Hansard — Thursday, March 12, 2026 Morning, Issue No. 140

I want to introduce a family friend, Kayla Huber, and somebody that will be maybe running this House one day but probably has bigger aspirations, my daughter, Alexandra Halford.

Hon. Adrian Dix: Aujourd’hui nous célébrons la Journée de la francophonie en Colombie-Britannique.

[Today we celebrate Francophonie Day in British Columbia.]

[French text and translation provided by Hon. Adrian Dix.]

We’re celebrating Francophonie Day in British Columbia. I want to welcome all of the members of the House to the celebration in the noon hour. It’s going to be fantastic. Yes, I’ll be speaking, but there will be things that you’ll really want to see in addition to that, I’d say.

Francophone communities play a huge role in British Columbia, as everybody knows, and we’re honoured to have a number of special guests with us today in the Legislature.

Raphaël Dang, consul général de France à Vancouver, who is a very, very distinguished and thoughtful individual. I hope members will have the opportunity to meet him. Marie-Nicole Dubois, présidente de la Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique — the opportunity to meet Marie-Nicole this morning.

Christian Leclerc, président de la Fédération des parents francophones de la Colombie-Britannique. Marie-Andrée Asselin, ancienne directrice générale de la Fédération des parents francophones de la Colombie-Britannique, accompagné par son fils William. Jean-Benoît Deschamps, procureur administratif de la Couronne, responsable des poursuites bilingues; he works for the Attorney General. Julie Fafard, attachée à la Francophonie pour l’Ouest Canadien et les Territoires, antenne du Québec à Calgary.

[French text provided by Hon. Adrian Dix.]

We want to thank all of our guests here today and welcome you for our lunchtime celebrations, especially you, hon. Speaker.

I’d like all of us to wish our francophone guests welcome on this extraordinary — extraordinaire, quand même — day.

Scott McInnis: It’s a bittersweet day for our household. Our one and only son, Luke, turns 16 today, so I’d like to wish him a happy birthday.

But I would like to speak directly to my son for a second, if I may.

No, you and the boys cannot borrow the truck, so don’t ask your mother.

Would the House help me wish my son a happy birthday today.

Dana Lajeunesse: Today I want to introduce the work of two extraordinary individuals from my riding. A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of meeting these folks in my constituency office in Sooke.

The South Island Primary Care Society is a non-profit organization that in two years has taken over three clinics that were at risk of closing and subsequently opened two new clinics on the south Island and are now hosting over 30 primary care providers.

The South Island Primary Care Society is proud to announce the Metchosin primary care clinic as their seventh clinic and will support rural residents in Metchosin and the SC’IȺNEW̱ Nation. The clinic will bring three nurse practitioners and a pediatrician to the community.

Joining us in the House today are Alyssa Andres and Jill Benton. Alyssa is the executive director of the South Island Primary Care Society, and over the past two years, she has worked with physicians, nurse practitioners, municipalities and community partners to open several new community-based clinics and has helped attach thousands of patients to ongoing primary care.

Jill is the medical director at the Metchosin primary care clinic as it prepares to open its doors. Jill has spent the past 15 years working across a range of health care roles, including a decade as a family and palliative nurse practitioner.

[10:10 a.m.]

Throughout their career, they have developed a deep commitment to team-based care, working collaboratively with patients, families and colleagues across disciplines to support community health.

Please join me and give Alyssa and Jill a warm House welcome.

Larry Neufeld: As I’ve mentioned a number of times in this place of honour, British Columbia does not end at Hope. There’s a whole heck of a lot more province to the north of that.

Mile Zero of the Alaska Highway is one important component of that, and I’m pleased to announce that today I have a very important constituent here with me that lives at Mile 6 of the Alaska Highway.

I’d like the House to make my constituent feel very welcome, and her name is Ferrol Pavlis.

Hon. Ravi Kahlon: I want to make two quick introductions.

I want to join the Leader of the Official Opposition in welcoming his family. He left, for the record, when I was going to do this.

I shouldn’t have said that. I apologize.

His lovely wife, Holly, and I have been friends for a long time. In fact, we’ve been friends longer than they’ve met. Sometimes in question period, when he gets a little fired up, I just whisper over to him that I’m going to tell Holly. Now that she’s literally here, he better be on good behaviour.

I want to join him in welcoming her and the entire family today.

Also, I’ve got folks from my GCPE team here today. I just want to thank them for the work — many of them supported the Minister of Finance, as well, before — and recognize that they work hard every single day. I appreciate them.

Todd Harmer is here with them, and he’s leaving. I heard he didn’t like to wake up early for labour force survey days, so he’s leaving the team. But he’s joining another team within government.

I want to appreciate him, thank them and welcome the Leader of the Official Opposition’s family.

David Williams: Today I have three generations of family here. First off, my spouse, Denise, who does all the work when I’m away here in Victoria. Accompanying her is her mom, Caroline. It’s Caroline’s 90th birthday tomorrow. She’ll be 90 years young tomorrow. Accompanying her is her eldest granddaughter, Amanda.

Please welcome them.

Welcome.

Also, a happy birthday to Caroline.

Hon. Laanas / Tamara Davidson: Joining us in the House today, we have two members of the Yellowstone to Yukon Initiative. I’d like to introduce Nadine Raynolds, director of communities and conservation, here visiting from New Denver, and also Tim Burkhart, director of landscape protection, from Nanaimo.

They joined me in my office this morning to talk about the B.C. outdoor recreation strategy, as well as the support and alignment that we have from them.

Would the House please join me in welcoming them to the House.

Statements

Appreciation for
Service of David Crebo

Hon. Mike Farnworth: It’s my pleasure but also my sadness today to thank my communications director, Dave Crebo. Today is his last day of service to me and also to my ministry and to government in general. He has had an amazing career over the years. He’s retiring to go on to, I think, more pleasant things than, sometimes, being in charge of communications.

I just want to thank him for the amazing work that he has done, wish him well in his retirement and ask the House to please thank him for his years of dedicated service to this place.

Introductions by Members

Hon. Christine Boyle: I’m also delighted today to welcome members of our outstanding GCPE team, who are joining us in the gallery: Caroline McAndrews, Matthew Borghese, Angela Soukoreff, Andrew Hughes, Mahee Azreen and many other members of the team who weren’t able to join.

I really want to recognize the tireless work that this team does on public engagement and communications, their dedication and professionalism and their steady support and good humour in everything that they do. Really grateful to get to work with them.

[10:15 a.m.]

I also have my chief of staff, Lauren Reid, here. Her mom, Colleen Reid, is visiting from Ontario to the Legislature for the very first time. Colleen is a proud mom of three and was a dental hygienist for 42 years before retiring and supporting her husband and their family business in downtown Kingston.

Colleen, your daughter is doing amazing work here. We’re so grateful to get to work with her.

Will the House join me in making all of them feel welcome.

Stephanie Higginson: I am thrilled to have two inspiring and award-winning constituents in the House today. Janel and Teegan are visiting from Oceanside.

Stand up, you two. You deserve all the accolades.

Janel is the founder of Oceanside’s 100 kids who care and will be starting first-year political science at Carleton in September. Teegan started Fridays for Future’s “Youth Strike 4 Climate Crisis” in Oceanside, continued to engage in these actions at the Qualicum Beach town hall for many years, but has recently retired and will be attending Queen’s University to study sciences in the fall.

Colleagues, these two young women inspire my work every day, and I’m fairly confident that not too long from now, they will be sitting in this House, despite Janel saying no. I know it’s in her blood. She’s going to be here.

I want you to know that I do this work every day to make the world a better place for you, and I thank you for the inspiration that you give to me every day.

I would like my colleagues to help them feel very welcome and ensure that they leave this place feeling as inspired and as valued as they did when they came. Thank you, everyone.

Hon. Bowinn Ma: I get to wish my grandmother a happy birthday today. In my nine years in the House, this is the first time I’ve actually managed to get it right on her date. It’s not just forgetfulness, though. I will explain.

My grandmother was born, on the lunar calendar, on January 24, 1930, which is the equivalent of February 22, 1930, in the western calendar. She prefers to count her age by the lunar calendar, so this year her birthday falls on March 12, 2026. She will be turning a solid age of 96 years old, or a nominal traditional Chinese age of 97 years old.

Would the House please join me in wishing my grandmother a happy birthday.

Hon. Brenda Bailey: I just very quickly would like to also add some accolades to the GCPE group in the House — two people in particular, Caroline and Angela, who took a very inexperienced minister, terrified of the world, and trained her up a bit.

We had some great times together. Thank you very much for everything you did when I was the Minister of JEDI.

The Speaker: The member for Esquimalt-Colwood, and the baby.

Darlene Rotchford: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have three introductions to make today.

First I’d like to recognize, in the gallery, my staffer Alex, from my constituency office. Alex started part-time with me and is now moving into a full-time position. During the last federal election, unfortunately, her employer wasn’t re-elected, so I was very excited to pick her up for my office.

Will the House make her feel most welcome.

The Speaker: Oh, one more. It’s not over yet.

Darlene Rotchford: I said three. I’m kind of busy, man.

Certainly, another person that I…. We all talk about our family here, and people hear me talk about how amazing a husband I have. I couldn’t do it or see this one or do my job…. Joey Rotchford is in the House, my amazing husband, who not only watches my two amazing daughters and is raising two amazing daughters but keeps me organized — which is not always easy, I know.

Last but not least, baby Jo, who we will talk more about, but baby Jo is turning one tomorrow.

I hope everyone will give us a clap and welcome them both in the House.

Harman Bhangu: I just want to wish Ted Campbell, a constituent of mine who is an avid watcher of the B.C. Legislature…. He’s also a book writer and, overall, just a great community guy. He’s been a great guide for me.

Would the House wish him a happy birthday.

[10:20 a.m.]

Hon. Sheila Malcolmson: I invite the House to welcome here again anti-poverty activists and accessibility advocates Brent Frain and Sonjia Grandahl to the House.

Introduction and
First Reading of Bills

Defunding Aboriginal
Title Claims Affecting
Private Property Act

Tara Armstrong presented a bill intituled Defunding Aboriginal Title Claims Affecting Private Property Act.

Tara Armstrong: I move that a bill intituled Defunding Aboriginal Title Claims Affecting Private Property Act, of which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, be introduced and read a first time now.

Aboriginal title claims over private property create chaos and uncertainty. They are a serious threat to the stability of our economy. This bill will help the government push back against the groups bringing these reckless claims.

First, the bill will require the suspension of all non-essential provincial funding to any Indigenous group that has commenced an Aboriginal title claim affecting private property within British Columbia.

In practical terms, this would immediately suspend all non-essential provincial funding to the Cowichan Tribes, which were granted Aboriginal title over private properties in Richmond last summer. It would also suspend all non-essential provincial funding to the Tk’emlúps Indian band, which is currently pursuing an Aboriginal title claim affecting the private homes of the city’s 100,000 residents. By doing so, the bill ensures that the government does more than wring its hands and offer empty gestures when private property comes under threat.

The bill also prohibits the use of any provincial funding by any person for the purpose of supporting an Aboriginal title claim over private property. This prevents non-governmental organizations from supporting these claims using tax dollars they receive from the province.

This bill will only apply to Aboriginal title claims that include fee simple lands owned by private businesses and citizens in B.C. So if the province’s 200-plus Indigenous groups wish to continue receiving funding from B.C.’s generous taxpayers, the solution is simple. Leave the private properties of British Columbians alone.

I commend the bill to the House.

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

Division has been called.

[10:25 a.m.]

Members, while you’re sitting, please sit in your own seat. Thank you.

[10:30 a.m.]

Members who are participating remotely, please make sure your video is turned on and audio is as well.

Member for Vancouver-Strathcona, your camera is not working. We see you are on Zoom. You are there. Could you please turn your camera on?

Members, the question is first reading of the bill introduced by the member for Kelowna–Lake Country–Coldstream.

[10:35 a.m.]

Motion negatived on the following division:

YEAS — 38
Loewen	Kindy	Halford
Wat	Kooner	Banman
Hartwell	L. Neufeld	Van Popta
Dew	Clare	K. Neufeld
McInnis	Bhangu	Paton
Day	Chan	Toor
Hepner	Giddens	Dhaliwal
McCall	Wilson	Maahs
Block	Stamer	Gasper
Tepper	Mok	Armstrong
Kealy	Brodie	Williams
Chapman	Bird	Doerkson
Luck		Davis
NAYS — 49
Lore	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	Valeriote	Botterell
	Sturko

Point of Order

The Speaker: Mr. Premier.

Hon. David Eby: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I rise on a point of order. The member for Kelowna-Mission. His conduct yesterday was sexist and inappropriate, and now he shows up today dressed as if the vote interrupted his trip to the gym.

You issued a reminder to all members to dress in contemporary business attire. The member has disrespected this House now two days in a row, and I ask that you issue a direction to the member.

Trevor Halford: I understand the Premier rose on the point of privilege, but the Premier had the opportunity to do so yesterday. He failed to take the opportunity to do that.

Also, if he’s able to do that, I’d like to stand on a point of privilege and ask him to clarify the comments he made regarding one of my members on vaccines and other things — derogatory comments that he made that were personally harmful and derogatory that I know for a fact he would not go outside of this House and do because he would end up in a courtroom.

If this Premier wants to have it both ways, he should go out there and say what he said in this House other than do it there.

The Speaker: Thank you, Members.

The Premier’s point of order is well taken, but please keep in mind it’s not a debate.

If other members have issues, too, or comments to make, then the Chair will take them under advisement.

The member for Kelowna-Mission wearing a hoodie does not stop us from counting his vote. His vote will be counted.

Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: Thank you, hon. Speaker. It was a point of order on the bill moved by the member for Kelowna–Lake Country–Coldstream. Based on my understanding of what she moved, it would offend the Constitution Act of 1982. I appreciated your ruling yesterday.

We have a duty to fulfil the law in this House and to move legislation and to take the time of this House with legislation that actually can fulfil the rule of law, not offend the Constitution of Canada, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the human rights code of the province of British Columbia.

The Speaker: Member, that bill on first reading was rejected by the House, so it’s not a point of order.

Anyone else? Member for Burnaby East.

Rohini Arora: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise on a point of order. I want to highlight the very harm that comes from even bringing these types of bills forward that the member for Kelowna–Lake Country–Coldstream just did. I would like to bring it on the record that this is stochastic terrorism. It is using your platform to mobilize people who are willing to cause harm, and I think that we should do something about this.

I just want to bring this to your attention, and I would like a response from you on it.

[10:40 a.m.]

The Speaker: Member, again, as I stated earlier, that motion was defeated by the House, so it’s not a point of order.

Jordan Kealy: I’d like to raise a point of order with the fact that that bill did not pass first reading, and not a single person in this House saw the details of that bill and the information that’s in that bill.

You’re passing judgment and assumptions on something that you don’t know.

This House is supposed to be making decisions off of details and facts and voting on them.

The Speaker: Member, let me make it clear, please. The House has made its determination already on that bill. It’s not a point of order. It’s not a matter for debate, so the Chair cannot intervene now.

Members’ Statements

Jared Falk and Drumeo

Korky Neufeld: Today I celebrate an incredible local success story, one that started in Abbotsford with a teenager who simply loved to hit the drums.

At just 15 years old, Jared Falk fell in love with music. What began as passion quickly became purpose, and by his early 20s, he was touring, teaching and carving out a path that few would have imagined. What makes Jared’s story so extraordinary isn’t just his talent. It is his vision, his work ethic and his unwavering belief that music education should be accessible to absolutely everyone.

From the early days of BreakSticks.com, FreeDrumLessons.com, to the creation of Drumeo in 2012, Jared and his team built something revolutionary. What started in a small Abbotsford studio has now become a global online powerhouse with over 50,000 active students, over six million followers and a library of lessons featuring some of the greatest drummers in the world.

Drumeo didn’t just change how people learn drums. It changed the industry entirely. It brought world-class instruction to living rooms everywhere, from beginners picking up sticks for the first time to seasoned musicians looking to sharpen their craft. Through Musora Media, that same spirit has expanded to guitar, piano and vocals, creating an entire community of people who simply want to play music because they love it.

What I admire most is that behind all this innovation, Jared has kept one thing at the centre: the human connection. Whether it is through live stream, feedback videos, interactive lessons, Drumeo reminds us that learning is most powerful when it feels personal. Jared’s journey from duck farming roots to global musician education leader is a reminder to every young person in any community that if you follow your passion, work relentlessly, stay creative and never stop learning, there’s no limit to what you can build.

Congratulations, CEO of Drumeo.

Members, look up Drumeo online for yourself.

Thank you, Jared Falk.

Journée de la Francophonie

Jennifer Blatherwick: On March 20, British Columbia will join voices around the world to celebrate la Journée internationale de la francophonie [International Francophonie Day].

Cette journée est plus qu’une simple date au calendrier; c’est un hommage à la tapisserie vivante des variétés de langue françaises et des cultures francophones qui enrichissent notre province.

French speakers around the province link us to a global francophone family that connects us to a larger cultural story.

I would like to thank the members of the international and Canadian francophone family for reaching out to us to express their sorrow and offer their condolences after the tragedy in Tumbler Ridge.

Chère famille de la francophonie Canadienne et mondiale: nous vous remercions.

[Dearest international and Canadian Francophone family: we thank you.]

Aujourd’hui nous marquons la diversité linguistique, l’ouverture et l’inclusion: des valeurs qui renforcent cette grande famille francophone à travers le monde et notre province.

[Today we mark linguistic diversity, openness and inclusion: values that strengthen this great Francophone family throughout the world and our province.]

At noon, we’ll gather in the Hall of Honour to celebrate this occasion together. As you know, each year the province highlights a particular theme. This year’s theme, “Le français pour la vie” [French for life], underscores how French is important at all life stages, beginning in early childhood with parents, grandparents and caregivers, libraries, community hubs and schools, and continuing into young adulthood through opportunities such as le Parlement jeunesse francophone [Francophone Youth Parliament].

[10:45 a.m.]

En ce jour où le drapeau de la francophonie flotte fièrement devant cet édifice, je vous invite à célébrer cette richesse et à remercier celles et ceux qui soutiennent nos jeunes dans la construction de leur identité francophone.

[On this day when the Francophonie flag flies proudly in front of this building, I invite you all to celebrate this richness and to thank those who support our young people in building their Francophone identity.]

Bonne Journée de la francophonie à toutes et à tous.

[Happy Francophonie Day to all.]

[French text and translation provided by Hon. Adrian Dix.]

BrainTrust Canada and
Advocacy and Support Services

Kristina Loewen: I rise today to recognize BrainTrust Canada. For individuals and families living with acquired brain injury, life can change in an instant. A fall, a car accident, a stroke and suddenly the path forward is uncertain, isolating and overwhelming.

What those at BrainTrust understand is that recovery is not just medical. It’s social, emotional and communal. Multiple studies show that more than half of people experiencing homelessness have a history of traumatic brain injury, an injury that often occurred before they became homeless. Brain injury is also disproportionately present among those involved in the justice system, struggling with substance use and living in poverty.

The team at BrainTrust builds community and connection. They advocate for those who struggle to advocate for themselves. BrainTrust offers case management, peer support, life skills, employment assistance and education. They offer dignity. They offer belonging and community. They offer hope.

System designs often do not account for cognitive impairment. Individuals may be labelled non-compliant, when in reality, they are living with memory loss, impaired emotional regulation or executive functioning challenges. Survivors of intimate partner violence may not even know they have sustained a brain injury. Youth exposed to violence may carry invisible neurological impacts into adulthood. People cycle through shelters, probation and treatment programs, often without screening, without accommodation and without understanding.

When BrainTrust steps in, they walk alongside individuals and families navigating life after injury. They recognize the person beyond the diagnosis. Amanda McFarlane, Katelyn Stoodley and their team see the person behind the injury. When they meet the client, they meet them with compassion and genuine care, not bureaucracy. They are supported to live full and meaningful lives.

The BrainTrust team reminds us that strong communities are built through people, people who choose to care, to advocate and to stand alongside others in their most vulnerable moments.

Herring Migration and
Protection of Spawning Stock

Stephanie Higginson: Late February and early March is a magical time of year on the Salish coast. This is when the Pacific herring migration arrives on the coast, marking the arrival of spring. During the migration to their spawning grounds along both coasts of Vancouver Island, the herring look like a living river of silver, and their milt turns the local waters turquoise.

The Strait of Georgia area of the Salish Sea holds nearly 40 percent of B.C.’s remaining spawning stock. Herring are a keystone species because this fish is the foundation of the ecological system of the ocean, forming the link between micro-organisms of the sea all the way through to the largest animals, including birds, larger fish, whales and humans.

When the herring arrive, it is often referred to as “the great feast” or “the big feast,” because every animal along the coast shows up for the event. The ocean splashes with sea lions. A cacophony of birds, from gulls and diving birds to eagles swooping down. Even humpback whales arrive for the feast.

But this amazing phenomenon, central to the local First Nations culture that thrived in balance for thousands of years, is in peril due to the risk of overfishing. Herring are harvested during the brief window when their roe is at peak quality. The roe fishery is one of the largest of the herring fisheries and opens in early spring, removing the fish before they have a chance to spawn.

Critics warn that continued overfishing could lead to an irreversible collapse, devastating marine ecosystems. Local knowledge-keepers and career marine biologists have all requested that DFO re-evaluate the current stock numbers to ensure the survival of this keystone species.

If you have an opportunity to get out and witness this incredible event, I encourage you to take a walk, to learn from the local nation about sustainable fishing practices and to relish in the beauty and the sounds of the arrival of spring on Coast Salish territory.

[10:50 a.m.]

Journée de la Francophonie

Jeremy Valeriote: Monsieur le président de la chambre, s’il vous plaît, et mes amis, on March 20, the United Nations celebrates French Language Day. I will also be marking French Language Day, and you’ll have to brace yourselves for my second language, French.

Le français est une des deux langues officielles du Canada. C’est une langue commune qui unie et rassemble partout à travers notre pays.

Avant la ruée vers l’or, la Gold Rush, la langue la plus parlée dans l’ouest du Canada était le Français. Maintenant, plus de trois cent mille résidents de la Colombie-Britannique sont capables de soutenir une conversation en Français.

Les communautés avec la plupart de francophones sont toutes situées a West Vancouver–Sea to Sky: Pemberton a dix-neuf pour cent, ses environs a dix-sept pour cent et Whistler a seize pour cent.

La ville britanno-colombienne de Maillardville — salut a la membre de Coquitlam-Maillardville — honore les traditions franco-canadiennes chaque année avec le Festival du Bois. Les gens mangent la soupe aux pois, la tourtière et la tarte au sucre, tout en écoutant la musique francaise, traditionnelle et mondiale.

Parmi les personnes qui parlent le Français au Canada, plusieurs sont arrivées d’ailleurs dans le monde. Ils proviennent de la France, d’Algérie, du Maroc, du Cameroun, de la Syrie, de l’Haïti, de la Tunisie, de la Côte-d’Ivoire et de bien d’autres endroits dans le monde. Les cultures de ces nouveaux arrivants contribuent au dynamisme de la francophonie canadienne.

Si vous êtes tannés déjà et vous voulez aller grimper dans les rideaux, je finis en disant que c’est tiguidou de reconnaitre la journée de la langue française, le vingt mars deux mille vingt-six a la langue française, Monsieur le president de la Chambre.

[French text provided by Jeremy Valeriote.]

Please join me in celebrating the beautiful French language.

Non-Partisan Debate and
Role of MLAs

Darlene Rotchford: One year ago, after a long day in this chamber, members were preparing to return to their constituencies, to break week and to continue our work in our communities. But did I know, at that time, that my family had other plans? Early the next morning, on March 13, baby Jo, my daughter Josephine, arrived way earlier than expected.

Just hours after she was born, she joined me and all of you in this chamber, where I cast a vote on the budget. In her own way, she made her first visit to this chamber on her own time. I feel like that’s going to be a theme in my future. Just then, baby Jo joined us here a few times, and tomorrow our family will celebrate her first birthday.

I sometimes joke that she’s our non-partisan baby here, but I share this sentiment because moments like this remind us of something more important. While we gather here to debate ideas and make decisions on behalf of the people of British Columbia, we are also parents. We are grandparents, we are children, we are neighbours, and we are all members of our communities.

Our work in this place is ultimately about the future of this province, and that future belongs to the next generation. Children like my daughter and so many others across British Columbia remind us why the work we do matters here. They remind us that the decisions we make today help shape the province that they will grow up in.

My hope is that one day baby Jo will be able to look back at these moments and know that her mother cared deeply about her family, the people of the province and the work that was done in this chamber to help the next generation.

I would be lying if I didn’t say that the last few days in this chamber have been quite disrespectful. I’m not going to pick on anybody because that’s not how I roll, for people who know me in this chamber. But I hope that when we leave here and we take our two-week break, we come back with a sense of unity.

We’re not always going to agree. That’s why we’re on opposite sides of the House. But I would hope that we all fundamentally agree that the children are the next generation and that the work we do here we do with respect, we do with dignity, not just for each other, because that will carry out into our communities.

At the end of the day, again, it’s kids like my daughter, the House Leader of the opposition’s daughters in the crowd, all the people who are going home to their families that we do this for.

Again, I hope we all take a moment of reflection on our behaviour this week and remember why we’re all here.

Point of Order
(Speaker’s Ruling)

The Speaker: Hon. Members, on Thursday, March 5, the member for Surrey City Centre raised a point of order regarding the application and interpretation of standing order amendments, respecting the consideration of private members’ business, that were adopted by the House on Thursday, February 19.

[10:55 a.m.]

While no other member offered submissions on the point of order, the Chair wishes to advise the House that the Chair engaged with all House Leaders to understand their discussions and intent prior to the introduction of those standing order amendments for consideration by the House.

The member for Surrey City Centre sought clarification from the Chair on the interpretation of Standing Order 27(5) and the actions prescribed “when the member reaches the third place on the list of assigned placements of members to present private members’ business.”

While there has been leniency to date in the application of the standing order and the related application of Standing Order 27A(6), the Chair and the House Leaders are agreed. A member must have an eligible item of business on the order paper before they reach third place on the list of precedence for private members’ business. The application of this requirement will be strictly upheld, going forward.

As private members’ time can be unpredictable, the Chair encourages all private members to ensure that their designated item of business is on the order paper well in advance of the member arriving at the third place on the list of precedence for private members’ business.

The member for Surrey City Centre also sought guidance from the Chair on when a private member’s bill is considered to be on the order paper. A bill is duly before the House once it has been introduced and the motion for first reading has passed and once the House has adopted the motion to add the bill to the order paper for consideration at a subsequent sitting. At that point, the bill is added to the order paper under schedule D.

While, pursuant to Standing Order 79, debate on the bill cannot proceed until the bill has been printed, the bill is officially before the House. Providing notice of a bill where the notice appears on the order paper under routine business does not constitute a bill being on the order paper.

The Chair thanks the member for Surrey City Centre for the spirit in which she sought the Chair’s guidance and hopes that it is to the benefit of all members.

Oral Questions

Water Services in Interior Region
and Role of Emergency
Management Services

Macklin McCall: Since the 2023 McDougall Creek wildfire, Lake Okanagan Resort hasn’t had potable water and essential utility services.

I have been urging this government to use its powers under the Emergency and Disaster Management Act to restore these services. The water system is on private land, and the owner still has not restored, provided access to or made regulatory applications for essential utilities.

The government has the power to fix this today. Will the minister today commit to using those powers under the act to restore water services to Lake Okanagan Resort?

Hon. Kelly Greene: Thank you to the member for the question. I know that this is an incredibly stressful time for those residents and for everybody who is impacted by the McDougall Creek wildfire.

This is a particularly challenging moment because the water system is on privately owned land. I understand that the water comptroller’s office sent a letter to the residents explaining the costs and next steps for the residents to do that work.

Following a disaster, the Emergency and Disaster Management Act, or EDMA, can be applied to require things like mitigating a hazard, developing a risk assessment or creating an emergency management plan.

We will be looking at all tools available to help residents at the Lake Okanagan Resort and welcome the member to have a meeting with me in my office.

The Speaker: Member, supplemental.

Macklin McCall: Because of this government’s inaction, homeowners and strata are legally blocked from reconstruction, without water and with wastewater services approved by Interior Health.

The government promised action for residents. Instead, they have hung them out to dry. For nearly three years, property owners have been left in a state of limbo because there is no water.

Will the minister live up to those promises made to residents and turn on the taps?

[11:00 a.m.]

Hon. Kelly Greene: The province has been in discussions with residents about the utility and the supply of water to residences on the site. We will continue to do this work. EDMA is available to do things like mitigating a hazard, developing a risk assessment.

I do welcome meeting with the member to discuss how next steps are possible. We are looking for all tools in our toolbox to assist residents.

Sage Mesa Community Water System

Donegal Wilson: I feel like that answer probably provides little assurance to the residents of the Okanagan Lake Resort.

Residents in Sage Mesa are also now facing a combined water cost exceeding $12,000 a year. That is $1,000 a month.

Can the minister explain how things have gotten so bad that these residents can no longer afford to live in their homes because of this government’s mismanagement?

Hon. Randene Neill: I thank the member so much for the question. We’ve had multiple discussions about this.

Once again, this issue stems from the fact that this water utility is a privately owned water utility, and all private utilities in B.C. are responsible for managing their own systems.

This is something that we’ve been working on very closely with the homeowners there, as well as the RDOS, the regional district in the area. We will do everything we can to ensure that they have access to safe, clean drinking water for as long as they live there.

The Speaker: Member, supplemental.

Donegal Wilson: Somehow the minister failed to gloss over the fact that the province seized the assets and the company in 1990 and that the government is the private owner of this water system.

Residents are being told if they vote no in the upcoming referendum that the downloaded cost to them…. They will face a potential Interior Health order that will essentially turn off their taps.

How can the minister justify placing homeowners in a position where the only choice they have is to accept water costs higher than their mortgages?

Hon. Randene Neill: Thanks again to the member for the follow-up. I want to stress again that Sage Mesa is a privately owned water utility system.

Interjection.

The Speaker: Shhh.

Hon. Randene Neill: It has been managed by the province because the private property owner mismanaged it…

Interjection.

The Speaker: Member.

Hon. Randene Neill: …and it was seized by the province back in 1990.

It is a private system. All private systems need to work with regional districts, as several conversations that we’ve had, to ensure that they can get the upgrades and the grants needed to restore the system, to ensure their drinking water is safe.

Investigation of Financial
Transactions Related to Quest
University Squamish Campus

Jeremy Valeriote: When Quest University in Squamish went bankrupt in 2020, it sold its campus to investment firm Primacorp Ventures for $43 million. Four years later, when Quest suspended academic operations, Primacorp sold the campus to the province for $63 million, along with student residences for an additional $55 million, to establish a Capilano University Squamish campus — for which we’re very grateful, in the Sea to Sky. But this is only after Primacorp carved off 37 acres of endowment land for a private real estate development.

Independent analysis has revealed these dealings are an elaborate shell game, a web of fraud centred on one of Quest’s original benefactors, diamond oligarch Stewart Blusson. Blusson originally promised a $100 million endowment that never materialized. Quest then relied on high-interest loans disguised as charitable donations from individuals linked to Blusson.

The CRA has been investigating $400 million in alleged fraudulent donations that led to Quest’s bankruptcy and has revoked the charitable status of a number of entities linked to a founding member of Quest’s board of governors.

Please bear with me, Mr. Speaker. My supplemental will be short, I promise.

Somehow Blusson ended up personally benefiting, becoming the owner of 100 acres of endowment land. This is no longer a private matter confined to the Sea to Sky University Act. It’s a matter of public accountability.

The Speaker: Question, Member.

Jeremy Valeriote: Given the district of Squamish’s financial support for Quest and the province’s purchase of its campus, this government needs to reassure the public that fraudsters didn’t benefit from public dollars.

My question. Is the government aware of the allegations against Blusson? Will the Attorney General investigate to determine his involvement in a real estate transaction with the province and how he walked away owning part of the university’s endowment land?

Hon. Niki Sharma: I’m happy to meet with the member and get the details of this. I’ll take that on notice. I’m happy to follow up afterwards.

The Speaker: Member, the question is taken on notice. Is this a different question now?

Status of Quest University and
Use of Tuition Fee Revenues

Jeremy Valeriote: This is a different question, Mr. Speaker.

I will note that this has been to both the offices of the Attorney General and the Post-Secondary Minister.

[11:05 a.m.]

We know that B.C.’s post-secondary institutions are under extreme pressure. The Ministry of Post-Secondary Education is considering adding another institution to this saturated market by renewing Quest’s degree-granting status, which would then be sold to Columbia College in a reverse takeover that would also transfer Quest’s debt obligations of over $18 million. If approved, students at this new institution will pay $2,000 per student per year back to the same sketchy private creditors I just described.

Will the Minister of Post-Secondary Education assure us that these students will not have to pay their hard-earned tuition dollars to debts owed to fraudsters and suspend review of a proposal for a new university under the Sea to Sky University Act, pending the results of a ministry investigation into Quest’s financial history?

Hon. Jessie Sunner: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. I recognize that we are having conversations about this, and we will continue to do so.

I just want to recognize that Quest University is a private university under the Sea to Sky University Act. The government has little authority to intervene in the actions of an entity under a private act, including providing direction to the university or appointing members. As it’s a private university, the ministry does not provide any kind of operating funding to this institution.

The Degree Authorization Act under which it is operating…. It has consent until the end of May of this year. It is currently undergoing a quality assessment process, which is done by an independent external review of its new organizational structure.

Those recommendations will be made to me as minister, and a decision will come in the coming months. I’m happy to continue these conversations with the member.

Agreement with xʷməθkʷəy̓əm Nation
and Government Handling
of Land Title Issues

Dallas Brodie: We have heard many questions over the past week about the Musqueam Indian Band agreement and the impact it will have on private property rights and title. But what has not been discussed as yet is the remainder of the land and waterways that are covered by this agreement that have been carefully developed, maintained and paid for by the taxpayers of British Columbia over the past 100-plus years.

These include parks, sports fields, schools, hospitals, beaches, seawalls, foreshores, bike paths, pools, streets, sidewalks, boulevards, bridges, community centres, museums, city halls, fire halls, police stations, power stations, courthouses, lighting, sewers, water mains, traffic controls, ocean markers, lighthouses, wharves, docks, boathouses, gas barges, naval reserves, breakwaters, and on and on.

All of this will now be under the decision-making authority of Chief Wayne Sparrow and his family, a man who is essentially becoming a king under this agreement.

My question to the Premier is this. Is he willing to stand up for British Columbia and admit that this agreement has now gone too far?

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: What I can say very clearly is the member, yet again, goes too far. She spreads untruths. She tells things that are not in any way factual. She can have her own opinion, but she can’t have her own facts.

The facts of the matter are that xʷməθkʷəy̓əm have been clear. Our government has been clear. No private property is on the table, no private businesses.

Interjection.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: I’m not sure why the member in the Conservative Party is shouting at me about this. I guess they’re so desperate to try and draft behind OneBC on this issue that they have to shout at me when OneBC is asking a question.

I just have to say clearly that the member continues to try and spread hate, to spread untruths and to spread division in her quest to somehow become queen of this province — if she’s using kings and queens in her analogy. Well, the people aren’t buying it. We’re not buying it. First Nations people aren’t buying it.

In fact, the loudest thing that I hear in the community is that they don’t want her as their MLA because she doesn’t have a constituency office and she doesn’t show up to work for her constituents. But when she does show up…

The Speaker: Member.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: …she shows up to spread untruths and hate.

The Speaker: Member has a supplemental.

Dallas Brodie: Okay. There’s so much there to deal with. I’m going to start by directly responding to the comments.

First of all, nothing in my question dealt with private property this morning. I don’t know if this minister is hard of hearing, but he needs to listen carefully to the question. I was talking about public waterways, public lands, public infrastructure.

[11:10 a.m.]

Secondly, let’s be clear on this. I do not have a legislative office. Why? That is the responsibility of this Legislature, and I had to get a statement from the Speaker’s office to chastise members of the opposition who continue to hack on me for not having an office. It is not my responsibility.

Don’t sneer and smirk.

This is a case where I have been working as hard as I can with [name removed], who is responsible for maintaining all of the leases.

The Speaker: Member, let’s stick with the question.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh.

Dallas Brodie: Okay. I’ll ask my next question then. But it is not on me that I don’t have an office. It is not on me. I am holding meetings by Zoom and at the Kerrisdale Community Centre.

You’re just disappointed you don’t have a place to protest.

Anyway, question No. 2. This troika of agreements, which none of us have even fully seen yet, grants the Musqueam Indian Band decision-making authority over two of the main waterways and shipping lanes of the Lower Mainland, namely Burrard Inlet, going all the way up Indian Arm; and the Fraser River, an area which also includes international borders.

A small, unaccountable band council having control over the main waterways and shipping lanes and harbours of the Lower Mainland is not only a direct attack on the arteries that are the economic lifeblood of this province but also a national security risk, as this proclaimed territory includes international borders. Think Roxham Road. Think Akwesahsne Reserve.

The Speaker: Member.

Dallas Brodie: This agreement cannot stand.

The Speaker: Question, Member.

Dallas Brodie: I ask the Premier: will you immediately call for this agreement to be rescinded and forever shelved as it constitutes a threat to the very sovereignty and economy of this province?

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: Well, the agreements the member talks about do nothing of the kind. She could actually pick them up and read them, and she’d understand them. She could talk to xʷməθkʷəy̓əm people, but she refuses to.

She could talk to the Chief, but she’s disrespected him so badly that why would he meet with her. They’ve said they’re willing to meet to talk with her. But because of the hate that she spreads, it’s very difficult to have any sort of civil discussion.

Now, I’ve got to say very clearly that xʷməθkʷəy̓əm has been clear from the beginning. They want to work together, just as First Nations all across this province want to work together. They don’t want hate. They don’t want people following them at the grocery store, calling them names, shouting at them. They don’t want people at their schools doing the same.

But when the member spreads untruths about First Nations people — that they’re coming for your homes, they’re coming for your waterway, they’re going to control the rivers and streams and oceans, and they’re going to stop everything from happening — it’s just simply untrue.

You know what? Some of the biggest economic investments, some of the strongest economic leaders in this province are First Nations communities, including xʷməθkʷəy̓əm. Working with First Nations people, we’re unlocking billions and billions of dollars in investment in this province, and it’s helping lead Canada. We’re helping lead Canada. The future lives in B.C., and that’s because we’re working with First Nations on mining, on energy, on schools, on education, on public safety and on housing.

You know what? Working with First Nations, the future is bright.

The Speaker: Thank you, Minister.

Hon. Spencer Chandra Herbert: Working with that member? I don’t think I want to.

East Kootenay Regional
Hospital Expansion Costs

Scott McInnis: Expansion costs at the East Kootenay Regional Hospital have ballooned by 30 percent over the past year.

Local taxpayers now have to foot the bill for this irresponsible cost overrun. Once again, residents of the East Kootenay have been forgotten about by this government.

My question on behalf of all residents of the East Kootenay is a very simple one. How are you going to explain why local taxpayers are on the hook for this bill?

Hon. Bowinn Ma: The province is committed to investing in an oncology and renal expansion at the East Kootenay Regional Hospital. We were prepared to proceed with this project and actually announced that a business case had been approved and full funding had been secured for this project on January 13, 2025.

After this announcement, the East Kootenay regional hospital district chair approached me and my team and asked us to revise the scope of the project to add a third floor. While the third floor was not, in our view, a wise decision at the time, I also accepted that the regional hospital district was very enthusiastic about adding a third floor.

[11:15 a.m.]

So my ministry and I agreed to support revising the business case and re-evaluating the scope for a third floor, provided that the East Kootenay regional hospital district took full responsibility of all associated increases in costs. They understood the risks, they accepted those risks, and now we’re seeing the consequences of those decisions.

We will continue to work with the Kootenay East regional hospital district on those additional costs and on finding a way forward.

Member, we were ready to go on this project. We were asked to change the scope, and we agreed to, under the understanding that the Kootenay East regional hospital district was ready to take on the consequences.

Access to Obstetrics
Care in Hospitals

Anna Kindy: Another diversion of pregnant women has begun at Peace Arch today. This is the sixth time this year that there has been a diversion of obstetrical patients at Peace Arch. There have been diversions for over three weeks in this year alone. This is unacceptable for pregnant women in the area.

When will the government stop failing mothers and make sure that all women across B.C. can access safe and timely obstetrical care?

Hon. Josie Osborne: Thank you to the member for her question. Stable, predictable access to maternity services is something every pregnant person in this province expects and deserves. That’s why, together with the health authorities, we are working hard to do just that. It’s very challenging in the global setting of workforce challenges, and challenges in maternity services and with physicians, to have been able to keep those stable services at certain sites.

That’s why the responsible thing for the health authority to do, after exhausting every option that they have to fill gaps in staffing, is to work directly with pregnant patients to make sure that they have a safe place to deliver their babies, because the safety of the mom and the baby is the paramount responsibility of the health authority, with the Ministry of Health standing at their back to do this.

Fraser Health is working hard. They are aggressively recruiting new physicians. They’ve got six new physicians joining maternity teams across the health authority. There’s a new physician joining this spring at Peace Arch Hospital. We are not going to stop in our work to provide these stable, predictable services across the province.

Medical Assessment Fees for Seniors

Brennan Day: Talking about stability and predictability across B.C., seniors are being charged wildly different prices for ICBC-mandated drivers’ medical assessments. Some seniors are paying $100 and some over $300 for the exact same paperwork.

For seniors on fixed incomes, that is not health care; it’s an affordability lottery.

Will the Minister of Health commit today to standardizing ICBC’s mandatory driver’s licence assessment fees for seniors?

Hon. Josie Osborne: Thank you to the member for the question. Yes, people of a certain age are required to get medical assessments to continue to have their drivers’ licences, and that needs to be sought and paid for by the person who is wishing to renew their licence.

I’m certainly willing to work with my colleague at the Public Safety and Solicitor General Ministry and examine this. I’ll take it on notice from the member.

Queensborough Bus Service Funding

Steve Kooner: Over 230 Queensborough students rely on the Queensborough bus service to get to New Westminster Secondary School safely and in a timely manner.

Advocacy has been relentless, and two days ago New Westminster city council voted to permanently reinstate the bus service. This NDP government campaigned on keeping the school bus running.

Will this government reverse its cut, extend funding and honour their promise, yes or no?

Hon. Lisa Beare: To the member, there is no cut. I find it very unfortunate that the member is scaring families and making them worry. We are continuing to work closely with our partners, with the district, with the municipality, with TransLink.

[11:20 a.m.]

I’m actually really excited to see that the councillors and city council are involved in this. This is great, because the school district, the municipal council and TransLink all need to be working together alongside us to provide those transit solutions in their community.

We, as a government, have prioritized education investments at a record level. We have $8 billion going directly into school districts next year. That includes funding for transportation. Every other community in this province provides their own transportation. We have water taxis in the gulf. In the North, we have buses that run on train tracks. We have a wide range of diverse transportation needs that are met by the local districts.

We’re working together with the district to provide that permanent solution for Queensborough.

Business Costs and Government
Support for Small Business

Teresa Wat: The legislative director for B.C., from CFIB — I quote: “When we talk to small businesses around the province, one thing is clear. The cost of doing business is too high.”

Small businesses are telling this government exactly what will happen. Higher costs for them mean higher prices for everyone. Instead of listening, this NDP government is choosing to ignore them.

My question is to this NDP government. Why do they keep ignoring small businesses and making life more expensive for British Columbians?

Hon. Ravi Kahlon: I thank the member for the question. We on this side certainly agree that small businesses are vital for the functioning of our economy.

This question was canvassed yesterday. I shared with the members that when we formed government, we actually reduced small business taxes here in the province. It’s one of the lowest in the entire country, something the business community had been advocating for, for a long time.

We heard from them that they wanted more dollars available to ensure that those repeat offenders are wrapped around so that we can address that challenge. We’ve got an additional $14 million in the budget to do that.

Stats Canada released a recent report, and it tells us that B.C. led the country in retail sales growth last year, up nearly 6 percent. Despite what we hear in this chamber, what Stats Canada also said was that B.C. also led the country in active business growth between November 2024 and 2025. This is good.

We have more work to do. We’re going to continue to work with the business community to see the economic growth we want to see in this province.

Sheldon Clare: This NDP government is out of touch with the businesses that keep our economy running.

Small businesses are being boarded up throughout Prince George–North Cariboo, and the ones that remain are now facing a 7 percent hike for security.

When is someone from this NDP government going to come to my riding, look business owners in the eye and defend their business-killing budget?

Hon. Ravi Kahlon: Thanks to my friend for the question. He’ll be happy to know that I actually met with the Business Improvement Association from Prince George this morning to talk to them about both the opportunities and the challenges. I would say that they’re not as negative about the economic opportunities as, perhaps, that question was.

They see the opportunity. They see the growth. There was an acknowledgement around the historic investment that we’ve made around addressing homelessness in that community. One of the largest encampments in the country was addressed by making sure that 120 people had homes that had wraparound support services in that community. We discussed the opportunities with our new vision for the economy in our Look West strategy.

They’re feeling hopeful about the opportunities. We talked about where the challenges are. We’re going to continue to work with them to make sure that they succeed and British Columbia succeeds, as well as Canada.

Budget Priorities and Layoffs
in Government and Public Sector

Bruce Banman: We listened to the Finance Minister talk about there needing to be some very tough cuts in this budget, some tough decisions that had to be made — one of the toughest of which was the layoff of 15,000 government workers and public sector workers.

[11:25 a.m.]

My question is simple. To the Finance Minister, how many political appointees in her office does she plan to cut, or does she believe in “Do as I say, not as I do”?

Hon. Brenda Bailey: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. We have been working on expenditure management over the last year and have been successful in reducing the size of the public service here in the province by about 1,000 workers already.

We know that we’ve seen very strong growth in the public service and public sector over the last ten years — 80,000 people, many of those people absolutely key to the important work that we’re doing to build out health care, to build out education, to address wildfires. These are protected and important positions.

We do, though, see the opportunity to be more efficient in the public service and public sector, and we believe that these 15,000 jobs are largely going to be focused on administrative jobs. We’re tackling this very carefully, because we know that we, at the same time, need to support the services that are so integral to British Columbians.

Government Handling of Land Title
Cases and Property Rights

Trevor Halford: I want to read a quote into the record here. “The Appraisal Institute of Canada, B.C., is aware that some valuers are attaching limitation clauses to their appraisal reports, suggesting inherent assumptions that current, past and potential future land claims have not been considered in current valuation assignments.” That is from the association president, Alan Beatty.

We have a Premier, we have a government, that will go into one room and say one thing, and they’ll walk into another room and say the other.

We have a Premier that has said that he will go to the wall for property owners. We have a Premier that has said he will go as far as even to backstop mortgages, he is so concerned. He is so worried about this, he will actually backstop mortgages to the tune of over $150 million. He’s off by about $1 billion, but that’s fine. At least he’s putting the effort in.

Now he’s saying there’s no issue with property rights — none whatsoever. So here we are. We’re about to take a two-week spring break. Nothing from this NDP government — from the Minister of Indigenous Relations, the Premier or any other member of cabinet, including the Attorney General — on legislation that the Premier committed, to British Columbians, to fix the mess and incompetence he personally caused.

Where is his legislation to clean up his mess?

Hon. David Eby: I think it will be good for everybody to have a couple of weeks at home to catch our breath and get some perspective. I would like to read the member a….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh. Members, now let him answer, please. Members.

Hon. David Eby: I’d like to read a quote to the member.

“Sooner or later, the question of whether those who hold certificates of indefeasible title — whether to ranchlands on Kamloops Lake or to a small lot with a house on it on Railway Avenue in the village of Ashcroft or to an office tower on Georgia Street in the city of Vancouver — are subject to claims of Aboriginal right must be decided.

“If the inhabitants of British Columbia, be they rich or poor, of whatever stock of descent, cannot rest on their certificates of indefeasible title, they, their mortgagees and, perhaps more importantly, their families, who are dependent on them for their economic well-being, should know, and the sooner the better. A cloud on title, whether it be upstream or downstream, is still a cloud.

“Twenty years ago, this cloud, then no bigger than a child’s hand, was on the far horizon. If the appellants and the intervenor, especially the latter, are correct in their interpretation of Delgamuukw, that cloud has grown to lower over the whole of the province, save that part encompassed in the Nisg̱a’a treaty, Treaty No. 8 and the so-called Douglas Treaties.”

[11:30 a.m.]

Now, was that last week? Was that during the term of our government? Was it during the term of the previous government?

No, this quote comes from a Court of Appeal decision in the year 2000, speaking about an issue that was identified 20 years prior to that. It has been 26 years since Madam Justice Southin wrote these words.

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh. Shhh.

Hon. David Eby: This is not…. As much as the member insists, this is….

Interjections.

The Speaker: Shhh. Shhh, Members. Members.

Please continue.

Hon. David Eby: This is not a new issue in the province of British Columbia. It’s an issue that needs to be dealt with. We have been very clear. Our bright line is we will protect private property.

We entered into an agreement with the Quw’utsun Chiefs, a joint statement that those private properties in the Quw’utsun title area are not at risk. The member insists that they still are. We are in court appealing that decision to defend private property rights. There’s a decision out of New Brunswick that went the opposite direction. We will end up at the Supreme Court of Canada.

But for the member to insist that by working with First Nations to try to grow the economy to provide certainty is a mistake, that that is opening the door to this issue…. He is dead wrong.

Doing that work provides the certainty that we need to grow the economy. It’s why we’re leading Canada in private investment. It’s why we’re leading Canada in business formation activity. It’s why we have the second-best unemployment rate in the country. It’s why we are projected to be the second-fastest growing province in the country next year. That’s why we have four major private sector projects on the major projects office with the federal government.

As much as the members hate our economic growth in British Columbia, we will keep fighting for it, and we will keep delivering it.

[End of question period.]

Speaker’s Statement

Guidance on Question Period
and Respectful Language

The Speaker: Before we continue further with the program of the day, with respect to the question raised by the member for Vancouver-Quilchena and response by the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation, the response elicited strong views, but it’s my expectation that all members approach their remarks with care. That includes not engaging in personal attacks against each other.

It also includes an expectation of respect for Legislative Assembly staff who serve us all impartially. They should not be singled out during debate in question period, as occurred earlier this morning.

Rohini Arora: I’m really appreciative that you brought forward that clarification. I would ask that the member for Vancouver-Quilchena withdraw the name that was spoken in this House earlier.

Dallas Brodie: Yes, I am happy to retract that. But as a point of order, this has become….

The Speaker: Member, let’s deal with one thing first.

Dallas Brodie: Okay. Yes, I retract that, because I am very fond of that person.

The Speaker: Thank you very much.

Tabling Documents

Hon. Niki Sharma: I present the 2025 annual report of the Property Assessment Appeal Board.

Point of Order

The Speaker: Member for Vancouver-Quilchena, you said that you had a point of order.

Dallas Brodie: My point of order is relating to the comments that you’ve just made, and that is that this issue has come up again and again by members across the floor attacking me for not having a legislative office.

I would request that these accusations against me cease and no longer continue, because all of you who arranged your offices know how it’s conducted in this legislative building. I am not responsible for the office. There’s glass needed; bathrooms needed to be installed — all these different things, using only government contractors.

If I were in charge of this, it would have been done a year and a half ago, but you have to use specific protocols in this building. I have been holding meetings with members of my constituency in the Kerrisdale Community Centre and on Zoom meetings, and I’m duly conducting my constituency business that way.

So as much as you like to hack on me for this, I would like you to understand, Mr. Speaker, that it’s not acceptable and not fair.

The Speaker: Thank you, Member. Your point is well taken, but I want to be clear that it was not unparliamentary language.

[11:35 a.m.]

Orders of the Day

Hon. Mike Farnworth: I call Motion 12 on the order paper.

Government Motions on Notice

Motion 12 — Schedule for House Adjournment

Hon. Mike Farnworth: I move Motion 12, which notice has been given in my name on the order paper, which aligns our break weeks with the standing orders and parliamentary calendar.

[That, notwithstanding Standing Order 2 (1), Standing Order 2 (2) (b), and Standing Order 3,

a. when the afternoon sitting on Thursday, March 12, 2026, is adjourned, the House stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Monday, March 30, 2026; and,

b. when the afternoon sitting on Thursday, May 7, 2026, is adjourned, the House stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, May 19, 2026.]

Motion approved.

Hon. Mike Farnworth: I know we still have some time, so in this chamber, I call second reading on Bill 9, the FIPPA bill, Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

In the Douglas Fir Room, I call Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs estimates.

In Section C, the Birch Room, I call the estimates of the Ministry of Forests.

[Lorne Doerkson in the chair.]

Second Reading of Bills

Bill 9 — Freedom of Information
and Protection of Privacy
Amendment Act, 2026
(continued)

Deputy Speaker: Thank you, Members. We will call this chamber back to order, where we will continue debate on Bill 9, Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act, 2026.

Korky Neufeld: I continue my comments in firm opposition to Bill 9, introduced by the Minister of Citizens’ Services, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Amendment Act, 2026.

This bill amends one of the most important statutes in our province. It’s the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Two key words in that heading are “freedom” and “protection.”

The act is not an administrative housekeeping item. The act is not procedural fine print. The act is not a bureaucratic technicality. The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act is the backbone of government transparency and the legal guardian of citizens’ privacy rights in this province.

It is the mechanism by which journalists uncover waste. It is the tool citizens use to hold government accountable. It is the safeguard that ensures personal information is not casually collected, is not casually shared or casually exposed. Today Bill 9 weakens both transparency and privacy at the very same time.

An article came out yesterday entitled “Critics Say B.C.’s New FOI Legislation Enables More Government Secrecy.” In this article, the B.C. Green Party MLA for Saanich North and the Islands, who led the legal team that drafted the province’s first freedom of information legislation in 1991, under the NDP government’s oversight…. That bill passed legislation with unanimous support the next year.

I quote what this member said. “If these amendments,” talking about Bill 9, “go through, it’s just going to be the end of freedom of information as we know it,” he said, “and we’ll be back to where we were in the 1980s.”

While working for the NDP government in that day, this MLA was instructed to create the most open system in Canada. Let me read that again. Through the previous NDP government, this MLA was instructed to create the most open system in Canada. Years of whittling away at the rules he helped create have left a system that is now far from this measure, he says.

[11:40 a.m.]

I continue on in this article. Near the end of the article, it states: “B.C. Conservative Citizens’ Services critic, the Member for Langley-Willowbrook, states, ‘The government is stalling on release. It’s just a small language, but that language has huge impact.’”

According to the Green MLA, all this gives the government more control over whether a request is processed and the chance to delay processing a request until the information is no longer relevant.

Here is a damning statement that this member made. “As long as that information doesn’t embarrass this government, you probably will get it,” he said. “But now, if it’s going to be embarrassing, you’ll never see it.” There is the key issue. This NDP government has already been shown by media and stated that they’re the most secret government in all of Canada.

This government frames this bill as modernization, as efficiency and as streamlining. You know, I’ve been around now for about a year and a bit, and I’ve seen bills come across, and this word “streamlining” still keeps coming up in pretty well every bill. I’m not sure what the definition means or how it’s actually applied, but it’s being used in every bill.

Let me be clear at the outset. Modernization is welcome only when it strengthens access and protects privacy. Efficiency absolutely matters. Administrative clarity matters. But efficiency cannot come at the expense of accountability.

When you examine this bill clause by clause, a pattern emerges, a very interesting pattern: (1) more discretion for government, (2) fewer clear timelines for government, (3) broader authority to ignore requests for government, (4) greater centralization of personal data for government, new financial barriers to accessing information paid to the government. Individually, each change may appear a technicality. Collectively, they move the centre of gravity away from citizens and towards the executive.

FIPA, the B.C. Freedom of Information and Privacy Association, is raising serious concerns about Bill 9. They asked a very interesting question, and I want to repeat it in the House. Why, after the Legislature wood splitter scandal and the subsequent joint remediation by B.C.’s independent regulators, does Bill 9 not extend FIPPA to cover the administrative offices of the Legislative Assembly? Very interesting question, indeed.

Here’s another quote off of what they said about Bill 9, warning that it weakens access rights at a time when government has failed to meaningfully implement its own recordkeeping law and that it fails to address needed reforms to the act. Further on, the government has framed the bill as a modernization effort to improve digital service delivery. However, FIPA notes that the real source of FOI delays lies upstream in inconsistent record creation, in classification, in retention and digitization practices across ministries.

They go on to say…. “Access delays are often a symptom of recordkeeping failures,” said FIPA executive director Jason Woywada. “You cannot fix systemic information management problems by weakening public access rights.” They go on to say that there are also some glaring absences. Bill 9 is deeply flawed because of what it does not include. The bill ignores the work of the last special legislative committee that reviewed FIPPA.

Can you imagine? They put people together over a period of time to look at some legislation. It takes an enormous amount of time. And what do they do? They ignore it.

The committee’s 2002 report, entitled FIPPA for the Future, listed 34 recommendations to improve and modernize access of information and privacy rules in British Columbia’s public sector. Bill 9 represents a failure to act on these recommendations. So why? Why do they keep wasting people’s time?

[11:45 a.m.]

There’s a quote in here that says…. “This is worse than missing opportunities,” said FIPA president Mike Larsen. “It reflects a pattern of successive governments receiving clear advice on gaps in the act and then completely disregarding this guidance.”

Let us begin with Bill 9. Actually, you know what? Somebody said, one time, this: “There is not a crime or a dodge or a trick or a swindle or a vice that does not live by secrecy.”

Let’s begin with clause 3. For decades, the law required public bodies to respond to FOI requests without delay. “Without delay.” That language is intentional. It creates urgency. It creates expectation. It creates accountability.

But you know what Bill 9 does? It replaces it with “without unreasonable delay.” That is not a neutral edit. Previously “without delay” set a high bar. Bill 9, “without unreasonable delay,” lowers that bar.

A few questions, if I can ask. Who defines what is unreasonable? The ministry. Who suffers the consequences? The applicant.

So let us remember the context. From 2022 to 2023, FOI applications waited an average of 192 additional business days beyond statutory timelines to receive a response. Nearly a full working year.

Instead of tightening compliance, instead of imposing consequences for chronic delays, instead of resourcing the system properly, the government is softening the language. Access delayed is access denied. Bill 9 normalizes delay instead of fixing it.

Clause 2 changes to section 5(1)(a) make it the opinion of the head of the public body whether a request contains enough detail. Previously it was an objective standard. Now it becomes subjective.

Here’s an example. If a citizen submits a request and government decides — in its own opinion, because it’s subjective — that it’s insufficient in detail, the request could be rejected or stalled.

The amendments also add that the record must be identifiable in a reasonable amount of time. What is reasonable? It’s not defined. So who decides? The institution holding the records decides.

Freedom of information legislation was designed to overcome bureaucratic resistance, not institutionalize it. This change tilts the balance towards the gatekeeper.

Clause 13 is one of the most concerning aspects of this bill. It expands the categories under which government may apply to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner to disregard requests. You may ask: “Well, what kind of things in this request would cause them to disregard a request?”

Well, here’s some language. “Malicious.” If they determine that the request is malicious, with no definition, they can disregard the request.

“Abusive.” You know, I did something very important. I bought an old, old Webster’s dictionary. If you want to know what words really mean, read those dictionaries. Man o’ livin’, over the years, we have watered down definitions. It is embarrassing. “Abusive” — you can define that however you want these days.

“Repetitious.” Now, is that two requests? Is it three requests? Is it four requests? It doesn’t say.

“Systemic.”

“Excessively broad.”

[11:50 a.m.]

[The Speaker in the chair.]

“Requests that unreasonably interfere with operations of government.”

These words are not defined. Not “malicious,” not “abusive,” not “excessively broad,” not “interference.” Government will argue that the commissioner still decides. But government now has far more grounds to attempt dismissals.

Investigative journalism is systemic. Our opposition oversight is repetitious. Corruption inquiries often begin with broad perspective. Transparency is really inconvenient. That is the point. We should not be empowering government to characterize persistence as abuse. We should not be expanding the categories under which scrutiny can be shut down.

Most troubling of all, these new grounds apply retroactively under clause 28. Requests already filed can now be subjected to broader dismissal arguments. Changing the rules midstream undermines fairness and trust.

Noting the hour, I reserve the right to continue, and I move adjournment of debate again, for the second time.

Korky Neufeld moved adjournment of debate.

Motion approved.

Amna Shah: Committee of Supply, Section A, reports resolution and completion of the estimates of the Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs and asks leave to sit again.

Leave granted.

The Speaker: Members, I will advise the House that Section C did not convene due to a lack of quorum being available by the time of adjournment. The committee will not report but sit at the call of the Government House Leader later today.

Hon. Brenda Bailey moved adjournment of the House.

Motion approved.

The Speaker: This House stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m.

The House adjourned at 11:53 a.m.

Proceedings in the
Douglas Fir Room

The House in Committee, Section A.

The committee met at 11:39 a.m.

[Amna Shah in the chair.]

Committee of Supply

Estimates: Ministry of
Housing and Municipal Affairs
(continued)

The Chair: Good morning, Members. I call Committee of Supply, Section A, to order. We are meeting today to continue the consideration of the budget estimates for the Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs.

On Vote 33: ministry operations, $1,683,425,000 (continued).

[11:40 a.m.]

Rob Botterell: In the interests of time, I have one question I’ll ask, and then, if time permits, I’ll read some questions into the record until the lunch guillotine falls. Then that’ll be the close of my questions in estimates.

The Housing and Municipal Affairs Service Plan aims to speed up development approvals and increase access to attainable and affordable housing in communities across the province by implementing the Homes for People action plan.

We’re certainly fully supportive of building more affordable housing across the province. As we’ve noted yesterday, we are concerned that some of the cuts or pauses seem to be decreasing access to affordable units.

In my riding, as the minister knows, in hopes to find cost-effective ways to create more housing units, an independent adviser has been appointed to the municipality or district of North Saanich to look at a variety of options, including federal and provincial Crown lands and including potentially surplus lands at YYJ, to contribute to the provision of truly affordable housing in the area.

There is a huge, huge demand that goes beyond simply the targets that have been established to include many folks I run into every day, including some of the 2,000 workers at the airport and people working in Sidney and North Saanich who would like to live where they work rather than driving hours a day back and forth.

My question is: would the minister be prepared to set up a meeting including the independent adviser and the minister, before the independent adviser’s report is finalized, so I can provide additional updated information and discuss options associated with surplus YYJ Airport lands for housing?

Hon. Christine Boyle: Thanks to the member for the question. Happy to help set up that meeting.

Rob Botterell: The next question really relates to efforts to deal with particular municipalities. We know that municipal governments like Lions Bay and Kamloops have become the beacons of polarization and dysfunction in local governments, and the ministry has indicated there would be changes to improve municipal accountability.

Does the ministry plan to allocate resources to support municipalities as they deal with these challenges?

[11:45 a.m.]

Hon. Christine Boyle: Thanks for the question. I continue to be grateful to work in collaboration with the Union of B.C. Municipalities, the Local Government Management Association and my ministry through the Working Group on Responsible Conduct, undertaking work that, as the member referenced, advances the responsible conduct of local government elected officials, and to support good governance and transparency for communities.

The province expects all elected officials and local government to conduct themselves according to principles of integrity, accountability, respect, leadership and collaboration. We have heard really valuable feedback from local government about their strong support for a standardized, legislated code-of-conduct framework and procedural fairness and accountability mechanisms.

This is important work we’ve been engaged in, and I look forward to being able to have more to say on it soon.

Rob Botterell: Those are my questions for the Housing and Municipal Affairs estimates.

I want to thank the minister and thank the ministry staff for the very helpful answers and all of the hard work that you’re doing. It’s truly appreciated in our riding and across the province.

I understand, from my colleague, that my colleague may have no further questions.

The Chair: I believe we are working towards completion at this point.

Minister, do you have any very brief closing remarks?

Hon. Christine Boyle: Very brief. Just to thank all the members for a productive dialogue, and a huge thank-you to my staff teams in the ministry and B.C. Housing for the incredible work that they do all of the time and support in being able to have such a good and fruitful and well-informed discussion.

The Chair: Great. Thank you, Minister.

Seeing no further questions, I will now call the vote.

Vote 33: ministry operations, $1,683,425,000 — approved.

The Chair: I ask that the minister move the motion.

Hon. Christine Boyle: I move that the committee rise and report resolution and completion and ask leave to sit again.

Motion approved.

The Chair: Thank you, Members. The committee now stands adjourned.

The committee rose at 11:48 a.m.

Contents