Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

How can a committee of one, with narrow terms of reference dictated to it, which will not meet the people BC to hear their concerns, “ensure optimal access to justice for British Columbians” will be met?


In British Columbia, a legal aid review is about to be undertaken by the government, at the request of Attorney General David Eby.  And I have to say the ‘why’, of why it is being undertaken does interest me.  The ‘why’ according to government is to help ensure optimal access to justice for British Columbians.  Now you may remember earlier this week I did write about issues and problems with the Legal Aid services. (When individuals enjoy equal access to justice, the welfare of society is enriched and its core values are secured.” That costs money however, and governments of all political stripes appear more interested in providing LESS funding).  

BC Attorney General David Eby
According to a government media release Thursday (Oct 4th), Eby has requested a review of legal aid service delivery models, to be undertaken by practicing lawyer Jamie Maclaren.  It will focus on the effectiveness and efficiencies of legal aid service delivery in British Columbia … from the point of view of citizens who use legal aid services … and recommendations will be delivered in a report by December 31st.  

As you may recall, my commentary on Monday stated there is a large number of people – the working poor -- who really have NO access to Legal Aid and who therefore DO NOT use it.  With that in mind I have to question why Jamie Maclaren will not have the opportunity to look into that segment of BC’s population.  Sadly, the reason is very clear; the review being undertaken will ONLY be using terms of reference laid out by the Attorney General.

That said, as a part of the review process, lawyer Jamie Maclaren will consider public feedback, during development of his report and recommendations.  For the public to do so however, they will have to provide written submissions no later than Nov. 23, 2018, via a dedicated email mailbox. 

I have a question. 

Why is this important undertaking not being referred a Special Legislative Committee, created by the Legislative Assembly?  For those unaware, they are created to examine a single, specific issue.  When I looked into the use of Legislative Committees, I was able to see that in recent years committees have investigated a wide variety of topics; those have included sustainable aquaculture, the use of cosmetic pesticides, and the provincial mid-term timber supply.

What I find to be of more interesting however is that within their terms of reference, committees are afforded total independence in their deliberations.   
And there my friends, is the answer to my question. Eby’s requested review is to be done using terms of reference laid out by the Attorney General.


In reviewing the use of Legislative Committees by the provincial government, they too are afforded the opportunity for a more detailed examination of policy and other matters … and … the committee system also provides members of the public with the opportunity to have direct input into the parliamentary process by making written or electronic submissions, and by attending public hearings.   Not just by a written message to some obscure email address.

Public hearings, where members of the public can have direct input.  Now that’s a novel idea … the public having direct input … but it’s one that rarely ever sees the light of day.

In fact, as it is, many of the regular Legislative Committees rarely ever meet.  Currently there are nine standing committees: Aboriginal Affairs … Children and Youth … Crown Corporations … Education … Finance and Government Services … Health … Legislative Initiatives …Parliamentary Reform, Ethical Conduct, Standing Orders and Private Bills … and finally Public Accounts.

Now one would think that the Education Committee should be working overtime to ensure BC’s children have the best education programs available.  Care to guess when this committee last met?

Spring Session of 2018?  No. 
During 2017?  No again.
2016 … 2015 … 2014?? Nope … Nada
Surely to goodness they must have met in 2013 then?    Nooooooooo!

Here’s what you find when you go online and look at the Legislative Committee for Education … The Committee has not received a terms of reference from the Legislative Assembly to work in the current session

In fact, the Standing Committee on Education has NOT MET since the 39Th Parliament, which was 2011 – 2012.

That must be an anomaly, right?  Surely to goodness the Legislative Committee for Health must be meeting all the time?  The Committee did undertake public consultations in 2014-15 and 2016, culminating with the release of its report in the Spring of 2017

Children and Youth.  After all, what could be more important than our young people?  Good news there as well.  On February 28, 2018, the Committee released its first report,  Review of the Representative for Children and Youth Act making nine recommendations for changes to the Act. The Committee released its second report, Annual Report 2017-18 on May 20, 2018.

So let’s ask the question, Why no Special Legislative Committee to look into Legal Aid, with references that allow it to look into all aspects of how it is delivered … what’s working … what’s not working … how can it be improved?

My guess is that a committee like that, which would be made up NOT JUST of NDP members, but also Liberals and Green MLA’s, might come up with recommendations the government may not wish to implement.

AND … in holding public hearings, the people of BC might also demand that the 7% legal fee tax be directed in full, once again, towards the costs of providing legal aid services.

Interesting possibilities, aren’t they? 

Instead, there will be a review by one, with references dictated by Attorney General David Eby, with NO public hearings, but an opportunity (if the public is aware of it) to make submissions by email.

The other more democratic option?

A full Legislative Committee, made up of members from all parties in the Legislature, that can tour the province getting input from the people most in need of legal aid services, and from those who are trying to deliver it from funding that for too many years has been inadequate.


It can’t … it won’t … it’s a waste of time.

In Kamloops, I’m Alan Forseth, and I hope you’ll join the discussion on this, or any other topic presented here.  Do you agree … disagree?  Post your thoughts in the Comment Section directly below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

GORDON F. D. WILSON: When The Trick Masquerades as The Treat

Thirty-seven years ago, Halloween 1987, I became the leader of the BC Liberal Party.   British Columbia was badly polarized. Social Credit held one side and the NDP the other. It had been twelve years, 1975, since Liberal MLAs Garde Gardom, Pat McGeer, and Alan Williams had walked away from their party to join Social Credit, one year after the lone Progressive Conservative MLA Hugh Curtis had abandoned his party to sit with Bill Bennett, the son and heir apparent to long-serving BC Premier, WAC Bennett.   An unwritten agreement by the biggest Canadian political shareholders, the federal Liberals and Conservatives, decided that if British Columbia was to remain a lucrative franchise from a revenue perspective, they couldn’t risk splitting the electoral vote and electing the real enemy, the NDP, so no resources would be used to finance either a Liberal or Conservative party provincially.   “There are two sides to every street,” I was told by a very prominent Canadian businessman who cont

FORSETH: You Have To Be A Bit Crazy

  Ward and his wife Carleen celebrating his win on election night.   In March of this year, I took on the role of Campaign Manager for BC Conservative candidate Ward Stamer.  It’s the third time I’ve had the opportunity as I took on the role for Peter Sharp in 2013, and for Dennis Giesbrecht in 2020. Now let me tell you, in the past, a BC Conservative campaign team generally consisted of myself, the candidate and one or two helpers – and very little in the way of a campaign budget. Thankfully, a benefit of having spent 30+ years in the broadcast media afforded me the ability to do ad copy and write candidate speeches, and prep both Dennis and Peter to deal with the media – it’s also something I have always enjoyed. That was part of my duties this time around as well, however having a team of a dozen and a half volunteers meant that for the first time we had people available to ID our supporters, put together and install campaign signs, distribute campaign literature, and help out at ou

FORSETH: As a BC Conservative member, and campaign worker, I will again state that the fact these errors were found -- AND brought to light BY Elections BC -- shows the system IS working

Sadly, two and a half weeks after the BC provincial election campaign, those who want to undermine our political process are still at.  PLUS, we also have one who doesn’t even live in our country, never mind our province. I speak of the buffoon running for President of the United States, who has poisoned the well when it comes to faith in the electoral process. Just today alone, comments such as the following, were being made of posts that I shared online: ... all the votes they keep finding has just favoured NDP on in all critical ridings and soon they will flip another riding in favour of NDP, Come on. ... Elections BC has ridiculed British Columbians, and I no longer have confidence or trust in their process and competence regarding the results Then there are others online, with comments like these – who are claiming fraud in the October 19th election: ... Who is the oversight for Elections BC? They should be investigated for election fraud! ... Fraudulent election ... should be red

Labels

Show more