Today in the legislature we debated at second reading Bill M209: Business Corporations Amendment Act, 2019. This is my Private Members’ bill that proposes amendments to the Business Corporations Act and will create a new Part 2.3 in the Act that enables companies to become benefit companies. The bill passed second reading today and moves on to committee stage shortly.

Below I reproduce the text and video of my second reading speech.

Video of Speech

Text of Speech

A. Weaver: I move that Bill M209 be now read a second time.

It gives me great pleasure to rise and speak at second reading to Bill M209, Business Corporations Amendment Act. I will outline my speech in four different sections. I’ll start by giving a brief introduction as to the purpose and the intent of the bill — what it does — moving on to the process by which it was created and finishing with a conclusion and the type of the economy it’s trying to encourage and build.

This is a bill that my office has been working on for quite some months since May of last year, and I’m thrilled that we’ve been given the opportunity to debate it today. I’m, frankly, grateful to government for providing us and members of the opposition access to legislative drafters to allow us to bring this bill in the form that we know has gone through the formal legislative drafting process.

I’ve talked a lot about the emerging economy and the fact that the government needs to be prepared and resilient amidst the rapid shifts that are occurring in our society and our economy. These include, but are not limited to, things like climate change, environmental degradation, changes to the nature of work, rapid technological advance, the whole increasing disparity between those who have and those who don’t have income security and so forth. I believe that, frankly, business must play a central role in helping us tackle these enormous challenges and find solutions. It is not only up to government to find the solutions. It is also up to business.

That’s why we created this legislation to create benefit companies in British Columbia. The idea for this legislation was brought to us from the business community, from both small and large companies that are already using their business to do good and wanted a clearer legal framework under which to operate. I think government, frankly, needs to do more to encourage and support these types of businesses that have chosen to go beyond the pursuit of profit to also pursue critical social and environmental values.

What does the bill do? I want to start by highlighting some of the key elements of the bill. One, it adds a new part to the Business Corporations Act, enabling companies to incorporate as benefit companies. It would provide a legal framework for companies that are committed to pursuing a triple bottom line to embedding social responsibility and environmental sustainability into their companies’ DNA. These companies could take on expanded purpose, accountability and transparency.

The bill would require companies to change their articles to enshrine a commitment to act in a responsible and sustainable manner. This means they must — that’s important, the word “must” — take into account the well-being of persons affected by their conduct and endeavour to use a fair and proportionate share of available environmental, social and economic resources and capacities. They must, again, also pursue one or more specific public benefits of a positive effect on society or the environment.

Another key component of the legislation is that it creates new duties for directors of benefit companies. They must — again I use the word “must” — balance their duty to act in the best interests of the company with the new duties to act with a view to operating their business responsibly and sustainably, as well as to promote specific public benefits. I want to come to highlight this a little bit more because I think this is an important element, a key element, that we need to highlight.

Right now it’s clear. Our case law already makes it very clear that directors may — the very important word “may,” as opposed to “must” — consider broader stakeholders as they consider their duty to act in the best interests of the corporation. The federal government recognized this and is now codifying this into the Canada Business Corporations Act. That’s a very welcome move, frankly, that the federal government is doing in making it clear that all directors have the ability to consider broader stakeholders in their decision-making — that they may consider. That’s based on the case law that arose from the very famous BCE case that enshrined at the Supreme Court level that directors may in fact go broader than just fiduciary responsibility.

We also know that considering broader stakeholders in their decision-making is one thing but also that Canadian directors are not bound by a shareholder primacy rule. This bill does something different. It does something very different: it goes further. It creates a duty for directors of benefit companies to act responsibly and sustainably to promote public benefits. More than this, it requires directors of benefit companies to balance their existing duty to act in the best interests of the company with these new duties to act responsibly and sustainably and promote public benefits. I’m going to come back to this. This was an issue brought to us by small and large business looking for certainty, looking to do a reduced risk as they move forward in these directions.

It’s important to note that nothing in this legislation precludes the directors of an ordinary company from also considering other interests, like employees or the environment, when acting in the best interest of the company. This is not preclude any existing company from doing that. But benefit companies must also report their performance against an independent third-party standard which must be developed by a person or entity that is unrelated to the benefit company.

The reporting must be done annually and must be available to the public. This element is important to ensure transparency for suppliers, purchasers and customers that the company is indeed living up to its stated goals. I hope that this requirement will spur innovation in B.C. and that strong local standards will emerge for benefit companies to use, as put forward and adjudicated by strong, B.C.-based, third-party verifiers.

The legislation creates clear expectations about the nature and mandate of the company and provides protections for directors who choose to prioritize public benefits and not only profit.

This legislation would help mission-driven companies stay true to their mission as they grow and protect the vision of the founders of benefit companies by embedding the environmental and social benefits into the companies’ actual mandate.

It would provide more certainty for impact investors, another critical aspect of this bill. The impact investors are looking to invest in mission-aligned companies of the nature and the mandate of a company, but what’s critical to them is that they not have an asset lock that existed in very fine enabling legislation for the creation of what are called C3s in the province of British Columbia, put forward by the B.C. Liberals in the last session. That doesn’t affect that at all.

But what it does here…. The asset lock associated with those C3s precluded impact investors from actually moving forward, because you invest and you can’t get your investment back out. This would allow impact investors to actually know that the company is triple-bottom-line and is one focused on a much broader mandate than just fiscal benefit for the shareholders.

The act would provide more certainty for impact investors looking to invest in mission-aligned companies, as I said. And moreover, this legislation would provide a simple framework for companies to adhere to that is legally and commercially recognized.

The choice to become a benefit company is completely voluntary. There’s no requirement. There’s no impact on existing corporations and no tax implications at all. Although the government down the road may view some kind of change in the way it incorporates tax to benefit companies versus other companies, if a government moving forward sees that this is something they wish to encourage…. But that is up to government and not something that we’ll be bringing or discussing in a private member’s bill.

I also believe that the benefit company legislation would be complementary to existing structures in place. And I want to recognize again — come back to this — the leadership and initiative put forward by the previous government in creating the so-called C3, or community contribution companies, that I spoke about. I see C3s and benefit companies as different ways, on a spectrum, for government to support socially and environmentally responsible business forums.

Now, I’ve heard, and we’ve consulted extensively, from many businesses that the C3 structure is simply too restrictive for many for-profit businesses, since they would need to fundamentally change their corporate structure and reduce their ability to attract investment. We can and should, frankly, provide another option to support sustainable and responsible businesses in B.C.

The C3 structure works wonderfully if a not-for-profit is looking to create a business arm that is permanently associated with the not-for-profit because the asset lock of the company associated with a not-for-profit is the not-for-profit. So any profits must be flowed back to the not-for-profit. That works well in that case. It does not work well for a for-profit business venture which is seeking to do more than just fiscal bottom line.

I’d fully support any efforts to continue the work started by the previous administration to support C3s. Steps in this direction could include, for example, doing more to promote the C3 brand, enhancing public awareness of C3s and providing tax incentives and benefits for investments in C3s.

So this, again, is not something that we believe competes with C3s. It’s something that we believe is very complementary to C3s. But it gives certain classes of companies, those that are looking to the triple bottom line and not have to worry about the asset lock associated with the C3 to actually incorporate and move forward in that manner….

I’d like to take a few minutes on section 3 here to discuss the process that led to the position we’re in now. As many, obviously, who are aware, I first introduced this bill for debate last May with the purpose of starting a conversation of that legislation.

We had a discussion and a debate and passed second reading, and over the following months, we worked as a caucus very hard to consult stakeholders and experts from across Canada, frankly, and elsewhere to make sure that we got the details right. We met with many, many business leaders, as well as leaders in social enterprise and owners of C3s, about their goals for a sustainable economy and how this legislation would fit in or what we needed to do to ensure that we were able to build support.

We also undertook an extensive consultation with the B.C. branch of the Canadian Bar Association to get insight from them as to the various legal questions that might be arise from this.

Throughout this process, we worked closely with the legislative drafter, the one that we’ve assigned to this project, to craft this amendment in order to ensure that it is legally enforceable and that it works well and is consistent with existing B.C. laws. And, of course, we consulted with government through the confidence and supply agreement secretariat.

In conclusion, I’m very proud of this piece of legislation, and I’m very glad to see that we’re debating it at second reading today. I’m grateful to government for bringing this forward to the order papers to actually allow us to have this debate. I think it bodes well for working across party lines to see private members’ bills discussed in this fashion. I hope we’re able to move forward both with opposition bills as well as other bills from others in this chamber.

We will have a rather interesting and novel process in committee stage. I look forward to articulating that as we move towards that. This hasn’t been done before in this Legislature, as far as we can tell, where an opposition member is in committee stage. That will be a unique experience. I think we might point to some revisions in standing orders that we might want to discuss collectively as we move forward, as we move to this committee phase, an odd committee phase that it is, in the B.C. Legislature compared to other jurisdictions.

I believe that, frankly, becoming the first jurisdiction in Canada to champion benefit companies is a huge opportunity. We know that Quebec is right behind us here and likely going to follow through shortly thereafter. But we’re leaders here in B.C. We don’t follow others. I think British Columbians enjoy being leaders, and that’s why I’m excited that government has continued to support this effort moving forward.

B.C. is already, like Quebec…. We’re sort of a mirror of Quebec in that regard. We are home to many, many socially responsible companies. It’s part of our, frankly, stellar brand as one of the greenest places in the world. “Super, natural British Columbia” and “Beautiful British Columbia” are monikers on our licence plates, for years have been focusing on our natural beauty and what brings people to our lovely province.

We’ve been seeing, also, shifts in consumer patterns and behaviour, particularly among younger demographics sensitive to social and environmental impacts. We know, again, from our extensive consultation, that the millennial group — the category, however you want to call them — millennials in this area, are very concerned about social enterprises. They’re very supportive of and look actually to buy from and invest in social enterprises or triple-bottom-line companies. Benefit companies allow those companies, from small to large, to actually demonstrate, distinguish and be publicly transparent about their overall mission in a triple-bottom-line sense.

Frankly, we’re struggling as a society to adjust and respond to massive technological, social and environmental shifts that we’re facing — whether it be, as I said earlier, from climate change to automation. We need, frankly, I think, to think differently in order to turn our challenges into opportunities. This is one of the things this bill does here.

We need the partnership and to engage with the business community to help us deal with these challenges. Not to prescribe solutions to business but to work with business to allow the innovative ideas in business to flow through in an environment that seeds and nurtures this innovation. That’s how we’ll be successful.

Government and the non-profit sector cannot, by themselves, respond to the challenges that we face before us; frankly, nor should they. Businesses play an incredible and a huge role in our society, and they must be part of any solution to any problem that we see emerging. Companies that pursue a triple bottom line, frankly, are on the cutting edge of rethinking the role of business in the 21st century.

Now, some are doing so voluntarily. Others wish to do so, and they wish to be protected. This legislation gives them protection and gives them the ability to follow a suite of rules that are set out to ensure that what they do is enshrined in their articles and protected moving forward.

You know, businesses know that acting in the best interests of people and the planet is the best way to build a thriving economy for the long term. If B.C. had this legislation on the books and if companies were able to incorporate as benefit companies, with an explicit social or environmental benefit baked into that purpose, it would send a very strong signal to the market that the government supports this approach to business, and British Columbia is a home and wants to seek and attract new business in this area.

We look forward and encourage more companies to incorporate social and environmental values into their own business, empowering them to create change in our province and to help us to solve many of the challenges that face us all.

I look forward to listening to the other comments and the deliberations at committee phase.

Today the BC Government tabled Bill 8: Employment Standards Amendment Act, 2019. Improving fairness for workers and ensuring balance in workplaces are part of the Confidence and Supply Agreement we signed with the NDP. Our caucus has approached this issue from the start by focusing on sensible policy that puts the health and well-being of people at its core. Our goal is to see an end to the pendulum swings that have marked labour policy in our province over the past three decades. Many of the changes in this legislation appear to be positive steps in that direction. In particular, the changes will give job security to workers fleeing domestic violence and protect children from dangerous work.

Below is our initial statement released in response to the Bill’s introduction. We look forward to debating this bill at second reading in the near future. I will provide a more comprehensive analysis of it once we have had a chance to examine it in detail.

Media Statement

Employment Standards Amendment Act
For immediate release
April 29, 2019

VICTORIA, B.C. – The B.C. Green caucus supports government’s legislation amending the Employment Standards Act, which aligns the province with United Nations standards to better protect children and youth, protect workers facing domestic violence, and improve balance in workplaces.

“Key elements of this legislation better protect the health and well-being of some of the most vulnerable people in our communities,” B.C. Green Party leader Andrew Weaver said. “This legislation will improve safety for children and youth in the workforce, and it allows survivors of domestic violence to take time off when they need it, knowing they will have a job to return to, which can make all the difference to those living in dangerous circumstances. We should take this a step further and provide paid leave for people fleeing domestic violence, to support them as they find safety.

“We have approached this issue from the start by focusing on sensible policy that puts the health and well-being of people at its core. Our goal is to see an end to the pendulum swings that have marked labour policy in our province over the past three decades.

“The upcoming months will require government to engage in a thorough consultation process to establish clear, fair and balanced regulations that businesses can follow. We must also start earnest work to modernize our laws to better support workers as they are forced to adapt to the changing nature of work and the growth of the gig economy.”

-30-

Media contact
Macon McGinley, Press Secretary
+1 250-882-6187 |macon.mcginley@leg.bc.ca

On April 11, the day before the legislature rose for a two week break, I stood during Question Period to ask the Minister of Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology whether he was aware of the critical services and programs provided by BC Tech at the Cube and the Hub in Vancouver and the positive impact they have on our innovation community. In response, the Minister spoke passionately about the good work and leadership of the B.C. Tech Association. Yet just five days later, the BC Tech Association announced the impending closure of the Cube due to their inability to secure provincial (and federal) funding to enable it to remain open.

Today I rose during question period to ask the Minister how he reconciles his stated support for the tech sector with the fact that the BC Tech Association is being forced to close the doors of this facility. In addition, I asked the Minister why the Ontario tech sector was getting a $90 million investment the same week that the BC Tech sector was making its announcement. Below I reproduce the video and text of our exchange.

Video of Exchange

Question

A. Weaver: Hon. Speaker, if you or other members in the gallery thought that they were participating in an episode of The Twilight Zone, I share their concerns. Here we have the official opposition and their leader arguing for Marxist policy to bring in a price cap, and we have the leader of the socialist party arguing for free market economics. What has B.C. politics come to?

We now have a new level of standard for research by the official opposition. Oil apologist, gasbuddy.com, providing the official opposition official research on their efforts. I cannot wait till the next episode comes forward.

Two weeks ago I asked the minister if he was committed to ensuring that programs and services provided by the B.C. Tech Association at The Cube and The Hub were able to continue. In his response, the minister spoke about how The Cube had provided many opportunities and shown leadership in the sector.

However, since that time, The Cube has now announced it is closing its doors in May because it was unable to secure either provincial or federal funding. This closure sends a wrong signal — the exact wrong signal as to where we should be headed.

My question is to the Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology. How can the minister reconcile his stated support for the tech sector with the fact that the B.C. Tech Association is being forced to close the doors of The Cube facility?

Answer

Hon. B. Ralston: I would like to thank the Leader of the Third Party for his question and for his continuing support for the tech sector. It’s a growing, vibrant sector here in our province.

We spoke last time about The Cube, and The Cube’s source of funding came from the federal government, from the western diversification fund. They decided to discontinue that funding. As part of the transition, our government gave them $500,000 to point themselves in a new direction. That did not result in their ability to continue it.

But at the same time, in the same sector — the virtual reality, augmented reality sector — just on Tuesday, April 16, I was there…. Actually, Ms. Tipping, the head of the Technology Improvement Association, was there at the launch of a new incubator, the Launch Academy, in the very same sector, the VR-AR sector — very successful, couple of hundred companies there.

This is the biggest AR-VR sector in the world. Perhaps maybe second, although one would be permitted, as an advocate, a little bit of boasting, I think. That sector is world-leading. We are doing well.

The vibe at that place was really good. I spoke with Alex Cheong, cofounder of Shape Immersive. They are very enthusiastic about the possibilities.

This is a sector where there is change. Things change. The Cube didn’t work out. This sector is taking over. I’m very confident about that sector and its future here in British Columbia — indeed, its future globally.

Supplementary Question

Well, I, too, am excited about the prospects for tech in British Columbia. I’m profoundly concerned that B.C. is not stepping up to draw the federal dollars that are available that jurisdictions like Ontario have done. In fact, the same week that the Cube was being closed, the federal government announced in partnership with Ontario a $90 million investment in innovation in Ontario.

Both B.C. and Ontario have burgeoning innovation sectors that drive economic growth and create high-paying, good-quality jobs. The sectors in both provinces have huge potential for growth, and our sector has some of the best potential of all. It will help us transform our economy and drive prosperity for British Columbians from north to south and east to west.

The only difference is that in Ontario, they’re at the table and willing to invest substantially in this new, up-and-coming sector, whereas B.C. appears to be the absent. We’ll be left in the dust behind other jurisdictions if it doesn’t back up its words with actions to ensure that we’re there able to leverage those federal moneys to ensure that we get the innovation centres in B.C. that are so instrumental to the development of the new economy.

My question is again to the minister. Why is the Ontario tech sector getting $90 million as an investment the same week as the B.C. tech sector is being forced to close a facility for innovation in B.C.?

Answer

Hon. B. Ralston: I appreciate that the member is particularly enamored of the initiatives taken by the Ford government in Ontario. But the reality here in British Columbia is that we are investing a huge amount in the tech sector here.

Let’s begin with 2,900 new tech spaces in institutions across the province. We are investing $110 million in innovative research in B.C.’s leading post-secondary institutions through the B.C. Knowledge Development Fund. We are investing $12 million in graduate scholarships for students, including science- and tech-related disciplines, as well as $500,000 for women in tech scholarships.

We are making the commitments. Those commitments are going to be renewed through a new Innovate B.C., which has a fresh mandate, a new CEO who comes from Accelerate Okanagan. I’m very optimistic about the future of the tech sector and the investments that come not only from the start-up environment here, which is booming from global companies which are choosing to locate here. Jiu-jitsu was mentioned in the two-minute statements, and there are many others.

People want to be and tech companies want to be in British Columbia. They are coming here, and they will continue to come here because of what we have to offer.

Today I was afforded the opportunity to address delegates at the 70^th annual convention of the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities held in Powell River. As noted on their website:

“The Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities (AVICC) is the longest established area association under the umbrella of the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM). The area association was established in 1950. It now has a membership of 53 municipalities and regional districts that stretches from the North Coast Regional District down to the tip of Vancouver Island and includes Powell River, the Sunshine Coast, the Central Coast and the North Coast. The Association deals with issues and concerns that affect large urban areas to small rural communities.“

Below I reproduce the text of my speech.

Text of Speech

I have had the distinct honour of standing before this group of leaders on a number of occasions – and each time I am grateful for the opportunity to address you.

By my count, the AVICC represents 53 distinct cities, towns, villages, districts or regional districts, stretching from the southern tip of Vancouver Island, all the way up to the Northern tip of the North Coast Regional District.

Each of you in this room has taken on an incredible responsibility to represent your friends and neighbours, helping chart a path forward for your community. For those of you who have been in office for a number of years, I think you will agree with me that the challenges that face us are getting harder to deal with and more complex, and that more than ever we need a vision that takes those challenges head on.

I will get to talking about the challenges – and even more important the opportunity that I believe we have in front of us. But before I do, I think it’s important to first acknowledge just how much we all have in common.

A couple of weeks ago, reporter Justin McElroy with CBC News published an article chronicling his four month, 12,000 kilometer trip across our beautiful province. By his count, he visited forty different communities, and had this to say about his experience:

“While our cities and towns are unique, the political dilemmas they face are pretty similar.

People need a place to live, whether it’s stable rental buildings or modular homes. They need to get around more easily, whatever form of transportation they take. They need jobs from evolving industries, and generally worry about losing those in traditional sectors. And they need to feel they’re making the world a better place for their children.

…No matter which B.C. communities we went to, that contrast existed. Every place is its own — but the conflicts and solutions to their political issues generally aren’t.”

I think this is a critical starting place. Whether it’s the challenges we face, or the opportunities we want to seize, we have more in common with each other then we have things that set us apart. And, I believe more than ever, we are all in this together.

So let’s talk about the largest challenge we face, especially on the coast – but also about the solutions that are readily available and right in front of us.

Over the last 150 years, Earth has made a transition from the past, when climate affected the evolution of human societies, to the present, in which humans are affecting the evolution of the climate.

Today we are at a pivotal moment in human history; our generation will be responsible for deciding what path the future climate will take.

You and I, as elected officials, will either be complicit in allowing climate change to despoil our world – or we can lead the way and choose a new future.

I don’t need to tell you that communities across BC – including the communities represented by the very people in this room – are on the frontier of climate change.

No level of government feels the impacts greater nor as directly as you do as municipalities.

I could spend every minute I have left one this stage with you enumerating the impacts that climate change is already having on our way of life.

You, as local leaders, see first hand the impacts on your communities. The evacuations. The water restrictions. The rivers that are drying up. The loss of species in our coastal ecosystems like the Orca or the Steelhead. The economic impacts to industries like fishing and tourism – industries every community in this room relies on is as risk.

More than anything, I think we are starting to see the impact that this instability and insecurity is having on the people who live in our communities. The insecurity – the uncertainty of where we are going – can sometimes feel overwhelming. The sense of powerlessness is the face of such a grand challenge can feel paralyzing.

To this, I say let’s look to the next generation for the drive and energy we need to overcome this feeling.

A couple of weeks ago our province witnessed tens of thousands of students walking out of class, joining the millions who marched worldwide, demanding climate action. They carried signs that read “We should be preparing for the future, not fighting for it!” and “The climate is changing, why aren’t we?”

The words of Greta Thunberg, whose actions have inspired so many – including the marches that took place – ring particularly loud for me.

“I am doing this because nobody else is doing anything. It is my moral responsibility to do what I can,” she says. “I want the politicians to prioritise the climate question, focus on the climate and treat it like a crisis.”

She is speaking to us. All of us in this room, asking us to rise to this challenge with real actions. We are the ones who can set our province on a path that shows the next generation that we will take responsibility for addressing the problems that they risk inheriting from us.

And here’s the thing – while it will absolutely take courage to see them through, the solutions are right in front of us, and will make our lives better.

So let’s talk about the path forward and how all of us collectively can build a path forward for our communities.

I’ve spoken a number of times about my vision for how BC can position itself as a leader in the 21st century economy. This may look different for every community, but there are certain things we all share in common

I believe BC has three strategic advantages over virtually every other region in the world.

1. The quality of life and natural environment allows us to attract and retain some of the best and brightest minds from around the globe — we are a destination of choice.
2. We have a highly skilled and educated workforce. Our high school students are consistently top ranked internationally. They are smart, well trained and they are ready to go to work.
3. We have access to renewable resources — energy, water, and wood — like no other jurisdiction. We have incredible potential to create a clean, renewable energy sector to sustain our growing economy.

To capitalize on these advantages, we need to start planning beyond the next election cycle. We need to focus on building a new economy that works for all of us — not just the privileged few. Policies must be based on principles and evidence, not political calculation and opportunism.

And governments must put people’s interests first – ahead of entrenched industry – because building healthy, safe, secure communities needs to be prioritized in a changing world.

I have been pushing government to prioritize the health and well-being of British Columbians since I was elected almost six years ago

By tackling climate change, with carefully designed policies, B.C.’s economy can grow in new ways. And as I said before – these solutions will actually improve our lives. That is because the only solutions to the climate challenge are ones that see us tackle inequality and focus on the health and well-being of British Columbians.

I want to give some examples of these solutions.

Earlier this spring the government released “Connecting Coastal Communities,” a report by special advisor Blair Redlin. This report outlined that over the next 9 years, 14 contracts will be needed for new vessels, and this doesn’t include retrofits of existing vessels.

However, right now BC seem fixated on giving these contracts to shipyards in other countries so that we can build vessels that use LNG.

Contrast this with Norway, who recently made headlines increasing reliance on electric ferries. And guess what? The battery technology they are using is made in Burnaby.

There is so much potential for made in BC ferries, using made in BC electrification technology which reduce GHG emissions and create local employment.

While we are accomplishing this, we can and should be rolling BC Ferries back into our provincial transportation network. I believe that ferries are a part of the highway system. They are relied on to get kids to school and for communities to access the healthcare system they pay for, That’s why it is essential that our ferry services don’t exist to maximize profits, but rather to serve the public interest. That’s why they’re there.

In forestry we must focus on the opportunities that arise when we prioritize the protection of out old growth forests.

Vancouver Island and our coastal communities have some of the most majestic forests left on the planet, drawing people from around the world.

The BC Green Caucus believes we need to protect what little old growth is left. These forests provide essential functions for our communities, protecting biodiversity, supporting watershed health and helping keep the very water we drink clean – not to mention the role they play in storing carbon.

By protecting our old growth forests, we can enhance the resilience of our communities – both the environment they rely upon, and our local economies.

There is a huge opportunity to support a retrofit program for our coastal mills to process second growth timber, and focus on developing a value added industry. This can go hand in hand with enhancing local ownership over these resources to ensure communities see the benefits, as well as have the responsibility to steward our public resources.

On another front, we have brought forward benefit company legislation, which would carve out a more deliberate space in our economy for businesses that want to pursue values beyond maximizing profits.   B.C. is already home to a number of incredibly innovative, socially responsible companies that want to play a bigger role in addressing the biggest challenges we face. And I think that it is critical that we harness this power of business to help us find solutions, and to create prosperity in an environmentally sustainable and socially responsible way. This should not be a task for governments alone. This legislation is one step to help us do this.

And, alongside making these changes, we should also be changing how we determine what success means in our economy. We need to move beyond a sole focus on economic growth measured by GDP, where we don’t incorporate the effects of the economic production and consumption on our environment or the health and well-being of British Columbians. Instead, we should be using a genuine progress indicator to measure the success of our economy. An indicator that captures   I’m excited to say that we’re working with our partners in government to develop a GPI for BC.

Making the changes needed in our economy won’t be a straight path. But the challenges in front of us are political – not technical.

Two weeks ago that was on display in the BC Legislature as all 83 members of the BC NDP and BC Liberal caucuses voted to provide new tax credits to a large fossil fuel company which will see the creation of the largest point source of GHG emissions in British Columbia.

This is a disappointing and counterproductive step. Governments can no longer have it both ways. They cannot advance status quo, polluting industries and be committed to tackling climate change and pursuing an economic pathway ground in well-being.

It is wrong to spend so much energy to expand fossil fuel tax credits and the race to the bottom economics of the fossil fuel industry.

So what do we do in the face of these actions that move us backward? We must meet them head on, showing the courage to challenge “business as usual” and the leadership to show a better pathway.

We should be using our time and resources to build the opportunity we have in BC to leverage our strengths and build a sustainable and innovative economy, and the imperative we face in getting our communities ready for climate change. This should be the time when parties are competing to present the boldest plans to British Columbians to position us for success in this new reality.

On this note I want to recognize the leadership the Mayor Lisa Helps and the City of Victoria are showing.

Their motion shows the courage to directly challenge the pursuit of LNG in this province in the face of the climate crisis, and the leadership to provide a path forward. I want to read directly from part of the motion:

“THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that UBCM call on the Provincial government to end all subsidies

to fossil fuel companies and to invest the money instead in climate change mitigation and adaptation activities being undertaken by local governments in a predictable and regularized funding formula…”

This is what is needed. I applaud this courage. This leadership.

The specific ways in which climate change challenges our communities may differ, but we must be united in responding to it.

I would like to end this speech with an open invitation to each of you to work with my colleagues on I to advance this vision.

Taking meaningful action, making real change, requires partnership.

I would welcome your ideas, your concerns, and your stories of success so that together we can create the bold change needed to ensure our communities can thrive as we navigate the 21st century. I look forward to the discussions to come.

Today in Question Period I rose to ask the Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology whether he was aware of the critical services and programs provided by BC Tech at the Cube and the Hub in Vancouver and the positive impact they have on our innovation community.

Below I reproduce the text and video of our exchange.

Video of Exchange

Question

A. Weaver: Hon. Speaker, I must say it is a kinder and gentler question period in the Legislature here today.

On that note, I will note that on February 5, 2018, the Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology announced the appointment of B.C.’s first innovation commissioner. The announcement was at B.C. Tech’s Cube. This was widely celebrated as a significant step forward for innovation in our province. I was present at the announcement.

Just two weeks ago, at the B.C. Tech luncheon, the minister and I met some B.C. leaders in the tech sector. Companies that have grown and thrived thanks to the programs and services provided by the B.C. Tech Association.

My question is to the Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology. Is the minister aware of the critical services and programs provided by B.C. Tech at the cube and the hub in Vancouver and the positive impact they have on our innovation community?

Answer

Hon. B. Ralston: I thank the member for the question. I too share his optimism about the growth of the technology sector here in British Columbia. Certainly the augmented and virtual reality sector, which the cube is a start-up laboratory for, is a very strong one. It’s a very strong sector — in fact, globally leading.

Since we have the ambassador for Korea here, on a recent trip with the Minister of State for Trade to Korea, we met with companies that are well aware of the opportunities here in British Columbia. In fact, there are exchanges, business exchanges, between the Giyungi Content Organization in the sister province to British Columbia and the sector here.

The B.C. Tech Association has provided leadership in that sector, I’m well aware of the opportunities that the cube has provided. Indeed, our government, in December, provided the sum of $500,000 to assist them in preparing as they move to a new funding model.

The initial funding for the cube came largely from the federal government, from the western diversification fund. They underwent a review of their funding of these incubators and have decided that they are heading in a different direction. So as the organization works out its approach, we have provided that money to assist the transition.

Supplementary Question

A. Weaver: Thank you for that very, very comprehensive answer.

The programs and services provided by B.C. Tech help people to take their ideas and turn them into companies. They help existing companies bridge what’s commonly known as the “valley of death.” That is, they help them manage the hyper-growth that these companies often encounter.

Programs and services are an essential engine for innovative growth in our economy, and they rely upon government and industry funding to be able to continue. But in the absence of provincial funding, these programs could be at risk.

Once again, my question is for the Minister of Jobs, Trade and Technology. Supporting innovation in our economy is a critical priority for the B.C. Green caucus.

Is the minister equally committed to ensuring the programs and services provided by the B.C. Tech Association at The Cube and the Hub are able to continue?

Interjections.

Answer

Hon. B. Ralston: I wish the answer were that simple.

The member has referenced the appointment of the innovation commissioner. In a recent report to the Legislature, he set out what he thought were important directions for government policy in the future. He recommends an economic and technology strategy that supports increased business investment in research and development, developing talents at post-secondary institutions and scaling up small businesses with huge growth potential. He’s suggested three different kinds of clusters, whether they’re regional community clusters, emerging technology clusters or scale-up, market-driven clusters.

Certainly, the B.C. Technology Industry Association is a strong leader in providing policy advice to the government. I think they have adopted and would recommend very similar solutions to those that the innovation commissioner put forward, particularly in relation to scaling up companies, taking companies from the start-up environment and building big companies here that are global leaders. And there are lots of opportunities to do that, given the strength of our sector here.

I thank the member for giving me the opportunity to talk about those policies, and I look forward to developing those policies with all members of the Legislature in the future.