Tird Session, 41st Parliament

OFFICIAL REPORT OF DEBATES (HANSARD)

Wednesday, October 24, 2018 Afernoon Sitting Issue No. 167

THE HONOURABLE DARRYL PLECAS, SPEAKER

ISSN 1499-2175 PROVINCE OF (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871)

LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR Her Honour the Honourable Janet Austin, OBC

Third Session, 41st Parliament

SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Darryl Plecas

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Premier and President of the Executive Council ...... Hon. Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance...... Hon. Carole James Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Training...... Hon. Melanie Mark Minister of Agriculture...... Hon. Attorney General...... Hon. David Eby, QC Minister of Children and Family Development ...... Hon. Katrine Conroy Minister of State for Child Care...... Hon. Katrina Chen Minister of Citizens’ Services...... Hon. Jinny Sims Minister of Education ...... Hon. Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources ...... Hon. Michelle Mungall Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy...... Hon. George Heyman Minister of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development ...... Hon. Doug Donaldson Minister of Health ...... Hon. Adrian Dix Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation ...... Hon. Scott Fraser Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology...... Hon. Bruce Ralston Minister of State for Trade...... Hon. George Chow Minister of Labour ...... Hon. Harry Bains Minister of Mental Health and Addictions...... Hon. Judy Darcy Minister of Municipal Afairs and Housing...... Hon. Selina Robinson Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General ...... Hon. Mike Farnworth Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction...... Hon. Shane Simpson Minister of Tourism, Arts and Culture...... Hon. Lisa Beare Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure...... Hon. Claire Trevena

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Leader of the Ofcial Opposition...... Andrew Wilkinson, QC Leader of the Tird Party ...... Dr. Deputy Speaker...... Raj Chouhan Assistant Deputy Speaker...... Linda Reid Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole ...... Spencer Chandra Herbert Clerk of the Legislative Assembly ...... Craig James Deputy Clerk and Clerk of Committees...... Kate Ryan-Lloyd Clerk Assistant — Committees and Interparliamentary Relations ...... Susan Sourial Sessional Law Clerk...... Loredana Catalli-Sonier, QC Sergeant-at-Arms ...... Gary Lenz ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING Ashton, Dan (BC Liberal) ...... Penticton Abbotsford-Mission ...... Simon Gibson Bains, Hon. Harry (NDP)...... Surrey-Newton Abbotsford South ...... Hon. Darryl Plecas Barnett, Donna (BC Liberal) ...... Cariboo-Chilcotin Abbotsford West ...... Michael de Jong, QC Beare, Hon. Lisa (NDP)...... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Boundary-Similkameen...... Linda Larson Begg, Garry (NDP) ...... Surrey-Guildford Burnaby–Deer Lake ...... Anne Kang Bernier, Mike (BC Liberal) ...... Peace River South Burnaby-Edmonds ...... Raj Chouhan Bond, Shirley (BC Liberal)...... Prince George–Valemount Burnaby-Lougheed...... Hon. Katrina Chen Brar, Jagrup (NDP)...... Surrey-Fleetwood Burnaby North...... Janet Routledge Cadieux, Stephanie (BC Liberal)...... Surrey South Cariboo-Chilcotin...... Donna Barnett Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP) ...... Vancouver–West End Cariboo North ...... Coralee Oakes Chen, Hon. Katrina (NDP)...... Burnaby-Lougheed Chilliwack...... John Martin Chouhan, Raj (NDP) ...... Burnaby-Edmonds Chilliwack-Kent...... Laurie Troness Chow, Hon. George (NDP)...... Vancouver-Fraserview Columbia River–Revelstoke...... Doug Clovechok Clovechok, Doug (BC Liberal) ...... Columbia River–Revelstoke Coquitlam–Burke Mountain...... Joan Isaacs Coleman, Rich (BC Liberal) ...... Langley East Coquitlam-Maillardville...... Hon. Selina Robinson Conroy, Hon. Katrine (NDP)...... Kootenay West Courtenay-Comox ...... Ronna-Rae Leonard Darcy, Hon. Judy (NDP) ...... New Westminster Cowichan Valley ...... Davies, Dan (BC Liberal) ...... Peace River North Delta North ...... Ravi Kahlon de Jong, Michael, QC (BC Liberal) ...... Abbotsford West Delta South...... Ian Paton Dean, Mitzi (NDP)...... Esquimalt-Metchosin Esquimalt-Metchosin...... Mitzi Dean D’Eith, Bob (NDP)...... Maple Ridge–Mission Fraser-Nicola...... Jackie Tegart Dix, Hon. Adrian (NDP)...... Vancouver-Kingsway Kamloops–North Tompson...... Peter Milobar Donaldson, Hon. Doug (NDP)...... Stikine Kamloops–South Tompson ...... Todd Stone Eby, Hon. David, QC (NDP)...... Vancouver–Point Grey Kelowna–Lake Country...... Norm Letnick Elmore, Mable (NDP)...... Vancouver-Kensington Kelowna-Mission...... Steve Tomson Farnworth, Hon. Mike (NDP)...... Port Coquitlam Kelowna West...... Ben Stewart Fleming, Hon. Rob (NDP)...... Victoria–Swan Lake Kootenay East ...... Tom Shypitka Foster, Eric (BC Liberal)...... Vernon-Monashee Kootenay West ...... Hon. Katrine Conroy Fraser, Hon. Scott (NDP) ...... Mid Island–Pacifc Rim Langford–Juan de Fuca...... Hon. John Horgan Furstenau, Sonia (BC Green Party) ...... Cowichan Valley Langley...... Mary Polak Gibson, Simon (BC Liberal) ...... Abbotsford-Mission Langley East ...... Rich Coleman Glumac, Rick (NDP)...... Port Moody–Coquitlam Maple Ridge–Mission ...... Bob D’Eith Heyman, Hon. George (NDP)...... Vancouver-Fairview Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows ...... Hon. Lisa Beare Horgan, Hon. John (NDP) ...... Langford–Juan de Fuca Mid Island–Pacifc Rim ...... Hon. Scott Fraser Hunt, Marvin (BC Liberal) ...... Surrey-Cloverdale Nanaimo ...... Leonard Eugene Krog Isaacs, Joan (BC Liberal) ...... Coquitlam–Burke Mountain Nanaimo–North Cowichan...... Doug Routley James, Hon. Carole (NDP)...... Victoria–Beacon Hill Nechako Lakes ...... John Rustad Johal, Jas (BC Liberal)...... Richmond-Queensborough Nelson-Creston...... Hon. Michelle Mungall Kahlon, Ravi (NDP)...... Delta North New Westminster ...... Hon. Judy Darcy Kang, Anne (NDP)...... Burnaby–Deer Lake North Coast...... Jennifer Rice Krog, Leonard Eugene (NDP) ...... Nanaimo North Island ...... Hon. Claire Trevena Kyllo, Greg (BC Liberal)...... Shuswap North Vancouver–Lonsdale ...... Larson, Linda (BC Liberal) ...... Boundary-Similkameen North Vancouver–Seymour ...... Jane Tornthwaite Lee, Michael (BC Liberal) ...... Vancouver-Langara Oak Bay–Gordon Head ...... Dr. Andrew Weaver Leonard, Ronna-Rae (NDP) ...... Courtenay-Comox Parksville-Qualicum ...... Michelle Stilwell Letnick, Norm (BC Liberal)...... Kelowna–Lake Country Peace River North...... Dan Davies Ma, Bowinn (NDP)...... North Vancouver–Lonsdale Peace River South...... Mike Bernier Mark, Hon. Melanie (NDP) ...... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Penticton...... Dan Ashton Martin, John (BC Liberal)...... Chilliwack Port Coquitlam ...... Hon. Mike Farnworth Milobar, Peter (BC Liberal)...... Kamloops–North Tompson Port Moody–Coquitlam ...... Rick Glumac Morris, Mike (BC Liberal) ...... Prince George–Mackenzie Powell River–Sunshine Coast ...... Nicholas Simons Mungall, Hon. Michelle (NDP)...... Nelson-Creston Prince George–Mackenzie ...... Mike Morris Oakes, Coralee (BC Liberal) ...... Cariboo North Prince George–Valemount...... Shirley Bond Olsen, Adam (BC Green Party)...... Saanich North and the Islands Richmond North Centre ...... Teresa Wat Paton, Ian (BC Liberal)...... Delta South Richmond-Queensborough ...... Jas Johal Plecas, Hon. Darryl (Ind.)...... Abbotsford South Richmond South Centre...... Linda Reid Polak, Mary (BC Liberal) ...... Langley Richmond-Steveston...... John Yap Popham, Hon. Lana (NDP)...... Saanich North and the Islands...... Ralston, Hon. Bruce (NDP) ...... Surrey-Whalley Saanich South...... Hon. Lana Popham Redies, Tracy (BC Liberal) ...... Surrey–White Rock Shuswap ...... Greg Kyllo Reid, Linda (BC Liberal) ...... Richmond South Centre Skeena ...... Ellis Ross Rice, Jennifer (NDP)...... North Coast Stikine ...... Hon. Doug Donaldson Robinson, Hon. Selina (NDP) ...... Coquitlam-Maillardville Surrey-Cloverdale...... Marvin Hunt Ross, Ellis (BC Liberal)...... Skeena Surrey-Fleetwood ...... Jagrup Brar Routledge, Janet (NDP)...... Burnaby North Surrey–Green Timbers ...... Rachna Singh Routley, Doug (NDP) ...... Nanaimo–North Cowichan Surrey-Guildford ...... Garry Begg Rustad, John (BC Liberal) ...... Nechako Lakes Surrey-Newton...... Hon. Harry Bains Shypitka, Tom (BC Liberal) ...... Kootenay East Surrey-Panorama...... Hon. Jinny Sims Simons, Nicholas (NDP) ...... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Surrey South...... Stephanie Cadieux Simpson, Hon. Shane (NDP)...... Vancouver-Hastings Surrey-Whalley...... Hon. Bruce Ralston Sims, Hon. Jinny (NDP) ...... Surrey-Panorama Surrey–White Rock...... Tracy Redies Singh, Rachna (NDP) ...... Surrey–Green Timbers Vancouver-Fairview ...... Hon. George Heyman Stewart, Ben (BC Liberal) ...... Kelowna West Vancouver–False Creek...... Sam Sullivan Stilwell, Michelle (BC Liberal)...... Parksville-Qualicum Vancouver-Fraserview ...... Hon. George Chow Stone, Todd (BC Liberal)...... Kamloops–South Tompson Vancouver-Hastings ...... Hon. Shane Simpson Sturdy, Jordan (BC Liberal)...... West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Vancouver-Kensington ...... Mable Elmore Sullivan, Sam (BC Liberal)...... Vancouver–False Creek Vancouver-Kingsway ...... Hon. Adrian Dix Sultan, Ralph (BC Liberal)...... West Vancouver–Capilano Vancouver-Langara ...... Michael Lee Tegart, Jackie (BC Liberal) ...... Fraser-Nicola Vancouver–Mount Pleasant ...... Hon. Melanie Mark Tomson, Steve (BC Liberal)...... Kelowna-Mission Vancouver–Point Grey...... Hon. David Eby, QC Tornthwaite, Jane (BC Liberal) ...... North Vancouver–Seymour Vancouver-Quilchena ...... Andrew Wilkinson, QC Troness, Laurie (BC Liberal) ...... Chilliwack-Kent Vancouver–West End...... Spencer Chandra Herbert Trevena, Hon. Claire (NDP) ...... North Island Vernon-Monashee...... Eric Foster Wat, Teresa (BC Liberal) ...... Richmond North Centre Victoria–Beacon Hill ...... Hon. Carole James Weaver, Dr. Andrew (BC Green Party) ...... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Victoria–Swan Lake ...... Hon. Rob Fleming Wilkinson, Andrew, QC (BC Liberal)...... Vancouver-Quilchena West Vancouver–Capilano ...... Ralph Sultan Yap, John (BC Liberal)...... Richmond-Steveston West Vancouver–Sea to Sky ...... Jordan Sturdy

Party Standings: BC Liberal 42; NDP 41; BC Green Party 3; Independent 1

CONTENTS

Wednesday, October 24, 2018 Afernoon Sitting Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members...... 5861

Statements (Standing Order 25B) ...... 5862 Indians Abroad for Pluralist India R. Kahlon Youth forestry skills program in Lumby E. Foster Part-time studies instructors at B.C. Institute of Technology J. Routledge Cultus Lake water quality L. Troness Vancouver Island economic summit D. Routley Salmon run events at Tsútswecw Provincial Park T. Stone

Oral Questions...... 5864 Real estate speculation tax A. Wilkinson Hon. C. James P. Milobar Indigenous children in care and funding for maternity programs S. Furstenau Hon. K. Conroy Community benefts agreement and workers S. Bond Hon. C. Trevena T. Stone G. Kyllo Union membership of teachers in independent schools M. de Jong Hon. R. Fleming Community benefts agreement and workers M. de Jong Hon. C. Trevena

Petitions ...... 5869 L. Larson

Orders of the Day

Second Reading of Bills ...... 5869 Bill 40 — Electoral Reform Referendum 2018 Amendment Act, 2018 (continued) On the main motion M. de Jong P. Milobar D. Ashton J. Rustad S. Chandra Herbert B. Stewart Hon. S. Simpson D. Davies

5861

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2018 S. Bond: It’s always a great pleasure to be able to introduce someone who lives in Prince George. I’m delighted to see Te House met at 1:34 p.m. Krystine Iley in the gallery today. She is a very hard-working young woman. She and her husband, Levon, have two [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] incredible little children, Scarlett and Lincoln. I’m delighted that she’s able to be here. Yes, I do admit I’m biased because Routine Business she also happens to work in my constituency ofce, for which I am incredibly grateful, and I’m glad to see her here Prayers. today. Please help me make her most welcome. [1:35 p.m.] Hon. C. James: I have a very good friend who’s visiting Introductions by Members today. She is an incredible self-advocate for people with diverse abilities. She is an employee at Trify Foods. She is Hon. C. Trevena: I’m sure there’s going to be an introduc- a Special Olympic athlete and medal winner. She is also a tion of the whole group shortly by my colleague the Minis- volunteer extraordinaire, whether it’s at the petting zoo or ter of Advanced Education, but I notice that in the gallery any other activities that go on in Victoria. You can always is Shirley Ackland. Shirley is here as part of delegations for fnd Sheenagh Morrison there. She is a frequent visitor to FPSE, Federation of Post-Secondary Educators. She works at this place. Would the House please make her very welcome. North Island College. She is a resident of Port McNeill. She [1:40 p.m.] was, up until this last weekend, the mayor of Port McNeill. She is an absolutely dedicated person to her community, Hon. M. Mark: It gives me great pleasure to introduce the whether that’s Port McNeill, the north Island or the province president’s council of the Federation of Post-Secondary Edu- of British Columbia. cators of British Columbia. FPSE represents over 10,000 fac- Shirley is, I would say…. I would hope that she recognizes ulty and staf at 19 private and public post-secondary institu- me as a friend. I recognize her as a friend. tions from all the regions in our province, including educat- I hope that the House will make her very, very welcome. ors, researchers, librarians, support staf and IT technicians. Tey’re in the Legislature this week, meeting with members Hon. B. Ralston: Joining us in the members’ gallery this of the assembly. afernoon is His Excellency Akylbek Kamaldinov, the newly I’d like to ofer a warm welcome to George Davidson, the appointed Ambassador of Kazakhstan to Canada. He is president of FPSE; Terri Van Steinburg, secretary-treasurer; accompanied by his frst secretary of the embassy, Mr. Ilyas Frank Cosco, frst vice-president; and the 20 representatives Akhmetov. from institutions that represent an important part of our As some of you may be aware, Kazakhstan is home to the post-secondary ecosystem. world’s frst and largest space launch facility. In fact, Cana- I would ask the House to please join me in welcoming dian astronaut David Saint-Jacques will be part of the crew them, but frst, I would like to say welcome to the young launching in December from Kazakhstan for the next exped- people that are here today. You’re champions, you’re advoc- ition to the International Space Station. ates, you’re ferce, and your voice is being heard. Haawa. I look forward to meeting with His Excellency later this afernoon to discuss trade and investment relationships Hon. M. Mungall: I have two guests in the gallery today; between our jurisdictions. they are two of my constituents. Colleen Driscoll has been a Would the House please extend a warm welcome to the maternity nurse at Kootenay Lake Hospital for over 30 years. ambassador. I think everybody here in the House knows how much I love the maternity ward at Kootenay Lake Hospital. She is with Hon. K. Conroy: I’m really pleased to welcome 52 rep- her husband, Robin Cherbo, who has actually served four resentatives of the Fostering Change campaign to the Legis- terms on Nelson city council as well. May the House please lature today. Tese passionate young advocates have come to make them very welcome. Victoria for a youth policy solutions lobby day. Tey’re meet- ing with ministers, with MLAs throughout the day to dis- D. Ashton: It gives me great pleasure today to introduce cuss how our government can further support youth who to the House a gentleman from Penticton, an award-winning are transitioning out of care and into adulthood or, as they reporter with Okanagan Valley Newspaper Group. He’s a informed me today, transitioning into community. reporter who will give you credit when you deserve it and is Tank you to Dylan Cohen and his colleagues at First not afraid to criticize when it’s also deserved — the king of Call B.C., who have organized this day. I thoroughly enjoyed freedom of information, Mr. Joe Fries. meeting with them this morning, and I look forward to con- tinuing to work with these amazing young adults. Hon. K. Chen: I would like to take this opportunity to say happy birthday to a friend and colleague in this chamber 5862 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 who is celebrating her “Xth” happy birthday. She’s someone stand up against bigotry and hate, not only in India but also who is passionate about children and family services. I work here in Canada. really closely with her on bringing in the frst universal child care in B.C. She’s so busy today that she doesn’t have time to YOUTH FORESTRY SKILLS celebrate her birthday, so we could only eat cake early in the PROGRAM IN LUMBY morning at 8:30, then following with a lot of doughnuts. I would like to say happy birthday to the Minister of Chil- E. Foster: Forty-fve years ago Hector LeBlanc, a logging dren and Family Development. Tank you for your service. contractor in Lumby, approached Charles Bloom Secondary School with the idea of running a program to teach young Mr. Speaker: I noticed that you didn’t specify which people logging skills. birthday. Fast-forward to 1997. Te program was operating, year on year, on small cutblocks provided by the B.C. Forest Service N. Simons: It’s a pleasure to introduce a friend of mine in or the local licensees. Te instructor, Jack Hockey, contacted the House today. It’s always nice to introduce someone who a local forestry technician, one Eric Foster, and ofered him a moved to British Columbia in the ’90s. Mary moved from job as a feld instructor with the idea of applying for a wood- Ireland to British Columbia in 1991. She’s a psychotherapist, lot licence. with ofces in Vancouver and Surrey. She enjoys her visits to In 2002, with a lot of help from RPF Keith Tucker, CBSS this beautiful city and this place. I’d like to ask everyone to was allotted woodlot licence No. 1908. Jack and I worked on welcome Mary Smyth to the House. development of the woodlot until 2009, when I was elected to the Legislature and Jack retired. R. Chouhan: It gives me great pleasure to introduce Te program has come a long way. Forestry teacher Mar- three friends in the gallery from a labour union, Local tin Tooms has added new equipment, new courses and, 1611 — Bruce Ferguson, who has done such a wonderful along with the feld instructor, Alan Farrer, has managed to job for the last many, many years, guiding us, providing get an expansion to the woodlot, which increases the allow- leadership; Merrick Walsh, another very dear friend, who able annual cut, giving the program more income to help of- has done the same kind of really enormous job in the set the costs. labour community; and our friend Mat McGreish. Please Te forestry program ofers many related courses, such join me to welcome them. as welding, heavy-duty-equipment service and mainten- ance, and all the safety and frst aid courses. Te program Statements (Standing Order 25B) provides students a broad-based, practical background in the forest industry and real-life skills. It has expanded INDIANS ABROAD FOR PLURALIST INDIA into several applicable trades for skills acquisition and has added skills exploration 11-12 to add value to the existing R. Kahlon: Today I would like to recognize an advocacy forestry program. group, an organization that has formed in my community Recently Charles Bloom’s woodlot 1908 was the recipient of North Delta, Indians Abroad for Pluralist India. IAPI of the Minister’s Award for Innovation and Excellence in gathered and released its policy document at George Mackie Woodlot Management for the whole province. Tis is a huge Library in North Delta on September 30. IAPI is a group honour, and I congratulate the teacher, Martin Tooms; feld of people of Indian origin in B.C. that was established in instructor and long-time logger, Alan Farrer; and the stu- response to growing attacks on religious minorities in India. dents of Charles Bloom Secondary’s forestry program for Tere is a rising fear amongst many Canadians of Indian their leadership in the industry. descent that diversity of the Indian society is under threat. Tis group looks to explore those fears and highlight the PART-TIME STUDIES INSTRUCTORS AT importance of diversity. On September 30, they formally B.C. INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY released their policy document that explains why Indians who have made Canada their home should continue to speak J. Routledge: Just recently I met with members of the up for those in the motherland but at the same time rec- BCIT Faculty and Staf Association, and they told me that ognize the struggles of Indigenous and First Nations people this week is the Canadian Association of University Teachers here in Canada. annual Fair Employment Week. Tis is a campaign that cel- [1:45 p.m.] ebrates the work of academic staf and afrms that all aca- At this launch, they highlighted the plight of Indigenous demic staf should be treated fairly. communities across Canada. Te members engaged in dia- Our conversation reminded me how unique BCIT really logue to further educate themselves on residential schools is, how it not only leads the way in technology, but it also and the efects still faced today by Indigenous and First continues to advance fexible and accessible learning options Nations communities. IAPI renewed the organization’s belief for students. Many of those students need to take part-time in interculturalism and secularism and vowed to continue to Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5863 courses and programs to meet the realities of their profes- beautiful, clear, sapphire jewel nestled in the Cascade Moun- sional and personal lives. tains, giving joy to tourists and residents and providing a Te instructors with whom I met are key to making edu- healthy home for fsh for generations to come. cation possible in today’s economy. Instructors in BCIT’s part-time studies courses are dedicated educators and sub- VANCOUVER ISLAND ECONOMIC SUMMIT ject area experts who are committed to their students. Just this week, at BCIT’s distinguished alumni awards, BCIT’s D. Routley: I’d like to bring to the attention of the mem- FSA celebrated one of their members who teaches in part- bers the Vancouver Island economic summit, which is hap- time studies. Tara Wilkie teaches in the forensic science and pening today and tomorrow in Nanaimo. It’s hosted by the technology program and is a practising forensic nurse. Tara Vancouver Island Economic Association. was selected for her knowledge and expertise and her educa- At the summit, they’ll release the fourth report on the tion in the human trafcking component of forensic nursing. state of the Vancouver Island economy, along with the Tara has made an enormous and unique contribution to Island Good campaign results. Te Island Good campaign the knowledge base of health care providers, law enforce- is a campaign to promote Vancouver Island–produced ment and the justice system, not only in the Lower Mainland food products. but provincially and nationally. She is a recognized expert in George Hanson, president of the association, says the eco- this area, and Tara is just one example of the incredible asset nomy on Vancouver Island is good. But he’s cautious about BCIT has in its part-time studies instructors. the future, primarily due to what’s happening south of the In celebrating Fair Employment Week, I want to thank the border. Fourteen percent of the provincial GDP, 20 percent BCIT part-time studies instructors who shared their stories of the province’s population — over 800,000 people, nearly with me. It was truly an honour. half of those in — make Vancouver Island very important. CULTUS LAKE WATER QUALITY Tis is truly an intersection of public and private interests, with the Premier of the province speaking today and tomor- L. Troness: Cultus Lake Provincial Park is one of the row with Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, Minister of Fisher- most popular parks in B.C. Te region welcomes three mil- ies, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard, as well as Celeste lion visitors per year, and the area has a growing residential Haldane, chief commissioner of the B.C. Treaty Commis- base as well. sion, and Katrina Marquez, senior patient service manager [1:50 p.m.] at Tilray, a cannabis producer in Nanaimo. Tere is signifcant aquatic potential in this deep, moun- Diversifcation and demographics, the skills shortage. We tain-fed lake. It used to be a heavy spawning ground for all have heard those terms, and on Vancouver Island, it’s sockeye salmon but not anymore. Survival rates for juvenile no less important than anywhere else. Exacerbated by hous- salmon are dropping because of rising levels of nitrogen ing shortages, difculties acquiring transit and difculties and phosphorus, which are nutrients that feed the growth of acquiring education, these are the challenges that intersect plant life in the lake, starving it of oxygen so that nothing public policy with private interests in the economy. else can live there. Over time, this will result in a phenomen- In fact, Island Health is the largest consumer of goods and on called eutrophication, in which the lake will basically turn services on Vancouver Island. Te obvious importance of green with algae. Tis would be a disaster for tourism, local coordinating our eforts between the public and the private residents and aquatic life. sectors is so important to us. Tere are four main contributors of nutrients to the lake. Who would run a business without a business plan? No A million tourists in provincial parks fush their toilets into one. No one would disagree. We need a public plan, and septic felds beside the lake all summer. Runof from agricul- that’s called a poverty reduction plan. Together, with all of tural fertilizer in nearby Columbia Valley is another contrib- this consultation and planning, we will create an overall plan utor. A surprising third source is waterfowl; 10,000 seagulls for prosperity for every British Columbian. spend their nights on the lake in a giant colony that has become known as Seagull Island. Te last major source is SALMON RUN EVENTS AT atmospheric. When farmers to the west spread animal waste TSÚTSWECW PROVINCIAL PARK on their felds, particles of manure drif into the air and make their way, on prevailing winds, to the lake. T. Stone: I rise today well aware of the risk that faces Tere are solutions at hand. B.C. Parks has been helpful in politicians telling fsh stories, but this is no ordinary fsh committing, over time, to tie into a state-of-the-art wastewa- story. Instead, it’s a tribute to our heritage as British ter system. Government could encourage new technology Columbians. that injects manure directly into the ground. Other sugges- Te Secwepemctsin word tsútswecw translates to “many tions have been made. rivers.” Tsútswecw Provincial Park is the location of the In summary, all actors need to work together to prevent Adams River sockeye run, one of the largest salmon runs in the eutrophication of Cultus Lake and to preserve it as a North America. Every fourth year is a dominant salmon run, 5864 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

with millions of fsh to be seen from late September through will have a good discussion around afordable housing. I’m to the end of October. looking forward to it. You still have a few days lef to take in this amazing spectacle of nature, as life and death unfold before us to Mr. Speaker: Te Leader of the Ofcial Opposition on a perpetuate a species so synonymous with British Colum- supplemental. bia. Tsútswecw Park, formerly known as Roderick Haig- Brown Park, was established in 1977, in part to conserve A. Wilkinson: I’m glad to hear that the incoming mayor and protect the spawning beds used by sockeye, chinook, of Nanaimo and the Finance Minister are still on speaking coho and pink salmon. terms. Hopefully, it will stay that way. [1:55 p.m.] Now, it remains unexplained how the boundaries of the Tis roughly fve-week world-famous salmon run at Tsút- tax were redrawn. In a surprise move in the spring, the swecw Park consists of many events put on by the Adams Finance Minister ruled out Parksville, where the retirement River Salmon Society, including the Salute to the Sockeye home of the Leader of the Tird Party lives. Of course, the Celebration. Tere are also weekly interpretive walkabouts, Finance Minister is counting on his support. the Shuswap Salmon Symposium, not to mention an artisans Here’s another quote from the city of Nanaimo: “Afer market, food vendors, live underwater camera viewing, careful consideration of the implications of this tax, we con- artisan demonstrations, Indigenous activities, wild salmon clude that this tax will hurt our economy. It is unfair and cooking, live music and even Yoga with the Salmon. unreasonable.” Tese events attract visitors from around the world. It is a Can the Finance Minister explain how Nanaimo is still feld trip like no other for thousands of B.C.’s school children subject to this tax when the Tird Party Leader’s home is every year. I remember making exactly this trip for the very suddenly exempted? frst time back when I was 12 years old, which was in 1984. I have visited many times since with my three daughters. Hon. C. James: I know the Leader of the Opposition Visit Tsútswecw within the next few days, and you’ll knows that we took a look at the major urban settings in fnd trails that lead to riverside viewing platforms with British Columbia. We took a look at the vacancy rate, and we interpretive signage that provides information on sockeye took a look at the lack of afordability in those communities. salmon, the salmon run and the spawning process. If you Tat determined the areas that we brought forward. We had can’t make it this year, this marvel of nature will be a discussion about how to ensure that vacation homes wer- repeated again in 2022. en’t included, and that included taking a look at geography or taking a look at price. We included both in the bill. Oral Questions I’m very proud of the bill that has come forward. It will act on afordable housing. It will end speculators. If the other REAL ESTATE SPECULATION TAX side wants to continue to stand up for speculation in our market, they should continue to do so. We’re going to stand A. Wilkinson: We’ve all become aware that in July the city up for the people of British Columbia. of Nanaimo told the Finance Minister that they preferred to be exempted from her completely mislabeled and mislead- Mr. Speaker: Te Leader of the Ofcial Opposition on a ing speculation tax. In fact, they wrote to the minister to say: second supplemental. “It will drive developers out of the city to nearby markets not subject to the speculation tax. Reduced developments will A. Wilkinson: Of course, the Finance Minister is com- mean loss of vital revenue from development cost charges to pletely dodging the question of how the Tird Party Leader’s the city. It also means the city could lose out on new, aford- house got exempted in some kind of surprise move this able housing developments built by developers.” spring, along with a little corner of the Premier’s riding and Can the minister explain why the surrounding communit- another corner of the province which comprises a large part ies are now out of her speculation tax zone and Nanaimo is of the riding of another Green Party member. lef in the zone? [2:00 p.m.] Te question remains: how did the Finance Minister Hon. C. James: I certainly understand that the other side cherry-pick these things, and what made her change her isn’t interested in afordable housing. Tey’ve made that very mind? Was there some dramatic change in vacancy rates and clear since the budget came out. But we are taking this issue afordable housing in three diferent areas that happened to very seriously. It is a crisis in British Columbia. It is an area be held by friendly parties? Perhaps the Finance Minister can that the people of this province expect their government to explain how this wonder occurred in the spring, where sud- act on, and that’s exactly what we’re doing. denly the tax zone was changed overnight. I met with the former Nanaimo mayor. I’ll be happy to meet with the current Nanaimo mayor shortly. I’m sure we Hon. C. James: It’s very clear that the Leader of the Oppo- sition would rather point fngers than look at themselves, Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5865 who brought nothing forward to address afordable housing Hon. C. James: It’s very clear from the other side that they in British Columbia. are taking a look at leaving the door open to money laun- I’ve already gone through the process that we went dering, to speculators in the housing market. Well, we aren’t. through to make the determinations. We brought the prin- We’re shutting that door, Member. We are shutting that door ciples of the tax out in February, and unlike the other side, and bringing in approximately $200 million for afordable we said we were actually going to talk to people, consult with housing. We’re dealing with both supply and demand. It’s people and include their views that were there. We did that. what the people of British Columbia expect us to do. Tey We looked at afordable areas. We looked at the challenges of want their government to stand up for afordable housing. vacancy rates. We looked at the major urban settings. Tat’s Not only that…. In fact, the B.C. Business Council, the what’s included in the tax, and that’s what we will move on chambers of commerce, the Vancouver Board of Trade — for afordable housing for British Columbia. what was their number one issue when it came to recruit- ment and retention of employees, when it came to growing P. Milobar: Hopefully, the incoming mayor of Nanaimo a strong economy? Deal with afordable housing. Tat’s what gets clarifcation if the upcoming meeting counts as his one we will do. meeting a year with the Finance Minister, before that meet- ing takes place. INDIGENOUS CHILDREN IN CARE AND Andrey Pavlov was one of the original architects of what FUNDING FOR MATERNITY PROGRAMS became the NDP’s so-called speculation tax, but yesterday he said: “What we proposed is very, very diferent from what S. Furstenau: We are in a humanitarian crisis in B.C. Indi- actually got implemented. It was supposed to be voluntary genous children are drastically overrepresented in our child for municipalities. Instead, what we got is the provincial gov- welfare system and, once pulled into it, are on a path to fur- ernment picks and chooses who gets penalized or not.” ther hardship and pain. To the minister, why are communities like Nanaimo being [2:05 p.m.] penalized? Te younger they are when they are taken into care, the longer they stay in care, the worse their outcomes and the Hon. C. James: I will continue to be very proud of the more likely they are to later lose their own kids to the system. fact that we are a government that will stand up for the least Te intergenerational impacts of the system are severe and afordable areas in British Columbia, the least amount of tragic. As stated in the recent MCFD and RCY joint report, vacancy rates, and will stand up for the people in those com- 80 percent of the women who access pregnancy outreach munities who can’t fnd afordable housing. We will contin- program services have lived in foster care types of arrange- ue to do that. It is not an option to pick and choose and ments themselves. We have to break the cycle. We have to say: “Tese people are worthy of standing up for afordable stop separating infants and mothers. housing but not these people.” We are going to stand up for To the Minister of Children and Family Development, afordable housing for British Columbia. We’re going to con- does she recognize that protecting the maternal bond is key tinue to do that, and that’s what’s important. to breaking the apprehension cycle, and if so, where is the If you take a look, Member, at the speculation tax — the funding behind the action plan? fact that 99 percent of British Columbians are excluded and that people who are speculating and who own two or three Hon. K. Conroy: I want to thank the member for this extra homes are being asked to contribute to the afordable question. I know she’s really passionate about this issue and housing in our province — I think the people of British really concerned, as am I. I know that breastfeeding has tre- Columbia have made it clear they support it. We support it. mendous benefts for the child’s health and development and We’re moving on it. building that bond between mother and child. As a mother who nursed one of my children and couldn’t nurse the oth- Mr. Speaker: Te member for Kamloops–North Tomp- er one, I know how important the mother-child bonding is, son on a supplemental. whether you’re breastfeeding or bottle-feeding. Tis spring I spoke to the Representative for Children and P. Milobar: It seems the only people the minister doesn’t Youth about what more we could do to protect and enhance want to listen to are her own hand-picked committees that that mother-baby bond. I’m pleased to say that we do have she puts together to bring these issues forward. this joint report between our ministry and the represent- Another quote from Prof. Pavlov. He continues: “It is ative. We are working on clear and specifc guidelines for absolutely dishonest, because it is labelled speculation tax social workers to support new moms, and they are working when it has nothing to do with speculation. It is absolutely a with them to promote mom-and-baby bonding when they cash grab, but I think it will backfre.” are feeding their newborn. Tat is exactly what is happening in Nanaimo, where Tere are some fantastic resource models that are already housing starts are projected to fall by 32 percent. Again, why in place in some communities in B.C., and they do support will this dishonest tax grab penalize Nanaimo? pregnant and parenting mothers with substance abuse 5866 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

issues. We’re going to evaluate the programs that already I think it’s really important to acknowledge the work that’s exist and look at the developing programs in which mothers being done by communities right across the province that and babies at risk can get wraparound services, the support want to work together to ensure that we can implement the that they need in a safe and secure setting. recommendations that were made by this excellent report We also know that First Nations and the Métis are very and to ensure that we’re taking into consideration the con- concerned about this as well. Before we complete our plans cerns — and have the ability to talk to the people that want for change, we want to make sure that we consult fully with to make sure that we’re implementing the right recommend- them and ensure that we bring the First Nations Leadership ations. I’m looking forward to doing that. Council in on that consultation, and other communities as [2:10 p.m.] well. We’ll be doing just that — seeking their feedback and ideas. We would welcome a similar opportunity from the COMMUNITY BENEFITS AGREEMENT member, and any member in this House who is passionate AND WORKERS about this issue. S. Bond: Dawn Rebelo has worked in the construction Mr. Speaker: Te House Leader of the Tird Party on a industry since she was 17 years old. Tis is her message to supplemental. the government: “I don’t want to change union representa- tion and beneft plans. I take personal ofence to the govern- S. Furstenau: Tere are, indeed, efective programs that ment forcing me to join unions that I do not support.” exist right now. FIR Square and Sheway both consider the Why is the minister forcing Dawn Rebelo to join an NDP- pregnant mother or the mother and infant as a team, which approved union? I think is the impetus of the MCFD-RCY report on breast- feeding. It’s saying we can’t just look at the infant as one indi- Hon. C. Trevena: I thank the member for her question. vidual and the mother as a completely separate entity. Luck- Again, we’ve canvassed this quite a lot in the House. I’d like ily, we already have very concrete examples of these pro- to remind the member that the way that community benefts grams that successfully embody that approach, and we have agreements have been working is that any contract, whether many communities that want them implemented right now. union or non-union, can apply for a job and any worker can Unfortunately, the action plan fails to recognize that. Say- go and work on the job site. It is a union job site. Tey’ll be ing that we’re going to continue to review, develop, research asked to join the union while they’re on that job site. and explore doesn’t change the lives of these women and I would just like to remind the members opposite — just a their babies right now. With 500 infants apprehended every little trip back to memory lane. Tey were very excited, earli- year, it perpetuates the cycle. We need urgency that matches er last year, about Ironworkers Local 97 supporting them the crisis. What was needed in that action plan was funding during the last election. Former Premier made and implementation. an announcement with them to show what a big deal it To the Minister of Children and Family Development, was. I’d just like to let the member opposite know that that the concrete outcomes the minister is trying to achieve, very same union has some thoughts on community benefts based on what is outlined in the report, won’t be achieved agreements that she and the people that she’s talking about by this action plan. Tey will be achieved by funding the may want to be aware of. I quote the business manager…. models that work. How, specifcally, will she address this discrepancy? Mr. Speaker: Tank you, Minister. Te member for Prince George–Valemount on a supple- Hon. K. Conroy: I have visited FIR Square and Sheway. mental. Tey’re excellent programs. Tey provide incredible ser- vices to young moms before they give birth and afer they S. Bond: Well, we see some improvement here. Tis min- give birth, to ensure that they continue that mother-child ister fnally has admitted the critical point — that, yes, work- bond, whether they’re breastfeeding or bottle-feeding. It’s ers can apply. But let’s be clear. It’s not a matter of whether a service that I’d like to see expanded across the province, they want to. It’s not a matter whether they should con- and it’s something that communities have come and talked sider…. Tey are required to join one of 19 NDP handpicked to us about. unions if they want to work on the project. At the same time, we need to make sure that we have Te minister’s colleague is shaking her head. She might the discussions with our Indigenous partners to ensure that want to read the agreement that points out: “If you want communities across the province also have the involvement the job, you have to change your union.” Restricting employ- in the child welfare decisions that are being made. To that ment to 15 percent of the workforce discriminates against end, we have signed agreements with three First Nations — workers like Dawn. So here’s what Dawn says — not our with the Wet’suwet’en, the Secwepemc and the Métis — to words, Dawn’s words: “I believe that union representation start implementing their jurisdiction over child welfare in is important, and it’s benefcial, but I’m very disturbed by those nations. Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5867

the prospect of the government telling me and my fellow any contractor in the construction industry to bid on and employees that I have to join a specifc union.” perform project work.” Anyone can bid. To the minister, why are workers like Dawn being forced Yes, we are working on having a union worksite. Any qual- — it’s not an option, Minister — to join NDP-approved uni- ifed worker will have the opportunity to apply, whether or ons in order to work on public projects? not they’re currently union members. But like any unionized worksite, they will be expected to join the union when they Hon. C. Trevena: I’dobviously like to hear from the mem- are on the job. ber. If she would like to share with me the details of the people who have been in touch with her, I’d like to talk with Mr. Speaker: Te member for Kamloops–South Tomp- them myself, because there is obviously a concern. son on a supplemental. Te opposition doesn’t seem to realize that B.C. is facing a major skills shortage. It was ignored by their government for T. Stone: Te minister and the government that she’s part years. I’d like to reference a government report prepared for of are hardly working on creating a union-only site. Tat is the member herself, when she was Minister of Jobs, Tourism the requirement. You have 30 days to join a union — and one and Skills Training. It was presented in 2014 and had some of the 19 approved unions — in order to work on major pub- helpful fndings on increasing the skilled workforce in the lic infrastructure projects. province and increasing apprenticeship opportunities. Tat policy is unfair, and it’s discriminatory. It’s going to It recommended that government consider having a min- result in taxpayers having to pay a heck of a lot more for imum number of apprenticeships on public infrastructure projects. Tese projects are going to have less scope. Tey’re projects, and it noted that “some private sector unions have going to have inherent delays. It’s going to result in appren- very high apprenticeship training completion success rates.” tices also earning less than the minimum wage. And…. Te B.C. Building Trades apprenticeship graduation rates are 85 percent on average, the highest completion rates in the Interjections. industry. With community benefts agreements, we are going to Mr. Speaker: Member, proceed. train the apprentices. We’re going to deal with the skills shortages. We’re going to help train B.C.’s future workforce, T. Stone: Tank you, Mr. Speaker. and we are very proud to do so. Mainline Roofng, which is a second-generation, family- [2:15 p.m.] owned commercial roofng contractor, has operated in Wil- liams Lake for 50 years. T. Stone: Well, in the expansive responses from the min- Niki Lyons has more to say: “Mainline Roofng was never ister in her previous two questions, she refuses to acknow- consulted. Tis was put in place without any construction ledge that the vast majority of apprentices that are trained in industry consultation whatsoever.” British Columbia are actually trained in open shops, and by Again to the Minister of Transportation, why is she for- all kinds of open-shop contracting companies across British cing the employees of companies like Mainline Roofng to Columbia. Tat was the case under our former government. make the very difcult choice of forcing them either to Tat’s the case today. join one of the NDP’s 19 approved unions or face the pro- Niki Lyons of Mainline Roofng is also very concerned spect of not being able to work on any public major infra- about the impact of this NDP union-only requirement for structure projects? major infrastructure projects. She’s very concerned about the impact it will have on her 20 employees. She says: “If I could Hon. C. Trevena: Te member opposite has no founda- talk to the Premier, I would tell him his community benefts tion on which to criticize us for how we are spending pub- plan isn’t benefting this community. Our job opportunities lic money. could be reduced by 40 percent to 60 percent as a result of Tis is the member who lef us with a billion-dollar hole this new policy.” for ICBC. He was part of a government that saw massive My question to the minister is this: why is the minister million-dollar, hundreds of million-dollar, overruns on B.C. going to stand in the way of Mainline Roofng’s employees Place, on hydro lines, on the Port Mann Bridge. Millions from working on major public infrastructure projects simply afer millions afer millions of dollars. because they do not want to join one of the 19 NDP- [2:20 p.m.] approved unions? Tis is also a member of a former government who had no investment in the public good when they were building Hon. C. Trevena: Again, to remind the member, we have infrastructure. Not only massive overruns but, when they canvassed this a lot. were hiring people, hiring foreign workers. Tirty workers One of the frst objectives in the agreement…. In fact, from Costa Rica, when they were working on the Canada the very frst objective in the community benefts agreement Line, were being paid $4 an hour. Tat side of the House has states — and it’s 1.100(a) if he wants to refer to it: “To allow 5868 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 absolutely not a leg to stand on, cannot talk about how we ter, but I’ll let him decide how he wants to do business. But if are investing in the province of British Columbia. he would have even checked any source, he would have real- ized that that is unsubstantiated. It is not true. As I said, no G. Kyllo: Jacob Bros. Construction is a family company such conversations have occurred between government and with an ofce in the Premier’s own riding of Langford. the BCTF. Before the union benefts agreement, Jacob Bros. would He could have further checked. Te BCTF actually has a routinely bid and win contracts on public projects, but not policy that they don’t organize in independent schools. So anymore, because their 400 employees are not afliated with he’s wrong on every score. Really, I wish he would ask us one of the NDP-approved unions. more substantial questions. Why does the minister think that the workers of Jacob Bros. aren’t good enough to work on public projects in B.C.? Mr. Speaker: Te member for Abbotsford West on a sup- plemental. Hon. C. Trevena: I’ve spoken with Jacob Bros. I’ve spoken with a number of contractors and continue to do so and Interjections. explain to them how community benefts work. Any con- tractor, whether they’re union or non-union, can bid. If they Mr. Speaker: Members, we shall hear the question. Tank are chosen, they can bring their own workers. Tose that are you. working on the job site will, as in any unionized workplace, [2:25 p.m.] be expected to join the union. COMMUNITY BENEFITS AGREEMENT UNION MEMBERSHIP OF AND WORKERS TEACHERS IN INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS M. de Jong: Well, it was not meant to be a trick question. M. de Jong: Te decision to tie one’s ability to work on I’m gratifed that the minister stood up and, I think — publicly funded infrastructure to membership in a certain besides dismissing the information — ofered some kind of NDP-approved union is discriminatory, and it ofends the an assurance that the government would not go down that vast majority of British Columbians. Even more worrisome path. I’m gratifed to hear that as well. is the possibility that the NDP is looking at ways to expand Having ofered this passionate defence of the right of an the application of this discriminatory practice into other independent teacher in British Columbia to make their own publicly funded services. choice about which union to belong to — if, in fact, any My question, actually, is for the Minister of Education. union at all…. My question goes back to the Minister of I have received, and notifed him of the information I’ve Transportation. She’s just heard her colleague announce how received, from teachers within the independent school sys- important it is for independent teachers to have that right. tem, who are advising me that they have been contacted by Why is a welder in Surrey a second-class citizen? Why colleagues in the public school system and alerted to the fact shouldn’t a welder in Surrey have the same right as an inde- that there are discussions underway between the govern- pendent teacher in Surrey? ment and the BCTF that would tie an independent school’s ability to receive provincial funding to the need for every Hon. C. Trevena: Earlier in question period, I was talking teacher in that independent school to become a member of about the opposition’s support, when they were in govern- the BCTF. ment, from the ironworkers union, Ironworkers Local 97. My question for the Minister of Education is: will he stand Christy Clark made a really big deal of being seen with a in the House today — and I hope he will — and ofer specifc hardhat with the members. guarantees that the government of British Columbia will Doug Parton, the business manager for the Ironworkers take no steps to create any hint of a link between the right 97, said about the community benefts agreement: “What’s of an independent school to receive the public funding it’s this about community benefts being a payof to unions? Do entitled to and the right of its teachers to select the union people not remember that the ironworkers supported the they wish to belong to if, indeed, any union at all? Liberals in the last election? I may not agree with everything that government does on one side or the other, but I can cer- Hon. R. Fleming: Well, thank you to the member for the tainly get behind the Premier on this one, because I remem- question. I received his letter about fve minutes ago. I’m sur- ber a time when we were building the Golden Ears Bridge. prised he would bring it up in the Legislature, because it’s Tose guys” — meaning the opposition, then government based on absolutely fimsy information that has no bearing — “brought in temporary foreign workers. My members, on the truth. No such conversations have taken place. I don’t unemployed members, had to bring pizzas down to help know who his sources are. support these people so they could eat and actually go to do He could have asked me in the hallway if he wanted to or a day’s work.” even…. It’s not something that’s even required to be in a let- Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5869

We are proud of investing in our infrastructure, in good- people in this chamber who will recall that the question of paying jobs, in the people of B.C. electoral reform dates back at least to 1996. In fact, arguably it dates back much longer than that. Tis [End of question period.] province has experimented with electoral reform once before, in the early 1950s. I think it lasted for an election, and Petitions we then chose to return to the system we have in place now. In 1996, there was an electoral result where a government L. Larson: I have a petition from 500 residents of the was re-elected. Tey didn’t secure the majority of the vote; South Okanagan asking government to fulfl the commit- they did secure the majority of the seats. Tat caused a meas- ment made, when Corrections opened two years ago, for two ure of consternation within the province and amongst more RCMP ofcers for the Oliver detachment. people. It certainly caused a level of discomfort and frustra- tion on the part of those who represented the political party Orders of the Day that received more votes. Nonetheless, those were the rules of the day. Hon. M. Farnworth: I call continued second reading But it did prompt a discussion that led to a general interest debate on Bill 40, the electoral referendum act. and demand for an opportunity to consider the way we elect [2:30 p.m.] politicians to this chamber. Of course, it is well known now and well established that that formed part of a commitment [L. Reid in the chair.] the party I represent took to the electorate in 2001, and it was acted upon. Second Reading of Bills [2:35 p.m.] In the course of my comments today, I hope it will become BILL 40 — ELECTORAL REFORM apparent to members and the public that my concern, both REFERENDUM 2018 AMENDMENT ACT, 2018 with the bill before the House and the general process being (continued) undertaken by the government, has as much and perhaps more to do with how this is being undertaken than the what, On the main motion. which is providing people an opportunity to express a view on how we elect politicians, representatives, to this chamber. M. de Jong: As we continue the discussion, now, back on Following 2001, a random selection of citizens was asked the main body of work with respect to Bill 40, I thought to turn their mind to this and was asked to provide a recom- it appropriate, and I’m grateful for the opportunity, to ofer mendation. It wasn’t easy. Anyone that had an opportunity, some thoughts. Someone observed the other day that I don’t afer the fact, to speak with the citizens that volunteered for speak as much as I once did in the House. Te pages of that assembly, the citizens’ assembly — non-political, non- Hansard are laced with my contributions over the year. partisan — will have learned just how difcult the task was On this matter, I thought it important to ofer some and how much time they spent developing a recommenda- views, thoughts, opinions and a perspective on the import tion to take to the people. It was well considered and well- of the matter that is before the House, both in specifc and thought-out. It was presented at the time of a provincial elec- general terms, and how we fnd ourselves at this point in tion, and it secured a healthy measure of support — more time. I hope the House will allow me to ofer my views, than 50 percent, in fact. based on some experience over the years with the question Of course, there was a threshold on a reported change of of electoral reform. this importance that required in excess of 60 percent, and I fear that one of the myths or perceptions that has arisen there was a geographic component to that. But we shouldn’t — I think in part advanced by members of the government underestimate the fact that with that level of support, there and those who are advancing the notion of this referendum was a fair degree of pressure on the government of the day, and the electoral reform it purports to promote — is that the government that I was a member of, to provide people the ofcial opposition, people like me, are opposed to change with a second opportunity to express their views. merely for the reason of wanting to oppose change. Tey did, in the election of 2009. Again the question that I can, hopefully, dissuade people of that idea two ways. I was put to the population, as it was in 2005, was a straight- can say unequivocally that that is not so, but perhaps more forward one, and more information was provided in that importantly on the question of electoral reform, generally regard. As people began to turn their mind to this, they or philosophically, I can point to a proud record of having began to ask more questions about how a new electoral sys- facilitated and encouraged people to turn their minds to tem would operate. electoral reform. I have heard occasionally but not ofen enough this We’ve talked, and people who have participated in this admission from participants in this debate — and I am debate have talked, about the referenda that occurred in both happy to make it: no system is perfect. No electoral system 2005 and 2009. But you, Madame Speaker, are one of the is without its benefts, nor is any electoral system without 5870 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 its faws. But surely, a prerequisite to having an informed that in 2009, people had far more information about how decision from the electorate, from the citizens, is that they be that new system would operate in their community, in their in possession of the facts and know the details on how the constituency and, ultimately, in the province as a whole. two options — and in the case before us now, four options — Tis group, this government and its allies have no would operate. interest in facilitating the fow of that information. How do What I think we gathered from the experience of the early I know that? I know it because I have participated in meet- 2000s, between 2005 and 2009, is that for all of the interest ings and debates where members of the government side and desire to explore alternatives…. You know, I understand — and I include the Tird Party caucus — have been pres- the appeal of slogans. By defnition, they are meant to be ent to ofer their argument and rationale in support of the appealing. When you say to someone, “Don’t you think proposed change. every vote should count?” I defy you to fnd someone who I remember, at one such gathering, confessing to the audi- would say: “No.” My entry into this chamber occurred 25 ence my amazement that in a forum where people are being years ago, in an election where I persevered over opponents asked, where we’re proponents and detractors, I suppose — by 40-some votes. Believe me, every vote is counted. Every on the negative side of the question, or proponents for the vote counted in that election. system we presently have — the spokespeople for the pro- When you say that to people, I don’t think most people portional representation options, remarkably, refused to talk would nod in disagreement. Or if you say to someone, “Don’t about the options. you think there should be a better way to do this?” in the It is a conversation that takes place entirely in the abstract abstract and in general, people will say: “Well, sure. Tere and entirely guided by slogans. As I say, slogans are great, must be a better way to do everything.” but surely, when people are being asked to make a decision [2:40 p.m.] of this importance, the people promoting that choice should It is when people are asked to compare on the basis of the be in a position, and should be willing, to discuss in detail details, when they are asked and provided an opportunity to the virtues of the options before them. I know that there has take what is most certainly an imperfect present system and been some speculation about: why are members of the gov- compare it to an operational alternative — not to a slogan, ernment unwilling to delve into the details? not to some abstract expression of a principle — that you [2:45 p.m.] begin to see people’s views congeal and reveal themselves in Why are members of the Tird Party unwilling to provide a specifc way, and in a meaningful way. a detailed description and synopsis of how these options Of course, that was the experience between 2005 and would work? Tere are two schools of thought. One is that 2009. In the abstract, people were very drawn to the idea very few people, including members of the government, of experimentation with something new. When they dis- people that are immersed in political life and public covered that they would no longer have a constituency or a afairs…. Tey are unable to describe, in any kind of a mean- riding, their enthusiasm disappeared. Not completely. Tere ingful way, what dual-member proportional representation were still 38 percent, 40 percent of the population that were or mixed-member or rural-urban pro-rep are. Tey’re prepared to take what has now been described as the leap of simply incapable. I think, in some cases, that’s true, because faith, but that was far below what we saw previously. they are incredibly complicated. As information and facts became known about what the But I think there is a more insidious reason. I think it is alternative would look like and how it would operate, a purposeful, strategic decision, because the proponents of people’s enthusiasm for that alternative began to wane. If I this shif understand that as people become more familiar have a criticism — I do, and I have several — of the process with some of these questions — and more familiar with all we are embarked upon now, it is that there seems to me to of the variables and the decisions that have not been made be a deliberate attempt, on the part of the government and of and would not be made until afer a positive result in the ref- those advocating for this change, to ensure that people don’t erendum — their enthusiasm, as it did in 2009, will drop of have the maximum amount of information upon which to dramatically. base an informed choice. I think that’s unfortunate. I was at a debate and discussion, and I waited in vain for When I say “deliberate,” I realize that is perhaps a serious the Tird Party member for Cowichan Valley…. I thought: accusation. I have enough respect for the political acumen “Well, here on this ballot that people are now receiving is an of the people that sit on the other side of the House and the option to elect people by something called rural-urban pro- government benches today to know that they, too, study his- rep.”Tat member and the members opposite are enthusiast- tory. Tey, too, study the phenomenon of electoral reform ic advocates for this as one of the options. I waited in vain for and how it has developed and evolved in British Columbia. her to explain it to the assembled people. Well, what is that? Tey, too, understand this basic fact that the only dif- How does it work? ference between 2005 and 2009 — where the question was I waited for her to explain to people that we would actually the same, where the means by which the non-partisan, non- have two very separate and diferent electoral systems in political option that was developed was the same — besides British Columbia. I waited in vain for her to describe in the result, which saw a dramatic drop-of in support, was detail for the people that, while there were certainly, arguably Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5871

— she thought — virtues to the change in general terms, it time you went to a car lot?” I do not wish to disparage car would mean that there would be less constituency-level elec- dealers. Let me…. ted representatives. Tere was no indication of how the distinction would be Interjection. drawn between rural and urban. People were lef completely in the dark. It’s not as if the member who was advancing the M. de Jong: Tey may be. I remember my last visit to a car cause for proportional representation provided a perfunc- lot some 28 years ago. tory description. She didn’t mention the word. Tis has been You go to the car lot, and the salesperson says to you: repeated over and over in a campaign built around slogans “Well, here’s a car.”You say: “What kind of engine has it got?” and not facts and information. Te dealer says: “Don’t worry. You don’t need to know that. Imagine 29 diferent areas. People want to know, in Surrey, It’s better than the one you’ve got.” “Well, what kind of trans- whether they will have 11 — I think it’s 11 — locally elected mission has it got?” “You don’t need to know that either. MLAs. If you’re someone who believes that this is a change But I guarantee it’s better than the one you’ve got. Trust me. worth pursuing, then have the courage to stand up and say Trust me.” “Well, what does it cost? What does the car cost?” to the people of Surrey: “Under any one of the options being “Don’t worry. It’s a better deal than the one you’ve got.” advanced here, you will not select 11 MLAs locally. It is not Tat reluctance, that hesitancy — and those are the polite possible.” Presumably, you would go on to explain that there terms — the refusal to share with people the factual basis, are other virtues to the system you’re advancing that would the implications of this change and how these other systems compensate for that. would operate and what it would mean for their represent- Te advocates of this change do not want people to ation locally…. Hey, I’ve been on both sides of this in the know the full story. I dare say they don’t want people to election I referred to, Madame Speaker. In 1996 — you’ll know the rationale for why we’re having this conversation appreciate this — the party that I was running with actually in the frst place. pledged to reduce the number of MLAs. Kind of great in [2:50 p.m.] the abstract, until you actually asked someone whether they Unlike nine and 14 years ago, when the motivation wanted to lose their MLA. derived from the work of a non-partisan, unbiased citizens’ People may not have great afection for their politicians, assembly generating an option that was put to the people but try taking one away. Yet that is what this will do. It will in unbiased and non-partisan terms, everything about this reduce…. exercise we are engaged in today derives from a partisan [2:55 p.m.] exercise to secure and cling to power. Tere is no way that It must necessarily reduce the ability…. Te member from I can think of to camoufage the fact that, but for a political the Kootenays, who I have some afection for, says that it deal between two political parties, we would not be having won’t. Except it will, in terms of their ability, the imposition this discussion today. It was the cost of grabbing power, of party lists, the imposition of a leader’s ability to determine the objective of grabbing power and clinging to power. Tat those lists. strikes me as the worst of all possible reasons for advancing We can go through…. None of these questions has been a change, a fundamental change, to one of the fundamental settled yet — 29 diferent variables that the government and pillars of our democratic process. proponents of this change and the Green Party refuse to I repeat: the issue here is not whether people should have answer frst. the right, from time to time, to express a clear opinion on “We didn’t have time.” Now, I don’t know who the “we” how they wish to elect their politicians. We’ve demonstrated refers to in that sentence, but I’ve heard that. “We didn’t have — I’ve demonstrated — that we are wholeheartedly in favour time.” Well, actually, British Columbia had all kinds of time. of that. But their involvement in that exercise should not be Two political parties apparently didn’t have time. Tat, again, manipulated in the way that it is through this exercise. How is a terrible basis upon which to manipulate a particular pro- else, as I have heard other speakers comment, do you explain cess like this and manipulate a particular result. the introduction of this legislation at this time? Te ability, the desire, the advisability from time to time Te members on the government side, just a moment ago, of consulting with people about the question of electoral were talking about this being the fulflment of some long- reform is not one you will get any quarrel from me on. held desire and pledge. Well, how is it that in the middle of Now, I haven’t spoken at all — nor will I, given the amount when ballots are being mailed to people, we fnd ourselves of time — about the virtues of proportional representation embroiled in a debate about the actual exercise? Well, that versus what we’ve got. Many other people, particularly in the suggests to me that there is a desire to manipulate, as Ofcial Opposition, have spoken eloquently about how this opposed to inform. province has been served by this electoral system. I have heard all kinds of examples, some of them quite col- I think people need to be very suspicious of going to the ourful, about what is happening through this exercise and democratic car lot and being told by the salespeople: “You what the citizens are being subjected to. But it really does don’t need to know. You don’t need to know who’s going to remind me of…. Members will say: “Well, when was the last create the lists. You don’t need to know what will happen to 5872 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 your constituency. You don’t need to know how many con- heard nothing but glowing about how bright the Attorney stituencies there will be.” Tat is something that every single General is. So one would have to conclude that maybe it’s British Columbian should be worried about, because it goes the former option as to what is going on and why we’re deal- to the heart of what is driving this attempt at reform in the ing with Bill 40 today in the middle of a referendum, as frst place. people are trying to make up their minds how to vote, as We will continue to speak out about not just the substance they’re receiving their ballots. We are standing in the Legis- of what is being promoted, but equally importantly, the man- lature debating legislation that fundamentally changes some ner in which it is being promoted and the manner in which people’s decision-making nature. I have a problem with that. important and vital information has been withheld from I have a problem with that because we dealt with this bill, British Columbians. the broader bill around proportional representation, back in I have a prediction. I’ve long ago given up on consulting the spring session. Back then it was a mad rush to get the bill or reading polls or relying upon them, so I say this without brought forward and dealt with. any regard for what apparently are public opinion surveys Why was this not dealt with back in the spring? Certainly, that show a split between supporters and opponents of what the government was talking about enabling a second vote, is being advanced here. two elections past, if PR passes and goes forward. Tey were I believe this: despite the eforts of the government, des- talking about it then. Why was it not part of the legislation? pite the eforts of the Premier, despite the eforts of the Tird Why was it not enshrined in legislation back then? Well, Party, people are going to begin to learn more about these because it was just a loose commitment that was made, and three options. Not one, as was promised, but three — two of as the pressure starts to mount, as people start to realize which, I’m advised, don’t exist anywhere else in the world so there is no information and there are no guarantees, we see can’t even be pointed to as an example. this last-minute ditch to circumvent democracy in a pitch to I believe people are going to learn more about these try to tell people that the new systems would actually be bet- options. I believe that despite the eforts of the government ter for democracy. to withhold information from them, they will obtain that Tere’s a big problem with that, and the timelines just information, and they will inform themselves as to the neg- don’t add up. I hazard to say that if the members of govern- ative implications of making that change and what it will ment and the Tird Party were on the opposition benches mean for democracy in B.C. and local representation right right now and were watching this debacle of a process around the province. unfold, well, the term “lighting your hair on fre” would be We, on the opposition side, certainly intend to do our part an understatement, I would suggest, for the members oppos- to facilitate that fow of information. We, in the opposition, ite, because there is nothing about this whole process that certainly intend to do our part to make sure people have the makes any sense and that can stand any scrutiny whatsoever. material and information they need. Tough I will say this. It When you look at the Elections B.C. documents on what is difcult to overcome the obstacles that have been placed in this could mean for us, even Elections B.C. has had to use the path of those who want to make an informed choice. But very loose language to give the voters an impression of what we will do our best. We will continue to speak for informed might happen. But they can’t actually tell you in their doc- decision-making on the part of the citizens. ument what will happen. In fact, on this specifc bill, in [3:00 p.m.] Elections B.C.’s own handout, although it actually references Tis, in my view, does not qualify — this process that has that the government has promised a second referendum two been unleashed. For that reason, I will be voting with my col- elections afer, which Bill 40 speaks to, there is no legislation leagues strongly against the provisions of this bill. in place. Tat is why the precursory language Elections B.C. has to use is: “If a proportional representation voting system P. Milobar: It gives me great pleasure to rise to speak to is adopted, government has said that afer the referendum,” Bill 40. Admittedly, I wish it was on a diferent topic than and then it goes on to list some bullet points. this. Just to let you know, Madame Speaker, I will be our des- I have a little bit of time today, so I’ll get into those bullet ignated speaker for second reading on this bill. points over the next little short time that we have together As I rise to speak to Bill 40…. From the previous speaker, here. Te interesting piece is that the last bullet point in this we heard a lot of the concerns. It strikes me that we’re speak- particular section says: “Another referendum will be held ing to Bill 40, a piece of legislation that directly afects afer two general elections to see if B.C. wants to keep the people’s decision-making process, in the middle of a refer- new voting system or go back to using frst-past-the-post.” endum, while they’re receiving ballots in the mail. It leads [3:05 p.m.] one to consider that either this has been complete, ham-fs- Now, again, Elections B.C.’s hands are tied pretty hard try- ted incompetence on the part of the Attorney General, or it’s ing to create this document, trying to be impartial, unlike been a deliberate attempt to try to sway voters at the eleventh the Attorney General has been, trying to give people some hour, as the government started to see support start to erode information. But to the average person who’s not deeply for this bill and this PR referendum. ingrained into the nuances of how legislation works and Now, I’m still new to this House — relatively new. I’ve things work in this chamber, the fact that half a page up Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5873 it says, “government has said,” but then further down it’s voting for anything that’s concrete. Why did the government worded as if it’s already happened in legislation…. It really is not bring forward that legislation that would have actually quite disturbing that that information was hanging out there put, in concrete terms, what it would mean with those three and developed. It would have to have been getting developed systems? Instead, what they brought forward, as a late piece months before this bill came before the House. of legislation, is Bill 40, which is a blatant way to try to sway Te very bill we’re debating is already mentioned in Elec- people in the middle of an election. tions B.C. and would give the average layperson out there the [3:10 p.m.] impression the government had already dealt with this in the We have three systems to choose from. Ranked ballot. You spring when we were dealing with the legislation — but no. get to choose your preference. Unlike yesterday, when we Again, either total ham-fsted incompetence or an attempt were hearing the Premier continually say that our leadership to try to inject the government back into the referendum by race was done under proportional representation…. It wasn’t using the full weight of the provincial government behind done that way. It was done the exact same way the second them, while we are being told that we can’t do something as question on the ballot is being done. It’s being done in a way simple as a $5 boost on Facebook to try to inform our con- where you rank your preferences, and you move forward. stituents around this issue. We don’t have a leader that suddenly gets to be leader on Make no mistake about it. We can see exactly where this Sundays and someone else gets to be leader on Tuesdays and goes. If Bill 40 passes, there will undoubtedly be the ava- Tursdays. Tat’s not what we have. Tat’s not what our end lanche of government news releases and statements being goal was. Tat’s not what our end target was. issued out to the broader media, using the resources of the For the Premier and others to say that our system of elect- government of B.C.’s communications department to convey ing a leader was proportional representation is just fat out what the government has just passed into law. A bill that wrong. But given how many over-the-top statements we’ve they’re passing into law, that they’ve given everybody the been hearing from the members opposite, it’s not surprising. impression, including Elections B.C., was already there. Again, either it’s intentionally trying to make people have a If it was simply a promise, why do we need this bill? You’re diferent opinion of what’s happening, or it’s just pure incom- probably asking yourself. I know I certainly am. Because this petence of not understanding what these systems are — yet bill cannot bind future legislatures to its action. It simply you’re championing these systems at the same time. cannot. And the government full well knows that. You know When you go to the confdence and supply agreement — how I know that the government knows that? Because the the confdence and supply agreement that actually enables very piece of legislation this bill would amend right now was the government to be in power right now — interestingly amended to make the other rules for this very referendum. enough, their number one bullet was proportional repres- Te referendum act was amended by this government in entation. Tat’s the number one priority between the NDP the spring to create the rules that we’re running this current and the Green Party in this document. Te number one referendum under. So for anyone to think that this piece of thing they want to work on. legislation has to be acted on by a future legislature, let alone Te interesting thing is…. If you want to talk about two elections down the road…. Tat’s disingenuous at best. broken promises, it’s all right here in this document. First It would have actually been, I guess, more forthcoming to of…. And they agreed to this. Both sides agreed to this people if the government had just lef it as a promise, a vague as a way to govern. “A referendum on proportional repres- promise. Now, we know they’ve walked away from most of entation will take place in the fall of 2018, concurrent with their promises when it comes to this, but they could have lef the next municipal election.” Well, it didn’t take long for the it as a vague promise. At least then we wouldn’t be standing Attorney General to walk away from that. in this House debating, using up massive amounts of gov- It’s interesting, for a government that has no problem ernment resources for the government to be able to promote shovelling money of the back of a truck, suddenly the single their position and try to allay the fears of people that what biggest concern when it came to how we were going to use they’re voting for is ultimately a massive train wreck. our democracy and choose our democracy moving forward When we start to look at the systems, there is no infor- was the cost. Tat was the excuse for not going to some mation. What we’re being asked to do is vote for frst-past- form of a general election, which municipal government the-post or an ideal. Tat’s your frst question on the ballot. elections…. Although they’re not technically a general elec- Would you like to see the current frst-past-the-post system, tion, given that every municipal council and every school or would you like to see the ideal of proportional repres- district in B.C. has an election on the same day, one could entation? You’re not matching system to system and saying, argue that’s a very close second. “Which do you prefer?” to the public. No. You’re matching Tat promise — out the window and gone. I don’t know an ideal with an actual, tangible system. Not exactly a level what the point was of even putting it in, if less than a week playing feld. later, they decided to walk away from this type of a commit- Ten we move to the second question. Tere you’re voting ment. How much faith should the public have with the nego- for three diferent titles, and that’s it. You’re not voting for tiation document, moving forward, for any government, if any structure behind any of those three systems. You’re not 5874 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 this is how little credibility they put into their own words in al-urban is the best system ever. But if they had to be asked ink in such a short time frame? for a second option, it would be frst-past-the-post because “Te form of proportional representation approved in the they don’t like mixed-member or they don’t like dual-mem- referendum will be enacted for the next provincial election.” ber. But they’re not being asked to make that direct compar- Of course, that goes on a little bit later on to make sure that ison of those three systems with frst-past-the-post. No, it’s the Greens toe the line with the NDP.Tat’s only if they actu- an ideal of proportional representation versus frst-past-the- ally run out the House and make it all the way to 2021. Tey post. Ten we start to compare systems together. don’t want the public to realize that. Tey bury that one a Again, if it wasn’t trying to be so rigged and so blatant, you little bit further down the road because, although they like to would almost think this was all made up, but it’s not. We’re say they’re all about open and transparent government, their living it in real time. So let’s go back to the Voter’s Guide, the actions certainly don’t demonstrate that. guide that says: “If a proportional representation voting sys- “Te parties agree that they will work together in good tem is adopted, the government has said that afer the ref- faith to consult British Columbians to determine the form erendum, a legislative committee will determine how some of proportional representation that will be put to a referen- aspects of the new system will work.” dum.” Te “form” of proportional representation — not the Whenever we point this out, the members opposite and forms. Either there’s a spelling error in this document, either the people within the pro-PR side of Fair Vote scream and someone forgot the “s” or it’s another broken promise by the yell that we’re fearmongering. “Oh, we’re fearmongering. same two parties that are saying: “Oh, just take a leap of faith. Tat’s not true. Tat’s not true. Tere’s no way that can be Don’t worry about it. Trust us. What could go wrong?” true.” Well, it says it right here. “A legislative committee will Well, plenty could go wrong. If it is so untrustworthy of a determine how some aspects of the new system will work.” coalition that the public can’t even count on them to stand Yeah, like 29 aspects of how this will work. So no, this isn’t behind their own words…. Yes, I use “words” in a plural fearmongering. Tis is actual black and white, right from sense because there’s more than one on this paper, so if they Elections B.C. meant to pluralize forms, they really need to get somebody An independent Electoral Boundaries Commission will that can proofread a little bit better. Believe me, I’m not that determine the number and boundaries of the electoral dis- person. My grammar skills are lacking at best. tricts and regions represented in the Legislature. Tat sounds [3:15 p.m.] pretty good. Tat sounds pretty fair, actually. And that’s actu- “Te parties agree to both campaign actively in support of ally what is expected — that the Electoral Boundaries Com- the agreed-upon form” — again, singular, so I don’t think it mission will do this from time to time. Tey do regularly. was a spelling mistake afer all — “of proportional represent- Te total number of MLAs in the Legislature will be ation.” Well, we certainly saw that last night in all its glory. between 87 and 95. Currently there are 87. Now, why We haven’t seen a TV debate at all, but we sure saw the power is that important? Because the bullet point right before of the government wanting to make sure that they were liv- said that it would be an independent Electoral Boundaries ing up to that clause. Commission, and they would determine the number. Te Tat’s part of the problem. We have three systems now on independent Electoral Boundaries Commission will deter- a ballot. If the government was truly interested in making mine the number and boundaries of the electoral districts this even remotely a fair fght…. and regions represented in the Legislature, yet here’s the I’ll get into the vote thresholds that have been changed government directing the independent Electoral Bound- and amended within this same piece of legislation. When aries Commission that they can’t go over the number 95. people say: “Oh, don’t worry. Once it’s in legislation, it can’t Tat’s the magic number. change….” Yes, it can, because we’ve seen this government It’s not really independent. It sounds kind of like going to change this legislation already. the BCUC and telling them that you’re going to freeze hydro Te three forms. If they really wanted to have a fair fght rates and then fnding out you can’t actually do that. Again, on this, why not have one simple question? Why not have totally misleading to the people about what the overall inten- one preferential ranked system — second question? Instead tions are. of having three systems, why not add a fourth? Why not [3:20 p.m.] add frst-past-the-post and ask people to rank in order what You can’t have it both ways. You can’t tell people that an they feel would be the best system of democracy in British independent Electoral Boundaries Commission will deter- Columbia, one through four, and have them pick that? mine the number and size of ridings and then turn around Instead, what we have in the frst question — and hopefully in literally the next sentence and say: “But by the way, the member can follow me on this because it seems to be we’re capping that. We’re telling you, independent Elect- confusing — compares frst-past-the-post with the ideal of oral Boundaries Commission, that you’re not really that proportional representation, not on the system of propor- independent. We’re telling you that even if you want to tional representation. have 99 ridings, if you want to have 105 ridings, you’re not Tere are all sorts of people out there — and this is why allowed to.” they’re not putting all four together — that might think rur- You’re not independent. You are now being directed by Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5875 the government on how many ridings, maximum, you’re gering. If it’s accurate, we’re pointing out the facts, as spelled allowed. In fact, you’re also saying there’s the minimum out by Elections B.C. number. You’re saying: “No, you can’t go below what we cur- Te pro–prop rep people don’t want you to hear any of rently have either.” Well, how’s that letting them be inde- that. No. What they would prefer is that you blindly go in pendent? I highly doubt they would shrink the number of and…. What is it called? Oh, that’s right: a leap of faith. Just ridings. But how is that letting them be independent? It’s not. take a great leap of faith with two parties that can’t even Again, it’s another little carrot to try to confuse the voter, live up to basic promises about how the question would be to try to make everyone think that it’s sunshine and roses all structured in the referendum. Take a leap of faith with two the time. Well, even unicorns give of methane, and people parties that have gerrymandered as much as they possibly need to understand that. could in this process to the point we’re now debating legisla- Tose are some of the problems within the actual “How to tion as it directly afects people’s decision-making abilities in Vote,”because it doesn’t actually have a whole lot. Now, when the middle of the election. they go into that, starting to describe…. Again, these are Tis isn’t even like just pre-writ period. Tis is the equival- Elections B.C.’s words. Tese are their words put out there, ent, and maybe they’ll wind up doing this…. Because when with the contradictions, with the assumptions that this piece the House dissolves for an election in the writ period, we’re of legislation we’re debating in Bill 40 today was already no longer MLAs, but the cabinet still exists. I would fully passed. So there was an oopsie. But maybe it wasn’t really an expect this current crew will probably call a cabinet meeting oopsie. Maybe it was a preplanned attempt to try to inject mid-election and ofer everybody a chicken in every pot or themselves into the middle of a referendum while people are something like that, just to try to make sure that everyone sitting at home with ballots. Not really sure. understands that they’re listening to them. Tey’ll call a cab- It says, right from the Elections B.C. site, as they’re inet meeting and add to the kitty so that people mid-election describing the systems, how they describe prop rep. Again, will fnd out and maybe sway their vote a little bit. when we say this, we get told we’re fearmongering. Tese are [3:25 p.m.] the actual words from the Elections B.C. “How to Vote” doc- Tat’s what this is the equivalent of. Tis is trying to inter- ument — all the information that you need to know. “Tends fere in the middle of an election period by introducing new to elect candidates from large and small parties and result in information, by introducing new legislation that should have multi-party or coalition governments.” been taken care of. And if it hadn’t been, they should have When we point that out, we’re fearmongering that there’s remained silent on it, not trying to pretend that they’re still going to be smaller parties controlling the coalition, even being neutral in the Attorney General’s ofce by bringing though it’s actually happening in real time right in front of this forward. It should have been: “No, we’ll wait until afer.” our eyes, where you see a party with three seats controlling Tat’s why it was so disappointing the hoist motion didn’t what’s happening in this House and propping up the govern- move forward yesterday, as well, because that would have ment and walking away from all sorts of promises they’ve given a six-month delay in something that isn’t supposed to made even about proportional representation. be triggered for 3½ years anyway. What diference did the Te one thing you would think they would actually live up hoist motion make to let it delay for six months? Oh, because to is their commitments around proportional representation they wouldn’t be able to stand up and say that they passed and how the vote would unfold, but that just went totally legislation, which they know can get repealed anyway, in the out the window — not even with an updated addendum, middle of an election. explaining to people: “Well, you know what? We’ve changed Let’s look at the three systems. Dual-member proportion- our agreement.” We’ve got a $1 million secretariat. You’d al. Sounds wonderful in name. What does it mean? What think they could have fgured out a way to pay for the editing does dual-member proportional mean? Oh, strangely of the document to update it. But no, they didn’t do that. But enough, dual-member proportional is not currently in use we’re the fearmongers out of all of this. anywhere in the world, so there’s no actual relevant example Ten you look and you see…. Oh, look at that. Districts you can point to and at least get an idea of where they may under frst-past-the-post…. Again, from Elections B.C.’s be headed with this. own document: “Districts are smaller than in proportional No. Dual-member proportional is one of those lovely systems.” Under frst-past-the-post, under our current sys- ideals that has 29 things that, afer you take your leap of faith, tem, electoral districts are smaller than under proportional the government will pat you on the head and tell you what’s systems. Directly from the Elections B.C. document. good for you. What we’ve seen so far is that the only thing You don’t get to have it both ways. You don’t get to wrap they seem concerned about is fguring out what’s good for yourself in this independent body of Elections B.C. and say, them and their Green partners. “Oh, well, their document — see, it’s all right there,”and then Mixed-member. Mixed-member is in use in parts of the whenever we point out what’s actually in their document, world, and mixed-member routinely gets rejected when we’re fearmongering. You either accept their document as we’ve had independent citizens’ assemblies look at systems. accurate, or you don’t. But if it’s accurate, we’re not fearmon- But at least it’s in use. At least the Attorney General put one 5876 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 system of the three in the referendum that actually is in use Now, I recognize that everyone likes to think that where somewhere in the world. they live is urban or rural. Depending on what your belief Again, we’re lef to guess. We’re lef to guess what the size system is, you might not even want to be thought of as in of our riding will be. We’re lef to guess how many MLAs you an urban area. You might take great pride, and I understand will have. We’re lef to guess whether or not there will be geo- why, in the rural lifestyle — a wonderful lifestyle. graphic restrictions on how those appointed MLAs come in and out of ridings. We’re lef to guess all of those. [R. Chouhan in the chair.] What we hear from people who are pro-PR is: “Don’t worry. Ten I’ll have someone representing me in my area I come from Kamloops. Most people in Kamloops would that represents my views.” Well, there is no guarantee, in consider Kamloops to be a very urban city. Most people my area, if you voted Green, that you’re getting appointed would consider Nanaimo to be a very urban city. Tey would a Green MLA when they start to balance out where all the consider Prince George a very urban city. Especially if they MLAs have to represent. Tere’s no guarantee, if you voted live in, say, Barriere, just outside of my community, they for the NDP, that you’re getting an NDP MLA Tere’s no would consider Kamloops to be urban. Kamloops would guarantee you’re getting another B.C. Liberal MLA. Just that consider Barriere to have a much more rural lifestyle — lar- there’ll be a balancing pool. ger lots, single-family homes, acreages. Tat’s all that there will be: a balancing pool. But we don’t I think that’s a fair assessment around the province. I know where they will live, because they can’t tell you that. think people self-identify with what type of community they Again, not fearmongering, just facts out of the Elections B.C. live in. Unfortunately, because there is absolutely no inform- handbook, plain and simple, right there in black and white ation, no one knows what the legal defnition is, under pro- — can’t tell you; doesn’t exist. portional representation, between rural and urban. Let’s go to rural-urban, speaking of something that doesn’t Again, coming from Kamloops, we always just call it Van- exist. Rural-urban doesn’t exist anywhere. In fact, it’s my couver. “Where are you going?” “I’m going to Vancouver. I’m understanding that rural-urban was actually designed by the going to the coast. I’m going to the Lower Mainland.” Tat’s organization that’s now the pro-PR champion. Isn’t that con- what you say. I’m sure Kelowna says the same thing. You venient? don’t worry about boundaries. You don’t say: “Well, I’m spe- Talk about a nice, wide separation between the Attorney cifcally going to Richmond, then I’m going to go across the General and organizations that are trying to promote PR. bridge into Vancouver for an hour, then I’m going to head What a wonderful thing that Fair Vote was able to design east and go over to Burnaby, and then I’m going to move a system that doesn’t exist anywhere in the world and have over to Coquitlam.” You just say you’re going to Vancouver the Attorney General include it in our referendum. Aren’t we for the weekend, to visit family or go to a concert. special? Aren’t we so privileged that this has happened? Tat’s wonderful, but that doesn’t help you in legal defn- Let’s look into the rural-urban a little bit. With rural-urb- itions. Is Chilliwack rural or urban? Chilliwack’s population an, if you’re in the rural, you would elect your members by a is not that far of from Kamloops these days. Or Prince mixed-member, which is also, strangely enough, the second George? Where is the dividing line? Abbotsford has seen option on the ballot. Mixed-member, I would point out, was great growth over the last little while. Is Abbotsford rural or rejected by the all-citizens’ assembly twice as an option for urban? No one can tell us. British Columbia. So the rural people, under rural-urban, Te interesting thing is that if you ask people in Van- will get to be governed under a system that has actually been couver, their perception is probably that Chilliwack and rejected twice by a citizens’ assembly in this province. Abbotsford would still be considered somewhat rural. I But it can’t be all bad, because urban has a diferent voting don’t think many people living in Abbotsford would con- system. Let’s take a look at that system. Well, the urban sider themselves rural these days. We don’t know, and people will vote under single transferable vote. Now, does that’s the problem. that sound familiar to you? We’re being asked to vote on three names. You’re not being [3:30 p.m.] asked to vote on three systems that have been defned as to It should, because single transferable vote was actually how they’re going to operate within this province. You don’t what the citizens’ assembly twice came up with as the most know where your ridings are going to be. You don’t know if workable proportional representation system for British everything north of Kamloops, up to the Yukon border and Columbia, but the only way it shows up on this ballot is blen- from the Pacifc Ocean over to the Alberta border, becomes ded into this rural-urban monstrosity which has just been a one riding. You don’t know if it becomes two ridings. theoretically composed system. It’s never actually been used We see it with health authorities, where you have compet- anywhere. It hasn’t been attempted to be used anywhere. ing interests of similar-sized cities within that same health Single transferable vote has been rejected by the voters of authority. Can you only imagine, if it’s not split up right, tak- this province twice — not once but twice. Te much-vaunted ing into account those types of scenarios? Because we don’t rural-urban option consists of two systems that have been know, the only way the Premier can answer that question — soundly rejected by the populace of the province. and he said it very clearly at UBCM — is: let’s take a leap of Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5877 faith. Tat’s his new out, his answer, because he can’t actu- chose to go in a diferent direction for four years, eight years. ally answer with any detail whether somebody lives in a rural Who knows? It’s their choice. Tey live in Ontario. Tey get area or an urban area. their free will and their free vote. I would suggest that most people in Surrey, Vancouver Ontario election results, 2018: 76 of the 124 seats went and, probably, the capital regional district can safely assume to the governing party. Tat works out to 61.29 percent of that they’re considered urban, but where does the boundary the seats in the House, and they received 40.5 percent of the lie? Where does the boundary lie, even on Vancouver Island? vote. It’s not dissimilar to what we’ve seen in results in this Does it just encompass all the way up to Nanaimo and cut of chamber over the years, both when the NDP were in power there — go up the Malahat from Victoria and cut of north by actually winning and when the B.C. Liberals or Socreds of Nanaimo and call it a day, and everyone else north from — or any other party name you care to come up with — were there is considered rural? Or does it cut of just outside of governing. Victoria and the capital regional district area, and everything Ten I thought: “Well, it can’t just be that they’re trying else on the Island is considered rural? to put this big right-wing conspiracy theory of unfairness [3:35 p.m.] out there.” I thought: “Well, let’s look at what happened next Where and how does Nanaimo ft into this whole scheme door.” Tere’s another NDP government in Canada that’s of rural-urban? How does Kamloops? How does Kelowna? right next door to us. It’s been in existence since 2015. I’m Kelowna, I would guess, would be considered urban. Its pop- thinking: “Well, that must have been a much, much better ulation is a little bit larger than ours. However, a lot of what result in terms of aligning with the ideals of PR, because cer- draws Kelowna’s strength as a regional base is that they have tainly, the government has never once mentioned the worry relatively larger communities — Vernon, Penticton — about about the election results in Alberta.” 45 minutes either side of them. Let’s look at those for 2015, the most recent election in Well, is Vernon going to be considered rural or urban? Alberta. Ironically enough, Alberta has 87 seats — that num- Is Penticton rural or urban? What about Salmon Arm? Sal- ber sounds familiar, because that’s how many seats we have mon Arm is 30,000 or 35,000 people. Te people who live in this House — and 54 went to the governing NDP in right inside Salmon Arm probably think they’re urban. Tey Alberta. Te NDP in Alberta won the majority of seats and probably want to be considered urban. didn’t need to cut a third-party deal to try to be able to gov- I know that economic development ofcers and people ern. Tey won. Congratulations to them. that market areas would want to know what they’re market- I assumed that it would be closer to PR. Tey won 62.06 ing. I can tell you, for a certain industry, especially if you’re percent of the seats. Contrast that to Ontario, which was going afer high-tech jobs, especially if you’re trying to get 61.29. So they actually won more of a percentage of seats the people that want to work at home or be innovators and than in Ontario. However, in Alberta, strangely enough, they entrepreneurs, it’s a lot easier to advertise yourself as an urb- had 40.57 percent of the vote, almost identical to what an centre than as a rural centre, because rural comes with happened in Ontario. other challenges. It comes with lack of Internet access or [3:40 p.m.] high-speed Internet, or cell service is spotty at times. Yet we never hear, from the other side, the crying: “How Tat’s what goes into people’s minds. It doesn’t mean it bad it is for the electorate in Alberta. How horrible the happens everywhere in a rural area, but that’s the public per- democratic process has been, because of what happened in ception. And perception is king, which is why the perception Alberta. I can’t believe people in Alberta have to live with around introducing Bill 40 in the middle of a referendum, such tyranny, that 40 percent of the vote got 62 percent of the while people are receiving their ballots, is horrible. Again, seats.” We never hear that. We never hear that from the other it’s either total incompetence by the Attorney General, or it’s side. Tey seem to say it a lot about Ontario, with the exact something much worse than that. If it’s total incompetence, same numbers, literally almost rounding-error numbers. But it’s a little scary that he’s the Attorney General. NDP math has always been a little bit diferent, so that’s okay. Now, we have heard in this House many times, from the I can understand that, I guess. government and the members of the Tird Party propping Let’s look at another thing we keep hearing. We keep them up, that Ontario is a perfect example of what’s wrong hearing: “Oh, you know this would make things much bet- with democracy — a perfect example because of what ter. People would work across party lines. People would happened in Ontario in 2018. It’s very interesting when you work together. People would have to work together.” Well, want to start looking at election results. It struck me the oth- there’s nothing stopping the Premier and the House Lead- er day as I was hearing this. I thought I would actually look er from working with us, nothing whatsoever. Unless I’m into it and try to get some facts. Again, because they’re facts, unaware of some piece of legislation that says we can’t I might get accused of fearmongering, I guess. Nonetheless, work together, there’s nothing stopping that from happen- we’ll give it a try. ing right now. We don’t need to change the voting system Ontario. Let’s see if this argument is strictly an ideology- to have that actually happen. driven argument because the members of this current gov- In fact, when the B.C. Liberals were in government, I seem ernment are unhappy that the will of the people in Ontario to recall — now I wasn’t here but just observing from afar — 5878 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 the occasional private member’s bill that would get brought government wants people to think is that if you vote for PR, forward, and the government, the B.C. Liberal government, that will change. would call it for a vote. In fact, there was one that the Green [3:45 p.m.] Party brought forward just before the election, and it got Well, we already have a minority government that’s held brought forward for a vote. up by a coalition, and it hasn’t changed. So you’re telling me Now, I say that because we keep hearing about this nir- the only way they’re going to change their ways is if the vot- vana of PR — that all of a sudden we’ll start every day by ing system changes? singing kumbaya, and we’ll have s’mores at the end of every Well, all the voting system change will do is result in a day, and everyone will go home happy and have a nice cup of minority coalition government that will operate under the hot cocoa, and the world will be wonderful under PR in this same rules of the House that they currently do, which says chamber. that they get to decide whether or not to call a bill for debate. Tat’s not actually stopping it from happening right now. It’s a totally misleading way to try to frame up to people that Te only thing stopping it from happening right now is that somehow PR changes how this House operates versus how it the Premier refuses to allow it to happen. Te Premier currently operates. refuses to allow private members’ bills to come forward. Te only change that’s needed to operate this House dif- Right now, if we go into the orders of the day, you will see, in ferently is for the leadership within government to actually black and white, 20. Tere are 20 outstanding private mem- change how they operate and allow private members’ bills to bers’ bills sitting there. be debated. Tey might not all get passed. Tey might get Not one of them will be called for debate in this House. defeated. I think people on opposition sides of the House Tey’re all stuck at second reading, which, for the people at would fully expect that. home, since I have a little bit of time, I’ll explain. When it’s Given that we know, by way of memos, that there’s no way stuck in second reading, the government gets to decide what government members are going to dissent with each other, bills we debate. we know they’re voting as a block. We have free votes on our Right now we’re debating Bill 40. As we saw earlier, last side of the House. I’m not so sure they do, based on some week, the government needed to change the order to get a paperwork, on the other side. Te Greens say that they have piece of legislation through, as is their right. Tey’re totally free votes, yet they seem to vote pretty much in unison every within their rights to do that, so that’s what they did. Tey single time. So they’re very similar in their thinking. put Bill 40 on hold while we were debating it, this bill, and Again, right from Elections B.C.: “result in multiparty or they brought in a diferent bill that we started to debate. coalition governments.” Tat’s what PR does. Tat’s what we Tey’re totally within their rights to do that. Every gov- have right now. Yet you’re being told the only way govern- ernment does it. I don’t take issue with that. I’m just trying ment will actually change and work diferently is if they have to give a little background to the people listening at home, a multiparty coalition government. We have a multiparty because they don’t necessarily follow, day in, day out, the coalition government. intricacies of how this place works. Tey refuse to call private members’ bills for debate. Tey When a bill goes to second reading…. Almost all private even refuse to call private members’ bills of their own minor- members’ bills get the courtesy of second reading. Te reas- ity partner in this endeavour. I wouldn’t want to own a busi- on they get that courtesy is because no debate has actually ness with them if I didn’t have 51 percent of the shares. Tat’s happened on them yet. A member stands up, introduces the for sure. Because the government would sure tell you how bill and explains roughly what the bill is. It gets frst reading. things are going to be, because they won’t even call a junior It gets second reading, and it gets put on hold. member’s bill for debate. Whether or not we debate at second reading, which is Tere is just so much wrong with Bill 40 being interjected what we’re doing now…. And although we call it a debate, I into the middle of a vote. would suggest, to the average person at home…. Tey view Now, we talked about past referendums. We talked about this as speeches. It’s not the same as a television debate. It why information is so vitally important for people, because I is speeches, where we’re providing our opinions, but people have every faith in the electorate. We saw it play out in muni- don’t stand up and point-counterpoint back and forth on the cipal elections. We see it play out time and time again. Te fy, not like a television debate would be. electorate pays more attention when it’s time to pay atten- At any rate, you have a private member’s bill. It gets taken tion than we give them credit for, and they’re starting to pay to second reading. But whether or not it gets debated is 100 attention. Unfortunately, there is no information for them to percent in the purview of the government. So although the grab on to, and I think that’s why you’re seeing the govern- opposition and members of the Tird Party have brought ment start to panic. Tat’s why you’re seeing the government forward 20 private members’ bills that are sitting right now try to introduce Bill 40. on second reading, not one of them has been called for In 2005, afer the non-partisan citizens’ assembly of, I debate. Te government could pick any one of those to call believe, about 160 people came up with a defnitive form for debate. But the government chooses not to. What the of proportional representation to vote for versus frst-past- Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5879 the-post, that was defeated. In 2009, when a very similar “Spring to fall 2019. Based on the priorities of Yukoners, the inde- assembly was set up, it was handily defeated. pendent commission will create recommendations for what the gov- ernment of Yukon should do next. Tey might do research or more Why I say information is very important is that there was public engagement to make the best possible recommendations. You critical, new information added in 2009. People saw riding might be asked for your input again here, depending on how the com- maps. People saw what would happen to the area they live mission decides to do its work.” in and how they would be treated under the system. And Not the Attorney General, no; the independent citizens’ in 2009, as people gained more information, they said no in commission. much more signifcant numbers than the frst time. Why is that signifcant? Because the promise by the “Fall 2019. Te government of Yukon will look at the recommend- ations and decide how to proceed.” Greens and the NDP says that they will put together an agreed-upon form of proportional representation — not a Now, that is how you put together a consultation piece mixture of three other systems, not a mixture where two of around electoral reform. Tat’s what we’ve been saying all the three systems have never been tried anywhere else in the along. Tis whole process is so fawed. Tis whole process is world, not a system where one of the three has been invented so fundamentally wrong that it is now requiring the govern- by the very people the government then gave authorization ment, in the middle of it, in the middle of the actual elec- for a half a million dollars to go out and spend and promote tion…. You can vote. If you have received your package in their own system that they invented. the mail today, you are legally allowed to vote. And while Tat’s not what’s in the confdence and supply agreement. you are legally allowed to vote, we are standing here talking Tey can’t even live up to their own confdence and supply about a piece of legislation, trying to amend into law, at least agreement, and they expect people to take a leap of faith. for the time being, what people might be able to base their Tey say: “Oh, don’t worry about it. Aferwards, we’ll operate decision on voting for. It is wrong. so much better.” Well, the rules of this House aren’t changing Bill 40 is fundamentally wrong. Bill 40 should not be in in this referendum. the House in the middle of a referendum. It’s just not right. [3:50 p.m.] It goes against all forms of proper democratic process. You If the rules in this House aren’t changing and we have a can’t have an election lawn sign up within 100 metres of a current coalition minority government — which, in Elec- voting place on election day, but we can stand in the House tions B.C.’s own words, tends to be elected under proportion- during an election day and debate the rules around what al representation — and we have zero of the 20 private mem- people are going to be voting on? How can you even take that bers’ bills that have been brought forward up for debate, I seriously? It is beyond ridiculous. don’t quite understand what’s going to change. Nothing will change, except for a rigged referendum meant to do nothing Interjection. more than serve the political interests of the Green Party. If you took the percentage of votes from the last election P. Milobar: Yeah. Tat’s the other wonderful thing. While and looked at what happened in this House, the B.C. Liberals people are going to cast their ballot, when you’re not allowed would have 36 seats. Te NDP would have 36 seats. Without to have election signage up within 100 metres, people from electing one more member, the Green Party would have 15. Vote PR were allowed to hand out literature on the referen- Te Green Party would be self-appointing 12 more people dum. How does that work? Talk about…. without receiving one more vote in the last election, without [3:55 p.m.] winning one more riding in the last election. Our parties Tere are even laws and bylaws in place that say if you’re would both drop down to 36 seats each. Te only party in at an ATM machine, it’s a no-go zone for panhandling this House that would beneft under the results of the last because you’re too much of an easy ask for people. We pro- election in a PR system would be the Green Party, the same tect people at the ATM so that they can’t get panhandled. party that is propping up the government. We protect people driving to the polling station so that Let’s look at what other jurisdictions in Canada…. Tere they can’t see an election sign within 100 metres of the is all this great talk about all these other countries all around polling station. But it’s somehow okay for proponents of the world. Let’s look at how some other provinces are dealing electoral reform, who are all trying to espouse fairness and with a referendum on electoral reform. Because there is a wellness on this, to stand there and hand out their own willingness for people to at least have the discussion. election literature, harassing people as they’re trying to go Let’s see here. Tis is from engageyukon.ca. in to vote. And we wonder why sometimes maybe people get a little hesitant about going to vote. “We want to improve democracy in Yukon, and we need your help. Here is the process we’re using to start the conversation about elect- Let’s look at what the Premier said in this House. oral reform in Yukon. “For four years, I sat on that side of the House ofering, I’d like “Fall 2018. We are here. You share your priorities for electoral re- to think, on occasion, useful suggestions to the government, whether form with the government of Yukon. it be in this place or in the budget estimates that happen annually, “Spring 2019. Te government of Yukon will create an independ- bringing forward ideas from not just myself but from the people that ent commission on electoral reform and suggest they use your prior- ities to guide their work. 5880 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

I represented at that time in Malahat–Juan de Fuca, and I got zero re- the $7 million in capital for the Pacifca Housing Advisory sponse from the government. Association. “Tey did not receive 50 percent of the votes — far less than that, in fact — but they had 100 percent of the power and the ability to say [4:00 p.m.] to me, as a member of this place, that my views didn’t matter and that If you go further and want to ignore the $6.3 million in my constituents’ views didn’t matter because of the banner I carried construction fnancing, the resurfacing projects to the tune one day four years ago. I think that’s wrong.” of $6 million in the Sooke area, $5½ million in capital fund- Tese are the Premier’s words. Let’s take a look at those ing to Knox Vision Society for housing, $5 million to Leigh words, because words do matter in this process. Te Premier Road interchange, $4 million to resurface the West Coast says: “Tey did not receive 50 percent of the votes.” He’s Highway. On and on it goes. absolutely right. Last I checked, the NDP did not receive What do we have? We have a Premier complaining that he 50 percent of the votes either. “Tey got 100 percent of the wasn’t listened to, when I’m looking at 58 projects over four power.” He’s absolutely right about that too. Tey get to years. Tat’s one a month. Tat’s over one project a month choose, based on the rules of this House, how this House to his riding, and he has the audacity to stand here in this operates, which rules are not changing in this referendum. House and say he wasn’t listened to. He has the audacity to Te operational rules of this House are not changing. Let’s all stand in this House and say he needs PR so that members of be really clear about that. Te governing party gets to decide the opposition can be listened to when, in fact, the rules gov- what happens in this House. erning this House won’t change under PR. He has the ability He was complaining that he was bringing forward ideas right now — today, tomorrow, next week — to actually listen and the government wasn’t listening. Magically, under PR, to members of the opposition and action our private mem- the government will — in a coalition government, which is bers’ bills, bring them forward, open them up to free votes in what we actually have right now, operating under the same this House. rules of this House that we currently operate under. He doesn’t need PR to do that. He needs to unshackle his Te Premier is complaining that he wasn’t listened to in own back benches and his ministers. He needs to allow the opposition. Well, the Premier has the power to change that, Green Party to vote with their conscience. None of these are and he doesn’t need PR. Te Premier has the power to look confdence matters. None of them are going to bring the gov- at his House Leader and say: “Mr. House Leader, we have 20 ernment down. We don’t need PR to change this. We need outstanding private members’ bills stuck at second reading. the Premier and his House Leader to change how private We’re going to do things diferently in this House, and we’re members’ bills are handled in this House. Ten his com- going to debate all 20 of those bills.” Te Premier doesn’t plaining about the last four years he was in would disappear. need a positive vote for proportional representation to do Instead of actioning what he actually has the power to do, that. Te Premier could do that starting tomorrow. we get this sham of a process laid out by the Attorney Gener- Is the Premier saying that between now and 2021, when al that’s built on nothing but lack of information. Te funny the frst proportional representation election, if this refer- thing is that this isn’t even necessarily misinformation, in all endum passes…? We’d still be operating under these same cases. It’s a complete lack and void of information. Tere’s rules. He’d still be in a minority coalition government. Is he literally nothing there when you try digging in to fnd what saying that he’s still willing, even though he admits that it’s a exactly these systems mean. frustration for him, to shut out a full 50 percent of the mem- Tere’s nothing in there that will explain to you how bers of this House from bringing forward ideas? a dual-member proportional system will work, let alone If it frustrated him as an opposition MLA, and he’s now how it will work in Kamloops, how it’ll work in my riding the man in charge, I would encourage him to actually change — nothing. Mixed-member is the only system you have a that. He has the power and the authority to actually change bit of an idea of how it’ll work. At least that one is in oper- it. But instead of that, he complains about it. He complains ation around the world, so you do get a bit of a sense. But about it as if there’s nothing he can do, and then he endorses there’s no guarantee. and allows Bill 40 to come forward to try to circumvent the What the other side doesn’t want to admit or acknowledge electoral process of fairness in this system. is, just as we’ve seen with the confdence and supply agree- In those four years that the Premier was complaining ment, that’s how coalition governments work. Again, Elec- about not being listened to — man, you’d hate to think what tions B.C.’s own words: “result in multiparty or coalition gov- he needs to actually feel loved — almost $106 million worth ernments.” of projects in his riding. Tat, apparently, is a government Around the world, those are all held together by docu- that doesn’t listen. Tat was a government that didn’t listen. ments similar to the confdence and supply agreement — Oh, wait. Tey did. Tey provided almost $54 million to Bel- the confdence and supply agreement that says: “Te parties mont Secondary. Tat’s a government, though, that doesn’t agree to both campaign actively in support of the agreed- listen — unless you count the almost $7½ million for the upon form of proportional representation.” Te confdence extension to the Westshore Parkway. But he’s probably right. and supply agreement — the two parties involved couldn’t It’s a government that doesn’t listen, especially if you ignore even live up to that basic piece of it. Now, there are other parts of this that they’ve walked away Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5881 from as well. But the fact they’re even walking away from winter’s coming. If we don’t change this, oh my, it will be per- clauses of proportional representation while trying to con- petual winter and darkness. It’s ridiculous. vince you proportional representation is a good thing…. Te It’s okay that they didn’t win and are still governing. I can best they can come up with is “take a leap of faith.” accept that, contrary to what some of the narrative out there Well, I would suggest their actions clearly demonstrate is. You know why I can accept that? Because the rules of there is no faith in this process. Tere is no faith in what this House were followed. Te public knew what the rules they’ve come up with. Tere is no faith in any of this. Tat were when they were voting. Te public knew, as we went is why we’re seeing the Attorney General bring forward through that election, that if it was a tight election…. Tere amending language in a piece of legislation, while people are was a lot of talk near the end of the election that it could be casting their votes, trying to change the narrative. It is bey- a very close vote, and the Greens might hold the balance of ond anything I’ve ever seen in my short time on this earth. power. Lots of discussion. Tere was an informed electorate I can’t understand how the Attorney General would think that went out, and the electorate said: “We’re okay with that.” that this is appropriate. I can’t understand, if we were run- Te rules of this House allowed for that that to happen. ning this process, that the Attorney General would be stand- Te rules of this House, as it stands today, allowed for a ing here, as a former head of the B.C. Civil Liberties, and say: minority coalition to govern. Yet, here’s the Premier ki-yay- “Tis is a wonderful day for democracy. You guys are chan- ing away that for four years, he wasn’t listened to, that for ging the rules in the middle of an election process. Good for four years, nothing happened in his riding. Well, for four you. Tat’s the way it should be.” years, he was getting the better part of an announcement [4:05 p.m.] every month in his riding. I’m sure that’s what the Attorney General’s speech would He’s been in ofce as the Premier now for almost a year be. He’d be patting us on the back as a government for chan- and a half. I haven’t seen a private member’s bill voted on in ging the rules mid-vote. He’d be standing up and saying, “It’s this House. I haven’t seen a private member’s bill debated in wonderful that people basing their votes on a certain set of this House. You don’t need to change the voting system for rules…. You’re changing them, even as some people have that to happen. We don’t need Bill 40. We don’t need to make already voted.” I can hear the speech now from the Attorney some promise that will never be kept to make that happen. General. It would be magnifcent. We need a little political will to actually follow through on What’s really magnifcent is the total lack of competence the words that they keep throwing out there to people. But that has been shown with this amending piece. We’re amend- that seems to be a little lacking these days. ing a piece of legislation that the government wants people to When you look at coalitions and you look at this confd- believe locks in future legislatures to have-to action. So we’re ence and supply agreement…. Why it’s so important, about amending the exact piece of legislation that they’re trying to the fact that the Greens and the NDP could not even keep make the public believe can’t be amended in the future. It is the most simple, basic promise…. Even the Premier was ridiculous beyond compare that that is how little regard for publicly speaking about a simple yes-no question. Even that the public this minority coalition government is showing. basic promise is in their confdence and supply agreement. We hear a lot. We hear the 16 years, the furtive cry: “Six- [4:10 p.m.] teen years, 16 years.” Well, I would point out that there’s a Why that is so important, as we look at Bill 40, is because reason it was 16 years. Te reason it was 16 years is that the that’s exactly what happens in a coalition government. Under public of this great province we all call home actually told the PR, as soon as there’s a vote, there’s going to be an immediate NDP they didn’t want them to be government. For 16 years, scrambling of two or three parties to try to fgure out how to that’s what the public told them. “We don’t want you as our negotiate who gets what, if you’re going to support me and government. We’ve had that act. We didn’t like it so much. prop me up. We’ve still got a bit of a bitter taste in our mouth.” Te precedent has been set. It’s going to be written out in It was getting better each election. Tey was getting a little a fve, ten — in this case, 11-page document. It’s going to bit closer. Tey snatched defeat out of the jaws of victory one get all signed up and taken to the Lieutenant-Governor, who time there, not too long ago. But it wasn’t the B.C. Liberals will decide whether it’s credible or not or whether we need to that kept the NDP out of ofce for 16 years. It was the NDP have another election. themselves, with their policies and their positions. Te pub- What faith is there if you’re one of those minority junior lic said to them for 16 long years: “Tanks, but no thanks.”So partners, like we have right now, that your frst order of busi- the NDP kept amending their policy a bit, and lo and behold, ness…? In this case, the junior partner’s frst order of busi- the NDP, afer 16 long years, won an election. ness was to have a prop rep referendum. It wasn’t the climate But no, wait a second. Tey didn’t win an election. And change. Tat was further down the document. We can worry that’s okay, because under the process we have, the process about climate change later. We’ve got lots of time to worry that the NDP and the Greens are trying to say is so fun- about climate change, apparently. No, no. What they wanted damentally fawed that people can’t be governed this way to worry about was proportional representation. We must do anymore…. It’s so horrible that unless we change this, it’s this, frst thing. like something out of Game of Trones. It’s like you feel like By the way, let’s just break all of the language in that clause 5882 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 at the same time once we get power, once we get sworn in of two people that, for the time being, happen to be getting and allowed to be government by the Lieutenant-Governor along. I know there are a lot of people out there supporting — all under the rules of this House. I’m not disputing that in PR that think it’s inevitable that the Greens and the NDP will the least. But that’s exactly what happens under proportional always form the same coalition. I’ve got news for them. Tat’s representation. not always the case. If you think for a minute that a new minority junior part- [4:15 p.m.] ner coming into this place would not make a condition of If there had been an agreement cut the other way, I guar- their frst agreement be to repeal Bill 40 that we’re debating antee you — especially afer 16 years of practising heckling today…. Well, I could sell you the Massey bridge, I guess, but from the opposition benches and with another four years in it doesn’t exist. We’ll have to go with the Pattullo. Maybe we front of them — we’d be hearing loud and clear if we came can sell that of in chunks for people. Tat’s what happens. up with such a sham, a debacle, a complete embarrassment Tere’s this belief, this sales pitch going on, that somehow of an electoral vote like this, and rightfully so, frankly. But I 40 percent of the vote should equal 40 percent of the power. hazard to guess, given our track record of doing referendums Well, we have 40 percent of the seats. We have, actually, and how we brought them forward twice, that wouldn’t have about 40 percent of the bills sitting on the docket right now. happened. Maybe he could bring forward those 40 percent, and then Te sheer number of things in this whole process that our 40 percent would feel listened to. are just ridiculous to the extreme…. It really is. It’s almost Don’t need to change the rules of the House. Don’t need like you’re watching an HBO sitcom or a Netfix sitcom, to change our democratic process. Just have to show a little where they’re chronicling some incompetent government bit of leadership. Just have to show a little bit of follow- trying to bumble its way through rigging and getting a res- through for your own words and your own actions and actu- ult that they want. ally change how this place operates. You have to wonder — you know, you hear it out there — We’re not seeing that any time soon. Tat’s the fun- are they tanking this on purpose? It is beyond ridiculous that damental diference, and that’s the fundamental problem we have an Attorney General — who used to be the head of with this. It’s a great little tagline: 40 percent, 40 percent. B.C. Civil Liberties, who keeps trying to insist he’s neutral in Well, there’s no guarantee under PR that if your party gets this, which is laughable in the extreme — who would actu- 20 percent…. Tat doesn’t mean you get 20 percent of the ally, truly think it was appropriate to bring forward a piece of legislation in this House. I’m not seeing that anywhere in legislation like Bill 40 while people are literally sitting at their the literature. homes right now with the legal ability and right to vote. I’m not seeing anything that says that the party that gets 20 Tey can be casting their vote. I cannot believe that trying percent of the seats and the vote also is guaranteed to intro- to change some of the parameters and put into law some of duce 20 percent of the legislation. Tat’s how that 20 percent the parameters…. People are making a decision on how they gets their voice heard in this place, if that’s what the Premier may or may not cast their vote, and doing that in the middle was complaining about for the last four years. is somehow okay? It’s ridiculous. But that’s not what we’re talking about. We’re just talking I’ll tell you, from the handouts at polling stations to regu- about how many seats you sit. We’re not talking about how lar Elections B.C. rules around what you can or can’t do on you divvy up the legislative calendar, how you enact change. election days…. But apparently, this doesn’t count as an elec- How you enact change is that, instead of rhetoric about tion day. It’s the only election day I’ve ever seen where I can doing politics diferently, like we hear from the Green legally vote, but it is not considered an election day. Party…. We’re not really sure what the ofcial election day is, I don’t know. Maybe they could actually vote against a because the Attorney General hasn’t clarifed that. But it government bill the odd time — not one that’s going to bring is a viable, open election period. Here we are, standing in the government down. Tat wouldn’t contravene their agree- this House, trying to debate and change the very rules that ment. In fact, it says right in there that they’re allowed to. may fall out of this, rules that we know can get changed in Tey’re actually allowed to vote against the government, as a moment’s notice afer this vote has happened, rules that long as it’s not going to bring them down. Haven’t seen them wouldn’t have to be enacted till 2021, because that would be do it. It sounds really good in theory. the frst PR vote. You know what else is in theory? At least two of these Let’s use the two extremes. You’re either going to have four three systems they want us to vote on. If they can’t even years and another four years — which is eight, which I highly demonstrate by their own actions, their own conduct, how doubt, because it’s going to be new — and there’s just going these systems would actually work in real time, I guess that to be a blood sport when it comes to negotiations and throw- explains why the Premier says: “Just take a leap of faith. Just ing each other under the bus. So let’s say it goes the whole trust me. It’ll all be good.” Well, it’s kind of hard to trust. eight years, and 2021 has to be the frst election. So you’re Te other problem with that statement is…. “Just trust me talking 2029. and take a leap of faith” is one thing, but you don’t change Let’s deal with it right now, in the middle of the vote. It’s your whole electoral system and base it on the personalities critical we do that. Let’s take care of this in the middle of the Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5883 vote, because we need to have this in place for 2029. If it’s not ernment is hiding from them and why they won’t come up done this week, oh, we won’t make the deadline for 2029. with proper details about how all these will actually work. Let’s assume that under PR, it’s not dissimilar to what we Because governments…. I hate to break it to the members see in Italy. Tat would mean that if 2021 was our frst elec- opposite. Maybe it’s because it’s been so long since they’ve tion, this would have to take place by 2023, because that been in government that they don’t realize this, but people would be our second general election. Governments would have a natural distrust toward government in the frst place. come and go and come and go and slingshot around, just like Well, the folks on the other side have done nothing to dis- they do in Italy, just like they do all over the world. pel any of that with this sham of a process that has been Tose are your two extremes. We’re dealing with some- designed for a very specifc outcome. Instead, what we have thing in October of 2018, meddling in the middle of an is an Attorney General running around, patting himself on election process, because of the great urgency to have it in the back. He keeps insisting no one’s happy with the process, place in legislation before 2023 at the earliest. If that doesn’t so it must be good. What a strange way to govern. scream ridiculous, I don’t know what does — that we need What a strange way to come up with an electoral process, to have this in place for fve years from now and we need to where your claim to fame is that you insist that no one likes be dealing with it now, in the middle of a referendum. It was it. Yet one of the groups that you keep saying doesn’t like the either intentionally missed in the spring, when we dealt with process — their system has been handpicked to be in this this, or it’s intentionally being inserted right now. process. Tey’ve been handpicked to actually be the ofcial As I said at the beginning, it’s either incredible incompet- proponent for this process. I have a hard time believing that ence on the handling of this fle, or there’s been zero proper they’re really that upset with the Attorney General, despite consideration given to the ramifcations of proper electoral how much he wants to try to promote that. process while we’re being asked to trust three unknown elec- For this and many other reasons, I cannot support Bill 40. toral processes that are all going to be sunshine and roses for It is nothing but a crass attempt to try to manipulate the elec- us and that this government and the Green Party members toral outcome of a system whose rules in this House would will not have any strange clauses come out afer the fact. not change anyway, under this vote, a system in this House [4:20 p.m.] that could change tomorrow, if the Premier and the Govern- When this government and the Green Party members ment House Leader chose to do that. can’t even live up to their own language in their own docu- Te Government House Leader and the Premier tomor- ment…. I certainly didn’t write that confdence and supply row could, under our existing rules, enact the changes in agreement. No one on this side of the House wrote that this House that they keep insisting you need to vote for PR confdence and supply agreement. You know who wrote the for. Te Premier and the Government House Leader tomor- confdence and supply agreement? Te Green Party and the row could call forward private members’ bills for debate and NDP wrote the confdence and supply agreement. And you listen to those voices of the opposition that are bringing for- know what they did? Tey broke it. Tey didn’t break it ward ideas, just like the Premier was complaining about in to each other. No, that one they’ve been very clear about. this House last week. Tey’ve made sure that the two of them haven’t broken any But no, they won’t do that, because they don’t really want clauses as it relates to how they’re going to work together. change. All they want to do is try to fgure out a way to…. Te only clauses they’ve broken so far, as it relates to pro- Afer the last election results, the only change we would portional representation, were the words of trust they were have seen in this House was that the Green Party could ofering to the public. Te words of trust they ofered to have hand-selected 12 unelected people to suddenly become the public, saying: “We are going to pick one form of pro- MLAs, representing who knows where in the province — portional representation and put it up against frst-past-the- located from where, no one knows in the province. And post.” Tose are their words in their document to the pub- that’s all we would get out of this. lic. Instead, what we have are three systems — two of which It is nothing but a direct payback for that confdence and are made up — on a secondary question. Teir new word is: supply agreement, the one that they are not living up to at all. “Trust us, when it comes to those other 29 procedural ways, Tey’ve already broken their word to the public. Why should that this will be implemented.” we take a leap of faith when they can’t even hold their word Well, if the public couldn’t even trust them to follow on something as simple as how to put forward the question through on the most basic language in their own document to the public to vote on? that they created, how can they possibly trust them to deal For those and many other reasons, I will not be support- with the 29 complicated pieces — each one with a ramifca- ing Bill 40. Tank you for the time today. tion that impacts the other decision — post-vote? You can’t, [4:25 p.m.] because they have not given the public any reason to trust them. Tey really don’t. D. Ashton: I rise today to speak to Bill 40. Te public is fully in their rights to be skeptical about this. British Columbians in every corner of this province are Te public should be very concerned about this. Te pub- debating and discussing the merits of keeping the current lic should be asking themselves what exactly it is the gov- electoral system or moving to a new process. 5884 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

I have to say…. I have to thank my esteemed peer from to see us, seeking information, seeking to help solve a prob- Kamloops–North Tompson. I hope people listen to and lem, we don’t ask if they voted in the last election. heed what that gentleman just had to say. Tere’s an awful lot of people behind those television lenses that look at us [L. Reid in the chair.] when we’re up in this wonderful House of the people, speak- ing. I really, really do hope they take in all, or most, of what We don’t ask what party they belong to. We don’t ask the MLA for Kamloops–North Tompson said. He laid it out what party they voted for. We’re there to help them. Tat’s beautifully. He laid it out in an opportunity that many could what makes our system and our democracy in this understand. He laid out what people really should be listen- province so great. ing to about what’s happening in this province over the next Tey’re being presented, at this point in time, a bill that, several weeks. in my opinion, really has no teeth. It lacks any connection to A great man in many’s eyes said: “No one pretends that the realities that will likely be playing out into the future. democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that Imagine with me that British Columbians have just con- democracy is the worst form of government except all those cluded a second election based on one of the proportional other forms that have been tried from time to time.” representation models that are being voted upon in the next Another gentleman that I really appreciate in my life, not few weeks. I really hope that doesn’t happen. I hope most cit- the gentleman that I just originally quoted…. My father said: izens just take a look at the frst question on the piece that “Take the high road. Te view is better.” He also said: “Treat they’ve been sent in the mail and mark that and resend the everybody how you like to be treated.” Unfortunately, that’s voted piece of paper back in. not happening in this process. I won’t actually trouble you at this point with the complex Te bill we’re here to debate today is of great concern to formulas that are going to be determining the outcomes of many. All of us gathered here know the fundamental rules of that referendum question. To me, having gone to university, this wonderful House of the people. We simply cannot limit and having been in sciences — and not being the best at the power of those who come afer us to pass whatever legis- physics — they really, actually, resemble a lot of the chalk lation they see ft. marks that my professor put on the board in the numerous Fundamentally…. I came through civic government. It physics classes that I attended. was one of the frst rules that we were told. You can’t pass any [4:30 p.m.] bylaws that are going to be beholden to the next council. We I guess the diference is that in physics, the laws of nature know here that we can’t pass any bills, can’t pass any legisla- can’t be misrepresented for political debate. Unfortunately, tion that another government can’t look at, but that is exactly they really are, underneath this bill. the promise that is being held out with this bill that is on I’m going to take you back a little bit. Tere’ll be a new the foor at this point in time, a bill that has been brought government afer the second PR election. It will be made up forward in the middle of a referendum process, a process of some amalgamation of parties. Some of them are going that wants to change the democratic process of how each and to be new. Some of them are going to be represented in every citizen in this incredible province that we all call home this House today, and some of them are actually going to is going to be afected into the future. be chosen in a back room by political parties of a list that Te philosophy behind this bill imagines that somehow, in they may have friends on, or associates on, or may have past two or three elections from now, the government of the day members on, or maybe even have spouses or relatives on. will be bound to hold a referendum on a possible return to What’s going to happen is that the government is going frst-past-the-post, if that’s what the people want. Ain’t going to put that forward afer the people have voted — afer the to happen, hon. Speaker. Ain’t going to happen. I say “two or people have voted for what they thought was a process to three elections,” because we’re all aware that any snap elec- elect an MLA, like the ones I’m looking at on all sides of this tion that could be held before the next ofcial election would House. Individuals. And I’m going to repeat again: individu- be held under frst-past-the-post. als in this House that have a huge concern for the people that So British Columbians take what has already been called they represent. And individuals in this House that, I can say, a great leap of faith by the Premier and decide to shif to a 100 percent represent their citizens, that have always made proportional representation electoral system. Tey’re being a diference to those people that they represent, by bringing asked to take this bill with an even bigger leap of faith. their problems here. It’s really, really unfortunate that this is taking place. You But you know what? Tey got elected in a process. Tey know, governance is difcult. I’ve only been here for fve and were elected by the people in their communities, probably a bit years, and, as I said, I have incredible awe for not only afer years of serving the public. Tey maybe started of this place that we spend an awful lot of time in, but for each working in a non-proft board. Maybe they just started of and every member in this House, because we’re all here rep- helping out at Soupateria. Maybe they started helping out resenting the citizens that elected us to represent them. at the SPCA, and maybe they moved on to a school board. I, myself, and I’m sure that 99.999 percent of the individu- Or maybe they moved on to a council, and they really got als in this House…. When somebody comes into our ofce the people of the community aware of their beliefs and Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5885 their actions that they could bring back to the community. felt that they had of the government at that time. I can’t And they committed numerous, numerous hours of time fathom it. I really can’t fathom it. in their community, helping out the citizens in any way Tere are a lot of people that we all get to listen to and that they could. probably that have a lot more experience. Tey’ve been Te citizens knew them, and the citizens got to know their around here a lot more than each and every one of us has, ideals, got to know their families, got to know their back- especially a couple of them. A couple quotes: grounds, got to know if they were good or bad, got to know “Te New Democrats have withheld a dozen aspects of how MMP their faws. Sometimes they accept them; sometimes they works, to be decided upon afer the referendum is over. Nine of those don’t accept those faws. You know what? Tey knew those will be decided by a committee of MLAs, where the New Democrats individuals. and Greens will have the majority, and they can vote their party in- terests. Underneath the new system that’s being proposed, those “Among the things that will be decided is how many seats in Le- people may not be representing the citizens in the House, gislature will be reduced or combined or consolidated. It could be because they’ll come of a list that has come out of some as many as 35 of the existing seats in the House. Where and when, organization, some back room, somebody’s thoughts of what we don’t know. Te number will be decided by the politicians. Te they want in this House, and I just don’t understand that pro- Boundaries Commission will then draw up the boundaries.” cess. I just don’t. Again, can you imagine being a voter in one of the com- I think we all realize that the communities that we live munities that we represent? You voted in somebody because in and raise families in and have an incredible amount of you thought that they were going to be representing you respect for really should have an opportunity to elect people in that area, and somebody comes along with a pencil and to come into this, the people’s House of British Columbia — draws a whole new map and says: “Oh, with all due respect, not from a list of favouritism. sorry. Joe Blow’s coming in, and you’re actually not going to I want to say that afer numerous attempts — over two be able to be representing the area that you thought you were that I’m aware of — from a previous government at trying going to be.” to bring forward some form of proportional representation, Here’s another issue with those lists. In countries that use with everything laid out, with maps, procedures…. In the MMP, it matters who controls the list. I’m going to say that maps, it would show the various areas that the individuals again. It matters who controls the list. If the political party would represent. People were able to make a real informed controls it, the frst dozen or so names on the list will be old decision on what they wanted. Unfortunately, today, that’s party hands or political party hacks. Tey can be, anyway, not what’s happening in this. people who’ve served the party for years. Tey get a seat in I don’t want to throw stones, because sometimes people the Legislature if they get picked. do that, and they live in glass houses and people throw In some countries, the voters are allowed to control who stones back. I just fail to see why a government that over the gets elected. So you can actually vote against somebody that years has prided themselves on being a government for the you don’t want to win, and one of those people of of that people and have shown, to be very frank, some real good list will get that seat. Tat’s decided afer the fact and will be policies and procedures that have come forward and that based upon a committee based upon members of the New have actually made a diference to a lot of people — a lot of Democrats and the Greens. people in the area that I represent. We heard about New Zealand. We heard what happened When I take a look at the Minister of Municipal Afairs down there. and Housing, I take a look at more and more people that are One other…. I’ve had a note from somebody saying: now getting roofs over their heads and are able to call a place “Well, why is it you’re saying that it will be decided by politi- home. Te government has done a lot of good things. I just cians aferward?” I said: “Look, everything the Greens and scratch my head why they would bend and do what it seems the New Democrats have done so far, including the promises that they’re trying to do to the people of British Columbia, that they have broken about this, has been done to serve with a referendum coming forward that doesn’t give us the their political interests, not to serve the people that they rep- information about what is going to happen in the future, resent — to serve the political interests of this House.” doesn’t give us the opportunity to see who we are going to be Tat’s wrong. We’re not here, or we shouldn’t be here, for voting for. And right smack in the middle of that, they bring the political interests of our party and this House. We should forward another bill that says: “Oh, don’t worry. Don’t worry. be here representing those people that elected us, each and Don’t worry. If you don’t like what happened in X amount of every one of those people. time, we’re going to give you the opportunity to reverse it.” Coming back to what was said. So you’re telling me that [4:35 p.m.] afer the referendum is over — say we’re getting MMP — the I just really, really don’t see why a government would Greens and the New Democrats are not going to tote their be doing that, especially afer the fve-plus years that I had political interests in the terms of those undecided matters? heard the government, when they were in opposition, saying No, not a chance. that things were going to change from a perception that they I mean these two parties, back in the spring, back in May, 5886 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 signed a power-sharing agreement in which they promised Island” equal to a government for the rest of British Colum- that what they were going to do was based on the consult of bia. I can’t see that. the public on a single system and put forward one system on Te one that really, really scares me is the Communist the ballot up against frst-past-the-post. Tey consulted the Party of British Columbia: “While PR does not guarantee public. Tere was no consensus, so they created their own more positive government policies, it increases the chances two-step ballot. Te Attorney General himself picked the to elect communists.” Tat was a statement from the Com- three options to go on the second ballot. So they’ve already munist Party of British Columbia in June 2018. Tese are broken two of the key promises in order to get what they individuals that have the right to make a comment. One oth- want, and it’s a shame. er comment that came from that is: “A small party like ours Te government today, along with their partner in gov- could potentially hold the balance of power and use that pos- erning, has a really great opportunity. Te member for Kam- ition to help extraparliamentary movements to block neo- loops–North Tompson said it. Tere are a bunch of private liberal austerity policies.” Tat came from a gentleman from members’ bills on the agenda here in the House that have an Kamloops–North Tompson, who’s a member of that partic- opportunity to be debated in the House. ular party. For fve years I heard the concerns, for four of those, com- In a democracy, people like that have a right…. ing from opposition that they were never listened to. Well, opposition is now in government. Opposition is in govern- Interjections. ment with a sharing agreement by another party, and they have that opportunity. So if you’re going to change or you’re D. Ashton: Well, unfortunately, Make Every Voter Count going to ask the people of British Columbia to give you the was going along saying that every vote is going to count. But opportunity of a change of government, why don’t you show now it’s only going to be if you get 5 percent or more, which the people of British Columbia that you’re going to change may exclude some of these individuals, and it’s probably stuf when they give that to you? Give an opportunity for every- that many of us don’t want to see. body to collectively work in this House. We have a process, frst-past-the-post. Maybe it’s not the Tere’s been a few votes, and the government has brought best in the world. Maybe it’s not the worst in the world. But forward some bills where this side has stood up. I’ve seen and it’s giving each and every one of us in this House an oppor- heard the clapping on both sides of this House, and I’ve seen tunity to be here. What’s being proposed right now…. For the smiles on both sides of this House, where something got the record, I’m all in favour of a referendum for what the through and passed. people of British Columbia may want. But if we’re giving a [4:40 p.m.] referendum to the people, let’s do it in a proper, unbiased, I don’t remember the exact word that the Clerk uses when non-political way. And I really think that this may backfre she stands up and says…. Somebody might be able to help on government. me on that. But it does make a diference. Te gentleman that held that seat, Madame Speaker, before you told me, as I was thinking about provincial polit- Interjection. ics: “Never, ever, ever doubt the electorate.” Te electorate have an opportunity…. D. Ashton: Pardon? See, even a member that’s been here a lot longer than me can’t remember. But in unanimity. It does Interjections. make a real diference. What worries me is also the opportunity that is given. Deputy Speaker: Members, through the Chair. I’m not going to be one to fearmonger at all, but what gives me a real concern is that there is an opportunity for D. Ashton: As I was saying, the opportunity is going to individuals that represent parties that are appreciated by present itself, possibly in the future, with what my two some, I would assume, but maybe not appreciated by the friends on either side of the House… vast majority of British Columbians to get a foothold in, as what’s transpired in other places in the world. You know, Interjection. that really bothers me. I take a look at one of them, the Cascadia Party of British D. Ashton: I would prefer that you didn’t. Columbia. It says: “We contend that Ottawa and, sub- …are talking about. sequently, Victoria are illegitimate by default.” Tese are new Coming back to it, the former Speaker said: “Don’t ever comments that are being said. Te . doubt the electorate. Give them a chance, because they will Te Vancouver Island Party lays out its declaration of inde- vote what’s right for the people of British Columbia.” I really pendence from British Columbia. Tat’s kind of funny. I hope that that holds true, that the people of British Columbia don’t know how they’re going to get to the Mainland. “We will take a hard look at what’s being proposed — not only need to join together to form a new province of Vancouver this bill that kind of, in my opinion, supersedes the referen- dum that is being proposed to the people at this point in time Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5887

— and will really take a look at the referendum and decide actually. I have been engaged with some politicians. I actu- what they think is best for the province of British Columbia, ally want to look up and read a little bit about the issue. Yeah, but specifcally for the other citizens in this incredible I plan to vote in it.” Te question came to her: “If you weren’t province. engaged with local politicians, if you didn’t have that expos- [4:45 p.m.] ure, do you think you would participate?” She said: “No, not A lot of the things that have been said today have been a chance.” repeated verbatim. It’s up to, again, those citizens to listen, Here’s a young lady who, because of her circumstances, and it’s up to, in my opinion, the media to get out there happens to be engaged and know about people that are in and report fairly and honestly about the opportunities that politics. She has an interest in it, and she wants to take some this referendum is going to propose for the future, not only time to learn about it. But for most people, they don’t even for themselves but quite possibly for their children and their know this is going on. And if they do, they don’t understand grandchildren. what it means in terms of the impact on democracy, because I really hope that people pay attention to the ballot and the they’ve got lots of other things that are important in their life. information that has been provided by Elections B.C. and Tat’s why it’s important to have a televised debate — to really consider the options that the future of this province help get people engaged, to get the conversation out there. may be governed under. It’s sad that we’re seeing the Premier of this province dodge Madame Speaker, I thank you very much for the oppor- this issue. It is too important an issue to just take lightly. tunity to speak, and I really want to thank my peers in this Tis is our democracy. People in our society have gone wonderful House of the people for the job that they do rep- and fought overseas, have laid down their lives to fght for resenting each and every one of the citizens in their area. the principles of democracy. Tat’s not something that just should be fippantly done or gerrymandered through a pro- J. Rustad: It’s a pleasure to join into the debate in here on cess that’s rigged. Tis is something that is critical to our Bill 40. As I was sitting here listening to the previous speak- future — my people, the people that I represent in Nechako ers, there’s an issue that needs to be thought about. Lakes, but all the people in the province of British Columbia. Many of us stand up in this Legislature and we give pas- [4:50 p.m.] sionate speeches about particular issues and particular top- We should be taking every opportunity to get information ics. Te reality is there’s only a small group of people that to people, to explain the full process — explaining things, listen and watch this. It’s a tremendous honour to have the showing maps, going through details — so that people have chance to be able to get up and do this, and it’s also a burden at least a basic understanding so that they have an opportun- to get up and represent your riding. But it’s something that ity to participate in what is the foundation of our society. we’re all passionate about doing, coming in here and giving Democracy, the rule of law, how laws are created, how the our speeches and talking about the various issues. process is done — that is what we’re talking about here. Tis For me, having the honour of representing Nechako Lakes isn’t just a matter of the NDP or the Green Party or the B.C. is huge. It’s what democracy is about. We’re a representative Liberals or the Conservatives or any of the other groups of democracy. I get the opportunity to put my name forward, the 25 some-odd groups we have in democracy. Tis is about put my issues forward. If people want that, they elect me. how our fundamental society operates. It’s a tremendous honour to have that opportunity, but it’s a When I think about this whole process, and I think about responsibility to come down here and argue and debate for the young lady that I spoke with today, how do we get people the issues of my riding. more engaged so that they understand what this is about Te challenge we have here, of course, as I just mentioned, and it doesn’t just become the special interest groups that are is there isn’t actually that many people that watch this. So engaged in making this decision? Public television debate is when you think about Bill 40, you’re hearing all of these a key piece of that. debates. Bill 40, of course, is about having a second referen- Tis is important. But as I said, not that many people dum, but it refers to the frst referendum, so that’s why it’s watch this or pay attention to it. Yes, the media may throw a important. bone every once in a while to something that is said in the Te reality is there are many, many people out there who Legislature, which is good. But the reality is that we need don’t get an opportunity to hear this. Tey don’t get an people to have that opportunity to be able to engage. opportunity to watch and see this. Tere’s a ball game on. Te ballots, of course, have been mailed out to many rid- Te children need to be fed — whatever the issues are. Tere ings already. My household has received our ballots, which are many reasons why people don’t engage in politics. Te is good. I look forward to participating in democracy when reality is that for most people, they aren’t even aware that this I get the opportunity to travel home. I know many other referendum’s going on. people have seen it too. But I saw a picture just today — on I had the opportunity just this afernoon to talk to a young Twitter, I think it was. Social media is such a great opportun- lady. I asked her about proportional representation and the ity to be able to see and share experiences of things that are referendum. She said: “Oh, yeah, right. Tat’s going on.” I going on. Above the mailboxes was somebody’s ballot, and it asked her: “Do you plan to vote in it?” She said: “Well, yeah, was mailed to the wrong address. 5888 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

I fnd it interesting when we talk about…. Te slogan tially, with a process that people will go look back at and say: for the pro-PR side is: “Every vote counts.” Every vote does “How come I didn’t get a say in it?” It’s a challenge. It is a real count, except for that person whose ballot wasn’t delivered challenge. because it was sent to the wrong address. How is that vote [4:55 p.m.] going to count? It’s sitting out in the wrong place. Another person that I ran into who had the opportunity to talk about the municipal elections and, of course, the Interjections. upcoming referendum explained and said: “How come this is coming out now? I thought the election was over.” J. Rustad: I love the chirping that’s coming from the other Well, the municipal elections were over, but the referen- side. It’s great to see them engaging. I wish you would get up dum is only just getting going. But she looked at it, and she and actually debate, but you won’t. But that’s fne. thought it was part of the previous municipal elections, For the reality is, for an individual like that that doesn’t and, once again, threw it out. Now she’s scrambling, and even know the referendum is going on, that hasn’t been she’s contacting Elections B.C. already, the day afer the engaged or involved…. Teir ballot won’t even come to ballots came out, saying: “I need another ballot, because I them. How do they even know to go and ask for a ballot didn’t realize this was going on.” if they don’t even have the basic information because they Tis is the challenge that we face with this referendum, haven’t been paying attention? We’re all wrapped up in which is why it is a rigged process. It is gerrymandered to here in the bubble that is politics. Many, many people do try to drive a certain result. It doesn’t have maps. It doesn’t not do that. have questions answered. Tat stuf is not being supplied out I’ll tell you, over and above that, that another young lady there, and it’s why a debate is so important. It is why a debate that I had the opportunity to hear from just the other day is so important. asked a question. She said: “Well, what is this proportional For the people up in my riding, they ask continuously representation thing that I’m hearing about? What’s actually — the people that I have the opportunity to engage, which, going on with this?” So we explained the details about what’s unfortunately, is only a small portion of the people in the going on, on the no side and on the yes side and what the riding…. Tey say: “Well, what will the riding look like?” I potential impact is and the changes to our democracy, par- have to say I have no idea. Tey say: “What do you mean, ticularly for northern B.C. She looked, and she was shocked. you have no idea? We’ve got to vote in this thing.” And I say: She said: “I had no idea that this is what we’re actually voting “I don’t know. All three options — I haven’t got a clue.” on. I have already thrown out my ballot.” I don’t know how many ridings there are going to be. I Here’s another young individual that, if they had had the don’t know how many MLAs there are going to be. I don’t opportunity to hear about it in advance, wouldn’t have know how many will be assigned. Tere’s a complex formula thrown out their ballot. So now she’s actually going to go if one of the particular options is picked. And the lady once back, and she’s going to dig through her garbage to pull out again…. It was not only the lady. I happened to run into this ballot. Tat’s good. She’s going to participate in demo- a number of these people. You know, that’s an opportunity cracy. Tat’s an important piece. when you’re grocery shopping and things. Te reality is that without a debate and without this kind Te lady asked me, and I said: “Well, we’re out grocery of engagement, people aren’t aware of what’s going on with shopping here. So tell me something. If you go down the aisle this. Many of those ballots will be thrown out. and pick out your tomato or your vegetables, your carrots, do I see the member from Sunshine Coast would like to enter. you pick it up? Do you look at it? Do you feel it for texture? Maybe if you go to your chair, you will have an opportunity Do you maybe smell it? Do you decide, ‘Tis is the one I to do that — or stand up and vote, of course. Stand up and want. Tis is the one I want to take home to eat’? You do that speak to the bill yourself. because you’re making an informed choice about the things Regardless of that, we’re in this situation where there is that you’re going to eat, something as simple as groceries.” this lack of information. In my riding, I know that when I Yet something as fundamental as the democracy that we go and pick up my mail from my mailbox, and I know that have today…. Tey don’t have that information to be able to where many people do, there’s usually a bin that’s beside make that decision. It’s a leap of faith, and we’ll make those there, and these types of things are thrown frequently into decisions afer the vote? It’s crazy. I can’t believe that this side the bin. thinks, for some reason, that’s a fair process. It’s gerryman- As a matter of fact, I know we’re going to see some pic- dering. It is rigging the election for one reason and one reas- tures of that in the near future, and it’s a shame. Part of on only. It’s because if they put the information out, they the reason those ballots get thrown out is because, just like know they wouldn’t get it passed. Tat’s sad. those two examples I gave, people are not engaged and What that is, is a party that could never manage to appeal aware of this. to a broad enough public to actually get elected as a majority Yes, we’re talking here about Bill 40, which has a second wanting to change the electoral system for their own beneft. opportunity for people to look at it. Maybe at that point, they If you look at that, that’s actually against the Canadian con- will get engaged. But in the meantime, we’ll end up, poten- stitution and the laws that have been defned in this country. Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5889

It shouldn’t be allowed, yet here we are in this institution, the mation, misdirecting voters — because we did not have a pillar of democracy in this province, debating something like citizens’ assembly. We did not have a source of accurate this. It’s unbelievable. I would use language, quite frankly, information that was put out there. We did not have this that’s unparliamentary, but I can’t get to that point in this. whole process that could have been there to be able to have You look at this and, once again, back to shopping for gro- a valid and proper referendum. ceries and talking about this with individuals, there are no Now we want a second referendum. Guess what. Te regional…. second referendum is going to be on the same rules as the frst referendum. What does that mean? How is that going to Interjection. work? More importantly, I also look at it…. Why is this com- ing forward right now? Here we are, beginning of the vot- J. Rustad: Tey know about it because I talk to them, for ing period for a referendum on our fundamental democracy, the member from Vancouver, west side. It’s unfortunate that and government is going out there and saying: “Hey, don’t is the way they have to fnd out about it. To that matter, I worry about it. If you don’t like it, you get a second vote. You can’t even pay to send information out to my constituents to get a second chance at it down the road.” express my concern with this because I’m not allowed. Tose Why wasn’t that part of the original bill? Simple. It’s are the new rules that have been brought in. It’s pretty sad. a one-page piece of legislation. Certainly, the legislative Regardless of this…. drafers wouldn’t have taken long to draf it. Why was it not part of the original bill? I tell you, Madame Speaker. It Interjection. was not part of the original bill because it was intentionally brought in now to be able to be used as part of this refer- J. Rustad: MLAs aren’t allowed to do third-party advert- endum, once again, gerrymandering and rigging a process ising, Member. Maybe you should try looking in the rules. to try to get a result to favour a political party, which quite Regardless of that, when I’ve talked about this, I’ve let frankly, is illegal. people know there are no regional thresholds. It doesn’t mat- It’s sad. It’s sad to see. Tis is our democracy. We’re about ter what the northern half of the province has to say. It to come up on Remembrance Day to remember people that doesn’t matter what three-quarters of the province has to say. laid down their lives to fght for our democratic rights, and It only matters with regards to the total vote. So there are no they’re just being brushed aside as part of a gerrymander regional thresholds like there would be in a normal referen- process. It is very, very sad to see. dum. Tere are no regional thresholds. As a matter of fact, there’s not even a requirement for a Interjection. minimum turnout. If it’s 15, 20 percent turnout, that’s it. It goes ahead. Tere’s no requirement for a 60 percent majority J. Rustad: Te member opposite talks about things across the province to support this. Tere is a higher restric- moving to the absurd. I tell you what’s absurd. What’s tion for somebody who is part of a strata to make a decision absurd is that this political party and its Green allies some- to change a strata than there is to change fundamentally how how think that they can do this in the province and get we do democracy in this province. away with it. You know what? If people don’t care about [5:00 p.m.] democracy, they will. It is scary to think that, yet this is the partisan approach I’m not afraid of fghting an election under any particular that this government has taken. For example, if somebody rules, if it’s going to be PR or if it’s going to be frst-past-the- wants to go out and recognize their fundamental democratic post. I’m not afraid of fghting that election. It’s not about right, put up a sign…. Tey’re going to make a sign and put it that. It’s not about what I’m worried about. What this is on their lawn saying: “Tis is the way I want to vote.” Tey’re about is my people in Nechako Lakes. Tis is about northern not even allowed to do that, not unless they’ve registered. B.C. Tis is about rural B.C. Tis is about our province. Tis Sad. Very sad. is about their rights and democracy. I can tell you they have People, en masse, are turning to social media, and people lots of questions. are trying to get information on what this means. Tere are Teir vote matters, and the reason why we have the system all kinds of people out there on the yes side or the no side. we have today — in particular, the range of diferences in Tey’re all out, making all kinds of claims. It’s good. Tat’s populations — is because we have unique geography. We’ve part of democracy. People are getting information out there, got large areas of this province that are signifcant resource but there’s no flter. Tere is a tremendous amount of misin- producers that have huge benefts that fow to this province. formation that is out there. I would use other language about Tey are recognized…. Yes, they have a lower population, it that is somewhat unparliamentary, but I won’t. but your vote and your voice matters. Tat is recognized as Te reality is that there is information out there that is part of our current system. Tat’s why they’re allowed the probably only utilizable for fertilizer on a feld. It is not plus or minus 25 percent variance in population. Tat’s why factual. It makes false claims. Yet this information is out we’re allowed to have — under special circumstances, very there and freely fowing out there — misdirecting infor- 5890 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 special circumstances — ridings that even go beyond that, the world. Yes, we can try to improve things, but it’s not the like my riding of Nechako Lakes. democratic system that does that. Yet they want to change it. Tat voice gets taken away under this. Tose components Why? Simply because they want to try to hold on to power of fundamental values in our society, in this province, are and grab power. Tat is it. Tat is the only argument that gone if PR passes. Tat’s why I’m fghting this. I don’t have a makes any sense. Anything else is jiggery-pokery, as one of problem with fghting an election under whatever the rules the members from the opposite side used to like to say. are. Tat’s why I’m fghting it, because I don’t think it’s fair. I For all of these reasons that I’ve mentioned and for the think the people of this province recognize something that is constituents of mine in Nechako Lakes, for the good people not fair, fundamentally unfair. of this north that help, on a day-to-day basis, to make this [5:05 p.m.] province as great as it is and for the good people all around I’ll also say this, for the people in my riding and the people this province, I can’t support this bill. I couldn’t support the in northern B.C. Te northern two-thirds of this province original bill. I’m glad I’ve had the opportunity, in the second has 6½ percent of the population. Currently they have 11½ bill, to be able to stand up and talk about this. percent of the seats in this Legislature. Once again, that is a Te reality is that this is not right for the province of Brit- recognition of the signifcant diferences of geography and ish Columbia. It’s not fair. I hope, as people out there may resources and how our province is put together. Tat’s why have the opportunity to listen to these debates and we’ll get those seats are there. to share some of this information out there, that the people Under proportional representation, what will that look of the province will agree that democracy is about being fair. like? Will northern B.C. have 6½ percent of the seats in this It’s about balance. It’s not about a rigged process designed to province, as opposed to 11½? Will you have a riding that is gerrymander a specifc result for the beneft of a few. half of the province represented by one or two people? Tose are all questions that are unanswered. Tey are S. Chandra Herbert: I rise today to speak in steadfast questions that are fundamental and that there is no answer support of this legislation and in support of proportional for because the rules will be made up afer the election. And I representation in general. I do that because I believe in hope. think if the people in the Lower Mainland and the people on I believe in the people of British Columbia. I believe we get the Island and other areas of the province understood that, more when we involve more people, not less. I believe we there’s no way they would consider supporting this. But it’s get a better democracy when more people have power rather impossible to get that information out. than fewer people having power, as has been the case under Debate might help. It might be able to get some of those our current frst-past-the-post system. things out, maybe a little bit of clarity. But it’s impossible to [5:10 p.m.] know because the rules aren’t going to be made up until afer. Tis legislation…. Although many who have spoken on it It’s fundamentally wrong, and it’s fundamentally unfair. before haven’t really addressed the specifcs of this legisla- Does this referendum help the province? What is it we’re tion — choosing to speak more broadly about proportional trying to change? We’re all in here debating democracy. representation or frst-past-the-post, as I will do later — it’s We’ve got one of the best democracies in the world. We’ve legislation that, I should be clear, gives people a choice. got one of the best provinces in this country, and we’ve got If we move to proportional representation, as I hope we one of the best countries in the world. We’ve got one of the do, people will get a chance to vote again on if they want to longest life expectancies. We have some of the best health move back to the current system we have. It’s almost, as they care outcomes. We have the best educational outcomes. We might say, a money-back guarantee, a return to sender on have some of the highest quality of life and highest values. delivery if you don’t like what you’ve got. You get a chance to Our society has advanced incredibly in this province. We try it out before you buy it long term. have a beautiful province. It’s got areas protected. It’s got the I think that’s a good thing. Our democracy is not perfect balance of industry. It’s got good rules around the environ- — no party is perfect; no process is perfect — but people ment. It’s got good rules around protection of people in this want a chance for change. My citizens, my constituents, province. voted consistently in support of changing to single transfer- What is it we’re trying to change? What is so fundament- able vote. Tey believed that that was a good idea. ally wrong with the electoral system, with the governance When I walk the streets of my community, I hear again system that we have that created one of the best places in and again support for a change to a system of proportional the world? People around the world say: “Canada is the solu- representation, a system where you would get a chance tion.” Only it seems to be looking for a problem. What is it to work more collaboratively with parties across the spec- we’re trying to change? trum. It’s not just me as a New Democrat MLA for Van- Tere’s only one conclusion. Te political parties in power couver–West End supporting this. I just read that the B.C. seem to think it’s unfair because they cannot appeal to a Conservative Party has said that they, too, support this broad enough audience to get elected, so they want to change change. I know that my colleagues in the B.C. Green Party the electoral system. Tey’re not out to change the way our support this change. society is to improve things. We’re already one of the best in I would tell you, to the horror of my colleagues opposite, Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5891 that I’ve had a number of B.C. Liberal colleagues, friends I understand there are those who campaigned for a system and neighbours in my community come to me and say that of frst-past-the-post — the current system we have — which they support this too. Tey’re ashamed that their political sets up false majorities, which sets up one vote more getting party, the B.C. Liberal Party, is trying to stop it, because all the power. Everybody else, even if it’s a majority of the they, too, want a Legislature where people will work more population of British Columbia voting for a diferent vision, closely together, where you don’t have a system where those don’t get to sit in the seats of government. Tey don’t get to who win one more vote than the others win all the power, make those decisions. Tey sit, in many cases, outside the where you don’t have a situation where somebody — who doors here, arguing and upset that their government’s not might have been elected, as in some provinces, with maybe listening or following their values. It’s happened again and 32 percent of the vote — wins the majority of the seats in the again over the last 16 years, and it’s one of the reasons that Legislature, the majority of the power, even though the vast the former Premier, Gordon Campbell, acknowledged that majority of the population vote against them. we needed to look at these issues years ago. Now, I know many folks have spoken about how they [5:15 p.m.] work colour-blind, as they might say. Tey don’t look at who My community voted in favour of change. Tey wanted a people have voted for in order to help them. Tat may be fx. Tey wanted us to acknowledge that every vote should true on an individual level, but I think the Legislature and count and that we should collaborate, not be afraid of each legislators have to admit that, obviously, we each have our other. What we hear now is a campaign of fear about the own biases. We each bring our own values to an argument. future and fear about each other as neighbours, fear about, To seem to suggest, if you had a Liberal majority, a New “Oh my God, we’re going to have radicalization,” and trying Democrat majority, a Green majority or a Conservative to spin these fears that somehow we will fall apart as a soci- majority government, that somehow that majority govern- ety if we have to collaborate. ment, of that one partisan hue, will also act as a party for Tat’s the farthest thing from the truth of what would hap- everybody else who didn’t vote for them — ofen, in some pen. Because when you actually collaborate, when you actu- cases, at cross-purposes with what they believe — is just not ally have to listen to the battle of ideas, listen to the values sensible. Tat’s why the electoral system actually has to rep- each other share and have them adequately represented in resent the values of who has voted. the Legislature, you learn from each other. You learn who We’ve had many circumstances in our Legislature where you disagree with, sure. You’re not always going to agree. But people win power and they don’t have the majority of the you actually have to listen to each other. votes — in fact, far from it. Sometimes they have fewer People, I think, will get more greatly involved in their votes than the second party, the opposition party. Tat has democracy if they see that their votes truly count, not just happened in our history. Instead of voting as a majority that you mathematically count them — sure — but that they and trying to control everything, as has happened in the actually count here, in terms of who sits in this chamber. past, I would plead for humility. I would plead for a system You’ll have more young people involved for sure. that actually got them to work with everybody else in the Te number of times I’ve heard from people who say: House to try and develop a better, more broad, collaborative “Well, I live in a Liberal riding where it goes Liberal all the approach to government, so that it’s not just: “I win; you lose” time. I’m not voting, because my person will never get in.”Or or: “Yes or no.” a New Democrat or a Green — the party label doesn’t mat- Sometimes there’s a third option. Sometimes there’s a bet- ter. People feel they get shut out of this House if their party ter value that can come out of collaboration with people. is not adequately represented. No party has a monopoly on good ideas. No party knows I understand that. I know for many years, there were large everything. I tend to believe that my party, the New Demo- numbers of people — 10 percent, 17 percent, 20 percent or crats, has the best balance, but I know that there are great more — in this province who were shut out 100 percent, ideas on all sides. Even parties that aren’t currently elected in their voices not heard in these halls at all. I would hope this House have much to add to the debate. members for those communities would agree that that is Just like we work as neighbours, just like we work in our wrong. It would be saying to your community, if you had a communities, I would hope we could bring into this House, community meeting: “Well, 30 percent of you, I don’t agree for a change…. If we brought the kind of values, the kind with your view. You’re not even allowed in the door of this of beliefs we have in this House, back to all our neighbours, community hall, because your voice doesn’t matter. I got one you’d have people bickering and fghting way more than you more vote than you, and you didn’t get any. So sorry. You’re would ever have today. Instead, people in our home com- out the door.” munities go: “Let’s collaborate.” I don’t say: “Well, you’re a Tat’s not how democracy should work. But unfortu- Liberal. You’re a New Democrat. We won more seats than nately, in frst-past-the-post, we create it because of the you. Ha, ha, I don’t have to listen to you.” No. Tat would mathematical formulas — not even a majority — pluralities be political suicide, for one thing, but it would also give us that you can win just because you got one more vote more really, really bad politics. But that’s what I hear being argued than the other next runner-up, even if that next runner-up for: “We want….” only got 20 percent of the vote, only got 15 percent. As long 5892 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 as you get that one more vote, you win all the power, even if [5:20 p.m.] the vast majority of your community voted against what that Te B.C. Conservatives and those that don’t support those value and belief that you hold is. Tat’s wrong. values would go somewhere else, and other parties would Tat’s why I want a change, but that’s also why I want a then win in British Columbia, so they don’t talk about those referendum to give people a chance to change back. Because, issues. Tat’s what she said on the podcast. really, I get it. Tere’s fear. Change happens, and that’s not It shocked me that it was that brazen, that the former easy. We don’t always understand every single element of Premier would come out and just say that there were certain what change we’re moving to. I think it’s important that we issues some members of her party don’t like, don’t support, give people that opportunity to say, “Okay, either it didn’t like my own human rights, and thus they just don’t talk work or it did,” and that they get to choose, just like they did about them because it might give my party, the New Demo- in New Zealand. cratic Party, a better chance of getting elected. I was shocked For those who are saying: “Well, the systems that you want to hear that. She herself said she was a supporter of LGBT to change to proportional representation…. It’s so confusing. human rights but that she wouldn’t act on them because Oh my God. It’s not going to work. Nobody knows how to there were a few members that sit across the way who don’t do it. Nobody can vote. Oh, it’s so, so confusing.” Te vast support those human rights. majority of the world uses this system. Most of the econom- Well, it sounds to me like there’s a certain extremist value ies that are doing well in the world use this system. Most that is still at home in a frst-past-the-post system. It’s just of the economies in the world that have some of the best hidden. It’s just hidden in a political party. Tey try to hide life expectancies use this system. Most of the economies and it and don’t move forward on any values that might divide countries in the world that have the greatest electoral parti- that interest, for power — for crass, partisan power. I would cipation use this system. prefer to see that kind of value, rather than hiding in the It’s not a hard system to understand, unless you want to background being able to infuence the government of the suggest that our population can’t understand what the vast day, being right out there and visible. You can’t fght extrem- majority of the world does understand. I don’t think that’s ism if it hides. I think, rather than hiding it in a frst-past- true. I know our population understands being involved, the-post system, we’ve got to name it, so that we can fght it collaboration, having their values count in this House. Tat’s and we can bring it down. why in so many communities, they did vote in support of I don’t believe the vast majority of British Columbians changes before and why people tell me they want to vote in support those kinds of extremist values, and I would rather support of change now. that we get to be clear on that and fght it at its source. I’m It’s not partisan. If it’s partisan…. I know I hear this from not afraid of taking on that battle. Tat battle only wins in all of my colleagues from across the way, that this is just the shadows. Extremism only wins when it’s hidden. Racism, about getting a certain party elected. Oh, it’s just about trying sexism and all the various other isms only win when you’re to trick the system. in the shadows and you’re unknown. Well, some would suggest that this is all about the B.C. I think frst-past-the-post allows that to be hidden — and, Liberals being afraid that the B.C. Conservative Party might sometimes, to show its face — when a minority of the pop- make a breakthrough and many of their members would like ulation wins majority power, as we are seeing in some jur- to abandon their party to the B.C. Conservatives and their isdictions down south of us, of course, where the president supporters and their voters. Tat’s what the B.C. Conservat- is preying on racism and other things to divide a country ives argue, that that’s why the Liberals are afraid of this. because he hopes he can get that one extra vote to win If you want to get partisan and argue it’s just about two majority power — even though he doesn’t, in many cases, parties wanting to get elected, then I think you’ve got to have a majority of the voters. It’s just that one extra vote acknowledge that there’s a partisan interest here for the B.C. above everybody else who gets shut out. Liberals to try to maintain the current system because We’re seeing that in some of the other provinces. I think they’re afraid of the B.C. Conservative Party. Tey’re afraid Ontario, for example, won a majority of the power with a that many of their members would like to and supporters minority of the votes. Tey didn’t win all the votes and again would vote B.C. Conservative if they had a better chance of are using that power to push more of a radical agenda than getting into this House. I think the people of Ontario thought that they were getting, Don’t believe me? Okay, well, let’s look to the former or hoped for, based on their actual votes. Premier. Te former Premier, Christy Clark, was on a pod- It’s clear to me that proportional representation is a better cast the other day. She’s reappeared in the media, is making path. It’s going to lead to more moderate politics than we’ve her presence felt. She was asked about the B.C. Liberal Party, seen in B.C., swinging one way or another. It’s going to force who they are. Te argument she made around why they have politicians to be more humble, to listen to their constituents to stick together in this kind of frst-past-the-post system is and to listen to other members in this House more ofen, to that they wouldn’t look at things like women’s rights issues, try and pick up the best values that each of us have, to nego- access to choice, LGBT rights, transgender folks’ access to tiate and bring that back to our constituents — what we’ve bathrooms, because that would split their party in two. worked for and who we’ve worked with. Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5893

I believe it’ll force us to bring the better out of each other, gets the best out of us right now?” I don’t think it does. “Do as opposed to the worse. If you have a winner-takes-all sys- our constituents deserve better?” I think they do. tem where it just takes one more point, one more punch, one I think in so many of our communities, we already operate more slight way over the top than the other guy, you fght this way in practice. Why don’t we update the legislation so for every last inch. You crawl; you scratch. You do whatever the Legislature can work the way we try and work in our thing if you’re in that kind of life-or-death, I-win-you-lose communities? Tat is listening to each other, collaborating situation, but if you’re in a situation where you have to nego- and trying to get the best out of our community, as opposed tiate with other people, you play better in the sandbox. to: “Might makes right. I won; you lost.” It’s a divisive polar- We see it in elementary schools, kindergartens. We see ization of politics, which we see far too much of in this day that with our own kids. It’s better when you share. It’s better and age. Let’s get people involved. Let’s involve them in this when you listen to other values, as opposed to saying: “Well, process. Let’s vote for change. Let’s give people that chance so you got to the top of the pile. Too bad. Everybody else falls that they, too, down the road, can vote if they want to return away. You don’t have to listen to them. You are the com- to the system. It’s only fair. mander-in-chief. You are the king of the castle.” Tat’s how I Previous governments in this province, in this Legislature, think you get to a situation of widening inequality, of might just changed the system without any vote. If you go back makes right, of power over the many by the few. It’s not how to what led to the creation of the Social Credit Party, they you get to a system of more democracy, more equality, more voted for a change to a version of the single transferable fairness and more togetherness and community. vote because they thought it would serve their best political Tat’s how I think we need to move. We need to be mov- interests. Tey didn’t even have a referendum. Tey just ing towards a more proportional system, giving people that changed the system. Tat’s what they’re doing in Quebec. chance to try it out and giving them that change to say Tey’re just voting to change the system. whether they thought it was a good idea or not afer they’ve I ran. I said very explicitly to my constituents, as did all seen it in practice. New Democrats — I know the Greens did as well — that we You know what? I think that’s about giving our constitu- did want a change. We committed to a referendum. I know ents credit, giving our belief that they can make that choice, the Greens just wanted to change the system. I guess, had just as we’ve given them the ability to make a choice in this they won a majority, they would have just changed the sys- referendum through a simple ballot. You fll it out. You’ve tem without a vote. We felt it was important to give people got your questions. You can say if you want proportional a vote, to give them a referendum, to give them a chance to representation or frst-past-the-post. When you get to that have their say. second ballot that we’re voting on today around this referen- We’re having that referendum now. In order to have the dum, you get that question: do you want to move back to the system ready to go for votes in the upcoming election, we former system or stay with proportional representation? It’s had to have that vote now. I’m glad we’re fulflling that fairly simple. promise. It’s a promise that many constituents told me they I trust that people can make that decision. Tey will vote were glad we made. Some of them told me we should just as they want to, as they see the need to. I think they will vote do it — just boom, bring in proportional representation. in support. It’s my hope, and at least in my community, that’s I said we should give people a chance to vote on it, to be been the history — that they do believe we can work togeth- clear on their intentions of where their values are going. er with a change of the system. We’re doing that now. [5:25 p.m.] Secondly, I said to my constituents that I wanted them to Instead of one power for one person, let’s bring power to have a chance to vote on it again, down the road, so that they many people. Again, no party has a monopoly on good ideas. could test it out and see if they wanted to make that change. Let’s make this Legislature work more collaboratively. Let’s You know what? Tey appreciated that. I heard from B.C. make it so that the Leader of the Opposition or the lead- Liberal voters, Conservatives, independents, Greens, New er of the government, whatever the stripe may be, can’t get Democrats, what have you, people who didn’t even know away with name-calling and other such things as we’ve seen who they support. Tey change their views all the time. Tey recently in this House. In fact, they’d actually have to work said that they like that guarantee. Tey like that argument. together and have a level of respect for each other. Tey like that we’re going to put it into legislation, put it into I’ve heard all this stuf about throwing derision on other law, so that down the road a future government is going to members as being somehow beholden, that it’s all about their have that referendum, and it’s clear. self-interest. Well, look at yourself in the mirror. Everybody I think that’s the kind of thing that we should be doing. has a belief, a bias, a value. Some people are afraid; I get that. Nobody is infallible. Everybody makes mistakes, but let’s Some people think the frst-past-the-post system is the best trust in the people of British Columbia. Let’s give them the system ever. Some people think proportional representation chance to have, frst, this referendum and vote, and give is the best system ever. I would appeal to us, I think, to try them a chance to vote again down the road. I believe in and raise the bar on this and say: “Do we think this system them. I hope that this House believes in our citizens as well 5894 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

— to choose, to their best ability, so that we can all work in entation approved in the referendum will be enacted for the their interests. next provincial election.” Tose are both facts. B. Stewart: It’s great to rise on Bill 40 to speak against this “Te parties agree that they will work together in good particular piece of legislation. I want to kind of talk a little faith to consult British Columbians to determine the form bit about why I think that this piece of legislation is fawed, of proportional representation that will be put to a refer- especially with the timing of it. endum.” I think one of the things that we have to remember is Honestly, I have no idea where this consultation took how this all came about and where the existing system came place. It must have been maybe in the back room, in the from. Why has it been preferred? Why is it used in literally caucus rooms, but it certainly didn’t happen out in British dozens and dozens of countries around the world? How did Columbia. Most people didn’t know until it was barbecue it evolve from an earlier feudal system? season that we were even going to have a referendum, What was the system of making decisions in a collaborat- because Bill 6 was introduced in the fall, and the actual ques- ive manner back in the days of Neanderthal man and people tion didn’t come in until May 30. like that when they were really struggling? Whose decision Te Attorney General, the people that we’re talking about, as to where they were going to sleep tonight or eat and do this consultation…. Te on-line consultation that took place those types of things evolved into something that is tried and in a very specifc narrow bandwidth of time was very convo- true and that has been used for hundreds of years. Although luted, and even the people that have written about it question not perfect, the system itself has proven that it leads to long, the validity of that consultation. stable majority governments. Te reality is thatS there’s nothing like what was done by [5:30 p.m.] Premier Gordon Campbell when he was here and promised to look at an electoral reform system. [R. Chouhan in the chair.] Tey took 160 voters and went across the province for over an entire year. Tey looked at these systems that are Now, one of the things that I think is particularly import- being proposed. Te situation is that those systems were ant is the fact that there was no commitment to run a pro- rejected, and they recommended the single transferable vote. portional representation referendum by the government pri- I think that we know that, under the Recall Act, there was or to the confdence and supply agreement. So I think that a threshold that British Columbians expected for something in reality…. Where did this come from? It came out of this of this magnitude and change in British Columbia. What agreement, which really is the very frst thing that is stated ended up happening is that it was defeated. It didn’t meet the under “Foundation of relationship” — “making democracy 60 percent threshold or the regional threshold, and I think work for people,” which…. Tat’s great. Tat’s a fabulous that the rest became very clear that Gordon Campbell felt statement, but on the other hand…. there maybe had been not enough information — the same public consultation that I was talking to — to make certain Interjection. that people knew exactly what they may be giving up afer this investment in the citizens’ assembly. B. Stewart: I’ll get to that, Member, when I speak about In the 2009 election, the same election that the member the comments that the Premier made yesterday here in Vic- for Vancouver–West End was elected in, it was on the ballot, toria about the fact that he ran on that. As a matter of fact, he and it was supported in certain ridings, as he mentioned. even made the claim that the Greens and the NDP had run But it was defeated soundly. Te bottom line is that British on this platform. Tat’s contradictory, unless the Greens and Columbians, afer twice voting on this, said: “We do not the NDP were working on this prior to the election, which want a change in our electoral system, and we don’t prefer I can hardly imagine, unless they anticipated that they were the STV system, even afer a year’s consultation.” going to end up in the voting situation they were in. I go back to this agreement. Who has made the decision, Tey talk about making proportional representation one within the Greens and the NDP, to ignore the fact that they of the things “making democracy work for people.” “Te signed this agreement? It was touted, published, shared with Legislature shall be recalled within one month of the swear- everybody, the fact that there was going to be these things. ing in of a New Democrat government.” “Tis is what you’re going to get from a B.C. NDP and Green Te second item, proportional representation. “Both the coalition. You’re going to have wonderful relationships, the New Democrat government and B.C. Green caucus are com- consensus-building, as it’s talked about in here.” mitted to proportional representation. Legislation will be [5:35 p.m.] introduced in the frst sitting of the next session of the B.C. I think one of the things that is a cornerstone, and what Legislative Assembly, with a New Democrat government British Columbians were led to believe, was that there was establishing a referendum on proportional representation going to be a consultation to determine the form of propor- that will take place in the fall of 2018, concurrent with the tional representation that would be put out on a referendum. next municipal election. Te form of proportional repres- Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5895

Again, the parties both agreed to support some form of pro- up, modifed, manipulated. I don’t know about the other portional representation, which they did last night. terms that some of my colleagues have used. But the bottom Te ballot introduction I talked about came afer Bill 6 line is that it is not the consultation that British Columbia was introduced in the fall session. Bill 6 talked about the voters expected when they signed on to allow both the Electoral Reform Referendum Act — how it was going to be Greens and the NDP, under the current system, to basically run and what the rules were going to be. I mean, it’s a relat- form government and sign this agreement. ively simple document, only being six pages long. Obviously, it means nothing, as we know from the leader We are basically amending that with Bill 40, and that’s one of the Green Party. I mean, he’s made all sorts of statements of the things that I don’t agree with. It’s the fact that we’re in about the fact that he wouldn’t support the speculation tax the middle of the election. We’ve been in an election. — in this House, outside of this House, all through the sum- As a matter of fact, some people have already received mer, talking to the people that are now directly impacted. their ballots, and they’ve sent them back in. Tey voted. Is Te bottom line is: what does that mean about the value of that democracy? Te fact that people were led to believe, his word when it comes to these type of things? when they were told that there was going to be this refer- Tis is about power. Tat’s what these people…. Tat’s endum, they could be going of and travelling or something what this is all about. People want to remain in power, like that. Tey flled that out, and now, here the government regardless of what the circumstances are. is proposing an amendment to actually have an adjustment [5:40 p.m.] to something that’s not going to happen until the year 2030. I think that many people have talked about the situation I mean, if this unfolds the way that the government goes that this type of voting system can lead to. I mean, there are the full term, it will not happen until 2030, when we’ll actu- examples of where this is, people say, working perfectly. I ally be having this vote. Who’s going to remember what mean, Italy has had three times as many elections since the happened in 2018 and the discussion here in this chamber Second World War — 65 elections, versus the 22 that we’ve that’s commonly referred to as a wonderful channel to fall had in Canada. Te fact is that this is a system that has led to asleep with? If you happen to get tired at night and you can’t an unbelievable amount of angst. go to sleep, turn on Hansard. Te fact is that that is not the I know colleagues that work in our company. Tey work in type of debate that…. New Zealand and Australia and places where they’ve adop- Our leader has been asking the Premier to sit down and ted this. Te idea that you can just unwind something or to debate this and be very transparent and honest. Let’s talk change something, especially when we, maybe, grow from 27 about the systems. Let’s talk about the fact that we want registered parties in British Columbia to 127…. Te fact is a television debate that actually is going to give people an that those fringe elements, those parties that have a single informed decision, not afer they’ve already voted, not afer issue, come here to the Legislature and want to advance that they’ve had the ballot for a week or two weeks. Te idea is and get their support — get the 5 percent, which is the that we want to make certain…. threshold that has been talked about in here. Tis is not the TV channel that people tune into. It is com- I don’t know what happened to the 5 percent of voters that mercial-free, so I guess that’s one good thing. voted for that fringe party. Teir votes don’t count, right? I Te ballot was introduced on May 30, and that particular mean, they’re completely discarded. Te bottom line is that ballot question is the one that we know is the simple yes-no it doesn’t mean that every vote counts. If you’re one of those question. Te bottom line is that it is not that simple. Te 127 potential parties, the bottom line is that this has led to ballot itself, as most people know because they’ve received it angst and to where there have been many disagreements. by now, is two questions. It’s a false dichotomy. Tat is what As you can imagine, a system of proportional repres- they say when, essentially, you get something — especially entation in this House will not likely change unless there from what is supposed to be a non-partisan, arm’s-length are four, fve, six, seven other parties represented in the statutory body of government that is not interfered with by House. And then, truly, you will have to work to get coali- government in terms of the way that they run things…. tion governments, as many do in Israel and other places In this particular case, you have your two questions. Te like that, where they have a system that is fraught with frst one is whether you support the continuation of frst- arguments and fghting and infghting. Te fact is that past-the-post or you prefer the proportional representation fringe parties end up arguing about things that become…. voting system. You know, they’re populist. Now, it’s been very difcult, on the second question, to I mean, you look at the changes in Europe right now in fnd out from Elections B.C. the actual facts, even though I terms of welcoming immigrants from countries that are war- have right here the actual facts that they have published on torn. It’s led to all sorts of factions of groups that are now their website. Te situation is that there is concern that if represented in parliaments across Europe that are saying: people answer for frst-past-the-post, and they answer ques- “No, we don’t want that. We don’t want immigrants. We don’t tion 2, that that could lead to a spoiled ballot. like them. We don’t want them.”Tat’s the non-inclusive type I think that there’s too much conjecture. Tere’s too much of society that I think everybody in this House is about, the concern by voters that this is a system that has been trumped way that Canada is, the fabric that we grew up under…. 5896 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

I think that when it comes back to British Columbians try- pendent Electoral Boundaries Commission, which I would ing to be informed, trying to get the information, well, we question how independent it can possibly be. have this document that arrived. It was put out last week. Nobody has really talked about this. Te advertising has It was circulated. It talks a little bit about the fact that your started to show up now that the civic elections are over. I ballot will be coming out. It’s only 20-some pages to try to think that the situation is that many people are looking for explain a ballot system that’s supposed to be simple. It’s sup- information. posed to answer the question about all of the choices that are As the MLA in Kelowna West — it’s not a small riding, but in front of British Columbians. it’s not huge — I took it upon myself to hold a number of Well, here in this particular document, on page 8, it’s updates. I ran through the riding — from Lakeview Heights already been printed, and it’s by this arm’s-length, non-par- to Westbank, Killiney Beach, Wilson’s Landing, Club 17 in tisan statutory part of government. It’s saying right here the Kelowna and one at Parkinson Rec Centre which is coming things that will happen, which have been stated here: “An up — to open it up to anybody. It was advertised as being an independent Electoral Boundaries Commission will deter- update of what’s going on in terms of the riding. I wanted, mine the number and boundaries of electoral districts and and I prepared, a completely non-partisan presentation — regions representing in the Legislature.” where people can get the information, Elections B.C., to Te independent Electoral Boundaries Commission. Is make certain they’re on the voter list, those types of things. that going to be kind of like the independent consultation I’m trying to do my job as an MLA, to try and be able that was in the confdence and supply agreement that never to answer those questions for the constituents, though happened? Is that the type of…? Who are we to believe? Are over 60,000 constituents live in Kelowna West. I think British Columbians actually going to be able to count on that they’re asking the same questions: “Why is the ballot the…? Who are they going to count on? so complicated? Why are the maps not determined?” I Let me just tell you one more thing about this document. mean, under the systems of dual-member, rural-urban and Before we’ve even passed this legislation, which actually says mixed-member, what are the boundaries going to be? that we are going to have this vote in 2030, it says that anoth- What’s going to happen? er referendum will be held afer two elections to see if B.C. We know that there is a component that there’s going to be wants to keep the voting system or go back to using frst- party lists. If we use the Droop formula or the Gregory meth- past-the-post. od and we’re going to transfer the votes at a fraction of this, How did Elections B.C. know that and publish and print the bottom line is, I think, at the end of the day, the voters this? How many millions of copies did they print? Te bot- are not all math experts. I think that they’re expecting to be tom line is that they’ve been told, and these things are still able to make some sort of informed decision about this ref- happening in the background. What happened to the inde- erendum. pendence of Elections B.C.? Te integrity, you know, is com- At this point, I think that the biggest shortcoming of what promised here about the democracy of British Columbians’ we’ve seen so far is that even the groups that were under- ability to count on this independent body. Somehow or oth- funded to actually put out the proper information about that er, the government has infltrated and is changing the way are generally not going to be able to convince voters that that either they think or they do things. they actually have enough information to make an informed [5:45 p.m.] vote. As the previous member, from Nechako Lakes, men- It should not be done on assumptions. It should be done tioned, many of these people are going to look at this, they’re on clear, objective facts that everybody has in front of them. going to unwrap the frst envelope and the second one and I think that, you know, we do see that the need for public the third one. Tey’re going to be sitting there confused, and information is important. We’ve got the information package they’re going to think: “You know what? Tis is already too coming out a week before the ballot arrives. I guess that’s complicated.” the assumption. Everybody will sit down and spend time Te fact is that it wasn’t tied in with any general election, reading the 20-some pages that are in this document, 21 — like it was done in 2005 and 2009. Te bottom line is that the sit down and read and understand. I think that there are importance and the legitimacy of this particular mail-in bal- many people here in this assembly that have tried to properly lot has got to be in question. Tis is a democratic right. As he understand and articulate the three choices under the pro- also said, we’re coming up to Remembrance Day here, and posed proportional representation. the fact is that we have veterans, tens of thousands, that have I think that is wrong for British Columbians. I think fought…. they’re being hoodwinked into a system…. Although the statements of claim have been made that every vote’s going to Interjections. count — except for that 5 percent who, if they don’t vote for the right parties, won’t be counted, because they won’t have B. Stewart: Well, they fought for the right to preserve a seat at the table…. Te bottom line is that these systems votes. I mean, what do you think that Nazi Germany was are confusing, and at best, we don’t know anything about the doing back in 19…? rules. Really, it’s going to be put into the trust of the inde- Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5897

Interjections. elections. Tankfully, there was a bit of an increase in terms of the voter turnout. In municipal elections, it was up B. Stewart: Well, the bottom line is that…. I mean, do you slightly, but just about 30 percent. think that they gave democracy to the German citizens? Tis I think that the reality is that with a mail-in ballot, it’s is exactly the problem. Te fact that these veterans really did very difcult to expect that we’re going to have a very high put their lives on the line and many, many didn’t come home, turnout — likely a lower threshold than the civic elections including many members of my family. and far less than the provincial elections, where the STV [5:50 p.m.] was put on two previous occasions where the turnout was Anyways, the bottom line is that there are still disputes roughly around 60 percent. going on today about the fact of representation. I mean, we Why did we have to drop it to 50 percent? What’s the reas- just fnished a war. Out there on the cenotaph, right on the on? Why would we drop it down to 50 percent of the votes front lawn of this building is the cenotaph talking about how plus one and without any regional context in it? What was long the war in Afghanistan went on. Te fact is that we are the rationale for that? I can only surmise that the bottom line peacekeepers, but we want to preserve the democratic right is it’s to help push this thing across the fnish line and make of voters in British Columbia. Tat’s what we’re here to do. certain that there’s no chance that the existing system will be At the end of the day, I think one of the worst parts of successful, because we, essentially, are going to take the low- the…. est common denominator. On something that’s so fundamental to democracy, the Interjections. value of our vote, again, here we are being disrespectful about the value of how hard the freedom of having a vote is. I Deputy Speaker: Members. mean, there are many countries still today where individuals’ rights are compromised. I know that many members on the B. Stewart: You said that this is a partisan prop? Tis is the opposite side of the House speak passionately and fervently voters guide. I don’t think that that’s a partisan prop. Tere about the fact that we do value those rights, and we want are people that fought for this country to make certain we to stand up for them. Tis is a right that I think that Brit- preserve the freedom of the vote, and you will know that… ish Columbians and Canadians have long since fought and worked hard to retain. Interjections. What we’re trying to do is to manipulate the system by lowering the threshold, taking away the big demographic Deputy Speaker: Members. diference we have in British Columbia. We have ridings that are…. I don’t even know the number of kilometres. B. Stewart: …if you talk to any one of them. As a matter of But with 93 million hectares in the province of B.C., I fact, maybe you should visit a cenotaph on November 11 and know for some of the representatives in the far north, it then go out there and talk to them. Ask them if they didn’t takes days to travel their ridings. Te reality is it’s going to fght for that. Okay. All right. only get bigger and worse. One of the things…. Te likelihood of people in Fort Nelson or maybe Dease Lake or Atlin…. Not that they’re visited ofen by their MLAs, Interjections. but I still think that the reality is that if your riding runs all the way down to Prince George, it’s going to be pretty tough Deputy Speaker: Members. to expect to see your representative or even hear from them. Continue. [5:55 p.m.] Tat’s not a fallacy. Te reduction is from 87 to a lower B. Stewart: Tank you. number of elected, and then the rest all become appointed One of the things that I do want to talk about is that there from party lists. How do I get on that party list? Is there are some changes about this. Te referendum and Recall a nomination process? Is it…? Maybe we just have one big Act…. Te bottom line is that, as I said earlier, we don’t have party list. any maps that show the boundaries of what these new rid- ings are going to look like and how these party lists…. Te Interjections. proportional portion of this reallocation of voting — how is that going to be redistributed? If we end up with these rid- Deputy Speaker: Members. ings…. We had maps from the 2009 STV vote. Some of them showed that ridings are going to be as big as some European B. Stewart: I ran in a nomination. My situation is that I countries. Te situation is that we don’t really know that. went out there…. We also have modifed the threshold so that even though we have a mail-in ballot, the likely low voter turnout, just Interjections. because of the fact that it’s…. We’ve just seen the municipal 5898 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

Deputy Speaker: Members. Order. balls but are probing questions for key information that all of us can beneft from.” B. Stewart: Tank you. Well, we think that we ask thoughtful questions too. I mean, we’ve been asking about the transparency. Why not Interjection. have this TV debate? Let’s make it…. It’s 30-some days ago that it was committed to. Deputy Speaker: Member. Member. What about the speculation tax? People heard on Febru- ary 20 that there was a speculation tax. We know nothing Interjections. other than the communities…. We do now, and now we still have amendments that still haven’t been introduced. Deputy Speaker: Member, take a seat, please. Te community benefts agreement. Te bottom line is Members…. we still have questions about that. Employer health tax, we haven’t even started debating. Interjection. It’s been a pleasure and an honour to stand here on Bill 40.

Deputy Speaker: Member. Hon. S. Simpson: I’m pleased to be able to join this Minister. debate. I’m more invigorated to join the debate afer listening Te member will continue. to the performance of the previous speaker. A bit of an embarrassment — an embarrassment, certainly, to himself B. Stewart: Well, thank you, Mr. Speaker. and an embarrassment to his party — with that perform- It’s obvious that we don’t have the answer to that question. ance, particularly when he invokes veterans. He invokes vet- I won’t even repeat it. But I do think that the idea…. To be erans in the most unacceptable way. honest, I’m a bit perplexed. I know we have diferent points [6:00 p.m.] of view, but at the end of the day, there is consensus on this Let’s be clear here. We’re debating this issue, but there side of the House. We don’t always have consensus, but this is not a question. Under our democratic processes in this is a coalition of diferent people that think about what it is country and around the world, you won’t fnd many people that they stand for. who won’t tell you there are two fundamental systems. You My colleague from North Vancouver is passionate about have countries and states that use a frst-past-the-post sys- certain things, but not everybody in our caucus is. Te bot- tem. You have countries and states that use proportional tom line is that she helps keep us focused in on that. We have representation. Tey are both democratic systems, and the people that are concerned about the environment. We’re democracy of those places that use them is absolutely legit- concerned about the land base, the natural resource imate. Frankly, it’s embarrassing that you won’t acknowledge industry, as is the other side. that on the other side. Tey have their coalition within the NDP and a long Both these systems are legitimate systems. You can debate standing with diferent groups. I really think that…. For the the merit of them. You can debate whether you like one bet- most part, unless they’re fnding it difcult working with ter than you like the other. But they are both fundamentally their coalition, why would they want to think that there democratic. Veterans around the world fought for us to have should be some sort of immediate change to something that the right as citizens to vote on which system we want, and is so fundamental? We haven’t really informed British we’ll do that. It becomes a fundamental question of demo- Columbians in the way that I think that their expectation is. cracy, and that’s the debate that’s going on here. We’ve got an election that is happening right now. We’ve We are making the argument, as are the supporters of pro- got a bill in front of us that talks about modifying or giving portional representation, that it’s time to change this insti- some changes — that leap of faith or the idea that we’re going tution, and it’s time to have this institution refect what the to make certain that we…. I guess we know that there’s a pos- people in British Columbia say when they vote. When they sibility, if we’re going to do this in the future, we can change say that 40 percent of the votes should be B.C. Liberal, then it back. I guess there’s always that possibility. 40 percent of the seats should be B.C. Liberal. When they say I want to just talk about a couple of things that were 40 percent of the votes should be New Democrat, then 40 said last night by the two leaders at their event. I want to percent of the seats should be New Democrat. Ten it’s the just read into the record the leader of the Green Party, the responsibility of us collectively, here, to govern. Tird Party: “We” — John Horgan and Andrew Weaver We come to this, and it becomes a question. We learned, — “both prefer to focus on issues that matter to people, with the formation of this minority government, that it not what’s wrong with the other parties. And you see that isn’t about the party that has the most or the least. It’s every single day in question period, as my colleagues and about who can govern the confdence and gain the confd- I ask questions of government that are relevant to people ence of this House and who can bring together, in a col- and get thoughtful responses to questions that aren’t sof- laborative way, the people that generate the confdence of this House. And that’s what happened with two parties on Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5899 this side that got 57 percent of the vote in the last election. eral members — not to the public but to B.C. Liberal Tat’s what we’re saying. members — was: “Our party’s future is at risk if propor- Te other side is saying we have a system where the win- tional representation passes, because we are a coalition of ner-takes-all, whether it’s by one vote or by 10,000 votes. You Liberals and Conservatives and Libertarians, and we will take all. Tat’s not the system I believe people are looking for split apart in a minute if this happens.” today. Tat’s not the system that we need. But sadly, that’s not Now, I don’t know if that’ll happen or not, but clearly that the debate in this House. We’re not talking about the merits fear has been well instilled and established, in the members of proportional representation versus frst-past-the-post, the sitting on that side, moving forward. Tat’s why we’re getting fundamentals of those two systems, about which system bet- all this fearmongering. It’s about a party trying to survive on ter represents government. what has been a really good thing for that party. Sadly, it’s a Tere’s an argument to be made — and I hear that — that detrimental way to move forward and to discuss important the other side would make that says you have better stabil- policy issues. ity with a winner-take-all, frst-past-the-post system because Te reality is — I know this, and I think members on you get a majority government with 43, 44 percent of the that side know it; I’m sure my colleagues know it — that vote, as the other side has done on numerous occasions, and neither system, proportional representation or frst-past- you’ve got stability for four years. But with a proportional the-post, is perfect in any way, shape or form. Both of representation system, it may require two or maybe three those systems have faws, and both of them still are at the parties to come together to form that coalition, that majority, behest of the people who are elected, in many ways. How to be able to efect government. Tere may be an argument people conduct themselves as elected has a lot more to say about one lasting longer than the other. Tat’s a legitimate about how people point fngers at those systems, pro or argument. con, than it has to do about the structures of the systems What’s not legitimate is the fearmongering that we hear in themselves. I think that’s the reality, but we’re not having a this place with almost every member on that side that gets mature debate about that. Instead, we’re having this debate on their feet. Tis can’t be a debate about fearmongering, that is about everything else. and that’s exactly what’s happened. I get it. I understand it. I I don’t know what the result is going to be when this understand that you have…. I do worry. I will tell you I do is all done at the end of the day. What I do know is worry that the fearmongering going on in the Liberal ranks that I absolutely have confdence in the people of British is having an impact in our northern and rural communities. Columbia to make the decision, and I’m absolutely happy I worry about that. I worry that you’re scaring people. You’re to respect that decision, whatever it might be. Te other not asking them to understand, to vote on what they believe thing that I know is that politics is evolving in our in, to vote on what they think is right. You’re scaring them. province, in our country and globally. You can do that because you have no other argument than I know we’ve talked in this House…. I’m sure both parties fear. We’ve seen…. You can look to the south. You’ve got a here — all three parties — have ofen talked about turnout. president in the south who is using fear to scare immigrants. We’ve talked about how to engage young people in politics. He uses fear, and fear just is simply the wrong way to go. We’ve talked about how to broaden interest in political pro- [6:05 p.m.] cess and civil society. We’ve talked about how we make it Why is that happening? Why is the other side so desperate more relevant for people. What I hear, more and more ofen, on this? Tis is the other side — remember, not that many is that people want more collaboration — that people want years ago — that put forward STV and brought the question more problem-solving happening in this place. I hear from of proportional representation to the table. Tey brought young people that they want the politics of this place to be that process forward and created an argument, then, so it more relevant to them. could never pass. Tey created a ceiling, a bar that could nev- People on both sides…. You know, we’ve got 87 person- er be passed. alities in this room, strong personalities, smart people and Here’s why. Here’s why we have this situation. Tis debate people who are invested in what they believe, and we have isn’t because the other side is fundamentally opposed, I lots of back-and-forth. It should be vigorous. Te debate believe, to a democratic process. It’s because the other side should be vigorous, and it should be strong, and we should is desperately concerned about their survival as a political hold frm to what we believe. party. Te other side knows that they will not form majority [6:10 p.m.] governments; neither will this side. You will have to be col- Te nature of the institution, the nature of winner-take- laborative. all, is such that it actually creates, I think, a detriment to our Tat’s outside the realm of possibility for that group ability to fnd the collaboration that, I would like to believe, as it has functioned in the last 16 years. You don’t have most people on both sides of this House would like to see to go far. Go back and listen to some of the leadership at some time. People on both sides of this House, at some candidates, in the last Liberal leadership campaign, who time, have to be exhausted by what is the confrontational, came out so vehemently and vigorously opposed to this. adversarial nature of this. I know that I talk enough to mem- Almost without exception, the argument made to B.C. Lib- bers on the Liberal side to know that’s true there too. 5900 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018

I know I’ve been around this place long enough to know all sitting in this place with the commitment, the obligation it’s true for many members. Tey would like to see problem- and the determination that we are here to do best for British solving happen diferently, because every member in this Columbians and to ensure the decisions here refect the val- place knows that there are very real problems in their com- ues, the interests and the aspirations of British Columbians. munities. Tere are very real problems in the province. [6:15 p.m.] Frankly, when we are at each other in this place, we do a dis- I think proportional representation gives us the best service to solving those problems. opportunity to do that. I look forward to that vote, and I am Tis becomes a debate about whether obliging us to be hopeful the vote will efect the change that the majority of more collaborative, by having more diversity, having more people in this province want today. voices and having more points of view, in fact supports a more collaborative approach and obliges us to that approach. D. Davies: I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this Te people of British Columbia will make that decision at bill that we are here talking about. the end of November. What we know here is that it is time We heard from the minister across, the member, talking — for the nature of this place, which has been here for all my about fear. I tell you there is a lot of fear. Tere is a lot of time and for a hundred years before that, or however long fear from the residents that live in my riding. Tere’s a lot this place has been around — for some change. of fear from the residents that live throughout this province Young people are telling us it’s time for change. We need to and certainly in ridings that are smaller and more rural. remember that while there are young people in this House, Tis fear is not from fearmongering. Tis fear is from there are a whole lot more of us who are less young in this people looking at this fawed process that this government House. At the end of the day, we should be looking at what has rolled out. Tis fear comes from the gaping holes that engages young people in the process, what brings them to are in this process. Tis fear comes from not knowing what the table, what brings them into this place, with seats, to be things will look like following this referendum. Tat is where able to be active participants in this discussion. Tat’s what I the fear is coming from. It is not coming from fearmon- think that we need to do. Te failure of that collaboration is gering; the fear is coming from not knowing the facts, not what people are tired of. knowing how this whole referendum will roll forward. We know that we have to efect change. What this partic- I just wanted to talk on a couple points earlier. Te mem- ular piece of legislation does in that much broader debate of ber for Vancouver–West End mentioned about people that proportional representation is say: “Tere is a safety valve.” have come to him in his riding and spoken about support, A couple elections down the road, if this doesn’t work, if some B.C. Liberals that have spoken about supporting this. I the folks on the other side are right, then the people of this can certainly talk from my perspective as well. province will efect a change again, because the people of the I have a number of NDP friends in my riding that have province generally get it right. come up to me and conveyed their concern, their issues, as It is time for us to look seriously at the change. Sadly, that well, on the electoral reform process. I mean, we also have debate does not happen in this place in a reasonable way. It’s well-known NDP folks that have come out completely time to set the fear aside. It is time to set the rhetoric and the opposed to this. We have Mr. Tieleman. We’ve got former bluster aside. British Columbians will decide. What this says NDP Premiers that have come out completely opposed to is that they will have the opportunity, two elections afer- this. wards, to consider the decision that they make in Novem- I do agree with the member that this is something that is ber, should it pass. Tey will have a chance to reconsider that divided. Our job here as legislators is to debate this whole- decision should they choose to want to do that. Tat’s what heartedly and to hope that the fne folks of this province do we’re voting on today. make the right decision. Te more fundamental question is: should this place start I also wanted to talk about a brief comment: that the B.C. to refect what British Columbia looks like more than it does Conservatives support proportional representation. Tat is today? Tis place, to too great a degree, refects, I think, what not correct. In fact, they have taken a neutral stance on this. British Columbia looked like a couple decades ago. It has to In fact, Mr. Anderson — I believe he’s still the temporary start to look like what British Columbia looks like moving leader — has also spoken about the process that the B.C. Lib- forward. eral government put in place in 2005 and how he believed It is my belief that proportional representation afords us that it was put in place to capture the true intentions of the the best opportunity, the best vehicle to begin to evolve that public and that he does not necessarily agree with the pro- change, to begin to make that happen, to begin to efect cess that is being laid out right now. the change that people want. Tat’s what I hear from young Tis week, of course — in fact, I believe even as early as people. Tat’s what I hear from people who’ve come to this Friday of last week — residents around this province star- country and want to be involved. Tat’s what I hear from vul- ted receiving their mail-in ballots. Te mail-in ballots, of nerable people who are looking for a place for a voice. course, do ask for the way that we elect our MLAs. I fnd None of us should be scared of there being four or fve it kind of laughable, actually, that we’re here debating Bill parties in this House that all bring a view as long as we’re 40, Electoral Reform Referendum 2018 Amendment Act. Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5901

A piece of this referendum is happening right now, and rural health care issues that face Vancouver while I was wait- we’re still here debating pieces of it. It completely doesn’t ing to be medevacked to Vancouver to receive the critic- make any sense to me. al health care that I needed. I know these issues well, and Of course, just to the handful of people that are watching I know the issues that are facing rural residents, especially this debate right now, Bill 40 is basically to hold a referen- around health care. I’m going to continue to fght like hell dum in more than a decade from now to judge what the gov- to make sure that every single constituent in my riding will ernment is doing today, to see if: boy, did we get this right? continue to have a strong, loud voice in this place. I fnd that in all reality, this bill that has come late into the As I talk about these issues, in my riding, of rural health process is nothing more than a fnal plea to the residents of care, as I talk about roads, as I talk about all these things, British Columbia. you’re wondering where this fts in. In all likelihood, once [6:20 p.m.] the dust settles afer proportional representation — if pro- It’s a plea to say: “All right, we know that this isn’t going portional representation becomes a reality…. My riding, well. We know this isn’t looking good. We will give you the which is already the size of Austria, Ireland and Vancouver opportunity to review and look at this 11 years from now, Island combined, is roughly 165,000 square kilometres. It’s but in the meantime, take a leap of faith. Don’t worry about big; it’s massive. these 29 pieces that are missing. We’ll decide those later.” [6:25 p.m.] And if they’re wrong and if we get it wrong, we’ll go back to It’s very likely that my riding is going to get bigger. It’s a referendum under who knows what government. hard to fathom that. I already struggle to make sure that Who knows what the government is going to look like I’m out constantly, out on the road listening to these issues. 11 years from now? I’m very certain that it’ll look diferent You know, talking about my riding of Peace River North…. under proportional representation than it is now. “But take We don’t know. Is it going to include Peace River South, my that leap of faith with us,” the Premier said recently at the colleague to the south? Is it going to include that? Is that UBCM. I fnd that wrong. I fnd that very wrong. “Trust us. big enough? I don’t know. Is it going to go as far as Prince Trust us on these 29 points, and we’ll make the world a hap- George, maybe, to get whatever is needed? pier place for you.” I don’t buy it, and I don’t think that the Tis is one of the problems that I’m going to talk about a people of this province buy it. little bit later, that we don’t know what ridings are going to I would like to stand, though, right now with my fellow look like. Tat’s one of those 27 gaping holes in this process Interior MLAs and rural MLAs, MLAs that represent the that we’re being asked to vote on. smaller ridings in the Lower Mainland and MLAs that rep- I’ve already mentioned that I drive thousands of kilo- resent large ridings in the Interior. I want to give my per- metres, all the time, up to Liard Hot Springs, Toad River. I’ve spective — and the perspective of us, specifcally, that rep- already mentioned that I go up to Fort Nelson ofen. I have a resent rural ridings — on some of the discussions that we’ve constituency ofce, actually, in Fort Nelson. It’s the second- been having. largest community in my riding. For those of us that represent these geographically huge We know that Fort Nelson has been troubled with eco- yet lightly populated ridings, having a dedicated voice in this nomic issues in the last few years. But did you know that I’ve Legislature is absolutely critical to carrying out our demo- been working with that community? I’ve been working with cracy in this province. I fear that under proportional repres- the Ministry of Health and working with Northern Health to entation, the representation of my constituents and constitu- ofer birthing opportunities in that community. ents of rural B.C. will be lost or at least watered down. Why am I talking about birthing opportunities in Fort I’m born and raised in Fort St. John. I’ve travelled my rid- Nelson? I would bet that many people in this place — or else- ing extensively over my lifetime. I certainly travel it a lot where in the province, for that matter — don’t realize that more now in my role as MLA. I know the issues intim- women that are pregnant in Fort Nelson are being told to ately in my riding. I live them. I breathe them every single leave the community weeks ahead of their due date and to day when I’m home. I’ve lived them, and I’ve breathed them have their child somewhere else. Tis is due to a shortage of every single day as I’ve lived there, as I raise my family in resources in that community, medical health resources. Fort St. John. From issues facing our post-secondary stu- Now, to tie this all together — talking about the size and dents, issues facing teacher recruitment, rural road issues in very specifc health care issues in my riding. My riding is my riding, getting a new bridge across into Taylor across the going to get bigger, and we don’t know what that looks like. Peace River, to rural health care issues — I know these issues. Well, we will know what it looks like afer the referendum. My constituents talk to me every day about these issues. But the government is not telling us what it’s going to look Tey come into my ofce every day and talk about these like. Te government is not telling us how MLAs are going issues. I travel my riding extensively to talk about these to be appointed to this place until afer. issues. Rural health care is a big issue that I ofen hear about Tis really worries me. Tis worries my constituents, who in my ofce. don’t know if they’re going to be able to come to my ofce As many know in this place, I myself was involved in a and look me in the eye and say: “I need help.” Or to pick up critical accident in March. I had a lot of time to think about a phone and call me and say: “Member, I need help.” I feld 5902 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 those calls all the time. I am accountable to every single one elected representatives from northern communities. We’ve of my constituents. I’m accountable to them, whether they got elected representatives from rural communities, whose voted for me or not. Tat’s how this system works. Funda- sole job is to bust our butts in here for every single resident mentally, that’s how this system works. in our riding, to remind the government that our needs are I’ve spoken a little bit about some of the issues that my rid- just as important as the needs of everybody that lives in urb- ing is facing. I’m intimately connected to those issues, from an British Columbia. Taylor Bridge to the health care issues in Fort Nelson. Rural and remote constituents do matter. It doesn’t mat- I worry about…. Again, we don’t know. If an MLA is ter if you’re in Fort St. John or Fort Nelson, Prince Rupert appointed to the Legislature to represent a piece of whatever or Terrace or in Vancouver, we all enjoy the same rights. the riding looks like in the future, how are they going to truly We all enjoy, expect and deserve to be equally represented understand and represent the constituents of Fort Nelson? in this place. How are they going to relate? Well, I tell you, I can relate. I Again, my job individually, as the MLA for Peace River do relate, and I will continue to relate to my constituents and North, is to make sure that my constituents have that voice the issues that are facing them. I will continue to fght pas- and have that representation in this Legislature. My job, and sionately for the issues facing my constituents. all of our jobs in this place, every single one of us, is to rep- My riding is a long way — in fact, the farthest away — resent our constituents, whether they voted for us or not. from this place. It takes a long time. I don’t know if anybody When we come back to say, “Oh, well, under proportional in this…. I’m sure there are a few folks in this room that have representation, it’ll get every vote to count, and people will driven from Victoria, grabbed the ferry, driven up Highway fnally be represented,” that’s not true. Tat is not true. Tat 97, maybe taken a trip up the Alaska Highway and driven is not true for any one of us who is sitting in this place — all there. It’s a long ways from here. 87 of us that have made a commitment to our communities, [6:30 p.m.] that have made a commitment to our constituents, that have By the way, I do encourage you to do that anyway, if you made a commitment to devote ourselves to public life here. haven’t. It’s absolutely gorgeous. It’s beautiful. Make sure you It’s not just to represent some people or a little part of stop at the Liard Hot Springs. Take a dip in probably one of the population. It’s to represent whoever walks through that the most hidden secrets in the world. I’m digressing a little door. It’s to represent whoever sends us an email. It’s to rep- bit. But it’s a beautiful place, and I do encourage you to drive resent whoever phones us. Tat’s what we do. Tat is the fun- up there. damental piece of being a member of this Legislature. I encourage you to drive up there to understand the [6:35 p.m.] incredible diversity of this province. It’s unbelievable — To say that I need other people in my riding to represent unbelievable, the diversity of this province. Te diversity of all the other parties — I don’t buy that at all, not for one this province geographically and the diferences that all of minute. I can guarantee if you probably ask anybody in this us in this province, whether it be culturally or otherwise…. room…. Certainly in my riding, nobody feels like they’re not We’re all diferent in all corners of this province. being represented when they come and speak to me about In fact, I’ve ofen said that if you were to take someone an issue that’s afecting them. Because I don’t do that, and I from Fort McMurray and someone from Dawson Creek and don’t believe that any of us in this room do that. Fort St. John and someone from Edmonton and Calgary and Every one of us has a moral compass that guides us, and I someone from Lethbridge and put them all in a cofee shop believe that’s why we’re all in here. If we don’t put people frst, together and tell them to have cofee, their conversations as I mentioned, we are lacking our primary task of being an would probably be quite similar. I mean, the demographics MLA. I truly believe that under proportional representation, are fairly similar across the province of Alberta. Te geo- it will become more about the party, more about the parties graphy is very similar across the province of Alberta. than it will be regarding the people. But not here. Again, this is what makes B.C. fantastic — Under many of the proportional representation systems the rich diversity of people, the incredible geography that we around the world, we see that unfolding. We see that today. have, from the prairies, where I live, to the Rocky Mountains You can look at almost every example of proportional rep- to our coastal communities. It’s fantastic. It’s unbelievable. resentation around the world, and the governments under I’m very proud to live in this province. PR are not focused on people. Tey’re in survival mode, Back to my point. My riding is a long ways from Victoria. it seems. Tey’re almost always in survival mode, trying In fact, it’s so distant that it could be very easy for this Legis- to hold the coalition together, trying to hold this minority lature to overlook the needs of the residents, to be drowned whatever together. It becomes much more about the party out by the incredible population that is located in the Lower than it does the people. Mainland. Again, this ties back into the diversity of our It’s going to be a sad day in British Columbia when it province, the demographics and geography. becomes more about a party than it does about representing At the end of the day, the residents of Peace River North, constituents. I absolutely believe that, and I absolutely the residents of rural and remote parts of British Columbia, believe that’s going to be what’s going to come under propor- our voices aren’t drowned out in this place, because we have tional representation. Wednesday, October 24, 2018 British Columbia Debates 5903

Of course, when I see legislation come through such as riding, making sure Indigenous voices were heard. Te Bill 40, as well as the previous piece of legislation that has got reason why the B.C. Liberals did that, the government of us to this point here today, it is my job, it’s our job, to give the day did that, was to ensure that the public had confd- it a thorough examination and to determine if it is good for ence in the process. the people — in my case, if it’s good for the people of Peace I have heard very little confdence in the process that has River North. I have to concur with my colleagues on this side been rolled out to this date on the bill we’re talking about of the House that have already commented on this bill. today, as well as the process that has led us to the referendum I think each one of them has come to their own conclu- that’s happening right now. People don’t have a lot of confd- sion, I’m sure in consultation with the folks that they rep- ence in the process. resent, that the whole process of this government and how I hear it every single day. I hear it when I’m at the grocery they’ve rolled out this referendum is wrong. Te fact that store shopping. People come up to me and talk about how they are attempting to bind an unknown future government concerned they are. I go to a restaurant with my family. with this bill to provide a false hope is wrong. It’s trickery. People want to talk about proportional representation and We’ve heard here, with a number of my colleagues that the problems that they have with it. have spoken about…. It was our party on this side in the Te fear is created by the government who has flled it past that had launched a couple of referendums on looking with holes, who have lef so many unknowns. “Take a leap at how we elect our MLAs — one in 2005 and the other one of faith. Walk with us. Don’t worry about it. Let us deal with in 2009. I hear folks on that side of the House talking about: these holes afer you guys vote for it. We know what’s best for “Well, you guys are in favour. You campaigned on it in the you. We’ll do what’s right.” past. Or the former Premier said this was a good thing.” I believe that that is the message that the public is getting, None of us over here are denying that. We have never when really, it’s nothing more than a deliberate attempt to said we’re not in favour of looking at electoral reform. If the rig the next election. I truly mean that. When we talk about people of this province had come out, or if there was a big looking at how the governments around the world are always push to say we need to look at electoral reform, I know that on survival mode, it is really concerning to me that this is a this side…. If we were in government, we would be looking way that we can guarantee that. at developing a process, again, that would keep in the best interests of all British Columbians. All right? We would be [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] looking at a process. Interjections. Interjections. D. Davies: I’m hearing these comments across the way. D. Davies: I hear a member across saying: “We put it to Tey haven’t put up many speakers, but they sure want to the people.” Well, we did too, and we did an unbelievable speak to this now. As we continue this debate, I hope to job at doing that with the citizens’ assembly, picking random hear from these folks here that, again, want to get their two people from each of the ridings, bringing them together and bits in. talking about the merits of how we elect our MLAs — a I see the clock is ticking here. grassroots way to come up with what is going to work best Proportional representation not only has the possible for British Columbians. efects of blurring truly local representation, it really does [6:40 p.m.] make it hard for local voices to be heard in this place. Tis is A far, far diferent approach than what the NDP and the why we are opposed to this bill. Tis is why we are opposed Green Party have mustered up in their little contract of hap- to the whole process that has been laid out before us by this piness. It’s shameful. “Let’s ram this through. We’ll create an government. on-line poll that was….” You couldn’t complete the poll. It It has been done poorly. It’s been done wrong. Again, I’ve was so lopsided. I don’t know if that is what the member talked about 29 major pieces of the puzzle that aren’t there. across was talking about: “We consulted the people.” Yet you want us to judge that puzzle. Yeah, that looks nice, I’m sorry. Tat’s not consulting the people. Consulting but the whole face is missing. You know, that’s the 29 pieces the people is out there talking, out there doing a citizens’ out of it. And this is what we’re asking. assembly, like we have done in the past, getting people’s [6:45 p.m.] responses, being guided by the citizens of British Columbia, Te member earlier from Abbotsford had mentioned buy- being driven by the citizens of British Columbia — not the ing a car without knowing the brand or the size of motor or other way around, which is what was done on that side or even if it has a motor. Te tires — well, it may or may not which is now what we see happening. have. I’ve got a car for sale. It’s going to be 10,000 bucks. Will Te best interests are going to come from British Col- you give it to me? No, people aren’t going to do that. umbians, not the other way around. Going back to the pro- Tat’s the same thing that the government is asking right cess that was done in the past on the citizens’ assembly, now — for people to vote on a referendum that has these picking men and women from across the province in every huge holes in it. Maps not provided. Is it open or closed 5904 British Columbia Debates Wednesday, October 24, 2018 lists? We can’t even get to the debate. I understand there is Or should I simply move adjournment and hold my place to something coming, but when is too late too late? Te middle come back? of November, I understand, might be the date for the debate. Tat’s too late. Tat’s not true. Mr. Speaker: Tat sounds like a good idea. In closing, the NDP and the Green Party think that they have a right to impose this style of government. I hope that M. Hunt moved adjournment of debate. the voting public turns out in full force and pushes back against the government, because I know that I’m going to be Motion approved. fghting tooth and nail to defeat this obvious political ploy that is being presented to British Columbians. I’m going to Hon. S. Simpson moved adjournment of the House. continue to step up, and I’m going to continue to make sure that the voices of my constituents are heard in this place. Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: Member, Surrey-Cloverdale. Mr. Speaker: Tis House stands adjourned until Tursday, October 25, at 10 a.m. M. Hunt: Tank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m also aware of the clock, so I’m really not sure whether you want me to start. Te House adjourned at 6:47 p.m. Hansard Reporting Services

DIRECTOR Robert Sutherland

MANAGER OF REPORTING SERVICES Christine Fedoruk

MANAGER OF PUBLISHING SYSTEMS Dan Kerr

TEAM LEADERS Mike Beninger, Laurel Bernard, Julie McClung, Karol Morris, Amy Reiswig, Glenn Wigmore

EDITORS Julia Bobak, Janet Brazier, Kim Christie, Deirdre Gotto, Jane Grainger, Betsy Gray, Iris Gray, Mary Beth Hall, Barb Horricks, Bill Hrick, Catherine Lang, Paula Lee, Donna McCloskey, Quinn MacDonald, Anne Maclean, Claire Matthews, Jill Milkert, Lind Miller, Erik Pedersen, Sara Shields, Murray Sinclair, Robyn Swanson, Antoinette Warren, Heather Warren, Kim Westad

INDEXERS Shannon Ash, Robin Rohrmoser

RESEARCHERS Niloo Farahzadeh, David Mattison, Steve Pocock

TECHNICAL OPERATIONS OFFICERS Pamela Holmes, Tom Qin, Robin Saxifrage, Mike Sinclair

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

www.leg.bc.ca

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