Second Session, 39th Parliament

official report of Debates of the Legislative Assembly

(hansard)

Tuesday, June 1, 2010 Afternoon Sitting Volume 19, Number 6

the honourable , speaker

ISSN 0709-1281 PROVINCE OF (Entered Confederation July 20, 1871)

LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR His Honour the Honourable Steven L. Point, OBC

Second Session, 39th Parliament

SPEAKER OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Honourable Bill Barisoff

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

Premier and President of the Executive Council...... Hon. Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations...... Hon. Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance...... Hon. Minister of State for the Olympics and ActNow B.C...... Hon. Mary McNeil Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation...... Hon. George Abbott Minister of Advanced Education and Labour Market Development...... Hon. Minister of Agriculture and Lands...... Hon. Steve Thomson Attorney General and Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General...... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Children and Family Development and Minister Responsible for Child Care...... Hon. Minister of Citizens' Services and Minister Responsible for Multiculturalism and the Public Affairs Bureau...... Hon. Minister of Community and Rural Development...... Hon. Bill Bennett Minister of Education and Minister Responsible for Early Learning and Literacy...... Hon. Margaret MacDiarmid Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources...... Hon. Minister of State for Mining ...... Hon. Minister of Environment...... Hon. Minister of State for Climate Action...... Hon. Minister of Forests and Range and Minister Responsible for the Integrated Land Management Bureau...... Hon. Minister of Health Services...... Hon. Minister of Healthy Living and Sport...... Hon. Minister of Housing and Social Development...... Hon. Minister of Labour...... Hon. Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General...... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Minister of Small Business, Technology and Economic Development...... Hon. Minister of Tourism, Culture and the Arts...... Hon. Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure...... Hon.

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

Leader of the OfficialO pposition...... Carole James Deputy Speaker...... Assistant Deputy Speaker...... Claire Trevena Deputy Chair, Committee of the Whole...... Harry Bloy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly...... E. George MacMinn, OBC, QC Clerk Assistant...... Robert Vaive Clerk Assistant and Law Clerk...... Ian D. Izard, QC Clerk Assistant and Clerk of Committees...... Craig H. James Clerk Assistant and Committee Clerk...... Kate Ryan-Lloyd Sergeant-at-Arms...... Gary Lenz Director, Hansard Services...... Jo-Anne Kern Acting Legislative Librarian...... Peter Gourlay Legislative Comptroller...... Dan Arbic ALPHABETICAL LIST OF MEMBERS LIST OF MEMBERS BY RIDING

Abbott, Hon. George (L)...... Shuswap Abbotsford-Mission...... Hon. Randy Hawes Austin, Robin (NDP)...... Skeena Abbotsford South...... Bains, Harry (NDP)...... Surrey-Newton Abbotsford West...... Hon. Michael de Jong, QC Barisoff, Hon. Bill (L)...... Penticton Alberni–Pacific Rim...... Scott Fraser Barnett, Donna (L)...... Cariboo-Chilcotin Boundary-Similkameen...... John Slater Bell, Hon. Pat (L)...... Prince George–Mackenzie Burnaby–Deer Lake...... Kathy Corrigan Bennett, Hon. Bill (L)...... Kootenay East Burnaby-Edmonds...... Raj Chouhan Black, Dawn (NDP)...... New Westminster Burnaby-Lougheed...... Harry Bloy Black, Hon. Iain (L)...... Port Moody–Coquitlam Burnaby North...... Richard T. Lee Bloy, Harry (L)...... Burnaby-Lougheed Cariboo-Chilcotin...... Donna Barnett Bond, Hon. Shirley (L)...... Prince George–Valemount Cariboo North...... Bob Simpson Brar, Jagrup (NDP)...... Surrey-Fleetwood Chilliwack...... Cadieux, Stephanie (L)...... Surrey-Panorama Chilliwack-Hope...... Hon. Barry Penner Campbell, Hon. Gordon (L)...... Vancouver–Point Grey Columbia River–Revelstoke...... Norm Macdonald Cantelon, Ron (L)...... Parksville-Qualicum Comox Valley...... Don McRae Chandra Herbert, Spencer (NDP)...... Vancouver–West End Coquitlam–Burke Mountain...... Douglas Horne Chong, Hon. Ida (L)...... Oak Bay–Gordon Head Coquitlam-Maillardville...... Diane Thorne Chouhan, Raj (NDP)...... Burnaby-Edmonds Cowichan Valley...... Bill Routley Coell, Hon. Murray (L)...... Saanich North and the Islands Delta North...... Guy Gentner Coleman, Hon. Rich (L)...... Fort Langley–Aldergrove Delta South...... Vicki Huntington Conroy, Katrine (NDP)...... Kootenay West Esquimalt–Royal Roads...... Maurine Karagianis Coons, Gary (NDP)...... North Coast Fort Langley–Aldergrove...... Hon. Rich Coleman Corrigan, Kathy (NDP)...... Burnaby–Deer Lake Fraser-Nicola...... Harry Lali Dalton, Marc (L)...... Maple Ridge–Mission Juan de Fuca...... John Horgan de Jong, Hon. Michael, QC (L)...... Abbotsford West Kamloops–North Thompson...... Terry Lake Dix, Adrian (NDP)...... Vancouver-Kingsway Kamloops–South Thompson...... Hon. Kevin Krueger Donaldson, Doug (NDP)...... Stikine Kelowna–Lake Country...... Norm Letnick Elmore, Mable (NDP)...... Vancouver-Kensington Kelowna-Mission...... Hon. Steve Thomson Falcon, Hon. Kevin (L)...... Surrey-Cloverdale Kootenay East...... Hon. Bill Bennett Farnworth, Mike (NDP)...... Port Coquitlam Kootenay West...... Katrine Conroy Fleming, Rob (NDP)...... Victoria–Swan Lake Langley...... Hon. Mary Polak Foster, Eric (L)...... Vernon-Monashee Maple Ridge–Mission...... Marc Dalton Fraser, Scott (NDP)...... Alberni–Pacific Rim Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows...... Michael Sather Gentner, Guy (NDP)...... Delta North Nanaimo...... Leonard Krog Hammell, Sue (NDP)...... Surrey–Green Timbers Nanaimo–North Cowichan...... Doug Routley Hansen, Hon. Colin (L)...... Vancouver-Quilchena Nechako Lakes...... John Rustad Hawes, Hon. Randy (L)...... Abbotsford-Mission Nelson-Creston...... Michelle Mungall Hayer, Dave S. (L)...... Surrey-Tynehead New Westminster...... Dawn Black Heed, Kash (L)...... Vancouver-Fraserview North Coast...... Gary Coons Hogg, Gordon (L)...... Surrey–White Rock North Island...... Claire Trevena Horgan, John (NDP)...... Juan de Fuca North Vancouver–Lonsdale...... Hon. Naomi Yamamoto Horne, Douglas (L)...... Coquitlam–Burke Mountain North Vancouver–Seymour...... Jane Thornthwaite Howard, Rob (L)...... Richmond Centre Oak Bay–Gordon Head...... Hon. Ida Chong Huntington, Vicki (Ind.)...... Delta South Parksville-Qualicum...... James, Carole (NDP)...... Victoria–Beacon Hill Peace River North...... Pat Pimm Karagianis, Maurine (NDP)...... Esquimalt–Royal Roads Peace River South...... Hon. Blair Lekstrom Krog, Leonard (NDP)...... Nanaimo Penticton...... Hon. Bill Barisoff Krueger, Hon. Kevin (L)...... Kamloops–South Thompson Port Coquitlam...... Mike Farnworth Kwan, Jenny Wai Ching (NDP)...... Vancouver–Mount Pleasant Port Moody–Coquitlam...... Hon. Iain Black Lake, Terry (L)...... Kamloops–North Thompson Powell River–Sunshine Coast...... Nicholas Simons Lali, Harry (NDP)...... Fraser-Nicola Prince George–Mackenzie...... Hon. Pat Bell Lee, Richard T. (L)...... Burnaby North Prince George–Valemount...... Hon. Shirley Bond Lekstrom, Hon. Blair (L)...... Peace River South Richmond Centre...... Rob Howard Les, John (L)...... Chilliwack Richmond East...... Linda Reid Letnick, Norm (L)...... Kelowna–Lake Country Richmond-Steveston...... Hon. John Yap MacDiarmid, Hon. Margaret (L)...... Vancouver-Fairview Saanich North and the Islands...... Hon. Murray Coell Macdonald, Norm (NDP)...... Columbia River–Revelstoke Saanich South...... Lana Popham McIntyre, Joan (L)...... West Vancouver–Sea to Sky Shuswap...... Hon. George Abbott McNeil, Hon. Mary (L)...... Vancouver–False Creek Skeena...... Robin Austin McRae, Don (L)...... Comox Valley Stikine...... Doug Donaldson Mungall, Michelle (NDP)...... Nelson-Creston Surrey-Cloverdale...... Hon. Kevin Falcon Penner, Hon. Barry (L)...... Chilliwack-Hope Surrey-Fleetwood...... Jagrup Brar Pimm, Pat (L)...... Peace River North Surrey–Green Timbers...... Polak, Hon. Mary (L)...... Langley Surrey-Newton...... Harry Bains Popham, Lana (NDP)...... Saanich South Surrey-Panorama...... Ralston, Bruce (NDP)...... Surrey-Whalley Surrey-Tynehead...... Dave S. Hayer Reid, Linda (L)...... Richmond East Surrey-Whalley...... Bruce Ralston Routley, Bill (NDP)...... Cowichan Valley Surrey–White Rock...... Gordon Hogg Routley, Doug (NDP)...... Nanaimo–North Cowichan Vancouver-Fairview...... Hon. Margaret MacDiarmid Rustad, John (L)...... Nechako Lakes Vancouver–False Creek...... Hon. Mary McNeil Sather, Michael (NDP)...... Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Vancouver-Fraserview...... Simons, Nicholas (NDP)...... Powell River–Sunshine Coast Vancouver-Hastings...... Shane Simpson Simpson, Bob (NDP)...... Cariboo North Vancouver-Kensington...... Mable Elmore Simpson, Shane (NDP)...... Vancouver-Hastings Vancouver-Kingsway...... Adrian Dix Slater, John (L)...... Boundary-Similkameen Vancouver-Langara...... Hon. Moira Stilwell Stewart, Hon. Ben (L)...... Westside-Kelowna Vancouver–Mount Pleasant...... Jenny Wai Ching Kwan Stilwell, Hon. Moira (L)...... Vancouver-Langara Vancouver–Point Grey...... Hon. Gordon Campbell Sultan, Ralph (L)...... West Vancouver–Capilano Vancouver-Quilchena...... Hon. Colin Hansen Thomson, Hon. Steve (L)...... Kelowna-Mission Vancouver–West End...... Spencer Chandra Herbert Thorne, Diane (NDP)...... Coquitlam-Maillardville Vernon-Monashee...... Eric Foster Thornthwaite, Jane (L)...... North Vancouver–Seymour Victoria–Beacon Hill...... Carole James Trevena, Claire (NDP)...... North Island Victoria–Swan Lake...... Rob Fleming van Dongen, John (L)...... Abbotsford South West Vancouver–Capilano...... Ralph Sultan Yamamoto, Hon. Naomi (L)...... North Vancouver–Lonsdale West Vancouver–Sea to Sky...... Joan McIntyre Yap, Hon. John (L)...... Richmond-Steveston Westside-Kelowna...... Hon. Ben Stewart

Party Standings: Liberal 49; New Democratic 35; Independent 1

CONTENTS

Tuesday, June 1, 2010 Afternoon Sitting

Page

Routine Business

Introductions by Members...... 6051

Tributes...... 6051 G.W. Graham J. Les

Introductions by Members...... 6051

Introduction and First Reading of Bills...... 6051 Bill M208 — Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Amendment Act, 2010 S. Simpson Bill M209 — Long Term Tenants Protection Act, 2010 S. Chandra Herbert Bill M210 — Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2010 D. Thorne

Statements (Standing Order 25B)...... 6053 Tour de Delta bicycle races V. Huntington Clearwater community events and infrastructure T. Lake Youth suicide prevention B. Simpson North Shore technology companies R. Sultan Youth in Philanthropy R. Fleming Children's play village at Qualicum Beach School R. Cantelon

Oral Questions...... 6055 Pacific Coast University construction costs and harmonized sales tax C. James Hon. C. Hansen Implementation of harmonized sales tax C. James Hon. C. Hansen Pacific Coast University construction costs and harmonized sales tax S. Fraser Hon. C. Hansen N. Macdonald Release of information on fish farm disease outbreaks V. Huntington Hon. S. Thomson Government action on closed-containment fish farming V. Huntington Hon. S. Thomson Government use of ICBC revenues M. Farnworth Hon. M. de Jong High school child care program for student parents M. Karagianis Hon. M. Polak M. Elmore Oral Questions (continued) Government action on domestic violence M. Mungall Hon. M. de Jong K. Corrigan

Reports from Committees...... 6059 Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts, report for the first session of the 39th parliament B. Ralston

Petitions...... 6060 S. Hammell

Orders of the Day

Committee of the Whole House...... 6060 Bill 20 — Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act (No. 3), 2010 (continued) S. Chandra Herbert Hon. B. Bennett L. Krog N. Macdonald Hon. M. MacDiarmid Hon. B. Lekstrom R. Fleming J. Horgan Hon. R. Hawes Hon. J. Yap Hon. I. Chong Hon. R. Coleman V. Huntington Hon. M. de Jong G. Coons Hon. S. Bond

Proceedings in the Douglas Fir Room

Committee of Supply...... 6084 Estimates: Office of the Premier(continued) C. James Hon. G. Campbell 6051

TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 2010 We have His Worship Mayor Wayne Lippert and the chief executive officer for the city of Vernon,L eon Gous. The House met at 1:37 p.m. They're here to speak to some ministers.I would like the House to make them welcome. [Mr. Speaker in the chair.] Hon. M. Stilwell: I rise today to introduce some Routine Business important friends and visitors from my riding of Vancouver-Langara who are in the House today. Rabbi Introductions by Members Infeld from Beth Israel Synagogue and his son Avishai are here in Victoria and visiting the Legislature building. D. Hayer: I have two special guests. I had a chance to As well, there is a group of 30 grade 5 students and 15 have lunch with them today. One is Mohsin Abbas. He's adults from St. Anthony of Padua School. I would like the senior editor of Jang Canada, which is one of the the House to please make them all very welcome. largest Urdu newspapers in Pakistan and also outside [1340] Pakistan. As well, he's a special correspondent repor- ter for Hajj news, a television program, and BBC World. L. Popham: Today I had the pleasure of lunching with And also his partner, Jiesu Luo. Would the House please four lovely ladies: Elsie McMurphy, Sue Geddis, Linda make them very, very welcome. Black and Ruth Howland. Please join me in making them feel welcome. Tributes Introduction and G.W. GRAHam First Reading of Bills

J. Les: With regret, I advise the House today of the Bill M208 — Manufactured Home Park passing of one of my constituents, Mr. G.W. Graham, Tenancy Amendment Act, 2010 at the age of 103. Mr. Graham was born in Greenwood, B.C., in 1907. He moved to Chilliwack in 1909. S. Simpson presented a bill intituled Manufactured When he finished his schooling, he took one year Home Park Tenancy Amendment Act, 2010. of teacher training and then proceeded to teach at Atchelitz Elementary, followed by Robertson Elementary S. Simpson: I move introduction of the Manufactured and Sardis Elementary, during which time he got his Home Park Tenancy Amendment Act, 2010. bachelor's degree and became vice-principal and then principal of Chilliwack high school, now known as Motion approved. Chilliwack Secondary. He left a lasting imprint on his students and on our community. In 1950 Mr. Graham was appointed school inspector S. Simpson: The Manufactured Home Park Tenancy for the provincial government and later became the Amendment Act, 2010, looks to protect the most vulner- superintendent of administration for the province's able sector of our society, the owners of mobile homes. school boards. Currently tenants renting pads or land in home parks In 2005 the Chilliwack school district named its new- have little protection against eviction for the purposes est middle secondary school after him, known today as of development. This group of people faces unique ob- G.W. Graham Middle Secondary School. stacles and barriers when they face an eviction. Their In 2008 the University of the Fraser Valley presented homes are, in most instances, permanent structures and him with an honorary doctorate degree for his decades not movable. If they can be moved, the costs are prohibi- of educational leadership. tive for moving a manufactured home, if you can find One of his former students said this: "There are very another location at all. few people in this world that you will encounter who By amending sections 42 and 44 of the Manufactured will have a lifetime effect on you, and he was one of Home Park Tenancy Act, this bill will accomplish the those people. He gave his students a profound sense that following: require that a park owner provide 12 months' we could do anything we wanted to do." notice of eviction when redeveloping land under any As I said, Mr. Graham left a tremendous mark on this prov- form of tenancy agreement, require that a park owner at ince and on our community, and he will be sorely missed. the time of eviction pays a tenant's relocation expenses up to $25,000 and require a park owner to pay those Introductions by Members tenants who are unable to relocate their manufactured homes because of local building standards an amount E. Foster: Joining us in the House today are two equal to the fair market value of the manufactured home friends of mine, important people in the Vernon area. as compensation. 6052 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Mr. Speaker, manufactured home owners are fre- ities of landlords and tenants, but this bill is a good first quently older British Columbians who have chosen this as step. The Long Term Tenants Protection Act could be their retirement option. They have worked hard all their passed into law this week to immediately protect long- lives, they pay their rent, and they keep their homes and term tenants who are currently living under threat of surroundings in good repair. These British Columbians mass eviction or massive rent hikes because of an unbal- believed they had an arrangement that would allow them anced and unfair Residential Tenancy Act. some longer-term security for their later years. I hope members of this House will think of Lynn, The Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Amendment Mary and Rolly and unite to pass this bill this week. I Act will help to ensure that this is the case and, when it move this bill be placed on the orders of the day for is not, will guarantee that they are at least treated with reading at the next sitting of the House after today. some fairness in terms of their costs and the protection of their asset. Bill M209, Long Term Tenants Protection Act, 2010, I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on for second reading at the next sitting after today. orders of the day for second reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Bill M208, Manufactured Home Park Tenancy [1345] Amendment Act, 2010, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be placed on orders of the day for second Bill M210 — Residential Tenancy reading at the next sitting of the House after today. Amendment Act, 2010

Bill M209 — Long Term Tenants D. Thorne presented a bill intituled Residential Protection Act, 2010 Tenancy Amendment Act, 2010.

S. Chandra Herbert presented a bill intituled Long D. Thorne: I move that this bill be introduced and Term Tenants Protection Act, 2010. read for a first time now.

S. Chandra Herbert: I rise to move that this bill be Motion approved. read for a first time now. D. Thorne: I'm asking today for support for this bill, Motion approved. which amends the Residential Tenancy Act to provide more protection for tenants. It increases the amount of notice S. Chandra Herbert: I rise today to ask each and that a landlord must give a tenant in the event of renova- every member of this House for their support for the tions that require the tenant to vacate their residence and Long Term Tenants Protection Act, 2010. of conversion to strata title, and it increases the compensa- This is a bill for Lynn Stevens, an 82-year-old con- tion payable to tenants under those circumstances. stituent of mine who has fought ovarian cancer and now It allows the tenant the right of first refusal, giving has had to fightH ollyburn Properties to stay in the only them the option of continuing residence following the home she has known for the last 41 years — an unfair renovation or conversion, and prohibits the landlord eviction. This is a bill for the Seafield, which 93- and from raising the rent any more than otherwise would be 82-year-old Mary and Rolly McFall have called home lawful. Finally, it allows the tenant increased time to pay for decades. They're now standing up to their landlord's overdue rent or dispute an eviction notice and increased attempt to jack up rents 73 percent through the geo- time before eviction due to the non-payment of rent. graphic area increase clause. This act is an acknowledgment of the imbalance of This bill says no to massively jacking up rents of long- power that exists between landlords and tenants, par- term tenants over and above the yearly rent increases ticularly with regards to the many avenues available for they pay year in, year out. This bill puts into law what landlords to eject tenants with very little notice or com- is there in spirit. It says no to big landlord companies pensation. With this act, British Columbia recognizes who try to evict long-term tenants under the pretext and protects the rights and interests of tenants in a way that it's for use by a caretaker when there are actually that is fair and reasonable to landlords. other suites available for that use. This bill says yes to I move that this bill be placed on the orders of the day the vast majority of renters and landlords who do follow for second reading after today. the rules and maintain long-term relationships based on trust, a home based on peace and quiet enjoyment, and Bill M210, Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, steady income for the property owner. 2010, introduced, read a first time and ordered to be As members will know, there are a number of other placed on orders of the day for second reading at the changes needed to balance the rights and responsibil- next sitting of the House after today. Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6053

Statements who serve the public — the official opening of the new (Standing Order 25B) Clearwater sewage lagoon. The Towns for Tomorrow program has enabled the district of Clearwater to add TOUR DE DELTA BICYCLE RACES aeration to the lagoon through a system powered by solar energy, greatly reducing the odour from the plant. V. Huntington: Delta South is known for nail-biting The only ones more excited about the project than the races that come right down to the wire. Today I would politicians were the neighbouring residents, who can like to talk about one that has been called "fast and furi- now enjoy their back yards whichever way the wind is ous" and "a wild, colourful, exciting pursuit to the finish blowing. with competitors at the top of their game competing all- [1350] out for the grand prize." It's the Tour de Delta, and the The skies parted just in time for the May Day parade in grand prize is the race jersey. which hundreds of residents lined up to watch colourful The Tour de Delta, the brainchild of the member floats and antique vehicles make their way through the for Delta North, is a fabulous weekend of bike racing town, while children reached out for the delicious treats that will be celebrating its tenth anniversary two weeks thrown by the participants of the parade. The highlight hence. Over 5,000 spectators will watch three rousing of the day was the opening of the Clearwater skateboard events in both men's and women's categories. Athletes park and tennis courts, and the crowd was treated to a from around the world will come to Delta to compete for professional skateboarding demonstration. what has become the richest cycling prize in Canada. The community of Clearwater, while facing the many North Delta stages the first event on Friday evening. challenges of a rural resource-dependent community, is The prologue is the Race of Truth, and cyclists compete full of optimistic and resilient people who celebrate their against the clock on special time-trial bikes designed, way of life and will continue to build a bright and pros- they say, for speed not comfort. On Saturday morning perous future. families from North Delta, Tsawwassen and Ladner bike to east Ladner for the mayor's race and to watch BMX youth suicide prevention competition. That evening the Criterium begins with the Kid's Crit B. Simpson: The accidental death of a young- per and ends with professional riders and a chase described son is difficult for all of us to accept, partly because of as NASCAR on two wheels. The Criterium core circles our innate sense of the unrealized potential of that loss. the village streets of historic Ladner. The final event is When a young person makes a choice to end their own the road race, which begins on Sunday in North Delta, life, there is an associated guilt and inevitable questions runs through the agricultural lands and ends with a of how family, friends and the broader society failed gruelling uphill battle on the streets of Tsawwassen. that person so deeply that they chose to not face another Staging the Tour de Delta takes enormous effort, and day. special thanks are due all the sponsors, organizers, vol- That's why programs like yellow ribbon suicide - pre unteers and billets throughout Delta who make this vention are so critical. The goals of this program are to weekend such a success. My thanks to them all, and my promote awareness that suicide is our collective problem best wishes to all the competitors for a weekend of leg- and is preventable; develop broad-based support for sui- burning fun. cide prevention and intervention; develop and promote a program to reduce the stigma associated with suicide, CLEARWATER COMMUNITY EVENTS which prevents individuals and families from seeking AND INFRASTRUCTURE help; and increase media knowledge about youth sui- cide in proactive ways to prevent it. T. Lake: On Saturday, May 22, I had the pleasure of For five years now, a group of young people in Quesnel spending the day in the beautiful North Thompson com- have exemplified an energetic, upbeat and community- munity of Clearwater, gateway to Wells Gray Provincial based approach to youth suicide prevention. Called Park, to celebrate May Days and a number of remark- Youth Entertaining for Service or the YES group, these able achievements. The day began with that staple of young people have raised enough money each year to rural B.C. life, a delicious pancake breakfast served up enable Barb Lamoureux, the Canadian representative by the Clearwater Elks Club, followed by a visit to the of the yellow ribbon campaign, to come to Quesnel to farmers market where home-grown herbs and hand- engage their peers in a proactive suicide prevention made jewelry were hits with my wife, Lisa. Although the program. weather was rainy, the smiles and hospitality were, as al- The YES group are talented musicians, singers, dan- ways, very warm. cers and true entertainers in every sense. They dedicate The next stop was an event that, while it might not months of their lives to the preparation of a themed var- seem popular to most, is always exciting for those of us iety show that enthrals audiences for two-plus hours 6054 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

each night, with many people coming back again and School, St. Michael's University, Reynolds Secondary, again to enjoy their energy, talent and absolute profes- Oak Bay High and Stelly's. sionalism. Their show titles reflect the range of their Originally launched in Victoria in November 2003, talents and their appeal to all audiences. They started the Youth in Philanthropy program is designed to with Fabulous Fifties, then Swing the Mood, followed by engage young people in proactive, values-led grant mak- Feeling Groovy and last year's Gone Country. This year ing. Students gain important, lifelong leadership skills as they're busy preparing Rock On. they carry out the process of making thoughtful grants I ask the members of this House to join me in recog- to benefit our communities. nizing this talented group of young people and thank Each year the foundation provides grants of $3,000 them for the sacrifices they make each year to provide for each school, $500 of which is retained to add to an support to young people in their community. established endowment in the school's name. Using Victoria's Vital Signs as a tool, the students learn about north shore technology companies critical issues that exist in their community. Students then research the potential charities. They conduct R. Sultan: I'd like to talk about some outstanding interviews. They conduct on-site visits. Each student North Shore entrepreneurs. ClearVision Technologies member provides input, and then the group as a whole is growing fast, solving a chronic problem in packaging. decides on how to allocate the grant-making funds. The Are those flaps on the box glued down right? A produc- written recommendations are then approved by Victoria tion line can glue eight boxes a second. ClearVision's Foundation's board of directors. camera photographs each box as it flashes by, decides This year the student philanthropists granted a total of whether the glue is right and tags rejects with ultraviolet. $17,500 to 14 different charities in my community, includ- Every order is defect-free. In the world of packaged ing the Land Conservancy, Victoria Women's Transition goods marketing, that's a breakthrough. House, Passion for Tango, Surrounded by Cedar, Island Wildlife Natural Care Centre, Beacon Community CEO Stephen Robinson was a big hit at the Chicago Services, BCSPCA, Victoria Youth Empowerment packaging conference. Augurex Life Sciences Corp. Society, James Bay Health and Community Services, led by Norma Biln, whose resumé runs from Pfizer to Victoria Single Parent Resource Centre, Victoria Riding Aspreva, has developed a protein biomarker for arthritis. for the Disabled, Extreme Outreach Society, Boys and Biomarkers give more accurate diagnoses, allowing med- Girls Club and Victoria Cool Aid Society. ical treatment customized to each patient. It's a growth Since 2003 local student grant-makers taking part in market. Biomarkers are a $5 billion business growing this program have made over 100 grants totalling more about 40 percent a year. than $100,000. I wish all of us in the House to pass on Inproheat was founded by an Austrian immigrant who our thanks to them for giving their time so freely this invented submerged combustion, which saves energy in year and for making the program such a success. industrial heating. Today it's the ultimate in greenhouse gas reduction. Inproheat works in Chile, Mexico, the CHILDREN'S PLAY VILLAGE United States, Europe and elsewhere. CEO Steve Panz in- AT QUALICUM BEACH SCHOOL forms me they converted this very Parliament Building to heating by natural gas, but he also observed there seems R. Cantelon: "We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto." to be no lack of hot air in the building to start with. Dorothy might have said those very words had she Why is the North Shore fertile ground for such entre- landed on the school grounds on Sunday afternoon at preneurs? Well, for some others, coaching by such Qualicum Beach Elementary School, because created mentors as Mike Volker and Ralph Turfus also helps. that day on the grounds of the school was a storybook Thank you, and thanks to them. village of children-sized, munchkin-sized buildings to inspire a child's imagination. youth in philanthropy It all began early Sunday morning with a team of builders, a pile of lumber and supplies in one place and R. Fleming: Greater Victoria high school students re- teams of eager builders, without plans, to build these ten cently celebrated the culmination of a year of giving back child-sized buildings. They included a general store, a to our local charitable sector. Student-led groups from hospital, fire hall, bank, post office, theatre, schoolhouse, seven local high schools demonstrated their support for library and gas station — all built to inspire children's a broad range of causes, community projects and organ- imaginations in an interactive environment. izations in the form of grants made through the Victoria Around the safety circle a child-sized roadway was Foundation's Youth in Philanthropy program. built, where children can ride their trikes or pedal cars [1355] and learn about the rules of the road with stop and yield Participating schools this year include Belmont signs, visit the various buildings and enjoy some inter- Secondary, Frances Kelsey Secondary, Victoria High active and learning play. Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6055

It was built in a day — miraculously, as I say. I C. James: I'd like to inform the minister that the pounded nails with the Oceanside Development and university obviously did a lot more planning than the Construction Association, so I had good help. It rose government did. This is $70,000 after the partial rebate, from the ground from nothing up to an entire village. which is an additional cost to this university and their Next to the village is an alphabet garden, which fea- construction. tures, of course — as you might expect — 26 planters, This is an award-winning program. It helps people each in the shape of the letters of the alphabet. These will with disabilities get back to work. It's precisely the kind be tended by volunteer groups in the community who of program that we should be supporting for our econ- apply to tend and grow vegetables and flowers in the omy and for people with disabilities so they can lead garden, which will be made available to the community. an independent lifestyle. But the Premier and this gov- The entire thing creates a great learning experience ernment are moving ahead with the HST — $70,000 and environment for seniors, grandparents, parents additional cost on this project. and teens to enjoy their imaginations with these inter- Again, my question is to the Premier. TheH ST is hurt- active buildings. It's all part of the concept of Building ing British Columbians every step of the way. Why won't Learning Together, which is a coalition of commun- he just say no to the HST? ity partners that have joined together to support early learning for children zero to six and their families. Hon. C. Hansen: The Pacific Coast University for Since 1999 they've grown to represent over a hundred Workplace Health Sciences has not contacted us. We businesses, service clubs and schools, 20 agencies, min- would certainly be pleased to work with them in terms istries, as well as over 200 individuals who participate in of the calculations they've done. this interactive development of childhood learning. When you look at the incremental cost of a construc- Let's congratulate their efforts and congratulate all tion project that would result from the introduction those who ably built the buildings. of the harmonized sales tax and the elimination of the provincial sales tax, we believe that for any typical Oral Questions construction of this nature, the rebate should totally off- set any incremental cost. But we are prepared to work PACIFIC COAST UNIVERSITY with them and look at the calculations that they've CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND undertaken. HARMONIZED SALES TAX Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a further C. James: In Port Alberni plans are underway to build supplemental. the Pacific Coast University campus, which will house an internationally acclaimed disabled management pro- IMPLEMENTATION OF gram. But thanks to the HST, the cost of construction HARMONIZED SALES TAX has just gone up by $70,000. So my question is to the Premier. Why is he hitting the Pacific Coast University C. James: In a September 2009 bulletin the member with the HST? for Parksville-Qualicum said that the Premier him- self had given his unequivocal endorsement to this Hon. C. Hansen: I am familiar with the news re- university. ports about the concerns around this institution in Port Now this same Premier and this government are hit- Alberni. Certainly, I am familiar with the good work that ting them with the HST, and it's not simply the Pacific has been done by the National Institute of Disability Coast University that's going to be hurt by the HST. Management and Research going back well over ten There are similar programs and similar projects all years. across this province. As we all know, the government's [1400] HST betrayal will hit British Columbians in every aspect I am curious as to how they would arrive at that num- of their life. ber. Certainly, we are prepared to work with them to Again, my question is to the Premier. The public has show them exactly how the rebate system would work. spoken loud and clear. Will he get rid of the HST now? When we announced that the university sector in British Columbia would be eligible for a 75 percent rebate of the Hon. C. Hansen: It's that kind of blatant misrepre- HST, I know that the university sector was very pleased sentation of the facts that I think has actually resulted with that because that, in fact, offsets the incremental in a lot of people's concerns about the harmonized sales cost of HST for any typical university. tax. As I have said on numerous occasions, about 20 percent of goods and services will be more expensive Mr. Speaker: Leader of the Opposition has a after the harmonized sales tax. But we also know there supplemental. are embedded production costs that will actually come 6056 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

out, resulting in prices being lower than they otherwise material, and yes, on the labour component as well, but would be. guess what. He actually gets 75 percent of that HST re- Let's actually just talk for a minute about the ability of bated as a result of the rebate system that we've put in a typical British Columbia family to afford those little in- place for universities. cremental costs that are going to happen to some things. I've mentioned the HST credit that's going to be there Interjections. for 1.1 million British Columbians. I have mentioned the reduction in personal income tax that we brought in Mr. Speaker: Members. Members. specifically to offset the HST implications. The member has a supplemental. [1405] But let's actually just compare what an individual S. Fraser: I wonder if that's the same kind of math earning $60,000 a year of income would pay today in that led to a $500 million cost overrun on the B.C. Place personal income tax compared to what they would pay convention centre. in the last year of the NDP government. In 2001 that individual earning $60,000 a year would pay $5,401 a Interjections. year in personal income tax alone. This year, after our B.C. Liberal budget, that same individual would be pay- Mr. Speaker: Continue, Member. ing $2,969. That's over $2,500 less. S. Fraser: Okay. I'll try, hon. Speaker. PACIFIC COAST UNIVERSITY The minister's pretty dismissive of $70,000. That's CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND a huge hit for a project like this. It's a major setback HARMONIZED SALES TAX for managers running a tight plan — like Wolfgang Zimmermann — and who want to deliver on budget. So S. Fraser: I don't believe anyone in British Columbia will the minister stop this misleading rhetoric? Will he believes the minister when he's coming up with these do what he said he'd do before the election and cancel numbers. the HST?

Interjections. Hon. C. Hansen: As I mentioned, the university sec- tor — and I'm assuming that this facility qualifies as part Mr. Speaker: Members. of the university sector — will be entitled to 75 percent Take your seat for a second. of all of the HST that they pay in the form of rebate. That, Continue, Member. given the typical university in Canada, will offset all of the incremental costs that they would be facing. S. Fraser: Wolfgang Zimmermann is the head of [1410] the National Institute of Disability Management and But going back to the member's initial comment Research. As the key force behind this non-profit uni- about how our understandings may not be the same as versity, he has put together a business plan. He did his his, I can tell you what the understandings are on this due diligence, and he is committed to helping people side of the House. with disabilities. It's our understanding of the economy in British The construction of this campus is underway.I magine Columbia that has meant British Columbia now has a his shock when he learned that the HST will penalize his triple-A credit rating in this province. It's our under- project — $70,000 that was not factored into the project, standing of the economy on this side of the House that $70,000 more than he was prepared for. To the minister: has actually led to dramatic reductions in provincial in- will he stop punishing initiatives that support British come tax for British Columbians; dramatic reductions Columbians hurt in the workplace? Will he scrap the in the small business tax rate for small businesses in HST? British Columbia; and the elimination of the corporate capital tax, which was strangling the economy in British Hon. C. Hansen: Let's be clear what Wolfgang Columbia. Zimmermann is paying today under the PST system on British Columbia is coming out of the recession faster the construction of this facility. He is paying 7 percent than any other jurisdiction, and it is because of the eco- provincial sales tax on every single nail, on every barrel nomic policies on this side of the House. of concrete, on every piece of wood, on every bit of wir- ing, on every bit of plumbing that goes into that facility. N. Macdonald: With the PacificC oast University, just He is paying 7 percent PST. let's be clear here. The minister says one thing, lays out Well, guess what. After July 1 he will be paying 7 per- one scenario, and Mr. Zimmermann lays out completely cent provincial HST on all of his wood, on all of the another. So who to believe? Is it the B.C. Liberals, who Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6057

promised not to bring in the HST but did bring it in and Hon. S. Thomson: I can confirm that, in response to now routinely trivialize any view on the HST that does the recommendation as a result of the order from the not correspond with the 2 percent of British Columbians freedom-of-information process, we have released that that agree with the HST? information and provided it on April 12, within the Is it him? Or is it Wolfgang Zimmermann, just timeline that was required. awarded Citizen of the Year in his community, just [1415] awarded or co-winner of Volunteer of the Year in his As you know, the legislation requires freedom of infor- community, recipient of the Order of British Columbia, mation but also respects privacy concerns, and we take executive director of the disability fund for forestry that very seriously. That process was worked through, workers of B.C., intimately involved in budgeting for the but when the decision was made that the information construction of Pacific Coast University? was to be released, we provided that information. Who are British Columbians supposed to be- lieve — Wolfgang Zimmermann or this discredited Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. government? GOVERNMENT ACTION ON Interjections. CLOSED-CONTAINMENT FISH FARMING

Mr. Speaker: Members. V. Huntington: I am pleased to hear that the infor- mation has been released, and I hope it's as publicly Hon. C. Hansen: As someone who was born in available as we would wish. But these fish farm oper- Port Alberni…. I think the first time I had learned of ations are breeding IHN and sea lice, in spite of what the work of Wolfgang Zimmermann was in the mid- members opposite have been told. They have destroyed 1990s, shortly after I was elected, during a time when wild salmon runs in Scotland, in Ireland, in much of I was the opposition Labour critic. Certainly, he has Norway and in Chile. They are well on their way to de- done a tremendous job in leading the National Institute stroying them in British Columbia. of Disability Management and Research. His work The government protects these corporate bullies who now in putting together the Pacific Coast University of have no right at all to tell us what they will and will not Workplace Health Sciences is to be commended and, I report. think, one of the reasons why everybody in this House, When is the Minister of Agriculture going to protect by unanimous vote, actually approved the private bill for our wild salmon and move these fish farms off migra- the establishment of the Pacific Coast University. tion routes and into closed containment? As I said earlier, he has not contacted us, but we would certainly be prepared to work with him, to look at his Hon. S. Thomson: Our approach to closed contain- numbers. Quite frankly, I would be very surprised if the ment is consistent with the recommendations of the HST results in any incremental costs for the construc- Pacific SalmonF orum. This was the most comprehensive tion of that facility, but we're quite prepared to look at report that was undertaken. It made recommendations that. that said there should not be substantial public invest- ment in closed containment until the business case and RELEASE OF INFORMATION ON the economics were proved. FISH FARM DISEASE OUTBREAKS This is emerging technology. Work continues in this area. There is progress being made. Our staff continue V. Huntington: We've learned through an astonishing to work with organizations such as the Save Our Salmon four-year-long freedom-of-information request that for society and Tides Canada in looking at this technology. almost two decades the Agriculture Ministry has failed We continue to support it. We will continue to work with to protect wild salmon from the lethal IHN virus and those organizations. actually fought to keep that information from the public. Also, as you know, we're in the process of negotiating In spite of an order from the Information and Privacy the transfer of regulation of the finfish and the shell- Commissioner, fish farmers are threatening to keep dis- fish aquaculture industry to the federal government. ease outbreaks secret if the minister releases the reports. The recommendations of the Pacific Salmon Forum are These foreign companies are conducting business informing those negotiations. We will continue to do in our public waters and are threatening our wild sal- that. mon. What are they hiding from us? Did the Minister We have the most comprehensive environmental of Agriculture cave in, as usual, to the salmon farm- regulation in place for this industry, and we'll make sure ers? Or has he released the details of the lethal pathogen that we continue to do that as we transition the regula- outbreaks? tion of this industry to the federal government. 6058 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

GOVERNMENT USE OF ICBC REVENUES minister has categorized the cuts as only affecting teach- ing around feeding and diapering and basic parenting. M. Farnworth: The government has shown that they're Well, the letter from Options says: "When you have a more than happy to reach into the pockets of ICBC rate- baby, your whole relationship revolves around feeding payers to help cover their budget deception. In this year's and diapering. How you hold your baby, how you look budget alone they've raided $778 million from ICBC cof- at her and respond to her cues are the beginning of the fers. Now we've learned that the government has passed attachment process." an order-in-council that gives them the ability to take Every mother knows how important this is, and I do money from ICBC's basic insurance rate coffers. not understand why the minister is so dismissive of the My question to the minister responsible for ICBC is: importance of this program. So I'm asking today: will will he ensure that if there are excess moneys, it is driv- she reinstate the funding fully before this organization ers who will benefit and not this government? is forced to close their doors this month?

Hon. M. de Jong: That's precisely what lies at the root Hon. M. Polak: As we've canvassed in this House be- of the document to which the member refers. The cor- fore, there have been no reductions to funding for day poration, as the member knows, goes to the Utilities care spaces in British Columbia — not one dollar. In Commission for consideration of rate matters. The ob- fact, our funding for child care subsidies this year is in- jective is to maintain stability, where possible, ensure that creasing to provide subsidies to more and more children drivers in B.C. continue to enjoy the lowest rates in North and their families. This year alone we will spend $300 America and, where possible, even reduce those rates. million on child care and a billion dollars across govern- ment on child care, early childhood development and Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. services for children and youth with special needs.

M. Farnworth: Well, the problem with the govern- Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. ment is that we've seen that they took the $778 million from ICBC coffers. When they decided to give some M. Karagianis: Almost $50,000 was cut from back to drivers, it was in the form of $1 for the driver, Options. The result, as the minister very well knows, is $19 for the government — $1 for the driver, $19 for the that they are going to be closing their doors. The letter government. here states: "Babies have been kept from going into fos- What we want and what drivers in this province want ter care. Mothers have gained confidence and skills to is a commitment that if there are any excess funds, rev- enable them to become better parents." enues, in the basic insurance coffers, that it goes back to It goes on to say: "Without this funding, the moms the drivers and not to this government — every single would not be able to continue their education, and for penny. Will the minister commit to that and ensure that many, dropping out of school would be a downward B.C. drivers don't get hosed at the expense of this gov- spiral in their lives." ernment trying to cover up its budget deceptions? It's very clear. Will the minister commit today to re- [1420] instate this funding so these young moms can finish their high school and get a better start in their lives on a Hon. M. de Jong: Happily for the member's sake and program that has been around for 21 years and will shut members of the assembly, the answer to that question its door if this minister does not do the right thing? lies in the OIC itself, which is designed to ensure that the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia has the Hon. M. Polak: When it comes to funding for the tools it requires going forward to make submissions to child care spaces, it is still there. When it comes to fund- the Utilities Commission around rates that will ensure ing for the subsidies, it is still there. There is no reason stability and that British Columbians continue to enjoy for child care spaces to be closing. The funding remains. the lowest rates in North America. The funding the member talks about is a small amount to provide for a basic parenting training program — pro- HIGH SCHOOL CHILD CARE PROGRAM grams that are provided by other community services. FOR STUDENT PARENTS Again, we have seen nothing but increases to what we've been spending and investing in early childhood M. Karagianis: The Options Child and Family development and in child care in this province. Centre provides integrated day care services so that young moms can finish high school. But last month the M. Elmore: This is a program for at-risk teenage moth- Minister of Children and Families cut the funding. ers, usually with a difficult history. The letter points out Heather Kay from Options has written to the minis- that rarely does a girl enter the program with an intact ter, pleading for the reinstatement of their funding. The family and a stable social safety net. Often this program Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6059

is the only support they have in their goal to fulfil and be surprised that the domestic violence death review complete their education. The moms at Options are vul- panel report cites the Langley pilot project as a model of nerable and at a considerable disadvantage, and this how agencies can work together to protect survivors of minister defends a cut of 43 percent that will kill the domestic violence from danger. However, people would program and take away vital day care spaces. be surprised that instead of being rolled out across the Will the minister finally just do the right thing and province, this government cut the Langley pilot project. guarantee funding for Options so they can stay open My question again is to the Solicitor General. Why next year? did this government cut this program instead of apply- ing it across the province? Hon. M. Polak: The member is wrong. This funding does not…. Hon. M. de Jong: In the report the authors refer to and emphasize the importance of collaboration, co- Interjections. ordination, standardization and ensuring that whether people are involved in the investigative, prosecutorial Mr. Speaker: Continue, Minister. or preventative side, they have the training necessary to [1425] identify and, hopefully, prevent domestic violence. Some of that work is already ongoing. The domes- Hon. M. Polak: The member is wrong. The funding tic violence action plan that launched earlier this year remains in place for the child care operating funding. speaks to some of those very themes. There is additional The funding remains in place for the subsidy. In fact, work to be done, and the government is going to capital- we recognize the increased vulnerability of these young ize on the good work of this report in moving forward to women, and that is why women in those circumstances address the scourge of domestic violence in our society. qualify for an enhanced child subsidy that amounts to approximately $100 more than an average child would K. Corrigan: Well, the minister has said that this is receive. a good report. This government can show their com- mitment to protecting survivors of domestic violence GOVERNMENT ACTION by acting now to restore the Langley pilot project and ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE begin unrolling similar programs in other communities across the province. M. Mungall: Today the domestic violence death re- Will the Solicitor General show good faith by commit- view panel released its report. It shows that 12 percent ting to fully restoring the Langley pilot project today? of homicides in British Columbia are due to domestic violence, and it offers recommendations to prevent such Hon. M. de Jong: I actually think — and I wouldn't deaths in the future. profess to have committed the entire report to memory My question is to today's Solicitor General. Will this — the report goes beyond that. I think the report and the government fully implement the recommendations of authors speak to the importance of coordinating efforts this report? between divisions of government, coordinating efforts between investigative authorities and prosecutorial au- Hon. M. de Jong: I think it's a good report. I think, thorities and the agencies that exist at the community in analyzing the 11 incidents that took place between level to prevent and counsel families who are victims of 1995 and this year, the civilian members of the panel domestic violence. had an opportunity to examine the tragic circumstances Whilst I appreciate and accept the importance that and make some very thoughtful recommendations. We the member attaches to the single program, I think the don't have time here to canvass each one of them, but value of the report that we're dealing with today is that each one of them appears to me, at first instance, to have it speaks to a much larger effort that the government is merit. committed to moving forward on in the future as part of We'll take until the end of June, as provided in the the domestic violence action plan. report, to provide a formal response from various de- [1430] partments of government, but I hope the member will take some comfort from the fact that I think, and the [End of question period.] government believes, it's a very good report. Reports from Committees Mr. Speaker: The member has a supplemental. B. Ralston: I have the honour to present the report of M. Mungall: Well, I'm glad the government thinks the Select Standing Committee on Public Accounts for that the report is good. But I think that people wouldn't the first session of the 39th parliament. 6060 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

I move the report be taken as read and received. the right to develop property, who had to do the con- sulting — all those kinds of issues. With UBC being Motion approved. the developer, wanting to proceed with major develop- ments there on the campus and in that surrounding area B. Ralston: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the House to there…. We've certainly seen those with Pacific Spirit suspend the rules to permit the moving of a motion to Park and the concerns around the beaches, as well as, of adopt the report. course, the farm. UBC is the developer. Metro Vancouver was trying to Leave granted. push for stronger land use planning there. They would be the regulator, I guess. But instead of dealing with B. Ralston: I move that the report be adopted. the gridlock by pulling the two parties together, what we've got here is that the government has decided to Motion approved. put the role of regulator into the role of developer. Now we have UBC, an unelected board, largely in charge as S. Hammell: I rise to present a petition. a regulator of the property development as well as the developer. Mr. Speaker: Proceed. I guess my question to the minister is: is there any concern that this could be a conflict of interest, could Petitions lead to decisions — in terms of the development side of things — being torqued because of the desire to develop S. Hammell: I'm presenting a petition calling on the by that board? British Columbia provincial government to cover the cost of the annual PSA test for prostate cancer screening Hon. B. Bennett: No, there is no concern about that. for all men aged 40 and older. TheUBC board doesn't have the final authority to make the decisions around land use; the minister does. The Orders of the Day minister determines whether there has been an appro- priate amount of consultation done with the people who Hon. M. de Jong: In Committee A, Committee of live on the UBC lands, and whether or not the land use Supply, I call the continued estimates of the Office of bylaw is in conformance with the legislation that we are the Premier, and in this chamber, continued committee discussing here today. stage debate on Bill 20.

Committee of the Whole House S. Chandra Herbert: I guess the question is: why wasn't there a process that brought the two parties BIll 20 — Miscellaneous Statutes together and got them to decide, as Metro Vancouver Amendment Act (No. 3), 2010 suggested, rather than this heavy-handed manner where (continued) now the minister is basically in charge of the future de- velopment for all of that area, and the residents there TheH ouse in Committee of the Whole (Section B) on have little to no say? Bill 20; L. Reid in the chair. Hon. B. Bennett: Hon. Chair, I'm not sure what sort The committee met at 2:34 p.m. of a process the member has in mind. I can tell the mem- ber that a couple of years ago there was an attempt to do On section 37 (continued). a form of mediation between UBC and Metro, and that was not successful. That is, in fact, why Metro and UBC S. Chandra Herbert: Before the lunch hour the metaphorically threw their hands in the air and said: minister and myself, as well as a number of the other "You have to do something to help us." members, were engaged in a discussion about UBC Maybe I don't understand the member's question and the wider property there — who's in charge, who properly, but if he's suggesting that there was no pro- should decide around property development there. The cess of bringing people together here, that would be response I got from the minister was that he seemed to incorrect. There was a process. It wasn't a flashy, public suggest that we were suggesting that a gridlock continue process. It was a process that involved our staff work- at Metro Vancouver and between UBC and so on. ing together with Metro Vancouver and with UBC to try [1435] and find a solution — and the solution exists in this pro- Well, the minister is correct that there was concern posed legislation — that would work on an interim basis between Metro Vancouver and UBC about who had for UBC and Metro Vancouver. Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6061

S. Chandra Herbert: I don't know that people have Another quotation from the same mayor publicly: said, "Throw your hands in the air," and I know earlier "We decided clearly that one of two things happens: the minister made the suggestion that Metro Vancouver either we govern, or we don't govern. No more in be- wanted this to happen, that this was a plan that they tween." Clearly, there was lots and lots of evidence that were calling for, basically. Metro was in need of some assistance in this matter, and Well, at least from my reading of Metro Vancouver so was UBC. councillors and board members, I guess, they've talked Despite what members on the other side might like about this. They talked of "dictatorship." They talked to suggest — and I'm not saying they haven't had their about, "They hit the panic button, and the crisis does not own private discussions with certain members of the exist" — that they wanted to be involved in this, as they Metro board; I'm sure they have — when our profes- had been trying to do. But instead of being involved, the sional staff dealt with their professional staff and with minister, through this bill, is becoming the boss, basic- some of their elected folks, they said: "We need you to ally, of all the residents for that area, without appropriate step in. We need you to help with land use planning on democratic principles in place. an interim basis and work long term towards more in- I don't think residents of that area are calling out for dependent government for UBC." That's precisely what a flashy kind of a thing. I think they're calling out for government is doing through this legislation. what we all have in other communities, which is the right to elect decision-makers who affect the develop- S. Chandra Herbert: Well, to quote the mayor from ment of their neighbourhoods. That's not what we're Burnaby, as the minister did…. This is what the mayor getting with this bill. What we're getting is the minister of Burnaby, Derek Corrigan, told the newspaper about as boss, and a largely handpicked board of directors at what the government decided to do here. The mayor is UBC who are not elected by many of the residents in quoted as saying: that area, many of them being staff. "It's the typical attitude of the province. It's the arrogance that [1440] makes it so difficult for us to be able to deal with them, because I understand the concerns UBC has, as well, with in essence, UBC was able to persuade them to really remain with the lands that they control. And I think, instead of ap- the status quo instead of doing something that we think is neces- pointing oneself boss, one would think that, maybe, a sary, and that is to end up with a local government that's demo- cratically elected and responsible to the people who live in the facilitated discussion where there was a timeline laid UBC area." down to pull the parties together so that we could ac- That's the mayor of Burnaby that the minister quoted in tually increase the democracy on the campus, as support of what has happened here, when very clearly, opposed to, instead, where we're at here. They are no from his quotations, he is not supportive of the action further ahead from what I can tell, in terms of demo- the government has taken here, instead calling for a cracy for those residents. locally elected body to represent the area, as opposed to The minister has suggested that there has been much the minister as boss. That's the concern that the minister call from Metro Vancouver for this kind of thing. Would needs to take into consideration here with this. the minister share his file of communications from I guess the next question is just around appropriate Metro Vancouver directors and residents calling for consultation. According to the bill, there's a suggestion himself to be appointed boss of the area and for the un- that there could be one consultation meeting about a elected board of directors to control development, both being a regulator as well as a developer? I'd be very curi- proposed land use plan, or more if they want. I guess ous if the minister has those communications. the concern that I've got is that when you don't have an elected body, when the minister is in charge but is not Hon. B. Bennett: I can see it's going to be a chal- in the area, does not get elected by those local folks, you lenge for me to convince the member and perhaps all could have one consultation meeting and ram the thing the members on the other side that Metro did in fact through. The board signs off on it, and then: "Here you express publicly on several occasions its desire that the go." province actually step in and do something. It was virtu- The minister, busy with many of his other files in ally impossible for Metro to deal with land use planning many other communities, probably not wanting to be, issues on UBC lands. in a sense, the mayor and council for that area…. That I can tell the member this much. This is a quotation doesn't appropriately reflect the widespread commun- from a mayor who sits on the Metro board. "It's getting ity use of that area, as opposed to just the use of the more and more difficult to be the government for them" university. — UBC — "because we're not there." The same mayor Does the minister suggest or feel that it's appropriate said a bit later: "Let me put it in clear terms. We're not just to have one consultation meeting in this situation, prepared to continue with the status quo." Both those as suggested in the bill? quotations were from the mayor of Burnaby. [1445] 6062 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Hon. B. Bennett: Well, the member is referring to questions, because I understand we're going to get very section 40 within the MEVA, entitled: "Consultation similar answers. I don't think the answers can come that and public hearing." That is the minimum that will have would say actually that it's the local people who will get to be done by UBCM in the land use planning process to democratically elect the people that will be making when they want to bring forward a land use planning that decision, because it's not in this bill, unfortunately. bylaw. I'll close there. For the member's interest, and in the interests of the House, that is the same routine, the same practice that L. Krog: The minister may well be aware that Wreck is established for municipalities. It's precisely the same Beach is a pretty prominent part of Vancouver's park thing. What's better about this particular process that's community. The Wreck Beach Preservation Society has encompassed by this legislation is that, in fact, the min- raised a number of concerns around the proposed legis- ister, in this case, has a capacity or opportunity to order lation. They've got two very serious concerns. as much consultation as the minister thinks is necessary, The first is that they are of the view that the real over and above this minimum that is described in the estate development at UBC should be regulated and re- legislation. stricted so as to prevent adverse impacts on Pacific Spirit In fact, there's actually greater potential for more Regional Park. consultation to take place in this situation with land use I'm just wondering if the minister has any comment planning at UBC than there would ordinarily be in a about his view about Pacific SpiritR egional Park and, in municipality. particular, around the use of buffer zones and requiring In fact, it is the opposite from what the members are UBC to develop a decent stormwater management sys- suggesting, with all due respect to them. It's not going to tem as well. be less democratic, and it's not going to have less consul- [1450] tation. In fact, there's a very good chance that there will be more consultation here than there normally is. Hon. B. Bennett: In the existing OCP that continues to apply as a result of this legislation, there is a require- S. Chandra Herbert: Well, I guess the other difference, ment that the land use planning take into account the of course — and the minister spoke of one difference — park that the member mentions, Pacific Spirit Regional is that the board of directors is making that decision that Park. As I say, that OCP will continue on. will affect all the residents, a number who are not affili- The transfer of land use planning authority to the ated with the university. If they don't like the decision, minister, with the planning process going to UBCM, in they don't have a vote to be able to tell the board of dir- fact does not include the parkland. So just to be clear, ectors, "Well, we're not voting for you next time because UBC will not have the right to do land use planning over you've decided to do something," which isn't in, in their the actual park. view, the best interests of that community. That's the same for everybody else who uses the L. Krog: I appreciate the minister's response, and I Pacific Spirit Park area, the beaches, the many public understand the point he's making. But the concern that spaces and facilities there — that they don't have a vote the society raises is quite a legitimate one. It's one thing to determine…. Instead, what you have is a board of dir- to have a park and a boundary in that sacrosanct prop- ectors who very much want this development. I've seen erty. It's another thing when you deal with the lands some of the proposals. Some of them are quite exciting, immediately adjacent that abut against that park. and some of them are quite concerning. The concern here is that they would like to see some I guess the concern here is that we're going to have guarantee around buffer zones, instituting reasonable a situation where the minister can order as many con- setbacks, height restrictions, design requirements on sultations as he likes — and I would encourage him to lands adjacent to the park, etc. In other words, you're order more, if this bill passes, than what's contemplated not going to have a wall of condominiums up against in the bill — but even with all of the consultations in the Pacific Spirit Park. That's a dramatic example, and I'm world, if a board or a government, as we've seen here not suggesting that's going to happen. But what they are with the HST and other things, decides they want to do looking for is some kind of guaranteed buffer zone, andI something, no matter what the public says, they can do wonder if the minister has some comment on that. it. However, in this place we all have consequences when Hon. B. Bennett: I think it would be helpful to the we do one thing. We have the chance of the voters telling member if I was to just read a short paragraph out of us in the next election that they do not appreciate that, the actual OCP that deals with green areas and specif- and they can vote us out. ically with the park. There's a lot of protective language I've laid out my concerns around this legislation, and I in this particular section of the OCP, but this is what think it's a concern shared by many. I don't have further this particular paragraph says. It says: "The planning and Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6063

development of areas adjacent to Pacific Spirit Regional L. Krog: I appreciate the minister's comments, be- Park will only be done in a manner that protects the cause obviously, the issue of stormwater management park values contained in the Pacific Spirit Regional Park on the site is a concern, particularly of the Wreck Beach Management Plan." Preservation Society, naturally. The cliffs are certainly That's the OCP that's in place today, so it would subject to significant erosion. There is the issue of pol- certainly be the government's position that there is pro- lution. I want to raise this as an issue for the minister to tection for the park and park values under the current understand and be concerned about. OCP. Certainly, the ministry would not support remov- The second thing is…. This is important, because ing that kind of protection at any time in the future. essentially, what this legislation does…. I understand that the minister will say that right now he is the final L. Krog: I appreciate the minister's comments. The authority with respect to what happens in municipal member for Alberni–Pacific Rim has wisely pointed government in the province anyway, but the reality is out to me, though, of course, that an official commun- that very rarely, if ever, does the minister disagree with ity plan really has no enforceability process to it. If I'm what the city of Nanaimo, the city of Vancouver or the wrong, I'm sure the minister's going to tell me, but es- city of Cranbrook does. sentially it's a plan. In this particular case, there is no elected body, the It's an official community plan. It's a statement of de- way we understand it, that will be electing officials who sire, but it doesn't mean, nor does it actually stop, the will be making these decisions, passing bylaws, etc. In development taking place in that area. Now the minister, this circumstance, the minister's view, with great respect, I'm sure, will provide me with his comments in response of what happens at UBC is extremely important to this to that. legislation. The decisions that will be made will be advanced Hon. B. Bennett: I hope that I'm responding specific- by an unelected board, largely. The minister does talk about their election, but the reality is that you've got ally to the member's question. He'll let me know, I guess, the chancellor, the president, 11 persons appointed by if I'm not. UBC, in their land use planning and their ef- Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council and eight elected per- forts to pass land use planning bylaws, would not be able sons — three students, three faculty members and two to pass some sort of a bylaw that's inconsistent with the employees. existing OCP. So that language that I just read out — that The reality is that the majority are appointed by the does give protection to the park, to the perimeter of the provincial government. The minister is the person- ul park and the values of the park internally — would have timately responsible. So I'd like to hear from the minister to guide whatever land use planning UBC is doing. today: what is his view of development at UBC in a gen- eral way? I'm looking for a statement of philosophy and L. Krog: Another point that the group has raised is a his viewpoint, because clearly his viewpoint is going to concern around UBC apparently not having an effect- have a significant impact on how these sections are ac- ive, state-of-the-art stormwater management regime tually implemented. to avoid polluting the foreshore area, which, as we all know — all of us who had the opportunity to attend Hon. B. Bennett: Hon. Chair, I think there are two the campus or be on the site — is a significant portion. parts to my answer. The first part deals with the first part So I wonder if the minister has any comment on that of the member's question. Just to set the record straight, and whether this issue has been raised to him by UBC, the minister in this ministry actually does not sign off Metro Vancouver or others. on or approve bylaws for municipalities. Regional dis- [1455] trict bylaws do come to this ministry. You know, I think the member describes that process Hon. B. Bennett: I might need a bit more detail fairly. The minister is certainly not obligated to sign off on from the member to fully understand what he's asking these bylaws. But typically, by the time they get through me. Maybe this will help. I can say that UBC will be in- staff who look at these things and send them back, often, volved, and already is involved, in managing stormwater. until they're done properly in terms of their formalities…. But as the member knows, the university lands are, for By the time they do get to the minister, they usually are the most part, up fairly high, and the foreshore is down signed off.B ut that's not the process that we're setting up below the cliff. through this legislation. The minister will actually have They actually don't have management responsibilities more authority in this situation than, typically, the min- for the foreshore, that I'm aware of, other than that they ister would have in a regional district situation. have to manage the water that flows from their land to [1500] the foreshore, obviously. I don't know if that captures To the second part of the member's question, there is what the member is after or not. an existing OCP there that provides…. From everything 6064 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

that I have been told, all of my advice would indicate that The culture, frankly, in this ministry is one that I think the existing OCP is a reasonably good one and that it ad- is almost unique in government, and it's that we don't go dresses issues of sustainability. Of course, UBC is known with necessarily preconceived notions about what the re- around the world for its grasp of sustainability principles sult will be. We want to work with our local government and how it implements them there at the campus. partners and have them help us determine what the result So in terms of the minister's role here, the minister will be, and that's precisely what will happen in this case. would be guided by the existing OCP but also by the legislation. When the member has a look at the legis- Section 37 approved. lation that's proposed here, he will see, for example, that any changes are supposed to be consistent with a On section 38. regional growth strategy. There are actually a number of restrictions on what UBC can do to change the existing L. Krog: If the minister could explain the effect of sec- OCP. tion 38. As I said before lunch, this is probably going to be [1505] about a two-year process, at least, where we'll be dealing with the existing OCP. For whoever happens to be min- Hon. B. Bennett: Well, the narrow purpose of the ister in this ministry, their job will be to make sure that particular section the member asks about is to ensure any changes, any bylaws, are consistent with the legisla- that the director of finance must, in a report to council, tion and with the existing OCP. set out objectives and policies for each year in relation to the use of tax exemptions for eligible not-for-profit prop- L. Krog: Given, as I understand it, that this is an erties under this new section 396F. More generally, what interim measure in a sense, what's the minister's long- we're doing with this legislation is that we are amending term view of how this issue — and I will try and state the Vancouver Charter to allow the city of Vancouver to it objectively — between Metro Vancouver and UBC is provide permissive tax exemptions on part or all of the going to be resolved? In other words, what's in the min- land and improvements owned or held by local charit- ister's contemplation on this? Are we doing this strictly able, philanthropic or other not-for-profit organizations as a stopgap with a view to creating a municipality? Are such as legions. we going to get something in place, throw it back and let them settle it on their own at some future date? What's Sections 38 to 40 inclusive approved. the minister's thinking behind this? On section 41. Hon. B. Bennett: Well, the member has been around here long enough. I suspect he has a pretty good appre- N. Macdonald: This is a reorganization. The minis- ciation of the complexities of these kinds of negotiations ter and I had a discussion on it. Essentially, this is, as I between these entities — an entity like UBC and an understand it, the forest renewal money. It's being re- entity like Metro. Any time you do any sort of a local allocated into a form that is going to broaden the scope government amalgamation or boundary change or any- of the funds that were still in forest renewal. thing like that — service sharing, anything like that — it The question I have for the minister, just to put it on takes time and effort. record, the amount of money that we're talking about To answer the member's question, what I would fore- here, if this is the appropriate section, and the changes, see is that we get started, after this legislation is passed the necessity for the changes…. There's quite a lot in — assuming that it's passed — and take our time to make here, but if the minister could characterize those chan- sure that everyone understands what their roles are. ges and the amount of money that we're talking about Over a period of time…. and the purpose for the reorganization of these funds. We do agree with Metro and with UBC that there is a need for more representative local government there Hon. B. Bennett: Well, the amount of money is ap- on the Point Grey peninsula. There's significant popula- proximately $14 million, and as the member and I tion growth estimated there, and we think there will be discussed the other day, that amount varies to some ex- some benefit to moving towards some form of munici- tent because we're talking about loan proceeds. We're pal governance. talking about money that was loaned out under the We do not know what that will be, and this is not un- Forest Renewal B.C. program and has been out there, usual. From the year that I've been in the ministry, I can and that is being repaid. So the amount does fluctu- tell the member that we often get into discussions…. ate to some extent. My advice is that it's approximately I've got discussions happening all over the province on $14 million now that is sitting idle, essentially because a myriad of different local government issues where we of lower uptake on these loans than what Community don't know what the result's going to be. Futures expected. Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6065

I think the member wanted me just to give a little bit L. Krog: I wonder if the minister can just confirm that of context for why we're doing this and what we're do- presently, the use of video cameras in the school system ing. Essentially, what we're doing is we're transferring in the province…. If she could just comment on it. How the responsibility for the administration of the — and extensive is it? Does she have any knowledge of it? Is it this is a term of art — forest community business loans permitted, presumably, under the statute already? program, that portfolio, to this ministry, the Ministry of Community and Rural Development. Hon. M. MacDiarmid: First, I'd like to say that with This legislation will authorize the ministry to expand me today from the Ministry of Education are Sherri the program's lending terms beyond the forest sector to Mohoruk, superintendent, liaison division; and Mary a wider range of sectors, and that includes aquaculture, Shaw, who is the manager of governance and legislation clean and renewable energy, innovative development and also registrar of student appeals in the student ap- and use of technology, manufacturing and tourism. peals branch. These loans will still be available to the forest sector [1515] in the same communities that they are available today. I We missed the last few words of what the member said, think there are something like 33 Community Futures but I'll answer the part that I did hear. Then ifI 've missed Development Corp. offices involved here and six aborig- part of his question, he could let us know. All three of us inal development corporations that have responsibility missed it, unfortunately — the last few words. for disbursing these loans. But with respect to the… Prior to the legislation we're So they will have more latitude in terms of where the aware that…. We actually surveyed the school districts. money is loaned out. Otherwise, our concern is, based We did not hear back from all the districts, but of those on the evidence, that that money is going to sit there and that we had replies from, 36 of the districts have poli- not be able to get out and help our rural communities. cies in place regarding video surveillance, but in fact 26 So that's the basis of the legislation. of the districts have video surveillance cameras in oper- ation in some of their schools at this time. N. Macdonald: Just one final question then, just to paraphrase what the minister has expressed here. People L. Krog: I'm sure the member for Skeena will be able on the ground that would be going for these loans would to tell me the number of school districts in the province not notice an administrative difference. All that they of British Columbia. would notice is that the types of loans that will be of- So approximately half of the school districts in the fered have been broadened. But in terms of how they province of British Columbia have cameras already would apply, all of those processes would remain very installed now. Is the minister satisfied that the use of familiar to people. If that's correct, then I think that will be the end of the questions on this section. those cameras is, in fact, presently permissible under [1510] the School Act, or is that the reason for this statutory change? Hon. B. Bennett: To answer the member's question, the only thing that will change with this legislation is the Hon. M. MacDiarmid: The current use of video sur- terms of reference for what kinds of enterprises will be veillance cameras is governed under the Freedom of successful in getting loan funds. Now, under the current Information and Privacy Act. It would continue to be legislation, it's limited to forestry-based or forestry- governed under that after the legislation, should the related enterprises. That scope will expand so that the legislation pass. Community Futures offices and the aboriginal offices, the development corporations, will be able to choose — L. Krog: Given that we've got half of the districts using for example, in the member's riding, tourism enterprises, video surveillance cameras and half not using them, was tourism projects as opposed to simply forestry projects. this legislative amendment a request through the B.C. I will tell the member that although this is not in the School Trustees? Was it a request from the school dis- legislation, I am advised by staff that the loan amounts tricts? I mean, where does this come from? I must say will also be able to be higher than they have been in the to the minister that on our side of the House we're not past. I think the limit right now is $75,000. The proposal aware of any public outcry or demand from any sources will be to the lenders that they go as high as $150,000 for this legislative amendment. — again, thinking that that's going to enable more eco- nomic development, more job creation, in rural B.C. Hon. M. MacDiarmid: This was an election platform commitment. We had heard from parents that they Section 41 approved. would like to have the option to have video surveillance equipment installed in schools if they believed it would On section 42. add to the safety of their children. 6066 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

L. Krog: I want to thank the minister for her answer. the legislation is that the school planning council now As I recall, it was a campaign commitment in writing that must be consulted with. the Liberal government wouldn't institute the HST, and that campaign commitment seemed to go by the way- L. Krog: I think I heard the minister in a somewhat side and meet with what I think can be fairly described lengthy way give a yes to my last question. She talked as a significant public opposition to that position. and referred to the purposes of protecting, and she's Is the minister telling this House that the real reason quite right. The legislation is specific. It said you may in- — indeed, it appears to be the only reason — that this stall them "for the purposes of protecting (a) the safety legislative amendment is before the House is because of individuals in a school facility or on school land." in some obscure part of the Liberal platform a commit- If there's regular bullying and beating going on be- ment was made to basically give government sanction to hind the backstop at the school, we'd want to stop that. the installation of video surveillance cameras across the But this section, with great respect to the minister, I B.C. school system? would suggest…. When we get to section (b), it says: "an [1520] individual's belongings in a school facility or on school land." It means, quite literally, that if Jane is stealing Hon. M. MacDiarmid: We previously had a situation Dick's lunch, you get to install a camera. where school boards were making the decision about video That, I would respectfully suggest to the minister, is surveillance cameras in isolation, and we heard from par- the literal and appropriate legal interpretation of this ents that they would like the option to have input. section. If there is a mass of stealing lunches in grade Further, through the use of school planning councils, 2…. In the law you always try and look at the most ex- it will not only be parents that will have a voice, but it treme cases. That's why law is drawn narrowly. That's will also be the principal, teachers and, in the case of sec- literally what that section says. Does the minister agree ondary schools, students, as well, that will have a voice. or disagree? We certainly do support parents. We think that parents [1525] are an integral part of the school community and that it is important for them to have a voice where they wish to. Hon. M. MacDiarmid: Although he does not seem to be taking this matter very seriously, I believe that the L. Krog: This amendment falls into the section of boards of education involved as well as the school plan- the School Act that's defined as division 2, "Powers and ning councils would, in fact, take the video surveillance Duties." camera issue very seriously and would contemplate The concept that a board, with the approval of a school carefully the use of these cameras and would do it wisely. planning council, which may or may not be functioning There's no indication that they're doing other than that very well, is in a position to have cameras installed in the at present. school facility means, as I see no restriction on this, that Although, as I've said, he seems to be trivializing it, in theory — and I'm asking the minister to comment on I'm very doubtful that either the boards of education or this — in our wonderful democratic system, as we can the school planning councils, both of whom would be elect anyone…. A school board could in theory install involved in the decision-making, would take this any- cameras in a grade 1 classroom. thing other than seriously. The way I read this legislation, it literally gives the au- thority to a school board to install video surveillance L. Krog: I'm somewhat disappointed that the minister cameras in a grade 1 classroom. would suggest that the protection of privacy in our society is trivializing — the government's view of this legislation, Hon. M. MacDiarmid: The current status is that as it's proposed. There is a time to use a sledgehammer, a school board is governed by current legislation, by and there is a time to use a fly swatter. What this legisla- freedom-of-information and privacy legislation. The tion is giving is the power to school boards, if a school change here is that if a board was contemplating video planning council consents to it, for the installation of surveillance cameras or if a school planning council re- cameras in literally every room in a school. quested it, the consultation has to take place. Now, I'm not going to suggest for a moment that There are clear indications for when these surveillance you're going to have school boards across this province cameras could be installed. A board may install and oper- or school planning councils in every district doing that. ate a camera in a school facility or on school land for the But the fact is that when you open up the door in this purposes of protecting the safety of individuals in a school way and, with great respect to the minister, for what is facility, an individual's belongings or school property. the most trivial of excuses that I've heard for legislation, So there are specifics in the legislation that talk about which is simply that it was in the campaign platform the circumstances under which a surveillance camera…. and some parent advisory councils and school planning But the main difference between the current state and councils requested it…. Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6067

With the greatest respect to the minister, why are we In terms of the survey that we did of the districts that doing this? What great mischief is going to be remedied currently do use video surveillance cameras…. As mem- by the passage of this section? bers pointed out, it's nearly half of school districts that are currently using them. The response to us from the districts [C. Trevena in the chair.] in terms of what they viewed as to be the effectiveness of the cameras was overwhelmingly positive, with many Can the minister tell me: has the B.C. School Trustees school districts noticing less damage and vandalism. We Association, the governing body of the school districts did not have any negative feedback from the districts. of this province…? Does she have a letter she can pro- duce in this House today that says they approve of and L. Krog: I appreciate the minister's response, but my request and want this legislation, or a letter even re- question was about consultation before this amendment motely resembling any of the things I suggested might was in fact introduced. I take it from the minister's an- be in such a letter? swer — which focuses on the process now, because you'll have to consult the school planning council — that there Hon. M. MacDiarmid: From the president of the B.C. wasn't really any significant public consultation prior to Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils. She stated the introduction of this legislation. that people seem to think that this is something new, but [1535] in fact, it isn't. She stated: "I think it's better than what I do note the minister, along with every other mem- we had, and I would prefer that parents have at least ber of this assembly, received a letter yesterday from the some input, which we did not have before." Victoria Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils ex- The president of the B.C. School Trustees Association, pressing significant concerns, setting out the policy that Connie Denesiuk, stated that Bill 20 is not going to lead to Victoria has adopted and asking for guiding principles. more cameras in schools. Instead, it adds another step to These include ensuring that consultation processes the process by giving input to school planning councils. used are thorough, adequate and appropriate in the cir- The BCSTA general counsel, Judith Clark, stated: cumstances; ensuring that there is a compelling reason "The amendments are helpful to boards that decide to estab- for each deployment; ensuring that video surveillance lish video surveillance systems in schools in that they specifically is only used after all other reasonable and less invasive authorize boards to collect information about students in this way, alternatives have been considered; ensuring that deploy- for the stated purpose of protecting individuals' safety, personal belongings and school property, in schools and on school grounds. ment is for a time frame realistically tied to the problem The amendments also limit the authority of boards and principals that led to the deployment; ensuring that video sur- by requiring approval of the school planning council before cam- veillance records are secure and that access is severely eras can be installed in a school or on school property." restricted; and ensuring that reporting procedures are designed to build empirical evidence. L. Krog: I don't think I heard a letter from the School I'm just wondering — as I have no doubt that the Trustees Association saying that they thought this was a minister read that letter before today: does she have any good idea or requesting it. So I come back to this. comment on the principles that have been suggested by [1530] the parent advisory councils? If so, why not consider en- Apart from the fact that you have some school plan- suring that those in fact are the principles, assuming this ning councils who have some interest in this…. We legislation passes? know that the school planning councils aren't working that well. Indeed, there are schools that don't have them. V. Huntington: I seek leave to make an introduction, We know that teachers aren't participating. Madam Chair. Given all those circumstances, did the minister, before this was prepared for approval by cabinet, consult widely Leave granted. with school districts, with the BCTF, with the school plan- ning councils, with educators generally? Did she engage Introductions by Members in some kind of process apart from the insertion of some- thing to this effect in the B.C. Liberal Party platform? V. Huntington: I have great pleasure in introducing 27 grade 5 students from Hawthorne Elementary in my Hon. M. MacDiarmid: What this legislation does is riding. They are here with Miss Grace Yan, their school actually put into place consultation that wasn't previ- teacher, and seven of their parents. I hope that the House ously there. It allows for consultation. In fact, it mandates makes them welcome. consultation with the school planning council that pre- viously wasn't there. Debate Continued Previously boards of education could and have put video surveillance cameras in place without any consul- Hon. M. MacDiarmid: I have not received that letter, I tation. They've made the decisions on their own. have not seen that letter, and the colleagues that are with 6068 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

me today have not seen the letter. But from what I could Hon. M. MacDiarmid: Yes, I did. understand of what the member articulated, many of the principles that he has read from the letter are in fact em- L. Krog: I want to quote from paragraph 2, and this bodied in many of the school district policies. Certainly is from the B.C. Civil Liberties Association and the they are in the legislation, the freedom-of-information British Columbia Freedom of Information and Privacy and privacy-protection legislation, which already was in Association: place to guide the use of these video surveillance cam- "The BCCLA and the BCFIPA urge the Legislative Assembly eras prior to this legislation being brought forward. not to pass the school surveillance amendments. We submit that the amendments are not needed, that they lower the standard for What this legislation does is to allow a school plan- justification of video surveillance in schools and that the facilita- ning council to actually have a voice so that if they are tion of increased video surveillance in schools undermines the opposed when a board comes forward proposing a new democratic values that public schools should exemplify." use of a video surveillance camera, they actually can They go on to say in paragraph 4, and I think it quite block the use of those cameras. It's adding an extra layer appropriate: of consultation and an extra step. "The BCCLA and the BCFIPA are concerned that this steep downgrading of the need for justification for introducing video surveillance in schools — from a demonstration of necessity to L. Krog: I'm somewhat surprised that the minister the mere ostensible aim of providing safety or property protec- hasn't seen it. I thought the public affairs bureau would tion — is (a) part of the creeping repeal of FOIPPA that is under- be working overtime — or some MLA's office. It was mining the citizens' privacy protections in a range of areas, and (b) apt to facilitate an unwarranted and harmful increase in video sent to every member of the assembly. It was sent at 9:22 surveillance in schools." a.m. yesterday. I wonder if the minister can advise the House: was With respect to the minister's comments, the way I any reaction sought from the Information and Privacy understand it is that this was supposedly more consul- Commissioner's office? tation, more consideration. The minister would surely [1545] acknowledge, then…. If you don't have a school plan- ning council, then, is the minister suggesting — and Hon. M. MacDiarmid: We certainly know that dis- correct me if I'm wrong — that this legislation means: tricts have worked with the Privacy Commissioner in unless you have a school planning council, the board the past in assessing the implications of using video sur- cannot install video surveillance cameras? veillance, and we have no reason to think that they will do other than that in the future. Hon. M. MacDiarmid: That is the case. If there's not The intent of this section is not to replace the previous a school planning council that's up and running, then procedures from boards but rather to add a new level one will have to be formed, because a board would have of accountability. The head of the B.C. School Trustees to put that matter forward to a school planning council. Association, the president, has certainly stated her view that Bill 20 will not lead to more cameras in schools but L. Krog: My reading of the legislation — and I'm not rather adds another step in the process by giving input skipping ahead to section 43 yet — is that it indicates and, in fact, a veto to school planning councils. that the principles, which involve the purposes of pro- tection that are referred to in the act, mean that if you've L. Krog: Of course, the school planning councils are got cameras installed already, then those are grand- hardly what one would call democratic. In a high school fathered, so to speak. In other words, existing cameras they're made up of the school principal, three parent will remain in place across the province. volunteers, one teacher representative and one student [1540] representative. In elementary schools, I believe, you don't even have the student representative. That's the democratic Hon. M. MacDiarmid: The legislation does provide forum that will be able to make the request to the board to for so-called grandfathering for existing cameras, but it install the video surveillance camera in the grade 1 class- also states that these would be subject to annual review. room to ensure that Sally doesn't steal Dick's lunch. TheB .C. Civil Liberties Association has argued — and Section 42 approved on division. I'd be interested in hearing the minister's comments, as I'm sure she sought legal advice in this matter — that the On section 43. potential effect of this is to indeed lower the standard that exists under FOIPPA now, that it provides a specific L. Krog: I'm not trying to check up on the minis- statutory provision, and that as long as a board in its ter's correspondence section here, but I presume she wisdom decides that an individual's belongings have to did receive the submission of the B.C. Civil Liberties be protected, you can install these and therefore bypass Association with respect to this amendment? That's a the existing legislation and protection under the infor- joint submission. Has the minister received that? mation and privacy act. Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6069

Hon. M. MacDiarmid: With respect to the compos- NAYS — 26 ition of the school planning council, in fact, they are democratically elected. The parents are elected by the Fleming Farnworth James parent advisory committee. Every parent of a child in Ralston Popham B. Simpson the school is able to have a vote, if they wish to, for who Austin Karagianis Brar will represent them on the school planning council. Hammell Lali Thorne With respect to what will govern the use of the video Horgan Bains Dix surveillance cameras, they will continue to be governed Mungall Chouhan Macdonald under the freedom-of-information and protection- Chandra Herbert Krog Gentner of-privacy legislation that's currently in effect. It will Elmore Fraser B. Routley continue to be in effect. Coons Sather L. Krog: I just want to hear it again from the minister, just to make sure. What she's saying to the House is that, On section 44. notwithstanding the specific provisions in sections 42 and 43 of this bill, FOIPPA will still govern and that this The Chair: We'll wait a moment until the chamber is will not provide a reduction in the standard, which is empty. exactly the point of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association's [1600] fairly lengthy and, I might say, cogent presentation. [1550] L. Krog: This section applies specifically to the Francophone Education Authority. I'm just wondering: Hon. M. MacDiarmid: Yes, the Freedom of were they specifically consulted on this, and did they Information Act still applies. In terms of what this legis- provide their position to the minister? lation does, it actually provides some limits for boards, because there most likely will be cases where school Hon. M. MacDiarmid: What this section does is planning councils will say that they do not wish to have make the previous legislation actually apply to the CSF. video surveillance cameras in cases where the board is As mentioned previously, what the legislation does is considering it. add a consultative process through the school planning council that wasn't previously present. The Chair: Would members please take their seats so the division members can be counted. L. Krog: I hope it's not the soft voice, but my question [1555] was, quite specifically: did the minister or the ministry consult with the Francophone Education Authority with Section 43 approved on the following division: respect to this section? In other words, did they request that these surveillance provisions apply to them as well? YEAS — 47 Hon. M. MacDiarmid: Again, what the legislation Horne Letnick McRae does is make…. For the francophone parents, they will Stewart Coell McNeil have the same ability for consultation as the anglophone Chong Polak Yamamoto parents through school planning councils. That's the point of this section of the legislation. Bell Krueger Bennett [1605] Stilwell Hawes Hogg As we did with the other school districts, we did sur- Thornthwaite Hayer Lee vey the CSF and found that they were currently installing Barnett Bloy Reid video surveillance cameras in two of their schools. That's Thomson Falcon Penner underway at present. de Jong Campbell Hansen Bond MacDiarmid Abbott L. Krog: I take it from the minister that there was a sur- Lekstrom Coleman Yap vey done, but what I'm asking is: was the Francophone Education Authority asked specifically if they approved Heed Cantelon Sultan of or supported this legislation? McIntyre Rustad Cadieux van Dongen Howard Lake Hon. M. MacDiarmid: As I've said, this legislation was Foster Slater Dalton developed based on our election platform. The specific Pimm Huntington promise that we made there was with respect to parents 6070 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

— that we'd heard from parents that they would like to Sections 45 and 46 approved. have a voice with respect to the video surveillance. We certainly believe that parents are an integral part The Chair: Minister, do you want to get your staff? of the school community and that they should be able to have a say. That is what is additionally added for both Hon. B. Lekstrom: Yes, please. francophone and anglophone parents. Before we begin questioning on this portion of the Specifically, to the member opposite, we did not con- bill, I would like to introduce Paul Wieringa, who is sult with school boards when we were preparing this my acting ADM for oil and gas, on my right, as well as legislation. Michael Rensing, who is the manager of renewables in the ministry. L. Krog: My question was specifically with respect to the Francophone Education Authority. The minister's On section 47. answer was to school boards generally. I take it that an- swer applies to the school boards of British Columbia. In R. Fleming: This part of the miscellaneous bill is an other words, they were not consulted specifically with opportunity for the government to get the low-carbon respect to this legislation. fuel standard right. What I mean by right is actually plausibly achieving the goal to reduce the carbon inten- Hon. M. MacDiarmid: As I've said, this legislation sity of transportation fuel by 10 percent by 2020. specifically is to allow school planning councils to have The government is aware of a number of reports that a say where they previously did not, where decisions cast doubt on some of the flaws in the legislation. There about video surveillance cameras were made by boards. has been a comparison in some detail between B.C.'s The consultation process now has to include school plan- low-carbon fuel standard and California's. The differ- ning councils, and we did not discuss this with the CSF. ences come down to how carbon intensity in the fuel is measured, the source and the reporting out of suppliers. L. Krog: With great respect to the minister, the desire [1615] to keep the information private is quite remarkable to There are obviously very high-carbon-intensity me. I mean, this is…. Regardless of what the minister sources of crude oil and conventional crude sources that may characterize as simply being a tool or an opportun- are not as high. One of the problems in our low-carbon ity for schools and students and parents to have a say fuel standard is that there is not adequate accounting for now in the installation of video surveillance cameras, it that and a reconciliation in the legislation. is in fact a step down the road to further surveillance in We have an example of better legislation in California our society, which is an increasing problem around the where this is done. The fluctuations of the carbon con- privacy issue. tent of certain types of oil can be as great as 40 percent. I would have thought that rather than implement this The problem with the legislation as it's drafted now is legislation, there would have been at least some con- that in striving to achieve a 10 percent reduction in car- sideration given to the issues of privacy, as opposed to bon intensity from fuels by having a biofuel additive, if the concerns of parents — some parents, I might add, the source of the crude is of a high-carbon intensity — some PACs, some school planning councils — to the and I'm, of course, speaking of sources from our dear concerns that have been raised by the opposition. neighbour here at this point in time — then the fuel I'm going to assume that given the nature of this sec- standard could be completely counterproductive, and tion…. I'm not sure where it fits in the School Act. Is it raises the prospect of completely misrepresenting the there at least existing provision so that regulations can emissions savings. be approved by cabinet, which is the last thing I gener- What I would like to do is propose an amendment to ally like to see, that might in fact limit the application of the definitions of this section of the renewable and low- this section or provide some guidelines, as discussed in carbon fuel requirement act by adding a new definition my earlier line of questioning? that reads…. [1610] The Chair: Member, this comes after section 47. Hon. M. MacDiarmid: The Freedom of Information Act still applies, as it did prior to this legislation. We R. Fleming: Okay. know that boards previously worked with the Privacy Commissioner, and we expect that they will continue to Section 47 approved. do that in the case where they're considering installing new video surveillance cameras. R. Fleming: I would like to add, as subsection (1) at this portion of the bill, a new definition that reads — Section 44 approved on division. and I've given a copy to the minister: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6071

[Section 47: Hon. B. Lekstrom: The flexibility was built in so that By adding a new section numbered 47.1 that reads "Section the suppliers could meet their numbers, as I said. For 1 of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Requirements) Act S.B.C. 2008, c.16, is amended example, there may be a global disruption in the supply by adding a new definition that reads 'High carbon intensity for what they needed for their fuel to meet these stan- crude oil' means any crude oil that has a total production and dards at the end of one year, so they may not have met it transport carbon-intensity value greater than 15.00 grams of there. The carryover to the next year would allow them carbon dioxide equivalence per Mega-Joule."] to actually meet their numbers through overcompliance I move that amendment. in the case of the way I've just explained it.

On the amendment. J. Horgan: I don't see, in these miscellaneous amend- ments, but perhaps with staff available….I s it anticipated Hon. B. Lekstrom: The amendment you've put for- that suppliers can continue to miss targets year after year ward is unnecessary. We actually already incorporate after year provided they're able to push that forward? Is the oil sands. It's already calculated in our baseline num- there any…? Do you get three strikes, two strikes, one ber. So I think that's where the member is looking at. I'm strike? How many misses do you get before you're called guessing that's where he was referring. He talked about on the carpet? our neighbour to the east, and I think he's talking about the oil sands probably. I would let him clarify that, but Hon. B. Lekstrom: No, you can only carry forward it's already utilized in our calculation of our baseline for one year or utilize from the one year back to bring number. yourself into compliance.

Amendment negatived. Section 48 approved.

On section 48. On section 49.

J. Horgan: I'm wondering if the minister can ex- R. Fleming: Again, in the low-carbon fuel standard plain to the House…. The changes in section 48 seem to there is a flaw that has been discussed at length in 2008 me to push forward or bring back compliance periods when we debated the original legislation around land previous and next. Can the minister explain how that use and the carbon intensity of the biofuel additives balances out over a calendar year, or is it a fiscal year? to the blended fuel. While the legislation that British How is that calculated? Columbia has does talk about some of the direct carbon [1620] inputs where biofuel is made — just looks at fertilizer use and some of those types of offsets associated with the Hon. B. Lekstrom: It is based on a calendar year, production of the fuel — it does not account for indirect Member, and what it does is allow for…. If there was land use changes, where land is taken out of either the an overcompliance in one year, they could use a por- natural environment or the use of the land is switched. tion of that overcompliance the following year to meet [1625] their numbers. Likewise, if there was an undercompli- California's regulation, again, is more comprehensive, ance in year 1, they could actually, in year 2, achieve that does force suppliers to report to government about that. by overcomplying in year 2. It's a loophole that the opposition thinks should be ad- dressed for the credibility of this legislation and for the J. Horgan: Did suppliers raise this issue with the min- achievement of the 10 percent reduction target by 2020. istry? Were they concerned about balancing out year So I would move an amendment at the appropriate over year or compliance period over compliance period, time to deal with that and ask the minister for a com- or was this amendment driven by the ministry staff? ment at this time.

Hon. B. Lekstrom: This amendment was a result of Hon. B. Lekstrom: Again, rising to speak to the member significant consultation with the fuel suppliers them- and comment on the amendment he's put forward, I would, selves to talk about how we could ensure that we could obviously, at this point speak against it, but for the reason meet these standards and these numbers. that it's about indirect land use on this and utilizing it in…. I know he's studied California's model — significantly, I J. Horgan: So the consultation that took place, initi- believe — but right now it is changing on a regular basis. ated by the supplier or the ministry, was a result of some There's still a great deal of work to be done on this. concern that the existing statute was less flexible than I know California is changing as we speak here today. it could have been or should have been, and is that the We aren't ruling it out, but at this time it is premature rationale for the change? to look at that until further work is done, not just for 6072 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

British Columbia, but really California as well is doing For that reason, I'm going to speak against it and vote a considerable amount of work, re-evaluating how they against the amendment, Member. actually approach this. Amendment negatived. R. Fleming: The minister is correct. California has gone quite far with this. I think in terms of the life-cycle R. Fleming: I'd like to propose another amendment, costing of it, they have taken some appropriate steps. adding a section in 49 that reads: They have tagged on to what is called the Global Trade [Section 49: Analysis Project. They look at where these biofuels come By adding a new section numbered 49.1 that reads "Section 6 of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Renewable and Low from and source them from the very first stage of pro- Carbon Fuel Requirements) is amended by adding a new duction. They have created their own peer-reviewed subsection that reads: '(5) Beginning in the second compli- model, which I understand is administered and gov- ance period, and for subsequent compliance periods, a Part 3 erned by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the fuel supplier must identify any high carbon intensity crude oil (HCICO) that it supplies and apply a default carbon intensity EPA in the U.S. developed specifically for the HCICO for the volume of each These are things that if we changedB .C.'s law…. These HCICO supplied in the determination of the weighted average are governance models and peer-reviewed steps that we of carbon intensities;'"] could take that would not make it difficult for each sup- plier. It would make the regulation clear. It would be able On the amendment. to account for indirect land use changes. It's likely that other provinces and parts of Canada may also be able to Hon. B. Lekstrom: We broached this earlier. I think participate in that when they have legislation like this. under 47 we spoke briefly about it. We already have this The point really is to get it right. It is to have full carbon in our default calculations, what you're recommending cycle accounting done for the fuel. here. Actually, when you look at it, about 48 percent I'm going to stop speaking to it now and allow this of the utilized oil here in British Columbia is from our section to pass and then maybe propose an amendment neighbours to the east oil sands. We use that in our de- that can address that and strengthen our legislation. fault calculations already, Member. [1635] Section 49 approved. R. Fleming: This is the concern, that it already is On section 50. a high content; 48 percent of the oil that's imported comes from that source. That could grow, perhaps, to R. Fleming: I'd like to propose an amendment to the three-quarters of the market. The attempt to reduce by bill by adding a new section, numbered 49.1, that reads: 10 percent our emissions intensity in this sector, from [Section 49: transportation fuels, by 2020 would be unachievable. By adding a new section numbered 49.1 that reads "Section 6 of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction (Renewable and Low While the minister says that it is accounted for, my Carbon Fuel Requirements) is amended by adding a new understanding is that crude oil is in fact treated equally. subsection that reads '(6) Beginning in the second compliance Fuel suppliers are not part of a credit and deficit system period, and for subsequent compliance periods, a Part 3 fuel when they account for where their crude comes from, supplier must apply an estimate of indirect land use impacts to the determination of the carbon intensity for biodiesel fuel and unlike in California. So while it may be referenced in the ethanol.'"] legislation, it is essentially meaningless in terms of any economic incentives or disincentives to source high- On the amendment. carbon-intensity crude oil. [1630] Hon. B. Lekstrom: We've taken the approach, Member, Hon. B. Lekstrom: Having just spoken briefly on this that we are actually rewarding the lower-carbon-intensity and knowing the intent, I'll speak against the amend- fuels in British Columbia. Higher intensity — obviously, ment, Member, for the simple fact that you've laid out there it's the carrot and the stick. There are penalties for the second compliance period. We're not sure…. As I the people that don't comply. We think that that's the said, there's still a great deal of work ongoing on this to proper way to do it. The act, I think, addresses that, and make sure…. And I will go back to the member's own we're comfortable with that. words. We want to make sure we get it right. Again, I'm not supporting the amendment you've put We think that this amendment may be somewhat pre- forward here today. mature. We're very cognizant of the fact of what you're referring to when it comes to indirect land use on this, The Chair: Through the Chair, Minister, please. but I'm not sure that your amendment meets what's go- ing to be needed here. Amendment negatived. Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6073

J. Horgan: Similar to the questions I had for the min- Section 51 approved. ister on section 48, can the minister give his assurance that the passing forward and backward of emissions On section 52. compliance periods is similar — that there will be one forward, one back, and that's it? J. Horgan: Those who just said "Aye" clearly haven't [1640] seen section 52 because we would never….

Hon. B. Lekstrom: Section 47 dealt with part 2, which Interjections. was renewable fuels. That was a one-year carry-forward, or utilizing overcompliance in the year out to meet your J. Horgan: It's one of those moments when I wish undercompliance in the first year. Part 3 deals with the we could use props so that members in the gallery and low-carbon fuel. This one — there is no back-carrying. people watching at home could understand what it is But what you can do, if you overcomply this year, is carry we're doing here with section 52. forward that overcompliance for up to three years. What What it does is it "corrects the formula for calculating you can't do is if you undercomply this year, you don't automatic administrative penalties when carbon inten- have the luxury, under part 3, as a part 3 fuel supplier, of sity requirements for fuel are not met for a compliance saying: "I'll overcomply next year." period." We've just been discussing compliance periods in previous sections where some compliance can be put J. Horgan: Was the consultation that the minister re- forward and some compliance can be brought back. That ferred to with respect to section 48 also conducted with in and of itself is interesting, but nothing in my time, my five years as a legislator, has prepared me for section 52 respect to section 50? And why did the minister make and the mathematic formula. Or I guess it wouldn't even the period of grace or moving forward three years — not be a mathematic formula, would it? two, not five? It is a formula, and I don't know how to describe this. I'm looking at my colleague from Nanaimo, who suggests Hon. B. Lekstrom: We did consult, Member. This is that rather than me explaining what we have here in sec- truly a housekeeping issue. What happened before is tion 52, why don't I just ask the minister to do that on my that they couldn't carry forward their own overcompli- behalf? Could the minister advise the House how it is we ance or credits. They didn't have that ability. They had came to the formula described in section 52? Mindful of to get rid of those. They could carry forward credits that the time, Minister, perhaps you could do it quickly. they purchased. So this is really a housekeeping issue that allows them to carry forward their own good work, Hon. B. Lekstrom: I, too, wish I could use props at really, or overcompliance. this point, Member. This calculation is similar to California. The only Section 50 approved. change we're making on this one is that we're making now the EER portion of the formula, which is being On section 51. added, which is the energy efficiency ratio. The energy efficiency ratio is utilized to calculate the difference J. Horgan: I'm reading in the explanatory note for between a gasoline vehicle and a vehicle powered by an- section 51: "…requires fuel suppliers to advise purchas- other source, whether that be an electric vehicle, a diesel ers of the renewable fuel content of fuel by posting labels vehicle, or so on. or giving notice." I'm wondering why we didn't put that in the original renewable and low-carbon fuel require- J. Horgan: As there is an administrative penalty as ments — why we are adding that today. a result of this section, and we're trying to correct the formula for calculating an automatic administrative Hon. B. Lekstrom: In our discussions with industry penalty, I think, although the minister made a valiant ef- it became clear that if we didn't enshrine this, it wouldn't fort there, perhaps I'll explain to those in the gallery who be uniformly dealt with across. We think that the label- are now on the edge of their seats, I can see, anxious to ling is extremely important; thus, we've put it in the act. learn more about the formula contained in section 52. I thought it might have been the secret to the universe, J. Horgan: I agree with the minister that labelling is but the answer is not 43. So it can't be that. For those vitally important to this initiative, and that's why I'm paying attention — I know my friend from Cowichan curious as to how it got through the first time. Maybe it Valley is — the formula goes as follows. The adminis- was the haste with which that legislation was passed. trative penalty equals — large bracket, small bracket With that, I'll let section 51 go by. — actual CI minus required CI, keeping in mind that the [1645] actual CI is the weighted average of the carbon intensi- 6074 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

ties of the part 3 fuels supplied in the part 3 fuel supplier section 52. It goes as follows: "…means the net amount in the compliance period before taking into account no- in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions trans- tional emissions under section 8. ferred by or to the Part 3 fuel supplier under section 8 [1650] that the Part 3 fuel supplier must apply under section 8" So that's the, bracket, actual CI minus the required — and so on for the compliance period. CI, bracket, times the sum of, bracket, EER times EC for [1655] each fuel, bracket, over one million, minus the NE credit I'm asking this because when we get to section 53, plus the NE increase equals times PR. we determine when an administrative penalty will be I think I've done a fairly adequate job. I know I'm get- issued. It's on a compliance date, and I'm confused, ting nods from the Minister of Mines, and those in the based on the previous sections. If we can move forward gallery now have a fuller understanding of the import- our compliance periods, then how do we set when the ant work at committee stage here on a miscellaneous administrative penalty will be due? amendment bill. I'm actually dealing with sections 52 and 53, I sup- But let me go back to the beginning of the equation, pose, at the same time. and perhaps the minister could just start there. The administrative penalty is the concern. Although I'm Hon. B. Lekstrom: There are two things, Member.A s interested in how we arrive at it, perhaps we could just we go to section 53, I think we could explain that section explain what we're going to do with that penalty as a re- a little better. sult of this amendment. On the notional emissions increased under section 8, the issue that you're talking about, that notional trans- Hon. B. Lekstrom: The administrative penalty, as you fer can only be used within the same compliance year. said…. I won't go into the detail. I want to commend Section 53, and we're going to move to that, deals with the member for his fine reading ability on reading that should a company not supply a compliance report. But formula. we can address that under section 53. The administrative penalty is based on the actual CI — what you have, what will go out, because this is a com- Section 52 approved. plicated formula, in all seriousness — then what your required CI was supposed to be. Then we apply the for- On section 53. mula that the member rightly read out, and based on the penalty rate, which is being established in regulation, it J. Horgan: If the minister could just continue on with is applied. The penalties will vary based on your compli- the answer he was about to propose for section 53, I ance. If your actual CI is significantly less than required, think we can fly through the rest of these. you would be impacted to a greater degree than if you [1700] were very close, for example. So the administrative pen- alty varies with your compliance. Hon. B. Lekstrom: What section 53 does is that if a company doesn't submit a report…. Let's just say three J. Horgan: That's a good job, Minister. My hat is off months passes, lapses, and then they submit their report. to you. We find out that they're out of compliance. Previously The penalty rate, which is at the end of the equation, you could only apply the penalty from that date forward. is set by regulation. Can the minister advise what that What this does is correct that and move it back to the penalty rate is today? start of compliance, based on the reporting period. So it's a correction. Hon. B. Lekstrom: We do not have that rate set today. We are working on it, but I can assure the member that Sections 53 to 61 inclusive approved. once it is, obviously it will be well known. The key here is that it will be set at a significant rate that will ensure On section 62. compliance. It would certainly be pointless, I think, to have a penalty that didn't ensure that. J. Horgan: I thank the Minister of Energy, Mines and his staff for their time, and I welcome of Minister of J. Horgan: We certainly don't want to be pointless State for Mining and his staff. in our work here, so I agree with the minister on that. To a number of sections in this miscellaneous statutes As we go through section 52, we have some definitions amendment act that deal with the Mineral Tenure Act. of what the EER, the EC, the NE and the various other My first question to the minister with respect to section acronyms are. That's well outlined. 62 would be: what consultation did the minister and But I want to talk about the "notional emissions in- ministry undertake before proposing these miscellan- creased under section 8," which is at the very end of eous amendments? Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6075

Hon. R. Hawes: In order to put these amendments Hon. R. Hawes: No, there was not consultation on or these changes together, we consulted with AMEBC, this particular change, but it is considered to be a minor Kamloops Exploration Group, Smithers Exploration amendment. It does reflect the practice that has been ac- Group, the Chamber of Mines of Eastern B.C. in tually on the ground. Cranbrook, Vancouver Island Exploration Group, Boundary Mining Association and the Cariboo Mining Sections 65 and 66 approved. Association. On section 67. J. Horgan: I'm sorry. If the minister said it, I missed it. Did he include the Mining Association of British J. Horgan: I realize that we're pressed for time, but Columbia? again, in my discussions with the mining association and AMEBC, they're concerned that amendments to Hon. R. Hawes: The mineral titles industry advisory section 42 have been brought forward without adequate group has representation from MABC. consultation from their perspective. I'm wondering, again. Very rarely do we see chan- Sections 62 to 64 inclusive approved. ges to the Mineral Tenure Act outside of miscellaneous amendments. The previous discussion on section 65 On section 65. was a classic example of staff trying to put and codify the practice that they find on a daily basis in the field J. Horgan: In this section the explanatory note speaks and in the office. of ranking. It ranks the terms or conditions that may be But in this instance the issuing of a mining lease is the imposed in respect to a mineral reserve and provides issue. Those that are on the ground with dollars invested that if mineral reserves overlap each other and the terms are concerned that they would of, ought of, should have and conditions are inconsistent with each other, those been consulted on this. I'm wondering if the minister having the highest rank prevail. could comment on that. Can the minister advise how staff and legislative drafters came up with that hierarchy, and the impact of Hon. R. Hawes: We had at first looked at this as a section 65? fairly minor amendment. But you're correct. The Mining Association of British Columbia weren't sure, and they Hon. R. Hawes: In the past the ranking has always wanted some time to look at it. As the member may note, been done just as a practice, but it was never set in writ- there is an amendment on the order paper that would ing. This does establish it in writing.C learly, for example, bring these sections into force by order. That would give an absolute prohibition on mining would be the highest us time to do the consultation with MABC, which we priority. So it's ranked in the priority that would actually intend to do. occur on the land base when you're dealing with these four conditions. J. Horgan: Well, I'm looking through the order paper for the amendment that the minister's referring to. J. Horgan: Again, this is a miscellaneous amendment Perhaps he can help me. I see numerous efforts on be- act, and it changes and amends numerous acts in the half of the member for North Coast to strengthen and process. When I look at the Mineral Tenure Act, section protect ferry users. I don't see anything in the name of 22, and I look at section 65 of this bill, I see prohibitions, the minister of state. reserves being established and retroactivity. I see something in the name of the Minister of Energy [1705] and Mines with respect to the Clean Energy Act, but I see I'm wondering again. Perhaps the minister will take nothing on Bill 20. So perhaps if the Chair could assist. the opportunity to be a bit more fulsome in explaining why it is that this amendment is coming forward today. Interjection. Who asked for it, and why is it being proposed? J. Horgan: I thought that the amendment in the name Hon. R. Hawes: This is a staff request that reflects of the Government House Leader was to do with the how they actually operate on the ground. This does pro- child representative, and I just assumed it wasn't to do vide some clarity to staff. It was a staff request, and it's with the Mineral Tenure Act. an operational change. Then could the minister explain, in his discussions with the mining association, how they've responded to J. Horgan: Was that staff request put to theA ssociation this being enacted by Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council for Mineral Exploration B.C. or the Mining Association — or, in essence, by cabinet? Is that preferable to the of B.C. for their comment? Legislature? 6076 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Hon. R. Hawes: In fact, even today I've had discus- of B.C. talked to me, they said they'd never heard of sions with Mr. Gratton, the head of MABC, who has these amendments. They didn't know what I was talk- again expressed great satisfaction that we're moving in ing about. I had to direct them to the order paper so that this direction. they knew what the bill was all about. This daily contact [1710] clearly wasn't sufficient to bring these issues before the He's very pleased that now we are going to have a con- leadership of the mining association. sultation. He does agree that this may be a minor change I suppose now we can take the minister at his word that doesn't really have big impact, but he does want the that he will get around to it sometime in the future. A time to do the consultation, and he's quite pleased that specific question: have you set a finite date before you we're doing it this way. ram this through without consultation? Are you going to take six months, 12 months? How long is it going to J. Horgan: Clearly, the minister has spoken to Mr. take? Gratton more recently than I have. Perhaps he could advise me what the extent of the consultation will be be- The Chair: Member, the use of "you" is not appropriate. fore cabinet runs this through. Hon. R. Hawes: First and foremost, we don't ram Hon. R. Hawes: We will be talking to MABC about things through. We are on a very, very…. We have a what their objections are. If their objections were very good relationship with MABC. strong, of course, and if there was a compelling reason MABC are taking a look at this themselves. Once they that we shouldn't proceed with this, we would consider have concluded their analysis of this, they will get back that. But I would suggest that this would be put through to us, and that's when we will begin discussions. But when we have satisfactorily concluded our consultation. MABC has not yet concluded its own internal consulta- I am quite confident that it'll be concluded in a mutually tion, which they are doing right now. I suspect that they satisfactory way between the government and MABC. will come to the same conclusion as us — that this is not a major amendment. J. Horgan: Again, in my consultation on this section, I'm getting a different message than the minister. If I Sections 67 to 73 inclusive approved. understood him correctly, hon. Chair, what he's telling the House is that he's agreed to sit down with the mining On section 74. association. The minor amendments that the govern- ment refers to are significant amendments in the eyes of J. Horgan: I'm wondering if the Minister of Energy the mining association. and Mines would wrap up this section so that it's got a In terms of the time frame, has the minister laid out a nice bow around it. Can he give an indication as to why period of time for these discussions? Has he committed we've decided that this would be going to December 31 to starting next week? Has he committed to this moving and may be made retroactive to January 1, 2010? We've forward by regulation, by Lieutenant-Governor-in- got a December 31, 2010, date that may be made retro- Council, by a certain date? Or is it open-ended? active. Could he just give a comment on that? [1715] [L. Reid in the chair.] Hon. B. Lekstrom: What this does is allow the Hon. R. Hawes: It is open-ended in terms of…. We retroactivity for part 2 and part 3 fuel suppliers on ad- have not set a date. I can tell you that the government ministrative penalties for retroactivity. meets on an extremely regular basis, sometimes daily, with MABC. We have an excellent relationship. The rap- Section 74 approved. port is very, very strong. We're working on a number of issues, including their great support for the HST initia- On section 75. tive, as the member would know. I would suggest that perhaps my conversation with L. Krog: I suspect the minister might want his staff. MABC is more recent than the member's and, I think, on a much more frequent basis. I'm very, very confident, Hon. J. Yap: I would like to introduce some staff who given the relationship that the government has with have joined me. We have Alicen Chow, Laura Lapp and MABC, that we will reach a very satisfactory conclusion Lee Thiessen from the ministry who have joined us to to this. canvass the next sections of this act.

J. Horgan: Well, I'm pleased that there's confidence L. Krog: This adds the definition of a contingency in the minister's voice. When the Mining Association account, a fairly technical amendment. I'm wondering Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6077 why we have to add a definition. Was it missed in the Hon. J. Yap: This is really a backstop to ensure that in first act? Has it been discovered that it's not going to the event there is some kind of catastrophe or act of God, work without it? we would have, within a contingency account, sufficient units in the contingency to cover the potential risk of Hon. J. Yap: The point of this contingency account is such an event, should it occur. In effect, we're saying that to allow for the potential possibility of acts of God that for a hundred units — hypothetically, through this con- might lead to the collapse of offsets, of projects that have tingency — we would require 105. This ensures that we been established. It's important to have a contingency would have — over the course of a portfolio of offsets account as a mechanism to provide for these potential — sufficient offsets. With the offset contingency account, events. we'd be able to cover the risk should the need arise.

Sections 75 to 77 inclusive approved. Sections 78 and 79 approved.

On section 78. On section 80.

L. Krog: I would be delighted to hear the minister ex- L. Krog: I wonder if the minister could explain the ef- plain the effect of section 78 after hearing his previous fect of this section and what sort of organizations we'd explanation. be talking about.

Hon. J. Yap: This establishes the mechanism through Hon. J. Yap: Organizations would include: the which we provide a way for government to manage the Standards Council of Canada, the American National risk associated with offsets using a portfolio approach. Standards Institute and other members of the International Accreditation Forum. L. Krog: I think the explanation was shorter than the actual section. Again to the minister: how does this fit in L. Krog: This makes reference, I gather, specifically the scheme of compliance? The explanatory section re- to information-sharing agreements. I guess the obvious fers to that it "provides that the compliance unit tracking question is: what sort of information would be shared system may include one or more contingency accounts." under the terms of these kinds of agreements? Can the minister explain how contingency accounts [1725] figure in this and what exactly this section means to the average person? Just think of me not as an opposition Hon. J. Yap: This is about quality assurance to en- critic but some poor, innocent person sitting in their liv- sure that with a cap-and-trade system where we want ing room in Dawson Creek as we speak and listening to to ensure the integrity of the information, if we have a this and asking: "What does this mean?" verifier that is collecting the information and providing [1720] that assurance…. Should it come to our attention that Hon. J. Yap: The intent here is to allow for the addi- it's somewhat lacking, we would have the ability to share tion of additional contingency units. For example, if an this information with these accreditation organizations. offset project were to provide 100 units of offset credits, we would require, say, 105 units. L. Krog: I'm just wondering if the minister has any Over the course of a portfolio with many such pro- concerns about this whole concept, because we're clearly jects, 105 — with the five being the additional amount, considering authorizing the acceptance of verification the contingency amount…. This gives us the oppor- from other jurisdictions outside of Canada. It talks about tunity to be able to meet the potential should, say, an Canadian provinces and other jurisdictions outside of act of God happen in an offset project, such as a for- Canada or with an agent of any of them. So arguably estry project. If there's a fire and there's shrinkage in the speaking, it could be the equivalent to a Crown corpora- amount of trees that were credited for reducing carbon, tion for the government of Zimbabwe, and I don't think we would have this contingency account that would al- I'm far wrong in saying that. low us to prepare for that. What this provision is doing is basically saying that you can enter into agreements, and you'll then be happy L. Krog: I think I heard the minister say that this is to rely on the information provided by the Crown cor- the "get out of jail free" card for the government. Is that poration in Zimbabwe that, in fact, British Petroleum, simply the way I can put it? This is the option? This gets for instance, is engaging in appropriate practices to you past the problem? This is a way to wiggle out of the qualify for credits. actual provisions of the act so that we've got a contin- Am I understanding this section correctly? And if the gency fund? Is that essentially what he's saying? minister can comment on my example. 6078 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

Hon. J. Yap: We are talking about emissions within fact, we'd really created the framework, but there wasn't British Columbia, and we are talking about jurisdic- much substance to this. So now what we're really do- tions within the Western Climate Initiative — which, as ing here today is actually putting some — I don't know the member knows, are the 11 members, including four — siding, if you will, on the house — that we really provinces and 11 U.S. states. have something now which was formally just sort of a political hot-air balloon, so to speak, to solve the gov- Sections 80 to 83 inclusive approved. ernment's environmental problems. [1735] On section 84. So really, what we're getting here today is an acknow- ledgment by these sections that the plan wasn't thought L. Krog: I wonder if the minister can just explain this out. It hasn't really been proclaimed, and it's not terribly particular section. effective. With those comments…. Hon. J. Yap: This section would allow the minister, through regulation, to specify the types of offsets and Interjection. the descriptions regarding how to calculate the baseline for the project and project reductions and the different L. Krog: I'm delighted to hear the member for types of offset projects and the ongoing monitoring and Kamloops–South Thompson entering the debate, as he risk-mitigation measures. always does. Whenever he enters the debate, I know I [1730] must be getting close to home, because he's the govern- ment's main defence minister, and that's delightful. L. Krog: I take it from this section — because it adds Having said that, I'm happy to see these sections, 85 to the minister's ability, not the cabinet but the minister's through to 87, pass. ability, to make further regulations — that the minister at this point is satisfied that he doesn't have that author- Sections 85 to 88 inclusive approved. ity under the act. Has some specific situation arisen which led to this provision being proposed? On section 89.

Hon. J. Yap: This is not in the act. We're adding this, L. Krog: The minister has kindly indicated she's ready and it's absolutely needed to ensure that we have con- to start with the section. sistency in terms of projects, whether they're in British The opposition is just fascinated that we have this Columbia or in any other WCI jurisdiction. provision amending the Tobacco Control Act before us. I assume we'll call this the…. I forget the name of the Section 84 approved. store in downtown Victoria that faced this tremendous problem. On section 85. I'm glad the government's moved on a specific re- vision to preserve the heritage nature of Victoria. But L. Krog: If I may, I might assist the minister in get- I must say I'm a bit surprised that given the significant ting through this. The previous sections — 85, 86, 87 concerns around smoking in the province, the minister — all add significant regulatory powers to the minister's has chosen to make this a priority, when the B.C. Cancer regulatory powers that exist already. So I take it that Society, the B.C. Healthy Living Alliance and others it's fair to say that what these proposals are telling the have all — how shall I say? — raised concerns. When Legislature is that the act wasn't terribly well thought we're devoted to lowering tobacco consumption, why through. Indeed, these regulatory changes that are be- this is a priority, as opposed to moves that would in fact ing proposed — are they, in fact, with respect to sections limit the use of tobacco in our society…. that have even been proclaimed at this point? I'd just like to know how this moved so quickly up the priorities of the ministry. Hon. J. Yap: The member will recall that when this act was first brought into effect, it was really intended as a legal Hon. I. Chong: I know that the member will appre- framework to build a carbon emissions–trading regulatory ciate the investment that government has made with system, cap-and-trade system, with our WCI partners. respect to dealing with the issues of tobacco use and Having said that, we have two sections, sections 41 and 42, smoking cessation. We will continue to do that. that are not in force, but section 45 is in force. However, currently we do have a situation whereby the Tobacco Control Act restricts the display and ad- L. Krog: I think I heard the minister just acknow- vertisement of tobacco and tobacco products by means ledge in his answer in a very subtle sort of way that, in of a sign or otherwise. In this particular case we have Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6079

one situation, where there is the one property that the L. Krog: As I understand it, the effect of this section, member is aware of, a heritage property. Without this and these sections generally, is to move horse racing out amendment, it would require this business to have some of the control of the Lottery Corporation. I'm just won- considerable, I guess, renovations made to a heritage dering: what's the point of doing this? site, which is not what is desirable. It would have left the health authorities no other option, so we are bringing Hon. R. Coleman: First of all, I'll introduce my staff — forward this amendment for that purpose. Derek Sturko, who is the assistant deputy minister of the I think it's fair to say that government will continue to gaming policy and enforcement branch. work towards helping reduce smoking rates. That is a goal The question is pretty general, and maybe we could that I think all of us in this chamber would agree with. just work through the sections, because there are about three different issues that are being dealt with in these L. Krog: Again, I'm really just wondering in terms amendments. The first one actually deals with certifi- of priorities. The groups that I've mentioned are argu- cates of affiliation and gaming event licences, and it goes ing for the issues around allowing the sale of tobacco on to each section being a bit different. in pharmacies; subsidization of nicotine replacement The general question the member asked isn't properly therapy; provincewide bans on smoking in patios, parks, canvassed by each section. If we could deal with the sec- playgrounds or on provincial beaches. tions, maybe we could do it that way. Yet somehow, ahead of all those priorities which might in fact have a significant impact on the health of British L. Krog: Noting the time here, I'm going to try and Columbians, particularly non-smokers who are subject speed this up. I'm happy to see section 90 go, and then to the secondhand smoke of others…. Why are we mov- we go into section 91. I think that may lead to the area ing this amendment and not doing something with those where the minister is going to answer my question. issues? Sections 90 and 91 approved. Hon. I. Chong: Certainly, the member is aware that On section 92. we continue to work with our stakeholders and the B.C. Lung Association, the Canadian Cancer Society on a L. Krog: I wonder if the minister is now prepared to number of initiatives, as we have done in the past sev- talk about why we are moving control of horse racing eral years, and we will continue to do that. out of the Lottery Corporation. In some instances, as well, there will be some chan- [1745] ges that can be introduced by way of municipal bylaws. He mentions smoking in the playgrounds. That is a pos- Section 92 approved. sibility that can occur as a result of local governments having authority to do so. So there are initiatives that are On section 93. currently underway that can have other levels of govern- ment take on responsibilities. L. Krog: I was just waiting for the minister's answer. [1740] There are other issues that also required some consul- Hon. R. Coleman: The only regulatory function that tation that local governments want to have more input doesn't take place with the gaming policy and enforce- towards, and we will continue to work with them on ment branch — and it's been this way for some time and that. needed to be corrected — is the collection of the horse- This is a minor amendment, in the sense that it is dealing racing betting fee, which is today collected by BCLC. with a very specific case. There was no reason to hold this up Then they give the funds to government. any further. It was creating some concern within the busi- Basically, it's the only regulatory function that isn't ness community, the heritage community, as well as with at the gaming policy enforcement branch. What we're the health authorities, which had no other alternative but to doing is moving that regulatory function and the man- enforce what was at that time available in legislation. agement of that fee to where it belongs in GPEB. It is dealing with the one specific case that we're aware of, and it was, as I say, a miscellaneous item that we felt Section 93 approved. could be advanced at this time. But we will continue to work with our other stakeholders to ensure that we deal On section 94. with reducing smoking rates wherever possible. L. Krog: This section makes reference to the betting Section 89 approved. fees that will be payable to government instead of the Lottery Corporation and provides for the application of On section 90. the revenue. 6080 British Columbia Debates Tuesday, June 1, 2010

I just wonder if the minister can confirm that this is L. Krog: This section disentitles participants in a vol- going to be divided, as it notes in this section, "firstly, by untary self-exclusion program to any monetary prize or paying into the consolidated revenue fund an amount winnings. This issue was raised, actually, by a constitu- equal," etc., blah, blah, and, "secondly, by dividing be- ent of mine. tween or among prescribed organizations, that the What that means is that if I've entered into the arrange- minister may recommend, in prescribed proportions, ment that I'm not to gamble, and I go in and gamble and that may differ for different organizations, any balance I win, then I don't get the prize. That's my understanding of collected fees." of the effect of this section. The next question, obviously, What are the organizations the minister is contem- is: who gets the money? plating? With great respect, this section reserves a power unto the minister which I thought we'd taken from King Hon. R. Coleman: I'll just spend a second on this one. John at Runnymede, which was absolute authority to This basically specifies that a person must leave a gam- take in the money and distribute it unequally to the or- ing facility if requested to do so by BCLC or the service ganizations that the minister may choose or not choose. provider and must not enter the game if they have been I think the minister, in fairness, will acknowledge that served with written notice as per a section of the act this is a pretty broad discretion. What are we contem- where they've entered into the self-exclusion program. plating by this section? This adds a provision to that section that disentitles the participants in a voluntary self-exclusion program Hon. R. Coleman: In moving this, they're the exact to any monetary prize or winnings if they participate in same powers that exist now. There's no change in the gaming in a gaming facility contrary to written notice powers. delivered to them under the section. Basically, for the member's information, the people The reason is that basically, it is to act as a part of the deterrent to the entire self-exclusion program with re- that would be receiving the betting fee…. The govern- gards to people going back into our facilities after they've ment actually doesn't make money on horse racing. It agreed not to go in. Any moneys they would win would all goes back to the two breeds. It's the standardbreds; be held back and have to be spent only on problem gam- it's the thoroughbreds. There's also a small part of the bling research. industry that still operates in some of the Interior race- courses, but it's a very small piece of the amount. Sections 110 to 120 inclusive approved. Obviously, the dollars that are required to operate the tracks are part of that total package, as well, with regards On section 121. to how the money is managed. It's all managed by GPEB in relationship with those organizations. V. Huntington: Section 121 of the amendments to the Liquor Control and Licensing Act allows regula- L. Krog: Just so I can understand. These organizations tions to exempt certain classes of licences or licensed — are they not-for-profits? Are they for-profit organiz- establishments from requirements to consult with local ations? Do they have shares? Do they have members? governments. Could the minister please tell me pre- How do they operate? cisely what those requirements are and what classes are and how he and his staff intend this to operate? Hon. R. Coleman: They're non-profit organiza- [1755] tions that represent the two breeds particularly. There's the HBPA, which is the Horsemen's Benevolent and Hon. R. Coleman: First of all, I've got with me Karen Protective Association, I think it's called, which repre- Ayers, who is the general manager of liquor policy and sents the thoroughbreds. There's another organization, liquor licensing and everything else in British Columbia which is the Standardbred Association and represents — she is the statutory authority, which means she makes the standardbreds, which are the sulkies. They basically the decisions and nobody can tell her what to do — run the relationship between their breeds and govern- and Barry Bieller, the director of policy, planning and ment. But the purse pool and all that is managed by communication. government, not in the hands of those organizations, so This is really for prescribed categories of licence. It's that horse racing can have some fiscal idea as to how really a regulatory-making power that we're giving to their business can be run. the general manager once we do the regulation. Basically, [1750] it's to provide some flexibility to have different processes for different types of licences prescribed by categories Sections 94 to 109 inclusive approved. of licence. We've been asked by a number of municipalities over On section 110. the last number of years to do this. For instance, today Tuesday, June 1, 2010 British Columbia Debates 6081

if a golf cart that serves liquor on a golf course would these rules were put in place…. There were only a few be considered to be a liquor primary, we'd have to go liquor suppliers in the entire marketplace decades ago. through exactly the same lengthy process to approve It was all about tied houses and things like that, where that golf cart for its operation on a golf course as, for people would come in and offer: "You become a specific instance, it would be if you had a large cabaret or bar beer for the whole operation, and we'll do this, this and opening up in a community. this for you." That would be called a tied house, and So this is to allow for the discretion. We will actually there was concern about those breweries coming in and prescribe the types of licences in regulation that wouldn't owning the brewery as well as owning the retail. require as high a process, because frankly, they're low- The reality is that today the consumer has a number risk licences that do not really need to have the same of choices that they want when they go into a licensed level of scrutiny as other licences do. establishment, and so they do that. The historical reasons for the policy are no longer very V. Huntington: Can the minister confirm, then, that applicable. The rules don't help us protect public safety, those regulat