have not benefited from focused education for five of their formative years in education.

If we’re going to do assessments, we need to make sure that people are in the seats for training. So maybe the number of seats is not the problem. Maybe it’s in registration, so maybe I can ask the question in these areas. What is the plan to attract registrations in these skilled areas, or is that under Health, as well, and nothing to do with Post-Secondary?

Hon. Anne Kang: My ministry is the Ministry of Post-Secondary Education and skills training. Our responsibility is to be training professionals that are in our post-secondary sector.

[2:35 p.m.]

I understand that the Health Ministry and Education and Child Care are attracting and recruiting new teachers and health professionals, so the question would be best addressed to either the Ministry of Health or Education and Child Care.

However, I would like to note that in our post-secondary system, we have high enrolments for these programs. We are maximizing the registration, and we are graduating as many as possible with a high-quality education that we are providing in our sector. So if you would like to address those questions in terms of attraction, which is your question, to the Health Ministry as well as school districts….

Korky Neufeld: I want to go through just…. Because we’re going to run out of time, I want to throw out a bunch of questions that can be taped, and if the minister wants to get back to me on these, they can.

I have documents here that B.C. Kwantlen University is going to lay off 70 faculty due to a $49 million revenue loss because of the student policy change of the federal government. The Okanagan College faces an $8 million deficit due to international student enrolment. Some programs shut down at CNC in Prince George. So we can see how in light of the federal international student policy changes, it’s going to impact our institutions.

I’m hoping that the ministry will be able to keep track of what is happening and how many institutions will be filing deficit with the government in 2025. Also, what are the dollar amounts for that shortfall?

Also, does the minister know how many programs will no longer be offered to students across the province? Once you get rid of faculty, you get rid of programs. So how many employment-ready degrees will not be offered anymore? I think what I’ve heard from many people is there are too many bachelor of arts degrees and not enough employment-ready degrees in training. Will the minister make sure that those programs that are employment ready will not be part of the cuts that these institutions are making because of their financial shortfall?

What additional supports have been put in place for these institutions during this international student crisis? I think, if I read the documents…. When the minister was, in 2021, Minister of Post-Secondary, there was a concern for the international student fees for institutions and how vulnerable it was. I believe when I read the documents, it was already put forward in 2021, when the minister was in Post-Secondary the first time. I’m hoping that we don’t wait for a crisis but that we are proactive in these things.

When you were, back in 2021, the Minister of Post-Secondary Education, there was an international education framework. I guess the question is: has that framework been completed? Has that framework been made public?

Will this government ensure that British Columbians and their post-secondary institutions will remain fiscally viable? I’m thinking especially of some of the smaller, more rural institutions that are probably going to be hit the hardest financially by this and probably be the hardest to recoup anything. I’m hoping that the ministry will be supporting them.

Also, how many institutions have submitted debt mitigation letters through to the treasury? How many of those institutions have submitted letters through the treasury three years in a row?

In other words, there’s obviously been some concern for some of these institutions about their financial viability, and they’ve been referred to the Ministry of Finance for debt remediation three years in a row, and still nothing is done. I think the fiscal cliff for many of these institutions is before us now, and so action needs to be taken. How will we meet the job market needs if our institutions are not fiscally viable?

I have with me here the post-secondary funding formula review of December 2022, and the question is: has that been made public? Also, all these institutions, unions, faculties, students and community members who gave their information to this review — have they been given this funding formula, which has been delayed and delayed in being made public for some time? Those are some things that the minister could look into.

[2:40 p.m.]

Has the minister looked at all these layoffs that’ll be taking place and how much that’ll impact their FTE targets? Does the minister have a plan about the direction they are providing to post-secondary institutions? How is the ministry tracking the total impact across the province? Is it your understanding that post-secondary education costs for students are becoming more affordable in the past eight years or less affordable?

What I also wanted to bring forward was Kwantlen Polytechnic University and Langara College student societies. I know that the minister and I, when I was in her office about a month ago, touched on this topic about student unions.

I was told that it doesn’t fall under her purview. It does, though, under the Minister of Finance. But I think it directly impacts the affordability of students to be able to afford post-secondary education when they’re forced to pay their student fees, and then the student fees aren’t being used appropriately in our institutions.

I know that the minister knows about this, because letters have been sent from students from Kwantlen Polytechnic University and Langara College with deep, deep concerns about their student unions. I think there need to be some changes made to this, and I think if we care about our students, the minister will take these up with the proper authorities.

I know that you received information like this that talks about some of the remedies, and I’m going to go through some of the remedies until my time is up. Some of the remedies for the student unions are very simple, because….

What is very interesting, actually, is that the Premier was then — back in 2015, November 18, when he was speaking to Langara College — the post-secondary critic at the time. When he heard their concerns, this was his response: “I am very concerned about the information you presented about what is happening at Langara, as an advocate for open government and transparency at all levels.” Ten years ago and no action. That is the concern — when somebody says something and doesn’t follow through with it.

These students were hanging on every word, hoping that somebody would follow through and deal with these student unions. Some of these staff members in these student unions get paid as much as an MLA, and that’s on the backs of our students and student loans. It is absolutely reckless, and something needs to be done.

Here are some of the remedies for this. The Premier needs to ask the B.C. Auditor General to perform a full audit of student societies for the past five years.

Two: amend the B.C. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act to cover student societies.

The Premier needs to launch a comprehensive, all-party public inquiry into the structured powers of B.C. student societies and their continued necessity, if any, or at least a public consultative process. This inquiry would produce a report with recommendations.

Four: create a new, standalone B.C. student societies act.

Five: Victoria urgently needs to legislate a hard cap on student society staffers’ salaries, expenses, bonuses and overtime.

What is happening at these student unions is that staff members who have control of their finances — and nobody’s checking on it — are loaning money to their friends without any payment back. That’s on the backs of our students, because our students have to pay the fee. They have no choice to pay the fee, but they’re not getting their bang for their buck.

These two groups especially are reckless. We’ve known about it for ten years. I’m hoping the ministry will take this to the Minister of Finance and, once and for all, deal with it, because our students are counting on us.

The Chair: Seeing no further questions, I ask the minister if they would like to make closing remarks.

Hon. Anne Kang: I do want to really graciously thank my two critics for this time that we’ve been able to spend together to ask questions on the estimates. From what I can see, they are very passionate about the post-secondary sector, the industry and, as well, the success of our future workers. I really want to thank them for the work that they do to hold government to account. Thank you so much for that.

We’ve had a very productive conversation today. Our ministry has captured all of your questions, and we’ll make sure to provide you a written response on your questions as soon as possible.

As Minister of Post-Secondary Education and skills training, I am very endeavoured to provide high-quality education.

I want to thank all my staff who are in this room today, who have spent the last two days with us in supporting our ministry and supporting the sector in the work that they do, not only in our 25 public post-secondary institutions but recognizing the important roles that private institutions are playing, whether they’re post-secondary or they’re training institutions and skilled training institutions.

[2:45 p.m.]

We will continue, also, working with First Nation–mandated institutes and, as well, with our Indigenous partners to make sure that Indigenous learners can achieve their higher educational goals. These are all very important to us. I am very endeavoured to be their champion and to be a strong advocate as we see the impacts on revenue streams as we are impacted by unilateral decisions made by the federal government.

It is my endeavour to continue the good work that we need to do for British Columbians.

Vote 41: ministry operations, $3,515,868,000 — approved.

The Chair: Thank you, Members.

We will now have a brief recess and reconvene in ten minutes, at 2:55 p.m. sharp.

The committee recessed from 2:45 p.m. to 2:54 p.m.

[Nina Krieger in the chair.]

Estimates: Ministry of
Environment and Parks

The Chair: Good afternoon. I call the Committee of Supply, Section A, back to order. We are meeting today to consider the budget estimates of the Ministry of Environment and Parks.

On Vote 24: ministry operations, $162,410,000.

The Chair: Minister, do you have any opening remarks?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Yes, I do. Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to offer a few remarks before we begin.

[2:55 p.m.]

As the MLA representing North Coast–Haida Gwaii, it’s my honour to stand here today as the Minister of Environment and Parks to debate our budget estimates.

I’ll begin by recognizing the territory of the lək̓ʷəŋən-speaking people, including the Songhees and SXIMEȽEȽ Nations, where we’re gathered here today.

[Jennifer Blatherwick in the chair.]

I’d also like to introduce a few of the extraordinary staff that I have representing me today: my deputy minister, Kevin Jardine; associate deputy minister for the environmental assessment office, Alex MacLennan; Chris Trumpy, ADM for the environmental assessment office operations division; Kathryn Forge, ADM for our environmental protection division; Jim Standen, ADM for conservation and recreation division, which includes B.C. Parks, recreation sites and trails, and the B.C. conservation officer service.

There’s John Hawkings, executive lead for our parks and recreation program; Amy Avila, ADM for our strategic services and Indigenous partnerships division; Julie Chace, executive director of strategic services and compliance division; and Ranbir Parmar, our executive financial officer.

I’d also like to take this opportunity to thank the members across the way for the time that they’re taking today to learn more about our work to protect the environment. And I’ll offer a reminder that our climate action secretariat is now with the Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions.

As a newly elected representative, I can’t thank the public service enough for getting me up to speed and supporting my unwavering commitment to protect our environment. I can assure you that we are completely aligned in this work. I also want to express my gratitude to the opposition for what I’m sure will be fruitful discussion for the next number of hours to discuss our environment and parks.

What I’ll say now, and to put it into the record after about five months on the job, is how impressed I am with what our government has accomplished since 2017 and how excited I am to build upon this work in my new role as B.C.’s Environment Minister.

Protecting our land, water, air and wildlife is extremely important to me. In the face of tariff threats from the U.S., my top priority is ensuring that our growing economy goes hand in hand with the strong environmental protections that are so important to the people of B.C.

Properly assessing large-scale projects is critical in making sure that development is sustainable, so that we get the good jobs and economic growth we need while protecting our environment and wildlife and keeping communities healthy and safe. That is the critical role of environmental assessments and permitting. That’s why we’re focused across government on accelerating major natural resource projects by making assessment processes more efficient and getting to decisions sooner.

Of course, that does not come at the expense of strong environmental protections or upholding our commitments to meaningful consultation with First Nations. And this is the work our government has already begun making progress on.

A great example is the Cariboo gold mine, the first project to go through the new Environmental Assessment Act, which was completed in three years. It also now has its permits in place thanks to a streamlined process between the EAO, my ministry and the Ministry of Mining and Critical Minerals.

We continue to do this work, and as you may know, we are reviewing the Environmental Assessment Act to make sure it’s working well and as intended. That includes looking at timelines and finding ways to streamline our processes. We know that these processes need to be responsive to the needs of society as we move forward, especially when it comes to timely decisions regarding projects that are critical to our economy, like getting more clean energy online faster to meet the electricity needs of people and the economy.

That’s why we’re exempting wind farm projects from environmental assessments and working on expediting reviews of projects, like solar farms.

It’s important that investors are able to move forward with confidence that government is committed to streamlining decisions within our jurisdiction while protecting the environment and properly consulting First Nations.

Of course, a great benefit of stewarding our environment is the value it brings not only to the lands and water themselves, but also to the diverse people, cultures, families and local economies in our province.

[3:00 p.m.]

That’s evident in our renewed focus on provincial parks and recreation sites, which will be more popular than ever this spring and summer as people choose to spend more of their time and money travelling locally and supporting Canadian businesses and communities.

Since 2017, we’ve added more than 2,000 new campsites to B.C. parks and recreation sites, with more to come, and we will continue to purchase more land to provide people with better access to the outdoors as our population grows. Since 2020, we have purchased 520 hectares of land for addition to the protected areas system. Just last year we were able to purchase 11.4 hectares of waterfront land, with an intention to expand Okanagan Lake Park, and we built 30 new campsites at Fintry Park near Kelowna.

Projects like these are drivers of tourism and support local businesses and jobs, and we’re excited to continue this work under our ministry’s new name. Fur parks, recreation sites and trails are also at the forefront of climate change, with extreme heat and heavy rain causing significant, costly damage.

This has led to temporary closures of popular parks that are important to local communities and economies, from the Othello Tunnels, in Hope, to Golden Ears Park, in Maple Ridge, to Berg Lake Trail, near Valemount. Popular trail networks near Logan Lake and Kelowna have also been affected by wildfires.

The cost of repairing damage from extreme weather is substantial: about $9 million in 2023 from the wildfires alone. We’ve estimated approximately $5 million will be needed for the ongoing repairs of Golden Ears Park, and we invest $1.2 million annually to reduce the risk of wildfires in provincial parks.

One of the ways that we do this is by working in partnership with First Nations and the B.C. Wildfire Service on prescribed burns. These burns reduce the risk and intensity of wildfires, while returning an integral and culturally significant process to lands across B.C.

Climate events have also prompted us to build back better, to withstand the impact of climate change into the future. For example, we’ve been repairing trails damaged by floods, by rerouting them with less river crossings or on higher ground. We do this because we’re all extremely grateful for our province’s natural beauty and because it’s one of our commitments to stewarding it for future generations to benefit from, care and enjoy.

As part of our commitment to the environment, we are steadfast in our work to reduce waste, to invest in innovative projects to better repurpose the plastic we use, and to keep more material out of our landfills. This is how we can contribute to a healthier future, with lower emissions and less pollution.

I’m so proud of this ministry’s work through the CleanBC plastics action plan to help people and businesses move away from single-use plastics towards more sustainable options, working with First Nations and our industry partners to move forward in a way that works for everyone. This includes the CleanBC plastics action fund, which supports innovative projects that prevent and reduce plastic waste in B.C.

Since 2020, we’ve provided $40 million to help find new ways to repair, reuse and recycle plastics into new products. This year we will be distributing an additional $8 million to fund new projects throughout the province.

British Columbians should be proud of the leadership our province has shown in recycling. Ninety-eight percent of the plastic collected in our blue boxes is sent to recycling and markets, and we’re going to strive to keep improving, especially in the industrial, commercial and institutional sector. We have always been leaders in this field, and we will continue to be.

We’re also looking to make more progress in composting of our organic waste, which can take up space in landfills and be a source of emissions — something none of us wants to see. I speak for all of us when I say we’d rather see organics composted into healthy soil. Right now 40 percent of all material sent to landfills is organic waste, but we are making progress, composting more than ever before, and we’re going to keep going.

[3:05 p.m.]

Since 2020 we’ve invested over $71 million through organics infrastructure and collections programs to help build and expand organics processing facilities and collection systems. This directly supports B.C. communities, and it reduces waste management costs for local governments and First Nations. This is important work and another example of how we are supporting British Columbia’s circular economy, creating jobs and building a sustainable future for our province.

As you can see, I’m excited about what we’ve accomplished and where we’re going. We’ll continue taking steps to protect the environment, taking action against pollution, toward a sustainable future for our province. I look forward to talking more about our environment with the opposition.

Trevor Halford: I want to thank the minister, and I want to thank the minister’s staff for allowing us to have this time today. I’m sure it will be a fruitful and important conversation. I think I really want to get down to the heart of it.

I’m going to hand this over to my colleague the MLA for Boundary-Similkameen. She’s got some questions specifically on conservation and enforcement. So she’ll take the floor, and then I’ll have another colleague come in and join us as well.

Donegal Wilson: Thank you, Minister, for the opportunity to ask some questions today. You may or may not know that I come from the snowmobile sector previously. I worked extensively with the recreation sites and trails branch and B.C. Parks. I look forward to delving into some of that.

I also just want to recognize Mr. Hawkings, who I worked with closely in my previous role.

Basically, I wanted to talk about conservation officers, natural resource officers and environmental protection officers. I have questions about all three, but rather than asking them separately, I’d like to just lump them, ask the questions, and know that I’m looking for the response for each of the three streams of enforcement.

I’ll start with: what portion of the budget is allocated to each of these front-line enforcement services in ’25-26?

[3:10 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member across the way for the question. For the natural resource officers, that question would actually need to be directed to the Ministry of Forests. They are housed under the Ministry of Forests.

I can say also that once the budget is passed, we will be loading each of the budgets into each branch. Although I’m unable to tell you precisely the allocations, I can confirm that there are approximately 197 conservation officer service officers and 53 within compliance and enforcement under the environmental protection division.

Donegal Wilson: Thank you very much. I didn’t actually think it would be that complicated of a question, but I appreciate it. I will put to my critic for Forests for them to talk about the natural resource officers.

I didn’t hear the EPOs, the environmental protection officers. Is that not in your ministry either or was that included in the conservation number?

[3:15 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: I did confirm, for the member across the way, that there are 53 people in the compliance and enforcement branch, of which 33 of them are the environmental protection officers.

Then the member may also be interested in knowing that there are three integrated pest management officers, as well, that do compliance and enforcement.

Donegal Wilson: Just to dig into that a little bit. The first number you gave me for the COs was 197. Is that correct? Of which, 53 are front-line staff?

[3:20 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Of the 197 in total in the conservation officer service, 167 are conservation officers, and then the rest are administrative or civilians.

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Of the 197 in total in the conservation officer service, 167 are conservation officers, and then the rest are administrative or civilians.

Donegal Wilson: I must have written that down wrong, because I thought that it was 53 the first time, but maybe you were speaking about the EPOs. Thank you for that.

Can you provide some clarity on whether those numbers, say, since 2020…? Are they up? Down? Are we the same? What has been happening, in the last five years, on our front-line enforcement?

[3:25 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Sorry for taking the time to get the information. We don’t normally track this on a year-over-year basis, but I can say that for the conservation officers, there was an increase. In the 2024-2025 budget, there was an increase by ten officers.

It’s a bit more complicated for the EPO and IPM because there has been a reorganization since that time, but overall, the numbers have not gone down. There are no fewer since 2020, and I’m confident that the numbers have not declined.

Donegal Wilson: I would appreciate if the minister were able to just provide me those numbers in writing at a later date.

[3:30 p.m.]

I understand that it’s hard to compile, but at the same time, from the ground, it seems like there’s less enforcement. I believe that there are quite a few positions that are vacant, that may need to be filled and that are included in those counts but perhaps aren’t actually people on the ground.

I know for Boundary-Similkameen, there was a point in time in this last winter where we had one conservation officer operating out of our Grand Forks office. That’s a really big region for one conservation officer. If I could just get that in writing — I understand I don’t want to take up all the time on that.

I do have another question. I anticipate that it would take a long time as well, so I’m going to submit that to you in writing. It’s specifically around enforcement on recreational closures.

I would like to know how much the province is spending on enforcement related to recreational closures related to caribou habitat. I understand that species at risk is within a different ministry, but the enforcement is over here which makes it a very confusing number. If I could have that maybe later. I know that will take some time to pull.

I would like to pass it over to the member for Skeena for a few questions and then I’ll continue a couple more.

Claire Rattée: I’ve actually condensed this into one question. Let me read through it, because it’s a little bit wordy. Thank you again for the time. I appreciate it.

Given the federal government’s move to label PFAS or polyfluoroalkyl substances as toxic and given that they’ve been linked to cancer reproductive issues and environmental contamination, has the ministry identified firefighter training sites or municipal runoff zones as high risk for PFAS entering drinking water or local ecosystems? Is the ministry monitoring PFAS contamination in rural or northern communities where runoff from firefighting foam may enter local waterways?

Also, will the ministry support or require the phased elimination of PFAS from turnout gear and fire equipment in B.C.? What funding or remediation is being provided to help municipalities like Kitimat mitigate or monitor PFAS contamination from historic firefighting operations? Also, what is the province doing to support transitions in the public safety sector away from PFAS?

[3:35 p.m. - 3:40 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member across the way for the question.

As we know, Environment and Climate Change Canada and Health Canada released a State of PFAS report in March 2025. As we also know, this is a federally regulated issue. The federal government is proposing new management actions through a phased prohibition, and each phase will consider exemptions based on available alternatives and the cost and feasibility of eliminating and replacing PFAS use.

In terms of the firefighting foams, which the member brought up, right now the federal government, I understand, is in consultation in the summer and the fall of 2025, and the new regulation is expected in spring of 2027.

We know that PFAS is a regulated federal issue, but we also, in 2024, published recommendations from a technical working group on compost and biosolids quality, including a focus on PFAS chemicals. The working group outcomes are going to be informing policy and sampling requirements for Organic Matter Recycling Regulation implementation.

This continues to be an emerging field, and we are taking steps to meet the requirements. B.C. has already set standards for three PFAS chemicals in the Contaminated Sites Regulation, and the ministry will continue to adapt and evaluate this regulation as more research emerges.

Then, finally, in regards to the firefighting equipment, this would be referred to the fire commissioner, who is under the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, for their standing operating procedures.

Trevor Halford: I want to thank my colleagues. We’re going to get back to my colleague from Boundary-Similkameen in a minute.

I just wanted to switch topics to the environmental assessment office. I don’t know if the minister has got the proper staff there. Looks like they…. They’re good. Okay.

Very quickly, to the minister, how many current, filled FTE positions for this fiscal exist within the EAO today?

[3:45 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: At this time, we have 111 FTEs, and 100 percent of those positions are filled.

Trevor Halford: That was a pretty basic question. My next one is going to be basic as well. For the previous fiscal, how many FTEs were in the environmental assessment office?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The previous fiscal there was 118.

The Chair: South Surrey–White Rock…. Oh, you’re just Surrey–White Rock.

Trevor Halford: We’ve got we got some south in there. But yeah, it’s Surrey–White Rock. Thank you, Madam Chair.

So we see a reduction in staff. Previous fiscal we had 118 full-time employees at the environmental assessment office. Today, as of right now, there are 111. So obviously, reduction in staff.

How many projects are currently before the EAO today in, we’ll say, the permitting phase right now?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member across the way for the question. Just bit of a correction. There is no permitting phase within the environmental assessment office.

I can say that there are six projects in the pre-assessment, not in the environmental assessment phase.

[3:50 p.m.]

There are 16 in the environmental assessment phase, and there are 13 projects in receipt of an environmental assessment certificate that have now requested amendments.

Trevor Halford: Thank you to the minister for that answer.

Given the economic position that we’re in now, and I think that I’ve said it a few times that I think it’s important that…. It’s a good thing that this government has now found the resource sector to be of importance when it comes to our economy.

Ministers will get up in the House, and they’ll talk about the number of projects that they are fast-tracking, which I think is a good thing to some degree — and we’ll get into some of those projects specifically as we go forward here.

The challenge is this: that the EAO plays an essential part of getting to yes. The fact is that we’ve seen a reduction in staff at the EAO level at a time where we actually need to make sure that we are getting these projects shovel-ready and done in a very responsible way. It’s also at a time too where we’ve seen the Premier’s office increase. We’ve seen communications increase, and yet for something as vital as the environmental assessment office, we’ve seen a reduction in staff.

I’ve canvassed this in question period before, and I was assured that wasn’t the case. But now we’ve got…. The numbers are.… I’m not good at math, but 111 FTEs versus the previous 118. So at a time when we are saying that we are all in when it comes to getting projects approved, and then even once they’re approved there’s still a component of the EAO in terms of making sure that compliance is in order, this government has actually chosen to reduce staff.

I guess my question to the minister is a fairly straightforward one. We’ve seen the environmental assessment office budget. I believe it’s a small increase. But what is that increase attributed to?

[3:55 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member across the way for the question.

I just wanted to say that for the environmental assessment office, the base budget has increased over time. We have gone from approximately 90 staff up to the 111 staff. This has also allowed us to improve the timelines.

For example, Cariboo Gold. We met the timelines within three and a half years. We do meet the timelines 90 percent of the time — the legislated timelines — when the proponent has not asked for an extension. The budget increase can be attributed to the wages for the positions.

The environmental assessment office has been successfully working to find efficiencies and streamline processes for the past few years and working with other ministries to do so.

Trevor Halford: I’m just a little bit confused now with that answer.

So the fact is that currently, we have 111 FTEs under the EAO. Previously, we had 118. The Premier and other ministers have said that their priority is to make sure that we are getting a fair number of our projects — I think the number is 18 or something like that — ready to go. Important projects.

We are now operating with less, even though the budget has gone up. Salaries have gone up. That number is evident in the budget. Employees have gone down.

[4:00 p.m.]

Again, I’m trying to figure out from the minister…. That is a cut to me. If we are looking at 118 full-time, and now we have 111, that is, by my definition, a reduction in the EAO. Even though the budget has somewhat, very incrementally, gone up, including wages, in terms of on-the-ground personnel, there has been a decrease. Can the minister confirm that?

[4:05 p.m. - 4:10 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member across the way for the question.

I would just like to say that year over year we have seen an increase to the budget for the Ministry of Environment and Parks. We’re also seeing, as we talked about, a lot of our efficiencies coming forward with the work that we’re doing in terms of working with other ministries.

We’re also seeing that we’re getting results, based on meeting the legislated timelines 90 percent of the time. We feel that the base budget represents an increase this year, and we’re going to continue working through the base budget and looking at the efficiencies that we can find for this upcoming year as well.

Trevor Halford: Just in relation to LNG, can the minister list out the number of LNG proponents by name that are currently in the environmental assessment process?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The three proponents that we have for liquefied natural gas proponents in the environmental assessment process are FortisBC, Western LNG, along with Nisg̱a’a and Summit Lake.

Trevor Halford: Just in regard to the Nisg̱a’a LNG project, I’m just going through a briefing note. I think it was issued October 8, 2024. It says in there, specifically, if asked about the energy action framework, what it means for LNG projects that haven’t received environmental approval, all new LNG project proposals need to develop credible plans to reach net zero emissions by 2030. Is that still an accurate statement today?

[4:15 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you for the question. LNG facilities that are in the environmental assessment process must be net-zero-ready by 2030, meaning that they need a credible plan for net-zero emissions, depending on grid electricity availability.

Trevor Halford: Just to clarify that, within the three projects that the minister listed just previously, the mandate is a credible plan to reach net zero by 2030?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Yes.

Donegal Wilson: Switching gears a little bit, I would like to talk about the Cathedral Lakes Lodge, specifically the bridge that was essential for accessing the park’s core areas and the lodge’s staging facilities. The destruction of this infrastructure in 2023 continues to impact our community and the business park operator themselves.

I’m just looking for some commitments on what’s happening with the Cathedral Lakes Lodge. Specifically, I would like to know: what are the projected costs and timeline for the full reconstruction or replacement of the Cathedral Park base camp bridge?

[4:20 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member for the question.

I’m really pleased to say that we’ve been working closely with the local Indigenous community and with the lodge operator, and my understanding is that this bridge is of critical importance to the lodge operations and for the local tourism in the area.

The work window right now for the bridge is for late summer or early fall, and we have to wait for the fish window to make sure that we are able to do the work on that during a time that isn’t going to disrupt fish habitat. I’m really confident to see that we’re in the final stages of the contract, and we’re working closely with the Indigenous community and the lodge operator.

Donegal Wilson: I’m going to assume that that’s this year, early summer or early fall. This originally was a promise in spring of 2024.

Those timelines…. While I appreciate that the bridge is moving forward, it’s a second season that that this operator hasn’t been able to operate their business. There are many community petitions going around supporting this business. I understand that there are restrictions, but it feels really like this has been dragged on and should have been done last fall.

Is any compensation going to be provided to this park operator, with their operations impacted for a second season?

[4:25 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: I recognize the challenge that this has presented for the lodge owner. This was a consequence of a major fire, and the widespread impacts created a really complex situation. Despite every effort that we’ve made to try to replace it as quickly as possible, in the circumstances such as they are, compensation is not being contemplated at this time.

Donegal Wilson: That’s pretty disappointing. My understanding is that one of the complications was that with the original bridge that was planned for installation in 2024, somebody hadn’t gone to measure it, and it doesn’t actually fit. There were 15 months when we thought that bridge was going to be in play for April of last year. Yeah, it’s disappointing to hear that there’s going to be no compensation.

To go back to the bridge, the one that’s being installed this late summer or fall, it will be a vehicle bridge, it will be paid for by the province, and it is in your budget. Is that correct?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you for the question.

Yes, it will be a vehicle bridge. It will be paid for by the Ministry of Environment and Parks and is currently included in our budget.

Donegal Wilson: Thank you very much. We’ll take that as good news.

Unfortunately with no compensation for that operator, I am hopeful that they are able to hang on until such time as the park is able to reopen, and that their clients continue to support them, as they did last season, by allowing them to hold their reservation funds for another season. I hope that happens for them, and I appreciate that we are moving forward with the vehicle bridge.

I do want to switch again and talk about roads. I know that road access to our B.C. parks, recreation sites and trails continues to be a challenge in this province. I am hearing that recreation clubs are being asked to take on agreements to be the road maintenance agreement holder. These clubs are being asked to put down a $10,000 deposit, invest $50,000 in a bridge, in partnership with the province, and then take on the liability of that road long term.

As these are volunteer groups that are managing these roads, trails and rec sites on behalf of the public, I wanted to know what the planning is from B.C. Parks and from Rec Sites and Trails B.C. around access to these recreation sites and parks.

These agreements take five to seven years to get in place. We make investments in the infrastructure and the trails, yet we’re continuing to lose the roads to them, and they need to be included in the budgets going forward. Is there going to be funding in the budget for access trails to parks, rec sites and trails?

[4:30 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The Ministry of Forests is the one that has the responsibility for the roads. Most of the time, the roads have been constructed for a specific purpose, which is for forestry. We do work closely with the Ministry of Forests to balance and to make recommendations to prioritize and identify roads that are leading into rec sites and trails — and that support going into those places — and also with Parks.

We also work closely with the conditions or requirements regarding the road with our community groups, and we’re supporting the road maintenance and the road access through that.

Donegal Wilson: I don’t know that I actually got the answer in there. Is it the intent, then, that these volunteer recreation groups are going to become road maintainers long term on these roads? I can think of three right off the top of my head that are within this space.

I’m looking at John, because he knows there are way more than that. We have the Kakwa Park access, which has been limited for some time. We have the McBride Bridge. My inbox is full of businesses in McBride that are struggling from losing access to McBride.

We have a major road into Allan Creek in Valemount. That is one very small area that is being severely impacted by these road accesses.

If it’s the intent of the government to download the maintenance of these roads onto volunteer groups, is it also the intent of government to extend their insurance to these groups for these new types of operations, or are they going to be sourcing liability insurance for road maintenance on their own?

[4:35 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: To answer the question, the Ministry of Forests has the statutory responsibility for the road maintenance, and they also include the securities and the financial arrangements. All of those are under the purview of the Ministry of Forests, and I would welcome the members to canvass the Minister of Forests.

Trevor Halford: I want to thank my colleague from Boundary-Similkameen for canvassing these important issues.

I just want to go back to the LNG sector for a minute and just confirm a couple of things on record here. We’ve had a lot of talk and, I think, obviously we’re in the middle of a federal election right now. We’re seeing LNG Canada come online, which I think is an absolutely important milestone in the history of our province.

When it comes to phase 2 of LNG Canada, the minister referenced the three projects previously in terms of getting a net zero by 2030. My understanding from the Minister of Energy’s comments publicly…. Just want to hear it from the Ministry of Environment. LNG Canada phase 2 is completely exempt from any net-zero requirements for 2030?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member across the way for this question.

For LNG Canada, both phase 1 and phase 2 received both federal and provincial authorization in 2015, and the net-zero policy does not apply retroactively.

Trevor Halford: I thank the minister for that answer.

Just going into the budgetary estimates on the minister’s office, previously we see that it was $658,000. It’s now in excess of $130,000.

Can the minister explain why, at a time when we’ve got a Finance Minister and a Premier that are talking about restraints in terms of hiring, budgetary measures, budget responsibilities, we would see a 26 percent increase in the minister’s office budget?

[4:40 p.m. - 4:45 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The increase in the budget, the additional money, was provided to reflect the number of positions that are needed to support my office.

Trevor Halford: With all due respect to the minister, I can’t believe that it took that long to get that answer. But here we are.

My question to the minister then: what exactly are those positions that have been either added to that office. It’s the minister’s office. I expect that it’s pretty straightforward.

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: I have five people that work in my office.

Trevor Halford: That’s not what I asked. I asked the minister…. We’ve seen an increase in the minister’s budget by 26 percent at a time where the Premier and the Finance Minister, have been talking about fiduciary accountability, restraint in terms of new hires and spending. So, can the minister please detail why a 26 percent increase in positions in the previous year?

[4:50 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: When the Ministry of Energy and Climate Solutions was formed, it was partially formed out of the minister’s office budget, mid-year. Funding was provided to form that office. The additional funds provided this year were simply a reallocation back to support the pre-existing positions.

Trevor Halford: Okay. The minister is saying the rationale for that 26 percent increase is because of a realignment with another ministry. That’s what the minister is saying? Is that the justification for the 26 percent increase in her own office budget?

[4:55 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: If we take a look at last year’s blue book, page 82, the funding was $822,000 for ’24-25. What the member is looking at is the money that was transferred out to support the Ministry of Energy and Climate Solutions. The $832,000 brings us back, close to where I started last year.

Trevor Halford: My numbers are the Ministry of Environment, office budget, $658,000; the current Ministry of Environment and Parks budget, $832,000. That’s an increase, to me, of 26 percent.

Just on the budget — we’re looking at capital, and we’re talking about cuts — we see a 27 percent cut, out of the capital budget. I think that amounts to about $12 million, down from $45.1 million. Now I think it’s approximately $33 million.

Can the minister detail what exactly was cut within that $12 million?

[5:00 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member for the question.

This can largely be accounted for in the one-time, $21 million five-year recreation expansion project. That project was time-limited and is coming to an end.

There are also some minor amounts to the capital budget. For example, a one-time capital investment for the ten new conservation officer services, and the specialized equipment was a one-time purchase for fitting the new Environmental Lab.

Trevor Halford: I just want to switch gears here very quickly to the Zero-Emission Vehicles Act and talk, specifically, when that legislation was passed, if those targets are currently being met. Does the Minister of Environment still stand by that 2035 mandate for zero emissions by vehicles?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: As the responsibility for CleanBC has transferred to the Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions, the member will have to canvass him for the question.

Trevor Halford: The original mandate was under the Ministry of Environment, so is the minister confirming that they have no jurisdiction regarding the EV vehicle mandates that are mandated for 2035?

[5:05 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: That is correct.

Trevor Halford: When you look at some of the initiatives that have been done under CleanBC, and we talk about the targets, whether they’re vehicle targets…. One of the things I met with was actually a condo owner in White Rock that is now facing exorbitant charges to have their unit become able to be…. It’s an older unit, but having challenges to be able to retrofit and have charging stations. That has been done.

I understand that’s under the Ministry of Housing, and I’ll canvass that with the minister at the time. But I think part of the challenge that I’m hearing from people — this has been talked about for the last six months — is clear direction on what the province’s targets are when it comes to electric vehicles and when it comes to the mandates that the province has set out.

Again, we look at different elements inside of this ministry’s budget. I think part of the challenge is clear delineation of responsibilities, right? We understand that some things have switched over.

Then I’ll ask this. When we look at climate enforcement, does Budget 2025 increase funding for enforcing climate regulations? That’s whether it’s industrial emissions or targets without compliance or what new staff have been allocated for that.

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you for the question. Once again, that has been transferred to the Ministry of Energy and Climate Solutions.

Trevor Halford: Try this one: carbon offsets. How much is being spent on carbon offsets for government operations? Is relying on offsets sustainable within this budget?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Once again, that would be under the Ministry of Energy and Climate Solutions.

Trevor Halford: Okay. NGO grants accountability. Which NGOs or partners get ministry funding this year, and how does this minister ensure accountability for those dollars?

[George Anderson in the chair.]

[5:10 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: We have canvassed staff, and we have no line item for grants to NGOs; nor were we able to immediately identify any planned grants. Any grants beyond funds to support…. We do have support for local societies, such as $100,000 to the B.C. Lake Stewardship Society and similar types of organizations.

Trevor Halford: When the service plan says “transferred to third parties,” is that the example the minister just gave? Is that within that? So what the minister just listed, is that the transfer to third parties that we see within the service plan?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Yes, that is an example. Any type of society or local government municipalities that are doing such things as monitoring activities, administration of programs such as the wood stove replacement — all things that are in support of the mandate.

[5:15 p.m.]

Trevor Halford: Just moving on to land acquisitions and new park expansion.

Let’s talk about, like, a 30 by 30 funding gap. The government’s pledged to protect 30 percent of B.C.’s lands by 2030. It’s a pretty ambitious target in terms of doubling protected areas under five years.

In the budget, though, it doesn’t seem to show any indicated or direct funds increasing for new park acquisitions. I think we’re only at around 14 percent of the land base. So how does the minister see achieving this goal with no significant new investment?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The Water, Land and Resource Stewardship Ministry, through their modernized land use planning processes, will identify lands that will contribute to the 30 by 30. We definitely support them in their process.

Further, once the land use planning process is completed, they may or may not become a park. The land acquisitions that we do are usually private land purchases, and they’re intended to strengthen the current park systems.

Trevor Halford: I thank the minister for that answer.

Then I guess, my question would be: how much money has the minister allocated this fiscal for those private land purchases?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: We have allocated $2 million for land acquisitions.

Trevor Halford: Is that in totality? Is that $2 million for all private lands throughout, or is that…? Sorry if I misheard. Is that for one specific element of that?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: That is for all private land acquisitions.

[5:20 p.m.]

Trevor Halford: Okay, so within that…. If we’re talking about the 30 by 30 context, then, and if we’re allocating $2 million dollars for the purchase of private lands…. I think there are some third parties that are doing fundraising as well. We’ll get to that in a second. But is the minister confident that that’s

Trevor Halford: Within that, if we’re talking about the 30 by 30 context, then if we’re allocating $2 million for the purchase of private lands, and I know that there are…. I think there are some third parties that are doing fundraising, as well, and we’ll get to that in a second. Is the minister confident that that allocation is going to get them to the 30 percent by 2030?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: B.C. Parks is a small element for the 30 by 30. As I stated previously, our land acquisitions are really there to strengthen the park system. Looking at infills or adjacent lands to the existing parks, the most recent large acquisitions have been made through conservation organizations and organizations such as the B.C. Parks Foundation.

Trevor Halford: If we’re looking at $2 million budgeted for this fiscal, what was the amount allocated for last fiscal?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: For last year, the budget was $6.9 million. This was the last year, as I’d mentioned, of the previous rec expansion program, and the purchases made were for Tribune Bay and the Okanagan property.

[5:25 p.m.]

Trevor Halford: I think one of the concerns we have here is....

Interjection.

The Chair: Member, just one….

I’d ask that members....

Interjection.

The Chair: Member, I’d ask that you please keep your conversations to a minimum. There are questions being asked in estimates. It’s important that the member be able to ask their questions directly, and it’s challenging if even I’m sitting up here and I can hear your conversations. Thank you.

Trevor Halford: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think part of the challenge here is trying to figure out the reliance on third parties and donations. The minister cited the B.C. Parks Foundation. I think, out of the Okanagan example that the minister just raised, B.C. Parks Foundation raised over $2 million of that, if I’m not correct.

Again, when we’re talking about this 30 by 30 target that this government has cited, how much revenue are they counting coming in from third-party organizations or donors?

It’s kind of almost looking like there’s a GoFundMe system here to try and meet this target, but with an allocation of just $2 million for this year, I find it fairly hard to believe that this ministry or this government is on track to meet those targets of 2030.

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Once again, I think that the member would be best to redirect his question to the Ministry of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship. They are the ones that are leading the land use planning process. They are the ones that are looking at the 30 by 30 targets, and they are the ones that are managing partnerships.

Trevor Halford: Just to be clear, this isn’t a trying-to-gotcha moment or anything like that.

When we’re talking about the B.C. Parks Foundation, that relationship is managed through the ministry that the minister just cited?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you to the member.

I’m more than happy to clarify the question that you had. The work that the B.C. Parks Foundation does, they have two roles. They work directly with Water, Land and Resource Stewardship, as I said, for the 30 by 30 targets and looking at land acquisitions and land use planning. The relationship that they have with the Ministry of Environment and Parks is to work with us to enhance the current park system.

Kiel Giddens: Thank you to the environment critic for allowing me to ask a question or two, and I appreciate the minister and the staff being here today.

My question is regarding Whiskers Point Provincial Park. There is going to be a closure this year, in 2025, due to four bridges that are being replaced. There was an engineering report that came out last fall saying that the park had to actually be closed.

[5:30 p.m.]

I’m wondering, from an asset management planning perspective, if the minister could describe what happened in this scenario where the park actually had to be closed for the 2025 season. This is a very popular park. It’s one of the limited provincial park camping opportunities in the regional district of Fraser–Fort George region.

It is really something that residents in my riding are concerned about, so I’m wondering if you could describe a little bit more about what happened in that scenario and the asset management planning process overall.

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The recent inspection of the bridges found that it did not meet the vehicle load ratings, and these are an integral part of the overall system within the park. The closure was needed in order to make sure that public safety is number one.

We have budgeted and we will be replacing the bridges as quickly as possible, hopefully this summer. We are prioritizing our asset capital, and we’re looking at addressing all of the assets as quickly as we can.

Kiel Giddens: I really appreciate the answer from the minister.

Would like to just understand if there are any more specifics on the timelines. It is the only public boat launch on McLeod Lake that is publicly accessible, so residents will be interested to understand their access to the park and what it may look like in summer 2025.

[5:35 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Right now it would be too early to tell. We’re currently in the planning and design stage, so we’ve reprioritized our capital to make this happen as quickly as possible.

Kiel Giddens: When this engineering report came out, it was last fall, sort of at the end of last season. With the overall asset management planning process for parks, why wasn’t this in a more scheduled and organized manner that didn’t require a park closure? Based on the timing, this work could have been done this spring or even perhaps last fall, after the season.

I’m wondering, from an asset management perspective, how B.C. Parks plans its activities to prevent these closures from happening in the first place. Then I’m wondering — if not today, maybe it could be noted into the record: what other parks in the province are going to be closed for this season, the 2025 season?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: We estimate that we have about $1.5 billion in assets, which cover about 14 percent of the provincial land base. When issues arise, the planning can be complex, and public safety is our number one priority. We need to make sure we’re doing it right. All capital projects are complex. We have to ensure the right engineering; we have to make sure if it crosses a stream.

[5:40 p.m.]

Sometimes these don’t happen immediately. Then also, I would say that we would have to get back to you on what the park closures will be for this season.

Kiel Giddens: I do agree that public safety has to be paramount and would just really ask for that planning to be really thorough, to make sure that park closures don’t happen.

As far as the broader question of park closures for this year, it would be great to get that information afterwards. I’m wondering if it’s possible to also get the same information for camping sites that are also managed by the Ministry of Environment.

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Yes, we can get that information to you as well.

Donegal Wilson: Since we’re talking about bridges, we can’t continue on without at least mentioning — I mentioned it earlier — the bridge in McBride accessing the snowmobile area. It was inspected in, I believe, 2023. The club was notified that it was zero-rated in January 2024. We’re now in April of 2025. Is there a timeline and a budget for that bridge to be in place for the coming snowmobile season?

Based on what’s in my inbox right now, there are many businesses that are failing in McBride, due to the lack of snowmobile tourism. That bridge is very important. If we could have a timeline and a commitment that that’s going to be fixed this summer, it would be appreciated.

[5:45 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: This particular bridge that the member is talking about would be under the Ministry of Forests. We are aware that the bridge and the road management is under the Ministry of Forests, but we have been working with the community, with the club, and trying to help to find alternative areas, perhaps recreation trails or rec sites.

We know the importance of snowmobiling, and we are definitely working with the communities to try to help find alternatives.

Donegal Wilson: It was my understanding that the Ministry of Forests had moved that to Recreation Sites and Trails B.C. because that particular bridge is under a rec agreement. Forgive me if I’m wrong on that; I will take it to Forests if that’s the case, but my understanding was that that particular bridge was the responsibility of Recreation Sites and Trails.

The Chair: Recognizing the Minister of Environment and Forests. Sorry, not Forests. Parks. There’s been a lot of discussion about forests.

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it’s almost dinner time.

Yes, the bridge is under the Ministry of Forests, but there is an established recreation trail near there. I am aware that our ministry is going to be working with the Ministry of Forests and the Jobs, Economic Development and Innovation Ministry to try to look for some solutions for this.

We’re aware that it’s not just that bridge. There are four other bridges as well that the Snowmobile Association uses, and we’re going to be working together to try to find some solutions.

Trevor Halford: Has the minister signed off on, or is she aware of, any travel outside of Canada, either by herself or by ministry staff? Has any budget been allocated for international travel?

[5:50]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: I am not aware of any planned international travel. Where it does happen for some of our staff, it’s usually for operational necessity.

Trevor Halford: Just a quick follow-up: So like an operational necessity to travel outside of Canada would be an example of that?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Examples of the international travel: B.C. Parks staff going through Alaska to get to Atlin is an access issue; the conservation officer service attending wildlife predator attack training; there is shared enforcement actions with the United States; and then also transboundary environmental emergency planning — for example, scientists going to meet with the Idaho government.

Trevor Halford: Thank you to the minister for that answer.

Switching to the diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives…. It’s pretty hard, if it’s not impossible, to find out where that’s allocated in the budget of Environment and Parks. So what is the total budget allocated to that specific DEI initiative, if any?

[5:55 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The initiatives that you’re talking about…. The corporate lead is out of the Public Service Agency, which is under the Minister of Finance. Beyond having an executive sponsor, this is just part of our regular operations. We have $1.2 million that we do set aside for providing more accessibility in B.C. parks.

Trevor Halford: I see in Budget 2023 that I think it was $3.6 million that was earmarked for accessibility upgrades in parks. Then we talk about the B.C. Parks…. I think they made a commitment to inclusion that was launched in 2023 with that $3.6 million.

The allocation that the minister just referenced for this fiscal — how many parks does the minister anticipate that funding being able to provide accessible facilities for, whether that’s washrooms, ramps or anything like that? What is the list of parks where that funding will be allocated? Because that’s a pretty small envelope. Where will that money be allocated if that decision has not already been made?

[6:00 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: We’re going to take that on notice, and we will provide a list. Right now we’re just at the beginning stages, and we’re still in some of the planning stages for some of the parks. It’s really hard to say which projects will be going forward for this year, but we will advise the member.

The Chair: I would just like to remind the members who are also participating virtually that you are not to be on your cell phone.

Excuse me, Member, from Richmond.

Just so you know, I am watching everyone.

Recognizing the member for Surrey–White Rock.

Trevor Halford: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your due diligence. I mean that sincerely.

When we talk about park operations in the budget there, we have…. I think this is a good-news story where we have an almost record-setting number of people that are utilizing our parks post-pandemic. We’ve heard stories about trying to get reservations and all that stuff. But it’s good. It’s good that we have a lot of people that are getting out there and enjoying our beautiful parks.

I think the challenge I see is that with attendance likely setting record levels, we see the park enhancement fund and operating budget only increased by I think it was somewhere around $40,000 or $44,000 — I don’t want to sell that short — but a $44,000 increase. We’re seeing a vast amount of more people utilizing these parks.

So my question to the minister is: why such a marginal increase when we have such a vast number increasing in terms of utilizing our parks? How are we able to keep up with maintenance and also making sure that we’re not overrunning the people that are working within B.C. Parks and doing their best? Why just that short $44,000 lift to that budget item?

[6:05 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The $44,000 that the member across the way was referring to is actually from the Special Accounts Appropriation Act. It’s one of the special funds that is set up through the licence plate program and reservation fees that we receive. It’s simply a forecast of what we anticipate to receive for this year. It does not fund our base operations or maintenance.

Trevor Halford: What were the last year’s park fee revenues?

[6:10 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: The revenue that we received last year was $23.6 million.

Trevor Halford: Out of that almost $24 million, how much of that is reinvested into actual park facilities? If we’re looking at the $23.6 million that is received through the park fees, how much of that is reinvested when it comes to park operations and facilities?

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: All of the fees go directly to the park operators.

Trevor Halford: Okay. I just want to just be clear on something. If the entire enormity of the $23.6 million goes…. Those are collected in the fees from parks. One hundred percent of that goes back into the parks in terms of that maintenance. Then how much is…? So what’s the discrepancy there in terms of the shortfall?

[6:15 p.m.]

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: So 100 percent of the fees collected go to the park operators. The shortfall is approximately $8.3 million, with deficiency payments, which we make up to the current contracts.

I move that the committee rise, report resolution and completion of the estimates of the Ministry of Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills, report progress on the Ministry of Environment and Parks and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The committee rose at 6:17 p.m.