The committee met at 9:06 a.m.

[Amna Shah in the chair.]

Amna Shah (Chair): Good morning, everyone. This is Amna Shah. I’m the MLA for Surrey City Centre and the Chair of the Select Standing Committee on Private Bills and Private Members’ Bills, an all-party committee of the Legislative Assembly.

I’d like to acknowledge that we are meeting today on the legislative precinct here in Victoria, which is located on the territory of the lək̓ʷəŋən-speaking peoples, known as the Songhees and SXIMEȽEȽ Nations.

At today’s meeting, we will hear from the sponsors of two private members’ bills that are committed to our committee, after which we will move in camera to deliberate.

Our first presenter is Darlene Rotchford, the sponsor of Bill M202, Eligibility to Hold Public Office Act.

Welcome, Darlene. As a reminder, you have up to 20 minutes to present to the committee, followed by 20 minutes for questions from committee members. Go ahead.

Consideration of Bills

Bill M202 — Eligibility to Hold
Public Office Act

Darlene Rotchford: Great, thank you very much.

Today I come forward to present Bill M202, the Eligibility to Hold Public Office Act. This legislation is a crucial step in ensuring that members of the Legislative Assembly are fully dedicated to their provincial responsibilities.

Specifically this bill will prohibit MLAs from simultaneously holding elected positions in local government, such as city councils, school boards, and collecting two paycheques for two separate elected positions, commonly referred to as double-dipping.

This legislation is about upholding the integrity of our democratic institutions. British Columbians deserve confidence that their elected officials are fully committed to the roles that they have chosen to fulfil. They deserve assurance that MLAs are not collecting two separate taxpayer-funded salaries, that there are no conflicts of interest and that those elected to serve at the provincial level are dedicating 100 percent of their time and energy to addressing the pressing issues facing our province.

Furthermore, the bill brings British Columbia in line with practices of other provinces — that serving as MLAs is rightly recognized as a full-time commitment.

When I decided to run for provincial office, I made a commitment to my municipal council that, should I be elected, I would step away from my role to avoid any potential conflict of interest. I took an unpaid leave of absence during the election campaign. Upon being elected, I officially resigned from my position on Esquimalt council.

What surprised me, however, was learning that there was no legal requirement to actually do so. I was astonished to discover that an individual could serve as both an MLA and a local government representative at the same time. I was astonished to learn of city MLAs collecting two paycheques, if they wanted to, for two completely separate elected positions. I think we’d be hard-pressed to find a regular person in the street who thinks that this would pass the smell test.

Being an MLA is not a part-time job. Since taking office, my days have been long and demanding. Like many of my colleagues in the chamber, I begin work early in the morning and often finish late in the evening. I could not possibly give my full-time attention to both provincial and municipal duties.

[9:10 a.m.]

The people living in Esquimalt-Colwood deserve an MLA who is fully committed to advocating for them at a provincial level, just as the people of Esquimalt-Colwood deserve a local representative who fully focuses on their municipal concerns.

This bill is not about workload. It's about transparency and accountability. Whether it's housing, policing or any other issue where the province and local government need to negotiate, the local and provincial government representatives often have different perspectives due to different accountabilities and responsibilities.

The potential for a conflict of interest is extremely likely. In fact, when this bill was presented in the House, a member was facing a potential for conflict of interest and, in result, could not even participate in the vote.

The high potential for divided loyalties undermines the trust the people place in their elected officials and compromises the integrity of both positions. It's clear that this has to be one or the other. The majority of Canada has already addressed this issue, and this bill will catch British Columbia up with those provinces.

At the moment, Esquimalt is holding a by-election to fill my former council seat. This, quite frankly, is how it should be. The people of Esquimalt deserve a local representative who is fully committed to municipal issues just as I'm fully committed to my responsibility as their MLA in Esquimalt-Colwood. This principle should apply not just in my community but across the province.

It is important to clarify that this bill applies exclusively to MLAs. We already have rules preventing an individual from serving as both an MLA and a Member of Parliament, and for very good reason. Public office is not something to be juggled. It requires our full-time dedication.

There are numerous MLAs across the province who were holding local elected positions. They did the right thing and stepped down to be 100 percent focused on their work as an MLA.

This bill is not about political partisanship. It's about good governance. It's about ensuring that the people of British Columbia have representatives who are singularly focused on the roles they were elected to fulfil.

Again, this bill brings British Columbia in line with practices of other provinces such as Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Manitoba. That means that approximately 70 percent of Canadians have confidence that their provincial representatives are completely focused on the job and not collecting two paycheques.

This legislation is about fairness, transparency and accountability. It ensures that MLAs are fully dedicated to their provincial responsibilities and that local government representatives are equally committed to serving their communities. British Columbians, quite frankly, deserve nothing less.

Amna Shah (Chair): Thank you for your presentation, Darlene.

Now, Members, we have 20 minutes for questions from the committee, so please indicate if you wish to ask a question, and I will keep a list of speakers.

Jessie Sunner: Thank you, MLA Rotchford, for your presentation.

The question I have is…. You mentioned that other provinces have already implemented this kind of legislation.

Could you tell us a little bit more about how many provinces and more details on that?

Darlene Rotchford: Right now, through our research, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Manitoba currently already have this in place.

Mable Elmore: Thank you for the presentation.

In terms of your presentation with respect to the conflict of interest and also looking at how to…. We've heard some arguments about folks holding different levels of office.

Can you just talk about your perspective in terms of…? Can someone who is an MLA excuse themselves from votes? Or how that would be…? You know, just address that issue in terms of being able to dedicate themselves 100 percent to two jobs and just some of the challenges around that with respect to the bill that you have introduced here.

Darlene Rotchford: Yeah. Are you looking for a specific example? I'll give you an example. For example, some of the local governments actually run at the same time as the Legislature, just from a time perspective, let's say.

[9:15 a.m.]

I'll pick on Victoria, because I know their local government meets during the day on Mondays, all day, for eight hours. When we're in session, we are here all day, for eight hours.

So at some point, you are not going to be able to fulfil your duties because you’re going to have to make a decision on where you’re spending your time. One would hope that if you’re elected as an MLA, you are at the Legislature doing the work that you were elected to do.

That then puts you not doing your duties as a local government official. Depending on what’s on your agenda for the day, either within the Legislative Assembly or within your local government, you may have to remove yourself to have those conversations and not be able to vote and be fully present.

So I think on Bill 44 across the province, there are a lot of conversations going on within local government, as well, around housing in general.

You cannot be, in my opinion, an MLA full time, doing the work of the province and talking about housing and the important work we’re doing within the Legislature and then go back to local government, being fully transparent, unbiased opinions, and having those conversations at a local government level.

Does that kind of help where you were?

Mable Elmore: Yeah, thank you.

Darlene Rotchford: Just to add to the time piece of it, I live on south Vancouver Island, unlike some of our counterparts across the province, and there are already challenges for people coming in and making sure we’re here and participating in the Leg. Trying to do that logistically even, along with the other stuff, is not feasible for folks.

Jeremy Valeriote: Thank you, Member, for the thorough explanation. I’m in agreement with most of it. I will say that the two paycheques thing is less of a consideration for me. I mean, a lot of people hold two jobs, but I agree the duties are difficult.

Two specific questions on timeline. The first one, I guess, is: was there…? The bill, as it is, is pretty straightforward, fairly simple. I’m wondering if there was consideration given to the commencement date. I’ve had suggestions that it come into effect January 1, which would not require the need for bylaws.

But my bigger concern is setting the rules so that the next people that run for office are aware. Not changing the rules in mid-term, I guess. So setting the date for, I guess, the next municipal election so that people know what they’re getting into and what the rules are.

Was there consideration given to when this comes into effect?

Darlene Rotchford: Thank you, Member, for the question. It was. Almost everyone who was in a local elected position during the election has stepped down, to be quite frank. So when we looked at the time frame, because we believed it was the right thing to do and people shouldn’t be allowed to do this, most people had already done the right thing and looked at that, because I do believe people should not be allowed to do this.

So for your question in regards to it, it was in consideration.

Just to clarify, you said bylaws, but I think you meant by-election in that question, right?

Jeremy Valeriote: Yes. Sorry.

Darlene Rotchford: Okay. I just wanted to clarify I got the question right. That’s okay. Thank you for the question.

Jeremy Valeriote: Can I ask one more?

Then just the other piece about the timing of all this. My sense is, and this is probably minor, but if somebody’s a local councillor and spends at least two months running for election, gets elected, my thought…. Was there consideration given to a certain short grace period for them to wind down their councillor duties, discharge anything they needed to?

I guess right now, as soon as the writs are returned, they’re quickly disqualified, and I think that’s less than two weeks. So just consideration to give them, I don’t know, say, four to six weeks to square everything away so that institutional memory isn’t lost?

Darlene Rotchford: I would have to double-check, but I believe my understanding was that from the time you were elected until the time you’re sworn in was the time frame, which is a couple of weeks. But I would have to think about that again.

But what I will say is most people…. I will speak on behalf of myself. When I knew I was going to run and there was a potential for this, I had those questions on the front end with my local elected officials. If you’re going to run provincially and it’s going to affect yourself and local government, not only do you deserve the respect for your colleagues but for your community that you’re having those conversations in and what that may look like.

[9:20 a.m.]

You should be doing that anyway. I don’t think you should have to necessarily be putting that in the legislation, because again, there are consequences when you do these things. This should be part of that conversation, anyway.

I guess, for me, the fact that this wasn’t even there shocked me. I just assumed at the time that if I was going to…. I prepared for it. One would hope that anyone in that situation is doing that as well, anyway.

Jeremy Valeriote: Can I just…? Yeah, okay, I take your point. I think just that the run-up to elections is frantic, as we all know, so the ability to do that properly…. I know that as soon as you’re elected, we’re into various preparations, but I think just the consideration of maybe you don’t expect to get elected or don’t know for sure so you can’t…. You probably prefer to spend time on getting elected than squaring away your municipal business and then….

Anyway, if it’s two weeks…. I thought that we become MLAs as soon as the writs are returned, which may be one to two weeks anyway.

Hon Chan: It’s about…. Yeah, it was the 19th, and the writ returned on November 6 or something like that. So it’s only about 2½ or 3 weeks, max.

Darlene Rotchford: I will add, as a candidate, for anyone who doesn’t know, I only became the candidate a week before the election. So if I can do it as a local government official a week before the election…. If people were elected ahead of me and weren’t thinking about it, well, you should have been.

Amna Shah (Chair): Okay, so we’ll go to the next question.

Hon Chan: Yeah, thank you for your presentation. That was informative.

I just have one follow up on Jeremy’s question, too. It’s on the timing. So, this one, how about for the current term? Is it on January 1?

Darlene Rotchford: You mean if this was to pass?

Hon Chan: If this passed first….

Darlene Rotchford: When would it be enacted? Immediately.

Hon Chan: Okay, so they don’t even…. Whoever is in two roles right now would have to resign immediately.

Darlene Rotchford: Yep.

Hon Chan: All right. Also, the second question is about by-elections. So, that would just fall onto the responsibility of the municipality, I’m guessing?

Darlene Rotchford: There’s already processes in place for that. Whether you won provincially, whether you get…. If something for a different reason happens, and you have to step down, that’s already in place.

Again, these are things that we as local government should be thinking about when we’re considering running. I know I did. I knew that when I stepped down, this would happen, because there was a process in place for it.

Hon Chan: Right, but there’s no legislation before that, so people who are running two roles might not actually know. Even though you mentioned that it’s the right thing to do, but it’s still considerable. Sometimes it’s the right thing, but sometimes people might be holding two jobs.

Have you thought about rural communities? Because I understand personally in my riding of Richmond, sure, there are tons of people who are running for councillor. In Vancouver, there was over 100 people running for councillor — that’s not a problem.

But how about rural communities? There’s many rural communities in the North. Actually many people are holding two positions — not MLA, but two elected positions — because there’s a lack of people and communities are about five or six hours’ drive away. Did we look at the impact on those rural communities?

Darlene Rotchford: Again, it comes rural versus urban. I will say I, technically, am in an urban community. During our election, for six seats, there were still only seven people. I think there’s different challenges no matter where you’re at in the province when it comes to local government. But at the same time, this bill is not looking at that. That is a different conversation to be had. This bill is specifically looking at the fact that people cannot be an MLA and cannot hold local government.

Hon Chan: Sorry, my understanding is that this bill covers the entire B.C. It doesn’t matter if it’s rural or urban MLAs.

Darlene Rotchford: Yeah, we’re on the same page. I agree with you.

Hon Chan: Yeah, so I’m just questioning: should we look into the impact on rural communities where there are not many people running for local elected officials?

Darlene Rotchford: But that’s not the intent of this bill. The intent of this bill is just to say you can’t hold two positions as an MLA and as a local government official.

Hon Chan: Yeah, I understand that. My question is that when we look at the rural communities where they do not have enough people to run for local government or municipal government or regional government, they just don’t have the people who…. Once you’re resigned, they might not actually immediately be able to find a replacement. So, do we have impact on those communities, and should we look into the impact on those regions?

Darlene Rotchford: Again, the bill is pretty broad. In regards to the unclear, it just says you can’t hold it. There are not details within the bill. The bill is just that you cannot hold two positions.

[9:25 a.m.]

Hon Chan: Okay, so I guess there’s no research on the impact on rural communities.

Also, a question…. Can I continue questions? I think I’m asking a lot.

Amna Shah (Chair): Yeah, I mean, we…. I think you have asked the question, and she’s responded to it.

Hon Chan: I will switch to another question.

Amna Shah (Chair): But I will give Darlene the opportunity to continue responding. It seems like she may have something else for you.

Darlene Rotchford: Just to be clear. It isn’t the responsibility of a local politician to find their replacement in any level of government, within local government. This isn’t how elections work, right? So at the end of the day, back to my statement, that’s not our job when we step down from any elected position.

Hon Chan: For the cost of a by-election…. Obviously, right now, I think this bill did not cover the cost. But there is actually, in the…. Do you look at the costs that it will trigger in a by-election? The costs will just be offloaded to the municipal, I guess?

Darlene Rotchford: Similar to the question I answered for the member previously to you, there are already systems in place. Something could happen outside of this that would also trigger elections. So there’s a process in place for people to follow in regards to when a by-election needs to be called.

Hon Chan: The reason I’m asking this question is because for an unfunded mandate, a mandate that’s offloaded by the province, which the legislation…. There’s actually legislation in place that the province cannot download unfunded mandates to municipalities. So if we are legislating and forcing people to resign, that cost actually might have to come back to the province. Do we look into that part as well?

Darlene Rotchford: There’s already a system in place. Therefore, they would follow the system as if a by-election was triggered. That is my understanding.

Hon Chan: I think it’s because a forced resigning versus a volunteer resigning…. That might be a problem. People are not volunteering to resign.

Darlene Rotchford: Again, there is a system to municipal affairs and what triggers a by-election. There is already a system in place for that by-election, to the best of my knowledge. Because that system is there, that would be the case.

Again, when we ran to be an MLA, we knew that by-elections would be triggered. That was a possibility, right? For myself, I knew I was going to be resigning. My council was aware it would trigger it and the costs associated with it.

Hon Chan: That’s all of my questions.

Amna Shah (Chair): Great. Thanks. Are there any further questions for Darlene?

Mable Elmore: Maybe just one.

I think it’s clear, and you’ve mentioned it, with respect to 70 percent of Canadians that are covered by this legislation explicitly prohibiting an MLA to hold multiple offices. With British Columbia coming in, I think we’d be over the majority of the country.

I think that enacting this bill meets the expectations of British Columbians, and certainly Canadians, in terms of…. I would expect the rest of the country to follow suit.

Just a comment on that.

Amna Shah (Chair): Great. Thank you.

I actually have a question, Darlene. In terms of other jurisdictions, like other provinces, do you know which provinces also have this? My understanding is that there are multiple, but I’m not sure which ones.

Darlene Rotchford: Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Manitoba currently all have this in place.

Amna Shah (Chair): Are there any further questions? All right. Seeing none….

Thank you so much, Darlene, for your presentation.

We will take a brief recess in line for our next presentation. We’ll start at 9.40.

The committee recessed from 9:29 a.m. to 9:39 a.m.

[Amna Shah in the chair.]

Amna Shah (Chair): Thank you, Members. Our next item of business is a presentation from the sponsor of Bill M204, Perinatal and Postnatal Mental Health Strategy Act, from Jody Toor.

[9:40 a.m.]

Thank you for joining us today, Jody. As a reminder, you have 20 minutes for your presentation, after which the committee will have up to 20 minutes for questions, so take it away.

Bill M204 — Perinatal and Postnatal
Mental Health Strategy Act

Jody Toor: Perfect. Thank you so much, Chair and members of the committee. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to present Bill M204, the Perinatal and Postnatal Mental Health Strategy Act.

This bill responds to a deep and persistent gap in our health care system, one that affects thousands of mothers, birthing individuals and families across British Columbia every single year. Up to one in five women in Canada experience prenatal mental health challenges, such as anxiety or depression, yet less than 15 percent receive evidence-based treatment. Those navigating pregnancy, childbirth, loss or early parenthood often face mental health challenges.

I bring this bill forward as a mother who has experienced these challenges firsthand. I’ve also listened to countless mothers and families who have shared their stories with me, stories of resilience, pain and the search for support that was too often unavailable or out of reach.

Anxiety, depression, trauma, psychosis and grief during this period are not new, but our system has been slow to respond in B.C. We face issues such as long wait times to see specialists, high cost for private care, challenges with transportation, difficulty finding child care or even understanding where to go for help. In some communities, there are simply no prenatal mental health services available at all.

Stigma continues to be a major barrier that prevents many from seeking help. While prenatal mental health challenges often affect anyone, individuals from unserved communities, including racialized, Indigenous and immigrant parents are often disproportionately impacted. These gaps are especially around rural and remote and northern communities, but they are present throughout the province. Without a coordinated provincial strategy, services remain patchwork, inconsistent and inaccessible for far too many families.

The need is urgent. Families are struggling today. While I want to acknowledge the work that is already underway across sectors from health care providers to community organizations, we heard clearly, during second reading, that more must be done.

I want to take this moment to sincerely thank the individuals who spoke during the debate and shared personal stories, whether their own or those of their loved ones. These were deeply emotional and important stories that were told, and I appreciate that. That helped bring this issue into light with honesty and vulnerability. These words were not just powerful, but they were essential.

I also want to take a moment to recognize how research can inform and should continue to strengthen the provincial strategy. Evidence alone is not the only solution but is one of the most powerful tools we have to guide in decision-making, especially when lives, families and long-term outcomes are at stake.

We have strong Canadian-led research that shows us what work has been done and is being done. Dr. Alanaise is a PhD doctor, a Canada Research Chair of mental health and associate professor at UBC. Dr. Sarah Horn is a clinical psychologist and post-doctorate student at UBC. After I presented my bill, they reached out and showcased how much evidence-based research has been done and how much work they’re doing.

Along with the SUMMIT trial, scaling up maternal mental health care by increasing access to treatment…. It’s one of the largest psychotherapy studies for prenatal depression and anxiety in the world. Led by Dr. Daisy Singla, the trial addressed a key issue. While talk therapy is highly effective and preferred by most women, only one in five are able to access it due to cost, transportation and a shortage of specialists.

SUMMIT tested scalable solutions, and findings were clear. Brief talk therapy, especially behavioural activation, can be just as effectively delivered by trained, non-specialist providers such as nurses, midwives and lay counsellors, with outcomes evident to care from clinical psychologists.

It also found that therapy delivered through telemedicine is just as effective as in person. That really helps with care for women that are in those rural areas or can’t leave the house because they can’t drive, they have other children in the house or even disabilities.

In short, the SUMMIT trial demonstrated that effective, evidence-based care can be delivered affordably and accessibly without compromising quality. These insights directly support the kind of innovative, equality models that the bill aims to provide and promote.

[9:45 a.m.]

These findings are echoed in the CANMAT 2025 guidelines by Dr. Simone Vigod, Canada’s national clinical guidelines for prenatal depression and anxiety.

They also emphasize the trauma-informed and culturally responsible care. Crucially, these highlighted scalable models like task-sharing and telemedicine are not only effective but essential in addressing access gaps and reducing the strain on the health care system, which we’re facing right now. Together, this research provides a clear direction. Effectively, care does not need to be complex or expensive, but it must be accessible, proactive and tailored to real-world conditions.

I want to be clear: this is not about replacing professionals; it’s about supporting them. In a resource environment, these scalable models can extend the reach of our health care system and ensure that psychologists, psychiatrists and other specialists are able to focus on the most complex areas.

This is about building capacity, not reducing it. This research points us towards what’s possible, and it’s time we act on that knowledge. This bill offers a meaningful step towards one informed by evidence, grounded in compassion and focused on equality. Bill M204 lays the foundation for a provincial strategy that would be developed in consultation with most-impacted patients, care providers, Indigenous communities and advocates. It calls for an inclusive trauma-informed approach and ensures ongoing oversight, transparency and accountability.

Today I’ll walk you through the bill, clause by clause, and speak to the intent behind each section. I’ll go through each clause and what it stands for, and we can answer any questions afterwards.

Clause 1, definitions. This section provides clarity on key terms. “Health care” means anything that is done for a therapeutic, preventative, diagnostic or other purposes related to health. “Health care provider” means a person licensed or certified or registered in British Columbia to provide health care. “Indigenous governing body” has the same meaning as in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.

Clause 2, development. This section is the foundation of the bill. It creates a legal obligation for the Minister of Health to develop and maintain a comprehensive strategy to improve prenatal and postnatal mental health in B.C. It lays out what the strategy must contain and how often it must be reviewed. The goal is to ensure that mental health during and after pregnancy is treated with the same seriousness, structure and provincial coordination as other areas of health care.

Clause 2(1): The minister must develop a strategy to support prenatal and postnatal mental health in British Columbia.

The intent here is to move beyond fragmented or localized efforts and require a coordinated provincewide plan. This makes prenatal mental health a government priority to ensure every region, not just a few, benefit from evidence-based services, so especially rural and northern communities.

2(2): The strategy must include measures to (a) provide universal access to perinatal and postnatal mental health care.

Universal access means that care is available to everyone, regardless of where they live, how much they earn or what language they speak. This goal is for equality, not just in theory but in practice.

2(2)(b): ensure timely access to prenatal and postnatal mental health care providers.

The intent here is to reduce long wait times and connect people to help when they need it most. Timeliness is key to prevention and early intervention, which can reduce the severity and duration of symptoms.

2(2)(c): expand the availability of community based perinatal and postnatal mental health care services.

This clause is important in bringing care closer to home. Community-based services are often more culturally responsible, accessible and trusted, especially in rural or underserved regions.

2(2)(d): increase awareness of perinatal and postnatal mental health disorders.

Many people don’t recognize what they’re going through as a mental health issue, or they don’t even know that help is available. This clause focuses on education, normalizing these experiences and reducing stigma so people can seek help early.

2(2)(e): increase the availability of perinatal and postnatal mental health training for health care providers.

The goal is to help equip the professionals who already interact with patients during and after pregnancy — such as doctors, nurses, midwives and doulas — to identify warning signs and offer appropriate support.

[9:50 a.m.]

2(2)(f): provide trauma-informed perinatal and postnatal mental health care.

Trauma-informed care is critical. Many people giving birth have histories of trauma, and others experience trauma during pregnancy delivery or loss. This clause ensures care providers are trained to respond with sensitivity, compassion and safety.

2.2(g): address the social determinants of prenatal and postnatal mental health.

Mental health is not only shaped biologically. It is shaped by lived realities — poverty, housing insecurity, racism, lack of social services and support. This clause ensures those root causes are part of the strategy and not an afterthought.

2.2(h): reduce barriers to accessing prenatal and postnatal mental health care.

The intent is to eliminate practical challenges: high fees, no services available, no transportation, long travel distances, no child care, language barriers. These barriers are often what stop people from getting care when they need it the most.

2.2(i): combat stigma related to prenatal and postnatal mental health care.

Stigma isolates people and makes them feel they’re failing as parents when, in fact, they’re struggling with something common and treatable. This clause focuses on public education and compassion.

2.2(j): promote research and data collection on prenatal and postnatal mental health care.

To build better services, we need better information: who’s being served, who’s not, what’s working, what isn’t. This clause ensures the strategy is evidence-driven and responsible for changing needs over time.

2.2(k): provide grief counselling for those who have experienced or are experiencing miscarriage, termination of a pregnancy, stillborn or a death of an infant.

This clause makes sure that grief and loss are recognized and supported. These experiences are incredibly painful and are often isolating. Including them in the strategy confirms that this care is not optional; it’s essential.

2.3(a): the minister must develop the strategy within one year after the day in which this act comes into force.

A deadline ensures urgency. Without it, implementation can be delayed. One year is a reasonable time frame to begin this important work.

2.3(b): review and update the strategy at least once every two years after that date.

This ensures that the strategy doesn’t just sit on a shelf. It must be reviewed and improved regularly in response to new data involving needs and community feedback.

Clause 3, “Scope.” In developing and updating the strategy, the minister must include….

This section outlines the factors that the minister must take into account when designing and updating the strategy. These are indicated to ensure that the strategy is evidence-based, responsive to real conditions on the ground and focused on areas known to directly impact access, quality and outcome in prenatal and postnatal mental health. It helps guide the strategy’s priorities and ensures that systematic issues such as wait times, service availability, training gaps, public awareness and social conditions are not overlooked.”

3(a): wait times for specialist, prenatal, postnatal mental health care services.

This focuses on reducing wait times for specialized mental health services during and after pregnancy, ensuring people get care when they need it most.

3(b): the availability of community-based prenatal and postnatal mental health care services, the importance of having accessible, local, community-based services that meet people where they are.

3(c): public awareness of prenatal and postnatal mental health care disorders.

This aims to access and improve public understanding of prenatal and postnatal mental health to support early recognition and reduce stigma.

3(d): the availability of training programs for health care providers in respect of prenatal and postnatal mental health.

This highlights the need to evaluate and expand training programs so that health care providers are equipped to address mental health concerns during and after pregnancy.

3(e): the social determinants of prenatal and postnatal mental health require a strategy to account for broader social and economic factors, such as income, housing and systematic inequalities. These impact health care outcomes.

Clause 4, “Consultation.” In developing and updating the strategy, the minister must consult with all of the following….

This section ensures that the strategy is informed by those directly impacted, as well as professionals and experts who work on the front lines. By requiring broader consultations, the bill guarantees that the strategy is inclusive, culturally sensitive and responsive to real-world needs.

[9:55 a.m.]

4(a): perinatal health care providers.

This ensures that front-line professionals involved in perinatal care can provide insight into gaps in current mental health support during pregnancy.

4(b): postnatal health care providers.

This includes input from those providing health care after childbirth, who often see direct effects on postnatal mental health challenges on parents and infants.

4(c): mental health care providers.

This involves mental health care professionals who bring clinical expertise and can help design effective, evidence-based approaches to care and treatment.

4(d): individuals who have lived experiences.

This centres the voices of those who have personally experienced perinatal and postnatal mental health challenges to ensure this strategy reflects lived realities.

4(e): Indigenous governing bodies.

This requires that Indigenous governing bodies ensure the strategy respects Indigenous rights, perspectives and culturally appropriate approaches to care.

4(f): perinatal and postnatal advocate organizations.

This engages organizations and agencies that have been working to raise awareness and push for change in this area, ensuring that their knowledge and networks are a part of the solution.

4(g): organizations specializing in pregnancy loss and bereavement support.

This brings in organizations that specialize in supporting people through miscarriages, stillborn and infant loss, ensuring grief and bereavement care is properly addressed.

4(h): prescribed classes of individuals and organizations.

This provides flexibility by allowing the government to include additional individuals or groups through regulation, ensuring that consultation processes can evolve as needed.

Clause 5, “Tabling”. Upon completion of a strategy referred to in sections 2 and 3, the minister must, as soon as practicable….

This section ensures that the final strategy is made public and accountable to the bill and the public.

5(a): table the strategy in the Legislative Assembly if the Legislative Assembly is then sitting or deposit the report with the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly if the Legislative Assembly is not sitting.

This requires that the minister table the strategy in the Legislative Assembly or submit it to the Clerk if the assembly is not in session, ensuring formal legislative oversight.

5(b): post the strategy on a publicly accessible website maintained by or on behalf of the minister.

This mandates that the strategy be posted online for public access, promoting the transparency and public engagement with the strategy.

Clause 6, “Review of Act.”

This section ensures that the legislation is subject to formal evaluation after five years to assess its effectiveness and determine if amendments or improvements are needed.

Five years after this act comes into force, a special committee of the Legislative Assembly is to be appointed for the purpose of reviewing this act. This requires a special committee of the Legislative Assembly to be appointed to conduct the review, embedding long-term accountability into the act.

Clause 7, “Regulations.” This section provides flexibility for the government to make supporting regulations necessary for the implementation of the act.

The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations referred to in section 41 of the Interpretation Act. This allows the Lieutenant Governor in Council to pass regulations under the authority of section 41, enabling the act to be adapted to practical needs as they may arise.

Clause 8. This section establishes the start date of the act. This act comes into force on the date of the royal assent. It brings the act into force immediately upon receiving royal assent, ensuring that there is no delay in beginning work on this strategy.

In conclusion, Bill M204 is more than just a policy. It is a necessary step towards building a health care system that treats perinatal and postnatal mental health with the seriousness and support it deserves. It reflects what evidence tells us — that early intervention is effective, that scalable care models work and that real change happens when we listen to patients, providers and the community.

By adopting this bill, we are not only supporting mothers and birthing individuals; we’re strengthening families, communities and future generations.

[10:00 a.m.]

I respectfully ask that you all support me as we move this bill forward. I thank you for listening to all the clauses, and I welcome your questions.

Amna Shah (Chair): Great. Thank you so much for your presentation, Jody.

Members, we now have 20 minutes for questions from the committee. Please indicate if you wish to ask a question, and I will keep a list of speakers. Great.

Mabel, we’ll start with you.

Mable Elmore: Awesome. Terrific.

Yeah, thank you for your presentation.

To your point with respect to addressing stigma and raising awareness, the stories that we heard really contribute across our society, I think, raising understanding in terms of this issue, which I think for a long time is…. Right? We haven’t become accustomed to talking about it. So I just appreciated hearing those stories, and you know, really contributing towards that.

I agree with you that needing to address one in five mothers who struggle or deal with either peri- or postnatal depression is a priority.

My concern and my perspective is that…. My expectation is that this issue be addressed, to your point, across our health care system — provincial mandate — but also be integrated in terms of the service that’s delivered by our health care system. So in terms of addressing issues or challenges around depression, I know it’s highly associated, as well, with mothers who have addiction issues, but notwithstanding, that’s one component of it.

So that was just my reflection that, yes, we need to address to reduce the barriers, we need to raise awareness, but in terms of moving forward, a provincially mandated, systemwide, across-the-board approach is critical. I know that the Ministry of Health has that mandate to move forward.

Yeah, that was just my…. I share that it’s a pressing issue. But my expectation is that we really need to address it in the context of our health care system and right across-the-board training to health care delivery to a provincial strategy, which is underway.

Amna Shah (Chair): Up next we have Hon.

Hon Chan: Thank you for your presentation. It was very informative, and I’m actually quite shocked to hear that only one in five women actually get access to the supports that they should have. You mentioned it’s because of cost, transportation and lack of health care supporters. Can you just expand on what the current support is and why it is so difficult for them to find the support that they need?

Jody Toor: Yeah, so some of that that I mentioned was some rural areas and northern communities that don’t even have mental health support. So if they were seeking mental health support, they would have to travel from the rural areas.

We’re lucky that we’re in the Lower Mainland. Some of us live within the Lower Mainland, let’s say, closer to Women’s Hospital, or we’re able to get to UBC where there is research or trials that are going on, that can get that support.

But people that are in rural areas or even some Indigenous groups or northern communities where there aren’t even any mental health centres have a hard time with travelling. They would have to leave their areas, travel — that’s a cost factor — and then get that support and then, as well, get those appointments when they need them. They would have to each time fly in or travel to come into the city to be able to get those kinds of services.

That’s why when I’ve been working with different organizations and research-based…. SUMMIT — it was one of the biggest research-led in the world…. They are bringing in and show evidence that 97 percent of women that got this care…. It was evident that it was exactly the same as being in person, that they were able to get it through telemedicine. So that would be cost-effective, meaning that they would be able to stay at home, not have to travel, be within their community and still receive that care.

Jessie Sunner: Thank you, Member, for your presentation and really bringing to light, as Mabel said, a lot of things that often go not talked about or are stigmatized. I think it’s a really important conversation that we had in the House, as well as moving forward with this.

[10:05 a.m.]

The question that I have is: just speaking about the resources that are available, were you in collaboration or have you spoken with Health or Perinatal Services B.C. about the programs that exist currently and what their programs are, moving forward on this?

Jody Toor: I have. I’ve been in touch with…. I think a lot of them have supported and are willing to come in and give their presentations from UBC and the SUMMIT trial, which is one of the world’s biggest trials for prenatal and mental health in the world. They have given their evidence that the gap is so major and that it’s so under-serviced to mothers and families. They have all the evidence and research available just right here at UBC, Toronto’s university.

I can tell you exactly who they are. I’ve been in touch with the Canada Research Chair in Mental Health — they’re associated with UBC — as well as the SUMMIT trial, which is scaling up maternal mental health care by increasing access to treatment. They are one of the world’s biggest research-led, evidence-based on where the gaps are and what needs to be done. They’re more than happy to come in and give a presentation, as well, showcasing where the lack is and what services are available.

But people aren’t able to access them, just like how I mentioned, like the rural areas and northern communities and Indigenous groups. Even cultural sensitive…. People don’t know…. They’re scared because there’s that language barrier. Or community-based — they just don’t know what kinds of services that are available to them, if there are any.

Jessie Sunner: I think that’s really helpful. But I think, specifically, I was just talking Perinatal Services B.C., the organization that works with the Ministry of Health. If you know what they are already doing on the…?

Jody Toor: Yes. There are services, like I said, but they’re available at B.C. Women’s. Not everybody has access to them. They have also spoken, and so have the clinical counsellors of B.C. They’ve also showcased the gap that’s there.

Yes, there are psychologists, but the wait times are so long that these mothers then…. There’s a time-sensitive of when they can get that service. But if they get it after nine months, they don’t qualify for that prenatal or postnatal mental health strategy. Then they go back into the other system of having care from a psychiatrist, and the wait time might be a year. That gap of that prenatal time that they seek or are seeking that help gets dissolved.

There is a gap where the professionals need to be involved to be able to screen. That’s why I’ve had those clauses that the screening process and the professionals do this in a timely manner.

Jessie Sunner: I ask because…. I recognize all of those programs. But my understanding, and I would want to know if you’re aware as well, is that the Minister of Health, in her mandate letter, has been mandated to improve services when it comes to maternity care, reproductive care and women’s health and has already undertaken working on a strategy with Prenatal Services B.C. to develop a refreshed maternal care strategy, which is to be implemented in the same timeline of this bill.

So my question is more if you’re aware of that and then how the work that’s being done there, if it’s being duplicated by this bill, really.

Jody Toor: The work hasn’t been done. It’s going to be implemented. The gap is already there, right? The care hasn’t been provided. That’s why I brought the strategy. I want to be able to work with every level — like the care providers, the communities, the groups and organizations that have already been in place — to be able to get their feedback, to see where the gaps are, what’s been missing, what’s working and what’s not working.

So that’s why…. I’d be more than happy to see what work the minister is thinking of doing.

Jessie Sunner: Yeah, I think if you haven’t spoken to them about it yet, I think it would be great because I think the work that is being done…. As you said, it was in the mandate letter right now, so it’s being done in the same, similar timeline, to create a plan, as in your bill. Maybe there’s work here that can be done without duplicating the work.

Jody Toor: Yeah, we can collaborate.

Jessie Sunner: Then the other question that I just have. Obviously, this is a private member’s bill, so the implications financially…. We can’t tie anyone’s hands. Just seeing the strategy, what are your goals of the strategy, knowing that we can’t have a financial aspect to the bill itself?

Jody Toor: So there is no financial…. The strategy is to work with what we have — the groups and organizations, the resources that are there — but strengthening and seeing where the gaps are. We already have, let’s say, family physicians or psychiatrists or doulas or midwives.

[10:10 a.m.]

I’m not trying to create a new service or a new…. I’m just trying to strengthen what we already have and seeing that we revamp and put mandates in place so that if a family doctor, an ob-gyn or a midwife is seeing a prenatal mother, a birthing mother, during the care of pregnancy or after loss, they have training that specializes in the field of grief or loss or depression and anxiety that these mothers may be having.

We’re not trying to create a new service; we’re trying to strengthen what we have.

Jessie Sunner: Okay. Looking at the language of the bill, I know it’s a strategy itself. But I know when you create a strategy, in order to have it have meaningful impact….

Jody Toor: There has been funding. I know that I spoke with the B.C. clinical counselling. There has been about $15 million that has been allotted to them that hasn’t been utilized yet. So there are fundings that have already been placed, and they were, like: “Well, we haven’t been able to implement anything, which we would like to be able to, to see strategies such as this and use that funding to be able to create more….” Let’s say if it’s telemedicine or where the gaps are and how to fix those gaps….

So that’s something that I have been in touch with different organizations on — where there is funding or where there are services that have been lacking or they just haven’t implemented certain services.

Jessie Sunner: Okay, thank you. Yeah, I think it’s really important that the work we’re doing, we’re doing as the best work we can do, efficiently, and making sure we’re using the resources. Again, I thank you for raising that.

Those are all the questions I had.

Trevor Halford (Deputy Chair): Thanks for the presentation today.

Just a couple quick things. One is: I’m just curious to know what the feedback has been since this has gone before the Legislature. The second thing is just in terms of consistency. Every area of the province is different.

In Surrey, specifically, I’ve talked to a number of physicians where they’re seeing a number of new Canadians coming in to give birth. So we’re talking about some very challenging language barriers that we’re trying to overcome.

The other thing, too, is just the work that needs to be done with the individualized health authorities to make sure there’s consistency throughout. I get that every area of the province is going to be a little bit different, but the framework is…. There needs to be a consistency amongst that framework throughout the health authorities. So just your comments on that.

Jody Toor: Yeah. That is one of the culturally sensitive…. That is something that education in cultural sensitivity so that stigma is taken away, especially in areas like Surrey where there are a lot of South Asian communities…. Being South Asian myself, I can tell you that it’s important that you can speak in your own language and get that care and be able to express what you’re going through.

There are different programs, like the Ronald McDonald House. I’ve been speaking with care providers from there, from Surrey, and they’ve said that there are volunteer groups that are coming, but they’d love to be able to educate more families when they’re in the hospital, letting them know that the service is available and it’s free of cost. It’s run by volunteers.

The feedback that I’ve been getting…. One of your other questions was: what was my response to getting this? I was actually overwhelmed with how much support I got from this bill.

Like I said, the SUMMIT group — that’s one of the world’s biggest research-led groups by Dr. Daisy — reached out to me, willing to fly out from Toronto to come and present on this bill and showcase how it can be cost-effective and evidence-based, how their trial has helped thousands of families and women and communities, not only here in North America. They’ve been doing research in Uganda, Kenya, India, Pakistan and North America.

Just to showcase that the work of evidence-based and cost-effective and the gaps that are in our system…. They’ve done a phenomenal job. I’ve gotten support from the summit group, UBC, B.C. Women’s…. I’ve gotten support from the clinical councillors of B.C. and just families in general that have reached out and shared their own personal stories, their journeys and how they felt isolated and how they didn’t get the support when they needed it the most.

[10:15 a.m.]

A lot of mothers…. Being a mother myself, a lot of people ask me: why did you bring this bill up? Where did you come up with this bill? It was my own struggles. I struggled from infertility, first and foremost.

I actually had a conversation with Jeremy on one of our walks one day. I was telling him I was a breast cancer survivor. I was on tamoxifen, which is a drug that eventually, after you’ve had breast cancer, usually puts you into not having your cycle on regular. So I had that before I got married, and that conversation of infertility was there. What am I going to do? How am I going to have children?

Being women, it’s something that we carry, like: oh, we’re supposed to have children. It could be a cultural thing. I mean, things have changed, but it’s something very personal.

I had a very supportive husband that was like: “You know, we’ll cross that path when we get there, and we’ll see what happens.” I had my own journey, and I ended up getting pregnant, and then, five years later, I was able to conceive again.

My first pregnancy was daunting. It was horrible. I was in the hospital for nine months. I could not even drink water. I was on IV therapy for the full nine months, for eight hours a day, at B.C. Women’s. A lot of women feel isolated during that time. I’d be in this hospital. My husband had to still work. I’d be in the hospital room by myself, being monitored and being like: what’s going to happen? What’s the outcome of this child going to be?

I’m not the only woman that might have gone through this. Millions of women have gone through this, infertility and the journey of the pregnancy. Then birthing itself is another journey.

I had to go through a challenge where I had to sign a will. If I don’t make it through this pregnancy, when I deliver this child, who gets the rights to this child? Yes, I have a husband, but I’ve never seen him as a father. I don’t know how he’s going to be. Who has the rights?

I’ve gone through my own journey. Then aftercare, once you’ve had this child. My husband and I were living in Sechelt, a very small little town, with about 5,000 people at that time. He was an optometrist there. Jeremy and I were talking, and it’s a very small, isolated community. I had no family nearby. Having that care of isolation is so stressful.

You want to be a good mother. You always want to showcase how good and perfect you are, because that’s what society thinks of women to do in families. So many women struggle daily — a lack of sleep, being a new mother. Motherhood itself and changing of dynamics within family are really concerning.

My personal journey really brought me, when I was speaking to other women…. I’m a doula. I was able to engage with other families and seek…. I’m not the only one that suffered. There are thousands. Then you continue on talking. When we bring that stigma out, where we can talk about it….

A lot of women suffer, a lot of families suffer. This bill is very near and dear to me, to be able to get that strategy and be able to give people that support where they live, when they need it. I think a lot of women fall in that gap because of stigma or without that support or without having organizations.

Now, more and more organizations are there. But just having that support, that structure, that we’re saying: is there structure throughout? Making sure that we even teach the physicians that are there the sensitivity.

If there’s a male, he may not know how this can affect a woman, childbirth or a miscarriage — how that relates to women. Women feel like failures, sometimes. I don’t think any women or families should be able to be struggling in silence, when we should be able to give that support to everyone.

Amna Shah (Chair): Thank you. Are there any further questions? Great. I have a question and maybe a comment, if I may.

I understand that this bill is really to develop a strategy, and that’s great. I appreciate the lived experience and the story that you bring to the development of this bill and the priorities that are outlined within it.

Really, when we’re talking about strategy, I think there is a natural recognition that there may potentially be gaps in the system. I also understand that there is a request for a refreshed maternity strategy that has been requested from the Ministry of Health to Perinatal Services B.C.

[10:20 a.m.]

My thoughts about that are…. As you mentioned, we do have the structures in place already, and the request has been made. As a matter of fact, my understanding is that this one-year request, as well, within this bill, is in line with that request to Perinatal Services B.C.

Given that there is that request on the table and that Perinatal Services B.C. does implement strategies as well, including the perinatal hub, which includes lots of resources — resources that are also requested in this bill — I think my concern is more so around the duplication of work that may already be ongoing. When I say work that is already ongoing, I'm referring specifically to the work around the development of a strategy, because the bill is about a strategy as well.

So I was wondering if you could maybe comment on the parallel development of strategies and whether you think that it is problematic or not problematic that Perinatal Services B.C. is also doing that work. It is in the minister's mandate, as well, to ensure that this work is done. I'm just wondering what your thoughts are about that.

Jody Toor: Yeah. I understand that the existing services are there, but they're not tailored or consistently available, and this bill mandates a dedicated, targeted and measurable strategy. The strategy also uses low-cost scalable tools like task-sharing and telemedicine, like I mentioned, for rural areas and northern communities, projected to save up to $2 billion annually by reducing system strain. That is why I feel that this is a little bit different.

How we can collaborate: I'm more than willing to collaborate and work on strategies and the evidence that I've collected, during my research, to bring this bill forward. I understand, like I said, the mandate has been there, but I can tell you where the gaps are. I don't think that that's going to be implemented.

Amna Shah (Chair): Okay. Just to follow up, if I'm understanding correctly, the difference here is the difference in the types of measures for the strategy, I suppose?

Jody Toor: Correct.

Amna Shah (Chair): Okay. Given that we don't know what the measures are for the strategy that has been requested by the Minister of Health to Perinatal Services B.C. — we may not know that at this point — this bill is asking for different measures of a strategy.

Again, it's just the word “strategy” that kind of makes me think: well, is there another way, other than introducing another bill, to work that is already being done? Nonetheless, I appreciate your answer there. That's my question.

Any further questions?

I thank you so much for your time. Sorry we kept you a little bit over.

Jody Toor: Thank you for giving me this opportunity in presenting my bill, the reasoning behind it, and why I brought it forward. I appreciate everybody.

Amna Shah (Chair): Great. Thank you, Jody and Members.

Our final agenda item today is in-camera deliberations. I'm wondering if we can take a brief recess and if the members will entertain a five-minute recess before we get into in-camera deliberations.

Great. We will come back at 10:29.

The committee recessed from 10:24 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.

[Amna Shah in the chair.]

Amna Shah (Chair): Welcome back, Members.

I will ask for a motion to go in camera.

Motion approved.

The committee continued in camera from 10:30 a.m. to 10:52 a.m.

Amna Shah: Motion to adjourn?

Motion approved.

The committee adjourned at 10:52 a.m.