Second Session, 40th Parliament

OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

(HANSARD)

Tuesday, April 8, 2014 Aft ernoon Sitting Volume 10, Number 6

THE HONOURABLE LINDA REID, SPEAKER

ISSN 0709-1281 (Print) ISSN 1499-2175 (Online) PROVINCE OF (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871)

LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Judith Guichon, OBC

Second Session, 40th Parliament

SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Linda Reid

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

Premier and President of the Executive Council ...... Hon. Deputy Premier and Minister of Natural Gas Development and Minister Responsible for Housing ...... Hon. Rich Coleman Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation ...... Hon. John Rustad Minister of Advanced Education ...... Hon. Amrik Virk Minister of Agriculture ...... Hon. Pat Pimm Minister of Children and Family Development ...... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Minister of Community, Sport and Cultural Development ...... Hon. Coralee Oakes Minister of Education ...... Hon. Peter Fassbender Minister of Energy and Mines and Minister Responsible for Core Review ...... Hon. Bill Bennett Minister of Environment ...... Hon. Mary Polak Minister of Finance ...... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations...... Hon. Steve Th omson Minister of Health ...... Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Minister of International Trade and Minister Responsible for Asia Pacifi c Strategy and Multiculturalism ...... Hon. Teresa Wat Minister of Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training and Minister Responsible for Labour ...... Hon. Shirley Bond Minister of State for Tourism and Small Business ...... Hon. Naomi Yamamoto Minister of Justice ...... Hon. Suzanne Anton Minister of Social Development and Social Innovation...... Hon. Don McRae Minister of Technology, Innovation and Citizens' Services ...... Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure ...... Hon. Todd Stone

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

Leader of the Offi cial Opposition ...... Adrian Dix Deputy Speaker ...... Douglas Horne Assistant Deputy Speaker ...... Raj Chouhan Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ...... Marc Dalton Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ...... Craig James Deputy Clerk and Clerk of Committees ...... Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sessional Law Clerk ...... Roderick MacArthur, QC Sergeant-at-Arms ...... Gary Lenz ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING

Anton, Hon. Suzanne (BC Liberal) ...... Vancouver-Fraserview Abbotsford-Mission ...... Simon Gibson Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal)...... Penticton Abbotsford South ...... Darryl Plecas Austin, Robin (NDP) ...... Skeena Abbotsford West ...... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Bains, Harry (NDP) ...... Surrey-Newton Alberni–Pacifi c Rim ...... Scott Fraser Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) ...... Cariboo-Chilcotin Boundary-Similkameen ...... Linda Larson Bennett, Hon. Bill (BC Liberal) ...... Kootenay East Burnaby–Deer Lake ...... Kathy Corrigan Bernier, Mike (BC Liberal) ...... Peace River South Burnaby-Edmonds ...... Raj Chouhan Bing, Dr. Doug (BC Liberal) ...... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Burnaby-Lougheed ...... Jane Jae Kyung Shin Bond, Hon. Shirley (BC Liberal) ...... Prince George–Valemount Burnaby North ...... Richard T. Lee Cadieux, Hon. Stephanie (BC Liberal) ...... Surrey-Cloverdale Cariboo-Chilcotin ...... Donna Barnett Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) ...... Vancouver–West End Cariboo North ...... Hon. Coralee Oakes Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...... Burnaby-Edmonds Chilliwack ...... John Martin Clark, Hon. Christy (BC Liberal) ...... Westside-Kelowna Chilliwack-Hope ...... Laurie Th roness Coleman, Hon. Rich (BC Liberal) ...... Fort Langley–Aldergrove Columbia River–Revelstoke ...... Norm Macdonald Conroy, Katrine (NDP) ...... Kootenay West Comox Valley...... Hon. Don McRae Corrigan, Kathy (NDP) ...... Burnaby–Deer Lake Coquitlam–Burke Mountain ...... Douglas Horne Dalton, Marc (BC Liberal) ...... Maple Ridge–Mission Coquitlam-Maillardville...... Selina Robinson Darcy, Judy (NDP) ...... New Westminster Cowichan Valley ...... Bill Routley de Jong, Hon. Michael, QC (BC Liberal) ...... Abbotsford West Delta North ...... Scott Hamilton Dix, Adrian (NDP)...... Vancouver-Kingsway Delta South...... Vicki Huntington Donaldson, Doug (NDP) ...... Stikine Esquimalt–Royal Roads ...... Maurine Karagianis Eby, David (NDP) ...... Vancouver–Point Grey Fort Langley–Aldergrove ...... Hon. Rich Coleman Elmore, Mable (NDP) ...... Vancouver-Kensington Fraser-Nicola...... Jackie Tegart Farnworth, Mike (NDP) ...... Port Coquitlam Juan de Fuca ...... John Horgan Fassbender, Hon. Peter (BC Liberal) ...... Surrey-Fleetwood Kamloops–North Th ompson ...... Hon. Dr. Terry Lake Fleming, Rob (NDP) ...... Victoria–Swan Lake Kamloops–South Th ompson ...... Hon. Todd Stone Foster, Eric (BC Liberal) ...... Vernon-Monashee Kelowna–Lake Country ...... Norm Letnick Fraser, Scott (NDP) ...... Alberni–Pacifi c Rim Kelowna-Mission ...... Hon. Steve Th omson Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) ...... Abbotsford-Mission Kootenay East ...... Hon. Bill Bennett Hamilton, Scott (BC Liberal) ...... Delta North Kootenay West ...... Katrine Conroy Hammell, Sue (NDP) ...... Surrey–Green Timbers Langley...... Hon. Mary Polak Heyman, George (NDP) ...... Vancouver-Fairview Maple Ridge–Mission ...... Marc Dalton Hogg, Gordon (BC Liberal) ...... Surrey–White Rock Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ...... Dr. Doug Bing Holman, Gary (NDP) ...... Saanich North and the Islands Nanaimo ...... Leonard Eugene Krog Horgan, John (NDP) ...... Juan de Fuca Nanaimo–North Cowichan ...... Doug Routley Horne, Douglas (BC Liberal) ...... Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Nechako Lakes ...... Hon. John Rustad Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ...... Surrey-Panorama Nelson-Creston ...... Huntington, Vicki (Ind.) ...... Delta South New Westminster ...... Judy Darcy James, Carole (NDP) ...... Victoria–Beacon Hill North Coast...... Jennifer Rice Karagianis, Maurine (NDP) ...... Esquimalt–Royal Roads North Island ...... Claire Trevena Krog, Leonard Eugene (NDP) ...... Nanaimo North Vancouver–Lonsdale ...... Hon. Naomi Yamamoto Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP) ...... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant North Vancouver–Seymour ...... Jane Th ornthwaite Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal) ...... Shuswap Oak Bay–Gordon Head ...... Dr. Andrew Weaver Lake, Hon. Dr. Terry (BC Liberal) ...... Kamloops–North Th ompson Parksville-Qualicum ...... Michelle Stilwell Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) ...... Boundary-Similkameen Peace River North ...... Hon. Pat Pimm Lee, Richard T. (BC Liberal) ...... Burnaby North Peace River South ...... Mike Bernier Letnick, Norm (BC Liberal) ...... Kelowna–Lake Country Penticton...... Dan Ashton Macdonald, Norm (NDP) ...... Columbia River–Revelstoke Port Coquitlam ...... Mike Farnworth McRae, Hon. Don (BC Liberal) ...... Comox Valley Port Moody–Coquitlam ...... Linda Reimer Martin, John (BC Liberal) ...... Chilliwack Powell River–Sunshine Coast ...... Nicholas Simons Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ...... Prince George–Mackenzie Prince George–Mackenzie ...... Mike Morris Mungall, Michelle (NDP) ...... Nelson-Creston Prince George–Valemount ...... Hon. Shirley Bond Oakes, Hon. Coralee (BC Liberal) ...... Cariboo North Richmond Centre ...... Hon. Teresa Wat Pimm, Hon. Pat (BC Liberal) ...... Peace River North Richmond East ...... Hon. Linda Reid Plecas, Darryl (BC Liberal) ...... Abbotsford South Richmond-Steveston ...... John Yap Polak, Hon. Mary (BC Liberal) ...... Langley Saanich North and the Islands ...... Gary Holman Popham, Lana (NDP) ...... Saanich South Saanich South ...... Lana Popham Ralston, Bruce (NDP) ...... Surrey-Whalley Shuswap ...... Greg Kyllo Reid, Hon. Linda (BC Liberal) ...... Richmond East Skeena ...... Robin Austin Reimer, Linda (BC Liberal) ...... Port Moody–Coquitlam Stikine ...... Doug Donaldson Rice, Jennifer (NDP) ...... North Coast Surrey-Cloverdale ...... Hon. Stephanie Cadieux Robinson, Selina (NDP) ...... Coquitlam-Maillardville Surrey-Fleetwood ...... Hon. Peter Fassbender Routley, Bill (NDP) ...... Cowichan Valley Surrey–Green Timbers ...... Sue Hammell Routley, Doug (NDP) ...... Nanaimo–North Cowichan Surrey-Newton ...... Harry Bains Rustad, Hon. John (BC Liberal) ...... Nechako Lakes Surrey-Panorama ...... Marvin Hunt Shin, Jane Jae Kyung (NDP) ...... Burnaby-Lougheed Surrey-Tynehead ...... Hon. Amrik Virk Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ...... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Surrey-Whalley...... Bruce Ralston Simpson, Shane (NDP) ...... Vancouver-Hastings Surrey–White Rock ...... Gordon Hogg Stilwell, Michelle (BC Liberal) ...... Parksville-Qualicum Vancouver-Fairview ...... George Heyman Stilwell, Dr. Moira (BC Liberal) ...... Vancouver-Langara Vancouver–False Creek ...... Sam Sullivan Stone, Hon. Todd (BC Liberal) ...... Kamloops–South Th ompson Vancouver-Fraserview ...... Hon. Suzanne Anton Sturdy, Jordan (BC Liberal) ...... West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Vancouver-Hastings ...... Shane Simpson Sullivan, Sam (BC Liberal) ...... Vancouver–False Creek Vancouver-Kensington ...... Mable Elmore Sultan, Ralph (BC Liberal) ...... West Vancouver–Capilano Vancouver-Kingsway...... Adrian Dix Tegart, Jackie (BC Liberal) ...... Fraser-Nicola Vancouver-Langara ...... Dr. Moira Stilwell Th omson, Hon. Steve (BC Liberal) ...... Kelowna-Mission Vancouver–Mount Pleasant ...... Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Th ornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ...... North Vancouver–Seymour Vancouver–Point Grey ...... David Eby Th roness, Laurie (BC Liberal)...... Chilliwack-Hope Vancouver-Quilchena ...... Hon. Andrew Wilkinson Trevena, Claire (NDP) ...... North Island Vancouver–West End ...... Virk, Hon. Amrik (BC Liberal) ...... Surrey-Tynehead Vernon-Monashee ...... Eric Foster Wat, Hon. Teresa (BC Liberal) ...... Richmond Centre Victoria–Beacon Hill ...... Carole James Weaver, Dr. Andrew (Ind.) ...... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Victoria–Swan Lake...... Rob Fleming Wilkinson, Hon. Andrew (BC Liberal) ...... Vancouver-Quilchena West Vancouver–Capilano ...... Ralph Sultan Yamamoto, Hon. Naomi (BC Liberal) ...... North Vancouver–Lonsdale West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ...... Jordan Sturdy Yap, John (BC Liberal) ...... Richmond-Steveston Westside-Kelowna ...... Hon. Christy Clark

Party Standings: BC Liberal 49; New Democratic 34; Independent 2

CONTENTS

Tuesday, April 8, 2014 Aft ernoon Sitting

Page

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills ...... 2943 Bill 22 — South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Amendment Act, 2014 (continued) G. Heyman Hon. P. Fassbender C. Trevena S. Hamilton K. Corrigan M. Hunt H. Bains J. Th ornthwaite S. Robinson R. Sultan S. Simpson Hon. T. Stone Bill 23 — South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Funding Referenda Act Hon. T. Stone G. Heyman Hon. P. Fassbender

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply ...... 2984 Estimates: Ministry of Environment (continued) S. Chandra Herbert Hon. M. Polak G. Holman A. Weaver L. Popham K. Conroy

2943

TUESDAY, APRIL 8, 2014 accountable, as expert as they may be, managers who are not elected, managers who meet in private, managers Th e House met at 1:33 p.m. whose activities are not transparent and, most import- antly, who are not also charged with the responsibility for [Madame Speaker in the chair.] other planning to which transit must be intimately relat- ed. Th at would be economic development. Th at would be Orders of the Day all forms of regional development and planning. In fact, what we have seen is transit in the Lower Mainland not Hon. T. Stone: I call continued second reading of keep pace with the livable region plan, which is Metro Bill 22. Vancouver's regional plan.

Madame Speaker: Member for Vancouver-Fairview. [D. Horne in the chair.] My apologies, Member. Government House Leader. Th is bill, Bill 22, introduced by the minister, tacitly acknowledges that, although it does set off a rather odd Hon. T. Stone: We might want to let the rest of the hybrid form, where many of the duties of the board are world know what the other House is doing. transferred to the Mayors Council, yet the board con- In the Douglas Fir Committee Room I call continued tinues to exist. estimates for the Ministry of Environment. Th e test for us on this side of the House will be, during committee stage, what we can discover about the mean- Madame Speaker: Vancouver-Fairview, please con- ing of some of the changes, whether they in fact give true tinue. decision-making powers on planning and priority to the elected offi cials in the region or whether there are still Second Reading of Bills residual confl icts that exist between the Mayors Council and the board. BILL 22 — SOUTH COAST BRITISH Let me add that it will be very, very important, I be- COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY lieve, to ensure that we don't, in fact, have a confl ict AMENDMENT ACT, 2014 that results from a duplication. I've said that the Mayors (continued) Council now appears to be a hybrid form of board, yet we still have a board. How will those interactions be ef- G. Heyman: It's always a pleasure to sit behind our fectively managed so we don't waste resources, we don't leader and be welcomed before my remarks. I was deliv- waste money, we don't have confusion about where ering my remarks on this bill prior to the adjournment policy-making lies and we also don't have confusion of the House before noon and didn't quite get to the end about what it takes to implement the policies that are de- of my remarks, so perhaps I should summarize. veloped by the Mayors Council — the strategic planning I see some promise in this bill. I see some signifi cant and the investment strategy? movement toward moving away from the bad decision Let me focus now for a moment or two on what I think in 2007 by then Transport Minister Kevin Falcon that is one of the most signifi cant glaring omissions in this bill. removed governance and policy-making at TransLink Everybody, I think, understands that you can do all the from the elected and accountable representatives of the strategic planning you want. You can set all the strategic people of Metro Vancouver. I believe that was a mistake. priorities that you want. But if you're not in a position to [1335] oversee the development of the budget that actually im- A governance review that was commissioned by the plements those priorities, implements that strategic plan, Mayors Council — but reviewed at some length the gov- does it in the form of priority order that you have already ernance principles across all kinds of public and pri- established as a matter of policy for TransLink, then it ef- vate agencies, not just in Canada or B.C. but across the fectively doesn't matter. Or as some people say, those who world — demonstrated clearly where the diff erent levels control the purse strings control the policy. of policy-making, management of the implementation of What is missing from this bill is control over the an- policies and actual operational carrying-out of the poli- nual operating budget of TransLink being placed in the cies should lie. hands of the people whose responsibility it is to develop the strategic plan, both the long-term and the shorter- [M. Dalton in the chair.] term strategic plans, and set the priorities for TransLink. Now, I will note — and I look forward to exploring this It clearly indicated that at the policy-making level, in committee stage…. In a February 6 letter that was sent that is not a level that should be populated exclusively to the mayors by the Minister of Transportation, a letter by managers, certainly not by managers who are un- which covered a number of details about the referendum, 2944 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

laid out the minister's vision of how things should pro- and who have the right to travel on roads that are freer ceed and then went on to talk about governance, virtu- from congestion, far freer from congestion than they ally every item identifi ed by the minister in the letter has currently are, which means that those people who can shown up in this bill, with the exception of one thing. travel by transit do because it's aff ordable, accessible and Let me preface that one thing by saying I still believe, available and that those people who have no other choice I believe strongly, and the mayors believe, that without but to use roads fi nd that the roads are not plugged and the ability to set and approve the operating budget of choked with people driving who could otherwise be just TransLink, there is a disconnect between the planning as happy on public transit. and priority-setting process which has been granted Th is minister, I will grant you, has met some of the them and ensuring that it actually proceeds in the way commitments he has made to the mayors. He has taken a in which they envision. step away from the bad governance model that was intro- [1340] duced in 2007. He is doing it, I will say, in a bit of a hybrid It is too easy, far too easy, for a board with budget- way, not in a way that I think we on this side of the House making authority, divorced from the people who set the would choose to do. Nonetheless, he has given, in this bill, planning and policy priorities, to, in eff ect, substitute signifi cant planning and priority decision-making to the something else simply by the way in which they allo- mayors, where it belongs. Th at is worthy of notice, and I cate money. do take note of that. Th e minister's letter said…. And I intend to explore Having said that, I think there are some fl aws in the this more fully in estimates with the minister. I look for- bill. We will be carefully evaluating the position we will ward to his explanation, but this is, in fact, a glaring ab- take on this side of the House as a result of questions that sence from the bill. Th e minister said: "TransLink's board I will ask of the minister and others will ask of the min- will be expected to prepare budgets, oversee operations ister during committee stage. and implement plans consistent with Mayors Council– As I have said, the question of budgeting is absolutely approved strategies and plans." Th at seems to me to be key. I don't think anyone who has run a business, anyone pretty clear, with the exception that it's one thing to ex- who has been involved in municipal governance, any- pect somebody to do something. It is quite another to re- one who has been involved in this House or politics at quire them to do it. I think we all know examples where the provincial level, anyone, even, who has worked for a we have high expectations for friends or family but they non-profi t society would believe that separating approval don't deliver. and input — signifi cant, meaningful input — of a budget I think that we need to require very clearly, in the ab- from the priority-setting process actually works. If you sence of handing budget-making authority back to the can't implement what your priorities are, your priorities Mayors Council, which I still believe should be done, and eff ectively are devoid of meaning. I still believe should be incorporated in the bill, which, With that, I will take my seat and turn further speeches of course will beg the question at that point about why over to other members of the House. exactly we have the second board with not much to do…. [1345] Th is explicit commitment to the mayors on February 6 is absent in any form whatsoever from the bill. It's a glaring Hon. P. Fassbender: I am absolutely delighted to have omission, and it needs to be fi xed. the opportunity to stand in this House and speak about With that, I look forward to continuing dialogue with this piece of legislation for a number of reasons. Th e fi rst the Minister of Transportation at committee stage. I think is that I spent a good 12 years of my life working on trans- I have spent quite some time talking about all of the rea- portation issues in Metro Vancouver as a locally elected sons why the change in governance in 2007 was a bad offi cial, and I served in the capacity of vice-chair and idea, why I believe it was a change in governance imple- chair of the Mayors Council. I sat on many committees mented by the Transportation Minister of the day for all over those years talking about transportation. of the wrong reasons. As I rise today, I do so because, having given a lot of It was a change in governance implemented by the my own personal time without remuneration…. I did Transportation Minister of the day, Kevin Falcon, without that because the region is absolutely critical to the prov- regard to all of the commonly held beliefs and knowledge ince, to our economy, and transportation is one of the about what works for eff ective governance, what is best key arteries that lets the fl ow of economic growth happen. practice for eff ective governance and what has worked in I fi nd myself a little bit perplexed that the member for other jurisdictions. It has created needless confl ict with Vancouver-Fairview spent most of the time living in the locally elected politicians, needless confl ict with the may- past and talking about what happened in 2007. Th ere ors. It has set up a bad dynamic with the Mayors Council. have been four subsequent Ministers of Transportation All of this has been to the detriment of British since that time, and there has been signifi cant work done Columbia's economy, the Lower Mainland region's econ- bringing us to the place we are today, where the minister omy and the people of the Lower Mainland who desire has brought a piece of legislation that refl ects the will of Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2945

the region, that refl ects the priorities of the region, that work with the local mayors, to fi nd legislation that would refl ects where we see transportation going in the future meet the goals of the region and the province and to work and how we can work with local governments to achieve together to do that. those goals. When we talk about structure, there is a suggestion Th e member opposite also talked a lot about TransLink. that the board that was put into place was unelected, un- Th e reality is TransLink isn't just moving people; it's also accountable and had no relevance to the system. Th at is moving goods and services. It isn't just about more rapid absolutely and patently incorrect as well. I was there at transit; it's about the major road network. It's about all the beginning of the implementation of the new structure, of the pieces that make a truly integrated transportation and I had colleagues from the Mayors Council who sat system, which the region has not only a signifi cant in- around the table, who actually left a lot of the meetings vestment in but has a signifi cant stake in the outcomes because they said: "I don't like this structure. I'm not pre- as to how that works. pared to work with it, and therefore, I won't participate." It's easy to criticize a former member of this House and Th ey were able to do that because we do operate in a a minister for trying to do something innovative, to break democracy. But then to criticize the structure that you're the logjam of disconnect that existed at the time, to change not even willing to try and work with and to say it's un- a leadership structure that was not working to the interest accountable and unelected is not appropriate. Members of the region, that was very narrow-minded at times and opposite should be aware that the board is selected by very parochial but that needed to re-evaluate the goals of the Mayors Council, is voted on by the Mayors Council. the region, the goals of a transportation system across the Indeed, one of the members opposite has a close rela- spectrum. tionship with someone who chose every time not to sit I think to be critical of that and be critical of someone's in on the selection, sat in while the criteria were being attempt to try something new and innovative just really discussed but then got up and walked out and said: "I will refl ects the narrow-mindedness in terms of policy that not vote for the board because I don't want to be held ac- I do see across the way and without an ability to under- countable for that decision." stand the complexity of transportation. Well, I respect that individual's right to make that de- Th e speaker opposite talked about a report. Pulling cision. I said that publicly at the time. But it was clear to things selectively out of a report misses some key ele- me that there was no willingness to even try and make ments. Ken Cameron's report that he referred to made a the structure work. You know what? I could give you couple of other points that I think are really important a litany of issues around that, disagreements that were to be read into the record of this House. held at the Mayors Council. I want to focus on the fu- Th e fi rst was: "Th e scope and mandate of TransLink ture. I want to focus, as the minister has done, on solu- — including not only transit but roads, cycling, goods tions, not problems. movement and transportation demand management One of the realities that I've learned in my life…. And I — are still seen as state of the art internationally." So heard a comment, anecdotally, that I have no credentials TransLink and its programs are viewed by the rest of the and no credibility to stand here. Well, I can tell you that world as being state of the art as refl ected in this report. the amount of time I spent in local government looking [1350] for solutions, not focusing on problems, absolutely gives Th e second comment is, "TransLink's funding sources me the moral right to stand here and speak about some- are enviable in the eyes of many others because they are thing that I am very passionate about, that I put a lot of diverse and appropriate," in what they refl ect in terms my own eff ort into, along with many others. of user-pay principles, and that is fundamental. I heard And I'm not patting myself on the back. Th ere were as an elected mayor and I heard from my constituents many mayors around that table who worked very hard that they agree: a user-pay principle is something that to fi nd solutions, and there were others who didn't want they support. to fi nd the solutions. Th at's democracy. But now let's talk Th e third point that's in the report that was not quot- about the future. What does this bill really hold? ed is: "Th e achievements of the present structure, in the [1355] form of development of an urban transportation system, Well, fi rst of all, it builds on a system that is meeting are considerable and a source of justifi able pride." So to the needs of the region, that does have many challenges say that the work that was done — the activities of the ahead of it but is recognized around the world as be- Mayors Council, the board and TransLink management ing functional and being one of the places where people — has been a waste and has not achieved anything is ab- come from around the world to look at how it's run, to solutely incorrect. look at the governance structure and to look at why we've As a matter of fact, I believe that we are well served in been able to achieve what we have. Metro Vancouver by a system that now needs to move Th at said, the minister introduced a bill that refl ected to the next level. When the current minister was put a lot of discussion, a lot of back and forth. And I will say in, one of the mandates that he had was to fi nd a way to in this House that the ministers that have served this 2946 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

province over the last number of years since 2007 all Do you know the comment that I was given back have been committed to fi nding solutions — not fi ght- at that time? "Well, there is a confl ict of interest in the ing with the regional government but looking to how we mayors having representatives sitting at the board table." get to a solution. I had trouble getting my head around that, because it One of the major steps was when a memorandum of seemed to me the link between the board and the Mayors understanding was signed with the region. Th ere were Council should be absolutely seamless, robust, ongoing. two communities that voted against the memorandum [1400] of understanding, and they voted against that because of Th e argument was made that: "Well, we won't be paid the very thing that I said at the beginning — not looking if we sit at that table." Indeed, the minister responded to for solutions but focusing on an unwillingness to cooper- that and said that absolutely, there would be remunera- ate with government to move forward in a positive way. tion. But I remember there were a number of mayors Th at memorandum of understanding forms the foun- who were willing to go to the board meetings without dation of the changes that the minister has brought in, remuneration simply to do the very thing that the legis- and it forms the attitude of this government that we are lation did, and that was to ensure the communication. going to work with the region. To stand in the House, as I think what's important in all of this is not what was the member opposite did, and say that it misses some wrong but now what is going to be right. And what are of the key principles and that there is a suggestion here those key principles? Well, the board is maintained to that there isn't going to be direct input, consultation and provide that professional input. work with the region and the elected offi cials to develop One of the other keys with the mayors selecting it…. the long-term plans, the strategies and the funding en- I don't know if members of this House are aware of this, velopes is absolutely incorrect. but the reality is that the Mayors Council, with profes- We see in this legislation a mechanism where the sional input, developed a matrix of skill sets that the may- Mayors Council, as elected offi cials, clearly will articu- ors felt should be on the professional board. Th ey wanted late the vision for the region, what the transportation transit riders. Th ey did want accountants. Th ey did want priorities are. Th ey will be responsible with TransLink to have IT professionals. Th ey wanted the cross-section of management to engage the public in that dialogue and professional expertise that could provide valuable input to say to the public: "What is your vision? Here is what to TransLink management and to the Mayors Council. we believe you have told us. Do you agree with that?" I Th e problem was that the relationship between the think that is a very appropriate process for TransLink, the Mayors Council and the board that they appointed was Mayors Council and the board to work on in order to be virtually nonexistent. Th at was a travesty, because it did able to achieve that long-term goal. not allow for that building of relationship to keep our Also, when we talk about the governance and the may- focus on the vision for the region and how we were go- ors…. Th ere is some criticism already about this legis- ing to achieve that. lation that's come from certain quarters. It is that the Th e suggestion is that the previous governance struc- mayors still don't have the fi nal approval. ture took away accountability. It didn't take it away. It Well, the new structure requires that the Mayors just was never followed through on by all of the parties Council can choose not, as they did in the past, to have to make sure that they had the kind of communication two seats at the board table when those plans, based on and the relationship to ensure that the vision for the re- the vision, based on the input, based on public consulta- gion was met. tion, are brought forward within a funding envelope that I want to thank the Minister of Transportation and his we will hear about in another, subsequent bill. Th e op- team within the ministry for the work that they've done portunity for the Mayors Council to have direct input on to take all of those issues and to look at them in the cold the day-to-day operations at the board table is absolutely light of day, to say: how can we develop a governance fundamental to this governance change, and it gives the structure that is going to ensure a seamless transition mayors a direct seat. from vision to action plans to funding envelopes and to Now, when I was chair of the Mayors Council and a delivery of an integrated transportation system? I believe previous minister brought in a change to legislation to al- that this legislation has each one of those ingredients in- low for two seats from the Mayors Council, the Mayors herent in it, and it will deliver that because it recognizes Council chose not to fi ll those seats. I was opposed to that the role of regional planning and it recognizes the need decision at the time. I said: "What is the problem with for provincial input. having the chair and the vice-chair sitting at the board Th e minister is now going to have two representatives table when those decisions are made so that they can from the province at the board table, along with the chair come back to the Mayors Council and report to the may- and the vice-chair of the Mayors Council and the other ors on the discussions and the essence of where things members appointed by the Mayors Council to that board. were being decided so that the Mayors Council could be If you look at that and you look at the rest of the world, it fully in the loop?" is probably the best system that we could possibly have, Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2947

and it will ensure that decisions made are done in light ture. Th at is going to ensure the strong economy that we of the vision, the action plans, the funding envelopes and have in this province and that we're going to continue delivery of an integrated transportation system. to build on. I noted that the member for Vancouver-Fairview also As I said at the beginning, transportation is at the heart had a couple of quotes, which I have here and would like of every part of our economic framework. It is goods to quote: "I am concerned that without signifi cant input movement. It is moving people. It's about education — into the operating budget, the annual operating budget so students can get to schools by the transportation op- or decision-making power over the operating budget — tions. It is at the heart of health care for seniors — so that or something in regulation that links the decisions the they can get to their doctor appointments and their other board makes about the operating budget to the ten-year medical appointments and move around when they are strategic plan — we have a potential problem." not able to drive themselves. I can assure the member, having read the legislation, If we have the kind of transportation system that the having sat at the table and recognizing what the minister vision has shown we want, then we're going to be able to is going to do in terms of regulations as this moves for- see people move throughout the region without conges- ward, that that absolutely will not be an issue, because all tion because we will take cars off the road. We will allow of the linkages are there. trucks and goods movement, and we will do that in a Another quote I'd like to read: "The Minister of transportation system that meets the needs both of our Transportation continues to shirk his responsibility to economy and of every one of our citizens. work collaboratively with regional mayors on fund- I'm looking forward to the ongoing debate on this bill. ing options for the clearly identified needs in Metro I can tell you that the work that has been done, the years Vancouver's transportation system." of challenges that we face…. I think we have a golden [1405] opportunity to move ahead in a positive way and to see Well, you know what? Th is minister and previous min- a transportation system that is funded and sustainable — isters have put in hours aft er hours to work with the may- and that the buck stops where it should. Th at is with the ors. I believe that the relationship that exists today, with decision-makers who are going to be charged with the a few exceptions, is a healthy one. It's one of collabora- responsibility to make those inputs and then, fi nally, to tion and communication. It's one that is refl ected in this make the decisions that need to be made. change in legislation that recognizes the role of the local elected offi cials. But it also recognizes that if the region C. Trevena: I stand to take my place in debate on Bill wants more responsibility, along with that comes the ac- 22, the South Coast British Columbia Transportation countability. Authority Amendment Act. I do so following the Minister What is critical as we move forward — for the taxpay- of Education, who has acknowledged he was on the ers of Metro Vancouver and the province, because Metro Mayors Council. He was talking about the fact that we Vancouver isn't a bubble that exists in isolation from the were perhaps a bit gloomy about what has happened in rest of the province — is that the accountability has to the past. I have to ask the minister: if things were going be there for every dollar that's invested in transportation. so well, why change it? Th ere is only one taxpayer. Th ere is only one taxpayer I think one of the things we have to recognize is that that funds the future of TransLink and transportation things haven't been going well. Th ere was a big mistake throughout the province. in 2007. Th is minister and this legislation says to the mayors [1410] in the local communities that if you want the respon- Th en–Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon brought sibility, then you have to be willing to take the account- in… He separated this whole concept of democracy — ability for those decisions and not blame someone else just took out democracy. I stood up in this place in 2007 if it doesn't go the way that you think it should. You will when the then minister, Mr. Falcon, introduced the bill. be making the decisions on the vision. You will be given People wondered why I, as a representative from the input into the priorities and the funding envelopes and North Island, would stand up and criticize this. I have the decisions on how those dollars are being spent, and some of my constituents who may be able to aff ord the you will be accountable for those to the electorates that ferry ride to get to the Lower Mainland occasionally, but elect you as local mayors and councillors in the region it's not a big issue. of Metro Vancouver. What is a big issue is the fact that we have elected I think this legislation refl ects, truly, many years of representatives, who are elected to do a job on behalf of hard work and a commitment by this government to an their communities and their constituents. We have the integrated sustainable transportation plan. It is a refl ec- Mayors Council, who are elected to represent their com- tion of this government's recognition of the role of lo- munities. As part of that, we all acknowledge — I hope cal governments and how we need to work together in we all acknowledge in this House — the importance of partnership, in collaboration and with a view to the fu- transportation, the importance of public transit, the im- 2948 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

portance of our highways and the importance of getting I think that we have to acknowledge that for the last people and goods moving freely. seven years there has been a discord. I think people Part of that is that we have people who are elected in would be really wrong to just ignore that and assume our communities, who have a voice, who should con- everything had been going on normally. Th ere has been tinue having a voice. So in 2007 we got this…. Basically, great discourse. I think that is partly responsible to the the democratically elected representatives lost control Minister of Transportation of the day who brought this over TransLink. It was put into a non-elected board, an in, in 2007, Kevin Falcon, who was eff ectively at war appointed board, where there might be, as the minister with the system and wanted to ensure that the mayors says, two members who could sit on this. But it wasn't lost their voice. democratic. Th e mayors are elected by people in their commun- We want to see democracy brought back into the sys- ities, and they represent the concern of their commun- tem. We hope that this bill will do this. We are wanting to ities. Th ey represent the concerns of their communities explore the bill. I mean, the minister has the opportunity across the board. Th e reason they run for elected offi ce, in cabinet briefi ngs to get all the details about the nuan- whether it's as a councillor or a mayor…. ces of how this bill is going to work. We aren't aff orded [1415] that luxury. We're going to have to fi nd out through com- We've been talking about municipal elections for the mittee stage, the next stage of this bill, aft er we've all put last few days. Th e reason people actually run for this is our voice to it, just how this bill will work. because they want to represent the people. Th ey have a Will it bring back democracy to the TransLink gov- vision for their communities. Th ey have a vision. It may ernance? Will it ensure that the Mayors Council, the seem quite mundane for a lot of people, but they have people who were elected by the people in the Lower a vision for how they want to see their communities Mainland…? Will it give them the voice necessary to do develop through their transportation policies, through their housing policies, through their parks policies across their job, which is to ensure the free movement of people the board. Th is is part of the whole meal deal of being a and goods through their communities? Th at we have locally elected person. mayors who have a vision for how they want the Lower So to take that responsibility and that ability to be in- Mainland to develop, as a very livable place? volved in the specifi c decision-making over TransLink We are portrayed as one of the greenest provinces and was, really, a blow to the mayors. What we are hoping, greenest conurbations, metropolises in North America, what we really do hope, is that this bill will ensure that if not the world. But how are we going to achieve that if there is more ability going back to the mayors. But what we cannot ensure that that vision, that livable cities vi- is troubling is that if they get, really, the opportunity to sion, the ideas that mayors and councils are embodying, either put their vision forward to still have it ignored or is enacted? that they put their vision forward not knowing that the Th e minister sat on the Mayors Council and says that TransLink board will ensure that there is the money avail- what's going to happen now is that the mayors will be able able or it will be enacted. to articulate their vision. I do think that that is being a bit It's very interesting that the minister has…. He's, I denigrating to the mayors. Th ey do have a vision already. think, had a diffi cult time with his own Premier over Th ey can articulate their vision. Unless we are very care- this. Th ere has been back and forth over a number of ful, it's fi ngers crossed that the TransLink board will en- issues, and we're going to be discussing, in the next bill, sure that that vision is enacted upon. a specifi c one. But he wrote to the TransLink board back As my colleague from Vancouver-Fairview, the critic in February and committed to them that in this session for TransLink…. And we do have a critic specifi cally for there would be a piece of legislation. We actually have TransLink, because we acknowledge how very important two pieces of legislation in front of us. He did commit this is for the whole of the economy of B.C. We're very to the board that there would be this piece of legislation. aware that TransLink and the movement of people and Th e concern that I think is being voiced on this side of goods in the Lower Mainland is vital for economic sta- the House is that we want to make sure that that demo- bility, economic prosperity, environmental good and so- cratic voice is heard and that democratic voice is actual- cial good. So we have somebody who is dedicated there. ly acted upon. It's not just a voice going to an appointed As my colleague said, what we seem to have here, and board and saying, "Th is is what we'd really like. Please, we do need to explore it in the committee stage, is a hy- will you do it?" but: "Th is is what we really like. We're go- brid structure. We have the Mayors Council that may ing to do it." It's as simple as that. have more infl uence, may have more involvement in Th e fact that we have the Mayors Council, the board…. the board than we have had in the past. We can't guar- As I say, I'm not going to go over what my colleague from antee that. Vancouver-Fairview expressed about this, about the con- cerns about the potential confusion of governance. But [R. Chouhan in the chair.] the fact is that we want to make sure that if we're going Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2949

to have this, it has teeth. ing in an era…. Two things in B.C. — one is exponential I think the telling part of it is in the letter from the growth in the Lower Mainland of population but also of minister to the TransLink mayors back on February 6 — climate change. so just a week before we came back into the Legislature People are looking at how we are going to be ap- — saying that "TransLink's board will be expected to pre- proaching all our community living, whether it's housing, pare budgets, oversee operations and implement plans whether it's transportation. Any part of our community consistent with the Mayors Council–approved strategies development is going to have the awareness that we have and plans." Th at sounds great. But it is the "expected to." climate change. Transportation is central to this, so a 30- Th e word that is very powerful and people use with year vision, having that scrutiny, is very, very important, caution — but lawyers are very aware of it, and people and having two people who are responsible to an elector- who love grammar are also aware of it — is the word ate, not to those who are appointed. "shall." Shall gives suasion. Shall says that the TransLink Th e bill also allows for the responsibility for executive board will do it. Th is is going to happen. "Expected to" is compensation transferred to the Mayors Council from like, "Well, we really want you to do this, and we would the board. I don't know whether this is possibly a bitter expect you to do this, but if you don't" — what is it, a rap pill or it's going to be a good thing. Again, this is going on the knuckles, no decisions? to be analyzed when we get to committee stage. I'm sure I think that this is a bit of a concern because there is a that some mayors think that this might be very good. legacy, despite the Minister of Education's eff usiveness, of Some mayors are going to be very cautious about this, caution between the Mayors Council and the ministry on left with some of the nasty stuff , where if this bill doesn't this. Th ey knocked out once in 2007, and they're treating work properly, the mayors are left with all the tough this with some caution. stuff , and the board still has the control. Th at's not going What would be ideal is that the transportation system to make anybody happy. So let's see. Let's work through in the Lower Mainland, as the transportation systems this bill and see how we can make sure it works for the in other communities, is locally controlled. We have the mayors as well as the governance structure. mayors who are elected to represent the wishes, ideals Th ey're also saying that the bill will take on the com- and thoughts of their constituents. If their constituents missioner's responsibility, including the approval of fare don't like them, they can be voted out. Every three, or increases, the authority over the sale of major assets and maybe now four, years that can happen. But they are the oversight of TransLink's complaints and customer democratically responsible. satisfaction survey process. Th at's a lot of responsibility A board is not responsible, is not democratically ac- for the Mayors Council. I think it is important, but that's countable. So I do think that this is the underlying con- important if they have control. If they are charged with cern, that we still have this hybrid. We acknowledge that setting the fares and selling assets and dealing with all the new legislation has the…. Th e three-year base plan the customer satisfaction but don't actually have author- and the seven-year outlook are replaced by a ten-year ity…. It's one of these questions like: why are you hand- investment plan, which is going to be approved by the ing us this bitter pill? Why do we have to do your dirty Mayors Council. work for you? [1420] Th is, again, is going to be something that really needs I'm not sure whether it's going to be reviewed every to be analyzed. I think it also hinges on the next bill, year or how regularly. Let's hope that we can fi nd this out which I believe is the next bill on the order paper, Bill in the committee stage. I think we're approaching this 23, the authority funding referenda act, which looks at bill not in a confrontational manner, as was expressed by new ways of funding local transportation in the Lower the Minister of Education, but we want to actually look Mainland, funding for TransLink and fi nding ways of en- at this, explore it, see what went wrong in the past, learn suring that funding. from history, learn from the government's own mistakes I think that some of the mayors are going to be look- of seven years ago and see how we can make sure that this ing to see what comes out of that before feeling too eager is the best possible piece of legislation. We're very con- about this. cerned about that, so these are some of the things that Th is is a bill that is really, as they say, a long time com- we'll be asking about. ing. Since 2007 we needed to get a democratic system Th is legislation also ensures that approval of the 30- back into Lower Mainland transportation. I think that year regional transportation strategy is transferred to the mayors acknowledge that it allows input into planning Mayors Council from the board. Now, that's very good — now. Most of them acknowledge that it isn't perfect, a 30-year vision coming back to democratically elected but there is also concern from a number of the mayors people. Good idea. You have a strategy, a long view, as about the fact that they don't have control over the an- you see your communities develop. I think we've got to nual budgets. I think that this is going to be one of the be cognizant that communities are developing very dif- sticking points. ferently these days than they were 30 years ago. We're liv- [1425] 2950 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

I mean, we have the Mayors Council chair, who is the whether it's lumber…. Whatever it is, the resources are North Vancouver district mayor, Richard Walton, say- shipped through the Lower Mainland, so it is necessary ing just last month: "I can't represent the fact we're all for all of us that this happens right, that we get the best happy, because I think, still, the large issues we want to governance model for that area, for TransLink, so that address have not been addressed" — very concerned our roads are operating well and the transportation sys- about the budget. tem is operating well and so that our economy and our Others saying that while it's consistent with the let- social structure and our environment can be sustained ter…. I quote the Richmond mayor, Malcolm Brodie: "If and can go forward with the fewest problems. we're not overseeing the budget, how can we ensure the I think that we should acknowledge that this comes out vision is being carried out?" As I said earlier on: here's our of a major mistake back in 2007. It is an attempt to try vision, fi ngers crossed that the board will approve it even and fi x that mistake. Let's hope it is an attempt that works. though the mayors are left with dealing with the whole We will have many, many questions during the com- diffi cult thing of compensation, fare increases, and so on. mittee stage of this bill, to ensure that we get some of Again, we've had the mayor of Coquitlam saying that it those answers. With that, I take my place in debate and hasn't always followed that what we decide, even on the look forward to hearing from others who are partici- core budget and the supplementary budgets, is presented pating. to the Mayors Council. Again, concerns there. [1430] Concerns also from the Port Coquitlam mayor, who says it's not what we wanted. Because what we wanted S. Hamilton: I'm pleased to stand up and speak in sup- was complete control, which is what happened before. port of Bill 22. I'm going to fi nd it very diffi cult to come There is also concern from the mayor of Burnaby, up here and speak on the heels of the eloquent words Derek Corrigan, who dismisses it as "all spin." that were espoused by the Minister of Education. Th ey I think that on this side of the House we want to make did resonate with me, and I hope they resonated with sure that we get the right legislation. We think that the every member in this House, because he was there. He mayors, as the elected representatives — they have a was in the trenches. He saw the problems. He saw the council, they come together, and they're working on be- dysfunction. half of their communities — should be the ones who are He acknowledged the fact, as has being acknowledged responsible for this planning. on the other side of the House, that there are things that We shouldn't be looking necessarily at a hybrid struc- need fi xing. Th at's what we're doing. We're responding ture. But if you're going to have the hybrid structure, to the needs of the mayors in Metro Vancouver and, as make it work for all the parties. Th at's what we're hoping such, looking at ways to improve TransLink governance, we will fi nd during the committee stage: how it's going to of course. work, how it's going to fall into place, what the minister's We are listening, and that really is what this bill comes vision for this is and whether it meshes with a vision of down to and what it's all about. Th e acknowledgment that some of the mayors. there were problems, that there are problems, is basic- Or is it just: "My predecessor, Kevin Falcon, made a ally at the centre of our decision-making. Th at's what is mistake, and I'm going down this way because I'm try- pushing this bill through, and I'm glad I am able to sup- ing to fi x it a bit but not all the way, because I haven't got port it. Th e role of government is to govern, and we're the authority. My Premier doesn't want to give me the au- showing real leadership that considers the best interests thority, so this is just a little bit." So we need to clarify that. of British Columbians. What we're doing in this place we should be doing with When Metro Vancouver mayors asked for more say on seriousness. We should be looking at things seriously, TransLink, we listened. Th is bill gives local governments because it is hard to fi x them, and a lot of people's lives more control over the future of their transit system. Th e really depend on them. I mean, when we're talking about Mayors Council has asked government for more say over TransLink, we're talking about economy, social issues, en- how investments are made in transit and how planning vironmental issues. is done for the region. We responded with amendments We are talking about serious issues that really need to the South Coast British Columbia Transportation to have serious discussion, serious debate and serious Authority Act. policy — not a policy that's done out of bitterness or The changes allow the Mayors Council to approve that comes out of whim or expedience but a policy that TransLink's long-term strategies, including a 30-year is really working for the best interests of all the people regional transportation strategy. Th at's important, be- living in the Lower Mainland, all the people living in the cause it gives control to the people who will make the TransLink area — and people outside of there who rely most use of transit in their communities. on that area operating eff ectively and effi ciently. Th e Mayors Council assumes responsibilities that have That is the area through which most of the goods been the responsibilities of TransLink commissioners, that we produce in our province — whether it is coal or who operate, essentially, outside the democratic process. Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2951

Again, both sides of the House have acknowledged that other side of the House when we have a fundamentally fact, and we're moving to change that. undemocratic board, essentially picked from the business Under this legislation, the Mayors Council will ap- friends of the Liberals. It's been that way since the begin- prove fare increases, decide the sale of major assets and ning, and nothing has changed over the last several years. oversee TransLink's complaints and customer satisfac- [1435] tion survey process. Th at's a direct connection between I'd like to say that what we have here with this bill, with how service is delivered and the people who will be pay- these changes, is essentially providing some areas of con- ing for the bulk of that service. trol to the mayors, all the crappy stuff — getting to raise The Mayors Council will also oversee how much fares, getting to decide what the compensation is for the TransLink executives and board directors are paid. Our board members that are unelected and unaccountable, government will add two provincial appointees to the all those things — but no control over the one thing that board, though the size of the board will be unchanged, maybe makes a diff erence. to improve communications between TransLink and the I wonder how this provincial government, how the Mayors Council and this province. Liberal government on the other side, would feel if they As I said, our government recognizes the value of mu- were told: "Look, you can do a ten-year plan, as long as nicipalities. Many of us in this House began our political it meets our goals." Part of the catch here is that the ten- careers at the municipal level, myself included. We know year plan has to fi t within the government's approved how important it is to have a provincial government economic plans and strategic plans, so there's no real that's willing to listen and to respond. Th is legislation is control. Th ere's less there in this strategic planning. a great example of how we're building those relationships. How would this government feel if they were sudden- We're taking local government seriously and working ly told by another level of government: "Oh, by the way, with the cities and towns of this province to better repre- you get to do this, this and this, but you don't get to set sent the people of British Columbia. Having a functional the budget every year"? relationship with other levels of government allows us to It's outrageous. If you don't have control of the funds, achieve what voters want, what our constituents are ask- if you don't have control of the everyday planning of ing from us. Aft er all, the goals are the same, even if we the system, which is what they used to have, there is no have diff erent roles to play in how we get there. Whether democracy whatsoever. It doesn't matter how much you you're a politician or represent a provincial or federal rid- move the deck chairs on the Titanic around. It's all smoke ing, all of us want a secure society. and mirrors. Th ere is no democracy in this process, there We want a strong economy and a bright future for our has been no democracy, and there continues to be no kids, and I'm pleased to be able to play a role in that at democracy. Until this government fi gures that out and the provincial level now. does something about it — it has no intention — there Our government has been able to set the stage for fu- will not be peace with the local mayors. ture investment. We balanced the budget for the second I was very interested to hear…. It's so interesting to see time. Th at fi scal restraint is what the people of British that we have people who were formerly in local govern- Columbia expect from their government at any level. ment sitting on the other side, including the Minister of When the people of British Columbia chose us last Education. Mind you, the Minister of Education wasn't May to lead this province, one of the promises we made exactly necessarily looking out for the interests of the was to give taxpayers a say on how their money is spent region. Th e Minister of Education had other aspirations, on transit. We're following through with that promise, which he has now played out by coming here and work- and we're doing so in a way that works for local govern- ing with the government that he's in. ments. We promised to reimburse local governments for the Hon. P. Fassbender: Th at's so cruel. cost of that referendum, and this legislation keeps that promise. We're also keeping our commitment to allow K. Corrigan: No, it's kind. the Mayors Council to have direct input into the wording It's funny to talk about…. We're going to be talking in of any referendum. And when the mayors asked for more the other bill about a referendum. Every single mayor in time to hold a referendum, we agreed to work with them. the Lower Mainland on the Mayors Council, every single If the people of Metro Vancouver are being asked to mayor said: "We don't want a referendum." And yippee. pay for new taxes or fees on top of those that local gov- What are they getting now? It's like being told: "Lookit. ernment and TransLink already collect, then taxpayers You're going to be executed, but you get to choose the must have a say. We're listening, and we are proud to have date." I mean, really, it is pathetic, and it's sad. the mayors of Metro Vancouver on our side. I remember back in the 1990s, the good old 1990s when we were in power, we had the transit system of the K. Corrigan: Well, it's been really interesting to hear year for North America — the transit system of the year, lectures about democracy and accountability from the 1996, run by the good old NDP. And do you know what 2952 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

happened? Here's what really happened. Let's talk a little put together 85 people who'd do a much better job, and bit about the history of why we are where we are today. then you wouldn't have to deal with that damned demo- Why don't we talk about why we are where we are today. cracy and accountability and answering to your com- We had democratically elected representation running munities. transit in the Lower Mainland. Th en in the early 2000s, Here's how the board was originally picked. A panel…. the then Minister of Transportation, now Kevin Falcon, did not like what that democratically elected group of Interjection. mayors said they wanted to do and came up with some excuse, saying they were dysfunctional. K. Corrigan: What's so frustrating, member opposite? Th ey were exercising democracy. Th ey were discussing It is frustrating. You know what? It is entirely frustrating the plans. Th ey were fi guring out what it is they wanted to have a government that cares so little about democracy. to do with their transit system and were doing well and planning well, like they do with their strategic plans for Interjections. the community as a whole. Th at's a democratic exercise wherein every single community in the Lower Mainland K. Corrigan: Yes, so little. Let's get rid of the 85 mem- got together and agreed about what they want to do with bers. A corporate board could do a much better job than their community. any of us — any of you. If this government would just get out of the way, the Lower Mainland would just do fi ne. Instead, they have Interjections. their friends. Th ey have the things they want to do. Th ey have their business friends. K. Corrigan: Really? Well, then why don't we bring a little bit to the Lower Mainland? Interjection. Anyway, I'm going to get back to the point.

K. Corrigan: Well, let's talk about business friends. Interjections. Let's talk about what the minister…. Deputy Speaker: Members. Members, let's have one Interjections. speech at a time, please.

Deputy Speaker: Members. Members. K. Corrigan: One speaker — right. I get my little mo- ment here. K. Corrigan: Let's talk about what the Minister of Th e way this was originally put together, TransLink Education was talking about. He used the words "ac- was taken away, just simply gotten rid of, by this govern- countability" and "democracy" and "election." ment. Instead, a screening committee was put together When you talk about the board, how did this board by then Premier Gordon Campbell, with representation come into place? First of all, they fi red the democratic- from the board of trade, the institute of chartered ac- ally elected board. Th ey got rid of them. Kevin Falcon, countants and the Gateway Council. Th ey describe them- in a pique — because he was not getting his way, was selves as a "dynamic, industry-led organization of senior not getting the priorities that he wanted for transporta- executives from the seaports, airport, carriers and other tion — fi red the board. He said: "We're not going to have companies engaged directly in the gateway transporta- democracy anymore. Instead, what we're going to do…." tion business." I think it's still mostly the same players. I see lots of members who were around then that were What they do…. Th is is democracy and accountability in local government. You should be ashamed of your- for you. What do they do? Th ey come up with a list, and selves for not speaking up for local governments and in- that list goes to the Mayors Council. Th ey don't know stead becoming toadies for this government. who has applied. I don't think anybody who is anything [1440] but…. Let's get rid of democracy. Let's not even have elec- tions for this place. What the heck. Let's appoint a board Interjection. that's put together by business. Th ey can do a much bet- ter job because they're professionals, and we're a bunch K. Corrigan: I absolutely know what I'm talking about. of amateurs. A list is…. I'm sorry that the minister has already spoken because I'd like to fi nd out exactly where I'm Interjection. wrong in this. Th e list comes together. It comes to the Mayors Council. Th ey don't even know who applied. Th e K. Corrigan: Well, really, it's the same argument. Why list is put together by this group, who then presents: "You not? I'm sure we could fi nd a business board that could get to choose who you want from this list that we've given Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2953 you." Now that is not democracy. know has been rejected by the Mayors Council as un- What have we got now? What do we get now in this democratic. I know the member opposite, the Minister bill? Well, what we get is no ability to have anything to of Transportation…. Now, I do believe the Minister of do with the budget. You don't get to have control of the Transportation did advocate for, would probably have budget. A ten-year plan…. By the way, the minister was supported…. Given his present position, I think he prob- being quite upset during earlier discussions, saying: ably would have advocated for that. But of course, be- "Th ey have to come up with a plan. Th ey have to come cause he was the chair of the Mayors Council, he would up with a vision." Th at ability to plan is exactly what this have got one of those positions. He would have had one government took away from the mayors in 2007. "You of those positions. can't do it anymore. We do it for you. Th is board, this Here's what a report said that was commissioned by private board, does it." the Metro Vancouver regional Mayors Council, which has repeatedly called on the province to make reforms. Interjections. Th ey had consultants, Acuere Consulting, who examined practices in 13 cities around the world. K. Corrigan: Really? Baloney? I've been watching this It concludes that TransLink's structure with an ap- stuff for a long time. pointed board of directors in control of all decisions ex- cept major revenue increases is an anomaly worldwide, Interjections. while other jurisdictions invariably have elected repre- sentatives in charge who answer democratically to the Deputy Speaker: Members. people being served — as opposed to what this govern- Member, please be careful in your speech. ment has done here. Th e report found accountability is "almost completely K. Corrigan: Th e ten-year plan — they get to partici- missing" from TransLink's current structure, and it's less pate. It's like ParticipACTION: you get to participate. In than ideal on transparency, responsiveness, clarity of pur- looking at the ten-year plan, they have to consider the pose, advocacy and productive relationships. provincial transportation and the province's objectives, Th e report again says: "Th e province has exercised a including their economic objectives, which gives more dominant interest, feeling free to impose its priorities control to the province rather than less. on the region and reluctant to provide a role in transit Get to help choose the question on the referendum. for local government institutions it did not directly or Every single mayor in the Lower Mainland said: "We indirectly control." don't want a referendum. Th at is no way to…." I appreciate that some of my colleagues have said that they'll wait and see, and maybe there are a couple of little Interjection. tidbits in here. I think it's just going around the edges and saying: "What is the absolute minimum that we can do in K. Corrigan: Th ere was a unanimous response. You order to fulfi l what we have been promising for several weren't there at the time. Th ere was a unanimous re- years, which is to review this structure because it's not sponse — unanimous disapproval of having a referen- working?" It never worked from day one. dum. A little nibbling around the edges, but this is not going Again, you don't get to…. to be bought by the local mayors. Th ey are not happy with this. Th ey're having a referendum imposed on them that Interjection. every single one of them said they didn't want. [1445] Interjections. K. Corrigan: I'm not making it up. It would be hard to make this stuff up. Th e complete lack of respect for K. Corrigan: Th at's a change. Th at might be a change. democracy would be hard to make up. Unfortunately, it does not address the fundamen- You get to raise the fares. You get to be the bad guys. tal problem with governance of TransLink, which was You get to be the bad guys who set the remuneration for pointed out in this most recent report, which is: there senior staff . But you can't cut back, of course, because is no democracy at TransLink. It's controlled in a back- there would be wrongful dismissals. You get to set the door way by this government, has been controlled since board's remuneration. So you get all the dirty jobs. Th ey 2007, because this government wanted to be able to con- get all the dirty jobs, and they get no…. If the govern- trol the decisions that were made in greater Vancouver. ment wants to give them responsibility, give them back And if that means getting rid of democracy, then so be it. the budget, because that's the only thing that matters. And now the government wants to reintroduce the M. Hunt: I have to admit to you that one of the real idea of having two members on the board, which they disappointments, I thought, in coming to the provincial 2954 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

government was that I was going to miss my times with And then, bingo, the Premier of the day says no. the mayor of Burnaby. Th e mayor of Burnaby would con- Well, by the same token, let's be fair here, because in stantly accuse me of revisionist history when I would this House we're all in this thing together. Th e reality is recount diff erent things that had happened in Metro that we then went through another plan. We created the Vancouver. I am just so delighted to be able to follow parking stall tax. We tried to work through the parking the member for Burnaby–Deer Lake and to be able to stall tax to try to be fair to Vancouver and Richmond, give my version of history and what actually happened who had the most parking stalls that were being charged. in history. We tried to work that. Again, the concept: trying to We spoke about that back in July of last year, as there spread the pain all around so everybody was contrib- was a resolution concerning TransLink that was brought uting, everybody was working together to build a good forward in this House. We had a discussion at that time transportation system in the Lower Mainland. about it. Regrettably, the Premier of the day said: "No parking [1450] stall tax. We're not going to let that one happen." So this At that time I had recounted some of the history of continued tension between what TransLink wanted to do TransLink and the tensions that were between the local- and what the provincial government, the elected offi cials ly elected offi cials and the provincially elected offi cials. at the provincial level…. We had this tension between the I'm just delightfully amazed that the good member for two. Th ey both were elected by the same group of people. Burnaby–Deer Lake described that as the good old days Th ey were both saying, "We represent the people; we want of the 1990s. In fact, TransLink was originally created to give action on behalf of the people," and coming to two with 15 members. Th ree of those members were, in fact, completely diff erent conclusions. from the government of the day, which was the NDP side I am very proud of this minister that we have today, of the House — including one of the members that cur- the Minister of Transportation. During the election one rently sits with us today, who I will leave anonymous and of the platforms we put forward is that we want to solve let that individual speak if they so choose to. this problem. We want to get this thing solved so we Th ose three members of the provincial government can get on with good transit and transportation in the that were working with the locally elected offi cials quit. Lower Mainland. Th is minister, to his credit, went out Th ey refused to attend because of the tensions at the and listened. meeting, I suppose, because they never did give us the Let's just think for a moment who he listened to and reasons why they quit. Th en, ultimately, the legislation the dispersion of ideas that he listened to. He certainly was amended to take those three provincial members off listened to the Mayors Council's opinion on things. He the TransLink board, because of the inherent tensions certainly listened to some of his own caucus members, that were built into the way that TransLink was built. because I want to assure you that I was talking to him, I guess I should pause for a moment just to put this and he was glad to receive my opinion. I don't doubt that into context. I am the only elected offi cial who served there were many others that spoke to him, as well as the the entire nine years that elected offi cials were governing general public. He listened to them. TransLink. So I guess I have the context to be able to give [1455] the history. I, quite frankly, had my doubts, because we had seen Interestingly enough, TransLink in the 1990s was previous ministers work on this fi le and no progress be- given all these wonderful ways to raise money to be able ing made. Th is minister is making progress. He is head- to create transportation and transit and deal with all ing in the right direction. I credit him for that, and I stand these goods and the movement of goods and services in this House to credit him. He is working on it, he's lis- and all those wonderful things. Except when we tried to tening, he's taking the input, and he's working at getting use them, all of a sudden we found strings attached back solutions that are going to work. here. Th e Premier of the day said: "Vehicle levy? Oh, no, Ultimately, the Mayors Council — and yes, we've heard no. You can't do a vehicle levy. We're not going to allow this from both sides of the House — asked very specifi c- that one." ally if they could get control over the long-term plans and It was in the legislation. It was something in the how to fi nance those plans. Th at we have in this legisla- Valhalla days that was given to us, but we weren't allowed tion. Th ey wanted to be able to manage the 30-year vision to use it. Th at was the Premier. And I'll just say the party for where this is going and how we're going to get there. that he was Premier of was the NDP — okay, just so we Th at's in this legislation. get it clear — the guys who created the legislation in the Ultimately, the funding of it has always been the prob- fi rst place. lem from day one. Actually, to be bluntly honest with Th en we get on with life. We try to struggle. We try you, although I was not in the House during the 1990s, I to come up with a plan. But that was a plan that we had have the sneaking suspicion that the NDP government gone through extensive consultation on with the elector- of the day wanted to get rid of the problems with fund- ate. We had done all sorts of things in creating that plan. ing TransLink. I'm sure that's why they created it. Th ey Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2955

just wanted to push those decisions off to another order your perspective, that it was not democratic. of government, to let them handle it and deal with it. As for me, I believe it is democratic. I believe it is work- No matter what you try to do, there are going to be ing in the spirit of that because we have democratic- people furiously mad with you, one way or the other — ally elected people making the decisions. Th ey are there the ones that want more transit and aren't getting it and representing their local municipalities. Th ey're repre- the ones that are having to pay for it and are not using senting their people. it. We constantly have this tension. We constantly have a [1500] problem. But that's part of politics. Th at's part of the art It's a federation of the municipalities, 22 member mu- of politics and working the compromises and working on nicipalities, plus First Nations working together in order things together. Th is legislation is giving that opportun- to fi nd solutions to get things done, to get transit and ity. It's giving that power to the Mayors Council to get on transportation moving in the Lower Mainland. Th at's with the job and get things done. why I will be supporting this bill. In fact, I would suggest that possibly the amendments I want to say it one more time so that nobody can think of 2007 — we've heard that discussed here too — were that I didn't say it: I am proud of this minister and this trying to deal with the constant confl ict that we had in legislation being here. TransLink coming to decisions. Some people say we were dysfunctional, that we didn't get anything done, H. Bains: I went through this, I think the previous but the Golden Ears Bridge is there today to the credit ten years almost, going back to 2007, actually — if you of the TransLink elected offi cials. Th e Canada Line was really look at what brought us here. And as you know, built and is there. We can go down the list of huge things 2007-2008 is the time when the debate was going on at that happened during those nine years and were set on the Mayors Council. course in those nine years. We got it done because we Th ese are the elected mayors or councillors that made had a vision. up the TransLink board. Th ese are the people who are Yes, it was painful. I have a certifi cate on my wall for elected, or were elected, from their communities, and chairing the mother of all Metro Vancouver meetings. It they were accountable to their communities. Th ey knew was nine hours long, fi ve challenges to the chair — and what was needed in their communities because they are yes, I was the chair. It just was a most interesting meet- the people who make land use decisions. Th ey would be ing. But at the end of the day, we had the vote that said: the right body to make the right decisions, because all yes, let's build the Canada Line. Today people are travel- experts in the world will agree that land use decisions ling it and enjoying the benefi ts of that good transit sys- and public transportation go hand in hand. Th ere's no tem. Without controversy? No. Without challenges? No. argument about that. Th is legislation that is before us is working at cutting So who is best in that position? Mayors and the coun- those strings back to Victoria so that the elected offi cials cillors, in their city halls, make decisions on land use can get on with the job of building transit. every day. Th ey also know what is needed as far as the Now, by the same token, we have another piece of services needed to serve that community as far as the legislation — which I'm only going to slightly refer to, transportation is concerned. So they were the right mix. with your indulgence, Mr. Speaker — subsequently, to Th ey were the right body to make the decisions to look at follow this, that deals with the issue of the tension be- this very, very important but complex situation that our tween the provincially elected offi cials and the locally growing communities face. And it's all over the world. elected offi cials concerning TransLink. I think: "Well, is Every city has huge and complex challenges when it it what they wanted?" Well, no. But by the same token, comes to public transportation, when it comes to mov- again it's a compromise that can work so that the citizens ing people and goods. work on the basis of buying into a vision and into the pain At the same time, you're talking about how to be re- that that vision is going to be in order to get things done. sponsible to our future generations, which means: how Is a referendum not democratic? I couldn't believe do we look at and protect our environment? I think hearing those words in this House — that a referendum that was the duty, that was the responsibility, that those is not democratic. I think it's extremely democratic be- elected mayors prior to 2007 did a remarkable job on. If cause the actual people who are going to pay the bills are you look at what they were able to deliver in the Lower the ones that say yes and no. "Let's get on with this. Let's Mainland, it's remarkable. And since that time, what do do this." As a matter of fact, I heard the words that this is we have? Th is government came to the table kicking and against democracy and all of those sorts of things. screaming. Finally, they worked with the mayors so that I remember during the 2000s that there were those we have the Evergreen line. who were complaining because we as the TransLink If you may recall, Mr. Speaker, and those members board, as locally elected offi cials, were not directly elect- on that side also know, it was becoming a joke because ed to that offi ce. Th erefore, they said that was not demo- there was no leadership coming from this government cratic. So even the original can be argued, depending on here. Th e mayors weren't allowed to do the work that 2956 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

they needed to do because of the change in the govern- and the councillors. Th e minister didn't like the decision ment in 2007. No wonder people who were hoping to that they were making, so he fi red them. So democratic. have the Evergreen line built on time started to call it As the Minister of Transportation was standing here the Nevergreen line. You may remember that. Th ey used earlier on and praising this government and the board of to call it the Nevergreen line because they stopped be- how democratic they are and how accountable they are…. lieving that this government is ever going to deliver on He didn't like the decision that they made. He fi red them. that promise. Th at's how democracy works in their world but not with Finally, it was the mayors again who showed the the rest of the world, not on this side of the world. leadership and advised this government of what is need- What did he do? Replaced those members. Who ed. Th at's when the two cents per litre was approved here did he replace them with? Not through election. He in this House so that they could have the revenue that went and said they will be from the board of trade, they need to pay for their portion of the Evergreen line. Gateway Council, chartered accountants and the As you know, it was a three-way split. It was the provincial Minister of Transportation. So much democracy there. government, federal government and TransLink. It was As the Minister of Transportation and my friend from TransLink that was having a diffi cult time in coming up Panorama are talking about how democratic they were with their portion to fund their $400 million. in the last ten years. I think I will be very, very cautious in looking, at com- Th at's what happened. Th at's why hardly any decision mittee stage, at exactly what this Bill 22 does, what the got made. In fact, if you compare to the services we had intent is. back then to the services that we have today, there's a cut [1505] in services right now. So much leadership coming from Mayors, time and again, ever since 2007 when they this government that we have to take cuts in transporta- were removed from being on the board, have been saying tion services. that they are removed from the decision-making table My friend comes from the Surrey-Panorama region and that an unelected board is making all those decisions where, Mr. Speaker, I must tell you…. The members behind closed doors. Once they come up with a plan, the from Panorama and Tynehead know, and the Minister Mayors Council, then, is required to say yes or no to that of Transportation and the Minister of Education knows, plan. Th ey could not amend it, could not change it. Th ey that south of the Fraser right now we have one hour, on have to say yes or no. a per-capita basis, of public transportation compared to If they said yes and they require more money, then it 1.9 hours for Vancouver-Richmond-Burnaby. About half. was the mayors who had to fi nd the new money. It was a So much leadership coming up from those elected on the system that was designed to fail. How do you ask some- government side from Surrey. one: "Make a decision, but you cannot amend it. You can- Th is is the fastest-growing community. It's not that not change it. You have no participation in designing and they could stand up here and argue: "Oh, we didn't know planning that plan, but you have to say yes or no. Once that Surrey was growing that fast." Th ey can't make that you say yes, if there's additional money needed, you have argument. Th ey knew it. Th ey knew it in 2001, and they to fi nd the money." I mean, it just does not work that way. knew it in 2007 — that Surrey is the fastest-growing Also, they were saying: "We're the ones who are ac- community. countable to the people who elected us. We know what We need more buses. We need more public transpor- goes on in our communities. We know where the growth tation. Guess what happened. We got cut. I'll tell you is. We know what is needed when it comes to land use exactly where the cuts were. I'll remind the Minister decisions and match that with the transportation deci- of Education where the cut had to be made — because sions." But they were far removed from that decision. All there's no money; there's no funding coming — because they could do…. of lack of leadership from this government. Th ey ran And the Minister of Transportation can sit here, as away when there was a chance and the time for them to he did all of his life when he was on that board, being make a decision. an apologist for this government. He's still doing that. [1510] He got awarded for that, by the way. Th at's why he's sit- Th at's not leadership. Th ey ran away from their re- ting here. sponsibility: "Oh well, by the way, yes, we need the public I think the reality and the facts are diff erent. I remind transportation, and yes, we need to increase the services, the minister how frustrated he was even, at the time when but we're not going to make any decision. We'll have a he was on the board, with this government. I'll show that referendum. Oh well." to you, and I'll read the quotes from the minister. Why wasn't there any referendum when Evergreen The problem was just because the Minister of line was built? Why wasn't there any referendum when Transportation of the day, Mr. Kevin Falcon, had a little the previous two lines were built? Why wasn't there any snit, had a fi ght with the mayors because the mayors were referendum when Port Mann Bridge was built? All of a making the decision — who were democratically elected, sudden…. I ask the members from Surrey to pay real Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2957

attention here. When it's Surrey's turn now, when it's Panorama. Surrey's time now, they're running away from the re- [1515] sponsibility and saying somebody else is going to make You want to talk about interference by the Premier. a decision. Th at's not leadership. Here is a prime example. Th is is what's happening. Th is Let me go back into the history. My friend from is aft er 2007 when the Minister of Transportation at that Panorama started with the history, and I was hoping that time said: "Th e old system doesn't work." Th e member he would continue on, but he stopped at 2001. I'm going for Surrey-Panorama said: "Th e old system didn't work." to fi ll inthose blanks for my friend. He talked about how Th ey were fi ghting with each other, and here is what was the government was interfering here in the 1990s. Th ey happening in 2012, right here in this House. wanted to do the work. Th e minister here, the govern- Th ere is a lot more history, Minister and Member for ment of the 1990s, would say: "Oh no, you can't have that." Surrey-Panorama, because interference aft er interference But let's talk about the last ten years. I will go back to, by the Premiers of this House in the last ten years is the actually, the Minister of Education and see how he felt. reason nothing got built. Never mind that nothing got On March 23, 2012, the day aft er the Premier announced built. We had to cut services. the audit and ruled out the vehicle levy, the Minister of Transportation, Mr. Lekstrom, admitted that he and Interjection. the Premier had not collaborated or talked. He had not. Here's the minister; there's the Premier. Th e minister is H. Bains: Yeah, the Minister of Health is talking about saying one thing; the Premier is saying something else. the Canada Line. For the memory of my colleague from Panorama, this is I gave a little history there — how the Canada Line true interference by the Premier. Th at's why decisions came about, how he fired the democratically elect- aren't being made. ed board so that he could appoint his own board. Th e He was a good soldier, Mr. Lekstrom, and I like him. elected mayors and the councillors were looking out for He said: "She is my Premier. I serve in the cabinet at her the region, but the minister and the Premier of the day discretion." So he's throwing his hands up in the air: had their own agenda — nothing to do with the Lower "What can I do? I know what I'm doing is right, but the Mainland, but they had their own agenda. Th at's the way Premier is interfering." they operate and they continue to operate to this day. I've But let's go a little further. Th e Minister of Education just read some of the quotes. was so forceful in saying, "Well, we had so much good Her own ministers are saying that she doesn't talk to stuff going on in the previous ten years. Th ere was ac- anybody, that she works in isolation. "It never surprises countability. Th ere were all of the decisions being made." me how she makes decisions." Th en he went on to contradict himself by saying, "Well, there are changes needed," because the old system wasn't An Hon. Member: She works with Harry Bloy. working. On one hand he was saying such wonderful things the H. Bains: Works for Harry Bloy, I guess. Okay. minister, the previous minister and the previous minis- Let's come back to 2010. Let's talk 2010 — September ter have done — all the great things. Th en all of a sudden 2010. I was present. The Minister of Education was he's: "Oh yeah. Th at stuff isn't working." present — such a huge fanfare — and the previous Here is just a recent memory for the minister. When Minister of Transportation. Th ey were all there. Th ey the Premier pulled the rug from underneath that minis- were all there, and I thought: there's a hope that fi nally we ter at that time, Mr. Lekstrom, this is what the Minister of are going to sign a piece of document that will have some Education had to say: "Langley mayor" — I will not use solutions to our badly needed public transportation. Th is the name — "vice-chair of the TransLink Mayors Council, is September 2010, and we're talking about it now, almost said the Premier seems to be 'drawing the line in the sand' four years later — still, the same thing. without even bothering to talk to the mayors who strug- Th e commitment was made by this government with gled for the past two years over the diffi cult decision of the local mayors that they would fi nd a long-term sus- what new funding mechanisms to request." tainable funding formula to have the Evergreen line and Th is is what the vice-chair, who happens to be the all of the other extensions and expansions that we need in Minister of Education now, had to say about this Premier. the Lower Mainland. Th at decision was made in 2010. So She was pulling the rug from under her ministers. He what are we doing now? Still talking about the same thing. went on to say: "She has never talked to me or Mayor It's hard to believe that the minister, who was vice- Richard Walton, the chair." Th e Minister of Education chair at that time, could stand up here and praise that further said: "Nor does she seem to have talked to her system of the last four years of doing nothing — doing own cabinet members. I am never surprised at things nothing those four years as far as public transportation the Premier says. I think that she makes decisions in is concerned. isolation." What a lesson for the member for Surrey- We needed more buses in Surrey. What did we get? 2958 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Service cut. We needed an expansion to south of Fraser. Premier? Th e mayors passed four resolutions, one re- What did we get? Nothing. jecting future property tax hikes. Originally they were If you look at the handyDART part of public trans- talking about…. As part of their deal in 2010, everything portation, there's another story. I hope the Minister of was on the table, and they would work with the province Transportation is paying attention. Th ere's another story. to come up with a long-term sustainable funding formula. Th ere are disabled people who use this service to go to Because this government continued to second-guess work so that they keep themselves busy. It's good for their the mayors and not cooperate with them and would not health. It's good that they're not depending on anybody sit down with them, they said: "Fine. You play your game else. But what's happening? Because of a lack of service, over there." What they did was…. Th ey did four things. and we have cuts in that system, they are told, "You can't Th ey passed a resolution: no future property tax hikes. go to work," because they have no transportation now. Th ey requested that there should be a governance change Th is is the reality. Th is is happening right now. I ask the from the minister. Th en they said also that in light of the Minister of Health to come over, listen to some of the real two previous audits, another one is not needed unless it people in Surrey. Let's listen to some of the real people in is done by the Auditor General, cancelling $30 million Surrey. Let's come and talk to…. in property tax and service expansions until alternative Th e Minister of Health is always sitting here chirping funding sources are determined. Th is was later found away about something that makes no sense at all. It's not not to be legal. relevant to what we're talking about, but he has to have Th is is the system that was brought in by the previ- his two bits in here. But real people are hurting, as they ous Minister of Transportation that they are so proudly waste their time trying to put somebody else down over saying how great it was. Th ey could never work with the important issues such as handyDART. mayors since 2007. Th e mayors were sitting over there. We're standing here today again, since 2007, to talk Th is government was sitting over there. Even when they about the change in governance. tried to do something, the Premier would always say [1520] one thing. Th e minister would show something else. She would pull the rug out from under the minister, and then G. Hogg: I seek leave to make an introduction. nothing got done. As a result, we have service cuts. I'm going to tell you what the service cuts were and Leave granted. how that aff ected our communities. Many of the mem- bers who are from outside of the Lower Mainland — it Introductions by Members may not mean much to you, but I can tell you that we have people who want to leave their cars at home to go to G. Hogg: I was also seeking leave to give my colleague work, to do their business or just to go to a shopping mall. from Surrey-Newton a chance to catch his breath. Th ey can't do that. Th ey are forced to drive cars. Th ese We are blessed to have in the Legislature today a group are the people who really care about climate change. Th ey of dynamic students. Th ey're grade 11 students from want to help to keep our air clean and not leave any foot- Elgin Park Secondary School, along with their teacher prints, but they're not being helped by this government. Lindsey Ellett and a vice-principal who is questionable Th ese are the people who are way ahead of this govern- in terms of his knowledge of the Legislature. Th e students ment, but they're not being helped. now know everything there is to know about the motto What happened? In September 2012 TransLink re- and the themes of our province. leased the 2013 Base Plan. Despite aggressive cutting of Sarah is actually one of the students and is a very good costs, TransLink faced a $472 million shortfall between rap singer. I heard her do a rendition of that famous rap 2013 and 2015 and had to cancel the following plans. Th is song called "So Fly." Would the House please make them is what happened; in 2012 they had to do this. most welcome to the Legislature. [1525] Th e planned increase of 306,000 annual service hours Debate Continued needed to reduce overcrowding on key routes, accommo- date population growth and meet U-Pass demand, and H. Bains: Let's continue on with what has happened full Highway 1 rapid bus project — cut. Full King George — the system that isn't serving our public transportation. Boulevard B-line to White Rock was cut. Extension of I just fi nished suggesting how the Minister of Education SeaBus service to every 15 minutes and upgrade the was engaged with the Premier, contradicting each other, Lonsdale Quay — cut. and how the minister at that time said: "I'm never sur- Full funding for major road networks and cycling prised at things the Premier says. I think she makes deci- was cut. Not only that. What was expected at that time sions in isolation." I think that time, when that was said, didn't get done. We have a SeaBus, the third SeaBus that was 2012 — March 22, 2012. was built, and I think that it cost over $20 million. Th e What happened as a result of those actions by the plan was to have three SeaBuses running. Th ey had no Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2959

money. Th ey had to park one. It's still parked. Th is is million people moving into the Lower Mainland. how the decisions are made. How are they fi scally pru- Over a million, and you know what? Most of them, dent decisions? if not the majority of them, will be settling south of the We have a SeaBus sitting there, parked — not being Fraser, northeast section. utilized because they have no operating funding. Th is [1530] minister and the previous Minister of Transportation and It's the south of the Fraser that is suff ering right now all of the members stand up here, one aft er one, about for public transportation. We don't have services now. how great the system works and how great a job they're Imagine when all those new people move in. Th at's just doing when it comes to public transportation. I'd just around the corner. It's not 100 years down the road; 2040 like to go back to what is happening to that $20 million is just around the corner. We're not prepared for that. SeaBus that was there to take those passengers that had to We're not prepared for our education. We have 7,000 come across from the North Shore to Vancouver for work. students in portables. We are behind in every service that Absolutely, change is needed. Absolutely, we need gov- we need to meet the needs of the growing community ernance change. Absolutely, the mayors have been ask- south of Fraser, and none of them is standing up there ing for governance change ever since they were fi red in acknowledging that — none of them. 2007. You know what? Knowing this government, I will I'm so surprised and disappointed that especially those be watching in detail to see what this Bill 22 actually people who are from Surrey would be standing up and means. Are they actually bringing the changes that the saying…. We're failing the south of Fraser population. mayors are asking for? Are they giving them the powers, We need more schools built right now. We need more especially on budgeting and planning and developing buses. We need expansion to public transportation. I strategies? I want to see how those powers are transferred don't hear them. They make all those good…. What over to the mayors. they're told to say, they say it. Th ey stand up and say it, and then they sit down, but there's no action or re- Interjection. sources behind it. Schools? By the time some of these new schools are go- H. Bains: Now my question is to the Minister of ing to be built, we'll need four more. All of those mem- Health, who again is chirping away rather than giving bers know we need ten schools now. Th ere's only funding any logical argument behind his chirping. My question for four more — okay? We need ten now. We need 500 is: what is the role of the board? What are we going to buses now, but we are seeing the services being cut to use those seven seats for — to have more defeated Liberal south of Fraser. candidates, to fi nd some place for them to go to? Is that I'm really hoping that the government, at least at this what we're looking for? What do we need them for? juncture…. Th ey have seen ten years of mismanagement and non-cooperation. Th is one somehow will…. Interjections. Deputy Speaker: Th ank you, Member. H. Bains: The Minister of Transportation and the Minister of Education should know better. Th e minister J. Th ornthwaite: I'd like to actually say a personal decides the governance change. Th e minister decided in thank-you to the Mayors Council for the hard work that 2007. Th e minister fi red the elected board at that time. they have done throughout the years and throughout the He could do that now. He can do that now. transition and for the work that they do, and in particu- My question is: what is the need for the board? I need lar, to my mayor, Richard Walton. He's the mayor of the to know the answers to that. If the mayors are going to district of North Van, but he also happens to be the chair do all of the work that the board is currently doing, if of the Mayors Council, and I know that he works very that's what they're doing, and all of those powers are hard. I want to give some kudos there. transferred over to the mayors, then what is the role of I'm standing up to support Bill 22. Our government is the board? Again, it shouldn't be a room for the friends committed to ensuring that the Lower Mainland is pro- of the Liberals or the defeated candidates to have a little vided with a working transit system designed to deliver place to go to. "Here you go. You served us well. Yes, we some of the priorities of the Metro Vancouver residents. will appoint you there." I believe that this legislation will enable locally elected I think those are some of the serious questions that we representatives, the mayors, to have an important say in need to ask. Before those questions are answered, it's hard how transit operates in their community, in our com- to say that this thing does the job that it set out to do. It is munity. such an important issue. I mean, in all seriousness, this is In my brief history with this issue, one of the main such an important issue. We're running behind right now. things that I've heard consistently is that the mayors In about 30 years, 2040, in Metro Vancouver, by their own want more say. Well, they've asked for more say over estimates, there will be another million people — over a TransLink's long-term plans and investments, and that's 2960 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014 what this bill is about. We've listened, and we're deliv- ries, tunnels, bridges, trains, buses. I was taken aback and ering. even recommended to the Minister of Education that he Th e proposed legislation will signifi cantly increase the take a visit there just to check it out, because I was really, ability of the Mayors Council to establish TransLink's really impressed. long-term strategies and to approve its plans and pro- Th en my sister, who we went to visit, who actually jects. In the words of Richard Walton: "Th is is a step in lives in Brisbane and travels quite regularly between the the right direction." cities…. I recognized it too, when I was in her car, that I really liked what our Minister of Education said, and I every once in a while when you were driving along the was very impressed with him and the member for Surrey- road system, their beeper, their transponder, would go Panorama because they've got this huge history in this off — a highly connected transportation tolling system issue and talk so passionately and so eloquently on it. I that connects all of these major cities. So it doesn't mat- liked the way he said that this looks to the future, to solu- ter whether or not she's driving in Sydney or Brisbane tions and working towards solutions, not to being hung or Melbourne; that car that she owns is connected to the up on the problems. It works towards a truly integrated transportation system via tolls. transportation system and to help articulate a vision to Everybody wants more transportation systems and set priorities, to engage the public and to work towards infrastructure, but nobody wants to pay for it. I can tell long-term goals for the region. you the Australians have a wonderful system there and Th e government's commitment is outlined through a huge infrastructure, but I've also been told that it costs these amendments to assume the responsibilities of the $30 a day just in tolls to get from one end of Sydney to TransLink Commissioner; allow the Mayors Council to the next. So we do pretty well here in Metro Vancouver. approve TransLink's long-term strategies — and they But as I said, everybody wants increased transportation, will be appointing the majority of the board of directors; but nobody wants to pay for it. manage a 30-year regional transportation strategy; and What this bill helps to do is to improve the governance develop a fully funded ten-year investment plan. model, which allows all levels of government to work Th e ten-year investment plan will replace the Mayors together and give the Mayors Council new tools that can Council's current planning and review process involving be used to expand the regional transportation system for base and supplemental plans. Th e council will approve all of us, for all of our benefi t, in Metro Vancouver. Th at's fare increases, decide the sale of major assets and oversee the reason why I will be supporting this bill. TransLink's complaints and customer satisfaction survey processes. Th e Mayors Council will also oversee execu- S. Robinson: I rise today to speak to Bill 22, South tive and board of director remuneration. Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority [1535] Amendment Act. I'm pleased to see this legislation come Recognizing that these new responsibilities and ac- forward, recognizing that the 2007 decision that this gov- countabilities will place greater demands on the Mayors ernment made wasn't the right decision, that they hadn't Council, government will ensure that the Mayors Council got it right, and they were going to attempt to amend the has appropriate resources to support that expanded role. error that they made back in 2007. So I was very pleased Government will also be adding two provincial appoin- to see this come forward. tees to the TransLink board of directors to improve com- What I note here is that local government is probably munications between TransLink, the Mayors Council in the best position to recognize the regional transpor- and the provincial government. tation challenges. I'm glad to see that members on the Th e decision-making power, therefore, has shift ed to other side of the House recognize that. Local government the mayors. Local decisions will be made at the local lev- has an intimate relationship with the land, with land use els. Th ey will approve the long-term funding and taxa- and with what their communities' transportation needs tion strategy, and I understand we keep everything on the are. Recognizing that the TransLink model that has been table. What would that be? A regional carbon tax, vehicle operating these last ten years hasn't been working and levy, road pricing, fuel tax, regional sales tax — whatever recognizing that it's time for a change is a good thing. — that will be decided, I assume, in a referendum, which What I've been able to pull out from this bill is that the is the subject of another bill. Mayors Council right now will have an increased role in One thing I wanted to mention is a personal visit that governance, and that's a good step in that direction. I made over the Christmas holidays to Australia. One of [1540] the things that I noticed when we landed in Sydney was Th e mayors represent their electorates quite well, and this huge amount of transportation infrastructure. they certainly have regional transportation challenges. I travelled through Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane Right now we know that getting tied up in traffi c has huge — highly connected road systems, rail systems, water implications not only for the economy but for those of us systems, a tremendous amount of infrastructure in all of living in the suburbs. those three cities involving roads, boats, ferries, river fer- Certainly, the members that I represent in Coquitlam- Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2961

Maillardville feel the traffi c challenges as they try to make didn't even have spaces to park on the street. So that let- their way around — through New West, through Port down and letdown were close together because, of course, Moody, through Port Coquitlam on the other side and it was going to be a transit-oriented community. getting through Vancouver and Burnaby. It's always a Ten years ago that was the plan — transit-oriented. Did challenge, and you're always trying to fi nd ways around it materialize? No, it didn't materialize. In fact, I spent my the bottleneck. fi ve years on council begging TransLink to get a tiny lit- Making sure that we have a transportation system tle bus to a tiny little corner at the bottom of the moun- that's properly funded, that's properly resourced, is what tain so that people could at least get to the bottom of the we need to do. Our communities are growing, and if mountain and hike up if they needed to. Complaints we're going to be absorbing all those people, we need came into council because the transit-oriented develop- to fi nd a way to help them get around our communities. ment that was supposed to be their community never One of the things that I want to highlight about why materialized. it's important that local governments have as strong a Th e fact that we had to beg for a little bus that fi nally say as possible in managing regional transportation has came this year — just this year…. I got elected in 2008. It to do with how they make land use decisions. I want to came about the end of 2013. Th at's how long it took for us talk about Burke Mountain for a second. Burke Mountain to get a tiny little bus for this transit-oriented community. is a brand-new community of about 25,000 or 27,000 I know I'm not alone. I know that Coquitlam is not people that's going up in the northeast sector — north alone. I see it in Langley, see it in Surrey. I certainly hear side of Coquitlam. from my colleagues about the challenges that come when Being a city councillor for a number of years, I was you have complete, distinct governance around land use quite familiar with the challenges that were presenting and transportation planning and a completely separate themselves around the fact that TransLink wasn't be- board. ing properly resourced to meet the needs that it said it [1545] would. Back in the early 2000s when the decision was We also see in my own community…. I've spoken to made by that council to develop Burke Mountain and put the Minister of Transportation from, again, a land use over 20,000 people up on the side of a mountain, it was planning model. Th e Evergreen line is fi nally coming, decided that it would be a transit-oriented community. and I have asked for park-and-ride spots in Coquitlam- My understanding and, certainly, the community's Maillardville. Everyone keeps saying that the Evergreen understanding at the time was that "transit-oriented" line is coming to Coquitlam, and it is — to parts of meant there would be transit. Transit would be the focus Coquitlam. It's completely bypassing Coquitlam- point of this community. Th ere would be a transit hub. Maillardville. Th ere would be buses coming in and out. People wouldn't I'm pleased that TransLink, in its wisdom, decided need cars. that they would actually include park-and-ride. I do Suburbia — as those of my colleagues here in this park-and-ride wherever I can because I prefer to use House who live in suburbia can appreciate — was built the existing infrastructure that we have. It makes my around the car. Our model for land use planning in those ride comfortable, it means that I can actually do some communities is changing. We recognize that we need to work on the way, and I get there safe and sound and in change our ways, and having a transit-oriented commun- a timely manner. ity is the way to go. But in Coquitlam-Maillardville we won't be able to Lo and behold, as land use changes came on side, de- access those 500 parking stalls that TransLink is bring- cisions were made not to have two-car garages, to use ing on side with the Evergreen line. All of those parking the land wisely and a little bit more intensely — to have stalls are going to be over in Coquitlam–Port Moody and a little bit more density. Th e decision was made not to in Coquitlam-Burke. Isn't that very interesting? I won't have huge parking pads for cars that people wouldn't see a single stall; neither will my residents. In fact, they're need to get around because, of course, they were going going to have to drive backward along the Evergreen line to have buses. to park their car to go forward along the Evergreen line. Th e 20,000-plus people were going to have buses that It certainly doesn't serve those constituents well, and were going to ferry them in — up the mountain and I've been asking the Transportation Minister if there's any down into the community. Th ere were going to be buses possibility of considering some stalls at, perhaps, Braid everywhere that would take them to the Evergreen line station or Lougheed station so that those people on the so that they could head downtown and buses that would south side of Coquitlam can be well served by this infra- take them home at the end of the day. structure. But that's not going to happen. I do hope that Well, about half of the mountain is developed. Most with some change in governance, the Mayors Council of the houses along that mountain have one-car garages. will have some familiarity with what the needs are of the Th ey don't have parking pads. In fact, in order to use the people who are making use of this transportation infra- land more intensely, they parcelled the lots so that you structure and they will be able to respond to those needs. 2962 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

What else have we been seeing in my community? Well, identifying. I presented it to the executive director and we've been seeing service cuts, just like other members to the management team about the direction we were have spoken to from this side of the House. We saw ser- going, and they were thrilled and coming on board, and vice cuts that have resulted in almost no bus service go- it was lovely. ing through our major employment area along United Th en we got to the board of directors, who had a dif- Boulevard. Th at was a real doozy. ferent idea and a diff erent vision. I have to tell you, it was I had phone calls from businesses that run 24-7 oper- crazy-making. To be told on the one hand that you have ations. Because they're 24-7 operations and in our com- this responsibility and this authority to go and do some- munities we don't have 24-7 transit service, they actually thing, and then this other body says: "You know what? staggered their shift work. Th ey've staggered their hours No, you don't get to do that." So that was six months of to accommodate their employees so that they can have work down the drain, with disappointed volunteers, dis- access and use the transit. People want to use transit. appointed staff and poorly served clients of an organiza- Th ey've been very accommodating. tion that really could have done a great job. Well, now that they've eliminated parts of that route, it's thrown into a tizzy. And what's really interesting is [D. Horne in the chair.] that these employers don't have enough parking for all of their employees. Again, it's going to come back to land As I read through this and I see some of the limits, I use planning and the challenges at the local level that worry. I worry for the future. Is this going to be another they're going to have when there isn't enough parking. bit of a boondoggle where you give some authority with a What I want to, I guess, point out is that those who are little bit of responsibility, but not enough to actually make closest to the people, those who deal every day with the a diff erence? And it begs the question of: how much of complaints and with the issues related to transportation a diff erence is enough of a diff erence? I don't think that infrastructure and transportation management, are the we see that here. I don't think that there's enough of a folks who ought to have the most say about how deci- diff erence that will actually change for our communities. sions are made, about how this program is funded. Th ey What's missing from the bill is the ability of the Mayors know what the needs are. Council to actually get in the muck of preparing budgets I'm going to bet that when you have a Mayors Council and making sure that, operationally, they can deliver. You given the authority and the responsibility to make these can vision all you want. I mean, I spent six months vision- decisions, you're not going to get these one-off an- ing. It was great. It was a great exercise. It was fabulous. nouncements: "Oh, by the way, that tunnel? We're going But until the board actually said to run with it, that's all to replace that." Like, where did that come from? Whose it was. It was a vision. So what? plan was that part of? It's something I'd never heard of. I It's not going to bring buses up Burke Mountain. hadn't heard it spoken of by any of the colleagues while It's not going to bring parking stalls to Coquitlam- I sat around a council table. It was certainly not part of Maillardville. It's certainly not going to bring buses along the conversation. United corridor so that the employment generation that Th at, I think — I hope — will take care of some of that happens down there can be properly served. grandstanding and promise-making, because I think In fact, what's very interesting is that I've been having this is really important. Th is will speak to our capacity a bit of a challenge in my community. Th ey're shutting to grow as a region and our capacity to meet the needs down Burquitlam Care Centre. Most of the people who of our current citizens. Th ey want good transportation. work in that centre use transit because it's by Lougheed Th ey want accessible transportation. Th ey want regu- SkyTrain station, and it's really easy for people to move lar transportation. Th ey want well-funded transporta- back and forth from their homes and their communities tion. Th is is what we need. Th is bill sort of moves us in to work. Well, it's being shut down because the contract that direction, but I'm not convinced that it will actually has been given to a private operator in the hinterlands get us there. of Port Coquitlam. One of the things that I guess I want to speak to is an I'm sure the member for Port Coquitlam won't be too experience that I had. Aft er I read some of this bill, it got upset if I call it the hinterlands, because it's just getting me to refl ect on a job that I once had. developed. It's where the Walmart is. It's way out there, [1550] almost by Pitt Meadows where there's no transit. Th ere I was the associate executive director of a family ser- is no transit. vice agency. It was a great job, and I was given authority When I spoke to Fraser Health, they said: "Oh no, to do a whole lot of visioning and planning. It was a job but there will be transit." It's: "Oh yeah, I've heard that. that I loved. I organized work groups with my staff , and I been hearing that for fi ve years at Burke Mountain." I organized work groups with our clients and our vol- Th ere will be transit. But in the meantime, people need unteers. We created some plans, some really great plans, to move around. Well, you know what? "You just go and for how to take care of some of the needs that we were get a car, and then when transit comes, you can sell the Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2963

car." It doesn't work that way. Th at's not how people live urbs I hear people — parents, seniors — saying that they their lives. are stuck in traffi c, that they want to have more time to Th e Mayors Council needs to have some tools in order spend with their families, with their children. Th ey want to make transit work, and I don't see that here in this bill. to spend time celebrating their grandson's hockey game I fi nd that we need to make sure that the Mayors Council or being at a birthday party, but they are stuck in traffi c. has enough authority, enough responsibility to make it It's only going to get worse. Th is isn't a problem that's work. I just don't have the confi dence that at this point going to go away. We need to get it right. We need to that's the case. see this Liberal government do the right thing: give the My colleague over here just handed me a couple of…. power to the mayors where it belongs. Let them struggle He's busy doing some research to speak about transpor- with these operational budgets. Let them make those de- tation in Sydney, Australia. Th e member opposite was cisions. At the end of the day, we all need to be moving talking about how fabulous it is. If I'm reading his notes around our communities with ease. We need to grow the right…. Th ey are too diffi cult to read, actually, as I read. economy together. We can't grow the economy if we're Yeah, we need to send him to some literacy program. stuck in traffi c. Th at just doesn't cut it. Th ose got cut, so never mind that. If this government really thinks that they're ready I guess what I'm trying to say is that the mayors need to grow the economy, then put your words where your to have real authority and real responsibility. Th at means mouth is. Change the words here to make sure that the making sure that they can take a look at the operations Mayors Council can act on our best behalf. and make the decisions. Th ey're elected offi cials. Th ey're elected, and if people are unhappy with how they do it, R. Sultan: I am pleased to rise in support of Bill 22, the then maybe they won't get elected again. But they need South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority to have some real opportunity to make real change. How Amendment Act, 2014. Some months ago in this House much of a change is enough of a change? Th is just doesn't I off ered my opinions on the future governance struc- cut it. ture of TransLink, and I referred rather facetiously to [1555] the province and the TransLink Mayors Council as re- I'm going to end with just a couple of quotes from sembling two individuals pirouetting on the stage, each some of the mayors, because I think they say it best. hoping the other would pick up responsibility for some Richmond mayor Malcolm Brodie: "It seems fairly con- tough funding decisions. But my laboured attempt at sistent with the letter written by the minister to the simile here was wrong. Mayors Council, and it's a good thing for the vision to Th e provincial government and the Mayors Council of be turned back to the mayors, who will adopt an overall TransLink have been engaged and will continue to be en- strategy…. But if we're not overseeing the budget, how gaged, as I've advanced my knowledge of ballet, in what can we ensure the vision is being carried out?" in ballet terms could be better described as a pas de deux It's a good question. My own mayor, Coquitlam mayor — that is, literally, a dance for two — the key point being Richard Stewart — who, I recall, sat in this House back in that each partner takes positions they could never main- the 2000s; he sat on the other side — says: "At this point tain on their own. Th ey're completely interdependent on the legislation doesn't look like we run it. It does look the stage. Such is the interdependent nature of the prov- like we run the long-term planning of it, but TransLink ince interacting with the Mayors Council. doesn't necessarily have to follow what we decide on the With this legislation, it appears to me that the prov- long-term strategies. It hasn't always followed what we incial government is substantially releasing the Mayors decided, even on the core budget and the supplementary Council from its embrace, and we all look forward to budgets that are presented to the Mayors Council." Th e watching the rest of the performance. I believe Bill 22 is mayor of Coquitlam, who sat in this chamber on that side a healthy step forward to a more balanced and conven- of the House, recognizes that it's just not enough. tional governance system for TransLink, which should Finally, Port Coquitlam mayor Greg Moore says: "It's receive broad support. not what we wanted, because we wanted to have com- [1600] plete control, as it was before. Will it be enough for us to Now, in this regard, I listened with great interest on proceed forward? We will have to see, because not hav- my television monitor in the offi ce to the remarks of the ing the budget and operational oversight is a real chal- member for Vancouver-Fairview, quoting a consulting lenge. If we develop a ten-year plan, for example, and in report, which it soon became apparent to me, has just year 2 the board decides to not implement pieces of our been released on Bill 22, and which the Mayors Council plan, there are no repercussions for us." had commissioned. It sounds like the risks of failure are great, and we Over lunch I got my hands on a copy of it, and it is a cannot risk failing. Th ere's too much at stake. So many very helpful document. Now, the member for Vancouver- people are coming into our communities, and so many Fairview read portions of the consultant's report which people are tired of clogged roads. Certainly, in the sub- were quite critical of the proposed approach and cited 2964 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

certain governance arrangements which weren't work- and whether they can do the job. ing very well. I read the report, and what struck me was Maybe that particular assumption may need some the positive enthusiasm for Bill 22's new governance ar- tweaking in the immediate future, or perhaps the may- rangements that it embodied. I realized…. ors will decide they rather like the commissioner's set- I hate to be unfair, Member, but it seemed to me that up functioning as it does, perhaps under a diff erent title. you were quoting the portions of the report referring to I assume that judgment is up to the mayors, and they're the status quo and the arrangements that had been put being given considerable latitude. In fact, I would say that in place by the former Minister of Transportation, Mr. it sounds to me like total control. Falcon. Th ey were not referring to the proposed modifi - [1605] cation and reform, if I could use that word, of TransLink Point 2. Th e Mayors Council will assume new respon- governance. I think you, perhaps, are a bit guilty of not sibilities with respect to the composition of the TransLink necessarily reading the whole consultant's report. board of directors. Th ey will continue to have two auto- But as we are all aware, in 2007 for various good reasons, matic appointments of the 11 members of the TransLink driven by the looming imperative of the 2010 Olympic board of directors, two seats always held open for the Games, TransLink's governance structure was modi- chair and the vice-chair of the Mayors Council. It seems fi ed very drastically by the Minister of Transportation to me an expression of pique more than responsibility for of the day. Kevin's solution had three components, rath- those positions not to have been fi lled in the past. er oddly: a board of directors, a Mayors Council and a As for the other appointees to the board, while the stat- regional transportation commissioner, who was more or ute is not entirely clear — and I fault legislative counsel less supposed to keep the other two honest, I suppose. and our own legislative review, perhaps, for not entirely Well, did it work? Th e Canada Line was built, and the being as thorough as we should have been — it appears Olympic Games were a great success. On that measure the mayors will also have a say in the appointment of the alone, I think one could say that it did the job. seven other directors, drawn from a list of qualifi ed can- Furthermore, despite grumbling and friction among didates identifi ed by a screening panel and as nominated the parties — some of it quite public and for which, we've by various stakeholder groups, in a manner very remin- been reminded, there's a long history, not just commen- iscent of the governance of YVR and the board of direc- cing in 2007 — TransLink itself has become a great suc- tors of that institution, which has brought our Vancouver cess, giving those of us who live in Metro Vancouver a Airport to international fame and recognition as one of modern, effi cient, expanding and quite aff ordable mass the truly great airports in the entire world. Something is transit system. At the same time it provides us with a ma- working well at YVR. jor road network — another component of TransLink, It seems to me we're trying to graft some of that gov- which seldom gets mentioned — a road system pos- ernance philosophy onto TransLink because it works itioned one notch below the provincial highway system, exceedingly well. Further clarity of the nomination pro- one notch above the municipal road systems in Metro cess, however, would probably be helpful at this time. It's Vancouver. inconceivable to me that the Mayors Council would not In short, TransLink is a success story, and it's ad- seize the opportunity to have a signifi cant personal pres- mired, as has already been pointed out by the Education ence on the TransLink board. Minister and others. People come from around the world Finally, two persons will be appointed directly to the to say: "Wow. How do you do it? How does it work? board by the provincial government. If the board was What's the governance system?" Well, sometimes we soft - ever considered to be controlled by the province in the pedal the governance side. past, and maybe some persons thought so, the province More specifi cally, the Mayors Council, with Bill 22, is is certainly cutting TransLink loose on its own today. now being given a huge whack of new authority and re- Th ird point. Similar to boards of directors one encoun- sponsibility. Mayors Council, be careful what you wish ters in the corporate world — and I have seen more than for. Number one, it will take over the functions and staff a few in my day — this TransLink board will be respon- of the TransLink Commissioner, which position shall sible for the recruitment and performance of the CEO probably cease to exist unless the Mayors Council, in of TransLink as well as its operating of fi nancial aff airs — its independent wisdom, decides some such function the TransLink board, I repeat. should survive, reporting exclusively to them. On capital funding matters, it will — at least that's my Certainly, the Mayors Council is now being given a interpretation — defer to the Mayors Council. Since "fol- huge, larger tranche of work and responsibility to per- lowing the money" is so fundamental to the role of the form. Th ey are thinly staff ed or hardly staff ed at all to Mayors Council, it seems to me this gives the Mayors carry on those functions. We should sympathize with Council a huge policy role and the responsibility for ac- that and understand it. It seems the staff , to do what is cepting or rejecting the plans and strategies laid before now expected of them, may come from the commission- them. It's just not going to work if they don't work togeth- er's staff . I have no idea how good they are, how big it is er and get along and agree on the way ahead. Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2965

As I would interpret it, the Mayors Council should to referendum. Th e nature of that referendum is defi ned tend to function as a group of shareholders who meet in a separate statute, Bill 23. from time to time to see how their company is being run Eff ectively, then, as I called for in my speech last sum- and whether or not they will approve a new share issue or mer, the provincial government is cutting the apron a new bond issue to raise capital — more oft en than an- strings, as I see it, over this vast enterprise and is setting nually meeting but hardly day to day. Aft er all, the may- up the Mayors Council as the representative and elected ors have other heavy responsibilities running their own body representing the ultimate shareholders of this en- communities as well. terprise, representing the citizens of Metro Vancouver, Fourth point. As Bill 22 makes clear, the board of and giving the Mayors Council most of the powers they directors of TransLink will continue to be responsible have been asking for. for preparing the long-term strategy and the plan for Is the province abandoning TransLink to its own de- TransLink but also, under that bill, are obligated to vices? Hardly. It would be irresponsible for them to do present those plans and strategies to the Mayors Council so. No doubt any long-term funding plan brought for- for approval. It's the Mayors Council, aft er all, who are ward will anticipate large and ongoing provincial grants the capital market representatives who must fi gure out to TransLink, just like the province helps pay for B.C. whether the strategy makes sense for the shareholders — Transit and helps pay for B.C. Ferries. Th e scale of that i.e. the citizens they are voted to represent — whether it's ongoing provincial subsidy is a matter which will be de- politically marketable, whether it's aff ordable, whether termined by negotiation in the future. Th e province will it's a castle in the air or whether it's something that, in of course have its own priorities to put on the table for fact, can actually work. consideration. Th ey are in a very strong, tightly gripped, controlled Finally, I would like to note that the most thought- position. It's up to them to fi gure out and approve or deny ful and sophisticated organization chart, the wisest and how the whole enterprise is going to be funded in the most competent managers and directors in the world, long run. Th e Mayors Council will be acting as if it holds the smartest strategies for moving people around this the proxy votes for the thousands of shareholders of this Metro area that we can devise will all come to naught if large complex organization, as indeed they do. the participants view this structure as a cockpit for con- [1610] tention and the playing out of political manoeuvring Fift h point. As the de facto shareholder representatives, and disputes. as I am inclined to view them, the Mayors Council must Folks, the transportation system of Metro Vancouver also approve all fare increases, pass judgment on major is too fundamentally important to our economic success asset restructuring and oversee TransLink's performance to tolerate that silliness. We've had more than we really in terms of customer satisfaction. Th at's all spelled out need up until now. I plead with all the parties: let's cut clearly in the legislation. out the nonsense and get down to work. Clearly, if the board is not up to the job, the represent- atives of the shareholders have every right to say their S. Simpson: I'm pleased to have the opportunity piece, and I'm sure they will. Immense power and au- to join in debate on Bill 22, the South Coast British thority is being lodged in this group — contrary, I think, Columbia Transportation Authority Amendment Act. to some of the laments we've heard here today. Th is is an interesting piece of legislation. What we Sixth point. Finally, its most fundamental source of au- know, of course, is that this piece of legislation is to fi x a thority is the fact that under the legislation the Mayors problem that was created by the Liberal government in Council must approve the long-term funding and taxa- 2007 when the minister of the day, Mr. Falcon, had a bit tion strategy of TransLink. Th is is their hammer. of a hissy fi t and decided to basically tear apart the gov- In this regard, my personal interpretation is that all ernance system that was in place at TransLink. It's been taxation options are on the table: farebox, gasoline tax, a downhill slide pretty much ever since that conduct by automobile tax, carbon tax, real estate tax, road pricing Mr. Falcon of the day. — just like my colleague from North Vancouver–Seymour Th ere's now some recognition that this was a mistake described, in Australia, that fl ashing light as you drive and some attempt to begin to put the pieces back together. by it on the highway — bridge tolls, highway tolls, poll Th at's a good thing. It's always good when people recog- tax, parking tax or any other scheme the planners may nize their mistakes and try to correct them. dream up. Th ere's only one caveat. It's a tough one; let's [1615] not kid ourselves. Th e funding plan must be endorsed Th e Liberal government, I'm assuming, is doing that via a referendum. here, though I'd love to have somebody stand up and say: We shouldn't minimize the diffi culty of that challenge. "We sure made a mess of that, didn't we? But we're going Any new funding sources that require provincial approval to try to fi x it now." — because maybe it's a brand-new tax system that doesn't What is the situation that brings us to Bill 22 and the exist — must be discussed with the province before going debate that's going on here today? TransLink was created 2966 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

in 1998, and it was established there when the provincial "Out, out with you. I'm going to put my own handpicked government of the day transferred a signifi cant amount people in place." He creates this "professional board" of of the authority to local government for transit and trans- his handpicked people. Th ey don't meet in public, unlike portation decision-making in Metro Vancouver. the TransLink board. Th ey meet in private. Th ere's little When they did that, they created a structure that es- known about their decisions until they roll out. Th ere's sentially put mayors and councillors in charge of this sys- really no ability for anybody to engage this board in a tem. Th ey were elected people who were then appointed discussion. to oversee TransLink, much in the same way that there As a consequence…. What we know is that organiza- are elected people who are appointed to oversee Metro tions like TransLink, organizations that bring together a Vancouver and the regional district and the way that lot of diverse interests, that kind of are right on the razor's that works. edge in terms of how they fi nance things, who need to Th at system functioned. It's a challenge, and nobody build consensus in order to be successful…. Well, that will deny the challenge that we face with transportation. doesn't work very well if you don't engage people and It's a very expensive exercise and enterprise to create the if you don't engage communities and engage legitimate kind of transit system that an urban metropolitan area stakeholders. like Vancouver and its suburbs require in order to be suc- When Mr. Falcon created this structure, he said, "But cessful. It's not cheap, and we've seen that with the pro- I'm not ignoring the mayors, so I'm going to create a may- jects that have proceeded and gone ahead. ors council that has absolutely no authority to do pretty So we have this situation where it's operating and, as much anything." But they're there in some vague advis- the member for West Vancouver–Capilano points out, a ory capacity that nobody ever fi gured out. change happens heading into 2007. Th e government of [1620] the day, the minister of the day, made the decision that Th e mayors, quite rightly, understood that their au- the priority was to be the Canada Line, and it was. As the thority had been gutted and that they had no role any- member for West Vancouver–Capilano said, it was driven more, essentially, in the administration and management by the Olympics to get that line in place. of the transit system in the Lower Mainland, so they said: Th at meant that the Canada Line queue-jumped at "It's yours, not ours." least two or three other projects to become the priority. What happens is that the system kind of fl ounders It queue-jumped, probably, the Evergreen line, develop- along for a number of years, and we now have this situa- ment of light rail in Surrey and maybe the Broadway tion we're in today where we spend years talking about corridor — probably at least those three — and became funding formulas without having any responsible struc- the priority. ture to make this thing work. What underlies that was Mr. TransLink — the leadership of TransLink of the day, Falcon, the B.C. Liberal government and the decision of the mayors and the councillors — raised concern about 2007 to throw out the local, elected leadership and create that and about how that was occurring and about how a professional board, which is pretty well paid, to run this those decisions were happening. Th e minister essentially system. It didn't work, and today we have Bill 22, which took decision-making out of their hands, I presume, as is an acknowledgement that this didn't work. Good on the member from across the way said, in order to get this the Minister of Transportation for bringing this forward accomplished for the Olympics. and trying to correct a problem. Regardless, the project goes ahead. Th ere are all kinds Th at's the failure of the model that we had. It's a model of complications with it, but it gets built. All you have to and a system. We now have this situation that we're in to- do is to talk to all those merchants on Cambie Street to day. We'll be talking a little bit more about some of those see how they feel about that period of time when half of consequences, which will come up in the discussion of them got…. Some got put out of business, and a lot of Bill 23. Th at will happen aft er we're done with Bill 22, others were seriously hurt fi nancially because of the con- presumably. We'll be talking about that because that talks struction and the way it proceeded and that. about the money side of this. Th is bill talks about how Regardless of that, that's what happened there. Th e you govern the system. Th at one talks about the pending mayors and the board of TransLink challenged the min- referendum and what the money side looks like, and that ister about how those decisions happened. We know the will be an interesting debate as well. minister of the day…. Certainly, those of us in this House We have this situation here. What Bill 22 does is it cre- who have sat here with Kevin Falcon, when he was here ates a situation where there are a number of things that as a senior minister of the Crown, and know Kevin…. do get addressed in some fashion here. It talks about Kevin always tended to like to get his way. Th at's kind changing the current three-year base plans and seven- of the nature of who Kevin was. When he didn't get his year outlook, which are prepared and approved by the way, he would try to…. Retribution was not above him. board. Th at's going to now become a ten-year investment So he trashes the board and the governance struc- plan which will be approved by the Mayors Council, and ture of TransLink. Not with much thought, but he says: that's a good thing. Th ere's nothing wrong with that. Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2967

It will be reviewed every three years, apparently, but At the end of the day, you can make all the plans…. I there's not an indication here about whether an annual can make plans for my home and for the trips I'd like to review is possible, and it may well be that an annual re- take and for all that, but if I don't have the control over view is more appropriate. Th at should actually be a deci- the money to decide where money goes for this and for sion for the Mayors Council to make as to whether they that, I'm not going to be able to do anything with those think it's appropriate to review annually or every three plans. Th e government, with this legislation, has omitted years. If they're going to be responsible for it, they should that control over the budget preparation. have the ability to probably decide whether adjustment is Th e other thing that doesn't exist here is to have real due on an annual basis rather than having to wait three oversight over the operations of the system on a more years. Hopefully, common sense will prevail and they'll ongoing and immediate basis. Again, there is — no ques- be told to administer the system and do what's right there. tion — improved capacity for planning and authority Th e approval of the 30-year regional transportation there with the Mayors Council, but it isn't refl ected in strategy now goes to the Mayors Council from this having oversight over the operation, and that's import- professional board — again, long-term planning. It's ant. Th at's important because for a lot of what happens a long-term planning issue. I think my colleague from here, that oversight is a key piece. Th at's a key piece of Coquitlam-Maillardville talked about the importance the accountability, having that oversight. It's a key piece of planning, but you've got to be able to do something of ensuring as much transparency…. with the plan aft er you make it. We'll talk a little bit about As the members have said — members on both sides that, because that's probably one of the shortcomings of — the success and the success of referendum, should it this legislation. come forward, or the success…. Whatever the fi nancial It deals with the responsibility for executive compen- decision-making is about investment — where the in- sation. It now goes over to the Mayors Council, and the vestment will come from and what taxes or fees will be Mayors Council essentially takes over the responsibilities dealt with in order to raise the dollars to build the infra- of the commissioner, along with the $1 million of budget structure that's required — the public is going to want the that's there, to approve fare increases, deal with the sale or transparency and the accountability before they're going disposal of assets, oversight of TransLink customer satis- to give up that money and say: "Th is is a good place for faction and some of those things. All good things, all fi ne. my tax dollars to go." Th e problem, though, is that there are things that aren't Th at becomes a real challenge. Transportation systems in this bill, and that's probably the biggest challenge here are very complicated. Th ey're very expensive to do. And I — the pieces that aren't in the bill. Th ere are two that kind don't think that people always see the priorities as theirs. of jump out at me. Th at's certainly true when you're building large pieces. Th e fi rst one is budget preparation. Th e ability to plan You have the debate that goes on today — probably the is important, and it's important that that rests with the two biggest projects that are in play for what comes next. elected offi cials, I believe, because I think that account- Th ere's building a light rail system in Surrey that meets ability comes with planning. Th e reality is that as there's the needs of the fastest-growing part of this province more authority invested in the Mayors Council, you can or dealing with Broadway corridor and moving people presume that the public and people who are concerned through one of the most congested areas in this province. about the transit and transportation systems in the Lower Probably $3 billion, $4 billion to do Broadway; $2 bil- Mainland will fi nd the opportunities to make represen- lion, $2½ billion to do Surrey — not cheap by anybody's tation to the Mayors Council, to talk with their elected standards. Th at's going to be a challenge. How do we deal offi cials about what's important. with those things? [1625] Just as an aside here, I think it was the member for Th e mayors will presumably, with their own councils North Vancouver–Seymour who talked about Sydney and their own communities, bring forward to the plan- and about how successful Sydney is and what they do. ning process the discussion that happens in their local I believe that that's true. I know a little bit but not very jurisdictions to make sure that that's part of the broad- much about it, but that's true. I guess the observation er conversation as you try to meld and put together this that I would make, of course, is that there — and they more complex system that tries to meet the needs of a have a population roughly about twice the size of Metro whole range of municipalities and jurisdictions that all Vancouver, give or take — a $9½ billion commitment was have some diff erent requirements and obligations. How paid by the state of New South Wales. No federal dollars, do you meld that package together when you have a fi - no local dollars; $9½ billion paid by the province, essen- nite amount of resources to play with? tially, the state — that's what's building that system up. Th e planning piece becomes very important there. Th e I suspect that if the province here found $5 billion and problem, though, is that if you don't do the budgeting, if said, "We're putting another $5 billion on the table to the budget preparation is not part of your responsibil- build transit," we'd fi nd a couple of mighty fi ne projects ity, the ability to deliver the plan is questionable at best. to build here too. So I don't disagree with the member's 2968 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

comments, but it is about major investment. It's about a be accountable for those decisions at the end of the day." major investment made by the state, the counterpart to Th at means being able to prepare budgets, and at the British Columbia in that case. end of the day, the preparation of budgets is both how Th ey chose to make that investment, and they did it I am going to spend the money and how I am going to without federal or local help in that case. Th at's a bit of raise the money. If they had some of that authority that a diff erent dynamic, because the folks who had the cash they don't have today, we would be in a better place. Th e came up and delivered. I don't question the value of what conversation that is going on around funding would be goes on there, but it is quite a diff erent circumstance be- a better conversation, because it would be a more equal cause of who's prepared to pay the bill. conversation, and everybody would have skin in the [1630] game. Th at's not necessarily the case today, because of Getting back to the situation we have here. We know the structure of governance. So I think that's a problem. that the minister in a letter on February 6 talked about I think that's a signifi cant problem. the need for an amendment to specify that the board Now, part of the challenge, of course, is: what do these must prepare budgets and oversee operations and imple- mayors think? It's a diverse group. Th e mayors that make ment plans consistent with Mayors Council–approved up the Mayors Council are politically a pretty diverse strategies and plans. group. You couldn't, by any stretch of the imagination, Well, it would seem to me that if you're going to do that, put them all in one political camp, one place or the other, what the minister said in a letter on February 6, it might and they all are saying similar things. make more sense to simply say that the Mayors Council Th ey all are saying that there are things about this is going to have some authority, direct authority, over the legislation that are positive, in terms of where it takes us preparation of those budgets. to steps in the right direction, but the other thing they Th ey may do it in consultation, and they may be ob- say is that it simply does not go far enough. It does not liged to do some consulting. Th ere's nothing wrong with meet the obligations necessary in order to accomplish obliging them to do that when they spend money. We the things we need to accomplish in the Lower Mainland send a Finance Committee around the province here when it comes to transportation planning, budgeting and before we do a budget. Maybe they need to do that. But implementation. at the end of the day, I would argue that the mayors are A couple of examples of that. Th e chair of the Mayors best placed to deal with this. Council, Richard Walton, the mayor for the district of Th e reality is this, and it's been pointed out by people North Vancouver, said: "I can't represent the fact that on both sides, I believe, that accountability comes with we're all happy, because I think still the large issues we elected representation. At the end of the day, we need want addressed have not been addressed." Th at's the com- to create a system and a structure where the organiza- ment of Mayor Walton, when he talked about this legis- tion is accountable, and accountable in ways that people lation. He understands — and he probably understands understand. Th at clearly was the case at one time with as well as anybody, as the chair of the Mayors Council TransLink. Anybody who doesn't think it works can talk — how big those challenges are. He understands primar- to George Puil, who was a long-sitting member of the ily how it's about the money. Th at's the key piece that is Vancouver city council, one of the most senior members a challenge. of the Vancouver city council. Mayor Brodie from Richmond said: "If we're not over- He was the chair of TransLink and took positions that seeing the budget, how can we ensure the vision is being were very contrary to what a lot of people in Vancouver carried out?" Th at comes back to this issue of planning were interested in, and he lost his seat aft er sitting for 20- and the question about planning. odd years as a councillor. Most people would attribute [1635] that loss not to his conduct on Vancouver city council As Mayor Brodie says, and Mayor Brodie is correct: if but to his conduct on TransLink. Th ey would say that's you don't have control of the money, the vision and the what he lost his seat over, because he did things that the plan become somewhat theoretical. If you don't set the people did not agree with in terms of transportation de- budget priorities, then it becomes somewhat question- cisions. Th ere was an accountability there. And I've heard able what that plan is really worth. the talk since that if you want to get into trouble as a lo- Mayor Stewart, who my colleague from Coquitlam- cal politician, discuss transportation. Maillardville spoke about, who sat in this House as a I think, though, that it's a good thing that can happen, member of the B.C. Liberal caucus, said: "At this point, and it's a good thing to have that accountability. I want the legislation doesn't look like we run it. It does look to give that authority and power to the mayors and to the like we run the long-term planning of it, but TransLink elected representatives, to say: "We're going to give you doesn't necessarily have to follow what we decide on the the authority, but you have the political accountability. long-term strategy." You should get to make decisions about where the local Well, how frustrating is that going to be for mayors portion or share of funding comes from, and you should who have many demands on their time, many great pres- Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2969

sures to deal with? How invested are they prepared to be ter — beginning to try to understand what the minister's if they don't have confi dence that there is any obligation thinking was in deciding to not include these key com- for the decisions they make around planning, around ponents in Bill 22; what the minister's thinking is about strategic thinking to be carried out? how these critical questions that are left unanswered will What Mayor Brodie is saying is that he doesn't have be resolved; about how the importance of the governance confi dence and that his colleagues on the Mayors Council system will drive, at the end of the day, a whole lot of the don't have the confi dence to feel that that will in fact be success of this system and of TransLink in the future; and the case, and that's a problem. about how that will work. Mayor Moore from Port Coquitlam said: "It's not what [1640] we wanted, because we wanted to have complete control, I look forward…. Th ose are critical questions from my as it was before. Will it be enough for us to proceed for- constituents in Vancouver-Hastings. Th ose are critical ward? We will have to see, because not having the budget questions for a couple of million people in the Lower and operational oversight is a real challenge." Mainland of British Columbia who increasingly are de- Again, all of these mayors are focusing in on the key pendent upon a transit system to be successful. omissions of this bill, which are around budget and oper- Th at doesn't even begin to deal with the questions of ational oversight — the two pieces that really needed to the broader transportation system, of the movement of be here to complete the work that the minister started goods, of all of those issues that TransLink and the trans- with Bill 22. Th ey're not here. It will continue to be a portation authority have responsibility for. All of those problem, and it will continue to be a frustration. It's not questions are critical, and they will need to be addressed. something that I think can be easily corrected without Th e one that obviously jumps out in people's minds, giving that authority, through legislation, to the Mayors probably, is the transit system in most cases, but it's not Council and, with that authority, the responsibility and alone. Th ere are a whole lot of questions here on the other the political accountability for the budget. side. I know the critic is looking forward to talking about Th ey need to be accountable. When they make deci- some of those issues in the context of governance when sions, they need to be accountable for those decisions. he gets an opportunity in committee stage to engage with But you can't hold them accountable for things that they the minister on these questions. don't have some control over, and that's the circumstance I'm pleased to have participated in this debate. I want you create with Bill 22. It's a problem. I believe it's a sig- to acknowledge that Bill 22 takes some steps in the right nifi cant problem. direction but, really, to express some disappointment that Bill 22 does some good things. It corrects some of the it doesn't deal with those core questions that really need problems that were created in 2007 by Mr. Falcon and by to be addressed in a pretty fundamental way if we are the Liberal government of the day when they basically going to rebuild confi dence in that system and if we're tossed out the whole system. Instead of trying to fi x it, going to be successful moving forward to have a vibrant they just threw it out and created the board of the mak- and dynamic authority over transportation in the Lower ing of the minister of the day. He appointed some people Mainland — an authority that has the capacity to make that he thought were appropriate people, and they met in decisions in a politically accountable way and move for- secret and made decisions. ward to build the network that we all need, both in terms We have seen the system unravelling since 2007 be- of the ability to get people around and to begin to deal cause of that fundamental governance decision, which with some of those critical questions around climate was just a mistake. Th ere is no other way to characterize and issues. it. It was just a mistake. It was a mistake that's been cost- We know that changing the way we move in our high- ly, and it's a mistake that I will acknowledge the minister ly populated areas will go an awfully long way to begin today is trying to correct. But he didn't go far enough. to address that. He didn't deal with the issues that he talked about in his Th at's what's on the table here. Th at's what we're de- letter of February 6. He didn't deal with the core ques- bating. Really, governance is such a fundamental piece tions around money. of that. I do hope the minister will give some thought to Until you deal with the money questions, you've got whether some adjustment here on these critical questions a problem. You have to deal with them both in the con- is warranted, and maybe we get to move forward with a text of where the money comes from and how you col- better piece of legislation. lect that but also on the governance side in terms of how you manage it. Th e mayors are not a whole lot closer to Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, I call on governing the money side than they were before Bill 22. the minister to close debate. Th at's a problem. I know the critic is looking forward to committee stage Hon. T. Stone: I do want to acknowledge and thank and looking forward to the opportunity of getting into all of the members of this assembly for what I think a number of these issues in some depth with the minis- have been, for the most part, very thoughtful comments 2970 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

— particularly my critic, the member for Vancouver- more than we disagree on with respect to this legislation, Fairview. We've had the opportunity through a couple certainly, in the comments that I heard back from him of rounds of estimates and now this fi rst piece of legis- earlier this aft ernoon. lation, and I do very much appreciate the thoughtful- One point of agreement, I think it's safe to say, is that ness and the commitment on the part of the member the foundation for the changes that we are moving for- for Vancouver-Fairview to work with us. As I know he ward with, these improvements to governance today, doesn't call into question my motivations, I certainly are really based in the Ken Cameron report. Th e report don't call into question his as well. that the member for Vancouver-Fairview mentioned — Th at being said, I also want to take the opportunity to which the Mayors Council commissioned in 2012 and acknowledge and thank the Education Minister and, in that released its recommendations in 2013 — really, in- particular, the member for Surrey-Panorama for his re- deed, is the blueprint for the governance changes that we marks earlier. Th ese are two gentlemen with a tremen- are moving forward with. dous amount of local government experience, who were Specifi cally, the report refers to the London model. Th e at the table within Metro Vancouver, within the Mayors London model is one that certainly is worth emulating Council, and have seen this issue ebb and fl ow over a from a best-practices perspective, and it is what we have good number of years. drawn from — not perfectly, not in every way, shape or Now, Bill 22 follows up on a commitment that gov- form, but substantially. Again, from within the Mayors ernment made to improve TransLink governance so Council's own report. that the priorities and decisions would be made by, and Th at report provides for what it refers to as "an opti- the related accountabilities would be in place for, those mal 'division of labour' between the various elements of closest to the challenges. Th ose individuals are locally a governance system." Th ose three levels are as follows. elected offi cials. Th ere's a policy level. Th at's the level that's all about stra- To that extent, I want to also take this opportunity to tegic decision-making on policies, plans, funding and acknowledge and thank the eff orts of the Mayors Council relationships to broader plans and public purposes. Th e — in particular, the chair of the Mayors Council, Richard responsibility of this level should be elected offi cials, and Walton and the vice-chair, Wayne Wright. I certainly that's what this legislation accomplishes. want to acknowledge the contributions of each and every Th e second level is the management level. Th at's the member of the Mayors Council. translation of policy decisions into operational plans We have been working together for the past ten and programs. Th at should be the responsibility of per- months, and as everyone in this House knows, one very sons and/or bodies skilled in management, administra- clear commitment that government made in the last elec- tion, service provision and fi nancial control, including tion was to improve TransLink governance. I certainly the selection of service delivery modes and structures. acknowledge comments that have been made on both Th at is why we have retained the TransLink board, and sides of the House about the fact that the governance, that is what the TransLink board will be responsible for. as it currently is constituted at TransLink, is not work- Last but not least, the third level of good governance is ing well. It is not serving the needs of TransLink and the an implementation level. Th is is where decisions relating needs of the region. to the responsibility of staff or contractors hired and paid Th at is why we made the commitment to improve the to actually run the buses, do the day-to-day operations of governance. Th is is hard work. Th is is very hard work. the operation…. Again, this is the level that will be car- Th is requires courage. It requires vision. It requires com- ried out by the TransLink executive and management and mitment, and at times it's going to be messy. the rest of the staff and contractors at TransLink. [1645] We really believe that we've substantially emulated I'm not going to rattle off any number of quotes from the recommended model, the London model, as de- mayors today who have said positive things about the tailed within the Mayors Council–commissioned Ken process thus far, who have said positive things about the Cameron report. proposed legislation here, with Bill 22. But I will say this: Now, I also want to say before I close my closing re- I do not question the motivations of any of the mayors marks here that we are very proud of the investments that who sit around that Mayors Council table. I know that this government has made in TransLink and transit gen- they are working as hard for their constituents as I work erally. Since 2001 we've invested $2 billion in TransLink. for mine. Th at's out of $17 billion of transit- and transportation- We have a tremendous amount of hard work to do related investments provincewide. together, moving forward, with respect to both the Specifi c to TransLink, Canada Line comes to mind, improvements to governance contained here in Bill 22 the Highway 99 and Highway 7 rapid bus projects, the as well as the companion legislation which will be up Langley 202nd Street park-and-ride and transit exchange. next, Bill 23. It would appear that my critic, the member There's been bus expansion. There are fare gates; the for Vancouver-Fairview, and I also…. I think we agree on Compass card program; SkyTrain improvements, includ- Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2971

ing station upgrades and 48 new SkyTrain cars; seven annual budget that is out of alignment with the Mayors new West Coast Express cars and a new SeaBus; transit Council's ten-year investment plan. on the Port Mann Bridge for the fi rst time in 25 years, Furthermore, the ten-year investment plan can be up- moving 50,000 people per month. dated by the mayors at any time, but no less than every When the $1.4 billion Evergreen line is complet- three years. It is that tie together, the alignment that will ed in the summer of 2016, Metro Vancouver will have be required between the annual plan and the ten-year Canada's longest rapid transit network, bar none. investment plan, that is so critical to success moving Now the results of these investments speak louder forward. than words. Th e transit service is up 45 percent since Th e Mayors Council will assume responsibility for the 2002. Ridership is up 84 percent since 2002. TransLink TransLink Commissioner's offi ce. Again, this relates to moves 233 million people per year, and that works out to all issues related to the fare box, this relates to the cus- 1.2 million people per workday. Again, 50,000 riders per tomer service policies, it relates to customer complaints, month now use the rapid transit bus over the Port Mann and it relates to all issues related to disposal of assets to Langley. I had the privilege of travelling that a couple and facilities. of months ago. It's a fantastic service. Th e Canada Line The Mayors Council will approve executive and moves over 100,000 passengers daily. board compensation and, quite importantly, the Mayors [1650] Council will also receive the resources that the Mayors Now, moving forward, the reasons to continue in- Council needs in order to assume these added respon- vesting in TransLink, both on the transit and the major sibilities. road network transportation sides, are very clear. First Again, despite some suggestions that have been made and foremost, congestion is estimated to be costing our today by some members of the opposition, the Mayors economy $1.5 billion today. Secondly, I think we all can Council are actually very hard at work. They're very agree that whether it's one million or a bit more or a bit hard at work on a plan that they will be presenting to less, there are a lot more people coming to the Lower the people of the Lower Mainland in the coming months, Mainland region of the province over the next 20 years. and they're building that plan on the basis of the author- Transit expansion will be critical to managing conges- ity that they see, that they know is contained in this Bill tion and growth. People, at the end of the day, are sim- 22. ply trying to get to work. Th ey're trying to get their kids Now, again, we believe that locally elected offi cials are to school. Th ey're trying to get to doctor appointments. best placed to establish the vision and set the priorities for Now, Bill 22, combined with companion legislation, transit and transportation in the Lower Mainland, cer- Bill 23, does provide mayors with the tools to create their tainly within the TransLink service area. Th at is why, on transportation vision, to develop a ten-year investment behalf of government, I am so very, very proud to have plan, to prioritize projects with costs and to propose presented Bill 22 to this House. funding sources to fund any expansion. Th is is exactly I move second reading of Bill 22. what the mayors have asked for. Over the past ten months — as I have spent count- Motion approved. less hours meeting with the mayors individually, meet- ing with the mayors as a group, talking with all kinds of Hon. T. Stone: I move that Bill 22 be referred to a other stakeholders — this is what everyone has been sug- Committee of the Whole House to be considered at the gesting. Th is is what everyone is asking for. Th e mayors next sitting aft er today. have been asking for the authority to come up with the plan, to prioritize the projects and to move forward with Bill 22, South Coast British Columbia Transportation transit and transportation expansion as a result. Authority Amendment Act, 2014, read a second time What we're saying, and I think the mayors agree with and referred to a Committee of the Whole House for this, is that with the authority must come the account- consideration at the next sitting of the House aft er today. ability. Specifi c to this bill, Bill 22, the Mayors Council will have input and authority over a 30-year vision. Th ey Hon. T. Stone: I now call second reading of Bill 23, will have input and authority over a ten-year investment intituled South Coast British Columbia Transportation plan. Authority Funding Referenda Act. I acknowledge the concerns that I've heard this aft er- noon from members opposite about what degree of input BILL 23 — SOUTH COAST BRITISH the mayors will have in the operational budget. We'll talk COLUMBIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY about that in a lot of detail, I'm certain, in the committee FUNDING REFERENDA ACT stage, but I want to assure the members, and I want to as- sure the mayors, that the TransLink board, as a result of Hon. T. Stone: I move that Bill 23 now be read a these changes, will not be able to move forward with an second time. 2972 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Swift ly moving on the heels of the previous bill, Bill 22, bill also provides for the government to reimburse local I am pleased to kick off second reading of Bill 23. and First Nation governments for the costs of adminis- [1655] tering a referendum. Effi cient and aff ordable transportation is indeed the Looking ahead, the regulations drafted under this backbone of a livable region and a growing economy. legislation will provide further detail in several key areas, TransLink delivers a world-class transportation network including the following: fi rst, the format and wording of for Metro Vancouver, one that we can all be very proud of, the referendum question; second, the amount or formula but, as we are all aware, signifi cant decisions about how that will be used to calculate the reimbursement to local to improve this network lie ahead. Over onde million governments; and third, the rules that will apply to ref- more people are expected to be in the Lower Mainland erendum administration, which will draw from existing region by 2030, so we really need to start planning for local government elections regulations. that future now. Th is legislation also makes amendments to the South Within Metro Vancouver, the transportation system is Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Act paid for through a combination of fares, taxes and tolls. that underscore government's commitment to the cit- Local leaders have told us that expansions of the trans- izens of Metro Vancouver by requiring that any future portation system are needed and that this expansion will requests from the Mayors Council for new funding be require access to new sources of funding. accompanied by evidence that a majority of the region's Government has been very clear, however, and has electors support their proposal. made a very strong commitment to the people of the I would also like to note that as part of my discus- Lower Mainland. Th at commitment is this: if the mayors sions with the Mayors Council, I have provided them of Metro Vancouver are asking the people of the region with the option of holding a referendum outside of the to pay new taxes or fees for transit and transportation ex- local election cycle before June 2015. Th is legislation al- pansion, then the electors must have a say in that deci- lows for a referendum to be held prior to this date as a sion. Th is is a commitment that government made in the stand-alone vote. last election. It is a commitment that citizens supported. Th is legislation delivers on government's commitment I am proud to be able to deliver on that promise today. to the taxpayers of Metro Vancouver and provides the Now, I believe that locally elected offi cials, as I've said Mayors Council with a tool that can be used as part of several times in the last number of hours, are in the best their eff orts to expand the regional transportation system. position to advocate for regional transit and transporta- With that, I look forward to the comments from the tion priorities. Th ey are those closest to those challenges. member for Vancouver-Fairview, as well as other mem- That is why government has challenged the Mayors bers of the House, and a more detailed discussion dur- Council to develop a regional transportation vision be- ing committee stage. fore June 30, 2014. I'm pleased that over the past couple [1700] of months the mayors have indeed risen to this challenge and have accepted this responsibility. Th ey are working G. Heyman: I will have a lot to say about this bill, on a vision to clarify regional transportation priorities, as I have had in previous sessions of this parliament. associated costs and potential funding sources. It in some ways defi es belief that we're continuing on Th e mayors' vision will provide the foundation for in this path with a referendum that appears arbitrary, a referendum vote. Th e South Coast British Columbia that appears to be a one-off , that appears to hold Metro Transportation Authority Funding Referenda Act is a Vancouver mayors to a standard in terms of enhancing critical element in this process, as it provides the author- and increasing service even just to meet the needs of ity for local and First Nations members of the Mayors population growth — in other words, steady state. It's a Council to hold a transit funding referendum in conjunc- standard that no other capital project in British Columbia tion with local elections up to 2022. is being held to. Th is bill also provides members of the Mayors Council When I asked the minister in estimates if there were with the authority to make recommendations to govern- plans to apply this referendum criterion to any other cap- ment on any question that is to be put to the electors. Th is ital project, any other highway project, any other transit will also ensure that the question will accurately refl ect project within British Columbia now or in the future, he the hard work the mayors have undertaken in developing said: "No, this was an election promise. We're keeping their vision, complete with priorities and preferred fund- this promise." Th is reaffi rms to me — and I thank the ing sources. minister for reaffi rming what I and many others have al- Now, a referendum held under this act will apply ways suspected — that this is, in fact, an arbitrary deci- to all residents within TransLink's transportation ser- sion, a one-off decision to hold a referendum on Metro vice region — essentially, all of the residents of Metro Vancouver transit in isolation from all other decisions be- Vancouver, including individuals living on Tsawwassen ing made on transportation, including a rather sudden First Nation treaty lands — and, as I have promised, this announcement by the Premier at the last Union of B.C. Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2973

Municipalities convention. methods of funding simply has become intolerable for Following a very quick consultation — a consultation people of the Lower Mainland. which, I hasten to add, was not a referendum at all and With that, let me talk a little bit about some of the his- was limited and had criteria that were perhaps not as ex- tory of this government with respect to TransLink and pansive as others would have designed — she announced funding of transit in the Metro Vancouver region. First that the province would proceed with a bridge to replace of all, I mentioned the 2008 provincial transit plan. Th at the tunnel, currently called the Massey Tunnel, to cross plan had very ambitious ridership. It was talking about the river at that point. It's a major project, but the Premier doubling transit ridership and reducing greenhouse was unable to say whether it would be tolled. gas emissions by 4.7 million tonnes by 2020. A signifi - Th e Premier was unable to say whether the design cant part of this was by investing in transit in Metro for the bridge had been completed. Th e Premier was Vancouver. Th at was the plan in 2008. unable to say what the bridge would cost. All of these What have we seen since then? With minister aft er standards are standards that Metro mayors, the Mayors minister, with Premier aft er Premier, with delay aft er Council, are being held to but which this government delay…. We have seen, for starters, a three-year delay won't even apply to its own initiatives or the initiatives in the Evergreen line and massive service cuts to bus of the Premier. routes, especially south of the Fraser. Th ose service cuts, So while I spoke some time ago about Bill 22, the chan- my friends at TransLink say: "We haven't cut service. We ges to governance — and many of my colleagues spoke just haven't expanded the way we planned to." to the bill, as well, and very thoughtful closing com- I think we all know that if the population is going up, ments from my colleague from Vancouver-Hastings as if congestion is going up and we actually don't expand well as other colleagues from Burnaby–Deer Lake and bus service to meet that growing demand, that's eff ect- Coquitlam-Maillardville and Surrey-Whalley and others ively a cut to the availability of transportation for people — the fact remains that we see some good in that bill, al- who rely on it. When another mechanism relied on by though we certainly see some aspects that are seriously TransLink called service optimization — that's mov- lacking and without which we question whether the bill ing buses from lesser-used routes to more heavily used can function eff ectively. routes — is implemented, that's also experienced as a cut In this bill we see no merit whatsoever. We have said by many of the people who use the lesser-used routes. so from day one. Commentators have said so from day Now, it is true that the demand may be higher in the one. Th e mayors have said so from day one. other places, but it's also true that it is an impact and If that was all, if we simply disagreed with the prem- perhaps an unnecessary impact on those people on the ise, we'd simply be agreeing to disagree. But the con- lesser-used routes. sequences of not just the delay this year or last year in So we have the 2008 provincial transit plan, and then finding some way to carry forward with funding for in 2010, to much fanfare, the province and the mayors TransLink and allowing the Mayors Council to actual- signed a regional transportation agreement. Th ere was a ly propose meaningful funding options for expanding news release dated September 23, 2010, and let me just bus service, for expanding rapid transit, for investing read some quotes from various people who were involved in infrastructure, for carrying out, in fact, the provin- in that initiative and from what the Premier of the day, cial government's own 2008 transit plan as it applies to Gordon Campbell said. Metro Vancouver…. "Today we are reaffi rming our commitment to the people of Metro Vancouver that their mayors and the provincial government Th e ability to move forward in a reasonable manner to will collaborate closely to keep people, goods and services moving prevent congestion, to prevent the cost to the economy quickly and effi ciently, with minimal impact on our environment. of congestion, to prevent the serious impacts on family Th e release goes on to say: life and livability in the region…. By not actually mov- "Th e province and the Mayors Council commit to the develop- ing ahead now and approving funding sources now to ment of a long-term, sustainable funding strategy that makes the most of TransLink's available revenue sources as well as fi nding move on with enhancing transit services in the Lower innovative ways to generate revenue, such as using the increase Mainland — even to the point of keeping up with the in property values along rapid transit corridors to support future level of customized transit for people with mobility issues projects." known as handyDART, even to the point of keeping up The current Minister of Jobs and then Minister of with plans that were part of the base plan to enhance bus Transportation and Infrastructure said: service and increase bus service, to increase SeaBus ser- "Together we're creating a transportation system that encourages vice — none of this is possible. people to take transit, rather than drive their cars, leading to less traffi c congestion and fewer greenhouse gas emissions…. An ef- [1705] fi cient, aff ordable and reliable public transportation system is an We're not just talking about infrastructure or capital essential component of a livable region." plans or light rail or subways. We're talking about sim- That's the statement of the then Transportation and ply keeping up with population growth in the Lower Infrastructure Minister, the current Jobs Minister. Mainland region. This continual delay in approving Th e current Minister of Education and then mayor of 2974 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

the city of Langley said: the region and to port, and those goods come from all "Th is agreement forms the foundation of a new dialogue to over the province. sustainably plan, fund and deliver a world-class transportation I was at a conference where the mayor of Surrey put system to the region." forward a fi gure that the cost of congestion to the econ- As I've said, the news release said: omy of the entire province of B.C. is estimated to be up "Th is MOU will help support the region and TransLink to ex- pand services and infrastructure to meet provincial transit plan to $1.5 billion annually. Th at's a lot of lost productivity. goals" — which had been developed two years earlier — "a strategy Th at's a lot of lost economic activity. We don't want to see to double transit ridership and reduce greenhouse gas emissions that on this side of the House. I'm sure the members op- by 4.7 million tonnes, all by 2020." posite don't want to see it. I know that people in resource [1710] communities and people who are operating resource in- Well, that announcement was worthy of some kudos dustries around the province don't want to see that. Th ere and some congratulations. Th e only problem is that it's has to be a better way. now almost four years aft er that announcement, almost We are stuck, I guess, with this system because the six years aft er the provincial transit plan, and we're still members opposite have a majority, and they're certainly in gridlock on funding. committed to carrying out this proposal. Th e minister Th e result of the gridlock on funding…. Th ere are a lot said that the mayors appear to be taking up the chal- of causes of that gridlock. It's been repeated over time, lenge in good faith to work on a question and to work and I'll detail some of this. Th e most recent one was a on a system of priorities. Of course they are. If you took surprise thrown to all of us by the Premier of British any of us, locked us in a box and said, "Th e only way out Columbia that any increase in funding for TransLink is through that door. Here's the saw. Cut your way out," to enhance service, to build new infrastructure, even to we'd be sawing away even if it was a very thick wall, be- keep up with a growing population or even to provide cause it's the only way out. the current level of service would have to go to a ref- So yes, the mayors are working hard, and they're work- erendum. Th is caused loggerheads to develop between ing in good faith. But the mayors, frankly, have put for- the government, the new minister, the Premier and the ward numerous funding options over many years, most Mayors Council on TransLink. of which have been rejected by successive ministers, suc- TransLink immediately suspended parts of a planned cessive Premiers, successive governments across the aisle. expansion in their base plan and supplemental plan. So It's just not good enough. 306,000 hours of additional bus service that were planned [1715] just to keep up with current demand and a growing It's not good enough in 2008 to create a transit plan population were put on the scrap heap because TransLink and say that you're committed to it and you're commit- believed that it would be irresponsible to go forward with ted to its goals — committed to doubling the ridership that plan without the funding to pay for it — even as they and committed to a very signifi cant reduction in green- were continuing to provide service by eating into their house gases. reserves at a rate that many people believed was com- It's not good enough to say in 2010, in a joint release pletely unsustainable. with mayors that they entered into in good faith, that Th is is not the way to do transit planning. Yes, there you're going to sit down and work out a funding formu- are hard decisions to make about priorities. Yes, the pub- la with them and consider in good faith how to fund the lic never holds up their hand and voluntarily says, "We're system, and then not do it. Not only not do it, but every ready to give you more money," unless it's clearly ex- time a suggestion is brought forward, dump cold water plained to them what that additional money is for. on it while at the same time having removed them from I believe, I know — and certainly, my constituents in an important oversight role and a governance role and a Vancouver-Fairview, the constituents of my colleagues policy-making role. on this side of the House for constituencies of Metro It's not good enough to undercut successive Vancouver and the constituents represented by mem- Transportation Ministers who negotiate agreements bers opposite know — that congestion is a problem. Th ey with mayors and then have the leader of the govern- want to see it solved. Not everybody will be able to take ment turn around, turn her back on them and undercut transit, but certainly, people who are able to take conven- the Transportation Minister of the day — or as some of ient, accessible and aff ordable transit are likely to do so us and some media wags like to call it, throw another if it gets them to where they need to be on a timely basis. Transportation Minister under the bus. Th at in turn will free up the highways and roadways for It's not good enough because there are real impacts on other commuters who have no choice but to take a car. people, there are real impacts on family, and there are real It will free up highways and roadways for service people. impacts on the economy. It's not good enough. Most importantly — well, I won't say most importantly, What we have is a 2008 transit plan with loft y ambi- but very importantly — it will free up the roads to allow tions. We have a 2010 agreement to work with mayors the transport of goods much more quickly throughout to expedite funding the system and fi nd new ways of Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2975

funding the needed transit expansion. Th e memoran- Now, the minister had spent a signifi cant amount of dum talks about it as needed transit expansion and an time and political capital in making this deal with the effi cient, aff ordable and reliable public transportation mayors. God knows what was actually said when they system, which was understood to be an essential com- met in a room fi nally, but two days later the Premier ponent of a livable region. recanted and agreed to support the deal that had been So what do we have? Back then it had a $14 billion made between the mayors and the Transportation price tag. We called it an unfunded wish list at that time Minister. She even wrote a letter to the Mayors Council on this side of the House because it wasn't funded, and chair, Richard Walton, to seal the deal. My colleague the unfunded it remains. But it's an honourable wish list. It's then Transportation critic called it at the time "policy the right wish list. on the go." It's the right aspirations and goals for both the prov- At least she reversed herself at that time and allowed ince and the mayors and TransLink. It meshes with the the signifi cant agreement that had been reached between residents of Metro Vancouver and their vision of a livable the minister and the mayors to go forward. region, their vision of being able to move around in a liv- Somewhat later in the fall of 2011 the mayors passed able region. It meshes with the desire of people engaged what's known as the Moving Forward 2012 supplemental in the movement of goods and services around the prov- plan to fund various transportation projects in the Metro ince and around the region to do that in an effi cient, cost- Vancouver region, including the Evergreen line. Funding eff ective and productive way. Yet unfunded it remains. would be provided in part by a two-cents-per-litre in- Let's take a look at some of the timeline of events to crease in the Metro fuel tax. do with funding. In 2009 the government ordered the In March 2012 the mayors then sent a letter — I've comptroller general to conduct a review of TransLink, referenced this — to Minister Lekstrom with additional which faced a $130 million funding shortfall and could funding proposals. Th ese included a graduated vehicle not aff ord its share of the Evergreen line. Th e review rec- registration fee otherwise known as a vehicle levy, a ommended cost containment before any new funding regional carbon tax, road pricing and an additional fuel sources. TransLink followed the recommendations and tax. passed the 2009 funding stabilization plan. At that point a by-election was being kicked off in To maximize its existing revenue resources, it in- Port Moody. Th e Premier simply rejected the idea of a creased tax on parking, was looking at property taxes, vehicle levy and called for TransLink's $30 million short- transit fares. But this only closed the operating funding fall to be made up by an audit. Now, it's fair enough to shortfall and provided no new services, and at that time have an audit. It's fair enough to have audits periodically, TransLink still didn't have enough for its share of the but unfortunately, the Premier's rejection of the mayors' Evergreen line. proposal triggered a temporary $28 million regionwide In 2010, as I mentioned, the province and the TransLink property tax. mayors signed the regional transportation agreement to Further, the audit that the Premier was promoting fi nd sustainable funding sources. A great document, lots for TransLink…. While she said that there had been an of agreement. People were hopeful. People thought they audit at B.C. Hydro and that it had resulted in signifi - could go forward and solve the problem, because we all cant savings and, therefore, would be a good model for know it takes a considerable amount of time to order and TransLink, the fact remains that it was the third such construct rapid transit, whether it's SkyTrain or light rail. audit in as many years. It takes not as much time, but a signifi cant amount of Now, there are only so many times you can keep go- time, to order and have produced new buses and to train ing back and doing an audit and assuming that, magically, the mechanics and drivers for those buses. whoever did the last audit 12 months ago missed a whole All of this takes time. If you don't start, if you don't big pot of money that we're now going to fi nd and that have an assurance of funding, the time frame just stretch- somehow, magically, we'll be able to enhance TransLink es out and you start falling further and further behind, services with it. which is exactly what's happening to us today. Let's talk about what was found by that audit. We know On July 6, 2011, then Transportation Minister Blair the Premier had ruled out the vehicle levy, and then Lekstrom announced that a deal had been struck Minister Lekstrom admitted that he and the Premier, as with regional mayors to increase the fuel tax in Metro he said, had not collaborated on a talk. But he did say, Vancouver to pay for the long-delayed Evergreen line. "She is my Premier. I serve in the cabinet at her discre- What happened fi ve days later? Th e Premier of the prov- tion," which, of course, is true of all ministers. Th is was ince announced, in one of her patented surprise an- in the Globe and Mail. nouncements for Transportation Ministers, that she did It is perhaps noteworthy — the now Minister of not support the minister's deal with the mayors because Education may want to remember what then Minister it was unaff ordable. Lekstrom said — that at the time, the Minister of [1720] Education was the mayor of Langley and vice-chair of 2976 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

the TransLink Mayors Council, and he said: "Th e Premier In October the TransLink audit was released, and seems to be drawing a line in the sand." the Premier claimed it found $41 million in savings. Clearly, I've heard the Minister of Education speak However, if you dug a little deeper, only $11 million was to the earlier bill today and praise it, and I have praised actually identifi ed as savings. Now, I don't want to pre- parts of it as well. But I'd ask the minister to remember tend that $11 million isn't a very signifi cant amount of that there was a time when, as a local government elected money. offi cial, he believed that the actions of the Premier were Let me restate this. Only $11 million was identifi ed not conducive to reaching agreement and cooperation as real savings, and $11 million is a lot of money, but in between the mayors and the provincial government on the context of what TransLink needs in order to simply the necessary funding. meet existing service levels — whether it's for custom- He went on to say: "She has never talked to me or ized transit for people with mobility challenges; whether Mayor Walton" — Mayor Walton, the chair of the Mayors it's for people in suburbs; whether it's planning for the Council — "nor does she seem to have talked to her needed expansion of transit south of the Fraser; rapid own cabinet members. I'm never surprised at things the transit; rapid bus; dealing with the most congested cor- Premier says. I think she makes decisions in isolation." ridor in North America on Broadway, which the city of Well, a long list of Transportation Ministers have in Vancouver is desperately trying to address in some form fact had to deal with a Premier who, when faced with or other — all of these things take considerably more a microphone, seems to say whatever she thinks is ap- than $11 million. propriate at the time, which has the eff ect, of course, of Now, $30 million of the $41 million in savings that undermining the legitimate undertakings and actions of was identifi ed by the Premier as a result of the audit was her ministers in trying to, in good faith, reach agreement not actually savings at all. Th ey resulted from applying with other levels of government. a less conservative budgeting method and eating into [1725] TransLink's reserves — something that then TransLink On April 17, 2012, TransLink's CEO, Ian Jarvis, an- chair Nancy Olewiler termed irresponsible. nounced that all future expansion projects are on hold There is, in fact, a level below which the reserves until the fi nancing issue is resolved. Th e Evergreen line should never go. Simply eating into reserves to cover was the exception, because a 2 percent gas tax had been operating costs because TransLink is not being adequate- allocated to that. ly funded is a deep mistake. It puts the future of the or- On September 5 Blair Lekstrom was replaced as ganization at some risk, and to call it an audit-found Transportation Minister — I guess he had disagreed saving or effi ciency is simply incorrect, misleading and with the Premier one too many times — by the current should never have been said. Minister of Environment. In September, again, TransLink March 1: TransLink makes up the temporary repealing released their 2013 base plan, and despite aggressive cost- of the $30 million property tax by changing 34 bus routes, cutting, TransLink then faced a $472 million shortfall which it termed service optimization. I've acknowledged between 2013 and 2015 and had to cancel the follow- that some routes are more heavily used and they certainly ing plans. shouldn't suff er. Th ere was a planned increase of 306,000 annual ser- [1730] vice hours, as I've mentioned earlier, that was necessary But if the funding level was appropriate, then it would to reduce overcrowding on key routes to accommodate be easier to determine which service optimization sug- population growth and to meet the U-Pass demand. gestions and methods actually made sense and did not signifi cantly lessen service to people unfortunate enough [R. Chouhan in the chair.] to live somewhere with a slightly lesser-served route in order to enhance and optimize service for the more Th ey cancelled, until funding could be found and as- heavily travelled routes. Th is is the kind of measure that sured, the full Highway 1 rapid bus project. Th ey can- TransLink will call service optimization but the people celled the full King George Boulevard B-line to White who are impacted will call a service cut. Rock. Th ey cancelled a third SeaBus that was planned March 22. Th e governance review we talked about, to extend SeaBus service to every 15 minutes, with an which the member opposite — in goodwill, I think, but upgrade to the Lonsdale Quay. Th ey cancelled, in addi- incorrectly — identifi ed as a governance review that was tion, full funding for major road network and cycling commissioned in support of Bill 22, was actually com- upgrades. missioned quite some time ago, at the end of 2012. It Now, all of this was supposed to have been dealt with was commissioned by the Mayors Council to review the by an audit, if only an audit could fi nd enough funding governance. for TransLink to go forward with the identifi ed service I won't go over it in too much detail, but as I noted in enhancements — enhancements, I will add again, that the debate on Bill 22, the report found that the govern- were necessary to keep up with population growth. ance structure at TransLink, introduced by this minister's Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2977

predecessor several ministers removed, was "unique in All of this could have been happening if there was the world and not in a good way" and that "accountabil- some leadership from the government on the transporta- ity to the population being served…is almost completely tion issue instead of ducking and looking for cover under missing from the present arrangement." a so-called democratic initiative like a referendum that On April 8 the government announced it would create may happen sometime in the future and where, in fact, a working group with regional mayors to look at sustain- it is a measure and a requirement that the minister him- able funding sources for Metro Vancouver transit. Now, self has said will be applied to no other transportation this is nearly three years aft er the party signed a deal to infrastructure or highway or project in British Columbia. do so in September 2010, when Gordon Campbell was In other words, the Premier wrote it on the back of a the Premier of the province — three years of no action napkin. She promised it in an election. She stuck it in the on a widely announced initiative between this provincial platform, and they're single-mindedly proceeding to dis- government and the mayors in order to put into eff ect the advantage the entire Metro Vancouver region on a plan province's own 2008 transit plan and to meet the needs to hold a referendum that nobody wanted, nobody sup- of the people in Metro Vancouver. ports and we on this side of the House will not support. Th e working group is set up and is scheduled to come It defi es the imagination that a Premier can promise up with recommendations to allow the province to intro- a referendum on TransLink funding while throwing out duce legislative changes by spring 2014. It was supposed an unplanned, unfunded, undesigned promise for a new to make recommendations by the end of September. bridge that is questionable and that will likely cause grid- Well, it is spring 2014, and we're debating legislation lock at either end because it is not integrated into an over- on a referendum that may not happen for another year. all regional transportation strategy. It's not good enough. At that point, if it passes, TransLink will then be wait- Let me continue with the chronology. September 2013. ing for this government to call the House to session and Premier Clark comments on the referendum, and she pass whatever enabling legislation is necessary in order says: "Th e TransLink referendum is something that needs to fi nd new funding sources to make up for the shortfall to be resolved by mayors. Th ey need to come together in service to a growing population in Metro Vancouver with a proposal. Th ey need to agree on it, and then we and to invest and plan for infrastructure — whether it's can put that forward to the public." Th at's an incredible new buses, light rail or subways — to meet the demands statement from a Premier who forces a referendum on of the future. mayors that they never asked for in the fi rst place and that In the meantime, TransLink's own fi gures show that they don't support. All of a sudden, the delay is the fault at this current rate of funding, if you consider service of the mayors because they haven't craft ed the question. on a per-capita basis, because of the growing population If we look at Bill 23 closely, does it say that the may- in Metro Vancouver, by the year 2020 service levels will ors get to craft the question? No. It says they get to make have regressed to where they were in 2004. recommendations on the question. It's still the govern- How on earth does that meet the 2008 transit plan ment that will decide the question. So what is it? Is it the of this government or the livable regions strategy put mayors' fault and their responsibility, or is it the govern- together by the democratically elected mayors and coun- ment's fault and the government's responsibility? I think cillors of the Metro Vancouver region? Th e answer is that the answer is in the legislation, and it's not a very good it does not. or very satisfactory answer. We're in policy gridlock here. Nothing has happened. In response to the Premier, the mayor of Richmond, Promises were made that were not kept. Nothing con- Malcolm Brodie, said — and he, I believe, refl ected the tinues to happen. And why? Because every time the may- sentiment of mayors across the region: "Th e Premier ors suggest a funding solution, a Premier says no. Every came up with the idea of a referendum. It's her idea. It's time a Transportation Minister enters into good faith to up to the government to formulate the questions. From try to solve the funding problem or makes a deal with the my point of view, it is up to the government to stage the mayors, a Premier says no, and in the worst-case scenario referendum, and they are responsible for the results." the minister is thrown under the bus. On the one hand, you have the government, the min- Here we are with an off -the-cuff election promise to ister and the Premier saying that it is the responsibility of have a referendum that is holding up progress on meet- the mayors to design the question, that they're the hold- ing the transportation needs of the people of the Lower up, that they need to come up with the priorities. Th ey Mainland and the economic needs of the entire province need to fi nd the wording of the question, notwithstand- of British Columbia. Th e number of times of years that ing the fact that there has been plenty of back-and-forth nothing has happened, multiplied by 1.5 billion, could between the Transportation Minister and the Premier pay for much of the improvements that are needed in about whether it'll be a multiple-choice question, wheth- service, in infrastructure — in buses, trains, subway cars, er it'll be a yes-or-no question, whether the government SkyTrain cars. will support the referendum, whether the government [1735] will keep hands off the referendum. 2978 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Th ere's not widespread agreement, even on that side of most successful referenda tended to be yes-no, the the House, about exactly what this looks like. Nonetheless, Premier said: "It needs to be a multiple-choice question. it is the responsibility of the mayors to read the collective A simple yes or no doesn't do justice to the questions minds of the government and come up with a question that are there. We really want to ask people: 'How much which the legislation tells us can only be in the form of a transit do you want? How much do you want to pay for recommendation. So they'd better guess right. it? How much change do you want, or do you want no November 23. We're getting close to today. On change to the system at all?'" November 23 the Transportation Minister tells Vaughn Well, hon. Speaker, I'll let you, I'll let members on this Palmer: "With respect to the referendum question, it side of the House, I'll let members opposite and I'll let the cannot be a convoluted question with a whole bunch of public themselves decide whether there is congruency boxes to tick off , and so forth. Th e successful referen- between the comments of the Minister of Transportation, dums tend to be yes-no, one single question at the bot- the commitment of the Minister of Transportation to a tom…. In terms of timing, we want to maximize voter successful referendum, and the comments of the Premier participation, we want to minimize the cost of the ref- following his comments — of which I would hope she erendum, and we want to set the referendum up for the would be aware — that eff ectively contradicted him and maximum chance of success." eff ectively threw him under one of the dwindling num- [1740] ber of buses in the Lower Mainland. While it may not always be apparent when I speak, Th e other thing the Premier didn't mention was, as I have a fair amount of respect for the Transportation I have said, the signifi cant impact on the economy of Minister, and I believe he meant exactly what he said. continued congestion in the Lower Mainland. Th is isn't I've said — and he obviously won't agree with me in about people simply: "Oh, it'd be nice to have a few more this House or in public — that he's making the best of buses. We really like those SkyTrains, and we'd like to a bad idea that wasn't his. Nonetheless, he understands see more of them. We'd really like a faster way to get out the need for transit. He's done his research. He's looked to UBC." at referenda around North America. I've listened to him. It's about the incredible congestion south of the I've read his comments. He understands what was suc- Fraser, the incredible congestion that's been caused by cessful and what wasn't. He stated that in the interview people choosing the Pattullo Bridge and streaming into with Mr. Palmer, and he also made his own commitment New Westminster, the incredible congestion along the to try his best to ensure the success of the referendum. Broadway corridor and the incredible congestion other I think his implication was: "We're having a referen- places where the provision of new technologies, rap- dum. We made the commitment to have a referendum. It id transit — whether it's rapid bus, light rail, subways, was in the platform. It's a promise, so we're going to keep SkyTrain or simply adding more buses to existing routes it. I may not have thought of it, but we're going to keep it." or adding more SeaBuses to cross from the North Shore But he does understand the necessity of the referendum to the downtown of Vancouver — actually gets cars off passing, so he said that. the road and allows goods and services to move. What happens aft er that? Well, the minister committed No, the Premier didn't reference that. I would hope to fi ghting for a successful result. He said: "Th e Premier the Premier would know about it. Members opposite did not make this commitment to just run through a continually remind us that they know about the econ- process — maybe it'll work; maybe it won't — whatever omy and we don't. Th ey know about the economy, and — and we'll move on. We're committed to success." Th e we don't understand it. Th ey're committed to growing minister said: "We are committed to success. I, as the the economy, and we're not. I reject that assertion abso- minister, am committed to success on this referendum. lutely. It's not true. It's a steep hill to climb to get there — no question about [1745] it." Now, I commend the minister for showing his com- We do understand the economy. We are committed to mitment at that time. growing it in a responsible and sustainable way, and part Th is particular interview was printed in the Vancouver of that is ensuring that there is necessary transit in Metro Sun on November 23. What happens December 13? Th e Vancouver to get cars off the road, to get people to where Premier has an interview with the Globe and Mail. And they're going, to allow goods and services to move and to does she back up the Transportation Minister? Does reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If the Premier doesn't she show the commitment to success in the referendum get it, we get it on this side of the House. that the Transportation Minister had referenced in his Th e Premier went on to say, just in case she thought interview with Vaughn Palmer? Well, let's see what the the bus should back up over the Transportation Minister: Premier said, and I'll let you judge for yourself. "Th e people will decide. People need to do their home- While the Transportation Minister said, following sig- work to make sure they get the answer that is right for nifi cant research — research that, I'm sure, the Premier them." I'm not sure if the Premier thought, when she did not have time to do herself, personally — that the said that, that as they are driving, stuck in traffi c because Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2979

there isn't accessible and aff ordable rapid transit they can Th e end result for people with mobility challenges take…. Th ey're in their car, not using their cell phones, has been an unbelievably high increase in the number because that's now illegal. Th ey are actually reading the of service denials by handyDART — an incredible in- details of the cost of enhanced transit with one hand, crease over the last seven years, a huge percentage in- driving with the other, hoping to get home in time for crease. Th ese are people who are eff ectively being kept dinner while they plan how they are going to vote on hostage in their own house because the funding to in- the referendum. crease handyDART service has not been available from "People will need to do their homework to make sure TransLink. they get the answer that is right for them, but I'm not go- [1750] ing to try to decide for people what their answers should TransLink doesn't have enough funding for be." Unlike, I might add, the new bridge to replace the handyDART. It didn't have enough funding to put Massey Tunnel, the Premier said: "I am not going to try 306,000 more service hours in place to meet the demand to decide for people what their answers should be." of a growing population. It couldn't keep the promise of Well, of course, she won't be deciding in a referendum, a previous transportation minister to add a third SeaBus but a little bit of leadership would be nice, a little bit of to the route so there would be three SeaBuses, a SeaBus honesty. Th e Transportation Minister at least, notwith- every ten minutes at peak times. Th ere's any number of standing the fact that I disagree on Bill 23, intends to things that haven't been done, and this is all a problem. show some leadership on this particular issue, because he To begin to sum up, despite aggressively cutting costs, does understand that TransLink is underfunded. TransLink faces a $472 million shortfall between 2013 It is diffi cult to understand what sort of conversations and 2015, and 2015 looks like it may be the date that a must happen between the Premier and Transportation referendum will be held under this legislation. Th at's a Minister. Th e Transportation Minister has, in fact, made long time. it clear on a number of occasions that he believes that Following the passage of a referendum, assuming it this referendum should succeed. He is prepared to put his passes, it will take a considerable amount of time for own political capital on the table for it, and I will com- buses to be ordered. It takes a little over a year for a bus mend him for that. He understands that it's important for to be ordered and delivered. It takes fi ve to seven years government to show leadership. for a SkyTrain to be ordered, produced and delivered If and when we ever end up with a referendum, if the and the infrastructure built. I believe it's somewhat less people of Metro Vancouver are given a chance to fi nal- for light rail. I think it's something like three to fi ve years. ly take some action, whether it's in 2014 or 2015, to ap- Th is all takes time. prove a funding model that's now four years overdue If the government had met its commitment under and by then will be fi ve years overdue and some would the memorandum of agreement that was signed on argue is actually seven years overdue, the government September 23, 2010, we'd be approaching a time when will understand that leadership is needed to talk about much of this infrastructure would be about to be deliv- all of the real choices. ered. People would have been hired. People would have It's not a zero-sum game. It's not just a question of been trained. More buses would already be on the road. spending money for nothing. It's a question of spending TransLink would have the funding necessary to not only money to enhance transportation, to enhance livability keep up with population but to keep up with the grow- and to support the economy. We know that. I believe the ing demand. Transportation Minister knows that. It's important that People with mobility challenges would not be forced people understand that if they don't pay for transit, they into a situation where, even with a week's notice, they will be paying in a myriad of other ways and likely be can't get the ride they need to see their doctor, or they're paying far more long term. told that aft er their doctor's appointment, they will have Finally, January 27 of this year — I knew I'd eventually to wait for up to three hours to get a ride home. Translink get into 2014 — the Premier once again said that the re- would not be forced to off er taxis, which are okay in suit- sponsibility was the mayors' responsibility. "Th ey are the able situations but are not okay in so many others, when ones that will have to lead the debate. We are enabling it taxi drivers have nowhere near the level of training or ex- as a province. We're enabling the people of the province, pertise in understanding the needs of the many people the citizens of the Lower Mainland, to vote on it. But it's who are served by handyDART. ultimately the mayors that are going to have to lead it." All of these things could have been avoided — all of If the Premier meant those words, the Premier would these things — if the government had met the terms of not have said no, on numerous occasions, to funding its memorandum and met with the mayors in good faith solutions put forward in good faith so many times over and accepted some of their proposals for funding. Th e the past several years by the mayors. She simply would government's own 2008 transportation plan could be tak- not have done that, because the end result of doing that ing life today instead of gathering dust on a shelf while has been a delay. Metro Vancouver commuters gather dust as they wait at 2980 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

bus stops while buses pass them by. We could have done ing people to cut a precious few half-hours off their com- better. We should have done better. mutes every day or every week in order to spend more Th e 306,000 annual service hours that were needed time with their family; the needs of people who work to reduce overcrowding, that were needed to keep up shift work — food service workers, people who work with the U-Pass program — cut, because TransLink had in hotels, people who work in the health industry who no assurance of funding. Th e Highway 1 rapid bus pro- travel at odd times of the day — to not have to sit around ject — on the shelf. Th e King George Boulevard B-line to in potentially dangerous SkyTrain stations or bus stops White Rock — out the window. Th e extension of SeaBus waiting for buses that may never come or may not come service — nowhere to be seen. Th e minister talks about for another hour or to wait when SkyTrain service is far a third bus, but it's not going to be an additional bus. more sparse than when it is at the normally considered Th at's what's not being said in this House. And full fund- rush hour peak times. ing for the major road network and cycling upgrades — We were elected to serve everyone. Th is government is nowhere to be seen. government to serve the needs of everyone. Hiding be- At this rate, as I've said previously, by 2020 service hind a referendum because it was politically expedient in levels on a per-capita basis will be back to 2004 levels. an election campaign is not good enough. It's not good How is that meeting the government's own 2008 transit enough for British Columbians. It's not good enough plan, which wanted to double transit ridership and re- for the economy. It's not good enough for the people of duce GHG emissions by 4.7 million tonnes? Th e answer Metro Vancouver, and it's disrespectful. is that it does not. It's disrespectful to the elected offi cials who, in good South of the Fraser in Surrey people are completely faith, signed a memorandum of agreement in 2010 with frustrated. Th e mayor of Surrey went to the federal gov- this government, where the government committed to ernment on her own to seek funding to increase transit sit down and talk about new funding sources that were and rapid transit in Surrey. Steve Burke, the president of needed to expand transportation options. Instead, the the Surrey Citizens Transportation Initiative, said that government cut and run, and it did not matter what any route adjustments will mean fewer buses on many routes transportation minister said or did or what deal they and longer wait times. "Route adjustments" — another worked out with the mayors or however hard they tried word for service optimization, which the people of Surrey to make a diff erence. Th e Premier threw them under experience as cuts. the bus. [1755] What did the Premier say, previous to this referendum Steve Burke went on to say: "We have about one bus idea, were her ideas about referendums on tax issues? for about 4,000 Surrey residents when the Metro average Well, in 2011 she said: "I never thought that tax issues are is about 1 for 1,700 and Vancouver is probably closer to best outside of the Legislature." Again in 2011 she said, 1 for 1,500." Why should the people south of the Fraser and this was a press release: "I think you have to be up- continue to be disadvantaged when even in Vancouver front with people. You have to explain the circumstances. and the rest of the region we know that service is not You have to have a debate, and then you introduce your keeping up with the growth of the population? tax policy. I will lead a government that consults, lis- Th ere seems to be no end to this. I mean, I guess a bill tens and then acts with the best interest of all British to introduce a referendum that's been talked about for Columbians at heart. When you do that, people are will- the last year is some form of…. I hesitate to use the word ing to accept changes to the tax system." "progress." I hesitate to use the words "moving forward," [1800] because those were the words used for the Metro Mayors That must have been a different Premier than the Council transportation plan. Clearly, this referendum one who has proposed this referendum and the one idea doesn't support that, nor does the lack of funding who is forcing this referendum on the people of Metro support it. I guess it's better than talking about it. Vancouver. As the minister himself confi rmed in esti- But the fact remains that it doesn't fund even the mates, there are no other plans for future referenda, ex- current needs, let alone the future needs. It doesn't get cept for TransLink — not for the bridge to replace the people into transit and out of cars. It doesn't allow goods Massey Tunnel, not for highway projects, not for transit and services to move more quickly through the region. elsewhere in the province, not for road improvements, It doesn't allow any of that. Instead, it just puts off the not for anything else. inevitable for political expediency, and that's not, in my Th e minister confi rmed that this was an election prom- view, what we were elected to do. ise and that it was going to be kept. In other words, it's an We were elected to understand the needs of the people arbitrary, one-off move. we serve. We were elected to support locally elected of- Let me quote the then Transportation Minister and fi cials who are completely accountable for that. We were the current Environment Minister one more time. elected to address congestion on the roads; the eff ect on Even aft er the Liberal platform was released, the then the economy; livability in the region; the needs of work- Transportation Minister said that voters will not be able Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2981

to reject any and all new taxes or fees for TransLink in sit. TransLink is trying to maintain service levels, and a referendum. She said that "none of the above" will not clearly, TransLink will not be able to do that until it's as- be an option. She said that because she understood that sured of funding. "none of the above" is not a practical option for solving [1805] the transportation needs of the Lower Mainland. We will see a continuing decrease of per-capita service What did the Premier do two days aft er that? She con- levels, projected to reach 2004 levels by 2020. Th is will tradicted her Transportation Minister by saying: "If vot- force more people to buy cars, and once people buy cars, ers don't want it, we're not going to impose it on them." they're committed to driving them. Th is is not how we Aft er the election the Minister of Environment once are going to get more people into transit. It is not how again said that there would be choices, not simply a yes we are going to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Buses or no. She said that she thought that voters would choose may have to be cut in growing areas. the best means of going forward and of funding their I spoke earlier today on Bill 22 about the mayor of transit future, and the referendum is to take place relat- Coquitlam speaking about the problem in new develop- ed to the choice of funding, not whether there needs to ments that were planned around the expansion of transit be funding, recognizing that there needs to be expansion that never happened, and how the people who bought in and maintenance of service. those new developments are turning away from a transit- Now, one might wonder why the Environment oriented community and turning it into a car-oriented Minister was speaking on the referendum when she was community. More and more of this will happen the long- no longer the minister. Of course, the availability of tran- er and longer we wait to make a commitment to increas- sit, getting cars off the road — even by the government's ing transit in the region. own transportation plan — and the goal to reduce green- We know what the problems in the Broadway corri- house gas emissions by 4.7 million tonnes is of important dor are. It is the most stressed route in North America. and critical concern to the Environment Minister. Th e buses are full. People stand and are passed up by the What did the Premier do? Once again, she said that it's 99 B-line constantly. It will take a long time before any up to the mayors. It's up to the mayors to come together, infrastructure can be built, and it will take a longer time step up to the table and come up with the question. Th is if we don't start now. was in response to many people questioning why we People south of the Fraser currently don't have the continue to have delay and confusion and disagreement same level of transit service as people throughout the between ministers and the Premier over what the refer- region, particularly in Vancouver. Th is should be of con- endum would look like, how it would take place, when it cern to all of us. Yet the people south of the Fraser are would take place, who would pay for it, whether or not being told they will have to wait longer and longer and the government would be involved in supporting it. longer before their needed and promised projects…. Th e Th is prompted Gary Mason of the Globe and Mail to projects were scheduled to go ahead until TransLink was say that the Premier and her Transportation Minister forced to scale them back because they were already in need to get on the same page. defi cit, they were eating into the reserves and there was I would say that the government needs to get on the no funding for them. same page with its own commitments, its own signed All future expansion is on hold. It takes 18 months memorandum of agreement with the Metro Vancouver from tender to buy a bus and to train operators. Light Mayors Council, and meet the promise that they made rail takes fi ve years; a subway takes six years. Th ere are almost four years ago to agree on funding options for federal funds available for matching that are dependent TransLink. Scrap this referendum idea and get on with it, on commitments from TransLink to put funds forward. because everybody knows that it needs to be done. All of this is at risk while we wait for a decision in a Let me simply read some other comments from com- referendum that no one asked for other than the Premier. mentators. Kim Emerson on News 1130, December 14, All of this is at risk while the government refuses to ex- 2013, said: "Here's the kick I get out of it. She's look- ercise leadership and a policy mandate and meet with ing more and acting more like Bill Vander Zalm when the mayors and agree on funding the expansion of rapid he was Premier these days than the leader who is ac- transit and provision of the needed expansion of existing tually in charge and directing what's happening." Th is services to meet up with the population. was in response to the continual disagreement between Let me close by simply saying what the reaction of the Minister of Transportation and the Premier on the some of the mayors was to the announcement of a refer- form of the question, whether the government would endum — the reaction of mayors who are now working get involved, whether it would be a yes or no question or in good faith to try to deal with the hand that was dealt whether it would be a list of options. them, to come up with priorities, to come up with a plan, I've gone on at considerable length, as the designated to come up with a referendum question so that given speaker, about what the problems are with the delay in this government's majority and the intransigence of the reaching agreement with the mayors on funding tran- Premier and her government about holding this referen- 2982 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

dum, despite widespread opposition, they are working in isn't funded by the fi rst referendum will have to go to a good faith to try to make that a success. future referendum under this legislation. The mayor of Surrey: "We just really need to stop Why on earth the Transportation Minister would take playing politics and get the job done." The mayor of a bad idea and write it into legislation in perpetuity is be- Richmond, referring to the referendum: "A recipe for dis- yond me, but that, among other reasons, is why this side aster. It will divide the whole region, and if it fails, we'll of the House will stand with the mayors and councillors be further behind than we ever were. A referendum is of the Metro Vancouver region and oppose this legisla- simply a way to avoid responsibility." Th e mayor of White tion, oppose this referendum and oppose future referen- Rock: "An absolute utter and total mistake and a total ab- da. It is a bad idea. It's an unfair idea, and it will hurt the rogation of responsibility." region and the economy of British Columbia as well as Th e mayor of Port Coquitlam, who in 2005 was a B.C. the people who depend on this government for leader- Liberal candidate, Greg Moore: "Th e hypocrisy of this ship, leadership that we are not seeing. policy platform proposal is unbelievable." Th e mayor of Coquitlam, a former member on the other side of Hon. P. Fassbender: In the short time that I have, I the House, "We need a solution. We don't need polit- have so many thoughts I would like to share. Let me start ical posturing" — this from a former Liberal MLA. Th e with the fi rst, most important one. Th at is that this piece mayor of Vancouver called it ridiculous, and the chair of legislation is probably the most democratic process of the Mayors Council, the mayor of North Vancouver for the people of Metro Vancouver that we could have. district, said: "It's clearly a defl ection of the province's I am somewhat amazed that members opposite don't responsibility." want to give voters a chance to have a specifi c voice on [1810] both shaping the future of the region and how that is go- Th is was not requested by the mayors. A referendum is ing to be funded. In the time that I served in local gov- not a condition that is being placed on other infrastruc- ernment, I clearly heard from people in Metro Vancouver ture or transit planning or highway planning or road on many occasions that they wanted a say, and a more planning. Th is is a one-off . Th is is an ill-thought-out and specifi c say, in how transportation was going to be de- arbitrary decision and condition being placed on Metro veloped and also how it was going to be funded. Vancouver only. I come from an area and am elected as an MLA for Metro Vancouver is important. It's critical to the econ- Surrey-Fleetwood, and I will agree with my colleague omy of British Columbia. It's not just the people of Metro from Surrey-Newton that Surrey has many needs. Even who deserve to be able to move around the region. It's when I wasn't an elected MLA from Surrey and I was not just the livability of the region, by getting cars off an elected offi cial for another community south of the the road, that's at stake; it's the economy of the whole Fraser, I clearly stood up on many occasions and talked province, whose goods pass through the ports of Metro about the importance of an integrated, well-funded, sus- Vancouver and which pass through more slowly as a re- tainable transportation system, not only for south of the sult of congestion. Fraser but for the entire region. We have opposed this referendum from day one. [1815] Metro Vancouver deserves better. Th e people of the re- I stood up in support of the Broadway corridor and the gion deserve better. Th e mayors and councillors in the pressures on the Broadway corridor. I stood up in sup- region deserve more respect, and they deserve a gov- port of the North Shore and a third SeaBus. I stood up — ernment that will live up to its signed agreements. Th e one of the few people, as an elected offi cial, who stood up province deserves better because the provincial economy in the early days — in support of funding the Evergreen depends on it. line. I did that because I believed that it was important Finally, let me simply say that it's not enough to have to understand the needs of the entire region — not my this one referendum, which we have opposed from day own community but to see the big picture. one and will continue to oppose. Th is legislation, this But my experience around the table at the Mayors bill, Bill 23…. I've already mentioned that the minis- Council was not that of some of my colleagues. It was ter confi rmed that a referendum on improvements to clearly about pitting one community against another. TransLink was arbitrary. It was a one-off . It's imposed Th at's one of the reasons that the governance structure is only on this region. being revised, where every community will have a voice and be able to go out to their communities and say: "Th is [Madame Speaker in the chair.] is the big picture for the region. Th is is how we fi t into it as a community and how we believe we need to fund the Th is bill not only calls for a referendum now; it calls sustainable future of transportation in Metro Vancouver." for perpetual referenda for any increase in funding for Th e bottom line to all of this is…. A lot of the mem- transit services. New infrastructure, increased number bers opposite don't want to talk about this, but Metro of buses on existing routes — any increase in service that Vancouver taxpayers have been given a break for many Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2983 years by not having to pay the hospital capital tax which concerned to the point that I wasn't prepared to work other parts of this province pay. In reality, that particu- with the Premier and the then Transportation Minister lar tax in other parts of the province has gone up high- to chart a new course based on a vision that I believed in er proportionately than what transportation tax has in for the entire region. Metro Vancouver. Th e Premier and I did speak. We talked at length about Th e funding formula that currently exists in transpor- the future of the region as I saw it, in my role and on be- tation in Metro Vancouver has certain funding tools, and half of every single community in the region. It was not there are a number of debates that have gone back and a partisan political discussion. It clearly was a discussion forth over the years about whether or not property tax is about the vision for the region and what I knew needed to sustainable, how that fi ts with other needs of the region, be done in my perspective and based on the input from how that fi ts into the long-term vision for the region. the other mayors. I sat at that table for 12 years. Anybody that suggests Th e Premier listened, and the Premier shortly there- in this House that the mayors were all unifi ed and were aft er came out and said: "Th is is a very complicated and all singing from the same song sheet and all agreed on complex issue. We need to review all of the elements, and where the priorities were and how it was going to be we need to look at what it's going to take to come up with funded…. Th ose people, I clearly know, weren't sitting a long-term plan, a sustainable plan and a vision that the at the table. Or they're getting notes from people who people of the region will clearly understand and clearly were and who may have a diff erent agenda than the in- know where we're going and why we need to go there." terests of the region. The Premier also recognized that to have a simple As I said in the debate on Bill 22, it is very clear to me question will only work…. She saw the research that was that this government is committed to saying to the people put in front of her. In the rest of the world, if you do a of Metro Vancouver: "You have a right to have a voice on good job on communicating the vision and the options, one of the single most important funding initiatives that the simpler you keep the question, the better. you will face coming forward." Th ere are many others. Th e challenge now leading up to the referendum is to Th ere is waste disposal, there is water, and there are all absolutely, clearly identify and recommunicate the vision of those other things. that was developed. It was called the 2040 vision. But if the mayors continue to say that property tax can- Th at vision has been refi ned. Th ere have been changes not be used as additional funding, then the mayors also made to it, but the fundamental principles…. have to work with the people in the region to communi- cate clearly what it is they believe are appropriate sources Interjection. — and not just one-off s. Th e sustainable funding for the region is going to be critical in how it is integrated and Hon. P. Fassbender: I know that the member for how it moves forward over the next fi ve, ten and 15 years. Burnaby–Deer Lake has notes from someone close to Th e people of Metro Vancouver have a right to hear her, and I appreciate that she might want to share those the vision, to hear what the mayors believe are the fund- in her comments. I have had lots of opportunity to debate ing sources and then to be able to express their support with various mayors from various communities, and the for that. Again, at the end of the day, there is only one mayor of Burnaby is one of the ones who has worked con- taxpayer. Th ey pay for their services, they pay for all of sistently to defeat any initiative to move ahead. I make no the infrastructure, and they pay for all of the things that apology for saying that. I said that when I sat at the table. are coming forward. I'll continue to say it. Transportation — because of its signifi cant impact Th at said, the rest of the mayors, the subcommittee on every sector of our society, the people of Metro that they've now formed, are working very hard, and I Vancouver have a right, as we move forward, to lay it out. applaud them for it. I applaud them for the fact that they [1820] are willing to move ahead in a positive way. I know they Th ere were a lot of comments about comments that I are going to come up to this government with a very clear made and what the Premier said and how there seemed articulation of the vision. to be a disconnect. Th e minister has clearly said that the government will Well, one of the things I admire about our Premier is support them and will ensure that that message gets out. that aft er I, as the vice-chair of the Mayors Council, said It is their responsibility to communicate it. We are going that I felt there was a disconnect, I got a telephone call to work with them to ensure that it is very clear, that all of from the Premier. She said, "I've heard your comments." the issues are there and that it clearly articulates how that She did not say to me that she didn't appreciate my com- fi ts in to the vision of this province on concepts I know ments. She said: "Can you tell me what I need to know the members opposite have trouble understanding called as I refl ect on where we need to go?" balanced budgets, reducing debt, growing the economy. I admired the fact that she would do that, because I [1825] was concerned that there was a disconnect. But I was not I clearly understand that the members opposite would 2984 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014 like to see the government spend more money, but the federal government to actually develop species-at-risk reality is that those concepts escape them. I clearly recovery plans for a number of species showed me, any- understand that those concepts may escape them when ways, that the federal government may have a law on the it comes to the funding of transportation, which is sig- books, but they certainly don't have the muscle behind nifi cant, and an economy that supports that is critical. A the law to ensure we're actually following the law. Th at's region that looks at those implications is critical. really what the judge ruled. Noting the hour, I would move that we adjourn de- I guess the question is…. Th e government has argued bate. I reserve my right to continue my remarks at the we don't need a species-at-risk law, as they think the next sitting. strategy can do the work. Where are we at in terms of the implementation, and what funds have been dedicated Hon. P. Fassbender moved adjournment of debate. to the implementation of the species-at-risk in a British Columbia draft plan or fi ve-year plan? Motion approved. [1340-1345]

Committee of Supply (Section A), having reported Hon. M. Polak: I'm going to attempt to answer this in progress, was granted leave to sit again. a little bit of a diff erent way just because, in terms of try- ing to pull out the funding from diff erent places, it be- Hon. T. Stone moved adjournment of the House. came apparent that it was probably going to be simpler to tell you the number of FTEs that are devoted to it. In Motion approved. addition to our amounts that are spread over all sorts of diff erent departments in our ministry and FLNRO, we Madame Speaker: Th is House, at its rising, stands ad- also then receive and distribute money from the federal journed until 1:30 tomorrow aft ernoon. government, from industry, and from local government as well. We partner with them. So the fi nancial part of it Th e House adjourned at 6:26 p.m. gets convoluted, to say what's directly there. In terms of the Ministry of Environment, we have 232 FTEs that are working on species at risk, and in FLNRO, PROCEEDINGS IN THE 315. Now, for the numbers in MOE, if you, for the sake DOUGLAS FIR ROOM of argument, want to consider that probably about 75 percent of the work that's done in B.C. Parks and by con- Committee of Supply servation offi cers has a relationship to…. Depending how you want to look at that, if you included those folks as ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT well, then you'd be looking at about 287 FTEs, but purely (continued) in the Ministry of Environment it would be 232.

Th e House in Committee of Supply (Section A); S. S. Chandra Herbert: My question is specifi cally: what Sullivan in the chair. are the next steps in the invasive…? Sorry, not invasive — I'm going back to this morning — but endangered. Th e committee met at 1:38 p.m. Th ese are species we want more of, not less of. What are the next steps in the plan to better protect our endan- On Vote 20: ministry operations, $101,243,000 (con- gered species? tinued). Hon. M. Polak: Of course, the largest part of the next S. Chandra Herbert: Thank you, hon. Chair and steps is the fi ve-year plan and the fi nalization of it. We neighbour. I wanted to follow up. We started discussions expect to have that out before the spring is gone, and around bears and some issues with conservation offi cers, then, of course, also signifi cantly, is the renegotiation or but I want to move on to the discussion of species at risk. the renewing of our Canada–B.C. agreement on species Certainly, B.C. is home, from what I'm told by the sci- at risk, which will expire in 2015. entists, to the vast majority of species. Seventy-fi ve per- cent, I'm told, of the species at risk are here in British S. Chandra Herbert: I guess the issue that we've got Columbia. We have got a massive biodiversity in this to grapple with is that the federal government, at least province, but we're only one of two provinces that do according to the courts, has not been doing their due not have species-at-risk legislation. Th e government has diligence in terms of protecting species at risk. Is the gov- argued that we don't need one. I would argue, and cer- ernment comfortable that continued reliance on the fed- tainly the NDP has argued, that we do. eral government's Species at Risk Act and follow-through Th e federal court ruling in February 2014 forcing the from the federal Ministry of Environment, when they Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2985

have seen their budget slashed and many people laid off , blue-list species in B.C. is a good strategy to protect B.C. species at risk? Th at's a diff erent list from the SARA list. Of the 1,597 We're home to 76 percent of Canada's bird species, 70 species listed in the red and blue lists under the B.C. percent freshwater fi sh species and 60 percent of conifer CDC, 210 are listed under SARA. Th ey are required to species. We're the most biodiverse province. have recovery strategies in place for them. We have the [1350] 150, and then some of the 210 will have federal strategies, I think I misstated earlier that 75 percent of the species not British Columbia ones. were at risk. Th at was not my intention, but certainly we We are making signifi cant progress in meeting that also have, probably, about 1,900 at least identifi ed as at requirement, and I'm told that we usually land fi ve to 15 risk. Would the minister continue to rely on the federal plans a year, depending on the year and on the complex- government, or are we looking to take more leadership ity of the plan. at the provincial level? S. Chandra Herbert: Could the minister tell us: are Hon. M. Polak: Th e member and anybody else could the recovery strategies so far…? I guess recovery would be forgiven for thinking that because the Species at Risk be growing the population back so that it leaves being Act is federal legislation, we therefore work in such a way endangered to threatened then to stable as the ideal. Out as to be relying on them to take responsibility for it. In of all the recovery strategies, what's the global success- fact, it's quite the opposite. If anything, the federal gov- fail rate? Are we seeing increases in success of breeding, ernment relies on the work that we do. I'll outline some of etc., for these endangered or threatened species, or are that. In fact, just as an overarching piece, approximately more of them continuing to fall further behind? How do 37 percent of our land base is managed in some form of we know if this is even working as opposed to just being conservation or protection. a bunch of paperwork? Now, when it comes to the specifi c areas we govern, [1400] those would be guided by the Wildlife Act, the Forest and Range Practices Act and the Oil and Gas Activities Hon. M. Polak: Th e Species at Risk Act is only 12 Act. We have authored or co-authored recovery strat- years old so we would not be able to provide any conclu- egies for approximately 150 species. We have established sive evidence with respect to success or failure in any of 1,654 wildlife habitat areas under the Forest and Range the strategies. Practices Act, and those are aimed at protecting 56 dif- I can tell the member that that is precisely what gets ferent species and ecosystems that are currently at risk. tracked through the B.C. CDC, and we will be looking at In actual fact, we're comfortable with relying on the the population numbers, based on that data, as we evalu- current arrangement, because it really is work that we ate the performance and the eff ectiveness of the various undertake largely in British Columbia, obviously in recovery strategies. cooperation with the federal government. But we cer- Th e short answer is that it is just too early to tell wheth- tainly want to renew our agreement with them. We hope er or not these recovery strategies are going to meet the they will continue to rely on the recovery strategies that objectives, in terms of either retaining species or grow- we have continued to put in place. ing populations.

S. Chandra Herbert: So we've got — I think the num- S. Chandra Herbert: Well, yes, 12 years, I guess, on ber is, and maybe the minister could correct me — ap- the geological scale of things is pretty short. However, in proximately 1,900 B.C. species listed as endangered or the life cycle of an endangered species, it could be the at risk. According to the minister, we have 150 species diff erence between disappearing forever or having con- — maybe plus the 56; I'm not sure — in her last answer tinued growth and expansion of the species that was sup- that have recovery strategies or plans of some kind. Th at posed to decline. seems to me to be a rather large gap between the num- I appreciate the ministry provided me with some in- ber that are threatened or endangered versus the number formation, as I asked about the conservation data centre that have recovery strategies. earlier. Th ey provided a list of the number of animals as- How many recovery strategies does the government sessed, total red-listed and total blue-listed, but with a plan on signing off on in this year's budget term? proviso that the main reason for changes in species status [1355] is improved information, as opposed to actual changes in the status. Hon. M. Polak: I'll begin just by giving some context I hope that's true. We don't know that, I guess, because to the various lists that are out there, and there are quite maybe one day you happen to fi nd a whole bunch of a a few diff erent lists. Th e one I would recommend to the certain critter, and then in the next couple years they've member, fi rstly, would be the provincial list that is on the moved from that location, and you can't see them any- B.C. conservation data centre. It keeps track of red- and more. I guess you could say that they were becoming 2986 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

more and more threatened. S. Chandra Herbert: What would be a success — I I think the public would feel a lot more secure that we guess that would be my question for the government — were getting it right, as opposed to just playing a guess- in terms of this data? Scientists will form opinions and ing game, if we were able to say conclusively that, let's say, form arguments and may disagree. Certainly, we see the Vancouver Island marmot…. Maybe that's a success that right now around the question of how many griz- story. We've added more of them. Th ey're on the way up. zly bears exist in British Columbia and whether or not Of course, you could have a couple of eagle attacks and a hunt should even be allowed because of concerns that various other things, and they could decline again. there are just far too few, with real disagreements and Still, there's a reality that in the caribou situation peer-reviewed studies. around Wells Gray Park we've seen a continued decline I guess my concern is siding on the side of caution, in in the population numbers. Th ey have a recovery strat- terms of making sure that we have the analysis, that we egy, and it clearly doesn't seem to be working. We've had have the work. Out of the 232, I believe it was, staff mem- no good response so far, at least in my estimation, about bers working on species at risk, how many are scientists? what's going to be done to change that. How many make those arguments around if one is do- I'll ask the minister if she's able to try once more and ing better or not? maybe list out a few of the strategies which are working [1410] and list out a few of the strategies which staff think need more work, because that would help me understand this Hon. M. Polak: The defining of success, actually, better. would be impossible to do on a global basis, because part [1405] of what you'll see in the recovery strategies is that success in terms of the mountain caribou might look very dif- Hon. M. Polak: I want to assure the member that I'm ferent than success for the Oregon spotted frog. It really not trying to be coy with the answer, but I don't want to depends on the species, and it depends on their circum- oversell what it is that I am describing as success. stances — what objectives we're trying to meet. Overall, of course, you're looking for some type of stabilization or One of the examples of success that I would point the recovery of the animal, but to try to give a general answer member to would be marine mammals. Sea otters, for across the piece, I think, would be impossible. example, were just about gone, and they're now back in I'm going to give you some numbers with respect to very robust numbers. Th at is an example of an animal scientists involved. Th ese will not add up to the 232 be- that has a recovery plan. Where I have to depart, in or- cause we don't have them split out — these folks, anyway der to remain honest about it, is that it's one thing for a — in terms of species at risk. I should clarify — my fault layperson like myself to look at perhaps the caribou plan — that the 232 number…. Th ose folks work on species at and say that it's not working, or a sea otter plan and say: risk and biodiversity, which is fairly well linked, just to "Oh wow, look; it worked." be clear. Th is will not add up to 232, but it'll give you a Th e science, the evidence is not yet there for me to be sense of how we're organized, because it's probably the able to tell you conclusively that it was our great plan that largest segment of what we've got here. was a success with the sea otters or that the caribou re- We have 219 scientifi c technical offi cers, we have 80 covery strategy is not a good strategy and isn't working. licensed science offi cers, and then we have 87 biologists Not an attempt to try to get around the answer but just of various kinds. wanting to be clear that there is a diff erence between be- ing able to talk about what we're witnessing in terms of S. Chandra Herbert: Before moving on to further experience and what we can actually provide to the mem- questions, I'll just do one more on the species at risk. I ber in terms of evidence. think it's important that we acknowledge those that are If there is a comfort that British Columbians can take, most at risk. What would the ministry feel would be the I do think it is in the extensive protection that we have top three, top fi ve if it's easier to have more to pick, that provided to habitat areas — 1,654 wildlife habitat areas are most at risk at this time? established under the Forest and Range Practices Act, a [1415] total of 3.8 million hectares involving the protection of 56 diff erent species and ecosystems. Th at is substantial Hon. M. Polak: Just with the caveat that this is also work. We know that the most important thing that we subject to change as conditions change, currently the top can do with respect to species at risk is to deal with pro- three priorities…. I'll back up. Th e way we arrive at set- tecting habitat. ting priority actions is based on two things, at least, and Th e actions are there. Th e tracking will continue to that is not only how endangered the species might be take place. We certainly are hopeful that over time we but then also what level of priority it ought to be given. will see success of our strategies and that we'll be able to Th is goes back a little bit to our jumping slug conver- eventually see that refl ected in the data we receive back. sation with respect to how much attention you pay to a Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2987

species that is really on the outer edge of its range, nat- expire this winter for the Thompson region. I may be urally, or one where you're dealing with their central and incorrect there, so if I am, then please let me know. ordinary expected habitat. Hence, I will talk about what I understand that they will be reviewed and might re- our priorities are as opposed to which ones are top en- sult in changes, given that the population of the caribou dangered. seemingly continues to drop in that area. Is the minister Th e Vancouver Island marmot, the caribou that we've confi dent that that's enough work? Or are we going to see spoken about and the northern goshawk would be the further work to better protect that species? top three on our priority list at this stage. I would encour- [1425] age the member and anybody else who's interested to take a look at our conservation framework on the website. Hon. M. Polak: In terms of expiration, to our know- It goes into greater detail about plans for various species. ledge there is no expiry of that protection. Staff are check- ing on it, but that's not our understanding of the situation. S. Chandra Herbert: Something locals in the Wells Having said that, though, it is an adaptively managed Gray area, one of the planning units within the B.C. plan. One can anticipate that as the plan unfolds, we mountain caribou recovery plan…. Th ey've raised real could adapt very many parts of the plan as we observe concerns about snowmobiles providing, basically, pred- things taking place on the land base. ator highways into caribou wintering range. People are It's also important to remember that this is a three- coming in, breaking the rules and riding in places they're generation plan, and we're less than one generation into it. not supposed to ride in. One of the very important things we must do is continue Certainly with the ability to go up steeper and steep- to actively research what factors are playing a role in the er embankments as the machines become stronger and decline of the caribou populations. We certainly do know stronger, we have seen them get to areas and allow access that snowmobiling has a signifi cant impact, but there are for wolves and other predators into areas that they never many other factors. We need to be closely monitoring would have gone before. Just curious: what kind of en- what other factors are impacting on the caribou survival. forcement action has been taken in this unit? How many tickets have been issued? How much time has been dedi- S. Chandra Herbert: I understand, in my meetings cated to stopping this kind of unlawful access? with freshwater fi sheries folks, who have been working to [1420] improve our lakes and improve our freshwater fi sheries, that they've been asking for a while now to ensure that all Hon. M. Polak: Th ere are a number of habitat concerns revenues from fi shing licences are provided to them for with respect to caribou. In terms of the forest sector, we have conservation purposes no later than 2015-2016. Is it still protected 2.2 million hectares of habitat; heli-skiing ten- in the minister's plan to make sure that change happens? ure holders, another two million. Specifi cally with respect to B.C. snowmobilers, we have actually closed one million Hon. M. Polak: Th e member will also know that it's hectares of habitat. a part of my mandate letter from the Premier. We, of In terms of enforcement, we don't have the discrete course, take those things very seriously, as do we take breakdown of the numbers. I can tell you the actions the requests from the stakeholders as well. we've taken. With respect to the areas that have been I am advised that we are on track to accomplish that closed to snowmobiling, we have targeted them for for '15-16. enforcement and monitoring — things like having a conservation officer located at the trailheads. We're S. Chandra Herbert: Th ere have been many that argue cooperating and utilizing B.C. Parks staff as well as that the old-growth rainforests of Vancouver Island are Natural Resource Operations staff so that we can ensure deserving of protection, their concern being that there the protection of those closed areas. So they are active is such a small percentage now of old-growth rainforests projects of ours. left that we need to pay attention to them as just incred- ible places of biodiversity but also in terms of places — S. Chandra Herbert: I don't need it today, but it would whether it's for carbon sequestration, whether or not be helpful if the ministry could go back and take a look it's for improving water quality — for scientifi c research, at, specifi cally, the Wells Grey area around tickets issued, and so on. I guess over the winter period, for that. Hopefully, the I'm curious if the minister has any response to those off -road vehicle legislation will allow us to have an eas- that argue that we should be protecting our old-growth ier time to ticket and track down those that are break- rainforests, particularly on Vancouver Island, where ing the rules. there are very few of them left . I understand that the one million hectares of high- [1430] suitability winter habitat, which was closed to recrea- tional snowmobile use…. Those management areas Hon. M. Polak: Of course, protecting old growth is 2988 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

something that we all strive for. Obviously, as Ministry nically why the provincial government couldn't make of Environment, it's something fairly close to our hearts. those rules more stringent with respect to management Th e challenge, of course — and the member will know of old-growth forests. this — on Vancouver Island is the signifi cant percentage Th e second question on private managed lands is…. of land that is in private hands. Th at means that, unlike My understanding is that the designation precludes lo- other parts of the province where we have Crown owner- cal governments from passing any regulation whatsoever ship and therefore have all the power we need to declare that aff ects timber harvesting on private managed forest something a protected area, a park or what have you, in lands. For example, local governments are not allowed to the case of Vancouver Island we are very oft en limited pass rules that would aff ect timber harvesting in drink- by the fact that we have no authority over the particular ing watersheds. lands with respect to protection unless we were to acquire I'm sure you're aware that the Islands Trust, which is in them in some way. Th e member will be aware of our very my constituency — a number of Gulf Islands — has been recent acquisition with respect to Quadra Island. raising this issue for years. Why in principle couldn't Th at is the challenge that faces us on Vancouver Island. the provincial government allow local governments to Of course, there is management of those lands through have some more authority? Yes, there would have to be the Private Managed Forest Land Act. Nevertheless, the a balancing of interests, but consider, for example, the challenge one is confronted with on Vancouver Island is agricultural land reserve. It's a provincial designation. the very signifi cant percentage that is privately owned Local governments are allowed to pass bylaws there as land. long as they have the approval of the Agricultural Land Commission. So it would be possible to balance those [J. Th ornthwaite in the chair.] interests. [1440] S. Chandra Herbert: A slightly diff erent voice, a dif- I know, for example, Saltspring Island has in the ALR ferent person. Amazing. Th ank you, hon. Chair. development permit areas protecting streams, riparian In terms of the old growth — and I understand the areas, that had to be approved by the Agricultural Land challenge with private lands — is the ministry making Commission. I see no reason why that balance couldn't any eff orts to try and fi nd ways to protect certain key be struck. It's been a longstanding request from Islands stands of trees as representative of biodiversity? Trust. [1435] Two questions there: stronger rules by the province, in I noticed the other day they discovered a giant, I terms of old growth, and allowing local governments to think, Douglas fi r tree that they've nicknamed Old Doug. protect the values that are important to them, including Everywhere around it was clearcut except for that one things like drinking water and fi sh streams. tree, so there was real concern that should a strong wind come up or something like that, now that it's not protect- Hon. M. Polak: I'm afraid I'm going to disappoint the ed, Old Doug could be lying down on the ground. member terribly here. We've been sort of walking this Some have argued we should have legislation in terms line between FLNRO and Environment because there's of an old tree act or something, where trees over a cer- so much crossover. In terms of this particular area, it tain size or a certain age are protected, as senior citizens really is specifi cally FLNRO, in their legislative world and of our province — things that can no longer be cut down, also in their operational world. and so on. Any thoughts around that? Certainly, we don't want to see more of these iconic trees lost. G. Holman: Th anks, Minister. Yeah, I was kind of ex- pecting that one. Hon. M. Polak: We certainly do have an ongoing inter- But specifi cally, say, with respect to protection of old est in pursuing greater protections. We do that together growth, that is clearly a ministry objective, as you've with the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource stated clearly before. Yes, I understand that maybe the Operations. To give the member an example…. I'm sorry regulatory authority rests with FLNRO, but surely the I can't break it down to the level of Vancouver Island spe- Ministry of Environment could work with them to try cifi cally, but in the coast region of B.C. there are current- and accomplish protection of old growth on private land, ly about 150 wildlife habitat area proposals, and most of just as you do on Crown land. those involve old-growth forests. It's the same issue. Crown timber-harvesting land is not a Ministry of Environment direct regulatory au- G. Holman: Regarding private managed lands — two thority, but you certainly work with FLNRO to try and questions, I guess. In principle, why can't the provincial achieve those objectives. I guess my question is: why can't government make the rules on private managed forest you do the same thing on private managed forest land? lands more stringent? Without making specifi c sugges- tions, it doesn't seem to me that there is any reason tech- Hon. M. Polak: It certainly isn't that Ministry of Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2989

Environment has no infl uence with respect to what oc- [1450] curs on the land base, whether it's Crown land or private land, but our role is one of setting the policy for species at Hon. M. Polak: First, I just always want to make it clear risk, biodiversity, recovery planning. We've talked a little to people who may be watching us here today that thank- bit about the habitat area proposals that we're working on. fully, to date there have been no viable quagga mussels FLNRO's role, though, is then to manage, informed by detected in Shuswap Lake. We're very thankful for that, that policy. Th at means that they make decisions around but we realize we can't rest on our laurels. We can't just how they will conduct that management and balance the be thankful to have escaped thus far. competing interests involved. Since the incident that the member described, just to [1445] give you the update, we have added provincial staff to It is where we part ways, in terms of our authorities ensure that they are available 24-7 to respond to reports and also in terms of our policy creation. I think that's of mussel-infected boats. We've also adjusted our RAPP about as far as we can go, in terms of Environment. line so that it's now set up to receive and distribute calls regarding mussel-infested boats. Th e Chair: Recognizing the minister of Vancouver…. Sorry. Th e member for Vancouver–Point Grey. [G. Kyllo in the chair.]

S. Chandra Herbert: I don't mind being the min- You're not going to see sort of roadside inspections in ister of Vancouver–West End, but I'll be the MLA for the near future. However, we have a B.C. dreissenid mus- Vancouver–West End. So that's all right. Motion to sels early detection and rapid response plan that's in the change the title? No. [Laughter.] works. We will be developing those, piloting them and Anyways, we've talked about the delicate fi rst course watching to see what the results are. It should be com- of jumping slugs. We can move on to the second course pleted this spring and ready for rollout in the summer. now of zebra and quagga mussels, very tasty for those who are into such things. Th ankfully, I'm not. S. Chandra Herbert: Are we going to see legislation? To get serious for a moment, zebra and quagga mus- sels are an incredible risk to the economy, particularly in Hon. M. Polak: Sorry, I meant to respond to that as the Okanagan but also to infrastructure. Th e ministry well. Since December 2012 we also have had in place knows that, so I don't need to go into a big dissertation our controlled alien species regulation, so you won't be on why we should be afraid of zebra and quagga mus- seeing new legislation. We believe we can operate with sels. I know the ministry has a briefi ng note, and has had respect to that regulation. Timing-wise, to give you a one for some time, arguing that legislative gaps persist as sense of it, as one of my staff ers described it, that came there is no comprehensive provincial legislation to ad- in aft er the snakehead but before the quagga mussels. So dress the risk of them. there you go. Th e risk rating is high. Th e risks are understood, but resources to implement prevention and management S. Chandra Herbert: Well, it may be fi tting to move programs for species other than weeds and plant pests from snakeheads and zebra and quagga mussels on to the are grossly inadequate. Another recommendation is pre- Enbridge northern gateway pipeline conversation around vention of new invasive species through a combination of the risks of oil spills in the north. So there we go. clear legislation, public outreach and a coordinated ap- Now, the B.C. government in its submission to the proach to early detection and rapid response programs. joint review panel…. Th e provincial government waived I know about "Clean, clear, dry" — I'm sure I've messed their own environmental assessment process and said that up — the program to get in there. I also know that they would stand for whatever the federal government there had been an earlier issue where a boat was brought process decided. Th e B.C. government at the time argued in. Somebody was alerted, but somebody had been on a no way, at least from what I could read. Th e Enbridge maternity leave, so the boat got in the water. Th ankfully, pipeline should not proceed, as we did not have any cer- the mussels or whatever had been there were dead, so tainty that any really eff ective spill response would be there wasn't — we hope; still, knock on wood — any sort able to happen, whether on the coast or particularly on of contamination. the pipeline route. Are we going to see actual roadside stations to do this? I know there have been studies released from the prov- Is that what the ministry's next step is, beyond just hav- incial government side. We've had the discussion around ing the border notice them? Is there going to be prov- kind of the look at what the risks are. Certainly, the gov- incial legislation brought forward to deal with this very ernment has identifi ed some very real risks and some real risk? And is the province working with the federal very real lack of capacity to respond. government to bring in legislation there as well? I hope Has the province seen any change in the ability to re- that we can get action on this, this year, before it's too late. spond — not just the understanding of the lack of ability 2990 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

to respond but in the real ability to respond — should that has every element right. What we are fi nding is that there be an oil spill today or in the future? there are elements of preparedness, response, recovery [1455] that are evidenced in places around the world, but not all in one place. [M. Dalton in the chair.] Th at leads me to comment, with respect to our work going forward, that we will not be, I don't think, arriv- Hon. M. Polak: I can say with certainty to the member ing at a number or at a percentage. What we want to be that in our view, the third condition of our fi ve conditions able to assure the public of is that the capacities we have has not been met. We are seeing, certainly, improved on British Columbia's coast are a higher bar than what cooperation on the part of the federal government. I they would see anywhere else in the world — that we think that initially when the fi ve conditions were out- truly are world-leading in our capacity to respond and lined, there really wasn't that much attention being paid. recover, and also in terms of preparedness. We've seen that turn around as we've proceeded with our Nuka Research report and, encouragingly, the fed- S. Chandra Herbert: Well, the federal government eral government put in place its expert panel on tankers. could make a decision whether to proceed with the Th at report has come out. Enbridge northern gateway pipeline any day now. Th ey We're encouraged by the increased cooperation we're had six months from when the decision was made. Of seeing, the increased attention to the issue. But certain- course, there are some legal challenges to the recom- ly, we have not reached a place where we would say that mendation by the panel which may delay things a bit condition 3 has been met. further. If the federal government determined tomorrow that yes, they want to proceed, what would the provin- S. Chandra Herbert: I can't recall whether it was the cial government do? Nuka or the federal government report that suggested [1505] that as little as 3 percent of the oil, should there be a spill — this was crude oil, not diluted bitumen — could be re- Hon. M. Polak: I'm not going to speculate as to what covered in a spill on the north coast. decision the federal government may arrive at. Any kind At what point does the government say: "Well, maybe of decision like that, of course, has conditions attached we've reached 20 percent; that's enough oil to be re- to it, and a federal cabinet can even decide to place more covered that we feel comfortable"? Where is the line? conditions if they see fi t. So I'm not going to speculate How do we draw that? about what decision they might ultimately arrive at. Of course, folks along the north coast who rely on the Nevertheless, I think that speaks to the importance fi sh there would say that any oil spilled and not recovered of working together with the federal government to could be a real threat to their livelihoods and would not be acceptable for them. What is the government trying to achieve world-leading marine spill response, prepared- land on here when studies suggest that the oil recovered ness, recovery. Th e best option for achieving protection is so incredibly low? of our coast is by ensuring that we are working hand in hand with them to develop that. Certainly, we've already Hon. M. Polak: Of course, where we're trying to land spoken of the success we've had in not only drawing the is precisely the second condition, which is world-leading federal government's awareness to the challenge but also practices. In terms of our second condition, it's world- now having their cooperation as we work through the re- leading marine oil spill response, prevention and recov- sults of the Nuka Research report. ery systems for British Columbia. Th e member is correct. It was the Nuka Research report that pointed out the vol- S. Chandra Herbert: I think many in the north and umes that they project would be perhaps attainable in across B.C. would say that the best option for protecting terms of recovery. our coast would be to say no to the Enbridge pipeline Here's where we are proceeding. Th e Nuka Research on the north coast, and the tankers. If you're not trans- report identifi ed the gaps, identifi ed where work needs porting diluted bitumen across the north, you're not go- to take place. ing to have oil spills of diluted bitumen. [1500] I disagree with the minister that the best way to pro- Now we are undertaking that cooperative work with tect the coast is to have good spill response guidelines. the federal government and with industry to fi ll in those Th e best way to protect the north coast is not to allow the gaps, to be able to put in place a world-leading response. ships and pipelines that could lead to the spill. Th at's, I I repeat that phrase because it is key to the work we're guess, the diff erence of opinion on this side and that side. undertaking. What would be world-leading in terms of an oil spill In our research we have yet to come across, and I response? What percentage of oil would have to be cap- don't think we will come across, one single jurisdiction tured to be world-leading? Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2991

Hon. M. Polak: Let me reiterate that our government because it risks environmental degradation"? has taken a very strong position with respect to Enbridge, [1515] and that is: as the project is proposed, we don't support it, and we don't think the federal government should Hon. M. Polak: It is when a statutory decision-maker support it. We made that very, very clear, but I want to is engaged in that adjudication that there may not be any reiterate it here. infl uence from the political sphere. We certainly rely on With respect to what is defi ned as world-leading, we our statutory decision-makers to adjudicate those appli- have not arrived at that yet. We do have information that cations, based on the best available science, and, in their we have gathered through the Nuka Research report, but judgment, to arrive at a decision independent from pol- nevertheless, the work is still underway to arrive at how itical infl uence. we would defi ne world-leading. [1510] S. Chandra Herbert: What permits have been issued In any event, I would be surprised if it had one num- for the Enbridge northern gateway pipeline so far, in ber in all circumstances or even if that was the means of terms of exploration and what have you? defi ning it. Th ere will be all number of factors that we want to see represented. Hon. M. Polak: None have been issued from the Of course, what we have been pushing very hard for is Ministry of Environment. to have a very solid preventative plan, because we know that that is where our greatest strength can lie, not just S. Chandra Herbert: Has the government received with respect to the potential for increased tanker traf- any legal opinion around its ability to stop the Enbridge fi c but even with existing traffi c on our marine corridor. northern gateway pipeline should they want to? We want to ensure that prevention is top of mind for the I know the Premier said that we could not issue per- federal government, and we're pushing them very hard mits, but the minister is saying that the staff are fi rewalled in that direction. off from political infl uence, that they have the ability to make these decisions themselves. S. Chandra Herbert: Certainly, preventative ap- My concern is that should the federal government proaches like preventing the Enbridge northern gateway want to push this through and the province not want to, pipeline and tanker project that is currently proposed we might not be able to say anything. If all the statutory would be a good way to do that. decision-makers said, "Okay, well, the federal govern- Th e ministry, as well as the Premier, spoke about ways ment says this is a go," and they say, "Th is is the law," and they could prevent the pipeline at one point, should the they say, "Yes, there are no permits that we're going to federal government try and push it through, and talked withhold," what would the government do? about withholding permits and a variety of other means. [1520] Can the minister tell us what kind of work was done to look into those issues and what permits they would pro- Hon. M. Polak: For a statutory decision-maker ad- pose to withhold should this decision come during this judicating an application, they do not have the capacity budget year? to arbitrarily withhold the granting of a permit. Th ey do have the authority, though, to adjudicate it based on Hon. M. Polak: For any project like this there are a whether or not, in their expert opinion, there is going to range of permits that would be required aft er an environ- be an adverse impact on the environment. mental certifi cate was received. Th ose permits are evalu- I would argue that if that is the basis of their decision- ated by professionals. Th ey use their expert opinion, and making, then we can be confi dent that they will arrive they are experts in their fi eld, to determine whether or at a decision that is appropriate to the given project. In not a permit application represents something that will this case the member is asking about northern gateway, have an adverse impact on the environment. but if there are adverse impacts that are determined, in Now, if the professional, in their expert opinion, ob- the judgment of that expert, to be at play, then a permit served that in their judgment there was going to be an ad- would not be granted. verse impact, then they would not be granting the permit. S. Chandra Herbert: I would have argued that we S. Chandra Herbert: If those professionals had to should have done our own environmental assessment make those decisions, is there a complete fi rewall be- process so the B.C. government would have the ability tween political leadership, ministerial accountability and to stand up for British Columbia and say no rather than those professionals? Or is there a legal possibility that the relying on a statutory decision-maker to hopefully be minister could say: "Th is project has been approved at the able to see the writing on the wall and say no, but that's federal level. However, these permits would be required, what the government decided to do. and we would urge you to consider not approving them My question regards the land-based spill prepared- 2992 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

ness and response report. I understand that there was and we'll continue to push that. supposed to be a second intentions paper released in February. When will we see that? S. Chandra Herbert: Well, the federal government may have mouthed some words and put out reports and Hon. M. Polak: We have now completed the consul- paperwork. I'm curious what the very real on-the-ground tations, which were quite extensive, with First Nations eff ort looks like in terms of what those improvements the communities and industry. We're fi nalizing the report minister mentioned there are. I know there have been re- based on that input and information. We don't have a ports and some of that. hard target for the date of release, but we anticipate hav- As one example, the Premier said that we never should ing it out soon. proceed with Kinder Morgan until we get our Coast Guard station back. We haven't got that Coast Guard sta- S. Chandra Herbert: Th e Premier has argued that B.C. tion back, and the government has really dug in its heels, should get a share of the economic benefi ts of a proposed refusing to do anything about it. heavy oil project. I'm curious. I understand there's some [1530] concern in the wider community around this. "Selling the Just on that one very small point — but of course, not coast" has been how some people have termed it. small in terms of marine safety for Metro Vancouver — Has there been consultation, a discussion, between the there's no way that we've improved. Where have we seen Minister of Environment or to her knowledge, around a actual real improvements? fair deal with either Enbridge or Kinder Morgan? [M. Bernier in the chair.] Hon. M. Polak: I haven't been involved in any discus- sions of that nature. Hon. M. Polak: We will continue to push for real tan- gible progress and real capacity being improved. We have S. Chandra Herbert: Diluted bitumen is travelling seen some advancement. One very good example is that through the harbour of Vancouver. I'm curious, given the Coast Guard has now agreed to adopt our incident that we know the real risk of diluted bitumen sinking command system. Th ey would now be a part of that um- in turbulent waters or waters that have a fair bit of sedi- brella when we are responding together to a spill in the ment…. marine environment. Th at is a signifi cant step forward [1525] for our work with the Coast Guard, and it's a very real What is the government doing right now to ensure that improvement. Metro Vancouver and British Columbia are ready to act — and, of course, southern Vancouver Island — should S. Chandra Herbert: Th ey've agreed to be part of the there be a spill even with the existing level of traffi c? Th e incident command centre. Th at's a good thing, in terms government has said that we're woefully inadequate in of where we're at now, but of course, there are still incred- terms of our ability to respond, and that hits us today, ibly large resource issues, an incredible lack of prepared- not just in the future, should these projects be approved. ness. I think the quote was "woefully inadequate" from the provincial government. I don't think that one change Hon. M. Polak: Th ere is much work being undertaken really changes that. Certainly, I understand the minister right now. I'm sure the member won't be surprised to has made similar arguments in the sense that we haven't hear that. One of the positives that has grown out of the seen the changes needed in any way to give people some focus and attention on the northern gateway pipeline sense of security. and the increase in tanker traffi c in the north is that it When analyzing these kinds of projects, whether it's has drawn the attention of the federal government and Kinder Morgan or Enbridge, does the provincial govern- other agencies to the need to advance our preparedness ment believe it's important to also analyze the climate on the south coast as well. change risks of increased oil exploitation? I can say that in general the Nuka Research report indi- [1535] cated that while we certainly still have work to do, we are much better prepared on the south coast than we would Hon. M. Polak: As we've discussed, our role would be be on the north coast in the event of a spill. in terms of permitting. Th e range of permits that would Nevertheless, we're encouraged by things like Port be required — none of those consider GHG impacts. Metro Vancouver's advancement of a centre of excellence, and again, continue to work with our federal counter- S. Chandra Herbert: But in both the Enbridge and parts to encourage them to increase the level of support northern gateway proposals, the provincial government that there is in place now for response, not just waiting for has to make a statement of concern or support or ques- expansion but leading to improvements in capacity right tions. I understand that the province would be an inter- now. Th ey seem to be receptive to that message from us, vener. Now, the minister has a responsibility to ensure Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2993

that we are reducing climate change within the province. not trying to use off sets elsewhere to justify expansion of Certainly, climate change emissions — and the minister emissions within B.C.? Given that, as the minister sug- has also made this argument — overseas or next door gested, we don't have the expertise, if one person takes have just as much impact on B.C. as if they happened B.C. oil, they might as well be taking a diff erent product, within B.C. in terms of climate change. so we really don't know what the impact is. Does the minister think that we should actually con- sider the climate change impacts of the Kinder Morgan Hon. M. Polak: Th ere's an important distinction to be and Enbridge pipelines, and is that going into the think- made here. With respect to the export of natural gas, we ing that the B.C. government makes? know that there is a signifi cant role to play for natural gas. When I say "we," I don't mean just British Columbia. I Hon. M. Polak: Can I just ask the member to clarify mean that around the world we know that the increase if he's referring to the GHG emissions that would result in the use of natural gas displacing other fuels can have from the portions of the pipeline that enter B.C. or from a very positive impact on the global amount of GHG the tankers, or is he referring to the broader issue of in- emissions. It is, aft er all, the cleanest-burning fossil fuel. creased GHG emissions as a result of the oil sands? What we don't know with regard to petroleum pro- duction such as the oil sands in Alberta is the impact on S. Chandra Herbert: I would just question that based amounts that they would draw, amounts they would re- on the oil sands. Obviously, if you're going to increase cover and produce as a result of the export choices that a pipe size and export more of it, you're going to see are made in respect of various pipeline construction, greater exploitation, and that's something that we need how that changes things relative to other oil-producing to consider. nations and then what impact that has on the rest of the globe in terms of GHG emissions. Hon. M. Polak: In British Columbia we take respon- [1545] sibility for our GHG emissions. We've done so for a We know that producing petroleum like that and the number of years now with some very aggressive climate use of it certainly has an impact on global GHG emis- action policies, aggressive targets and aggressive work sions. But on the interaction between what happens to reduce our emissions. We've been successful on many, when you construct opportunities for shipment, such as many fronts. the proposed northern gateway pipeline or any others [1540] — whether or not that causes the production to increase, When it comes to the oil and gas industry, particularly what other forces could cause production to stay the with respect to oil and the oil sands, globally the impacts same — we don't have those answers. Th at is not some- are not yet well understood in terms of how the move- thing that we…. ment of that oil, the export increases, decreases GHG We are not the only ones wrestling with the economies emissions; whether or not oil would have come from a around what happens with exports and pipelines and the diff erent place, if it didn't come from the one proposed. impact on oil production. So therein would lie the diff er- Th at's not something we would propose that we analyze ence between the two positions. and contribute to, in terms of a position. We do certainly recognize that the effi cient movement S. Chandra Herbert: We've just taken a sidetrack from of goods is an important thing to consider in terms of where I had hoped to go, and we're going to get into fur- GHG emissions, but that's a very broad statement. It isn't ther climate change questions as we go. But I guess just in only refl ective of this particular issue. that regard, what studies have been done, while we're on Suffi ce to say that there are still many questions around the question of oil and LNG, to justify the government's how one ought to account for the impact of things like argument that B.C. will be doing the world a favour? the oil sands. It's not something we are going to try to Of course, there are many other jurisdictions produ- give any specifi c determination to in our submissions. cing LNG. Why would B.C. be the one doing the world Th at's beyond the work of a province such as British a favour, if that supply to China could also be picked up Columbia and goes to much, much bigger questions by Australia, for example? Using the same questions that that people are wrestling with in governments around the minister is using around the oil production, how does the world. that same question not apply to LNG production?

S. Chandra Herbert: Would it be fair to say that the Hon. M. Polak: We know that anytime oil such as B.C. government's position around exports of materials what one would produce in the oil sands is utilized, it that could either create climate change somewhere else, contributes to GHG emissions. What we don't know is: emissions or not, is that the B.C. government will only will constructing a pipeline cause them to produce more? be making statements around B.C.'s own climate change Of course, that's one pipeline; that's one point of export. reduction targets, its own emissions created locally, and Th ey are aff ected by other forces, not just that one pipe- 2994 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

line. It would be very diffi cult to conclude, one way or made the comparison. It's the minister and the Premier. another, whether or not a single line of export would Th ey've argued very strongly that LNG should hap- have would have the eff ect of increasing production in pen so that we can end the use of thermal coal in China, the oil sands. yet thermal coal continues to travel through the ports — When it comes to natural gas, what we know there arguing that by doing that, we're doing the world a favour is that anywhere natural gas is used in place of other while also, on the other hand, thermal coal continues. fuels such as coal and oil and anyplace it comes from — We will talk about that later. I just want to make clear whether it's B.C., Australia, Qatar — it is having a posi- that this is coming from comments the minister and the tive impact in terms of the GHG emissions that would've Premier have made themselves. potentially resulted from the use of other fuels like coal [1555] and oil. G. Holman: One last point on this whole issue of ac- S. Chandra Herbert: Is that thinking extending to counting for greenhouse gas emissions. We're not neces- all of British Columbia's exports around what creates sarily suggesting changing anything. What we're talking more emissions or not? Th e minister just mentioned about here is getting the accounting consistent across coal. I understand that thermal coal is said to be one of those fuel types in terms of our greenhouse gas inven- the worse polluters for climate change in the world. So tories and responsibilities — just getting the accounting for making this discussion and this debate around LNG, right and, yes, trying to compare apples to apples and getting China off of coal, is the government working oranges to oranges. to…? What, if anything, are they doing around thermal I had a couple of questions about the potential prov- coal exports if the government is arguing that thermal incial tax liabilities around oil spills. I understand that coal should not be used in the sense that LNG should be? there have been some fairly recent changes with respect [1550] to federal government rules around that. I wondered if the minister could quickly bring us up to date on the state Hon. M. Polak: I would observe this. Th ere's a very of play about that issue and, in particular, the thresholds big diff erence between an industry that has been a foun- at which point provincial and federal taxpayers start to dational part of our economy for generations and a new bear the costs of cleanup and the potential economic industry that is to be established in B.C. — one which, by costs associated with oil spills. the way, we have committed will have the cleanest oper- It's fi ne to talk about world-class oil spill recovery, but ations of any liquefi ed natural gas operations in the world. even world-class systems only recover a small percent- One cannot turn back the clock. One must adapt with respect to how the world grows and changes. Th ere are age. Depending on the conditions and the circumstances, still places in the world that rely on coal. Th ere are still that can vary. It's still a minority of the spill that gets re- places…. Well, our place in the world still relies heavily covered, and there are costs associated with recovering on oil. I don't think it would be practical to suggest that whatever you can. Th en there are other potential costs, any of those things can be changed with a fl ip of a switch. economic costs associated with possible impacts on, for What we can do is produce liquefi ed natural gas in example, fi sheries, which result in additional compen- the cleanest way possible in the world. We've commit- sation costs. ted to doing that, and in so doing, we contribute to a Th e question is: what's the state of play in terms of transition that is taking place in countries like China. In provincial taxpayers? At what point does their liability fact, even to the south we see a transition taking place for these kinds of costs start to kick in? toward greater use of natural gas to displace other trad- itional forms of fuel. Hon. M. Polak: Th is is actually another example of I don't think you can compare apples to apples with where we're seeing some progress in our work with the respect to coal and oil — long-established coal, a long- federal government. They have announced a $1 bil- established industry in our province, and coal exporting, lion absolute liability. It's no-fault. Th ey have not yet something that segments of our province rely on quite announced the details. Our staff are working together heavily in order to produce the wealth that we enjoy in with their staff to determine what they are going to put places of the world where myself and the member live, in in place. We will certainly hear, I'm sure in short order, the Lower Mainland. what the details are. I don't know if that's suffi cient. S. Chandra Herbert: No, the reason I bring it up is the minister, the Premier and many government minis- Th e Chair: With that, there's been a request. We're go- ters have made this connection between LNG and ther- ing to take a fi ve-minute recess. mal coal, which is an export through British Columbia's ports and has been for many years. It's not me who has Th e committee recessed from 3:59 p.m. to 4:05 p.m. Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2995

[M. Bernier in the chair.] tion where only one person spoke in favour of the pro- ject, and many, many, many others spoke against it. Th e G. Holman: Just a follow-up on that question. Th e $1 public consultation demonstrated that there's little, if any, billion threshold means that if the costs of oil spill re- support for the current plan. covery and any potential economic compensation costs My question is this. Considering the CRD currently exceed $1 billion, that would presumably mean that prov- has no alternative site for the treatment plant and, in fact, incial taxpayers and federal taxpayers at that point pick Esquimalt has tasked staff with putting together informa- up that responsibility, and the minister could confi rm. I tion to rezone McLoughlin Point to not allow a sewage wanted to follow through on these questions. plant there, will the minister reassure residents of the re- With respect to the sharing of the liability beyond that gion that the province will not intervene on the zoning threshold, what's the provincial and the federal share? I'm unless the CRD proves all other options are exhausted? sorry. Perhaps I should know this. Is there a formula for sharing those liabilities above that threshold between the Hon. M. Polak: I can assure the member that our pos- province and the federal government? ition remains the same today as it has in the past. Th e Th en secondly, is the threshold the same? Is the prin- federal government requires that they treat their sewage ciple the same? Whether we're talking about Kinder by 2020. Th is is an obligation that falls on the local gov- Morgan or northern gateway, is it still basically the same ernments. It's unfortunate that they've reached this kind framework that's in place that determines the liabilities of an impasse. of shippers versus taxpayers? I understand that CRD is meeting this week, perhaps even tomorrow, to discuss the implications. I'm not going Hon. M. Polak: Th e federal government's new frame- to speculate on what might result from that, but we have work is still at the stage where they are developing the de- no plans to intervene. We've said from the beginning that tails, and so I couldn't give you too much of a breakdown. this is an issue that the local governments need to grap- I can't give you any of a breakdown of that. ple with, understanding that they are the ones who are What I can say is this, though — some things to re- obligated to begin treatment of their sewage. So we have member. If we're talking about a spill from a federally no plans to intervene. regulated pipeline — so a transprovincial pipeline — and this occurs on a federal right-of-way, then it would be A. Weaver: I just wanted to say, for the record, for entirely the federal government's responsibility. Th ere those calculations with respect to the credits of LNG would be no splitting of that. In addition, under our legis- and coal that were asked of the minister, please go to lation, if such a spill should then impact on land that's my throne speech. Th ey're all done there, and they were beyond the federal right-of-way, then our legislation al- made available for all to see. Th e government need not lows us to recover our costs of cleanup from the polluter. do those calculations. I did them and presented them in my throne speech. A. Weaver: I only have one question I'd like to ask the minister. I apologize that I haven't given it in advance. It's Th e Chair: I assume that was not a question. relatively new. I'm not going to ask the other questions. Th e opposition have been doing a fi ne job. In fact, I'm A. Weaver: No. dumbfounded, I must admit, to hear the questions con- cerning thermal coal exports and the carbon budgeting S. Chandra Herbert: I understand that the member of thermal coal exports being asked since the minister who just intervened won't be asking about his support will recognize that I actually put an amendment in the for the Kitimat oil refi nery or his support for the Liberal throne speech, which was voted down unanimously by budgets, but there you go. every member of the opposition. It's just mind-boggling. Anyway, moving back to the questions of ministry es- Anyway, I stand to ask a single question. Th e question timates, not speeches disguised as questions. Th e Kinder is with respect to my favourite topic — second-favourite Morgan pipeline proposal. I understand that the National topic, the fi rst being climate change. As I said, the ques- Energy Board recently rejected one-quarter of those who tions are being covered well, many of which I've heard asked to participate in the process. Th at included neigh- before. bours, business groups, environmental groups, scientists, Th e question is with respect to sewage. what have you. [1610] [1615] As the minister is aware, Esquimalt council voted Basically, the National Energy Board decided: "Sorry, unanimously last night to reject the capital regional we don't want your input." The government of B.C. district rezoning request for McLoughlin Point for the passed over responsibility to the federal government sewage plant there. Th is comes following considerable through an agreement giving them a fi nal say. Does the public engagement — four evenings of public consulta- minister think this is acceptable to reject those with ex- 2996 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

pertise that could be really useful in understanding such to say no to the pipeline project and has put all its eggs a proposal? in one basket of the NEB's review. To accept a review which has said to one-quarter of those who wanted to Hon. M. Polak: Th e National Energy Board has its be involved, "You're not allowed," that didn't even have own process. Th ey evaluate applications as they come in, appropriate routing for a pipeline — which could impact and I'm not going to pass judgment on what criteria they property values, could impact rivers, streams, etc. — and used. I know in our case we are interveners. We intend to that the company hasn't even decided on what its rout- be strong advocates in favour of British Columbia's fi ve ing is, I think is just wrong. It's not good public policy. conditions and certainly will make our voices known I understand I won't get an answer today from the quite loudly at the hearings. minister on whether or not she accepts this, but I guess that's the answer in itself, that the B.C. Liberal govern- S. Chandra Herbert: Th e B.C. government decided ment thinks it's okay to reject people from having their to give away B.C.'s ability to do its own environmental voices heard on a project that could directly impact them assessment and gave away B.C.'s ability, really, to do its and that it's okay to not have a route decided before you own community consultation to make sure that all the shut off the application process, eff ectively disenfranchis- residents of Burnaby, Surrey, Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows, ing people along the new route from having the chance Chilliwack, Abbotsford, Kamloops — wherever you want to have their voice heard. to go — would get a chance to have a say. Th at could hap- Th at is not how these processes should occur, in the pen within a B.C. process. Th e government gave away NDP's point of view, so we're disappointed that the gov- that right to the National Energy Board, saying they ernment has decided to accept that. would provide a fair process. Th e B.C. government, in a joint deputy ministers' dis- Does the minister have any concern that in the pro- cussion around the transportation of oil, describes the cess, residents were not even adequately informed of transportation of oil by rail as a viable alternative to de- what routing Kinder Morgan was considering before be- liver bitumen to the west coast. What conversations has ing asked to apply? the ministry had in terms of potential expanded export terminals for oil by rail? Hon. M. Polak: Th e member is correct that the feder- al government, the federal cabinet, will ultimately make Hon. M. Polak: I believe the member's referring to the a decision based on the recommendations from the B.C./Alberta Deputy Ministers Working Group. With re- National Energy Board process. In so doing, they will spect to that, the lead for us is the Ministry of Natural Gas have the authority and the obligation to evaluate, as part Development. I'm advised by my staff that they weren't of that decision, whether or not the consultation was involved in conversations with respect to the viability of adequate and whether or not the consultation met any rail as a transport mechanism. guidelines or expectations that they have. S. Chandra Herbert: Does the minister agree with her S. Chandra Herbert: I guess I'm trying to read through deputy minister who told the radio a while ago that oil the minister's answer. Is she eff ectively saying she has no spills are inevitable? concerns that the routing was not decided on before the application process was complete and that a quarter of Hon. M. Polak: I'm sure the member will recognize those that applied to participate were rejected? there's absolutely no activity involving the extraction of resources and the transportation of resources that Hon. M. Polak: Th e National Energy Board has made is without risk — absolutely no activity like that that is its decisions with respect to how it will conduct its evalu- without risk. Our job, of course, is fi rst of all to do our ation of the project. My main concern is ensuring that we utmost to prevent incidents from occurring and, in the are able to make the best and strongest case for British event that there is an incident, to be able to respond and Columbia's fi ve conditions. Th at's where I am putting my recover from that incident and hopefully mitigate any eff orts with respect to this fi le. adverse impacts on the environment. [1620] I don't think the deputy said anything that any of us don't recognize. It's a question of putting in place those S. Chandra Herbert: I would have thought the B.C. things that respond to the risk. But there is no activity on government would have wanted most British Columbians the land base or indeed on the water that is without risk. who had concerns around this, and ideas and suggestions, to be allowed to be involved. I would have thought the S. Chandra Herbert: I appreciated the deputy's can- government would have demanded that the routing be dour in the interview, and I appreciate the minister's re- decided before closing off the application process. sponse here. It is a real challenge, and that's why we need Th e B.C. government gave away its right to say yes or to be moving to greener and cleaner forms of transporta- Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2997

tion and energy, of course. emissions tremendously. [1625] Th e member may have noticed an opinion editorial I wonder if the minister could share when we will see piece about clean energy vehicles. When one starts to the government's plans to meet our next climate change think of the potential application of that in terms of fl eet reduction target in 2016. When will those plans be made purchases, you can quickly see that that is an area where public? When will we get a chance to see what the next there is great potential. We continue to look for those op- steps are? portunities as we're guided by the strategies that we've outlined in this document and in others. Hon. M. Polak: I know the member is well famil- iar with our 2008 climate action plan. We have imple- S. Chandra Herbert: It's interesting that the minister mented the actions outlined. We've been reporting out mentioned the fl eet vehicles and electric vehicles, be- on our progress. cause I've been getting quite a few e-mails from people As the member will note, the items that are outlined upset that the government has cancelled or ended its pro- in there, the actions, are ongoing, and we continue to gram of supporting people to purchase electric vehicles progress. We know that we will need to be undertak- themselves. If we're talking about one in ten fl eet vehicles, ing continued reductions in emissions if we are going to both within the government and in the private sector, meet the targets out in front of us. We've known, even in what other strategy will the government use, if they've the original document, that we would need to continue decided to cancel that program, to get us to that level? to press for new innovations and new initiatives as we go forward. Hon. M. Polak: First, just a brief history on the clean energy vehicle program. It was part of an overarching S. Chandra Herbert: I understand that the report — I clean transportation initiative that involved an invest- believe it's on 2012 — will be fi led this summer, I think. ment of $15.8 million. Th at went to not only the clean If the minister could provide a date or a rough timeline energy vehicle program but also to SCRAP-IT, to Carbon of when that report will be made available, that would Off set Aggregation Cooperative and the installing of be appreciated. charging infrastructure. Also, as we're now only two years away from 2016, the [1635] next reporting goal or the next period we have to have Th e charging infrastructure still continues. We haven't reductions by, it would be good to know what specifi c completed that project yet. But with respect to the clean new actions are being taken this year and next year be- energy vehicle program, initially the program was only fore 2016. supposed to run for a certain amount of time. At the end [1630] of that period, there was still funding available, so we ex- tended the program until such time as either the fund- Hon. M. Polak: Th e provincial inventory report usu- ing was exhausted or the March 31 deadline was hit. We ally comes out June/July, so we can anticipate that. With certainly did see the program as very successful, but of respect to moving forward and looking into the future, course, in a post-2008 world it's much more diffi cult to I know the member attended GLOBE and, hopefully, fi nd the resources. stopped by the B.C. pavilion. I hope he picked up a copy. We continue to look for other opportunities to re- A very important document, Growing Green Jobs, con- establish incentives for the purchase of clean energy nects not only with the jobs plan but also with ongoing vehicles. We certainly saw the program as very success- work in terms of climate action. Some of the important ful. In a balanced-budget environment, that means it be- priorities are set out in the broad areas of strengthening comes more diffi cult to fi nd that new funding, but we're our leadership and reducing our own emissions. hopeful that we will fi nd new initiatives, new ways, to We know also that it's very important for us to be pro- continue that incentive. moting our policies internationally, like the carbon tax, something that I have been working on directly, as it's S. Chandra Herbert: Th e government signed an agree- part of my mandate letter, and where we've seen suc- ment with Washington State, California and Oregon cess in terms of the accord signed at the Pacifi c Coast suggesting that 10 percent of fl eet purchases, both in gov- Collaborative, and then, of course, pursuing our LNG ernment and outside, would be electric. What percentage operations as the cleanest in the world. are we at today within B.C. for provincial and corporate Th e member will see in the document an outline that in terms of fl eet purchases? What specifi cally are those is guiding the development of new initiatives. We are al- opportunities that the government is going to embrace ways, through our work with the climate action secretar- to make sure we get there? iat, looking for new opportunities to engage in areas like transportation conversion. We know that, for example, Hon. M. Polak: Th at was, of course, a very important the transportation sector is one that impacts on GHG part of the accord that was signed. Th e member will know 2998 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

that the accord is actually quite comprehensive, covers low with a cap-and-trade system aft erwards for big busi- a number of diff erent areas. Th e baseline numbers, in ness so that they were also captured — those that were terms of where the fl eets are at with respect to the diff er- not captured under the carbon tax — arguing that we ent jurisdictions, are currently being developed. We don't would be able to cooperate, then, with California and a have that number here to off er you today. number of other jurisdictions. Has there been any more movement on the question of cap-and-trade, or are we S. Chandra Herbert: And the opportunities that the decided that that's not a government priority any longer? minister had discussed to get there? [1640] Hon. M. Polak: Well, the world has unfolded in a diff erent way than we would have anticipated when we Hon. M. Polak: I'm advised that staff are currently fi rst envisioned a cap-and-trade system following on the working together with staff in the other jurisdictions to revenue-neutral carbon tax. Nevertheless, we remain develop their plan with respect to what initiatives would involved with the Western Climate Initiative, and we're be behind achieving that target. hopeful that at some point the jurisdictions will come together and will be able to implement an eff ective cap- S. Chandra Herbert: Would it be fair to say that from, and-trade system in the end — but impossible at this I guess, when the government signed the agreement with point to say when they might get there. the other jurisdictions, staff have been heavily involved [1645] with the other jurisdictions to come up with solutions or some communications, or are we just starting now? S. Chandra Herbert: How are we doing in terms of climate change reduction goals? Does the minister be- Hon. M. Polak: Th e amount of collaboration varies lieve we're on target to meet our requirements for 2016? somewhat by topic or the amount of time that they are I understand that last summer when we had this discus- spending together and working on it, but we have had — sion, the minister felt fairly confi dent that we would meet and continue to have — a very active relationship at the the 2012 GHG reduction targets. staff level between those jurisdictions. It's very well de- I'm just curious. We're two years out. How are we do- veloped. Again, it depends on the topic how much time ing in terms of 2016? they have been spending working on it. It depends on the interest from the various jurisdictions as well. But a very Hon. M. Polak: We don't actually forecast where we active relationship at the staff level and one that's been think we will be. What we do is track the numbers as we ongoing for some time. go. Th e best and most accurate answer I can give to the member is that the information we have in front of us, S. Chandra Herbert: If I were to fi le a freedom-of- and that he's aware of, with respect to the interim tar- information request from the time that the document get in 2012 shows us that we are on track with where we was signed to three or four months aft erwards, I would would have hoped to be. expect to fi nd communications back and forth between staff ? S. Chandra Herbert: In addition to transit — or transportation, I guess I should say — our homes are Hon. M. Polak: Yes and, likely, results on a variety of oft en large greenhouse gas emitters, as well, when we diff erent working groups on a whole range of topics as burn gas for cooking or for heating. B.C. has been criti- well. cized by some for not having the highest energy code standards for building and also for insulation and those S. Chandra Herbert: We're going to have to follow this kinds of things. up, because I did fi le such a request and was told there I know that some countries have gone as far as decid- were no documents. I don't know who decided that there ing that passive house construction, for example, should were no documents. Maybe I can follow up with the min- be the requirement so that 90 percent of energy use will ister's assistant to fi gure out what's going on, or I'll have be eliminated — fossil fuel use in many countries, in par- to make a complaint. It was very specifi c what documents ticular, that don't have hydro. we were looking for — and were told by the freedom- What kind of conversation is the ministry involved of-information offi ce that there wasn't anything to fi nd. in around building codes and making sure we have the I had a similar problem with asking for documents greenest building code in Canada, if not the world? around the Kitimat Clean refi nery and then being told that there were no communications with Mr. Black about Hon. M. Polak: We certainly work with the Ministry that as well. It seems like there is a problem in that offi ce. of Natural Gas Development, the Minister Responsible Some of the arguments that the government made for Housing. Ultimately, that is their project, and they're when bringing in a carbon tax were that we would fol- the lead. Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 2999

S. Chandra Herbert: Th e ministry of housing and nat- ments. We're also looking for a way in which we might ural gas is the lead. I can understand that. But I would allow the smallest emitters, the communities with the hope that the minister is putting forward a view in terms smallest emissions, to use just a single number instead of where we need to be at with regard to the building of having to do the range of reporting. code, because I don't think we've got it right yet. We're also in the fi nal stage of discussions with the util- Certainly, from the environmental point of view, meet- ities — like Fortis, B.C. Hydro — so that they would have ing the minister's legally required reduction targets — the capacity to download their utility data directly for we're going to need to do a lot better on how we build those communities, and that would make it easier as well. our homes. Th e minister has talked about green jobs, and that's S. Chandra Herbert: Hello, hon. Chair. My goodness. part of her mandate. What are we doing to ensure we get Every time I look up, there's a new Chair. more green jobs, whether it's building retrofi ts or in new construction, through ensuring better building materi- Interjection. als and better building construction standards under the rubric, I guess, of the Minister of Environment? S. Chandra Herbert: And we stay the same, Minister. [1650] We stay the same. I'm curious what studies have been done to analyze the Hon. M. Polak: I agree with the member. I think there eff ects on the natural gas industry of extending the car- are many opportunities in the built environment. Th at's bon tax to include planned venting of natural gas into the another area where I think there's much that can be atmosphere. I understand that Alberta does this; B.C. so achieved in terms of greenhouse gas emission reductions. far has decided not to. Folks in the oil and gas sector said Whether it's in the building code area or whether it's in to me: "Well, we don't understand why. We do it across the development of green job opportunities, the climate the border in Alberta." Why don't we have a carbon tax action secretariat's role is one of providing strategic ad- or a cost on venting or fl aring of excess gases to try and vice and information, data, research. incentivize people to do it better and to do it less? Ultimately, though, this is the cross-government work that we do. Th e ministries themselves, though, that have Hon. M. Polak: While things like the carbon tax cer- primary responsibility — whether it's the Jobs Ministry tainly have tremendous impact on our ability to reach or Housing through Natural Gas Development — are our emissions targets — we know it has a very positive the ones who set their policies and determine their im- environmental benefi t — nevertheless, it is a tax, and plementation plans. Our role through climate action it's therefore the purview of the Minister of Finance. It secretariat is to provide that strategic advice and infor- would be the Minister of Finance who could respond mation support. with respect to any plans or any rationale for the ap- proach, just as it was the Minister of Finance who would S. Chandra Herbert: I understand that the climate ac- decide whether or not the carbon tax is frozen, which it tion charter is applied to large municipalities, small mu- is at this time. nicipalities, districts, towns, etc. In one case, a small town of 200 people, they were quite concerned that the costs of S. Chandra Herbert: Well, there goes a line of ques- all the implementation, of the reporting and everything tioning for another date. But certainly, I think many have were quite onerous for them on a small tax base. Th ey questioned why, in crowing about the leadership of the said that they didn't feel it was really useful. carbon tax…. I'm just trying to fi gure out what the ministry is do- In saying that it didn't hurt jobs, didn't hurt the com- ing currently, now, to ensure that climate action policies munity and was great for reducing climate emissions but are relevant and supported for smaller municipalities in then in the next sentence saying that we can't do anything rural B.C., so they, too, can reduce their climate change with it now because it will threaten jobs — when just hav- emissions and do so in an eff ective and economic manner. ing said it didn't threaten jobs…. People question how that works, particularly when it comes to something like [J. Sturdy in the chair.] venting — something that really is something we need [1655] to drive down, not continue to allow to go unchallenged. It's polluting the environment without a cost. Hon. M. Polak: We currently have 182 of 190 com- [1700] munities signed on to the climate action charter. It is, of When we get to the Pacific Carbon Trust, another course, voluntary. We'd certainly like to see every com- aspect…. I'm curious. What happened to the surplus? munity benefi t from it. Th ere was approximately a $30 million surplus in the What we have done as we've seen the challenges for Pacifi c Carbon Trust. Where is it going? Is the govern- small communities is streamlined the reporting require- ment going to use that to support our schools in jump- 3000 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

ing forward in reducing climate emissions in our schools? S. Chandra Herbert: We're moving quickly through Certainly, I think that would be a good place to put it, a bunch of things, and I've got a number of colleagues since it came from our schools and our health care fa- waiting here who are going to take us down many other cilities to begin with. diff erent paths very shortly. In terms of the proposed Surrey-Fraser docks, I'm Hon. M. Polak: I'll separate two diff erent things, one curious. A number of MLAs, municipalities and others being the mechanics of it. Technically, the surplus is still have raised concerns and requested that the minister with PCT, so it won't move out of there until we have step in and ensure Port Metro Vancouver has a fully in- fi nally completed the dissolution of it. Th at's the mech- dependent health impact assessment process. Th ey've anical end of it. raised concerns that if they don't get one, they don't know In terms of whether or not the money will be directed what they're going to do, and have raised suggestions of at a specifi c program area, that would be determined by things that could occur on Texada Island regarding en- the Minister of Finance. On the mechanics of it, it would vironmental impact assessments. go back to the CRF. Certainly, I'm supportive of the idea of doing a full Now, it's important to understand that out of the ap- comprehensive independent health assessment in collab- proximately $30 million — we don't have a fi nal number oration with the chief medical health offi cers. I'm curious yet because of where we're at in the process — $21 million if the minister has a point of view on this issue. of that was provided by government initially. Th e rest, in [1710] terms of deciding what happens going forward, would be in the purview of the Minister of Finance. Hon. M. Polak: With respect to the Fraser Surrey Docks proposal, it is located on federal land, and it's over- S. Chandra Herbert: I want to jump back just quickly. seen by Port Metro Vancouver. Th erefore, the process is When I asked about venting and fl aring, I asked specifi c- entirely theirs and outside of our jurisdiction. ally about any studies done to analyze the eff ects of ex- In terms of Texada, where we do have some jurisdic- tending the carbon tax to drive down venting emissions. tion, that would be managed primarily through their Surely the ministry has considered a range of options, mining permit. Where we would come into play is if of ways, to continue to lower greenhouse gas emissions there was any waste discharge. But there is no waste dis- within the province. Have they done any on the natural charge. Th erefore, our jurisdiction wouldn't be triggered gas industry, particularly also looking at fl aring? under the Environmental Management Act either.

Hon. M. Polak: I am advised that we have not con- S. Chandra Herbert: Well, I will wrap up with one ducted any studies with respect to the impact of a tax on more question on this section, and then I'll hand it over venting or fl aring. to some colleagues for their questions. We'll see how long they go. I may come back with even more. We're not here S. Chandra Herbert: All right, so back to Pacific quite all week. We're having so much fun. Carbon Trust. I understand that $21 million, the govern- Anyways, the question is in terms of the Pacifi c Coast ment said, was provided and that the total $30 million Collaborative. Th ere are a range of things that the gov- would go back to the Minister of Finance. Is the minister ernment has agreed to do — some of them very easy to considering advocating for use of that money to reduce understand, some of them I'm not sure what actions are climate change emissions? going to be taken. Th ere are, I guess, a range of points [1705] from whether or not it is supporting high-speed rail to leading the way to net zero buildings. Hon. M. Polak: Th e member will not be surprised to I'm curious if maybe the minister, rather than taking hear me say that as Minister of Environment I'm always half an hour to go through each point here and tell me advocating for as much money as possible to be attached exactly what the ministry is doing on each point, would to initiatives that will improve the results we have, not commit to providing a document just with a background only on the climate action front but on many other areas on what each point will mean for British Columbia. of the environment. I think the evidence of that is clear Certainly, pushing for high-speed rail is exciting. in that we've seen the expansion of the carbon-neutral We've got some real challenges with the infrastructure we capital program. We certainly have other initiatives in currently have, to do that. Th ose of us who like to travel mind. Every ministry does. south now and then could certainly see that as an option I always will be advocating with the Minister of instead of fl ying or busing. Finance to put greater emphasis, and of course, that's If she could go through each section and give us an the great balancing act he has between all of our minis- answer around what we're going to do. Some have criti- tries. But rest assured, that's always what the Minister of cized this, saying: "B.C. can sign on to it because it doesn't Environment does. have any binding targets and really not much that B.C. Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 3001

has to do out of it." It would be helpful to get that infor- stepped forward with a plan for their members' products. mation. If the minister could confi rm that her staff will However, the door remains open. If there was another do that for me. organization, a like-minded industry sector, they would also have the opportunity to do that. Hon. M. Polak: Happy to confi rm that. Upon receiv- With respect to the oversight of MMBC, the board ing that, if the member would like, we can certainly have that is in place now is an interim board. Th ey have just staff sit down for a briefi ng and maybe talk about some of now announced the advisory council that will be work- the next steps that they're undertaking and update with ing with them. It has representation from the British respect to the development. But no, absolutely happy to Columbia Chamber of Commerce, the Union of B.C. share on that. Municipalities, the waste industry, food processors, the Landscape and Nursery Association, B.C. Dairy Council L. Popham: My topic is going to be MMBC. I'm just and the Recycling Council. wondering if any other staff needs to be there, or are we Th ey will transition, then, into a 15-member board, good to go? which will be selected across industry groups. In terms of who is involved in operating the organization, the large Interjection. players are the ones with the largest fi nancial contribu- tion to the operations of MMBC, and therefore it stands L. Popham: Good to go? Great. to reason that they would have a role to play in operat- I'm going to start with the, kind of, big-picture fi nan- ing the organization. cial questions and how it fi ts into the budget. How many Again, this is an organization that came together vol- equivalent FTEs work on matters related to MMBC in untarily. Th ey produced a plan as per the regulations the ministry? and put it forward for to us review, and eventually we [1715] approved it. Th ey are by no means the only ones with an opportunity to do that. Hon. M. Polak: We're estimating it's about three FTEs. Now, it won't remain so. As we've implemented other re- L. Popham: Th ank you for that answer. cycling programs, for example, you have more staff work- Around the advisory group, these advisers, as far as I ing on a project initially. Th en, as implementation takes understand, actually don't hold any power, so the board place, they would move around to support other recyc- itself that's in place, the three-person board, is actually ling initiatives. in charge of the advisory board. Now, the ministry's own Recycling Regulation Guide, L. Popham: How much money is budgeted for MMBC 2012, recommends on page 5 that multi-stakeholder rep- compliance and review? resentation on the board of directors of the agency — such as consumer groups, environmental non-government or- Hon. M. Polak: There's no specific line item for ganizations, local governments, etc. — should be part of MMBC. We would manage compliance and enforce- the board that's in place. ment there along with all the other extended producer Th is program is going in on May 19. If this is an inter- responsibility programs that we have. im board, I don't think anybody understood that at this point. My question to the minister is: at what point will L. Popham: Next I'd like to examine briefl y the over- the permanent board be put in place? We'll start there. sight provisions of MMBC. Th is is an organization that [1725] the minister has empowered to run residential recycling in B.C. as per MMBC's approved packaging and printed Hon. M. Polak: I should just go back to the previous paper stewardship plan. question, because I neglected one additional piece of in- My question: is the minister concerned that the non- formation. We actually have another plan that has been profi t society MMBC is controlled by just three direc- submitted to us from the brewers. It hasn't been approved tors, two of whom do not reside in B.C. and are in fact yet, but that is another plan that we will be looking at. vice-presidents of large corporations centred outside the I should say that with respect to stakeholders who met province? with us to express concerns around this, the chamber and [1720] CFIB were both well aware that this is an interim board and that the transition will be made to a 15-member Hon. M. Polak: I'll try not to be too lengthy in the an- board. Th at board will have representation from a broad swer and hit on all of the items. range of sectors, understanding that the packaging and MMBC does not and will not run recycling in B.C. printed paper area is quite a diverse one. It will also have Th ey are responsible for their members' products. Th ey members representing a variety of skill sets. are, thus far, the only organization of industry that has It's a large program. It will need to integrate with what 3002 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014 will happen nationwide as part of the national planning Hon. M. Polak: Yes, although, not having the letter that environment ministers are doing, leading to ex- in front of me, the one caveat I would put to that is that tended producer responsibility for packaging and printed I'm not immediately aware of anything that may have paper across all of the provinces. Th ey will need a fairly changed as a result of our agreement, for example, be- good variety of skill sets there. tween MMBC and small business and government with I anticipate that the 15-member board will be formed respect to the reg changes around requirements for the up not long aft er the May 19 implementation date. exemption for small business and low-volume producers. Just not having the letter in front of me, I wouldn't want L. Popham: Can the minister tell me where it states, to swear up and down that that isn't in there somewhere. for the record, that this is an interim board? L. Popham: Well, the letter includes a third-party as- Hon. M. Polak: It has been in MMBC's published ma- surance implementation schedule, and the fi rst item on terials. It's obviously part of their plan, so it's not in our that schedule is an audit report due for July 2013. I'm documentation. wondering if this was done.

L. Popham: Th ere's also a requirement for a govern- Hon. M. Polak: My staff have advised that they're not ment rep to be on the board of MMBC. Is this going to certain, so they will go back and will come back with an be happening? answer for you. In terms of going forward, they are re- quired to annually produce audited fi nancial statements Hon. M. Polak: Notwithstanding the guidelines, when as their operations ramp up. We certainly expect that all we look at the other 25 extended producer responsibil- of that will be done accordingly. ity programs, I am advised that we don't have represen- tation on those. L. Popham: MMBC was incorporated on May 4, 2011, as an agency under the recycling regulations. My ques- [D. Plecas in the chair.] tion is: were independent third-party audits done for the fi rst year of operation, 2011-2012? When we get to the MMBC 15-member permanent [1735] board, we'll consider whether or not it would be appro- priate and eff ective for us to be on that board — recog- Hon. M. Polak: Up until the point that their plan was nizing, of course, that this is not an agency of government approved and they were an approved steward, their re- and that, in fact, we end up being the regulator of MMBC, porting requirement would have been the same as any as we do of other stewardship programs. Th erefore, we other not-for-profi t under the Society Act. But in terms want to maintain an appropriate role. of operationally, they would be responsible under the [1730] regulation to us once their plan was approved. I think it's safe to say that as our policies and programs around EPR have evolved, it's likely that in terms of the L. Popham: I'm not quite sure if that means it was development of the guidelines, much has evolved that done or it wasn't or the minister might be looking into it. was not anticipated, including the success of EPR pro- grams, to the extent that we have 25 of them operating Interjection. in B.C. right now. L. Popham: Th ank you. So MMBC wouldn't have re- G. Holman: Mr. Chair, I'd like to take this opportun- ported to the minister at that point. ity to withdraw an earlier comment that I had made in It's very diffi cult to fi nd if there was an audit done at a private conversation which was apparently picked up all. I'm actually wondering if one was done in the second on the mikes. It was unparliamentary language, and I year, 2012-2013. And are they being required to do one apologize for that. in their third year, from 2013 to 2014? Th is is the reason why I'm asking if MMBC will even L. Popham: I'm going to move to MMBC's steward- be obligated to provide third-party audited financial ship plan. My question: is the April 8, 2013, update the statements at all. On page 29 of the PPP stewardship most recent version? plan it states that MMBC will not be obligated to provide third-party audited fi nancial statements. Is this correct? Hon. M. Polak: Yes. Hon. M. Polak: In terms of requirements, if they were L. Popham: Do the requirements of the April 15, 2013, charging an eco-fee to the public, for example, which approval letter for this plan from David Lawes of the en- some stewards do, then they would be required to pro- vironmental stewardship branch remain in eff ect? vide third-party audited fi nancial statements. So they are Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 3003

not required to. Th ey have said that they will voluntar- elected offi cials who are duly elected to make decisions ily be providing audited fi nancial statements once they around how they expend their tax money. As with any are in operation. other initiative of government that saves municipalities money, or any other operation that might impact on their L. Popham: Th ank you for that answer. revenues in a positive way, it's up to local governments Just as a comment. It seems that we're changing our who are elected by their communities to make the deci- provincial recycling program completely on May 19 — sion as to how they use that money. residential recycling program. I would think that the minister would be interested in an audit process just to L. Popham: If MMBC is not required to disclose a see how things are going, since there are a lot of changes fi nancial audit — if that's voluntary, and they decide that are going to be happening and a lot of businesses that they're not going to do that — how do we know, in fact, are going to be in turmoil. It would be nice to see how that it's a non-profi t society? How do we know if MMBC things are looking fi nancially for MMBC. is making money off this program? We'll move on to consumers and how they'll be aff ect- ed by MMBC. How many municipalities have provided Hon. M. Polak: As a not-for-profi t they are governed written assurances to the minister that they will no longer by the Society Act, as any other not-for-profi t would be. be collecting taxes for recycling costs from residents once While we have responsibilities to regulate from the stand- MMBC begins to pay for those services? point of performance of the program, on the fi nancial [1740] side of it, while they have said that they will voluntarily provide those audited statements, nevertheless the re- Hon. M. Polak: First, back to the previous question. quirement for them to meet a not-for-profi t standard is MMBC is required to report on the program perform- not ours. Th at is under the Society Act. I think the CRA ance. It's the fi nancials that they are voluntarily providing would probably have something to say about it. audited statements for. In terms of the program perform- ance and the requirements that are outlined with respect L. Popham: What eff orts have been taken to stop the to their plan, they do have to report to us about that. development of a monopoly with MMBC in place? With respect to the municipalities, it will be their choice as to how they handle the savings that they will Hon. M. Polak: Th e regulation requires industry to receive. In some cases, like Nanaimo, they have already be responsible for the disposal of their packaging and publicly committed to return that money to the taxpay- printed paper. It is up to industry how they would like to er. In other cases we see municipalities making choices organize themselves to do that. Any industry group can to invest in further eff orts around managing their solid form. MMBC, thus far, has been the one that has come waste. I know of one community that has committed to forward with a comprehensive plan. I have mentioned, utilizing the funds to develop and expand their organic as well, that the brewers have come forward with a plan waste systems in their community to ensure that they're that they're seeking to have approved. able to pick up green waste, which they currently aren't Any part of the industry could come forward with their able to do. own plan. MMBC is the one that we're discussing today, It will be up to local governments to decide what they but it certainly is not a monopoly. do with that savings, as it would be with any other sav- ings that a local government accrued. L. Popham: MMBC has been given monopoly-like powers, and we're already seeing a signifi cant decrease in L. Popham: In setting up the PPP process, did the sector competition. For example, three major recycling minister take any steps to ensure that consumers are fi rms have now combined to create one large corpora- not gouged and obligated to essentially pay twice, once tion, and this corporation has won an exclusive contract MMBC goes into eff ect? with MMBC. Th at's Green by Nature. I think it's actually happening. Hon. M. Polak: Yes, by providing savings to local gov- [1745] ernments, which is where those taxpayers currently pay What we see is that there is going to be some collat- for the system. eral damage within our business community in British Columbia. For example, an article that came out today L. Popham: Is it not true that the minister could have was around a plastics recycling plant that's going to close required MMBC to include such a provision in the con- down, and 30 employees are going to be gone, because tract it signed with municipalities? they're now losing their access to the plastics that they depend on to make lawn furniture and plastic-wood Hon. M. Polak: MMBC would have no authority to products. include something like that in their contract. Th ese are Th ey collect nearly 700,000 kilograms of plastic, and 3004 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

that is now going to MMBC, so they're closing down their Th e impact on businesses that produce PPP for resi- shop. Th at's just one around B.C. So it does have an eff ect. dential — I'd like to know what work has been done to I'm wondering if the minister is taking steps to make sure assess the cost of the impact on businesses in B.C. Th is that these businesses can continue. is a national program. We're trying to align ourselves na- tionally, but what about the actual businesses in British Hon. M. Polak: Certainly, when diff erent businesses Columbia? What is the loss that businesses will take be- take over diff erent responsibilities, things change, and cause of MMBC? Has there been a study on that? not all of those are going to be easy changes. Nevertheless, if we are going to ask industry, business- Hon. M. Polak: Here's where we have to remember es, to pay for their packaging and printed paper and, in what area the ministry has responsible for and what area turn, if municipalities make an agreement with MMBC industry has responsibility for. If we look across the other to deliver the service, of course MMBC is going to go out 25 extended producer responsibility programs, each in- to tender for people to bid for that contract. Th at's exactly dustry has chosen a diff erent approach. When it comes what they did. Of course, in a bidding process, it is nat- to packaging and printed paper, our regulation includes ural that someone will win the bid and someone else will packaging and printed paper in the extended producer not. Th at is going to have an impact, no question. responsibility framework. However, there are other changes that come with that. We did not determine how industry would discharge While there will be some who are no longer providing the their responsibilities. It was open to them. MMBC has services they did, there will also be new investment. With come forward with one plan. Another organization could the new post-collection system, there will be a $32 mil- come forward with a diff erent plan, and MMBC could lion investment in infrastructure that includes two new have come forward with a diff erent plan. Th e point of ex- facilities and will employ almost 600 people. tended producer responsibility, and the point of our regu- Yes, it is changing. Th ere are certainly impacts. But one lation, is that we don't tell industry how best they should cannot expect to ask industry and businesses to pay for handle their business. Industry decides that, and it was the service and not at the same time allow them to make industry that came forward with this plan. the choices as to who they would be contracting with. L. Popham: Well, it seems like industry is telling us L. Popham: It seems like the recycling businesses how to run our province. around the province…. Especially in rural B.C. it's basic- I guess my next question in particular is around the ally tough luck for those companies. newspaper industry. Th ey've calculated that MMBC will I'll move on to extended producer responsibility. What cost upwards of $10 million a year, at minimum, leading data or research did the minister rely on when conclud- to job losses of 300 to 500 jobs. What steps were taken to ing that EPR would create meaningful downward pres- ensure EPR change was brought in gradually and with an sure on packaging? eye to the business reality of businesses like small com- munity newspapers? I hope the minister can agree that if Hon. M. Polak: I can't point to any B.C.-specifi c re- we lose small community newspapers, we lose something search. What I can point to is the national approach to ex- that's very important in this province. tended producer responsibility for packaging and printed paper using the price signal, which is what governs the Hon. M. Polak: First, with respect to small commun- approach that businesses take to the market. If it is more ity newspapers, if the newspaper is…. Well, I'm general- expensive for you to produce packaging, you have a fi - izing, but for small community newspapers that are not nancial incentive, therefore, to reduce your packaging. part of a chain, depending on their size, chances are they In any case, what we've heard from consumers is that would not be captured under the regulation, now that we they believe that those who are producing the packaging have in place the small business exemptions as well as the ought to be the ones paying for disposing of it — not low-volume producer fl at rate. Th at's in terms of small them through their property tax bill. As I've said before, community newspapers. though, this is part of a national approach that will extend In terms of those that are part of larger organizations, to all provinces, and it's something that we have agreed the Canadian Newspaper Association has been involved to across all provinces in Ministries of Environment and in this and aware of this since prior to the development together with the federal Environment Minister. of the regulation in 2011, so they've been well aware of this all the way along. L. Popham: I think everybody can agree that the Th ere is no requirement that they join MMBC. Th ey people that are creating the packaging should pay for it, may, in fact, wish to join together all their colleagues but I think there's also an obvious understanding that under their newspaper sector and form their own stew- that cost will be passed down to the consumer. ardship group. Th at's open to them to do that, and I've [1750] said that publicly as well. Th ere's no requirement for Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 3005

them to join MMBC. Th ey can do their own thing if they are, of course, all the diff erent contractors who are also wish. Th is, certainly, was no surprise to them. Th ey've involved in various ways throughout the province. been involved from the very beginning, since before the regulations were brought in place. K. Conroy: We're going to move now to the Lemon Creek spill that happened last July 26. Th e minister is well L. Popham: Well, it's certainly a fact that the Black aware of this spill, so I don't need to really go into the Press will be aff ected. In fact, the Canadian Newspaper gory details. It's nine months later, and residents of the Association has said that this policy will bring the news- Slocan Valley are still feeling the aft ermath of the spill. I paper industry to its knees in British Columbia. just wanted to ask the minister if it is possible that she Finally, my last question is…. I'd like to know how has any kind of a timeline for when aff ected residents are many municipalities have signed on to MMBC. I believe going to fi nally receive some sort of compensation for the it's less than half the municipalities in British Columbia losses that they have faced. that have done so. [1755] Hon. M. Polak: Unfortunately, and I think the mem- I'll end on a statement that with only half, less than half, ber is aware of this, there's a lawsuit now with respect to of the municipalities signing on and with businesses with a potential class action. As a result, it's impossible for me many, many questions, I think that the appropriate thing to predict when all of that will be resolved. I think, sadly, to do would be to delay the implementation of MMBC. I it probably will take a signifi cant amount of time, but that think that's fair. I think the minister should be able to see is the situation that we're faced with at this point. that's fair. I think the minister is reasonable. My request today is: will the minister please delay the implementa- K. Conroy: I recognize that there is a lawsuit, and I tion of MMBC until this is sorted out? also recognize that people have waited a long time. Now what's happening is that the company who owned the Hon. M. Polak: Currently 86 communities have trucks and the drivers themselves and the diff erent min- signed on for MMBC, starting the program on May 19. istries that are involved are all manoeuvring with each Th ere are also 170 service providers who have reached other to see who is ultimately responsible. an agreement with MMBC to provide recycling services [1800] in those 86. Th e signifi cance of this is that the 86 com- What ends up happening is that the people of the val- munities represent 73 percent of B.C. residents. Th ese ley are the ones that are suff ering. It's not the ministries. are communities that have already budgeted for the sav- It's not the government. It's not the companies that are ings that they are going to experience. Any delay in im- involved. Th ey're all fi ghting with each other over who plementation for those communities would mean a loss has to pay. of those savings. I think it would be appropriate for the ministry to con- In the case of the CRD, that's $4.8 million; Nanaimo, sider some kind of compensation for the victims and then $917,000; Williams Lake, $132,000; Penticton, $330,000; for the ministry, the government, to fi ght with the com- Richmond, $1.5 million. Delay in implementation would pany to determine before the courts who actually should certainly have a very negative eff ect on those munici- be doing the compensation for the people that are af- palities. It would also have a negative eff ect on munici- fected. It might be a novel concept, but it might be, also, palities, local governments, where residents are going something the minister would like to think on if they're to receive curbside recycling for the fi rst time, such as really going to be eff ective in saying that they can protect Terrace, Smithers, 108 Mile House, Nakusp and Kaslo. the coast of British Columbia from oil spills. I have to say I think there's a natural contradiction in If we can't even deal with compensation for a small expressing concern that not all municipalities will be in- area in our province — considerable compensation to volved right from the beginning and, at the same time, the people involved but not a huge amount of compen- arguing for some kind of a phased-in approach. sation if you think what would happen if compensation Essentially, when municipalities expressed to us the needed to be given out up and down the coast of British concern about the swift ness with which this was mov- Columbia…. How can we safely say we're going to deal ing, we announced that we would provide for them an with that if we can't even deal with this in Lemon Creek? extension in the negotiations. The understanding, of I wonder how the minister feels about this. Is this course, was that if they weren't in the program before something that they will even consider? It's been nine the deadline, they wouldn't be able to meet the May 19 months now, and some people lost their livelihoods. implementation date. Eff ectively, that results in a phas- People are still aff ected healthwise, and there's been ab- ing in of the program. solutely not any compensation for any of these residents. So with respect to the desire to delay or take a diff erent approach, we have obligations to the municipalities, not Hon. M. Polak: In terms of the authority of the only in cost savings but also in expected services. Th ere Ministry of Environment, we actually would not have 3006 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, April 8, 2014

the authority nor the ability to do anything more than dinarily happen in a circumstance where there was no recoup our reasonable response and cleanup costs. We baseline data is that they would compare like habitats. don't have the authority or the ability to collect in terms Th ey would compare similar environments and use that of compensation or, in fact, to provide compensation. It's as their baseline information. not within our authority to do so. Generally speaking, decisions about compensation K. Conroy: In fact, there is baseline data. Th e Slocan would rest with some combination of the Ministry of Streamkeepers have been keeping data on the Slocan Finance and the Ministry of Justice and Attorney General. River and Lemon Creek for, I think, 25 years, 20 years — On the specifi cs, though, I really have to be careful how for years. Th ey off ered the relevant data to SNC-Lavalin. far I comment just because of the lawsuit. But to the ques- It was turned down. tion as to the general idea of compensation, that would I'm wondering if the ministry would ensure that the not be one that we have either the authority or the abil- baseline data was utilized to be able to determine the true ity to respond to. eff ects of the spill, because it's there. Th e data's there. It's [1805] been off ered. I understand it's been off ered to the min- istry as well as SNC-Lavalin, and that off er hasn't been K. Conroy: I believe maybe the minister could make a accepted. It is there, it's available, and I'm asking the min- new rule, because I'm sure the minister does talk to those istry to please utilize what's there. other ministers. I know they meet at least once a week. [1810] Th ere could be some way of endeavouring to ensure that this might happen in the future. Hon. M. Polak: I, of course, can't speak for SNC- I'm just going to move into something a little more Lavalin, but staff would certainly welcome the data from specifi c. People are still seeing results of the spill. Th ere the streamkeepers. was always the issue that the Executive Flight Centre, the company involved in the spill, had hired SNC-Lavalin to K. Conroy: I think, because the ministry has approved conduct the environmental assessment, to determine the SNC-Lavalin's reports, there should be some input into impact. Th ere was concern that there could potentially be how those reports are carried out. I'm glad to hear that confl ict of interest for a company to pay SNC-Lavalin to the ministry will potentially carry through on that. determine what the environmental impact was. Th ey're In the wake of the Lemon Creek spill, I'm wonder- evaluating the environmental impact for the company ing if the minister will commit to some kind of enforce- that's paying them — the company that's created the spill, ment of jet fuel storage and transportation standards in and the company that sat in a public meeting and said remote rural areas. that they would guarantee they would clean up the mess. I'm wondering if the minister believes there is a con- Hon. M. Polak: There's a division of jurisdictions fl ict of interest in this evaluation. and accountabilities here with respect to the storage of Hon. M. Polak: I apologize to the member. Even with hazardous materials. We do have regulations under the respect to items like that, I'm restricted in terms of my Ministry of Environment, and they're fairly extensive. comments because of what's before the courts. When it comes to the transportation of hazardous materi- als in trucks, for example, that is solely the responsibility K. Conroy: Th e ministry did approve SNC-Lavalin's of the federal ministry of transportation. Th ey govern environmental monitoring plan. Can the minister tell the movement of hazardous goods across the country. us if the company plans to compare pre- and post-spill fi sh populations? K. Conroy: Then, this ministry would only have jurisdiction over the storage of jet fuel, not the actual Hon. M. Polak: We don't have the specifi c information transportation. It's my understanding…. We have some with respect to fi sh populations. I imagine that would be fabulous heli-skiing operations in our region, and there's part of it, but staff will make certain of their information jet fuel that's stored. I'm wondering if there are any and provide that to the member. guidelines around that. People in the region have raised concerns when they're out in the rural parts of the com- K. Conroy: Th en I'm not sure if the staff that are avail- munity and the region, out in the mountains, and they able can answer this either. Does the minister believe that see large containers of jet fuel being stored. SNC-Lavalin can accurately monitor the fi sh populations without baseline data? Hon. M. Polak: Th e storage of hazardous material is governed under the hazardous waste regulation. We can Hon. M. Polak: I'm advised by my staff , whom I'll provide you with the regulation and with any guidelines mention has a biology background, that what would or- that are attached. Tuesday, April 8, 2014 British Columbia Debates 3007

K. Conroy: I'm sure that would be monitored by staff to remain an internal debrief. When the legal wranglings in the region. I just need a nod. Th e storage would be are over, we'll be able to extend that more broadly, in- monitored by staff in the region? Okay, that's good. volve the community. Th at is always our intent whenever [1815] there's an incident like this — to debrief, learn from it. I know that the minister has met with the folks from We certainly would be happy to be continuing to work the regional district. Walter Popoff is the area director for more broadly with UBCM in terms of ensuring that all the area and worked really hard on this spill — did a lot of communities have well-established protocols and also work in making sure that people were working together. that we're able to coordinate response as a best practice One of the things that the spill did, I think, for the people throughout the province in the case of any incident. of the Slocan Valley and the entire region was it really accented the need for the province to have some kind of Th e Chair: Member for Kootenay West, noting the spill response protocol — for rural areas especially. hour, perhaps this could be your last question. Th e delay in how long it took to get help to the region, the need for proper containment and where it should be K. Conroy: I thank the Chair for the indulgence. It will contained — just letting people know — was a bit of a be my last question. disaster for the people in the region. Th e evacuation was I want to thank the minister for that response. My only a real issue for people, and the minister knows this. She's concern is that it's been nine months. We know how the talked to the folks at the regional district. I know that the courts work and the system, with all due respect to the regional district director, Walter Popoff , has talked to courts and the lawyers in the room. I worry that it could UBCM about spill protocol. take a long time. They're also hoping that the minister, through the Th ese responses are being developed. Th ere's protocol ministry, will commit to some kind of spill protocol so for how agencies will communicate with each other. It's that if something like this ever does happen again — and been discussed with the regional districts as well as the hopefully for people in this province, it doesn't — there UBCM. I'm hoping that the ministry, even though there is protocol in place so that things can be dealt with in a is a court case hanging over their heads, can still take the much more effi cient manner. People can get the help they opportunity to look at these responses and to respect the need quickly, the containment can happen quickly, the work that's gone into it. cleanup can happen quickly, and there's protocol so that It has been nine months. I think that the people of the people know who's responsible for what. valley have been very patient and will continue to voice I think this spill has been a prime example of what their concerns. So I thank the minister for that. hasn't worked. I'm hoping that the ministry has learned from this and will be willing to put protocol in place so Hon. M. Polak: I move that the committee rise, report that if it ever happens again, there is that protocol there. progress and seek leave to sit again.

Hon. M. Polak: After any incident like this we go Motion approved. through fairly extensive debriefi ng to determine if there are things that we can improve. At this stage that has had Th e committee rose at 6:19 p.m.

Hansard Reporting Services

Director Robert Sutherland

Manager of Reporting Services Christine Fedoruk

Publishing Supervisor Laurel Bernard

Editorial Team Leaders Janet Brazier, Karol Morris, Robyn Swanson, Glenn Wigmore

Technical Operations Offi cers Pamela Holmes, Emily Jacques, Dan Kerr

Indexers Shannon Ash, Julie McClung, Robin Rohrmoser

Researchers Jaime Apolonio, Richard Baer, David Mattison

Editors Kim Christie, Deirdre Gotto, Jane Grainger, Betsy Gray, Iris Gray, Linda Guy, Barb Horricks, Bill Hrick, Paula Lee, Donna McCloskey, Bob McIntosh, Anne Maclean, Jill Milkert, Lind Miller, Lou Mitchell, Erik Pedersen, Janet Pink, Amy Reiswig, Heather Warren, Arlene Wells, Anita Willis

Published by British Columbia Hansard Services, and printed under the authority of the Speaker.

Printing Agent Crown Publications, Queen's Printer for British Columbia PO Box 9452 Stn Prov Govt, Victoria, B.C. V8W 9V7 www.crownpub.bc.ca

Daily and annual Hansard subscription information is available from Crown Publications.

www.leg.bc.ca

Access to on-line versions of the offi cial report of debates (Hansard) and webcasts of proceedings is available on the Internet. Chamber debates are broadcast on television.