 Good afternoon everyone, I'm honored to be on the territory of the Muscovium Squamish and Slewa Tooth people here in downtown Vancouver. Before I take your questions I'd like to make a brief statement this afternoon. By now most of you will have seen and reviewed the contract entered into by the previous government regarding Little Mountain. While families in Vancouver were struggling to afford housing, in the middle of an active housing crisis, the BC Liberal government with the help of people like Kevin Falcon and Rich Coleman evicted 224 families from low-cost housing, demolished their homes, and handed the land over to a private developer with no deadlines for reconstruction, while at the same time offering them hundreds of millions of dollars in interest-free loans for 18 years. Thanks to the BC Liberal government's negligence and self-interest, Little Mountain, which used to be an active, thriving low-income community in an increasingly unaffordable city, became an empty lot full of weeds for more than a decade. I've heard the calls for a public inquiry into the actions of the BC Liberal government and the steal. I've also heard the calls for government to take back Little Mountain. To the first, I will say that if we held a public inquiry into every dismal, devastating, and problematic decision of the BC Liberals, we'd never get anything done. Let me save the taxpayers the time and expense of the inquiry and provide what would surely be the key recommendation of any such investigation. The contract was a giveaway. The politicians were at best, grossly negligent, and complicit, and government should do what it can to get the housing built as soon as possible. I have also explored in detail our legal options to get the housing built, and given this contract, there is no option where we can take back Little Mountain without having to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to the developer. That news, I will say, was very disappointing for me to receive. As a result, I pushed to get the contract released, but was advised because it was before the courts it could be problematic to release the contract before a final decision of the court was made. That news was equally disappointing to me. Thanks to the BC Liberal disaster that is Little Mountain, at that time, we had no enforcement tools and couldn't even tell the public how terrible the deal was as it was tied up in court. In March of 2021, I made some comments in the media explaining how disgusted it was by this deal and expressing my desire that it should be made public as soon as possible. Holborn reached out to me to request a meeting. At that meeting in April, Holborn indicated they wanted to move forward with the project and turn the page. I told them we could not turn the page until there was a full accounting for what had happened. The deal would have to be released to the public. To my surprise, Holborn ultimately agreed, in principle, to abandon their court action and release the contract as part of a larger agreement. This good faith gesture by Holborn to build trust gave me confidence to instruct BC Housing to work with Holborn in the city of Vancouver to come up with an ambitious but realistic set of timelines for a memorandum of understanding to get the remaining 167 affordable units at Little Mountain built. For the first time in more than a decade, I had some hope about this project. Since that time, BC Housing has been working closely with Holborn and the city of Vancouver to reach a realistic accelerated timeline for the completion of this desperately needed housing. Today, we are announcing a signed memorandum of understanding reached between BC Housing, the province, the city of Vancouver and Holborn properties to accelerate construction of social housing at the Little Mountain site. All parties have agreed to work and meet monthly to achieve the delivery of all of the non-market housing on the site. Explicitly in our MOU, it says we are working to deliver these affordable homes ready for people to move in no later than December 31st 2024. Moving forward, the city, BC Housing and Holborn will work closely to coordinate efforts during the development and building permit approval stages for the remaining homes. A planning group with the city will be established to track construction progress and to address any issues that might impact the construction schedules of the non-market housing. This group will meet regularly and include a senior representative with decision-making authority from each party. I would like to be clear, because of the deal struck by the previous government, there is nothing enforceable about this MOU. This is a good faith agreement based on what I understand to be the shared will of all of the parties to get this project done. Although there is nothing enforceable, I will say this. Holborn started this trust exercise first by agreeing to release the contract to the public. They didn't have to do that. They had a date scheduled in court and a legal argument to make. They also had absolutely no obligation to enter into this agreement, which, if it is not met, will just result in more bad press for them. It is a risk they don't have to take, but they are anyway. Our government is interested in getting housing built, and if Holborn is too, then let's get Little Mountain done. I would like to draw to your attention as well, part of the agreement which relates to a new building which is not at Little Mountain. BC Housing will be working with Holborn to deliver increased affordability and new rental housing on a site Holborn owns in downtown Vancouver as well. Make no mistake, there is a lot of work ahead, and not just housing to be built, but also trust. At this point I believe that Holborn wants to get this housing open, and I believe the City of Vancouver wants to get these homes built too. Certainly the province does. I know that the community wants this housing open yesterday, and I am optimistic that although 2024 is an ambitious schedule for any project in Vancouver, if we all work together we can get it done and get Little Mountain active again. I hope this announcement gives hope to Little Mountain's neighbours that this long, sad saga is drawing to a close, and also gives hope to the families who are displaced from Little Mountain. You were treated unjustly, but hopefully we're turning a corner today. We know it's not just about Little Mountain. It's about building more homes for people across the province. That's why we're working with partners to deliver 114,000 affordable homes for British Columbians, so families have a safe and secure place to call home. Thank you. I'll be happy to take any questions you may have. As a reminder to media on the phone please press star one to enter a queue. That's star one to ask a question. You will be limited to one question and one follow-up. Please also remember to take your phone off mute. You will not be audible until your name is called. Our first question today is from Lisa Yuzda, News 1130. Please go ahead. Minister, I can't help but hear that you sound dubious at best about this deal going forward. Can you talk about what some of the actions are in the MOU and do you feel optimistic that Holborn is now going to stick with what they say they're going to do? Well, I'll say this. Holborn has taken a number of steps now that they didn't have to take in order to build trust. And this is definitely a trust building exercise after a decade of this site sitting empty. For the first time I have some optimism about this project and that is in part because of some of the logistics that are set out in the MOU. Monthly meetings between the city planning department, between BC housing and Holborn construction schedule that all parties agree is realistic and achievable. And the fact that Holborn didn't have to enter this MOU and the fact that if they don't meet these commitments it will simply result in more bad press indicates to me that there is reason for optimism that we can get this done. But the track record of this project is a difficult one and so I'm trying to be as realistic as I can about the opportunity that's in front of us which I hope everybody wants to achieve which is the completion of all these units by the end of 2024 as well as the difficult road we've been on to this date. Lisa, did you have a follow-up? Yes, you mentioned 224 people were evicted a little those long years ago and can you fill in again about what kind of units we're expecting when this opens in 2024 and then the years to follow? I'll run through the numbers. On the original site there were 224 units. Most of the units were occupied by families so more than one person. Those units were demolished and the intention was that they would be replaced by 282 new units on the site. Of those 282 new units one building is complete, 153 unit building, 162 unit building is underway and 167 units have not yet commenced construction. At the second building site there is a prospect of 132 rental homes on the property owned by Holborn. Our next question is from Ben Milger, CTV please go ahead. My apologies I didn't expect to be so high in the queue but this is on a different matter. Mr. Edie, the Cohen Commission has heard from yet another B.C. Rodgers investigator that his boss has told him to stand down on investigations into suspicious buy-ins at casinos because it could impact revenues. As this commission winds up what can your government do to hold people to account for apparent negligence that contributed to tens of millions of dollars dirty money being washed through casinos every year? Given that the inquiry is still underway and in my role as Attorney General and frankly as one of the witnesses in the proceedings I'll refrain from commenting on witness evidence until the inquiry is concluded but I will say this you know there have been calls for a public inquiry into the Little Mountain project as well. I think the public does want accountability for the decisions made by the previous government and we'll do our best to provide that but in the case of this particular project that's in front of us today there are also the lives of families in the balance who want to move into this housing and we're trying to get that done. Ben, did you have a follow-up? Yes I do. What kind of changes would you like to see in federal laws and regulations to help combat organized crime and money laundering activities in particular? I've made many proposals to the federal government including RICO style, United States style organized crime laws, unexplained wealth orders, increasing and dedicated policing to go after money laundering in the province and nationally so that we don't just transfer the problem from one province to another. There are many opportunities available to the federal government and I look forward to working with whatever new administration comes into addressing the issue. Our next question is from Francis Bula Globe and Mail please go ahead. Hi can you hear me I'm in a bad place. Okay so the second bad part of the deal was that province didn't get any money from the 200 million that's still owing for the property and that won't happen until they get occupancy on market rentals. Is there any agreement on when that's going to happen and when the province is going to start getting its 200 million? It's our expectation that in the conversations around the table with the planning department Holborn and BC housing that market housing will also be part of the staging and planning around the conversation so that the site can be complete. You're right this contract provided a 211 million dollar interest-free loan for 18 years to the developer. The province has only received a 35 million dollar down payment from the developer and that is entirely in accordance and in compliance with the agreement Holborn has met all the obligations under the contract noting that there were very few obligations. Francis did you have a follow-up for the market condos and the payments to you? I'm sorry Francis you were cut off all it started at market condos I didn't understand the question. So there is no set date for the completion of the market condos or for payments to the province? That's right the focus of this MOU is on getting the affordable housing units open for the community and it's our expectation though in the conversations with the city of Vancouver that the market housing will be part of it but our focus is on getting the affordable housing open as quickly as possible. Our next question is from Chloe Durei de Perini, Radio Canada. Hi we have reports from people living in the Crop Park encampment in Vancouver who say addiction efforts have started this week even though there is no real suitable housing for them mostly only shelter beds which they say is contrary to a memorandum of understandings signed by your ministry this summer. What is your answer to them? So my understanding at the site currently is that there are 30 tents still there that there are 10 people who have accepted housing offers. There is a sufficient housing available for everybody who is currently sheltering at the site consistent with our commitment that we've made publicly on many occasions that we would not simply be putting a mat on the floor that this would be dignified in appropriate shelter with some level of privacy and including meals and things like this this is not substandard housing. So we have housing options for people and I understand that the park board is moving ahead to relocate people from the site. It is part of our agreement with the park board in the city of Vancouver that we will ensure there's adequate housing for people to move into and there is based on everything that I've been told by BC housing sufficient housing to get everybody who's currently camping at Crop Park inside. And Chloe did you have a follow-up? Yes I do. What are your thoughts about the lawsuit filed by the BC City Liberties Association over delays in responding to public complaints about police misconduct? Given that it's currently in front of the courts I'll refrain from from commenting on it although I do understand that the complaint is in relation to federal issues. Our next question is from Mike Howell Vancouver Courier. Please go ahead. Hi Minister. Can you tell me if Holburn has or continues to pay the BC speculation and vacancy tax on a little mountain property? Yes my understanding is that as government we have an obligation not to disclose individual taxpayer information. I would like to be able to share that with you but I understand we have a legal obligation to not do that. The speculation tax applies to vacant and unoccupied residential zoned properties as well as buildings. And I do understand there's litigation in front of the court in relation to a separate Holborn project in the speculation tax which is public information. And Mike did you have a follow-up? Yeah just looking at the the MOU it says that BC housings to the Vancouver and Holburn acknowledged that due to quote unforeseen and unanticipated circumstances the delivery of the housing did not proceed expeditiously. Just so I'm clear what were these unforeseen and unanticipated circumstances that there isn't the housing that's supposed to be there? Well I think that realistically the city of Vancouver the province of BC and one hopes Holburn did not believe that the site would sit vacant for almost 15 years. This itself the MOU and this process is not a public inquiry into what went wrong but I am sure both Holborn and the city and BC housing and possibly the previous liberal government would have some explanations but realistically what we were trying to do with this MOU was to move forward and to get the housing built. And while I'm sure fingers could be pointed in many different directions and I will point one at the previous government the challenge that's in front of us in a housing crisis is to get these units built and that's what the MOU aims at. We have time for one more question our final question today goes to Graham Woods from Business in Vancouver please go ahead. Oh hi David could you explain to me with the Public Interest Disclosure Act how does that if a government employee whistleblows to the ombuds person does the ombuds person have a right or a duty to report to the public? What I'm getting at here is you've introduced whistleblower protection laws however how does that advance the interest of the public in getting the knowledge that they should get according to the whistleblower if PETA doesn't allow for continues to not allow employees of government to go to the media? There are exceptions in the act that allow a prospective whistleblower to make concerns public but there are very clear restrictions on that ability. The intention was that a third party namely the ombuds person would be receiving these complaints and the ombuds person in his or her discretion could make those complaints public if they felt it were appropriate so that the decision-making around what to announce and what not to announce to the public would be in the hands not of government which presumably is the subject of the complaint but in the hands of the ombuds person the ombuds person provides annual reports about the number of complaints received being investigated and so on and the ombuds person does have the ability to make information public about complaints that they have received and investigated that was the structure that we set up the ombuds person has now provided two annual reports there are investigations that are ongoing based on information brought forward from whistleblowers within government which was the intention of the act and so in my opinion it is working as intended and the ombuds person will make announcements one presumes in relation to any substantiated complaints that are brought forward. And Graham did you have a follow-up? Sure clarify your your refraining from witness evidence of call and commission crept David pardon me you're you're refraining from witness evidence from commenting on witness evidence about the calling commission right Graham that's correct Graham my question do you think Edward Snowden should be allowed back into the United States without charges that is that is well outside of my lane Graham I uh I uh I don't feel comfortable commenting on issues of American border policy that's all the time we have for today thank you everyone thanks