Hon. Brenda Bailey

BC NDP

4/8/2025

I rise to respond to the question of privilege raised by the member for Kamloops Centre. I take my responsibilities seriously to this House, to British Columbians and to upholding the long-standing rules, laws and conventions that govern the budgetary process in British Columbia. The member for Kamloops Centre’s argument appears to centre on a claim regarding the applications of sections 5 through 7 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. I have reviewed the member’s statement and written submission in detail. Budget 2025 was tabled on March 4, 2025, in accordance with the legislative requirements outlined in sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. Section 5 lays out the process for what must be considered in the main estimates. Section 6 lays out when the estimates must be presented, and section 7 lays out documents that must be presented with the main estimates, including but not limited to the economic and fiscal forecasts, including a range of economic forecasts. The tabling of Bill 6, the Supply Act, has also been done in accordance with that act. Like all budgets, it was prepared at a point in time based on the latest information available and inclusive of government decisions to date. There was no decision to remove the carbon tax at the time of the tabling of the budget on March 4. On March 14, the federal government signed a directive to eliminate the carbon tax on consumers, and B.C. followed suit by introducing Bill 8 to eliminate the carbon tax at the very next sitting. This was fully canvassed when you considered the Government House Leader’s application to consider Bill 8 through Standing Order 81. Mr. Speaker, you also heard the replies from the official opposition and the Third Party. Ultimately, you granted the application for Standing Order 81. In the application for Standing Order 81, the government followed the practice and courtesy to this House to provide notice to this House. In the instance of this question of privilege, no such notice was given to this House. There is no requirement in the legislation or practice of this House to continuously update the budget after it has been tabled. Changes to forecasted revenue, expenditures and debt that arise after the budget is tabled are addressed in quarterly reports, as contemplated in section 10 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. Otherwise put, there is no requirement in the act to table revised estimates or otherwise delay the consideration of the budgetary estimates process for the budget or ministerial service plans that were tabled on March 4. Government plans to remain within the proposed Supply Act appropriations, which is the basis of the estimates debate. The economic and fiscal forecast is always subject to change. This is not unusual. The current fiscal plan notes heightened uncertainty caused by U.S. tariffs and the impact it’s already having on our economy. This House is aware that there is an established process set out in legislation to provide quarterly updates that incorporate the latest information and forecasting that is based off government decisions and external factors. Section 10 of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act sets out the quarterly reporting requirements, including the tabling of the first quarterly report on or before September 15. We have publicly shared the financial impact of the carbon tax decision. The program review is also an ongoing process that is happening now. Decisions on specific programs have not been made at this time. As I shared with the member opposite during Committee of the Whole, government intends to meet our quarterly reporting requirements and provide a report on the impacts of the carbon tax decision, including any offsetting mitigation strategies, at Q1. Similarly, the member’s comments about the climate action tax credit regulation are inaccurate. The tax credit was eliminated through legislative amendments to the Income Tax Act in Bill 8, which has received royal assent. The regulation is not required to be amended to eliminate the climate action tax credit, as this was done through legislation. Government does not hold that a prima facie breach of privilege has occurred. The government is following the relevant sections of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. Further, I recognize that this House has the right to scrutinize and consent to the main estimates, and the government has provided all relevant information to this House to consider. In addition to the legislative requirements in keeping with past practice, each ministry has provided each recognized caucus critic the opportunity for a technical briefing with the public service as well as the allowance for a submission of written questions for any member of this House to ensure that the budgets and ministry service plan objectives are fully scrutinized. As I have said before, I take my responsibility seriously and am committed to continuing to follow the rules, laws and conventions that govern the budgetary process in British Columbia. I have further documentation to submit to you, Mr. Speaker, to support the government’s position, including selected Hansard debate and sections of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

854 words

Peter Milobar

BC Liberals

3/31/2025

Bill 8 — Carbon Tax Amendment Act, 2025

Well, there are all sorts of tax changes. Rates change. They go up or they go down. In Bill 6, there are multiple tax changes in this year’s budget implementation bill that have retroactive clauses in them. Some go back years. Some go back almost a decade or more to when they would take effect. There have been retroactive clauses with carbon tax changes over the years as well. Again, the Premier signalled very clearly, and the Premier has a majority, to retailers and that that this was coming. I fail to understand how a retroactive clause would not have been deemed to be possible under this and that it was critically important to ram this through tonight. When I asked, when I made a statement earlier: what happens if we’re still debating this after the clock strikes 12…? We know what happened to Cinderella when the clock struck a certain time, but I’m not sure if we were into April 1 with this bill, or potentially even April 2 if we start having some amendments, that we wouldn’t have retroactivity by default anyways. There are bulletins that go out from the Finance Ministry all the time about tax changes coming. There are all sorts of tax changes built into the budget that was presented on March 4 that will be retroactive not just in this fiscal year or a coming fiscal year but previous years, and people make tax adjustments and everything else to the like. Why, if in previous years section 28 of the act was able to be retroactively amended, was it not possible to retroactively amend it in clause 2 of this bill this year?

279 words

Raj Chouhan

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Bill 6, Supply Act (No. 1), 2025, has been read a third time and has passed.

16 words

Raj Chouhan

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Members, the question is the third reading of Bill 6, Supply Act (No. 1), 2025.

15 words

Lorne Doerkson

Conservative Party of British Columbia

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

The committee on Bill 6 reports the bill complete without amendment.

11 words

Lorne Doerkson

Conservative Party of British Columbia

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

We will report to the Speaker that this House has passed Bill 6. The committee stands adjourned.

17 words

Lorne Doerkson

Conservative Party of British Columbia

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Seeing no further speakers to the amended clause, to the amendment that has been introduced by the member for Kamloops Centre, the question before this House is the amendment of clause 1, Bill 6.

34 words

Lorne Doerkson

Conservative Party of British Columbia

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Members, we’ll call this chamber back to order. A motion has been introduced, from the member for Kamloops Centre, reading that Bill 6, clause 1, be amended by striking $20,536,726,000 and substituting that number with $19,786,726,000. The motion is in order, and I would welcome the member for Kamloops Centre to speak to the motion.

55 words

Hon. Brenda Bailey

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

I feel like this is the tenth time I’ve said this, but as the member surely must be aware, this is blanket legislation based on the entire year’s expenditures and calculated that one-quarter of them will be pulled through and provided so that there is timely payment available for the programs and services that British Columbians need. It is not specific. It is a very general calculation to ensure that government keeps operating. While we can do the specific work of passing our budget and participating in estimates and having debates on budget and having each of the ministries appropriately do their estimates, where in-depth questions and deep exploration of the type of question the member is interested in getting into can occur, this is much different than that. This is an interim supply bill that provides a very generalized bucket of spending based on the budget for the entire year and divided by a quarter. It’s a very rough methodology. It’s not specific, but it is the tool that we have that provides us the ability to keep things moving forward while we do the important work of passing our budget. That’s really what this Bill 6 is about.

200 words

Hon. Brenda Bailey

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Again, this member is determined to be debating a bill or raising questions about a bill that is not here tabled. This is the interim supply act. It is based on the budget that was tabled on March 4, a calculation of what we expect to need to ensure that government continues delivering its key programs and services while we debate the budget. It is not related to the question that the member is asking. It’s not related to a list of things in regards to the questions that the member is asking. That is related to Bill 8. Really, what we’re talking about is section 1, which is a proposal of $10.5 billion. This is a calculation based on a general estimate, not a specific thing, ministry by ministry or program by program. It’s designed to provide us operational funding while we appropriately debate and explore the budget. This is not related to Bill 8, which is where the member opposite is spending their time, and I don’t believe that is an appropriate direction of the time we have today to be talking about the interim supply bill, Bill 6.

191 words

Hon. Brenda Bailey

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Again, I don’t feel it’s appropriate to get into the types of questions that the member opposite is fielding in regard to Bill 6, the interim supply bill. The expenditures that are related to carbon tax and that are funded through that will be canvassed. There’s opportunity to canvass them during estimates for the particular ministries that they live in. That opportunity exists in a fulsome way. The interim supply bill is about a general calculation that is used to ensure that government has funding to continue our important work while we debate the budget, as the budget goes through estimates. All the questions that the member opposite has asked today are appropriate for any of those. Today we’re talking about the interim supply bill, not Bill 8.

128 words

Hon. Brenda Bailey

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Really, the interim supply is about the initial spending into this fiscal year, and it’s based on estimates that were tabled on March 4. They have not been adjusted and are not going to be adjusted to reflect changes in carbon tax. That will be reflected in Q1. There is a lot of work before us, without question, in regards to path to balance, but questions on path to balance are really outside the scope of this bill, Bill 6.

80 words

Lorne Doerkson

Conservative Party of British Columbia

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

All right, Members. Welcome. We will call this chamber back to order where we are moving on committee for Bill 6, the Supply Act (No. 1), 2025. Shall clause 1 pass?

31 words

Hon. Mike Farnworth

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

In this chamber, I call Committee of the Whole, Bill 6, Supply Act. In the Douglas Fir Room, I call Committee of Supply, estimates for the Ministry of Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport. After that, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. After that, the Ministry of Infrastructure and, time permitting after that, the Ministry of Emergency Management and Climate Readiness Estimates.

61 words

Peter Milobar

BC Liberals

3/31/2025

Bill 8 — Carbon Tax Amendment Act, 2025

Well, there are all sorts of tax changes. Rates change. They go up or they go down. In Bill 6, there are multiple tax changes in this year’s budget implementation bill that have retroactive clauses in them. Some go back years. Some go back almost a decade or more to when they would take effect. There have been retroactive clauses with carbon tax changes over the years as well. Again, the Premier signalled very clearly, and the Premier has a majority, to retailers and that that this was coming. I fail to understand how a retroactive clause would not have been deemed to be possible under this and that it was critically important to ram this through tonight. When I asked, when I made a statement earlier: what happens if we’re still debating this after the clock strikes 12…? We know what happened to Cinderella when the clock struck a certain time, but I’m not sure if we were into April 1 with this bill, or potentially even April 2 if we start having some amendments, that we wouldn’t have retroactivity by default anyways. There are bulletins that go out from the Finance Ministry all the time about tax changes coming. There are all sorts of tax changes built into the budget that was presented on March 4 that will be retroactive not just in this fiscal year or a coming fiscal year but previous years, and people make tax adjustments and everything else to the like. Why, if in previous years section 28 of the act was able to be retroactively amended, was it not possible to retroactively amend it in clause 2 of this bill this year?

279 words

Raj Chouhan

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Bill 6, Supply Act (No. 1), 2025, has been read a third time and has passed.

16 words

Raj Chouhan

BC NDP

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Members, the question is the third reading of Bill 6, Supply Act (No. 1), 2025.

15 words

Lorne Doerkson

Conservative Party of British Columbia

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

The committee on Bill 6 reports the bill complete without amendment.

11 words

Lorne Doerkson

Conservative Party of British Columbia

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

We will report to the Speaker that this House has passed Bill 6. The committee stands adjourned.

17 words

Lorne Doerkson

Conservative Party of British Columbia

3/31/2025

Bill 6 — Supply Act (No. 1), 2025

Seeing no further speakers to the amended clause, to the amendment that has been introduced by the member for Kamloops Centre, the question before this House is the amendment of clause 1, Bill 6.

34 words