2007 Legislative Session: Third Session, 38th Parliament
HANSARD 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.
(Blues)
HANSARD BLUES DRAFT TRANSCRIPT
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (SECTION A)
WEDNESDAY, MAY 30, 2007
Afternoon Sitting
PROCEEDINGS IN THE
DOUGLAS FIR ROOMCommittee of Supply
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF CHILDREN
AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENTThe House in Committee of Supply (Section A); H. Bloy in the chair. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The committee met at 2:43 p.m. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On Vote 20: ministry operations, $1,219,530,000. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. T. Christensen: As I've just indicated, the ministry's operations budget is just over $1.2 billion for the 2007-2008 year. We're here to seek approval of that by the House. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would first like to introduce staff that are with me now. There will be additional staff that come in and out depending on the issues that we're dealing with. With me now is my Deputy Minister, Lesley du Toit; Assistant Deputy Minister Donna Knox; Assistant Deputy Minister Alan Markwart; Assistant Deputy Minister Sarf Ahmed; and of course, my colleague the Minister of State for Childcare, who obviously will be dealing with those issues. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Before we do get into the specifics of the ministry operations budget, I do want to talk a bit about the provincial budget in general and the commitments made with respect to children and families across British Columbia. Budget 2007 did include significant investments for children and families in our province. The budget invested a total of $468 million in new funding over four years on provincial programs and services to enhance the quality of life for children, adults and families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Of this, $239 million is for the Ministry of Children and Family Development together with Community Living British Columbia. This funding is specifically targeted to programs and services to children and youth at risk or with special needs, adults with developmental disabilities, and individuals and families in need as well as to our community and social service providers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]The government is committed to building the best system of support for British Columbians and to giving children the best possible start in life. Obviously, the Ministry of Children and Family Development has a significant role to play in meeting that commitment, but there are a range of cross-government efforts that are making a positive difference to children and families across British Columbia. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Because of the government's focus over the last number of years on providing opportunities for employment and self-reliance, there are more than 116,000 British Columbians who no longer rely on income assistance since 2001. That's a drop of 46 percent. That includes more than 51,000 children and families who now have more opportunities to achieve their potential. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Since 2001 our government has significantly reduced income taxes for British Columbia families. With a 10-percent cut to the provincial income tax this year, every person earning less than $108,000 is now paying the lowest income tax in Canada. There are 250,000 British Columbians who now pay no income tax whatsoever, provincially. As a result of those tax cuts, a family of four earning $50,000 now pays nearly $1,300 less than they did in the year 2000. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Budget 2007 raises the rental assistance program's income threshold to $28,000 a year, making over 20,000 lower-income working families renting in the housing market potentially eligible for direct assistance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The province, through MCFD, delivers child care subsidies to make it more manageable for families earning less than $38,000 a year to access quality child care in their communities. Until we raised that threshold for child care subsidy in 2005-2006, only families earning less than $21,000 a year were eligible for that subsidy, so that is making a significant difference. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The province has doubled the school startup supplement for children to assist over 18,000 families and 29,000 children to afford the supplies they need for school. Low- to moderate-income families also receive help with the costs associated with basic dental care and prescription glasses for their children through the Healthy Kids program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The ministry has improved assistance to parents of special needs children with the extraordinary costs of serving their diverse needs, including parents who have adopted children from the care of the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As I indicated earlier, improving the quality of life for lower-income families by tackling a number of social issues — which the families that the Ministry of Children and Family Development often work with do — is a cross-government partnership. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That's why we partner with the Ministry of Health on improving mental services. It's why we partner with the Solicitor General's office on addictions issues. It's why we partner with the Ministry of Education on early learning opportunities and many of the efforts to assist special needs children in our province. It's why we partner with the Ministry of Forests and Range and Housing on opportunities to pair child care opportunities with new and existing social housing projects. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Whenever we talk about budgets, we unavoidably deal with numbers, budget allocations, percentage increases, demographics and caseload projections. But as I've stated before, spending alone is often not a very good measure of progress. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Let me state right off the top today that what is driving the budget for the Ministry of Children and Family Development is a fundamental shift that we are making to provide children, youth and families across British Columbia with an integrated continuum of services that reflects their individual needs. We are making those shifts in the context of increasing budgets. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The ministry operations budget for this year is slightly more than $1.219 billion. That's an increase of $106.7 million in the provincial commitment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My colleague Minister Reid will speak to the child care portion of the budget at greater length. But I will say that the federal cancellation of the 2005 early learning and child care agreement has impacted MCFD's budget — no question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We had $147 million of federal funding for early learning and child care in this last year, 2006-2007, which had been anticipated to increase to $151 million in this current year. But once we exclude that federal funding for comparison purposes for both those years, we see that the ministry operations budget actually goes up just under $107 million, or almost 10 percent over last year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Over this three-year budget plan, MCFD's operations budget is expected to rise 15 percent. It's those funding increases that allow the ministry to enhance supports for vulnerable children and families, those with special needs and those at risk. At the same time, the increases will carry the ministry through an ongoing critically important process of examining our best practices, integrating our services more fully, further regionalizing decision-making and shifting toward aboriginal governance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Now, I do want to tell you about a few of the things the ministry is going to achieve with this additional funding. We're going to continue to build on ongoing investment in services to children and youth by providing $93 million over the next three years to improve services to children at risk and children with special needs. A significant portion of this funding will be used for special needs children to support intervention therapies and supports, and additional medical equipment and benefits. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This increase is on top of investments made in Budget 2006 as well as in the fall of 2005 update, which provided increased access to services by children and youth at risk or with special needs and their families, including funding for the child and youth mental health plan. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are finding that autism, specifically, is a growth area for the ministry. Government currently serves approximately 4,000 children and youth on the autism spectrum. In the year ahead we expect further increases in the number of children and youth accessing autism support, so the provincial budget for autism intervention and support is increasing by $10 million, to $44 million in 2007-08. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Ongoing funding has been committed to reduce waiting times for key intervention and support services, and we are making progress on this front, I'm pleased to report. Our service providers have told us that while wait-lists continue to exist in some programs, more children and youth with special needs and their families are receiving services, and wait times are shorter. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If anything, the message I have heard from some of our service providers is that they need flexibility in terms of how they apply those funding increases so that they can address the needs they see coming through their doors specifically. We're certainly committed to working with our service providers on that front. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We're also increasing funding for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, which is thought to occur in roughly nine in 1,000 births. Again, thankfully, we're seeing progress there in terms of prevention efforts led by Minister Reid over the last number of years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The 2007-08 budget for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder support is $5.4 million. That's a $1.8 million increase from last year. That increased funding will allow us to continue to work across government to enhance and adapt services to meet the needs of individual parents, foster parents, FASD organizations, service providers and children and youth. Our goal is to ensure that services improve children's long-term outcomes, increase knowledge and that families have an ongoing network of support. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Budget 2007 brought very good news for foster parents; $31 million has been allocated over the next three years to increase monthly rates and other supports for foster parents. Certainly, we were delighted to be able to increase monthly payments to the families to ensure that the day-to-day needs of foster children and youth are met, including those who provide specialized care for foster children with specialized needs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The majority of foster families will receive a rate increase of at least $200 per month incrementally over the next three years. The new money for foster care is in addition to the improvements made last year, when we enhanced training for foster parents, increased the mileage rate from 20 to 30 cents per kilometre and invested in recruiting of new foster parents. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I can tell you that recruitment of foster parents does continue to be a challenge. It varies, certainly, from one area of the province to another. But we have a very strong partnership and working relationship with the B.C. Federation of Foster Parent Associations and the aboriginal foster parent associations as well as others to try and assist in improving recruitment efforts and in retaining the foster parents that are providing such a critical service to children in our province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In the area of child and youth mental health, we have a real success story to tell. Certainly, there are too many young people who are having problems functioning at home, at school, with friends or in their communities because of a mental illness. We recognized that early in government's mandate. It became clear that new approaches and additional resources were urgently needed to better meet the mental needs of children and youth in our province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Back in 2003 cabinet endorsed a five-year plan to improve outcomes for children and youth coping with the challenges of mental illness. That's the child and youth mental health plan for B.C. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What we have seen since 2003 is that the child and youth mental health resources in our province have doubled. We're helping more children and youth than ever before. This past year close to 20,000 B.C. children and youth were able to get help through government-funded mental health programs and services. That's an additional 9,000 young people who are getting that help since the plan was introduced — so almost a doubling. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]We've seen more than 200 child and youth mental health workers who have been hired since the plan's inception. Just a couple of weeks ago we announced a further national and international recruiting campaign to hire another 75 mental health professionals to work in communities across our province. We do want to expand on these successes with the implementation of this, the fifth and final year of the plan, in cooperation with the Ministries of Health and Education. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Some key focuses in the coming year will be on our most vulnerable populations, children and youth who have combined mental health problems with developmental disabilities as well as aboriginal communities, where unfortunately what we often find is that there is a significant need to build capacity, and the resilience of the community is too often tested. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We're also expanding the popular Friends program, which teaches grades 4 and 5 students about preventing or reducing anxiety in their daily lives. That is a critically acclaimed program. I believe British Columbia is the first jurisdiction to implement that. Again, we're seeing significant success there. By the fiscal year-end some 60,000 students will have participated in that program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Of course, we'll do all of this with additional funding. Just under $17 million is being added to the child and youth mental health budget in this, the final year. That comes on the heels of about a $13 million increase in 2005-06 and a little over $14 million increase in '06-07. That brings the total spending on the child and youth mental health plan, on an annual basis, to more than $85 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The community child and youth mental health budget is part of the larger child and family development budget. Within the child and family development budget is funding for child protection; for residential guardianship, foster care, permanency, and adoption planning for children and youth permanently in care; for youth services; for community youth justice services; for services to strengthen families; as well as for regional administration. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The total budget for child and family development services is $704 million in '07-08. That will rise to almost $730 million by 2009-10, which is a 14-percent increase. This is the highest this budget has been in the history of the province. The child and family development budget was $664 million when we became government in 2001. Today there are 1,400 fewer children in care, yet we're investing an additional $40 million in the child and family development budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As you know, obviously the number of children in care fluctuates. We expect to have approximately 9,200 children in our care in '07-08. That's relatively unchanged from where it is today. As I already stated, that number alone does not set the budget. What drives child and family development funding levels is the ministry's desire to protect and support children in their own homes with their immediate or extended families whenever possible. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We provide services to youth as part of our continuum of services ranging from preventative outreach services to mental health and residential services. We will continue to build these services as we proceed with our transformation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Mr. Chair, in the year ahead we will be looking to Youth in Care to take a leadership role in helping the ministry to identify new and effective ways to support youth in care and to prepare them for adulthood. Input from the recently established youth advisory committee, whose members include current and past youth in care, we expect will be most valuable as we continue to improve transition planning for youth heading into adulthood and post-majority supports. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We're also working to develop provincial early intervention pilot programs to increase the support and safety of vulnerable children and youth. We're beginning discussions with the youth in care to work out the details of a pilot program to ensure that every vulnerable young person in the province has at least one supportive, caring and healthy adult in their life to whom they are attached and who will be a constant in their life through the teenage years and into their adulthood. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The ministry is in the midst of a recruitment effort to increase the number of front-line staff. This is an ongoing effort to provide more flexibility in the regions and to address workload issues. As a result, the ministry's FTE allocation is increased from 4,067 in 2006-07 to 4,286 this year. It will further increase to 4,316 next year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]We've targeted the addition of 100 new front-line workers in the current fiscal year but actually have been more successful in that, in recruiting workers, with the addition of almost 200 new front-line staff. It is projected that dozens more front-line staff will be added in the next fiscal year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Recruiting and training aboriginal social workers for our ministry does remain a priority and a challenge. To that end, we are looking to offer aboriginal applicants who met the criteria during the first phase of our front-line recruitment process, but who were not considered to be child protection–ready, with expanded training options to prepare them for future hiring. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We've introduced a new program in partnership with UNBC that currently has ten aboriginal child protection workers from communities in the north being trained in the north with the expectation, certainly, that they will remain in the north — as recruitment of people to the north remains a challenge, and recruitment of aboriginal workers in particular has been a historic challenge. Much of that work is consistent with the recommendations made to government by the hon. Ted Hughes last spring. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As all members know, a little over a year ago in April of 2006, the hon. Ted Hughes released his report on B.C.'s child welfare system, and in doing so, he made 62 recommendations. As recommended by the Hughes report across the ministry transition, a steering group led by the Deputy Attorney General was established last spring to lead and oversee the implementation of the recommendations. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We have now posted to our website a report reflecting the work done of this transition steering committee as well as providing an update to the public in terms of where things are at with the current status of each of the 62 recommendations. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think it's fair to say that over the past year the transition team has done a great deal of work in conjunction with the ministries involved in the process. Staff, stakeholders, first nations, youth and community partners have worked side by side not only to address the recommendations in the Hughes report but also, and most importantly, to put all of the work around the report in context, to make our province's child welfare services stronger, more accessible and more reflective of the needs of those that we serve. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
A great deal of progress has been made. All 62 of the recommendations are completed or underway, including the 45 recommendations that were directed specifically to MCFD. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
However, as Mr. Hughes did note in his report, some recommendations will take considerable time to complete, and others will be of an ongoing nature. Some of the recommendations are such that I don't think we'll ever be in a position that you would say that they were complete. They are of a nature where it's ongoing work that is in the nature of continuous improvement. Certainly, we're pleased with the progress that has been made on that front. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It must be understood that the funding levels that we see in Budget 2007 build on the previous year's budget increases. We've laid a strong foundation for a ministrywide transformation to a strength-based approach for improving services for children and families and ensuring that more of our young people have the opportunities that they need to succeed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We believe that the best decisions for children and families are made by them or by those closest to them. Hence, our focus is to shift decision-making processes closer to communities and to our regional local offices as much as possible and feasible. That's not going to happen overnight, but our plan is to work on this over the coming months and years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Over time, we expect that regional offices will take the lead on all service delivery and have greater say in budgets, planning, program design and decision-making within the ministry. What we expect is that by transforming the ministry, we will have greater regional decision-making and service delivery. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We will see that aboriginal children and family services are designed by and for aboriginal people. As the next step in that particular process, I am pleased that we've been successful in working with our aboriginal partners to move towards interim aboriginal authorities in at least two regions of the province, with more to come. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We will have an integrated continuum of services to better serve the unique needs of individuals, and we'll have greater resources and focus placed on the front end of the system where services are making a difference to people and communities right around the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The budget for the coming year does give us the ability to improve services where needed, to maintain the quality of existing services while we continue working on transforming our system for the better. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]I can tell you, Mr. Chair and Members, that in my nine months of experience now as the Minister of Children and Family Development I've been incredibly impressed with the dedication of the people working within the ministry, some of whom are here today, most of whom are out in communities right around the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I've been incredibly impressed with the dedication and commitment of people working for service providers around the province who, day in and day out, are making a very significant difference to some of the most vulnerable children and families and people in our communities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's been a pleasure to have some opportunity to visit with different service providers and staff in offices around the province and to hear what they believe needs to be done to improve the work that they're doing with children and families. I look forward to that continuing dialogue as we all strive to move in a direction where we continue to improve upon our ability to meet the needs of children and their families right across the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That will conclude my opening remarks. It's my understanding that the opposition would like to deal firstly with child care questions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I see a nod, so I'll pass the floor over to my colleague, Minister Reid. I know she'll be more than happy to address your child care questions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I thank the minister for his introduction and the minister of state for not doing an introduction. It gives us more time, because I know our time is limited. Like her, I've got to say it's very exciting to be able to talk about child care in the province of B.C. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We don't have that much time, so I'm not going to do a great speech about my concerns about child care. I think that will come out in my questioning. But just to give the minister an indication of my direction, I want to look at the global funds available and then a bit of a breakdown with the changes that have come over this last year with the announcements the minister has made. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wanted, first off, some clarification. In previous years the ministry's service plan has been broken down into three categories — child care and supported child development, early childhood development, and supports to children with special needs — or, rather, four categories — autism as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This year it is all blocked together, and I wanted to have a breakdown from the minister on how much each section is going to be getting. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: My colleague will craft those numbers for you. While he is doing that, I will give you a sense of where we're headed around the delivery of child care services and the notion that this is only going to be about integrated cross-government service delivery. That is the challenge that I have undertaken over the past six years, and that is the challenge that continues. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, you will know that that is the work we have done around hubs in British Columbia. It is about a concept that's well understood if you happen to be a senior in the province. You get to age in place as a senior. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want that same expectation of service delivery if you're a baby in British Columbia. When you're 12 months of age, your family should not be looking for a new child care program when you're 30 months or three years or four years of age or perhaps an out-of-school care or kindercare piece. We want very much to do the work that ramps us forward as we go. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
How we integrate early childhood development and whether it's infant development, how we coordinate that with supported child development…. What all the research will tell you, Member, is that this is about attachment. It's about relational theory in the early days and how we create those levels of attachment for very small children and, frankly, what the health of the pregnancy has been. It's how you go from pre-conception all the way through that process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's how we attempted as a government to put those pieces in place, if you will, to build on what is the child's first and best teacher, the parent, and how we intend to provide ongoing supports as we go forward to support parents to parent their children as effectively as they possibly can. That's the number one goal. That speaks to my colleague's comments earlier when he talked about foster children, when he talked about resourcing children more effectively when they're smaller. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
How we begin that process will allow all British Columbians to see the benefit as we go forward. I think the member, in her question, is referencing the differences around the service plan and, certainly, the 252 that was referenced in the service plan in terms of child care spending. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That was done prior to the notification on March 19 from the federal government that, indeed, that budget would lift by $33 million. So there has been some shifting in there because, frankly, they came to us late, well past our budget cycle, with that information this year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]You'll know that in the past — indeed, I believe it was even last year — the federal and provincial budgets came down on the same day. That was not the case this year. It was probably well into six weeks after. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
How we have framed that as we go is very interesting. Actually, $252.9 million for child care, $25.5 million for early childhood development and $151.6 million for children and youth with special needs totals $429.9 million overall. The actual child care expenditure that we have before us today is $287.8 million, $210 million of which is the provincial share. Of the 2003 early learning and child care agreement, $45.7 million is what is coming to British Columbia. I think that covers the framework that you have addressed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: To the minister: how much of the special-needs money is going to be on FASD and how much on autism? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: Again, I'm happy to give you the detail in terms of where we are around autism programming while the detail is coming for FASD. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's $44.4 million for the programs that will support children with autism and their families in British Columbia as we go forward. The member will know that it's $20,000 for every youngster in British Columbia under six years of age. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member will know that the incidence of autism is on the rise across the globe, not unique to British Columbia. I'll give the member an interesting example. When I taught children with autism 20 years ago, it was one in 10,000 in terms of incidence rate. Today it's one in 165, an enormous shift in terms of how we go, not necessarily just as a province but as a country and across the globe. There are issues confounding populations — no question. How we continue to put in place supports that will dramatically impact positively on parents is absolutely important. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member may know that with the Ministry of Health, in terms of my opening remarks around the integration that's required, we have probably the finest early diagnosis process in place and are now diagnosing youngsters with autism at 18, 20, 24 months of age — unheard of across the globe when we began that process. A world-class delivery system. Absolutely, numbers of children will continue to move their way through that process in very timely ways. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly what the research says today, in that autism is a spectrum disorder, is that it will be about finding the exact approach for a particular child, understanding fully that the necessity to change that approach may well change as the child ages. There will be different demands in terms of the functioning of a child with autism around social development, cognitive development, language development. There are different stages of that development, very much driven by the individual needs of the child. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
To stay abreast of the best research, you will know by press release that the province has absolutely been supportive of a national longitudinal study so that we can finally have Canadian data normed on a Canadian population. That work is underway through the University of British Columbia, and all of the affiliated pieces, if you will, are taking us forward in terms of that expenditure. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'd make the same claim around fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. Indeed, under some very good leadership with the Canada Northwest Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Partnership, we have taken $5.4 million this year and leveraged it into some very important work on behalf of children and families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is not about any one jurisdiction in Canada's northwest going it alone. This is about us taking advantage of the skill, the expertise and the knowledge base that's there and not beginning each discussion from ground zero, but absolutely complementing, layering on, how we go forward with children's autism. That work is underway as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: It's a very full response for a question on just how much is being spent. On FASD, I don't need the full explanation of quite what's happening. I just wanted to get a figure, which I don't know whether your colleague has been able to provide yet. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I'm happy to repeat it: $5.4 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]C. Trevena: Thank you, minister; I missed that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
One last question. In the global budget that we're talking about here for child care…. I know that the minister's responsibility also includes WorkLife B.C., the new program which I'd like to talk about in a little while. I just wanted to know: how much of this is WorkLife B.C., or is it coming under a separate budget line? If so, where? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I'm delighted the member opposite has asked the question. WorkLife B.C. is another opportunity for this province to engage those who would choose to offer child care from near-site, work-site and on-site settings and to engage those who are creating flexible work environments. It's a $250,000 expenditure, and it is something that we believe will give us an enormous return in terms of those individuals today who are contemplating and, frankly, delivering child care who have not contemplated that in the past. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In my opening remarks, I talked about integration across government. You will know full well the number of issues around businesses in various parts of this province who have difficulty recruiting and retaining staff. Many businesses who can demonstrate that they are committed to the notion of work-life balance will, we believe, create more opportunities for employment and, frankly, drive a greater sense of loyalty to the company or the firm. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the $250,000, it's something we tend to take forward to acknowledge the businesses in British Columbia who are doing the best. This is not a negative discussion. This is not about the ten worst companies. This is about the ten best companies in British Columbia, the ten or 15 that we will select as we go forward who actually can share best practice in terms of making the workplace more accepting — a workplace of choice, if you will. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We went forward and acknowledged Envision Financial as the workplace of choice in British Columbia, an enormous recommendation for individuals who would choose to work in the finance industry. We intend to continue to work with those individuals so they, indeed, build child care spaces as we go. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: The minister has just raised a very interesting question. She said that these businesses will create child care spaces. Is the minister expecting that they're going to be having on-site crèches, or how are they going to do this? Would it be funded partly through capital funding from the ministry? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I'm delighted you're asking these questions. The opportunities before us are certainly to create examples of where it works best. We have not yet been asked to contribute financially to the creation of child care space. We certainly have provided information and dialogue around how the licensing piece works in the Ministry of Health and how the early childhood education piece works in terms of who they will hire to man these centres. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, there are opportunities for us to continue to act as a catalyst as we go forward, and we have done that. We have absolutely been interested in doing that from the perspective of, again, one of my earlier comments about attachment. If you, as a parent, have the ability to take your baby to work in the morning and have them cared for down the hallway, on the same floor or in an adjacent building, where you can actually see that child during the course of the day, it's hugely important for a child's development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
To honour that in terms of child development is absolutely why I'm interested in that approach. There are good examples in British Columbia today where there is on-site and near-site child care that has not been funded by anyone other than the business, where they are doing, I think, some remarkable things. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I think, though, there is a very basic issue, as the minister quite rightly said, of companies being able to recruit. Being able to recruit is a very big challenge. One of the issues about recruitment that I'm hearing very clearly and very loudly is the access to child care within the community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know that the minister has been facing a number of, as she describes, challenges and repositionings of spending. So I'd like to ask her a little bit more about that spending. Last year's budget left at least $40 million still available for spending, $20 million of which was given in one-time payments at the end of March. At the time the minister indicated that that was because the Auditor General had directed her ministry to make sure that money was spent, but that was still leaving $20 million of $40 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]I'd like to know from the minister initially about this $20 million. Why was this spent in this way when the Auditor General has come back and said it didn't actually have to be spent before the end of the financial year? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I would point out that the member probably is in possession of this same piece of correspondence written by the comptroller general, which clearly says that under our current legislative framework, the Ministry of Children and Family Development does not have the ability to carry forward funding into future years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That was certainly the advice we accepted at the time, and that is the reason that $20 million went into the field when it did. I know that the member continued to raise in question period the notion that that dollar had to be spent. The dollar had to move from our organization into the field. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We did not prescribe, as the member opposite continued to say, that it must be spent within hours, days — frankly, irresponsible commentary on behalf of the member opposite. That dollar was put at the disposal of those agencies in terms of them making the choices as to how they would pursue professional development, pursue equipment renewal and replacement. There are a number of different avenues that are outlined in the correspondence that went to them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In that I'm now addressing the $20 million, let me address the second $20 million. The indications we have is that that dollar will go to the field, and we will determine, in that there has been no reduction to date in terms of how CCOF moves forward…. There will be no changes until July 1. So in fact, that dollar went to them when there was no other change on their landscape. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If the member's next question will be: "Is the urgency there to put it out tomorrow…?" There is opportunity for us to continue to consult with the field in terms of how best and when best, but I can assure the member opposite that that dollar will go into the hands of child care providers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: The minister has raised a few points there that I would like to take up with her. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm not going to go back to question periods past because we don't really have the time to do so. However, what I was trying to get during question period was not so much when the child care providers had to spend the money but why the government was spending $20 million in this way in one-time spending. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'd like to clarify from the minister, then: if one set of $20 million had to be spent by the end of the financial year because the comptroller of B.C. said that it had to be spent by the end of the financial year, why does the second $20 million carry forward into this financial year? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I am happy to put the content on the record again because I think it's abundantly clear. Under our current legislative framework, the Ministry of Children and Family Development does not have the ability to carry forward funding into future years. Providing one-time grants to independent child care providers and organizations delivering programs allowed the Ministry of Children and Family Development to provide transitional funding to the organizations most affected by the federal government's cancellation of the early learning and child care agreement and invest in programs that support the objectives of early learning and child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Absolutely, that dollar is available, and that second $20 million is available in the community to those individuals as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: With all due respect, the minister still hasn't explained why one set of $20 million gets spent before the end of the financial year. The child care providers get this one-time money that, quite frankly, in talking to the child care providers was money that they needed, but this second $20 million is left until…. There's a letter that goes out on May 15 saying that it should be available to providers in the coming weeks, which I assume will take us well into June, which is three months into the financial year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The first $20 million in '06-07 was distributed by the Ministry of Children and Family Development. The second $20 million will not be. It is currently with a non-profit organization and will flow from that entity as opposed to flowing from the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]C. Trevena: Which non-profit? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The B.C. Council for the Family. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: How was this non-profit chosen, and how is the disbursal going to occur from the non-profit? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The ability of the agency to put that dollar out is in their hands. They will go forward. We selected the agency based on a longstanding history with government. They have had the ability to deliver programs over a 30-year history. The member may well have been in the House when we acknowledged the 30th anniversary of the B.C. Council for the Family. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Their ability to do this task on behalf of child care providers was not seen to cause consternation in the minds of any. It was a place where they could certainly perform that task, and they will do so at their discretion as they go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: The previous $20 million was divided up between all licensed child care providers or licence-not-required child care providers. How will the second $20 million be divided up? Will it be an application process, or will it be divided equally? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: We are indeed looking for the simplest, most straightforward, most equitable process. Ultimately that will be decided by the Council for the Family, but it is certainly their desire to do what needs to be done as quickly as possible. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Surely the most simple and equitable process would be exactly the same as happened previously, though it's not the best solution. It's just to give every provider an equal share of the money. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: We agree. We certainly understand that we are not in a position any longer to dictate that process, but we absolutely agree. They agree as well that it will be equitable and direct, and we will ultimately see what the future holds. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I'm still uncertain about why, for this second $20 million, it has been farmed out to another organization and isn't being handled by the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wanted to ask a little bit more on the first $20 million, which had very clear sets of criteria to it. Why weren't child care providers allowed to invest in wages or capital costs with this first set of $20 million? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: Again, I'm happy to remind the member that the comptroller general was abundantly clear. The question continues to come: why is it we put the dollars with a non-profit organization in the community? Under our current legislative framework, the Ministry of Children and Family Development does not have the ability to carry forward funding into future years. That was the determination reached by the office of the comptroller general. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the second part of your question, did we suggest they should use that dollar for capital? No. We were still of the mind — and frankly, it's proven to be effective and true — that indeed we would receive capital dollars from the federal government. I know there are many who didn't believe that dollar would actually flow back to the provinces. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]I can assure the member opposite that that was a fierce discussion over many, many months with the federal-provincial-territorial ministers as we went forward in terms of them not choosing the jurisdictions to flow that dollar for capital. The member needs to be aware that that dialogue, as fierce as it was, derived the result we were looking for — that the jurisdictions would be back at the table in terms of how some of that capital dollar was dispensed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Had the agreement carried forward into its third year of life, British Columbia would have received $152 million this year. We are in fact receiving 1/5 of that, as the member is more than aware. We're receiving $32 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[S. Hammell in the chair.]
We were not prepared to give up on any opportunity for capital dollar. So did we encourage the recipients of this $20 million to invest in capital? No. We simply wanted to keep that door open so that, indeed, once we believed that the federal dollar would transpire, once it did, we would have the opportunity to do that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of equipment, in terms of relocation, the minor capital program covers that off, as the member is probably aware. In terms of licensing, if you carry two separate licences on the same site, it's upwards of $10,000 annually to support equipment replacement, repair. That certainly seems to be a program that's well subscribed, and that dollar is flowing into the field on a regular basis, if not weekly, as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: It's clear that the other $20 million was already allocated before the end of the financial year by going to the non-profit. I wondered why the minister didn't tell anybody that this was the case. I know that child care providers and those involved in the child care field have been wondering where this other promised $20 million is. So I wondered why the minister actually didn't explain to people that this was the case. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member may well be aware that we were working that through every single day as we went forward on that discussion. Would it have been my preference to have the ability to put that dollar into the field directly from the Ministry of Children and Family Development into this fiscal? Absolutely. That was our goal. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We did not receive that assurance from the comptroller general that we would be able to do that. So indeed, there has been a very straightforward discussion with the sector, as early as January, that that dollar would be going into the field. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The vehicle absolutely wasn't determined until very near the end of March — no question. But there was the commitment at the start and the commitment at the end of that process that that $40 million would go into the field. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You would be hard pressed to find a service provider today who was unclear that that $40 million was allocated for the child care sector and would flow. They may not have been aware of the vehicle, because frankly, there was some work that we needed to do with the comptroller general around that, but that commitment that we began with is the commitment we concluded with. And we continue to take that message forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I wondered, then, why in the letter that's gone out to child care providers on May 15 it isn't clear that this extra money is coming through a third party. It's not coming through the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The indication in this letter is that details regarding the distribution of the remaining $20 million in ELCC funding are being finalized, and that information should be available to providers in the coming weeks. It's on ministry notepaper. I wondered why it isn't clear to child care providers that this isn't coming from the ministry; it's coming through a third party. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I think that what you just read out is abundantly clear — that $20 million is going to child care providers in the coming weeks. There is no change in that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I'm not disputing with the minister that it's clear that there is $20 million coming to child care providers for whatever purpose that they can use it. I just was unclear why it doesn't say that this money is not coming from the ministry but is coming through a third party. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wondered why the minister felt that it was necessary to not just explain that straight up and say: "This is who you are going to be hearing from. This organization will be in touch with your organization about $20 million of federal money that is still out there to be transferred." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. L. Reid: That message will be going to them in the coming days. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: That's very good to know. I still have no indication why it hasn't happened sooner, since it was obviously arranged before the end of the financial year to accommodate the comptroller general. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wanted to know a little bit more about other moneys that I understand may still be outstanding. I wanted to go through just a bit of a breakdown. In the '06-07 revised estimates $390 million went on child care, and $145 million went on special needs. There was about $50 million of federal transfers, another $10 million in administration, roughly, and $190 million for other funds. There were cuts. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I worked out, breaking down the figures from the previous years' revised estimates, that there's approximately $105 million outstanding from that. We know that $5 million went on StrongStarts, and $12 million went on early learning. We've got this $40 million that's gone in one-time payments. That adds up to $57 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm wondering, from the minister…. In the calculations that I have worked out, there's still roughly another $48 million that is unaccounted for. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[The bells were rung.]
The Chair: Division has been called in the big House, so we'll declare a recess here. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The committee recessed from 3:37 p.m. to 3:49 p.m. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[S. Hammell in the chair.]
On Vote 20 (continued). [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member, prior to the short recess, certainly had a whole list of numbers. I'm sad to say that most were not accurate, so I will put the accurate ones on the record. Child care operating funding in '06-07 is $65.7 million; child care resource and referral, $14 million; supported child development, $57.2 million; capital funding, $12.5 million; child care subsidy, $121 million; and one-time-only grants for $95.7 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Planned expenditures for '07-08 are $60.4 million; child care resource and referral, $9 million; supported child development, $55.6 million; capital funding, $2.1 million; child care subsidy, $125.8 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I put the original amount on the record at the start of the discussion — $287.8 million. If you were to add in $14.8 million administration, $300,000 and some other issues, it would equal $287.8 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]The reference that the member made to some of the examples she gave: $40 million to child care providers in two $20 million allocations; to Education for StrongStart, $5 million; for the early learning initiatives, $12 million; contribution towards the creation of the learning framework, $500,000; professional development bursaries — I'm sure the member would have seen the press releases of the last number of days — $4.172 million; and research chairs, $2.5 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: If I might go back, the minister referred to $91.7 million one-time-only. Is that correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: It was $95.7 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: If I might ask the minister: where did this money go? I have the $40 million one-time-only, $20 million and $20 million. Where is the other $50-plus million in one-time-only? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: We canvassed the ones I just put on the record in terms of the $40 million — $5 million for StrongStart; $12 million for early learning; $500,000 for the learning framework; professional development bursaries, $4.172 million; research chairs, $2.5 million. There are other initiatives. Some are yet to be announced. Once those announcements have been made, indeed, that will be up on the website and absolutely available to you. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I can certainly indicate, in addition to this…. The member may be aware of the announcements around the hub discussion, and we can put those on the record for you if that provides you some guidance in terms of how that allocation was made. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Abbotsford Community Services, $92,000; Aldergrove Neighbourhood Services Society for $100,000; Burnaby Family Life Institute for $100,000; Central City Mission Society for $50,000; Comox Valley Child Development Association for $149,500; Dawson Creek Aboriginal Family Resources Society, $200,000; district of Ucluelet for $250,000; Enderby and District Community Resource Centre Society for $25,000; First Nations Friendship Centre for $100,000; Golden Community Resource Society for $33,834; Kla-how-eya Aboriginal Centre, $50,000; Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows Community Services for $92,000; Mission Indian Friendship for $10,000; Mount Curry band for $198,604; Mount Pleasant Community Centre Association for $250,000; Deh Zona family services society for $200,000; Options: Services to Communities Society for $80,000; Penticton and District Community Resources Society for $79,000; Richmond Family Place for $50,000; Sea to Sky Community Services for $50,000; Lower Mainland Purpose Society for Youth and Families for $190,000; and Yellowhead Community Services, $150,000. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member may recollect from my opening comments that this is about securing with community the notion of aging in place for babies. We want very much to see services that support children and families and have a strong child care component situated at single addresses, if you will. We understand that this entire exercise is about the notion of complementary service, and frankly, we come at it from the respect of a kindness to families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This should not be about families who have children of two or three or four different ages under five going to two or three or four different places on the way to work or school in the morning. This should be about an opportunity to consolidate service that speaks more favourably towards families. That is the intention. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm absolutely delighted that we have 22 that we've continued to enhance and foster as we go forward. Some of those dollars will go towards relocating programs within a more central structure, co-locating programs. It's not just about sharing an address. It's about sharing a family, sharing a child. That work has been accomplished in terms of this funding allocation, and now we certainly intend to continue that direction as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Frankly, some of these dollars may not always flow from government. There may be others in the community who wish very much to honour the principle of supports to families, seeing families as the central focus of any kind of service delivery. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Thank you very much for that breakdown and for the explanation of the one-time funding which is going to things like bursaries and other worthwhile initiatives. But I have to ask the minister this. We're talking of over $90 million in one-time funding. I'd like to ask the minister a very straightforward question. Why is this $90 million, which is a lot of money in anybody's lexicon, not invested in a child care program? Why is this going into one-time funding? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I think the member opposite, frankly, can answer her own question. The early learning and child care agreement ceased to exist. It puts it into the bailiwick of one-time funding. There isn't funding beyond, and I am happy to put it on the record again. Under our current legislative framework the Ministry of Children and Family Development does not have the ability to carry forward funding into future years. They have reconciled this discussion as transitional funding. The agreement ceased to exist. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The comptroller general was very clear that that dollar cannot move beyond the life of that agreement, and said so very clearly to all kinds of individuals in the child care community. I know the member opposite is aware of that information and that discussion. You're welcome to disagree with the comptroller general. I don't do that. I don't make a habit of that, Member. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of what transpires around that, either it is annualized in terms of the ongoing continuation of the early learning and child care agreement, or it is one-time funding. The agreement ceased to exist. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: We will disagree on this. There is no question that we will disagree on this. There is a way of investing money, even if it's money that will not be coming in future years, that doesn't hand out big chunks of money to organizations that they have to suddenly deal with. There are very bright minds in the ministry and outside the ministry who could look very creatively at how to make sure that this money was invested in the longtime development of a child care system for B.C. Sadly, that's not the case. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I just wanted to clarify, then, if this is all the ELCC money that we're talking about, the $90-odd million that's going out in one-time funding in grants here and there. It has to be spent by the end of the financial year, and $20 million of it has been handed over to a third party to dole out, and there are still announcements yet to come. Why have those announcements not been made — seeing as we are heading towards June, well past the end of the financial year? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Therefore, in the minister's own directive and the letter from the comptroller, which the minister, I'm sure, will read into the record again before the end of these estimates…. It is still in the hands of the ministry, which is not what it should be, according to the letter that the minister keeps reading, or it's in the hands of a third party. Where is this money right at the moment? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I will indulge the member opposite, since she has so kindly asked to put this on the record yet again. "The province received transitional funding of $86 million from the federal government on the cancellation of the early learning and child care initiative." That seems to be the stumbling block, hon. Chair, for the member opposite. It is one-time funding because it's transitional and attached to the early learning and child care agreement. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
"The absence of any restrictions…. Under our current legislative framework the Ministry of Children and Family Development does not have the ability to carry forward funding into future years." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]The member continues to make the point, and the member will know that the recipients have received the funds because that is the direction we received from the comptroller general. The recipients of this dollar were not treated any differently than the B.C. Council for Families, and it is our prerogative — it is the prerogative of government — in terms of when they make those announcements and when they take those projects forward. But the dollar has been handled as per the instruction of the comptroller general. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: So the several million dollars that has been handed out, was handed out before the end of the financial year, for unnamed projects to unnamed parties who have the right to give their names and where they're spending it when they choose, and the ministry will not put on the record where that money has gone? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I think in terms of all the sums that we put on the table this afternoon it comes in close to $60 million of announced funding. The difference of $85.6 and $60 million is roughly $25 million. Is it our prerogative to make those announcements as we go forward? Again, to reassure the member, the dollar has been handled as per the instruction of the comptroller general, is currently in the hands of the recipients, and government will make the announcements as quickly as we can as we go forward in terms of how that dollar will benefit the children and families of British Columbia. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: So the money is actually in the hands of the recipients, but the minister will not say which recipients it's in the hands of when we are talking about $7 million of taxpayers' money? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: Let me again take the opportunity to reassure the member opposite that we are acting on the instruction of the comptroller general, and we have assured anyone who has come forward that there will be a full and public accounting. The member opposite has not been in this place long but will know that government announcements go forward on a regular basis. Indeed, as these are publicly announced, certainly that will be available to all and sundry on the website as we go forward. But is that something that we would like to celebrate? Absolutely. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are not going to steal the thunder, if you will, from the agencies that currently have that dollar. We are working closely with them in terms of the planning of press conferences and the planning of announcements. That will be readily available to the member as the days go on. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: So the minister isn't prepared to say until the minister can do it with a fanfare how these moneys are being spent? Am I correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I'm more than happy to give the same answer. We are working closely with the agencies that have received the dollar. If the member's direction is to steal the fanfare of agencies who are absolutely enchanted with the programs they will be able to deliver and are today preparing those announcements…. Interesting perspective, but not one I share. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I think we will move on. I don't think we're going to get any more details, unfortunately, about how money is being used and why it isn't actually going into much-needed child care spaces or child care wages. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have just one question. I'm sure the minister talked to many, many child care workers, many child care providers and many people in the field, and this is something that may be a wonderful announcement in the near future. But I have been hearing rumours, and I just wanted to be able to have a yes or no to these rumours — whether the ministry is planning a wage lift for child care workers? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I can assure the member opposite that discussions are ongoing on a regular basis across British Columbia. I would be intrigued as to the origins of that rumour, and she may wish to enlighten us as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]C. Trevena: I thank the minister, and I take it from conversation with staff that it is a rumour and it is not going to be happening. So I would like the minister to just say whether it is going to happen or it's not going to happen, without speculation on the rumour. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I say this because one of the huge issues that I'm sure the minister is aware of is the declining numbers of people entering the child care field because they can't afford to work in the child care field, which has an impact on the wages. While I know the minister has announced recently on the Internet, on the website, a new bursary, I really don't feel that this is going to be enough for the child care workers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So I would just like to know — yes or no; simple answer; tick the box — whether this is being considered or not. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I think the member by now knows that I am absolutely passionate about how we go forward in terms of delivering child care in British Columbia. She will know there is an array of dialogues happening across British Columbia. Is my door open always as we go forward? Yes. Do we have the ability to direct what happens with the federal government? No. We will be heading into a federal-provincial-territorial meeting at the behest of the federal government when they choose to call that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We will certainly continue to advance the notion that how we retain staff in any jurisdiction in Canada is vitally important. This won't be new to the member. We've canvassed this, I'm sure, repeatedly in the Legislature over the last four months. I believe the average wage in British Columbia is sitting at about $14 today. The ability of government to directly influence that…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As the member knows, we don't directly employ child care providers in the province of British Columbia. Non-profits, the private sector, the community, etc., make those determinations. Certainly we will continue to work with them in the best interests of the babies of this province as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: To the minister, I will not proceed with this line of questioning because I really don't think we're going to get very far. We have a limited amount of time on this, as I think we're both aware. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like to bring up a couple of issues that we have canvassed in the House. I'm sure the minister is aware that the minister is not the only person who is passionate about child care. At the beginning of this session, the very first day of this session, there were hundreds of people outside the Legislature protesting for increased funding for child care. I think that they are still somewhat dissatisfied with the answers that the minister has been giving over the past month. They really don't feel that there is money coming. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wanted to ask the minister: getting $33 million from the federal government, how much of this is going to be going to assist in the CCOF levels and to ameliorate the cuts that the minister herself announced earlier this year? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I am happy to give the consolidated version of what issues we're prepared to take forward and strongly stand behind and have over many occasions in the Legislature. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member may know that prior to the early learning and child care agreement coming into effect the dollar that went towards subsidy in the province of British Columbia was about $92 million, lifted to $126 million, in terms of actual expenditure. You will know that that lift has been covered and carried forward by the province in the absence of that agreement. You will know the same regarding supported child development for special needs youngsters. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]You will recall from my earlier comments that the notion of building a continuum from infant development to supported child development is reflected in the research. The expenditure in priority ELCC was $37 million and will likely exceed $55 million this year. You will know that that lift has actually been covered and carried forward by the province. That is not federal dollars. They entered the playing field. They vacated the playing field. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We did not for a moment choose to make vulnerable families in British Columbia…. Having lifted the income threshold around subsidy from $21,000 to $38,000, we chose to honour that. We did the same in terms of special needs youngsters, even though that federal dollar had been withdrawn. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of how we go forward, the member opposite will know that additional dollars from the provincial line are carrying forward and being maintained. Certainly, in terms of child care operating funding, the member opposite will know, because we have had this discussion, that it was never appropriate, in our view, that the federal government would build child care space and not have any interest in the operational costs of that space. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know it was an issue shared by many of your members that there is cost associated with the creation of a child care space. We do believe we have that opportunity in this allocation of the federal government, in terms of the $33 million, that we can in fact set aside some of those dollars for the actual ability to operate that space. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It will be determined entirely by how many spaces are created. The member will know that this is a busy, challenging time in British Columbia in terms of the construction cycle and that it's difficult to get these projects up and running and get them built. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member, I know, is aware that probably on a weekly or an every-ten-day basis, we either do a groundbreaking or have an opening on the 1,500 spaces that are currently coming on line. Are their construction costs different today than when they put those proposals in a year ago? No question. Any thinking person would absolutely understand that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of how much dollar we set side for sustainability of that space, it would be determined on how many spaces we can get into the field this year, next year and the year after. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That work is underway. Proposals are available. We have many that have come in. Many we're working through. Many we're working directly with communities and agencies in terms of refining those proposals, because my challenge and my great delight will be to get that dollar into the field so that those projects can be underway. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When I talked about subsidy and about special needs youngsters…. For those families in British Columbia today, subsidy, special needs and spaces — those are their three priorities. I add a fourth to that. I add professional development for those who work in the sector. That is about a $290-million package for British Columbia into the coming year — a significant investment, hon. Member. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I'd just like to clarify a couple of the figures that the minister mentioned on subsidy. I know it's something that the minister quotes quite regularly on — the issue of the $126 million annually in this last year. I have to remind the minister that it was $125 million in '01-02 and that the target number of children who are going to be receiving subsidy, according to the MCFD's own service plan, has almost halved from 40,000 to 24,480. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minister is talking with great eagerness about the issues of capital funding and creating spaces, and there have been many talks about this. How many new capital projects have been approved? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: While they get the actual number of projects, I can tell you that the number of spaces approved is almost 1,500 — about 1,498 spaces coming on line since the last announcement. In the year previous, 1,800 spaces came on line. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member opposite will know that some of those projects are small. Some of them are ten or 12 spaces; some of them are 60 or 74 spaces. They are varying sizes and, frankly, often driven by the size of the community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There are situations today where they may have a three-to-five-year-old preschool program and they wish to add eight or ten or 12 toddler spaces or eight or ten or 12 infant spaces. She will know that that only confounds the construction cycle. When the projects are very small, it's oftentimes difficult to get construction individuals who are prepared to take on a project of that size. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Would they want to be building centres of much larger capacity? No question. But the variety of size is driven in some instances by licensing and in some instances by capacity. So you will know, just off the cuff, that there is usually a whole plethora of 12-space centres, 20-space centres and 24-space centres. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]On a good day you might actually be able to build two or three 20-space centres on the same location, driving down some of those construction costs. But again, that's driven by the size of the community. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: The minister keeps talking about how many new spaces there are and how many new places are opening up. I wonder if the minister has kept any tally of how many places have closed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: There has been a net increase in the number of spaces. If you require further detail, we can certainly get it to you at a later point. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: The minister gives very rounded answers, so there are always lots of issues to pick up in an answer. I wanted to get back to where it started from, which is the $33 million federal funding and the issue of CCOF. The minister did announce at the beginning of the year that as of July 1, there are going to be cuts in the child care operating fund program, and this is going to mean an increase in fees. I wondered if there will be any assistance to parents or providers to mitigate against these fee increases. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member opposite had an interest in the number of funded spaces. In '04-05 there were 75,328; in '05-06, 79,190; in '06-07, 82,386. Each year there have been a significant number of new capital spaces come on line. The member will know that the provincial allocation for CCOF is intact and going forward. What is vacating the landscape is the federal enhancement to that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
For most families that's $2 a day per space. That's $40 a month — the federal allocation of $100 a month. They certainly seem to believe that that will cover that. We will see if that works. I have a particular interest and a concern around the infant space, and we are continuing to look at that as we go forward and certainly to see if there are ways we can mitigate that allocation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Yes, $2 to $4 a day is going to have a large impact on many families who have already spent the $100. It is a taxable $100, as the minister is well aware. I'm pleased to hear that she's looking at helping on the infant side, but I just wondered: what about the rest? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: It's an interesting discussion for me in terms of where the federal government sees that $100 a month. The members opposite will recall the family allowance program that was brought in by a Conservative government and, incidentally, coincidentally cancelled 13 years later by federal government. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In those days it was $60 a month, and it went to every child in Canada. Today, the member has noted, it is taxable. For the majority of our families it will still be $70 or $80 a month. No question, it's taxable. Frankly, 13 years has gone by, and it's a $20 lift. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I do believe that there is much discussion, much work that needs to happen in terms of the federal government understanding that that's more clearly a family allowance program. They have heard me very clearly on that question over the last number of months, and we will continue to take that direction as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member may state that that dollar has been spent. But for most families, they will have collected it for close to 12 months before there is any drawdown on that dollar. They began collecting on June 1 of last year, so they will have collected that $100 a month for 12 months before anyone from the federal government asks them to put any of that dollar towards the $2 a day per space. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]So partially correct, Member, but in fact that dollar has not had a draw on it since its inception. We'll begin July 1. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I would dispute with the minister that there has not been a draw on the $100. The $100 — $80 after tax — was provided to families, and I would find it very strange whether there is any one family in B.C. who has been saving this money just in case they have to pay extra child care fees. I think that the money is being spent. The $100 doesn't go very far in diapers or for any other area that people need or the extra cost that they have when they're raising children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I don't want to debate that $100 with the minister because it is federal funding. I think, however, that to use it as a way of covering off increased child care space costs is extremely disingenuous. I think we're going to find that there is a big squeeze on families in July. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I just wanted to ask the minister, however…. It's something that I have discussed with her staff before, but they were unable to give me a very precise answer on this. Everything is done by the financial year, and yet suddenly we're talking July 1 for changes to CCOF. Why July 1? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member is correct. The fiscal year end is March 31. I was not in favour of doing anything to disrupt a child's school year — those who are in school settings until the end of June — which is why we chose as a government July 1 and, in fact, have picked up that additional cost for April, May and June — again, a contribution that the province has made to, frankly, float a federal program that they have cancelled. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member is absolutely correct. It is a federal program. It is not something that the province cancelled. I can assure the member opposite that the ministers at the federal-provincial-territorial meetings were absolutely fierce that there needs to be a long-term commitment to the babies of this province, to the children of Canada, as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That ability to dialogue effectively with the federal government was not something ever evidenced by the member's government when they were in office, and it certainly continues to pose challenges. But it is a federal program. The provincial dollar is intact and is going forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Correct me if I'm wrong, Minister. We're talking about child care; we're not talking about school programs. I still wondered why it's July 1, why we're doing this at this stage and why the province felt they could cover off the cost for three months and then suddenly off-load it to the parents. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member opposite will know that the early learning child care agreement is birth to six, so it does indeed capture some school-age children. It does capture some children who have the kindercare piece or the out-of-school-care piece. Indeed, I was not prepared to fragment that. I was prepared to carry it forward as a government until July 1 so that it was an opportunity to suggest preschool versus school age. That wouldn't have been sensible. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: To the minister again: there is obviously the possibility that families can apply through that very large and daunting book for a subsidy, assuming that they are hit by the increased costs. I do say it's a large and daunting book. I actually attended one of the briefing sessions run on how to fill out the subsidy form for child care providers, and it's somewhat difficult. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But I know that the ministry introduced a new computer system for subsidy for Vancouver Island and has now withdrawn that computer system, saying it didn't meet standards. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]I wondered how much this has cost — the introduction of it, then the assessment of it and, finally, the withdrawal of it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: We are actually in a test phase as we go forward. We are continuing to work with that program to see if it will give us the result we're looking for. My challenge is to ensure that it does produce a quality product. Certainly, the provincial line as we go forward does have some, I think, immediate benefits to families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I won't disagree with the member's comment in terms of the complexity of the form. I can assure the member that that form will be simple and straightforward as we work our way through this process because I believe it needs to be. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the provincial line, what families across British Columbia are saying is that in fact its ability to respond to their questions and concerns in 140 different languages is actually valuable to them. It's actually a valuable service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
How that data gets entered on a system…. The old system is in place, and we'll continue to make those allocations and determinations as we go forward. If we can improve upon this system by some of the newer technology that's in place, we will do that. But at no time will we be without a system that indeed provides that level of coverage to families as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I think maybe the minister didn't quite understand my question. I was asking about the cost of bringing in the new Vancouver Island computerized telephone system that came in, in February of this year and that is now being changed, according to a letter from the subsidy service centre that has gone out to parents and child care providers. It says: "Our standards for service delivery were not being met, and the ministry's ability to process applications and payments in a timely manner was being affected." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'd like to know how much it has cost to introduce this system and how much the overhaul is going to cost — or the change back to the old system. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member may not be aware that the existing system in the Ministry of Children and Family Development is decades old. Is this renewal, replacement, refinement of a process with newer technology evident across government? No question. Absolutely no question. Can I give you the exact costs? No. But I certainly will commit to provide that to you as soon as they are known to me. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are in an early stage of taking a look at how we do it in this particular region of the province. We are not going to advance it to the other four regions of the province until we get the quality of the product that we're looking for. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Is this pretty common, pretty typical in terms of how technology comes on line? It would be lovely, Member, if it rolled out smoothly. I don't know what your experience is with technological undertakings when new systems come on line. There are often glitches as we go forward. We'll continue to work it through. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We'll continue to have the system operational. It has been in place for decades, as I've said, in this province. If this one can improve the product, we'll continue to move forward in terms of expanding into other regions. But we're very clear that we are not doing that until we get the service delivery outcomes that we're looking for. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I'm surprised that the minister doesn't have or her staff cannot provide her with a figure for the cost of introducing this, because this was introduced in February of 2007. So I would have thought that this would be in the minister's own budget, the estimates of which we are discussing right now. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[B. Lekstrom in the chair.]
Hon. L. Reid: I think I was abundantly clear that this is a process that's underway. Technological advancement often works that way. The refinements are ongoing. We'll continue to work it through. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If the member is interested in the day-to-day costs, my staff will certainly provide them to you. We will have that probably in the next day or so, because we certainly will be making some determinations about whether or not we will move to another region. I'm happy to share that with you. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]C. Trevena: I appreciate that, because it is quite a substantial changeover. Yes, there are technological challenges when you move to new systems, but one would hope that the ministry has actually budgeted something for this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I just wanted to know how much has been budgeted for the subsidy phone line, because this is a switch that people are dealing with every day. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member may be aware that this is actually budgeted through a capital vote which is outside of this vote. She may also need to be reminded that in fact the development of this has been ongoing for a number of years. Frankly, it began in the Ministry of Employment and Investment, and Community, Aboriginal and Women's Services. As child care moved, this program came. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The ability for us to give you the spending that would have occurred in those two ministries prior to it coming to us…. We simply don't have that ability. But you will find it reflected in the public documents. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: The minister earlier did indicate that she would make sure that her staff provide me with that. I would appreciate that, because the issue of subsidy and access to subsidy is something that is of huge concern to people and — which brings me to my next section —because people have been able to access subsidy through the child care resource and referral centres. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
While the minister announced in January that these were going to be cut dramatically and then suddenly found an extra $6 million to make sure the dramatic cuts weren't quite so dramatic, it still had a huge impact on the child care resource and referral centres. I wondered if the minister would explain to me how the notional budgets for the various child care resource and referral centres have been allotted. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member may recall from previous discussion that one of the issues I wished to advance as we went forward was that we'd actually see dollars more accurately reflect the population of children in each of the regions of this province. There were historical inequities, absolutely, over time — not unique to this ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You may well remember the discussions in the House over the years regarding education funding, in terms of why particular decisions were replicated as we went forward. The same thing happened, I believe, in a number of different allocations under Children and Family Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member may know that even though 39 percent of the children reside in the Fraser region, today under child care resource and referral, we're getting closer and closer to that 39 percent. But it was not that way at the outset. Indeed, over the years the dollar had not reflected children within any particular region. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My goal through this process was certainly to go with the best-case scenario, which was to maintain the $9 million which was the provincial allocation. Once we had reached that determination, we put those decisions into the hands of the regions based on population — the number of children who live in the Fraser region, the interior region, the north, Vancouver Island, Vancouver Coastal. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That dollar was then shared directly with the regional coordinators for child care resource and referral, and they worked it through with the individuals who offer the programs in a variety of regions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]I believe that prior to us coming to government there were 38 child care resource and referral programs in the province. Today there are 41. So we've weathered the onslaught from the federal government ELCC infusion and vacating the landscape in ways that I think actually matter to families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My particular concern was to ensure that there were evening openings and Saturday openings in a variety of different centres. There is much made of the fabulous resources available at child care resource and referral. Many of them did not have hours where child care providers could actually access those materials. That is something that is going to be a positive step forward as we move. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Many family programs wished and frankly did offer programming Tuesdays between ten and 12. My challenge is to ensure there are resources available for families who cannot come during the day, have other obligations during the day, have work experiences during the day. So, indeed, we are looking at encouraging programs, as we go forward, to offer Saturday morning programs. And many do. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You will find many today offering programming for dads and tots and fabulous support to the moms in those scenarios and a fabulous opportunity to mentor some skill-building for the dads as we go forward. In fact, there have been some very nice decisions taken, some very nice products realized for many communities in British Columbia. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Frankly, the providers can now access the resources. I know the member opposite will be aware of this, because I've certainly received some lovely correspondence saying it's important that they had that opportunity and they didn't before. The member will know that many child care resource and referrals had 9-to-5 or 8-to-4 hours. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member opposite will know that child care centres often have hours that extend beyond the opening hours, which precluded providers from accessing those materials. So there's been some healthy shifts, I think, in terms of how providers have been supported in the field, and families who now have the ability to attend some of those programs on Saturday mornings are thankful for that as well. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Lots of interesting issues to pick up on, but to start off on the notional budgets, which is what I was asking about initially. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm just intrigued on the notional budgets where it works out that, if you break down the notional budget for a certain area to the number of children, in Vancouver, one child would get the equivalent of $9, whereas in Sechelt there would be $56. In, let's say, Langley there would be $14. In Hope, $89. I wondered why this huge difference in equivalent funding for each child in each community? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member may well be aware that there are certain base costs to operating a program, and then you take into account whether or not there are geographic considerations as well. We are not today completely reflecting the population, and my challenge is to move us in that direction. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We could not do it in one year. Frankly, the change I think would have been significant as we went forward. On average, in terms of the child care resource and referral, roughly 30 percent of the budget is going to the Fraser, 20 percent to Vancouver Coastal, 20 percent to Vancouver Island, 15 percent to the interior and 15 percent to the north. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You'll know, the interior and the north, that that doesn't reflect exactly or accurately, but there are opportunities for us to put in place the little bit of cushion for programs that would have greater challenges in terms of distance. You will know that that is a better reflection of the realities of where children reside in British Columbia today over where we were. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]C. Trevena: I'm a little confused here. I thought what the minister was saying was that it was being done to better reflect the reality of where children are in the province. Then the minister says it's being done in a different way. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The two answers don't jibe very well with me. I think I'm a bright person. I think that I can understand where we're coming from on child care resource and referral. What I don't understand is why, as I say, a child in — let's just pick — Mission would get $17, and going back to Vancouver it's $9. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It makes no sense to….What's the difference there? Why would one community have so much less allocated to it than another? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I do believe that the information provided to the member is indeed complementary, and I'm happy to work our way through this discussion with the member this afternoon. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The point I made very clearly was that the base cost of operating a program, no matter where you are in the province, is about $90,000. If she checks the Blues, she'll know I said that earlier in the discussion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[H. Bloy in the chair.]
In terms of the breakdown of the child population across the province, we're getting closer and closer approximations of getting there. We are not there yet. I certainly didn't suggest otherwise in my previous answer. I did indicate in my previous answer that there are geographical considerations as well that are folded into that discussion as we go — so three pieces of complementary information that indeed drove this discussion. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We set the budget for a region based on the population that we believed in the shift that we could make at this time in terms of closer and closer approximations of actual child population. These dollars don't reflect actual child population for the simple reason that if you took a population of children of 9 percent in the north, it would be very difficult to operate a program knowing now that the base cost of that program is about $90,000. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You start with the base, and then you leverage additional dollars onto that for the actual programming piece, understanding fully that the cost of heat, light and utilities have some standardization to them, but also have some individualization to them in terms of costs in the north are absolutely going to be higher than costs in the lower mainland. All of those things are figured in. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If the member's next question will be what transpired following that, the actual regional amounts went to the professional development folk for each of the five child care resource and referral regions in the province, and they work that through. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Did they perhaps have some other information that they wished to do some things? They may well have had ongoing discussion. Certainly, they brought that back and folded that through the ministry in terms of the actual figures they finally arrived at. But there is very clear direction in terms of what it costs to create a baseline program and how you add on additional dollars to reflect the programming beyond that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: The minister mentioned in her earlier answer that there are now more child care resource and referral centres. She said there are 41 child care resource and referral centres. There obviously were 44, but three have closed since the cuts came in. There are 41 child care resource and referral centres. I would like to ask the minister if her figures include Elk Valley. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. L. Reid: The decisions that were taken in terms of which ones we would maintain were done on the driving time required, if you will, and certainly the ones that had easier access than others. The ones we no longer have — Sechelt, Walnut Grove and Kitimat — we do believe we can service from other centres. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The question specifically in terms of the Elk Valley…. We indeed have put the dollars in place, but the member may know that the building they occupied experienced significant flooding. The service is still ongoing in that region, and we will continue to have discussions and deliberations with them in terms of whether or not we pursue a physical plant or continue to operate the service. Frankly, what families are interested in is the service, and that service is underway today. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I wonder if the minister could tell me how the service is underway when the staff member who was working there is no longer working there, because she lost her job when the cuts came down. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: To refresh the member opposite on the discussion of a few moments ago, the dollars that were allocated for that region allow for that service to be delivered. We have been assured that that service is currently being delivered. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: The minister has talked a lot about how this repurposing of child care resource and referral centres has meant that centres can stay open longer, that they can have alternate hours, that they can open on Saturdays and that they can provide services to families when families might need them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wondered if the minister has talked to anyone in a child care resource and referral centre recently about how their staffing is very stretched because they aren't getting the funding to pay for the staff and are finding it very difficult to make sure they can have the two staff on at any one time, particularly when they are now having to juggle extra hours. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: If I might begin by answering a question previously posed, the detail has just come. Child care subsidy system, capital development cost, 2004 to 2007, $4.4 million for the entire system to replace the existing subsidy system, which has been operational since 1980, so not premature in terms of intending to improve the system as we go forward. That was operated by Employment and Income Assistance. The detail will be available through that ministry's spending all the way back to 2004. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the adjusted hours at child care resource and referral, we're not asking them to maintain the same hours. Frankly, it was not that helpful, oftentimes, to providers who wanted to access those resources, so absolutely adjusted hours as we go forward…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Do we believe we can acknowledge that the work is changing? Yes, that's the reality. There are 44,000 calls a month that go to the provincial line. Does that mean that there are families who are finding the reality of a service that's available for them from seven in the morning until seven o'clock at night — that 12-hour coverage so that they can call on their time — is helpful to them? Yes, we're finding that. That's absolutely demonstrated by 44,000 calls a month. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Is the same workload in place for child care resource and referral? I'm hoping that they'll spend more time directly modelling and mentoring parents as we go forward, understanding completely how I opened these estimates today in terms of the necessity to more effectively support parents. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]They have had an interest in that area. Many have embraced that area, and many will take the notion forward that it is about the wraparound service for parents and providers, and that they have resources and expertise that they can share more readily with families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Child care resource and referral centres are staffed by very hard-working people. I find, and I'm sure the minister also finds, that the people who work in child care — whether in a resource referral centre or in a child care setting — are extremely dedicated, extremely hard-working. To be honest, they are doing very long hours and very difficult work for, particularly in a child care setting, a very low wage. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What I think the minister is not addressing through this is that the impact the cuts have had for most child care resource and referral centres has been on staff numbers. Child care resource and referral centres have lost staff or have had to cut staff hours and are still trying to fulfil very difficult outreach and opening hours. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wondered how the minister can really see that this is still going to be the service that it should be and that it was going to be previously when these centres were encouraged to expand, when there was the federal money. How does the minister really think they are going to be able to deal with all the needs and requests they have and provide a good service when they've had their funds so dramatically cut? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member is more than aware that the benefit of the federal funding was only with us in terms of child care resource and referral enhancement for about 18 months. So were they able to maintain the services? Yes, at $9 million, and that is the provincial allocation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Have we asked them to do the exactly the same work they did before, at $9 million? No, because now there are other tools in the toolbox, i.e., 44,000 families that may have potentially made contact with child care resource and referral are receiving information from another source, and they're doing it in hours that, frankly, the child care resource and referral have not been asked to do. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We have adjusted hours and asked them to think about different ways to deliver service, knowing full well that their work has changed. There aren't many who won't tell you the work has changed. There's a different type of parent, a different type of inquiry that often comes before child care resource and referral in terms of the interest in the notion of becoming a better parent, in terms of mentoring, about seeing someone else interact with their child. All of those things are vitally important and valuable. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Do we believe that the child care resource and referral service can be maintained at $9 million in terms of the provincial allocation? Yes. We have made that commitment on a go-forward basis. It is the federal government that has withdrawn their $5 million. That is their decision. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Before I move on to the next subject, noting the time and noting that we're going to be moving to my colleague shortly, I would like to ask: how many child care resource and referral centres has the minister visited? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I can assure the member opposite that I take every opportunity to visit child care resource and referral and child care centres and families and infant development programs and supported child development programs and fetal alcohol programs every chance I get. Certainly, I will continue to do that work and have done that work pretty comprehensively over the past six years. There probably aren't many that I have not been in. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Maybe to refine the question, how many child care resource and referral centres has the minister visited since January 2007? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. L. Reid: We put them into the travel schedule whenever we're on the road, so probably a couple dozen in the last three or four months. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I wonder if the minister could provide me with a list of the child care resource and referral centres that the minister has visited over the last five months. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I know the member opposite is a frequent requester of my calendar, so it'll probably come to you. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I appreciate that, Minister. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We touched earlier upon the issue of capital funding. I'd like to go back to that very briefly. I understand that there are going to be no new applications for capital funding until we find out more from the federal government how its money is going to be allocated. Is that correct? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member may appreciate learning that indeed, the last round of capital, which put into the field $14 million to generate almost 1,500 spaces, brought with it a number of applications that we are continuing to work through in terms of seeing if we can get that dollar into the field as quickly as we go. So there are applications today in government that we are continuing to work on. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: On the minister's website it says that the major capital funding program is not accepting applications pertaining to clarity regarding the new federal spaces initiative. So is the ministry taking applications, or isn't it? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: When we put out the last round of capital application, the response to that brought countless applications. We're not accepting new applications today. We have many applications today that we are working through. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I understand that there is a list of priority communities for capital funding. I wonder if the minister can provide me with that list of which are the priority communities for capital funding. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I will certainly endeavour to do that. I believe that has been publicly distributed, because it was, frankly, drawn from the work of Dr. Clyde Hertzman through the Human Early Learning Partnership in terms of the EDI work, where the most vulnerable communities are. The member will know, as these announcements come forward in terms of where child care centres are, that they actually reflect that work, and we will continue to take that direction as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Looking on a constituency basis, that's hopeful news for my constituency, because North Island ranks high on the needs list as laid out by Dr. Hertzman. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We touched earlier on the issue of WorkLife B.C., and I just wanted to spend a couple of moments going back to this. The minister says it is not a huge budget line, but I'm very intrigued by the concept of it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I have to note again, from a constituency level, that one of my constituents, Murray Johnson from Quadra Island, was actually one of the award winners when the awards first came out. It's an interesting idea, and I wondered how many of the recipients of the first round of awards actually do have child care on site. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: That was not a criteria for selection. It was an opportunity for us to begin that discussion once we had them in the same room for the first forum in terms of how many we could encourage to begin the discussion around child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]I can tell you that there are probably five that are very committed to that exercise. One of the participants at the forum has opened a child care centre on site. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Is it speedy progress? Frankly, none of the construction projects are speedy in terms of finding folks to actually go forward and build them. That's just the benefit of a blazing economy at the moment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the interest expressed, my entire commentary during that day that we spent at the first WorkLife B.C. Forum was to encourage individuals to consider child care as one way to increase the flexibility of their workplace. That message was well received. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We've got five that we're continuing to work with as we go forward, out of roughly ten. Well, it's five recipients of awards of excellence and some additional awards of merit. So there has been good uptake, and I will certainly report back to the member as these sites come on line. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Does the minister know how many of the recipients are also active on child care centre boards and involved in other child care initiatives within their communities? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I don't have their bios imprinted in terms of all the other things they've done. Many of the participants continue to work directly in the child care field. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
You will know that we have had individuals from VanCity and from Central Credit Union who participate in the advisory committee around that, who are assisting and are absolutely like-minded in that regard. The business-based child care that we have today in British Columbia…. That individual sits on the national advisory committee and has represented British Columbia. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There are opportunities for that effect to continue to grow in terms of creating…. This is not a discussion about those who already believe in the notion of child care. This is about how we get everyone to understand that this is a shared responsibility for Canada. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Have we taken individuals who have not necessarily been in the discussion before and brought them into the discussion? Absolutely. It will continue to be my goal to encourage as many people as possible to be fundamentally, phenomenally concerned with how the care and development of young children occurs, from the notion of a healthy pregnancy all the way to school graduation and a lifelong relationship and lifelong learning. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is not any longer a discussion about how we compartmentalize early learning versus later learning versus lifelong learning. This is a package that we are attempting to address collectively as government. You will know that the Premier has been passionate about literacy pieces, about early childhood pieces, about ActNow, about the movement pieces, about all of those things coming together to produce the product. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We had those same discussions with attendees at the WorkLife Forum, and I believe we're having some very, very good uptake in terms of how we go forward and work with them so that they, indeed, see that there is a true advantage, a true benefit to hosting child care opportunities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I can tell you that I recently toured Next Level Games in Vancouver, which is a company of probably 120 gentlemen — probably 110 of them are male. They had just as much concern about the care for their children. Their employer had thought that perhaps it wasn't such an issue because most of his employees were male. So changing the dynamic, changing the dialogue, changing the discussion is very healthy for us as a province, as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I have to admit that I'm amused when the minister talks about how enthusiastic the Premier is on literacy, because the Premier was also very enthusiastic for the Westcoast resource centre when it first opened, as was the Finance Minister. Neither seemed to step in enthusiastically when this minister of state withdrew funding for it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wondered, from the minister, again looking at WorkLife ideas: has the minister had her staff look at government departments, and how many of those would be, perhaps, eligible for a WorkLife B.C. Award? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I'm glad you mentioned that. The head of the public service, the deputy, has been a member of the advisory committee and will continue to work with us, as we go forward, in terms of honouring the excellence in the public service. Very recently I have toured the three child care centres that are attached to government and that offer supports to children from families that are currently employed by government. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]My challenge as we work this through is to see if we can indeed continue to deliver that service in ever-expanding ways, because it speaks to me in that I am a proponent of near-site and on-site child care — to have your child adjacent to your workplace. It's something government has demonstrated clearly in the past that they have an interest in doing. Our challenge will be to see if we can continue that. The three existing centres have not had a long life and certainly have not been added to over previous tenures in this place, but there certainly is opportunity before us. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I wonder, just on this, if we're talking about the same thing. When I say "government departments," I'm talking of ministry offices and government departments as the same, just across B.C. government. Okay. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I wanted to go back. I touched on Westcoast resource and referral centre. I think the minister is very well aware of the shock to the community when it lost its funding and the manner in which it lost its funding — that it was a telephone call on a Friday afternoon from ministry staff. I just wondered if the minister could explain the rationale for her ministry's approach to the announcing of the cuts to the Westcoast Child Care Resource Centre. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The discussion around Westcoast created the opportunity for us to reallocate that funding, and certainly I wanted very much to decentralize or regionalize professional development happening in the regions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The notion that we would put on the same site a few million dollars, when indeed it made more sense to have those services regionalized across British Columbia, spoke to me. The notion that Westcoast doesn't exist is untrue. They continue to operate the Vancouver Child Care Resource and Referral. They are the host agency for Vancouver Child Care Resource and Referral. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Frankly, there was much greater interest in spreading that service more effectively across the geography of this province rather than in consolidating it in Vancouver. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I think the minister is perhaps playing a bit fast and loose with the figures. It was $800,000 that went to Westcoast, not millions of dollars, as I understand it. If I'm wrong on this, I would like clarification. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The point I made was between the two. It was roughly $2 million — $800,000 and then an additional allocation very close to $1 million. I think the member understands the point. Did it make sense to put a $2 million allocation in Vancouver when the desire was for professional development to cross British Columbia? They shared office space. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They continue to cohabit, to exist together. They will continue to offer services in Vancouver, which is the intention. The professional development component will be spread across British Columbia, and there is huge interest in having that done in areas where families and providers don't always have to flow to Vancouver to receive professional development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I think that the issue of centralization towards regionalization depends on the service. Westcoast Child Care Resource Centre did have a very good reputation for providing assistance as a provincial service — not in the same way that the child care resource and referral centres and other centres have, but it was the provincial service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
To break it up and to say we're just going to spend the funding elsewhere in the regions in these allocations that go back to the budget we were discussing earlier, where there is professional development, I would argue, is not the best way forward when you have a core team of people who have been working on this for many years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]In this respect I wondered with whom the minister discussed this to find out that the child care community wanted this to be broken up into small pieces and sent out around the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I think the member made my point very cleanly when she said the child care resource and referral centre. Westcoast Child Care Resource Centre will continue to operate the Vancouver child care resource and referral. Those services will continue. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I'd like to ask the minister if she has actually talked to anyone at Westcoast. A number of the staff have lost their jobs because the service was closed. Vancouver has helped ensure that there is some semblance of provision still there, but it is nothing like it was before. It is dealing with trying to squeeze some money that is being given to one service — that is, Vancouver — and trying to make sure that it can still work for a provincial service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minister says that I made it clear. The minister has made it very clear. We've just got rid of one whole service and said that it's not necessary. I would like to ask the minister with whom she discussed this to find out that child care workers didn't want to have Westcoast there as a provincial resource. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: I'm happy to repeat that the decision was taken to regionalize the service. Families in Dawson Creek, Fort St. John and Prince George — providers in all those regions all across British Columbia had an opportunity to come to Vancouver for professional development. That wasn't meeting their needs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The commitment to regionalize service has been in place over the life of this government. We are regionalizing service. We have five health authorities. We have five MCFD authorities. We are moving forward. We are not doing anything other than regionalizing service to bring it so that it responds to the needs of those who live in those communities and of those who provide service in those communities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: Seeing as this is a government philosophy, as the minister says, to regionalize in this way and to have their five areas, I wondered, then, if the minister could answer my first question. Why did her staff advise Westcoast in a telephone call on Friday afternoon that they were losing their funding? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: The member will know that none of these decisions are easy. Once the determination was made to regionalize the service, there was no point in not giving them that information. I'm not sure if the member is suggesting that somehow we delayed providing that information. We worked it through as much as we possibly could in terms of whether or not we were going to make that determination. Once the decision was made, it was only right that they learn of that decision as quickly as possible. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I think the minister has said, though, that regionalization is part of government policy. Therefore, it was not an overnight decision that Westcoast was going to be cut and disbanded, sent across the province in this way and that training would go outside. It caused a huge amount of distress in both the child care community generally and Westcoast in particular — that they received a call on Friday afternoon from ministry staff saying: "That's it. You're gone at the end of the financial year." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. L. Reid: To reiterate, it's a difficult decision — no question. But once a decision was taken, there was no value in delaying letting the contractor know we didn't choose to continue purchasing the service. Absolutely, they would be the first people we would let know at the earliest opportunity. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
C. Trevena: I question the minister's description of a difficult decision. The minister has quite clearly said that her ministry and other ministries across this government are regionalizing and putting things into the five chunks, not taking it right to the local level. So the decision would be part of the government's thinking. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think it is symptomatic. The approach the government took with Westcoast is symptomatic of the approach that the government and, unfortunately, this minister have taken with child care across this province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We have had a very short time to explore the budget, but in this short time we have been able to talk about the cuts to child care resource and referral centres provincewide as well as to the provincial service of Westcoast. We ought to talk about the cuts to the operating fund, the many, many applications that are there for capital funding and the many, many spaces that are going to be there, assuming that there are actually going to be workers who can staff the places so that we can have the child care working there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We've seen that much of the financial management has devolved to other organizations — in announcements, when the minister pleases — in one-off payments. I think it's very sad that there was such an opportunity here. There is such an opportunity — and I'm sure the minister would agree with me — to have a proper, effective, accessible child care system in our province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minister knows. The minister is in cabinet. The minister knows there is the money there. The minister is passionate about child care and about assisting, as the minister quite often states, our most vulnerable children. I think it is a huge sadness for people within the profession, for parents, for families that we are seeing an attrition rather than a growth in the provision of child care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With that, I will hand over to my colleague for Esquimalt-Metchosin, who is going to be taking up on the estimates. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. L. Reid: That comment absolutely requires a response. In terms of the optimism I feel for child care, we're in partnership with parents in the province, with providers, with community, with all levels of government as we go forward, because it's vitally important. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member is quite correct. This is about vulnerable children, which is why you saw this province step up to the plate and maintain the enhancements to the subsidy program. That is for families in British Columbia who earn under $38,000. The member opposite can diminish that in no way whatsoever. That is a fabulous accomplishment as we go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I will say the same for special needs youngsters. To move from $37 million to $55 million and have that enhancement carried forward is never anything that the member opposite should diminish. And to not be proud of the agencies in this province who are building space with government today…. An additional 1,500 spaces are coming on line. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The member opposite could actually be of assistance in this regard and build with the province as we go forward. The difference in last year's budget of about $203 million and well on the way to $290 million of spending around child care is a significant enhancement. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know the member opposite will continue to make faces, but I can assure the member opposite that when her leader was the director of child care policy in British Columbia, I would put my record up against space creation for the time I've been here, which is two years in this file, over the ten years that that government was in operation. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Do not for one moment, hon. Member, suggest any kind of self-righteous attitude around the creation of child care space in the province. It is not worthy. It is simply not worthy. Frankly, it's shameful that that is the only level of commentary you can bring to this debate. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I am on the side of parents and providers as we go forward. We will continue to deliver programs that will come very close to $300 million in spending this year. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]M. Karagianis: I do have some questions for the minister, so I think we will probably take a moment to move staff and change places with the appropriate ministers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Chair: Do you have questions for the minister? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: For the minister, yes. We are going to start with Community Living B.C., if we may, please. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. T. Christensen: If you could just indulge me for a moment. We've had a shift in staff because we are, I understand, going to be working through questions around Community Living British Columbia. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm pleased to be joined by CEO for CLBC Rich Mowles, on my left; the chief financial officer, Richard Hunter, on my right; as well as another assistant deputy minister from MCFD, Mark Sieben, in behind us here, who will certainly provide able advice to me as these questions go forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Just by way of brief introduction — and I know the member opposite will appreciate that this will be brief — CLBC is a separate vote. Vote 21 is the budget for Community Living British Columbia. The total budget for the Crown agency is just under $683 million. Most of CLBC's funding comes from the provincial government through an operating contribution that this year will total $647 million. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
About 92 percent of that, $633 million, goes directly to community living support and services for children and adults with developmental disabilities as well as for children and youth with special needs and their families. That this year is a 6-percent increase over provincial contributions last year, and in this three-year budget plan we'll see a 15-percent increase in the province's contributions to CLBC's operational funding. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I do want to just briefly touch on or highlight a couple of things in terms of CLBC, because it is a new agency. Certainly, it's government's belief that the province has gained a great deal by establishing this new Crown agency. We are now at the forefront in North America in delegating delivery of services to developmentally disabled citizens to an arm's-length authority with a board of directors that must reflect the community that it serves. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
A majority of CLBC's board must be individuals who use or who have a significant connection to a person who uses the types of supports that CLBC delivers, and at least two of the board members must themselves be individuals with a developmental disability. So it is a very unique agency in that respect, and as I said, it really is at the forefront of working with the developmentally disabled community in North America. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
CLBC is committed to promoting choice and innovation in how support and services are delivered. We now have over 19,000 people who are currently served by CLBC throughout the province. With the increase in budget as well as a number of the steps that CLBC is taking to be innovative in how they deliver services, we certainly expect over the next three years that 1,600 individuals will receive 2,400 new or enhanced supports. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Due to CLBC's efforts, I think it's important to note that for the first time ever we have a better handle on the demand for services for adults with developmental disabilities. That ensures transparency, equity, and sound financial planning and resource allocation as we go forward. It enables that to happen. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As well, CLBC is being successful in providing individuals and families with a range of options. People certainly have the opportunities to select from existing services as well as to work with CLBC facilitators on developing new supports. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]I know that CLBC works closely with its funded service providers to engage them in problem-solving and promoting innovation and cost-effective service delivery. It is a firm belief of CLBC and government that families know best when it comes to their needs, their goals and planning for the future. That really is at the foundation of CLBC's mandate and success. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I can tell you that similar to with the ministry as a whole, my experience with CLBC is that it is fortunate to have very dedicated staff that have worked very hard over the first two years of the establishment of the agency to deal with the challenges of shifting services to a new agency. I think they have done a very good job of that over the last two years, working through some of the bumps that are inherent in any change process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We're certainly looking forward to a continued strong working relationship with CLBC as they work to deliver additional services to the clients that they serve. With that, I'm happy to start taking questions on the Community Living B.C. budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: The minister has talked in the introduction here about the fact that this is a new Crown agency. So one of the questions I have is: what did the transition from MCFD to CLBC cost? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. T. Christensen: Certainly, this isn't the way I wanted to start out the answers, but we don't actually have that figure available. Apparently, the question was asked last year, and we provided a response. That was more aligned with the timing of that transition, given that the agency has now been in place for two years. But we'll find that number and provide it to the member. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: In the process of that, I would hope it breaks down the moving costs, offices, the setting up of the offices — individual costs there. I know that there has been a process that included moving out of government space into market-based spaces, so I would hope that that information will also include what that cost the taxpayers of British Columbia in the process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I appreciate that that information is not here. Perhaps the minister could let me know what kind of time line I might expect, to get that information. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. T. Christensen: As I understand it, there are two questions there. One is really the cost to government in terms of the transition to CLBC as a new agency. Then the second is really the operational cost of CLBC as they get their offices up and running. We'll look to provide answers to both of those. I would expect we wouldn't have any difficulty doing that within a month. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would expect that there probably was a good business case in favour of moving to the CLBC model. Is that available? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. T. Christensen: The decision to move toward CLBC as an independent authority with a board, as I've described earlier, wasn't driven by a business case. It was driven by a discussion with those that were receiving community living services from the ministry, with the families of people who have developmental disabilities. It was really a practice-based drive towards a new way of delivering services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Obviously, in doing that, there was assessment done of what it would cost to move in that direction. It would have been irresponsible not to do that. But it wasn't put forward as a business case in terms of that being the driving motivation to establish CLBC. The motivation to establish CLBC as an independent authority was very much driven by: how can we better put in place a structure that gives more decision-making to the people who are going to be served by the agency itself? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[S. Hammell in the chair.]
M. Karagianis: Is this the normal way a Crown agency is established in government? Is it such an experimental mode or on such a conceptual base, rather than having a written business case scenario? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. T. Christensen: I may have left the wrong impression in terms of my previous answer around the terms of business case. As the member asked the initial question about a business case, I took that to mean: what's the financial case driving the decision toward establishing CLBC? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It wasn't a financial case that drove the decision. It was best practices around delivering services to people who have a developmental disability. That was the motivating factor in terms of: how you can better deliver service? How can you better be responsive to families of those individuals requiring services? How can you get to a model that better engages the community and service providers in determining how services are best provided? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
On that front, in terms of whether we call it a business case or a feasibility study, what government looked at in 2001 was what practices are elsewhere. What are the principles we wish to follow in terms of how services are delivered to people with developmental disabilities? And how can we, in consultation with those individuals and their families, move in a direction that better empowers them to determine the way in which services are delivered? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]That is how we came to the CLBC model. It was done over a number of years with significant consultation and with very significant support from the community living sector, and it was initially done by establishing an interim authority for a period of time that could better explore how a permanent authority would function. Only after a number of steps were taken to ensure that this was in fact going to be a better model in terms of delivering services was the permanent authority established in July of 2005. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: With greatest respect, how could you determine if a new and better model had been created if you didn't have a business case scenario to compare it against? Again I ask: is this the way government creates new Crown agencies — without a full written business case against which you can measure whether or not you have created a better model? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm actually quite surprised that there would not be a full written business case against which you could compare something as important as a new Crown agency that's been created by government. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I understand that the minister mentioned an interim authority had been established. Again, is there a written business case on the interim authority? How was it created? What, if any, performance measures were put in place before the new Crown agency was created out of that interim process? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. T. Christensen: I'm a bit concerned that the member may be suggesting that this is something that was a grand idea of government in the absence of being driven by the community living sector — that we would then develop a study and then implement it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The reality of how Community Living British Columbia came into being was that government believed, in 2001 — based on comment from people in the community living sector, from individuals and families — that it was possible to have a better model for delivering services. Government established a community living transition committee in 2002, I believe, that was made up of representatives from the community living sector — family members, individuals with developmental disabilities, service providers from around the province — to examine what it was that people were looking for in terms of a better way of delivering services. What would be their expectations, their goals around that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]The transition committee did prepare a report. That full report, I believe, is available on CLBC's website. It was the work of that committee that ultimately led to the establishment of the interim authority, who then continued the work in terms of fleshing it out a little bit more around how they can move towards delivering services more effectively and whether it made sense to establish a permanent authority that was somewhat at arm's length from government. That work, as I said, proceeded and ultimately resulted in the establishment of the permanent authority as of July 1, 2005. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I am not personally intimately familiar with all of that work, because it predates my time as minister. But certainly I was in government and was an MLA at the time, and I recall that there was very significant engagement of the community living sector in terms of how to move that agenda forward. It was very much a responsive agenda by government to what we were hearing from the community living sector. It involved a number of presentations to both the Treasury Board and cabinet in terms of the fiscal implications and the policy implications of what was necessary. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Again, we're very pleased with the establishment of CLBC, the foundation that has been set to enable improvement of services going forward. That is certainly what the 2007-08 to 2009-10 service plan is geared towards. With these estimates, my expectation was that we would be discussing the budget of Community Living British Columbia on a go-forward basis. While I'm happy to try and respond to the member's questions in terms of three, four years ago, I'm at a bit of a loss in terms of determining how that's relevant to the '07-08 budget in moving forward. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: In fact, I think that the basis on which the model was created…. As the minister has said, it is a new model. It's only two years in existence at this point. I think that certainly the basis on which it was built and created is very important to its current operating model and, as the minister says, the go-forward basis here on how the budget is being spent. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, although the minister says there've been great improvements in services, both the minister and I continue to receive many complaints from families about the services. So as I explore those with the minister, I think it's fair to ask on what basis this authority was created. It is a Crown agency. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This is a government that has been very public about its endeavours to establish a more businesslike environment within government, to in fact conduct government business in a more businesslike manner. We talk and hear often about best-case management models and things like that. So it would seem to me very natural that we could question the basis, the business case, on which CLBC was founded, then look at it from this perspective two years later and examine the current service plan on that basis — to say: "Did it meet the expectations of the business model created originally?" [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If there was no business model, how can we say two years into it that the service plan is meeting those criteria as we look at the future of it? Perhaps, if it's not meeting the business case scenario that was laid out originally…. As I hear from the minister, much of this was sort of consultative in nature rather than a written business plan that was followed simultaneous to the consultation and the motivation by the community and the sector itself to look at delivering services better. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]So I think it's very relevant for us to look at how the Crown agency was formed and from that, to judge, as we go forward, how successful the model is being rather than just stand on the consultative concept of whether or not we believe the services are being delivered better. That would be the purpose for me asking for this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The interim authority. The minister has talked about a concept; some consultation took place. The sector itself seemed to be driving initiatives around providing the service in a better way. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly there is a bit of a troubled past with the interim authority. The KPMG investigation into one of the founding members of the interim authority, Mr. Doug Walls, and the concept itself, showed a number of very disturbing findings in that KPMG report. Again, comparing this to the business case scenario, does it interfere in any way with the business case scenario? Any concerns around how the interim authority operated? Obviously that was the basis, as the minister has clearly said, for moving into the permanent authority. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would argue that in fact these are all very relevant things to question the minister on — as both the minister and I are fairly new to this portfolio; he as the minister, I as the critic — to lay some groundwork for both of us on making some judgments here on the success of Community Living B.C. from the perspective of government, from the perspective of the community itself and certainly from the perspective of the critic. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
If the minister is unable to provide me with any kind of business case scenario that was used to establish this, I accept that. But I do know that there was an endeavour to establish a memorandum of understanding and a children's agreement between the MCFD and CLBC. Can the minister tell me what the status of that MOU is at this time? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. T. Christensen: I will answer the question in terms of the children's agreement, but I do want to respond to some of the member's other comments. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, government agrees that it is critical that we be able to measure the success of CLBC. I think the member and I are on the same page on that. There were a number of reports prepared in the process of moving towards CLBC. The most critical reports that really set out the expectations in terms of how CLBC would better deliver services to people with developmental disabilities were the reports prepared, firstly, by the transition steering committee, which, as I've indicated, is on CLBC's website, and secondly, by the interim authority. Again, those reports are available on CLBC's website. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It has been two years now since CLBC was established. Both CLBC and government agree that it would be timely in the course of this next year to look back at the original documents and some of the vision at that time to determine whether or not CLBC, as a permanent authority with a track record now of almost two years, is meeting what those expectations were at the time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Later this year CLBC will be engaging an external review to look back at the work that was done prior to the establishment of CLBC and to measure success against the expectations that were originally there. I think all of us, CLBC included, look forward to that work being done. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, what I've found in my discussions with CLBC's board is that they are continuously interested in how they can be more responsive to the community they serve and how they can continue to improve services. There will be that accountability loop in terms of looking back and saying: "Okay, what were the expectations, and are those being met?" [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With respect to the children's agreement, CLBC and MCFD had entered into the children's agreement. What that agreement contemplated, essentially, was a splitting of the services that are available to children in the province. CLBC would deliver services to those children who had developmental disabilities and were likely to have an ongoing relationship with CLBC throughout their lives. MCFD — and this is a generalization —would continue to deliver services to other children with special needs. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What the experience has been since that agreement was initially entered into was that trying to split services in that manner is too disruptive. Even if you got through the disruption, both CLBC and MCFD agree, I think, at this point that it wouldn't be the appropriate way to move forward in terms of best serving children in the province. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What we are doing now is that we have sort of interim understandings in place between CLBC and MCFD in terms of who will deliver what services. We're consulting with one another and working together to determine, moving forward, how we best accomplish the general intent of the children's agreement but in a manner that best serves children in the province. The reason we haven't fully implemented the children's agreement was the definite recognition on behalf of CLBC and MCFD that it actually wouldn't be in the best interest of the children we're both trying to serve. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]M. Karagianis: I will just ask a further question on the first half of the topic that we discussed there. I think it's excellent that the ministry is going to undertake a review. That is an excellent step to take. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It is, as the minister mentioned, an external review. Will this involve consultation with those obtaining services from CLBC? Will it be in full consultation with those families? Obviously, with the concept in the consultation process that gave birth to CLBC, it seems fitting that those families would be consulted as part of this external review, to say: "Here we are two, three years later. Is this model working? What is required to make it better?" The external review: how would you see that taking place, and how would families participate in that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I guess the second part of my question, while we've got you there, is with regard to the MOU, then. The memorandum of understanding is not moving forward as expected. Can the minister clarify for me, then, how the services are expected to be delivered to these obviously somewhat dissimilar clients? How, then, do families understand exactly what the process is and where the divide is between MCFD and CLBC? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. T. Christensen: In terms of the review to be commissioned by CLBC, the terms of reference for that aren't yet fully developed, but certainly it's intended that they will retain an external consultant to conduct that review. The expectation is that there will be a bidding process for that through B.C. Bid. All of that will be set out up front in terms of what's expected. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There's no question that part of that review will involve consultation with the people that CLBC is intended to serve. Quite frankly, from my perspective, and I'm sure from CLBC's perspective, not consulting with the people actually being served by the agency probably wouldn't result in much of an effective review. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: We had a second question there, so I'll let the minister answer the second part of the question. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. T. Christensen: That's the problem with these two questions at a time. I lose track of the second one. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the MOU, from a practical standpoint what has happened is that in the establishment of CLBC, the staff that have moved over to CLBC were the same staff that were generally dealing with the children who are now receiving services from CLBC. From the family's perspective, generally, there hasn't been any disruption. They have continued to work with the same social worker or other worker that they were engaged with, and that person who was employed by the ministry previously is now employed by CLBC. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Where there are challenges that are certainly brought to CLBC's attention and the ministry's attention, we're try to work closely with families to work through that and minimize or eliminate any disruption. Generally, what has happened is that the caseloads have effectively moved over intact. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I guess the purpose of the MOU in the first instance was to establish what the relationship would be between MCFD and CLBC. Are you saying now that all services pertaining to the developmentally challenged, special needs children are now being served under CLBC, and MCFD no longer has any of the care, oversight, program provision or service provision to any special needs individual? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. T. Christensen: There are certain programs that MCFD still is more directly involved in. For example, autism funding is administered through the ministry. That's a unique program. For the most part it's very much individualized funding, where the family has access to the funding, and then they determine what services they wish to purchase with that funding. Similarly, supported child development is another program that's being funded primarily through the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Essentially, the division that was contemplated, as I said, by the children's agreement was that once it was determined that a child had a developmental disability that was going to be permanent so that they were going to have an ongoing relationship into adulthood with Community Living B.C., then Community Living B.C. would be the primary contact and service delivery agent or would determine where to get service with other contracted service providers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
For the most part, that is definitely what has happened. Once it's determined that somebody does have a developmental disability, then they're into that CLBC track. Their relationship is with CLBC, who in turn assists them in terms of working with other potential service providers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The greater challenge, certainly, is with our youngest children. For very young children it's very difficult to determine initially whether it's a developmental disability that is going to be there on a permanent and long-term basis or whether it's a special need where some early intensive intervention may in fact overcome the disability, or make a significant difference in addressing it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We have to deal with the cases or the situations that are more challenging to ensure that we are working closely with CLBC so that from an operational standpoint we're working closely together in making it easier for families. There is a joint management committee of CLBC and the ministry that meets on a regular basis to try and deal with any issues, while we try to work through how to put a more permanent structure in place to make it as seamless as possible and as easy as possible, from an individual family standpoint, to access the services they need — whether those services are provided by CLBC, by the ministry or by a contracted service provider. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Obviously, it is probably difficult for families, then, to discern at what point their situation moves from MCFD to CLBC. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In the case of autism, has the minister determined whether or not that is a condition that will fall under CLBC's authority at some point? I mean, autism often follows children through most of their life, in one form or another. I'm wondering where the determining factor is on when a child moves out of MCFD's service provision umbrella into CLBC's hands. Does this also apply to services like speech therapists and similar therapists that CLBC clients may also access? Where is the crossover back and forth, and how do families determine seamless service delivery, given some complexities here in defining whose program authority they fall under? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. T. Christensen: I think what's important — because there is a substantial opportunity to sort of confuse all of this, and I'm certainly guilty of that myself from time to time — is to look at it from the individual family's perspective. At the end of the day I'm confident that what both the member and I are most concerned about is if you are parents of a child you believe may have a special need or may have a developmental disability and you don't know where to turn or how to access help, who do you go see? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The reality is that, from a family's perspective, very little has changed. There continues to be a number of, for lack of a better way, doorways into service. For example, the member will be familiar with child development centres in various communities. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
A family may take their child to see their family physician, who may then sort of direct them towards the child development centre. That would enable them to get service at the child development centre, provided it was offering the necessary service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Alternatively, a family may have a concern and in the past may have contacted the Ministry of Children and Family Development to say: "What help can I get in terms of addressing the concern I have about my child?" [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Now they would make the same contact. What has changed is that the person they're talking to is now actually an employee of CLBC rather than an employee of the ministry. The place they'll actually go to get the service would now depend on CLBC determining what service is required. It may be that they get referred to a child development centre or another service provider that is contracted to provide the particular intervention or therapy which it has been identified that the child requires. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
From that perspective, the direct services that were provided by the ministry historically are now provided by CLBC to children. The exception to that is…. Well, it's not an exception in terms of direct service delivery. Where the ministry has retained the program is around more of the direct-funding programs like the autism funding where, in the determination of whether somebody needs the funding, CLBC is involved as that front-line service agency. Then the ministry has to process the actual funding application. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: For me the one concern that I would have immediately is: how is funding then allocated? The minister spoke about a specific bill in allocating funding to CLBC as an agency somewhat independent of government, yet MCFD also has a budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
How, then, is the funding allocated? More importantly, where there is finite funding — certainly in the case of CLBC, funding is finite — what is the determining factor on service provision? How do families know where to turn if, in fact, there are funding shortfalls or if some funding, in the case of autism, is delivered in one place and CLBC delivers the service and funding in another place? How that funding is split is pretty important. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]Hon. T. Christensen: Within the overall envelope of funding from government to CLBC, a certain portion of that envelope is dedicated to children's services. CLBC isn't allowed to reallocate any portion of the children's services budget to other parts of their service delivery — for example, to adult services. They have to focus that on children's services. The amount of that funding is generally based on the intent of the children's agreement in terms of the services that CLBC would be engaged in delivering. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Then there's still some funding, as I indicated earlier — autism, perhaps, being the most clear example — where MCFD has actually retained that funding within the ministry and is funding parents directly with that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm sure that there are families watching right now, and I'm sure my phone will be ringing the minute we leave here. If we've in some way strayed from the views that families have, we'll hear about it. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This does actually bring to mind other questions, but noting the time, I would move that the committee rise, report progress and seek leave to sit again, with the minister's indulgence on that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Motion approved. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The committee rose at 6:22 p.m. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[ 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) 2007: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada