Advertisers


February 21, 2007
Get out your rulers

In his authoritative British Columbia Children and Youth Review, former conflict of interest commissioner Ted Hughes noted past ministry of children and family development service plans "have contained too few" performance measures. Those measures, a hallmark of the Campbell administration, are used as "indicators of the government's progress in achieving its goals" - in this case ensuring "child safety and child wellbeing."

So it seems somewhat strange the ministry would remove a timeline for regionalizing aboriginal and non-aboriginal children and family development services from its latest service plan. The fiscal 2008/09 and 2009/10 targets for increasing the number of aboriginal children in aboriginal care has also been discarded. And the report doesn’t record the "average annual number of days between entry into care and placement," "the proportion of children in foster care and 'kith and kin' placements who are 'very satisfied' with their placements" or any number of performance measures the Hughes review suggested will be needed "in the coming years."

Asked why those new measures weren't in the plan, Children and Family Development Minister Tom Christensen said, "We are in the midst of a process of transformation - a process that will put in place a framework to enhance the delivery of services to the children, families and communities we serve. It is through this process that we will be able to re-visit our targets and ensure those measureables are the correct ones. To establish new targets in advance of creating that framework would make no sense."

But why does the ministry no longer have a timeline for establishing regional authorities? "We are in the process of building a structure to support families and communities," responded Minister Christensen. "This is a grassroots process - one that will take time - and one that will be done properly. However, we will not force the process by putting a time frame in place."

Posted by Sean Holman at 04:04 PM
Permanent link

Bullshit

Posted by Bingo on February 21, 2007 07:21 PM

So it sounds as though the minister has taken his cue from the premier himself.

Announce something like a dramatic green plan that aims to cut GH gases by more than a third, turn your weasels loose to troll for positive reviews and then get your finance minister to smile and sweetly inform the climate panicked peasants that, no, in fact the province simply can't afford to tackle the most pressing issue ever, at least this year because if they did, well then there would be no tax bribe, er cut for us.

So I can take the money and buy myself a stinking big SUV to drive around the city because the finance minister has once again exempted those oh, so important urban gas hogs from luxury taxes.

Sorry I got carried away here, but it seems one issue just runs into another with these guys.

Posted by bleedingheart on February 21, 2007 09:52 PM

Blah, blah, blah....transformation...blah, blah, blah...process...blah, blah, blah...process...blah, blah, blah...process.

Posted by The talking head on February 22, 2007 12:32 AM

Without endorsing everything Christensen has said, I have heard feedback that some Aboriginal agencies who were starting to do family services work weren't fully prepared. The result has been some return of services to the provincial ministry.

Posted by Budd Campbell on February 22, 2007 08:14 AM

From Judge Hughes:

'The strongest impression I have gleaned from this inquiry is one of a child welfare system that has been buffeted by an unmanageable degree of change. There has been a revolving door in senior leadership positions; emphasis in practice has shifted between child protection and family support; functions have been sifted out to the regions and then pulled back to centre.......'

'In the 10 years since 1995, the Ministry has been led by no fewer than nine ministers, eight deputy minister, and seven directors with lead responsibility in child protection. This turnover has taken a toll in terms of staff morale and the Ministry's ability to set directions, frame goals and make progress. The revolving door has got to stop.'

He goes on to recommend that senior leadership be appointed for no less a term than 4 years and preferably 5 years.

My question to the Minister is this:

Now that ADMs have been appointed, what are their responsibilities? As just one example, MCFD lost two very able and experienced REDs from the Regions when they were moved to Victoria to work as ADMs but we know nothing about their job descriptions and it appears that they have been sidelined. Were they moved for that purpose and if so, why?

A supplementary question to the Minister: when will the new ADM Human Resources put to rest the massive insecurity being felt by staff across the province about job security?

Posted by TL on February 22, 2007 11:17 AM

Hear!!! Hear!!! thump thump thump thump thump!!!

I believe that TL is referring to the new COO who, previous to her appointment, was a RED. There was only one ADM transferred to Victoria from the Regions but if either of them are not valued in Victoria we could definitely use their Management and Leadership skills back here and we would welcome the switch!

thump thump thump thump thum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Hear! Hear! on February 22, 2007 03:38 PM

So let us review the facts.

Given that children are a society's future and that they are also it's most vunerable members, their protection should be the number one priority of the Government.

The Government acknowledges, albeit obliquely, that the Government is not doing an adequate job and as such, commissions a report.

The Report is addressed to the Minister of MFCD to implement.

The Minister of MCFD indicates that it is not his Ministry but the Attorney General's responsibility to implement the Report's recommendations.

The Minister of MCFD then indicates that his Ministry is not implementing the Report including a key recommendation that MCFD should develop key performance indicators.

So is this to be the end of it?

The Minister of MCFD and his Ministry are allowed to ignore the Report's recommendations with impunity?

Shame on you Premier Campbell if you allow this state of affairs to continue.

What kind of leadership is that!

Posted by Someone needs to be fired! on February 22, 2007 09:02 PM

And then, of course, there are the things that Mr. Hughes did not say.

Things such as, "If at first you screw things up, screw them up again (and again, and again, and again)".


.

Posted by RossK on February 22, 2007 10:14 PM




Remember me?

(You may use HTML tags for style)

wanted: hearsay & innuendo Site Search

category archives

Allan Warnke
At the Rockpile
Bob Russell
Broken News
Creatures of Government
Fighting Words
From the Gallery
Letter from the Editor
Loose Lips
Off the Hill
Public Eye Radio

monthly archives

April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004

syndication

RSS 2.0
Atom Feed