Health — Issue No. 8 — Thursday, September 11, 2014 (HTML)

Present: Linda Larson, MLA (Chair); Judy Darcy, MLA (Deputy Chair); Dr. Doug Bing, MLA; Katrine Conroy, MLA; Sue Hammell, MLA; Richard T. Lee, MLA; Jane Jae Kyung Shin, MLA; Michelle Stilwell, MLA; Dr. Moira Stilwell, MLA

3. It was agreed that the deadline for submissions would be extended to December 31, 2014.

5. The Committee considered correspondence dated April 9, 2014 and received June, 2014, regarding health capital funding from Treasury Board to the Minister of Heath and copied to the Committee.

6. It was agreed that the Committee would make a decision regarding a separate consultation process on health capital funding at a later date.

7. It was agreed that a proposal to have a joint meeting with the Select Standing Committee on Children and Youth be explored in order to discuss commonalities with that Committee’s special project examining youth mental health.

The following electronic version is for informational purposes only.
The printed version remains the official version.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON
HEALTH


CONTENTS
Page
Submissions and Call for Submissions Review	155
Correspondence from Treasury Board	157
Other Business	158

L. Larson (Chair): Good afternoon. It's so nice to see everybody. It seems like summer has just gone by so quickly, but it also seems like it's been a long time since we got together. Welcome, and I'm glad you could spare a bit of time to do this here and now. We certainly will be meeting again when get back to Victoria.

I just thought it might be a good idea to catch up on what's happened so far with our request for submissions and whether or not we need to revamp it a little bit. That's the first item on our agenda: to review the submissions we have received to date. I'd like anybody at all who'd like to comment on what we've already got.

J. Darcy (Deputy Chair): Happy September to everybody. Summer is indeed almost over, although the weather is great.

We have a few interesting submissions, but I think that the operative word there is "few" and that probably we were a little overly optimistic about how soon we might get submissions in. We just put stuff out after the session, so people really have only had the summer. I expect that people will turn their minds to it more in September.

I think it would make sense for us to extend it to end of December and do a renewed push by e-mail, by Facebook, Twitter, by phone call or whatever — that we do an aggressive push to get submissions in. We do have a few. I certainly, especially, appreciate the fact that a number of individuals have even done handwritten ones and submitted them. But I think we need to get the word out more widely and give people a bit more time, so I would suggest that we extend to December 31.

L. Larson (Chair): Okay. I don't disagree with you at all. I really like the fact that people actually handwrote and put in some…. That's what we wanted. We wanted to hear from real people. We've had wonderful things from the academic end of things, but it's nice to hear from people on the ground and in small communities about what their health care means to them and what suggestions they would make.

In saying that we would possibly extend it, Judy, do you think that we need to rewrite how we've asked at all, or do you think it's clear enough?

J. Darcy (Deputy Chair): Well, we may want to do some more explanation around each of the questions that we're asking. I think you may well be right about that. Certainly on these topics, many people have submitted before. We want to find people who have submitted in the past, both health care practitioners and health care policy folks, as well as, as you've said, individual folks out there in communities.

But if we want to really capture people's imagination and have people understand that we want to hear from everybody, maybe we do need to do need to do some framing of each of them and not just jump directly to the question. I think that's a good suggestion.

L. Larson (Chair): Anyone else have any comments on what we've been doing so far and whether we should maybe tweak the submission?

J. Shin: One thing that I wanted to add was that when I was promoting about getting the submissions in, there was a lot of skepticism around what this would summate to. Would their opinions matter? I've had quite a few comments saying: "Well, I can invest my time and make the submission, but in the end, isn't it going to be ignored anyway?"

In order for us to maybe consider having a language about clarifying what we actually do with these submissions as part of the application process would, I think, help us encourage the public to engage a little bit more.

L. Larson (Chair): That makes a lot of sense too. We don't want people to not submit because they think that it's just going to end up on a shelf somewhere and that nobody's going to read it.

We are going to read these. The more we have, the better; because out of this, I hope we'll have some really tangible things we can recommend.

R. Lee: I think I saw one page of Norm's submission to one of the newspapers. I think it's useful, probably, for all the community newspapers to get a copy of these questions so that more people will be aware of the work of the committee and also so that they are actually welcome to provide input.

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): The questions that are in are the old questions. Those aren't the revised questions.

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): We can certainly advertise. We can place an ad or write an article.

L. Larson (Chair): I was just going to say that perhaps the idea of writing an article is not such a bad idea, Richard, then, a similar way. That way it's easier to explain what
[ Page 156 ]
we're asking, because there'd be an explanation with it.

J. Darcy (Deputy Chair): That's exactly what I was thinking, yes. Thank you for articulating that. If we get it out in community newspapers in the same way that this one obviously was…. When people responded, they actually numbered his questions, and they numbered their responses. I think the more we can do by getting it out by a variety of means so that the widest possible spectrum of people see it the better.

Moira Stilwell: I was going to suggest that we have a poster to put in clinics and doctors' offices. Maybe the Doctors of B.C. would cooperate with us to put them on the wall, and pharmacists — those kinds of places that people go frequently.

L. Larson (Chair): Good idea. Especially rural communities, without a doubt. In any of those clinics or any waiting rooms in a hospital, where you're sitting there. That would be nice, if we had something — not too flashy, obviously. I don't know what we have for a budget.

D. Bing: I was just going to say that I agreed with idea of a news release or having an article sent out to the newspapers, but not an ad, because that'll blow our budget for sure. That costs us money.

Michelle Stilwell: I think it's wonderful that we've had people bring in these handwritten suggestions for the questions that we put forward, and there were some interesting ideas. I'm wondering how we're going to encourage those people to look at the costs that are associated with their ideas — and justification. How do we promote that in their responses so that we are getting a little bit of that as well — their ideas of how the money is going to be spent, where we're going to get this money from? As we all know, it has to come from somewhere.

L. Larson (Chair): I think that can be done. Even with Norm Letnick's article, one of the last things was: how do we reduce the fiscal impact? So if we are going to do the article, I think that we can finish it with that kind of a statement — to be aware that we have a fiscal responsibility with what's coming in. I think that would do it.

K. Conroy: Well, I definitely agree we should extend the deadline. Did we get a list of how many people had actually sent in a submission and who they are? I haven't seen anything like that, so I don't know if you're looking at that down there, and I just don't have it here.

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): Katrine, I think it was sent out electronically. I think there are nine or ten submissions received to date, mostly individuals.

L. Larson (Chair): And if you didn't get them, Katrine, it's understandable. I noticed when I opened my e-mail that in the submissions part of it there was only one. The rest of them weren't there. So some of these I'm only seeing for the first time. Even when I went through to the 20th page of the first one, there was nothing beyond that.

L. Larson (Chair): Yeah, so it's quite possible that you did miss it. But we're not going to take any kind of action on them today, so we'll make sure that we get them out to you as quickly as possible.

K. Conroy: I was just curious how many. I'm glad we're going to delay it and get it out again — definitely get it out through word of mouth, e-mail again to people. I really agree with Judy, I think it was, who said people were not really keen on this over the summer. It's not a priority in the summer. I think people will be much more able to get to it now in the fall, hopefully. I definitely agree with that.

L. Larson (Chair): We think that this is a priority all the time, but you're right. When people are on summer vacation — you know, that time of the year — their minds just kind of go a little bit rested. Yes, you're 100 percent right. I agree with extending the deadline as well.

Maybe we'll just deal with that issue first — to extend the deadline — and see whether everyone is in agreement with that. Okay? Everyone all right with that? So just by consensus, we'll extend the deadline.

Then the other item on here was to do an article for the paper. The best thing is…. We can certainly rough it up and send it out to you before we submit it to the newspapers in general and let you have a look at it. Would that work? Judy, is that all right to you?

L. Larson (Chair): We'll use a similar format to what Norm Letnick did with his — just by point, be very specific and add the fiscal responsibility part of it at the end. Okay?

J. Darcy (Deputy Chair): Also, we'll notify everyone who's already on our list. And I wonder. Because there was a list, and then we were adding to it…

J. Darcy (Deputy Chair): …it might be helpful for us all to see the current list we're working from, the complete one, to see if there's anyone we think is missing from it. So we'd communicate with them.

I like the poster idea — simple, inexpensive — that could be circulated and downloaded, because then it could be posted all over — you know, doctors' offices, hospitals…

J. Darcy (Deputy Chair): …residential care, community health, all of our offices, constituency offices. Yeah, I think that's a wonderful idea.

L. Larson (Chair): All right. Anything else to do with the submissions that we need to…? I think we cleaned up the loose ends on that. By extending it, it gives other people an opportunity to sit down and send in a submission if they like. I hope that more people do what some of these people have done and actually send in a submission from their heart, just handwritten. In some of them it's their own experiences and so on too. That's really good to have.

L. Larson (Chair): End of December, yeah. We'll go with December 31, but we'll review again, I would think, probably in November. Let's just see what's happening in November. If that's all right with everybody, we'll set a meeting while we're in Victoria.

L. Larson (Chair): The other item that we had on here is the correspondence from Treasury Board. We had a request, a written request from Treasury Board asking us to consider in our consultations the question of how health capital should be funded. I have responded with a letter that's here and explained that we wouldn't meet until today and that we would take a look at the request today. So I need to know from you what you think we should do with this request.

J. Darcy (Deputy Chair): I would find it very useful to have someone give us a short presentation at our next meeting about how the funding model works now. I know that it varies from urban to rural and so on. I think it would be helpful to know that and to know what options exist so that we can figure out what's the best way to do consultation on it. I think it's a bit awkward to add it to those four questions that we've asked about, which really are birds of a different feather, right?

We did some excellent health 101 at the beginning, after we were appointed, and I think this could maybe be a little piece of health 101 so that we all have a common understanding of how it works and what the options are and then can see how we go from there. Does that make sense?

Moira Stilwell: I'd just like to agree. It would also be helpful to know how other provinces do it, because ours has grown in an ad hoc kind of way, and I suspect that other provinces' have.

I would suggest that it would be a separate consultation. I suspect that nine out of ten people in the province don't know, never mind maybe nine out of ten people in this room, counting me.

I think that it's a worthwhile question. I don't see it being piggybacked onto this effectively, and it would be helpful for us to know more than we do going into it.

L. Larson (Chair): I agree. I think that getting some background on that particular question would be good before we even make a decision as to whether or not we want to go down that path and look at that from a consultation process. And perhaps, to keep it clean, we'll just continue with what we're doing right now.

I can respond to the minister in that fashion and say that we are currently working on a specific request that we have in the public. We're going to gather more information about this from our own province and from other jurisdictions, and then we'll make a decision as to whether we would go out to consultation on a question like this at a later date.

K. Conroy: Okay. I agree with what everybody has said. It would be interesting also to see what direction the Ministry of Health is going in, because they've asked us to go ahead with consultation without knowing what the original intent of the report was even about.

And it is rather complicated in rural areas. I mean, we have representation from every municipality sitting on a board that decides where capital funding goes. Just in my area, the regional hospital is in the southern part of our area. The majority of the municipalities are in the northern part, and quite often they don't all agree on where the funding should go as far as the regional hospital is concerned.

It does create some real issues in rural parts of B.C. I know it happens in other parts of rural B.C., where you have municipalities' voices at these regional boards and then you don't have the regional hospital, for instance, having any kind of a say as to what's going to happen with capital funding. So it can be quite complicated.

I definitely agree. We need more information as to where this is going and why, what the intent is from the ministry.

L. Larson (Chair): Yes. I think we all agree with you on that for sure. It is an incredibly complicated system, and there is more than one pocket that funding comes out of, depending on what the issue is. It would be nice to try and get that presented to us in a very simple form — not supercomplicated but simple enough that when we are asked that question when we're out talking to people, we're able to give them a clear, concise answer as to how these things are funded and then go with it from there. So thank you, Katrine. That's good.

Other comments around the table on this letter and the response to it? No? Okay? We're good with that?

All right. Now we're down to anything else anybody wants to throw on the table. We're so efficient.

Moira Stilwell: I don't know whether we talked about this informally. As you know, the committee for children and youth is doing some work around youth mental health. It has been quite interesting and quite profound, what we have heard and learned, and there is some intersection here. So I wonder if, when we are in Victoria, we should convene together, even if informally. Because by that time…. We have some intersection on what people are feeding us, and I think that what we have learned would be very worthwhile.

L. Larson (Chair): I agree. Is that something that's possible to do, Susan? Is it all right to actually have two committees compare on that one issue? We did put mental health and addictions on ours as it related more to adults, but is it quite acceptable for us to discuss just that one issue together as a group?

S. Sourial (Committee Clerk): I will find out. Certainly, committees do meet jointly at the federal level. I don't see why we couldn't, but let me find out. I'll find out. And certainly, if it's not a formal, on-the-record meeting, it can be an informal meeting of the two committees.

L. Larson (Chair): That would be great. Thank you. Yes, because we're all in the same pot. We're just dealing with different things, but we're still under that same funding umbrella, same everything.

Moira Stilwell: Right, although youth mental health, as you know, is in the Ministry of Children and Family Development, which is one of the issues that we have heard about and we want to talk about.

Anybody else have anything that they want us to think about or look at other than what we've already got on our plate? No? All right. Everyone is good?

J. Darcy (Deputy Chair): Focus, focus, focus is a good idea to continue doing. We just have to get other people now to focus on those questions.

L. Larson (Chair): Maybe now that the air is a little cooler, all the brain cells will click back in again.

We will certainly get everything out for everybody to have a look at. We'll make sure that all the submissions are sent to you as soon as they're received and also whatever correspondence or letters that are going to come out from the committee itself so that everybody has a chance to look at them and sign off on them. We'll do that over the next week or two.

Access to on-line versions of the report of proceedings (Hansard)
and webcasts of committee proceedings is available on the Internet.

Chair:	* Linda Larson (Boundary-Similkameen BC Liberal)
Deputy Chair:	* Judy Darcy (New Westminster NDP)
Members:	Donna Barnett (Cariboo-Chilcotin BC Liberal)
	* Dr. Doug Bing (Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows BC Liberal)
	* Katrine Conroy (Kootenay West NDP)
	* Sue Hammell (Surrey–Green Timbers NDP)
	* Richard T. Lee (Burnaby North BC Liberal)
	* Jane Jae Kyung Shin (Burnaby-Lougheed NDP)
	* Michelle Stilwell (Parksville-Qualicum BC Liberal)
	* Dr. Moira Stilwell (Vancouver-Langara BC Liberal)
	* denotes member present
Clerk:	Susan Sourial

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON
HEALTH