The committee met at 9:34 a.m.

[D. Routley in the chair.]

D. Routley (Chair): Good morning, everyone. My name is Doug Routley. I’m the MLA for Nanaimo–North Cowichan and the Chair of the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act, an all-party committee of the Legislative Assembly.

I would like to acknowledge that I’m joining today’s meeting from the traditional territories of the Malahat First Nation.

I’d also like to welcome all those who are listening and participating to this meeting. Our committee is undertaking a broad consultation with respect to policing and related systemic issues in B.C.

[9:35 a.m.]

We are taking a phased approach to this work and are meeting with a number of organizations and individuals to discuss the ideas and experiences they put forward in written submissions earlier this year. We are also hoping to learn more about British Columbians’ perspectives on policing, including from those working on the front line in several fields, including policing, public safety, health care and social services.

Interested individuals can fill out a survey to share their views with the committee. Further details are available on our website at www.leg.bc.ca/cmt/rpa. The deadline to complete the survey is 5 p.m. on Friday, September 3.

In terms of the format for today’s meeting, each presenter will have five minutes to speak, followed by 15 minutes for questions from committee members. We kindly ask that the presenters be respectful of this time limit. There is a timer available to assist, which presenters can see when they are in the gallery view.

All audio from our meetings is broadcast live on our website, and a complete transcript will also be produced.

I’ll now ask the members of the committee to introduce themselves. I will first call on my friend and Deputy Chair, MLA Davies.

D. Davies (Deputy Chair): Good morning. Dan Davies, the MLA for Peace River North.

I’m coming to you on the road today from the Neskonlith, Adams Lake and Little Shuswap territory.

G. Lore: Good morning. Grace Lore, MLA for Victoria–​Beacon Hill.

I am calling in from the traditional territory of the Lək̓ʷəŋin̓əŋ-speaking peoples of the Esquimalt and Song­hees Nations.

K. Kirkpatrick: Good morning. I’m Karin Kirkpatrick, and I’m the MLA for West Vancouver–Capilano.

We’re on the traditional territories here of the Squamish, Musqueam and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations.

R. Singh: Rachna Singh, MLA for Surrey–Green Timbers.

I’m joining you from the territories of Kwantlen, Katzie, Kwikwetlem and Semiahmoo First Nations.

T. Halford: Trevor Halford, MLA for Surrey–White Rock.

I’m joining you from the Semiahmoo Nation.

H. Sandhu: Good morning. I’m Harwinder Sandhu, MLA for Vernon-Monashee.

Today I am joining you from the unceded and traditional territory of the Okanagan Indian Nations.

G. Begg: Morning. I’m Garry Begg. I’m the MLA for Surrey-Guildford.

I’m coming to you today from the traditional territories of the Coast Salish people, including the Kwantlen, the Semiahmoo and the Katzie First Nations.

A. Olsen: Good morning. Adam Olsen, MLA for Saanich North and the Islands.

I’m working today out of my constituency office in SETI¸NES, Sidney, in W̱SÁNEĆ territory.

R. Glumac: Hi. It’s Rick Glumac, MLA for Port Moody–​Coquitlam.

I am on the traditional territory of the Coast Salish peoples.

D. Routley (Chair): Thanks very much. I appreciate it — to all the members.

Assisting the committee today are Karan Riarh from the Parliamentary Committees Office and Billy Young from Hansard Services.

I’ll now introduce to the committee our first guest, Karla Verschoor, the executive director of Inclusion B.C., for the presentation she’s brought.

I welcome you to the committee. Thank you very much. I hand it over to you.

Presentations on Police Act

INCLUSION B.C.

K. Verschoor: Well, thank you for having me. I didn’t realize I’d be first on the agenda. I’ve got a little bit of nerves this morning.

I did send over a presentation, but I’m not sure if we can display it in that corner. So maybe what I’ll…. We won’t. I’ll just get talking, then.

Thank you for the introduction. Again, Karla Verschoor, the executive director of Inclusion B.C.

I respectfully acknowledge I’m joining from the traditional, unceded territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh people.

For those of you who don’t know us, Inclusion B.C. is a non-profit federation working with our partners to build community and enhance the lives of children, youth and adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. As an organization, we’ve journeyed alongside thousands of people to ensure they are well supported in community.

[9:40 a.m.]

To understand their experience with policing, it is critical to acknowledge ableism as a fundamental barrier and the impact it has on the lives of people with disabilities. Ableism is a social process that privileges non-disabled bodies and minds as valuable and ideal. This creates a discrimination and bias against people with disabilities.

The UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities establishes concrete thresholds and expectations so that people with disabilities can exercise full citizenship. As a signatory country, we all have a collective responsibility to uphold their rights in all areas of life. For that reason, our overarching recommendation is for the province of B.C. to align the Police Act with the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. At the same time, we recognize that this should be done alongside the UN declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s call to action.

We focused our submission on three articles of the convention while using the perspective and experience of our members to contextualize the recommendations. Article 13 refers to ensuring effective access to justice, which includes providing right accommodations to facilitate people with disabilities’ effective roles as direct and indirect participants. That could be as a witness in a legal proceeding, an investigation or any preliminary stages. In order to do this, people working in the field of administration of justice, including police and prison staff, need to have appropriate training.

What we heard from people’s experience is that police officers do not always know how to respond or de-escalate situations and interact with a person with an intellectual disability. Our recommendation is for the province to mandate training for police officers on topics such as de-escalation techniques, implicit bias, anti-ableism, anti-racism and techniques for interviewing and responding to situations where there may be communication barriers. Training needs to reach all levels of police and law enforcement, guided by robust standards linked to codes of professional conduct regulation.

Article 14 of the convention reads: “People with disabilities should enjoy the right to liberty and security of person.” In preparing our submission, we heard of people being questioned without access to lawyers and people being interrogated for hours on end, exacerbating their need for disability-related supports. There were many positive interactions. However, families also shared stories of excessive force when responding to someone in distress and police escalating a crisis rather than de-escalating the situation.

Here, our recommendations are to mandate a provision of public safety services rather than policing services exclusively. This would allow municipalities more flexibility to allocate funds to crisis response teams that could work with police, creating an alternative to police being the primary responder when possible.

Article 14 also talks about police accountability and transparency and the need to address and provide justice to members of the society that are already feeling marginalized. Here our recommendations are to update the accountability provisions for the Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner and independent investigation officers that emphasize independent and civilian control as well as transparency at all stages of complaint.

Considering that a large part of the province is policed by the RCMP, we recommend that the province work with the federal government to reform transparency and accountability standards that uphold the right of people with disabilities, regardless of the jurisdiction.

The last one, article 31 of the convention, a particularly important topic here, is the collection of appropriate information, including statistical and research data, to enable governments to formulate and implement policies. The experience of people with intellectual disabilities varies greatly from community to community and from officer to officer. The opportunity to understand the intersectionality and discriminations within our systems and to provide solutions lie in the data that we collect.

We recommend that the province of B.C. collect data and disseminate statistics to help assess how people with disabilities are experiencing barriers to justice and other factors that aggregate their experience, such as race, gender, age and mental health.

Those are the foundations of our….

Oh, I’m out of time. Sorry. Really looking forward to your questions now.

D. Routley (Chair): Okay. If you’re comfortable stopping. You can go for a few minutes longer if you think….

K. Verschoor: That’s okay. My last part was just thanking you for presenting my submission. I hope that came across as cohesive without the slide deck.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you very much. We had it. Thanks very much for that presentation.

Are there questions from members?

[9:45 a.m.]

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you, Karla, very much for that. I know it’s tough trying to get all of this in, in five minutes, so I think you did a great job. It was very, very helpful.

I just want to understand, again, in terms of Inclusion B.C…. Please forgive me if this is a silly question, but when we’re referring to people with disabilities, how are you categorizing that? I work with some groups. It’s mobility, or it’s neurological or…. How do you define that, as Inclusion B.C.?

K. Verschoor: Our first attempt is to not define parameters and just meet people as individuals, as where they’re at. We predominantly support people with intellectual disabilities, and that’s where our primary work…. There are two levels. It’s really about intellectual functioning as well as adaptive functioning. But whenever possible, I think we try not to label people. Inclusion B.C. works in a variety of areas, but our specialty is around supporting people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, if that’s helpful.

K. Kirkpatrick: Thank you. That is helpful, and I apologize. I didn’t….

K. Verschoor: That’s okay. It’s all good.

K. Kirkpatrick: It kind of flows into the wellness checks and the escalations from a mental health perspective and those kinds of things. That’s really the reference to what we’re talking about here.

K. Verschoor: I guess the pieces…. We really want to be careful not to define people as single characteristics of who they are and recognize that people have multiple aspects of their identity and that intellectual disability is one of those components that needs to be paid attention to, in concert with who they are in their community and the other ways that they live their lives.

K. Kirkpatrick: Great. Thank you, Karla.

R. Singh: Thank you, Karla, for your presentation and all of the important work that you are doing.

I would really like to know, especially in the context of the police and people with an intellectual disability…. If such incidents come to your notice, how does that happen? I just want to understand the process. Would people approach you when they have had an experience with the police which was negative? How does the advocacy happen?

K. Verschoor: It happens in a variety of ways. Because we’re a federation and we have members throughout the province, if they are supporting someone that may have had an interaction with police or the justice system in general, they will often reach out to Inclusion B.C. and our advocacy for additional support.

Some of the situations we’re involved in come directly from our member organizations, of which there are 61 around the province. Then, more common than that, we’ll hear from a family who is concerned about an interaction with police.

Again, because we work around the province, it is often the RCMP as well, so it is usually the family or the individual themselves sometimes, or a community member, neighbour, recognizing that something is just not right about the way the situation is unfolding, and they reach out to Inclusion B.C. So it comes to us from a variety of places. That is when myself or my advocacy team would meet with the individual, making sure that there is legal representation and that appropriate disability accommo­dation is provided.

I do need to say that that system depends on privilege, that someone had the capacity to know who we are, knew how to get a hold of us — right? — recognizing that we’re not available to everybody, which really made it important today to do this presentation so that there’s information being gathered outside of just our community advocacy model.

R. Singh: Thank you so much for all the work that you are doing, especially representing the marginalized, the people who don’t have a voice. Thank you so much.

G. Lore: Good morning, and nice to see you, Karla. Your submission and some of the stories told touched on the wellness checks, interactions with police — kind of in that way.

[9:50 a.m.]

I’m wondering if you heard at all, or hear at all, from your member organizations or folks who reach out about experiences — making reports to police, if that makes sense as kind of a different way in which folks interact with police — and whether you have any reflections on access to making police reports, reporting a crime, etc.

K. Verschoor: We have, but there is certainly much, much work to do there. It’s where we often hear things, of how the act of actually filing a complaint can be more traumatizing than the crime itself, in terms of the lack of disability-related accommodation and communication.

Also, I think a big part there that I’ve experienced is the understanding of people with intellectual disabilities, legal capacity, themselves. There is an assumption that there needs to be someone doing that for them, rather than recognizing their agency of person and their ability to participate in reporting crimes, with the appropriate supports. Definitely that is a piece of it, but I do think there’s slightly more community capacity to support that than there is once there is that direct crisis intervention with policing.

I’m really hopeful that the new accessibility legislation will speak into the communication barriers that exist in some areas. Did that answer…? Okay.

T. Halford: I’m just wondering if you guys have done any work with, or if you can suggest work done with, the autism community. I speak about that community a little bit. I have some familiarity with it. But I know some organizations have done…. I reference where if you go to a sporting event and things like that, they’ve really changed the way they interact with those that have ASD. I’m just wondering if you’ve worked with any police organizations, specifically, on autism awareness.

K. Verschoor: Certainly. The disability community is broad. I know that, particularly, the Pacific Autism Network has really taken a lead on creating some first-responders curriculum for people, which I think is wonderful.

Where I would like to see that go further is with what we talked about in our submission — that it starts being linked to professional conduct and standards. The onus is on the community to provide that help, create it, most definitely, but we need to take it that step further and have it as a part of foundational skill development for people working in policing and administration. Yes, I’m very fond of that first responder work. I wish that it was more scalable and that everyone could participate.

D. Routley (Chair): I don’t see any more hands up or questions. Anybody?

Thank you very much.

K. Verschoor: It was my absolute pleasure. Thank you for creating this space for community advocates and people to speak to this very important topic.

D. Routley (Chair): It’s a great help to have this kind of insight brought to the committee. We’ve got a big job in front of us, and we need all the help we can get it. Thank you so much.

K. Verschoor: Yes, you sure do. We are here as a friend and ally. Thank you.

D. Routley (Chair): Okay, members. Our next presenter is scheduled at ten. Shall we take a brief break? We’ll sign back on at ten.

The committee recessed from 9:53 a.m. to 10 a.m.

[D. Routley in the chair.]

D. Routley (Chair): Okay. Everybody, welcome back to this meeting of the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act.

I’d now like to welcome our next guest, seniors advocate Isobel Mackenzie, for her presentation.

Thank you, Mrs. Mackenzie, for attending our meeting, and I’ll hand it over to you.

OFFICE OF THE SENIORS ADVOCATE

I. Mackenzie: Thank you very much, and thank you for the invitation. I know you have important work to do on many aspects of what you might reform in the Police Act. I’m going to speak particularly to one aspect that is impacting seniors and will impact them to a greater degree in the future, and this is around the role that police play increasingly in the seniors arena around wellness checks. This has come to the attention of my office as we’ve worked through a number of cases with a number of seniors and a number of concerned citizens about seniors.

Proportionately right now, 20 percent of the population is over the age of 65, and that, as you know, is going to grow, and we’ll have about one out of four people over the age of 65 by about 2035. Now, increasingly the proportion that is 75 and 85 is going to grow to an even greater degree, and that’s really the population where we see the most needs around police.

What is happening is that as the designated agencies, the health authorities, are grappling more and more with the social issues that we see, particularly in our large cities, they’re looking to the police more and more around wellness checks. They have concern around sending health authority staff into situations where 25 or 30 years ago, they wouldn’t have perceived some of the issues they perceive today.

From our perspective, the concern is that as we do this more and more, we’re relying on the police force — who are constituted and trained for law enforcement activities — really coming into what are health care and social service activities. So their role has grown. The act has not really been amended to address this. In the brief that I submitted, I think the points raised are that we need to define what exactly the role of policing is around wellness checks, and I think we need better definition of that.

We absolutely need better data collection. One of the struggles that my office has in determining the scope of issues, abuse and neglect and whether we’re being effective in responding is the paucity of data out there around what police forces are categorizing and using what data collection systems and how we are rolling this up on a provincial basis. So I think that there is a piece of work in our policing system in British Columbia which, as you know, is a combination of RCMP and municipal forces, around collecting and synthesizing data, regardless of who is collecting it. I think that there is a provincial role to play in that.

[10:05 a.m.]

Then I think we need to really address the training. What is the training that we give in basic training for police officers? What is additional training? Whether we look at specialized units within police forces that look at these issues specific to seniors, I think that these are the things that we have to look at as we see (1) the growing population and (2) that there are issues specific to the seniors population that are not as relevant in the younger population.

It’s not just about the physical and cognitive frailties of aging; it is also around the rights of autonomy that we retain throughout the aging process. The issues that can present themselves in older adults require a more nuanced approach and some training to understand when we need to provide greater oversight and step in, in a greater way.

Those are just the highlights, as I say. I’ve explored this a little bit more in depth in the brief that was submitted to the committee. I think, with that, I will wrap up my comments there and turn it over to the committee to ask any questions.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you very much. Normally we’d do a round of introductions, but in the interests of time, each member, if you could introduce yourselves as you ask a question. Do I see any questions?

A. Olsen: It’s nice to see you as well. Thank you for presenting. Adam Olsen, MLA for Saanich North and the Islands.

Just wanting to…. You’ve kind of offered, I think, in this presentation and in your submission, either increased training of police or perhaps another body that could respond. I think we’ve heard similar options put forward. Is there a preference? Do you have a preference as to whether or not…?

I guess I’ll just put it in this context. There have been some questions about what happens when a police officer shows up to the door rather than…. And what is the response to a situation when it’s a police officer that shows up as opposed to somebody else? I guess I just want to dig down a little bit deeper. If we were to make a clear recommendation of one or the other, is there a preference in that for you?

I. Mackenzie: I do agree, MLA Olsen, that the showing up of a uniformed police officer can be problematic. One of the things that is unique to the seniors population is this relationship or dependency that some seniors will have on family members, because they have care needs that a family member is helping them meet. So when you’re dealing with issues of potential abuse or neglect, whether it’s physical or financial, in a familial setting, it’s tricky. I think that having a police presence can exacerbate that.

I prefer — and I reflect more on my previous work in the community — that really having dedicated and trained units, where there’s this connection between the training around a potentially dangerous situation but also, really, what is a, for want of a better term, health or social services assessment, that that is best handled in as low key an environment as possible. I don’t believe that uniforms actually promote that. I think that they can be triggers of stress or a less forthcoming, perhaps, conversation than you might have with people who come at it more from a capacity-building, social work perspective — if that makes sense. I might have been a little bit roundabout.

A. Olsen: If I may, Mr. Chair, just a quick follow-up. In terms of that…. So something along the lines of the home care services that you and I have talked about in the past. That might be a unit within our…. Specially trained people within that, maybe supported by police, but that they’d be the front line, just as an example, within the Ministry of Health.

I. Mackenzie: Yeah. I think, in very practical terms, if I can give an example of what happens. Somebody phones in, and they are concerned that their elderly neighbour is being abused or neglected by the son that’s living there. They phone the designated agency. Now, what theoreti­cally is supposed to happen is that the health authority is the designated agency. So a couple of either social workers or a case manager or somebody is supposed to go out to the home and do an assessment. They are trained to know capacity issues, all this kind of thing.

[10:10 a.m.]

What’s happening often is that the health authority is reluctant to send their staff out, and they will tell the person phoning in to phone the local police and ask for a wellness check. So the police perform a wellness check. They show up in uniform to do that.

The other thing that will happen sometimes is that the health authority will ask for a…. The person from the health authority will go, but they’re asking for the police to accompany them. Again, that person will be in uniform. I’m not sure that we fully appreciate that something like 90 percent of British Columbians have never had a uniformed police officer show up at their doorstep. It can be very intimidating. My concern would be that it would be intimidating enough for the senior that they’re not going to talk openly about what’s happening because they’re seeing this law enforcement person in front of them.

In social work, we’re trained a little bit better. We sort of know how to get around the issue. Whether it’s a combination of the social worker with a non-uniformed — that that’s the specialty unit…. Ideally, that’s what it would be. Ideally, we actually would be back to where it could be that we didn’t feel we needed police support for the visit, but I think we all understand why health care professionals are nervous in today’s environment, showing up at a location where they don’t know what’s going on.

D. Davies (Deputy Chair): Thank you, Isobel, for all the work that you do.

G. Begg: Thanks, Isobel. Nice to see you. My question has been asked and answered. Adam had the same concerns I do, and I think it is about the appropriateness of police responding to these situations. I think you’ve handled that very well. Thank you.

D. Routley (Chair): Wow. A common pursuit here.

R. Singh: Thank you, Isobel. Rachna Singh, MLA for Surrey–Green Timbers. Thank you for your presentation.

A lot of questions have been answered, but I am very interested in the data piece that you talked about, with the police collecting the data. Is that data public, Isobel? A lot of…. Especially with my interest in the data and the role that I play in bringing in the new legislation, I’m very interested in what kind of data has been collected.

I. Mackenzie: We do report it on an annual basis, MLA Singh, so I can get you the links to our monitoring reports. But we know by the numbers that there’s a big problem because there isn’t one data source. So what do we do?

We go to the designated agencies, which are the health authorities, Community Living B.C. and the Public Guardian and Trustee. We say: “How many reports of abuse, neglect and self-neglect have you had?” It’s like 1,700 for the whole province. Then we go to the police departments. We go to RCMP E division. Something like 86 percent of the province is covered by RCMP E division. They will capture, by age, complaints of fraud, physical abuse, etc. Those numbers are quite low.

Then you have to go to every single police department. You have to go to the Vancouver police department, the Central Saanich police department, the Oak Bay police department. They’re capturing it differently. Without wading into a unified provincial police force debate — I don’t want to do that — I think where we can start is unified data collection. This extends to not just my arena but I think in a lot of places.

I’ll give you another practical example from my previous work. We had to obtain a restraining order against a staff member who was out in the community visiting various seniors. But there were five police forces involved. So the coordination and the sort of obstacles that were in place were actually quite significant. It spoke to some of the challenges around the vulnerable population. And we speak to information-sharing. There is a lot of that. But the systems aren’t absolute, because it’s not a unified system. Or it’s not as unified as we….

[10:15 a.m.]

It depends on a lot of individual practice, rather than a systems approach. I don’t know how you address it in the Police Act itself versus recommendations from a provincial level around direction. I’m not sure.

We really have very poor data around abuse and neglect, and we can’t fix what we don’t really know. We say in abstract terms…. We know it’s happening. We know this. We know it’s underreported. Okay. Well, we need better, more uniform data collection. We need to find the patterns. We need to know, you know, are there pocket areas? How do we fix it? What do we do? We’re sort of operating blindly, frankly.

R. Singh: That’s a very, very important point that you make.

Also, one last question, Chair.

On this data — and I will definitely do my research as well — if any disaggregated data was also collected about the intersectionality, about the race…. I know that gender and age usually is collected. But then going into the race, the ethnicity. Is that data also collected?

I. Mackenzie: It will vary by each police department in the degree to which they’re identifying the individuals involved. You can do a hypothesis test using postal code data intersecting with some StatsCan data. If you’ve got a big enough number, that’s a reliable approach. If you’ve got small numbers, that is a very wobbly approach to infer anything.

Our numbers are far too small. So when you’re talking about 1,700 cases provincewide reported, you’re not really going to get reliable disaggregated data on that number. You need like 50,000 to be able to start to reliably drill down.

R. Singh: Great. Thank you so much. I really appreciate that.

D. Routley (Chair): Thanks. We have one more.

Grace, go ahead.

G. Lore: Good morning. Grace Lore, MLA for Victoria–Beacon Hill. Nice to see you again.

I had a question. I hear the points you made, partly in response to my colleague’s questions around appropriateness of response and the concerns that the health authorities or health care providers have sending someone and how that’s changed.

I wonder if you have any thoughts on things community organizations are doing that provide an alternative or delay police wellness checks with other means of connecting. In the absence of health care professionals being sent directly, whether there are other bodies or supports that are doing something that’s operating alongside or maybe providing an alternative.

I. Mackenzie: It’s a good question. I think the best way to describe it is…. Right now, out there, there are a series of community agencies that are nibbling away at the issues. That would be the best way to describe it. So somebody comes on their radar screen. They’re able to get supports. They’ll talk to you about the seniors that they’ve been able to help get the assistance they need or get connected to supports.

But when we’re talking about a person in the public or a family member concerned that their older loved one is being abused or neglected, I do think that you’ve got to have a system in place that has an intervention and a tracking…. That may include a referral to the kinds of community agencies we have. I think that the community agencies, as I say, are nibbling away and undoubtedly reducing the number of cases that are out there.

I think we have to find a way, and I do think there’s a way, even if you’re from the health authority. The uniform, I think, does present a challenge — when that shows up on the doorstep. I think we know from other areas we work in — child protection would be an example — where you can be properly trained to get involved with that family member in a way that is non-threatening and in a way that is trying to get at the heart of the matter of what is going on here.

[10:20 a.m.]

The challenge we have right now is that in many cases our first cut at that is a police wellness check. Our concern is that it’s stopping there in a lot of cases because of that initial approach that we’re taking. If the initial approach was able to find a way to bring the security to the person visiting….

You’re dealing with a situation here where you’re going to a person’s home for the first time. You don’t know what’s in that home. You don’t know if there are weapons in the home. You don’t know who else is living in the home. You don’t know if there’s criminal activity happening in that home. You’re going to that home because somebody has phoned and said: “I am concerned that the 86-year-old living in this house is potentially being abused.”

It’s understandable that you want somebody who can respond to this situation that may or may not be explosive — right? — but you’ve got to combine that with this soft-touch approach. Showing up in uniform as the first point of contact I don’t think is the best approach.

D. Routley (Chair): I think that’s the last question.

I’d like to now thank you, Isobel, for helping us out here. It’s a big task. A lot of really great voices in our province are able to help us, and you’re obviously one of them. I deeply appreciate your time.

I. Mackenzie: I deeply appreciate the work you’re doing. Good luck to all of you.

D. Routley (Chair): Okay, Members, our next guest is at 10:30, so take a break until then. Sign back on at 10:30.

The committee recessed from 10:22 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.

[D. Routley in the chair.]

D. Routley (Chair): Welcome back to this meeting of the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act. I’m Doug Routley, Chair, MLA for Nanaimo–North Cowichan. Normally we do a round of introductions, but I’ll ask each member to introduce as you ask your questions, in the interests of time.

Our next presentation is coming from Mr. David Fisher and Ms. Gisele Benoit.

We welcome you to the committee. Thank you for your submission, and thank you for the presentation.

I’ll hand it over to you now.

DAVID FISHER, GISELE BENOIT

G. Benoit: Good morning. Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you today. David and I, as mental health professionals, are specifically concerned with how effective and safe wellness checks could be provided. That’s our focus. Our perspective is that these should follow evi­dence-based health protocols, with an understanding of the likely meaning given to the intervention by the recipient. David will speak to you about that piece.

Police appear to have been assigned this responsibility for responding to mental health crises by default. In effect, when our under-resourced mental health system is unavailable, police are expected to respond. Police are being placed in situations which are likely to escalate simply by virtue of their presence and the fear created by that presence. We’re suggesting that wellness checks be reviewed and recommendations for modifying these be made as part of this process that you’re doing of reforming the B.C. Police Act.

We’re very concerned about tragic and violent outcomes of police wellness checks and believe that a lot of those can be avoided. We’re advocating for an approach that includes safety for civilians and first responders and that brings benefit to those in a mental health crisis. Our main recommendation is that wellness checks should be responded to within a health care approach, as opposed to a law enforcement approach.

Police and mental health professionals legally intersect in section 28 of the Mental Health Act, when an involuntary hospital admission is required, so we understand that there is a role for police as backup in cases of violence. But many instances would not come to violence if a less intru­sive process of de-escalation were applied first.

Mental health services must be properly resourced and created to fill the current gap and create less need for police to be called in the first place. With respect to the B.C. Police Act in particular, we do agree with the recommendations of the B.C. crisis association — who, I believe, presented last meeting — specifically those related to section 2.4. This section appears to be a useful tool for making program and policy recommendations.

Ultimately, we would like to see a model for wellness checks that includes a continuum of response, starting with the least intrusive approach, such as peer support, and then continuing right through professional mental health support to collaborative mental health police response.

Peer support is currently in development as an approach and will certainly need to be studied and evaluated. There are collaborative mental health and policing models that are currently in use that do experience some success and could be expanded or tailored to B.C. communities. Examples of these would be Car 87 in Vancouver and Car 67 in Surrey, the Memphis model of policing in the USA and CAHOOTS in Oregon.

David will speak now about the interactional aspects of wellness checks that need to be considered in any intervention.

D. Fisher: We recognize that our interest in the conduct of wellness checks is but one facet among the many that you’re considering in respect to the reform of the B.C. Police Act. Even so, the adoption of your recommendations regarding wellness checks is likely to have a signifi­cant bearing on the lives of a large number of people.

[10:35 a.m.]

Given police involvement, adverse outcomes lead to negative publicity for the police, which is detrimental to the public interest.

I want to address a key psychosocial dynamic at the moment of contact with recipients of service. Imagine for yourselves: two in the morning, a bang on your door and the shout “Police.” In 40 milliseconds, adrenaline is coursing through your body. You’re on high alert. A quarter of a second later, your brain kicks in and explains your physiological reaction: “Something terrible has happened.” What is the recipient of service likely to make of a comparable intervention? Interveners need to be prepared for a confused mind, a degree of paranoia and a strong fear response. A fight or flight reaction is natural.

Imagine a peer intervention. A knock. “Hey, sis. This is Bill. I’m worried about you. Are you hearing me?” Police backup would be out of sight.

Police training and orientation is for the maintenance of law and order. That mindset is contrary to the spirit of wellness checks. It is not easy to switch into outreach in an uncertain situation, especially when an appropriate personal disposition and specialized training are absent.

We are happy to take your questions. Gisele will address program questions, and I’ll take any concerned with social or psychological considerations. Thank you.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you very much, both of you.

Members, questions?

T. Halford: I’ve looked at it before, but maybe if you guys…. I think, Gisele, you commented on the Memphis model and some of the things that go into that. I’ve heard about it. I’ve read about it. But I’d just maybe get your perspective on that particular model, which seems to be getting quite a bit of praise.

G. Benoit: Sure. I guess one thing I can mention about that model that looks great is that they do offer consultation to people who want to replicate it. So there is support available for replication. And it is a pretty well-articulated model, and they do evaluate it. What I don’t have access to are their evaluation stats or anything like that, but obviously somebody that was working on replicating that program would get easy access to that kind of information.

The biggest piece of that model that I’m aware of that seems to have a positive impact is that you have a combination of…. It’s training. Sorry.

Your patrol officers are really chosen carefully. There’s a good percentage of the force that would have the particular qualifications and characteristics that they’re looking for and would be trained. It sounds like it’s a 40-hour training program, so not just sort of an afternoon type of thing.

I’m not sure what to tell you. I do know that their training is very specific and that everybody gets the same training, which is very important when replicating a model, and that they do cover all facets of mental health and de-escalation.

T. Halford: Yeah. I wanted…. Sorry. Trevor Halford, MLA for Surrey–White Rock.

One of the things they say is: “A core of 20 percent of patrol officers selected for their knowledge of mental illness, characteristics of patience, compassion and communication.” Right? So while they’re selecting their officers, they’re going through that criteria.

I looked at it last week and then again this morning. It’s something that we can take away. But they’ve got some good provisions in here that…. Once you raised it, it triggered it for me.

G. Benoit: Oh, that’s great. Because again, if you’re trying to switch from a police approach towards a more mental health approach, that’s a really good interim. It’s a good interim measure. It could use resources that are already in place. So there are lots of positives there.

R. Glumac: MLA Rick Glumac from Port Moody–​Coquitlam.

Similarly, I would love to hear your opinion on the CAHOOTS model, which has been brought up by some other speakers as well.

[10:40 a.m.]

G. Benoit: Once again, what I would love to tell you is that I have their data, but I don’t. I still don’t have that. They do offer it, so again, I was pleased to see that. If someone were to develop it, you can consult with them. They are available for that. I’m sure they would share data.

I do have information back to, I think, about 2017 in terms of cost that I can tell you about there. It’s definitely a more cost-effective program. In about 2017, they answered about 17 percent of the Eugene police department’s overall call volume. They have a budget of $2.1 million. The entire police department budget is $90 million — so definitely very cost-effective.

How calls get to them is through 911. They do have their dispatch actually trained to determine which calls would be best slated to CAHOOTS. CAHOOTS goes out with, always, a medic and a crisis worker. The medic, I believe, can be a paramedic, a nurse — someone with a medical background. Then, of course, the mental health worker could be social work, etc. They do go out in pairs, and they are mobile.

They do have, in terms of satisfaction surveys…. I’ve seen some of the results there, and the people that interact with them show good satisfaction. They’ve been operating for, I think, about 30 years. I was a little bit surprised that we hadn’t heard about them before.

Anything else specifically you’d like to know about that program? I’m obviously not an expert in the program, but it did look very positive.

R. Glumac: No, I just wanted to hear your thoughts on it. We’ve had some people bring it up before and how it ties to the 911 call system. We’ve learned that New Zealand does something similar to that. So I’m just interested to hear your opinion and to learn more about it. Hopefully, we’ll have an opportunity as a committee to learn more about it as well.

G. Benoit: Excellent. Thank you.

D. Routley (Chair): Okay. I think that’s the end of the questions. With that, I’d like to thank you very much, Gisele and David, for helping our committee. There are a lot of great voices and insights in our province, and you’re definitely a part of that. We appreciate your contribution very much.

G. Benoit: Thank you so much — really appreciate the work you’re doing.

D. Routley (Chair): Members, the next guest is at 11 o’clock, so it looks like we have another break. I’m going to have yet another cup of coffee.

A. Olsen: Mr. Chair, are we in recess? Can we recess?

D. Routley (Chair): Shall we…? Yeah. We’re in recess.

The committee recessed from 10:43 a.m. to 11 a.m.

[D. Routley in the chair.]

D. Routley (Chair): Welcome back to this meeting of the Special Committee on Reforming the Police Act. I’m Doug Routley, MLA for Nanaimo–North Cowichan and the Chair. I’ll ask members to introduce themselves as they ask questions after your presentation.

We appreciate you attending our meeting. In the interest of time, I’ll hand it right over to our guests, Ella Hale and Emma Epp.

Thank you very much. It’s over to you.

ELLA HALE

E. Hale: Hi. I’m Ella.

E. Epp: I’m Emma.

E. Hale: We created a Facebook page for individuals to share their stories on psychiatric emergency services at Royal Jubilee Hospital. Through that, we’ve come with some stories involving police officers. Adam’s team actually introduced us to this committee and explained what was happening and told us to write in if we had any suggestions.

My letter just explains that we both have had experiences with IMCRT, which is the integrated mobile crisis response team, and the benefits that it has but also the limits that it has due to lack of resources. Something that we would like to see is it being available 24-7 but also being available to everyone when needed, not just if you have a gun to your head and if you’re going to shoot it. We’ve called the crisis line before and basically been told they don’t have enough resources to send somebody out to us.

When police officers are responding to mental health calls, there needs to be a trained professional there. No fault of their own, but they’re not trained in that situation. That would be something that we would find very useful into the Police Act.

Emma, do you have anything?

E. Epp: No. That’s about it.

E. Hale: I do have to say, too, if I knew that the thing was going to be posted so publicly, I would have got my mom to edit my letter. I used a wrong “there,” and she’s an elementary school teacher. She would be very embarrassed, but we are going to move on from that part.

Also, five minutes is a long time to talk. Yeah, I think that’s it.

D. Routley (Chair): Half my family, literally, are teachers too. I’m frequently subject to the same kind of critique. Thank you very much.

Members, any questions for our guests?

R. Singh: Thank you so much, Emma and Ella. I’m Rachna Singh. I’m the MLA for Surrey–Green Timbers, and it’s so good to see you here.

Emma, I would like to say your name is the name of one of my favourite characters, from the Jane Austen book. So good to see people with that name. So happy to see you here.

Your letter is just great. I honestly feel that it takes a lot of courage to come to a public setting and talk about the issues that are so important, so critical. Talking about mental health is challenging. It is difficult anyways. But then to talk about it publicly…. I’m glad that you have a great MLA who gave you this option, and we are so glad to see you here.

Just some questions that I have, Emma and Ella, are: what do you think…? Like, your own personal experiences…. You said, about the funding, that they don’t have the resources. The police, yes, sometimes are not equipped to deal with it. What would be your recommendation? Just so that…. I know you have written the letter too, but also for us in the committee to be aware of. What would you suggest — police coordinating with some mental health professionals? That is what we are hearing a lot. What would you recommend?

[11:05 a.m.]

E. Hale: Yeah. I think IMCRT is a really, really great model. I think how they follow up and how they take you to the hospital and talk to the staff is, in theory, a really, really great model. They need more funding, and they need to be available 24-7, because they are only available 12 to 12.

We know that a lot of people, especially young people, struggle at night. So if you’re having a crisis at 11:59, you won’t get help until the morning at 12. So you’re like: “Okay. I’ve got to put my crisis on pause.” I think having that service available 24-7 and with more resources…. Right now I think there is only one, maybe two, plainclothes police officers, which is not nearly enough if they’re the ones that have to section you under the Police Act or under the Mental Health Act. Definitely more resources towards that.

R. Singh: Also, we heard today a lot about the wellness checks, with the police officers in uniform. You also bring up that point — police officers in plain clothes. Do you think that could make a difference in how people are treated and how people respond to that — a police officer not in a uniform but in plain clothes?

E. Hale: Yeah. I think mental health needs to stop being criminalized. When you’re in a crisis and in a vulnerable state, having lights and sirens and people with guns and batons and stuff showing up is not helpful for the majority of the cases. So having somebody in a T-shirt and jeans come and talk to you like a human, not like another call, is really important. I think de-escalation and that sort of stuff is really, really key.

Yeah. I do think it’s helpful. There is a time and a place for people to have more high-risk and have police officers with weapons to protect themselves and protect the public, but I think for a majority of the cases, that’s just not needed.

R. Singh: Very important point. Thank you so much, and thanks again for your presentation and being here.

A. Olsen: Thank you very much for your presentation and all of the advocacy work that you’ve been doing, to both you and Emma. I’m very happy to have been working alongside you in this.

I’m just wondering if you could provide some context. You’ve heard a lot of stories over the last…. You’ve created a space and then invited people to share their stories. Can you provide us a little bit of insight into what you’ve heard from those in terms of…? I don’t expect any hardened statistics from the numbers that you’ve received in the responses. But how often do police have a role in the stories that you’re hearing from people — that they’re sharing with you on your platform?

E. Hale: Yeah. I think, just because of the way the mental health system is — and everybody is aware — if you go in voluntary, you don’t get treated the same. You get dismissed and stuff. I think a lot of people know that, so they cause a scene — not consciously, I would say — to go in involuntary. So I would say in the majority of our stories, police are involved in some way or another. If you go in involuntary, you definitely get treated more seriously. I would say 95 percent of our stories that we’re receiving are people going involuntary with police.

T. Halford: Thank you to Ella and Emma for sharing and for your advocacy. It’s making a huge difference. It is.

Just if you’re able to comment in terms of your own past experiences. In terms of the police and their actions and how they actually facilitate and work with, particularly, health care professionals at the hospital, if you had an observations on that or thoughts, I’d be curious to hear your perspective.

E. Hale: Yeah. I think it’s hard, at least, for us to speak on the negative effects of police officers. We’re very privileged in the fact we’re white, cis females. So some of the things we see in our stories from Indigenous folks and from BIPOC folks…. It’s just not something that we experience. Personally, I don’t think I’ve had a horrible experience, and I would say police officers are more trained than security officers. I think that’s another thing. I don’t know if this committee has anything to do with that, but security officers getting special privileges I don’t think needs to happen either.

[11:10 a.m.]

Interactions with staff or police officers, I think, have been fairly positive — more helpful when IMCRT is there, because they have the social worker or counsellor being able to communicate what’s actually happening. And they have your records, so when they show up at your house, they know, “Oh, she’s in psychosis” or “She’s experiencing a PTSD flashback” or whatever the case may be. They know that information. They’re not just coming there blind.

In terms of when you actually get to hospital and they’re interacting with medical professionals, I think it has been fairly positive. I think it’s unfortunate to hear the Times Colonist say that they’re just sitting there babysitting, because I think that’s not relevant — on not needing to place the onus on the patient.

T. Halford: That’s what I was getting at. Thanks for pointing that out.

D. Davies (Deputy Chair): Thanks, as well, to both of you. As a former school teacher, I didn’t even notice your little errors until I just read it again. It was a well-written letter.

As a follow-up, I want to comment on a comment that — I can’t remember — one of you just made a moment ago about…. You know, the police need to respond to these calls not just as another call. I think that’s, very simply, a profound statement, so I appreciate that.

Regarding your Facebook page…. I apologize. I have not been to it, or I’ve never had a chance to. What has the response generally been on the page? You may have already alluded to it a little bit — but some of the themes that you’ve been seeing on your page.

E. Hale: I think our page isn’t so much about how people get to the hospital. It’s more so what happens when they get to hospital. I always say this. It’s probably not quite right, but it really doesn’t matter how people get to the hospital if when they get to the hospital, they’re treated the same. So it’s really important to address the police scenario and that, but I think once people get to the hospital, they’re treated horribly — emotionally abused and physically abused by security officers there.

A lot of our stories aren’t really reflected in so much the police involvement, I would say. The ones that do involve police officers are from Indigenous folks and BIPOC folks, but a common theme is lack of resources and underfunding.

G. Lore: Hi. Grace Lore. I’m the MLA for Victoria–Beacon Hill.

My questions were answered either by being posed by my colleagues or in your response, but I did just want to thank you for being here and for your courage and your voice and the advocacy that you’re doing. I know myself and know others on this committee have spoken publicly about their own mental health challenges. I know it takes courage, so I just want to thank you for your leadership.

D. Routley (Chair): Thank you, Grace, and I second that as well — or third or fourth it. We really appreciate you being here, and I hope you go away feeling really good about your contribution and the fact that participation in the process matters. We really appreciate seeing that from young people like yourself. Thank you so much.

With that, I think we’ve extinguished the whole question list. Does anybody else have anything?

With that, I’ll thank you very much for your contribution to the important work of making these recommendations.

Members, it has come to the point of me, this day, asking for a motion to move the meeting in camera.

Trevor has made that motion, and Dan has seconded it.

Motion approved.

The committee continued in camera from 11:14 a.m. to 11:50 a.m.

[D. Routley in the chair.]

D. Routley (Chair): I would like a motion to adjourn the meeting.

From Trevor, seconded by Karin.

Motion approved.

The committee adjourned at 11:50 a.m.