The House met at 10:02 a.m.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

Routine Business

Prayers and reflections: Jennifer Blatherwick.

Introductions by Members

Susie Chant: This morning joining us in the members’ gallery is His Excellency Rob Tinline, the High Commissioner of the United Kingdom to Canada. He is accompanied by Tom Codrington, the British consul general in Vancouver.

They will be taking part in a number of meetings with government officials today, and I am hoping this House will make them truly welcome.

[10:05 a.m.]

Kiel Giddens: I know that the Minister of Forests introduced the United Steelworkers yesterday, but there have been meetings over the past couple of days with the Wood Council, with members on both sides of the House.

I want to thank the Steelworkers for standing up for forestry families in this province. I just want, on behalf of the official opposition, to thank them for the great discussions that we had, and we hope to continue those conversations about working people in this province.

Would the House give them another round of applause, please.

Harwinder Sandhu: Today my son Avishaan turns ten. Avishaan is a very kind, loving and deeply caring person. He stands up proudly against bullying, and he cares for everyone around him. He does admit when he makes mistakes, and he strives to be a better person.

As a mom, I cannot be prouder of him. I started this work when he was less than a year, and I got elected when he was only four. I miss him so much, as many members can relate. But when I talk to Avishaan with this mom guilt, he tells me and reassures me, “Mom, I’m proud of the work you do for people in our community,” and those words mean a lot.

Besides being my French tutor, he also joins me for most of the community events and asks the meaning behind it. Recently he joined me for Coldest Night of the Year. Not only he joins; he is getting to the point he recruits his friends to come join and tells them the meaning of these events. That is who Avishaan is.

May I ask the House, please join me to wish my son Avishaan a very happy birthday.

Happy birthday, Avishaan.

Misty Van Popta: In the House today, we have Dan Baxter from the Progressive Contractors Association. With him also is Ryan Bruce from CLAC. Two strong voices in the construction industry advocating on behalf of the contractors and skilled workers who build the infrastructure and communities of our province. I want to thank them for all the hard work that they do.

Will the House make them feel welcome.

Bruce Banman: This House has heard me talk often about my grandchildren, and one of them, it is her birthday today. She’s half a world away fulfilling her dream as a marine biologist.

I just want to say happy birthday, Kenadee. I love you. I’m proud of you. And who knew that buying the Disney mermaid stuff would make you into a marine biologist? I hope you’re happy under the sea.

Statements

International Women’s Day

Darlene Rotchford: Before we carry on, I think it’s worthwhile to wish every woman in the Legislature today an early happy International Women’s Day. International Women’s Day is this upcoming Sunday, and with the most women ever elected to this building, I think there’s value in wishing everyone on both sides of the House a happy International Women’s Day.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

Bill M233 — Public Sector Construction
Projects Procurement Act

Kiel Giddens presented a bill intituled Public Sector Construction Projects Procurement Act.

Kiel Giddens: I move that a bill intituled Public Sector Construction Projects Procurement Act, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read a first time now.

This bill is about fairness and value for the people of British Columbia. This bill establishes a clear and straightforward rule. Publicly funded construction projects must be procured through labour-neutral processes.

Public sector entities would no longer be permitted to issue construction solicitations that require union-only labour or require a contractor to enter into a specific collective agreement as a condition of bidding. It would also ensure that no government, now or in the future, could require non-union-only labour. In other words, contracts would be awarded based on merit, on safety record, experience, qualifications, price and the ability to deliver results, not on labour affiliation.

British Columbia’s construction workforce is diverse, and skilled tradespeople choose different paths. Some are members of unions, and others are not. We value all workers, because each and every one of them contributes their skills and hard work to the building of the homes, schools, hospitals, roads, bridges and public works our communities depend on. This bill respects that diversity of choice for B.C. workers.

At the same time, as public sector projects face rising costs and persistent labour shortages, we can’t afford to limit the depth and breadth of British Columbia’s labour market. As we all know, we’re facing serious economic uncertainty and unprecedented budgetary pressures. Taxpayer-supported debt is projected to reach $189 billion, and debt-to-GDP is anticipated to reach over 37 percent, while average capital cost overruns sit at roughly 25 percent.

[10:10 a.m.]

We have a responsibility to think like taxpayers. Now more than ever, we need to broaden competition, strengthen resilience and continue delivering critical capital projects while safeguarding public dollars.

Public infrastructure belongs to all British Columbians. The opportunity to build it should be open to every qualified contractor willing to meet our standards. It should be open to all skilled workers who are simply trying to support their families and their communities.

I urge all members of this House to support the advancement of this bill for thoughtful consideration and debate.

The Speaker: Members, the question is the first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

Kiel Giddens: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Motion approved.

Bill M234 — School Amendment Act,
2026

Jordan Kealy: I move that a bill intituled School Amendment Act, 2026, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read a first time now.

I rise today to introduce the School Amendment Act, 2026. The purpose of this legislation is straightforward — to strengthen the safety of our children while class is in session.

After the tragedy in Tumbler Ridge, it reminded us that the safety of our schools cannot be taken for granted. No parent should worry that someone could simply walk into their child’s school, without oversight, while students are in classrooms trying to simply learn. This legislation takes clear steps to strengthen the protections of students by establishing controlled entry points, ensuring that access to students and staff is properly monitored.

Some schools across B.C. already operate this way today. Many elementary schools already use controlled entry systems where visitors must check in before entering the building. This legislation ensures that the level of protection is applied consistently across the province.

In truth, the safeguard proposed here is a simple one. Controlled entry points create a critical moment of pause. They ensure that individuals cannot simply walk into a school unnoticed. In an emergency, even those few moments can matter, giving staff time to call 911, initiate a lockdown and protect children in their care.

The truth is we already accept controlled entry as a basic safeguard in many parts of our daily life. Courthouses, government buildings, control who enter. Even in our own homes, we lock our doors and check who is outside before allowing someone in. Yet the places where our children spend most of their days are often among the most accessible buildings in our communities.

I’ve spoken with many individuals closely connected to families affected in Tumbler Ridge, and the message from parents is clear. No one should be able to access their children during the school day without permission.

The loss suffered in that community is a tragedy. I never want to see something like that happen to another child in this province ever again. It would be my honour for this to be my first bill to pass into legislation as quickly as possible.

The Speaker: Members, the question is first reading of the bill.

Motion approved.

Jordan Kealy: I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Motion approved.

Bill M235 — Drug Recovery and
Community Safety Act

Tara Armstrong: I move that a bill intituled Drug Recovery and Community Safety Act, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read a first time now.

If we want to fight drugs, we shouldn’t pay people to use them. The purpose of this bill is simple — to end all provincial funding and enablement for unlawful drug use.

Today millions in taxpayer dollars fund government-sanctioned drug consumption sites that permit the ongoing use of illegal substances. That will end. Under this bill, all 58 provincially authorized drug consumption sites will be shut down within six months.

[10:15 a.m.]

This government also turns a blind eye to the diversion of social assistance payments toward illegal drugs. Current policy allows individuals to classify drug addiction as a disability, unlocking benefits intended for those with legitimate mental and physical disabilities. This bill closes that loophole.

Furthermore, there are presently no consequences when income or disability payments are misused to purchase illegal drugs. This bill will change that too. If a person receiving provincial benefits is convicted of a drug-related offence, their benefits will be suspended — and reinstated only after completion of an approved drug recovery program.

These measures mirror the licence suspension and rehabilitation requirements applied to impaired driving conditions. By eliminating this provincial financing for unlawful drug use, this bill will free up millions, if not billions, of dollars for recovery programs, community safety and to increase support for people who, through no choice of their own, rely upon income or disability assistance to make ends meet.

I therefore urge all members to vote in favour of this bill.

The Speaker: Members, the question is first reading of the bill.

Division is called.

[10:20 a.m.]

The Speaker: Is the House willing to waive the time?

Leave granted.

[10:25 a.m.]

The Speaker: Members, the member for Kelowna–Lake Country–Coldstream called division on her bill.

Motion approved on the following division:

YEAS — 84
Blatherwick	Dhir	Routledge
Elmore	Toporowski	B. Anderson
Neill	Osborne	Brar
Krieger	Davidson	Parmar
Sunner	Beare	Greene
Wickens	Kang	Begg
Arora	Higginson	Sandhu
Lajeunesse	Choi	Rotchford
Chant	Phillip	Popham
Dix	Sharma	Farnworth
Eby	Bailey	Kahlon
Chandra Herbert	Whiteside	Boyle
Ma	Yung	Malcolmson
Gibson	Glumac	Shah
G. Anderson	Chow	Morissette
Loewen	Kindy	Milobar
Halford	Rattée	Wat
Kooner	Banman	Hartwell
L. Neufeld	Van Popta	Dew
Clare	K. Neufeld	McInnis
Paton	Day	Chan
Toor	Hepner	Giddens
Dhaliwal	McCall	Wilson
Maahs	Block	Stamer
Gasper	Mok	Armstrong
Kealy	Sturko	Boultbee
Williams	Chapman	Bird
Doerkson	Luck	Tepper
NAYS — 2
Valeriote		Botterell

Tara Armstrong: I move that the bill be placed on the orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today.

Motion approved.

Rosalyn Bird: Before I start my statement, can I request leave for an introduction, please?

Leave granted.

Introductions by Members

Rosalyn Bird: I’d like to draw everybody’s attention to the gallery. Hannah, the executive assistant for our House Leader, is in the gallery today. However, it is her last day at the precinct for quite some time.

[10:30 a.m.]

She is leaving on maternity leave. So from the Conservative caucus, we want to thank you for your dedication and all your hard work. We wish you extremely well.

Heather Maahs: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

The Speaker: Proceed.

Heather Maahs: I would like to wish my granddaughter Landry Maahs a happy birthday today. I neglected to do that before.

Happy birthday to Landry.

Members’ Statements

International Women’s Day
and Women in Canadian Navy

Rosalyn Bird: Today I rise in recognition of International Women’s Day and to reflect on the legacy of women who have served our country in uniform.

The story of women in Canadian navy stretches back more than a century. In 1914, during the First World War, six nurses joined the Royal Canadian Navy and served aboard His Majesty’s Canadian Hospital Ship Prince George. At the time, they were not setting out to make history. Women in Canada did not even have the right to vote. They were simply answering the call to serve.

During the Second World War, more than 6,000 women joined the Women’s Royal Canadian Naval Service and served with distinction in 39 trades across Canada and overseas. Yet after the war, it would take decades before women would again serve at sea.

It was not until 1980 that mixed-gender crews were first trialled in the Canadian navy. In 1990, the frigate HMCS Nipigon returned to service as the first Canadian navy warship equipped to accommodate a mixed-gender ship’s company.

HMCS Nipigon was the first ship I sailed on when I joined the navy as a boatswain in 1990. Even then women in the forces often had to work harder to prove themselves and earn the same recognition as their male peers. Through hard work and perseverance, years later I was selected to commission from the ranks, and I served as a logistics officer for the remainder of my career. That experience only reinforced for me the importance of determination, discipline and leadership.

Over the 23 years I served, I saw meaningful progress, though challenges remained. In 2001, another barrier fell when submarine service was open to women, meaning every opportunity in Canada’s navy was finally accessible.

Today it is a privilege to serve the people of Prince George–Valemount, a community whose name, fittingly, was also carried by that hospital ship.

On International Women’s Day, we recognize women who served before us, women serving today and women who will lead us in the future.

Organ Donation
and Donor Registration

Debra Toporowski / Qwulti’stunaat: My nephew James was on a waiting list for a kidney. We had hoped just over a year ago that his cousin was a match, but then during the screening process, she found out she was pregnant. So different options were started and pursued. He received a call on December 27, 2025, and had the surgery on December 29.

I know not everyone has the same outcome, as I have witnessed many times over the 20 years with community members not receiving the call and passing away. Every year in British Columbia, hundreds of people are waiting, like my nephew, to receive that call that could save their life.

In British Columbia, more than one million people have already registered their intent to be donors through B.C. Transplant. That’s encouraging, but we can do better. There are still many more people waiting than there are organs available. Each registration donor has the potential to save up to eight lives and improve many more through tissue donation.

Registration is easy. It takes just a few minutes online — register.transplant.bc.ca. What takes the longest is the conversation with your loved ones so they know your wishes when it comes, and that matters most.

[10:35 a.m.]

Organ donation isn’t just about medicine or policy. It’s about compassion and community. When one person says yes to donation, it ripples out, saving patients, comforting families and strengthening our shared humanity.

Today I invite you to take the small but powerful step: register. I have. Talk about it. Inspire others. Together we can turn waiting lists into second chances and transform loss into the ultimate gift, life.

Mission Sunrise Rotary Club

Reann Gasper: When I think about Mission Sunrise Rotary Club, what stands out to me is how connected they are to our community. This is a group of people who care deeply about Mission and who consistently step forward to serve and support the people who live there.

When I first visited one of their meetings, I remember saying to them: “I feel like I’ve just met the heart of Mission.” Being in that room left a real impression on me. Listening to how they care for this community and seeing the passion they bring to their work was incredibly moving. I left that meeting feeling both humbled and inspired by their service.

The Mission Sunrise Rotary Club has a strong commitment to investing in our young people. Through the starfish backpack program, youth leadership initiatives, mentorship and scholarships, they are helping to support the next generation and encouraging young people to understand the value of leadership and giving back.

Their impact can also be seen in the everyday ways they serve, from volunteering for Hope Central to helping with local environmental cleanups that keep our community spaces healthy and cared for.

With International Women’s Day just around the corner, it is also important to recognize the women of this club. Their leadership, their dedication and the spirit of service play an important role in the work that the club does and the positive impact it has across our community.

What I admire most is the example this club sets. They remind us that strong communities are built by people who care enough to serve and look out for one another. Mission is stronger because of this club, and our community is better because they show up, serve and lead with heart.

Stress and Mental Health

Garry Begg: Our world has become an increasingly complex and confusing place in which we live.

We awaken one day to the news that war has broken out in Iran. There are global conflicts in the Ukraine and that continue in Syria and Israel.

We’re worried about financial pressures, our caregiving responsibilities and our obligation to our families. Issues of isolation and grief and the constant and ever-present information from the electronic and digital world keep our bodies and minds in a constant state of hyper-vigilance and constant awareness.

Anxiety and depression have become increasingly prevalent in health care complaints. Ordinary people are presenting at doctors’ offices, complaining about a racing heart, tight shoulders, poor or lack of sleep, restlessness or a mind that simply will not shut down even when the body is tired. For many, the hardest part is not the symptoms. It’s their fear that something is wrong with them for feeling the way they do.

Having spent many years in crisis and emergency management, I’m here to give you some hints. Anxiety and depression are not character flaws or personal failure. It is the nervous system doing exactly what it is designed to do — to notice imminent danger and prepare your body for response.

The problem, of course, begins when the system stays switched on too long. Our nervous systems are designed to endure short systems of stress, followed quickly by recovery. A threat appears, the body reacts, and once again, once the danger passes, our systems return to normal. Our modern lives today rarely allow that to happen.

[10:40 a.m.]

You oversee your life and your destiny. Stress and anxiety are normal. Our bodies experience moments of safety and rest. Change happens. Your sleep will improve. Your tense muscles will soften. Your thoughts become less urgent. Your anxiety may not disappear, but recovery will be easier.

If you live with anxiety and fear, there’s nothing wrong with you. Your body is trying to protect you. Let your body allow your mind to do its work.

Balcony Solar Energy

Rob Botterell: In North America, we are very good at taking simple solutions and making them very complicated. Balcony solar is one such simple idea.

Standard solar panels are easy to mount on apartments and condo balconies. The good news is that the CSA has approved hard-wired, professionally installed, balcony-mounted solar panels.

The cost of everything is going up. Groceries, child care, transit. Bills keep getting higher for all of us, but balcony solar makes electricity bills go down. The estimated payback time with a rebate for balcony solar would be about nine years.

Balcony solar is accessible to renters, not just homeowners, allowing for more equitable distribution of rebates across our province. The dollars used in a single-family home solar rebate would allow six households to gain access to balcony-mounted solar.

It gives us energy independence from volatile fossil fuel markets and foreign corporation. And it’s clean energy, turning sunlight into money and power.

Germany has seen the light. After Russia’s war with Ukraine destabilized energy resources, at least 1.5 million homes have registered as Balkonkraftwerk, balcony powerplants.

Balcony solar is rapidly expanding in Japan, South Korea, Netherlands and France, and more European countries are moving to adopt it in 2026.

In more than half of U.S. states, Republican and Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation that would boost adoption of do-it-yourself solar systems.

British Columbia should be next and lead the move to balcony solar in Canada. I’m very excited to be working with Salt Spring Island–based Skyblue Products and the Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions to make this happen in 2026. This is an exciting opportunity to move hundreds of Asian-based manufacturing jobs to B.C. — green industrial development.

Let’s bring B.C. out of the dark ages and enjoy solar-powered freedom.

International Women’s Day
and Human Rights

Harwinder Sandhu: I still remember, with immense pride and gratitude, walking into this Legislature on International Women’s Day on March 8, 2021, as a newly elected MLA.

Stepping into this people’s House brought tears to my eyes. I thought of my community who sent me here, the hardships I overcame and the history of this place, where people who looked like me were not even allowed to enter. Despite coming from British-ruled India, South Asian Canadians in B.C. had their right to vote stripped away in 1907 due to racial prejudice. They did not regain this right until 1947.

The history reminds us that rights are not given; they are fought for, and they must be protected. That is why March 8, International Women’s Day, matters so profoundly. It’s not just a celebration; it’s a call for action. Women fought for the right to vote; the right to open bank accounts and to equal pay; for safety in the workplaces; for reproductive rights; for protection from violence.

Sadly, today across the world and here at home, we are seeing renewed attacks on those very rights. We cannot afford to go backwards. As a woman and as a mother of two strong, powerful daughters, I feel this deeply.

I stand for women and girls, for 2SLGBTQIA+ people, for people with disabilities, for newcomers, for seniors and for every person I represent. Human rights, including women’s rights, are non-partisan, and they are foundational. Regardless of our political stripes, we were sent here to protect people from discrimination, misogyny, violence, homophobia and hate.

Progress is never permanent. It demands vigilance, and it demands solidarity. So on this International Women’s Day, let us stand united from all sides of this House to defend the dignity, equality and human rights of every person in British Columbia.

We cannot go back, and together, we will not.

[10:45 a.m.]

The Speaker: A reminder to all members. Your two-minute statements must be two minutes. When we come back on Monday, please keep that in mind. Otherwise, the Chair may be compelled to interrupt you in midstream.

Oral Questions

Government Handling of
Reconciliation and Indigenous
Rights Issues

Peter Milobar: This week, we’ve discovered that the Premier has a very interesting grasp of versions of events with the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm deal that keep unravelling every day on him. So let’s recap.

Over the last year and a half, this government has had to walk back Land Act changes that were proposed, because the Premier realized how controversial those were. Then we had the Pender Harbour situation at the same time. We’ve had the Heritage Conservation Act changes have to be repealed.

We’ve had the Cowichan ruling, which has, understandably, created a lot of concern for the public. We’ve had the Gitxaała judgment that has created a lot of issues in the public. We’ve had salmon allocation meetings with the federal government and people worried about what’s going to happen with the salmon allocations.

Under the backdrop of all of that and all the discussion…. Oh, and the Premier is insisting he’s bringing forward DRIPA amendments, although no one in this House has actually seen that legislation yet, as the clock is ticking. Under the backdrop of all that, the Premier expects us to believe that he went to witness a signing ceremony with the federal government and the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm with zero briefing, zero knowledge ahead of time, zero understanding of what he was walking into.

A simple question to the Premier. I’ve been to signing ceremonies, First Nations signing ceremonies. They typically take a little bit of time, an hour, an hour and a half. The Premier is a busy person, after all. Does the Premier routinely make a practice of going to events, committing that block of time and having absolutely no idea what he is walking into and about to take part in?

Hon. David Eby: We’ve canvassed this for a couple of days. I’ve been as clear as I can be about the information that was provided to me in advance of attending the event. I understand the member is a leadership candidate. He wants his own chance to ask the question as well.

He does raise an important issue. There is clearly a difference between this side of the House and that side of the House in terms of what we understand our legal obligations are in relation to working with First Nations people. The member who asked me a question is a leadership candidate. The current leader of the Conservatives has been clear on the record. He says: “I fully support reconciliation.”

You’re either on the team or you’re not. I’m on the team, and I’m focused on what we need to be focused on. I’m clear in terms of my position. Our government believes that this is core to the economic success of our province. Agreements with First Nations, including with xʷməθkʷəy̓əm and others, pave the way for the $50 billion in final investment decisions that are coming forward just this year and the $200 billion in final investment decisions that we are targeting over the next ten years. With uncertainty, those projects will not move ahead.

If the member wants to govern this province — he says he does; he wants to be the leader — does he support this work? We support the work. I attended as a witness. I was honoured to attend. I support the federal government’s work on this.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. David Eby: I’ve reviewed the agreements. It is what the federal government needs to be doing. Does he agree with that?

The Speaker: Member, supplemental.

Peter Milobar: Well, this has nothing to do with our leadership race. This is about the Premier’s judgment.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Peter Milobar: I can understand the NDP’s fascination with parties that actually have leadership races and just drum out all the competition so that the Premier can be anointed. But this is about the Premier’s judgment and lack thereof.

This signing agreement ceremony happened on February 20. Two to three weeks later, the Premier acted like he didn’t know what anyone was talking about. It was only after pictures actually came out.

Now, it would be interesting. The Premier is a lawyer. I can only imagine him going to court and asking a witness, the main witness for the prosecution, what they saw. And the witness keeps saying: “I don’t know. I don’t know if I was there. I don’t know, Your Honour. I was the main witness, but I don’t know what I was actually witnessing.”

That is how ridiculous the defence has been from the Premier. And the story changes every day, so yes, we’re going to keep asking so the public can actually get the truth.

Again, the Premier danced around and didn’t actually answer the question I had for him. Is this a matter of practice that the Premier goes to events that would take up significant blocks of time for the Premier, especially in his own area of Vancouver, and not have a clue what he is walking into?

[10:50 a.m.]

Hon. David Eby: The Chief made a personal invitation to me to attend this event. Their local MLA does not represent their interests. I was honoured to attend as a witness to the event. I received the contents of the agreements at the same time as the opposition did and the general public did. We’ve reviewed this on a number of occasions.

What the member has completely dodged and what he is missing in terms of a leadership moment is to be clear with the members of the Conservative Party, who are going to be selecting a leader with his colleagues all across the other side, about what his position is about whether or not this work should be happening, because that is the core of their objection here. What they put on social media, that this was a land grab, that people’s private property was at risk — total fiction.

The xʷməθkʷəy̓əm Chief on the record, the Facebook posting the band had to put out, facing death threats now because of what the Conservatives said….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh. Members.

Thank you, Members.

Hon. David Eby: I will not retract that. That is a fact. People calling up the band office saying: “You cannot. You should not steal our land.” That’s what’s happening right now. The members may be uncomfortable with that, but that is the consequence of what they’ve been doing.

So now a moment for the member to stand up and say that he, like the current leader of the Conservatives, like the previous leader of the Conservatives, supports reconciliation, recognizes that First Nations title is real and that any government, any leader would have to do this work, would be facing significant court judgments and uncertainty by failing to do this work…

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members. Shhh.

Hon. David Eby: …and that $50 billion of investment in this province would be put on the line by denying that those rights exist. It’s very simple and straightforward, and I don’t understand why he’s not taking the opportunity.

Gavin Dew: At a critical time for reconciliation and land title, British Columbians need a Minister of Indigenous Relations who is present, informed and empowered. So why was that minister not briefed on the Haida litigation, and why was he not even at the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm signing ceremony for an agreement affecting his own riding?

Can the Premier explain who is actually in charge of Indigenous relations in this government?

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: Well, I invite the member to read the Hansard. We talked about this quite consistently through the estimates process.

Now, the issue seems to be, though, that the opposition rejects working with First Nations people, working with First Nations governments. When their party puts out online that the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm is coming for your home, when they’re coming for your land, when it couldn’t be further….

Interjections.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: They are, they say. No, they are not, hon. Member. They are not. I think it’s shameful that the member keeps repeating it and that other members…. Oh, is that a B.C. Conservative member? Pull up your X, Member. Take a look at your Twitter. Take a look at what your party has said. Unfortunately, your party continues to go on to promote division in our province, when we need to come together.

We need to be working together. When we work with First Nations, we get things done. More mines opening than under those people.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: More opportunity in clean energy. More opportunity in housing, community safety, supporting cultural revitalization. We do that with First Nations people. We don’t do it by dividing and trying to claim that they’re coming for your home when they aren’t.

The members should be ashamed for repeating those things on their…. Take a look online, Members. You’re all doing it, and you should be ashamed for it. The critic said: “No, no, no. They’re not coming for your home. I never said that.”

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: If their critic believes that, then why do all the others seem to repeat the opposite?

The Speaker: Member, supplemental.

Gavin Dew: The truth is that this government’s incompetence and inconsistency is promoting division. The story keeps changing, but we do know one thing. The MLA who, at least for now, holds the title of Minister of Indigenous Relations was not at the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm signing ceremony for an agreement affecting his own riding.

So which is it? Was he not invited, did he choose not to attend, or has the Premier sidelined him because he doesn’t trust him to do his job?

[10:55 a.m.]

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: Unlike the other side, we have strong relationships with our local First Nations Peoples, with our local Chiefs.

You know what? I speak with Chief Sparrow.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members. Shhh.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: Has the member ever spoken with Chief Sparrow from xʷməθkʷəy̓əm? Because if he would, and if he did, he would understand that Chief Sparrow and the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm are not coming for people’s private homes.

You know, one thing that the member might want to look at…. Maybe history doesn’t matter.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members. Members, order.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: I know for some of the members…. They said facts don’t matter in this debate. Well, they do, hon. Speaker. They do, hon. Members.

The former leader, who sits next to the critic…. In fact, when he was Minister of Indigenous Relations, he signed agreements with the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm — agreements that acknowledged Aboriginal title, agreements that acknowledged Aboriginal rights.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members. Shhh.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: And now they seem to pretend that history doesn’t matter, but they actually returned land when they were in government. The member sat at that cabinet table, and he returned the university golf course. He returned what’s called the triangle lands, out at Pacific Spirit Park, because he was acknowledging that title exists for xʷməθkʷəy̓əm — something that now, on their Twitter, they seem to pretend that they never did and that he never did.

I read what he had to say online. You know what? He pretended that history just somehow didn’t happen. Well, it does, and it exists. I would invite them to read history and understand our legal obligations here in this House.

Government Target for
Protection of Lands and Water

Rob Botterell: This government committed to protecting 30 percent of B.C.’s lands and waters by 2030. Scientists say protecting 30 percent of oceans, lands and fresh water is the bare minimum needed to prevent mass extinction and biodiversity collapse.

Protecting nature helps fight climate change. Study after study says that B.C. nature is worth more protected than pillaged, but the government is falling behind, and progress updates are nowhere to be found. Right now Canada has protected 14 percent of its land and over 15 percent of its waters, and most of that progress happened between 2000 and 2020. That’s 20 years.

Does the Minister of Environment seriously expect British Columbians to believe that the remaining 15 percent will be protected in just the next four years?

Hon. Randene Neill: I want to thank the member for the question. Any chance we get to talk about the work we’re doing in protecting 30 percent of our lands and waters is a good day for me.

Right now we have about 20 percent of British Columbia protected. We’re working on something called the northwest strategy, where, on this side of the House, we really work towards understanding that reconciliation, economic prosperity and conservation go hand in hand in hand. We’re doing that in the northwest.

If all goes well with all of the engagement that we’re doing publicly, sitting down with mining companies, farmers, foresters, First Nations and local governments to ask them to define what values are important to them in that area…. Once those decisions are made, we hope to have about an extra 5 percent protected, bringing us up to 25 percent.

Then we still have some work to do to protect the vital 30 percent. But understanding that we can do this in a really good way, with economic prosperity, conservation and working together with First Nations and reconciliation, we are going to get to 30 percent by 2030.

The Speaker: Member, supplemental.

Rob Botterell: As a follow-up to the minister, will the government, then, release a detailed plan, with timelines and maps, showing British Columbians, in more detail, how we’re going to get to 30 percent by 2030?

Hon. Randene Neill: Certainly maps do exist about the 20 to 22 percent that we have protected currently. And we will…. B.C. Parks Foundation has a lot of those areas also mapped publicly, talking about the areas that have been protected. I can certainly walk you through that map as well, but this is work that we’re incredibly proud of and will continue to promote publicly as we protect more areas.

[11:00 a.m.]

Surrey Memorial Hospital Capacity
and New Tower Project

Elenore Sturko: Last year more than 6,000 babies were born at Surrey Memorial Hospital. The Mata Tripta family birthing unit is an exceptional unit, but it was built to accommodate one family per room.

Now, because of capacity issues, every room has been turned into a cramped double room. Women are forced to share a toilet, impacting their privacy and infection control. New moms are also getting less rest after giving birth now that there are two crying newborns in every room. These overcrowded conditions are unacceptable and made worse by maternity diversions from hospitals across the region.

In 2024, Surrey residents were promised a new acute care tower to help alleviate the strain on maternity services.

The Speaker: Question, Member.

Elenore Sturko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Their 2024 news release said: “During the next 15 to 18 months, the project will proceed to the business planning phase.” The Fraser Health website, updated just this year, in 2026, still says: “During the next 15 to 18 months, the project will proceed to the business planning phase.”

The Speaker: Question, Member.

Elenore Sturko: With no business plan after two years and nothing in the 2026 budget, is the new Surrey Memorial Hospital tower one of the NDP’s repaced projects?

Hon. Bowinn Ma: Surrey has been a fast-growing community for many, many years. It is one of the fastest-growing cities in our province, and we are making the investments that are necessary to meet their needs.

I am so pleased that the member across the way was able to take a site visit to the new project, new hospital being built in Surrey-Cloverdale. This new hospital and cancer centre is under construction now. It means a second emergency room and B.C. cancer centre for Surrey. A new kidney and cardiac cath lab at Surrey Memorial has also been delivered.

We’re expanding maternity and NICU capacity at Surrey Memorial and strengthening care at Surrey Memorial, including boosting physician coverage, expanding internal medicine capacity and emergency department support and more. There is so much work already underway in Surrey, and there is more to come.

We are in the midst of a development of an additional acute care tower at Surrey Memorial Hospital, and we look forward to providing more information when that’s complete.

The Speaker: Member, supplemental.

Home Support Services

Elenore Sturko: It’s been more than two years since we’ve had that announcement, and still no business plan. But it’s not only Surrey residents and hospitals getting shortchanged by this government.

So 71-year-old Tom Cretain from Cloverdale has very profound physical challenges, but with funding through CSIL or choices in supports for independent living, Tom has been able to live in his own home, and he hasn’t had a stay in an acute care hospital bed since 1998. With hospitals like Surrey Memorial running over capacity, I’m sure the government would agree keeping people in their homes and out of acute care beds is a good thing.

To maintain his safety, Tom requires 720 hours of care per month, but he’s currently only funded for 500 hours. When Tom asked program administrators what he was supposed to do about the shortfall, he was told just to get creative with the scheduling or that he should pay his staff less.

The Speaker: Question, Member. Member, ask the question, please.

Elenore Sturko: Even at the minimum rate required by CSIL, Tom has had a hard time recruiting and retaining staff.

Does this minister expect people with profound disabilities to put their safety at risk and to shortchange their own caregivers because of this government’s incompetence?

Hon. Josie Osborne: Thank you to the member for the question and pointing out the incredible importance of providing home supports for people of any age, but particularly seniors. That’s why this government has taken steps in improving long-term care at home, improving community-based home supports for seniors, because we know that people want to live independently, that they are healthier when they live independently and that that results in better health outcomes.

That’s why we invested over $300 million in last year’s budget to support, through United Way, home supports for seniors. It’s why this year’s budget provides $35 million to Independent Living B.C. to help keep seniors in their homes.

We’re dedicated to this work. We understand just how important it is, and we’re going to continue doing it.

The Speaker: Members, I urge all members to have your short preamble before the question is asked because we have very limited time in the House.

[11:05 a.m.]

Human Rights and
Equity Hiring Program

Tara Armstrong: Universities in our province are carrying out racist and sexist hiring programs, and this government appears to be happy about it. SFU has 15 professorships for Black applicants only. UVic has positions restricted to those who are Indigenous or transgender only. And UBC now openly excludes applicants if they are healthy white men.

How does the NDP justify these discriminatory programs? Under their so-called human rights code, of course, in section 42.

My question is for the Attorney General. Does she support this blatant discrimination against white people, men and others targeted by the far Left, or will she rewrite her racist, sexist and abusive human rights code?

Hon. Niki Sharma: I’m often at a loss for words when this member asks questions, and I find myself in that place again.

I would ask the member to seek to understand how racism and discrimination show up in our communities and what the barriers are for people that they’ve faced in this country and continue to face based on their race and identity.

Our human rights code — we’re so proud of it on this side of the House. It’s what prevents women from being paid differently than men. It’s what prevents somebody from being fired based on the colour of their skin or their religion. It’s what prevents people from being treated differently across this province based on their identity. That is something we stand for unapologetically in this House, and we will not be making changes to that.

The Speaker: Member has a supplemental?

Tara Armstrong: Well, obviously, the NDP government supports discrimination as long as it punishes people that the far Left says are evil, like white people, for instance.

Let’s test my theory. My question to the Attorney General is this. Does the NDP government accept that it’s even possible for white people to experience racism, yes or no?

Hon. Niki Sharma: What we believe in is a province that gives everybody the opportunity to have a good life free from discrimination, free from barriers that are created based on their identity. We believe that strongly, and every single one of us on this side of the House works every day to achieve that vision for British Columbians.

It’s hard work. There’s a lot in the history of this province that shows us how discrimination can show up to make people’s lives and outcomes different. Just today one member from this House talked about how South Asians weren’t given the right to vote till 1947. This is the history that we all inherit in this place.

We will continue the work of creating the province that stands up for everybody and creates a space where they can live free of discrimination and to have the best life possible.

Forest Industry Conditions
and Support for Forest Workers

Lorne Doerkson: Last night I had a very emotional conversation with a couple that reached out to me after losing their job at the West Fraser mill in 100 Mile House after 17½ years of service. In a letter to me, they said: “We can’t even afford groceries.”

What does this Premier have to say to this family and the thousands upon thousands of families who have lost their jobs in this forest sector under his watch?

Hon. Ravi Parmar: I want to thank the member opposite for being a strong advocate for people in 100 Mile and throughout his region. His community has been devastated by the impacts of Donald Trump’s tariffs on our forest sector, on the end of the pine beetle kill and, of course, in particular as it relates to the 100 Mile operation, the impact of wildfires that have devastated that entire region.

It is so important for all of us, as we look up to the galleries to see steelworkers in the House — who are standing up not only for their workers, for union members, but for forestry workers in every corner of this province — that we do the work in this House to look forward, to ensure that we can build a strong, sustainable forest sector that can produce good-paying, family-supporting jobs.

[11:10 a.m.]

On this side of the House, we recognize the impact that the forest sector has on British Columbia. It provides good jobs. It provides revenue to pay for services. We are committed — the Premier, myself, our entire government — to ensuring that we can create more good-paying jobs, that we can stand up for forestry workers. We’re going to continue doing that work in 100 Mile and every part of this province.

Ward Stamer: Peter Lister, the executive director of the B.C. Truck Loggers Association, has said: “I’ve never seen it this bad. I’ve been involved in the forest industry for 35 years, and it’s really on the edge of collapse.”

Under this government’s watch, just in the last three years alone, 16 sawmills and pulp mills have been closed, 15,000 jobs have been lost. And a direct drop in government revenue of over $1½ billion….

Can the minister explain to union workers that are here today in this chamber and workers around B.C. how mill closures are protecting workers and their paycheques?

Hon. Ravi Parmar: Members of the United Steelworkers know how important forestry jobs are for their members and for communities all across British Columbia.

They also recognize that when those members sat on this side of the House, we lost 45,000 direct forestry jobs. We also lost 100,000 indirect jobs. They removed appurtenancy, which led to entire communities being devastated. We saw, from 2003 to 2017, a 140 percent increase in raw log exports leaving our province. Those are the last folks that we would ever give access to when it leads to forest policy.

Let’s talk about the work that we’re doing. When I inherited the Ministry of Forests, I knew that B.C. Timber Sales needed to change. I needed to ensure that that organization is delivering for British Columbians. In one year alone, a 30 percent increase in BCTS sales.

There is more work to do. We are expanding community forests. We’re making sure that we’re delivering a strong, sustainable forest sector. That’s the work that we’re going to do.

Heather Maahs: Can the minister explain to the union leaders here today why he promised 30,000 new jobs and delivered 15,000 job losses?

Hon. Ravi Parmar: What breathtaking arrogance from the member across the way. We are talking about a member who is part of a party that, when they sat on this side of the House, lost 45,000 jobs when they were in government, 100,000 indirect jobs.

Whenever I mention Trump and the impact that he’s having on our forest sector, that member defends Trump. In fact, that member in this House has defended Trump.

We on this side of the House are going to stand for union workers. We’re going to stand for our friends from the United Steelworkers and every forestry worker in every corner of this province.

Kiel Giddens: Geoff Dawe, national president of PPWC and longtime Catalyst Crofton power engineer, said: “Why are they allowed to export these logs while our jobs are being taken from us because of no fibre?”

That’s under this minister’s watch. The Minister of Forests just signed an order last month that will contribute to more log exports from Vancouver Island. The workers at Crofton deserve better. The Steelworkers from 100 Mile, Prince George and communities across the province are asking for a working forest in this province, and they deserve better.

When the Forests Minister isn’t doing his job, it’s leading to job losses for the people up in the gallery today. It’s clear from the government’s own budget that there is no plan in sight. The annual harvest is projected to remain stuck at 29 million cubic metres over the fiscal plan, and that harvest is a direct correlation to jobs. The industry believes that this harvest level will only lead to more closures.

Last year I asked the Forests Minister a simple question, and he knows what I’m going to ask, but I don’t want him to answer that for me. I want him to answer it for the Steelworkers who were up in the gallery today.

The Speaker: Question, Member.

Kiel Giddens: The Minister of Forests’ mandate from the Premier is a 45-million-cubic-metre harvest.

Will he resign if he can’t meet his mandate?

[11:15 a.m.]

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

Hon. Ravi Parmar: The absolute irony in this House.

You have a member across the way that just tabled a piece of legislation that would gut workers rights, that would gut union rights.

This coming from a member from Prince George–Mackenzie who prides himself on being a steelworker. I guess, not anymore.

Let me be very clear. When they sat on this side of the House, we lost 45,000 jobs. When they sat on this side of the House, they ripped communities apart when they removed appurtenancy. On this side of the House….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

Hon. Ravi Parmar: Sixteen long years, Members. We still remember every single day of those 16 long years when they sat on this side of the House. Those steelworkers know that it’s New Democrats that will fight for them every single day.

Let me be very clear. New Democrats will fight for our working forests, New Democrats will fight for our forestry jobs, and New Democrats will fight to ensure that dollars from Ottawa are invested in our workers here in British Columbia and every corner of our province.

[End of question period.]

John Rustad: I seek leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

The Speaker: Please proceed.

Introductions by Members

John Rustad: I just noticed up in the gallery we have former MP Kerry-Lynne Findlay, a leadership candidate here, as well as David Denhoff.

Would the House please make them welcome.

Scott McInnis: I rise on a point of order.

The Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation accused opposition of not having positive relationships with local First Nations, when in fact he has no idea.

And from the nations I talk to, it’s the Minister of Indigenous Relations who has work to do on his relationships.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Members.

The comments were made by the member for Columbia River–Revelstoke, but that was not a point of order, Member.

Brennan Day: I seek leave to move my motion M204.

Leave not granted.

Point of Order

Amna Shah: I rise on a point of order.

I recognize that the standing orders that were agreed to by the House recently are fresh, but I’m unclear on the procedural application applied. I’m looking for your guidance and clarification for all private members as we mature in this new process. Before I get into it, I seek that this clarification be on a go-forward basis, and I hope that whatever ruling you provide does not affect members in a negative way.

Specifically, I’m seeking clarification on Standing Order 27, on subsection (5) and subsection (6) of Standing Order 27A. Subsection (6) of Standing Order 27A says: “If a member does not have an eligible or designated item of business to advance in accordance with Standing Order 27(5), the member shall be moved to the bottom of the placement list for private members’ business.”

Subsection (5) of Standing Order 27 says:

“The item of business that a member wishes to advance shall be on the order paper when the member reaches the third place on the list of assigned placements of members to present private members’ business. If a member has more than one item of business standing in their name on the order paper, when the member reaches the third place on the list of assigned placements of members to present private members’ business, the member shall provide the Clerk of the House with written notice of the item of business that the member intends to advance, which shall be so designated on the order paper.”

[11:20 a.m.]

It seems clear to me that “shall be on the order paper when the member reaches the third” means that the item must be added to the order paper before they reach third place to be on the paper when they reach third place.

My reading of the standing order is that it does not mean that it can be added at some point after they are already in third place. Further, I would like to see clarification on when a private member’s bill is considered “on the order paper after notice of the bill is given, after first reading of the bill or is it after it has been printed?

I hope you can provide the procedural guidance for all private members, again, on a go-forward basis, only whether a member will get moved to the bottom of the list if they do not have an item on the order paper already by the time they are put in the third place.

The Speaker: I’ll take that matter under advisement.

Are there any further submissions on this issue? Thank you.

Hon. Lana Popham: I’m seeking leave to make an introduction.

Leave granted.

The Speaker: Please proceed.

Introductions by Members

Hon. Lana Popham: I didn’t want to miss these wonderful folks that are joining us today. We have teacher Melissa Turnbull joining us from Claremont Secondary School with 41 of her grade 10 students.

I welcome you. I live a couple blocks from Claremont. My son graduated from Claremont. It’s a fabulous school.

I’d like to welcome you to the chamber today.

Orders of the Day

Hon. Mike Farnworth: In this chamber, I call second reading of Budget Measures Implementation Act.

In Section A, the Douglas Fir Room, I call committee stage on Bill 3, Budget Measures Implementation Act (No. 2).

In Section C, the Birch Room, I call Committee of Supply, estimates for the Ministry of Education and Child Care.

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 2 — Budget Measures
Implementation Act, 2026

Deputy Speaker: Members, we’re just going to take a brief recess of a couple of minutes.

The House recessed from 11:23 a.m. to 11:25 a.m.

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Members. We’ll call the chamber back to order where we are going to contemplate Bill 2, Budget Measures Implementation Act of 2026, and I’ll call on the Minister of Finance.

Hon. Brenda Bailey: I move that Bill 2, Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2026, be read a second time now.

Bill 2 consists of two parts. Part 1 of the bill makes a number of amendments in relation to non-tax measures. The bill amends the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act in three ways.

First, the bill amends the Balanced Budget and Ministerial Accountability Act to include the 2028-2029 fiscal year in the period of fiscal years that may contain a deficit in the main estimates. Budget 2026 includes a three-year fiscal plan extending to ’28-29 and it includes deficit forecasts for each of the three years of the fiscal plan. This proposed amendment ensures that the fiscal plan as presented in Budget 2026 is in line with legislation and past practice.

Second, the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act is amended to bring forward the reporting requirements with respect to public accounts and related reports from August 31 to July 31. This change will be in effect for the 2026-2027 public accounts and supports the timely release of year-end fiscal results. The bill also amends the Financial Administration Act and the Insurance Corporation Act to keep the year-end reporting requirements harmonious.

Third, the bill amends the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act to increase the threshold requirement for reporting major capital projects from the current amount of $50 million to $125 million. This update is to reflect inflation since the current threshold was originally set in 2000.

The bill also amends the Public Service Act to close the Office of the Merit Commissioner during this coming fiscal year and transition key functions into the Public Service Agency. This change recognizes that the PSA has strengthened its work to create a hiring culture that is transparent, accountable and upholds the principle of merit — a culture that attracts and retains top-level talent. The PSA will continue to provide public annual reports on hiring, promotions and dismissals in the public service. The avenue for public service employees with questions or complaints about promotions or dismissals is and will continue to be through the PSA.

The bill also amends the Economic Stabilization (Tariff Response) Act to remove the sunset requirements for part 2 of the act related to procurement directives. The intention is for the Minister of Citizens’ Services to assume responsibility of the act.

Part 2 of Bill 2 amends several statutes to implement tax measures. As announced in Budget 2026, the tax measures in Bill 2 represent careful choices to protect core services that British Columbians rely on.

The bill amends the Land Tax Deferment Act to change the terms of property tax deferment loans so that other B.C. taxpayers are no longer subsidizing these loans. To achieve this for 2026 and later years the loan terms will be more closely aligned with commercial lending terms with an interest rate of prime plus 2 percent and monthly compounding.

[11:30 a.m.]

The deferment program will continue to give seniors and families flexibility to help manage their expenses. It remains an affordable way to help people, particularly those on fixed incomes, and we’re making sure it works as intended. These changes don’t impact people’s day-to-day finances. Homeowners can use the program to have a bit of relief as they pay the province back later, like when they sell their house.

The bill also amends the homeowner grant to remove the extra $200 grant to homeowners outside the capital, Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley regional districts. The extra amount was meant to offset increased fuel costs that were associated with the carbon tax, which has now been repealed. The general homeowner grant of $570 remains available across the province. In fact, 92 percent of homeowners in B.C. remain eligible for this amount.

The bill amends the speculation and vacancy tax to increase the tax rate in 2027 from 3 percent to 4 percent for foreign owners and untaxed worldwide earners. The new rate will apply to the speculation and vacancy tax payable by property owners based on the use of their residential properties during the 2027 calendar year and onward.

Increasing the speculation and vacancy tax rate for foreign owners and untaxed worldwide earners will help turn more vacant and underutilized homes into housing for people rather than empty investments. With the federal government ending its national underused housing tax, it’s important for B.C. to continue to discourage speculation. All of the revenue from the speculation and vacancy tax will continue to help pay for affordable housing initiatives right here in British Columbia.

The bill also amends the School Act to increase the additional school tax. For the 2027 and later tax years, the rate applied to the portion of the property valued between $3 million and $4 million will increase from 0.2 percent to 0.3 percent. The rate for the portion of the property exceeding $4 million will increase from 0.4 percent to 0.6 percent.

The bill also modernizes the Provincial Sales Tax Act by extending its application to professional services, notably accounting and bookkeeping services, architectural services, engineering and geoscience services, non-residential rental property and non-residential strata management services, commissions related to buying and selling non-residential real estate, and security and private investigation services.

Expanding the PST to these services is generally consistent with how the tax applies these services in most provinces. As an example of consistency, similar to Saskatchewan, B.C.’s PST will apply to 30 percent of the purchase price of architectural engineering and geosciences services instead of the full purchase price.

In order to help protect core services, the bill amends the Income Tax Act to increase the personal income tax rate on the first $50,363 of income. The rate will increase by 0.54 percent to 5.6 percent starting in the 2026 tax year. This higher rate will also apply when calculating B.C.’s basic credits, like the personal amount and the age amount.

To further mitigate the effects of this change for people with lower income, the bill also increases the value of the B.C. tax reduction credit from $575 to $690 for the 2026 and later years. More than 40 percent of taxpayers will see savings as a result.

For the 2027 through 2030 tax years, Bill 2 amends the Income Tax Act to freeze personal income tax brackets and non-refundable tax credits at their 2026 levels. Bill 2 also creates new tax programs as well as renews existing ones to support a more innovative and productive B.C.

Case in point, this bill creates a new temporary manufacturing and processing investment tax credit to support capital investments made in B.C. over the next ten years. It provides a 15 percent refundable tax credit to Canadian-controlled private corporations that acquire machinery and equipment, or buildings used for manufacturing and processing, up to a maximum investment of $2 million per year. The full amount of the credit is available for acquisitions within the first five years of the program, April 1, 2026 to March 31, 2031.

[The bells were rung.]

Deputy Speaker: Minister, maybe just take a quick pause while the bells ring.

Hon. Brenda Bailey: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[11:35 a.m.]

Deputy Speaker: Apologies, Minister. I couldn’t hear you.

Hon. Brenda Bailey: Thank you.

Acquisitions between April 1, 2031, and March 31, 2036, are eligible for the credit but will receive a reduced amount, as the credit begins the five-year phase-out on April 1, 2031.

To give businesses predictability when making their long-term investment decisions, the bill makes both the scientific research and experimental development and the book publishing tax credits permanent by removing the sunset dates. Further, for the scientific research and experimental development tax credit, or SRED, the bill expands eligibility for the refundable portion of the tax credit to Canadian public corporations, aligning the rules with federal changes first announced December 2024.

Similarly, responding to feedback from B.C.’s film industry, the Income Tax Act is also amending four changes to the film tax credit programs after significant consultation with industry. Effective for notices or filings due on or after February 17, 2026, the pre-certification notice requirement for the production services tax credit is removed. The filing deadlines for both the Film Incentive B.C. and the production services tax credit are extended from 18 months to 36 months after the end of the corporation’s tax year.

The completion certificate required by Film Incentive B.C. tax credit claimants will no longer need to be filed with the CRA, and effective March 1, 2026, the certification fee for the production services tax credit is increased to $19,000 and the major production tax credit is set at $5,000 for corporations that begin principal photography after December 31, 2024.

This bill also creates a new $6,000 children and youth disability supplement as part of the B.C. family benefit. This new payment is available to families who have children with support needs and are eligible for the federal disability tax credit. Families with income up to $50,000 receive the full $6,000 benefit, and families over that income threshold get a partial benefit above that limit.

The children and youth disability supplement will be administered on B.C.’s behalf by the Canadian Revenue Agency. Eligible families will see their first payment added to their July 2027 B.C. family benefit payment.

The Income Tax Act is also amended to double the volunteer firefighter or search and rescue volunteer tax credit from $3,000 to $6,000, recognizing the crucial service these volunteers provide to their communities.

The bill also makes the farmers food donation tax credit permanent by removing the sunset date, ensuring this important source of food for B.C. families remains available.

The shipbuilding and ship repair industry tax credit for eligible employees that take on apprentices is also extended to the end of 2027 through amendments to the Income Tax Act.

Bill 2 maintains momentum on the construction of housing by amending the Property Transfer Tax Act to extend purpose-built rental exemptions to situations in which the developer has leased the housing units to tenants prior to the sale of the newly constructed purpose-built rental building. This practice is common among developers, and the change being implemented is after consultations with industry.

In order for the sale to be eligible for these exemptions, the sale must occur within 24 months of the commencement date of the first lease and meet all the existing eligible requirements of the purpose-built rental exemptions.

Finally, the bill makes various technical changes to harmonize with federal income tax provisions, as well as other technical amendments.

Gavin Dew: I am pleased to rise in the House to speak to Bill 2.

At the outset, let me be clear. British Columbians understand that government needs a budget and that government needs legislation to implement that budget. But what British Columbians also understand, better than this government seems to, is that budgets are moral documents. They reveal priorities. They reveal what a government thinks it can get away with. And they reveal who the government thinks should carry the burden when times are tough.

[11:40 a.m.]

Bill 2 is presented as a budget implementation bill, but this is not just routine housekeeping. This is the bill that gives legal effect to the government’s choice to raise taxes on paycheques, expand taxes onto more goods and services, reduce relief for rural and northern homeowners and, at the same time, weaken independent oversight that is supposed to protect the public from patronage and insider dealing.

That is the real shape of this bill — more burden on the public and less independent scrutiny on government. At a time when more British Columbians than ever are struggling to make ends meet, this government has launched an all-out attack on working families, seniors, homeowners and small business.

Bill 2 increases the lowest personal income tax rate in British Columbia from 5.06 percent to 5.6 percent. That is not a narrow tax aimed at a small group of high earners. That applies to the first bracket of taxable income. It touches workers, seniors and families. It hits people who are already watching groceries, gas and mortgage payments.

And then, as if that were not enough, this bill freezes indexation of tax brackets and non-refundable credits for several years. So even after raising the lowest rate, the government is setting British Columbians up for bracket creep, as inflation does their dirty work.

Let’s talk about what that means in plain language, because this is where governments try to hide behind jargon. Bracket creep is not a theory. It’s not a talking point. It’s just math. When inflation pushes wages up just to keep pace with the cost of living and the tax brackets do not move with inflation, more of a person’s income gets taxed at higher rates. People pay more tax even if they’re not actually better off in real dollar terms. That is the cold, cruel mathematical reality.

This government may or may not be economically illiterate, and they may wish the public was too. But wishing does not change arithmetic. Freezing indexation is not fiscal genius. It’s an undercover tax hike. It’s a way to raise revenue without having to look British Columbians in the eye and say: “Yes, we’re taking more from you next year as well.” It is trickery dressed up as policy.

We should be very clear about what kind of government does this. A serious government makes tax policy openly, transparently and with economic literacy. A serious government makes policies informed by evidence, not by the hope that people will not notice what is happening to them. This House should not accept policies designed to fool people and get one past them.

The government will say it increased the B.C. tax reduction credit. Fine. But that does not change the basic fact that this bill raises the entry-level income tax rate and then turns off the protection that prevents inflation from quietly raising taxes year after year. A government that truly understood cost-of-living pressures, which are hammering everyday British Columbians, would not raise taxes on the first slice of income and then quietly let inflation do the rest.

Now let’s talk about the provincial sales tax. This budget is an assault on small business, and they are not taking it lying down. Bill 2 expands PST to a wide range of professional services that businesses rely on to operate, including accounting and bookkeeping, architectural services, engineering and geoscience services, non-residential real estate services such as property and strata management, and security services.

This is not some arcane technical tweak. This is the government taxing the cost structure of the private sector, and by extension, the cost structure of the entire economy. The NDP’s PST expansion is a direct hit on small businesses and a guaranteed price hike for everyday British Columbians, with most businesses saying they will be forced to pass these costs on. This plan is reckless, anti-competitive, and it punishes the very people who keep local communities running and locals working.

We don’t have to speculate about what will happen, because the Canadian Federation of Independent Business asked small businesses directly. In a flash survey of 439 B.C. business owners released today, CFIB found that 80 percent oppose expanding the 7 percent PST to professional services like accounting, security and non-residential real estate services. They found that 72 percent say they are likely to pass on some or all new PST costs to customers. That’s how the economy works.

CFIB also found out where the pain concentrates. Accounting and bookkeeping come out as the biggest negative impact, then property management, then security services, then architectural, engineering and geoscience services.

[11:45 a.m.]

In other words, this tax hits the services that keep businesses compliant, keep projects moving, keep buildings designed safely, keep properties managed and keep storefronts protected. That means this is not just a tax on business. It is a tax that cascades. It becomes higher costs for consumers, higher strata fees, higher commercial rents, higher bills, higher prices.

There is something even more offensive here, because this government is choosing to tax safety. Let’s zoom in on the security services piece, because it tells you exactly how upside down this government’s priorities are.

Business districts across British Columbia are living through a public safety crisis. Cities are paying more. Business improvement areas are paying more. Small businesses are paying more through theft, damage, lost revenue and the growing cost of private security because police can’t keep up. So when businesses are already paying the price for this government’s failures, why is this Premier now making them pay 7 percent more just to protect themselves?

The Premier says the struggles of small business are just anecdotes. Well, business districts have been measuring what is happening. Business Improvement Areas of B.C. surveyed its members. Ninety percent say violent repeat crime has had a moderate to severe impact, and 40 percent report annual losses of $5,000, with many reporting losses in the tens of thousands. This is not a tax on growth; it is a tax on safety. It’s like taxing fire extinguishers in the middle of a fire.

The government cannot pretend the tax on security stays contained in the business community. CFIB’s survey found that 72 percent of businesses said they are likely to pass on some or all of these new PST costs to customers, so the tax on security becomes a tax on every shopper, every tenant, every family, because it gets built into the price of doing business.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

Now let’s talk about the damage that does to jobs in the professional services sector, especially for young people. Professional services are a starting point for thousands of young British Columbians. Entry-level roles in accounting, bookkeeping, property management and related services are where people learn the ropes, get their designation hours and build careers.

This government is about to add a legislated 7 percent cost increase across the board on those services. That is a direct hit on demand and a direct incentive for firms to cut back, automate, consolidate or move work elsewhere at exactly the wrong moment.

Noting the hour, I reserve my place to continue at the next sitting and move adjournment of the debate.

Gavin Dew moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Reporting of Bills

Bill 3 — Budget Measures
Implementation Act (No. 2), 2026

Stephanie Higginson: Section A reports Bill 3 complete without amendment.

The Speaker: When shall the bill be read a third time, House Leader?

Hon. Brenda Bailey: Next sitting.

Sunita Dhir: Committee of Supply, Section C, reports progress on the estimates of the Ministry of Education and Child Care and asks leave to sit again.

Leave granted.

Hon. Brenda Bailey moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1 p.m. today.

The House adjourned at 11:48 a.m.