On a lighter note, how would you describe this video?

I stand corrected. Thank you, and I agree—that was a poor choice of words on my part. You are absolutely right that we cannot simply dismiss people’s concerns. This is why I sincerely hope we can continue advocating for a collaborative approach where the government and community work together on tangible solutions.

@LGSentinel @Richmond_BC Absolutely. Instead of politicizing the issue or reacting impulsively, we should work collaboratively to support both the vulnerable population and public safety. My concern at this stage is that our focus seems to be on the wrong aspects of the challenge.

The Vancouver mayor and council have already expressed concerns about how their community bears a disproportionate share of the responsibility for addressing homelessness in BC. There must be a province-wide approach where all municipalities share their fair portion of the challenge. That is why I agree that pushing the problem back to Vancouver is not productive.

@stevestonnotri1 I agree that we need to do much better moving forward to both earn the trust of constituents and address the homelessness and fentanyl crises. We must enact better legislation, improve services, and support law enforcement.

via @YouTube

Canadians do not need your agreement or Trump’s. Neither of you holds any authority in Canada. Our collective destiny will be determined by us—Canadians. Like Ukrainians, Canadians will fight for every inch of our sovereign nation against any unprovoked, unjustified, and disrespectful attempt to annex Canada into the United States.

In 2017, I defended Temporary Modular Housing (TMH) in the hope of helping Richmond reduce homelessness, support vulnerable populations, and create opportunities for healthy dialogue. When TMH was introduced by the government, it came with promises of security measures, professional management, and neighborhood committees to address local needs and concerns. However, once the first TMH was built, I observed RONA hiring security personnel, heard numerous complaints from local businesses about public safety, and received reports from neighbors stating that their concerns were neither heard nor addressed. The current promises made for permanent supportive housing don’t seem to differ much from past promises. We need to reduce homelessness in our city. We need to support vulnerable community members. But we also need more concrete upgrades and measures to ensure that future supportive housing initiatives work effectively, while treating public safety as the highest priority. I would like to see the government move forward with involuntary care programs for individuals who are potentially harmful to themselves or others due to addiction or mental health challenges. I would also prefer to see the new supportive housing managed by a local organization, one that understands Richmond's dynamics better than a provincial organization. Additionally, I urge the government to address less entrenched individuals when tackling homelessness. This includes: Seniors on fixed incomes who can no longer afford rising rents. Individuals who lost their jobs and are unable to maintain housing. Women and children escaping gender-based violence. Recently homeless individuals whose circumstances were beyond their control. While I support supportive housing, safety measures must be established to minimize negative impacts and ensure that the intended support fulfills its purpose. I sincerely hope the provincial government will upgrade and strengthen measures before moving forward, as we must ensure that public safety remains our top priority.

Today, something dumbfounded me a bit. I entered a parking lot managed by @Impark . After finding a spot and parking my car, the IMPARK staff were right there watching me. I scanned the Hang Tag QR code, paid for my parking, and then walked away. When I returned to my vehicle, I noticed I had received a violation ticket. I was confused because I had parked for less than 15 minutes and had actually paid for half an hour of parking. So, I checked the time the ticket was issued. It was literally just a minute after I paid for the parking. Since the Hang Tag QR code and my car were less than 50 meters apart, the staff must have seen me scan the QR code and pay. Even if they hadn’t seen me scan the QR code and pay, I knew they had watched me park my car and walk away. It’s hard not to assign ill intent to their behavior, especially considering the effort it takes to dispute the violation. There are no clear instructions on how to dispute the ticket. I had to click on "Parking Notices," but the webpage didn’t provide any guidance on how to dispute. Then, I had to click on the "Canadian Customer Assistance" option before the dispute option became available. The violation ticket itself doesn’t provide dispute instructions either. However, it’s full of legal jargon and threats designed to “remind” people of IMPARK’s right to collect fines and why we should pay immediately. Am I missing something? It feels like the private parking company is going out of its way to issue tickets and make the dispute process unnecessarily unclear, which seems to unfairly tilt the situation in favor of the parking company. Am I being too sensitive, or is this something I should escalate as a concern?

As Canadians brace for the unprovoked, unreasonable, and unproductive tariff from President Trump, we are reminded that there are no permanent allies or enemies in the world. As the international environment becomes more hostile and less cooperative, I sincerely hope that leaders at all levels of government in Canada take advantage of this situation to diversify and modernize our economy, trading partners, manufacturing sector, agricultural sector (food and water security), and technology sector. By doing so, we can reduce our reliance on any specific jurisdiction, strengthen our economic resilience, and reinforce our sovereignty. Dark times may lie ahead, but British Columbia will emerge stronger if we all work together.

RT @johangreg: 🚨 It’s Tariff Day — Here is how you can replace American Brands with 🇨🇦Canadian Brands. Save the image and Take this shopp…

@elonmusk Why is there an algorithm in the first place if you believe in free speech? If you believe in free speech then there should be no artificial barriers preventing “tweets” from reaching people?

@TecFeed @teririch

Everyone knew? Based on what evidence? The legislative schedule that applies to all MLAs? This only shows that @HarmanBhanguBC makes random claims without even consulting his own party or colleagues. Any returning MLAs, such as @JohnRustad4BC, @BruceBanman, or @elenoresturko, can properly fine tune @HarmanBhanguBC misinformation to proper scrutiny.

@Theoron1000 Unfortunately, only @HarmanBhanguBC claims it is a break time. I am certain even his Conservative colleagues are working hard right now.

@JacksonBluSky @HarmanBhanguBC is essentially asking British Columbians to “trust me, bro” when he promises that the legislative calendar wouldn’t reflect his schedule—while simultaneously criticizing historical legislative practices that his leader, @JohnRustad4BC, was a part of.

@Theoron1000

My apologizes, cannot provide detailed information on casework due to confidentiality. However, my team and I worked on many WorkSafeBC case files during my term, including some transferred from other constituencies. As much as MLAs want to be helpful in resolving issues, they must handle casework within the confines of existing legislation. When we encountered cases we couldn’t resolve but still feel the case is unfairly addressed, the best we could do was pass our concerns to the ministries, hoping they would consider our advocacy in future legislation. In regard to the data you are requesting for I don’t have it. It was never given to me. Maybe approach your local MLA as they may be able to request for it.