Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

First of all, it’s an honour to be back here in the fall session to have another committee stage of a bill with the Attorney General. I also want to thank the staff that’s here today. I know you guys work really hard to put this…. There’s a lot that goes behind preparing these bills and getting the bill ready for committee stage, so I thank you for your time. In regards to clause 1, I have some general questions about the bill. I know there’s some latitude to that that’s provided on clause 1. I’d like to ask some general questions about the bill starting off. The main theme from the second reading of this bill was that, in principle, this bill was supported by the official opposition, but there were some concerns over consultation. I did state in my second reading speech that we’d be asking consultation-related questions in the committee stage, so that will open up my first question. Can the Attorney General outline the consultation process used to develop Bill 10 in an overall manner?

179 words

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

Good afternoon, Members. I call the Committee of the Whole on Bill 10, Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025.

19 words

Raj Chouhan

BC NDP

10/7/2025

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

Bill 10, Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025, has been read a third time and has passed.

17 words

Raj Chouhan

BC NDP

10/7/2025

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

Members, the question is the third reading of Bill 10, Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025.

16 words

Susie Chant

BC NDP

10/7/2025

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

Section A reports Bill 10 complete without amendment.

8 words

Hon. Lisa Beare

BC NDP

10/7/2025

Bill 12 — Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2025 (continued)

In Section A, the Douglas Fir Room, I call Committee of the Whole on Bill 10, the AG Statutes Amendment Act. In this House, I call continued second reading on Bill 12, the Motor Vehicle Act.

36 words

Mable Elmore

BC NDP

10/6/2025

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

Members, the question is second reading of Bill 10, intituled Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025.

16 words

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

I rise today to speak to Bill 10, the Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025, as it relates to my critic role in Water, Land and Resource Stewardship. What we’re discussing here today is what we would call a housekeeping bill, a review of a technical piece of legislation with changes that are intended to align, clarify and modernize existing statutes. These kinds of bills rarely make the headlines, but they are essential to the smooth and effective operation of our province. They ensure that our laws keep pace with evolving practice, technological change and the realities faced by those who administer and rely on them every day. I want to begin by recognizing the tremendous amount of work that goes into preparing even what appear to be the smallest legislative amendments. This bill touches on several acts, including the Judicial Compensation Act, the Land Title Act, the Police Act and the Members’ Remuneration and Pensions Act, among others. Behind every clause are hours of legal review, cross-referencing and consultation among staff, council and administrators. In particular, I want to acknowledge the public servants in the Ministry of the Attorney General who undertook this painstaking review of these acts to bring forward these clarifications and technical corrections. This kind of work rarely gets headlines but is absolutely essential to the integrity of the legislative framework we operate under. These staff comb through laws line by line, cross-referencing provisions that may not have been touched in decades, ensuring consistency between statutes, regulation and practice. The preparation of Bill 10 is detailed, highly technical work that demands both legal precision and practical understanding of how our laws function on the ground. Often the public will never know their names or see the impact of their diligence. But the reliability of our laws, our courts and the confidence that British Columbians have in their government’s administration, our justice, depends on it. In many ways, these individuals are the quiet stewards of legislative stability in our province, and they deserve our sincere thanks. However, as legislators, it is our duty to remember that even small changes can have a large and unintended consequence. When we modify sections that touch something as foundational as the Land Title Act, for example, we are adjusting the rules that underpin property ownership, inheritance and the transfer of land in British Columbia. These are not abstract matters. They are the framework through which families settle estates, small businesses secure loans and local governments plan for growth. A minor adjustment to the language around probate or to the documents required for registration may seem technical, but on the ground, it can mean real delays, added costs and unexpected hardship for people who are simply trying to carry out their legal or financial affairs. In rural regions like mine, where access to legal professionals, notaries and land title offices can already involve long drives or limited hours of service, even a small procedural change can create barriers that urban British Columbians may never encounter. Imagine having a notary in your community only one day a week or perhaps no service at all. This is the reality in my riding of Boundary-Similkameen. It’s a reminder that precision in law-making isn’t just about getting the words right. It’s about ensuring that those words work for everyone, in every corner of the province, and apply equally, even in rural areas like mine. That is why attention to detail matters so deeply and why each clause in this so-called housekeeping bill deserves careful scrutiny. Our goal should always be to make the law clearer, not more complicated, and ensure that modernization truly makes the system more efficient and accessible for the people that rely on it the most. While the amendments to Bill 10 are described as housekeeping, we must ensure that in tidying up this language, we don’t accidentally sweep away important procedural safeguards or create new uncertainties for lawyers, registrars or the public who rely on these systems. That’s why consultation is so important, and I’ll echo my colleague, especially on technical bills like this. For the proposed changes to the Land Act, I would assume that the legal profession, land title professionals and estate administrators would be the first to spot where a small drafting change could create unintended consequences. Their practical, hands-on experience helps ensure that changes meant to modernize do not inadvertently complicate or delay transactions, especially in rural or remote communities where access to legal services and land title offices is already challenging. In that sense, housekeeping bills are a test of our diligence and due process. They are an opportunity to ensure that modernization is done thoughtfully, that each amendment has been properly vetted and that all affected stakeholders have been consulted. At committee stage, I look forward to exploring these details with the minister, particularly around the Land Title Act amendments, which consolidate several historical provisions. While these changes appear minor and administrative, we now know that even the smallest mismatch between statute, regulation and practice can lead to delays, confusion and unnecessary costs for the public. Housekeeping bills may not draw crowds, but they remind us that legislative precision matters. They show the importance of vigilance, of making sure every word, every cross-reference and every effective date line up. So while Bill 10 may be routine, it deserves the same careful scrutiny we would give to any major piece of legislation. I want to close by once again acknowledging the staff who keep these statutes up to date and to thank them for their diligence and professionalism. I look forward to the committee stage of this bill, where we will have the opportunity to verify that appropriate consultation has taken place and that these changes achieve their intended purpose without unintended consequences.

966 words

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

It’s a pleasure to be back for the fall session. I rise today on behalf of the official opposition and the Conservative caucus of British Columbia as Attorney General critic to respond to Bill 10, the Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025. At first glance, this bill is described as a housekeeping measure. For the most part, it appears to be true, appears to be a housekeeping bill. It proposes a series of small targeted amendments across several statutes, as we just heard from the Attorney General. These changes are generally administrative — updating terminology, correcting cross-references and aligning provincial law with a federal program or modern legal practice. We fully support the principle of keeping our laws clear, current and consistent. A legal system that relies on outdated or inconsistent language quickly becomes confusing, not just for lawyers but for ordinary British Columbians who rely on these laws every day. Clear statutes mean fewer disputes, smoother administration and better confidence in government decision-making. However, even technical or routine changes deserve scrutiny. Housekeeping bills can sometimes introduce unintended consequences. If those working on the front lines — such as judges, lawyers, notaries, police, court staff — haven’t been consulted, what may seem like a minor drafting update on paper can have ripple effects in practice. So while this bill may be largely administrative, it’s still our job to ensure that these amendments are both necessary and responsible and that the Attorney General’s ministry has done the appropriate consultation. With that in mind, I now turn to each of the acts being amended by Bill 10. The first set of changes is to the Judicial Compensation Act, which governs the salaries, benefits and pensions of our judges. This bill adjusts the way pensionable service is calculated for judges who have prior non-judicial service before joining the bench. In simple terms, it modernizes how those years of service are recognized when determining retirement benefits. While this may sound purely administrative, pension changes always carry fiscal implications. Even small, formal adjustments can affect the province’s long-term pension obligations. For that reason, it’s important to know whether an actuarial analysis was completed before this change was proposed and whether the judiciary was fully consulted. Judicial independence is a cornerstone of our democracy, and that independence is supported in part through fair, transparent and properly funded compensation. If this amendment brings consistency and fairness, that’s positive. But it’s equally important to ensure that the taxpayers understand the cost and that the process has been transparent. It’s also important to mention that when we had the estimates debate around the Attorney General’s budget on the justice system, I had some reservations. I had some concerns in regards to whether the justice system was being properly funded. I felt that there needed to be more resources and more funding towards the justice system, especially considering population growth and inflation. I felt that the numbers in terms of the increase to the justice system budget were not good enough. It’s an important point that here we’re looking at judiciary compensation in terms of pensions. This is a direct contribution to the justice system. Next, the amendments affect the Land Title Act, which governs how land ownership and transfers are recorded in British Columbia, something that affects virtually every homeowner and property owner in this province. This update clarifies documentation requirements for property transfers upon death, aligning them with modern probate and estate administration processes. The change makes sense in principle. The way estates are handled today is much more digitized and streamlined than when many of these laws were first written. However, any change in this area has a direct impact on lawyers, notaries and estate professionals who are responsible for filing these documents and advising families. It’s crucial that these professionals were consulted. Without that engagement, even a small procedural change could cause confusion, delays and added costs for families trying to settle an estate, particularly older estates that involve complex titles or multiple heirs. Modernization should make things simpler and faster, not create new red tape for grieving families trying to complete a straightforward property transfer. It’s important to note that we don’t want to cause grieving families any unnecessary stress with administrative obstacles. Next, Bill 10 also deals with the Libel and Slander Act. The Libel and Slander Act governs defamation law in British Columbia. It balances between protecting one’s reputation and also protecting the freedom of expression. Here, the amendment is modest. It replaces the outdated phrase “issue of the writ” with the “filing of a notice of civil claim.” That aligns that statute with our current Supreme Court civil rules, as the Attorney General stated earlier, and modernizes terminology that dates back to a time before electronic filing even existed. In my practice, while practising civil litigation, I practised in an era when we didn’t do that many electronic filings into an era in which you had to learn electronic filings and how to do them. I understand there’s a lot of different procedure that gets involved, and a lot of things change in terms of practice when you do involve technology. So revisiting how documentation gets registered is a good exercise at this stage. On the surface, this particular change in regards to the Libel and Slander Act is a small housekeeping fix, but it’s part of a much larger issue. B.C.’s defamation laws haven’t been comprehensively reviewed in decades, even though the landscape of communication has changed completely. We now live in an era of social media, viral posts and online reputational harm. If the government truly wants to modernize this particular law in regards to defamation, there is an opportunity here to go further, to engage with legal scholars, journalists and digital rights advocates on a broader review of defamation law in the 21st century. We are currently dealing with a digital world of today where we have a lot of sharing that goes online. People have Facebook groups. They have social media groups where they share online community posts. We have online reviews of businesses and services. It’s happening at a rapid pace. And with that, the defamation law comes into place. This would have been an ample opportunity to actually address defamation law and how we could make improvements to it, moving forward, in a more thorough manner. While this particular change in regards to amending the Libel and Slander Act is a minor update, it raises the broader question of whether our statutes are keeping pace with how people actually communicate today. Bill 10 also amends the Members’ Remuneration and Pensions Act. The Attorney General just touched on this. It seems to be pretty self-explanatory. The Members’ Remuneration and Pensions Act governs MLA salaries and benefits, and the amendment freezes MLA salaries for the 2025 fiscal year. The amendment seems to be pretty self-explanatory. Next, Bill 10 amends the Police Act. In this amendment to the Police Act, there is a new deputy chief civilian director position that is established at the independent investigations office, the IIO. This is a civilian-led agency that investigates incidents involving police that result in death or serious harm. The IIO plays a vital role in maintaining public confidence in policing and accountability. Adding a deputy director could strengthen leadership capacity and ensure operational continuity when the chief civilian director is unavailable. However, several questions arise. What qualifications will this new deputy be required to have? Will they be appointed through an independent, merit-based process? What is the budgetary impact of this new management role? Will there be any additional staffing required to staff this particular position? We’d also like to know whether police organizations, oversight experts and the IIO itself were consulted on this amendment. The goal of oversight is to enhance accountability, not add unnecessary bureaucracy. If this new role helps investigations proceed faster and strengthens public trust, that’s a positive outcome, but it’s essential to confirm that this change achieves those goals. Bill 10 goes further to amend the Small Claims Act, and there’s just another minor change here. The Small Claims Act governs lower-value civil disputes, the kinds of cases many British Columbians encounter when trying to recover money or resolve contractual disagreements. This amendment removes an obsolete cross-reference to a repealed section in another law. It’s a very minor change, but these small corrections are important. Outdated references can confuse judges, clerks or self-represented litigants trying to interpret their rights. By keeping the Small Claims Act internally consistent, the government ensures that the small claims court remains accessible, straightforward and user-friendly, especially for people without legal representation. It’s a small fix, but a meaningful one, for the people who rely on this part of our justice system most directly. Last but not least, this bill, Bill 10, amends the Wills, Estates and Succession Act. The Wills, Estates and Succession Act governs how estates are distributed when someone passes away. This amendment adds the first home savings account, FHSA, to the list of benefit plans that can pass directly to beneficiaries outside of probate. The FHSA is a new federal program that allows first-time homebuyers to save for a down payment with tax advantages similar to an RRSP or a TFSA. This amendment ensures that those accounts are treated the same way upon death, allowing a smoother transfer to beneficiaries and avoiding unnecessary probate costs. It’s a timely and practical update that reflects changes in federal financial policy. Still, because estate planning affects so many families, the government should confirm whether estate lawyers and financial institutions were consulted in the process of making this amendment. Public understanding of how new savings vehicles interact with estate law is essential to prevent unintended consequences for families down the line. In conclusion, Bill 10 is, in large part, a housekeeping bill. The Conservative caucus supports the general intent of keeping our laws modern and internally consistent. But the common thread through all of these changes is consultation. It’s not enough for legislation to be technically correct. It must also be practically sound. The people who work within these systems every day must have a voice in shaping the laws that guide them. British Columbians expect laws that are clear, modern and fair. They also expect their government to listen, to consult, to anticipate the real-world impacts of even small legislative tweaks and to be transparent about the rationale behind each change. We will support Bill 10 at second reading because maintaining clarity in our laws is always worth supporting. But at the committee stage, we will be asking detailed questions about the consultation process. Who was consulted, what feedback was received, and how was it incorporated? That is the accountability British Columbians deserve.

1792 words

Hon. Ravi Kahlon

BC NDP

10/6/2025

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

I call second reading of Bill 10.

7 words

Estimates: Ministry of Labour (continued)

I’ll have to learn more about this, but now I’ll appreciate the update from the minister. I’ll have to dig into that a little bit more as I’m learning the file. As I referenced already, in 2022 the government passed Bill 10, which made it significantly easier to unionize in the province by eliminating secret ballot votes for a union that demonstrates 55 percent or more employees who’ve signed membership cards. Secret ballot votes are only now required if 45 to 54 percent of members have signed cards. I’m wondering. Since this change, how many unions were certified by a secret ballot vote, compared to card check? Can the minister break that information down by year?

116 words

Hon. Niki Sharma

BC NDP

4/14/2025

Bill 10 — Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025

I move that the bill be introduced and read a first time now. I am pleased to introduce Bill 10, the Attorney General Statutes Amendment Act, 2025. This bill amends the following statutes: the Judicial Compensation Act; the Land Title Act; the Libel and Slander Act; the Members’ Remuneration and Pensions Act; the Police Act; the Small Claims Act; the Wills, Estates and Succession Act. We’d be pleased to elaborate on the nature of these amendments during the second reading of this bill.

83 words