Earlier, we exclusively reported former Vancouver Grizzlies and Canucks owner Arthur Griffiths was considering running for the provincial Liberals - possibly in the proposed riding of Vancouver-West End. And now we're hearing Mr. Griffiths will make that bid for elected office official next Tueday.

Former Vancouver Quadra federal Conservative nomination candidate Rick Peterson says he's thinking about running for the provincial Liberals in Vancouver-Fairview. Said Mr. Peterson, "I had a chat with the premier. He called me a couple weeks ago and raised the idea. So we sat down and had a chat. It's really interesting, Sean. There's lots of good things happening. So it's something I'm looking at. And it's pretty exciting to think what this province is poised to do for the next four, five, six, seven years. So I'm definitely having a look at it, yeah." So when will he be making a decision about the matter? "I think it'll be pretty soon. I think, if it's a go, you'll be hearing pretty soon on it. But if it's a not go, you'll be hearing pretty soon too. But I'm definitely leaning in" the direction of running. New Democrat legislator Gregor Robertson, who is running for the Vision Vancouver mayoral nomination, presently represents Vancouver-Fairview.

Earlier, we reported former BC Cancer Foundation president and chief executive officer Mary McNeil would be running for the provincial Liberals in False-Creek. But who's going to be managing her campaign once she wins that nomination. Well, it's been suggested Mark Jiles, who formerly managed Premier Gordon Campbell's constituency campaigns, may be tapped for the task. But, in an interview with Public Eye, Ms. McNeil stated, "It's too early to say that. Obviously, he is in demand with a few people. Because he has helped me in the past" - managing her federal Conservative nomination bid in Vancouver-Quadra - "he's doing some work with me now...But until I'm actually the candidate - because I've got to sell memberships right now and I'm in that process - and it gets closer to the time, we just haven't made those decisions."

Decima Research Ltd.'s report didn't just include clever monikers for the Campbell administration's climate action initiatives. As part of its recommendations on the Campbell administration should sell those initiatives, the polling firm also tested a "series of visual concepts" connected to the environment - with the strongest reaction being to pictures of polar bears and cars in traffic.

The firm also reported, "The contrast of showing two opposites - a situation that is taken for granted now and the aftermath of that situation being lost had a greater impact on making people care and thinking and what it means them. The image of kids with their elders in the wilderness enjoying a green space together, with a phrase that suggests it will be lost soon if people's habits don't change was recommended by many of the participants."

So if you soon see government commercials featuring children and their parents being mauled by polar bears and run over by gridlocked cars in the middle of the woods, you'll know where the Campbell administration came up with the concept.

Research conducted by a national polling company appears to have been influential in laying one of the cornerstones for the Campbell administration's climate action initiative, Public Eye has exclusively learned. During its February 12 throne speech, the Campbell administration announced it would be rewarding British Columbians for making choices that will "save energy, water, fuel, time and money" as part of its LiveSmart BC strategy. But the thrust and even the name of that program - which will include "public education campaigns that will give citizens the tools and information they need to make informed choices" - seems to have been outlined in a report prepared by Decima Research Ltd. for the government in the days leading up to that announcement.

The report - the result of 12 focus groups conducted during the last two weeks of January - stressed "British Columbians are increasingly looking at what they can do on a daily basis to reduce their cost of living, and at the same time reduce their environmental footprint." And group participants were willing to see government take measure to promote "environmentally-conscious behaviours" - such as rebating the purchase of hybrid cars or energy saving windows. But, according to the participants, government most important task was to teach British Columbians what they can do as individuals to solve the climate change problem.

Decima went on to report the phrase Living Smart was seen by focus groups as being "most consistently fitting with the sense of importance, urgency, and ethic" associated with environmental action.

Public Eye has filed repeated freedom of information requests since December for the results of Decima's research - the latest of which was set to be rejected on the grounds it would have revealed the substance of cabinet deliberations. But, instead, the Campbell administration quietly posted that report on the climate action secretariat's Website last week.

Provincial Liberal Port Moody-Westwood backbencher Iain Black has a "difficult decision" to make in the "coming weeks." In a message posted on TriCityEvents.com, Mr. Black writes his riding will be "dramatically affected" by the upcoming adjustments to British Columbia's electoral boundaries, being split in half. "The result is two very winnable ridings for the BC Liberals: 'Port Moody-Coquitlam' and 'Coquitlam-Burke Mountain.' I will announce the riding I intend to defend shortly after the passing of the legislation later this spring. In the mean time, I would urge each of you to seriously consider increasing your involvement in one of our four Tri-City BC Liberals Riding Associations, to renew your membership in the party, and to start engaging in the preparations (already under way!) for the next provincial election in 14 short months: May 12, 2009." Of course, what Mr. Black doesn't mention is that Coquitlam-Burke Mountain is the more winnable of those ridings. But that's the same constituency Liberal regional coordinator Greg Moore is assumed to be running in.

Another former senior provincial Liberal aide has joined the government relations industry. Steven Puhallo - who left the legislative precincts in 2006 to become a regional party organizer - has been hired as an account director with lobbying giant Hill and Knowlton Canada Ltd. The company also employs former ministerial assistant Steve Vander Wal.

Last week, we exclusively reported former Vancouver Grizzlies and Canucks owner Arthur Griffiths is considering running for the Liberals in the next election. At the time, Mr. Griffiths declined to say where he would be making his bid. But our understanding is that constituency may be the proposed riding of Vancouver-West End.

Today, The Vancouver Sun's Gordon Hamilton reported "Premier Gordon Campbell told mayors attending a Whistler convention last week that he wants to support the province's forest industry by allowing the construction of wood-framed condominiums higher than the current four-storey limit. And Housing Minister Rich Coleman told the Canadian Home Builders' Association two weeks ago that he wants to see wood-framed buildings up to six storeys high." So where did the Campbell administration get the inspiration for this plan?

Well, back in February, International Forest Products Ltd. vice president Ric Slaco attended a Campbell administration climate action meeting. And, at the meeting, Mr. Slaco delivered a PowerPoint presentation urging the government to promote British Columbia wood products by making "BC's Building Code and procurement policies wood-centric" and expanding the province's wood first policy to private buildings. This, as part of an effort to increase wood product use in construction for both environmentally and economic reasons. Fancy that!

When last we spoke with Greg Moore, the Port Coquitlam councillor had been hired as a regional organizer for the provincial Liberals. So it should come no surprise many assume he'll run for the party nomination in the proposed riding of Coquitlam-Burke Mountain. But he'll evidently be doing so without the support of neighbouring Burquitlam backbencher Harry Bloy. Asked whether he'll be backing the councillor, Mr. Bloy told Public Eye, "I don't support any candidate for individual nominations."

What does the Law Society of British Columbia have do with the airline industry? Who knows! But, according to the board resourcing and appointment office, Haydn Acheson, the former flight operations president and vice president for Harmony Airways, was named one of the society's lay benchers last Thursday. Of course, this isn't the first time government has had dealing with ex-Harmony employees. Climate action secretariat head Graham Whitmarsh also worked for the now defunct airline - which was once run by former Campbell administration finance minister Gary Collins.

Last December, civil service head Jessica McDonald announced education deputy minister Emery Dosdall had been named British Columbia's new education and skills development trade commissioner. According to that announcement, Mr. Dosdall will be responsible for implemtning "government's strategic international and skills development initiatives for that Asia Pacific Gateway." And it looks like that means promoting the province's post-secondary education system in India. Because last week, the advanced education ministry quietly announced it was looking for a contractor to "gather relevant information about the education market in India, identify opportunities to expand BC's engagement with India and recommend the most effective ways to increase international education business with this market. The study must be sufficiently concrete and focused to be a springboard for an enhanced marketing effort in India." The following is a complete copy of the relevant portion of that request for proposal.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL:
Post Secondary International Education Committee
India Education Market Study

1. Background

The Post Secondary International Education Committee (PSIEC) is a collaborative organization within which the Ministry of Advanced Education (AVED), the post secondary system and other stakeholders coordinate marketing for the sector. The International Education Strategy includes a key goal of developing and implementing Marketing Strategies to promote international education as a significant economic sector.

International education includes a variety of activities, such as:
* Recruiting international students and faculty to BC as a study and/or work destination,
* Assisting BC students and educator to study and/or teach abroad,
* Developing partnerships between institutions on dual-degree programs and research, and
* Exporting BC developed off shore schools or branch campuses, curricula and other educational services and products to other countries.

The advanced education sector is committed to facilitating a coordinated approach to promoting and marketing international education, in a trade context, to overseas markets. As part of this process, PSIEC is commissioning market research studies to identify the best educational opportunities and develop the marketing tools to engage in priority and emerging education markets. Such research will be used to focus BC’s education marketing efforts and lead to the development of an overall marketing strategy.

In December 2007, a large group of representatives from BC‘s post-secondary institutions, education sector associations, provincial and federal government departments responsible for international education participated in an Education Marketing Roundtable to discuss and identify new emerging and priority markets. The selection of India as the new priority market was an outcome of the Roundtable. Mexico, Brazil, Gulf States and the United States, with a focus on certain regions, were selected as the new markets of interest.

2. Purpose of study

The purpose of the study is to gather relevant information about the education market in India, identify opportunities to expand BC’s engagement with India and recommend the most effective ways to increase international education business with this market. The study must be sufficiently concrete and focused to be a springboard for an enhanced marketing effort in India.

The study should present a discussion about the present level of engagement, by BC and other international institutions, and the potential demand. The study should provide a clear picture of potential educational opportunities in different regions throughout India. It should be noted that the Ministry of Economic Development has designated Chandigarh, Mumbai and Bangalore as priority markets; unless there are pressing reasons not to, the marketing focus for the advanced education sector should be consistent. Post secondary system has also expressed interest in Chennai, Cochin and New Delhi. The study must focus this market intelligence into an implementable market plan for India.

3. Description of study

The Indian Education Market Study will be used by the PSIEC and post-secondary institutions to focus effective initiatives to expand marketing, promotion and entry into India. The scope of this project should include essential ground work research and information about the following:

1. How can the PSIEC and BC post-secondary institutions recruit more international students from India? What are the needs and desires of Indian students who are planning to study abroad? How do Indian students make decisions about selecting location and post-secondary institutions as a study destination? What marketing and promotional activities and media will be most useful in recruitment?
2. How can BC post-secondary institutions evaluate and recognize Indian credentials? Are there differences between private and public degrees?
3. What are the best ways to develop partnerships with institutions in BC? How can BC post-secondary institutions establish new relations with Indian institutions? Given the varying levels of quality in Indian institutions, are there types of institutions that would not be appropriate as potential partners?
4. What are the benefits of establishing government to government relations, memoranda of understanding? If so, which levels of the Indian government should AVED pursue relations with?
5. What are the benefits of working with reputable third party agents? How can BC institutions partner with reputable third party agents?

The final report must include the following content:

* Executive Summary

* Opportunities across various international education activities
* Student Recruitment—estimated annual expenditure of Indian students (post-secondary level) and/or education delivered in BC/Canada to Indian students
* Transnational Delivery—education delivered by Canada to local students in India
* Advanced education—academic and/or vocational programs, research, faculty/student exchanges, co-operative education, internships, 2+ 2 programs,
off-shore schools, distance education

* Challenges, barriers, limitations, considerations for developing in this market, and how to overcome these

* Information on the Indian Education System (please include discussion about any regional differences, if any) necessary to focus our efforts appropriately

* Market Environment
* Annual expenditure by local institutions, governments, students on international education, estimate size of the market, if possible
* BC and/or Canadian market share/rank
* Market entry considerations
* Use of agents, institution/institution and/or government/government MOU
* Government regulations
* Cost/expenses
* Government regulations

* Competitive environment--international and national
* Branding and marketing issues
* Government support
* Other

* Future prospects (short term, i.e. within five years, and long term, i.e. within the next decade).

* Set of recommendations regarding an effective marketing strategy, the components of that strategy, and the key regions of India on which to focus this marketing effort.

* Appendix with all data tabulations upon which analysis is based

* Reading resources/useful internet sites

* Bibliography/references

* Signed consent forms of all participants who contributed quotations to the final document

4. List of roles and responsibilities

The consultant is responsible for:

* Consultation with the local and Canadian embassy, consulate or high commission, and other contacts in India
* Consultation with post-secondary institutions and sector organization staff as necessary, as well as appropriate authorities and specialists in the province
* Developing a research plan for PSIEC approval
* Data collection, analysis, assessment of its trustworthiness
* Determination of findings, conclusions and recommendations
* Report generation.

5. Project deliverables

* Final report including all elements identified above. Report should be provided in MS Word format (print and electronic copy).
* Presentation of results to AVED staff.

6. Project timelines

Consultant is advised to provide workplan and timeline with staged progress goals. The proposal should clearly indicate key deliverables, with indication of expected completion dates for each stage of the research project. A substantive portion of the report in at least draft form should be completed by August 8, 2008. The project should be completed in its entirety by Aug 29, 2008.

7. Project cost

Please provide a costing model and work schedule for the above deliverables.

On Saturday evening, provincial New Democrat leader Carole James and president Jeff Fox paid tribute to the party's top one hundred donors over the past decade. But just five past and present legislators were among the top 25 contributors - Jenny Kwan, Dale Lovick, Jan Pullinger, Joy MacPhail and Bruce Ralston. So perhaps New Democrat MLAs should have joined the Liberals in taking last year's 29 percent pay increase?

Former Vancouver Canucks and Grizzlies owner Arthur Griffiths is considering running for the provincial Liberals in the next election, Public Eye has exclusively learned. In an interview, Mr. Griffiths confirmed the news. But he wasn't prepared to elaborate on the reasons why he might make a bid for elected office. "I'm just going to reserve that for the right time," he said. "But I think I need to really just decide in due course what direction I'm going to take. But I'm certainly considering it. I've actually been approached many times over the years. But the timing might be right." Mr. Griffiths said he'll be making a decision about his political future "by the end of the month" at the latest. He declined to say which riding he's thinking about running in. Mr. Griffiths also served as chairman of the Vancouver/Whistler 2010 Bid Corp.

Earlier, we reported on Michelle Stewart's sudden departure from the children and youth representative's office to reprise her role as the ministry of health's communications director. But who's going to replace her? Well, yesterday, Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond told her staff Marg LeGuilloux had been named her new communications director.

Premier Gordon Campbell may have given provincial Liberal bankrollers a sneak preview of some of his draft picks for the next election. While attending a fundraiser at Bear Mountain Resort developer Len Barrie's residence, the premier introduced Colwood Mayor Jody Twa and Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP partner Clark Roberts to the audience - suggesting the two might be party candidates in the next election.

Asked about the matter, Mayor Twa - who would presumably run in the proposed riding of Juan de Fuca - said, "I'll probably be able to speak more in the future. But it's not a good time for me to answer those questions." Meanwhile, in an interview last month, Mr. Roberts - the general counsel for the Liberal caucus when they were in opposition - told Public Eye he's "been asked a number of times whether I'm interested" - in the Saanich South nomination - "But no decision has been made."

Controversial Victoria developer and former National Hockey League player Len Barrie had a $10,000 per plate fundraiser for the provincial Liberals at his residence on April 29, Public Eye has exclusively learned. The fundraiser, attended by Premier Gordon Campbell, has raised the ire of activists who have been protesting the environmental impact of Mr. Barrie's Bear Mountain Resort - which they say is contributing to urban sprawl. In an interview, Order of Canada recipient Vicky Husband, a former Sierra Club of Canada director, said she's "deeply concerned by the apparently close relationship between the premier of this province with Len Barrie and Bear Mountain" - especially given the Campbell administration's apparent commitment to championing environmental concerns.

The premier's office didn't respond to a request for comment. And Bear Mountain declined to address concerns about their relationship with the Liberals. In an interview with Public Eye, spokesperson Trisha Lees, stated, "You're right. There was a party. It was last Tuesday night. And that's the right amount per plate. Although, I think, for some people it was a couple for $10,000."

But, that being said, Ms. Lees added, "It was a group of local business folks that organized the fundraising event for the provincial Liberals and Len provided his home as the venue. So it wasn't Len himself hosting the event." And, therefore, "it was not related to Bear Mountain itself."

Meanwhile, Liberal communications director Chad Pederson refused to provided details about the fundraiser, except to state, "What I can say is, yes, we did hold an event on (Vancouver Island) last week. But any events and contributions that we receive are declared in our year-end filings - and that is where they'll appear." And publican Matt MacNeil, who helped organize the fundraiser, also declined comment.

The provincial government is looking for a computer program that can be "easily customized" to create a "central repository from which local governments can identify their annual community energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions." This, according to a document quietly posted on BC Bid earlier today. The request for information states the system "will be an important tool" in helping municipalities make their own operations carbon neutral by 2012. The following is a complete copy of the relevant portions of that bid document.

1 Summary

The Ministry of Environment provides leadership in environmental management through innovative legislation and programs, compliance activities and shared stewardship initiatives. The mandate of
the Ministry is to protect human health and safety, and maintain and restore the diversity of native species, ecosystems and habitats. Through partnerships across government, and with First Nations, the private sector and communities, the Ministry works to enhance the protection and stewardship of water and air resources, advance sustainable use of environmental resources, and provide exceptional outdoor park and wildlife services and opportunities.

The Ministry's Environmental Quality Branch develops legislation and policies, and works with regional staff to protect air quality, and to address municipal liquid and solid waste. The Branch leads the development and management of industry product-stewardship programs. It sets standards for, and does monitoring and reporting for, ambient air and water (surface and ground water) quality.

The Branch is a co-leader within the B.C. government in developing and implementing measures to address global climate change. The Branch resides within the Ministry's Environmental Protection Division.

The Ministry intends to acquire a Community Energy and Emissions Inventory System to store and analyze energy consumption and related emissions data pertaining to 187 communities throughout British Columbia. The CEEI data, from the transportation, buildings, and solid waste sectors is available from a number of public and private data providers (e.g., BC Hydro; Insurance Corporation of BC; Recycling Council of BC, etc.). The System will:

* serve as a central repository from which local governments can identify their annual community energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions;
* uniformly calculate and deliver community baseline energy consumption and GHG emission information to serve the needs of the provincial and local governments;
* provide a centralized point of enquiry for all who require annual inventory reports thus reducing demand for reports directly from individual data providers; and
* deliver province-wide aggregated summary reporting for intercommunity analysis and enable future linkage to other government inventory systems.

The purpose of this Request for Information is to obtain input from vendors, organizations and/or individuals to help the Ministry determine if there are any suitable Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) systems, off-the-shelf (OTS) systems or pre-built custom systems available for sale that can be easily customized for its contemplated CEEI System. An easy-to-use Response template is included in this RFI for completion by Respondents.

2 Background

The Province has introduced legislation, the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Act, to put into law the most aggressive greenhouse gas reduction targets in North America and make its carbon neutral government commitment legally binding. The Act will put into law British Columbia's target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by at least 33 per cent below 2007 levels by 2020. It also requires that realistic, economically viable interim targets for 2012 and 2016 be set by the end of 2008, and further establishes an emission reduction target of 80 per cent below 2007 levels by 2050.

In addition, the Province, the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) and signatory local governments in BC have signed the British Columbia Climate Action Charter to work collaboratively to positively affect climate change. Through the Charter, local governments commit to making their own operations carbon neutral by 2012. The Province committed to making its own operations carbon neutral by 2010.

The parties to the Charter share the common goals of:
a. fostering co-operative inter-governmental relations;
b. aiming to measure then reduce GHG emissions, including both their own and those created by others;
c. removing legislative, regulatory, policy, or other barriers to taking action on climate
d. change;
e. implementing programs, policies, or legislative actions, within their respective jurisdictions, that facilitate reduced GHG emissions, where appropriate;
f. encouraging communities that are complete and compact and socially responsive; and
g. encouraging infrastructure and a built environment that supports the economic and social needs of the community while minimizing its environmental impact.

The CEEI System will be an important tool in helping the Charter's signatories achieve their energy and GHG reduction targets.

Earlier, we posted a comprehensive analysis of ministry of children and family development's progress in achieving the Hughes Review's recommendations. But when is children and youth representative Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond going to release her own such analysis - following up on the report she released in November? Well, a spokesperson for the representative's office informed us via email, "We have suggested to the Select Standing Committee that we could present this in June however it is up to the SSC to decide on the agenda."

Vision, mission and values statements are a commonality at most private and public sector organizations. But does anyone really pay attention to them? Well, it seems the Northern Health Authority seems to think so. Because, between May 27 to July 10, staff have been invited to participate in an internal consultation process to help the authority update those statements. The reason: well, evidentally, a recent survey showed employees didn't connect with them. Quick, dial 911! The following is a complete copy of the authority's current vision, mission and values statement.

The Vision of Northern Health is to be a model of excellence in rural health care.

The Mission of Northern Health is as follows: Northern Health will build and strengthen the health of communities, relationships, and all people in Northern British Columbia.

Values: Northern Health is committed to improving the health of all the people of Northern British Columbia.

This will be achieved through:

* A spirit of collaboration and
* Strengthening of communities.

It will be done with:

* Honesty and integrity
* Accountable decision making, and
* A culture of respect.

There will be a commitment to:

* Learning and innovation, and
* Continuous improvement.

Earlier, we reported on the firing of Louise Comeau, the climate action secretariat's public outreach and strategic engagement director. And now we're hearing talk climate policy executive director Robert Joshi, who is responsible for leading the government's consulation efforts with the oil and gas industry, may be departing. So we rang Mr. Joshi earlier this week to ask him about those rumours. The response: "Oh, you should forward any inquries to David Haslam" - the secretariat's communications manager. "Do you have his number?" Of course we do. But referring questions to Mr. Haslam is, in our experience, tantamount to referring questions rocks, sticks and other non-responsive objects. And we said as much - although in not to so many words - to Mr. Joshi. But this didn't seem to trouble him. Because he once again told us, "You should forward inquiries to him." Not surprisingly, the secretariat didn't respond to questions about the matter forwarded to their office.

Earlier, we reported Premier Gordon Campbell was in attendance when former BC Cancer Foundation president and chief executive officer Mary McNeil announced she would be running for the provincial Liberal nomination in Vancouver-False Creek. And it seems Vancouver-Langara nomination candidate Moira Stilwell, the head of nuclear medicine at Saint Paul’s and Surrey Memorial hospitals, is also getting some attention from the Liberal leader. She's invited supporters to attend a "tea and politics" event with Premier Campbell this coming Saturday between 3:30 and 5:30 at the Marpole-Oakridge Community Centre.

It's been two years since Ted Hughes released his independent review of British Columbia's child protection system. And it's been five months since children and youth representative Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond reported she found "too little evidence" within the ministry "of a coordinated effort to implement numerous Hughes recommendations where its leadership has been required." But, despite her scolding, it appears that implementation effort is still lagging. This, according to a comprehensive analysis prepared by Public Eye.

Earlier this month, the ministry released its operational plan for 2007-2012. And, embedded in that plan, is children and family development's own assessment of its progress in achieving the Hughes Review's recommendations. That assessment, when compared with Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report, shows the ministry has made some headway since November. For example, children and family development has now confirmed external evaluation will be a part of the ministry's quality assurance activities. This, despite the fact the children and youth representative initially reported such evaluations weren't even being considered. And the ministry has laid out some plans for a program that will report on the results it achieves for children in care and children at risk.

But, on many other recommendations, our analysis suggests the children and family development hasn't made much progress. The ministry, for example, maintains it's using data to "develop, deliver and review delivery" of government programs. But, in her most recent report, Ms. Turpel-Lafond states children and family development "cannot speak with specificity or confidence about the outcomes achieved in relation to children it is serving or in its care."

And the ministry also appears to have moved backwards in developing a common tool to review the deaths or serious injuries of children. Because, in that same report, the children and youth representative alleges the tool the ministry has developed "does not demonstrate enough detail to serve the interests of public accountability and continuous organizational learning."

Perhaps even more troubling, though, is the fact the ministry seems to have determined it doesn't need to heed or has already met at least five of the Hughes Review's recommendations (49, 50, 53, 57 and 61) - despite contrary opinions from the children and youth representative. For example, the ministry continues to insist its privacy policy documents are easily useable by employees - even though Ms. Turpel-Lafond mentions children and family development's "revised Confidentiality and Disclosure of Information Guide does not meet the spirit and intent of the recommendation."

Asked for comment, New Democrat children and family development critic Nicholas Simons said, "It seems like the Ministry has a problem with priorities. And the safety of children seems to come pretty far down in their list. It's arrogance that doesn't let them acknowledge and learn from their failures - which are too numerous to mention. When will they figure out that they need to have a vision that isn't based on glossy public relations brochures but on the needs of children?"

The following is a complete copy of our analysis, which focuses on those recommendations assessed by Ms. Turpel-Lafond as either "planning underway," "limited or no progress" or "insufficient information provided." Recommendations directed at government agencies other than the ministry have been excluded from the analysis.

***

Planning underway

Recommendation 12: That the provincial and federal governments, in collaboration with Aboriginal communities, begin work towards fulfillment of the commitments of the Kelowna Accord by assessing the health, economic and social needs of Aboriginal communities, including urban, off-reserve populations.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states "most of the activities associated with this recommendation are under development." And that doesn't seem to have changed over the past five months. According to the ministry's operation plan, the Campbell administration has implemented a number of measures to support the goals of the Kelowna Accord. But all of them occurred before the release of Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report on November 26. The following is a list of those measures and the date they were implemented.

* The First Nations Summit on Aboriginal Health, held in Vancouver in November 2007, reaffirmed commitments to close the health gap between Aboriginal people and other Canadians by 2015. (There is no record of a First Nations Summit on Aboriginal Health being held in November 2007. However, the government did reaffirm its commitment to close the health gap between aboriginal people and other Canadians at the First Nations Health Forum, held in Vancouver in April 2007).

* A tripartite First Nations Health Plan has been agreed upon by the First Nations Council, BC and Canada. (November 27, 2006)

* BC has launched the Aboriginal Housing Initiative and provided over $50 million for new housing projects. (March 2, 2007)

* BC, Canada and First Nations representatives agreed upon the First Nations Education Jurisdiction Agreement. (July 5, 2006)

* Legislation has been passed federally and provincially to recognize First Nations jurisdiction over on-reserve schools. (November 22, 2007)

* BC launched a $65 million Aboriginal post-secondary education strategy in 2007. (April 24, 2007)

Recommendation 20:: That responsibilities be transferred to regions and to Aboriginal authorities once they have demonstrated their ability to meet key performance targets.

The ministry had already established two interim aboriginal authorities when Ms. Turpel-Lafond released her report. And a third, according to children and family development's operational plan, "is close to being established." Moreover, the plan states "a proposal for legislation to establish permanent Aboriginal Authorities responsible for service delivery is under consideration by government and First Nations/Aboriginal leadership." But that legislation, which was scheduled to be introduced but then withdrawn on Wednesday by the Campbell administration, was heavily criticized by native leaders.

Recommendation 31: That the Ministry adopt a common review tool to guide the conduct of case reviews across all program areas that are relevant to the life of a child who has died or been seriously injured.

The ministry's operational plan states, "Case review processes for all MCFD program areas have been reviewed and an Integrated Case Review Framework (2008) has been introduced." But Ms. Turpel-Lafond's most recent report - Amanda, Savannah, Rowen and Serena: From Loss to Learning - mentions the children and youth representative is "of the respectful view that the new framework does not demonstrate enough detail to serve the interests of public accountability and continuous organizational learning, and is not fully responsive to Mr. Hughes' recommendations in this area. It is quite possibly a step backward in terms of defining when to conduct a review."

Recommendation 33: That the Ministry undertake reviews of critical injuries and deaths of children receiving services from any of its program areas.

Legislation and policy requires critical injuries and facilities to be reported and review. But Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report notes, "According to the latest posted audit results for the child welfare area, compliance is just under 50 per cent of incidents identified from case files of children and youth receiving services. Compliance with reporting in the other program areas is less clear, or not clear at all, in the absence of audits of compliance." The ministry's operational plan doesn't speak to this concern. Although the government recently announced Oracle Corporation Canada. Inc. has been awarded a $17.9 million contact to develop a new integrated case management system for children and family development workers - presumably addressing Ms. Turpel-Lafond's criticism that, "the MCFD electronic case management systems are not linked."

Recommendation 34: That the Ministry rename its internal injury and death reviews and clarify the scope of each.

The ministry's operational plan reports, "The Integrated Case Review Framework" - which has been criticized by Ms. Turpel-Lafond - "outlines the scope of reviews. Within the framework, the Deputy Director's Review has been renamed the Integrated File Review and the Director's Case Review has been renamed the Integrated Comprehensive Review."

Recommendation 40: That the Ministry provide required orientation, training, and mentoring for practice analysts who will conduct reviews; and maintain a list of qualified reviewers.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "there is no evidence of a work plan for the training and mentoring of the staff who will conduct reviews (practice analysts and or consultants)." Nor is there any evidence of such a plan in the ministry's operational plan.

Recommendation 48: That the Child, Family and Community Services Act, which sets out powers and duties of the provincial Director be amended to include the power to produce reports of internal child death reviews and to state that although the main purposes of the report is learning, public accountability is a purpose of these reports.

The ministry's operational plan states the Child, Family and Community Service Act was "amended in 2007 to address this recommendation." But that happened in March - before Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report was released. And, in that report, the children and youth representative seems to suggest that legislative amendment wasn't enough. According to Ms. Turpel-Lafond, "the draft Proposed Case Review Model indicates that MCFD is reviewing options to facilitate the public release of fatality and critical injury reviews, and will make a decision shortly as to which method balances the needs to maintain the child's privacy with the need to be publicly accountable." The ministry doesn't provide any indication of what that decision may have be - if, indeed, it has taken place.

Recommendation 51: That in its annual reports, the Ministry of Children and Family Development provide a statistical report on its reviews of deaths and critical incidents, as well as the recommendations that resulted from those reviews, and a progress report on their implementation.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "MCFD has not placed in its annual reports a statistical report on its reviews of deaths and critical injuries, or the recommendations, or the status of the recommendations arising from them." But the ministry's operational plan indicates, "Beginning in 2008, summaries of all case review reports including reviews pertaining to critical incidents and deaths will be posted on the MCFD web site semi-annually."

***

Limited or no progress

Recommendation 14: That the provincial government work with Canada to clarify their respective funding responsibilities, remove jurisdictional obstacles facing Aboriginal child welfare agencies, and replace Directive 20-1 with a new approach that is more supportive of measures that protect the integrity of the family.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "MCFD indicates that it expects to develop a new model for federal funding, in collaboration with First Nations leadership, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and service agencies. Verbal updates place implementation of this item in 2009." And the ministry's operational plan affirms, "MCFD is working with First Nations leadership, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and service agencies on the framework for a new model for federal funding inclusive of prevention services." No further progress is mentioned. Although, on January 25, Premier Gordon Campbell made a commitment to support Jordan's Principle, whereby "the government first contacted pays for a child's services and settles the accounts later."

Recommendation 18: That the Ministry and community representatives jointly develop a plan for decentralization, beginning with a set of principles that will guide the process, a clear statement of expected results, and a course of action to achieve those results.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "MCFD has created only preliminary plans for decentralization over the next 18 months." And it seems work on achieivng this recommendation continues. The ministry's operational plan reports children and family development has "articulated goals, principles and expected outcomes" for decentralization with "community representatives and aboriginal leaders." And its regional executives are "developing process with community representatives for continued decentralization."

Recommendation 21: That the Ministry retain at its headquarters, the authority it needs to set and ensure compliance with provincial standards and to meet its responsibility for public accountability.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond expressed concern about the ministry's progress in achieving this recommendation, despite its importance. And a reading of the children and family development's operational plan reveals little appears to have been done to ally those concerns. The ministry has hired "an Integrated Quality Assurance ADM...to ensure an integrated quality assurance lens is applied to all programs and to share learning across programs in MCFD." But the process by which that post was filled is suspect. Moreover, the ministry's claim that it's meeting its "responsibility for public accountability" by reporting out "on quality assurance activities through MCFD's web site and service plan" is especially troubling, given the flaws in that annual document.

Recommendation 22: The Ministry should examine its management structure to find ways to realign roles and responsibilities in ways that will clarify lines of authority and facilitate collaboration across program areas and between regions and the central office.

The ministry's operational plan states its "provincial office has been restructured to facilitated collaboration across program areas, both regionally and provincially." And the plan also reports "an Integrated Policy and Legislation team has been establishment...to pursue integration of policy and legislation." But that team was established in June 2006 - well before the children and youth representative released her report. And it's questionable whether the ministry's restructuring initiatives have actually clarified lines of authority and facilitated collaboration at children and family development.

Recommendation 23: The Ministry should establish a comprehensive set of measures to determine the real and long-term impacts of its programs and services on children, youth and their families and then monitor, track and report on children, youth and their families and then monitor, track and report on these measures for a period of time.

The ministry's operational plan states children and family development "publicly reports on 17 performance measures." That includes the six in its service plan, the six posted on its Website and the five scheduled to be included in its forthcoming service plan annual report - scheduled for release in June. The ministry also reports it will also be "participating in the Third Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect." But that's not much of an accomplishment since British Columbia participated in the first two studies. Moreover, the ministry states it's participating "with other Canadian jursidictions in the National Outcomes Measures committee which is developing national child welfare outcome indicators." That's a laudable enterprise, given that the Hughes Review suggested making children and family development's service plan measures "consistent with National Outcomes measures." But it's an enterprise the ministry had embarked on prior to the release of Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report.

Recommendation 25: Once collected and analyzed, data must be used as a tool to support operation and management decision making and program evaluation and policy development.

The ministry's operational plan states, "As data is available it is used to develop, deliver and review delivery of MCFD programs and services." But in her most recent report, the children and youth representative alleges her investigation "found an inability on the part of the Ministry to learn from valuable lessons" from child deaths. Moreover, Ms. Turpel-Lafond further reports children and family development "cannot speak with specificity or confidence about the outcomes achieved in relation to children it is serving or in its care."

Recommendation 26: The Ministry must devote sufficient resources to develop and maintain a strong central quality assurance function at headquarters, in the regions, and in Aboriginal agencies. In consultation with the regions and Aboriginal agencies, headquarters must set provincial standards, provide training, support and expertise; and monitor results.

In her report, Ms. Turpel-Lafond states the ministry has "draft plans for the development of an integrated quality assurance system by December 2008." But, because that system hasn't been developed, the children and youth representative assessed the ministry as having "limited or no progress" in achieving Recommendation 26. And the ministry's operational plan present no evidence suggesting the children and youth representative would change that assessment today. Although children and family development has hired an "ADM of Integrated Quality Assurance" to review and strength "quality assurance processes across program areas."

Recommendation 28: The Ministry needs a regular, coordinated program of reporting on its activities and results achieved for children in care and children at risk.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "There is significantly more work necessary to address Recommendation 28 to ensure that reporting is outcomes-focused, multi-dimensional and useful." And, according to the ministry's operational plan, at least some of that work seems to be underway. The plan reports "The 2007 child fatality case review summary report will be posted in spring 2008. Beginning in 2008, summaries of all case review reports including reviews pertaining to critical incidents and deaths will be posted on the MCFD web site semi-annually." Moreover, "MCDF is developing a means of measuring child in care outcome achievement in health, education and other significant development areas through work with the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance and the Representative for Children and Youth, and the means of reporting these measures."

Recommendation 29: That the Ministry finalize, with a new sense of urgency, its complaint resolution process, ensuring that the process is timely, accessible, and simple; that it takes a problem-solving, rather than confrontational approach; and that it is respectful and responsive to the complainant; and that it involves the parties in resolving the issue.

Despite the Hughes Review's suggestion that this recommendation be pursued "with a new sense of urgency," the children and youth representative found the "effectiveness of the (complaint resolution) processes" varies by region. The ministry's operational plan gives no indication this has changed. Nor does it include any mention of the ministry ensuring its complaint resolution process is timely, simple, problem-solving oriented and respectful to the complainant. Although the plan does state works is underway to establish a "new Advocacy Unit in the Integrated Quality Assurance Team (that) will assist in increasing child, youth and family access to the complaints process and will enhance opportunities for the voices of children and youth to be heard in the process."

Recommendation 30: That the Ministry develop processes for resolving complaints by Aboriginal children, youth and families that incorporate and respect traditional cultural values and approaches to conflict resolution.

The ministry's operational plan states ministry agreements with delegated aboriginal agencies require them to have a complaint resolution process in place that respects "traditional culture, values and approaches to conflict resolution." And plan adds the "MCFD wide Complaints Resolution Process and the Provincial Complaints Resolution Policy also speak to the need to incorporate cultural approaches to resolving disputes with Aboriginal children, youth and families." But such measures were in place prior to Ms. Turpel-Lafond assessing the ministry as having achieved "limited or no progress" in responding this recommendation. Although children and family development is presently working to establish a "new Advocacy United in the Integrated Quality Assurance Team" to "support cultural approaches in increasing Aboriginal children, youth and family access to the complaints process."

Recommendation 37: That the Ministry review injuries and deaths not only of children who were receiving Ministry services at the time of the incident, but also of children who had received Ministry services during the 12 months preceding, and in exceptional circumstances, going back even further.

The ministry's operational plan states this recommendation is "consistent with current practice for services received under the Child, Family and Community Service Act." Indeed, Ms. Turpel-Lafond acknowledges "regulation or policy in all program areas requires the reporting of critical injuries and fatalities of children in care and or in receipt of services in the preceding twelve months." But she states, "There do not appear to be clear criteria for the other program areas such as youth justice or child and youth mental health." Nor is there any "information regarding new policy for the review of children who died or were injured beyond the preceding twelve months."

Recommendation 41: That the Ministry make use of multidisciplinary teams in its child injury and death review process.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "There appears to be no progress regarding this recommendation other than the discussion of the use of a multidisciplinary team in the Proposed Case Review Model." Indeed, the ministry's operational plan doesn't give any further assurance concerning the ministry's use of multidisciplinary teams. Although the plan reports, "MCFD is considering whether a need exists for another multi-disciplinary team in the context of a review of requirements for an integrated quality assurance system."

Recommendation 42: That government provide sufficient funding, staffing and training to support its newer approaches to child protection work.

The operational plan boasts "almost 200 new front-line workers were added in 2006/07, and MCFD will fill another 60 full-time equivalent positions in the coming year." And it reports, "In fiscal 2006/07, over 700 employees received training through conferences and one and two day workshop child protection including family development response, family group conferencing and mediation sessions." But Ms. Turpel-Lafond states "it is unknown whether" that training is "more effective than what existed prior to the Hughes Review." Moreover, the government's decision to hire "approximately 300 regular staff, mostly front-line social and mental health workers" was announced a year before the children and youth representative released her report.

Recommendation 43: That an external evaluation of all programs under the service transformation initiative, beginning with kith and kin agreements, be undertaken both during the implementation phase and then later, on an ongoing basis.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "Our understanding is that external evaluations are not being considered, so Recommendation 43 is assessed at 'limited or no progress.' But it seems that has changed. Because the ministry's operational plan reports, "External evaluation as a component of MCFD's quality assurance activities has been confirmed and as a result Kith and Kin and other initiatives will be evaluated in 2008/09."

Recommendation 44: That program evaluation become a routine part of the Ministry's management role, to be carried out in consultation with the regions and with Aboriginal authorities, once established.

The ministry's operational plan states, "Program evaluation will be part of integrated quality assurance development." Indeed, Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report mentions, "MCFD's draft plans identify several program areas that are slated for internal review." However, she notes "these activities appear to be in the preliminary stages of development leading to a 'limited or no progress' rating. It is also not known what methodology will be used to conduct these reviews."

Recommendation 45: That government provide training for current social workers and recruit individuals with necessary mediation and counselling skills to support the services transformation initiative.

The ministry's operational plan states, "Implementation of collaborative practice initiatives including family group conferencing and mediation is well underway. Selection of mediators is based on skills and other qualifications and is done in consultation with the Dispute Resolution Office in the Ministry of the Attorney General. Social worker orientation/ training are specific to their role in family group conferencing and mediation." Such processes were in place prior to the release of Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report.

Recommendation 49: That the Child, Family and Community Services Act be amended to allow the provincial Director to make information sharing agreements with other agencies for the purpose of multidisciplinary child death reviews.

The ministry's operational plan suggests children and family development will not be making such an amendment because, "Privacy experts consulted on this topic advised that such agreements are best managed outside of a statutory framework."

Recommendation 50: That the Child, Family and Community Services Act be amended to require the provincial Director to give, on a confidential basis, a complete copy of the final child death review report to all agencies that participated in the multi-disciplinary child death review team.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "It has not been possible to determine whether this is under adctive consideration as MCFD has not incorporated a multidisciplinary approach to case reviews." And, five months later, that approach still hasn't been incorporated. Although the ministry's operational plan states, "The Director already has discretion to provide such information under the CFCSA and further amendment is not necessary."

Recommendation 53: That if the death of a child who was in care or known to the Ministry has already been disclosed by police, a court or the Coroner, the Ministry be permitted by the Child, Family and Community Service Act to disclose the child's name and relationship to the Ministry and the contents of the Ministry's case review, to the extent necessary for accountability but without unreasonable invasion of privacy.

The ministry's operational states, "Amendments to the CFCSA in Spring 2007 address this recommendation." And yet, Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report - which was released after those amendments were introduced - specifically mentions, "There is as yet no proposed amendment to the Child, Family and Community Service Act to address this recommendation."

Recommendation 57:: That the Ministry of Children and Family Development, in collecting linked data from other public bodies for the purpose of decision making about individuals, ensure that the absolute minimum information is collected and that each linking is necessary to enable the Director to deliver mandated services, and that the highest privacy standards are met.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report notes, "MCFD indicates that its current Confidentiality and Disclosure of Information Guide" - dated November 2007 "meets the standards referenced in Recommendation 57." But, according to the children and youth representative, that document "does not appear to address the recommendation." And the ministry's operational plan - which states "existing policy and practice limit the use of personal information and establish high standards of privacy and security" - doesn't give any indication children and family development has made progress in achieving this recommendation.

Recommendation 61: That the Ministry of Children and Family Development review its privacy policy documents to ensure that they are current, accurate and easily useable by employees.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states the ministry's "revised Confidentiality and Disclosure of Information Guide does not meet the spirit and intent of the recommendation, which speaks to the need for privacy policy documents that present information in an easily comprehensible format for field staff." But, in its operational plan, children and family development appears to maintain that it does.

Recommendation 62: That the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act be amended to incorporate the “unreasonable invasion of privacy” test into s33.2, which authorizes public disclosure of personal information under certain conditions.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states, "Amendments to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act introduced in the last legislative session are said to address Recommendation 62, in part. The amendment does not appear to substantially address the recommendation." Five months later, the ministry's operational plan mentions, "Amendments to the FOIPPA are under consideration by the Ministry of Labour and Citizens Services" - although no specifics are given.

Insufficient information provided

Recommendation 15: That the provincial and federal governments provide Aboriginal agencies with: modern information technology and help them acquire appropriate office management systems and skills; the same training opportunities as are offered to Ministry staff, as well as specialized training directed at their particular needs; and support during a crisis from an emergency response team.

Ms. Turpel-Lafond's report states "it is difficult to tell from available information whether this recommendation has been adequately addressed." But the ministry's operational plan says, "In February 2006" - which was prior to the release of the Hughes Review on April 7, 2006 - "delegated Aboriginal agencies received enhanced access to MCFD’s management information system." And that their staff "receive training equivalent to that of MCFD staff." Moreover, the plan states "During a crisis, rapid response plans are developed collaboratively between MCFD and Aboriginal agencies."

Recommendation 19:: That government commit itself to decentralization, which means supporting it with adequate resources, time, a dedicated team, and budget stability.

The ministry's operational plan states "this commitment to decentralization is in place." For example, according to the plan, "Regional Executive Directors have joined MCFD leadership council and provincial office has been restructured to support further involvement in planning and decision-making." And a "Regional Council Support Team has been established at the provincial office to support regionalization and to guide implementation across program areas." But, five months ago, Ms. Turpel-Lafond said such changes didn't provide her with "sufficient information to permit an assessment of the commitment and resources dedicated to decentralization." Although the ministry, which has increased regional budgets over the past three years, reports it does have "specific budget support for Planning Committees and Interim Authorities."

Recommendation 60: That the Ministry of Children and Family Development review the statutes that govern it to ensure that there are no statutory barriers to disclosure of information among program areas.

The children and youth representative's report states, "no source documents were provided to permit an assessment of the recommendation or as evidence of efforts" to address information barriers since 2006 - when the ministry last conducted such a review. The ministry's operational plan makes no mention of a new review being undertaken. But it does state, "MCFD is a participant in a cross government initiative being led by the Government Chief Information Officer intended to 'enable the right information, to the right people, at the right time, for the right purpose.'"

Later this month, the Canadian Association of Journalists will announce the winner of its annual Code of Silence Award - recognizing the most secretive government department in Canada. And, this year, 24 hours, The Tyee and Public Eye are proud to nominate British Columbia's climate action secretariat for that award.

We know the competition is going to be tough. After all, since taking office, the Harper administration has been repeatedly criticized as "unnecessarily secretive." And those criticisms continued in 2007.

But the Campbell administration was elected in 2001 with the promise of running the most open and accountable government in the country. And nowhere has the breaking of that promise been more apparent than at the climate action secretariat - which reports directly to the premier's office and is responsible for achieving the province's greenhouse gas reduction targets.

Indeed, according to The Vancouver Sun's Vaughn Palmer "no quality has been more lacking in the Campbell approach to fighting climate change" than transparency. Let us count the ways:

* The government has refused to say whether the secretariat's head - Graham Whitmarsh - has any environmental credentials. But Internet and newspaper database searches show no reference to Mr. Whitmarsh being involved in any carbon trading or climate action work. Although, according to news release and trade publications, the ex-British submariner has extensive experience in the airline information technology and aerospace industries. And he also worked at Harmony Airways - the now defunct airline once run by former Campbell administration finance minister Gary Collins.

* Cabinet's climate action committee boasts it has had at least 177 presentations from scientists, public servants, environmental organizations, academics and industry sectors. The government has refused to reveal the contents of those presentations. Although, Premier Gordon Campbell did say in November he was "surprised" his administration hadn't yet released a list identifying those stakeholders. But, 161 days later, the press gallery is still waiting for that list - despite reminding the premier of his earlier statement.

* Meetings of the provincial government's climate action team - which will be making recommendations on how the Liberals can meet their greenhouse gas reduction targets - are happening behind closed doors. And the government has been reluctant to open them. On December 16, 2007 - a freedom of information request was filed for minutes from the team's first meeting - which had occurred two days earlier. The legal deadline for responding to that request was January 31, 2008. But the government didn't release the two-pages of meeting minutes until March 20.

* One of British Columbia's leading business ethicists has said measures should be taken to prevent a possible perceived conflict of interest between Cheryl Slusarchuk, the climate action team's chair, and former Campbell administration deputy minister Andrew Wilkinson. The reason: Mr. Wilkinson, who works as a partner at the same law firm as Ms. Slusarchuk, recently registered to lobby the government on behalf of Covanta Energy Corp. - an American renewable energy company that could conceivably be affected by the team's recommendations. The government hasn't responded to repeated requests for comment regarding the issue.

* Opposition environment critic Shane Simpson says the New Democrats "haven’t seen any information on where the Campbell government has gotten their climate change figures from, despite repeated requests through FOI - which, of course, come back blank or ‘no records’."

* The government has held sectoral symposiums to discuss greenhouse gas emission strategies with stakeholders in the forestry, mining, energy, waste and landfills and agriculture industries. But those symposiums have also happened behind closed doors.

* The government has repeatedly refused to say why it fired Louise Comeau, one of the premier's key climate action advisors, after just eight months on the job. Ms. Comeau, the climate action secretariat's public outreach and strategic engagement director, was the former president of the Sierra Club of Canada and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities' sustainable communities and environmental policy advisor.

* In April 2007, The Vancouver Sun's Miro Cernetig reported Premier Campbell "signed-off on a little-noticed changed to the Freedom of Information Act, putting everything" cabinet climate action committee members "discuss under an official cone of silence." At the time, information and privacy commissioner David Loukidelis said it was "the first time I can remember that we weren't consulted on an amendment of the FOI Act."

* In October, Mr. Palmer reported premier's office had "rebuffed several attempts to get" basic information about the secretariat. And the secretariat's communications office hadn't been any more helpful, failing "to respond to requests going back to the beginning of summer." Indeed, it was the finance ministry that finally provided Mr. Palmer with that information - including the secretriat's spending and staff levels. Although specifics about its budget haven't been forthcoming. In a subsequent column, Mr. Palmer noted the climate action secretariat - which had an initial budget of $4 million for fiscal 2007/08 - would be receiving an additional $46 million over three years, as well as $62 million in contingency funding. But the initiatives which will be bankrolled by that contingency fund haven't been determined, prompting Mr. Palmer to wonder "if the B.C. Liberals could possibly have been more vague about their plans for disposing" of those monies.

* The government recently introduced legislation that will make British Columbia the "first province to legislate cap and trade." But that legislation, according to Mr. Palmer, leaves citizens "almost completely in the dark about what kind of carbon trading system the Liberals are contemplating and how it would work." Indeed, the bill "contains almost nothing in the way of specifics. No word on what the caps will be, to whom they will apply or how. No indication which sectors of the economy will be covered, what level of emissions will bring companies into the system, how the allowances will be allocated, what offsetting credits will qualify, what is tradable and what is not." Instead, cabinet will answer those questions via regulation, "using the fill-in-the-blank powers under Bill 18. By then it will be too late for British Columbia to do more than live with a backroom fait accompli."

* In January, Mr. Palmer reported, "member of the premier's own caucus have begun to complain quietly (and not so quietly) about being left out of the loop" on the government's action plan. After all, at the time, the MLAs had "not yet been granted a proper briefing on emissions trading, carbon taxes and other aspects of the plan."

We could go on. But let's let the government have the final word...or lack thereof. Because the secretariat's two senior communication staffers - David Haslam and Kirk Smith - didn't respond to a request for comment.

Earlier, The Globe and Mail's Wendy Stueck reported the mining industry was "totally caught off guard" by the provincial government's decision to close the door on uranium mining. This, according to the Association for Mineral Exploration of British Columbia president Dan Jepsen. And Boss Power Inc. president Dan Stone - whose company owns the controversial Blizzard Uranium Claim - also expressed his displeasure. But Messers. Stone - who recently hired Cindy Burton to lobby the provincial government on behalf of his firm - and Jepsen aren't isn't the only ones concerned about the ban.

In a letter addressed to Premier Gordon Campbell, former British Columbia Geological Survey member B. Neil Church writes, "We feel that the government has been ill-informed in deciding to return to the uranium moratorium. The global investment community will remember the government freeze on development of the Windy-Craggy deposit in the 70’s and many other major and minor projects that resulted in the ‘ABC’ mantra (Anywhere but British Columbia). As an active member of the of the local mining-exploration community, I urge you and your government not to damage or seriously alter the mineral investment climate in British Colombia, especially at this time when metal commodity prices are high and there is much attraction elsewhere for development funding." The following is a complete copy of his letter.

***

April 28th, 2008
Honourable Gordon Campbell
Premier
PO Box 9041 Stn Prov Govt
Parliament Buildings
Victoria, B.C., V8W 9E1

Dear Premier Campbell

I am writing to convey my concern with the recent remarks by your Minister of State for Mining, Mr. Kevin Kruger, who has proclaimed a prohibition against exploration and development of uranium (reported by the Globe and Mail, April 26th/08).

Since expiry of the uranium moratorium in 1987, imposed by the previous Social Credit Government, there has been new research prompting more uranium exploration in British Columbia. Much progress has been made in the science of extraction and handling uranium. Indeed, many uranium deposits in British Columbia appear to be amenable to the widely used low environmental impact in situ solution leach ‘ISL’ recovery process. Solution mining is a relatively new method whereby ore is treated in situ. The ISL process reverses the ore genesis in a very short time frame. Most operating ISL mines are small and less than 10 years old yet they supply 85% of the current US uranium production. There is little surface disturbance and no tailings or waste rock generated. Techniques for ISL have evolved to the point where the procedures work within strict environmental controls and considerable cost savings compared to traditional mining methods.

The combined production of uranium in Canada from six provinces and three territories amounts to 25-30 % of the total annual world production. Uranium mining and development in Canada is highly regulated by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

Nuclear power using uranium fuel is seen as a major solution towards the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions in the greening of global energy production.

We feel that the government has been ill-informed in deciding to return to the uranium moratorium. The global investment community will remember the government freeze on development of the Windy-Craggy deposit in the 70’s and many other major and minor projects that resulted in the ‘ABC’ mantra (Anywhere but British Columbia).

As an active member of the of the local mining-exploration community, I urge you and your government not to damage or seriously alter the mineral investment climate in British Colombia, especially at this time when metal commodity prices are high and there is much attraction elsewhere for development funding.

Yours Sincerely,

B. Neil Church Ph.D., P.Eng.
600 Parkridge St.
Victoria, B.C., V8Z 6N7

Earlier this month, the ministry of children and family development quietly posted copies of its revised good practice action and an accompanying operational framework on its Website. Those documents are the culmination of a consultation effort that got underway last July. But, despite their importance, a spokesperson for the children and youth representative says the ministry hasn't yet given Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond a briefing about that plan. Nevertheless, the spokesperson said Ms. Turpel-Lafond is "looking forward" to that briefing. And would be "happy" to discuss the issue once she has received "more info from the ministry on it."

The ministry of children and family development wasn't the only public institution that got a thrashing in child protection watchdog Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond's most recent report - Amanda, Savannah, Rowen and Serena: From Loss to Learning. In that report, Ms. Turpel-Lafond states, "It was strongly hoped that the establishment of a social work program at the University of Northern British Columbia would significantly improve the recruitment and retention of well-trained staff. The results have apparently been mixed, with some new graduates leaving the Ministry after a year or two of employment...If better results are to be achieved in the system of supports and services for vulnerable children, then more careful monitoring and evaluation is required of the placement of graduates, program content, and human resource issues." But the program's chair doesn't seem to be in much of a rush to respond to those concerns.

In an interview with Public Eye, Dawn Hemingway stated, "I would actually prefer to go back and look at the comments in context before I respond. It just has not been possible for me to do that at this point. So I would really prefer to be able to do that before I responded just to see what she was saying around that and maybe actually give her a call myself. So, at this point, I would prefer to actually get back to you at a later date." And when will that later date be? "It could be next week. As I say, I'm in the middle of two days of hiring now. And then I'm heading to Toronto. But I will try to do that and see if I can get to that and connect with her myself."

Public Eye had placed a message with Ms. Hemingway on Monday, notifying her we would be seeking a response to Ms. Turpel-Lafond's concerns.

Yesterday, we reported the Vancouver Island Exploration Group is raising concerns about the Campbell administration's newly-introduce Road Resource Act. But, in an email to Public Eye, the ministry of forests and range seems to be suggesting the group's concerns are unfounded. Responding to complaints that commercial and industrial road users will now have to pay forest companies to use those corridors, the ministry confirmed the act does allow for the establishment of such fees. But "there is no plan to impose new fees for industrial use."

And what about allegations the legislation will result in the dismantlement of British Columbia's back country road infrastructure? Well, according to the ministry, "The government has no mandate to dismantle the backcountry road structure and this act does not empower it to do so." And as for suggestions the legislation "repeals and abolishes" the mining industry's land access rights, the ministry stated, "As the Resource Road Act is an enabling piece of legislation and as the inter-industry and multiple ministry operations are very complex, many of the details required to complete the regulations will need to be addressed through detailed engagement with industrial users regulated under the act."

The provincial government has already announced the University College of the Fraser Valley, Kwantlen University College and Malaspina University-College will all become universities. At it looks like Capilano College may be next. Because the Campbell administration has invited dignitaries to attend "a special event" at the post-secondary institution tomorrow morning at 10:00. Earlier, The Georgia Straight's Charlie Smith reported the premier's only sister, Catherine Vertesi, has been "involved in the campaign to designate Capilano College a 'regional university.'" The following is a complete copy of the aforementioned invit