No. 31 VOTES AND PROCEEDINGS OF THE Legislative Assembly of British Columbia Second Session of the Forty-third Parliament

Wednesday, April 1, 2026

One-thirty o’clock p.m.

Prayers and Reflections by Darlene Rotchford.

The Hon. Niki Sharma (Attorney General and Deputy Premier) presented to the Speaker a Message from His Honour the Administrator, which read as follows:

Leonard Marchand
Administrator

The Administrator transmits herewith Bill (No. 16) intituled Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2026, and recommends the same to the Legislative Assembly.

Vancouver Law Courts,

March 30, 2026.

Bill introduced and read a first time.

Bill Ordered to be placed on the Orders of the Day for second reading at the next sitting after today.

Order called for “Members’ Statements.”

Order called for “Oral Questions by Members.”

Claire Rattée reserved her right to raise a question of privilege.

John Rustad rose on a point of order regarding comments made by the Attorney General and Deputy Premier during Oral Question Period.

The Speaker stated that he would take the matter under advisement.

The Hon. Ravi Kahlon (Minister of Jobs and Economic Growth) tabled the InBC Investment Corp. Annual Report, 2024/2025.

The House proceeded to “Orders of the Day.”

14  The Hon. Mike Farnworth moved —

That, notwithstanding Standing Order 2 (1),

a. the adjournment time of the sitting of the House commencing at 10 a.m. on Thursday, April 2, 2026, be modified to immediately following the conclusion of Oral Question Period; and,

b. the start of the afternoon sitting on Thursday, April 2, 2026, be modified to 2 p.m.

Motion agreed to.

Pursuant to Sessional Order, order called for Section A and Section C of Committee of the Whole.

The House resumed the adjourned debate on the motion for second reading of Bill (No. 11) intituled Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2026.

The debate continued.

On the motion of Tony Luck, the debate was adjourned to later today.

(In Committee — Section A)

Bill (No. 2) intituled Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2026, was again committed.

Clauses 40 through 107 and the title of Bill (No. 2) passed.

Section A of Committee of the Whole reported Bill (No. 2) intituled Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2026, complete without amendment.

On the motion for third reading of Bill (No. 2) the House divided.

Motion agreed to on the following division:

The Speaker announced that the votes being equal, and in accordance with established practice that the confidence of the House should not be decided by the sole vote of the Chair, he cast his vote in favour of the motion.

Bill (No. 2) read a third time and passed.

On the motion for third reading of Bill (No. 6) intituled Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2026, the House divided.

Motion agreed to nemine contradicente on the following division:

Bill (No. 6) read a third time and passed.

Pursuant to Sessional Order, order called for Section A of Committee of the Whole.

The House resumed the adjourned debate on the motion for second reading of Bill (No. 11) intituled Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2026.

On the motion of George Anderson, the debate was adjourned to later today.

(In Committee — Section C)

Bill (No. 8) intituled Civil Forfeiture Amendment Act, 2026, was again committed.

Macklin McCall moved a proposed amendment to clause 2 of Bill (No. 8) which was defeated, on division.

Macklin McCall moved a proposed amendment to clause 2 of Bill (No. 8) which was defeated, on division.

Clause 2 of Bill (No. 8) passed, on division.

Clauses 3 through 5 of Bill (No. 8) passed.

Macklin McCall moved a proposed amendment to clause 6 of Bill (No. 8) which was defeated, on division.

Clause 6 of Bill (No. 8) passed, on division.

Macklin McCall moved a proposed amendment to clause 7 of Bill (No. 8) which was defeated, on division.

Clause 7 of Bill (No. 8) passed, on division.

Clauses 8 through 10 of Bill (No. 8) passed.

Macklin McCall moved a proposed amendment to add clause 11.1 to Bill (No. 8) which was defeated on the following division:

Clause 11 of Bill (No. 8) passed, on division.

Clauses 12 through 21 and the title of Bill (No. 8) passed.

Section C of Committee of the Whole reported Bill (No. 8) intituled Civil Forfeiture Amendment Act, 2026, complete without amendment.

Bill (No. 8) read a third time and passed.

Pursuant to Sessional Order, order called for Section C of Committee of the Whole.

The House resumed the adjourned debate on the motion for second reading of Bill (No. 11) intituled Residential Tenancy Amendment Act, 2026.

On the motion of Bryan Tepper, the debate was adjourned to the next sitting of the House.

(In Committee — Section A)

Bill (No. 12) intituled Safe Access to Schools Amendment Act, 2026, was committed.

Clause 1, clause 2 and the title of Bill (No. 12) passed.

Section A of Committee of the Whole reported Bill (No. 12) intituled Safe Access to Schools Amendment Act, 2026, complete without amendment.

On the motion for third reading of Bill (No. 12) the House divided.

Motion agreed to on the following division:

Bill (No. 12) read a third time and passed.

(In Committee — Section C)

Bill (No. 10) intituled Labour Statutes Amendment Act, 2026, was committed.

Clause 1 and clause 2 of Bill (No. 10) passed.

On clause 3 of Bill (No. 10).

Section C of Committee of the Whole reported progress on Bill (No. 10) intituled Labour Statutes Amendment Act, 2026, and asked leave to sit again.

Bill to be considered at the next sitting.

Committee to sit again at the next sitting.

And then the House adjourned at 6.48 p.m.

HON. RAJ CHOUHAN, Speaker

NOTICE OF BILLS

Thursday, April 2

Tara Armstrong to introduce a Bill intituled Transparency of Advocacy Organizations Act.

Monday, April 13

Tara Armstrong to introduce a Bill intituled Speculation and Vacancy Tax Repeal Act.

NOTICE OF MOTIONS

Thursday, April 2

M 209  Brennan Day to move —

That the Select Standing Committee on Health be empowered to examine, inquire into, and make recommendations respecting:

a. the growing demand for seniors’ health services in British Columbia, including the availability of long-term care beds, the management of long-term care waitlists, and the capacity of the current system to meet the needs of British Columbia’s rapidly aging population; and,

b. strategies to support the development of a coordinated, cross-government approach to seniors’ care, including improvements to transparency, system planning and the public reporting of data necessary to inform long-term care capacity, reduce delayed hospital discharges and improve patient outcomes.

That, in addition to the powers previously conferred upon Select Standing Committees, the Select Standing Committee on Health be empowered to:

a. appoint of its number one or more subcommittees and to refer to such subcommittees any of the matters referred to the Committee and to delegate to the subcommittees all or any of its powers except the power to report directly to the House;

b. sit during a period in which the House is adjourned, during the recess after prorogation until the next following Session and during any sitting of the House;

c. conduct consultations by any means the Committee considers appropriate;

d. adjourn from place to place as may be convenient; and,

e. retain personnel as required to assist the Committee.

That the Committee report to the House by February 26, 2027, and that during a period of adjournment, the Committee deposit its reports with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, and upon resumption of the sittings of the House, or in the next following Session, as the case may be, the Chair present all reports to the House.

NOTICE OF QUESTIONS

Thursday, April 2

3  Reann Gasper to ask the Hon. Minister of Children and Family Development the following questions: —

1. How will the new funding model ensure that children who are currently working with trusted providers can maintain those relationships, rather than experiencing disruptions in care? Particularly regarding those who will not receive the Benefit or Supplement, or receive a minimal amount not sufficient to pay a provider.

2. What are the specific evidence-based curriculums/service models being provided in the community programming? What steps will be taken to ensure individualized services/support to clients and families?

3. If an individual/family is receiving individualized therapy services under the current Autism Funding model, how will the Minister ensure the continuity of individualized services under a reduced funding/community-based model?

4. If a family is receiving individualized therapy services under the current Autism Funding model (e.g., parent coaching, family support services), how will the Minister ensure the continuity of individualized services under a reduced funding/community-based model?

5. The Minister has stated that the community-based services will be neuroaffirming. What steps are being taken to ensure this? What research has been reviewed and what professionals have been consulted in preparing for neuroaffirming support?

6. Why was it decided to end the Autism Funding Unit (AFU) on March. 31, 2027, but not provide families with their Supplement until July 2027? How are families supposed to continue therapies without funds? How are service providers supposed to work without payment guarantee for three months?

7. If 85 percent of the service providers surveyed (currently 308 have completed a service provider impact survey), showed that they were not confident they would be open past March 31, 2027, who will be supporting the children should the parents wish to use their supplements for continued therapy?

8. What ownership/responsibility does the NDP government take over the potential reality of an estimated 85 percent of independent providers/small businesses shutting down as a result of this model being introduced?

9. It has been projected that services for youth will not be established for up to three more years from now. How does the government plan to provide for youth and their families during this time if they do not qualify for individualized funding/do not receive sufficient funds to continue with providers?

10. What research was consulted regarding:

a. Level 1/2 autism and suicide/suicidal ideation/self-harm

b. Level 1/2 autism and mental health co-morbidities (e.g., anxiety, depression, PTSD, burnout)

c. Level 1/2 autism and risk for abuse (e.g., sexual, physical, emotional, substance)

d. Level 1/2 autism and need for gender-affirming care

e. Parent experience (e.g., burnout, trauma, risk factors)

f. Please state specific research reviewed.

11. With the three-year delay in youth services, how will they be supported into their adult transition (e.g., job skills training)?

12. If the child’s supplement is divided between two parents when a child is in shared custody, how does the government expect the parents to make decisions in the child’s best interest when it comes to how to use the supplement? Will parent mediation services be included in navigation? If one parent was the signatory for AFU why is one parent not receiving the supplement to make medical decisions with the funds?

13. Will there be grants or similar funding options available to private service providers/therapy agencies to allow them to continue to work with their ‘Level 1/2’ client base in collaboration with the community-based programming?

14. Why were various professional groups/frontline workers not consulted in this development? Who were the professionals/groups consulted in the development of this model (names/role requested)?

15. What research was reviewed with respect to therapeutic horseback riding that stated that it did not have therapeutic value? Please provide research.

16. With respect to an estimated 10-15 percent of children/youth with autism and existing services to lose all funds, what is the statement/demonstration of ownership from the NDP government for going back on their word to families?

17. How will the community-based programming provide hours/access to families that cannot attend Monday to Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and require full service care on early mornings, evenings, weekends and statutory holidays?

18. How will community-based programming provide flexibility in service location to meet the needs of families?

19. What duration of time (e.g., months, years) was data collected on the efficacy or inefficacy of the current AFU model as well as the ‘goodness of fit’ of a community-based model such as the piloted hubs? Specific dates requested. Additionally, what data sources were reviewed to come to these conclusions? Specific sources requested.

20. As the reduction/removal of access to trusted, continued care from existing providers poses a serious risk of crisis for individuals with autism and their families, what has been prepared in anticipation of mental health/behavioural crisis, specifically:

a. Access to 24/7 crisis ‘help-line’ to contact qualified professionals who can assist in de-escalation and crisis management

b. Access to mental health services (e.g., Child Youth Mental Health) without extensive waitlists

c. Accessibility to be re-assessed for ‘need’ under the Benefit to gain funding and access more private support

d. Guarantee of qualified professionals to support individuals and families through crisis (not students, brand new professionals, assistants, etc.)

e. Increased resources for schools/hospitals to buffer increased demand on their systems in response to urgent crises.

21. Why is it not an option to have some form of individualized funding like the AFU for all children/youth with Autism? Why is it acceptable to have up to 15 percent losing all funding and an even larger percentage not receiving enough to support a beneficial therapy team?

Copyright © King’s Printer, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada