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 4^th), 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 31^st.  

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 39^Th 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.

Here’s my final question.  How can a committee of one, with narrow terms of reference dictated to it, which will not be meeting with the people of BC to hear their concerns, “ensure optimal access to justice for British Columbians” will be met?

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.