2009
Legislative Session: First Session, 39th Parliament
COMMITTEE A BLUES
This is a DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY of debate in one sitting of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. This transcript is subject to corrections, and will be replaced by the final, official Hansard report. Use of this transcript, other than in the legislative precinct, is not protected by parliamentary privilege, and public attribution of any of the debate as transcribed here could entail legal liability.
(HANSARD)
PROCEEDINGS IN THE
DOUGLAS FIR ROOM
Committee of Supply
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT
The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); H. Bloy in the chair.
The committee met at 2:38 p.m.
On Vote 19: ministry operations, $1,394,139,000.
The Chair: Minister, if you'd like to make opening remarks. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First of all, I want to begin by introducing staff who are with me here today. I have my deputy minister, Lesley de Toit. I have Mark Sieben, my associate deputy minister and chief operating officer. Also, seated behind me, I have Sarf Ahmed, assistant deputy minister and executive financial officer of corporate management. There will, of course, be other staff coming and going throughout the time that we spend here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I did want to just talk briefly about the scope that the ministry has within its operations, because very often, of course, the focus is primarily on actions surrounding child protection. Really, it's important for everyone to know just how comprehensive the work of the ministry is in supporting children and families across this province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Of course, there is the role of child protection and family development. We also work in the area of adoption, foster care, early childhood development and child care, child and youth mental health, youth justice, youth services, special needs children and youth, and adult community living services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But more important than all the responsibilities that we have as a ministry is the very nature of the work we undertake — and that is, to be the kind of support that children and families need across this province. That means that we focus on the safety and well-being of children, youth and adults. It means that we work to advance early childhood development through very strategic investments and initiatives, and it also means that we advance and support a community-based system of family services that promotes innovation, equity and accountability. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1440]
Primary to this and leading us through the last number of years and the years ahead has been a guide called Strong, Safe and Supported. It's our operational plan for the ministry. We continue to make real progress through this in enhancing and improving services to children, youth and families to support healthy developmental outcomes. Despite the current fiscal climate, our commitment to the goal set forth in the plan under the five foundation pillars — prevention, early intervention, intervention and support, the aboriginal approach and quality assurance — has not wavered. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The coming months will see a concentrated focus on practice change, with the development of a new practice framework to help ensure a consistent, strengths-based, developmental and, above all, child-centred approach to assessment, planning and working with B.C.'s children, youth and families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Before I take questions from the member opposite, I would like to offer not only my special thanks for those who work with me day to day here in my office — those who are with me around the table today — but a very special thank-you and deep regard to all of those who are working in the system. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have had the privilege of visiting with front-line workers now in the north, the Interior and the Vancouver coastal region, and we are soon to be visiting those in the Fraser Valley and then on the Island as well. I am just so impressed with the work that they do every day, and I am very impressed with the commitment they have with respect to our future goals and in turning this ministry into the very first place that a family would think to call if they were in need of support or help. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With that, I'm happy to take questions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would say thank you to the minister for the introduction of staff and for this opportunity to ask some questions on the Children and Families Ministry budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like to just maybe explore a little bit the budget as a whole. I have before me here a number of documents that start with the service plan of 2008-09 and go right through until today — the budget that the minister has just tabled. There's considerable shift in the documents from the 2008-09 service plan. There are, in fact, a number of contradictory documents that I would like to ask some questions about. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have before me here, as I mentioned, the 2008-09 annual service plan report, and the budget estimated at that time for the total ministry was $1.987 billion —which, of course, is considerably greater than the amount that the minister has tabled today. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That document then was restated in the 2009-10, 2010-11 service plan after that, where, again, the numbers were restated downwards considerably to $1.388 billion for the 2008-09 budget and then, I believe, restated once more in the pre-election budget. Actually, they held in the pre-election budget. That was the $1.388 billion number. So the drop was from the '08 budget service plan — $1.987 billion — to the pre-election budget, which was $1.388 billion. Then, of course, to today's number: in the current '09-10 service plan, it states the '08-09 number at $1.382 billion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Perhaps the minister could first just clarify for me.... These are considerably shifting numbers — three documents all alluding to the '08-09. I'd just like to explore that number first. Perhaps the minister could talk about the severe drop in the '08-09 budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1445]
Hon. M. Polak: I'm happy to provide the information to the member. The number that's quoted from the '08-09 service plan budget includes services provided by CLCB to adult clients. The second number, the $1.388 billion, is a number reflecting the budget excluding those services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Then when we moved to our current number that we're dealing with, the change reflects, first of all, a transfer which has happened across government with respect to human resources — so that's not a loss to our budget; it simply means that the responsibility is taken on centrally — and also a transfer of freedom of information to central. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So if I understand it correctly, the initial budget that was tabled, '08-09, that talks about $1.987 billion…. The $600 million there is CLBC responsibilities. Then we move into the pre-election numbers, the pre-election budget, where we have the decrease to $1.388 billion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now, I see that in the '09 budget, then, of that year…. I don't have the '09 projections for the first service plan here, but I do for the second pre-election service plan. This was from February '09. I see here that the '09-10 estimates at that point were for $1.402 billion, to increase in the years out from that to $1.414 billion and actually to stabilize at that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But now we have the budget that the minister has tabled today, which is $1.394 billion. That's a considerable drop, from the February budget of $1.402 billion to today's budget of $1.394 billion. Could the minister talk about where those reductions are? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'll just take two steps back, because in answering the first question, I think I probably confused what I was describing to you. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The $1.388 billion would be the same as the '08-09 service plan budget that you were speaking of, only it would be excluding the CLBC. Then you speak of the projections that you had for a budget. If you take the transfer of FOI and the transfer of HR away from that, you will arrive at pretty close to what our budget is now with the exception of the initial February update, which had us with a $14 million increase. The current one has us with a $12 million increase. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I am trying to follow the dollars through. The '09-10 budget that was tabled in February has the budget for the ministry at $1.402 billion. It then moves up to $1.414 billion for the '10 budget. And we have before us now a budget that states that the current '09-10 year is a budget of $1.394 billion. Of course, that flatlines out in 2010. It does not increase. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1450]
So the minister is saying to me –– and I really just want to be very clear here –– that the difference between the original budget, those tabled in '08-09…. So $600 million went to Community Living, over to the Community Living file. Then we were dealing with straight up MCFD budget in February that talked about a $1.402 billion budget, increasing to a $1.414 billion budget. Now we have before us a budget that says we are tabling a $1.394 billion budget that has no increase in 2010. Am I correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Indeed, the February update had us pegged at $1.402 billion, and we then arrive at a budget today of $1.394 billion. It represents about an $8.5 million decrease in the number. That is taken up largely by the human resource transfer to be centrally managed. The rest, which is little more than $1½ million, is represented by a $12 million increase to our budget this year rather than what was projected initially as a $14 million one. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Okay, so we have a considerable $8.5 million transferred to a new HR function that's no longer within the ministry's area of responsibility. Could the minister just elaborate on what that is and why that was done? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It was a government reorganization, taking in all ministries. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Is that the explanation, then, for why there are no FTE numbers included in this new September budget? I know that in the pre-election February budget there was, laid out very clearly here, the number of FTEs, full-time-equivalent employees, and what was expected to be the staffing levels out to 2011-12. Where is that information to be found now? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Yes, that is the reason. Those will now be reported out by the Public Service Agency. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Where would I go to find that? Where would I look for that information? What minister do I question on that? Or where would that information be available to me? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: My understanding is that that will be reported out with the public accounts at the end of the fiscal year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1455]
M. Karagianis: Can the minister explain to me why that is being done? I think it's fairly important here and very evident that in the documents up to this point in time part of the estimates debate had included questions on full-time employees — certainly the projections of increase or decrease leading out into the future — so why now has this information disappeared? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I mean, I know in past estimates and historically here that has been one of the most compelling parts of discussions — understanding the number of employees within a ministry, what was the expected projection out in the future in retention and, perhaps, dramatic changes. That's been a really compelling part of the estimates. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm actually mystified why that information is now no longer available for examination under estimates and why, in fact, now we would have to wait for months and months to make that connection with the budget that's being spent here and the number of employees within the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It was a decision made corporately by government with respect to the better management of full-time-equivalent positions. That can be canvassed through the Minister of Citizens' Services, who has responsibility for the PSA. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Did the ministry have any say in this transfer of responsibility and, obviously, significant information out of their hands and into a different ministry? What, in fact, are the implications of that? What does that mean for management of these individuals? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The way it functions is this. First of all, workforce planning within the Ministry of Children and Family Development is still our responsibility, but the day-to-day operations associated with managing human resources are the responsibility of the Public Service Agency. As to the decision to go there, it wouldn't be appropriate to comment on the decisions of government cross-ministry, with respect to how those decisions are reached. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1500]
M. Karagianis: If I were to ask, then, about the February service plan, where…. It is laid out here very clearly that in the '08-09 estimates there was an expectation of 4,542 FTEs. In '09-10 that dropped to 4,437. That stayed the same till '10 and dropped again in 2011 to 4,339 employees. Would you still have that information, and are those numbers still accurate? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: As of July we were at around 4,200 full-time-equivalent positions, and we now have experienced the addition of those who are coming over from Community Living B.C. That amounts to about 167 full-time-equivalents, so roughly about the same as the February numbers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: However, the February numbers, of course, didn't anticipate the Community Living employees, so that's actually a significant drop — is it not? If July figures were at 4,200 FTEs — and, in fact, it says here that there should have been 4,437 — even if we take into consideration 167 coming over, which would have not been in this document, the February document, that is a considerable drop in FTEs within the ministry — is it not? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In fact, the decision to reorganize the human resources functions was taken in June of '08. Therefore, the February update did in fact consider the loss of the FTEs associated with that, and it also did project the associated increase that we would experience from bringing in the CLBC transferring employees. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Okay, that makes some sense, then. I really want to go back a little bit to this budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The February budget anticipated that from 2008 to 2009 there would be a $14 million lift. We have 2008-09 numbers which we've verified at $1.388 billion, and '09-10 was planned to be $1.402 billion, so that's about a $14 million lift. Then we have, again, in this budget projected for 2010-11 an additional $14 million lift. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We really have anticipated from the '08 budget through to the '10 budget that there would have been a $28 million lift. I know that the minister has talked about the fact that in reality it turned out to be a $12 million lift, so in fact it fell short significantly from the expectation in the February budget to the September budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1505]
Hon. M. Polak: Yes, I would have loved to have a $14 billion increase. It would have been great. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In fact, the projection, when one takes into account the change with the human resources going to a central government function…. We were projected to have a $14 million increase this year, and instead, that has become a $12 million increase. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm still trying to just add up this math in my head. This is the February budget I'm looking at because, obviously, this is a new budget before us. I'll ask some questions directly about that, but I want to ask about this February budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We do have, from the '08-09 period to '09-10, a promise of a $14 million lift. From '09-10 to '10-11 it's another $14 million lift, which is $28 million. Even if I take into consideration the $8½ million, which I believe that the minister said was transferred out for the HR component, that still would say that the previous budget promised a $20 million lift in the budget, and we're only getting $12 million. That's the way I read it. Is that not correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It's true that the February budget update contained projections, as budgets always do. We are here to canvass the budget for this year, so I will repeat that we had projected for this year to receive a $14 million increase, and we instead received a $12 million one. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: The minister doesn't want to talk about the discrepancy in that, which is fine. I accept that the government would like to stick with the story here, that we've had a $12 million lift, and ignore the fact that there was considerably more promised in the February budget, and that has been downgraded significantly. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Let me ask you, then…. The minister has talked about the number of FTEs moving back into the ministry from Community Living — $660 million that was transferred out in '08. Has that come back in, and where does that appear in the budget? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The $600 million represented all of CLBC, including adults. The portion that is returning to the Ministry of Children and Family Development is only those representing the under-19s. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: How much is that precisely? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1510]
Hon. M. Polak: The total amount that has been transferred is $89 million. Now, $62 million of that came over just recently, and $27 million of that, thereabouts, was already within the ministry. The total for staff and contracts coming from CLBC was $89 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: The $62 million that came recently — where is that reflected in this budget that's being tabled today, and when did the previous $27 million come over? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: When CLBC was established in July of '05, that $27 million never left the Ministry of Children and Family Development, so it wasn't a recent transfer over. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The $62 million. When it comes to taking a look at where to find it, we restated our '08-09 service plan to include the figures that would be moving around from CLBC. So you'll note that in the February 2008 budget you'd see a $1.326 billion, and the $62 million accounts for the change to $1.388 billion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm just going to try and follow the money here. In the 2008 service plan the $660 million that was transferred to CLBC didn't include $27 million that was left here for MCFD purposes. Of that money, now that the responsibilities for children under the age of 19…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know that the minister alluded in her opening remarks to adult community living services, and I will have a bunch of questions on that at a later time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Of the $660 million that left, $62 million was returned to the ministry very recently and is reflected in the February budget under the '08-09 restated estimates of $1.388 billion. Is that correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The member is correct. The $27 million wouldn't have been a part of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1515]
M. Karagianis: However, I see in the September budget — the one that the minister is tabling right now — in the line item 2008-09 restated estimates, it has a total of $1.382 billion. That's actually a drop from the $1.388 billion. Why is that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: That represents the restatement as a result of the government reorganization around human resources. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: But that actually doesn't represent…. It was $8½ million, I think, that the minister said had gone over to the human resources. That doesn't reflect that. That doesn't add up. From $1.388 billion to $1.382 billion is not $8½ million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The human resources part itself is about $6 million. The other changes are reflected in what then resulted in the change to this budget from the previous projections. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm sorry. I didn't understand that last explanation at all. I understand that the minister is now saying that only $6 million went to human resources, so there is $2½ million that has been unaccounted for here. Could the minister please explain that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Unless I misspoke earlier, it's still the same $8½ million, and it's made up of government reorganization, which took in…. The largest part of that was the human resources transfer, but there were other smaller items — such as the envelopment of the Minister of State for Childcare position within the ministry, the freedom-of-information one that I mentioned. As I also mentioned, there was then the additional reduction in what increase we were going to receive. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Altogether, it's about $6 million or $6½ million in government reorganization, if you take in all the components, and then about $2 million less than what we had expected or anticipated to receive when the $14 million was presented. It still comes out to $8½ million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Thank you very much. Again, some confusion here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minister talks about when the Minister of State for Childcare was absorbed back into the ministry. That should have been dollars in, not dollars out, shouldn't it? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Actually, that ends up being dollars out, because what happens is that we take over the workings of the child care portfolio. That is, rather than having what would have been an additional budget allocation, that would have been under the Minister of Children and Family Development previously as part of the minister of state. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm sorry. That didn't make sense to me. Let me just restate it this way. I know that one of my colleagues is going to be concentrating specifically on child care, and that will be tomorrow. But in looking at the movement of money here from each of these budgets, it's not clear to me that all the dollars have been accounted for. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There presumably is a budget for child care, and that would have been the responsibility of the ministry. If that has not changed, I'm not entirely sure…. We're missing about $2 million here, and I don't follow it. I don't understand where the minister has said it's gone. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1520]
Hon. M. Polak: With respect to the minister of state, it's because we're talking here not about revenue; we're talking about an expense. So the Ministry of Children and Family Development did not retain that expense of running an office for the minister of state and the positions involved. It's an expense, not a revenue. Therefore, it is money out when we eliminate the minister of state position. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm going to just try, for my own purposes, to understand exactly, to follow the money, which I think is the best course of action here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In the February budget we had a starting point of an '08-09 budget of $1.388 billion. That was then projected to have a lift of $14 million in '09-10 and another $14 million in '10-11. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We then moved to the current budget, which has a significant drop in it. First, the '08-09 has been restated to $1.382 billion. That is because $8½ million has gone to HR; to FOI and to the dissolution of the ministry — of the secretariat or whatever it was called — for child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That leaves us with a budget of $1.382 billion in '08-09 and the projected increase of $14 billion for the two coming years of '09-10 that was promised in February and then disappeared and became a simple $12 million lift for '09, with nothing in '10 and beyond that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's the way I read it. Hopefully, that's clear. Can the minister verify if I have made the right connections now in the budget? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'll go through what we have in terms of each of the components that represented the government reorganization. The minister of state — the reduction represented there was $337,000. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The human resources transfer to the Public Service Agency was $2.584 million. There was also a chargeback to PSA, which was also another part of that, which was $2.972 million. Then there was the reduction in the freedom-of-information chargeback, which was $312. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The rest is made up by a decrease of $14 million in the projected or anticipated increase that we were hoping for in our budget, which now is at $12 million for us. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Could I have the minister restate, please, the transfer to HR? I heard that as being considerably less than $6 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Yeah, it's pretty close to $6 million. You've got $2.584 million in terms of the transfer. Then the chargeback, which is another component of that, is $2.972 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Okay, thank you. I think I followed that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Let's talk now about the budget that has been tabled today. This is the '09-10 budget, and the budget year runs from March of 2009 to the end of April 2010. Am I correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Just reverse the months. It runs from April to March. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: In fact, the minister is tabling a budget today for a budgetary period that we are already — what are we? — 8/10 or 8/12 of the way through or something. At this point it is November, and this is a budget that encompasses the time from April 2009 forward to today and projects through into March 2010, which is five months away. So we are 7/12 of the way through this year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: That is correct. We had a budget update in September as a result of an election in May. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Perhaps the minister, then, could talk a little bit about what the ramifications have been for the ministry on a budget that was tabled in February, which would have projected the budget for the ministry at $1.402 billion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1525]
We're now 7/12 of the way through, so we would have been operating up until this point on a budget of $1.402 billion, which has now been reduced to $1.394 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Could the minister talk about what that has meant, in operational terms, for 7/12 of the year at this point? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[J. McIntyre in the chair.]
Hon. M. Polak: The impact with respect to the change from February to now is about $2 million, and that represents less than 0.001 percent of our overall budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: What the minister is saying is that in fact we're a great percentage, almost the majority, of the way through the year, yet a significant change in budget has meant very little? The $2 million that the minister is referring to…. I'm not sure I understand what she's saying. If the ministry, in February of 2009, went in expecting a budget of $1.402 billion…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There was obviously reorganization going on where there were dollars going over into this new HR. That has had significant impact on the government, on the running of the ministry, if in fact we're now tabling a budget that is $1.394 billion. That's considerably lower. How has the ministry been operating for the last seven months? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I have to admit that I added a zero into my percents there. I was overexuberant with my percents. I should have said 0.01 percent. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The fact remains that in February we tabled a budget with a $14 million increase. As a result of the September budget, we tabled a budget with a $12 million increase. That represents a difference of $2 million, which is less than 0.01 percent of our budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Has the transfer, then, of the $8½ million to HR and FOI and the various things that the minister has outlined had any implications whatsoever? In reality, now the ministry is operating with a much smaller budget than what was anticipated in February. What are the implications of that? Has that made any change whatsoever in the operating funding? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Just to clarify, the $8½ million is complete with the government reorganization and the reduction of the $2 million. The reduction with respect to the government reorganization…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
All those services are now being provided by other ministries and agencies of government. They are not being provided by the Ministry of Children and Family Development. Therefore, the transfer of those funds in support of what are no longer direct ministry employees has no impact on us. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1530]
M. Karagianis: I'd like to talk a little bit about the FTEs. Again, because some of this is no longer as easy to follow and as transparent as it was in the past, I would have to ask what in fact has been gained by moving all of these HR resources to a different government responsibility. What has been gained by MCFD in moving the transparency around FTEs out of this ministry and into another body that reports out in a completely different stream than these estimates? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In terms of the overall benefits of the government reorganization, that would be something to canvass with the minister responsible for the Public Service Agency. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: But I am actually canvassing with the Minister of Children and Family Development what the implications are of having all of the HR dealt with someplace else, where there is no reporting out. What does that mean in terms of the day-to-day operations? How does the ministry stay in touch with what is happening with those HR functions? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In terms of the function of the relationship, workforce planning still remains our responsibility as a ministry. Budgeting for the workforce planning still remains our responsibility. In essence, the Public Service Agency provides a service to the ministry by managing the day-to-day operations associated with managing our human resources — hiring, firing, etc. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Then how does the minister track things like retention of employees? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: There is a common human resource system, and all ministries have access to their data. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: This seems to me to be a bit disconnected from the day-to-day operations. If in fact you're budgeting, paying for the staff, but they're being managed someplace else outside of the view and oversight of your ministry, how is that connection made between staff and responsibilities within the ministry, all of the accountability within the ministry? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, as we get into more depth here about activities of the ministry…. How do you provide that oversight if you're not technically responsible for any of your own staff? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The employees are still employees of the Ministry of Children and Family Development, and as such, there is the same oversight and the same management of those employees as there always has been. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The difference is that the Public Service Agency provides a service to us in managing the day-to-day human resource functions that are associated with the actions of hiring someone or managing any other level of different human resource aspect. In terms of the jobs they provide, they are still Ministry of Children and Family Development employees. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Can the minister please explain to me what the benefit of this new system is to you? What is the actual front-line, on-the-ground benefit of this system? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1535]
Hon. M. Polak: The impact on our ministry is neutral. The impact with respect to the ease with which central government is able to manage full-time employees through the public service is something to be canvassed with the minister responsible for the Public Service Agency. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would have to say that right there is, for me, one of the huge disconnects here. When I'm asking questions about FTEs within this ministry, the minister says: "I can't answer these questions because that's the responsibility of the new HR component of the government reorganization here." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The day-to-day responsibility for what we assume at this point…. I believe that the minister said that we're somewhere around 4,300 FTEs. Is that true? I mean, whatever the number of FTEs is, why is that not stated here? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If, in fact, this is simply a matter of an HR system that takes care of the day-to-day management…. One would assume that would be the benefits, the tracking of hours — I mean, I'm not entirely sure, exactly — and all of the basic HR tasks of any HR department. But why would this not be reported out within the ministry, then, as being FTEs within this ministry? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You can't have it both ways. You can't say: "We're paying for the staff and FTEs, but we're not responsible for them. They're someplace else. We don't have to report them out. We don't…." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I don't understand, particularly, why they're being exempted from reporting out in the current service plan. There'd be no reason. If this is simply an arm's-length HR function that deals with minutiae, then I don't understand why it's not being clearly reported out that these FTEs are based within this ministry and are definitely connected to the budget of this ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I just do not see what the advantage is in any way. I don't understand the minister's explanation as to why they're no longer included here, and it's vague. It's difficult to find. I have to wait until Public Accounts reports out before we can ask simple questions about the number of FTEs within this ministry. I simply do not make the connection here at all. I don't understand why they wouldn't be reported out if it's such a simple HR function that's being performed elsewhere. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I want to remind the member that earlier on she did ask a question specific to the number of FTEs that we had within the ministry and the number coming from CLBC. We provided that information. We're happy to provide information with respect to FTEs in different areas. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the management function, again I want to stress that these are still Ministry of Children and Family Development employees. The workforce planning responsibility remains with us. The planning for budget remains with us. The difference is that we are paying for a service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We're receiving a service, if you will, from PSA, much as you would, in a business, hire a company to manage your human resources functions. You would still, as that company, retain supervisory and management authority over those employees. You would still know what they were doing day to day, but you would still, if you had a sizable enough business, perhaps decide to purchase services from a human resources company that could provide that service to you. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The same thing is happening here with respect to the impact on the Ministry of Children and Family Development. I've said earlier that the impact is neutral. With respect to any potential benefits for government as a whole, that would be the responsibility of the minister that is responsible for the Public Service Agency to respond. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I understand, certainly, the function of the HR component of this. However, the February budget very clearly states the number of FTEs and the expected change in that number going out years ahead, which dropped about a hundred FTEs for each of the years going out forward from 2008-09 to '09-10 and '10-11. There was a considerable drop. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I understand that the minister has now talked about a number of employees who are moving over from CLBC to be added to this, but all of that information is missing from the current September budget. I'm unclear why that would need to be missing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1540]
If, in fact, you are simply obtaining a service — and that makes perfect sense — why are those numbers not stated clearly here? Why do those FTEs not remain as part of the reporting-out of the service plan of this ministry? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: As I've stated before, a corporate decision was made to pull all of that from individual service plans of ministries to be within the Public Service Agency, to be reported out with the public accounts. It's not only the Ministry of Children and Family Development. It's all ministries across government, and all of those numbers will be freely available at that time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So a corporate decision — that's a completely different twist on why we're doing this. The corporate decision has been made across government not to report out on FTEs. Then, certainly, I think that will be an explanation we'll be pursuing in a number of ways. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But is it fair to say that, based on the last information we had here, we won't get a reporting-out from PSA for some time? It's not like I could have that to compare it here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The last projection we had from the ministry in February was that there was going to be a significant drop in the number of FTEs, excluding this movement of CLBC employees across, because it would have been the same regardless of whether they came in '08-09, '10-11 — whenever they came over, those 167 employees. It looks like there's going to be a considerable expectation of a reduction in numbers of FTEs over the coming years. Is that still the case? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: My reference to a corporate decision is no different than saying that there was a government decision. That's what that means. It was a corporate decision. It's no different than the answers I've been giving throughout this afternoon around the FTEs. So I'm not sure what the member intended by that statement. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the projected drop in the number of FTEs, that was related to the decision around government reorganization and the loss of full-time-equivalents and also to attrition. In fact, our FTE numbers are fairly stable, and this year — unlike many other ministries — we didn't have to issue a single layoff notice. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are certainly in good shape for this budget year in terms of our FTEs, albeit facing the same challenges as every other ministry. Nevertheless, we're managing to what our budget has. At this stage, our numbers in terms of FTEs are fairly stable, as I've canvassed earlier. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So the minister is saying that the expected drop in at least a hundred FTEs each year projected out from '08 is, in fact, not occurring? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The member is talking about projections that have been made in the past. I can speak about this budget year, and I can tell you that our numbers are stable, that we have not had to issue a single layoff notice. We certainly, as the years go forward, will have to be managing our budget. We will be able to canvass that when the time comes in the coming years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1545]
M. Karagianis: Under the new HR structure at PSA, when government decides to reduce costs or find savings or repurpose or all the other clever terms that you're using these days for cutting, what happens, then, if all of the employees…? If government decides to and has been.... [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think we'll document a little bit of information here about expectations of reductions. So PSA is given a directive to reduce staff by 20 percent. What say do you have over how that affects your own employees? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Again, the Ministry of Children and Family Development maintains its responsibility for workforce planning and its responsibility for the budget to support that and managing that budget. Those decisions are not made by the Public Service Agency. Those decisions are made by the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: In the case of…. We know that there have been some vacancies and there has been some attrition within the ministry, retirements. How are those being treated? Are you filling those positions as they come available, or are you holding the line with attritions and retirements? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: We handle retirements and we handle vacancies in a way that allows us to best handle supporting front-line positions. In fact, our public position — it's well known — is that we are actively recruiting for those to fill vacancies that we have in front-line positions. We will continue to be doing that aggressively. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to those retirements and open positions that would be represented in the administrative and management area, what we try to do, as we approach different vacant positions, is to take a look at them from the perspective of whether or not we can provide better value so that we can then direct more resources to the front line. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
A good example of that is the work that we've been doing with the Ministry of Housing and Social Development. We have combined our legislative and legal services teams, so no one lost their job through attrition. We were able to then create one unit, thereby saving administrative and management functions for both ministries and, at the same time, not having to see a loss in staff outside of what would be natural. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm not sure I got a really straightforward answer there about whether or not you're filling retirements or whether or not you're simply allowing those positions to go vacant. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: When it comes to front-line positions, we are actively recruiting, and we will continue to do that. When it comes to those positions that are not front-line, direct services, we consider always whether or not we need to fill those positions as they come open or if there is a better, more efficient way of doing business, as in the case I cited where we're working with Housing and Social Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Now, a letter that was sent out this summer from the head of the B.C. Public Service had very clear directives to all government employees. I'll read from that letter. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1550]
This is from Jessica McDonald, and this states: "Significant work has been underway for some time across ministries to reduce operating costs, rethink program delivery and produce new solutions for managing within limited budgets. Ministries have also been working diligently to map their current workforce to their salary budgets." Then she goes on to talk about a number of steps here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like to know, in light of this directive, exactly what steps the ministry has taken to follow the directions that have been given to them by Ms. McDonald. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Actually, the example I just gave is a pretty good one to reference the kind of work that goes on in response to that. It is, in fact, the work that we've done to map what we provide for employees, or what we provide as numbers of employees to what we have for a salary budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's that that has resulted in our prioritizing front-line services and deciding that while we will actively recruit in that area, when it comes to management functions, administrative functions, we will be looking for every opportunity to provide services in different ways that can be more effective, more efficient, and thus allow us to provide greater funding to front-line services. So that example with respect to the legislative and legal services functions of Housing and Social Development and MCFD working together as a team is a very good example of responding to that type of direction. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: This directive goes on to say: "Wherever possible, we have avoided filling vacancies created from retirements and resignations…and have reassigned staff to fill vacant positions…. Restrictions have been placed on…external hires." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now, I know that the minister alluded earlier to recruiting for the front line, and I'd like to know where that matches up with this directive to restrict external hires. How can you be recruiting at the front lines and then be expected not to have any external hires? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The letter to which the member is referring describes an overall hiring freeze on those coming from outside, and that did apply for the month of September. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Subsequent to that, there were restrictions lifted for ministries who were providing front-line, direct services, such as the Ministry of Children and Family Development, which has therefore enabled us to continue with our active recruitment in the area of front-line services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1555]
M. Karagianis: The letter does go on to say that "821 employees signed up for…voluntary reduced workweek." Can the minister tell me how many within MCFD have signed up for that reduced workweek and whether or not there are expectations of more of those kinds of voluntary sign-ups? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I am told that it's a very small number. We don't have that precisely with us, but we can provide that to you tomorrow. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: That would be very helpful. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Two other things particularly caught my attention in this letter from Ms. McDonald. The reference here to "the opportunities and skills database was created as a new tool to ensure that…openings across ministries are first considered for internal placement…." I expect that as the writer of the letter is the head of the public service, this has been created as part of the HR function. Has the ministry been expected to dedicate any dollars towards that database? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: No. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Then, in the second-to-last item out of this particular letter. Ms. McDonald says that "the public service transformation fund was established to support strategic investments in key job opportunities and redesigning processes that help us to deliver services with fewer staff. These projections provide an opportunity for additional staff placements, which will also be offered this week." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is in August. I know that the minister alluded to the fact that restrictions were lifted for MCFD in September. What does this mean, and what does it mean to the minister and to the ministry itself — this public service transformation fund and the strategic investments and key job opportunities and redesigning processes? What is that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: That fund is managed through the Ministry of Citizens' Services, and that should be canvassed with that ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Great. One more question that came out of the directive that came from Ms. McDonald. She has reiterated in here that the government has "no plans to offer voluntary departure or early retirement programs." Is that the case for the ministry — that there will be no offer of voluntary departure? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: When it comes to decisions of that nature, government has one public service. So that would be consistent for MCFD, as it would be for any other ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So when the restrictions were lifted with regard to front-line hiring, it didn't apply to any of the other expectations that there would be no voluntary early retirement or other such programs to help reduce costs or find budget efficiencies? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The response that I have provided with respect to restrictions being lifted was specifically regarding the ability of the ministry to make outside hires. The fact is that that was then recognized as something that needed to be handled differently for ministries such as my ministry, which has direct front-line services and managed caseloads, but the response was specific to that issue that was canvassed by the member around our ability to hire externally. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would like to ask a question with regard to the division for quality assurance. It's my understanding that there are perhaps up to 60 staff in that quality assurance division. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1600]
Could the minister please give me a bit more enlightenment on what this division is doing — the staffing there and their progress? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Before I provide the answer for that question, we do have the number with respect to the staff who participated in the voluntary workweek reduction, and it's 23. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to the current question, I just need some clarification from the member. Was she requesting information about our provincial quality assurance office or about the quality assurance functions that are represented regionally? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I specifically just want to ask about the division of quality assurance that was created within the ministry and just ask for some explanation about it — its current function, status and number of staff, please. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The FTE count in that department is about 50. It's important to note, though, that we didn't establish a new team in the sense that we suddenly created a group that were doing this. We did put in place an ADM, Sandra Griffin, and she then pulled together existing staff and existing work that was going on into an integrated quality assurance team. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1605]
They do work in the areas of evaluation and outcome-related data — those kinds of initiatives that would support that. They also, on individual case bases, would be looking at reportable circumstances for both children in care and children who are known to the ministry. They also manage adoption for our provincial office. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Then with respect to their relationship to the regions, they basically provide a data-management type of function or, as I've been told, a knowledge mobility function. I thought that's a very descriptive term that probably best encapsulates what it is that they do for the regions and the ministry. We have them to thank for the high quality of the estimates binder that we have before us today. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Is there a reporting process here for this group, and how and when do they report? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The integrated quality assurance team reports to the leadership team of the ministry and through that to the deputy minister. They don't produce an individual report of their own work. They are, in fact, the team that provides the information that allows the ministry, both provincially and regionally, to construct its reports. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: This is an internal organization of 50 FTEs that report internally. I'm going to go back to what the minister called knowledge mobility. I know she sounded very excited about that, but it didn't necessarily resonate for me in the same way. I'm not sure I understood exactly what it meant. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But this is strictly an internal organization that reports within the ministry to senior management. What kind of resources, financially…? How much of this budget goes towards this department? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1610]
Hon. M. Polak: To be clear, this is not an internal organization that is any different from a department in any ministry. What happened in the formation of this integrated quality assurance team is that at a time in the past one would have found small groups of people within each department who would have had responsibility for quality assurance in their area. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What the ministry did was bring those existing people together into one functioning team that was integrated. We then had a focus, through our ADM, on quality assurance across the piece and a more direct relationship to quality assurance between the team, who then report, through their ADM, to the leadership team. That, of course, is a group that reports to the deputy minister. So this is an important department within our ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the budget, we are simply locating the number for that team specifically, and I'll provide that as soon as we pull that out of the materials. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Knowledge mobility was simply…. I'm sorry if it was a clumsy attempt to try and give an illustration to what happens in our ministry every day. As you well know, we have a tremendous amount of data that flows across all departments in our ministry. The ability for us to be able to take from that data, knowledge that can then be passed onto those who are on the front line so that it affects their practice is really key to everything that we do. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I do have a number now. The number for that department is $6.4 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'll see if I can reiterate what I have heard from the minister on this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The quality assurance function is something that was done by a few people within departments across the ministry and has now been consolidated into 50 FTEs that have a function of accumulating information and disseminating it back to the front lines, I think — this knowledge mobility. That's what I interpreted the minister's comments to mean. They report internally through the ADMs to the leadership team, who reports to the deputy minister. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Who exactly is the leadership team in this? If it's not your ADMs and it's not your DM — it's somebody in between — who is it, please? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The leadership team is made up of the assistant deputy ministers and the deputy minister. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I think when the minister said that the quality assurance, the 50 FTEs, report out to the ADMs… [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Through their ADM. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: …through their ADM to the leadership team, which is the ADMs — a group, theirs and others, I would assume. It's a bit confusing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
How many people sit on the leadership team? How many ADMs? They wouldn't necessarily report to the DM, if the deputy minister is part of the leadership team, unless we're talking about numerous ADMs that are not sitting on this team. Perhaps the minister could just explain a little more clearly the hierarchy of this system of quality assurance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1615]
Hon. M. Polak: We currently have seven assistant deputy ministers and one associate deputy minister. They participate on the leadership team, as is the case in every ministry. They have an executive of their ministry, and this is ours. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Seven ADMs, one associate deputy minister and then the deputy minister. Are all of those…? The minister talked about the budget for this quality assurance process — this department of 50 people and this leadership team, $6.4 million. Now, is this part of the transformative change that the ministry has been undergoing for quite a number of years? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Just to clarify around the $6.4 million. That, first of all, is the funding that represents the provincial office. It does not take into account the quality assurance functions that take place in the different regions. What the $6.4 million would cover would be funding for our interface unit — that's the unit that works to provide information that is requested from outside sources — the research analysis and evaluations, the adoptions unit and also accreditation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That is not a budget representative of anything beyond that integrated quality assurance team. With respect to transformation, this is pillar 5 of Strong, Safe and Supported. Quality assurance is an integral part of the transformation agenda and of what we seek to achieve as a ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: How long has this particular team been in place then, this quality assurance team of 50 people? This is not something that's been around for a very long time. When was it put in place? And perhaps the minister could just refresh my mind on when the transformative change started and when we expect it to end. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1620]
Hon. M. Polak: In terms of the integrated quality assurance team, that was brought together in approximately the spring of '08. It's important again to emphasize that these were not new hires or new FTEs. In fact, they weren't even new functions. These were people already working within the ministry who were then brought together into one focused team under one ADM. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to transformation: that began in 2006. In 2008 we saw the release of the ministry's operational plan, Strong, Safe and Supported, which takes us out to 2012. And in 2011-12 we will at that stage be reviewing our progress to determine whether or not there are further steps that need to be taken around transformation. But you'll find that the bulk of the process is outlined in Strong, Safe and Supported. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: My particular question is around the quality assurance team that started in '08. I know the minister has talked about how some of those functions were being done elsewhere, but bringing them together and giving them a dedicated budget of $6.4 million certainly elevates it above a number of staff scattered throughout the ministry that might have been doing quality assurance or research or data processing or data delivery and that kind of thing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Is the budget for this team a part of your budget going forward out to, say, 2011-12, when you expect the transformative change to have been complete? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1625]
Hon. M. Polak: With respect to coming years, if I'm fortunate enough to remain the Minister of Children and Family Development, I would be happy to canvass that at that time. But it's important to note that this $6.4 million was not new money. The functions were, by and large, already there. So simply put, this was a matter of taking the budget support from those areas and putting them together, combining them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, though, the action of forming that group is a part of trying to be more effective, and certainly, integration and integrated service is a hugely significant part of our transformation agenda in the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: It was my understanding, actually, when the minister first talked about this quality assurance team…. Putting a very specific individual in charge of the team, putting together 50 FTEs under this quality assurance division — those are clear moves to create a body. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Although, certainly, the minister rightly cannot guarantee what's going to happen in the future with this ministry, what I was looking for was to establish whether or not this quality assurance team is a temporary entity or whether this is now an embedded part of the ministry under the transformative change — if this is an embedded division and if it will continue to have these dedicated resources given to it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: These functions have always had dedicated resources. They will continue to have dedicated resources, dependent on…. The amount would depend on the budget for each year, as has always been the case. But again, these are functions that were already in place, so they have always had dedicated resources. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So these 50 individuals were already working within the ministry somewhere, doing these exact jobs in isolation. Is that what the minister is saying? I mean, what were these 50 people doing before they were brought together under this division and given the task here of interface unit — research, accreditation and the other things that the minister has listed? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The member is correct. Essentially, for the most part these were people who were doing the same job in different areas of the ministry in different parts of the ministry. Over time there are some exceptions with respect to people who've been added, but not in any substantial way. So the member is correct. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm going to ask some questions about accreditation in a minute. But I would like to know, then, this team…. Can the minister just elaborate a little bit more, or reiterate what she said, about what they are actually delivering in the way of tangible services to front-line workers? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1630]
Hon. M. Polak: When it comes to front-line workers, the value that they provide is, I would think, almost immeasurable, really, because it is this group that puts together the information such as the Trends and Indicators report — so taking a look at all the different necessary pieces of data that we use to track and make decisions that we then work out to the regions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's extremely important that this unit is there to support what happens for the regions because, of course, that's where the management of our front-line workers comes into play. But there is a tremendous amount of research, analysis and evaluation. They, of course, manage through the accreditation process, but all of the masses of data and information that flow through the ministry are managed by this unit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They certainly provide support when it comes to adoptions and when it comes to the interface unit. But then, too, consider the supporting role that they play when it comes to dealing with case management issues and issues around critical incidents, etc. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
These are the folks who provide us with the information that we need and that regions need in order to give the best support we can to front-line workers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: In fact, what the minister is saying is that this quality assurance team delivers information to the front lines, which is invaluable in helping front-line workers. Maybe the minister could clarify that a little bit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, in processing data and information to help the ministry make decisions on all kinds of things…. I can understand that. I'm sure that the quality assurance people…. Their research probably is very informative and has a great deal of influence on decisions that the ministry makes. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[J. Thornthwaite in the chair.]
Is the minister saying, then, that this team has information that flows up to government and down to front-line workers? Maybe just clarify a little bit on exactly how this is a tangible resource for front-line workers. How does it improve front-line delivery of services? So far it seems like there's a lot of internal organizational things going on, but I'm not sure I see how it translates to anything on the front lines that has changed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know from front-line workers and from communities and things that are happening out there on the front lines that all of this huge body of internal information and processing…. How is it translating out on to the front lines? I'd like the minister to explain that, because I don't hear that tangibly from front-line workers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Somewhere here in this great body of work that's being done — years of work, a great deal of money and a lot of manpower going towards this…. I'd like to have a clearer picture of how this in some way is helping kids out there in care or needing care or families needing care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It's important to note that the work that front-line workers do every day and that happens through our regions doesn't take place in a vacuum. We don't collect data and analyze it for the sake of it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We conduct the research. We collect the data. We analyze it. That information is a two-way street. There's a reciprocity there. We have information that comes from the regions. We then have analysis and data that assists in policy-making and informs practice through the regions and, therefore, out to the front-line workers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want to say that one of the things I have been most impressed with in the last number of months as I have been meeting directly with front-line workers in the north, in the Interior and in Vancouver Coastal is the attention that they do pay to research and evidence and the importance they place on incorporating that into their practice. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There is a very direct relationship between the work that the quality assurance team does to collect, interpret and analyze information and to ensure that that dialogue continues between the provincial office and the regional offices. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1635]
M. Karagianis: The minister did mention that one of the responsibilities of this quality assurance team is accreditation. One of the questions I have is the cost to date for accreditation and perhaps a status update from the minister on the process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The budget is $1 million, and we currently have 263 agencies that are either accredited or in process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: As far as the number of agencies that represents, is that all or half or 90 percent or 20 percent? Perhaps the minister could clarify that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Accreditation is required only for those agencies that would be in receipt of $500,000 or more in contracted services. All of those agencies have been accredited. Then would follow those who could choose, if they wished, to undergo an accreditation process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to MCFD, there are 48 that have chosen to do that. The rest would have no requirement to be accredited through that process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would like to talk a little bit about some of the recent changes that have been announced, but first, I would like to ask the minister about the expectation that over the next three years there will be a reduction in the number of children in care by significant numbers. Perhaps the minister could explain how that will be achieved. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1640]
Hon. M. Polak: It's important to note that when we report on our children-in-care caseload, we make forecasts. We certainly don't set targets for budget. These are forecasts of what we anticipate, based on trends that we've seen in the past. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the number of children in care, there has been a steady decline since 2000. In the fiscal year 2000-2001 the number of children in care was 10,474. As of September 30 of this year the number is 8,677. The numbers across that piece, from 2000 to present, have dropped consistently every single year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Do those numbers include children in the home of a relative? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: No, and they never have. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: But we do know that children in the home of a relative are now somewhere in the range of about 5,000 children. Have the numbers that have been reduced off of this caseload been accounted for anywhere else in other versions of care? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Children in the home of a relative, as we have canvassed numerous times in estimates and other legislative processes, have been the responsibility of the Minister of Housing and Social Development. As a consequence, they have not been included, but often they have moved through the ministry into the home of a relative. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As a consequence, I think it's semantics about whether or not they're included as part of the children-in-care caseload, because they very likely have at some point been part of the ministry's responsibility and could be again in the future. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In the case of these projections, exactly what is the minister's explanation for where these children are going? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In terms of the number of children in the home of a relative, that has remained stable over the last three or four years –– currently at 4,422. That's as at August of this year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is really a good-news story. We have been working very hard over the last number of years in the ministry to increase our use of out-of-care options. We know that children fare far better when they are provided with out-of-care options such as kith-and-kin agreements. This is a good-news story, and we can only hope to achieve the same kind of good news in the aboriginal community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: The minister brought up one other group of children, the kith-and-kin. Does the number 8,677 reflect the number of children in kith-and-kin agreements? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Those in kith-and-kin agreements are not children in the care of the ministry, so no, that number would not reflect that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, this is a good-news story, because one of the challenges faced by the ministry over many, many years –– I'd say decades –– was the tendency to err on the side of drawing a child into the care of the government. Instead, what we've seen increasing over the last number of years is the ability of those on the front lines to find alternative arrangements that provide a safe and caring environment for that child without having them taken into government care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: The number of adoptions, which is a significant new factor of the ministry responsibility — and the minister has alluded to it several times here…. What are the numbers of children that have been adopted, and how does that affect the reduction in the number of children in care? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1645]
Certainly, if they're in care and then adopted, either by foster parents or elsewhere, they no longer appear as caseloads within the ministry. It would be great to know exactly how many children are moving out of care and into adoption. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The number of adoptions hasn't played a significant role in the change in numbers. The number of adoptions has been very consistent over the last ten years or so. It hovers in and around 300. The number of placements, for example, for '07-08 was 319, and the number of placements for '08-09 was 301. We don't anticipate a significant change this year either. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would like to talk a little bit now about the new reorganizational practice framework changes within the ministry. I did request a briefing sometime prior to the estimates, which was not given to me. I did have one of your staff members very courteously approach me late yesterday to offer a briefing on this. It unfortunately didn't in any way help to educate me before this estimates debate, so you'll forgive me if I am not particularly knowledgable about this process. But I know that there have been some activities around this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
First, I would like to ask the minister about a survey that has been sent out to agencies providing services to children and youth with special needs. This survey has been sent out very specifically. It says here that the project is part of the scope of the new framework, I believe, and that the goal is to get some of the information here from agencies that serve children and youth with special needs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm curious as to why this wasn't done well in advance of the framework. I've seen some diagrams and information here, and I know there have been announcements of changes within the ministry. Why was the survey not done well in advance of the new reorganizational change and this new framework? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'm not sure what survey the member is referring to. Perhaps if we could understand where it's coming from, we'd be able to respond. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: This is a survey for agencies providing services to children and youth with special needs. This has been sent out through the B.C. Association of Child Development and Intervention. It very clearly talks about the need for this information to be gathered for the framework for action. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now, this may be a different practice framework. Maybe the word's being used in several instances that are serving several different functions to the ministry. I'd appreciate hearing, in fact, if I misunderstand what is being asked for here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: This is a survey that is a part of the CYSN, children and youth with special needs, cross-ministry framework. While everything that we do as a ministry is, arguably, somehow related to transformation that will, of course, affect our whole ministry, this development of the framework has been occurring for quite some time, separate and apart from the work of transformation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1650]
In fact, the work with respect to this began in April of '08. It's part of the mapping that we've asked BCACDI to conduct, and we've provided them some funding to do that. In fact, I believe there was an initial phase that's already been completed, and this is yet another phase of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is work that is ongoing with organizations like BCACDI. While it is a part of what the ministry's work is in respect of the cross-ministry framework, it is not directly related to the new practice framework or the transformation agenda. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Then let's talk a little bit about the new framework. I accept that the children-with-special-needs framework is something separate from the new practice framework. I know that there has been significant anticipation about changes in roles and functions within senior staffing. Could the minister perhaps just start to talk about the new practice framework — what the changes will be, in general terms, from the staffing level down to the front lines? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would hope that the new framework must be something that could be explained succinctly, or perhaps not. I know that I was unable to make headway through some of the diagrams and things that I received. I am really looking to the minister to give me a bit more robust explanation of the new framework. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First of all, I do want to apologize in terms of the timing of the briefing that we had attempted to put together. In part, it was simply a misjudgment on my part as to when we would be up in estimates. I apologize for that and still look forward to having a more fulsome discussion than we'll be able to have here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to practice change, it really is not related to staffing. It is related to conducting the ordinary work of those on the front lines in a different manner using best practice, using models that are going to achieve the best results for children and for youth. It isn't a reorganization. It is literally new practice that is being developed using the expertise of those who work in that field. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Perhaps the minister could give me an example of what new practice would be versus current practice. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Probably the best example and the most significant change that we are undertaking is that of the manner in which children are assessed. What we are moving toward is an assessment model that would see us assessing for the individual needs of that child and to do that in a much more holistic way so that we are taking into account all the very many factors that come into play in that child's life. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: How is that different from the way children are assessed right now within the ministry? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1655]
Hon. M. Polak: If you were to try and draw a difference, currently the type of assessment that is conducted for any child really depends on which door they are entering the ministry through, whether that be child protection, youth justice. There are any number of ways in which a child or youth could come into contact with the ministry. The assessment at this stage is really dependent on what that entry point might be and on what legal mandate would be associated with that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Notwithstanding the fact that we need to respect the legal mandate to provide services, what we are working towards is a common entry point to the ministry that would then allow us to utilize an assessment that is based on the overall need of that child — so looking at everything that is in play in that child's life, not just those things that would be related to the narrow mandate of the point at which they entered the system. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I will say, as well, that I'm happy to canvass issues around the transformation or around the practice framework. Nevertheless, given that they are practice items, I think those are probably more usefully canvassed in the form of a briefing, which we are happy to provide. I think that with respect to this, while we're pleased to discuss what it is that we do in the ministry, we do have budget-related issues that are more germane to what we are dealing with now. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Well, I was actually going to get to budget-related issues out of this. I'm trying to really just understand where this new practice framework was going, because there has been a significant shift in even your senior staff. I note that a number of ADMs have moved into new positions. Some have left. What the implications of that are, are really at the heart of my discussion around the budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, the esoteric discussion or more detailed discussion on what this new practice framework really means to front-line children and how it will work on the ground and all of that — you're right — needs to be explored in a briefing session. But I do see that there will be significant impacts here, that ADMs are being moved. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like to ask the minister: in that case, what exactly is the purpose of changing all of the ADMs' roles, and why have members left in this process? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[N. Letnick in the chair.]
Hon. M. Polak: Well, the reason is actually quite simple. We've made the changes because we believe that this structure better supports the work of the regions and the services that we provide through the regions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1700]
M. Karagianis: Why are a number of your senior staff leaving, then? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'm not going to comment on the individual decisions of staff people as to their positions within the ministry. I am happy to respond to questions with respect to the positions and the roles within the ministry and as they relate to our budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Well, could the minister tell me whether or not individuals who've left have been given severance packages and how that impacts your budget? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The handling of severance packages is such that they are governed by provincial guidelines that every ministry must abide by, and the same would be true for us. I can tell the member that there certainly hasn't been any significant impact on the ministry budget as a result. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would like to ask the minister, then…. We will not canvas in much depth here the new practice framework as much as I'd like to. I am conscious of the time and the great number of other questions that I have here on issues. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like to know whether or not the decisions that the ministry has made around program cuts to very specific areas like autism and others that we'll explore here in a little more depth…. How much of this is being influenced in any way by the quality assurance team that we've investigated in depth here? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Have these recommendations for some program cuts come out of the quality assurance information–processing that the minister talked about? In the new practice framework how do these cuts and reductions in services to many front-line programs fit into that? What effect have either of those or both…? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1705]
Quality assurance is part of the transformation, and all of this new reorganizational framework is apparently part of this. How has that informed the decision around program cuts generally, if not specifically, at this point? I will get into specifics, but how has your quality assurance team and this new practice framework influenced the decision to begin cutting programs to children and families and vulnerable members of the community? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It would be helpful if the member could identify to which program she is referring. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Well, let's talk about particularly the EIBI program, because of course, that's been one of the most controversial ones. I'm sure that the minister continues to hear from the community about how they feel about that. But I'll talk a little bit more about many of the programs that have been cut or altered or diminished. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Your quality assurance team, if, in fact, quality assurance is the title as indicated.... The purpose of that team is to, as you've said, evaluate information from the front lines and help to inform decision-making at the executive level. How does that team view — or what kind of influence did they have on — the minister's decision to cut the EIBI program? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First and foremost, I want to place on the record the fact that the changes to our autism funding program did not result in any reductions of funding for our autism programming. That budget, in fact, has increased this year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the decision around the EIBI program, that decision was not based on the quality of the program. That decision was based on providing greater equity, better access and increased funding to hundreds of families who now have autistic children six and under. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: In fact, the minister didn't answer my question about the quality assurance team. This division has 50 employees whose task is to process information, collect data, take information from the front lines that help upstream to inform decisions made by the minister and senior management and, conversely, takes information from the minister and senior staff out to the front lines. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
How are cuts like the EIBI program or many of the others that we may explore here…? How does the quality assurance team evaluate that information as a whole? I'm not even talking about, necessarily, whether you redistributed those dollars or not. We'll explore those in a moment. But where does your quality assurance process fit into this very contentious move by the ministry? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Frankly, I sat in on the initial press release, where I do believe that there is evidence that the first comments about the EIBI program were that it was being cut because there was no data to prove the outcomes of that. I did listen with great intent to the questions being asked at that press conference. That subsequently was no longer used within a few days as being the prime motive for that. It became strictly financial. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want to know your quality assurance team. If they're about providing quality assurance, and if all of the transformative change that has cost thousands of dollars and many man-hours and years of process, at the end of it how does this square the circle with cancelling programs at the front line that have been very effective for the more vulnerable members of the community and under the ministry's care and responsibility in some ways? Whether they're providing programs or actually full on care for these, how does your quality assurance initiative fit with that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1710]
Hon. M. Polak: In fact, getting to that level of operation for the quality assurance team is precisely where we would like to see that team get to. We certainly are not there yet. Nevertheless, we are attempting to change from the previous model of quality assurance where, as we've described earlier, the focus was really on individual program areas rather than on being able to look at the overall impacts of various decisions of the ministry and how they would be received or felt or what kind of impact they would have throughout the system in other areas. So that is where we are hoping to get to. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to the autism funding program, it is important to note that the government deals with autism in a different way than virtually any other special need, and that is that we do not provide a program. What we provide is financial support. Government's philosophy from the outset has been to provide financial support to every child with an autism diagnosis, and that funding is being made available immediately upon their diagnosis. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But it is important to be clear that government's role in supporting parents who are raising children with autism is not one of providing a program. It is of providing financial support. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I do want to briefly, though, comment on the member's recollection with respect to the technical briefing. I would draw her attention to the fact that nowhere in any of the documentation that we provided to the media and to anybody else at that briefing, be it the press release or backgrounder, did we in any way raise the issue of research around the program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That, in fact, was raised by a member of the media who asked if we had any research, at which point we provided that information. But you will not find any mention of quality of the program in any of the announcement documentation that we provided. That was raised by the media. In fact, contrary to some comments that I have heard, we continue to stand by the research results, only that certainly wasn't a force behind the decision around the program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: When we look at things like the EIBI program…. Let's talk about that very specifically — the financial implications, which the minister has said is really the sole issue here around why this program was cut. Why did the government not make an attempt to sit down with program providers and families and try and find a way to provide what is very admittedly an exceptional program with exceptional outcomes to more families, rather than saying, "Because we can only reach 70 families at a time, we're cutting the whole program," and rather than actually finding a way to make that very effective program available to, perhaps, more people? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I've talked to program providers, and at no time did the government sit down with any of the program providers and say that "$70,000 per child" — if that is, in fact, the real number — "is not acceptable, and can we find a way to provide this program more cost-effectively?" No program provider was ever approached. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In fact, the government, by their own documentation, has said that because only 70 families at a time were able to take advantage of that program, we're doing away with it completely. The substitute for that, for all families now, is perhaps another hour a week in the kinds of therapies that $20,000 and $22,000 will buy. I'm sure that the minister and the government generally are getting the kind of enormous pressure from families that is very evident to members of the opposition. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1715]
I have attended numerous rallies. I have got truckloads of e-mail, as I'm sure has the minister. I have been cc'd on all of the correspondence that has gone to the government on this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In the case where the outcome for children is so markedly improved and the support systems going forward for children into the future are so much more cost-effective by providing this kind of early and intensive behavioural intervention, why has the government not chosen a path of trying to reach the best possible outcomes, best practice — if we can use those terms? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know the ministry talks about best practice in everything they do. Yet when I look at this, and many other cuts, it would seem to me that we've gone from best practice to lowest common denominator. Perhaps the minister could just say whether, in the business sense of taking the outcome for these children forward for the rest of their lives where they're not dependent on government funding or support or teaching assistance or anything else as an outcome of this…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It would seem to me that the savings are millions of dollars in the lifetime of a child versus a fairly modest investment at the front end. Why has that not been the criteria? Or would the government consider making that the next step — to try and find a way to work with families and service providers to take advantage of what is a very effective program? To see this thing disappear altogether — except for the wealthy, who might be able to afford it — seems a tragic decision to make and certainly not a good business decision for the ministry to make. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In fact, that is exactly what we are doing. It is incorrect to say that we are eliminating the EIBI program. We are eliminating the $70,000-per-child support. We are continuing to work with the providers. I think all but one of those service providers are working with us so we can ensure their continued viability so that they can continue to provide the EIBI-type of therapy service to those families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In fact, our budget for autism this year is $46 million. That kind of growth — from $4.1 million in 2001 — tells a bit of the story with respect to the increases in numbers of children. We're seeing, I'm told, an average of about 75 children a month who are being added new to our rolls. Of course there are some who age out and leave, but nevertheless, it's a growing area of service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We now, between all age groups being served through our autism funding unit, serve 6,000 families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the economic argument, it is very true that early intervention is of critical importance to children with autism. But that is true for the hundreds of families around the province, and we have a responsibility to ensure the continued viability of this program so that we always are able to provide the most funding to the largest number of families that we can in every region around the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Is it not fair to say, though, that when you strip away the funding, the opportunities for those programs are diminished? I mean, I know from meeting with service providers in the centres where the program has existed that in the interim, while the ministry explores other options for providing this kind of behavioural intervention, staff are laid off and changes are made that strip away the very infrastructure for providing those programs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1720]
So if the minister is, in fact, making some demonstrable steps towards trying to ensure that the early intervention program is available and that there's a review of the current steps that could see this program disappear in many communities entirely, then I think that it's fair for her to say that to families. If government is prepared to re-evaluate this in any way, perhaps families could take some confidence from that, because at this time we have families that are feeling distressed, emotional, disappointed, in crisis. Extreme strain on families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think if the government is going to review how they are approaching assistance with making sure this program, this early intervention program…. As the minister said, they're exploring ways to make it more available and perhaps more affordable –– then that's a good move on government's part. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Perhaps letting that be known to families might certainly give some of them some comfort out there, because families are feeling extremely neglected and betrayed at this point by government. They've been very vocal in that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know that they'll be watching very carefully the discussion that takes place here in estimates and taking heart by every word that the minister says that is encouraging in any way about the possibility of that program being available for those children who have just started the program and are losing their funding or those children on wait-lists who are not going to have an opportunity because the program is no longer funded. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think it's important. I think that this, along with several other of the funding cuts that government has made, is seen as being the hardest, the harshest, the most difficult and hurting the most vulnerable. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If the minister can be, perhaps, a bit more reassuring about what kind of options might be available to parents with your discussions with program providers, I think that that would be a huge step forward. I know families would take a great deal of comfort from that. So I'll ask the minister if she could perhaps be a bit more definitive. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: There's no change in what I'm saying now from what there was the day of the announcement. At that time we announced that we would be working with those service providers and with those families leading up to January 31 to ensure that there was the least disruption possible for those families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The fact is we have continued to do that with some very good success. All but one of the agencies has agreed to work with us to hopefully establish their continued viability. We feel quite confident that we're close to that with all but one of the agencies. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If they continue to be viable, they will continue to be able to provide the same type of service, albeit they will not be receiving service levels up to that of the $70,000 because we are no longer providing the $70,000. Nevertheless, this is no change from what we said we were going to do at the outset. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are encouraged by the work that these agencies are doing with us. We recognize that many of them have deadlines for staffing decisions that are coming upon us soon, and so we are working hard to give them some certainty prior to that, but there is no difference here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have to say that as I've been meeting with parents who have been involved in the EIBI program, certainly we recognize that any change can really throw panic into the world of a parent who is dealing with a special needs child. We've tried very hard to put out accurate information, to be able to say to parents that this is a process that we are working through and are going to work through with them and with the agencies. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It certainly is not helpful when there are those out there who are providing misinformation. That's been a discouragement to me, that there are very many families who are upset, and then when I dialogue with them it is apparent that they've been given information that is absolutely incorrect. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1725]
M. Karagianis: Well, for a moment there I actually thought there was going to be a bit more of an olive branch extended there, but I'll accept what the minister says — that some reconsideration and discussion with agencies is going on. But it would seem to me that the government is not necessarily prepared to support the EIBI program. Something like it, I guess, whatever it is. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like to ask about the other two fairly significant program cuts that have garnered a lot of attention, and those are the infant development program coordinators and the supported child development coordinators. I know that the minister, when we canvassed this in the House, said that these tasks are now being absorbed into the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Could the minister please be a bit more forthcoming on exactly how it's being absorbed, who has those responsibilities and exactly what kind of increase to staff duties it would make? We have talked here extensively about the budget, about staffing, about some of the other very significant things that are going on here. What are the implications here of taking over the IDP and SCD tasks? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The member is correct. The services that are currently provided by those offices will be taken on by our provincial and regional staffs. Certainly, the policy and standards role can be adequately provided from the ministry's provincial office. With respect to coordinating, referral, consultation types of roles, those roles can quite adequately be fulfilled by our regional staff. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One must remember that we are also in the midst of having the "children and youth with special needs" component of CLBC being transferred into our ministry, so it's important that we take a very holistic approach to how we deal with all of those things. This decision certainly supports that type of model of operation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to specific staffing, that will be the decision for each of the regions to make with respect to what their own needs for service provision might be. We can canvass that at the time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Well, certainly, the tasks that are being performed by these coordinators are significant, so I don't think in any way we can belittle the implications for this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have here an outline of the work right now that has been undertaken by one of the current providers. This individual says: "As the provincial adviser to supported child development, the SCD, I am supporting 48 SCD and 37 aboriginal SCD programs throughout the province. Within these programs there are approximately 297 staff delivering services to children with developmental disabilities." This goes on to talk about the various tasks. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So that's a significant workload. If you're going to cancel out these SCD coordinators, this is not a minor addition to a workload of someone within your ministry. This is very significant. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have a letter here from the department of pediatrics at Children's Hospital. This is from Dr. Michael Whitfield, who talks about the vast amount of work that these coordinators undertake. This letter was sent to you and I've been cc'd, so I know that the minister is aware of it. It really outlines what these infant development program coordinators do. These are not insignificant amounts of work. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This should have dramatic implications to your workload if, in fact, you are taking on these tasks within an existing staffing model that is not being increased in any way. In fact, we've seen it being decreased slightly. Exactly how are these tasks being taken on, and who will be doing the body of work here? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1730]
Hon. M. Polak: Firstly, I just want to advise the member that we do currently have staff who are working with the existing provincial advisers to ensure a smooth transition plan, but let me attempt to describe a little bit of how we see this working. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
First of all, the budget for IDP and the budget for SCD. Neither one has been cut. In fact, both have been increased this year, so it's incorrect to say that this is a cut. What is happening is that we have two positions that will be gone, two provincial adviser positions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the coordinator positions for those, with respect to IDP, when they're attached to an agency, they will be remaining. The IDP, the infant development program, is founded basically in community agencies. It's not something that we run out of our offices, so there isn't an impact with respect to that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the workload issues or the service provision that we would be taking up in the regions, there are staff who are coming to us from the "children and youth with special needs" sector of Community Living B.C. Part of their responsibilities will be around integrating what we do in supported child development and infant development because those are integral parts of providing service to those children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So this, again, is not a cut or an elimination of a program. This is taking a look at what we are doing in the current context and recognizing that we are going to do a better job when we're fully integrated and when we have people working together to do that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want to, though, say a few words about the advisers, because they've been incredibly valuable over the years. When we talk about the provincial adviser for infant development, one could, I think, easily argue that our provincial adviser was really the founder of that program and saw it through to become the very well-coordinated and well-established program that it is today. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is not in any way a reflection on the work of those advisers. It's been extremely valuable to us, but when it comes down to the decision to make this change, it supports what we are doing with children and youth who have special needs and how we will be supporting them through our regions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the policy and standard aspect of that, that will be managed through our provincial office, again, allowing us to better integrate and work together rather than having independent offices that are siloed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So all of the concerns that have been voiced by some of these experts in the region are misfounded, misplaced? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1735]
Hon. M. Polak: I think the expression of concern such that it is…. Maybe I'll back up a little bit. I understand that what they've heard with respect to the ending of these positions would cause them to express concerns around the very important nature of many of these services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would say that their expression of concern around what is actually happening in the ministry is incorrect. The letters that I have read, unfortunately, show a great misunderstanding with respect to what it is that we are undertaking in the ministry. Hopefully, that is something that over time they will begin to understand better. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I alluded earlier to the survey that the BCACDI has been asked to undertake. I would expect, because that will be very specifically around the special needs community and the kinds of resources that are provided to them…. Certainly, the kinds of questions that are being asked very specifically will talk about how to improve, build a better framework for delivering services to the special needs community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If it is obvious there that the changes that the ministry is making right now around IDPs and SCD are not favoured by that community…. If the survey comes back and says that a vast majority of people support the IDP and SCD advisers' positions right now, will the ministry revisit that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In fact, it is probably better to describe this as a mapping project. In the partnership we have we BCACDI, that's how it's been described. The mapping project takes into account services provided by the Ministry of Health Services, Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Children and Family Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's an attempt to determine what services are being provided by each ministry — in other words, who's doing what where. It's not a program evaluation. We will be using that information to then continue the dialogue around the cross-ministry framework for children and youth with special needs so that we are better able to integrate what we do across those three ministries. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, that's been an ongoing theme. It's been a big part of our work with BCACDI, and we're very pleased with the work they've done with us to date. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I think the minister missed my question. If this framework, this map, comes back from the BCACDI and says that it was a tragic mistake to cancel the EIBI program or to do away with these very specific infant development and supported child development positions, what will the ministry do then? If this is yet one more piece of information that comes back into your quality assurance ministry that says, "Tragic mistake. These are vital services in our map of the special needs world," what are you prepared to do? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1740]
Hon. M. Polak: I was not trying to avoid the question. The answer is: it is not that type of a survey, and it would not return that type of an answer. It isn't a program evaluation. It's a mapping of who does what and where they do it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Presumably, it would also identify where there are gaping holes in who's doing what out there in the world for special needs. If there's a gaping hole left by the non-funding of EIBI, or the repercussions of these other programs for special needs babies and children, what does the ministry do then? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Again, this is a service-mapping project. It is not a program evaluation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In fact, services to those receiving IDP services or SCD services will continue uninterrupted. There will be no change in those, and we have already canvassed our position with respect to the autism funding program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm just looking here at the survey for agencies and looking at the kinds of questions that would be asked here. In the introduction of this it says: [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"The B.C. Association of Child Development and Intervention, with the help of a provincial multidisciplinary and cross-sectoral steering committee, has been charged with leading a project whose aim is to identify and map services and service providers for children and youth with special needs in B.C."
It seems pretty straightforward there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"This project is part of the scope of the framework for action for children and youth with special needs initiative developed and signed off by the ministries of Health, Education and Child and Family Development.
"The goal of the mapping and modelling of the service providers project is to produce a comprehensive description of the services and service providers for children and youth with special needs in the province. This is a groundbreaking effort to document these services in Canada and represents an important opportunity to help improve service planning and delivery for children and youth with special needs and their families in B.C."
I thought it was pretty clear that this is, in fact, a fairly in-depth and groundbreaking survey that will identify opportunities to improve services. We're talking about services that are being cut right now, that admittedly…. The minister herself has even admitted that the EIBI program has had significant and terrific outcomes for children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If this survey comes back as part of this mapping, unless the ministry is prepared to simply not allow that information to come back…. If you have a survey that's seeking to find ways to improve the service plan for children with special needs, it would seem to me that you're going to, inevitably, run up against the issue of the EIBI funding cuts and the infant development program changes and the supported child development changes, especially for aboriginal families with special needs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm not sure how you can not get that information out of a survey by agencies that specifically deal with special needs children. You cannot talk to these individuals without the EIBI funding changes coming up instantly in the conversation. So I would suspect that when they're going to do an in-depth survey, you've got to have this kind of feedback. Is the ministry prepared, then, to simply ignore that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: This is our survey. We've asked them to do it. We've asked them to map this. We want to know where the money is going, from each of these different ministries, to provide services out in the field. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1745]
We want to know that because we then want to be able to examine what it is that each of our ministries is doing. Are there any areas of duplication? Are there places where we could do things better together? It's about integrating our services to special needs children and youth across our three ministries. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But it is a mapping project. It is simply, as the letter states, to take a look at what's out there and describe what it is so that we can then take that information and be aware, on one document, of what is happening not just in our ministry but in the other two as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As I'm sure that the member is aware, integration is always a huge challenge across ministries. It doesn't matter what area of service you want to look at. This is our work, together with the BCACDI, funded by us because we want this information to map what services exist. It has nothing to do with the questions around EIBI or the questions around IDP or SCD. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
All this does is map what it is that is being provided by different agencies, funded through which ministries, so that we have that information in one place, which is a form of integration that we will continue. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Well, I certainly look forward to seeing what kind of response comes from the BCACDI, because I suspect that one of the things it will identify is that there was a very superior early intervention program for autistic children that is no longer available and a vital piece of special needs resources in the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
However, because time is slipping by and I do want to get into some other questions here today if I can, I actually want to just ask one more question about a program cut. Then I want to talk a little bit about the presentation that the B.C. Association of Social Workers made to the Finance Committee. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Can the minister give me the latest update on the Roots of Empathy program and its status? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Unfortunately, we will not provide funding for Roots of Empathy programs from the ministry this year. We did make the decision to retain 14 aboriginal Seeds of Empathy programs, which the member will likely know are operated through Roots of Empathy. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Can the minister please explain the rationale for the cut to the funding for these programs? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Certainly. As a result of budget pressures in the Ministry of Education, they were unable to provide their support. That certainly is the lion's share of the funding that is provided for Roots of Empathy. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
From the Ministry of Children and Family Development, as well, we had to make decisions around how we would prioritize these services. With limited funds, we decided that the highest priority should be placed on the absolutely most vulnerable. Those are our very youngest aboriginal children, who we feel could benefit the most. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Just to be clear, there are currently 640 of these programs in British Columbia, and only 14 are going to be left operational? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I don't have the exact figure in front of me, but that's more or less correct, yes. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Because I can see that the time's going to get away from us here — we've probably only got about another hour before the end of this day — I would like to ask the minister some questions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm sure she is aware of the presentation that the B.C. Association of Social Workers made to the Finance Committee. These are the front-line workers of the ministry. I would expect that the minister is probably very concerned by the presentation. Certainly, there have been a number of very clear recommendations made here, so I would like to talk a little bit about these. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1750]
The B.C. Association of Social Workers has more than 1,200 social workers employed throughout the province. They look after child welfare as well as many other aspects of social work. They say in their introduction here that they: [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"…have witnessed the rapid erosion and dismantling of the child welfare and the child and family–serving systems and its toll on our most vulnerable people in B.C. These circumstances are preventable and can be remediated by the province.
"Improving investment in our social infrastructure through sound economic and public policy decision-making — made in consideration of proven best practices in child welfare, anti-poverty strategies and economic development — have all yielded measurable results and improvements in other jurisdictions.
"We believe that B.C. can and must do better for our current and future generations of citizens. Our very health, well-being and the future of the province depend on it."
Pretty strong comments. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Can the minister respond as to whether or not she's read this document? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: We have an ongoing working relationship with the B.C. Association of Social Workers. I've met with their representatives as a new minister some time ago, and we continue to work collaboratively with them when it comes to things like new initiatives around family group conferencing, around mediation. We've been invited to present to one of their upcoming conferences, so that work is ongoing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the statements around their view with respect to child protection in the province, it will come as no surprise to the member that I disagree. More importantly, that isn't what I'm hearing when I talk to front-line social workers around the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
While they have very difficult jobs and ones that I would encourage the Finance Committee to support, nevertheless, they are excited by the prospect of the changes that are coming, and they are very committed to the innovative kinds of tools that we are currently putting into place in regions, such as family group conferencing, mediation and things along those lines. So we would continue to work with the B.C. Association of Social Workers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to the report, I have not read it. I have received a summary from staff. I'll be interested to see the consideration that is given to it by the Finance Committee, which is where the report has been presented. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: In particular, I read with great interest the evaluation of the association on services and particularly their recommendations. I would like to talk a little bit about those, because the recommendations here, I think, would be far and away more interesting to the ministry than they would be even to the Finance Committee, although some of these certainly have huge implications. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would think that in particular…. These are front-line workers. This is their organization and, one would assume, had the approval of their membership in order to submit what is very strong language here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1755]
We've been canvassing here some of the program cuts that government has made. They canvass at great lengths here in their report, their submission to the Finance Committee. Cuts to services for children with special needs is one main focus they have, and they talk about the various cuts: [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"Cuts to early intervention intensive autism services for young children.
"Community support service agencies around B.C. were directed by MCFD to find $3.6 million in cuts and had funds earmarked for programming, to be clawed back by the ministry.
"MCFD has eliminated valuable clinical specialists in supervisory positions in supported child care and infant development programs" — which we've talked about.
"Child and youth mental health, and addiction services are inadequate for the numbers of young children who require assessment and treatment…. Children who have been sexually abused and those who experience mental health crises have had to wait for months."
I know that I do have a newspaper clipping here of an agency that was affected here in the south Island that provides services and has had their funding cut. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"Funding has been cut to the Special Olympics and a program that sought to reduce the number of children born with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.
"Children, youth and adults in need of services and supports through Community Living B.C. number in the thousands. We do not know the full scope of the wait-lists, because CLBC and MCFD are not adequately tracking the numbers of individuals on wait-lists, or analyzing service gaps, barriers to receiving their services…."
I would like to ask the minister about a couple of these, because they're very pertinent to the budget and the function of the ministry over the next fiscal year. We've canvassed the autism service cuts. We have not touched on the fact that there's been a directive to MCFD to find $3.6 million in savings. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Could the minister perhaps talk about that — about where that is, what the status of those savings are right now and what the implications are for perhaps further cuts as a result of a $3.6 million savings that's been required to be found. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: As a way of context, the total funding for our contracted agencies amounts to a little more than $700 million annually. Of that, we worked with the federation of community social service agencies to locate $3.6 million in savings in administration, not programming. In the end, most of that was recovered through unearned revenue. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1800]
M. Karagianis: Then the point here on child and youth mental health, and addiction services and, particularly, sexual abuse services. I know that the local agency here has been affected and had to lay off a number of therapists and, in fact, may be forced to shut down entirely. What does the minister have to say in the way of a response to this issue of these programs or these services being reduced or inadequate at this point? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In fact, specific to the sexual abuse intervention program, SAIP, the funding has actually been increased to them over the last couple of years. In our ministry the funding for children and youth mental health services has more than doubled since 2003. Right now it sits at more than $85 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would like to call the minister's attention to this: "Island's Only Child Abuse Unit Closes." This was reported out in the Times Colonist some time ago. This is specifically around children who have been sexually abused. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Does the minister feel that there are adequate services now for wait-lists for these kinds of services? Children with mental health issues or sexually abused certainly often are the most hard to care for. What step is the ministry taking in this regard? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: If the member could clarify, is that the HARC program? Is that the one to which she's referring? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I believe it is. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Well, there's actually the suspected child abuse and neglect program through the Queen Alexandra. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: If that's the one to which we're referring, in fact the issue for them was not budget-related. The health authority was having difficulty locating the appropriate medical personnel in order to provide the service. My understanding is that that has since been resolved, but we can certainly check on that for the member. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I know that in my own community the Pacific Centre Family Services, which works with sexually abused children, has also voiced their concerns about inadequate resources, wait-lists and the expectation that government has put on them to find incredible savings when they are already working on threadbare budgets. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[H. Bloy in the chair.]
I think that at this point it's imperative that many of these agencies, specifically around sexual abuse treatment programs, not be cut in any way and not feel that they have to find incredible savings when they have huge wait-lists. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Does the ministry look at these programs and determine what kinds of wait-lists are there and what kind of implications there are to these programs when any kinds of cuts are made to their funding or to the security of their funding in outgoing years? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1805]
Hon. M. Polak: I want to reiterate that when it comes to SAIP, we've actually increased the budget over the last three or four years, and in fact, we've continued to increase our budget for children and youth with mental health issues. It's more than doubled since 2003. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the suggestion that we're asking these organizations to find large sums of money, again, I want to draw the member's attention to the proportionality here. The total budget for our contracted services is over $700 million. The amount that we sought to find in administrative savings from these agencies was only $3.6 million, and most of that was recovered in unearned revenue. None of it was addressed at program changes. Certainly, the impact on any of these agencies would have been extremely minimal. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Can the minister tell me whether or not there are wait-lists for any of these programs and how long the wait-lists are for mental health services? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Provincially, we try not to manage a traditional wait-list when it comes to these types of services. What we ask our local agencies to do and our regions to do is to prioritize service based on the need of the child, and so those are always shifting with respect to those who we intake. We work with service providers and with physicians to ensure that if we don't have one type of service available for a child who is in need, we are able to redirect them to another type. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So we don't actually maintain traditional wait-lists because we are constantly adjusting, based on the priority needs of the children who come into our sphere. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: One more question here with regard to the views of the B.C. Association of Social Workers. There is generally non-support at this point for the regionalization process. I'd like to ask the minister: when we talked about the new framework and some of the other initiatives that are included in that, has there been consultation with the B.C. Association of Social Workers on this? What are their views on this? They will be certainly expected to participate in this, but what has been the consultation with them? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1810]
Hon. M. Polak: First and foremost, I think it's important to recognize that the B.C. Association of Social Workers represents only some of the social workers who are employed by our ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Secondly, with respect to their concerns around regionalization as described in their report to the Finance Committee, what they are describing is a process that the ministry has halted. Instead, what we've been undertaking for the last number of years is empowering service in our regions such that that can be driven from a community level. It's very different from the kind of regionalization that they are describing in their presentation and that they appear to be opposed to. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I have several members here that would also like to ask some questions, so I just have a couple of other issues I want to touch on. Foster care is a significant part of the child care picture, and I would like to canvass a few questions on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There have been a number of issues with retention of foster parents. The number of foster parents has declined dramatically in the province over the last number of years. Can the minister tell us what the current status is of the number of foster parents and foster families that are available? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First, I do want to acknowledge that it is becoming an increasing challenge for us to recruit and retain foster families. That is something that's being experienced pretty much North America–wide, near as we can tell. We continue to work to encourage fostering as a very rewarding experience for families, and we work hard to try to recruit new individuals to that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Nevertheless, we are confronting the same forces as other jurisdictions are with respect to the overall age of our population and also with respect to other opportunities for families to engage in the care of children, so we are competing, if you will, with other opportunities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The numbers, though, have not dropped dramatically. In '06 we had 2,985. In '07 we had 2,988. In '08 we had 2,946, and this year we have 2,835. So while those numbers have dropped, they have not dropped nearly as much as the number of children in care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I do have one other issue that kind of comes out of the foster care question, and this has been posed to me by several care workers and a foster mom. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1815]
The government had initiated a program that social workers and child care workers have been calling on for a very long time, which was financial assistance to former wards of the government or foster children or children in care for their educational courses. This was implemented just over a year ago, but this has now been cut. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have several care workers who are approaching me about the fact that these educational courses and living allowances for individuals who are aging out of care need to go on to post-secondary education. In the case of this one, it's a child who has FASD. There are not enough support systems to allow these children to leave care, pursue a post-secondary education or a trade and have adequate money to live on. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This has become a growing crisis for these children and for the children who have youth agreements as well. As they age out of their youth agreement, there are concerns about their ability to pay for shelter and food while they go to school. For some of these individuals who, of course, have been very challenged…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Those children who have grown up in the system, so to speak, have great challenges in trying to make sure that they get an education. Where they're pursuing that, it seems to me that any barriers that government puts up to them doing that fails these children the second they leave care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Youth agreements are the same way. I've had the same comments from individuals who have been on youth agreements, and once they reach an age, so many of the resources that would help them finish their education are removed. Can the minister comment on this? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: With respect to the youth educational assistance fund — that's a fund managed by the Victoria Foundation — we're not aware of any cuts to it. They ended the quarter of March 31, 2009, with a balance of $2,929,520. Those are handled as bursaries to those young people, and the Victoria Foundation manages those. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to agreements with young adults, that program was reinstated in 2008-2009. The expenditure for that year was $1,742,229. Our budget for this year is actually $3,288,200 — so again, no reductions there either. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So there are supportive programs for those children who are in youth agreements and pursue further education. What happens to them when they're 19, though? Does the ministry continue to give them that care until they finish their post-secondary education course? What happens with their living allowance and other things? They obviously receive that kind of protection and care when they're on a youth agreement. What happens once they're 19? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1820]
I mean, just providing them with tuition is not adequate because many of them have no capacity to support themselves once they reach the age of 19. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It's the youth educational assistance fund that would provide for tuition and books. When it comes to the other support, the agreements with young adults program functions such that between the age group of 19 to 24, a young person who has been in care can enter the program and can receive financial assistance for 24 months. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I have several of my colleagues that would like to ask some questions. I'd like to give them a chance to do that, and then I'd like to ask another question that harks a little bit back to the autism program. This is around how the funding is paid to families. I will cede the floor to my colleagues. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
S. Herbert: Thank you to the minister and her staff. I know one of the goals of the ministry in the service plan is preventing vulnerability in children and youth by providing strong supports. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The suicide rate amongst gay, lesbian, bi and transgendered youth is incredibly high. Some surveys say six times and some say four times the average for youth in B.C. My question is: what is the Ministry of Children and Family Development doing specifically to help queer youth and kids in their care? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1825]
Hon. M. Polak: I thank the member for the question. Certainly, it's always tragic when a youth commits suicide. But we recognize that there are specific groups where the prevalence rate is much higher — in the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered community; in the aboriginal community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As such, because of the doubling of the funding for our child and youth mental health services, one of the things that that has allowed us to do is to increase the number of clinicians and others who are involved in intake when youth are brought to our attention. So we not only work with those assessments, such that if it's determined that that is a component of what is presenting as the cause for that young person, but we then work with agencies who are connected with the local gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As you can imagine, it differs, depending on the region, the amount of community support there is or what agencies we can connect them with. But we certainly do everything we can to address the specific needs of that individual. Where those involve issues around sexual orientation, we certainly make every attempt to connect them with local resources in their area connected with the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Also, we work closely with the Youth in Care Network, who are exactly what it sounds like — a group of youth who are in care, have been in care. They are invaluable in providing us with, really, more up-to-date information with respect to what's going on with young people in their everyday lives out in the community. That also is a tremendous help to us as we try to ensure that all of our staff are made well aware of the challenges out there for those young folks. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
S. Herbert: I appreciate the answer about what happens if somebody did go to the lengths of suicide or a suicide attempt. But the question that I've got is: what about the before — the prevention? How is the ministry working to ensure that the youth that are in its care know that it's okay for them to be who they are? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Globally, in terms of prevention, we've recognized for quite some time the need to really get down to the younger grades in terms of dealing with mental health issues, with anxiety and, in particular, getting at suicide prevention. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One of the ways in which we've done that through our ministry is in implementing the Friends program in grades 4 and 5. That's something that's funded through MCFD. It's provided as a school-based program, and it's the first of its kind in Canada. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1830]
Working with that age group, we've seen what we believe is some very big success in terms of preventing the kind of anxiety and mental health issues that can eventually lead to suicide. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to those youth in care who may be struggling with their sexual identity, this is one of the benefits of an integrated model in that when it comes to those who might be presenting with…. They are already down the road, so we're past prevention. They’re already there, and they're presenting with a challenge. This is something where, as I've said, we would be wanting to connect them with those within the community in their area. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But when it comes to those for whom care is being provided, and they're growing up in our care with foster parents, we are certainly pleased to be highlighting in our ministry the U.N. convention on the rights of the child for foster parents who have kids in care. They are certainly aware of the rights of a young person who's living with them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When I say that, it sounds almost cold to talk about it in terms of rights, but the U.N. convention is so much more than that. It really asks us to consider the whole youth and everything about them. So that's one of the reasons why we're moving to our new assessment model, which does take into account all aspects of what's going on in a young person's life when we're taking them into care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, as we work with our foster parents and other care providers, when there are challenges around adjusting to a person's sexual identity and struggling through that, that's another area where we certainly work with youth, just as we would with any other challenge they're facing in their life. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
S. Herbert: So I'm just trying to understand. The first part of the minister's answer was about the Friends program and about children from grade 4 and grade 5, people dealing with mental health issues — and I'm sure the minister didn't mean to infer that it was children with sexual orientation that I was meaning — anxiety. I'm guessing that the anxiety would be because of discrimination or something like that. The minister nods her head, and I'm glad to hear that. So that's at the elementary school level. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now, oftentimes people will discover their sexual orientation later in life. It could be as a teenager or something like that. I'm curious if there are any resources focused specifically on ensuring that either foster parents or the youth themselves get those resources so that they know before they might go to something — the level of suicide —that they are okay to be who they are and if they have questions, who to talk to. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Once we finish this question, I've got some about sexual health and those kinds of questions, but we'll finish with this one. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: We don't have specific programs that deal with that. When we're talking about youth in care, we're talking about children who are being cared for by a foster family. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's our expectation amongst foster families that when the young person in their care is experiencing difficulties in any area — if in fact, it happens to be struggling with their sexual identity or figuring out whether they want to come out or not — whatever those questions might be, our expectation would be that that foster family, as any loving family would, would seek out the kinds of supports that that young person would need, whether those be in school or in the community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We would certainly, as an organization, be assisting foster parents in that work if they needed assistance in identifying what organizations might be out there or what supports there might be in the community or in the school. We would certainly be encouraging and supporting that with the foster family, just as we would with any other aspect of growing up in care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1835]
S. Herbert: One more question, just quickly. If there was an instance of a foster family who very specifically did not want to foster children who were gay, lesbian, bi or questioning, what would the ministry do in such an instance? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Just so I know what I'm answering, are you speaking to how we would review someone to become a foster parent in the first place, or are you referring to how we would match kids in care with a foster family? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
S. Herbert: Well, it's kind of a multipart question in that sense, and maybe the minister can try and figure that one out. Basically, either becoming a foster parent — what's the consideration there; but also, if the person is a foster parent and the youth that they're working with did come out and then the foster parent decided they weren't comfortable with that, would that foster parent stay in the system? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In terms of how we place children in foster families, we have a wide array of foster families from all different walks of life, and we have foster families who provide service, in some cases, in some very specialized cases. For example, we have foster families who specialize in looking after young infants, and that's their focus. That's what they do. Some specialize in certain special needs. We have foster families who are same-sex families. So we have all manner. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What we try to do is match those families with those children as best we can. Of course, that becomes an even more significant issue when you are talking about older children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We wouldn't engage in a blanket policy around that. I must say that we would expect that to be a rarity in that, for the most part, our foster families are accepting of the fact that they are standing in place of existing parents. I would expect that to be the rare occurrence. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, if something like that were to occur, we would want to be looking very carefully at what the circumstances are to try to determine just exactly what's causing this kind of a difficulty between the foster parents and the young person. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
S. Herbert: Just to wrap up, I thank the minister for her time and the staff for their time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's interesting — the blanket policy, not having a blanket policy, I guess. The question I had asked earlier is: what would happen if somebody went into becoming a foster parent but was not comfortable with having a gay, lesbian, bi, trans youth in their care — say, if they were looking after youth? Would they still be allowed to become a foster parent? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The second question that I had was: if they were a foster parent existing and the youth they were looking after came out — maybe they didn't know, and then they realized who they were — what would happen in those cases? Would that person continue on in the system as a foster parent if they absolutely did not appreciate people being who they were? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1840]
Hon. M. Polak: There are a few different levels of this at which this might occur. I want to deal with one, which is the case of, say, a family seeking to be foster parents who we find to be acting in an extremely prejudicial manner. Certainly, when it comes to what we seek out in a foster family, we're looking to people who are open, who are loving, who are supportive. So I would hope that that would be something that we would screen out in the initial process — if somebody was acting on the basis of prejudice. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think there's another aspect to this, though, and that is getting back to the fact that foster families are the same as any other family. For any family, issues around sexual identity can be very challenging for them. Much of that — the actions we would take subsequent to an issue like this arising — would depend on the family and the relationship with the young person. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
For example, if the young person had grown up in that family for quite a number of years, then there would be a likelihood that the action we would take would be to work together with the foster family and the young person so that they can remain in relationship, because that's an important relationship. So that's one example. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But our primary task there is to take a look at what is that circumstance — right? Is this a case where the best thing for this young person is for us to work with that family and resolve it? Or is the best thing to have this young person move on to someone else? Maybe, in our evaluation, we've thought: "No, maybe these foster parents aren't appropriate anymore." But it's very important that we take a look at their particular foster family circumstance and determine what action is the best that we take. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's why I would say that we wouldn't have a blanket policy. More often than not, especially now that we're moving toward a greater use of family group conferencing and mediation, what we're trying to do is work through challenges like that that families face, rather than trying to just draw a line in the sand. Because oftentimes that doesn't end up being good for the young person either. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If we can help support that family and that young person so that they can maintain that relationship and if they're able to support that young person in discovering their identity and being able to express that, then that obviously would be the ideal outcome for our circumstance too. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Chair: Member, noting the hour. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
S. Herbert: All right. Well, I guess I can't ask any more questions because it's 6:45. I've got a bunch of them. Hopefully, the minister and I can talk about some of these later on, whether it's about sexual education for kids in government care or foster families and those kinds of situations, whether or not it's around how we can be even more proactive in ensuring that our youth and our kids are able to express the full diversity of who they are and that their families are supported in that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm just reflecting on the minister's comments about blanket policies. I would assume, though, that there is a blanket policy at the start — that when somebody is going to become a foster family, no discrimination of that sort would be accepted and that they certainly would be asked about that in the screening process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We will continue this discussion over time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I just want to thank the member for his questions and for his line of questioning. I think that it gets us back to what is primary for us — that is, thinking about the child at the centre and recognizing that that really is all about what we do. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With that, Mr. Chair, I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Motion approved.
The committee rose at 6:45 p.m.
[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]
Hansard Services
publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.
TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule
Copyright (c) 2009: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada