I am pleased to report on the activities of BC FamilyNet over the past year. To say that it has been busy is an understatement.
Following our June 2003 Annual General Meeting, we undertook initiatives to revitalize BC FamilyNet and strengthen our advocacy role as an independent provincial network and voice for children and youth with special needs, adults with developmental disabilities, and their families. This involved establishing a new mailing address and meeting locations that reflect the independence and family-led focus of BC FamilyNet, developing new Terms of Reference, strategic plans and goals. A key focus has been on rebuilding our membership base and establishing effective community communication channels. We increased the frequency of our newsletters and other updates to families, launching a new, interactive BC FamilyNet website, and urging individuals and families throughout the Province to share their stories with and to join BC FamilyNet.
Since July of last year, your Board has met on a regular basis and has held several meetings with stakeholders and the Ministry of Children and Family Development Minister and her Deputy.
We began expressing grave concern over the new direction that the Government was going with the move to a new governance model. While we supported the principle of greater self-determination and choice being proposed, we questioned the viability of such a move during a time of budget reductions. We therefore requested a meeting with Minister Hogg and the Interim Authority Board. Sadly, our requests were ignored. In the meanwhile we were hearing from families who wondered what was going on and felt that the so-called consultation meetings being held around the Province were raising more questions than answers.
Finally, in November your Board made the decision to go public with our concerns and ask for an immediate moratorium on proposed budget cuts, service redesign, restructuring and related legislation for Community Living Services. Some media attention was achieved and we spoke of our concerns on radio. As a result of this action, we succeeded in meeting with the Interim Authority and BC Association for Community Living (BCACL) in January. However, we were unable to influence either group to support a moratorium to address legitimate family concerns and came away discouraged, to say the least. Both groups did concede that they could have done a better job of communication but tended to blame Government for this. They were very committed to the vision for community living under a new governance model and were not willing to do anything that would put this in jeopardy.
We, like so many others, were upset to learn of the events that led to the resignation of Minister Hogg, his Deputy Minister and the Acting CEO of the Interim Authority. This only served to reinforce our belief that this whole process had been flawed from the beginning. We subsequently met with Christy Clark and Alison MacPhail, the new Minister and Deputy Minister in late February. We felt encouraged by their willingness to hear our concerns and since have had another two meetings with Alison MacPhail and Robin Syme (Assistant Deputy Minister, Community Living Services-Children With Special Needs) in late June. Despite government’s decision to continue with the move to a governance model, subsequent recommendations by Bert Boyd, a consultant hired by government to assess readiness criteria, have resulted in a slowing down of the process and a greater co-ordination of administrative responsibilities between the Ministry and the new Interim CLBC Board of Directors. Many of our concerns have been acknowledged and, in fact, most players such as BCACL, Community Living Coalition and other family groups are now urging the need for more funding to be put back into the Ministry.
Many issues still need to be resolved. These include addressing wait-lists, children’s services, the closure of group homes, changes to services without consent of individuals and families involved, erosion of services, inadequate communication, the apparent emphasis on individualized funding and representation of self-advocates on the CLBC Board. On September 2nd three members of your Board met with Fred Milowsky who has been contracted to meet with family groups and other stakeholders to hear their concerns regarding the proposed model. We were very frank in expressing our concerns such as the need for more money to be put into the system, the permissive wording of the proposed legislation, moving away from a regional focus to a central one and that facilitators might not be sufficiently familiar with the community in which they were assigned.
FamilyNet is committed to advocating on behalf of our loved ones in the coming election year and is looking forward to the support of our members that we received during the past year. In closing I want to thank our Board of Directors for their incredible dedication in working to raise the concerns of so many families during this troubling year. Their commitment has been outstanding.
Respectfully submitted,
Anita Dadson
