Social Policy and Workforce Development

India has an enterprise known as Apollo Hospitals Enterprise Ltd that delivers a single point of access that provides the care for and management of chronic diseases. It includes a pharmacy, physicians, dental physicians, physiotherapy, and telemedicine4. This innovative hospital also provides patients with access to healthcare in the form of including community and social networks, which can be your priest, your family, and your friends. By including all of these aspects in one area, patients can consult with many experts and it will alleviate the pressures on the primary care provider, the Family Physician.

Working with medical professionals, Apollo has endeavoured to advocate for a system that would alleviate the pressure on the current healthcare model. In addition to the GP and nurses within the current acute intervention model (i.e. hospitals), they have many healthcare providers working in tangent to ensure that patients have well-rounded support systems. Apollo envisions a reform where care is delivered in a continuum. The patient is empowered to involve their social network with other professionals in the healthcare industry.

In this innovative approach, the GP and patient would be central to the chronic care management/primary care system. The government would work with regulators to provide funding, research, and incentives; they would also ensure accountability. A pillar supporting the GP and patient would be the resources – this would include many NGOs, other care deliverers, and the local healthcare regulators (i.e. Fraser Health). The other pillar of support would be the community and social network of the patient. Finally, there would be the technology industry providing innovative approaches to care delivery.

Background

As per the Lobbyists Registration Act[2] and Regulation:

• Chambers/Boards are “in-house” lobbyists rather than consultant lobbyists – unless they have been paid a fee specific to a lobby activity by a third party
• Chambers/Boards mandate (going back 460+years) is to advocate on behalf of their business members to all levels of government
  • Local & regional
  • Provincial
  • Federal
• For local/regional and federal Chambers/Boards do not need to register their interactions with government representatives or officials – this is specific to BC/Provincial government
• Any organization that has staff collectively work on advocacy addressing specific BC/provincial legislation, and that work by any/all staff on any/all advocacy that is listed which exceeds 100 hours/year, must then register as an in-house lobbyist. 100 hours is the equivalent of 12.5 days.
• Intent, according to the Registrar’s manager, is described as “once a decision is made to do an activity” that falls under the lobby list, the “clock starts ticking.” This means that the intent to do an activity must be registered within 30 days. How this works:
• An organization registers as an in-house lobbyist is required to list its intent to reach out to various ministers, describing the various policies/legislation/program, etc., they anticipate to advocate for in the following 6 month period
  • As each item listed is completed (sent letter, had a meeting, submitted a policy), or changed, that action is required to be registered within 30 days of completion or change
  • If an organization determines an additional activity may be required, that intent is also required to be registered within 30 days of the decision to act is made
• Activities such as round-tables (unless specific to an issue with a determined ask), invites to events, etc., do not apply

Given that the webpage is not as user-friendly, the time to fulfill the obligations as expected include:

• Tracking each and every encounter with Ministers and MLAs of the governing party and determining whether if falls into the categories listed or not – by both staff & board members if representing the organization
• Tracking each and every decision to act – even verbally – on a given government policy/legislation/program, etc.
• Tracking each and all communications that request the government/minister do “something” about a policy/legislation/program, etc.
• Determine whether all activities taken by the Chamber/Board all staff add up to 100 or more hours
• Then register, listing up to 6 months of anticipated activities
• And set the calendar for monthly reminders to update with all the activities that may have occurred that differ from the original list – completion, changes, new intents – that will need to be tracked carefully

Given the above bureaucratic expectation to track and register what would be seen as a major part of Chambers/Boards’ operational plan (and has been for over 460 years of Chamber history); AND

Given that Chambers/Boards are not required to register all advocacy activities with local governments/federal government; AND

Given that the Chambers/Boards recognize the original intent of the lobbying registration legislation;

The chamber recommends

That the Provincial Government:

1.     Remove and acknowledge that Chambers of Commerce/Boards of Trade are exempted from the list of organizations that are required to register regardless of 100 hours minimum, unless they are acting as a paid agent to a third party;

2.     Remove the need to register all intents to act, just track/register the actual act (letter, meeting, policy) upon completion; and,

a.     Simplify the online form by developing a portal specific to Chambers of Commerce/Boards of Trade to quickly “note” the advocacy action taken.

References
[1] Lobbyists Registration Regulation http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/284_2002
[2] Lobbyists Registration Act http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/01042_01

Media reports often highlight threats to communities when an individual is released from incarceration and has not completed mental health or drug treatment programs. News reports headline those who re-offend shortly after their release. While the public does have the right to know, the impact of such media upon business decision-makers as to where they will house their companies and staff cannot be ignored. The media is not the problem. The concern is the profligacy of offenders and their return to the same community time and again.

Solutions to the problems of prolific offenders are widely known and supported amongst the criminal justice community; however, federal and provincial budget decisions leading to program cuts can lead to the unsuccessful reintegration of some offenders. For example, reductions in federal funding for psychiatric services for offenders while incarcerated and post-release can set up an offender for failure and increase community risk.

The Province of British Columbia released a report in December of 2014 entitled Getting Serious about Crime Reduction, which is one example of best practices across Canada to end the cycle. The six recommendations are listed below:

1.     Manage prolific and priority offenders more effectively.

2.     Make quality mental health and addiction services more accessible.

3.     Make greater use of restorative justice.

4.     Support an increased emphasis on designing out crime.

5.     Strengthen inter-agency collaboration.

6.     Re-examine funding approaches to provide better outcomes.

The current initiatives undertaken by the BC government in relation to the Blue Ribbon Panel Recommendations include:

·       Consideration of a regional, integrated community safety partnership pilot project that would bring together local, relevant government and non-government agencies in identifying and prioritizing community safety goals, focusing resource allocations and programs accordingly, and measuring and evaluating the outcomes.

·       Collaboration between BC Corrections and provincial post-secondary institutions to expand job-training options for offenders and thereby better support their re-integration into society.

Since the release of the Blue Ribbon Panel in December 2014, the Provincial government has not provided much public commentary on their efforts to enable the recommendations. Certain initiatives, such as the Integrated Court Services model recently approved in Surrey, British Columbia, do incorporate aspects of the recommendations in their development.

Provincial and federal resources contributed to the success of Community Courts and Integrated Services Programs. Senior B.C. Corrections staff led the development of the Mental Health Strategy for Corrections in Canada. The strategy seeks to ensure mentally ill offenders receive progressive and consistent care in custody and after release.[1]

To date, BC Housing, and social assistance providers are the only points of access for released inmates to receive assistance in finding housing. Without adequate housing and jobs, re-offense becomes a higher risk. The current plan to move rehabilitated individuals into half-way homes then allowing them to reside in their choice of communities puts these communities at risk if stable jobs and housing assistance is not provided by governments.

Communities throughout BC benefit when stakeholders, service providers, police and justice agencies, under the leadership of the Province, work together to provide offenders with the best opportunities for re-integration and minimizing criminal behaviour. Services including housing, drug, and alcohol rehabilitation programs, life skills, employment, and counselling are key to decrease prolific offences occurring in any community. Less crime leads to greater economic prosperity as businesses and customers come to a safe, viable community.

THE CHAMBER RECOMMENDS

That the Provincial Government:

1.     Work in coordination with the Federal Government to provide adequate budgetary support for offenders to receive treatment while incarcerated and for post-release housing and programming of prolific offenders to ensure successful societal reintegration and safer communities; and,

2.     Combine resources with the Federal Government to ensure the efficacy of programs such as the Integrated Court Services Plan and the successful implementation of measures such as the previous Blue Ribbon Panel recommendations.

Reference

[1] http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/health/092/MH-strategy-eng.pdf

On March 6, 2019, the Advisory Council on the Implementation of National Pharmacare released an interim report for the government’s consideration. The Council is leading a national dialogue on how to implement affordable national pharmacare for Canadians – families and employers. The Honourable Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Minister of Health, and the Honourable Bill Morneau, Minister of Finance, announced that the Government has received an interim report[1] from the Council, chaired by Dr. Eric Hoskins. The report identifies three initial recommendations for national pharmacare:

1. Creating a national drug agency to oversee national pharmacare;
2. Developing a comprehensive, evidence-based list of prescribed drugs – a national formulary – to harmonize coverage across Canada; and
3. Investing in data on prescription drugs and information technology systems.
4. The Government of Canada will consider the Council’s initial recommendations while it awaits the final report, due in Spring 2019.

Inefficiencies of fragmented coverage

The fragmented nature of drug coverage in Canada costs businesses, taxpayers, and patients billions of dollars every year. First, lack of coverage means that many Canadians cannot afford to fill necessary prescriptions.

A 2015 Angus Reid Institute poll found 29% of British Columbia households reported they did not take medicines as directed because of cost.[2] This occurs because British Columbia’s PharmaCare system provides benefits after patients have spent hundreds or thousands of dollars on medicines. This costs everyone because it results in the worst health for patients and increased use of tax-financed medical and hospital care.

Fragmentation also means higher drug costs. Overall, Canadians spend 40% more on pharmaceuticals than the average of most comparable countries that offer universal, comprehensive drug coverage, including the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Australia, Sweden, and New Zealand. Thus, Canada is spending as much as $10-billion per year more than it would if it had a universal drug plan like those found in many comparable countries.

Heavy burden on business

Prescription drugs are the largest and fastest growing component of extended health benefits in Canada[3]. Today, more than 25% of private drug plan costs are spent on medicines that cost more than $10,000 per patient per year. Business owners should not be responsible for managing access to and the price of such specialized medical care. No comparable country with universal health care requires individual employers to do so.

The burden of Canada’s incomplete and inefficient system of public drug coverage falls heavily on businesses, especially the small and medium sized enterprises who comprise the backbone of Canada’s economy. With rising costs of medications, many businesses are seeing their bottom lines erode and some find they simply cannot afford to provide insurance plans for their employees.

Small businesses are least likely to offer drug coverage and few entrepreneurs and independent contractors are covered by any drug benefit plan. This harms the efficiency of our economy because many Canadians are forced to choose where to work based access to insurance rather than aptitude and passion.

Money spent on private drug plans is not being spent well. Private sector analysts estimate that up to $5 billion spent by Canadian employers on private drug benefits is wasted because private drug plans are not well positioned to manage drug pricing or the prescribing and dispensing decisions of health professionals.[4]

Dangers of a mandatory insurance system

As provincial health ministers hold discussions with their Federal counterpart, businesses are concerned of any additional costs to their employees, their insurance plans, and their bottom line. The biggest concern is that governments are considering making private drug coverage mandatory, as was done in Quebec in 1997.

The Quebec private-public system increased access to insurance for working-age residents but increased employer-and household – financial expenditures. A higher proportion of income for lower-income households goes to premiums, deductibles and coinsurance under this regime.[5]

For 22 years prior to mandatory private drug insurance in Quebec, per capita spending on prescription drugs in was approximately equal in Quebec and the rest of Canada. In the 21 years since their policy change, costs in Quebec have far outgrown the rest of Canada. Private employers and households in Quebec now spend $200 per capita more on pharmaceuticals than employers and households in the rests of Canada.

In British Columbia, a Quebec-style system would cost employers and households $1 billion more every year if private drug insurance costs rose here as they did in Quebec.

Economies of a single-payer system

There is a better option. A universal, comprehensive public drug plan that was consistent throughout BC and across Canada would be a wise investment for BC’s economic prosperity. The Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that such a plan would reduce employer-sponsored drug costs in Canada by over $10 billion per year if implemented by 2021. This would dramatically boost Canada’s labour market competitiveness.

A universal pharmaceutical program would be economically viable not only by taking advantage of the power of a single purchaser, but through the following:

• Reduction of administration costs for businesses and unions
• Decreased direct emergency and acute care medical costs due to inappropriate or underuse of drug therapies
• Reduction of other health service costs

Because of these increased efficiencies, the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates that a universal pharmacare program would generate net savings of $4 billion per year even after taking into account the increased public spending on medicines. Multiple public opinion polls have found that most taxpayers would support such a program, even if it required modest increase in taxes.[6]

Pharmacare must:

• Ensure that all Canadian employees have access to prescription drugs based on medical need, without financial or other barriers to access;
• Ensure that coverage is portable and consistent across all jurisdictions;
• Provide access to a comprehensive, evidence-based formulary, with special consideration for drugs for rare diseases;
• Be designed and delivered in partnership with patients, employers and citizens;
• Be founded on strong partnership between federal, provincial and territorial governments and Indigenous peoples;  and,
• Include a robust pharmaceutical management system that promotes safety, innovation, value-for-money and the sustainability of prescription drug costs

Moving forward

As British Columbia joins the national discussion about a universal “pharmacare” system, caution is advised when choosing a program of delivery. It is tempting, and usually preferable to choose private suppliers over a government-run program; however, in terms of cost-effectiveness of prescription drug policies, the best strategy is one where pharmaceuticals are added to the universal health coverage of our medicare system.

THE CHAMBER RECOMMENDS

That the Provincial Government:

Work with the Federal Government to develop a universal pharmacare program that will allow cost savings through bulk purchasing agreements and other cost-sharing strategies.

References

[1] https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/about-health-canada/public-engagement/external-advisory-bodies/implementation-national-pharmacare/interim-report.html
[2] 2015 Angus Reid. Prescription drug access and affordability an issue for nearly a quarter of all Canadian households. http://angusreid.org/prescription-drugs-canada/
[3] 2018. Private Drug Plans in Canada: High-Cost Drugs and Beneficiaries, 2005 to 2017. http://www.pmprb-cepmb.gc.ca/view.asp?ccid=1366&lang=en
[4] 2014 Drug Trend Report. Express Scripts Canada. 2015. http://www.express-scripts.ca/research/drug-trend-reports
[5] 2017. Steven G. Morgan, Marc-Andre Gagnon, Mathieu Charbonneau, and Alain Vadeboncoeur. Evaluating the effects of Quebec’s private-public drug insurance system.
[6] 2019. Attitudes Towards Health Care. Environics Research.

Figure 1 illustrates the decline in literacy scores by age group over the years. There is a need for greater investment in literacy and numeracy at all age levels beginning with the 16-25 age demographics. Therefore, public schools and post-secondary institutions must have adequate funding to test and improve literacy and numeracy scores. Skill loss occurs at a higher rate later in life per Figure 2. Ensuring that regional public and post-secondary institutions allow for adults to upgrade their skills would be instrumental in preserving skills and reducing the skill gap shortage.

Figure 1: Decline in literacy scores by age group comparing 2003 and 2011

Figure 2: Skill loss by age group comparing 2003 and 2011

Ryerson University, the Conference Board of Canada and Blueprint ADE are working together to run Canada’s Future Skills Centre at arm’s length from the Government of Canada. Located on Ryerson University’s campus, the Future Skills Centre will support community-based projects across Canada, in all provinces and territories, and be responsive to regional differences. There has been an access issue for in-demand skills and training for service providers, employers, governments, and community groups; the Future Skills Centre fills this gap.

The Centre will be partnering with and funding projects that are led by groups such as provincial and territorial governments, Indigenous governments, for-profit organizations, and not-for-profit organizations to:

help Canadians make informed training decisions by identifying emerging in-demand skills required now and in years to come;
help Canadians gain the skills they need to adapt and succeed in the workforce by increasing access to quality training; and
share results and best practices across all sectors and with Canadians to support investment in the skills needed to be resilient in the face of change now and into the future.[1]

Jobs in the changing economy demand even higher levels of literacy

Technology is taking over many routine tasks leaving higher-level, more complex, interactive tasks to humans. While specific technical skills are a requisite to being hired for existing and newly created jobs, the capacity to adapt to and use changing technology and processes is also necessary. Employers are increasing the skill level demanded by their jobs to maintain competitiveness in the global economy. Manufacturing, for example, is becoming much more skill intensive, for technical and cognitive skills.

The pace of change that the industry is experiencing, combined with global competitive pressures, means that manufacturers will continue to expect more from their employees. Essentially, manufacturers need skilled workers who have the ability to master new, advanced technologies, work in highly collaborative team environments, use critical thinking and problem-solving skills, adapt to ever-changing environments, and embrace an attitude of never-ending learning.

Training is lowest for those who need it most

The 2003 International Adult Literacy and Life Skills Survey (IALSS) looked specifically at the number of people who were involved in adult learning and training in 2002. The survey found that, in Canada, just 20% of people, who had low skills and were in low-skilled jobs were involved in a course or program, and this is 10 percentage points lower than Norway, Switzerland and the United States. Over 60% of high-skilled people in high-skilled jobs in Canada participated in adult education and training – again, Canada was 10 percentage points lower than the United States (which is also troubling for productivity of our most skilled workers). Employer-financed training was highest for people who had higher-level skills and were in high-skilled jobs – 35% compared to 7% for lower-skilled people in low-skilled jobs. Employers were more likely to fund training for people with lower skill levels who were in higher-skilled jobs, but still, only 25% of them received employer-funded training of any kind in the previous year.

The chamber recommends

That the Provincial Government in coordination with the Federal Government:

1.     Build and implement competency frameworks to identify skill levels and competencies required by jobs in the economy and embed literacy in all workforce training and education initiatives;

2.     Mandate the new Future Skills Centre to include cognitive skills in its research and implementation programs; and,

3.     Ensure that each of our province’s K-12 and post-secondary institutions offer an adequate number of opportunities to learn and upgrade their literacy, numeracy, problem-solving skills & other essential skills.

[1] https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/future-skills/centre.html

Background

In a study done by Vancity[1], the cost of housing was determined to inhibit young workers from coming or staying in Metro Vancouver. Similar studies have pointed out that the rise of real estate values is greatly outpacing incomes and the gap is growing. Very few workers receive salary increases of 10-20% per year. In fact, Vancity’s findings are that salary growth is slowing in the past five years averaging 1.3%. This, they claim, is why millennials are exiting the Lower Mainland labour market for greener pastures where higher incomes, employment, and housing opportunities co-exist.

Renting is often seen as an affordable alternative to house a workforce, particularly temporary or contract employees, near employment. However, with a BC average rental vacancy rate of 1.2%[2], a decrease from 2014 and the Lower Mainland rate approaching 0, the pressure on the existing rental stock is inhibiting in-migration of Canadian skilled labour, particularly where they are needed the most by BC employers.

From October 2014 to October 2015, only 1,900 purpose built rentals units were constructed throughout BC (CMHC). These are either new or renovated units returned to the market. Rents are rising in response to market pressure on average of 3.7% compared to 2.4% from the previous year. As mentioned, salaries have not.

Vancity’s analysis of salaries that provide insufficient incomes for purchasing may be enough for rental units – if available: mid-level managers, and senior administrators, computer programmers, and technicians, registered nurses and social workers, researchers, counselors, food industry workers, and contractors. The list of skilled workers unable to purchase in Metro Vancouver is long. This improves outside urban areas and into the farther regions of the province, but employment opportunities diminish.

Relying on developers to provide a variety of housing stock, including purpose-built rentals, to meet differing levels of income has failed.

The reality is that rental developers would build a significant supply of new secure purpose-built rental housing if the legislative environment were more conducive to doing so (e.g. more restrictive rent controls were put in place last September). The risk/reward imbalance that exists between building rentals versus condos needs to be addressed through measures such as rental pre-zoning, fast-tracking of rental projects, DCL reductions, elimination of CACs, parking relaxation, elimination of inclusionary zoning requirements, reduced property taxes, GST exemption on new builds.

GST: Developers must pay Goods and Services Tax (GST) on the development and operating costs of rental housing buildings, however, rent is GST exempt which places a burden on developers. To recover GST, landlords increase their rent. Because of the GST increasing operating and development costs, there is a substantial decrease of investment into the development of rental housing.

Property Assessments: Older rental homes are more affordable. CMHC data show apartments built between 1975 and 1989 are, on average, 40 percent cheaper than those built since 2005. But longtime landlords say the current system threatens their ability to operate the older rental apartments that form a crucial part of the city’s housing stock.[3]

B.C. Assessment Authority’s practice of assessing properties also needs to be reviewed. That means a property’s value, upon which its taxes are based, isn’t assessed based on its actual use — whether a single-story neighbourhood pub or a three-story rental apartment building — but on the use that would return the highest value. Residential landlords can’t pass on soaring property tax bills or other increases directly to their tenants — they’re restricted by rent control measures.

The Center for Housing Policy[4] collated a number of studies that demonstrate clearly the connection between the development of low- to mid-level income housing units and employment. They concluded that not only are employers able to attract the best and the brightest, but there are also spill-over benefits for the local economy.

The solution is for the Province of British Columbia to work with Federal and Local colleagues and find ways to create incentives and opportunities to save and increase the current rental stock, protect and expand co-op and co-housing units, and encourage innovation through reviewing relevant legislation that controls row housing and strata by-laws. British Columbia is doing well economically; however, to continue to do so, we need to ensure that a lack of housing for skilled labour does not become a barrier to future economic growth.

THE CHAMBER RECOMMENDS

That the Provincial Government:

1.     Work with the Federal Government to ensure infrastructure support includes tax incentives for purpose built rental housing units, in particular larger family-friendly 2 and 3 bedroom units;

2.     Review BC’s Property Assessment Process;

3.     Review the Strata Property Act, particularly Part 8, for opportunities of freeing up currently vacant condo properties as rental units;[5]

4.     Work with local governments to provide incentives for innovative development designs that provide quality rental market housing units for mid-range income levels near centres of employment and transit hubs; and,

5.     Work with the Federal Government to remove the GST on new rental housing.

References
[1] Vancity, May 2015. Help wanted: salaries, affordability and the exodus of labour from Metro Vancouver. Accessed March 2016, https://www.vancity.com/AboutVancity/News/MediaReleases/Archives/MediaReleases2015/JobsStudy_May20_2015/
[2] CMHC, Fall 2015. Rental market report – British Columbia Highlights. www.cmhc.ca/housingmarketinformation
[3] https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/dan-fumano-the-ticking-time-bomb-threatening-affordable-rental-homes
[4] 2011, Center for Housing Policy, The role of Affordable Housing in Creating Jobs and Stimulating Local Economic Development: A Review of the Literature.
[5] http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/98043_00

Background

Beyond need, the demand for quality child care has also increased, due to the potential benefits on peer socialization, school readiness, and numeracy and language skills. In Canada, options for childcare are varied, ranging from nannies, home daycares, daycare centres, preschool programs, and before and after school services. Finding the most appropriate child care arrangement can, at times, be challenging. Parents must often balance the need between the overall quality, convenience, availability and cost of childcare.[1]

Surrey released their Surrey Child Care Report in April 2018 detailing a comprehensive analysis of Surrey’s ability to provide childcare access for workers, and a lack of coordinated child care planning and service delivery. The key findings of the report illustrated the lack of child care resources and support services for families in the advent of Surrey’s booming population. Early Childcare Educators (ECE) cannot receive training in adult education facilities in Surrey.[2]

The research done by Dr. Paul Kershaw of UBC found that work-life conflicts of parents raising young children are actually costly for employers with resulting higher absenteeism rates, greater turnover, and increased use of employer-funded extended health benefits. [1] Further, the cost to the BC business community, according to Kershaw, is over $600 million annually and over $4 billion for Canadian businesses. These costs are exasperated by the costs to the Canadian health care system of over $2.5 billion and child welfare of over $1.2 billion. Inadequate childcare is too costly to ignore.

In Surrey, there is a widespread shortage of qualified, well-trained ECE workers. Because of this shortage, operators are less stringent in hiring and vetting practices.[3] The Fraser Health Authority has reported a high number of licensing exemptions.

ECEs in BC

·     Comparing 2017 to 2014, the number of Early Childhood Educators remained unchanged[4]

·     The budget for ECEs also remained unchanged when observing the 2014 provincial budget to the 2017 budget

In urban regions, prime employment areas for a diverse and skilled workforce, home-ownership requires two reasonable incomes to cover mortgage payments. Childcare for one or more children can be the equivalent of another mortgage payment or higher than rent for family-sized homes (2 to 3 bedroom units). To alleviate the pressure on families finding homes adequate to their needs, it is necessary to reduce the cost of childcare so that it is a small flat rate, such as $10 per day. This would free up financing opportunities for young adults to enter the housing market, becoming stabilized, and contributing to a community’s economy. Affordability and accessibility to quality childcare spaces are necessary for employees to be able to perform at peak productivity, confident in the knowledge that their children are cared for in a safe, learning environment. Building a universal, affordable, quality child care system in BC is a smart use of public resources that will have ripple effects across the provincial economy by:

·     Removing some pressure from young working families by freeing resources to pay off student loans, mortgage debt or rent.

·     Providing a good start for all BC children.

·     Allowing more parents (particularly mothers) to participate in the workforce, increasing tax revenues almost immediately.

·     Creating new jobs.[5]

THE CHAMBER RECOMMENDS

That the Provincial Government:

1.     Provide more funding to adequately train Early Childhood Educators that have been exempted to date;

2.     Improve access to child care by introducing a new capital budget to purchase and build publicly-owned child care facilities;

3.     Enhance child care quality and address the recruitment and retention crisis in the childcare sector; and,

4.     Reduce child care fees for families.

References
[1] https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-652-x/89-652-x2014005-eng.htm
[2] Recognized Early Childhood Education Training Institutions
[3] 2018. Surrey Child Care Report.
[4] 2017. Early Childhood Education Report.
[5] https://www.policynote.ca/bc-budget-2019-maintain-momentum-building-a-universal-affordable-quality-child-care-system/?utm_source=enewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=focused&utm_content=secondary

Background
In a study done by Vancity[i], the cost of housing was determined to inhibit young workers from coming or staying in the greater Vancouver region. Similar studies have pointed out that the rise of real estate values is greatly outpacing incomes and the gap is growing. Very few workers receive salary increases of 10-20% per year. In fact, Vancity’s findings are that salary growth is slowing with the past five years averaging 1.3%. This, claims Vancity, is why Millenials are exiting the Lower Mainland labour market for greener pastures where employment and housing opportunities co-exist. It may also deter in-migration and immigration of skilled workers to locations where skills are required.

There is a gap in the upper-low income and mid-range incomes for rental accommodation. For example, the Lower Mainland’s current median income is $63,000 (most renters fall under the median[ii]), with the median income of a census family in Vancouver at $79,930[iii] for 2015. An average 2-bedroom suite is $1,552[iv] requiring an after tax income of $55,872 in Vancouver. The problem is not affordability for Vancity’s list of skilled workers, it is a deficit of mid-range lightly subsidized to full market rental units. There is opportunity for developers to reach this market.

The Federal government recently announced the National Housing Strategy[v], which outlines a number of strategies to provide affordable housing.[vi] However, the funds for the $4 billion Canada Housing Benefit, in partnership with provincial and territories’ governments, won’t be available until 2020, and it will focus on lower income earners and social support housing. Further, the Federal Budget proposed to increase the amount of loans provided by the Rental Construction Financing Initiative from $2.5 billion to $3.75 billion over the next three years. This, they anticipate, will support the construction of more than 14,000 new modest to middle income units across Canada. The Federal government also proposes to provide $113.6 million over five years, starting in 2018–19, to Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to expand the Rental Construction Financing Initiative.[vii]

While the federal loans are laudable (and long overdue), the focus of investments are at the social to low-income rentals. The recent BC Budget proposed a 30 point plan for housing affordability, likewise focusing on the lower income renters, with some acknowledgement of development through their HousingHub – a collaborative effort across governments and other stakeholders. Part of the plan is to define the problem of housing with a $5Million, 3 year assessment by local governments housing needs. Again, these are laudable proposals. However, as pointed out, there is a ready market of middle- to upper income earners who are seeking rental units. If there is not a continuum of rental units from supportive, through to market, the demand will continue to cause rapid increases in rent on the few units that are available. Therefore, to provide developers with the tools they need to address this market, a range of tax incentive programs, such as DCCs, property tax, income tax, and capital gains tax incentives, in conjunction with other levers, should be implemented to foster innovative development.

The Strata Suggestion
In Vancouver, according to a report released in 2017[viii], there are over 25,000 unoccupied homes (or had temporary occupants), and of those, 8,500 registered for the city’s Empty Homes Tax[ix]. There is speculation on how many more will receive a tax bill due mid-April. Other cities, particularly urban centres that have numerous condo developments are likely to find many are vacant for much of the year.

With rental rates in urban areas experiencing an all time low,[x] there is pressure on the provincial and local governments to find ways of opening up these spaces for long-term rent. Vancouver has developed the Empty Homes Tax as a disincentive to owners; however, nowhere does it mention one of the biggest barriers to converting these properties to rentals – strata by-laws that prohibit renting properties to non-immediate family members.

Chapter 43, Part 8 of the Strata Property Act outlines rental restrictions that apply to condominium developments. Of particular note is section 141, which reads in part:
(2) The strata corporation may only restrict the rental of a strata lot by a bylaw that
(a) prohibits the rental of residential strata lots, or
(b) limits one or more of the following:
(i) the number or percentage of residential strata lots that may be rented;
(ii) the period of time for which residential strata lots may be rented.

The limitation is that the strata corporation cannot restrict an immediate family member from renting a unit, or it cannot restrict rental arrangements for units rented prior to the incorporation of a strata within one year of the unit’s construction.

Most condominium complexes restrict rental units, from an outright ban (with the above exceptions) to allowing only so many units to be rented at any one time. With the current emphasis on having owners rent their vacant properties, some consideration is required to assist in that effort prior to applying punishing speculative taxes on BC owners.

The BC and Federal governments have made great strides forward in putting programs and investments in place to begin to address housing needs for those who are not able to purchase a home. Homes are required for those without a place through to those who can afford, but are challenged by a very low rental rate. Without that continuum of housing options, the pressures on any rental unit will continue to cause high rents and low vacancy rates.

The Surrey Board of Trade recommends that the Provincial Government:
1.    Not wait for the completion of a 3 year study of housing needs assessment by local governments to provide tax incentives for developers to build purpose built market rental housing for workers, and
2.    Review Part 8 of the Strata legislation with a view to loosening rental restrictions to free up vacant properties for long-term rent.

References
[I] Vancity, May 2015.Help wanted: salaries, affordability and the exodus of labour from Metro Vancouver. https://www.vancity.com/AboutVancity/News/MediaReleases/Archives/MediaReleases2015/JobsStudy_May20_2015/
[ii] Metro Vancouver, 2015. Housing and Transportation Cost Burden Study.
[iii] Census Family median income 2015 http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/famil107a-eng.htm
[iv] CMHC Vancouver Rental Market Report 2017 https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/catalog/productDetail.cfm?cat=117&itm=3&lang=en&fr=1520623797115
[v] National Housing Strategy https://www.placetocallhome.ca/
[vi] CMHC: Canadians get affordable housing help, November 2017 https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/corp/nero/nere/2017/2017-11-22-1505.cfm
[vii] https://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/hoficlincl/moloin/mupr/rental-construction-initiative.cfm
[viii] Ferreras, Jesse, Global: From 2001 to 2016, over 12,000 more Vancouver homes were left ‘empty’, June 2017 https://globalnews.ca/news/3552940/vancouver-empty-homes/
[ix] Little, Simon, CKNW: Census found 25K empty homes in Vancouver. Empty homes tax filings show 1/3 that, March 2017 https://globalnews.ca/news/4068194/vancouver-empty-homes-tax/
[x] Ghoussoub, Michelle, CBC: BC Cities have some of the highest rents and lowest vacancy rates in Canada, November 2017. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-cities-have-some-of-the-highest-rents-and-lowest-vacancy-rates-in-canada-1.4422343

Background:

That cyber crime is on the increase is indisputable. What becomes challenging is measuring the impact on Canada’s economy. Published only a year ago, PricewaterhouseCoopers economic crime survey found 59% respondents believe cybercrime is on the rise, with 28%confirming they’ve been impacted in the previous 24 months. Losses ranged between $50,000 to $5M for 16% of respondents, with another 31% losing from $1,000 to $50,000. Those tipping over $1M have increased to 12% from 5% in 2014.[i]

Norton Cyber Security Insights Report 2016 states that $1.9B (USD) was lost to cybercrime in Canada in the previous year with 26% (8.5 million Canadians) affected.[ii] Another private security firm predicts cybercrime will cost more than $2.1T (yes, T for trillion) by 2019 with 60% of the breaches occurring in North America.[iii] The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners puts it at $3.5T globally, now.[iv]

Symantec reports that security breaches are up 2% in 2016 from 2015 with more than 10 million identities exposed, a huge 125% increase from the previous year. 62% of the business victims were small to medium enterprises. Customer details are the targets putting many individuals at risk for fraud or worse.[v] Start-ups are most vulnerable as a data breach recovery averages $38,000; with intellectual property and trade secrets compromised. Bankruptcy looms for those who lose much.

Even governments are not safe. Since 2010, Public Safety Canada has spent $245 million on defending government computer networks, safeguarding critical infrastructure and educating the public. Currently, there are no federal laws to require companies to disclose hacks, security breaches, thefts of data or money, so the general public has incomplete knowledge of which companies have been compromised. There are several models used elsewhere which can be adapted for Canada. For example, Australia’s ACORN program (Australian Cyber Crime Online Reporting Network) collects citizen complaints so that police and industry can monitor trends, thwart organized criminal groups and arrange incidents for further investigation.

Canada does have a Spam Reporting Centre and a government operated Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC), but neither is equipped to handle the exploding array of cyber-scams and malware that are targeting home and business computers.[vi] Recently, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (CACP) and the Canadian Advanced Technology Alliance (CATAAllliance) joined forces to create the eCrime Cyber Council (ECC) to develop a national cybercrime strategy for Canada,[vii] which will begin to address the need for data and a more coordinated approach with law enforcement agencies. As an advisory body, it does not have legislative powers to effect necessary changes to protect Canadian businesses, though its work will no doubt be of value in the future.

The RCMP has a cybercrime strategy (2015)[viii] defining cybercrime in two categories: technology-as-target (the unauthorized use of computers and/or data, including identity theft, scams, phishing, etc.), and technology-as-instrument (criminal usage including fraud, drug trafficking, cyber-bullying, exploitation, etc.). Their data is collated accordingly as the number of incidences reported in each category. The RCMP has a broad mandate for investigating cybercrime including coordinating with local policy forces and international agencies. As part of their action plan, #8 identifies the need to enhance the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC) “as a trusted data and intelligence source on financially-motivated cybercrimes,” and “improve victim-based reporting” to improve police information sharing on cybercrime activities and trends, “including potential links to National Police Services.” Action items #9 and #10 are similarly seeking coordination of data collection across agencies. As not all incidents are reported or recorded, the true impact of cybercrimes has yet to be measured by anyone, including those charged with investigating criminal activity in cyber-space.

To conclude, the research is not consistent on cost or number of incidences in Canada as this data is not fully tracked and not all breaches are reported. It is safe to guestimate that cybercrime has cost the Canadian economy up to $3.12 billion dollars annually (Huffington Post, quoting NORTON, 2013). The time taken (averaging 19 hours for individuals, according to Norton) to deal with an incursion as well as the cost to salvage data, the cost to develop a more secure system, the cost to update employee training to avoid further breaches, and ultimately, the cost to a business’s brand as client trust is lost along with their data, is incalculable. Cybercrime has become a barrier to economic growth.

THE SURREY BOARD OF TRADE RECOMMENDS

That the federal and provincial governments work collaboratively with stakeholders and business to:

1.   Strengthen and promote the Canadian Cyber Incident Response Centre (CCIRC) and the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC)

·    as collectors of data including type and number of incidences;

·    to develop awareness and education strategies for businesses in a format that is easily accessed and understood, and

·    to pro-actively engage businesses and the public in awareness and education campaigns

2.   Ensure that the newly formed Electronic Crime Committee (ECC) includes business association representatives to assist with communications and outreach strategies to businesses[ix]

3.   Invest in the resources required to increase the RCMP’s ability to investigate and prosecute criminal activities with collaborating investigative agencies and local authorities

REFERENCES
[i] Global Economic Crime Survey 2016. www.pwc.com/ca/crimesurvey
[ii] https://us.norton.com/cyber-security-insights-2016
[iii] https://www.canadiansecuritymag.com/news/data-security/cybercrime-will-cost-businesses-over-$2-trillion-by-2019
[iv] http://www.mnp.ca/en/posts/7-shocking-statistics-on-small-business-data-theft
[v] http://www.mnp.ca/en/posts/7-shocking-statistics-on-small-business-data-theft
[vi] Canadian Cyber Incident Response Centre. https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/ntnl-scrt/cbr-scrt/ccirc-ccric-en.aspx
[vii] https://www.cacp.ca/electronic-crime-committee.html#122
[viii] http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/royal-canadian-mounted-police-cybercrime-strategy
[ix] As per the RCMP Cybercrime Operational Framework: E5 “Engage industry to address shared cybercrime issues and foster mutually beneficial relationships.” http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/en/royal-canadian-mounted-police-cybercrime-strategy

This policy was adopted by the BC Chamber of Commerce members at the 2017 AGM

Inefficiencies of fragmented coverage

The fragmented nature of drug coverage in Canada costs businesses, taxpayers, and patients billions of dollars every year. First, lack of coverage means that many Canadians cannot afford to fill necessary prescriptions.

A 2015 Angus Reid Institute poll found 29% of British Columbia households reported they did not take medicines as directed because of cost.[1] This occurs because British Columbia’s PharmaCare system provides benefits after patients have spent hundreds or thousands of dollars on medicines. This costs everyone because it results in worst health for patients and increased use of tax-financed medical and hospital care.

Fragmentation also means higher drug costs. Overall, Canadians spend 40% more on pharmaceuticals than the average of 14 comparable countries that offer universal, comprehensive drug coverage, including the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Australia, Sweden, and New Zealand. Thus, Canada is spending $10-billion per year more than it would if it had a universal drug plan like those found in many comparable countries.

Heavy burden on business

The burden of Canada’s incomplete and inefficient system of public drug coverage falls heavily on businesses, especially the small and medium sized enterprises who comprise the backbone of Canada’s economy. With rising costs of medications, many businesses are seeing their bottom lines erode and some find they simply cannot afford to provide insurance plans for their employees.

Small businesses are least likely to offer drug coverage and few entrepreneurs and independent contractors are covered by any drug benefit plan. This harms the efficiency of our economy because many Canadians are forced to choose where to work based access to insurance rather than aptitude and passion.

Money spent on private drug plans is not being spent well. Private sector analysts estimate that up to $5 billion spent by Canadian employers on private drug benefits is wasted because private drug plans are not well positioned to manage drug pricing or the prescribing and dispensing decisions of health professionals.[2]

Dangers of a mandatory insurance system

As provincial health ministers hold discussions with their Federal counterpart, businesses are concerned of any additional costs to their employees, their insurance plans, and their bottom line. The biggest concern is that governments are considering making private drug coverage mandatory, as was done in Quebec in 1997.

The Quebec policy requires that all eligible employees be enrolled in a private drug plan. Rather than increase efficiencies, the policy further fragmented the system and generated the highest per capita costs in Canada.[3]

For 22 years prior to mandatory private drug insurance in Quebec, per capita spending on prescription drugs in was approximately equal in Quebec and the rest of Canada. In the 19 years since their policy change, costs in Quebec have far outgrown the rest of Canada. Private employers and households in Quebec now spend $200 per capita more on pharmaceuticals than employers and households in the rests of Canada.

In British Columbia, a Quebec-style system would cost employers and households an additional $920 million annually if costs rose here as they did in Quebec.

Economies of a single-payer system

There is a better option. A universal, comprehensive public drug plan that was consistent throughout BC and across Canada would be a wise investment for BC’s economic prosperity. Research has shown that such a plan would reduce employer-sponsored drug costs in Canada by up to $10.2 billion per year – a $570 million annual savings for businesses in British Columbia alone.[4] This would boost Canada’s labour market competitiveness.

A universal pharmaceutical program would be economically viable not only by taking advantage of the power of a single purchaser, but through the following:

Reduction of administration costs for businesses and unions
Elimination of the need for tax subsidies to encourage employer funded benefit packages
Decreased direct emergency and acute care medical costs due to inappropriate or underuse of drug therapies
Reduction of other health service costs
Because of these increased efficiencies, a universal pharmacare program would increase government costs by only $3.4 billion, $2.4 billion of which could be financed by the reduced cost of private drug benefits for public sector employees. The 2015 Angus Reid Institute poll found that most taxpayers would support such a program, even if it required modest increase in taxes.[5]

Moving forward

As British Columbia joins health ministers across the country to discuss how best to control the costs of pharmaceuticals through bulk purchasing agreements and other strategies, caution is advised when choosing a program of delivery. It is tempting, and usually preferable to choose private suppliers over a provincially run program; however, in terms of cost effectiveness, the best strategy is one where pharmaceuticals are added to the universal health coverage of our medicare system.

Recommendation: That the Provincial Government and the Federal Government:

1. Work to develop a universal pharmaceutical program that will engender cost savings through bulk purchasing agreements and other cost-sharing strategies; and
2. Avoid off-loading costs of providing pharmaceutical coverage onto businesses through private insurance schemes per Quebec model

[1] 2015 Angus Reid. Prescription drug access and affordability an issue for nearly a quarter of all Canadian households. http://angusreid.org/prescription-drugs-canada/
[2] 2014 Drug Trend Report. Express Scripts Canada. 2015. http://www.express-scripts.ca/ research/drug-trend-reports
[3] 2015, Mar-Andre Gagnon. Quebec-Style Pharmacare Program Won’t Work for the Rest of Canada.
[4] Morgan, SG, et al. Estimated cost of universal public coverage of prescription drugs in Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2015. DOI:10.1503/cmaj.141564. Draft.
[5] 2015 Angus Reid. Prescription drug access and affordability an issue for nearly a quarter of all Canadian households. http://angusreid.org/prescription-drugs-canada/

In order to ensure that the most basic of needs, a home, does not become a barrier for skilled labour in BC, there needs to be a variety of income-sensitive strategies to encourage innovation in the housing sector.

In a study done by Vancity[1], the cost of housing was determined to inhibit young workers from coming or staying in the greater Vancouver region. Similar studies have pointed out that the rise of real estate values is greatly outpacing incomes and the gap is growing. Very few workers receive salary increases of 10-20% per year. In fact, Vancity’s findings are that salary growth is slowing with the past five years averaging 1.3%. This, they claim, is why Millenials are exiting the Lower Mainland labour market for greener pastures where employment and housing opportunities co-exist.

Renting is often seen as an affordable alternative to house a workforce, particularly temporary or contract employees, near employment. However, with a BC average rental rate of 1.2%[2], a decrease from 2014 and the Lower Mainland rate approaching 0, the pressure on existing rental stock is inhibiting in-migration of Canadian skilled labour, particularly where they are needed the most by BC employers.

From October 2014 to October 2015, only 1,900 purpose built rentals units were constructed throughout BC (CMHC). These are either new or renovated units returned to the market. Rents are rising in response to market pressure on average of 3.7% compared to 2.4% from the previous year. As mentioned, salaries have not.

Vancity’s analysis of salaries that provide insufficient incomes for purchasing, may be enough for rental units – if available: mid-level managers, and senior administrators, computer programmers, and technicians, registered nurses and social workers, researchers, counselors, food industry workers, and contractors. The list of skilled workers unable to purchase in Metro Vancouver is long. This improves outside urban areas and into the farther regions of the province, but employment opportunities diminish.

Simply, relying on developers to provide a variety of housing stock, including purpose-built rentals, to meet differing levels of income has failed. The current stock of purpose-built rentals are aging, and not replaced by strata-based condominiums (most are not permitted to be rentals by strata councils). Co-ops and other subsidized housing arrangements are also aging and the agreements are coming to a close.

The Center for Housing Policy[3] collated a number of studies that demonstrate clearly the connection between the development of low- to mid-level income housing units and employment. They concluded that not only are employers able to attract the best and the brightest, there are spill-over benefits for the local economy.

The solution is for the Province of British Columbia to work with Federal and Local colleagues and find ways to create incentives and opportunities to save and increase the current rental stock, protect and expand co-op and co-housing units, and encourage innovation through reviewing relevant legislation that controls row housing and strata by-laws. British Columbia is doing well economically; however, to continue to do so, we need to ensure that a lack of housing for skilled labour does not become a barrier to future economic growth.

Recommendation: That the Provincial Government:

1. Work with the Federal Government to develop tax and other incentives for purpose built market rental housing units for low- to mid-range income levels, using innovative designs and locating near transit hubs; and
2. Work to combine other social program supports to help support those in the lower income ranges to access market rentals, such as expanding the SAFER program to other vulnerable populations.

[1] Vancity, May 2015. Help wanted: salaries, affordability and the exodus of labour from Metro Vancouver. Accessed March 2016, https://www.vancity.com/ AboutVancity/News/ MediaReleases/Archives/ MediaReleases2015/JobsStudy_ May20_2015/
[2] CMHC, Fall 2015. Rental market report – British Columbia Highlights. www.cmhc.ca/housingmarketinformation
[3] 2011, Center for Housing Policy, The role of Affordable Housing in Creating Jobs and Stimulating Local Economic Development: A Review of the Literature.
[4] http://www.bclaws.ca/Recon/ document/ID/freeside/98043_00

By supporting the development of a social policy framework, the business community achieves both goals: addressing social challenges effectively and supporting economic growth in their community.

Background
Social Capital is very loosely defined as an economically based network of relationships within a described society that benefit all members of that society;[1] or, more colloquially, since we’re all in this together, let’s all work together. And that’s the key – how to develop a network of agencies, ministries, services, and business interests that works effectively together for the benefit of all.

When it comes to public policy, a coordinated network operating with economic efficiency is the ideal that businesses and communities hope governments aspire to. The Liberal government of B.C. put forward a BC Jobs Plan that sought to tie various parts of society together to promote job growth, and to that end, they have made great strides forward. It is a comprehensive strategy that touches on nearly all ministries, outlines various investments, and measures progress against a baseline.

However, silos still exist. Recent experiences in Surrey, as an example, point to schools and childcare spaces have not kept pace with job growth and development. The fast-growing city has one part of the puzzle, the school district another, and several ministries (Education, MCFD, Health) have responsibilities for education and childcare. Surrey currently has a deficit of over 12,000 child care spaces (0-12) and, despite the recent $217M towards capital builds for 5000 spaces, there will still be a sizeable population of children that will see out their school years in portables. Attracting good employees becomes difficult if a community cannot ensure quality childhood experiences for their families.

Another example is homelessness – a complicated source of frustration and despair. According to the Metro Vancouver report on homelessness[2], the cost per homeless person per year is estimated to be $55,000 tax payer dollars – spent on homeless shelters, support services and health care costs.

It is clear that the current system of fractured governance that has multiple ministries and agencies working silos, each within their narrow scope of authority, has not been efficient nor effective in slowing down or reducing the growth of the homeless population…. The many agencies involved in addressing homelessness must work together in a system-wide approach to help prevent homelessness… serve the region’s 3,000-4,000 homeless population, and expedite the transition out of homelessness for the 10,500 people in the region…[3]

As any business owner who operates near where homeless people gather, it is very difficult to attract new customers to an area that has challenges.

A cost-efficient framework to facilitate coordination between ministry departments, stakeholders, and business organizations would be helpful to ensure policy alignment and consistency. A policy framework to guide decision-making and identify important connections would help anticipate needs and avoid crises before they arise.

In early 2013, Alberta’s Premier Redford launched a Social Policy Framework, a tool which the government anticipated would assist in setting priorities in addressing community challenges.[4] Further, it would “coordinate activities between government departments,… to ensure policy alignment and consistency.”[5] Their policy outlines core components, tools, and the roles and responsibilities of government, stakeholders, organizations, communities, and businesses to vision and then implement a set of harmonized social policies for environment, health, and social services.[6] This collective action by a diverse set of stakeholders provides the basis for a resilient and thriving community.

If B.C. were to consider adopting a similar policy, the over-arching purpose of a framework would be to describe the quality of life citizens want and how to achieve this within the communities of B.C., each with their unique challenges. Social capital is often overlooked as an economic driver, yet evidence exists that “healthy, educated, and trained workers determine how productively other critical factors such as land, labour, and physical capital are used… [and] the potential for each person to contribute to the economy and to economic growth.”[7]

BoardVoice, an umbrella association representing non-profit service providers across B.C., is concerned that expenditures for services are not coordinated sufficiently to effect desired results. Further, they are engaging business associations to consider how employers would benefit if the homeless were not sleeping on their doorsteps or if family challenges were not impacting a worker’s productivity, and perhaps their personal safety and the safety of other co-workers at their workplace. They state:

We wouldn’t think of building a road or planning a new real-estate development without a framework for planning the project. But the concept of planning for social outcomes has been slower to catch on.

In B.C., we spend many billions of dollars a year on social interventions and supports – policing, courts, community programs, income assistance, services for people with disabilities or mental health issues, park development, treatment centres, skate parks, new street lights, on and on.

Yet we spend it with no clear idea as to what we’re trying to achieve, or how we’ll know when we get there.[8]

BoardVoice posits that by uniting levels of government, ministries, organizations, business sectors, and other stakeholders into a network of cooperation and collaboration on a shared vision with measurable outcomes, to harmonize policies and effect cost efficiencies through coordinated implementation strategies, B.C.’s social capital would indeed provide the foundation by which employers and employees can grow within desirable, healthy communities.

The BC Jobs Plan is a strong vision. However, to support its continued success there is a need to ensure service delivery for all communities while recognizing and keeping pace with their unique needs, in order to support growth and economic success efficiently and effectively. A Social Policy Framework will provide a guide for policy-makers and stakeholders alike to ensure cost savings through efficiencies of needs anticipation, strong inter- and extra-ministerial agencies’ harmonization, and a measurable outcome of a shared vision.

THE CHAMBER RECOMMENDS
That the provincial government implement a framework to deal with social issues similar to that of the BC Jobs Plan to recognize and achieve efficiencies across ministries and stakeholders.

Footnotes
[1] One such definition is “the institutions, relationships, attitudes, and values that govern interactions among people and contribute to economic and social development.” Christiaan Grootaert and Thierry van Bastelaer. “Social Capital: From Definition to Measurement.” Understanding and Measuring Social Capital. The World Bank. 2002
[2] Metro Vancouver, Addressing Homelessness in Metro Vancouver, February 24, 2017. P.1.
[3] Ibid, P.9
[4] Press release: https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?xID=3373421703E69-E310-8B91-0D86BF049…
[5] Alberta Government. Alberta’s Social Policy Framework. February 2013. P.3.
[6] Alberta Government. Alberta’s Social Policy Framework. February 2013.
[7] McLean, Colin, et al. Making the Case: A Social Policy Framework for British Columbia. SFU School of Public Policy Report with BoardVoice. August 2014. P.73.
[8] www.boardvoice.ca

Alignment of BC’s Family Day with the February holidays of neighbouring jurisdictions is necessary to ensure that business productivity and economic activity is not unduly adversely affected by the holiday.

BC’s Family Day holiday was first proposed by Premier Christy Clark during her successful run for the leadership of the BC Liberal Party in early 2011. Later, in that year’s Speech from the Throne, it was announced that BC’s first Family Day holiday would be observed on February 18, 2013—the 3rdMonday of February.  However, later atwo-week online consultation process was held to determine if British Columbians preferred the holiday to fall on the 2ndor 3rdMonday in February. Following a public campaign by some in the tourism industry to promote the 2ndMonday as a way to boost their mid-February sales, the respondents to the online poll expressed a preference for the 2nd Monday.

Unfortunately, four years of this misaligned holiday have shown that it has negative impacts on the operations of businesses across the province. Companies which conduct business in other provinces or in the United States are negatively impacted by the misaligned holiday in many ways, including wasted staff time and missed business opportunities.  When offices in BC are closed for Family Day but firms are operating in all neighbouring jurisdictions, local businesses are unable to service their interprovincial or American customers and may be unable to capitalize on potential sales or other opportunities. Then, come the 3rdMonday in February, the employees of those same local businesses may largely be sitting idle, wasting staff time as they are unable to reach those same clients who are then closed due to their own holiday.

The misalignment of Family Day causes inconvenience, increased costs, and lost opportunity for businesses of all sizes and in myriad industries. From the financial services sector which still has to operate when markets in Toronto or New York are open, to the film and television industry which must stay open on Family Day to coordinate with the industry hub in California, to any company that has customers, ships product, or does business outside of BC, the misalignment of Family Day is a unnecessary inconvenience and burden.

To put the economic impact in context, the following indicates revenues generated by interprovincial trade between BC and the rest of Canada. Interprovincial trade accounts for 44% of BC’s total complement of trading partners. The value of interprovincial export of goods and services from BC is valued at more than $37 billion.[1] Of that, fully 81.5% or $30.5 billion is conducted with provinces, which have February holidays that are misaligned with BC’s Family Day.  The value of one business day’s interprovincial export between BC and the six misaligned provinces is in excess of $120 million. This does not include the nearly $18 billion in annual BC exports to the United States[2](or over $71 million per business day) whose manufacturers/suppliers are also inconvenienced on the 3rdMonday in February because of the President’s Day holiday in the United States.

The solution to this problem is to align BC’s Family Day with the February holidays of neighbouring jurisdictions which are all observed on the 3rdMonday in February. There is little legal impediment to changing the date and such a change would be relatively simple for the provincial government to make; the Family Day Act does not designate a specific date but instead empowers cabinet to prescribe a day in February to be observed.

The Surrey Board of Trade recommends that the Provincial Government continue its history of reducing unnecessary burdens on business and:

• Align BC’s Family Day holiday with the February holidays of neighbouring jurisdictions by moving the date Family Day is observed to the 3rdMonday of February.

[1]Exports of Goods and Services to Other Provinces, by Province/Territory, BC Stats, accessed at: http://bcstats.gov.bc.ca/StatisticsBySubject/ExportsImports/Data.aspx
[2]Trade Profile – United States, BC Stats, accessed at: http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/statisticsbysubject/ExportsImports/Data/CountryTradeProfiles/TradeProfileUnitedStates.aspx

The following recommendations are similar to the 2014 federal recommendations.

1. That the BC government, in alignment with its Families Agenda document, investigate the overall financial savings to the provincial economy if it increases investment in secure, comprehensive child care facilities and spaces that are consistently accessible and consistently affordable with a low flat rate, such as the $10 per day recommendation
2. To assist families out of poverty and increase employment opportunity by coordinating child care access and affordability with those programs that help parents / guardians overcome barriers to employment
   Background:

Since BC published its Families First Agenda for BC in 2012, families and employers anticipated support for childcare access and affordability. Recent study findings suggest that rather than improving, accessibility is decreasing while fees are increasing challenging those most in need of assistance in gaining full employment.

In 2014, Surrey Board of Trade successfully raised the issue and gained national support at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce to request that the federal government

1. Work with the provinces and territories to fully examine the potential impact on productivity and the Canadian GDP of a countrywide system of Child care with possible implications for child care rates and spaces
2. The findings and policy recommendations associated with the aforementioned study should be delimited by, and respect, provincial jurisdictional limitations as well as fiscal considerations, associated with the implementation of child care policy.

The Surrey Board of Trade used the work of Dr. Paul Kershaw who found that work-life conflicts of parents raising young children is actually costly for employers with resulting higher absenteeism rates, greater turnover, and increased use of employer funded extended health benefits. Further, the cost to BC business community, according to Kershaw, is over $600 million annually and over $4 billion for Canadian businesses. These costs are exasperated by the costs to the Canadian health care system of over $2.5 billion and child welfare of over $1.2 billion. Inadequate child care is too costly to ignore.

Issue:

Finding adequate, safe care for children in one of the fastest growing cities in BC continues to be a major challenge for Surrey’s employees. Most care is a patchwork that provides insufficient early childhood education stimulus or simply warehouses children in a neighbour’s basement. The stress and challenge of childcare concerns do have a profound impact on an employee’s morale, productivity and ability to be fully employed.

According to First Call’s 2015 report card, BC’s rate of child poverty remains consistently higher than the national average, increasing dramatically for children of recent immigrants, aboriginal identity, female lone-parent families, racialized families, or with a disability. Child poverty is a misnomer of family poverty as children do not choose poverty but are in families experiencing under employment or unemployment.

Access to safe affordable child care is seen as a primary support mechanism to raise families out of poverty as it would allow single parents an opportunity to find and keep a job, give immigrant families opportunities to attend integration support programs, and address other barriers that families experience.

However, in BC as of 2012, only 18% of children under 12 had access to a regulated child care space, which is less than the Canadian average of 20.5%. Unregulated care arrangements include family members through to neighbourhood small care-givers, with no standards for safety or quality.

Using First Call’s most recent figures, BC invested $398 / year for regulated spaces, which is substantially less than the Canadian average of $838 / year (including Quebec; without Quebec, the average is $436). Further, BC’s investment decreased by $16 million between 2011 and 2012. As a result, parent fees are higher on average across all age groups in Canada. Fees are a major barrier to employment even with subsidies that may be available to parents/guardians that apply — although acceptance criteria is unclear.

Facts

The following highlights were compiled by the Surrey Child Care Task Force, of which Surrey Board of Trade is a member.

Population Growth

• Surrey has BC’s largest child population and highest birth rate
• School District 36 is the largest district in BC with approximately 70,000 students
• Over 35,000 children are 0-5 years old in Surrey, equal in number to the 3rd largest school district in BC
• Over 41,000 children are 6-12 years old

Labour Force participation

• 1976: under 40% of mothers with children under 16 were in the paid labour force
• In 2012: over 73% of mothers are in paid labour force and is continuing to climbThe rate for mothers with a child under 3 years has increased from 28% to almost 70% in the same time period

Child poverty (2013)

• BC Child Poverty: 20.4% (after tax)
• Depth of poverty has increased – average gap $11,000 below the Low Income Measure
• 31.8% of poor children live in families with at lest one adult working full-time

Child Care in Surrey

• Only 12.4 spaces for every 100 children aged 0-12 years, which is the second worst ration in Lower Mainland
• BC averages 24 spaces for every 100 children
• After school care and under 3 years old care is in serious deficit
• Very few facilities serve more than one age group
• 93% of available childcare is commercial
• Child care fees as high as $1850 per month for under 3 and up to $1550 for over 3 care, and is the second largest expense in a family’s budget

Recommendations:

1. That the BC government, in alignment with its Families Agenda document, increase investment in secure, comprehensive childcare facilities and spaces that are accessible and affordable
2. To assist families out of poverty and increase employment and skill building opportunities by coordinating childcare access and affordability with those programs that help parents / guardians overcome barriers to employment.

There are multiple strategies to attract youth to trade programs and to attract skilled immigrants. A third approach may be required to meet the growing skills gap: a flexible, easily accessible incentive program for employers to upgrade the skills of existing employees and potential hires to meet their specific skill requirements.

Background

A Google search for “Canadian skills gap” yields about 349,000 results, mostly news-media and “grey” literature articles. Anecdotally, employers decry the lack of skills, which leave positions unfilled. Unemployed or underemployed university graduates decry the lack of opportunities in their fields. Industry associations, such as CME, advocate for developing a stronger skilled workforce in Canada as part of their Industry 2030 reports.2

Loosening immigration and temporary foreign worker regulations to assist employers access skilled labour or introducing the trade careers earlier in the education stream to foster a change of perceptions regarding employment prospects are often proposed. One concept that has yet to be brought forward in any substantive form is using tax credits to provide incentives for personal or in-house training.

Despite a variety of programs, grants and tax incentives there is no over-arching flexible opportunity to encourage employers and employees to work together to fill any skills gap. Employers spend less on training than in previous decades3 and attracting good workers has become challenging since wages have stagnated.4

There are a number of programs that provide some incentives through grants and other tax credits, however they are limited in various ways to specific demographics and circumscribed circumstances. The Canada – BC Job Grant provides up to $10,000 to employers per employee. However, the grant only applies to certain demographics, is available for a certain period of the year (April through August), must be applied for well in advance of that training period, and it comes in the form of a reimbursement for only two-thirds of the cost requiring the employer and/or employee to pay for tuition up front.5 There are tax credits available through WorkBC for very specific industries and activities.6 There is a federal wage subsidy program for youth only.7 And for older workers, there is an employment assistance program for re-training – but only if the worker is unemployed, in a community experiencing high unemployment or economic downturns.8 The best program by far is the Training Tax Credit for apprenticeships through ITA.9

The targeted nature of grants and credits are very helpful to employers to onboard minorities and the sometimes hard to employ. However, if an employer requires a very specialized skill set and has an employee who, with a bit of training, could fill the gap, there is little to support either party, particularly for small to medium sized entities.10

Employees, whether full or part-time, in their chosen career or underemployed based on their degree attainment bear some responsibility for their own training, but many are caught with student debt and minimum wage positions.11 Workers cannot gain experience because employers are reluctant to take on those who may require additional skills mentoring. Full time workers with families are unable to shoulder the high cost of tuition that is required for them to keep up with the changing nature of their employment. This is particularly true for positions that are becoming more vulnerable with the rapid advances in technology.12 Further, employees and/or students are eligible for a small tax deduction for tuition fees,13 but effective January 1, 2017, related education and textbooks deductions were eliminated.14

Employers in Ontario were asked why they are reluctant to train, especially the small and medium enterprises who are not training their employees in any substantive manner. The Ontario Chamber of Commerce and Essential Skills Ontario (2014) concluded:

Employers are not training due to a couple of key factors, including cost, risk of turnover and ‘poaching,’ and a lack of human resource capacity. The success of employer-driven training programs is contingent on employer engagement.
It is vital that government design training and employment programs so that they overcome these barriers. Training and employment programs should be easy to access for businesses, offer flexible training options to the workers who need it,
and make room for not-for-profit and private service providers to play an intermediary role in the new training and employment system. [Emphasis added]

Similarly, employers need to get more engaged in building the skills of their employees. Ontario’s population is aging and our workforce is shrinking. Some 28 percent of OCC members are having trouble filling job vacancies….15

BC’s situation of aging workers and the need for specialized skills would, no doubt, be similar to what the researchers for Ontario found. And, as listed, programs for BC employers are limited and at times difficult – more a challenge and a barrier than an incentive. Streamlining opportunities and simplifying application processes would greatly enhance the ability of employers, particularly the small and medium sized entities, to engage in developing their own workforce.

Employers no longer have the luxury of hiring a made-to-order employee as the nature of the labour force has changed; and, employees no longer have job security as the nature of their work is rapidly changing due to advances in technology. An over-arching strategy of incentives for skills-upgrading on the job would encourage employers and employees to fill their own gaps with their own resources, particularly when employees have the opportunity to tailor their skills sets to the need at hand.

SBOT recommends that the federal government:

1. Develop an easily accessible and understood portal to the tax credits and grants currently available for individually-funded and employer-sponsored education expenditures,
2. Expand tax credits and grants and be more flexible to assist businesses fill diverse and specific skills gaps as they emerge.

Resources:

1 Industrie 2030, Manufacturing Growth, Innovation and Prosperity for Canada, CME, CMC. 2016. P.15. www.industrie2030.ca 2 Industrie 2030, Manufacturing Growth, Innovation and Prosperity for Canada. CME, CMC. 2016. P.20.
http://www.industrie2030.ca/
3 Ontario employers spent $1,200 in 1993 decreasing to $700 in 2010. http://www.conferenceboard.ca/infographics/skills-gap-info.aspx
4 Morissette, Rene, et al. The Evolution of Canadian Wages over the Last Three Decades. Statistics Canada – Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series. 11F0019M-No.347. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11f0019m/2013347/part-partie1-eng.htm
5 https://www.workbc.ca/Employer-Resources/Canada-BC-Job-Grant.aspx
6 Training Tax Credit https://www.workbc.ca/Employer-Resources/Funding-and-Programs/Incentives-and-Tax-Credits.aspx 7 “Get Youth Working” for BC, 15-29 years old, provides a $2,800 hiring incentive. http://canadabusiness.ca/grants-and-financing/government-grants-and-financing/wage-subsidies/
8 Funding for Employment Assistance for Older Workers
https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/training-agreements/older-workers.html
9 http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/income-taxes/corporate/credits/training/employer
10 Employer/employee tax deductions for scholarships, etc., “In this situation, the amount of the scholarship or bursary is considered to be employment income for the employee or former employee.” http://www.cra-
arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/pyrll/bnfts/dctn/ttn-eng.html
11 Dehaas, Josh. “Entry-level” jobs are getting harder to find. Macleans. April 5, 2014. http://www.macleans.ca/work/jobs/entry-level-jobs-are-getting-harder-to-find/
12 Hennessy, Angela. “As well or better than humans”: Automation set for big promotions in white-collar job market.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/automation-jobs-canada-computers-white-collar-1.3982466. February 28, 2017.
13 Eligible tuition fees: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns300-350/323/lgbl-eng.html
14 Effective January 1, 2017, the federal education (a $ amount x #of months) and textbook tax credits will be eliminated.
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/ddctns/lns300-350/323/menu-eng.html
15 Holmes, Andrea and Josh Hjartarson. Moving Forward Together: an Employer Perspective on the Design of Skills Training Programs in Ontario. Ontario Chamber of Commerce. 2014.

This policy was adopted by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce members in 2017.

Most of the refugees do not speak English, have varying levels of trauma and medical needs, and are learning how to adapt to Canadian society. Their day-to-day settlement needs – finding appropriate housing, furniture, appropriate clothing, food and living costs, enrolling children in school, figuring out the public transit system, finding their way to medical appointments, and finding social and emotional support networks – takes the majority of their time in the first year. In addition, the emotional toll of having left loved ones behind has an understandable impact on their resettlement efforts. Service providers such as Options and DIVERSEcity have done their best to accommodate, but waitlist for services, English Language training, basic job-skills training are long.. A new Syrian-Canadian association was developed in Guildford to help alleviate the pressure on services, providing food and translation assistance. The Surrey School District’s Welcome Centre is working with the Syrian students (approximately 600 expected to be enrolled by end of year). The Surrey Food Bank experienced a jump in requests with Syrian refugee families signing on.

Progress is slow to move Syrians off supports and in to stable employment. According to a recent survey of Syrian refugees by the Immigrant Services Society of BC, 76% of respondents are in federally funded adult English classes or LINC classes, 51% on waitlists have waited an average of 4 months, 20% are taking training/education other than English towards economic integration. Only 17% are employed either full or part time, with 59% of those in Manufacturing, Construction and Trades. Of those not currently employed, 64% are actively looking. A majority of respondents, 66%, are using the food bank regularly.

The concern is that the Federal support for publicly sponsored refugees is only for one year. Refugees then move to Provincial funding, which in BC is much less with the average family losing roughly $348/month. Funding varies based on size of family and housing needs, as well as health, language instruction and employment services. However, the provincial funding, though similar in base amount, does not include transportation allowances and housing supplements, leading to a substantial decrease in support especially in the tight housing /rental market of the Lower Mainland.

Given that it is unreasonable to expect refugees to find sustainable employment within a year of arrival due to waitlists for language and job skills training, as well as family health and emotional needs and the challenges of integration to a very different society, service providers are now advocating for the provincial support to be increased to help mitigate the impact of transition funding source.

As reported in the Globe and Mail, December 4: The B.C. government said it is continuing to look at the issue. The province said its supports for low-income individuals can include subsidized housing and child-care subsidies. It said refugees who are eligible for disability assistance could also receive more support than they did under the federal government.

These measures, if implemented, will help. Employment and English language training, essential for economic integration, however, are still Federally funded and waitlists are long. BC currently has the highest waitlist with over 5,000 permanent residents looking for spaces, the majority in Surrey (ISS of BC report), and this prior to the influx of Syrian refugees.

BENEFITS:

A number of the Syrian refugees have various education backgrounds such as engineering, or other professional credentials. Many have had their education interrupted and would like to continue. However, with lengthy waitlists for English instruction that will expedite employment opportunities, a provincial “top up” of the income assistance (IA) funding will assist Syrian and other refugee families transition until their English becomes relatively proficient. Two key areas are being suggested including the reinstatement of bus passes for all employable income assistance recipients including refugees who must avail of BC income assistance (BC IA). For those BC IA recipients living outside communities without public transit eg Syrians have now settled in 69 different communities throughout BC then a cash equivalent would be provided. Without a transportation allowance it makes it extremely difficult for people to find work and/or attend English and job related training. The other policy area relates to wage claw back mechanism while on BC IA. The wage claw back portion should be increased to fifty percent (50%) or higher in order for especially refugee newcomers to gain Canadian work experience without significant claw back of benefits. Currently the federal government provides all government assisted refugees with the ability while on federal income support to earn fifty percent (50%) of their monthly income support without claw back.

It should be noted that between 1979 and 1981, Canada accepted 60,000 “boat people” from Southeast Asia. Within a decade, 86% of those former refugees were working, healthy and spoke English with some proficiency, achieving the basic criteria for success set out by academic Morton Beiser in his landmark study of their integration into Canadian society (Strangers at the Gate: The Boat People). They were less likely to use social services and more likely to have jobs than the average Canadian. One in five was self-employed. They weren’t a drain on the taxpayer—they were taxpayers.

This mirrors the experience in Germany, where a 2012 study found residents with foreign citizenship paid $218 billion more in taxes than they received in social benefits. German officials have been smart to cast their willingness to accept a half-million asylum seekers each year as not just a humanitarian gesture, but as wise economic policy. In December 2015, Vancity Credit Union released a report entitled From Crisis to Community: Syrian Refugees and the B.C. Economy. The report outlined that Syrian refugees settling in British Columbia would generate at least $563 million in local economic activity over the next 20 years. 2

Like Germany, Canada has a rapidly aging population. Two hundred and fifty thousand (250,000) Canadians are currently retiring annually with future projections to reach 400,000 in the near future. In fact, in December 2016, the Department of Finance released a report that indicated that the federal debt could double to $1.5 trillion by 2050-51. The report points to the major economic challenge caused by the gradual retirement of baby boomers. The demographic shift is expected to shrink work-force participation, erode labour productivity and drive up expenditures for things like elderly benefits. At the same time, the Advisory Council on Economic Growth advised the Government of Canada to increase immigration levels to 450,000 annually as one step to address the projected challenges to the Canadian economy. On October 31, 2016 Minister McCallum announced a new immigration baseline of 300,000 per year starting in 2017 along with a signal of future higher immigration levels and a multi-year three-five (3-5 year) immigration levels plan. According to a Conference Board of Canada report we’ll need to attract 350,000 immigrants annually by 2035, up from 260,404 in 2014.

What’s needed is not just a discussion of how to facilitate immigration—of refugees and others—but how to ensure our new residents integrate swiftly into the economy. Germany has had success with an “early intervention” model that identifies skilled refugees and pairs them with opportunities as soon as possible. But all of this requires a shift in thinking. Done properly, bringing refugees into our country isn’t about charity. It’s about investing in the future of business —both theirs and ours.

CHALLENGES:

Statistically, only about 10% of refugees find employment in their first year in Canada. The concern is the need for the Province to support families that the Federal government have accepted until they are sufficiently employable through English and other training. This will be a draw on provincial resources.

There is a need to ensure Syrian families continue to be supported beyond the one year federally-funded period at a level that provides sufficient economic security to continue with English and employment related training. Recognizing the challenge to provincial resources, once employed, Syrians will be able to contribute back to BC and Canada through taxes as well as economic activity in their community.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Provincial Government works with the Federal Government:

1.     To extend the Federal financial support of refugees from one year to three years.

2.     To enhance education and career planning supports for refugees.

With that purpose at the forefront, these recommendations encompass general and specific requests for clarity and guidance for employers large and small, unionized or not, safety-sensitive or not.

Background

A preliminary review of recent (within the past 5 years) and relevant (Canadian) literature (including peer reviewed academic literature) reveals three general foci: adolescent usage concerns, non-alcoholic drug-impaired driving, and accommodation for medical marijuana usage. Workplace research is minimal and tends to be reliant on case law findings arising from appealed dismissals.

The recently released report of the Task Force on Cannabis legalization and Regulation, “A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada,” likewise concerns itself with adolescence and impaired drivers. The section on workplace safety is 1½ pages and from which, three of the Task Force’s 83 recommendations are relevant:

• Facilitate and monitor ongoing research on cannabis and impairment, considering implications for occupational health and safety policies,
• Work with existing federal, provincial and territorial bodies to better understand potential occupational health and safety issues related to cannabis impairment, and
• Work with provinces, territories, employers and labour representatives to facilitate the development of workplace impairment policies. (P. 29)

In April the Federal government introduced Bill C-45 respecting cannabis and set out the purpose of the Act to protect public health and public safety but does not specifically refer to the workplace.

In B.C., both the B.C. Human Rights Code1 and WorkSafe BC have bearing on employment guidance. In the Human Rights Code, there is no specific definition for impairment; however, Section 13 (1) states “A person must not (b) discriminate against a person regarding employment or any term or condition of employment because of … physical or mental disability…; nor can any person discriminate in regard to accommodation (Section 8) based on physical or mental disability without reasonable justification.” This is relevant to marijuana usage as drug dependence (addiction) is considered a disability.2 Accommodation is required up to the point of undue hardship, where the cost of reasonable and practical steps are too difficult or expensive.3 The bar for employers to prove this is very high.4

Worksafe BC regulations provides some guidance:5

4.20 Impairment by alcohol, drug or other substance

(1) A person must not enter or remain at any workplace while the person’s ability to work is affected by alcohol, a drug or other substance so as to endanger the person or anyone else.
(2) The employer must not knowingly permit a person to remain at any workplace while the person’s ability to work is affected by alcohol, a drug or other substance so as to endanger the person or anyone else.
(3) A person must not remain at a workplace if the person’s behaviour is affected by alcohol, a drug or other substance so as to create an undue risk to workers, except where such a workplace has as one of its purposes the treatment or confinement of such persons.

Note: In the application of section 4.20, workers and employers need to consider the effects of prescription and non-prescription drugs, and fatigue, as potential sources of impairment. There is a need for disclosure of potential impairment from any source, and for adequate supervision of work to ensure reported or observed impairment is effectively managed.

While various guidelines exist and templates can be found for employers to use to develop onsite alcohol and substance use policies, (with caveats in the literature regarding which ones would be better), what is lacking in all the literature is clarity in definitions and clear guidelines for employers.

There are two separate issues to consider: medical marijuana users and recreational usage on the job. For medical marijuana, the rules are quite clear regarding accommodation. Insofar as an employer can, those with appropriate medical documentation are accommodated and only actual impairment at work, not usage, would be grounds for further action up to dismissal. The challenge is determining what constitutes impairment.6 Under current Federal criminal law, the Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations (ACMPR), medical marijuana patients must have a medical document from a health care practitioner to legally purchase and consume marijuana:

8 (1) A medical document provided by a health care practitioner to a person who is under their professional treatment must indicate

a) The practitioner’s given name, surname, profession, business address and telephone number, facsimile number and email address, if applicable, the province in which the practitioner is authorized to practise their profession and the number assigned by the province to that authorization and, if applicable, their facsimile number and email address;
b) The person’s given name, surname, and date of birth;
c) The address of the location at which the person consulted with the practitioner;
d) The daily quantity of dried marihuana, expressed in grams, that the practitioner authorizes for the person; and
e) The period of use.7

For medical marijuana usage, therefore, the challenge for an employer is to determine whether the documentation and allowable amounts can lead to impairment up to the point, as expressed by WorkSafe BC, of undue risk. This does not address potential decreased productivity, the impact of usage and/or accommodation on other employees, and the overall costs of accommodation even if not up to point of undue hardship. What employers and employees need is a workable definition of impairment, and a tool to assist in determining impairment, such as a universally applicable checklist for non-medically trained supervisors. Further, employers and employees, particularly those without an in-house Human Resources department – such as small and medium sized entities – would greatly benefit from having a readily identifiable regulatory authority that could provide consistent, standardized documentation and up to date information.

Recreational users (legalized or not) would be treated as other substance users and potential abusers, according to the literature.8 However, again, it is the level of impairment, rather than usage itself, that provides grounds for employer action up to and including dismissal. Key to whether employers have any sway is the existence of written policies outlining a clear statement of drug usage on the job, the levels of graduated disciplinary steps, and an invitation for disclosure with accommodation considered. Recreational users may or may not be addicted – a determination that is difficult without self-disclosure; and addiction is considered a disability requiring accommodation. Until that point, an employer’s “duty to accommodate does not extend to the point of accommodating an employee that is not properly medically authorized.”9

Safe Workplaces

In safety-sensitive workplaces, drug use can lead to serious injury or death. In its submission to the Task Force, national oil and gas safety association Enform stated that, “marijuana use is incompatible with working in a safety-sensitive environment.”10 Employers have both a legal and a moral obligation to provide safe workplaces. This legal requirement is enshrined in provincial occupational health and safety legislation, and in Section 217.1 of the Criminal Code. Ensuring workers in safety-sensitive roles are not impaired by legal or illegal substances is a key component of fulfilling that obligation.

Limitations on Testing

Marijuana is a substance with complicated effects on the body, and legal substances like alcohol do not provide useful comparisons. Testing for alcohol impairment is straightforward – the quantity of alcohol in the bloodstream is a reliable indication of how intoxicated an individual is at the moment of testing. THC, the primary psychoactive component of marijuana, can remain in the bloodstream of users for days or weeks after the intoxicating effects have worn off. Furthermore, there is no “breathalyzer” equivalent for marijuana, which would provide a clear indication of current intoxication and impairment. Complicating matters further, there is no “.08” for marijuana, no standard legal limit or cutoff that can be used in impaired driving cases, for example.

The limits of testing technology have significant impacts on Canadian workplaces. Entrop v. Imperial Oil allowed random alcohol testing for safety-sensitive positions, but not random drug testing, because a breathalyzer can reliably prove current impairment, whereas drug testing techniques cannot.11 This is further confirmed by the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s (CHRC) Policy on Alcohol and Drug Testing, which considers random drug testing an unreasonable infringement of privacy rights, as it cannot reliably determine current levels of impairment.12 Under these guidelines, drug testing can only be carried out as a bona fide occupational requirement in safety-sensitive positions, with reasonable cause or after an accident has occurred.13 As the federal government has not yet established a legal limit for marijuana impairment, or the necessary testing protocols, the validity of workplace testing has largely been left to the courts to decide. Federal legislation includes new provisions which would allow Cabinet to set per se limits for marijuana-impaired driving, similar to a 0.08 BAC for alcohol impairment. This is consistent with the advice of The Task Force, which recommended further investment and research into both a per se impairment limit and the development of a roadside testing protocol.14 These innovations would serve as a major step towards rationalizing the conflicts that currently exist between an employer’s obligation to provide a safe workplace, and an employee’s right to privacy. We recommend that the research and development of impairment limits and roadside testing protocols be used to develop legal limits and testing protocols for safety-sensitive workplaces.

There are many guides and helpful suggestions available online. What is lacking, however, is clarity for employers along with guidance that provides assurance that the information by which they operate is best practice and in line with legislation in existence and anticipated.

SBOT Recommends that the federal government:

1. Create a standard testing protocol to detect marijuana impairment, with legal limits for both traffic safety and workplace safety prior to the legalization of marijuana.
2. Work with provinces and territories to ensure consistent regulation across Canada.
3. Provide clarity for employers by developing regulations concerning the use of medical marijuana in the workplace and its impact on health and safety procedures in conjunction with relevant provincial and territorial regulators,
4. Consult with industry, business and their representative associations to identify standardized policies and processes to deal with medical marijuana requirements and recreational usage that may lead to impairment in the workplace, in a manner that balances the rights and responsibilities of employers with the privacy and rights of employees.
5. Allow a two-year implementation window to address the workplace safety recommendations contained within the Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada.

References:

1 http://www.bchrt.gov.bc.ca/human-rights-duties/index.htm
2 Lynch QC, Jennifer. Human Rights and Employer Responsibility to Accommodate Disability in the Workplace, Visions: BC’s mental Health and Addictions Journal, 2009, 5 (3), pp 9-10. http://www.heretohelp.bc.ca/visions/workplaces-vol5
3 http://www.bchrt.gov.bc.ca/glossary/index.htm#undue-hardship
4 Bhalloo, Shafik, and Alisha Parmar. Medical Marijuana in the Workplace—Don’t Weed Out Your Employees Just Yet! The Advocate. 74, 2016. Pp 687-696
5 https://www.worksafebc.com/en/law-policy/occupational-health-safety/searchable-ohs-regulation/ohs-regulation/part-04-general-conditions#SectionNumber:4.20
6 Brown, Shelley. Road Map to Weed in the Workplace: legal Considerations as Legalization Approaches. Canadian HR Reporter; Oct 31, 2016. 29, 18 ProQuest. P.16
7 http://laws.justice.gc.ca/PDF/SOR-2016-230.pdf
8 Brown, Road Map. P.16
9 Bhallo and Parmer, The Advocate. P.691
10 http://www.psac.ca/wp-content/uploads/Ltr-Marijuana_legalization_commission.pdf
11http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2000/2000canlii16800/2000canlii16800.html
12 http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2009/ccdp-chrc/HR4-6-2009E.pdf
13 Ibid.
14 http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/task-force-marijuana-groupe-etude/framework-cadre/index-eng.php

This policy was adopted by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce members in 2017.

issue in Alberta or B.C. After that date, people in the trades and professions can accept opportunities in the other province without a delay to re-certify, the time and expense of additional training, or a break in earnings. And employers in Alberta and B.C. can draw on the entire workforce of both provinces. This is the employment future in our two provinces under the most comprehensive free trade agreement in Canada. It could be your future, even if you do not live here. We believe our agreement is a model for the rest of Canada. Under the TILMA (Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement), a business registered in one province automatically is recognized in other provinces ⎯ no residency required, no added cost. Government procurement including professional services like accounting, engineering and architecture, is open to suppliers in both provinces, at lower thresholds. Commercial trucks need not be re-registered for temporary travel in the other province. Farmers will no longer have to restack their loads of hay at the border to comply with different transport regulations in the other province. Of interest, professional and trade certifications will be mutually recognized where scopes of practice are similar, and without undermining the authority of regulatory bodies. That means TILMA will be an open door to employment opportunities and choice.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did:
Resolution supported by the Canadian Chamber of Commerce in 2008 to replace the Agreement on Internal Trade.

The result:
TILMA was approved and includes the governments of BC, Alberta and Saskatchewan under this new Western Partnership Trade Agreement (2010). Ongoing watch for the rest of Canada – Provinces did meet and agreed to TILMA principles. More work to be done.

This led to the determination of four key priorities identified by Surrey Board of Trade members that challenge workplace productivity:  access to primary care workers (e.g., family doctors, health clinics); mental illness and health; elder care; and, community and workplace wellness. In order to take action, more information was required.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Throughout 2016, the Surrey Board of Trade held four Surrey Leadership Dialogues on Business and Healthcare with panelists presenting on primary care, workplace mental health, senior caregiver impacts, and opportunities for wellness programs. Further, SBOT teamed with several 4th year Kwantlen Polytechnic Nursing students who developed and implemented a survey of SBOT membership and interviewed a number of members.

Status: Ongoing

The school district was forced to use a disproportionate number of student portable classrooms this negatively impacted the school district’s budget, as these $100 thousand portables were not considered capital facilities and were therefore the responsibility of the school district to provide. As well, most of these portables were without bathroom facilities and were not as conducive to learning as main building classrooms.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Over the last decade the Surrey Board of Trade has been lobbying the provincial government to readress the facilities imbalance in Surrey vis-a-vis the rest of the province, by releasing a position paper in partnership with the School District, the PACs, and the Post-Secondary institutions in 2011.

The result: An announcement in February 2013 said a new Secondary School will be built in the North Clayton area of Surrey. The school, to be built on property purchased that month, is expected to begin construction early 2014 with possible completion in the Spring of 2016.

The issue: Community Court (Surrey Version).

What it’s about:

1. The community court is about partnership and problem solving. It’s about creating new relationships, both within the justice system and with health and social services, community organizations, area residents, merchants, faith communities and schools.

The issue: Surrey RCMP announced actions to mitigate gang violence by releasing the names of gangsters by BC’s anti-gang policing unit and to develop a strategy to include business to help combat organized crime violence

The issue: RCMP Contract.

What it’s about: As a result of the public discussion concerning the BC Provincial contract with the RCMP for policing, there has been a discussion about the continued use of the RCMP versus a switch to either a provincial police force and/or an expanded Vancouver Regional municipal force to a metro force.

The issue: Reporting crime and the reasons why many victim businesses don’t report.

What it’s about: Many businesses are subject to criminal acts ranging from trespass and petty theft from yards, to breaking and entering and theft of materials and equipment worth tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Yet it appears that many victims still don’t report crime, which impacts the police and their ability to bring

The issue: Shopping malls experiencing problems with their stores not aggressively prosecuting shoplifters.

What it’s about: Most large businesses are strict about prosecuting shoplifting, however, it was determined that many small stores were not particularly keen to pursue prosecution, or even report incidents because of inexperienced staff, time lost to handle thieves, and longer term issues of going to court and so on.

The issue: Metal Theft – As the value of metal increases, so does the theft of metal products, (primarily by the drug addicted) ranging from fences, aluminum window frames, and copper, including power and other transmission lines.

What it’s about: Drug addicted, low level thieves patrol business areas searching for any metal that can be stolen from machinery, buildings, power lines, street lights and so on.  The incidence rises and falls with the commodity markets. The problem is that the criminals have a place to sell their takings, often for ridiculously low amounts

The project: Fraud Awareness: Fraud awareness is the best defense against becoming a fraud victim.

What it’s about: To create an annual education program and tools to help counter business fraud such as fake cheques, currency and identity theft.

The issue: Aggressive panhandling in business areas.

What it’s about: Businesses in certain areas of the city are impacted by the presence of aggressive panhandlers in the vicinity of their businesses.

The issue: Identity theft through theft of documents, physically and online, and how to counteract it and repair damage.

What it’s about: Identity thieves collect information on people in order to use their identity to commit crimes.  This can be perpetrated against individuals and companies and causes enormous financial loss and injury to reputation and well-being of victims.

The issue: Identity theft involving the use of private information unknowingly left in photocopier and printer hard drives after disposal of machines.

What it’s about: Digital photocopiers, high-end printers and other such machines have hard drives, like computers, to input data while it’s being manipulated by the machine.  Many owners and operators of these machines were unaware that the data is never purged from these hard drives. When the machines are returned from

The issue: Identity theft arising from the collection of information from receipts of electronic transactions.

What it’s about: Businesses producing receipts use certain protocols to hide or truncate card numbers. Unfortunately different sectors truncate different parts of the numbers (the first group, middle group or last group).  A reformed ID thief identified this as a serious vulnerability because all one needed to do was follow an individual

The issue: Protecting the victims of identity theft from further harassment.

What it’s about: When an identity is stolen and used to commit crimes, how does the innocent victim prove that they are indeed the victim? The Ohio State Government has an Identity Theft Verification Passport Program created by the Ohio Attorney General’s Office to provide victims of identity theft with a way to verify to law

The issue: Long Gun Registry

What it’s about: The Long Gun Registry has always been, and remains, a political issue split between the abolitionists generally aligned with the Conservative government on the right and the Liberal, Bloc Quebecois and NDP in the centre and left of the spectrum.  It is also an urban versus rural issue.

The issue: Judges – French/English Language Requirement – A bill requiring that all judges on the Supreme Court of Canada, be fully functional in both official languages, to a legal level, passed parliament due to the minority make up of the House of Commons.

What it’s about: The bill, if it were to become law, would require that all jurists of the Supreme Court would have to achieve a proficiency in both official languages to a legal standard.  This is an onerous requirement and would rule out the appointment of jurists from much of Canada where French is not represented in enough numbers

The issue: Identity Theft – Notice of Disclosure when breaches occur.

What it’s about: When privacy breaches occur, companies must notify the Provincial Government as well as the affected parties.

The issue: Cybercrime (online crime) issues beyond Identity theft – Reducing Crime in Canada.

What it’s about: The Canadian Chamber of Commerce has spoken to the issues of identity theft and spam in previous resolutions. However, there is much cyber crime outside of these two aspects including espionage and terrorism which obviously pose a threat to commerce as well as the integrity of the country and need attention by

The project: Business security.

What it’s about: During large events, SBOT alerted businesses urging caution regarding pick pocketers and other safety precautions.

The issue: Medical Marijuana Regulations.

What it’s about: Marijuana Consultations Controlled Substances and Tobacco Directorate. The Surrey Board of Trade is a key and active player in the Surrey Crime Reduction Strategy. Representing the business community, we indicated simply that Medical Marijuana Grow Operations pose significant issues for public health and

Domestic abuse is typically viewed as a problem that occurs within the confines of a person’s home. However, abusers seek control and when a victim leaves their home, they are still not safe. Domestic abuse can enter the workplace when an abuser attempts to harass, stalk, threaten, or injure a victim while at work.

The implications for business: higher costs, lower productivity
Domestic abuse plays a significant role within a workplace. Domestic abuse can result in:

1. Reduced employee productivity and motivation
2. Loss of focus, which can also lead to increased risk of injury
3. Higher absenteeism
4. Replacement, recruitment, and training costs if victims are injured or dismissed for poor performance
5. Higher company health expenses
6. Decreased worker morale
7. Strained co-worker relations
8. Potential harm to employees, co-workers, and/or clients when a violent abuser enters the workplace
9. Liability costs if a member of the public or another employee in the workplace is harmed

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Policy Recommendations:
The Surrey Board of Trade and the South Surrey & White Rock Chamber of Commerce recommend that the Provincial and Federal Governments implement the following policy and educational recommendations:

1. Prevention
   Create and implement training, education, support, and partnerships, especially with the tools provided by WorkSafeBC.
2. Services
   1. Develop and implement an engagement strategy to identify key issues, specific actions, strategies, timelines and desired outcomes in collaboration with community partners.
   2. Develop resource materials to support the legal community and public in preparing for the transition to the Family Law Act.
3. Accountability and justice
   1. Determine next steps regarding domestic violence courts upon review of the BC Justice Reform Initiative report.
   2. Develop legal education materials for the public with the Public Legal Education Institute and the Legal Services Society on the Family Law Act.

The result: Composed position paper – more work to be done on the recommendations around collaboration with WorkSafeBC, and further advocacy.

other provinces in Canada, as BC had the lowest minimum wage at the time.

In March 2015 the BC government decided to tie increases in the minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). As of September 15, 2015 the BC minimum wage will increase, in accordance with the 2014 CPI of approximately 2% from $10.25 to $10.45 per hour.

The Surrey Board of Trade has engaged our members and the volunteer members of our Finance and Taxation and Social Policy Advocacy Teams to understand their concerns with the new policy and the impacts it may have on our members and the business community at large.

The Surrey Board of Trade membership expressed several concerns in connection with the policy of tying minimum wage increases to the CPI, including the following:

1. The minimum wage may not meet our current cost of living standards, leading to increased poverty that escalates health care costs and social spending;
2. Recent changes in Alberta and in Washington State minimum wage policies may create upward pressure on the B.C. wage policy;
3. It may be better to eliminate minimum wage and adjust education and social welfare programs to accommodate long-term low-wage employees; and
4. Instead of addressing low wages in isolation, all the programs that assist low wage and under-employed individuals should be addressed to improve job opportunities.

Recommendation: Keeping those concerns in mind, the Surrey Board of Trade supports the decision of the British Columbia government to tie the minimum wage level to the Consumer Price Index. The measured increase should provide a small improvement to low wage employees’ living standards without causing a dramatic impact on SME employers.

1. That the BC government, in alignment with its Families Agenda document, investigate the overall financial savings to the provincial economy if it increases investment in secure, comprehensive child care facilities and spaces that are consistently accessible and consistently affordable with a low flat rate, such as the $10 per day recommendation
2. To assist families out of poverty and increase employment opportunity by coordinating child care access and affordability with those programs that help parents / guardians overcome barriers to employment

Background:

Since BC published its Families First Agenda for BC in 2012, families and employers anticipated support for childcare access and affordability. Recent study findings suggest that rather than improving, accessibility is decreasing while fees are increasing challenging those most in need of assistance in gaining full employment.

In 2014, Surrey Board of Trade successfully raised the issue and gained national support at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce to request that the federal government

1. Work with the provinces and territories to fully examine the potential impact on productivity and the Canadian GDP of a countrywide system of Child care with possible implications for child care rates and spaces
2. The findings and policy recommendations associated with the aforementioned study should be delimited by, and respect, provincial jurisdictional limitations as well as fiscal considerations, associated with the implementation of child care policy.

The Surrey Board of Trade used the work of Dr. Paul Kershaw who found that work-life conflicts of parents raising young children is actually costly for employers with resulting higher absenteeism rates, greater turnover, and increased use of employer funded extended health benefits. Further, the cost to BC business community, according to Kershaw, is over $600 million annually and over $4 billion for Canadian businesses. These costs are exasperated by the costs to the Canadian health care system of over $2.5 billion and child welfare of over $1.2 billion. Inadequate child care is too costly to ignore.

Issue:

Finding adequate, safe care for children in one of the fastest growing cities in BC continues to be a major challenge for Surrey’s employees. Most care is a patchwork that provides insufficient early childhood education stimulus or simply warehouses children in a neighbour’s basement. The stress and challenge of childcare concerns do have a profound impact on an employee’s morale, productivity and ability to be fully employed.

According to First Call’s 2015 report card, BC’s rate of child poverty remains consistently higher than the national average, increasing dramatically for children of recent immigrants, aboriginal identity, female lone-parent families, racialized families, or with a disability. Child poverty is a misnomer of family poverty as children do not choose poverty but are in families experiencing under employment or unemployment.

Access to safe affordable child care is seen as a primary support mechanism to raise families out of poverty as it would allow single parents an opportunity to find and keep a job, give immigrant families opportunities to attend integration support programs, and address other barriers that families experience.

However, in BC as of 2012, only 18% of children under 12 had access to a regulated child care space, which is less than the Canadian average of 20.5%. Unregulated care arrangements include family members through to neighbourhood small care-givers, with no standards for safety or quality.

Using First Call’s most recent figures, BC invested $398 / year for regulated spaces, which is substantially less than the Canadian average of $838 / year (including Quebec; without Quebec, the average is $436). Further, BC’s investment decreased by $16 million between 2011 and 2012. As a result, parent fees are higher on average across all age groups in Canada. Fees are a major barrier to employment even with subsidies that may be available to parents/guardians that apply — although acceptance criteria is unclear.

Facts:

The following highlights were compiled by the Surrey Child Care Task Force, of which Surrey Board of Trade is a member.

Population Growth

• Surrey has BC’s largest child population and highest birth rate
• School District 36 is the largest district in BC with approximately 70,000 students
• Over 35,000 children are 0-5 years old in Surrey, equal in number to the 3rd largest school district in BC
• Over 41,000 children are 6-12 years old

Labour Force participation

• 1976: under 40% of mothers with children under 16 were in the paid labour force
• In 2012: over 73% of mothers are in paid labour force and is continuing to climb
• The rate for mothers with a child under 3 years has increased from 28% to almost 70% in the same time period

Child poverty (2013)

• BC Child Poverty: 20.4% (after tax)
• Depth of poverty has increased – average gap $11,000 below the Low Income Measure
• 31.8% of poor children live in families with at lest one adult working full-time

Child Care in Surrey

• Only 12.4 spaces for every 100 children aged 0-12 years, which is the second worst ration in Lower Mainland
• BC averages 24 spaces for every 100 children
• After school care and under 3 years old care is in serious deficit
• Very few facilities serve more than one age group
• 93% of available childcare is commercial
• Child care fees as high as $1850 per month for under 3 and up to $1550 for over 3 care, and is the second largest expense in a family’s budget

Recommendations:

1. That the BC government, in alignment with its Families Agenda document, increase investment in secure, comprehensive childcare facilities and spaces that are accessible and affordable
2. To assist families out of poverty and increase employment and skill building opportunities by coordinating childcare access and affordability with those programs that help parents / guardians overcome barriers to employment

that challenge workplace productivity:  access to primary care workers (e.g., family doctors, health clinics); mental illness and health; elder care; and, community and workplace wellness. In order to take action, more information was required.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Over the past year, the Surrey Board of Trade held four Surrey Leadership Dialogues on Business and Healthcare with panelists presenting on primary care, workplace mental health, senior caregiver impacts, and opportunities for wellness programs. Further, SBOT teamed with several 4th year Kwantlen Polytechnic Nursing students who developed and implemented a survey of SBOT membership and interviewed a number of members.

The result: Dialogue findings and research results are incorporated in a report that will be presented to the SBOT Board Directors early in 2016 with recommendations for further action.

$100 thousand portables were not considered capital facilities and were therefore the responsibility of the school district to provide. As well, most of these portables were without bathroom facilities and were not as conducive to learning as main building classrooms.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Over the last decade the Surrey Board of Trade has been lobbying the provincial government to readress the facilities imbalance in Surrey vis-a-vis the rest of the province, by releasing a position paper in partnership with the School District, the PACs, and the Post-Secondary institutions in 2011.

The result: An announcement in February 2013 said a new Secondary School will be built in the North Clayton area of Surrey. The school, to be built on property purchased that month, is expected to begin construction early 2014 with possible completion in the Spring of 2016.

budget.

There are 940,000 people in Surrey and the South Fraser region, the largest and fastest-growing region of BC. We produce 22% of BC’s high school graduates. However, Surrey students have much less access to post-secondary institutions than students in the rest of BC.

Kwantlen Polytechnic University and Simon Fraser University-Surrey together offer only 12.7 post-secondary spaces for every hundred 18-24 year olds in the region. The rest of B.C. receives almost four times that level of access, with 48.7 spaces for every hundred of these young adults.

The region’s historically low levels of access to local post-secondary spaces – degrees, diplomas, and trades certifications – has led to an environment where many students commute north of the Fraser River for their post-secondary education. But the distance to these facilities and the cost of this commute is a significant barrier. The lack of educational opportunities close to home makes access to post-secondary education particularly difficult for lower-income families.

As a result of the limited number of post-secondary spaces available in our region, more and more students are being turned away from the region’s post-secondary institutions. This is a concern to the Surrey Board of Trade.

Simon Fraser University has had to raise its admissions criteria. For 2012, only applicants who had a high school GPA of 80% or higher can be admitted. Kwantlen Polytechnic University, while in theory an open-access institution, has long waits to enter various programs and has raised some program admissions criteria.

B.C.’s Labour Market Outlook for 2010 to 2020 estimates that 78% of the expected employment openings will require a university degree or some post-secondary education (including trades).

In 2011, only 62% of Surrey’s workforce had any post-secondary education, compared to 71% in the rest of Metro Vancouver. Further education for a greater proportion of recent high school graduates and for the current workforce is of paramount importance for the people of Surrey and for Surrey’s economic and social development.

What the Surrey Board of Trade wants: The Surrey Board of Trade urges the Provincial Government to phase in a tripling of the number of post-secondary student spaces per resident in the South Fraser region from 2014 thru 2025.

Without this action, B.C.’s most populous and fastest growing region may not be capable of harnessing its potential to become a social and economic powerhouse.
With this action, Surrey and the South Fraser region – and the province – will reap many social and economic benefits.

The result: Ongoing advocacy.

The Surrey Board of Trade has already recognized through previous position papers that homelessness and a lack of accessible and affordable childcare are central issues that challenge our robust economy.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: The Surrey Board of Trade asked that the Government of Canada, in conjunction with the provinces, design and implement a ‘National Poverty Reduction Strategy’ with goals, objectives and target dates to reduce/eliminate poverty in our country. The ask is to include an ‘Affordable Housing Strategy’ and specifically address a  ‘National Child Care Program’ to enable parents to work and contribute to the economic well-being of their families, communities and country; and asks that all programs dealing with poverty and homelessness are to lift people out of poverty rather than to make living in poverty more manageable; that the Government of British Columbia work cooperatively in a timely fashion with civic governments throughout the province, local community champions, and homebuilders to develop new, innovative and creative ways to convert, buy or build housing stock to develop.

The result: Ongoing advocacy.

offices in areas with a visible homeless population. For many municipalities and business communities in Canada, homelessness is a real problem that requires expenditures on security upgrades to maintain the safety of staff and property. Businesses cannot realize their full potential while homelessness exists in their areas, due to reduced revenues through lost sales. The Federal Government needs to develop a new approach, which includes the reallocation of resources to develop a national plan that mandates the Federal Government to end homelessness within a reasonable timeframe.

Homelessness is a business deterrent that negatively affects commercial activity, harms tourism and deters investment. In fact, many businesses have incurred extra costs in response to increased homelessness activity in their area

A national plan to end homelessness will provide the necessary leadership to allow the Federal Government to measure the success of investments on homelessness programs.

Housing the homeless as a first priority is a cost-effective approach to reducing homelessness. Case study evidence shows that vulnerable and at-risk homeless families are more responsive to interventions and social services support after they are in their own housing, rather than while living in temporary/transitional facilities or housing programs. A national plan to end homelessness should adopt a housing-first approach as a best-practice model for reducing homelessness.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Recommendations submitted by the Surrey Board of Trade with the Burnaby Board of Trade:
That the Federal Government:

1. Reallocate funds, from within the federal budget envelope, to develop a national plan to end homelessness.
2. Establish a reasonable target for the reduction of homelessness in Canada and set a reasonable timeframe to accomplish this goal.
3. Maintain the housing-first approach of creating and sustaining affordable and supportive housing as a first priority in the development of the national plan.
4. Consult with other levels of government and community partners in the development of the national plan.

The result: Accepted as Canadian Chamber Policy. Ongoing observation and advocacy.

• Educate itself and its employees about homelessness and poverty in Surrey
• Send a letter to civic, provincial and federal decision-makers to support a national housing program;
• Ask the Provincial Government and BC Housing Management Commission to increase investment in affordable housing options south of the Fraser;
• Support the City of Surrey’s plan to permit secondary suites throughout the city. This will assist in housing affordability across all income levels;
• Acknowledge, support and showcase the efforts of community services providers that show positive results and use good business practices;
• Support initiatives that address low literacy and education levels as these are associated with increased risk of homelessness;
• Encourage funding of community-based services for at-risk youth that prevent them becoming chronically homeless;
• Encourage review of public policy given the double jeopardy of relatively high market rental rates coupled with the low shelter component of provincial income support.
• Business needs to be involved to make the changes happen.

The result: The Surrey Board of Trade has hosted as part of its ‘Leadership Surrey Series’ – a Business and Homelessness Dialogue from 2011-2013.

or programs and services that support business, cultural, social, health care, education, housing, or recreational needs will be made in ignorance and open the door to waste and abuse.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: After conducting a survey of our membership, the Surrey Board of Trade disagrees with the federal government’s decision to replace the mandatory Long Form Census with a shorter, voluntary survey. Like the Canadian Association for Business Economics (CABE) and the Canadian Association of University Teachers, we are particularly concerned about the loss of the compulsory Census Long Form as it will undermine and impact the economy, research and innovation initiatives.

The quality of data collected in the census would drop considerably if it was only through voluntary participation. Businesses and governments all depend on data for analysis, making investment and operating decisions. Funding decisions by government are based on census data. Small errors in the data with a voluntary collection could cost provincial and municipal governments millions of dollars. As the CABE stated: “achieving an adequate quality and an appropriate response rate from a voluntary survey will be very challenging and will almost certainly involve more resources than retaining the compulsory Long Form of past censuses. Secondly, the costs of maintaining existing programs in business and government will be increased because of the need to fund new data sources. Thirdly, high quality regional data at the municipal level will be seriously compromised, if not lost entirely in many parts of the country. This will require the development of alternative data sources with an enormous analytical and resource cost as well as a loss in comparability.” The Surrey Board of Trade in addition to our business members (which include universities and not- for-profit/service organizations) do not understand why the government did not solicit our input on this issue. We, with our nation-wide Chamber of Commerce/Board of Trade colleagues, rely on access to accurate census data for economic development and advocacy projects.  Consequently our membership, and by extension our communities, have a significant financial stake in the quality of the data.

If a small and voluntary census takes place, the lack of data and resulting weak decisions will tear at the very fabric of our country. Census information is abrogated at the cost of good governance; privacy issues can be addressed in other ways. We strongly urged the federal government to reverse its decision to eliminate the Census Long Form.

The result: The Surrey Board of Trade made their position clear and was recognized in the media. The Census Long Form was  implemented in 2016. POLICY WIN!

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: The Surrey Board of Trade’s position is: The Surrey Board of Trade supports an increase in the provincial minimum wage to a level more reflective of the cost of living in British Columbia. The increase to the higher level should be made in such a way as to ensure a smooth transition to that level and that the minimum wage be reviewed by government on an annual basis. One idea that was brought forward was the idea of a liveable wage.  British Columbia had become the province with the lowest minimum wage in Canada as well as one of the highest costs of living in the country.  The province of BC now had the lowest minimum wage in the country at $8 per hour, not counting the widely criticized $6 training wage.

The result: Minimum wage was increased by the BC Government. Much of our position was utilized by the BC Government.

disadvantaged both socially and economically. This potential outcome has spurred the Surrey Board of Trade to produce a paper on the state of education and its ramifications on the region’s economy titled, Education Today/Productivity Tomorrow.

• One-third of Surrey residents are under 19 years of age.
• 20% of all babies in BC are born in Surrey Memorial Hospital
• Surrey growth is approximately 10 thousand people per year
• Surrey School District is the largest in BC, 5th largest in Canada
• Over 1,000 new students registered for school each year.
• Lowest post-secondary rates of participation in the region

These are some of the facts from the presentation of the Surrey Board of Trade’s Education and Business Paper launched in 2011.  About 150 people from the business community heard of the challenges that impact the education system, in the context that the problems are also problems that directly affect business now and for the next decade and longer. As the paper points out, by 2016 one-third of graduating grade12 students will be from a South Fraser secondary school, yet this same region faces an imbalance of funded post-secondary seats of 100 per thousand students versus the provincial average of 244 seats per thousand. Businesses need to become advocates for education, with respect to funding, and seek ways of building a stronger education system by participating in it.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: The Surrey Board of Trade is seeking participation by the business community to act as champions for education as key indicator of economic success. With their education partners, the Surrey Board of Trade hopes to continue to raise the awareness of the problems facing Surrey and the South Fraser Region.

The Education Today/Productivity Tomorrow Position Paper, and supporting documentation is on the Surrey Board of Trade website.

The result: Meetings with MLA’s, Minister of Education, Minister of Finance – ongoing advocacy and observation at all levels. Some funding received in 2011 and 2012. Post-Secondary Funding Task Force was created.

workforce is aging as the baby boom generation slides into retirement. The economic fallout of shortages in IT, skilled labour, and health care could be devastating. We need to prepare our businesses – small or large, now! Tomorrow’s Workplace was multi-sponsored project in British Columbia linking the Business community, the Surrey Board of Trade, five unique test business-employee models, and an educational/consultant research team. The mandate was research, communication and collaboration, and finally, a toolkit to enable future development in communities across Canada.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: The Tomorrow’s Workplace Guide will make it easier for business to create solutions, to identify the workforce they need, to anticipate change, and to have a diverse workforce. The project is unique because it brings the community together to show how business and employment service provider organizations can work together to benefit their workplaces and the community.

The result: Business Tools were created: Business Guide, Community Guide and Facilitator’s Guide. Continued promotion.

Game Studios, Port Metro Vancouver, Schneider Electric, Schenker Logistics, Safeway, Westminster Savings Credit Union, we have committed as a partner and participant in the program to support the Tap Into Talent resource website and the Skills International hiring resource for employers. The Surrey Board of Trade, so far, is the only Board of Trade/Chamber of Commerce noted as a partner and participant.

Tap Into Talent is an online tool to help employers attract, hire and retain skilled workers in the face of current skill shortages. Employers can access a database of skilled landed immigrants that are pre-qualified for appropriate certifications, credentials and English language skills. The candidate database is available at no charge to the employer, who can screen, interview and hire at will.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: We endorsed this program and supported it.

The result: Ongoing support.

“We launched a one of a kind employer and community resource – www.getintheknow.ca   – an all in one stop shop – created in Surrey, that will help solve looming labour shortages and make BC’s economy more competitive at a global level. This leadership project will help businesses (a) Access new markets and new employees. (b) Improve customer service. (c) Gain experience. (d) and Create dynamic workplaces,” said Anita Huberman, CEO of the Surrey Board of Trade, Both employers and potential employees can access the latest tips, strategies and research at www.getintheknow.ca. They can base future diversity policies on a new workplace guidebook. A series of training sessions in the Lower Mainland will provide training to both employers and new immigrants. “There are all kinds of information and tools here that employers have never had before.”

Canada’s economy is experiencing big changes. Retiring baby boomers in BC will help create more than a million job openings by 2015. Canada’s low birth rate has not produced enough workers to replace them. Employers in Surrey and beyond can keep their businesses competitive by recruiting, hiring and training more new immigrants. This is a reality. These workers have skills and experiences from all over the world. They’re full of new ideas, perspectives and talent. New immigrant workers also belong to fast-growing immigrant communities. They speak different languages, and understand other cultures. They know how to connect to those communities. That is evident right here in Surrey, where 49% of our population has a mother tongue other than English.

There are many clear benefits to creating culturally diverse workforces. This resource, called ‘Get in the Know’ will provide businesses with the tools and strategies to hire and retain a more diverse workforce. This will build inclusion in the workplace and give resources to support employers in the hiring process.

The project was funded by the Ministry of Regional Economic and Skills Development. The Project Advisory Board consisted of business leaders including the Surrey Board of Trade, stakeholders and service agencies that are helping make Surrey a provincial leader in workplace diversity. Each member has deep ties to the community and understands the benefits of a multicultural society. Throughout the project the Advisory Board met to share their experiences and perspectives, provide input and direction to new resources and develop sound approaches for inclusive workforces.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: The Surrey Board of Trade, through their CEO, was an Advisory Board member. The Surrey Board of Trade supported this program and utilized the membership for key usage of this tool.

The result: Funding for the 2nd phase is currently being worked on by DiverseCity in this collaborative community project.

kindergarten meeting all of the developmental benchmarks they need to thrive both now and into the future: 29% are developmentally vulnerable.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did:

Created an Action Plan:

Education

Compile family-friendly activities & validate/document their efforts, gather member perspectives on specific “family- friendly” tools and sponsor a conference.

Advocacy

Promote members issues to appropriate local, provincial, federal levels, develop policy position statements, select partners and collaborate on specific issues and sponsor a conference.

Engagement

Develop a resource guide on where engagement opportunities exist and promote opportunities for engagement.

The Surrey Board of Trade joined the call to Government Leaders for a Smart Family Policy:
Call to action: The high early vulnerability rate in BC sounds a warning that the current approach to supporting families with young children comes at significant costs to British Columbians; it costs BC businesses on their bottom line; and it costs society now and for generations to come. We call on Leadership Canadidates to address the Family Policy Deficit:

Families need smart family policy to provide more time, more services and/or more income. Businesses need smart family policy to improve their bottom line. Society needs a smart family policy to advance gender equality, population health, crime reduction and a fair start for kids.

The result: Ongoing advocacy and observation.

the bottom line.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Created a Healthy Workplace Award, the first of its kind in BC.

The result: Will be creating a second phase of the Healthy Workplace Plan in partnership with the Heart & Stroke Foundation.

In progress.

flat-lined (after adjusting for inflation) even though the share of young women contributing to household incomes today is up 53 per cent. With their stalled incomes, young families must pay far higher housing prices, which increased 76 per cent across the country since the mid-1970’s.

The generation raising young children today is squeezed for time at home, squeezed for income because of the high cost of housing, and squeezed for services like child care that would help them balance earning a living with raising a family.  Yet, international comparisons consistently rank Canada among the worst industrialized countries when it comes to investing in young families.  Canada’s slow policy response to the decline in the standard of living for the generation raising young kids is not consistent with our proud tradition of building and adapting policy in response to our social and economic environment. – a proud tradition that includes public schools and universities, veterans’ benefits, workers’ compensation, unemployment insurance, the Canada Pension Plan and the Canada Medical Care Act.

The Context For Surrey

Growth & Diversity

Surrey is a young city that is growing at a phenomenal pace of 900 new families per month coming to live here and is projected to surpass Vancouver’s population in the next 8 years. Population projections depict that the overall population will increase from 483,260 in 2011 to 578,830 by 2021 – an increase of 95,570 people over a 10 year period. Considering the exponential growth that has already occurred in the last ten year period from 2000 (370,630) to 2010 (474,070) an increase of more than 100,000 people, it seems likely that even these projections are highly conservative.

In particular, over the next ten years, selected town centres such as Cloverdale are projected to grow (from 62,490 to 79,650); Newton (from 126,810 to 151,260) and South Surrey (from 79,660 to 104,890). Combined, South Surrey and Newton equals the entire population of the City of Burnaby (202,799).  Immigrants comprise almost 40% (151,000) of the population in Surrey; the majority reside in Newton (about 50,000), Whalley (about 36,000) and Guildford (about 23,000). More than 41% of all refugees to BC reside in Surrey.

The Most Children: the Most to Gain & the Most to Lose

With the largest number of children and youth than anywhere else in B.C. (approximately 110,000 as of 2006 census), Surrey’s school district has experienced unprecedented growth with 873 new students enrolled in 2011 for a total of 70,018  students in 127 schools, of which 38,662 are in elementary schools.  We have 23 Strong Starts operating out of 22 schools throughout the District; and a Community School Partnership with 4 Community School coordinators working with 17 community schools. Through the City’s Community Recreation Services, we have developed nine multigenerational sites, one stand alone youth centre and 2 new facilities – Kensington Prairie Early Years Community Centre and Cloverdale Recreation Centre recently opened.  Along with the current and extensive library services & programs for children, youth and families the new City Centre Library has excelled in its creation of child and youth friendly spaces and programs.

The Links between Affordable Housing – Family Debt & Child Care

Recent research reports through the CGCA of Canada, the Payroll Association of Canada, the Vanier Institute of the Family and the Conference Board of Canada all consistently refer to the increasing family debt load for Canadian families and the crunch to find both affordable housing and child care for those with young families.

According to the CGA Canada (June 2011) report, “households with an income of $50,000 and under were six times more likely to be financially vulnerable in terms of debt-service ratio.  Single-parent families were the only category where debt increases with age, and they have two-thirds more debt than couples with no children”. British Columbia stood out as the province with one of the highest household debt-service burdens in 2009. Households in that province paid 9.4% of their disposable income to service debt interest payments”. In three provinces – Alberta, British Columbia and Saskatchewan – the number of mortgages in arrears continued to increase in 2010 while declining in all other provinces. In 2010, Surrey ranked #4 in the “Top Canadian Investment Cities” study by the Real Estate Investment Network.   In 2009, Surrey was named the #1 place in BC to invest in real estate by the Real Estate Investment Network.

Based on the 2011 Child Care Gap Assessment by the Children’s Partnership of Surrey-White Rock, Surrey has only nine licensed spaces for every 100  children aged 0 – 6. According to a Metro Vancouver Child Care report (2011), Surrey and Langley have the lowest ratio of spaces to children (compared to West Vancouver with 25 spaces for every 100 children and Vancouver with 18 spaces for every 100 children.

The Costs To Business And Community

The Implications For Business: Higher Costs, Lower Productivity

Since parents are an integral part of the labour market, the business community pays a price when employees with young kids bring their time and service squeeze to their jobs.  The work-life conflict experienced by parents raising young children today is costly for employers.  The result is higher absenteeism rates for this group of employees, greater turnover, and increased use of extended health benefits – all of which employers pay for.

In collaboration with Warren Beach (CFO) and his CA colleagues at Sierra Systems, UBC’s Dr. Paul Kershaw and his team estimated that work-life conflict among employees with preschool-aged children costs the B.C. business community in excess of $600 million annually, and the Canadian business community more than $4 billion.  The stress from work-life conflict among adults with young kids costs the Canadian health care system 2.5 billion annually, and the child welfare system another 1.2 billion per year.

In addition to these direct costs to business, the ‘squeeze’ experienced by families today also contributes to rising costs of crime, poverty, education and health care.  Over the long term, research shows that Canada’s inaction in support of the generation raising young kids is compromising the quality of our future labour force and our competitiveness. A 2009 study commissioned by the Business Council of BC reports that unnecessary vulnerability among the Generation raising young kids is the real brain drain, costing the BC economy $401 billion. The pan-Canadian cost is closer to $2 trillion. For children under age six, child care services cost most parents the equivalent of a second mortgage, even though researchers raise concerns about the quality of many services. The cost of regulated child care services erodes take-home pay for employed parents more than taxes do.

In Surrey, 32% of children in kindergarten are considered vulnerable and not ready for school in terms of their physical development, social maturity, or ABCs/123s. (For Canada, 27% are considered vulnerable). These kids are more likely to go to jail, and less likely to earn grades to go to post-secondary schools. At least two-thirds of this early vulnerability could be avoided.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Recommendations To Provincial Government (these would also apply to the Federal Government also):

Families need a New Deal to provide more time at home for moms and dads with newborns, $10/day child care services, and flex-time that enables employers and employees to balance successfully earning a living and raising a family.

The Surrey Board of Trade recommends that the Provincial and Federal Governments implement the following policy recommendations:

CHILD CARE SUPPORTS
Reform the child care subsidy system so that parents pay no more than $10/day (full-time) and $7/day (part-time) making it free for families earning less than $40,000/year. Ensure quality services by providing funding for ample caregivers on site so that children spend their time in developmentally stimulating activities and play, including children with extra support needs. Caregivers will have appropriate training in child development and will be paid pay equity wages.

FLEXIBLE & FAMILY FRIENDLY WORKPLACES
Create and implement tax incentives to support employers to develop family friendly workplaces that include features such Family Responsibility Leave, a culture that supports work life balance, alternative work arrangements, and recognition of child and elder care issues.

HEALTHY CHILD CHECK IN
Introduce a healthy child check-in and parenting support program during a child’s first 18 months.

PARENTAL LEAVE
Conduct additional research and explore how to extend parental leave beyond 12 months.

The result: We have lobbied to the Provincial and Federal Governments. In progress.

benefit Surrey’s economy and offset the growing number of retirees, as the population ages and as residents leave the workforce.

Business, small and large, need to seriously think about the skills that they need to make their products and sell their products and services. A global talent shortage is poised to hit employers by as early as 2015. This means we will require a significant influx of talent to counter the rate at which our aging population is leaving the workforce. Employers in BC will become increasingly reliant on skilled immigrants to remain competitive in this changing economy. Integrating immigrant talent is critical to BC’s future economic prosperity. However, we need to see this talent pool not as a temporary economic remedy, but as a new reality about our diverse community that will unquestionably affect the way we hire and conduct business now and for the foreseeable future. We are taking a sector-based and regional approach to develop solutions that address the labour market needs of employers in BC. This is why we are meeting with employers in regions across BC to obtain feedback on how to more effectively attract, hire and retain immigrant talent.

Surrey’s visible minority population in 2010 was 182,860 or 38.3 per cent of the city’s total population and 24.8 per cent of the provincial population. Population growth in Surrey was higher than the provincial rate (2.9 per cent increase between 2005 and 2010, compared to 1.5 per cent) and Surrey’s business community has identified immigrant employment as a top business priority in the region.

With support from the Surrey Board of Trade, IEC-BC has invited businesses operating in Surrey, and the surrounding region, to participate in a guided focus-group that is expected to yield recommendations that will inform the development of provincial and federal programs and policies that support immigrant labour market integration in BC, where appropriate. This feedback will also assist IEC-BC in building concrete tools, resources and effective practices for employers, especially SMEs, that would benefit their bottom line and ultimately grow BC’s economy.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Employers representing businesses in the Surrey region met for an employer consultation, one of 15 sessions being held across the province, to obtain feedback and advice from BC employers on attracting, hiring and retaining skilled immigrants. Lead by the Immigrant Employment Council of BC (IEC-BC), with funding from the Province of BC, the purpose of the consultation is to better understand the labour market needs of the Surrey region as part of an overall effort to develop more effective solutions that address the hiring challenges of businesses in BC.

Surveys in partnership with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce to gauge issues from the local business community were sent out.

The result: Ongoing engagement with business community.

grants were being phased out, and their allotments reduced to under $100,000. Some of the organizations that applied in 2010 found that the amounts they were traditionally given were reduced considerably. In some cases this meant staff layoffs and downsizing of services often related to the most vulnerable in our society such as abused women, the homeless, seniors and children. To exacerbate this situation for these agencies, little or no notice was given and as a result these agencies did not have the opportunity to seek funding through other sources if available.

Our business members who provide some community funding were inundated with higher than usual requests for funding. Because of the economic downturn that impacted all businesses, these corporations were unable to help many excellent programs. The Business community was unable to make up funds that these agencies had lost. In addition, this event happened when the grant process had already been completed by businesses and the existing money had been dispersed.

Gaming in Canada has been linked to the not-for-profit sector since its inception in 1960. The public was prepared to tolerate gaming activities such as bingo if the proceeds were to be used by non-profit agencies that benefitted the community. Gaming expansion has always been justified by this relationship. In the Gambling in Canada Research Report Number 9, the author notes “that not-for-profit funding is a vital component of provincial gambling policies and that expansion initiatives are intended to enhance, not threaten, the gambling revenues available to the charitable sector,” and, “the public is less supportive when the expansion is for the simple sake of a tax grab.”

The business community not only recognizes not-for-profits for their good work but for their economic benefit as well. John Restakis in his paper Defining the Social Economy -­‐ The BC Context January 2006 states “BC non-­‐profits generate $11 billion in revenue and employ 147,000 people. This compares to $16 billion reported by BC’s manufacturing sector, which employs 167,000. BC’s non-­profits also reported the use of 1.5 Million volunteers who in turn contribute an estimated 114.3 million hours of work to these organizations.” The erosion of the not-for-profit sector is an erosion of the provinces economic well being.

If government had to pick up the social services provided by our not-for-profit sector, the costs to BC would be considerably more than what is spent through gaming funds. The leveraging of volunteer time is one of the factors that make non-profits cost effective. Most of these organizations are lean with salaries that are historically low. Another point to consider is whether these societies will be able to find the lost funding. Many businesses and foundations that fund not-for-profits are project oriented and require the project to be completed within a year. Only a few funding organizations will permit funds to be used to maintain the organization. Many charities appreciated the gaming funds because they could be used to maintain the organization.

Some organizations have engaged in social enterprise in an effort to generate sustainable income. This is a movement which we support as it helps societies continue their charitable giving despite funding fluctuations. The “enp” (enterprising not-for-profits) organization has been providing grants, expertise and education to not for profits who wish to engage in social enterprise. Some of our member organizations such as Vancity and Coast Capital Savings are partners in this endeavour. The BC Government has provided a one-year grant to develop a tool kit for charities. The BC Advisory Council on Social Enterprise is working with this organization, a move that we support. The Surrey Board of Trade also asked for an increase in funding their grant capability to encourage entrepreneurship in the not-for-profit sector.

Given these factors it is hard to understand the decision made to reduce funding to these organizations over the past two years. In fact the funding percentages of the consolidated revenue given to charitable organizations were 17% in 2009‐2010 and 20% in 2010-­2011 as compared to 35% in 2001-­2002 and 34% in 2002-­2003. If this continues, the societal cost to replace what not-for-profit organizations do will increase dramatically.

From our work with the non-profit sector we are aware that sustainable funding is a major issue.

What the Surrey Board of Trade did: Our member non-profit agencies brought to our attention their concerns about the reduction of gaming.

The Surrey Board of Trade recommends:

Amend the Gaming Control Act to permit the General Manager to dedicate annually an amount equal to 30% of the gaming funds deposited to general revenue to qualified charities.

Reinstitute the policy of three-­year grants, which will reduce the administrative burden on both the charities and the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch.
The General Manager adjusts the local and provincial caps on the amount a charity can receive in accordance with the projected three-year funding levels. Right now there are societies who will be experiencing a considerable cut to their gaming grant as the result of the $100,000 local cap and the $250,000 provincial cap.
The Gaming Control Act be amended to permit the General Manager to dedicate annually an amount equal to 2% of the gaming funds deposited to general revenue to the development of social entrepreneurship and that this money be granted to “enp” (enterprising non-profits), a portion to be for distribution to qualified not-for-profits to develop a social enterprise to provide sustainable income and a portion to provide educational programs to assist these charities in the development of a social enterprise.

We are also concerned about the section in the Gaming Control Act that permits the Minister to “issue written directives to the lottery corporation on matters of general policy.” The provision to make these directives available through the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch during business hours is not providing sufficient oversight. The Regulations direct the General Manager to post these directives on the web site for 12 months. We would suggest that these directives after the 12-­month period be available for public consultation through an accessible archive section on the web site.

The result: Presented to Provincial Gaming Grant Review Committee. Ongoing.

on the table would only see those business owners who do not already have a ballot to cast in the municipality given a vote as a business. Should businesses – which pay taxes, buy permits, and have to abide by the rules of their municipality – be able to cast a vote in civic elections? Or does the idea encroach on the essence of democracy, that is, the rule of people by the people?

What did the Surrey Board of Trade do? Issued a position: The position of the Surrey Board of Trade is that we do not support corporate voting.

The result: Corporate voting is not in place.