WARD STAMER -- It sounds like we’ve gone almost full circle and we’re going to be having the same conversation again (Part 1)

Estimates on the Ministry of Forests operations with Forest Minister Ravi Parmar, for forestry critic Ward Stamer – budgeted with $406,398,000

RAVI PARMAR: It’s an incredible team that I’m responsible for and get the opportunity to work with as well. I just wanted to give them a shout-out as they support me over the course of the next six hours. I’m looking forward to the discussion.

Ward Stamer ... it sounds like we’ve gone almost full circle and we’re going to be having the same conversation again. Part of that was when we looked at the current data and how many direct jobs that we had in our industry, we had approximately 56,000 direct jobs with anywhere between 150,000 and 200,000 other jobs that were tied directly to the forest industry, and that we had lost approximately 10,000 jobs in the previous year.

That was previous 2025. I would suggest that we’ve lost probably somewhere in that neighbourhood again last year in 2025.

So, let’s get right to the crux of some of the situations that we were talking about last year and that is the allowable cut. Now, on the understanding of people that may not understand how the process is, the minister’s chief forester determines what the Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) will be for harvesting in the province of British Columbia. Currently, that number is 61.6 million cubic metres.

Unfortunately, we’re nowhere close to that number. We have in the past, but again, as the minister has alluded in the past, between some of the reductions in pests and pine beetle kill and wildfires, that has taken a bit of a hit on our inventories. But nevertheless, our AAC is supposed to be 61.6 million cubic metres in this province.

The Minister and the Premier last spring told us, and the minister’s mandate letter specified, that we should be at 45 million cubic metres in this province, which is still only three-quarters of what it should be, and the minister had a mandate letter to say: “and a path to that 45 million cubic metres.”|

Now, as recently as February 2026, the Council of Forest Industries (COFI) issued a following statement after the budget came out. I’m just going to paraphrase what they said.

As the province navigates significant fiscal and economic challenges, the forest sector continues to face intense pressure. We welcome their recognition of the urgent crisis facing the forest sector and the government’s plan to make targeted investments that support this sector.

We are concerned about the budget’s plan for a harvest level of 29 million cubic metres over the next three years — not 45, and not anywhere close to the 61.6.

The sector’s immediate survival depends on increasing the harvest level through predictable and economic access to fibre. We look forward to working with the government to strengthen and modernize our management approaches to unlock that wood supply and improve global competitiveness.

Working together, we can reverse the mill closures and the pulp mill closures that we’ve been seeing.

Forests actively support our economic security. By working towards an annual harvest of 45 million cubic metres, these are the significant benefits that we can receive. We can retain our skilled workers. We can protect our critical infrastructure, including those primary sawmills, pulp mills, secondary manufacturing, that rely on the main manufacturing side of things and generate another $600 million in additional revenue.

Again, back in 2021, I think the direct revenue to the Forests Ministry was $1.9 billion. That’s now down to $500 million and dropping.

Expanding opportunities for economic reconciliation with our First Nations partners, enhancing our ecosystem health through innovative forest management practices and opportunities to grow our forest economy — that is what COFI had said.

A couple of straightforward questions to the minister, if I may. Back to the AAC, I have some specific questions in regards to what the plans are with the industry when it comes to the allowable cut.

If the Chief Forester is saying that the sustainability level is 61.6, the path to 45 is 45 and we’re stuck at 29, what initiatives are the forests minister, and his staff, looking towards in 2026 that was different in 2025?

I think the main request from industry is more access to supply.

We know, through some of the information that we’ve received, and we’ve heard it, that the timeline has gone from 45 days to 25 days when it gets to the district manager. We also know that getting to the district manager has gone from one year, to three years, to sometimes not even getting there.

What exactly is the minister planning on doing in the next short term, in the next three months, to be able to help alleviate these situations where these licensees only have one or two cutting permits to be able to rely on? And to be able to look at the economics to scale on having enough fibre across the entire region to be able to balance the high cost, being able to make a proper budget plan and not just be stuck with one or two cutting permits and knowing that they’re this close to shutting their facilities down.

Ravi Parmar: Thanks to my colleague across the way for starting us off with a really important question around the importance of being able to get our harvest right back up to where it needs to be.

The member is absolutely correct about the mandate that the Premier has provided to me to restore confidence in the sector and ensure that we’re delivering for workers and families and forest-dependent communities in every corner of our province.

The member knows very well the impact of Donald Trump’s tariffs and duties on our forest sector, and I also think he knows that, just in the last couple of weeks, we’ve had major success in NAFTA panel rulings showing, once again, in the case of countervailing and anti-dumping duties, that the United States Commerce Secretary continues to not follow U.S. law.

As early as yesterday, we received another ruling that shared that from 2017, countervailing duties were incorrectly determined, and the NAFTA panel shared that the U.S. Commerce Secretary had to go back to the drawing board. Hopefully, that will not only lead to a redetermination, but also to money back into the pockets of licensees here in British Columbia and throughout Canada as well.

It’s really important to talk about the impact of duties and tariffs, but I think what differs in our conversation from last year is not just the duties that went up and the 10 percent tariff —but also the impact of U.S. housing starts having gone down significantly, which always impacts British Columbia in a big way, being that we are so reliant on the United States. Also, where the lumber price is, and the price of pulp as well, a big factor.

I wanted to provide that as kind of the overarching comment on some of the things that we are dealing with and that, in many ways, are out of our control but that do not stop us, on this side, from doing the important work to ensure that we’re standing up for our forest sector.

It’s why the Premier met with the U.S. Ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, to continue to make the case for Americans to come to the table and solve this softwood lumber issue once and for all.

Also important, equally, is that we ensure that no worker is put in this position ever again. That means we have to diversify. We’ve got an incredible organization in my ministry called Forestry Innovation Investment. I’m not sure if we’re going to get a chance to talk about their work, but they’re doing outstanding work, led by Michael Loseth, the CEO, as well as the new board chair, Rick Doman, who are travelling the world and forging powerful partnerships. I was proud to join them in Japan and South Korea last year as well.

To get to the root of the member’s question around what we are doing to try to increase fibre supply, there are really two pieces that I want to alert the member to. There is the provincial work that we’re doing, and then there’s the local work.

On the provincial side of things, the member will have heard my speech at the Truck Loggers Convention earlier this year. Last year we led management unit reviews across the province to better understand what the sticking point was for not being able to move fibre. There are countless examples in the province of where we’ve actually got STI but it’s not moving, and cost is a big reason for that.

Building on that, we have launched a tenure cost obligation review across the province. We’re working with licensees, and First Nations, to better understand why costs have gone up. Are these costs that government can address to ensure that we’re making our sector more competitive?

Also, transportation costs on the coast have gone up 40 percent. That’s because we’re harvesting farther from where these mill sites are as well. Those are some things that we’re going to have to address as part of this new generation of forestry that we’re dealing with here in British Columbia.

I am committed, as is my team, to ensuring that we can work with licensees not only on the provincial stuff that we’re doing as part of our tenure cost obligation review but also locally on management unit reviews to move a path forward with licensees and First Nations to get that fibre moving. We’ve had a number of examples recently of where we’ve worked with First Nations to be able to address issues that have seen fibre moving.

From an economics perspective, we’re always having conversations. I would point the member opposite to the conversation that we had, last estimates, to the work that we did in Mackenzie with cost blending.

When we have these situations where cost is a big factor — and it speaks to some of the challenges we have here in British Columbia, historically, around competitiveness — we have to find out-of-the-box solutions to be able to address those challenges, and block blending in Mackenzie is one of those things.

I’ll also advise the member opposite — I’m sure he’s well aware, from reading the budget — that we have a stumpage payment deferral program as well, which I hope will help licensees. We’ve got a number of companies that are taking advantage of that program right now to be able to keep the lights on and keep their operations going.

That’s really important as we do our level best. on this side of the House. to ensure that we’re standing up for the forest sector, restoring confidence and, most importantly, standing up for those workers as well.

Ward Stamer: A couple of questions, then. When you’re talking about this tenure obligation review, what is the timeline on that?

Again, I think, as you alluded to, there seems to be not only a cost structure challenge.... We know that we have the most expensive fibre in North America, and part of that is planning. We know that costs have gone up astronomically in the planning, anywhere between 200 and 300 percent in the last five years alone.

That’s obviously going to be a concern to everyone going forward; What measures is the minister going to be able to implement to be able to streamline that process? Also, when we’re looking at the total.... When you mentioned Standing Timber Inventory (STI), BC Timber Sales (BCTS) ... I know that there has been some on the BCTS review, and we’ll get into it later on some of the specifics, but where are we seeing that additional fibre coming to market?

I think that’s one of the questions that is foremost on everyone’s mind, that if we recognize some of the challenges that we have, how is the ministry able to navigate through that and cut through some of the red tape and be able to expedite these permits quicker. Can the minister a little bit more on what the work his ministry has done in the last year on the regulatory and the policy side of things to be able to speed up that process?

Ravi Parmar: To the member opposite, thanks for the question around the timelines for the tenure obligation review. The team has been working since the last half of 2025, and right into 2026, to be able to meet with licensees in every corner of this province, First Nations, to better understand the concerns there.

In late 2025, we began an assessment of the cost of obtaining a cutting permit. It was really important for us not to look in one particular area, but to do this analysis in every timber supply area. Also to not do this in silos but to invite licensees, to invite First Nations to the same table to be able to assess not only our perspectives but to be able to invite them to be a part of that discussion as well.

We have found the cost to be widely varied around the province, and we’re going to be working over the course of the next number of weeks to bring more consistency and efficiency to the process to reduce costs and timelines. There is a cost component to this, to the member opposite, absolutely, but as we’re doing this work, we’re also looking at the efficiency.

Late last year I directed my deputy to begin the work of bringing all of the district managers together to ensure that we had one process. One thing I heard, and I’m sure the member opposite has heard this in his travels across the province, is: “This district office may have this process; this district office has that process.” That’s just not acceptable anymore.

We need to ensure that if you’re Canfor operating in the East Kootenays, versus Canfor operating in Prince George, that there at least is a balanced approach to ensuring that the ministry has a set number of guidelines. Don’t get me wrong, local is important. It’s important that we recognize that this province is vast in its geography, but it’s also important that we have an efficient process. One of those things that we’re looking at is our cutting permit (CP) and expanding use for that, creating more streamlined efficiencies.

Very proud of the work that the ministry did. One of the first actions I took was to take the threshold of cutting permits from 45 days to 25 days. And 80 percent of the permits are being approved in 25 days. The ministry is doing an outstanding job. In fact, in coastal BC, it’s almost 100 percent being turned around in 25 days, which is very important.

The member talked a bit about not only expediting permits, but just his comments around increasing the benefits of forestry with harvesting. I just want to note the member to again my remarks that I’ve made over the course of the last year at different speeches around active forest management.

The member and I had an opportunity last session to be able to watch a film from Murray Wilson called BC is Burning. I’ve actually invited Murray to sit as a special adviser on my Forest and Range Practices Advisory Council to be able to help advise the work that we’re doing on active forest management.

Thinning guidance for BC was released in April of last year. The guidance has been updated to include wildfire risk reduction, which will be released in spring of 2026 and I’ve asked the Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA) committee that reports to my chief forester to also look at the important work of how we expand active forest management throughout the province as we deal with the impacts of wildfires as well.

Ward Stamer: I thank you for those answers. I was just hoping for something to be a little bit more specific. When we’re looking at an allowable cut of 61.6 million cubic metres, which the chief forester has set as being sustainable in the province of British Columbia, and we have a path to 45, which has been mandated to the minister and the premier supporting, and we’re still stuck at 29, I had a fairly specific question. What tangible things is the Ministry of Forests doing to make sure that we get to 45, because, again, that represents 50 percent more than what we’re doing right now.

That is a significant amount of volume that we need to be able to not only bring back some of the manufacturing facilities that have shut down, but also to be able to expand our opportunities in this province. Again, it’s up to those businesses to determine whether they can afford that fibre with tariffs or not tariffs. That’s a business decision.

So I have a couple of quick, straightforward questions. Do we have enough cutting permits that have been approved to even be able to cut 45 this year? If we don’t, what was stopping us from having that happen? If the minister is able to say that we can reduce the amount of time from 45 to 25, where are the cutting permits?

It doesn’t mean that you have a cutting permit approved and you have to go log it. That’s not the way it works. So where are these cutting permits that we need to get us to 45?

Ravi Parmar: I just want to reiterate again that the work that we’ve been doing on this tenure obligation review is very critical. It’s important that we get it right, and that’s why we’ve been taking our time working with licensees. We’re not starting from scratch. We’re also doing this work as part of the work that we did last year with these management unit reviews.

These management unit reviews have been critical in my ministry’s ability to understand what exactly is locking up fibre. Right now, there are 48.7 million cubic metres of standing timber inventory across the province.

I shared a couple of answers ago that there are different parts of the province where you’ve got STI. I think of Campbell River as an example, where right now you’ve got an STI of 3.6 million. It was 3.6 million a couple of months ago, when I last asked for an update, and a couple of months before that.

We are approving permits. But we have to ask ourselves: why is that fibre not moving? Duties and tariffs, U.S. housing conditions, the price of lumber — which is important around why we need to diversify our trade and ensure we never put workers in this position ever again. But it comes down to the economics. It comes down to the cost.

As part of this ten-year obligation cost review, we are ensuring that we are being more efficient in our permitting, but we are also, as part of the management unit reviews, looking at planning stability, making sure that we’re looking at pricing.

I used cost blending in Mackenzie as an example. We’re open to having those conversations across the province. That is what’s going to open up access to fibre. That is what’s going to ensure that we get to that sustainable cut that the member refers to.

I would be happy to talk a bit about the allowable cut. I’ve been intrigued by some of the comments that the member has made in the media around this being a made-up number and stuff. It’s not. There is a thorough process it goes through. But I’d be very interested in spending some time, if the member is interested, in talking about his concerns.

Our goal is to make more of this STI available. That’s the work that we’re doing. It is work that’s immediately happening across the province.

I would also just add that as part of this work that we’re doing, it’s so very important, as part of the efficiencies, that we look across the spectrum around how we can be more efficient as an organization, utilizing AI. But we’ve done a lot of work on the permitting side. We’ve got more work to do. One of the biggest barriers is cost right now.

I think if you look at the ability for people to submit permits but also move on their STI, if the price of lumber goes up, that will help. If U.S. housing numbers go up, which they are set to go up later this year, based off of some economist reports I read, that will help as well.

Ward Stamer: I agree with the minister that there are a lot of factors that go into play in the cutting permit process, but there are many of our permits already in this province that are negative stumpage.

I know all about blending. I understand the dynamics of that. I also understand that there’s a bunch of issues when it comes to the planning that is taking significantly longer than it used to in the past.

We’ve explained before where, yes, cutting permits, when they get to the district manager’s office, may go from 45 days to 25 days. But it can take anywhere from two to three years to get that process through, when before it was only six months.