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
(continued)
The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); J. McIntyre in the chair.
The committee met at 2:33 p.m.
On Vote 19: ministry operations, $1,394,139,000 (continued).
M. Karagianis: Just prior to the break we were canvassing the reports that had come through from the representative for children and families, and I had asked the minister about a question that the representative had posed on training. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minister had asked for a clarification on that. This actually comes from the report From Loss to Learning. One of the things that the children's representative had discovered in her investigations of that was, perhaps, some disconnect with training. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1435]
The question that I had posed to the minister was — the representative had very specifically asked about some kind of annual report on supervisory training within the ministry — just whether the minister can, perhaps, update me on whether that is occurring, has occurred, may occur in the future, and perhaps just address the issue of training that was covered in this report from the children's representative. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The Loss to Learning report is one that we have responded to in full and have presented that report. It is available publicly. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[H. Bloy in the chair.]
Of course, the question of training was dealt with in our response. We'd be happy to provide that to the member if she requires a copy. However, I do think that the appropriate place to canvass response to recommendations by the representative is really the select standing committee and not the estimates process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I was particularly canvassing just a few of these questions because they very specifically had to do with plans out of the ministry. I know that there was an expectation that a plan for training, especially around aboriginal social workers, would be a part of the ministry plan and would be tabled in April in some form. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1440]
I'm just looking to see what kinds of perhaps ongoing costs the training components of the ministry responsibilities might have and what the agenda is — what the plan is, I suppose — for continuing training to meet the needs not only of this report but generally of the quality assurance information that the minister talked about yesterday — the quality assurance team and the information that goes to the front lines. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
All of that must result in some kind of new training. Really, I wanted this to be a broader question about that specific aspect of staff responsibilities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'm happy to say that in terms of our budget for learning and development for MCFD staff, that remains intact at $3.7 million this year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of going forward, again, this is part of our Strong, Safe and Supported plan. As we look to developing training in the future, we see that as aligned within that context. We need to be looking at training that is much more integrated and that in fact supports the move we have to greater responsibilities in the regions and to having staff able to take part in many of the innovative ways in which the Strong, Safe and Supported work will support families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: The children's representative, in this particular report, goes on to look at issues around reporting. I think one of the recommendations came out of the study here around audits, the audit program. There was a recommendation about an external contract to complete a comprehensive evaluation of the current case practice audit program. I wondered whether that was something that the ministry had undertaken and if that is either in a final stage or completed in any way and whether the minister could comment on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Actually, it wasn't a recommendation from the rep. It was in fact an evaluation of the case practice audit program undertaken by our ministry through the direction of our deputy minister. We'd be happy to provide a copy of that report when it's finalized. I understand that we've already been through a draft and briefed the representative on that and would be happy to provide it to the member when it is complete, which should be shortly. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Great. Thank you very much. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Will this be one of the kinds of practices that changes under the new practice framework, or is this going to be something that's in place? Right now the way that the case practice audits are done could change, presumably, under this new practice framework. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1445]
Again, I know that we're going to get into a briefing on that, but just to touch on that briefly coming out of this discussion. How much is that going to change in the future, and what will replace it? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: As I know the member will appreciate, given her involvement on the committee and with this file, the ministry over the years has been through many changes that have been undertaken sometimes in rather swift fashion. It's our intent…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As we go through what is the most substantial and, I think, probably the most potentially impactful change — and that is, change to practice in the ministry — we're trying to ensure that we have everything built from the ground up in a solid foundation. This report will form part of that guidance of change. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Primarily, we are guided by Strong, Safe and Supported. But when it comes to how these practices will change…. Yes, they will change. They will change in line with the needs that we evaluate and determine across the ministry, and they will change as we see the need to support those out in the field who are engaged in the real day-to-day practice change. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, I do think that we are straying more into the realm of what would be appropriate at the select standing committee as opposed to canvassing in estimates. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Under the new practice framework, then, how will reporting be done in the future? What will be the accountability mechanisms under the new framework? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Just a clarification. Are you asking about accountability to the minister or accountability to the public? I'm not sure which reporting the member is inquiring about. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'd actually be interested in both, so that would have been two sides to the question. Obviously, in the current procedures within the ministry…. Previous to this new practice framework being initiated, there have been reporting processes. We're just talking right now about case practice audits. But in the future, certainly, how is the reporting going to be done out on the new practice framework, as far as within the ministry and then to the public as well? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1450]
Hon. M. Polak: Of course, all the statutory reporting requirements would remain intact. What we're moving to, though, is actually outlined fairly well in our Strong, Safe and Supported document, and I'll just read briefly from that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of key actions, there's implementing our integrated quality assurance approach. We've talked a bit about that, about now having an integrated team that is able to work across the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"Increase the reporting on quality assurance indicators and outcomes for children and youth." That's important because currently our system tends to report more so focused on outputs as opposed to outcomes for children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"Develop and strengthen internally and externally based evaluations of and research into programs and services." That work is already beginning, as evidenced by the report that we just spoke about in terms of evaluating case practice. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"Increase child and youth participation in decision-making." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We also want to know from families, for example, what their experience has been with the ministry. "We expect increased effectiveness, efficiency and accountability of supports and services for children, youth and their families served by the ministry." In terms of indicators of success, we want to see an "increase in comprehensive and accurate information used to inform continuous service improvement" and an "increase in the use of evidence in policy and practice changes." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One of the things that is extremely important about this pillar of Strong, Safe and Supported is that we want our social workers, our child protection workers, those in the field able to really act according to their profession and to be able to use their professional discretion in the best way possible. That means best practice around continuously evaluating what it is they're doing, taking a look at the outcomes of that and then revisiting decisions and continuing that feedback loop. So I hope that gives an appropriate flavour to the member. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: When and how will that, the reporting out, actually be done? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The process has already begun, and as we canvassed yesterday, with the development of the new practice framework and of Strong, Safe and Supported, that takes us out to 2012. We are planning currently that in the year '11-12 we would have a review of where we are at in that process and whether, in fact, we need to continue work in some areas or whether or not we have completed that transition. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, we're working with approximately 4,300 individuals employed by the ministry, and the key piece that we want to ensure is that we are not moving from one step to the next until we have properly completed the foundation for those next steps. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again though, I have to say that I do think that what we're canvassing currently is really more appropriate for the select standing committee and not really appropriate for the estimates discussion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I didn't actually get a clear idea of whether there would be annual reporting on these various outcomes, but I'm sure that I'll be watching for those to see exactly when and how that's actually reported out — throughout the year or on a yearly basis. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That does kind of move me into the next piece of questioning that I have here, which is around first nations and aboriginal authorities. There was a concerted effort made — a very well-known and public effort — to move towards more aboriginal authority over aboriginal children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Recently, I believe, Haida Gwaii was given the responsibility for their own children in that community. Could the minister talk about the aboriginal authorities and where we stand today, because there was a process where a lot of activity was underway and then there has been a period of sort of static progress. So I'd just like an update on where we stand now on the creation of aboriginal authorities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1455]
Hon. M. Polak: Certainly we all agree, I think, that the best thing that can be in place for aboriginal children is for them to be cared for by their own aboriginal community. In fact, that that has huge benefits beyond the individual child and family — but on, again, to the community itself. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The aboriginal authorities were disbanded as of last year, when the legislation did not go through. Instead, we have now signed a protocol. As of March 2009 we are currently working not only with the Interim First Nations Child and Family Wellness Council, but in each region there's a chiefs council. Through that process, we have developed and have commitment not only from our ministry, but from all the first nations, to work together in a nation-to-nation process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That has been going along, to my mind, rather successfully, and I've had very good feedback from first nations about that. There are currently 13 nations and groups of nations that are working directly with us to be able to establish the way in which they will take authority over their children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of delegated agencies, we currently have 24, of which Haida is one. Eight of those are now fully delegated, so they take on the entire range of services that MCFD would have provided in the past, including child protection. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Is the protocol taking the place of the initiative to create these authorities? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1500]
Hon. M. Polak: I think it's worthy of note that the authorities were always meant to be an interim step as we worked toward supporting the ability of individual nations to take over the responsibility for their children and the services to them. Nevertheless, it's also important to note that there is no replacement for these authorities. That opportunity or that initiative is absolutely off the table. That is something that has come directly from the leadership of the first nations. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This in no way replaces that. In fact, one could argue that this has allowed us to jump forward a step to a place that we are now working with those leaders to ensure that we are moving to their full and complete authority being recognized by the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The role of the chiefs and their communities, as we work with them in the regions, is to provide, then, an opportunity for them to create and establish what is in line with their own vision for their own nation at the community level. Then, through the wellness council, we're able to continue a dialogue around things of a provincial nature. That continues, ongoing, as we work toward establishing more delegated agencies and greater ability for different nations to take on different aspects of looking after their children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So in creating these new protocols or supporting the eight agencies that are now responsible…. What does that look like as far as funding goes? Obviously, the responsibility goes with it, but how does the funding go? How will that affect your budget? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1505]
Hon. M. Polak: We really are talking about two different processes when it comes to the 13 nations and groups of nations with whom we are in ongoing nation-to-nation work through the chiefs in the regions and also through the interim child and family wellness council. The budget that we have in terms of that work around those 13 is about $8 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the delegated agencies, the total budget there is about $65 million, understanding that there is not an evenness with which the responsibilities are distributed amongst those agencies. Different agencies are at different stages of developing and, therefore, have different aspects of responsibility that they have taken over. So their funding reflects that. But in a general sense, as responsibilities transfer to the delegated agencies, then staff and funding also transfer to them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There is, however, a difference with respect to the level of federal versus provincial funding when one gets to discussing which ones are on reserve and which ones are off. But essentially, there is no new money involved. This is a matter of money that is already within the system. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: One of my questions was going to be: what component of that is federal money? In fact, who retains responsibility for that budget? Does that stay in the hands of the minister or, in fact, when that responsibility is shifted to first nations communities, do they then have control over their budget as well? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The federal component of the funding is over and above the $65 million that we provide to the delegated agencies. The 21 that are on reserve receive direct funding from the federal government. We have no way of knowing how much that is. When it comes to the three urban delegated agencies, they are entirely funded by the Ministry of Children and Family Development. The $65 million — there is then some of that going to the three urban. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There is also, though, some of that going to the 21, because, of course, beyond the work that they do that would be federally funded, there are also contracted services they provide that MCFD provides them funding for. So again, that's something that when they have their budgets, they have control over their budgets and make their decisions based on the financing that comes into them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Perhaps we could just go back and clarify. In discussing this, the minister said the three urban agencies are fully funded. But earlier you did talk about 24 agencies, eight of which have full responsibilities. So only three of those are fully funded from MCFD? Or how do you break that out? You talked about three and 21 versus 24, with eight being fully.... Perhaps you could just clarify the different numbers there. It doesn't quite make sense to me. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Yeah, the eight only refers to their delegation status, so "fully delegated" means they have no more stages to go through. They are then, at that point, delivering all of the services themselves. But the same would apply to those eight if they are on reserve. Then they are collecting significant — in fact, the bulk of their —funding from the federal government, and we would have no way of knowing what that is. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1510]
Then, if they were to have contracted services that they are delivering on behalf of the ministry, we would provide them funding for that. Again, that would be different depending on each delegated agency. Then, of course, the breakdown of the 21 to three is simply which ones are on reserve, which ones are off. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The eight simply represents where they are along the delegated agency road, and it represents those that are now fully delegated and completely through the process. The others that are not fully delegated would each be at different places down that path. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Obviously it's quite complex on how funding flows to those various agencies, whether it be from federal, whether it be on reserve, off reserve, whether it comes from the ministry fully, whether it's a combination of those. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
How is that all evaluated by the ministry? Is there, you know…? As far as evaluating at what stage communities are completely responsible for their own child care, child protection, where is the break-off point between the money and the actual responsibility for children in those communities? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I should reflect, too, that much of this depends on what the community itself wishes to achieve. There are some for whom the goal is always to get to the end piece where they are taking over the responsibilities for every part of this, including child protection. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There are others for whom their involvement stops at the early stage, and they're quite pleased to simply remain there, providing only part of the services. Maybe it's foster parenting services, etc. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We conduct this through trilateral agreements between the federal government, the province and the first nation, the delegated agency involved…. In terms of standards, we apply the AOPSI, the aboriginal operational and practice standards indicators. That is the guidance that we follow in terms of the service that's delivered. But again, it really does depend on the individual nation or group of nations as to how far down that road they wish to proceed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So do I take it from the minister's comments here on this issue that there is no longer a desire on the part of government to actively pursue full on responsibility for all aboriginal communities for their own child care? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I mean, that was the goal at the beginning, with the creation of aboriginal authorities. That is, obviously, I think…. At this point, first nations communities have determined that they are not particularly interested. So what are the next steps for government in this issue of first nations' responsibility for child protection? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1515]
Hon. M. Polak: I would have to say that, if anything, we've actually intensified our work with aboriginal communities to ensure that they are able to fully exercise their authority over their own children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would just read pillar 4 from Strong, Safe and Supported. The belief statement there is: "Aboriginal people will be supported to exercise jurisdiction in delivering child and family services." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The difference now is that aboriginal authorities were really government's idea as to how first nations ought to organize themselves. Instead, now we are working intensely with first nations, through the regional chiefs councils and also through the Interim First Nations Child and Family Wellness Council, to ensure that each and every nation or group of nations is able to now develop the type of model that they feel would best suit their community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In many cases that will be a delegated agency. In many cases it might take on a completely different form. We are open to that, and we are being guided by the nations themselves as they tell us what level of involvement they wish to see and what model they would like to establish in order to see that come to life. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Where does kith and kin fit into this, then? I canvassed it a little bit earlier, but it's certainly not included in the ministry's report on caseload. Where does that fit in now, especially under what looks to be a fairly mixed bag of authority over first nations children? Perhaps the minister could explain exactly how this component is part of all of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Kith-and-kin agreements really don't directly relate to aboriginal communities any more than foster parents and the foster parent program would relate to aboriginal communities. Kith and kin is an out-of-care option which those in the mainstream community can afford themselves of or, indeed, those in the aboriginal communities could avail themselves of. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1520]
In the aboriginal communities these tend to be referred to as extended family arrangements. Nevertheless, they are still kith-and-kin agreements. But it isn't directly related to aboriginal or non-aboriginal. Although these are out-of-care options — so they are not part of our children-in-care caseload — they are reported out, and we can provide numbers, with respect to aboriginal and non-aboriginal, of those who are within kith-and-kin agreements. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would appreciate that report. It would be good to see exactly what the numbers are there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like just one more reference in this discussion about aboriginal children in care, because, as we know, it is a significant concern that there are a disproportionate number of aboriginal children in care to non-aboriginal. In the latest Auditor General update on reports there is a page here that is dedicated to Management of Aboriginal Child Protection Services. I'm sure the minister is aware of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I just wanted to talk in particular about the list of responsibilities here and the one where the Auditor General has recommended that the ministry "in consultation with first nations and aboriginal organizations, obtain provincewide community-by-community knowledge of aboriginal child protection needs." The Auditor General has listed this as having had no action taken. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would expect that the ministry would…. This would be a significant component of what we're talking about here, in this mixed tapestry of services and how they're delivered. Could the minister comment on this, please? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First, just to the numbers on kith-and-kin arrangements. We're just hunting down the aboriginal numbers here, but for non-aboriginal, the total number for this year, '09-10, is 210, and the monthly average — those that we see being taken into kith-and-kin agreements — is 17½. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the Auditor General's recommendation to take a look at this community by community, it is one that currently we don't see ourselves having the appropriate infrastructure to engage in on that level. Still, I would disagree with his characterization that no work has happened. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1525]
Instead, what we've attempted to do — and we have talked a bit about some of the work — is try and use not only our communications through the delegated agencies and our knowledge of those areas, but also the work that we have underway with the chiefs councils in the regions to develop the kind of knowledge base that we need in order to assess the kind of service gaps that may exist and also to assess the capacity of those nations and those agencies to be able to provide service and what kind of support we may need to provide to them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It is true that we have not taken the action in exactly the way that the Auditor General would have presented in his report. Nevertheless, we're feeling very confident about the road that we are travelling down, in part because we are doing it based on the feedback and the leadership that we're receiving from the first nations themselves. We believe, in our ministry, that that is the appropriate way to go about this and, indeed, the way in which we are most likely to meet with a successful construction of how our relationship works with first nations in the end. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would simply point out that that is our role in this. In evaluating it, it is somewhat different from the Auditor General in that the Auditor General's view and scope is much more narrow than ours in terms of how we build those relationships with first nations. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Is there going to be an attempt made, then, to perhaps have the Auditor General reconsider his current position on this? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: As with other ministries who receive reports from the Auditor General, we've followed a similar practice. We have responded to each one of the recommendations with descriptions of work that we have had underway, and we would see that…. Well, it's similar to any other ministry, which then provides that to public accounts, and it's considered along with his report. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I note that the Auditor General does talk about partial implementation of two other items here, and perhaps the minister could speak to those. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One that we've talked around a bit here is the recommendation that "the ministry, in consultation with first nations and aboriginal organizations, determine whether transfer of all child protection services to aboriginal agencies is still viable and, if not, adjust the service delivery approach to support some continued ministry service that meets the needs of aboriginal children and their families." The minister may want to elaborate a little bit on some of the comments she's already made. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The second part of this is: "We recommend the ministry, in consultation with first nations and aboriginal organizations, determine the resources, including social workers and support services, required to meet those needs in a culturally appropriate way." Certainly, that would have a huge impact on the budget, if that's only been partially implemented at this point. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would appreciate the minister responding to those two recommendations coming from the Auditor General. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'll answer to the second recommendation mentioned first. Basically, that is precisely the work that is underway with delegated agencies. Again, we've responded to the evaluation of the Auditor General to provide for him the information around what work is underway with the delegated agencies. That has been tabled. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to the first recommendation around aboriginal agencies, we have responded to the Auditor General to describe the transition that's taken place. This is the second time the Auditor General has examined actions around these recommendations. Of course, they were developed at a time prior to the failure of the aboriginal agencies and the legislation related to it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In describing our work now, in our response to the Auditor General, we have canvassed very similarly what we've discussed here in estimates and that we, in fact, now are not proceeding down the road of aboriginal agencies…. Sorry, aboriginal authorities. Anywhere I've said aboriginal agencies like that, it should be authorities, and I apologize. There are a lot of names to remember. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are not going down the path of developing aboriginal authorities. That initiative is no longer underway. Instead, we are now moving directly into the phase where we are supporting aboriginal communities to take over responsibility for their children, be that as a delegated agency or in some other form that we would work out with them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1530]
M. Karagianis: I think that this actually is a place to segue, while we're talking about aboriginal communities, into the last issue that I wanted to touch upon at this point, which is the issue of child poverty. Certainly, we've talked here in estimates about the number of children in care and the fact that there is a concerted effort by the ministry to reduce the number of children in care. I think that there are even some declarations to that effect in the September updated budget and fiscal plan. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would have to ask the minister: given the current circumstances around child poverty, is it realistic to think that we would not see growing numbers of children being taken into care as more working families reach the stress point or as the current employment numbers put those pressures on families? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[D. Horne in the chair.]
Has the ministry a plan for this? Is this something that has been discussed? Is part of the current new framework around thinking about what the repercussions will be of child poverty on the ministry's services? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Just to get back to numbers we promised to provide around kith and kin for aboriginal, unfortunately, with our system, we cannot pull a total for the aboriginal for the year. I can tell you that the September number of new kith-and-kin agreements for aboriginal was 17, so that compares to the non-aboriginal. I believe that the number I gave there was 17.5. We can pursue getting you a total, but what we're able to pull at this point is only the month-by-month numbers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the impacts of an economic downturn with respect to our caseloads, I should be clear that even in this fiscal year, during the height of much of the unemployment, we have not seen an increase in our caseloads, following them month by month, and we have been monitoring them very closely. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I should also say that there isn't a…. No, I'll back this up. Just because a family loses its job — loses, you know, a portion of their income — just because they get into a difficult financial state doesn't mean that they are going to be turning from a functioning family into a dysfunctioning one. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1535]
Certainly, we recognize the need to provide supports to communities that are struggling, and we have increased the amount of out-of-care support that we provide for families who are struggling in many ways. We see part of the success in keeping kids out of care, which is hugely important, is a result of an increased focus on prevention. The work that our front-line workers are engaged in is much more focused on prevention and providing supports to families prior to there being a problem that would cause us to take a child into care, and also an increased use of out-of-care options. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We're making much greater use of extended families and close friendship relationships of those families when we go through family group conferencing, mediation, etc., such that we don't have to go to that additional step of taking a child into care. So we are not anticipating a huge influx of children into care as a result of the economic circumstances. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Nevertheless, we do monitor those numbers month by month, and to date, for this fiscal year, we have not seen an increase. In fact, the numbers are consistent with the decline of children in care that we've seen over the last ten years or so. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I know that the minister is talking about, really, the impact of the economic downturn, but in fact, the Ministry of Housing and Social Development is looking at a considerable growth in the number of individuals seeking income assistance. That will most certainly have an impact on families and on the number of children that will be caught within that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They're now currently, possibly, on employment income assistance from the federal government but will be moving from there as those unemployment insurance benefits run out. They'll be moving to seek more income assistance. Has the ministry looked at the issue of that growth there, through the lens? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You know, earlier this year the children's representative talked about a very unfortunate case where a young family was unable to obtain enough funding for emergency housing, ended up living in an unsafe family environment in a first nations community and ended up having their baby taken into care by the ministry because they were unable to put together the pieces they needed to find housing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That, I think, should be kind of a stark lesson for government to say that we have to really be careful that a circumstance like that doesn't happen again, where simply the issue of a poor family, unable to find their way through the complicated process of obtaining emergency housing care…. Then their child becomes a responsibility of the ministry. That particular report, and that particular episode, I think, is particularly chilling because the family ended up having their baby apprehended by the ministry because the family was poor and couldn't access emergency funding from another level of government. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That kind of circumstance, I think, is not going to be unusual, given the growing concern around poverty — intergenerational poverty as well as transitional poverty. In the case of economic downturn and people leaving employment assistance income and having to seek income assistance from government, that's a transitional kind of poverty, which is different from the kind of deep-rooted intergenerational poverty that we've seen in first nations communities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is not a new topic. It is, I'm sure, on government's mind as we've hit the threshold, yet again, in British Columbia of having the highest rate of child poverty in the country. Has the ministry looked at child poverty and the impacts that it will have? How has that, in any way, I guess, helped define the new framework? How has that defined the planning out through the rest of this fiscal year and beyond? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, we see no expected increase in ministry funding after this fiscal year. So is there a child poverty plan? Is it something that is talked about within the ministry? Has it in any way helped to determine how you move forward with any of your new plans for how the ministry will function in the future? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1540]
Hon. M. Polak: Firstly, to the individual case that the member references. That's something that, obviously, was a tragic circumstance that the representative has recently reported on and that we continue to review and prepare an appropriate response to, which we will review with the select standing committee and provide to them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want to emphasize that contrary to some of the statements that have been made both in that report and in other places, the ministry does not ever remove a child as a result of low income. We remove a child when it is felt that they are in unsafe circumstances. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have to say that it's kind of inconsistent to have a concern expressed around that when at the outset the member was saying that as a result of increases in caseloads and HST, we would certainly see an increase in children in care. I actually don't believe that. Just because a family becomes poor doesn't mean that they suddenly become dysfunctional. The evidence just isn't there to support that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Our requests and our responses when it comes to service have remained consistent month by month over the last fiscal period. In fact, the numbers of children in care continue to decline over that period of time in this fiscal. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I do want to say a word about child poverty, too, because I think we can all become…. We can all get to a point where we feel as though this is a challenge that somehow, as a society, we're unable to solve, that it's something that will always be with us. We actually have some very recent, very good news from Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They have their market-based measure that they produce. They produced a report in September of this year — so, very recent — their 2009 report. What it shows is a very dramatic decline in the rate of poverty in British Columbia, down from 22.6 percent in 2000 to 13.4 percent in 2007. We also note that in the period from…. Sorry, that's the LICO. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If you use the market-based measure, we've actually seen in the year from '06 to '07 — one year — an 18 percent drop in poverty rates overall and, for children, a drop of 17 percent in that one-year period in British Columbia. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1545]
It still puts us at 0.1…. When we talk about being last in Canada, which is a distinction we don't like, we still need to talk about the numbers, and some of the differences between provinces amount to a degree of only 0.1 percent. So while we're tracking at last, I would argue that the recent market-based measure shows that the initiatives that we've been undertaking across government have shown tremendous success, and we intend to continue that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We work together under our integrated framework for children and youth. We as a ministry are the lead in that, to work together with ministries to put a children's lens to all of the things that we do. As we develop through Strong, Safe and Supported, we intend to strengthen that and be able to see those numbers decline even more profoundly. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I take it from the minister's comments that there's not a poverty plan. There is no specific focus on looking at intergenerational poverty and how we resolve that for aboriginal communities primarily, but not exclusively. Certainly, the minister sees that poverty issues will not affect the number of children in care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, in the case of the family that I referenced, the child was removed from those parents because they were in unsafe housing. The reason they were in unsafe housing is because they couldn't access housing and adequate funding in order to live in a safer environment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So the issues around poverty are certainly complex, and we can't isolate simply the ministry's role in the apprehension of a child to say: "Well, the child was in an unsafe environment, and that's why the child was apprehended." You have to actually look one step broader than that and say: "That family was in an unsafe situation because they were poor, and they couldn't access adequate resources to find safer housing for themselves at that point in time." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm just really disappointed that the government hasn't picked up the issue of child poverty as part of the ongoing, multi…. If we want to talk about across all ministries…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We want to talk about how we look at children through the lens of not being siloed, look at all of the ministry responsibilities in the various ways that children in care or families needing assistance at some point touch on the government and make contact with the government and why poverty and the reduction of poverty…. Deep intergenerational poverty is, I think, the most challenging. But, certainly, the issue of poverty and the growing concern about the working poor…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When we have a government that actually directs families to food banks as a way to make income assistance stretch from one part of the month to the next, I think we've failed miserably in our ability to come to grips with the reality for families. So it is very disappointing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Noting the time, I feel that this is a topic we probably could explore at great length. I am surprised that the ministry hasn't adopted more of a poverty strategy that they want to be very public with and say: "We are going to tackle poverty. We're going to tackle it in first nations communities" — where it is often the most deeply felt, and it is intergenerational poverty — "and we're going to tackle it for the working poor. We're going to look at transitional poverty, and we're going to actually make that part of our mandate: to provide the best care for children and families in the province of British Columbia — and that we would actually address that." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I haven't heard that from government, and it's too bad. I would hope that they would see that part of their responsibility is to address that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We don't have a lot of time left here today, and I know that my colleague has many questions around child care, which is equally important. So I will cede the floor to her and let her ask some questions at this point on child care, if I may. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First and foremost, I have to say that poverty does not occur in isolation. The idea that government would form a plan and say that we're going to have a plan that only resolves around child poverty is, in fact, creating another silo. We do have a very public initiative that has been published in our Strong, Safe and Supported plan. I've spoken about it in the chamber, I believe, on a number of occasions, and it's called the integrated framework for children and youth. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What it represents is our cross-ministry work that recognizes that supporting families is not just about alleviating a financial strain. Supporting a family means determining what we can do to support them in terms of their finances, but also in terms of the various needs that they might have as a family, as a whole. Because, again, poverty does not happen in isolation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1550]
Nevertheless, as evidence of the concern of government, it is obvious from the evidence before us — and that is, the poverty rates in British Columbia and how they have been declining over the number of years; the dramatic decline that we've seen in a one-year period from '06 to '07 — that the initiatives that government has undertaken across ministries, be it the rental assistance program or the eliminating of MSP premiums for those with low incomes…. The list goes on to various initiatives that have supported those families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We have continued to recognize that there is a need to address families' difficulties in a very direct way. In terms of the development of Strong, Safe and Supported, the integrated framework for children and youth is a key component of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of our children's lens that we want to bring to this, that really brings us to considering poverty amongst other things that should take us to considering the UN convention on the rights of the child and how important it is for us to think of outcomes for children beyond just what we would claim as poverty alone. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Finally, while we will deal with the particular report that the member mentions at the select standing committee, I do want to re-emphasize the fact that the only time the ministry takes a child into care is when there is an unsafe environment in which that child is living. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That is not something that is done on the basis of merely an unsafe household. That has many components to it and is certainly not a decision that any social worker takes lightly. But this ministry does not take children into care as a result of poverty. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: I'll be asking some questions on the topic of child care. I guess my first question to the minister is: can you just outline for me the budget allocated for child care? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The budget for child care is about $300 million this year. That's an increase of about $8 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Would I be able to get a breakdown of the different components of the budget in terms of…? I know it's usually broken down by the program; it's been broken down in the past. It's usually designated as child care, ECD and special needs. Is it possible to get a breakdown on those areas? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1555]
Hon. M. Polak: For the purposes of this — and the member can ask a further question if I'm incorrect — I believe the member was considering supported child development when she mentioned special needs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'll start with early childhood development, because that actually isn't included in that $300 million. That amounts to $23 million. In terms of child care subsidy, which is a part of the $300 million, that's $148 million. The child care operating funding is $65 million, and the supported child development funding is $57 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Thank you, Minister. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question is.... I understand we are still receiving funds from the federal government for child care. It should be $33 million that's been promised for the last couple of years, and continuing as well. Does the minister have a breakdown for those funds as well? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: For '09-10 we received from the federal government — the member is correct — $33.61 million. That breaks down as follows. Some $14.35 million goes to subsidy, $9.16 million goes to the operating funding, $9.3 million goes to resource and referral, $160,000 goes to major capital, $200,000 goes to child care operations and administration, and $440,000 goes to supported child development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: My question is to the minister. Can you tell me...? It says here in the service plan that for 2007-08 the total number of ministry-funded licensed child care spaces was 87,538, that the actual for 2008-09 was 92,751 and that the target for 2009-2010 is 91,000. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So I was just curious if the minister could explain — it appears that there's a drop — the numbers from 2008-09 of 92,751 to a drop for the 2009-10 target of 91,000. That also carries through to '10-11, a static target, as well as to '11-12 for those spaces. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1600]
Hon. M. Polak: In part, this is because it isn't the ministry that actually creates spaces — right? It's the sector out there that creates the spaces. When they do, we provide them funding. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are anticipating that due to the fact that we are not providing a major capital budget for this year, we will not see an increase in spaces. We are on track to meet that 91,000-space target, and essentially, the performance measures targets are consistent with what we anticipate in terms of year-over-year growth and looking at the historical trends. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What we have done over the last number of years…. You recognized some of that in the previous numbers. Since '01 the major capital funding that we've provided has actually enabled us to create or to assist in creating more than 6,500 spaces in that time period. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are not at this time, given the current economic circumstance, able to provide a major capital funding program. Nevertheless, we are at a very high level in terms of the numbers when compared to past years, and we expect that to remain consistent and not see a reduction. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Minister, can you tell me: what is the budget line for the minor capital grants and what percentage of the budget that makes up? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The amount allocated for minor capital this year is $500,000. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: What was the amount for minor capital grants last year, last budget? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It was $1.2 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: So my question is with the reduction. Maybe you can talk about the reduction in the minor capital grant program. Certainly, I've heard a number of concerns come forward, and a number of facilities talked to me about the difficulties that they're facing trying to meet the needs of maintaining their facilities in terms of meeting the provincial regulations that they are required to. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The difficulty of the reduction in the minor capital grant program from a maximum of $5,000 to $2,000 is that it falls short. Many child care providers, facilities, are having difficulty making the necessary renovations, meeting the regulations and upgrading their facilities. So maybe you could just explain to me some of the reasons behind that reduction. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1605]
Hon. M. Polak: Essentially, this is a result of economic pressures and our attempt to ensure that funding we are providing is focused primarily on direct services to children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This has been difficult, certainly, for those operators who were expecting to be able to receive funding up to the $5,000 level. I made the decision that it was better to move to the $2,000 maximum in order to allow us to not see a number of operators receiving no funding but instead for them to all be able to receive a small amount of funding. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minor capital funding, though, was never intended to cover major renovations. If there are major renovations that are needed in order to be compliant with licensing, it would be something that would be more appropriate when we have a major capital fund. We do not have that this year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Minor capital funding was never intended to cover things that would be of a significant nature in terms of renovations. Rather, they would be minor repairs. Again, a difficult decision to make, but we felt it necessary in order to protect the subsidy program at its current level, and also the child care operating fund. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Does the minister have a percentage of the cut that that represents to the overall child care budget, just as a reference? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It represents approximately $700,000 less out of that $300 million budget, which is, to my mind, although I have to say it's late in the day, and my brain is tired…. I think it's less than half a percent. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: I've got correspondence, and I'm sure the minister and the staff have heard from a number of facilities that are experiencing hardship, certainly, in recognition that the minor capital grants are not for major renovations but just for the upkeep, for minor repairs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have a report from the Esprit child care centre in Gibsons. I can forward this on if you haven't received it as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Esprit child care centre in Gibsons is an on-site child care centre at Elphinstone Secondary School. The repairs that they have done there are by the school district maintenance staff. They say that they're having a hard time making the necessary changes and minor repairs to their facility to meet the regulations. Due to the cut, they are experiencing hardship. That's a report from that care centre in Gibsons. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I also have a submission from the Quignas day care. They talk also about the hardship of the reduction in the grant. They take a little bit more of a historical view. The coordinator there has been working in the field since 1979 and has seen that very little has improved. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1610]
They characterize the cut to the minor capital grant as a money grab from the child care field, putting undue hardship on the facility trying to meet the regulations and make the necessary changes, and the reductions in the child care grant…. Actually, they would have to pass those fees on to parents, and they would be forced to offset the costs of making the necessary upgrades. That would be translated into higher parent costs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's certainly the story I've been hearing and painting in terms of the situation of child care here in British Columbia. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Number one, it represents such a small percentage of the overall budget. Also, in context of the lack of investment in major capital, one component of a sustainable child care system is the necessity to invest in infrastructure, not only in major capital funding but in terms of the minor capital, in making those necessary upgrades. It's an important aspect of our child care system, and it's to meet the provincial regulations that they're required to do that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Child care facilities are reporting that it's putting a hardship on them. They have to make these changes, these upgrades, and it's resulting in having to transfer those costs onto parents. They're having to raise their fees, and that's a concern from child care providers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Since I've been talking to and meeting with a number of child care providers, I've been struck by their concern in terms of wanting to offer quality service to kids and also for parents and families. That also is quite touching in terms of their commitment to the field. They take it very seriously — providing quality child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think they take it personally in terms of wanting to be able to provide quality child care for kids to ensure that kids have the appropriate environment. Also, they want to have their services accessible to families. They feel bad — because they often know these parents, and they're in the community — when they have to raise their fees and parents have to take that burden. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Just recognize the hardship that's put onto these child care centres in their efforts too. They also have a very high…. I found that they take it very seriously and that they want to meet all the provincial regulations. They are committed to doing that. So that's a hardship on them that they feel they have to pass on to the parents. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My next question is just…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: How can they meet the regulations? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Okay. Maybe I can phrase that into a question. Thank you. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Yeah, just how would these child care providers be able to meet the provincial regulations in making these minor upgrades? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1615]
Hon. M. Polak: First and foremost, I want to emphasize that this was not an easy decision to make. We had to take a look at what we felt was important to protect. Certainly that was the child care operating fund and the subsidy. Of course, the subsidy protects affordability for those children who are in some of the most vulnerable circumstances, and families that are experiencing income challenges. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But it was also an important decision to maintain the minor capital funding rather than having a more complex major capital funding. We eliminated that for this year and focused on our minor capital. The decision was made later in the year, so we do have 25 applications that were approved at the previous $5,000 and $10,000 level. Then there are a further 80 — it's actually probably a little bit more now, but the latest numbers we have are 80 — at the $2,000 level. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of licensing. The licensing folks who are involved in the inspections, in our experience, have been very reasonable with the operators in terms of providing them with reasonable timelines when we're not dealing with any kind of extensive safety…. You know, those types of violations. Ordinarily for these kinds of funds, we're dealing with very minor matters, and licensing is able to work with those agencies. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
To date we're not seeing any increase in the kind of licensing complaints that we would see if, in fact, they were having a difficulty with licensing. So we're hopeful as we try to get through what will be a difficult time for agencies, that, in fact, we will be able to get through this, maintain our support for child care operating funding and for subsidy and be able to see brighter days ahead, hopefully, economically, when we can provide more in terms of major and minor capital. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Yeah, I wouldn't also expect to see a lot of reports coming down in terms of violations of regulations or having those reports come in just in terms of the time frame. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So how do you think these centres will be able to make up the difference, with having to…? That's what I've been hearing. I've been hearing they have to make these investments, they have to spend money, and there's a shortfall. They're in deficit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I think it's important to note at this juncture that child care is not a service provided by government. It is a service provided by the private sector, and we support that through the child care operating fund and also through providing subsidy to make it more affordable for parents with low incomes. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1620]
When it comes to the minor capital funding — and, in fact, even the major capital funding — in most cases, the vast majority of them, the funding that we provide through minor capital is only a portion of what those agencies will need to spend on different projects that they might have before them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So while this will be less funding than they were anticipating this year, it is not the only funding source for the vast majority of agencies, and I'm sure that they are experiencing difficulties in other areas as well. We all are — government, private agencies. Again, we anticipate that the agencies will do their very best to maintain services and maintain cost levels at a place where parents can afford it, but that is their decision to make as private agencies. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We continue not only to support child care at an unprecedented level in this province, but in fact this year, even in tough economic times, we've increased the overall spending on child care by $8 million. Again, a difficult decision but one that focuses on protecting the child care operating fund and protecting the subsidy program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Recognizing that it's in the private sector, and these child care centres are often operated out of family homes or group care homes that are non-profit. There are very limited funding sources to support the provision of day care, and the minor capital grants are a small but substantial part of that. Is the minister suggesting that it's up to the families and that the child care providers have to pass those costs on to the families? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The reason is… I have a letter from the Windermere Valley Child Care Society. They're running a non-profit child care centre, and they're finding that the financial issues they're being faced with…. They're running a deficit over the years, so it's accumulating, and it's insufficient to cover their costs. From this letter, the parents are receiving the brunt of the shortfall. Some families can handle it, but some can't. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would just like to be able to report back to the letters that have come in to me, in terms of some relief for these facilities that are providing child care and their efforts to meet the provincial regulations. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1625]
Hon. M. Polak: The child care operating fund is provided to agencies at a rate of about 12 to 14 percent of what it's costing to them to run their facility. You can add to that the subsidy that's provided for low-income families, which is up to the full amount of what they are charging. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The money that comes through CCOF is no-strings-attached money. If they chose to, they could certainly make an internal decision to have moneys like that go to minor capital. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
These are private agencies, and it is up to them to manage their budget appropriately and determine whether or not they have other places they could look to within their budget, whether those are administrative efficiencies or other actions they may decide not to take this year. Again, that's over to them as a private agency. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Our decision was based on difficult economic times and on our desire to protect what we felt was the highest priority, and that was the operating fund and also the subsidy. Certainly, we would love to be able to not have to make any of those decisions. Nevertheless, we were able to see our spending on child care increase this year by $8 million in the midst of some very difficult economic times. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Unfortunately, we're not able to maintain funding for everything that we do, but we felt that the priority should be on maintaining the CCOF and the subsidy for low- and moderate-income families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: I'd just like to have on record that a number of child care providers have expressed that it will have quite an impact on them and their ability to make the necessary renovations and improvements to meet the regulations, and that they'll have to pass those costs on to the families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I was wondering if I could just go back. You gave me the current number for this budget — $300 million for child care. Do you also have the numbers for '10-11 and '11-12 projected for the child care? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: As I've said in previous questions, if I'm fortunate enough to be the minister in '10-11 or '11-12, I'll be happy to canvass forecasted amounts or actual amounts at that time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: It's a math question again. Just in terms of the overall MCFD budget, the investment of $300 million in child care — what does that represent in percent of that budget and in percent of the overall budget just roughly? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It's about 21 percent of our overall budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Could the minister explain to me the trend in the subsidy allocation? I notice that it's about half of the current budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1630]
Hon. M. Polak: Last year we spent about $144 million, and this year we'll spend $148.2 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: The subsidies — I recognize that they comprise nearly half of the overall child care budget. I have a submission from the B.C. Government and Service Employees Union in terms of subsidies — that subsidies are simply giving money to individuals. It's not a substitute for quality child care, and just pouring money into child care subsidies doesn't address the need for more spaces in the province. There is a need for spaces, and also the issue of affordability. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If I can just hear the minister's response on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In fact, the ability of this province…. I shouldn't say the ability. The decision of this province to provide for subsidy as a significant portion of this funding is what provides parents with choices that they don't have in other places. Our province is the only province that allows parents to be subsidized for in-home day care, which they may choose to have. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We believe that affording parents that choice is an important thing. It's also important to note that most provinces have a hybrid model of funding, where there is some money going to subsidize and some money going to daily operating funding. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of spaces, as I've already said, through our major capital program we have provided for the creation of over 6,500 new child care spaces since 2001. That's quite significant. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would add that I believe personally — and I think I would be joined by my government colleagues — that the provision of subsidy for low- and moderate-income families is yet another component of assisting low-income families to be able to get out of a level of poverty. I think it's an important component of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: I've been hearing reports about the long wait-lists that parents have in terms of trying to get their infants, toddlers or young children into day care spaces and just the lack of spaces that are available. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The question to the minister is about…. Certainly not contradicting the role that subsidies play, but in terms that subsidies don't address the need to alleviate wait-lists and to provide spaces for much-needed child care spaces…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1635]
Hon. M. Polak: It is unfortunately difficult to assess wait-lists coming from day care centres or child care centres, because in very many instances it is most common for parents to register in a number of different day care centres. Then when they would be successful in acquiring a space for their child, they don't tend to follow up and remove their name from the other four or five centres that they may have registered for. So it is very difficult to assess properly what the wait-lists mean in terms of demand. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
For our purposes, though, we have certainly been great contributors to the creation of spaces. Since '07-08 we've contributed $14.5 million in major capital funding. Again going back to what's happened since 2001, our major capital program has seen the development of more than 6,500 spaces around the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We recognize that child care is always in high demand, and we continue to provide a child care operating fund to those facilities that are constructed and qualify for it under the proper licensing. We certainly recognize the need to support those spaces, and we do so on quite a substantial level. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: The minister has raised the challenge of determining what is.... We know the current number of spaces that are provided. Certainly I hear, and child care providers tell me, that there are huge wait-lists. They characterize it as a system in crisis. There are not adequate spaces to accommodate the requests, and affordability is also a challenge. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So the question becomes: is the ministry looking at ways to actually document and quantify what the wait-list is in the community to be able to better inform plans going forward in terms of addressing the needs for child care spaces? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: We don't plan for where child care spaces should be or how many there should be. What we do is provide funding to those that are created. I believe the number right now is 4,800 providers throughout the province. That makes it, as you can imagine, being that they are private agencies, difficult to track exactly what is going on in each community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Nevertheless, our role is in providing support through not only the child care operating fund but also through subsidy. It is the private sector's role to create those spaces, and we respond with funding support when they do. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1640]
M. Elmore: I believe there are a number of child care resource and referral facilities undertaking a survey to try and determine precisely, in more of a scientific way, what the wait-lists are and what the need is. It's difficult to quantify that, and you need to have that data in terms of being able to plan how you're going to…. You have to identify what the needs are in terms of more effectively being able to plan to accommodate those needs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have a submission from a family in the West End just talking about their difficulties in accessing child care and the wait-lists. They've been on a wait-list for 2½ years. Their child is three years old. They got on a wait-list, and they still haven't gotten a space. They went on the wait-list in July 2006, more than three years ago, and they're placed at over 300 in order of priority. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's one report in terms of the wait-lists, and that's what I've heard on an anecdotal level in terms of the wait-lists at facilities that I've been to certainly in the West End. I was wondering if the minister had heard about or what knowledge you have in terms of reports of wait-lists for child care around B.C. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Again, it's very difficult to maintain accurate wait-lists or be able to access accurate information about wait-lists for precisely the reasons that I outlined, in that parents tend to register at multiple different sites. So it's very difficult to come to grips with what the accurate information might be. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to determining what is out there or what is available, that is what the child care resource and referral agencies do. We provide a $9 million budget for that. There are currently 38 agencies providing child care resource and referral services in 41 different locations around the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, this is up to private agencies to determine where and how many spaces they wish to invest in and create. Our role as a province is to support those spaces that are created, and we do that to the tune of 91,000 spaces in British Columbia this year that we estimate. We respond, as spaces are created, to provide them with operating funding and also with subsidies to low- and moderate-income families so that they can afford the fees associated with that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Besides these facilities, I've also had meetings up at UBC and at SFU with their child care facilities there. They've reported to me that their wait-list is also in excess of the hundreds and also many years' wait-list. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The problem — it's a little bit of a different constituency in terms of the needs of students and families pursuing their graduate and post-doc and post-graduate work at these institutions — is that besides the faculty and staff, the students also need that support. If they're young parents and have small kids, they need to access child care to have that support in terms of pursuing their educational programs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I was just wondering if you're aware of the backlog and the wait-lists at UBC and SFU in terms of the requests for spaces and the needs for that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1645]
Hon. M. Polak: While I cannot speak directly to the SFU situation, I have met with the Alma Mater Society about UBC. I think it's important to identify the support that's already been provided to UBC in '09-10. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This year they've been provided with $240,000 in child care operating funding, and already this year, about $8,000 in minor capital funding has been provided to UBC child care services, as well as approximately $267,000 provided in child care subsidy payments for those that are attending there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Currently, in terms of licensed child care on the UBC Point Grey campus, there are seven group day cares that take in the under-36-month crowd, with a total of 96 spaces. Last year's total spaces was 84. There are seven group day cares for 30 months to school-aged, with a total of 264 spaces. Last year's total spaces was about 216, so an increase there as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Two group day cares, with a total of 110 spaces for out-of-school care, and one kindergarten program and one kindercare with kindergarten program. There are also seven registered licence-not-required child care providers listed on our ministry website, and they are within seven kilometres of the UBC Point Grey campus. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
While I recognize that they are struggling, as well, with increased demand, nevertheless I would have to say that in comparison to other areas of the province, the UBC Point Grey area is very well served. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: I also met with the UBC alma mater. Did they raise to you the wait-lists and the need for spaces and the wait times? Did they give you an indication of that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Yes, they did. They acknowledged the similar circumstance that I have outlined, which is that it's very difficult to judge anything from the wait-lists that are provided, given that we have no way of knowing whether or not parents have registered at multiple sites or whether, in fact, they have already located child care somewhere else and their name simply remains on the list. It's very difficult to assess. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, we understand they're experiencing issues around demand — high demand for their programs. But that is an opportunity, hopefully, for someone to see the need and then decide that they wish to invest in creating child care spaces, which we then would be funding through our child care operating fund, should they qualify, which we would expect they would. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Certainly, responses for the need, the pressing need, for more spaces out at UBC and also a number of other post-secondary institutions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The need there, as well as the need for more spaces — which I've been hearing in terms of the wait-lists — is support for young families, particularly young mothers. It's not as much as in past years. You know, there is shared parenting of parents — mothers and fathers — but certainly it often falls to the mother. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One of the aspects, as well, that I heard is that the lack of child care spaces, particularly at UBC and SFU, is resulting in a barrier for young women who are seeking to complete their degrees and pursue their education, their academic careers. It's a barrier in terms of pursuing their academic work. So that's one of the impacts of lack of spaces at post-secondary institutions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Also, in the community, it's young families and often the working mothers who face the greatest challenge of needing to find reliable child care for their kids when they're trying to work and also support their family. So if the minister could speak to that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1650]
Hon. M. Polak: We recognize, certainly, the very important role that appropriate child care plays in the life of a student or a student couple who would be dealing with children. That's precisely why we felt it was important for us to protect the child care operating funding. Those spaces certainly depend on it for their existence. When it comes to, very often, single mothers who are pursuing post-secondary education and struggling in terms of their income level, the subsidy is extremely important to them in terms of ensuring affordability of child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We would hope that the increased demand they are seeing at the university would motivate a provider to establish spaces at the site. Certainly, we would be there with our operating funding to be able to support that. But that is part of the challenge we face — that we depend upon the private sector to develop appropriate spaces. We then provide very important funding and support to them and subsidize low- and moderate-income families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Certainly the CCOF and the subsidy address supporting parents and families when they're able to access the spaces. But the need to address the wait-list and for the creation of more spaces is, I think, a pressing.... I've been hearing it's a pressing concern that's needed at these institutions — from community child care providers and from parents, young parents, and from my colleagues who have young children. They're not spared the challenge of trying to find adequate child care for their kids. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There's a need — certainly that's what I've been hearing in terms of a need for spaces and for the creation of more spaces. I was concerned that this year there wasn't a provision for investment in the creation of new spaces. I've heard the rationale about the economic difficulties, and I recognize that. But I also recognize the role that investment in child care can play and, in terms of investment in infrastructure, that it has a recognized multiplier effect. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm concerned, and I think it's really too bad that we're not seeing the creation of more spaces this year and that it hasn't been projected into the plan. So if the minister could speak to that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1655]
Hon. M. Polak: The role of the private sector is to create spaces. They do that. We are there to support them with operating funding, which provides stability to the system — maintains the existing spaces. Certainly, as a result of that, we came to the decision that it was extremely important to maintain the child care operating funding and the subsidy. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Although the target for this year is 91,000 spaces, that doesn't necessarily mean that there might not be providers who come along in the interim and build or open new spaces. If they were to do that, then we would be providing them, as well, with child care operating funding. But, again, that is not the role that the ministry plays. We do support spaces at times when we have finances to run and operate a major capital budget, and we have done that over the years to the tune of 6,500 spaces since 2001. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Nevertheless, as we fall on more difficult economic times, we've increased our budget for child care by about $8 million this year. We felt the important priority was to maintain the child care operating fund and maintain the subsidy. Certainly, if you are to speak to any of the providers out there, they depend on that fund for stability and for money that they can count on. Indeed, the existence of that fund is an incentive to providers to develop spaces, because they know that that fund is there to provide support for those spaces. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: I think that the dependence on the private sector can be identified as one of the problems in terms of relying solely on the private sector to create child care spaces. If you look at it in terms of quality child care assistance that is offered in other jurisdictions, other countries, market-based models have not been shown to deliver the spaces because the profit margin is small. Also, the other problem is that it tends to drive up costs — costs that comes out in terms of fees for parents. Also, it drives down wages in terms of wages to the child care providers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[H. Bloy in the chair.]
I think that maybe exists as a philosophical difference in terms of the role of government supporting child care and, also, regarding it as an investment to create child care spaces and to identify child care as a public service that's offered and benefits society as a whole. We reap those benefits for providing universal, affordable and accessible child care for all citizens regardless of their ability to pay and according to need. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Maybe the minister can speak to that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I suppose there is a philosophical position to take that says that government should fund every aspect of child care, from building of spaces, to operating and all the way through. Nevertheless, throughout British Columbia's history, regardless of which government has been in power, the system in place now that relies on private operators has remained the same. It is not new with this government. It has been the same throughout, regardless of which political party was in power. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1700]
This is indeed a choice that one has to make between whether the priorities are around capital or around operating, and we believe that the best support we are able to provide to parents is through providing operating funding to agencies that provide child care, to provide subsidies to make it affordable for low- and moderate-income families and, when our budget allows, to provide for capital support toward the construction of new spaces. As I've mentioned before, that has resulted in the development of more than 6,500 spaces since 2001. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Nevertheless, I would emphasize that this is not a new system. It's one that has been in place throughout our history in British Columbia, and I would venture to say that the move away from supporting operating would also present a significant challenge to those who are in the business at this point. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Recognizing that I've heard and it's been characterized as a crisis in the child care system — the lack of spaces, the long wait-lists for parents, to get into facilities — another issue that has also been raised consistently is the issue of affordability and the rising costs of child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have a letter, a submission from a family who was on a wait-list for over three years in the West End. The child care costs are continuing to rise, and it's out of the reach of many families, even with the subsidies. They quote here the cost of child care. It's recorded now that child care costs are the second-highest expense for a family after they're paying for their home, shelter. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One is a lawyer, and the other works at UBC. Their fees are $1,290 a month, which works out to $23,500 gross net income. Those are the fees they are having to pay, in addition to the high wait-list. That's the situation. It's very grave for families and young families. I think I'd characterize them as desperate in terms of needing to find places to look after their kids while they're going to school. There's a need for more spaces in our system. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If I can just ask the minister to comment on what she heard in terms of affordability of child care for families here in B.C. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Certainly, we recognize that affordability is a challenge. That is why, when faced with difficult decisions this year due to tough economic times, we felt that it was important to make the decision to prioritize child care operating funding and subsidy, because that is the very most direct way that we can help parents with the affordability question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, back to our priorities, they were chosen based on the recognition that affordability is a significant challenge for parents out there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Thank you to the minister for recognizing that affordability is a big challenge for families in B.C. — trying to access day care, off and on, with wait-lists. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'd like to just move on to a different area of questioning around the rationale behind the elimination of the Minister of State for Childcare and moving it into MCFD. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: That would be appropriately canvassed in the Premier's estimates. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Can I ask why? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1705]
Hon. M. Polak: The ministry is not responsible for making the decision as to the existence or non-existence of the minister of state position. That is a decision made by the Premier. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Can the minister tell me how that will affect the provision of child care in B.C.? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: There should be no change in service. There's simply a change in responsibility. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: If I'm to understand it, basically child care would be administered off the side of the desk and not have the dedicated resources and focus put onto child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My question is in terms of restructuring and how restructuring within the ministry will affect the delivery of child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I have to say that I actually take offence at the suggestion that any department in my ministry runs off the side of my desk. It doesn't. In terms of the minister of state position, as is true for any other minister of state, they do not operate as a separate ministry. They operate under the auspices of an overall ministry, in this case the Ministry of Children and Family Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The staff that were the complement for the child care department remain. They simply are under the authority of my ministry as a whole now, without the minister of state. In fact, our executive positions and, indeed, my ministry office have been constructed in such a way as to pay adequate attention to the addition of that workload to our ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In fact, even the ministerial assistant who was working directly with the minister of state is now one of my ministerial assistants. In my ministerial office, rather than having a ministerial assistant and an executive assistant, the typical complement that a ministry would have, I have two ministerial assistants and do not have an executive assistant. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That, in part, is to recognize the very expansive workload that is represented in our ministry. But there's no way, ever, that any department of our ministry operates off the side of my desk. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: It's my understanding that there haven't been any staff reductions with the transition. You still have all the dedicated staff. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: That's correct. The only staff reductions or changes that would have taken place would have been directly at the minister's office level. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Can I ask where does child care fit in the new practice framework? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: As I mentioned, it has never been the case that the minister of state was separate from the Ministry of Children and Family Development. In fact, it did operate underneath the auspices of the Ministry of Children and Family Development, and child care is a part of pillar 1 of our Strong, Safe and Supported. It's an extremely important part of the continuum. In fact, it's the beginning of the continuum that we see with respect to the importance of early childhood development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1710]
If I could quote from Strong, Safe and Supported in pillar 1: "Government will place a primary focus on preventing vulnerability in children and youth by providing strong supports for individuals, families and communities." That, of course, involves providing quality child care and quality early childhood development to those children and families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: I have a question for another cut. Maybe the minister can tell me about the "supported child development." In that line, what's the trend there? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Did you mean in terms of the budget for it, or did you mean in terms of the number of children? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Yeah, in terms of the budget. I've got reports that child care centres are reporting that they've lost the supported child care portion in terms of the component that goes to support children with special needs into their facilities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: There have been no reductions there. In fact, there's been an increase. In terms of trend, in '04-05 we had a budget of $37.7 million, and this year we have a budget of $57 million. There have been no reductions there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Okay, thank you. Maybe I can follow up with the facility, and I can inquire at a further time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have a question in terms of the early childhood educators. If the minister could just explain some of the supports and programs that are available to support the professional development and, also, the licensing of ECEs here in B.C. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1715]
Hon. M. Polak: Certainly, we recognize the need to train and recruit more early childhood educators. They are the backbone of our system. So a number of different supports. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One is a grant that we provided to Vancity for bursaries of $1.5 million. Our incentive grants this year — we had 50 applicants, and 21 ended up being eligible. For our loan assistance program we had over 100 applicants, and 42 ended up being eligible. The total that we spent on those was $116,000. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Then, we also provided $500,000 in '04-05 and another $660,000 in '06-07 to the University of Victoria, where we continue to support the School of Child and Youth Care at the university. The purpose of that is looking forward. We really want to identify and support good practices that exist in terms of early childhood education and to share those kinds of strengths across programs so that we really can be developing the best way to incent those we would want to see train to be early childhood educators. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We should also recognize, though, that this is a challenge that is being faced not only in British Columbia but in fact North America–wide. We'll continue to pursue whatever means we can to improve the recruitment rates for early childhood educators. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: The minister mentioned the program at UVic. I'm wondering if you're aware also that the University of Victoria is facing great pressure for child care spaces and looking to alleviate that. They've had a proposal submission from Kids and Co., which is a large corporate child care — also referred to as big-box child care — which is unanimously opposed across the board by all the child care providers and advocates here on the Island and also across B.C. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I was wondering if the minister had a comment. We don't have currently in B.C. large corporate child care — if the minister can comment on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Certainly, the decision around the acceptance of that proposal would be the purview of the University of Victoria, not the ministry. In terms of the ministry's role, it would be to ensure that any new child care provider would meet our standards for licensing. But the decision whether or not to employ the services of an organization such as that would be the decision of the University of Victoria, not the decision of government. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Chair: If I can remind all members that they should direct their questions towards the budget Vote 19 for the ministry for the years 2009-10. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: The previous minister of state is on the record as opposed to large, corporate child care in B.C. I was just wondering if the minister is also going to go on record about that in terms of this current budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'm not familiar with the particular quote that the member references. What I can tell the member is that our consistent position has been that our role is in terms of ensuring that any provider would meet our licensing standards. In terms of this particular proposal that the member describes, that would be a decision for the University of Victoria. It wouldn't be a decision for government. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1720]
M. Elmore: I do have the quote in here, because I pulled it off. It's from the previous estimates procedure: "I know the question has been whether or not British Columbia will be home to large, corporate child care. The answer to that is no. We have small, independent operators today, and there has been no interest in having anything else come to British Columbia." That's what the previous minister is on record as saying. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Again, I don't think that my comments are inconsistent. She's responding to the fact that we hadn't had any requests at that time, and it wasn't a direction that she saw the province going. The fact of the matter is that the decision that the member is referencing would be one for the University of Victoria. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It isn't a decision for government. Our decisions are around whether or not there are appropriate standards being met and if, indeed, a facility is meeting those standards and should, therefore, be licensed. But the decision as to whether or not to accept this proposal is the purview of the University of Victoria. It's not the purview of government. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: I understand that the minister isn't prepared to take a stand on this pressing issue that's of concern, pretty much, to the entire child care providers and advocates and organizations in B.C. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have another question in terms of the early childhood educators. One of the concerns, certainly, is ensuring that these professionals, who are very dedicated to their careers, are able to make a living wage in their profession. Often we see that there is downward pressure on wages in terms of trying to meet affordability for parents. I'm wondering if the minister is in support of…. There's a campaign calling for a living wage for early childhood educators, a $20 an hour wage. I'm wondering if the minister is in support of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The role of the ministry is to provide for financial support to day care providers. We do that through the child care operating fund. It is the providers who set the wages for their employees. It is not government who has a role to play in that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, though, the operating funding that we provide can be used by the day care providers in whichever way they choose, and if that would be to increase the wages for their employees, that's their decision. But again, our role is to provide financial support through the child care operating fund and, in addition to that, through subsidy for low- and moderate-income families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: My next question is: is the minister interested in looking at adding a wage subsidy for early childhood educators as one of the line items — besides providing the subsidy and the operating funds and the minor grants and those different lines, adding a line in terms of supporting the wage subsidy for ECEs? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: No, we have not considered a separate wage subsidy. In fact, the child care operating fund can be used by providers to increase wages for their employees if they see fit, but that's their choice. Our role is to provide financial support for them through the child care operating fund and also through subsidy to low- and moderate-income parents. It is their decision to make as to how they support their employees and at what wage. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1725]
M. Elmore: I just have a couple of more questions to wrap up, and then I'll pass off to one of my colleagues, who has some more questions. It's around the plan, or if there is a plan, for child care in terms of addressing the need for more spaces and, also, the issue of affordability. Is there a plan? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: As I've said before, we have in the past provided capital funding to the extent that we have been able to support the development of well over 6,500 spaces since 2001. We will continue to provide a major capital program when there are finances available, but in this fiscal year, given the economic challenges, we felt it was important to focus our dollars where they would, first and foremost, meet the needs of children in a very direct way, and that's through the child care operating fund, the subsidy, and also by maintaining at least a portion of the minor capital funding. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: So I take it, then, that there isn't a plan. We don't have a comprehensive plan in government to expand child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's striking when I meet with a number of the advocates and people very passionate about child care and the need to have a comprehensive, universal, affordable, accessible child care plan. Many of them are women. When I sit down with them, they say that this has been a fight they've taken on when they themselves were young mothers. They had young children, and they were trying to find child care spaces for their kids. They say they can't imagine, you know, 30 years later that now their kids have grown up, their kids have had kids, and they're grandparents now, and they are still fighting for a comprehensive child care system. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think it really speaks to the need for a plan, in terms of how to systematically address the needs and concerns that I know…. Certainly, many people in this room, if you've raised kids, are familiar with that and have heard about the need for a comprehensive, universal child care system. There is need for a plan to address that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Again, the decision we've made as government is to protect and enhance the child care operating fund and the subsidy through an $8 million lift this year to our budget, which is now $300 million. It is not our role to be providing the spaces. We provide the support for the spaces and, as I've mentioned, since 2001 the capital support that we have provided has resulted in the creation of more than 6,500 new spaces. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Should there be new spaces created in the sector, we would then be providing our operating funding to those as well. Again, it's just a difference in view with respect to the role of government. But, as I have also mentioned previously, throughout British Columbia's history it has been the private sector that has provided the child care with government providing the operating funding. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It has not changed, despite changes in government. That has been true throughout British Columbia's history. It did not change with this government. Again, our role and our goal right now is to protect what we feel are the priority areas — the child care operating fund and also the subsidy. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Elmore: Just to conclude my remarks, and then I'll pass it off. Certainly, I've been hearing from parents and child care providers, reporting that parent fees are going up and wait-lists are growing across the province. Also, low wages for the child care providers, the early childhood educators, are forcing them to leave the field. A child care action plan that actually looks at implementing and addressing some of these issues in a systematic way is what is needed to move the burden of child care funding from user fees to public funding; to set targets and timelines for lowering and capping parent fees; and to raise wages to a fair wage, a living wage, for early childhood educators. Also, to promote building of community-owned spaces to meet everyone's needs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So that's what I've been hearing, and I think those are the priorities that I'm hoping to see more commitment from the government on. Thank you very much. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1730]
Hon. M. Polak: Just to finish off, I appreciate the member's concern and focus on child care. Certainly, we see the early years as the very most important, and that's why we will continue to invest in supporting quality child care. As new spaces come on-board through the sector, we will be there to provide the support for them through the operating fund, as well, and also through the subsidy for low- and moderate-income families. We are hopeful that the private sector will continue to step up and continue to improve on the number of spaces as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: I would like to ask some questions about a particular situation in my riding related to child care. They've actually made a plea to the minister or to the government for assistance. Let me just outline some background around the issue for you, Mr. Chair, before I ask the minister some questions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is premised on a report that has been done in my community by Clyde Hertzman. The research, of course, shows that…. In the 2004 data, it shows that the children in the Strathcona community have fallen far behind from where they were in 2002, increasing vulnerability in each of the developmental areas. In 2004-2005 this data confirmed what the community parents and organizations had already known, and that is that there is a desperate shortage of child care spaces. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
To that end, the community began to work to save a hundred-space child care centre at 717 Princess Avenue, which is located in Strathcona. At that time, that child care centre space was on the market. It is a project that the community had worked hard on and finally came to realization. It's called the Phil Bouvier Child Development Centre. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When the centre opened, it had over 200 children on the wait-list. Over 90 percent of those 49 children in the child care program are eligible to receive child care subsidies due to limited income. As the Chair may well know, and the minister may know, this is one of the poorest neighbourhoods in all of Canada, the area which I represent. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Of the 49 children taken off of the wait-list, 34 children have a range of medical and developmental issues that require additional staff resources for quality, safety and to help the children meet developmental milestones and be school-ready. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The support needs of the children have been documented and have been recorded by a number of professionals from other systems. Having just three staff — in addition to regular staff ratio required by the community care licensing for a typical child care setting — all children, of course, benefit. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Several children on the wait-list for a one-to-one and one-to-three staff support ratio also exists in our community. In the current system, they would be excluded from our child care centre and put on the supported child care wait-list until they were assessed and a support worker or funding assigned to them so that they could participate in regular child care programs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The situation at 717 Princess is, really, a reflection of the larger reality of the community that I represent and, particularly, of the inner city. That is to say, for 717 Princess Avenue, this could be as many as five to 12 extra staff that would be required for this centre to support the children, based on the supported child care criteria if it were to apply in terms of the guiding principles of it. Unfortunately, there is no funding in place for the children on the wait-lists, and they must wait until funds become available. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The current system excludes these children from supports and enrichment environments that will give them opportunities to develop and to thrive despite the challenges that they face. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1735]
Two issues are at hand that bring us relevant to this set of estimates, Mr. Chair. I know that you're sitting there wondering what I am going on about. But it is totally relevant. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The community currently has received partial funding — that is to say, enough to sort of keep it going but not enough to really do the job that it needs to do. The cost of the building is approximately $70,000 a year, and the extra staffing that's needed for this society is a requirement as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We need that for the safety of the children and for the quality of care of the children as well. With such a high ratio of children with special needs supports, we need to ensure that there is more staffing on hand. So my question to the minister is this, first of all: is the minister aware of the situation at 717 Princess Avenue? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: For clarification, can I ask: is that the Phil Bouvier Centre? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: Yes, it is. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'll try to provide a brief history of our interaction with the Phil Bouvier Centre to perhaps give some clarity to what is occurring at this time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Initially, the government provided a million dollars to help construct the facility, and on an ongoing basis we provide about $85,000 in annual operating funding — that covers 49 child care spaces — in addition to around $420,000 each year that flows in subsidy funding to help offset the child care costs for the parents who are accessing that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the Phil Bouvier Centre, though, we also recognize some of the unique challenges that the member raised, and we provide an additional $75,000 annually to the Vancouver Native Health Society at the Bouvier Centre, through which they're able to provide a key worker position to assist parents in accessing necessary services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Nevertheless, when it comes to the Downtown Eastside and the challenges that they face, there are also other ways in which we provide support. Currently, the Ministry of Children and Family Development…. If you total up all the early childhood development funding that exists there, it comes to a grand total of about $9 million. Since '05-06 our capital investments have seen the creation of about 127 new spaces, and, in fact, coming in January 2010 we will see the opening of three more child care centres: the one at Woodward's will be 37 spaces; the Citygate one, another 37 spaces; and the International Village one will be 47 spaces. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would await if there are further questions from the member. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: I appreciate the information that the minister is providing, and that's great that there is support there. But having said that, I want to go back to the background that I was laying out for the minister's information, and that is the situation in the inner city. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I appreciate that there are 49 spaces that are being funded, but the reality is that for that very centre, just that one centre alone, we have over 200 children on the wait-list. And because it's an inner-city environment, we also have a disproportionately high number of children who have special need requirements. To that end, extra support is necessary in order for the centre to be safe and for the environment to be optimal for the children where they could learn. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The extra funding provides some support but, unfortunately, not enough support. The reality of the centre is such that they are still in need of support for the space itself and to ensure that it is actually an affordable space, and to that end they're not asking the province for all the assistance. They are turning to the city of Vancouver to assist in making that space more affordable for the children and for the community there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Then the other aspect of it is, though, that they need three additional qualified staff to address the ratio of special needs kids or kids who need special support in that centre. So the $75,000, while it is some additional support, is not enough for the centre to do the work it is necessary to do. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1740]
Otherwise, the centre is going to have to turn away these special needs kids requests. If we do that, of course — I think the minister can appreciate.... By not providing these early childhood development opportunities for, particularly, children who are in special needs, it will just further set them back in terms of the future and their future development, and ultimately it would be a heavier burden on the system itself. Of course, it would be missed opportunities for the children in terms of their opportunities to maximize their potential in the future. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So I'm asking whether or not the minister would consider…. First of all, has the minister had a discussion with the operators of the centre around additional funding for these three additional qualified staff that they're requesting? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: In fact, our ministry has been working very closely with board of the Ray-Cam Co-operative Centre, who operate Phil Bouvier. We have been working with them for some time. One of the challenges that we face in working with them is the need to have a system whereby these children are being properly assessed so that they can qualify for supported child care dollars. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We continue to work with not only the board at the Ray-Cam Co-operative Centre but also with the city of Vancouver and other partners, like the Native Health Society, to ensure that there is a plan in place that would enable the centre to proceed and enable them to qualify for the additional funding that would come with supported child care dollars if they were able to complete those assessments. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My understanding is that that work is ongoing, and we're hopeful that the centre will be able to be viable when they are able to complete these plans. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: When did the minister's staff meet with them last? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The latest information I have is from September, at which time we had a meeting with them on September 22. We've also communicated with them through correspondence our willingness to continue that work with them, again, to ensure that they have every possible assistance in meeting the requirements to be able to qualify for supported child care funding and also to assist them in some of their budget planning that they've been challenged with. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Chair: Member, noting the hour. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: I thought we go to quarter after six? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Chair: No, six o'clock on Thursdays. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
J. Kwan: Oh no. Oh dear. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On that note, thank you for that, Minister. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wonder if the minister, then, can assign whoever's staff that's been working with the centre so that I can communicate with them. I have received correspondence from them since that time, and just to catch up on the situation to date, and to see how it is that the ministry can assist with that process in an effort to work out an arrangement that would support the centre. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It would be a tremendous loss to our community if nothing could be worked out, and the loss is not only, of course, for the centre itself but, more importantly, for the children who rely on those centres. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I all of a sudden lost 15 minutes. I'm very distracted by that. I have one other quick thing that I just want to raise, Mr. Chair, if you indulge me. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I received some time ago…. It was this month, actually — October 22, more precisely. A woman named Tracy Lynn Skomoski from Kelowna…. The minister might be aware of this case. It was brought to the Minister of Housing's attention. I thought it was his responsibility. It turns out that it fell under this minister's responsibility. It is the case where she actually needs child care subsidy support. She's a woman who was working full-time, and then she got laid off. Then she was on UI, and then she got cut off UI because it ran out. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Then she was on income assistance and continues to be on income assistance, but she ran into problems with respect to that because she lost her child care subsidy for her granddaughter, for whom she has full custody. There were some issues around that, because the ministry was simply saying they did not pay for child care so that she could job search. But if she didn't have child care, it would be a bit of a problem, because she couldn't otherwise job search, and it would cause problems on the income assistance end and so on and so forth. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1745]
So this case was brought to the minister's attention. I know that there isn't much time. It's not a constituent of mine, but she just wrote me, and I just felt terrible about her situation. I said I would assist her as best I can. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want to bring this to the minister's attention, and I wonder if the minister can direct her staff to look into it. I'd be happy to work with her. I have a consent form here to release the information and, hopefully, to resolve her problem and ensure that she can continue to care for her granddaughter but at the same time meet the requirements of income assistance and get the child care subsidy that is needed for the family's well-being. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: On both counts, with respect to the Phil Bouvier Centre and with respect to the question regarding this individual, I'm happy to connect you with staff. In particular, with respect to the Phil Bouvier Centre, I'm happy to keep you updated as to any progress that we might make in that regard. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Vote 19: ministry operations, $1,394,139,000 — approved.
Hon. M. Polak: I move that the committee rise, report resolution and completion of the Ministry of Children and Family Development and ask leave to sit again. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Motion approved.
The committee rose at 5:47 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